RKD STUDIES

Oil on canvas, 63.5 x 53.5 cm, monogrammed lower left: FH
Washington, National Gallery of Art, inv.no. 1942.9.28

This bust of a slightly melancholic looking young man has been distinctly transformed by a careful restoration in the workshops of the National Gallery of Art in 1991. The full head of curls was significantly shortened and now matched the representation of the painting in a watercolor by Pieter Holsteyn II (c. 1614-1673) (D60). In addition, the overpainting of the background could be further removed, so that the previously faintly visible hat was fully revealed [1]. As Holsteyn’s watercolor cannot have been painted later than 1673, two stages in the overpainting are thus confirmed. It seems that the hat was removed quite soon after the creation of the portrait by Hals. At a later point, after 1673 in any case, the hairstyle was changed. These interventions provide an insight into the handling of portraits as decorative commemorative objects that were subject to later changes in taste.

The soft modelling and the delicate contours of the painting match stylistically with the period around 1650. My suggestion of a resemblance between the sitter’s features and those of the German painter Michael Willmann (1630-1706) can no longer be upheld, since the latter’s self-portrait of 1682 in Wrocław depicts his eyes as blue, while the eyes of the present portrait are brown.¹ Nevertheless, the rhetorical affirmative gesture of the hand on the chest would be commensurate with a portrait of a painter, since it can be read as an expression of artistic sensitivity and honesty.²

A1.122
Photo courtesy National Gallery of Art, Washington

Oil on panel, 35 x 26 cm
Berlin, Stiftung Heinz Kuckei – on loan to the Frans Hals Museum, inv.no. OS 2013-17

As Slive noted, this small painting is stylistically closely related to the Portrait of a man in Washington (A1.122), which also displays a similarly cut large, smooth collar.³ The representation gives an impression of a quick casual commission for a sitter in transit, who enters without even taking a seat. Such a spontaneous execution brings to mind Arnold Houbraken’s (1660-1719) report of the meeting between Anthony van Dyck (1599-1641) and Hals where both painters created portraits of each other.⁴ The clothes are merely sketched, but the face is clearly executed. Nevertheless, the paint layers are thin, so that the dark contours of the underlying brush drawing are faintly visible. Treatment by Martin Bijl in 2013 has once again revealed the quality of this small picture. Upon first hand investigation of the painting, I revise my earlier attribution to Jan Hals I (c. 1620-1654) that was only based on reproductions, and I recognize the present picture unequivocally as a work by Frans Hals.⁵

A1.123

Oil on canvas, 110.5 x 86.4 cm
New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv.no. 91.26.9

The sitter presents himself in a much-used position, with his proper right arm akimbo and his hat in his other hand, depicted frontally. Like Tieleman Roosterman (1597-1672) (A1.65), he raises himself up in front of the viewer, looking down on them. But this performance is tempered in Hals’s later work through the texture that is created by the visual structure of brushstrokes. An overall planar visual suggestion slightly disassociates the viewer from a close physical proximity. In a newly fluid painting technique, the modelling shades in the face are softly blended, while the shadows of the corner of the mouth, bridge of the nose and eyebrows are marked by calligraphic dashes of dark color. The slight rounding of the muscles around the mouth conveys a friendly and relaxed manner, while the serious unwavering gaze is directed straight at the viewer. The sitter wears a black silk suit in the French fashion, with slashed sleeves and an open waistcoat. The multiple ruffles on the sleeve and the colored silk ribbons on the waist are especially striking. It is not clear why the hand is a bit too small and misshapen. Pentimenti indicate a different original execution in this area.

A1.124

Oil on canvas, 65 x 56.5 cm
England, private collection

Like many other examples, this picture was moved onto an oval stretcher at some point – probably in the 18th century – in order to serve as a pendant for another painting.⁶ However, the canvas was not cut off, so that it was possible to later restore the original rectangular shape. The soft brushwork and the two-dimensional approach of the subject matter demonstrate an almost superficial simplification of the figure, while maintaining the apt characterization of the facial features.

A1.125

Oil on canvas, 82 x 73.5 cm
Berlin, Gemäldegalerie der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, inv.no. 801H

