RKD STUDIES

Oil on canvas, 74.9 x 61.0 cm, monogrammed center right: FH
New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv.no. 71.76

A comparison between the two versions of the same subject – the present one in New York and the variant by Hals himself in Berlin [1] – demonstrates how economically the means of sketching accurately were employed in the Berlin painting. In contrast, the New York picture displays a bold brushwork that makes less use of the colored ground and the underlying modelling shades, instead adding an array of impasto brushstrokes. Even so, the present picture is an independent artwork which was most likely executed on the basis of the same template as the masterly version in Berlin. The face, which is observed in an entirely different turn and lighting, is nevertheless convincingly modelled, while displaying an individual, somewhat abrupt style of brushwork. As a variant of the sketchy style developed by Hals, the painting is artistically remarkable and is among the workshop’s most outstanding achievements. The painterly manner is close to that of individual children’s heads and some fisherchildren’s heads, but also to the representations of musicians in Vaduz (A3.49) and Dublin (A4.3.7).

The early impression made by this monogrammed painting is underlined by its echo in Malle Babbe and a smoker (B18), which combines motifs derived from several artists. Judging from the expansive depiction of fish, the latter painting was probably created shortly after the New York piece, in the workshop of Abraham van Beijeren (c. 1620/1621-1690), and thus most likely not in Haarlem. A further historical benchmark is provided by the engraving by Louis Bernhard Coclers (1741-1817) [2], created after the New York Malle Babbe. It is inscribed:

‘Fr. Halls pinxt. L. B. Coclers sculpt.
Babel of Haarlem, To you, your owl is a falcon. O Babel! I am glad of it.
Play with a fake doll. You are not alone’.¹

Finally, the picture’s entry into the collection of the Metropolitan Museum in New York must be mentioned here. It was exhibited in the museum from 1871 onwards, and later on copied by Frank Duveneck (1848-1919).²

A4.2.31

1
Frans Hals (I)
Malle Babbe, c. 1639-1646
Berlin (city, Germany), Gemäldegalerie (Staatliche Museen zu Berlin), inv./cat.nr. 801C
cat.no. A1.103
Photo: Christoph Schmidt; Public Domain Mark 1.0

Oil on canvas, 72 x 59 cm
Lille, Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille, inv.no. P 302

When comparing the diverse variants of Malle Babbe, there is a general agreement on qualitative differences. Nevertheless, the present variant in Lille also adds its own aspect of the sitter. It is not possible to achieve such a result with a different body turn and different lighting simply through modifying an existing painted example. The modelling of highlights and shade in the Lille version also gives the impression of being painted from life, or of being based on a preparatory study from life. Conversely, the facial features in following two variations on the Malle Babbe motif (A4.2.33, A4.2.34) have been derived from the present one. Overall, the Lille painting shows a more subtle facial representation, with a more coherent expression than the following two works. If this conclusion is correct, the three different representations of the seated drinker Barbara Claes complement each other in creating an impression of her appearance. At the same time, the varying representations of this person illustrate the range of simultaneous depictions of the same subject in varying qualities in the Hals workshop.

A comparison with the subsequent painting (A4.2.33) indicates that the composition of the present picture was partly overpainted at some point. In the process, the clay pipe in the woman’s hand was covered. A last remnant of the motif can be seen in the peculiarly turned lower edge of the neck scarf. Also, the faint smoke rings remain visible. Hofstede de Groot noted that the background had been completely overpainted, an observation which could have been prompted by the same reworking process.³

A4.2.32

Oil on canvas, 80 x 66 cm
Sale London (Phillips), 10 July 1992, lot 33

This painting is largely identical with the version in Lille (A4.2.32), and is rendered in a slightly coarser manner. The sitter here holds a clay pipe in her hand and the usual lion's head on the knob of the chair was reinterpreted as a devil's head. These attributes underline the wicked and demonic elements of the woman’s supposed character. Both could already be found in the Lille version, which has been overpainted in several areas. Based on the painterly technique, the present picture can probably still be dated in the 17nth century and thus in the same period as the model in Lille. It therefore provides an indication of the contemporary interpretation of Barbara Claes’s behavior.

A4.2.33

Oil on canvas, 67.9 x 63.5 cm
Private collection

While there are numerous variants and imitations of the two depictions of Malle Babbe, this coarsely executed picture nevertheless appears to be a product of the Hals workshop. The angular highlights and the shadow lines on the clothing, as well as the dissolving hands are reminiscent of the Fishergirl with a basket on her head in Cincinnati (A4.2.23). The facial features are based on the variant in Lille (A4.2.32), while the motif of the jug was taken from the version in Berlin (A1.103).

