2021/04/26 by Dave De ruysscher, Cornelis In ’T Veld · 1 citation
Arts and Humanities · Social Sciences · #Art History and Market Analysis #Law in Society and Culture
paper · pdf · doi:10.1163/18750176-13401002
openalex publication_date 2021/04/26 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/04
Since the publication of Scheltema in 1866, the life of Rembrandt van R n (1606-1669) has received considerable attention, including his financial demise in the 1650s. The facts surrounding this episode, in connection to Rembrandt's behaviour towards his creditors in general, are commonly analysed as indicators of the painter's intentions, not to mention his personality. In doing so, many scholars have corroborated the conventional image of the individualist and non-conformist character of the artist. In 2006, Paul Crenshaw was the first to devote an entire monograph to Rembrandt's insolvency. 2 His book extensively addressed the legal aspects of Rembrandt's debt management and the insolvency proceedings. From the archival materials, Crenshaw drew a picture of Rembrandt as reluctantly fulfilling obligations and pushing beyond the boundaries of what the law or custom allowed. More recently, Michiel Bosman reassessed Rembrandt's bankruptcy and interpreted it as being part of a scheme that purported to shield his house from his creditors. Bosman stresses that Rembrandt was taking care of his family and contrasts this view to the traditionally negative approaches to evaluating the artist's actions. his article takes yet another look at Rembrandt's financial troubles. It will be argued that the legal dealings of this master artist did not usually go beyond the norms of his day, but that the artist was very well aware of the legal rules and exploited them to their limits. The core argument is that Rembrandt was a meticulous entrepreneur who used the legal rules in a strategic fashion, without breaching them. This overall image of Rembrandt's legal actions is evident when they are scrutinized against the background of the law of the city of Amsterdam and the Roman-Dutch legal doctrine. This analysis leads to the conclusion that Rembrandt could not in fact have brought his house outside the reach of his creditors. Moreover, the filing for 'cessie van goede' was not part of a masterplan but, rather, a last straw that allowed for retaining some control within a context of imminent legal actions from frustrated creditors.