On the stretcher, a 19th-century inscription reads: ‘Portrait de Tyman Oosdrop peint en 1656 par Frans Hals’. A second inscription on a label, probably in 18th-century writing reads: ‘Tyman Oosdrop’.⁷ The date of 1656 is plausible on stylistic grounds and was adopted in the literature. According to Biesboer's research, Tyman Oosdorp (1613-1668) was a brewer, serving as a Haarlem councilor from 1650 onwards, as representative to the States-General from 1656 to 1658, as a lay judge in 1660/1661 and as mayor in 1665/1666.⁸ In 1654, his first wife Hester Olycan (1608-1654) died. She was a daughter of the influential brewer and town politician Pieter Olycan (1572-1658) (A3.25, A3.32) and sister of several other sitters of Hals. On 14 October 1658 Oosdorp married the also widowed Margaretha Schellinger (1611-1668). Biesboer therefore assumed that the present portrait – whose sideways turn may indicate a pendant – was created on the occasion of Oosdorp’s remarriage.⁹ This seems highly plausible: neither date could be excluded, since there are only very few portraits dating from Hals’s last two decades and, with the exception of the 1650 Portrait of Nicolaes Stenius (A3.54), none of these is dated. As far as dates have been suggested in the literature, these were deduced from the circumstances of creation of the portraits, and from the placement of the painting style in specific ideas of stylistic development.

A1.126
Photo: Christoph Schmidt; Public Domain Mark 1.0

A1.127 see: A3.61

Oil on panel, 47.1 x 34.4 cm, monogrammed lower right: FH
Munich, Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen - Alte Pinakothek, inv.no. 8402

Pieter Biesboer provided the reference about the connections of the Croes family, of which several members were painted by Johannes Cornelisz. Verspronck (1600/1603-1662).¹¹ The fact that Verspronck’s last known picture was painted in 1661, and that he died in June 1662, could have been a plausible reason for the beer brewer Willem Croes (1608-1666) to commission his portrait from Frans Hals. At the same time, Biesboer was able to document the friendship between Croes and Joseph Coymans (1591-1677), whom Hals had portrayed with his wife in 1644, followed by several other commissions from the Coymans family (A1.111, A1.112, A1.114, A1.119, A1.120).

The present small-scale picture of a half-length figure combines all the qualities of a work by the late and – in his individual approach to painting – entirely confident Hals. The pattern in the compositional lines and individual brushstrokes is connected in a suggestive manner with the energetic expressive tension of the face. The dissolution of the facial representation into strokes of subtly captured nuances of color and brightness has reached an extreme point, while it still has nothing arbitrary or erratic. The visual perception of the painting technique enhances the energetic surge in the facial features in a masterly way.

We do not know how this type of portraiture was received before Hals’s ‘Impressionist’ discovery in the late 19th century. If the attribution of the drawn copy after the Portrait of Willem Croes (D91) to Jean Honoré Fragonard (1732-1806) had not been rejected, it would have been an important document reporting on Hals’s reception prior to his discovery as an artist in the modern sense.¹² It would have also been the earliest copy after Hals’s example by an international artist. An honour which is now reserved for Gustave Courbet’s (1819-1877) copy of Malle Babbe from 1869.¹³

A1.128

Oil on canvas, 70 x 58.5 cm
Zurich, Emil Bührle Collection, inv.no. 151

The features of this face, executed in short, softly applied brushstrokes, light up by the hint of a smile. The profile is modelled by unblended shades of grey, which are distinct yet semi-transparent and merge with the brownish ground. The different levels of brightness are clearly distinguished and appear graduated in a mix of separate shades of red and ochre along the basic three-dimensional structure of the face. The rhythm of the brushstrokes configures the perception of the face and its expression. This area is the focus of the entire creative tension; the brightest spot is the zone between the eyes. The sitter’s gaze is directed just over beholder’s head, and indeed the entire picture is presented as a close-up view from below. The position of the arms corresponds to the frequently used pose of arms akimbo and held close to the chest. In contrast to this obligatory position, the facial movement is spontaneous and turned to the viewer in a relaxed mood. We do not know who the sitter with the fashionable curls was, but we are presented with a psychological study of the very personal and informal character of this unknown gentleman.

Together with the Portrait of a man with a slouch hat (A1.130) and the Regents of the Old Men's Almshouse (A3.62), this portrait with its consistent brushwork documents the focused view of the late Hals. The area around the sitter’s eyes always forms the centre of the composition, and is the focus for the direction of the light and enhanced contrasts. The sitter’s active gaze is captured with the greatest clarity – unlike the schematic rendering of the area around the eyes as is present in several paintings from catalogue part A4.3. The thin paint layers and the rhythm of the brushstrokes in their recurring diagonal pattern evidently separate the clear design of the present picture from the demonstration of unbridled handling that can be discerned in the contemporary Portrait of a man (A3.64) and Portrait of an unknown man (A4.3.55).

