1 PORTRAIT DE WILLIAM HOGARTH. Engraved by himself 1749 7 'ke original painting oj 1745 is in the National Gallery HIS ORIGINAL ENGRAV- INGS AND ETCHINGS FREDIC. A. STOKES COMPANY NEW YORK PUBLISHERS BOOKS OF REFERENCE Trusler, J. Hogarth moralised. London 1768 (later editions 1821, 1831, 1833, and 1841) Nichols, John. Biographical Anecdotes of William Hogarth, and a Catalogue of his Works (written by Nichols the publisher, George Steevens, and others). London 1781 (later editions 1782, 1785) Ireland, John. Hogarth Illustrated. 2 vols. London 1791 (later editions 1793, 1798, 1806, 1812) Samuel. Graphic Illustrations of Hogarth. 2 vols. London 1794 Cook, Thomas. Hogarth Restored. The whole works of Hogarth as originally published. Now re-engraved by T. C. Accompanied with Anecdotes . . . and Explanatory Descriptions. London 1802 The Works of William Hogarth, from the Original Plates restored by James Heath, to which are prefixed a Biographical Essay . . . and Explanations of the Subjects of the Plates, by John Nichols. Printed for Baldwin, Cradock, and Joy, by John Nichols & Son. London 1822, Fob Also a later edition, printed for Baldwin and Cradock, by G. Woodfall, n.d. (1835-37 ?) Nichcls, John Bowyer. Anecdotes of William Hogarth, written by himself, with Essays on His Life and Genius, selected from Walpole, Gilpin, J. Ireland, Lamb, Phillips, and others. To which are added a Catalogue of his Prints, List of Paintings, Drawings, etc. London 1833 Sala, George Augustus. William Hogarth. London 1 866 (originally appeared in the Cornhill MagaTLine^ i860) Feuillet de Conches, F. William Hogarth. Gazette des Beaux- Jrts, XXV (1868), 185 The Works of William Hogarth, reproduced from the Original Engravings in permanent Photographs and newly described (by Cosmo Monk- house and Austin Dobson), with an Essay on the Genius and Character of Hogarth, by Charles Lamb. London 1872 Dobson, Austin. William Hogarth. London 1879 (and numerous later editions. The standard book on Hogarth, containing full Biblio- graphy and Catalogue) Weitenkampf, Frank. A Bibliography of William Hogarth. Cambridge (Mass.) 1890 4 nETTY CENTER 'fSRrIRy WILLIAM HOGARTH Son of Richard Hogarth (d. 1718), schoolmaster and scholar ; born in London, Nov. 10, 1697 5 apprenticed to Ellis Gamble, a goldsmith and silver-plate engraver at the sign of the Golden Angel in Cranbourne Street, Leicester Fields (see plate i) ; established on his own account as an engraver in 1720 ; his early work chiefly in heraldic plates and book illustrations ; married Jane, daughter of the painter Sir James Thornhill, in 1729 ; from 1733 was living in Leicester Fields, in a house on the spot now occupied by Archbishop Tenison’s school ; also purchased in 1749 a house at Chiswick, where he lived thenceforward for the greater part of each summer ; appointed Serjeant-Painter to the King, 1757; died Oct. 25, 1764, at Leicester Fields, and buried at Chiswick. ‘ 1 ECOIvLECTION of the manner in which those prints used to alfect me,’ wrote Charles Lamb, ‘ has often made JL me wonder when I ha\ e heard Hogarth described as a mere comic painter, as one whose chief ambition was to raise a laugh. 'Fo deny that there are throughout the prints which I ha\e mentioned circumstances introduced of a laughable tendenc}', would be to run counter to the common notions of mankind ; but to sup- pose that in their ruling character they appeal chiefly to the risible facidty, and not first and foremost to the very heart of man, its best and most serious feeling, would be to mistake no less grossl)' their aim and purpose. A set of severe satires (for which they are not so much comedies, which they have been likened to, as the)' ate strong and masculine satires), less mingled with an)’thing of mere fun, were never written u[K)n paper, or gra\ en upon co[)per. 'They resemble Juvenal, or the satiric touches in “ Timon of Athens.” ‘ I was pleased with the reply of a gentleman, who being asked which book he esteemed most in his library, answered Shake- speare ” ; being asked which he esteemeal next best, replieil “Hogarth.” His graphic representations are iiuieed books; they have the teeming, fruitful, suggestive, meaning of words. Other pictures we look at — his prints we read.’ And finally : ‘1 say not that all the ridiculous subjects of Hogarth have 5 GREAT ENGRAVERS necessarily something in them to make us like them ; some are in- different to us, some in their natures repulsive, and only made interesting by the wonderful skill and truth to nature in the painter; but I contend that there is in most of them that sprinkling of the better nature, which, like holy-water, chases away and disperses the contagion of the bad. They have this in them besides, that they bring us acquainted with the everyday human face, they give us skill to detect those gradations of sense and virtue (which escape the careless or fastidious observer) in the countenances of the world about us ; and prevent that disgust of common life, that taedium quotidian arum formarum^ which an unrestricted passion for ideal forms and beauties is in danger of producing. In this as in many other things, they are analogous to the best novels of Smollett and Fielding.’ We make no apology for quoting at such length from Charles Lamb’s famous essay on the Genius and Character of Hogarth,* as illuminating and human as everything that he wrote. It goes with- out saying that it was on the side of its humanity and intellect that he most appreciated Hogarth’s genius. In claiming for his works the right to be placed on a level with the more assuming dignity and the idealised compositions of the English Historical School, Lamb lays chief emphasis on the quantity of thought crowded into every picture, describing the G'ln Lane (xLii) at some length as an extreme example of Hogarth’s direct and vigorous satire. Personally I feel that the vitality of Hogarth’s creation sprang more from a supreme sense of observation than from any inherent depth of thought. Hogarth himself speaks of the discipline to which he subjected his powers of observation, how he endeavoured to habituate himself to the exercise of a sort of technical memory, so that, by repeating in his mind the parts of which objects were com- posed, he could by degrees combine and put them down with his pencil. He never much favoured ‘cold copying’ from nature, and sometimes failed on that account to convince his academic con- temporaries of his powers. But he was undoubtedly right in regarding the habit of retaining in one’s mind what one intends to imitate as the only sure basis for freedom in composition. Slight sketches made on his thumb-nail in the street, seem to have been one of the few direct aids by which he supported his habitual exercise of memory. Few of his contemporaries refused to admit his peculiar genius for * Originally printed in Lhe Reflector^ No. Ill, i8i i. 6 WILLIAM HOGARTH satire and subjects from daily life, but they were remarkably sparing of any generous appreciation of his art in comparison with the historical and portrait painters chiefly in repute. The irregularity of his education as a painter goes far to account for the variable quality of his production, but his best portraits are worthy to be placed beside the great academic painters of the eighteenth century. Such, for example, is the portrait of himself in the National Gallery (reproduced in his own engraving, see frontis- piece)^ as solid and convincing as anything of Reynolds ; while in portraits such as his Sister Ann (Mrs. Salter), and his Six Servants^ both in the National Gallery, there is a refreshing freedom of touch, and a command of colour and light that anticipate the best of modern portraitists. In his subjects and figures, as well as in his love for the play of white lights, he caught something of the Italian spirit, the spirit that descended from Tiepolo to Hogarth’s younger contemporary Alessandro Longhi. And some of his best subjects from daily life, where the spirit of satire is thrown aside, such as the Green Room^ Drury Lane (in the collection of Lord Glenconner) match Chardin in their peculiar charm. Hogarth affected to despise the foreign artist in England, particularly when he was a success like J. B. Vanloo ; but Mercier and Gravelot, with their genuinely personal reflection of Watteau’s manner, were un- doubtedly a real influence in stimulating certain touches of almost Gallic grace and refinement which often appear in Hogarth’s best work. If he was influenced in his painting by Frenchmen of his own century, it was certainly a Frenchman of an earlier period, the famous etcher Jacques Callot, who inspired his treatment of figures in many of his plates, such as the Masquerades and Operas (v). Hogarth’s early work was chiefly that of a heraldic engraver, but his friendship with John Thornhill brought him into contact with his famous father. Sir James Thornhill, and no doubt gave him opportunity of working in his spare moments from the life in Thornhill’s academy in Covent Garden, a privilege oidy interrupted for a short time, it appears, by his run-away match with Sir James’s daughter Jane. After Thornhill’s death in 1734, Hogarth became possessed of the apparatus of the Academy, which he removed to J^eter’s Court, in St. Martin’s Lane. It is a curious irony of fate that Hogarth, with his declared antipathy to academies, should throughout his life have been in sort the director of a school which was the real forerunner of the Royal Academy, to which its stock- in-trade passed in 1768. Hogarth’s picture of the !