Gershman
Gershman
Gershman
ZHENYA GERSHMAN
In memory of Leonid Matsikh
here are many mysteries and much contradictory evidence surrounding Rembrandts life. Why was
Rembrandt, the ninth of ten children, the only one to be enrolled in Latin school? Around age fifteen, why was he then
pulled out to apprentice as a painter with Jacob Isaacz van
Swanenburg? Why was Swanenburg, whom we would call a
second-rate artist, chosen as a teacher? How did Rembrandt,
the son of a miller, cross paths with Constantijn Huygens,
one of the most erudite people in the Netherlands and a secretary to Stadholder, prince of Orange? How did Rembrandt,
a newcomer to Amsterdam and only in his mid-twenties, become one of the most famous and sought-after artists almost
overnight? And why did he then have to declare bankruptcy
in 1656, dying in near poverty, abandoned by most of his students and prior collectors? Most of these questions have been
dealt with by puzzled art historians in one way or another.
Each of their hypotheses often contradicts the otherand in
some cases, Rembrandts history is constructed solely from
guesses. The actual evidence of his biography is largely based
on two sources, the first of which is a 350-word account by
Jan Jansz from 1641, part of his Leiden city guidebook.1
Even this contemporary description of Rembrandts career is
full of generalities and subjective interpretations.
The other famous source of facts about Rembrandt is the exhaustive bankruptcy list of his possessions, which, though it
tells us a lot of details about Rembrandts private life, is full of
gaps when it comes to explaining his work. Titles of Rembrandt paintings were attributed posthumously, with paintings
often being revisited on numerous occasions with diametrically
opposing theories and subject attributions. Such is the case with
arion 21.3 winter 2014
80
the great late painting of St. Bartholomew, whose identity morphed over the centuries from assassin, to doctor, to cook, and
finally to apostle. Many subjects remain in question, as in the
famous example of Night Watchwhich is actually not a night
scene. Rembrandt himself seemed either not to be concerned or
was purposefully cautious about leaving any written document
about his life or artistic practice. Paradoxically, he left more autobiographical paintings than any artist
of his time, including over seventy selfportraits and numerous painted, drawn,
or etched images of his wife, children, and
companionsas H. Perry Chapman appropriately calls him, a self-portraitist of
unmatched power.2 In addition, Rembrandt used his signature as another
method of self-insertionwhen signed,
his presence was always proudly asserted.
Over the years, he continually revised and
honed a particular way of signing his
work. By 1632, he had dropped all of the
auxiliary information such as his hometown, his last name, and the reference to
his father to focus primarily on what
makes him unique, which he represented
with his first name alone. Let us begin our
investigation into Rembrandts mysterious contradictions with an examination
of his signature.
Fig. 1
1. d for . . . ?
sometime in the early 1630s (probably around 1633), Rembrandt made a significant change to his identity that, mysteriously, remained uncommented upon by his contemporaries.
For some reason, he added a letter d to his first name, changing Rembrant to Rembrandt (fig. 1). Despite the large number
of paintings and etchings signed with this modified first name,
Zhenya Gershman
81
most of the documents that mention him during his lifetime retain the original Rembrant spelling. An interesting comparison is presented by a legal document from 1665 that was
drawn up by Titus in which Rembrandts name lacks the letter
d in the body of the text, yet prominently displays it in the
fancy signature by Rembrandt at the bottom (fig. 2). While
scholars have noted the change in the spelling of Rembrandts
name, they have not offered an explanation to account for it.
