KWAB - Ornament as Art in the age of Rembrandt

Ornament as Art in the Age of Rembrandt reinier baarsen with a contribution by ine castelijns van Beek

rijks museum

Ewer, Adam van Vianen, 1614 (FIG. 48)

FOREWORD The silver ewer made by Adam van Vianen in 1614 for the silver­ smiths’ guild of Amsterdam, commissioned to commemorate his brother Paulus who had died in Prague the previous year, was probably the most famous work of art of the Dutch seventeenth century. No other contemporary work of art was depicted in paintings anything like as often. Already in 1615, Pieter Lastman showed it in his Lamentation at the Cross; more than 60 years later, during which interval many pictures had been painted featuring the ewer, Barend Graat still chose it to represent the box of his Pandora.

Artists and connoisseurs were overwhelmed by Adam van Vianen’s entirely original invention, which he had turned into a silver object with unwonted technical mastery. The ewer’s completely new form was evidently a product of the artist’s brilliant imagination.

Whether a work of art was created ‘from life’ or ‘from the mind’ was a vital distinction at the time: the latter category was rated much more highly.

Van Vianen’s contemporaries were at a loss to describe the ewer’s equivocal forms, humorous and unsettling at the same time. They reverted to the old term ‘grotesques’ or spoke, more generally, of snakerijen (witticisms). We are still in the same quandary. Since the late nineteenth century the Dutch use the expression ‘kwab ornament’ and the English say auricular. Some kwab forms do indeed resemble bodily parts, but that is hardly their essence.

And is kwab even ornament? Ornament is used to decorate an existing surface, but kwab can be the substance from which an object like Van Vianen’s ewer is made. It remains a mysterious phenomenon, impossible to catch, or account for, in words.

In the Dutch seventeenth-century galleries at the Rijksmuseum, many of the silver masterpieces of the greatest practitioners of kwab are proudly displayed. And yet they do not always command the attention that should be theirs from a historical point of view: confined to showcases, they tend to lose out against the famous paintings on the walls around them. In the exhibition Kwab. Dutch Design in the Age of Rembrandt and in this book written to accompany it, this curious phenomenon takes centre stage. That is just as unhistorical, but seems warranted in order to re-establish a certain balance. Rembrandt’s name is not invoked lightly. Like his teacher Pieter Lastman or his pupil Gerbrand van den Eeckhout, Rembrandt was fascinated by kwab.

The trompe l’oeil carved and gilded frame which he painted around his Holy Family of 1646 reveals him as a daring designer of a magnificent kwab work of art. We are most grateful to the Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister in Kassel for lending us this picture, which allows Rembrandt to shine in the exhibition as the ‘Bernini of Amsterdam’. His competitor for that distinction was his friend, the great goldsmith Johannes Lutma the Elder, whom for the first time we present as a draughtsman as well. As draughtsman/ designer he was responsible for the largest and most spectacular kwab-project ever undertaken in Amsterdam, the brass choirscreen in the Nieuwe Kerk. We are deeply grateful to the church wardens for their unprecedented willingness to allow us to show two doors from this screen in the exhibition.

3

It is almost unfair to pick out some lenders to the exhibition in this way. From the National Museum in Stockholm to the Nikolaikirche in Eckernförde, from the National Trust to the Victoria and Albert Museum, many organizations and individuals have reacted favourably to our requests for loans, many of them immodest and difficult to realize. We were particularly dependent on liberal collaboration from abroad in order to show the European dimen­sion of kwab. That ambition fits the general policy of the Rijksmuseum to present Dutch art in an international context. We are most grateful to all those who have temporarily entrusted their treasures to our care. We are confident that kwab will be given a new lease of life through this singular assembly of widely differing works of art.

For the realization of the exhibition and this publication the Rijksmuseum has received generous support from the following funds within the Rijksmuseum Fonds: the Ernst Nijkerk Fonds, the Fonds Dirk Jan van Orden and the Rijsterborgh Fonds, as well as from Hans and Hedy de Klerk.

In addition, the exhibition was realized with the support of the M.A.O.C. Gravin van Bylandt Stichting, the Holland America Line and the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. We are extremely grateful for their help in organizing this manifestation on an aspect of the culture of our seventeenth century that, little known though it may be, seems unusually modern and relevant to present-day concerns.

