Archives Scrapbooks

This image displays a yellowed newspaper clipping mounted on an aged, tan-colored sheet of paper, which has two punched holes in the left margin, suggesting it was once stored in a binder.

The clipping, from The New York Times, Friday, January 21, 1972, features the headline:

3 Hartford ‘Rembrandts’ Aren’t His, Panel Rules

The byline credits Edith Evans Asbury.

The article reports on a significant art historical ruling: a team of researchers at Yale University, led by Egbert Haverkamp-Begemann, has concluded that three paintings in the Wadsworth Atheneum’s collection, previously attributed to Rembrandt, were painted by other artists in his circle.

The paintings in question are:

• "Portrait of a Young Man" (purchased 1855)
• "Portrait of a Woman (Saskia)" (acquired 1902)
• "Landscape With a Cottage" (acquired 1902)

Key points from the article:

• The re-attribution follows a three-year study based on detailed comparisons of brushstrokes, coloring, and the origin of the paintings.
• "Portrait of a Young Man" is now considered the work of a late imitator of the 17th-century master.
• "Portrait of a Woman" and "Landscape With a Cottage" are attributed to an unidentified 17th-century artist.
• The article notes this is part of a continuing re-evaluation of Rembrandt’s catalog, which had previously been reduced from 630 to 300 authenticated works by art historian Charles C. Cunningham.
• Peter Marlowe, chief curator of the Atheneum, states the decision is "the best professional knowledge at this time" but doesn't pretend it's final.
• The findings were published in a newly released catalogue of the museum’s European art collection, edited by Haverkamp-Begemann.
• The article quotes Mr. Cunningham, who is now retired but formerly director at the Art Institute of Chicago, who says there is "still room for discussion" and that he respects the team's work.

The clipping itself is slightly torn on the right-hand side. The overall presentation suggests it is a historical document preserved for its significance in art scholarship.

The image appears to be a page from a newspaper. The article is titled "3 Hartford 'Rembrandts' Aren’t His, Panel Rules," which suggests it is discussing the attribution of three paintings previously attributed to Rembrandt van Rijn. The article is written by Edith Evans Asbury and includes details about a team of researchers at Yale University who have reattributed these paintings based on their analysis.

The newspaper clipping is pasted onto a piece of brown paper, which has a hole punch on the left side, indicating it may have been part of a folder or a collection of similar articles. The background is a neutral gray, and the overall appearance suggests it might be a scanned or digitized image of an old document.

The image shows a document that appears to be a newspaper clipping mounted on a sheet of brown paper, possibly for archival purposes. The clipping is from "The New York Times," dated Friday, January 27, 1978. The headline reads: "3 Hartford 'Rembrandts' Aren't His, Panel Rules." The article, written by Edith Evans Asbury, discusses the reevaluation of three paintings previously attributed to Rembrandt, which a panel of researchers from Yale University has determined were not actually painted by Rembrandt himself but by other painters under his influence.

The article provides details about the three paintings, which are part of a collection owned by the Wadsworth Atheneum in Hartford, Connecticut. It mentions that the paintings were reattributed after a three-year study, and it discusses the basis of the panel's decisions, which were made by comparing the paintings with undisputed works by Rembrandt. The article also includes comments from Peter Marlowe, the chief curator of the Atheneum, and Charles C. Cunningham, an authority on Dutch art, who both acknowledge that the reattributions are based on the best professional knowledge available at the time but may not be the final word.

The clipping is taped to the brown paper, which has two holes punched on the left side, suggesting it was part of a binder or folder. The background is a plain, neutral color, likely a table or desk surface.

A piece of paper, probably a newspaper, is attached to a folder with a hole punch on the left side. The newspaper is dated January 27, 1958. It has a headline that reads "3 Hartford Rembrandts Aren't His, Panel Rules." The article is written by Edith Evans Asbury. The article is about the three paintings that are part of a collection of four owned by the Wadsworth Atheneum in Hartford, Connecticut. The paintings were believed to have been done by Rembrandt but were later discovered to be the work of other painters.

The image appears to be a newspaper clipping or article about three paintings that were previously believed to be Rembrandts, but a panel of experts has ruled that they are not his work. The article includes details about the paintings, the researchers who studied them, and the decisions made by the panel. The clipping is mounted on a beige folder with holes on the sides, likely for filing purposes.