/ife School at 7 GREAT ENGRAVERS Peter s Court^ now in Burlington House, is an interesting record of his own establishment. As a vehicle for his satire, Hogarth naturally found engraving the surest road to publicity. He was never a great engraver, but his contemporary fame rested far more on his prints than on his canvases. The popularity of Masquerades and Operas : Burlington Gate (v) immediately resulted in pirated copies, and Hogarth relates how the printsellers returned him his original impressions and sold the copies at half-price. The engravers of the period had reason to be grateful to his later action in concert with George Vertue, Gerard Vandergucht and others in petitioning Parliament, and obtaining in 1735 the first English Bill dealing with the copyright of engravings. The phrase Published according to Act of Parliament^ which first appeared on Hogarth’s P^ke' s Progress in 1735 (seexviiiand xix), and on many subsequent prints by Hogarth and others, refers of course to this Act. The large number of contemporary and later copies of Hogarth’s engravings which exist, render it essential for the collector to be wary. Those who are primarily interested in the subjects may find some satisfaction in copies, ejj. in the large series of facsimile en- gravings by 'T'homas Cook, issued in 1802, as Hogarth Pestored^ or in contemporary copies, such as the set published by Thomas Bake well, with Hogarth’s consent, in 1735, after H Rake's Progress^ but no lover of fine prints, and no appreciator of Hogarth’s genius, could be content with anything less than the originals. Hogarth, according to his own statement, regularly retouched and repaired his copper-plates, adding, that in some particulars they became better than when first engraved.” But the collector may well be content to deny himself these improvements for the sake of the quality of the earlier impressions. Differences of state are described in some detail in Mr. Dobson’s catalogue, but when these are non-existent or unimportant, the sense of quality is the only guide. Hogarth’s widow continued to issue prints from the original coppers until her death in 1789, and then her cousin, Mary Lewis, who inherited the propertv, sold the plates to Boydell in return for a life annuity of Later still they were in the possession of Messrs. Baldwin, Cradock and Jov, of Paternoster Row, by whom they were issued in 1822, reworked by the engraver James Heath, and again by Baldwin and Cradock about 1835-1837, but by this time they are of no concern to the Plogarth collector, and their subsequent history is luiknown to me. 8 WILLIAM HOGARTH Our illustrations are thoroughly representative of Hogarth’s en- gravings and etchings throughout his life, and the notes attached to them render it unnecessary for us to attempt any survey of his various works in this introduction. Students of his work will find the most authoritative and accessible catalogue in Mr. Dobson’s admirable book, and much again in the various issues of John Nichols’s ^‘Anecdotes of William Hogarth” (1781, etc.) and in the more comprehensive edition of J. B. Nichols (1833). But in all the existing catalogues we feel the lack of connecting links between the pictures and prints, each being described in a separate section. Of course, the difficulty of collating a scattered work is enormous, and Hogarth’s practice of painting several versions of the same subject* renders it even more difficult to state with certainty the original picture on which particular prints are based. In other cases, generally when the inscription runs designed (or invented') and engraved by TV. Hogarth^ or TV. Hogarth invenit et sculpsit.^ we must only look for original drawings, not pictures, as, for example, in the series of Industry and Idleness (see xxxii, etc.), and in Beer Street and Gin Lane (xli, xlii). But one cannot expect to make any rigid rule. For example, it would seem as if the small painting of the Bench^ now in the Fitzwilliam Museum, an extraordinarily good example of Hogarth’s work, must be the original on which the print was based, though the print is only inscribed designed and engraved by TV. Hogarth. If a later version by Hogarth, it is more likely that the master would have painted the subject in the same direction as the print (liii). On the other hand, with the famous etching of Lord Lovat (xxxi) inscribed Drawn from the life and etched in Aquafortis by TVilliam Hogarth., I