Taco Dibbits General Director of the Rijksmuseum

Detail of the choir screen of the Nieuwe Kerk, Amsterdam, c. 1654 (FIG. 174)

CONTENTS Foreword Acknowledgments Introduction

3 7 10

1. Courtly inventions: Paulus van Vianen 2. A Ewer as Revolution: Adam van Vianen 3. A Jump in Size 4. Amsterdam Triumphant: Lutma, Rembrandt and Doomer 5. Competition on Paper: Van Vianen versus Lutma 6. Brass in the Church: Johannes Lutma the Elder as Inventor 7. Framed by Kwab 8. Amsterdam and the Netherlands 9. At the Court of Charles I: Christiaen van Vianen 10. A Cabinet from Paris 11. Ohrmuschelstil and Knorpelwerk

20 46 68 90 124 136 160 174 198 216 228

Notes Catalogue Bibliography INDEX of names

250 256 272 281

Detail of a cabinet, Paris, c. 1640 (FIG. 284)

Acknowledgments In writing this book, I owe a great debt of gratitude to a number of fundamental studies that have preceded it. German-speaking scholars have of old taken the lead in the study of ornament and related art forms. W.K. Zülch offers an unusually wide-ranging interpretation of the phenomenon in his study of 1932, Entstehung des Ohrmuschelstiles, but his work is of essential importance nonetheless. In her dissertation of 1973, Das niederländische Ohrmuschel-Ornament, Antje von Graevenitz applied the German manner of describing and interpreting ornament to Dutch kwab.

Johan ter Molen, in his dissertation on the goldsmiths Van Vianen of 1984, assembled an enormous amount of information on these artists, the inventors of kwab, and provided a broader overview of the development of this ornament in a number of later publications.

I thank the last two authors for their advice and support.

Antje von Graevenitz summarized her approach in a most infor­ mative presentation for a Masters’ seminar on the making of this exhibition that I conducted in 2016 at Leiden University. The contributions of the participants in the seminar, Jan de Bruijn, Menno Hendriks, Emma Järvenpää, Raisa van der Knaap, Lise-Milou Lagerwerf, Alexandra Nevill, Verena Ott-Bakhuizen, Anouk Reijmer, Debbie Splinter and Demet Müge Toplupete, provided new insights on a number of subjects. The lack of a comprehensive study of kwab was keenly felt in Leiden. This inspired me to try and fill the gap, rather than produce a conventional exhibition catalogue concentrating on individual entries.

During the organization of the exhibition and the writing of the book many friends, colleagues and owners of works of art were extremely committed and enthusiastic in providing assistance.

Jan Drees took me on a memorable tour of Schleswig-Holstein, arranging access to the work of Hans Gudewerth the Younger.

Eloy Koldeweij allowed me to quote freely from his unpublished dissertation on gilt leather and commented on an early version of my text on the subject. I am also particularly grateful to the following: Stijn Alsteens, Vincent Behaghel de Bueren, Anders Bengtsson, Jan Blaberg, Wolf Burchard, An Van Camp, Peter Capon, Vera Carasso, Sarah Coffin, Caitlin Condell, Meg Craft, Micael Ernstell, Anne Forray-Carlier, Hazel Forsyth, Fritz Fischer, George Gordon, Lizette Gradén, Sarah Grant, Onno Voitus van Hamme, Christel van Hees, Jørgen Hein, Liesbeth Helmus, Nick Humphrey, Ingo Janssen, Ingalill Jansson, Simon Jervis, Prosper de Jong, Kirstin Kennedy, Martin Kiener, Thijs van Kimmenade, Mirjam Knotter, Merit Laine, Heather Lemonedes, Lars Ljungström, Eva Michel, Norbert Middelkoop, Tessa Murdoch, Markus Neuwirth, Magnus Olausson, Inger Olovsson, Laura Plezier, Kathrin Pokorny-Nagel, Paulus Rainer, Christopher Rowell, Xavier Salmon, Frances Sands, Ulrich Schneider, Timothy Schroder, Lorenz Seelig, Mienke Simon Thomas, Eric-Jan Sluijter, Joaneath Spicer, Luke Syson, David Taylor, Lambert van Tuyll van Serooskerken, Pieter Vlaardingerbroek, Christiaan Vogelaar, Christian Walda, James Wehn, Renate van de Weijer, Anja Wiesinger, Harry Williams-Bulkeley, Carla de Wilt, Matthew Winterbottom and Ada de Wit. Within the Rijksmuseum I received an enormous amount of assis­ tance from Esther van der Hoorn, junior curator of decorative arts, and her successor, Ine Castelijns van Beek, who during the past two years worked almost exclusively on the project and who wrote the catalogue section of the present book. I also wish to thank

