Portrait of Jahangir

Watermark: None visible through lining

Laid down

...; collection Jonathan Richardson the elder (1667-1745), London (L. 2184); his sale, London (Cock), 22 January (11 February) 1747 sqq., no. 70 (‘A book of Indian Drawings, by Rembrandt, 25 in number’), with 24 other drawings, withdrawn;¹¹Copy National Art Library, Victoria and Albert Museum, London. ...; sale, Mary Venetia James et al. [section Banks], London (Sotheby’s), 14 July 1926, no. 5 (‘An Indian Prince (copy after an Indian miniature). Pen and bistre wash. 18 cm. By 12 cm.’), £300, to the dealer P. & D. Colnaghi, & Co. London;²²Copy RKD. ...; collection Isaac de Bruijn (1872-1953) and his wife, Johanna Geertruida de Bruijn-van der Leeuw (1877-1960), Spiez and Muri, near Bern, by 1929;³³According to London 1929, no. 598 by whom donated to the museum, 1949, but kept in usufruct; transferred to the museum (L. 2228), 1960

ObjectNumber: RP-T-1961-82

Credit line: De Bruijn-van der Leeuw Bequest, Muri, Switzerland

Most of the twenty-three known drawings by Rembrandt after Mughal paintings are portraits of Mughal rulers and courtiers at the seventeenth-century courts of Emperor Jahangir (1569-1627) and his son and successor, Shah Jahan (1592-1666). Besides the twenty-one examples assembled by Otto and Eva Benesch in the 1973 edition of the Rembrandt drawings corpus,⁴⁴Benesch, nos. 1187-1206 and 1194A. two others have since been identified: the Medallion Portrait of Muhammad Adil Shah of Bijpur, formerly in the collection of Mrs Christian Aall in New York, later in that of Dr William K. Ehrenfeld (a noted collector of Indian paintings), and now in the Achenbach Foundation for Graphic Arts in the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (inv. no. 2000.70),⁵⁵W.W. Robinson, ‘Review of P. Schatborn, Drawings by Rembrandt, his Anonymous Pupils and Followers, The Hague 1985’, Kunstchronik 41 (1988), p. 585 from pp. 579-86, fig. 4a; J.A. Ganz, Rembrandt’s Century, exh. cat. San Francisco (De Young Museum) 2013, p. 45, fig. 41. and another, representing two female heads, which was seen in a French private collection by Frits Lugt in 1966 and by Martin Royalton-Kisch in 2002. There were once at least two more, for in 1747 a ‘book of lndian drawings by Rembrandt, 25 in number’, was briefly offered for auction from the collection of the British portraitist and connoisseur Jonathan Richardson the elder.⁶⁶According to a copy of the sale catalogue in the National Art Library, Victoria and Albert Museum, London, the lot was ‘withdrawn’ before the auction. The J. Paul Getty Museum has brought together the majority of the Mughal copies, with the exception of the drawing in the French private collection (which remains unpublished), in the recent exhibition Rembrandt and the Inspiration of India (13 March-24 June 2018). This show, which included all four examples in the Rijksmuseum, was the first time that the works from Richardson’s collection have been reunited since the mid-eighteenth century.