A1.129

Oil on canvas, 79.5 x 66.5 cm, monogrammed center left: FH
Kassel, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, inv.no. GK 219

This particularly memorable late work repeats the same compositional structure as in the 1626 Portrait of Isaac Massa (A2.7), but here in the form of a cypher concentrated on a few accents. Just like the landscape background is reduced to a few strips of light, the black clothes, collar, sleeves and hand are merged into light paths and shadow lines. This structure of rising and falling diagonals surrounds the area of the face, which is suggested as a fleeting impression in muted red, ochre yellow and shades of grey, rather than being rendered three-dimensionally. The distinct features of the facial expression have been sharply emphasized, especially the look in the eyes and the corners of the mouth. This psychological precision and capture of a moment of attention lifts the present and other late works by Hals above any contemporary artworks. It forms the crucial difference between the expressly ‘Halsian’ products of the workshop and the probably contemporary and technically related Portrait of an unknown man in the Fitzwilliam Museum (A4.3.55).

In connection with the present painting, Slive referred to the passage of praise in Cornelis de Bie’s (1627-c. 1711/1716) Het Gulden Cabinet of 1661: ‘He [Wouwerman] studied with Frans Hals, who is still alive and living in Haarlem, a marvel at painting portraits or counterfeits which appear very rough and bold, nimbly touched and well composed, pleasing and ingenious, and when seen from a distance seem to lack nothing but life itself […]’.¹⁵ This bright spot on the horizon of connoisseurship fell into a time when Hals only received occasional commissions. According to all characteristics, this picture was a commissioned work as well. It is the boldest of the entirely autograph executions that have come down to us. It is in the light of this image that De Bie's recognition gains particular value. His praise is so outstanding compared to the few and muted comments of Hals's paintings in his life time and aware of the decline in orders and many instances of smoothing revision of his faces.

A1.130
© Museumslandschaft Hessen Kassel, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister
photo: Ute Brunzel

Oil on panel, 31.1 x 25.5 cm
The Hague, Mauritshuis, inv.no. 928

This bust-length portrait is rendered with a few brushstrokes. The energetic tension of the facial features conveys an impression of willpower and aloofness. The angular base of the collar and the stripes of the folds in the dark cloak set the directional impulses which correspond with the lines of light and shadow in the face. During a restoration in the early 20th century lighter colored folds in the lower right corner were covered, it is not clear if these were original. In any case, pentimenti are visible to the right of the upper body. The right outer contour of the body was later covered by a grey brushstroke, which is certainly not original, and which makes the white collar appear suspended mid-air. It is worth comparing this subsequent narrowing of contours with the late Portrait of a man, possibly a clergyman in Amsterdam (A3.60). There, the in parts somewhat haphazard, almost patchy marking of cast shadows and bright highlights – noticeable in the areas of nose, mouth and chin – differs from the confident strokes in other late works. They suggest a later date for the present picture than that of the Portrait of Willem Croes (A1.128) and the Portrait of a man with a slouch hat (A1.130). They match the accents in the face of the figure on the far right in Regents of the Old Men’s Almshouse (A3.62), of the second and third woman from the left in Regentesses of the old Men’s Almshouse (A3.63), and of the Portrait of a man (A1.132).¹⁶

A1.131

Oil on panel, 31.3 x 24.3 cm
Sale New York (Sotheby’s), 1-2 February 2018, lot 34

This picture is unfortunately damaged and was long obscured by overpainting. At first glance, the execution of most details, especially the hair and the clothing, seems coarser and less clearly accented than Hals’s indisputably autograph works. The paint layers in the face are abraded and therefore no longer visible in their original clarity, especially around the eyes. In Hals’s own execution, this area is always emphasized and the direction of the gaze is unequivocal. These were probably among the reasons why Slive listed the present picture under ‘doubtful and wrongly attributed paintings’.¹⁷ In 2016 Martin Bijl undertook a thorough cleaning and clarification of the painting, so that traces of the original design became recognizable again, particularly in the shaded areas of the face. Contour lines also became visible on both sides of the dark coat. Previously, Peter Klein had conducted a dendrochronological analysis. This resulted in the finding that the present panel was cut from the same tree as the Portrait of Hendrik Swalmius, dated 1639 (A4.1.13).¹⁸ Pieter Biesboer, Norbert Middelkoop and Martin Bijl all accept an unqualified attribution to Frans Hals and date the picture between 1658 and 1660. I agree with the attribution to Hals himself, but regard it as a painting from his final years.

The rhythmical arrangement of the diagonal accents in the face is striking; they resemble those in the figure seated on the outer left in Regents of the Old Men’s Almshouse (A3.62). Some of the shades of color also match this noticeable area, for example on the lower lip, which is done in short swerving brushstrokes as only approximate markings. Similarly to areas of the regents’ portrait, the restoration revealed a few sparse contours in the shaded parts of the face. They have nothing in common with the washed-out brushstrokes of the workshop pictures listed under A4.3. This decisive approach prompted me to remove the present picture from the mere workshop- and follower-production. To my mind, the ‘lion’s paw’ seems to be recognizable in the faint traces of the facial design. At the same time, a hesitant and by now only cautious brushwork appears.

A1.132