American Scientist

To the Editors:

In the article “What’s in a Grasp?” (September–October), David A. Rosenbaum, Oliver Herbort, Robrecht van der Wel, and Daniel J. Weiss begin with an example of a Rembrandt painting of Dutch militia members to submit that studying action planning and control “may inform the design and skill-training systems and safer and more efficient setups for work.” However, Dutch military leaders accomplished just this with a new drill system before 1600. By the 1607 publication of the illustrated drill manual by Jacob de Gheyn, Wapenhandlinghe van Roers Musquetten ende Spiessen , Dutch soldiers were so well drilled that they came close to automatic handling of their firearms.

I attest to the drill’s efficiency through my participation in living history reenactments. I can use proficiently reproductions of the firearms and accoutrements that Rembrandt painted in Officers and Other Militiamen from Amsterdam’s Second District, led by Captain Frans Banning Coq and Lieutenant Willem van Ruytenburch , a daytime scene long misconstrued as The Night Watch .

Rosenbaum and his coauthors erred when they said the soldier in red is handling his ramrod (scouring stick); he is not. Just before the moment Rembrandt depicted him, this soldier used his right thumb-up grasp to remove a cover from a wooden charger; Rembrandt painted the subsequent motion with the soldier’s right thumb down, emptying gunpowder into the barrel. The chargers are shown suspended from a bandolier across his left shoulder. After the powder was poured, a bullet would be taken from a pouch on the bandolier, inserted into the barrel, and only then would the scouring stick be withdrawn to push the bullet down the barrel.

Rembrandt likely knew the de Gheyn illustrations—the painting depicts several steps from the manual. He also had many opportunities to observe militia drill gatherings, which had become social events as well as military preparedness exercises. This painting was commissioned circa 1639 to hang in the great hall of the arquebusiers’ guild. The static poses used by other portrait artists were eclipsed by Rembrandt’s action composition of men handling their weapons. The portrait was immediately acclaimed for its dynamic realism.

Contemporary scientists must consider the social milieu, symbolism, and technology of our ancestors before forming conclusions about them. Portrait painting provided Rembrandt with much of his livelihood; he knew his mind and world better than we do today.

Neal L. Trubowitz, PhD
Andover, MA

Drs. Rosenbaum, Herbort, van der Wel, and Weiss respond:

We appreciate Dr. Trubowitz’s comments about 17th-century Dutch musketry and defer to his expertise on this subject. Our main point remains unaffected by his critique of our opening example: Grasps reflect planning, as revealed by behavioral experiments, neuroscience, and computational modeling.