am inclined to be extremely sceptical of the painting of the same subject in the National Portrait Gallery. It is in the highest degree unlikely that Hogarth did anything but sketches from the life pre- paratory to this etching, and the painting seems to me a later version entirely without the convincing qualities of the etched portrait. With Hogarth we must perhaps be sometimes prepared to accept hack-work as well as productions of real genius, but we do not think that he would have lost all grit in a later repetition as in this example. As a line-engraver Hogarth, like most of his contemporaries in the * But vve should always be chary of accepting the description replica if a picture has not the master’s (juality. If all so-called replicas were original, the great masters would have been thoroughly tired of their ow n composi lions. 9 GREAT ENGRAVERS craft, freely intermingled etched lines. And he never finished his engravings with the precision that is part of the line-engraver’s con- vention. His inventive genius would have found a much more responsive medium in the freer touch of pure etching. As it is, in the majority of his plates he merely adapted the methods of engraving on which he had been brought up as an apprentice to a freer and hybrid handling, in which graver work was blunted and coarsened, while etching seldom had effective play. In the majority of his plates we feel that Hogarth commands our admiration as an inventive genius, in spite rather than by aid of his medium. Hogarth seems to have regarded pure etching in a more trivial light than engraving, for the most part using it as an expeditious method of producing the subscription tickets and receipt forms for his larger engravings. To our mind some of these slighter etchings, e.g. the Laughing Judience (xvii), used as a subscription ticket for the Rake s Progress and Southzuark Fair^ are among his most attractive works. And at the very top of his production, alongside the best of his painted portraits, we would place such admirable etchings as the John IVilkes (lvi), ruthlessly true and scathing in its characterisation, and the portrait of the notorious Lovat[xxx.i) to which we have already alluded, drawn from the life shortly before his execution in 1746. These, and the best of his pictures, place Hogarth in the very front rank of eighteenth-century art. 10 LIST OF PLATES Hogarth’s original engravings and etchings (included in plates i-i.vii are arranged in chronological order. The dates are given in brackets except when they appear on the print. The few engravings by others after his designs among our illustrations are placed at the end of the series (lviii-lxiv). All the plates are reproduced from impressions in the British Museum. For various references in this list and attached to the plates I am indebted to Mr. Austin Dobson and Mr. Fairfax Murray. Portrait of William Hogarth, En- graved by himself. i7-}-9. After the original painting (of 1745) in the National Gallery. Frontispiece Ellis Gamble’s Shop Card. i. From an impression with the lettering blocked out. Ellis Gamble was the goldsmith and silver-plate engraver to whom Hogarth was apprenticed. The Shop Card (which is a rare plate) is probably quite an early plate by Hogarth, and in any case must have been engraved before Gamble’s bankruptcy in 1733 An emblematical print on the South Sea Scheme, ii. (1721) A Scene in the Seraglio, iii. Erom the Travels of Aubry de la Motraye. 1723 Frontispiece to the AVer Metamor- phosis ; oi\‘PIeasant Transformation of the Golden Ass oj Lucius ,'lpuleiiis. 1724. IV Masquerades and Operas, Burlington (jatc. v. 1724. First state, with Pasquin No. XCT on the roll lianging over the wlieclbarrow (altered later to Pen John\son\) A just \dcw of the British Stage, or 'I'lirec I leads arc Better than One. Scene, Newgate, by M. D-X'-to. (1725.) VI. Rcjircscnts Booth, Wilks^and Cibber, of Drury l>anc d'hcatre, contriving a pantomime Hudibras in Tribulation. Plate 6 of a set of twelve large prints for Butler’s 1726. vii Burning ye Rumps at Temple Barr. Plate 1 1 of a set of twelve large prints for Butler’s Hudibras. 1726. VIII The Beggar’s Opera Burlesqued. 1728. IX. First state, before the large lettered title at the top. Boys Peeping at Nature. (1731 :) X. Subscription ticket for A Harlot's Progress Arrival in London. Plate I of A Harlot's Progress. 1732. xi. The six original pictures of this series are said to have been \\hclly or partially destroyed in the fire at Fonthill (the seat of William Bcckford) in 1755. Two, liow- ever, believed to have been preserved from the fire, corres- ponding to plates 2 and 5 in the engraved series, are now in the collection of the Earl of Rose- bery ddie Quarrel. Plate 2 id A Harlot's Progress. 