7

Huub Baija, Joosje van Bennekom, Dirk Jan Biemond, Iskander Breebaart, Taco Dibbits, Jan Dorscheid, Paul van Duin, Robert van Langh, Huigen Leeflang, Suzan Meijer, Arie Pappot, Pieter Roelofs, Marijn Schapelhouman, Frits Scholten, Roxana Schreurs, Harm Stevens and Gregor Weber.

Barbera van Kooij and Geri Klazema edited the book with unwonted devotion and efficiency, assisted by Marieke de Jong. D’Laine Camp copy-edited the English text. Ellen Slob was responsible for the illustrations. Miekie Donner compiled the index. The Image Department worked very hard, in particular Maria Smit and the photographers, Carola van Wijk and Staeske Rebers, who took many new pictures of works of art in the Rijksmuseum. In addition, Rob Erdmann and Frans Pegt devoted much time and creativity to the production of films of Adam van Vianen’s ewer of 1614 and of the Parisian cabinet from Stockholm. René den Engelsman and Gerrit Schreurs, an external photographer, took many pictures in churches.

For the realization of the exhibition a project team was assembled, consisting of Taletta van Berckel, Nicole Delissen, Eva Hermans, Marieke de Klein, Esther Munoz-Grootveld, Frederique van Reij, Iris van Santen, Koen van Santen, Jacobien Schneider, Renate Schoon, Ilse Severijnen, Pauline Stoopman and Cindy van Weele. It was a pleasure and a privilege to work with them all. The collaboration with Keso Dekker, the exhibition designer, and with Irma Boom, assisted by Eva van Bemmelen, who designed the book and the exhibition graphics, was unforgettable.

I was privileged to spend long periods writing and translating at Schloss Strössendorf, the guest of Christoph Freiherr von Seckendorff-Aberdar and Christian Eduard Franke. Norbert Berger is now allergic to the word kwab, but he has been a cheerful support throughout the project. Sadly, my mother did not live to see its completion. In gratitude I dedicate this book to her memory.

Reinier Baarsen

8

Kwab

9

Introduction Kwab is the somewhat unsatisfactory but graphic word used in the Netherlands for the most original contribution ever made by the Dutch to the art of ornament. Kwab, usually called auricular or lobate in English, is too strange a phenomenon to be easily classified.

It is more than just a form of ornament, used to adorn existing surfaces: it can be the substance itself from which a work of art is made. As such, in its most revolutionary aspect, it was created by a few great silversmiths. Their inventions never met with the wider application associated with a style – it may be questioned, therefore, whether it is helpful to speak of a kwab, or auricular, style. The principal objects fashioned entirely from kwab were immediately recognized by both artists and connoisseurs as marvellous works of art. Kwab enjoyed exceptional artistic prestige, perhaps unparalleled in the history of European ornament. Even when the use of kwab forms spread more widely, they retained an obvious strangeness that lent them a particular distinction.

FIG. 2

FIG. 1 Theodorus van Kessel after Adam or Christiaen van Vianen, Title page of Part 1 of the Constighe Modellen, Utrecht, c. 1646–1652. Etching, 216 × 166 mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum (cat. no. 49) FIG. 2 Jacob Lutma after Johannes Lutma the Elder. Title page of the Verscheijde Snakerijen. Amsterdam, 1654. Etching and engraving, 228 × 118 mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; purchased with the support of the F.G. Waller-Fonds

What is kwab?

A kwab is a flabby fold or thickening, for example of a human or animal body. With its vague outline, a kwab looks as if it may change or dissolve at any moment: there is an inherent suggestion of movement. It is the antithesis of a classical, balanced form, and suggests a soft, treacly or slimy substance.