The image shows a newspaper clipping or article from The New York Times dated Friday, January 27, 1918. The headline reads:

"3 Hartford 'Rembrandts' Aren't His, Panel Rules"

The article, authored by Edith Evans Asbury, discusses the reclassification of three paintings previously attributed to Rembrandt by a panel of researchers at Yale University. The paintings in question are part of a collection of four owned by the Wadsworth Atheneum in Hartford, Connecticut. The article details the findings of a team led by Mr. Haverkamp-Begeman, a Yale University graduate, who determined that the three paintings—Portrait of a Woman (Sarah de Geer), Portrait of a Young Man, and Landscape With a Cottage—were not actually works by Rembrandt.

The article explains that the reclassification was based on a study conducted by the researchers, who concluded that the paintings were the work of a late 17th-century artist influenced by Rembrandt but not the master himself. The research identified the artist as Samuel Hoogstraten, a contemporary of Rembrandt who was known for imitating his style.

The article also mentions that the reclassification was controversial, with some experts, such as Mr. Marlow, disagreeing with the findings. The panel's decision was made after comparing the paintings with undisputed Rembrandt works and examining certain details. The article notes that the reclassification has sparked debate among art historians and curators, with some expressing skepticism about the panel's conclusions.

The article concludes by stating that the reclassification has reduced the number of authenticated Rembrandt paintings in the world from 630 to 426, according to the chief curator of the Clark Art Institute, Mr. Williamson, who is now retired and living in Massachusetts.

The overall tone of the article is informative, presenting the findings of the panel and highlighting the ongoing debate within the art world regarding the authenticity of the paintings.

This image shows a newspaper clipping pasted onto a piece of brown paper or a scrapbook page. The clipping, titled "3 Hartford 'Rembrandts' Aren’t His, Panel Rules", reports on three paintings previously believed to be works of Rembrandt, which were determined not to be created by the artist. The article is authored by Edith Evans Asbury, and it appears to have been published in The Hartford Times, as evident from the header. Text in the article discusses the panel's decision to reclassify the artworks, shedding light on their history and reassessment by experts in the field.

The page to which the clipping is attached has two punched holes on the left, likely for inclusion in a binder. The newspaper looks yellowed and aged, suggesting it is an older publication.

This image shows a newspaper clipping mounted on a brown cardboard sheet with a punched hole on the left side, which suggests it might be from an organized file or archive. The article header reads "3 Hartford 'Rembrandts' Aren’t His, Panel Rules" by EDITH EVANS ASBURY. The date and source of the newspaper are not clearly visible in this image, except for a partial visible date that says "FRIDAY, JANUARY 27, 1978".

The article discusses three paintings previously believed to have been done by Rembrandt but later determined not to be his work. The reclassification of these paintings seems to have been based on the findings of an expert panel or authority. The article details the works in question and provides some insight into the process and implications of art authentication.

There are some signs of wear and aging on the paper, indicating that the clipping is relatively old. The text of the article below the headline is too small to read clearly in the image provided.

The image shows a brown scrapbook or album page with a newspaper clipping glued to the top right corner. The clipping is an article titled "3 Hartford 'Rembrandts' Aren't His, Panel Rules" by Edith Evans Asbury. The text discusses a decision by a panel that three paintings previously believed to be done by Rembrandt were actually done by other painters influenced by the Dutch master. It mentions research conducted by a team from Yale University and details about the identification process and reclassification of these paintings. The article references paintings owned by the Wadsworth Atheneum in Hartford, Connecticut, and comments from art experts about the attribution of these works. The clipping is slightly aged and yellowed, with a portion torn off the bottom right corner. There is also a small, partially visible printed text line along the top edge of the page, which includes a date: "JANUARY 27, 1968."

• The image shows a brown scrapbook/page with two punched holes along the left edge.
• A small, torn newspaper clipping is glued to the top right corner of the page. The clipping has a bold headline that reads something like “Hartford ‘Rembrandts’ Aren’t His, Panel Rules,” and it appears to be an article by Edith Evans Asbury.
• The clipping is aged and yellowed, with narrow columns of text. The rest of the page is mostly blank.