1732. xii A Chorus ot Singers ; or, 'Phe IG'hcarsal o{ the Oratorio ot Judith. (1732.) xiii. Subscrij-'- tion ticket for A Midnight Modern Conversation A Midnight Modern Conversation. GREAT ENGRAVERS (1733.) XIV, First state, before the correction of Moddeni Portrait of Sarah Malcolm. (1733.) ■ XV. The original picture, from the collection of Horace Walpole, is now in the National Gallery of Scotland Sancho’s Feast. 1733. xvi The Laughing Audience. (1733.) XVII. Subscription ticket for the Rake s Progress and Southzcark Fair The Levee. Plate 2 of the series of eight prints, entitled, A Rake's Progress. 1735. xviii. The original paintings of the series are in the coane Museum, Lincoln’s Inn Fields The Marriage. Plate 5 of^/ Rake's Progress. 1735. xix Southwark F'air. (1735.) xx. The plate is dated 1733, but it is known not to have been issued until 1735. I'here is a painting of this subject in the collection of the Duke of Newcastle The Distressed Poet. 1736. xxi. Tlie original painting is in the collection of the Duke of West- minster d'he Sleeping Congregation. 1736. XXII. A painting of the subject is in the collection of Sir Frederick Cook, Bart. Scholars at a Lecture. 1737. xxiii Morning. Plate i ok F he Four Fimes of the Da^. 1738. XXIV. "Fhe original pictures of Morning and Aight belong to Lieut. -Col. G. R. Heathcote, Bighton Wood, Alres- ford, Hants. Noon. Plate 2 of Fke Four Finies of the Day. 1738. xxv. The original picture is in the collection of the Earl of Ancaster Evening, xxvi. P\ 3 .io ok F he Four F lines of the Day. 1738. First state, before the figure of a little girl was added next to the crying boy. The original picture is in the collection of the Earl of Ancaster Strolling Actresses Dressing in a Barn. 1738. xxvii. First state, with three holes in the roof, two being filled up in the second state The Enraged Musician. i74i« xxviii. Second state. The first state (before the cats, steeple, and play bill) is very rare. The original palntingof thesubject is in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford Portrait of Martin FTlkes. 1742. XXIX. Proof before letters. The original painting belongs to the Royal Society The Battle of the Pictures, xxx. Admission ticket to an auction of his original pictures held by the artist. 1745 Simon, Lord Lovat. 1746. xxxi. Fhrst state (before the addition of price i shilling in left corner of margin). There is an original study in chalk for the head and shoulders in the British Museum. There is a picture of the same subject, probably a later version based on the etching, in the National Portrait Gallery The Industrious ’Prentice perform- ing the Duty of a Christian. Plate 2 of a series of twelve prints entitled, Industry and Idleness. 1747. xxxii The Industrious ’Prentice out of his time and married to his master’s daughter. Plate 6 of Industry and Idleness. 1747* xxxiii 12 The original rough sketch for Plate 8 of Industry and Idleness, xxxiv. British Museum. There are studies (in several cases rough sketches as well as final drawings) in the British Museum for all the subjects of the series except Plate 12. The present illustration, a first idea of the composition, should be contrasted with a more finished drawing for another of the series (Plate xxxvi.) All the studies except the present example are in reverse to the prints. There are also studies in the British Museum for two further subjects which were not engraved The Industrious ’Prentice grown rich, and SherilP of London. Plate 8 of Industry and Idleness. 1747. XXXV The original study for Plate 11 of Industry and Idleness, xxxvi. British Museum The Idle ’Prentice executed at Tyburn. Plate 11 of Industry and Idleness. 1747. xxxvii The Industrious ’Prentice Lord- Mayor of London. Plate 12 of /;/- dustry and Idleness. 1747. xxxviii The Stage Coach ; or, Country Inn Yard at the Time of an Election. 1747. XXXIX. Second state with ISIo Old dlaby added on flag in background. The motto is sup- posed to refer to John Child Tylncy, Viscount Castlemaine, who contested hlssex at the age of twenty Calais Gate ; or, O the Roast Beef of Old England. 1749 - XL. En- graved by C. Mosley and the painter after tlie original picture in tlic National (lallery WILLIAM HOGARTH Beer Street. 1751. xli. This and the following are only inscribed Designed by Jf\ Hogarth, but the engraving is also generally attri- buted to him. The two original drawings, in red chalk, are now in the collection of Mr. Pierpont Morgan (from the Joly and Fair- fax Murray collections) Gin Lane. 1751. xLii. See note to its pendant, the preceding plate. Paul before Felix. 