This hardly sounds attractive, and kwab will rarely have produced a sense of beauty.

Nonetheless, auricular forms were used in Dutch art for the greater part of the seventeenth century, which was Holland’s so-called Golden Age. To denote these forms, the word kwabornament was invented in the late nineteenth century.

It was necessary to come up with a term, however flawed, as in the seventeenth century itself the Dutch had not yet coined a word for the auricular. This does not imply that kwab was not recognized as a separate subject. On the contrary: there was even a number of series of prints published exclusively devoted to auricular designs.

Even their long-winded titles, however, do not yield a specific word for these shapes.

If the seventeenth-century Dutch did not attempt to name the forms themselves, they did describe their strange, provoking and unsettling aspect. In 1654 Jacob Lutma published a series of prints of auricular cartouches invented by his father, celebrated Amsterdam silversmith Johannes Lutma the Elder. On the title page they are announced as snakerijen; the Latin text has, even more vaguely, festivitates (FIG. 2).1 Snakerijen were coarse jokes or rustic pranks.

The best-known and largest publication of auricular designs is the Constighe Modellen, a series of engravings of works by the famous silversmith from Utrecht, Adam van Vianen, issued in about 1646– 1652 by his son, Christiaen (see pp. 125–127). The title emphasizes the artistic, constighe aspect (FIG. 1).2 The ‘models’ are constituted of ‘various silver Vessels, and other spirited (sinnighe) works’;3 the French title has caprizieuzes for sinnighe, highlighting the capricious and unexpected nature of the designs. These are so extraordinary that they could have only been devised by a great artist: they were ‘invented and drawn by the famous Adam van Vianen’.4 The focus is on the inventions (the French text has inventées), visualized in drawings (desseignées). Only in the last instance is it recorded that the artist executed them in a brilliantly virtuoso manner (‘mostly hammered by him out of a single piece of silver’).5 In this way the three principal activities of a creative artist are presented. The reader is told that the book is meant for ‘lovers of the arts’,6 hence not primarily for executant artists or craftsmen who might extract some practical use from it. These art lovers are concerned with the genius of Adam van Vianen: the title-page of the second volume of the book is followed by his portrait, as it may be assumed that the physiognomy of such a famous artist is of interest to them as well (FIG. 3).

Shortly after the completion of the Constighe Modellen, Amsterdam publisher Cornelis Danckerts issued a set of fourteen engravings after inventions by Van Vianen, Lutma and Amsterdam artist Gerbrand van den Eeckhout, which did explicitly address silversmiths, 11

44

Adam van Vianen

45

A ‘photograph album’ from the early eighteenth century It is hazardous to try and analyse the oeuvre of a goldsmith on the basis of his surviving FIG. 68 Unknown artist, Silver Cup, Made in 1625 by Adam work, as objects of silver and gold have so often been melted down because of the van Vianen, Amsterdam, c. 1726. Graphite, pen and black ink, in grey, 320 × 238 mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; monetary value of the bullion. Although the fame of the Van Vianens has doubtlessly led brush purchased with the support of Stichting Beaulieu et Beaux to the survival of a considerable portion of their work, it is nevertheless certain that more Arts/Rijksmuseum Fonds, the K.F. Hein Fonds and an has been lost than preserved. To recall a single instance: no single silver vessel by Paulus anonymous bequest FIG. 69 Unknown artist, Silver Salt, made in 1625, by Adam van Vianen that belonged to Rudolph II and his successors is known at present. van Vianen, Amsterdam, c. 1726. Graphite, pen and black ink, The loss is irretrievable, but the recent discovery of a group of drawings probably made brush in grey, 322 × 238 mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; with the support of Stichting Beaulieu et Beaux in 1726 or shortly thereafter has enriched our knowledge of Adam van Vianen’s work in purchased Arts/Rijksmuseum Fonds, the K.F. Hein Fonds and an an unexpected way.87 The drawings depict twenty silver works of art in his style, some of anonymous bequest them in more than one view, as well as five scenes like those he chased on his ewer of 1619. As some of these objects have survived, the drawings can be shown to be almost photographic in their accuracy (FIG. 68, see also FIGS. 258, 259, 261). It is as if an album of photographs has surfaced, from a period long before the invention of that technique.