A4.2.34

Oil on panel, 46.5 x 34.5 cm
Greenwich, private collection

A4.2.34A

Oil on panel, ø 29.9 cm
Sale London (Christie’s), 7 July 2009, lot 5

For a long time, this cheerful picture of a child, with its expressive turn of the gaze, was kept in the Wernher collection at Luton Hoo, which has been open to the public since 1950. It is one of the few examples of late genre pictures from the Hals workshop. The rendering of the face has a clarity and simplicity that is only imaginable in a work by an outstanding painter. It is impossible to say which of Hals’s assistants was the artist in question, due to the inimitable imprint of the Hals style. In the same way as we cannot approach Hals’s early works before he settled as an independent master on the basis of his later style, we also cannot identify any equivalent ‘Halsian’ early works by his known assistants. The delicacy of the present painting’s execution recalls the Girl with the straw hat (A4.2.36). The open collar and the area of the hair differ most notably from Hals’s style. But the modelling of the face also shows a soft brushstroke with dry, chalky paint – without the edges that are typical in Hals’s work. In the face, short bright lines stand out from the brushwork, which are likewise inconsistent with Hals’s manner.

A4.2.35

Oil on panel, 36.2 x 31 cm
Remagen, Arp Museum Bahnhof Rolandseck, inv.no. GR 1.285 – on loan from UNICEF

This small and very painterly genre piece is one of the best achievements from the group of artworks created by Hals’s assistants. Stylistically, it is reminiscent of the more spontaneously painted Malle Babbe in New York (A4.2.31),even though that painting has a cooler tonality. Hals’s composition and the rhythmically structured painterly realization are both adopted here. Yet, the paint layers have been softly applied throughout, without Hals’s angular and rhythmical accentuation. The depiction of the straw hat is a brilliant performance; both visually understood and freely applied, similar to the softly modelled facial features of the child. Both the brittle hat and the dreamy child convey the vanitas concept. It was only George Romney (1734-1802) and Thomas Sully (1783-1872) who conjured something comparable from the same motifs, about 150 years later.⁵

Hofrichter attributed the present painting to Judith Leyster (1609-1660).⁶ However, I see a more confident artist’s hand at work here, with a more painterly approach. As I do not have a solution for the question of authorship, I can only note that one of Hals’s most talented pupils must have been the painter of this independent study from life.

A4.2.36
© Arp Museum Bahnhof Rolandseck / Collection Rau for UNICEF Photograph: Horst Bernhard

Oil on panel, 78.5 x 62.4 cm
Sale Pfarrkirchen (Reibnitz), 2 March 2007, lot unknown

This painting first appeared in Munich in 1892 and was included in the catalogues of Hofstede de Groot, Bode & Binder, and Valentiner as a work by Frans Hals.⁷ In the 1937 Haarlem exhibition, it was displayed as a work by the painter as well.⁸ The bright colors and the painting’s indistinct character – somewhere between a portrait and a genre scene – gave rise to various doubts about the attribution. Van Dantzig rejected the picture, Slive listed it as a doubtful attribution, as did Montagni.⁹

Comparison of the photographs taken from 1892 onwards shows several stages of reworking. Most recently, Martin Bijl’s examination revealed that the picture had been overpainted and retouched several times. As a result of this analysis, we can conclude that the present painting was unfinished and subsequently completed by a later hand. The sketchy application of paint and the hints of modelling give an impression of the initial steps of labor. The uncovering of this document of the working process in Hals’s workshop is ongoing, but it is certainly unique in its kind.

However, it is almost impossible to decide whose hand was responsible for the sketched design. The outlines of the facial features appear confident, as do those of the hand resting on the chin. These economical first outlines of the composition may be by Hals himself, but could equally be the work of an assistant, for example the one who painted the Dublin Lute player (A4.3.7) and the Young man holding a lily in the Louvre (A4.2.47a). The discussion of whether Hals himself, or a practiced assistant was involved is also connected to the approach to the subject of the present painting as such. It is not a portrait which highlights an individual in her social importance, but rather a genre painting in which a type of person has been represented. In this case, the woman is most probably a prostitute, with a red flower in her voluminous hair. Hals’s characterization of figures on the fringes of society shows them in action and with lively facial expressions, but also as examples of uninhibited life and devotion to sensual pleasure. The merry tavern waitress (A1.14) and the young woman with her mischievous smile (A1.43) are the closest examples for such depictions of women. However, the present picture lacks the tangible emotional and momentaneous impression of the two autograph works by Hals. In this respect, Hals’s typical pictorial psychology is absent, or not yet sufficiently pronounced in this unfinished picture, of which the modelling in the face and the left hand suggests a dating of c. 1640.

