The plate was not part of any of the major, early collections and is probably not in existence anymore.

This etching is quite different from all other etchings. The face of the woman seems much too white for a woman with such clear African looks. This may be due to a technical error. But it has also been suggested that the model was in fact an albino.

The etching was known as Het Moorinnetje (The Mooress) in the catalogue of the De Burgy sale (1755, nrs 110-111).

There is a similarity with the black woman in an etching by Lievens, The raising of Lazarus, as well as a painting by him. That has led several experts to believe that Lievens is also the maker of this print, or has at least played a role in it.
Gerard Dou made a similar etching at the same time. The most likely explanation is that they all used the same model.

Rovinsky and Hind think that this etching may be by Jan Lievens, based on the similarities mentioned above. Yet Hind accepts the attribution to Rembrandt by J. Six.
According to Middleton, followed by White-Boon, the work is made by Anthony de Haen (viii, p. 207).
The etching is also considered to be by another hand by Seidlitz, Coppier, Campbell Dodgson and Singer.

NH lists three states, the 2nd state being a ‘new’ one. Most other authors list two states, Biörklund three, Nowell-Usticke three trial proofs and two states. The differences between the three trial prints and 1st state of NU are mostly related to additional lines in the eye. In trial state an almost horizontal line runs over the pupil of the right eye) and there are two lines where the brow touches the hair. The shading on the chin and cheek is not complete, because of foul biting of the acid. In trial print B the shading is completed, in trial print C an extra line leaves the impression of a circumflex over the right eyeball. There are now 3 lines where the brow touches the hair.
The 1st state (NH, WB/R936/NU trial print B) there is an extra line near the right side of the circumflex over the right eyeball. The corners are rounded.
In the 2nd state (NH only) the outline of the neck and shoulder are made continuous with double lines. Other small changes.
In the 3rd state (NH/WB, NU 2nd/R937) the plate is cut to 98 x 77 mm, as a result of which the monogram disappeared.
Biörklund mentions a 3rd state in which a pearl necklace is added. It is not listed in the New Hollstein.

NH lists four impressions of the 1st state, in the British Museum (2, trial proofs A and C, both printed verso of trial proofs of B NHD 60 and B NHD 62), in the Bibliothèque Nationale (trial proof B) and in Coburg.
Of the 2nd state there are three impressions, in the Rijksmuseum, in the Bibliothèque Nationale and in the Kupferstichkabinett in Berlin

In the 1st state: Serpent (1630).
In the 3rd state: Double-headed eagle (1632-34); Strasbourg lily with BA (1635); Foolscap.

H 364, BB 30-17, G 324, M -, Mz 84, RA 936-937, Cl 347, W 351, Bl 241, Du 345, CD 367, S 138.
Rembrandt’s Women 2001, p. 74; J.Six in Oud-Holland xxvii, p.99; Hinterding 2006, p. 330; Hinterding 2008, p. 597-599; Rembrandts Radierungen 2011, p. 32-33; Baas 2015 , p. 114-115;

NH: 3rd and final state/WB: 2nd and final state.
A fine, contemporary impression. An oblique soft crease through the middle, a few spots of staining verso.
Sheet 100/99 x 79 mm, thread margins of 1 to 2 mm all around (+5%).
Watermark: part of a Foolscap, listed but not dated in NHD. Horizontal chain lines at approx. 22 mm.

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; Stedelijk Museum Vianen, October 2017 – January 2018;
Rembrandt in Black & White, Schloß Britz (Berlin), Bozar Expo (Brussels), Chateau des Penthes (Geneva), November 2015-September 2016;
Rembrandt, de fotograaf, Westfries Museum (Hoorn), June 2024 – January 2025;