There can be no doubt that the artist has drawn the objects from life. But when were so many works of art in the style of Van Vianen together? That question inevitably leads to the collection of Anthoni Grill, a well-to-do scion of a family of goldsmiths from Augsburg, some of whom settled in Amsterdam in the seven­ teenth century (see pp. 108, 190, FIG. 135).

Anthoni moved to Amsterdam as well and FIG. 69 assembled a large collection of works of FIG. 68 art there, which was sold in the year after his death in 1727. The sale catalogue lists no fewer than 27 silver works of art as being

by Adam van Vianen, and another seven by ‘Vianen’.88 These attributions were certainly not all accurate, although the fact that the Van Vianens habitually signed their work must have considerably aided the compiler of the catalogue. In a few cases it has been possible to check the attribution, and in most of them it proved to be correct (see FIGS. 66–68, 258, 259, 261). Putting the descriptions in the catalogue next to the drawings, an all but complete match can be proposed, albeit a highly speculative one, due to the summary nature of the descriptions. The drawings all appear to show objects that were ascribed to Adam van Vianen.

Most of those objects are in Adam van Vianen’s FIG. 70 FIG. 71 late manner, when he often assigned an important role to human figures. An example is a salt-cellar of 1625, supported by Bacchus (FIG. 69).89 Its dish is chased with naturalistic grape vines; only the base has some auricular ornamentation. A lobate bowl with a tall handle may provide an idea of the ‘vessel’ that Adam van Vianen made for Torrentius in 1620 (FIG. 70). 90 A ewer or cup with a shell-shaped body (FIG. 71)91 is close to the exceptional cup of 1625 (FIGS. 66, 67). Other drawings show types of objects of which no examples are known to have survived (see FIGS. 262–265), but FIG. 70 Unknown artist, Silver Bowl and the Inside of a Silver the impression that Adam never surpassed his ewer of 1614 remains unchallenged.

Cup, both Probably by Adam van Vianen, Amsterdam, c. 1726.

Graphite, pen and black ink, brush in grey, 349 × 239 mm.

Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; purchased with the support of Stichting Beaulieu et Beaux Arts/Rijksmuseum Fonds, the K.F. Hein Fonds and an anonymous bequest FIG. 71 Unknown artist, Silver Ewer, Probably by Adam van Vianen, Amsterdam, c. 1726. Graphite, pen and black ink, brush in grey, 331 × 232 mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; purchased with the support of Stichting Beaulieu et Beaux Arts/Rijksmuseum Fonds, the K.F. Hein Fonds and an anonymous bequest

62

FIG. 72

Disegno Adam van Vianen was celebrated for his unsurpassed ability to fashion fantastic works of art from a single sheet of silver. How did he know during this process which form he wished to achieve? He must have had a precise idea in mind, in order to distribute the metal accordingly. He probably worked out his shapes in models of wax or clay, perishable bozzetti that have not survived. Upon his death in 1648, Amsterdam silversmith Lucas Pfreint left numerous ‘copper impressions by Adam van Vianen’, all numbered in chalk, as well as a number of ‘modelled’ objects, or parts thereof, also by Adam van Vianen.92 It is conceivable that these were models from the workshop of the Utrecht silversmith.

When Adam’s son Christiaen published his father’s Constighe Modellen more than twenty years after his death, he wrote that Adam had ‘found and drawn’ them (see pp. 11, 125–127, FIG. 1). This implies that he based his publication on drawings by his father, which had presumably been preserved in his workshop; he does not explicitly mention threedimensional models.

