Entry

This headless fragment of a portrait bust is a chance discovery made in 1986 during excavations coinciding with the restoration of a bridge on the Prinsengracht canal in Amsterdam. The importance of the find lies chiefly in the monogram ‘HDK’, belonging to the city’s municipal sculptor Hendrick I de Keyser (1565-1621). The monogram’s letters are incised immediately above the grotesque mascaron on the sculpture’s socle. Even without the head, there exists very little doubt regarding the identity of the man portrayed: the bust was found in the canal very near the location of a tavern-cum-pleasure garden operating in the seventeenth century, called ‘Het Oude Doolhof ’ (the old maze). The grounds outside this public house included a sculpture garden and a fountain. The latter object is visible in an engraving of circa 1622 by Cornelis Florissen van Berckenrode aimed to promote the work of the French fountain-builder Jonas Bargois (1583-1629).² The caption beneath the engraving (written in both Dutch and French) names the pleasure garden’s owner as one ‘Sente Peijlder’, a moniker for the affluent wine gauger and buyer Vincent ('Cente' or 'Sente') Coster (1553-1608/10). As a socially respected citizen of Amsterdam and successful businessman, Coster managed to build a sizeable collection of art. He was also friends with the painter Cornelis Ketel.³ Even after Coster’s death, Het Oude Doolhof remained in the family’s possession, overseen by his widow and children. Not until 1625 was the property sold and eventually partitioned. By this time, Jonas Bargois was able to acquire the rearmost parcel, on which he subsequently placed newly built waterworks.

In 1608, the self-assured and culturally inclined Coster commissioned De Keyser to do his portrait in the form of a marble bust (BK-NM-11452). For a member of the burgher class, the ordering of such a work of sculpture was an exceedingly unusual and progressive initiative. At this time, the genre of the sculpted portrait was virtually non-existent in the Dutch Republic and moreover traditionally reserved for members of the noble and princely classes. Equally exceptional was the choice of exclusive Italian marble.

Archival research has shown that Vincent Coster also possessed a terracotta portrait of himself made by De Keyser.⁴ Given the great rarity of such busts, together with the location in which the present fragment was found – coinciding with the site of Coster’s pleasure garden – there is reasonable cause to believe this piece is identical to this terracotta bust. Judging by its less ambitious execution, the bust appears to have been modelled several years prior to the marble, perhaps at some point having served as a model when carving the marble portrait bust. At what point and for what reason the terracotta ended up in the canal are questions as yet unresolved.

The fragment is comparable to another terracotta by De Keyser in the collection of the Rijksmuseum: the bust of a man, in all probability identifiable as the Utrecht painter Joachim Wttewael (BK-NM-4191). Both busts are constructed in the same manner, with the head modelled and fired separately, and only thereafter joined to the truncated chest. The sharp and horizontal termination of the fragment’s neck was made by the sculptor intentionally. The technique of working with separate parts when creating statues modelled in clay was more commonly applied, primarily to prevent the collapsing or breakage of the otherwise excessively heavy object during the drying and firing stages. After firing the two parts, the sculptor joined the head to the separate trunk by means of cow bones, which functioned as posts, with plaster for the filling. The figure’s raised collar then functioned to conceal the join between the head and the rest.⁵ The working approach applied confirms Hendrick de Keyser was very familiar with standard practices of sculptural technique, despite the portrait bust’s relative rarity as a sculptural genre in the Dutch Republic. In the case of his bust of William of Orange, the sculptor even went one step further: by modelling or form-casting the front of the face as a piece separate from the back of the head, he was able to sell the face as a mask-like relief.⁶ This was not the same technique applied with another bust, modelled somewhat later and attributed to De Keyser or possibly one of his sons, Pieter or Hendrick Junior. In this case, the head and trunk were modelled as a whole, comprising just one piece. The now missing face, however, appears to have been made as a separate mask.⁷

Frits Scholten, 2025