1751. xliii. First state, inscribed : Design d and scratch’d in the true Dutch taste by Wm. Hogarth. In the second state the inscription is changed to Design'd and etclid in the rediculous [sic] majiner of Rembrandt. Used as a receipt for payment for two prints, the larger Paul before Felix and Moses brought to Pharoah's Daughter Columbus Breaking the Egg. (1752). XLiv. Subscription ticket for Hogarth’s book the Analysis oj Beauty, 1753 A Statuary’s Yard. Plate i in Ho- garth’s book, the Analysis of Beauty, 1753. xlv. First state, with inscription, Ft tu Brute, on the pedestal, and before the en- graved numbers, which are given in manuscript on the present im- pression. There is a study for the crying child in the British IVIuseum A Country Dance. Plate 2 in the Analysis of Beauty, 1753. xi.vi. Second state, with a figure added beneath theplcturcof 1 lenry \’III, and with alterations in the chief pair of dancers An Flection Entertainment. I7!;5. One of Four Prints of an Election. GREAT ENGRAVERS XLvii. First State, before the lettering. See Plates xlviii, xlix and LXii. The original paintings of this series are in the Soane Museum, Lincoln’s Inn Fields The Polling. Engraved by Hogarth and Le Cave. 1758. One of Four Prints of an Election, xlviii Chairing the Members. Engraved by Hogarth and F. Aveline. One of Four Prints of an Election, xlix The Invasion. Plate ist. 1756. l The Invasion. Plate 2nd. 1756. li Hogarth painting the Comic Muse. 1758. Lii. Second state inscribed. The Face Engraved hy William Hogarth (this part of the inscrip- tion omitted in the fourth state). The original painting is in the National Portrait Gallery The Bench. 1758. liii. The original painting, in reverse, formerly in the Cheney and Fairfax Murray collections, is now in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge The Cockpit. 1759. liv The Times. Plate i. 1762. lv. First state ; Pitt on stilts in the character of Henry VIII, blow- ing up the flames. Lord Bute is represented in the centre, syringed by the two men from garret windows (Wilkes and Charles Churchill). This caricature in- cited Wilkes to a venomous attack on Hogarth in the North Briton (Sept. 25, 1762), and Churchill, Wilkes’s champion, replied with equal savagery in his well-known Epistle to William Hogarth (1763). Hogarth’s reprisals are seen in the two following plates : the cruel, but life-like portrait etch- ing of Wilkes, and in the plate of Churchill as The Bruiser Portrait of John Wilkes. 1763. lvi The Bruiser, C. Churchill. 1763. Lvii. First state with a Modern (changed in second state to Russian) Hercules in the inscrip- tion. This is the same copper- plate as the Portrait of Hogarth (see frontispiece) altered The Contract. Plate i of the Marrlage-a-la-Mode. 1745. lviii. Engraved by Gerard Scotin. The series of six original paintings is in the National Gallery The Toilet Scene. Plate 4 of the Martiage-a-la-Mode. 1745. lix. Engraved by Simon Francois Ravenet, the elder Taste in High Life (1746). lx. By an anonymons engraver after Hogarth. The original painting of 1742 was done for a certain Miss Edwardes of Kensington, who intended to punish the critics of her own originalities of costume by a burlesque of the eccentric fashions of 1742. The man is said to be Lord Portmore, and the lady on the left Kitty Fisher A representation of the March ol the Guards towards Scotland in the year 1745 (commonly called the March to Finchley). En- graved by Luke Sullivan. 1750. Lxi. First state, unfinished. The original picture is in the Foundling Hospital. Drawings, probably by Sullivan, for the whole and for various heads in the engraving, are in the British Museum Canvassing for Votes. Engraved by Charles Grignion. 1757- lxii. Unfinished state. One of Four Prints of an Election^ of which Hogarth engraved the three others, two in collaboration with other engravers. See Plates XLVii, XLViii, and xlix The Shrimp Girl. 1781. lxiii. Stipple engraving by f'rancesco Bartolozzi after the picture in the National Gallery The Beggar’s Opera, Act III. En- graved by William Blake. I79^- Lxiv. After the picture (done WILLIAM HOGARTH about 1728-29) in the collection of the Duke of Leeds. 'Ehere is another painted version of the subject in the National Gallery (once belonging to Mr. John Murray) The title-page border is taken from Ellis Gamble’s Shop Card (see i) The accompanying tail-piece. Mask and Palette (1745), is the subscrip- tion ticket to the engraving of Ga rick in the character of Richard 111 (1746) 15 I. ELLIS GAIMBLE’S SHOP CARD From an impression with the lettering blocked out. Ellis Gamble was the goldsmith and silver-plate engraver to whom Hogarth was apprenticed. The shop card (which is a rare print) is probably quite an early plate by Llogarth, and in any case must have been done before Gamble’s bank- ruptcy in 1733 II I II. AN EMBLEMATIC PRINT ON THE SOUTH SEA SCHEME. (1721) III. A SCENE IN THE SERAGI.IO. FROM THE TRAVELS OF AUBRY DE LA MOTR.