This morning on the Museum Security Network, I read the following reports of severe damage that in year’s past was done to the works of the famous artist, Rembrandt.

Rembrandt is probably one of the most famous artist who ever lived, who’s name is recognized world-wide. Rembrandt was born in The Netherlands in 1606 and died in 1669. His most famous painting is The Night Watch . Rembrandt would have never imagined his soon to be world famous painting would be vandalized, not once, but twice, in later years. A 1975 vandalisim has been well publicized. But was there others?

I have searched the Internet for any information of a 1911 attack on The Night Watch painting and no where have I seen anything about this incident. Why is there no mention of this act of vandalism against this masterpiece?

And now the rest of the story…………..

On January 13, 1911 in Rotterdam, a disgruntled Navy cook, angered by his discharge from the service, went into the Rijiks Museum and badly slashed the masterpiece with a knife. The man’s name was Sigrist, and he said he vandalized the painting as an act of vengence against the state for discharging him.

On June 19, 1999 I received the following update:

May I suggest an addition:

There were three incidents, not two. The 1975 incident was the worst. Large pieces of canvas were lying on the museum floor after a psychic cut the painting. It took a long time, about half a year, to restore the painting. This was the first time all old varnish was removed. The 1975 damage can still be seen on the painting (not very clearly, but if you know where to look for it…)

April 1990 another patient threw acid on the Nightwatch. Thanks to an extremely quick and adequate reaction of the guards damage was limited to the varnish. By the way: the guy who did this cut and severely damaged a Picasso in another Amsterdam museum last month.

best regards,

Ton Cremers


When I read this and considered the efforts that were expended to restore these priceless works of art, my mind flashed to the human soul, and the bodies wherein are housed these everlasting entities. I thought of the damaged people around me, people bearing hideous scars, people whose lives and bodies reek with sin poisoning and whose minds and emotions are slashed through with the havoc of evil living . I thought of myself, born fully entrenched in the curse of sin, and who has to fight constantly to live a holy life.

But as damaged paintings are yet considered precious and worthy of enormous amounts of time, energy and sums of money to restore them, surely every human being must deserve the same attention and respect. No matter the damage, the slashing, the scarring we have endured, we are yet loved by Christ, and His redeeming blood is available to exact a full and beautiful restoration


My other blog is here.

7 thoughts on “Damaged, but Precious

  1. Welcome Lorna and GS

    I have to disagree with you, GS. I’m not Christ, nor can I redeem myself. Only the blood of Jesus will redeem us.

    I wish you both well.

  2. Dear Lady,
    Thank you for this thoughtful post. To continue the metaphor, I believe the Creator knew that even those of us who consistently live for Him would, from time to time, become smudged, dirtied, torn, obscured by the grime of the world, so He continually cleanses, repairs, and polishes us. Though I primarily see myself as damaged goods, I know I’m a work in progress.

    Your writing–those inverted sentences–bring to mind the work of the 17th-century New England poet Anne Bradstreet. If you aren’t already familiar with her, check her out.

    Much love, Rebecca

  3. Hello, Rebecca.

    Yes, of course, we get messy after we come to Jesus, but immediately, there appears grace and mercy!

    I’m not familiar with Anne Bradstreet, but will “run a Google” and read some of her work.

    Help me with this: Last line of next to last paragraph in my writing above reads, “I thought of myself…” Should that read instead, “I thought of me?”

  4. Your sentence is correct the way you wrote it. Each personal pronoun has a reflexive form. The reflexive pronoun for “I” is “myself” (not “me”). So, there you have it, in a nutshell.

    “The Vanity of All Worldly Things” is a representative introduction to Bradstreet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s