To explore the reasons behind Rembrandts new identity, first,
lets consider the etymology of the name Rembrant. It derives
from a Germanic name containing the word sword. Some
scholars explain Rembrandts appearances with a sword in his
paintings as indicative of the meaning of his name. By adding
the extra letter, though not making a phonetic change, the
meaning of the word was altered. The name can be divided into
two distinct words: Rem and brandt (in a number of his
signatures after 1632, Rembrandt emphasized this duality by
either capitalizing the letter B in the middle of his name or literally separating the word into two: Rem brandt). In Dutch,
Rem stands for brake (or obstruct) and brandt translates as fire (or light). The combination of these two
words rem and brandt creates a wordplay that means
obstructed light. In fact, whenever Rembrandts name is
mentioned, one of the first associations with his art is the mastery of light and dark. The radiant light that illuminates his canvases, panels, paper, and copper prints, is accentuated by rich,
dense, and velvety areas of darkness or obscurity. Thus, Rembrandts revised name becomes a pun reflecting the quintessential ability of creating illuminated darkness or dimmed light.
Additionally, in Western esoteric tradition the letter d
carries important connotations. It evokes the word Deus
meaning Godbut at the same time, as Antoine Faivre
points outA principle of knowledge, an organ of the soul,
called the Light of Nature, reveals the magnalia Dei. . . .
The task . . . of the people . . . is to learn how to receive this
Light of Nature in themselves.3 Rembrandts modification
of his first name is indicative of his understanding of this con-
82
cept and reflects his artistic identity as both receiving and reflecting the light of nature through his art. Furthermore,
Rembrandt repeatedly added a beautifully rendered letter f
after signing his name. Scholars have interpreted this to mean
fecit or made by. A master of multiple meanings, Rembrandt may have enjoyed the potential of this letter to also
evoke the word frater or brother. Thus his signature
would be read as Rembrandt, fraternally, or Rembrandt,
brother, implying his belonging to a closed fraternal society.
There is another piece of evidence in support of the use of
this abbreviation. Albert C. Mackey, in his Encyclopedia
Figs. 2ab
of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences, recorded: Abbreviations of technical terms or of official titles are of very extensive
use in Freemasonry. . . . A Masonic abbreviation is distinguished
by three points . . . in a triangular form following the letter.4 It
was a unique form of coded communication by which one
Freemason signaled to other Brothers. Mackey goes through the
Fig. 3
Zhenya Gershman
83
Figs. 4ab
84
Fig. 5
Zhenya Gershman
85
3. know thyself
just as in his preoccupation with light and dark, Rembrandts
ongoing practice of self-portraiture is also akin to the Masonic
philosophy of self-realization. Unlike most organized groups,
Freemasons strive for the cultivation of individuality rather than
adjusting to fit in with the preexistent structure. Each members
task is to cultivate and polish oneself, a process akin to polishing a rough stone to smooth perfection. This undertaking involves not only striving to perfect oneself and thus realizing full
potential, but understanding ones personal limitations. The concept of initiating change in the world by changing oneself is at the
basis of the Masonic way of life.
No wonder Masonic philosophy appealed to such great and
independent minds as Voltaire,
Mozart, and Goethe. Few
painters have practiced the task
of scrupulous self-examination
as much as did Rembrandt. In
just four years, between 1627
and 1631, he portrayed himself
at least 20 times. As mentioned
earlier, he painted, etched, and
drew his own likeness at least
75 times over 40 years in an astonishing number of roles, ranging from a street beggar to the
Apostle Paul. Over time, one can observe the pretenses of an aspiring court painter being stripped away from the aging artist, allowing a more private and vulnerable self to come forward. This
impulse of self-examination has been variously interpretedas
the practice of the humanistic tradition, as vanity, or a self-marketing tool, or even as a response to actors exercises (fig. 6).
However, it is important to consider Rembrandts extraordinary
contribution to self-portraiture in a new light, as it bears strong
resemblance to the Masonic task of ongoing self-examination.
Fig. 6
86
Fig. 7
Zhenya Gershman
87
Figs. 9ab
88
Fig. 10
Zhenya Gershman
89
Fig. 11
90
Fig. 13
Zhenya Gershman
91
92
Fig. 15
Zhenya Gershman
93
Figs. 16abc
brew letters spelling God, and the letters INRI (fig. 16).