Rembrandt himself owned what are presumed to have been the original models from which his series of drawings was made. The Mughal paintings were described as ‘curious miniature drawings’ in the inventory of his household goods made on 25-26 July 1656 following his bankruptcy: ‘An album filled with curious miniature drawings, together with woodcut and copper engravings of various sorts of costumes’.⁷⁷RD 1656/12, no. 203: ‘Een ditto (kunst boeck) vol curieuse minijateur teeckeninge nevens verscheijde hout en kopere printen van alderhande dragt.’ Although referred to as ‘drawings’, they are mostly coloured and are what scholars now term ‘paintings’. The album’s prints of figures in different costumes might well have included the series of twelve figures in Italian dress by an anonymous engraver after drawings by Rembrandt’s teacher, Pieter Lastman.⁸⁸Hollstein, X, nos. 11-22; these prints were issued by I. Covens and C. Mortier and used to decorate the borders of a map of Italy published c. 1650 by Dankert Dankerts, which was based on a map of 1608 by Giovanni Antonio Magini; A. Tümpel and P. Schatborn et al., Pieter Lastman: Leermeester van Rembrandt/The Man who Taught Rembrandt, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Museum Het Rembrandthuis) 1991-92, no. 39. The Mughal paintings in Rembrandt’s collection had probably arrived in the Dutch Republic via Dutch artists who worked for the Verenigde Oostindische Compagnie (VOC or Dutch East India Company), which had an office in Agra, and later for Shah Jahan.⁹⁹M.J. Bok, ‘The Migration of Netherlandish Artists to Asia in the Seventeenth Century’, in T. DaCosta Kaufmann and M. North (eds,) Mediating Netherlandish Art and Material Culture in Asia, Amsterdam 2014, pp. 177-204; K.H. Corrigan, J. van Capen and F. Diercks (eds.), Asia in Amsterdam: The Culture of Luxury in the Golden Age, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum)/Salem (MA) (Peabody Essex Museum) 2015-16, p. 287. It is not known what happened to Rembrandt’s ‘curious miniature drawings’ after the sale of the works on paper from his collection on 20 December 1658.¹⁰¹⁰RD, nos. 1658/19 and 1658/30. The group was probably split up and dispersed to various collections.

Some of Rembrandt’s drawings closely resemble the Mughal paintings that form part of the wall decoration of Schloss Schönbrunn, near Vienna.¹¹¹¹J. Strzychowski and H. Gluck, Asiatische Miniaturenmalerei, Klagenfurt 1933, pp. 18-21. Shortly before 1762, Empress Maria Theresa had the room now called the Millionenzimmer decorated with 266 Mughal paintings mounted in rocaille-shaped cartouches within carved wooden frames. We cannot, however, be certain that these versions are any of the ones that Rembrandt actually owned, for such Mughal art works were often copied and repeated by local artists with very little variation (sometimes even generations later), and many of Rembrandt’s drawings do not correspond precisely with those now in Schönbrunn. Moreover, the Schönbrunn paintings are now considered to be mostly provincial work of the late seventeenth or early eighteenth centuries, that is, too late for Rembrandt to have possessed them.¹²¹²P. Lunsingh Scheurleer, ‘De Mogol-Miniaturen van Rembrandt’, in H. van den Muyzenberg and T. de Bruijn (eds.), Waarom Sanskrit? Honderdvijfentwintig Jaar Sanskrit in Nederland, Leiden 1991, pp. 99-103 from pp. 95-115; E. Koch, ‘The “Moghuleries” of the Milionenzimmer, Schönbrunn Palace, Vienna’, in R. Crill, S. Stronge and A. Topsfield (eds.), Arts of Mughal India: Studies in Honour of Robert Skelton, Ahmedabad, India/London 2004, pp. 153-55 from pp. 152-67; W.W. Robinson, Drawings from the Age of Bruegel, Rubens, and Rembrandt: Highlights from the Collection of the Harvard Art Museums, New Haven/London 2016, p. 362, n. 9. However, they do have inscriptions in Dutch on their versos.

The relationship between Rembrandt’s drawings and his Mughal prototypes is interesting. Since there is a clear difference in style, they can scarcely be termed ‘copies’ in the strict sense of the word. Rembrandt basically remained true to his own style and was not interested in copying the paintings as accurately as possible. Inspired by his models, he created a new and unique type of drawing, recording the figures as if they had been sketched from life rather than from a two-dimensional source. Yet the technique of the originals did influence Rembrandt’s style. This can be seen in the fine handling of line and in the careful, but fluent layers of subtly coloured washes. It is, of course, unfair to characterize the Mughal models as stiff in comparison to Rembrandt’s drawings, as some authors have done: they reflect the established modes of expression for Mughal artists at the time. But Rembrandt’s experience of drawing from life led him to make the poses of the Indian figures more natural as he was copying them.¹³¹³B.P.J. Broos, ‘Rembrandts Indische miniaturen’, Spiegel Historiael 15 (1980), p. 212 from pp. 210-18. He lent their faces the same expressive quality that he would have given a living model.

