The copperplate was not part of any of the major sales or collections and is probably not in existence.

Originally this print was just called Cottages beside a canal, with a church and sailing boat. Lugt identified the town as Ouderkerk aan de Amstel on the basis of the shape of the church tower. White-Boon, however, assumed the town to be that of Diemen, south-east of Amsterdam.
Hinterding argued in favour of Lugt’s position, pointing at the fact that Diemen is not situated at a river (although it does have a canal) and that Rembrandt has pictured Ouderkerk on more occasions.
Bakker e.a. concluded on the basis of old maps that the view is from the south-east of the town, looking in the direction of Amsterdam

The plate is very lightly etched, giving the picture a ‘foggy’ image. In 1922 Seidlitz was the first to assume the plate to be a winter scene. Others followed and pointed at other works in the period between 1646 and 1650, but watermark research has shown the dating to be around 1641. The horizon is set exceptionally low. Other than in most other landscapes, the small houses are not positioned parallel to the drawing, but diagonally, creating perspective. The typical sulphur tint is possibly caused by granulation of the copper plate. It is not clear if it was done intentionally.

Note the dog, barking to his master, in front of the house.

There is a painted winter scene in the Staatliche Museen in Kassel (Bredius 452) which shows some similarities.. There are also two drawings with winter scenes which Rembrandt made some years later (Benesch 837 in the Rijksmuseum and Benesch 845 in the Fogg Art Museum in Cambridge).

NH lists seven copies, of which two in the same direction. Copy F is attributed to William Ottley (136 x 207 mm, WB 2). Copy G is by Lucy Brightwell (146 x 214 mm, WB 1).
There are five copies in reverse. Copy A is by Francis Vivares, with foliage on top of the big tree (his nr 6, 137 x 205 mm, WB 6). Copy B is by Richard Byron (his nr 10, WB 3). Copy C is by Costatino Cumano (106 x 206 mm, WB 4). Copy D is by Alexander Tytler (59 x 99 mm). Copy E is an anonymous copy in which the dog is not shown (114 x 193 mm, WB 5).

The etching is considered as special by Bartsch, de Claussin and Wilson.

In early impressions of the only state there is much sulphur tint and burr on the grass in the corner below right.  Later impressions are weaker.
Hind sees a 2^nd state with clumsy work on the spine and the roof of the cottage, but it is probably a fake.

An impression in the Hermitage is printed on an uncut folio sheet, resulting in exceptionally large margins. On impressions made after 1650 the grain, which is so typical for this print, is hardly visible.

Strasbourg lily (4 ed. of which one with LC c. 1641); Strasbourg bent (1646); Foolscap with five-pointed collar with cm LB (c. 1650); Arms of Ravensburg; Countermarks IDC and LL’; Serpent. A total of ten editions

H 212, BB 45-1, G 219, M 314, Mz 148, RA 613, Cl 225, W 225, Bl 329, Du 225, CD 174, S 105.
Lugt-Amsterdam p. 123-124; Wandelingen 1998, p. 302; Hinterding 2006, p. 30; Hinterding 2008, p. 430-433;

NH/WB: Only state.
A fairly good impression, the sulphur tint in the sky still visible. Two printer’s creases to the right of the subject.
Sheet 140/138 x 206 mm, trimmed on or slightly within the platemark (-1%).
An unidentified watermark (sort of head), vertical chain lines at approx. 24 mm.

The Rotunda at Exchange Square, Hong Kong, January 2008
Rembrandt in Zwart-Wit, Westfries Museum (Hoorn), Het Markiezenhof (Bergen op Zoom), Stedelijk Museum Zutphen, Het Hannemahuis (Harlingen), Museum Gouda, Jan ten Horne Museum (Weert), Stadsmuseum Harderwijk, March 2013-August 2015;
Rembrandt, 17^th century photographer, Daegu Art Museum (Korea), November 2023 – March 2024;
Rembrandt, de fotograaf, Westfries Museum (Hoorn), June 2024 – January 2025;