In People of the Book: Christian Identity and Literary Culture, David Lyle Jeffrey stresses the interest that Goethe, as a
Freemason, had in this particular print by Rembrandt. In
fact, Goethe went so far as to obtain a reproduction, illustrating with it his 1790 first edition of Faust.23 Jeffrey suspects that the Alchemists alternate title, Doctor Faustus, was
probably inspired by this association. Further, Jeffrey concludes, The light symbol which comes through the window
does have significance for Freemasonry.24 In addition to the
Christian interpretation of the letters INRI signifying Christ,
Jeffrey adds that for Masons this came to signify rather Igne
Natura Renovatur Integrasuggesting the sacred fire of Masonry that renews humankind naturalistically. Goethe obviously saw something more than just a collectible item in this
mysterious etching by Rembrandt.
Rembrandt had one more source for esoteric knowledge.
Thomas E. Rassieur, in his essay on Rembrandts printmaking
techniques, mentions the artists reuse [of] plates previously
worked by other printmakers.25 He explains that usually
Rembrandt purchased new plates, for those that already
bore an etched or engraved image usually cost more. Out of
the two known exceptions, Rassieur describes the first as
Rembrandts frugal recycling of an out-of-date mathematical
diagram no longer having commercial value. Fate has it that
this copper plate survived and is now housed at the
Rijksmuseum (fig. 17). It is on the verso of the plate for the
94
Zhenya Gershman
95
96
dered whose main characters . . . neatly match the major figures in the painting. . . . It lay in the line of expectation that
Scriveriuss clan would encourage Vondel to write
Palamedes, and that Scriverius would commission Rembrandt to paint it.31 Another match between the painter and
the poet is Vondels 1639 play Gebroeders (Brothers), staged
in 1641, and Rembrandts The reconciliation of David and
Mephiboseth (1642). The main two subjects of the play and
the paintings are not brothers by blood but by compassion
and convictiona theme that would fit well with the Rosicrucian or Masonic Brotherhood.
The inspiration worked both ways. Vondels famous lines
were written in response to Rembrandts portrait of Cornelis
Cllaesz Anslo: O, Rembrandt, paint Cornelis voice. The
visible part is the least of him; the invisible is known only
through the ears; he who would see Anslo must hear him.32
The subject of invisibility is described by David Stevenson:
Masons, as many of the seventeenth-century references to
the Mason word indicate, were not what they seemed, in
that outsiders could not see anything distinctive about them
which identified them as masons, but fellow initiates could
detect invisible emanations which identified them.33 Vondel,
indeed, may have belonged to a secret
group that would have
preferred to stay invisible to the authorities.
A seventeenth-century
Rosicrucian caricature
survives, etched by
Pieter Nolpe,34 with a
verse below the image
mentioning a meeting of the brotherhood
of the Red Cross (fig.
Fig. 19
Zhenya Gershman
97
98
Fig. 20
Zhenya Gershman
99
11. oh brother . . .
an important question remains: when did the Freemasons
originate in the Netherlands? It is commonly accepted that
official Freemason history began with the 1717 Grand
Lodge in England. Naturally, so powerful an organization,
unified under the Grand Lodge, was not born overnight. Its
roots extend deep into the past. In his insightful book, The
Origins of Freemasonry, David Stevenson observes that
without denying the importance of grand lodges in the
spread and development of freemasonry, it is difficult to see
the existence of a grand lodge as an essential of freemasonry,
necessary before the latter term can be used.50 Stevenson
provides a chart for pre-1710 Masonic lodges in Scotland
with the earliest documented lodge, Aitchisons Heaven, dating to 1599.51 Such Masonic documents rarely survive prior
to the eighteenth century. Though Holland was considered
to be tolerant to the outsiders, in Rembrandts time one
could still risk being jailed or even tortured for belonging to
an unsanctioned organization. Consider the example of the
Dutch painter known as Johannes Torrentius (earlier mentioned in connection with Scriverius), whose paintings were
ordered to be burned, after he was accused of being a Rosicrucian, arrested (in 1627), and tortured in prison.