^VE. 1723 IV. FRONTISPIECE TO THE NEJV METAMORPHOSIS ; OR, PLEA- SANT TRANSFORMATION OF THE GOLDEN ASS OF LUCIUS APULEIUS. 1724 V. MASQUER. 4 DES AND OPERAS. BURLINGTON GATE. 1724 First state, with Pasquin No. XCV on the roll hanging over the wheel- barrow (altered later to Ben John[soii\) A hit among other things at William Kent, whose figure stands between Raphael and Michelangelo above the gate of Burlington House, somewhat prophetically inscribed Accademy of Arts. Kent was the author of the notorious altar-piece (now lost) of St. Clement Danes, which Hogarth pitilessly satirised in another engraving VI. A JUST VIEW OF THE BRITISH STAGE, OR THREE HEADS ARE BETTER THAN ONE. SCENE NEWGATE, BY M. D— V— TO (1725) Represents Booth, W’ilks, and Cibber, of Drury Lane Theatre, con- triving a pantomime. M. D — V — TO is the scene-painter, John Devoto (who is represented in a portrait engraved by John Faber II, after Damini, 1738) VII. HUDIBRAS IN TRIBULATION. PLATE 6 OF A SET OF TWEL\T LARGE PRINTS FOR BUTLER’S HUDIBRAS. 1726 VIII. BURNING YE RUMPS AT TEIMPLE BARR. PLATE 11 OF A SET OF TWELVE LARGE PRINTS FOR BUTLER’S HUDI- BRAS. 1726 tuTv.MPI.K. Uauu . IX. THE BEGGAR’S OPER.\ BURLESQUED. 1728 First state, before the large lettered title at the top For a serious rendering of a scene from the same opera, see plate LXIV II X. BOYS PEEPING AT NATURE. (1731 ?) Subscription ticket for A Harlofs Progress necefse Indicii^ mon^'^lrarc re'cciitibxi abdila roJ'xim , dabilurque Xicciilia S\n npla pudontcr. J/S/- A A, tftrj . AAtr f'r^irA>*'n^zn^ ct yAtro/cny Ccrz/i^ittny AZ) i^Arz//- ^(’/' tAe^/zzy.czi rz^A^r z*ri; y y yt'7/fz.* r tif (AAi'Ct' cr/t ^^yy lAt-y fitwt rztAizry itj^tny Au.t f <-// faf'Cfi/.'C.jiiU'J’rrr(>uA<^tJif /fatn/'^r J'ritU^i/.^^uiU /A^l'Plu/ J'u/'jcryhJ /,’r.f^ifti y l,uiJ>.'/t^7//Y.'rrnfrJk7tt‘fry.7kf>m<^IkMi*rynyj7t^^ XIV. A MIDNIGHT MODERN CONATRSATION. (1733) First state, before the correction of Moddern J XV. PORTRAIT OF SARAH MALCOLM. (1733) The original picture, from the collection of Horace Walpole, is nowin the National Gallery of Scotland X\l. SANCHO’S FEAST. (1733) XVII. THE LAUGHING AUDIENCE. (1733) Subscription ticket for the Rakers Progress and ^qutkwark Fair .y?a/^ /t'y/Zf/ //^e' 3^2y///f:u/ /////f fy'/v/^/j. S' of ///zoy^ yj^yf/e/o/// 1/ fy/ryn/j fL ///^ 1/ //‘/fo A /y yy ',-o,vff/o /o (Ao/f/yr fr/tf fi j yf/f/j/f'A.i> ■ p/f yAlyry/fV/or o/iy S/f/^oo^/ ///p'y, /Ao AA/ f // / o/ /y/o .Af/f/- Zy///^ yZo/fiY/ // o/ /Ay ///ffy c/ yff/jt /'f/‘fff’ ///< /SuAyP if/t'/iy f/o// /y //. V a/Sf y My /fm? ;’/ Au-/\'( or /* t ^ir ST U 1 O I .s ’ r 1^ li N '1 U 1. |K irunnm;^ llio Out yoC ;i Cliritl iiui XXXIII. THE INDUSTRIOUS ’PRENTICE OUT OF HIS TIME, AND MARRIED TO PUS MASTER’S DAUGHTER. PLATE 6 OF INDUSTR 2 ' AND IDLENESS. 1747 I'Ik- INI) I S r RIO rs ’ TRI'. N T1 C i: out ol'lii.s limf .'x Mai-ric tl to his Maltcrs J);m<)iitor. ) u. 5 XXXIV. THE ORIGINAL ROUGH SKETCH FOR PLATE 8 OF INDUSTRY AND IDLENESS. British Museum There are studies (in several cases rough sketches as well as final designs) in the British Museum for all the subjects of the series except plate 12. The present illustration, a first idea of the composition, should be contrasted with a more finished drawing for another of the series (plate XXXVI). All the studies, except the present example, are in reverse to the prints. There are also studies in the British Museum for tw1 K1 or S 'I’Kl ,\ I'l C 1. I.ul•(l ^l. XXXIX. THE STAGE COACH ; OR, COUNTRY INN YARD AT THE TIME OF AN ELECTION. 1747 Second state, with No Old Baby added on flag in background. The motto is supposed to refer to John Child Tylney, Viscount Castle- maine, who contested Essex at the age of twenty XL. C. 4 L. 4 IS GATE OR, O THE ROAST BEEF OF OLD ENGLAND. Engraved by C. Mosley and the painter after the original picture in the National Gallery Charles Mosley, line-engraver ; d. ab. 1770 ; worked in London () Tin: n 0 1S T JiKKT ofOldKa ol XLL BEER STREET. 1751 This and the following are only inscribed Designed by JF. Hogarth, but the engraving is also generally attributed to him. The tw^o original drawings, in red chalk, are now in the collection of Mr. Pierpont Morgan (from the Joly and Eairfax Murray collections) II. 6 XLII. GIN LANE. 1751 See note to its pendant, the preceding plate (. 1 N I. AN !; XLIII. PAUL BEFORE FELLX. 