Rembrandt’s copies are usually dated to about 1656, the year of the bankruptcy inventory and the year of a dated etching, Abraham Entertaining the Angels (e.g. inv. no. RP-P-1954-135),¹⁴¹⁴B. 29; New Hollstein: Rembrandt, no. 295. whose composition and individual figures seem to depend on one of the drawn copies showing four Mughal elders, now in the British Museum in London (inv. no. 1895,0915.1275).¹⁵¹⁵Benesch, no. 1187; M. Royalton-Kisch, Catalogue of Drawings by Rembrandt and his School in the British Museum, coll. cat. (online 2010), no. 56. However, since Rembrandt’s collection of works on paper was not sold until 1658, he could have carried on making copies of the Mughal originals for at least another couple of years. The style of the drawings resembles other drawings from the 1650s and, to some extent, from the 1660s. These copies, in turn, may have influenced Rembrandt’s own drawings to some degree.¹⁶¹⁶There are two drawings that in their brief, sketchy treatment of line somewhat resemble the copies after Mughal paintings: the Dismissal of Hagar, in the British Museum, London (inv. no. 1910,0212.175; Benesch, no. 962; M. Royalton-Kisch, Catalogue of Drawings by Rembrandt and his School in the British Museum, coll. cat. (online 2010), no. 50), and Christ and the Apostles with the Woman who Had an Issue of Blood, in the Albertina in Vienna (inv. no. 8793; Benesch, no. 1052). One characteristic of the copies is that no backgrounds have been indicated, although they appear in many of the known Mughal models. Only the figures were important to Rembrandt as can be seen after all in many of his drawings in which only figures and their interrelationships are depicted.

The Rijksprentenkabinet owns four drawings with Mughal subjects, three of which bear the mark of Jonathan Richardson the elder and must surely have been part of the album from his collection offered from sale in 1747 (the present sheet and inv. nos. RP-T-1930-41 and RP-T-1961-83). The fourth, Indian Archer (inv. no. RP-T-1897-A-3203), does not. Nor is the mark present on the example in the Harvard Art Museums/Fogg Museum in Cambridge (MA) (inv. no. 1932.366).¹⁷¹⁷Benesch, no. 1198; W.W. Robinson, Drawings from the Age of Bruegel, Rubens, and Rembrandt: Highlights from the Collection of the Harvard Art Museums, New Haven/London 2016, no. 72. The absence of the Richardson mark on both sheets, and the previous misidentification of their support as European paper, led some scholars to doubt the attribution to Rembrandt.¹⁸¹⁸Moreover, Martin Royalton-Kisch has questioned the attribution to Rembrandt of the whole group, proposing as an alternative Aert de Gelder or another pupil; M. Royalton-Kisch, Catalogue of Drawings by Rembrandt and his School in the British Museum, coll. cat. (online 2010), under no. 56; E. Hinterding and A. Kofuku, Rembrandt: The Quest for Chiaroscuro, exh. cat. Tokyo (National Museum of Western Art)/Nagoya (Nagoya City Art Museum) 2011, p. 120. However, it merely suggests either that the pair never belonged to Richardson, or that they were once the left half of sheets that were later cut in two, with the mark – always applied on the right side or centre of the sheet – remaining only on the other half. Certainly there are examples of drawings that combine two figures, such as Emperor Jahangir Receiving an Officer and Two Mughal Noblemen, in the British Museum (inv. nos. Gg,2.263 and 1895,0915.1281),¹⁹¹⁹Benesch, nos. 1190 and 1204; M. Royalton-Kisch, Catalogue of Drawings by Rembrandt and his School in the British Museum, coll. cat. (online 2010), nos. 57 and 60. and Two Mughal Noblemen in The Morgan Library & Museum in New York (inv. no. I, 208).²⁰²⁰Benesch, no. 1203; J. Shoaf Turner, Dutch Drawings in the Pierpont Morgan Library: Seventeenth to Nineteenth Centuries, coll. cat. 2 vols., New York 2006, no. 222. In addition, another sheet in The Morgan, Indian Warrior with a Shield (inv. no. I, 207),²¹²¹Benesch, no. 1201; J. Shoaf Turner, Dutch Drawings in the Pierpont Morgan Library: Seventeenth to Nineteenth Centuries, coll. cat. 2 vols., New York 2006, no. 221. shows clear traces of another figure on the right trimmed edge.