The Freemasons left behind other clues of their existencepredominantly in architecture. In the Netherlands,
Jacob van Campen (15951657), an artist and an architect
(and a friend of Constantijn Huygens), adopted Vitruvian
principles (based on the work of Roman architect Marcus
Vitruvius Pollio) to help design the Mauritshuis. To comprehend the importance of the Masonic implication, consider
Stevensons evaluation: Vitruvius concept of the architect
was vital to the changing perceptions of the mason craft . . .
which helped to lead to the emergence of freemasonry; and
again: It would seem, then, that some men joined lodges
through identifying masonry with Vitruvian concepts of architecture.52 In addition, van Campens work was influ-
100
Figs. 21abc
Zhenya Gershman
101
Figs. 22ab
102
Fig. 23
notes
authors note: I would like to extend deep gratitude to those who encouraged and advised me throughout the research, writing, or editing process:
Irina Gershman, George Gershman, Amy Golahny, Ineke Huysman, Harry
Maslin, Evan Pepper, Christine Sellin, Paul R. Sellin, and John Slifko.
1. Gary Schwartz, Rembrandt His Life, His Paintings (New York 1985),
20.
2. H. Perry Chapman, Rembrandts Self-Portraits A Study in Seven-
Zhenya Gershman
103
104
Zhenya Gershman
105
48, fol. 19r and 5r, Deel 6, 274 and 356, number 6778 and 6954, dated December 31, 1670 and October 7, 1674. Of specific interest is the latter, asking Wren to serve as a reference at court for a Jewish scholar interested to
give a presentation on the curious model of Solomons Temple.
41. Huygens had been a friend of Torrentius. The Rosicrucian painter
protected by Charles I. Some scholars argue that he was associated with
Rosicrucian society in Holland, S. Ackerman, Rosse Cross, 146, 22425.
42. Katherine Fremantle, The Baroque Town Hall of Amsterdam
(Utrecht 1959), 97109.
43. There is a controversial Dutch tradition that Huygens belonged to a
Masonic Lodge in 163738: see Schuchard (note 39), 545, and S. Ackerman (note 41), 146.
44. For futher evidence on Morays contact with Dutch Masons see
David Stevenson, The Letters of Sir Robert Moray to the Earl of Kincardine, 165773, (Aldershot 2007), 7475: The city had decided to build a
grand new town hall. Moray was consulted about how it should be positioned on the chosen site, the market square. He advised that it should not
be built on one side of the square, in line with other buildings, but freestanding, in the middle of the square, in forma quadrata, and that it should
face west. The advice was accepted, and on 6 March 1659 the craft (guild)
of steenmetzen (stonemasons) admitted Moray as a member, to qualify him
for a grant of citizenship, which duly followed on the 10 March. Presented
by the metselaars (bricklayers) craft, he was enrolled as a Brabant citizen of
Maastricht. On 24 March the authorities formally thanked Moray who at
several times has been asked to engineer [some parts of] the new town hall
and the place where it will be placed.
45. The following Huygens quote praising Rembrandt is an excerpt from
the manuscript autobiography of Constantijn Huygens (162931): Such I
place against all the elegance that has been produced throughout the ages. .
. . I maintain that it did not occur to Protagenes, Appeles or Parrhasius, nor
could it occur to them were they return to earth that (I am amazed simply
to report this) a youth, a Dutchman, a beardless miller, could bring together
so much in one human figure and express what is universal. All honor to
thee, my Rembrandt. Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague; published in
Oud Holland (1891), translated by Benjamin Binstock. Art Humanities Primary Source Reading 29, section 7: Rembrandt.
46. While I am using the term Freemasons, Rembrandts involvement may
also include groups that share similar ideologies drawing from the kabala and
alchemy in seventeenth century Netherlands, specifically the Rosicrucians.