A4.2.37

Oil on panel, 14.6 x 11.1 cm, monogrammed lower right: FH
Philadelphia, Philadelphia Museum of Art – John G. Johnson Collection, inv.no. 432
Pendant to A4.2.39

Oil on panel, 14.4 x 11.4 cm, monogrammed lower left: FH
Philadelphia, Philadelphia Museum of Art – John G. Johnson Collection, inv.no. 433
Pendant to A4.2.38

Slive referred to the unusually large monograms on these two pendants as ‘dubious’.¹⁰ However, the pair is conceivable as the sketchily executed product of an assistant in Hals’s workshop. Unfortunately, without any dendrochronological and technical examination of the entire group of profile sketches (the present pair and cat.no. A4.2.40), it is impossible to be more precise.

Oil on panel, 13 x 12 cm
Sale Kassel (Lempertz), 9 May 1892, lot 73

This painting is only known through its reproductions in publications from the early 20th century and the engraving by William Unger (1837-1932) of 1892.¹¹ Stylistically, the representation follows Hals’s loose brushwork from the 1640s. As far as can be seen from the reproductions, it is a consistently painted work by a relatively confident hand, probably that of an assistant in Hals’s workshop. The somewhat dashed handling in the hair and clothing differs from the precisely placed highlights in autograph works by Frans Hals and from smoother works by his workshop. All the more surprising is the considerable price of 3050 marks that was achieved at the 1892 auction for this picture, which is hardly larger than a man’s hand.

A4.2.40

Oil on canvas, 76.5 x 64 cm, indistinctly monogrammed lower right: FH
Winterthur, The Oskar Reinhart Collection ‘Am Römerholz’, inv.no. 81

This dark representation in coarse brushstrokes harkens back to the earlier, more detailed depictions of similar subjects. The background was simplified to a nocturnal landscape. A few spots of light reflecting off the face recall the origin of the painting in the Hals style.

A4.2.41
© Oskar Reinhart Collection ‘Am Römerholz’, Winterthur

Oil on canvas, 45 x 39 cm
Arras, Musée de Beaux Arts

Partial copy after the painting in Winterthur.

A4.2.41a

Oil on panel, 32.7 x 26 cm
Maastricht/London, Robert Noortman Gallery

The angular contouring and modelling of the folds and creases in this painting are striking, both in the skin and in the clothing. It can also be observed in the small-scale genre paintings by Jan Hals (c. 1620-c. 1654). While the brushwork in Frans Hals’s works is presented as an independent and attractive pictorial element, the contours in the present picture are over-emphasized. This is noticeable in the face and fingers, and in the folds and outlines of the costume and cap. Unlike in the master’s work, the nuances in color have been neglected in favor of a stiff outline drawing, which is easier to execute. Instead of the sensitive application of alternating blended and angularly contrasting layers of paint, the brushwork is uniform and narrow-lined. This characteristic also appears in the stripy roughening of the facial shadows – executed with a worn dry brush). If we attribute this painting to Jan Hals, it would be a relatively early work, closely related to Frans Hals’s warm-toned palette of the late 1630s. Yet the style of dashed contouring also appears in the larger portraits by Jan Hals that were painted in the 1640s.

A4.2.42
© Christie’s Images Limited [1999]

Oil on panel, 14.0 x 13.2 cm
Sale Amsterdam (Christie’s), 10 May 2006, lot 101

This painting’s concept refers back to a model by Hals in the style of the Schwerin profile, a head of a drinking boy, but without the plasticity and clarity in modelling of the head and hair (A1.35). This is partly due to a paint application that is more glazed than impasto. Accordingly, the picture should be assessed as a product of the Hals workshop from the late 1630s or early 1640s. I do not have concrete indications whether Frans Hals was involved in an initial design himself, or whether the energetic first sketch was done by the executing assistant. A variant of this profile study was sold at auction in 2012.¹² A larger, oval shaped variant was with Gallery Brod in London by 1970 and now in a private collection in the United States.¹³

A4.2.43
Photo © Christie's Images/Bridgeman Images