Four of the known drawings – including inv. nos. RP-T-1930-41 and RP-T-1961-83 – bear the mark of Richard Houlditch.²²²²The other two are King Timur on his Throne, in the Louvre, Paris (inv. no. RF 693; Benesch, no. 1188; P. Schatborn, C. van Tuyll van Serooskerken and H. Grollemund, Rembrandt dessinateur: Chefs-d’oeuvres des collections en France, exh. cat. Paris (Musée du Louvre) 2006-07, no. 60) and the Portrait of an Indian Woman in an Oval, in Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Rotterdam (inv. no. R 35 (PK); Benesch, no. 1206; J. Giltaij, The Drawings by Rembrandt and his School in the Museum Boymans-van Beuningen, coll. cat. Rotterdam 1988, no. 31). Until recently, it was assumed that this was Richard Houlditch the elder (c. 1659-1736), who would have owned the drawings before Richardson. The latest research, however, shows that although the collection was begun by Richard the elder, it was his son, Richard Houlditch the younger (d. 1760), who applied the collector’s mark,²³²³L. Lippincott, Selling Art in Georgian London: The Rise of Arthur Pond, New Haven 1983 (Studies in British Art), p. 172, n. 76. who was an active buyer at the 1747 Richardson sale and who may have got hold of some of the sheets from the withdrawn album of Rembrandt drawings through the mediation of Richardson’s son, Jonathan Richardson the younger. Another four of the Mughal subjects – including one in the British Museum (inv. no. 1910,0212.182),²⁴²⁴Benesch, no. 1199; M. Royalton-Kisch, Catalogue of Drawings by Rembrandt and his School in the British Museum, coll. cat. (online 2010), no. 58. long paired with inv. no. RP-T-1961-83 – were eventually owned by Thomas Hudson, the brother-in-law of Jonathan Richardson the younger and the former pupil of his father.

Jahangir – whose name in Persian means ‘conqueror of the world’ (literally ‘world-seizer’) – was the eldest surviving son of Emperor Akbar (1542-1605). Like his father, he was an able administrator, but his reign is best known for its cultural achievements. He was fascinated by art, science and architecture, and from a young age showed a particular interest in painting. Under him, portraiture flourished, evident in the original prototype of the present sheet, as well as the models for the museum’s two portraits of his son, Shah Jahan (inv. nos. RP-T-1930-41 and RP-T-1961-83).

Peter Schatborn, 2017

W.R. Valentiner, Rembrandt: Die Meisters Handzeichnungen, 2 vols., Stuttgart and elsewhere 1925-34, II (1934), no. 639 (c. 1656); O. Benesch, The Drawings of Rembrandt (rev. edn. by E. Benesch), 6 vols., London 1973 (orig. edn. 1954-57), no. 1191 (c. 1654-56); B.P.J. Broos, Index to the Formal Sources of Rembrandt’s Art, Maarssen 1977, p. 120; P. Schatborn, Catalogus van de Nederlandse tekeningen in het Rijksprentenkabinet, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, IV: Tekeningen van Rembrandt, zijn onbekende leerlingen en navolgers/Drawings by Rembrandt, his Anonymous Pupils and Followers, coll. cat. The Hague 1985, no. 57, with earlier literature; M. Westermann, Rembrandt, London 2000, pp. 228-29, fig. 148; M. Schapelhouman, Rembrandt and the Art of Drawing, Amsterdam 2006, pp. 19-24, fig. 14; K.H. Corrigan, J. van Capen and F. Diercks (eds.), Asia in Amsterdam: The Culture of Luxury in the Golden Age, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum)/Salem (MA) (Peabody Essex Museum) 2015-16, no. 79c; S. Schrader and W.W. Robinson, Rembrandt and the Inspiration of India, exh. cat. Los Angeles (J. Paul Getty Museum) (forthcoming 2018)

P. Schatborn, 2017, 'Rembrandt van Rijn, Portrait of Jahangir, c. 1656 - c. 1658', in J. Turner (ed.), Drawings by Rembrandt and his School in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.28576