There is a single group of eight drawings that is traditionally – at least since the late eighteenth century – attributed to Adam van Vianen.93 This attribution was probably based on the immediate connection between some of these drawings and prints in the Constighe Modellen. For instance, the top one of two salt-cellars with covers drawn in brown and black ink is copied on print 20 from that work (FIG. 72). The engraver, Theodorus van Kessel, has elaborated the faces of the mermaids in particular, as well as defining all parts more sharply. A drawing in graphite with brown and black ink of a quarter of an oval dish is even closer to print 29 from the Constighe Modellen, Van Kessel’s intervention being less marked (FIG. 73). On another drawing, executed in the same technique on the same thick grey paper, various ideas for borders of dishes are given, some more finished than others; these are not directly connected to an engraving (FIG. 74). Other techniques are represented within this small group as well; at least one drawing appears to be by a different hand altogether.94 Among these drawings two small, closely related studies of triangular objects, perhaps salt-cellars with covers, stand out because of the beautifully rendered suggestion of the reflection of light on silver, of its ever-changing effect (FIGS. 75, 76). Although this does not automatically imply that the artist was a gifted goldsmith, it is nonetheless tempting to regard these two drawings, which were perhaps too free to be copied in the Constighe Modellen, as absolutely autograph works by Adam van Vianen. It is equally tempting to assume that this varied group of drawings, each of which is related to the style of Adam van Vianen’s work in silver, has a common history that goes back even farther than the late eighteenth century. Perhaps they all originated in the workshop of Adam and Christiaen. Some may be by the son, who mentions on the dedicatory page of the Constighe Modellen that some work of his is also reproduced in that publication (see p. 126).

In view of the heterogeneous nature of the drawings, it seems unlikely that they were especially made in preparation of the production of the Constighe Modellen. Two direct studies for prints in that publication are preserved elsewhere; these are clearly meant to instruct the engraver. Although they are executed in a spirited manner, their character is determined by the suggestion of engraved lines.95 In view of this it seems justified to interpret the group of eight drawings as exemplifying the way in which Adam van Vianen rendered his inventio in disegno, as part of the process that resulted in his works of art.

FIG. 72 Attributed to Adam van Vianen, Design for Two SaltCellars, Utrecht, c. 1610–1627. Graphite, pen and brown and black ink on pale brown paper, 328 × 195 mm. Stockholm, Nationalmuseum (cat. no. 35)

63

FIG. 203 (DETAIL)

163

FIG. 204 Cornelis Jonson van Ceulen I, Portrait of Jasper Schade, Utrecht, 1654. Oil on canvas, 113.5 × 91 cm, in the original frame of gilded limewood. Enschede, Rijksmuseum Twenthe (cat. no. 80) FIG. 205 Cornelis Jonson van Ceulen I, Portrait of Cornelia Strick van Linschoten, Utrecht, 1654. Oil on canvas, 113.5 × 90.8 cm, in the original frame of gilded limewood.

Enschede, Rijksmuseum Twenthe (cat. no. 81)

FIG. 206

FIG. 206 Unknown woodcarver, Picture frame, the Netherlands, c. 1650–1660. Gilded limewood, h. 53, w. 47 cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; purchased with the support of the Rijksmuseum Fonds (cat. no. 116) FIG. 207 Gabriel Metsu, Man and Woman at a Virginal, Amsterdam, c. 1665. Oil on panel, 38.4 × 32.2 cm. London, The National Gallery (cat. no. 86)

The earliest examples Notwithstanding these indications for the birth of the auricular frame in the 1640s or perhaps even slightly before, the earliest datable examples made for paintings of manageable size are from 1654. They are the gilded limewood frames of the portraits painted in that year by Cornelis Jonson van Ceulen I of Jasper Schade and Cornelia

Strick van Linschoten (FIGS. 204, 205). The frames are characterized by a fine play of abstract auricular forms that roll in- and outwards like waves, creating the odd suggestion of a mask. These sophisticated frames perfectly match the elegant, coolly distinguished portraits that show the couple against loosely painted draperies. The narrow moulding that separates the portraits from their lively surrounds acerbates the distance exuded by the sitters.

Jasper and Cornelia Schade, who were married in 1649, lived in Utrecht, and Jonson moved there in 1652. It is therefore likely that the frames were, like the portraits themselves, made in that city, although the artist may possibly have advised his clients to order them from Amsterdam, where he had worked from 1646 until 1652. The frames, which in no way refer to the sitters, were probably not especially designed for this commission. Other examples were made according to the same pattern, as a single, somewhat smaller frame in the Musée des Arts Décoratifs in Paris exemplifies.245 Jonson van Ceulen was born in England in 1593 as the son of Dutch parents. He worked there until he moved to Middelburg in 1643.246 Auricular frames probably came into fashion in London earlier than in the Netherlands (see pp. 210–212), which reinforces the suggestion that Jonson exercised a decisive influence on Schade’s choice of frames.