47. Schwartz (note 1), 73: By April 1633, however, his (Huygens) enthusiasm had cooled off to freezing point. He wrote a series of perfectly insulting poems on Rembrandts portrait . . . For a few years Huygens was
Rembrandts greatest admirer, and then he turned against him.
48. P. Chapman, 1034: In 1647, the year after Frederk Hendrik had
ordered the Adoration and Circumcision from Rembrandt, his name was
omitted from a list, drawn up by Constantijn Huygens and the architect Ja-
106
cob van Campen, of painters to decorate the Stadholders new palace, the
Huis ten Bosch . . . After Flinks death he (Rembrandt) was commissioned
to provide a single night scene for the town hall, The Oath of Cladius Civilius, which was removed within a year.
49. G. Schwartz addresses Rembrandts bankruptcy in his two books on
him. In The Rembrandt Book ([New York 2006], 43) he writes: From
1650 on, Rembrandts finances went from bad to worse. In a nightmarish
decade, marked by an endless sequence of broken promises, evasive tactics
and lawsuits, he lost his belongings, his house and the art collection that
was so dear to him. He moved to a poorer neighborhood. . . . Valuable
commissions continued to come in, but the once overfull studio in which
Rembrandt trained his apprentices and gave expansive art lessons to amateurs became a lonely place. In his earlier study, Rembrandt His Life, His
Paintings ([New York 1985], 283) Schwartz comments that though there
are about one hundred-and-twenty-five documents dealing with the problems on the history of Rembrandts insolvency, archivists and art historians are not sure what really happened. Schwartz presented a theory that
the bankruptcy might have been political in nature (287).
50. Stevenson (note 22), 215.
51. Stevenson (note 22), 234.
52. Stevenson (note 22), 106, 113.
53. Stevenson (note 22), 170.
54. It is known that Plantin was connected to the movement of Famillists. Both Freemasons and Rosicrucians have a lot in common with Famillists as we can see from the two sources below:
Elizabeth L. Eisenstein in The Printing Press as the Agent of Change
([Cambridge 1979], 14041), noted: We know that the great Antwerp
printer Christopher Plantin was secretly a member of the Family of Love. .
. . We know that the Family of Love was a secret society . . . which allowed
its members to belong ostensibly to any religious denomination whilst secretly maintaining their affiliation with the Family. These attitudes of the
Family . . . have something in common with Freemasonry. Margaret Anne
Doody, in her chapter on Samuel Richardson (Fiction and Knowledge, in
The Cambridge Companion to the Eighteenth-Century Novel, John
Richetti, ed. [Cambridge 1996], 95) highlights the Rosicrucian connection:
The sense of a certain internationalism, and a brotherhood beyond frontiers, connected with a new religious sensibility even to extent of creating in
effect new sects, such as the Family of Love that grew around the
Antwerp printer Christopher Plantin. The early Familists were printers;
their beliefs were the inception of Rosicrucianism.
55. Dr. Leon Voet, The Golden Compasses: The History of the House of
Plantin-Moretus (Amsterdam 1969), Vol. I, 31.
56. The detail from Rembrandts Belshazzars Feast makes another curious
juxtaposition; in this case, the hand of God produces a radiating circle of light.
57. Ron Heisler in his article The Impact of Freemasonry on Elizabethan
Zhenya Gershman
107
Literature (The Hermetic Journal 1990) noted a parallel symbol: A drawing recently discovered in British Library Mss Harley 1927 f.76 verso. The
manuscript belonged to Randle Holme III, the 17th century Chester freemason and herald. Showing a hand with a compass, and with the inscription of
Constantia et labore, it is drawn on a page with the dates 1621 and July
1639 on the back. Randle Holme III probably was the artist.
58. Stevenson (note 22) observed: Further evidence of Sir Robert
Morays interest in symbolism is provided by a number of other symbolic
seals he used. One shows a dice or a cube bearing a star on each face and
the legend CONSTANTIA. Whichever way the dice fell, the symbol remained unchanged or constant (178).
108