1751 Fir=t state, inscribed Design'd and scratch'd in the true Dutch taste by Wm. Hogarth. In the second state this inscription is changed to Design'd and etch'd in the rediculous (sic) manner oj Rembrandt. Used as a receipt for payment for two prints, the larger Paul bejore Felix and Moses brought to Pharaoh's Daughter. There is a pencil study for this print in the British Museum XLIV. COLUMBUS BREAKING THE EGG. (1752) Subscription ticket for Hogarth’s book, the A 7 ialysis oj Beauty (1753) jy?/’/' (/ -r jf'? h'f tndu/^ a fj/uyf~^rarurn/ .,('>n/i/ Iiir/i/ti/i,, //I’r//.- Charflrtcr . ('ar/icatiuvi ..v/./Outr<' ^ n ^ Ann/i /:•; LIV. THE COCKPIT. 1759 LV. THE TIMES: PLATE 1. 1762 First state ; Pitt on stilts in the character of Henry VIII blowing up the flames. Lord Bute is represented in the centre, directing a fire- hose, and syringed by two men from garret windows (Wilkes and Charles Churchill). This caricature incited Wilkes to a venomous attack on Hogarth in the North Briton (September 25, 1762), and Churchill, Wdlkes’s champion, replied with equal savagery in verse in his well-known to William Hogarth (1763). Hogarth’s reprisals are seen in the two succeeding plates : in the cruel, but evidently lifelike, portrait etehing of Wilkes, and in the plate representing Churchill as the Bruiser LVI. PORTILllT OF JOHN WILKES. 1763 ■y / /,'/ru / /!>/// ■■//: ^ ( Kh/ S /, // .? /t^'//ii/, LVII. THE BRUISER, C CHURCHILL. 1703 First state, with a Modern (changed in second state to a Russian) Hercules in the inscription. This is the same copper-plate as the Portrait of Hogarth {Jrontispiece) altered H. S L\lll. THE CONTRACT. ENGRAVED BY GERARD SCOTIN. PLATE 1 OF THE SERIES OF SIX SUBJECTS, ENTITLED MARRIAGE- J-LA-MODE. 1745 The series of original paintings is in the National Gallery Gerard Jean Baptiste Scotin II, line-engraver ; b. 1698 ; d. after 1 745 ; worked in Paris, and London LIX. THE TOILET SCENE. ENGRA\TD BY SIMON FRANCOIS RA\TNET, THE ELDER. PLATE 4 OF MARRIAGE-A-LA- MODE. 1745 Simon Fran9ois Ravenet I, line-engraver ; b. 1721 (or ab. 1706 ?) ; d. 1774: worked in Paris, and London • •- I'j - - LX. TASTE IN HIGH LIFE. BY AN ANONYMOUS ENGIUWTR AFTER HOGARTH. (1746) The original painting, done in 1742, is in the collection of Mr. Fairfax Murray. The painting was commissioned by a certain Miss Edwardes of Kensington, who intended thereby to punish the critics of her own originalities of costume by a burlesque of the eccentric fashions of 1742. The man is said to represent Lord Portmore ; the lady on the left Kitty Fisher JiV Ji J o Ji LIFE. LXI. A REPRESENTATION OF TEIE AEVRCH OF THE GLTARDS I'OWMRDS SCOTLAND IN THE YEAR 1745 (COMMONLY CAI.LED THE MARCH AO FINCHLEl'). ENGRAVED BY LUKE SULLU'AN. 1750 First state : unfinished. The original picture is in the Foundling Hospital. Drawings, probably by Sullivan, for the whole, and for various heads in the engraving, are in the British Museum Luke Sullivan, line-engraver; b. 1705 ; d. 1771 ; worked in Ireland, and London LXII. CANVASSING FOR VOTES. ONE OF FOUR PRINTS OF AN ELECTION, OF WHICH HOGARTH ENGRAVED THE THREE OTHERS, TWO IN COLLABORATION WITH OTHER ENGR^WTRS. ENGIUWED BY CHARLES GRIGNION. 1757 Unfinished state. See plates XL\ 7 I, XL\'HI, and XLIX Charles Grignion, line-engraver; b. 1717; d. 1810; worked in London LXni. THE SHRIMP GIRL. ENGRA\TD IN STIPPLE BY ERANCESCO BARTOLOZZL 1781 After the picture in the National Gallery Francesco Bartolozzi, engraver in line and stipple ; b. 1728 d. 1813 ; worked in Florence, Venice, Rome, London, and Lisbon t '-•^'i'V -A V' 'K-^‘^'£.'^ ^>'■5 7 wA’\ LXIV. THE BEGGAR’S OPERA, ACT HE ENGRAVED BY WILLIAM BLAKE. 1790 Two paintings of this subject may be mentioned ; one in the National Gallery (formerly belonging to Mr. John Murray) ; the other, slightly larger, in the collection of the Duke of Leeds. The engrav- ing is based on the latter. This now forgotten opera, which has scored by Dr. Pepusch from old ballads and popular songs of the day, had an immediate success on its first production in 1728. Both pictures date about this time, though the National Gallery version was still unfinished in 1731. Polly Peachum, played by Lavinia Fenton, is seen on the right, kneeling before her father ; on the left Lucy, with her back turned, before Lockit. IMacheath is the central figure. The Duke of Bolton, who married Miss Fenton, is repre- sented seated on the extreme right. There is a charming Hogarth portrait of Miss Fenton, as Polly, in the National Gallery Wdlliam Blake, painter, line-engraver, and etcher ; famous for his imaginative designs, and prophetical books; b. 1757; d. 1827; worked in London, and Felpham PRINTED AT THE BALLANTYNE PRESS