AMSTERDAM.-For the first time in its history, the Rijksmuseum presents paintings that were considered genuine Rembrandts at the time of their purchase, but whose authenticity fell into doubt through the years. During the presentation, visitors will be shown what elements of a painting lead us to believe that it is, or is not a Rembrandt, using methods such as infrared- and X-ray images. The presentation will offer a behind-the-scenes look at the Rijksmuseum Rembrandt study, whereby new insights will also be revealed. In all, 13 works will be displayed at the presentation. Really Rembrandt? will give visitors the opportunity to learn about of the opinions of various experts, but most of all to have a look for themselves and to form their own opinions.

Research methods - Rembrandt’s extensive œuvre has been the source of discussion for centuries. Owing to the fact that research methods have improved over the years, new discoveries are still being made and the discussion rages on as to which paintings can or cannot be attributed to Rembrandt. As a rule, style considerations are a major criterion in determining to whom a work should be attributed. For instance, paintings are examined using X-rays, and infrared cameras can sometimes allow researchers to see ‘under’ the layers of paint. By studying the pattern of annual rings in wood panels, one can acquire information about when the tree used to make them was cut down and the approximate age of the panel can be determined. Additionally, chemical analyses can sometimes provide useful information about the use of pigment.

Two examples - The works to be displayed at the presentation were celebrated as genuine ‘Rembrandts’ when purchased, but lost this distinction over time. One example is the portrait of Elisabeth Bas. When the portrait was brought into the Rijksmuseum in 1880, its status as a ‘Rembrandt’ was undisputed. However, Bredius, Rembrandt expert and director of Mauritshuis, posited in 1911 that Rembrandt’s ‘signature’ was missing from the painting, thus attributing the work to Ferdinand Bol. In particular, the old woman’s hands could not be the work of Rembrandt, as they were “lacking the broadness and the daring paint structure”. Conversely, the same hands were the reason given by Cornelis Hofstede de Groot, another Rembrandt expert, to believe the painting was from Rembrandt’s hand. To this very day the nameplate still reads, ‘attributed to Ferdinand Bol’.

Another example is the Bust of a laughing young man. When the Rijksmuseum purchased this piece, it was still called Self-portrait. The title change was an immediate and clear sign that the painting was not by Rembrandt and that the person pictured in it was not Rembrandt, either. Therefore, the painting was no longer attributed to ‘Rembrandt’, but to ‘Rembrandt’s Circle’. However, this is not the last word on the painting’s origin. As demonstrated in the exhibition, recent research has uncovered data that strongly suggests that the small painting was painted, in any event, in Rembrandt’s studio.