Purely auricular frames of this kind were also made in smaller sizes. A pair in the Rijksmuseum that have become separated from their pictures are so close to the Schade frames that they may actually be from the same workshop (FIG. 206). These smaller frames were perhaps made for portraits as well, as those were particularly often painted in pairs.

164

This book was published on the occasion of the exhibition Kwab. Dutch Design in the Age of Rembrandt held at the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam from 30 June to 16 September 2018.

The exhibition and this publication were made possible by: Rijksmuseum Fonds: Hans en Hedy de Klerk Ernst Nijkerk Fonds Fonds Dirk Jan van Orden Rijsterborgh Fonds

Author Reinier Baarsen, with a contribution by Ine Castelijns van Beek Translation Catalogue: Gerard Forde Text editor D’Laine Camp Project coordination Geri Klazema, Rijksmuseum Image research Ellen Slob, Rijksmuseum Index Miekie Donner Photography Image Department of the Rijksmuseum and other institutions mentioned in the captions, to which the following should be added: Fig. 12: © 2018. De Agostini Picture, Library / Scala, Florence Fig. 19: Studio Buitenhof Figs. 20, 150, 151, 244, 271: Tom Haartsen Fig. 25: © Beaux-Arts de Paris, Dist. RMN-Grand Palais / image Beaux-arts de Paris Figs. 54, 59: RKD Netherlands Institute for Art History Figs. 57, 267: Sotheby’s London Figs. 64, 65: Christie’s London Fig. 80: Els Horst Fig. 85: DNP Art Communications Co., Ltd. Tokyo Fig. 86: Historic England Fig. 92: Luisa Oliveira / José Paulo Ruas / Direção-Geral do Património Cultural / Arquivo de Documentação Fotográfica (DGPC / ADF) Fig. 93: Ralf Turander Fig. 99: bpk / Gemäldegalerie, SMB / Jörg P. Anders Figs. 102, 103, 214, 215, 216: © Centraal Museum, Utrecht / Adriaan van Dam Fig. 133: Roelien van Neck Figs. 136, 137: CC-BY-SA John Lee, National Museum of Denmark Fig. 141: Iben Kaufmann

Fig. 143: bpk / Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden / Elke Estel / Hans-Peter Klut Fig. 144: © The State Hermitage Museum / Photo by Vladimir Terebenin Figs. 147, 148, 277-280: National Trust Images Fig. 165: bpk / Hamburger Kunsthalle / Elke Walford Figs. 174, 177, 178, 182, 184-188, 190-195, 197, 198: Gerrit Schreurs Fig. 175: Lex van Lieshout ANP XTRA Fig. 179: Thijs van Bruggen Figs. 180, 181, 218, 229, 235, 239, 281, 284-297: Rijksmuseum, Image Department Fig. 196: Peter Schickert / Alamy Stock Photo Figs. 202, 204: Benno Ellerbroek Fig. 210: Studio Tromp Fig. 260: bpk / Bayerische Staatsgemälde­ sammlungen Fig. 276: Jeff Gilbert / Alamy Stock Photo Fig. 296: Tiffany Matson Fig. 303: Reinier Baarsen Figs. 309–316: Holger Ceglars Figs. 316–320: Peter Cox Fig. 326: Driejuni, Doorn

Publisher Rijksmuseum P.O. Box 74888 1070 DN Amsterdam The Netherlands publicaties@rijksmuseum.nl rijksmuseum.nl

Cover Adam van Vianen, Ewer, Utrecht, 1614.

Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum (fig. 48)

ISBN 978-94-6208 -428-5 NUR 646

Design Irma Boom (concept), assisted

by Eva van Bemmelen Lithography and printing Lenoirschuring, Amsterdam Binder Boekbinderij van Waarden, Zaandam Paper IBO One 60 gr.

Symbol Matt Plus 130 gr.

founder

main sponsors

Distribution nai010 Publishers Mauritsweg 23 3012 JR Rotterdam The Netherlands sales@nai010.com nai010.com © Copyright 2018 texts: Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam © Copyright 2018 photographs: Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, and other institutions mentioned in the captions and the photographic acknowledgments

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form, or by other means, electronic or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher.