E. K, WATEKHOUitK 
 
 \ 
 
f 
 
1 
 
 Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2015 
 
 https://archive.org/details/originalportraitOOstev 
 
4 
 
(["original ^artrnits 
 
 nf tilt 
 
 Birtrijitis nf 5^1nntrnsr, 
 
 $nmt nf liis jFriEnJiB. 
 
ORIGINAL PORTRAITS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 MARQUIS OF MONTROSE, 
 
 AND 
 
 SOME OF HIS FRIENDS. 
 
 EDINBURGH: PRINTED FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION. 
 
 M.DCCC.LVI. 
 
(iitlg ^oxt^ Copies ^rhttfb for ^asenls. 
 ^proofs upon fnbia |3apcr. 
 
 lEDinburgl) : ^rintcD bp J^latpl)£rson & Sgmc, 12 5t. ©abiC Street. 
 
T has scarcely happened, we beheve, to 
 any other illustrious personage of history 
 than the great Marquis of Montrose, 
 that his personal appearance should have 
 been so minutely described by the pen 
 of several of his contemporaries, so strikingly deh- 
 neated by the brush of some of the greatest portrait- 
 painters of his day, and yet so extensively libelled by 
 the burin of engravers, contemporary and modern. 
 
 This last, which the facility of transmission had caused 
 to predominate, and had even cast into abeyance all the 
 best efforts of the former, has at length been corrected 
 by the indefatigable researches of Mr Napier. But, in- 
 dependently of the very interesting and valuable illus- 
 trations thus brought to light in aid of a complete bio- 
 graphy of Montrose, the enquiry into the authenticity 
 of his portraits, so fully and minutely treated as it now 
 has heen by his biograjiher, seems to possess a separate. 
 
VI 
 
 and no unsubstantial interest, at least for all who take 
 delight in the beauty, and the truth, of genuine art. 
 
 Impressed with this idea, the Publisher of the latest 
 and most complete biography of Montrose has, with the 
 liberal permission of the author, thrown off a very limited 
 impression of these portraits, wdth the illustrative letter- 
 press, in the present form for private circulation. He 
 has only to add his anxious hopes, that the lew Noble- 
 men and Gentlemen to whom this selection is humbly 
 presented, as a small token of gratitude for kind and 
 liberal patronage, will find therein so much of originality 
 and interest as may serve to excuse the presumption. 
 
 lEnin'curgl), 87 prince's Street, 
 ji^larcf) 1856. 
 
^plates anti OTootinits^ 
 
 PAGE 
 
 I. Portrait of Moxtrose after Lodge, 9 
 
 11. Portrait of Montrose by Jameson, 1629, 11 
 
 III. Portrait of Montrose by Jameson, 1640, 14 
 
 IV. Portrait of Montrose by Dobson, 1644, 17 
 
 V. Portrait of Montrose by Honthorst, 1649,... 21 
 
 VI. Portrait of Archibald First Lord Napier by 
 
 Jameson, 34 
 
 VII. Portrait of Archibald Second Lord Napier 
 
 by Jameson, 35 
 
 VIIL Portrait of Sir George Stirling of Keir by 
 
 Jameson, 1637, 36 
 
 IX. Portrait of Lady Stirling of Keir by Jame- 
 son, 1637, 38 
 
 X. Portrait of Argyle, ( Woodcut), 39 
 
 1. Seal of Montrose, 16 
 
 2. Seal of Montrose, 20 
 
 3. Facsimile of the Autograph of the Queen of 
 
 Bohemia, 25 
 
 4. Facsimile of Crow and Motto attached to Mon- 
 
 trose's Proclamation, 1644, 31 
 
 5. Facsimile of the Autographs of Montrose and 
 
 HIS Curators, 33 
 
 6. Medallion of John Napier of Merciiiston, 37 
 
) ■ 
 
(IDrijjiiial ^Jartrniln 
 
 nf 
 
 fflaatrnBt, ml nmt nf tjin /amilij Cirrlr. 
 
 It was the fate of Montrose to be no less obscured, misunderstood, 
 and even calumniated, in the physique than in the morale. Rejecting, 
 of course, the endless engravings of the penny-print school, produced 
 and reproduced throughout the progress of a century, and all claiming 
 for their common parent the Dutch caricature of Montrose engraved 
 by Houhraken in 1740, we were constrained, so lately as 1838, to re- 
 peat for our frontispiece, on a smaller scale, the engraving in Lodge. 
 But the portraits in that attractive gallery of illustrious personages, 
 stand very much in the same relation to the Vandykes, Dobsons, Hon- 
 thorsts, Jamesons, &c., which they represent, that the pleasant but 
 flimsy text bears to minute and accurate biographical history. The 
 Mai'quis of Argyle, with a head not his own, indeed presented to us 
 imder oije of the finest aspects in the collection, — John Knox repre- 
 sented with a plan or chart before him, a pair of compasses in one hand, 
 and a mason's rule in the other, at once shook our faith in Lodge's 
 individualities, as regards Scotland at least. A record of the kind, how- 
 ever, embracing so vast a field of illustrious effigies, which shall be im- 
 pervious to any such criticism, must be reserved for a niillenium of art. 
 So, when in 1838, we published " The Life and Times of Montrose," 
 having as yet seen no original portrait of our hero whatever, we were fain 
 to cook an epitome of the portrait in Lodge, for our own small octavo. 
 The reader is here presented with a specimen from that plate. 
 
 Hitherto the name of no artist but Sir Anthony had been connected 
 with any well-known portrait of the champion of Charles the First. 
 Yet it cannot be doubted, when the matter comes to be investigated. 
 
 2 
 
10 PORTRAITS OF THE 
 
 that the immortalizer of the English Cavaliers never dipt his brush in 
 a colour to represent the Scotchman who may be called the Cavalier of 
 " the Troubles" par excellence. This question must be disposed of at 
 once, ere laying before our readers the only information relative to 
 original portraits of Montrose, that any one has hitherto been at the 
 trouble to discover. 
 
 Sir Anthony Vandyke " died in Blackfriars, December 9, 1641," 
 says the well informed Walpole, " and was buried on the 1 1th in St 
 Paul's, near the tomb of John of Gaunt." Not very long before his 
 death, he was married, under the auspices of his royal patron, to Maria 
 Ruthven, grand-daughter of John first Eaid of Gowrie, Montrose's 
 maternal grandfather. But this connection did not make them ac- 
 quainted. Vandyke immediately after his marriage set out for Paris, 
 intent upon distinguishing himself there ; but ere long returned to 
 England, disappointed in that speculation, and again relying upon the 
 patronage of his best friend King Charles. In 1641, death put an end 
 to his ambitious scheme of decorating the walls of one of the rooms 
 in Whitehall with the histoiy and procession of the Garter. Had he 
 lived to perform the feat, Montrose, who did eventually earn that great 
 distinction, could have found no place in Vandyke's representation of 
 the illustrious Order. Sir Anthony never painted a portrait in Scot- 
 land, and it is not known that he ever visited that country. While the 
 future champion of the Throne was as yet only in a miserable transi- 
 tion state between the Covenant and the King, Vandyke was abroad. 
 Throughout the most part of 1641, the year of the artist's death, Mon- 
 trose was suffering under persecution and restraint as a "delinquent" 
 in Scotland. He had not as yet attained even the distinction of a 
 "malignant." We can discover no reason to suppose that Sir Anthony 
 and the future martyr of loyalty ever met. Certainly they never met 
 under circumstances that could have induced, or enabled, the King's 
 painter in ordinary to present to the world an heroic portrait of a too 
 notorious covenanter. Montrose did not join the Court of Charles the 
 First until some time after Vandyke was in his grave. 
 
 It is only since our former publication, in 1838, that we have been 
 so fortunate as to bring to light, and authenticate, three original por- 
 traits of Montrose which had never been engraved. And a fourth, 
 that, namely, still in possession of his family, we think we can now trace 
 to its proper source. These four very interesting portraits, accurate 
 engravings of which accompany our notices of them, we proceed to 
 describe and account for in the order of their chronology. 
 
5*. 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. 
 
 11 
 
 portrait of iBontros'e hij Samrs'on, Siateti 1629, m 
 pogges£»ion of tijt Car! of ^outftesk, at liumai'rti 
 Castle, 
 
 The liberal permission accorded to us by the late Sir James Car- 
 negie of Kinnaird, subsequently to the publication of '' The Life and 
 Times of Montrose," to institute a search among the archives of the 
 Southesk family, for documents relating to his early marriage to Mag- 
 dalene Carnegie, first brought to light all those interesting particulars 
 of his youth and education, by which our new edition of his biography 
 has been rendered so complete. When we came to peruse the accounts 
 of the domestic expenditure of the young Earl, which his temporary 
 establishment in Kinnaird Castle caused to be preserved there, we 
 found a distinct and precise entry of the following facts. On the 3d of 
 November 1629, Montrose rode to Aberdeen from Morphie, the seat of 
 Sir Robert Graham, one of his curators, and there had his portrait 
 painted. At this time he was just seventeen years of age ; and on the 
 10th of November 1629, as the same accounts prove, he was married to 
 the daughter of Lord Carnegie of Kinnaird (afterwards Earl of Southesk) 
 in the kirk within the park of Kinnaird, and the young couple immediately 
 took up their abode in the castle. The portrait painted in Aberdeen was 
 brought to the castle of Kinnaird on the 2d of December 1629 ; and, 
 from a note in the account-books, would seem to have been a marriage 
 present from Graham of Morphie to the young Countess. The artist's 
 name is not mentioned in the accounts ; but as George Jameson, Scot- 
 land's only known artist of the period, was at that very time following 
 the profession of a poi'trait-painter in his native town of Aberdeen, the 
 reason for the young nobleman riding to Aberdeen to sit for his portrait 
 is manifest. 
 
 This discovery of course suggested the enquiry, whether a portrait 
 of Montrose was yet preserved among the family pictures at Kinnaird 
 Castle. The desideratum was, — a portrait of Montrose painted in 1629 ; 
 when he was seventeen years of age ; and painted by Jameson. The 
 facts disclosed by the accounts had been, with those neglected papers, 
 long buried in oblivion. Yet the tradition seems to have been trans- 
 mitted in the family, that the gallery of Kinnaird could boast of a por- 
 trait of Montrose. Tradition, however, had settled on a wrong one. 
 When we first visited the castle in search of it, there was pointed out 
 
12 
 
 PORTRAITS OF THE 
 
 as such, the head and bust of a middle-aged steel-clad warrior, black 
 and truculent as the Covenant could desire, hut without any resem- 
 blance to Montrose in feature, expression, or complexion, at any period 
 of his life. A glance sufficed to reject the grim usurper ; and little 
 more was required, by an experienced eye, to attract it to a portrait of 
 the young Montrose, decorating the same wall. A boy of fair and 
 somewhat delicate complexion was smiling at the spectator, with an 
 aspect that spoke not of " the Troubles." But the port, erect and 
 lordly, the exuberant auburn hair, of a fairer hue than the later por- 
 traits, the " penetrating grey eye," the finely moulded nose with its 
 sensitive nostril, and the characteristic expression of the compressed 
 lips, as yet devoid of the shadow of a moustache, at once suggested the 
 young Montrose. Then the sumptuous dress— a rich olive- velvet 
 doublet, profusely slashed with white satin, every seam and edge trim- 
 med with gold, and over the collar a lace ruff of the most delicate tex- 
 ture — seemed to announce the boy Benedict in his wedding bravery. 
 A closer inspection discovered these dates painted by the original artist 
 on the upper corner, to the right of the head, — " Anno 1629. yEtatis 
 17 ;" and in the back-ground, near the left shoulder, this autograph, — 
 " Jameson, fecit." The problem was solved. 
 
 The pupil of Rubens, and fellow-student of Vandyck, might well put 
 his name to this interesting and graceful portrait, which had been called 
 Sir John Carnegie of the Craig, upon no better authority than if it had 
 been dubbed Sir John Colvil of the Dale. It is a head size, gene- 
 rally adopted (from necessity) by Jameson, and in the usual conven- 
 tional position, half in profile, with the right shoulder presented to the 
 spectator. Like most of the early porti'aits of that master, it is painted 
 on panel. A slight flaw down the centre, which fortunately mars no 
 feature, is the only injury of any consequence incurred through the 
 lapse of two centuries. It is " signed all over," even had the artist 
 not added his name. For there is no mistaking the light rapid pencil, 
 warm priming, and thin transparent colouring of Scotland's only artist 
 in the great era of painting. 
 
 No type or shadow of the warrior's career is to be found in that por- 
 trait. Not even the hilt of a dagger. The artist had only to deal with 
 the lively school-boy, who headed the sports at St Andrews, and led 
 the Christmas revels at Balcarres, and in many others of the ancient 
 halls of Scotland; whose college fame was chronicled by a poor " Hun- 
 garian poet;" whose ancestral glories, and early promise, were lauded 
 in more ambitious strains by William Lithgow ; and who, wherever he 
 went, was welcome to the rich, and kind to the poor; and fed his hun- 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE, 
 
 IS 
 
 ter with loaf bread and ale ; and delighted in minstrels and mummery ; 
 and who was now, while yet a boy, on the eve of separating himself 
 from the ways and means of boyhood, to settle as a married man a 
 Kinnaird, with sweet " Mistress Magdalene Carnegie." 
 
 The engraving of this long obscui'ed work by a master of whom Scot- 
 land may well be proud, and for the first time attached to a biography 
 of its illustrious subject, was executed in 1848 for the historical collec- 
 tion which the author compiled, under the munificent auspices of the 
 Maitland Club, and entitled " Memorials of Montrose." The liberality 
 of that great litei-ary Society was further extended to bestowmg the 
 plate upon our new biography of the hero. 
 
14 
 
 PORTRAITS OF THE 
 
 |3oitrait of iBontrose h}] Same^£!it, tfatcti 1640, m 
 possitssion of prmnpal JBarfailan of <l5Ias!a:oU) 
 CoIIfgf. 
 
 There is at present in the possession of the very Reverend Principal 
 Macfarlan, a portrait in tolerable preservation, the originality, and even 
 authorship of which is obvious on the first inspection, without the aid 
 of the following legend, which appears on the back of it : — 
 
 " The great Mai-quis of Montrose, when in England in the year 
 1640, took refuge in the house of a Mr Colquhoun, a clergyman, second 
 son of the Camstraddan family, where he remained for a considerable 
 time. When about to depart, he thanked Mr C. for the respect and 
 tenderness with which he had been treated, and the fidelity with which 
 he had been concealed, regretting he had not something more substan- 
 tial than words by which to express his gratitude. Mr C. replied, — 
 ' You now have it in your power to repay an hundredfold any little ser- 
 vice we have ever done you ; a likeness of your Highness would be in- 
 estimable ;' — that if he would condescend so far, Jameson the Scotch 
 painter was in the house, a man of honour, a friend who might be 
 trusted. The Marquis agreed, and the picture now in our possession 
 was the likeness taken. About the year 1755, my father, Robert 
 Colquhoun of Camstraddan, became possessed of the portrait ; and in 
 1776, Lord Frederick Campbell carried it to London, and had it clean- 
 ed. On bringing it back to Camstraddan, he told my father it had 
 been greatly admired by Sir Joshua Reynolds, and other judges of 
 painting. No copy was ever allowed to be taken, so far as my memory 
 serves me. Such is the account I have frequently heard from my 
 father, who died 1787, aged seventy-one. 
 
 " Maegt. Haldane Colquhoun, 
 " Melville Place, Stirling, 2d March 1833." ^ 
 
 In 1640 Montrose was still a covenanting commander, passing occa- 
 sionally between their leaguer in Newcastle, and Edinburgh, but under 
 no necessity whatever of concealment. So far, then, the tradition is at 
 fault. The portrait itself, howevei", sufficiently establishes the main 
 fact, that it is Montrose by Jameson. It displays every characteristic 
 
 1 Miss Colquhoun died in lO.'iS. The proprietor of the portrait, for whom Principal 
 Macfarlan has it in keeping, is Robert Colquhoun, Esq., late of Canistradden, H. B. M. 
 Consul General at Bucharest. 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. 
 
 15 
 
 of the master, and has been more elaborately executed than the Kin- 
 naird portrait, but not so well preserved. Moreover, we have the date, 
 1640, in the corner of the pictui-e where Jameson usually painted it, 
 and in the same kind of figures. 
 
 A change had come over the spirit of Montrose's dream since he sat 
 to the same artist eleven years before. His archery, and golfing, and 
 hunting, and minstrelsy, and domestic enjoyments, had all merged in 
 the public commotions. For four years he had been boiling in the pitch 
 that we cannot say did not defile him. He had stood upon a barrel in 
 the High Street of Edinburgh and harangued a mob against Episcopal 
 government, till the facetious Rothes predicted his yet higher elevation 
 " in a tow." The times had determined the bent of his ardent genius 
 to arms. He was already distinguished as a soldier of the Covenant. 
 This boy had already crushed the loyal demonstrations of the veteran 
 Huntly in the North, and conducted that potent chief from the midst 
 of his clan a prisoner to Edinburgh. He had redeemed " the Cause " 
 from Haddo's " Trot of Turreff," by the desperate battle of the Dee. 
 But the course of his armed rebellion was already run out. He had 
 alarmed the Covenanters by making a stand in the senate for Monarchy, 
 when he defended the prei'ogativcs of the Crown ; and in the field for 
 the cause of humanity, by pi'otecting the loyal city which he had been 
 ordered to reduce to ashes. He had come into contact with his Sove- 
 reign ; and it was at this crisis of his career that the covenanting vulgar 
 affixed to his door the complimentary taunt, Invicttts armis verbis vinci- 
 tur ; and that the Argyle faction openly denounced him with the threat 
 that " his sword should be taken from his side before two months passed." 
 Such was Montrose in 1640, the twenty-eighth year of his age, when 
 George Jameson undertook to paint him again. We have it now en- 
 graved for the first time. 
 
 The attitude in this half-length portrait is precisely the same as that 
 painted in 1629. But the costume is very different. The sleeves, only, 
 of a pink and white satin doublet appear, and these not puffed or 
 slashed. The rest of the person is covered by a military buff-coat, 
 which imparts a fine tone and surface of colour to the picture. A broad 
 sword-belt, richly embi'oidered, crosses the breast ; and these warlike 
 signs are relieved by a falling collar of costly lace and tnxe Vandyke 
 pattern, such as a countess might covet in these degenerate days of 
 male attire. One defect in the composition is observable. In the por- 
 trait which Jameson first painted, the hair is naturally parted and 
 turned aside over the brow, so as completely to discover it, and though 
 full and curling is of moderate length. But in that now described. 
 
16 
 
 PORTKAITS OF THE 
 
 while the auburn locks descend in voluminous waves to the shoulder, 
 the hair in front is cut straight across, and very close to the eyebrows, 
 according to a most unbecoming fashion of the day, which Jameson and 
 other masters too frequently submitted to. This, and the black calotte 
 cap on the crown of the head, constitute a striking resemblance be- 
 tween the Camstradden portrait and the one at Buchanan House, to be 
 presently noticed, besides great similarity in the features.^ Both of 
 Jameson's portraits possess the advantage of representing Montrose in 
 the very dress he wore. In this respect all the other portraits of him 
 that we have seen, and the whole hei'd of prints, are merely figurative. 
 It was not the habit at that time to be cased in armour like the knights 
 of old, although it was the right of every great military commander to 
 be so pourtrayed. The English Tintoret, and Gherardo dalle Notte, 
 whose portraits we have next to discuss, have given us sublime histo- 
 rical representations of the hero. From George Jameson we have 
 biographical delineations of the individual, as boy and man. 
 
 ' The following clerical ilescription of Montrose is worthy of being preserved among 
 the curiosities of literature : — 
 
 " Montrose's genius, restlessness, ambition, and personal antipathies, moved him from 
 one side to the other (2tnck and dear as the fluid in a spLril-hrel. The daring, romantic, 
 and brilliant military movements of Montrose, naturally lead us to expect in his portrait 
 something of the stern decision of a Roman hero ; but for once at least, in this group, 
 either Lavater, or ilie painter, is at fault. The unmeaning common-place countenance, 
 the low round head, covered with long dark hair, hanging almost half over the face, and 
 the simple and soft ei/cs, convey more of the notion of a weak well-meaning enthusiast, 
 than of the fiery ambition and unconquerable spirit of Montrose." (Life and Times of 
 Alexander Henderson, by the Rev. John Alton of Dolphinton. 1836.) 
 
 To what atrocious print this worthy clergyman had applied the ingenious test of his 
 spirit-level, in order to construct a Montrose after his own fancy, I know not. Obviously 
 he had never seen a painted portrait of the Marquis. 
 
If^^ ^ Lk ^' iLn ik. iftl iK\ lill ii' Ll \j'<. ^ 'U' iivlJ ^ \b llD Ij llvO lUJ ilj 'U liU .i- p 
 
 r/ioM ■rii!-: oniGLNnL in thf. posshssioh or ouacj; the nvK'n of mcvtrcs^. 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. 
 
 17 
 
 portrait of ;0lontro£Je bp ©obsicin, probaljlj) pamteJj 
 m 1644, m pos^ges^icin of iBvMt tiyt Mnkt of 
 i¥lontros:e at Biirftanan fmi^t. 
 
 As might be expected, there is a portrait of Montrose at Buchanan 
 House, the seat of the Duke of Montrose. We find from the date on 
 Houbraken's engraving of it, to be afterwards noticed, that it has been 
 in possession of the family at least for a period extending so far back 
 as 1740. Nor are we aware of any reason for doubting that it has been 
 in the family since the time it was painted. 
 
 Unquestionably this is an original portrait of the great Marquis, and 
 by a most masterly hand. The colouring of the head is extremely rich, 
 and the flesh tints especially are warm and glowing as nature itself. 
 The figure, clad in armour beautifully painted, terminates awkwardly 
 just under the bend of the elbow. The attitude, being a full front, 
 though firm and heroic, is not graceful, and anything but characterestic 
 of the composition of Vandyck. But the expression is very animated, 
 the air noble, and the execution generally not unworthy of having been 
 attributed to that renowned artist. In the corner of the back-ground, 
 elevated above the right shoulder of the figure, stands the statue of 
 Minerva, armed, a symbolical accessory intimating how accurately the 
 artist appreciated the accomplished character of the warrior Marquis. 
 In the opposite corner of the back-ground, also elevated upon some 
 architectural projection, rests the helmet of the mailed figure ; which 
 represents, — as a comparatively modern label superinduced upon the 
 ancient painting intimates, — " James first Marquis of Montrose." 
 
 A very minute examination of this portrait, for which his Grace 
 kindly afforded every facility, enables us to pronounce without hesitation 
 that it is but the remnant of a much larger picture. The present form 
 of it is nearly square, but somewhat broader than long. The accessories 
 in the back-ground are out of all proportion to what remains of the 
 picture ; and assuredly the masterly hand that coloured the head and 
 armour, never would have added those accessories to any composition 
 less than a full length figure, on a large canvas. But that the head 
 and shoulders, which are life-size and fortunately in a state of good 
 preservation, represent only a portion of the original painting, seems 
 placed beyond doubt by the fact, that the edges of the canvas, where 
 folded over its present stretcher, distinctly indicate, by the broken re- 
 
18 
 
 PORTRAITS OF THE 
 
 mains of colour, that the original painting had extended on every side 
 beyond the limit of the present surface. 
 
 This splendid work of art, for enough remains to show that such it 
 was when entire, would seem to have been reduced to its present frag- 
 mentary state, of an ill-proportioned and ungainly head- size, for at 
 least more than a century back, Vertue and Houbraken each engraved 
 it prior to the middle of last century, without giving more of the figure 
 than we find now. And we cannot doubt that the reason why both of 
 these celebrated artists omitted altogether the ornate and characteristic 
 accessories in the upper corners of the picture, was, because the Goddess 
 and the helmet, predominating on either side, buUi/ (so to speak) the 
 heroic head beyond what the artistic eye could endure. Their several 
 performances shall be more particularly noticed afterwards. The ac- 
 curate and pains-taking Vertue has avoided the blunder of affixing to 
 his engraving the name of Vandyck, while he mentions the fact of the 
 portrait being in the possession of the Duke of Montrose. But Hou- 
 braken to this latter fact adds the assertion of the portrait having been 
 painted by Vandyck, and dates his own engraving of it, 1740. What 1 
 One of the most heroic and cavalieresque portraits of the age, produced 
 by the immortal limner of royalty and loyalty from such a theme as 
 the covenanting Montrose, prior to the year 1641 ? Impossible. 
 
 Having separated this best known portrait of the hero from the 
 great master under whose name it has hitherto been engraved, it be- 
 comes us, if we can, to establish the real authorship. 
 
 William Dobson was appointed Sergeant-painter to Charles the 
 First, on the death of Vandyck in 1641. He was the most successful 
 imitator of his illustrious predecessor and patron. Walpole commends 
 him; and, yet more precious to his fame, he is lauded by Sir Joshua 
 Reynolds. So far from there being any chronological difficulty as to 
 Montrose having been painted by the immediate inheritor of the court- 
 ly position and celebrity of Sir Anthony, it is not very easy, under the 
 circumstances, to imagine the contrary. When the King held his 
 military and migratory court at Oxford in 1643-4, at the commence- 
 ment of the great civil war, he was attended by Dobson as his Ser- 
 geant-painter ; and, adds Walpole, " at Oxford his Majesty, Prince 
 Rupert, and several of the nobility sat to him." Now Montrose had 
 been admitted to the King's most confidential counsels in Oxford at 
 that very time, superseding those of Hamilton. It was then and there 
 that he pledged himself to relieve the King from the pressui-e of the 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. 
 
 19 
 
 covenanting army, by creating a diversion in Scotland. His commis- 
 sion as Lieiitenant-General of all his Majesty's forces raised or to be 
 raised in Scotland, or brought thither from England, is dated at Oxford 
 on the first day of February 1644. The warrant for a patent creating 
 him and the heirs male of his body Marquises of Montrose, is dated at Ox- 
 ford on the sixth day of May 1644, and of course had been contemplated 
 for some time prior to that date. That he was one of the nobles who 
 sat to the Sergeant-painter at Oxford upon this great occasion, is certain- 
 ly most probable. Accordingly, we do find a portrait of Montrose recor- 
 ded among the performances of William Dobson. While enumerating 
 his works, Walpole says : " At the Lord Byron's is the portrait of 
 Sir Charles Lucas ; and at Drayton, in Northamptonshire, Henry Mor- 
 daunt. Earl of Peterborough, in armour, with a page holding his horse, 
 and an angel giving him his helmet. A head of the Marquis of Mon- 
 trose was taken for the hand of Vandyck ; in a corner, in stone colour, 
 is a statue of Peace ; on the other side his helmet." 
 
 Walpole, in this paragraph, had failed to attend to his own maxim, 
 " not to become obscure by brevity and conciseness." By whom, and 
 where, was Montrose's head mistaken for Vandyck's hand f Not, as 
 we have ascertained,^ at Drayton in Northamptonshire. Doubtless 
 Walpole alludes to that remnant of a portrait, (hence described as a 
 head,) in the possession of the Duke of Montrose. The accessories 
 mentioned by him, seem to identify the porti-ait of which he speaks 
 with the one at Buchanan House. He calls, indeed, the symbolical 
 figure in the back ground a statue of Peace ; an attribute surely not 
 very characteristical of Montrose. Having closely examined the por- 
 trait, when in our own possession, we can say that the statue repre- 
 sents Minerva, with her shield braced on the left arm, extended down- 
 wards, the other arm being out of the picture, owing to its imperfect 
 condition. 
 
 But whence Walpole's oracular judgment, that " a head of the Mar- 
 quis of Montrose was taken for the hand of Vandyck," — instead of 
 Dobson, to whom he imputes it ? This, too, can be easily explained. 
 Houbraken, more courtly than careful in such matters, engraved it in 
 1740 as a work of Vandyck, to whom a loose family tradition had pro- 
 bably I'eferred it. Vertue attached no such blunder to the small engra- 
 ving which he executed of the portrait at least ten years before, and 
 does not venture, on the face of his plate, to assign it to any one. From 
 his voluminous MS. notes, however, forty volumes of which Walpole 
 
 ' Through the kind offices of our friend Mr Stirling of Keir. 
 
20 PORTRAITS OF THE 
 
 purchased from Vertue's widow, his aristocratic editor had derived the 
 information, that Houbraken's impress, or the family tradition, was a 
 mistake, and that Dobson, and not Vandyck, was the author of that 
 portrait. Those charming volumes, "Anecdotes of Painting in England, ' ' 
 doubtless are indebted for their charm to Walpole, but for all their 
 facts to the laborious and scrupulous engraver, of whom his editor tells 
 us, that " the indefatigable pains of Mr Vertue left nothing unexplored 
 that could illuminate his subject." 
 
 The conclusion we arrive at is, that the portrait in question was 
 painted at Oxford in 1644 by William Dobson, Sergeant-painter to the 
 King, then holding his Court there ; most of the noble Cavaliers being 
 upon that occasion submitted to his pencil ; and, among the rest Mon- 
 trose, just commissioned as Lieutenaiit- General of all his Majesty's 
 forces in Scotland. And the fine colouring of the animated head, breath- 
 ing loyalty and lustihood, and as if rejoicing in having shed the chry- 
 salis of the sordid Covenant ; the easy flowing pencil manifest in the 
 luxuriant locks, flashing golden light round the glowing countenance ; 
 the symbolical accessory ; the rich tone of the brilliant armour, — all 
 bespeak the hand of him who caught his inspiration from an early and 
 anxious study of Titian, and was rewarded by Charles the First design- 
 ing him " the Tintoret of England." 
 
 isriL 
 
 MEDIVM 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. 
 
 21 
 
 |3ortrait of iHontrose ^ontim^U tiateti 1649, m 
 
 Immediately after the death of Chai'les the First, Montrose was inves- 
 ted by Charles the Second with the yet higher commission of Lieu- 
 tenant-Governor of Scotland, and Captain-General of all his Majesty's 
 forces there. This commission is dated at the Hague, on the 4th of 
 March, 1649. The King was put to death on the 30th of January of 
 that year. That upon this second great occasion, also, Montrose sat for 
 a heroic portrait to another worthy successor of Vandyck, is a fact we 
 are now enabled to demonstrate ; and it tends to confirm the theory of 
 the former portrait. In one of a series of letters to Montrose from the 
 Princess Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, and sister to Charles the First, 
 written very soon after the murder of her brother, she says, — " I give 
 you many thanks for your picture ; I have hung it in my cabinet to 
 fright away the Brethren." This letter is dated " the Hagh, this 24th 
 of June," 1649. Montrose had just gone to Breda with Charles II., who 
 had recently been at the Hague, and had there signed Montrose's com- 
 mission, as above mentioned, in the month of March. There is every 
 reason to believe that the picture acknowledged by her Majesty (which 
 from the in terrorem display of it could scarcely be a miniature,) was 
 a heroic portrait, painted at the Hague, by Gerard Honthorst, one of 
 the first artists of his day, who was there at the same time with Mon- 
 trose, and in the service of the Queen of Bohemia and the Prince of 
 Orange. This was the celebrated Gherardo dalle Notte, born at Utrecht, 
 but who had acquired that name and fame from his early studies in 
 Italy. There, under the patronage of Prince Justiniani, he chiefly ex- 
 celled in night-pieces and candle-light effects. Charles the First patro- 
 nised him for a time in England, and rewarded him with three thousand 
 florins, a horse, and a service of silver-plate. But he returned to his 
 own country ; and at the unhappy commencement of the reign of tlie 
 second Charles, in 1649, Honthorst was at the Hague, continually 
 painting for the Queen of Bohemia, whose daughters he had the honour 
 to instruct in the art, and the portraits of whose sons, the princes Ru- 
 pert and Maurice, he had taken most probably about the time when he 
 painted Montrose. Walpole says : " Mr West has the portraits of the 
 
22 
 
 PORTRAITS OF THE 
 
 1 
 
 Marquis of Montrose, of the Princes Rupert and Maurice, with his name 
 written to them thus, Honthorst."^ 
 
 Montrose was highly esteemed by both of those Princes, and his 
 first commission, as Lieutenant-General of Scotland, was (by his own 
 express desire) under Prince Maurice. Mr West had probably acquir- 
 ed possession of the very portrait which Montrose presented, in the 
 month of June 1649, to the Queen of Bohemia. This might well have 
 happened. The collection of that unfortunate Princess, who was in- 
 volved in the ruin of her husband and brother, was no doubt partially 
 dispersed. It is said that in her widowhood she was privately married 
 to the first Earl of Craven, to whom she bequeathed most of her pro- 
 perty ; and hence Combe Abbey is still rich in portraits, many of them 
 productions of Oherardo dalle Notte. But the portrait of Montrose is 
 not there. That mentioned by Walpole, in conjunction with those of 
 Rupert and Mauiice, has ever appeared to me a great object of research 
 ever since finding the very interesting acknowledgment of it by the 
 " Queen of Hearts." For if Honthorst painted Montrose shortly be- 
 fore the date of that letter, it must have been while he was yet suffer- 
 ing from the shock of the murder of his Sovereign ; and a heroic por- 
 trait of him, at that crisis, calculated " to fright away the Brethren" 
 from the cabinet of the Queen of Bohemia, and by a painter who had 
 been munificently patronized by Charles, could scarcely fail to be treated 
 con amore. 
 
 While prosecuting these researches on the subject of Montrose's por- 
 traits, one was shown to me at Lincluden House, in Kirkcudbrightshire, 
 by the Honourable Mrs Young, who called it a portrait of Montrose by 
 Vandyck. It had formerly passed from the Panmure family to the late 
 Marquis of Queensberry, and was by him bequeathed to the present 
 Lord Panmure (in the lifetime of his father,) whose sister, Mrs Young, 
 thus happened to possess it. To determine that it was a portrait of 
 Montrose, independently of his name, " Marqus. Montrose," painted at 
 the upper edge of the panel, and unquestionably contemporary with the 
 rest of the painting, was not difficult. Nor was it more difficult to pro- 
 nounce that the manner was not Vandyck's. The portrait itself had 
 long fallen into abeyance, and I am not aware of any engraving which 
 represents it ; although in one or two of the rude old prints of Montrose 
 there is just sufficient resemblance to suggest an idea that this might 
 
 ^ Anecdotes, vol. ii. , p. 261. In tlie original Strawberry-hill edition, the painter's 
 monogram is cut in wood, in order to present a facsimile ; from which it would seem 
 that Walpole, or rather Vertue, had carefully inspected the portrait. 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. 
 
 23 
 
 be their prototype. It is in fine preservation, particularly the head and 
 features, which time has only mellowed so truthfully that copyists may 
 despair. The transparent colouring of the face and back-ground, with 
 its tender glazing, would stand no touch of cleaning, which perhaps has 
 been rashly bestowed at some period upon parts of the figure. The sim- 
 plicity, dignity, and solemnity of the composition, is that which strikes 
 at the first glance. Genius and originality ai"e stamped upon the old oak 
 board. The truth of ancient Flemish art comes over the spectator like 
 a spell ; and the breathing expression, life-like colouring, and time- 
 honoured tone of the countenance, grow upon him like flesh and blood. 
 The figure, which is life-size, and three-quarters length, stands erect, 
 not quite fronting the spectatoi', but with the right shoulder partially 
 presented, and the face nearly in the same plane with the figure. It is 
 completely cased in black armour, with the exception of the head, which 
 is not even crowned with the small calotte cap that appears in the por- 
 trait at Buchanan. The brow is well exposed ; and the long dark auburn 
 locks, equally parted above it, flow in graceful waves to the shoulders. 
 The right hand, slightly elevated and thrown across the person, grasps 
 a red baton ; while the left, projected as far as the wrist beyond the 
 pommel of his sword, is resting upon the open vizor of his helmet, 
 placed in front upon a bank or shelf of rock, and overshadowed with a 
 voluminous plume of black ostrich feathers. If Walpole ever saw this 
 portrait, it must have reminded him of his own Castle of Otranto. The 
 accessories are extremely simple, and in tlie severest taste. The black 
 helmet, and funereal plume, the blood-red baton, the brighter but some- 
 what lurid light in the far horizon, appearing on either side of the figure 
 and finely relieving it, the precipitous rock in front, spai'ingly fringed 
 with wild foliage, and harmonizing vv'ith a few warm-tinted clouds scat- 
 tered in a grey sky, are all in keeping witli the figure. Nothing could 
 excel the stern vigour of the attitude, the simple grace and intelligence 
 of the head, the animation of the well-opened powerful grey eyes, and 
 the peculiar but characteristic firmness of the compressed lips, expres- 
 sive at once of sadness and determination. 
 
 But who painted it ? Having deprived this portrait also of the name 
 of Vandyck, it was fortunate that we were able to substitute the true 
 one, by something better than a theory. After several close inspections, 
 we detected at the lower corner of the panel, and in deep shadow under 
 the helmet, this name and date, all but obliterated, — " Honthorst. 
 164:9 ;" the date being painted immediately under the autograph. The 
 monogram formed by the initial letters precisely resembles the facsimile 
 mentioned before as having been made for the early edition of Walpole's 
 
24 
 
 PORTEAITS OF THE 
 
 Anecdotes. That it is an original portrait of Montrose by that great 
 master, painted at the Hague in the year 1649, cannot now be ques- 
 tioned. Neither can it reasonably be doubted that the black armour 
 and plume indicate mourning for Charles the First, who suffered at the 
 beginning of that year. It must have been painted immediately after 
 the sad event ; and it is not very likely that the Queen of Bohemia 
 had there received at the same time^ any other portrait of the hero than 
 this one, the name and date on which prove it to have been then and 
 there painted by the hand of her own favourite artist. 
 
 Whatever Portraits of Montrose may hereafter come to light, that 
 now described, and which has hitherto been so unaccountably overlook- 
 ed, cannot fail to be the most important. It is coincident with the 
 period when, his great though ill-fated actions performed, his passions 
 were about to commence, and his destiny to be fulfilled. The fearful 
 vow he uttered, after having been struck senseless to the ground by 
 the intelligence of the murder of his Sovereign, and his metrical ver- 
 sion of it, — " Great, Good, and Just," — were notorious at the Hague. 
 And then it was, that Gherardo dalle Notte^ combining the truthful 
 simplicity of his native school, and his master Bloemart, with something 
 of tlie gloomy grandeur of Caravaggio whose style he affected, pro- 
 duced this noble portrait for his royal benefactress " the Queen of 
 Hearts." 
 
 Of the portrait last described, — the most interesting, and the most 
 complete, of all the portraits of Montrose hitherto authenticated, — we 
 have been unable to discover any engraving prior to that, which, under 
 the liberal auspices of the Maitland Club, forms the frontispiece to the 
 second volume of " Memorials of Montrose," issued in 1850. An ex- 
 tension of the same liberality has also bestowed this plate upon the 
 new edition of his biography. It is a most faithful and feeling repre- 
 sentative of the original portrait, and worthy of the name of Faed 
 attached to it. 
 
 I am aware that the above does not exhaust the list of alleged por- 
 traits of Montrose, or even of such as have been attributed to the hand 
 of Vandyke. But I have not the means at present of authenticating 
 any other.^ Were it possible that the greatest of portrait painters 
 could have painted Montrose as a cavalier, — and no theme, after 
 Charles the First, would have been more congenial to his pencil, — the 
 
 ' There is an old, and not a very faithful copy, of Honthorst's signed portrait of Mon- 
 trose, in the Marquis of Breadalbane's rooms in Ilolyrood House. It was purchased at 
 Murray of Broughton's sale, for i.'100, as an original, and attributed to Vandyke. 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. 
 
 25 
 
 hope of such a work might well excite research. We have given our 
 reasons for considering it hopeless. As it is, the four unquestionable 
 originals described above leave little to look for, and must ever hold 
 their place, especially being now (for the first time) recorded by accu- 
 rate engravings. These four porti'aits, independently of being the 
 works of the gi'eatest portrait-painters of the day, in Holland, England, 
 and Scotland, happen, each of them, to mark a separate epoch of the 
 hero's life; namely, his early marriage in 1629; his transition state 
 from the Covenant to the King, in 1640 ; his commission as Lieu- 
 tenant-General of Scotland, and his Marquisate from Charles the First 
 in 1644 ; and his commission as Lieutenant-Governor of Scotland, and 
 Plenipotentiary to the Northern States, from Charles the Second, im- 
 mediately after the murder of his father in 1649. The last portrait,^ 
 as we have said, is the most perfect ; and, undoubtedly it is the most 
 interesting, having been gifted by himself to the " Queen of Hearts," 
 who so shortly before his cruel murder wished him " safety in Scot- 
 land," and always signed herself, " Ever your most constant affection- 
 ate friend," — 
 
 ^ IIonthorst''3 Italian designation we have given as printed in Dallaway's recent 
 edition of Walpole's Anecdotes of Painting (vol. ii. p. 259.), namely, " Gherardo dalle 
 Nolle;" but " dalk" seems a misprint, by the transposition of the two vowels, for della. 
 
26 
 
 PORTRAITS OF THE 
 
 Of the host of previous engravings of Montrose existing in every form, 
 size, and style of art, there is not one which has the slightest preten- 
 sion to compete, as an accurate representation of any original portrait, 
 or as a trustworthy effigies of Montrose himself, with the four which 
 we have now presented to the puhlic. We may say, after an examina- 
 tion of all the known engravings so extensive and careful as to entitle 
 us to do so, that now, for the first time after the lapse of two cen- 
 turies from his death, have the portraits by any of the great contem- 
 porary limners of him, been carefully or faithfully engraved. Through 
 the kindness of a valued, and, let us add, a very liberal friend, who 
 has spared neither pains nor expense in promoting oiu* researches in 
 that matter,^ we possess twenty-seven engravings of Montrose from 
 different plates. Of these but one is of any account as a work of 
 art ; and of the rest, regarded as specimens of engraving, though some 
 of them be valued by collectors on account of their rarity, there is 
 not one that rises much above the level of a sixpenny print, or in- 
 spires more confidence. The many editions of Wishart's Commentaries, 
 hastily translated, and rudely got up, had sent abroad various paltry 
 prints as frontispieces, in which all individuality disappears, and nothing 
 is left but the rudest type of a warrior. Yet such of these as would 
 seem to be contemporary with the subject, have for the most part been 
 filched from the volumes to which they originally belonged, and have 
 entered the portfolios of collectors, as rare contemporary engravings, 
 and therefore to be relied iipon as likenesses. The experience of an age 
 infinitely advanced in the luxuries of book-making, and whose cheapest 
 and most ephemeral productions can boast a far higher class of art than 
 the prints in question belong to, might teach us how fallacious are even 
 contemporary engravings of heroes and statesmen, when appended to 
 publications of no very expensive character. These old stray prints, 
 manifestly not pretending to represent any of the four original portraits 
 which we have now authenticated, but which possibly may have been 
 rudely and inaccurately derived from others we have not seen, are al- 
 
 ' Mr Stirling of Keir. 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. 
 
 27 
 
 together worthless as a record of the personal appearance of Montrose. 
 Only two of these contemporary pi'ints are at all worthy of special 
 notice. One by Matham, a Flemish engraver in the vicinity of the 
 Hague, presents rather an interesting portrait as regards expression, 
 but stiff and unmeaning in the composition. Although a respectable 
 and firm line engraving, this has no pretensions to fine workmanship, 
 and thei'e is an obvious disregard of individuality, and correct repre- 
 sentation of peculiar outlines in delineating the features. This appears 
 to have been engraved as the frontispiece to the first translation of 
 Wishart's Commentaries, published at the Hague in an octavo form, 
 in 1647. An impression from the original plate (for it has been 
 repeatedly re-engraved, and always deteriorating) is extremely rare ; 
 and it is yet moi'e rarely found " growing" in its original volume. It 
 approximates more nearly to the portrait of Monti'ose by Honthorst 
 than to any others we have seen. The other contemporary print 
 worthy of notice, is also of great rarity in its original form, and has 
 been attributed to Faithorn. But he has not put his name to the 
 plate, and we can discover no authority for the assertion. We doubt 
 if Faithorn, who was a great engraver, to be known by peculiar 
 characteristics, particularly that individuality of expression and feature 
 which marks the truth of a portrait, as also great vigour, combined 
 with softness, and what stands for colour in engraving, we doubt if he 
 would have owned this very soft impeachment. He had three manners, 
 indeed, the third of course very inferior to the first, and collectors 
 classify his engravings accordingly. But the print in question, we 
 think, would tend to assign to him a fourth, or weaker manner still. 
 It presents, however, a gentle agreeable aspect of Montrose, approxi- 
 mating (although of maturer age, and In armour as usual) to the youth- 
 ful portrait by Jameson, but with all the peculiar characteristics of his 
 features indicated rather than developed. There has been no attention 
 paid to character, or to firmness and precision In tracing the outlines. 
 This print has been repeatedly reproduced, and always for the worse. 
 All the rest, — that, for instance, published In " Montrose Medivivus," 
 1652, or in those rudely decorated volumes, " Heath's Chronicles," 
 " English Worthies," &c., — may, in their isolated and most pretentious 
 form, be consigned, without a sigh, to the tomb of all such Capulets, the 
 collector's portfolio. 
 
 This leads us to the more modern and hopeful era of Ve7^tue and 
 Houbraken ; a hope most miserably disappointed, at least as regards 
 our present subject. 
 
 Walpole tells us, that Vertue having accomplished tAvelve heads of 
 
28 
 
 PORTRAITS OF THE 
 
 poets, which appeared in 1730, his " next considerable production was 
 the heads of Charles I. and the loyal sufferers in his cause." But the 
 scale was too small, and the execution proportionably feeble. To give 
 importance to the design, however, these heads were engraved in pairs, 
 at the top of a folio page, with historical characters, extracted from 
 Clarendon, engraved beneath, and occupying the most part of the page ; 
 the whole within a border, the design and execution of wliich must have 
 cost the engraver considerable trouble. One cannot appreciate such 
 frippery round " Illustrious Heads." It is the head we want, espe- 
 cially when thereby hangs a tale. The head of Montrose, which could 
 hardly be absent from such a collection, Vertue authenticates by this 
 careless inscription under it, — " This original at the Duke of Montrose." 
 Undoubtedly he means the portrait still at Buchanan. But the im- 
 portant accessories have been omitted, and the characteristic expression 
 lost. So little careful has Vertue been to preserve individuality, that 
 the portrait of Lord Derby, with whom Montrose is coupled, might 
 easily pass for the same head in a different attitude. The order of the 
 Garter he has placed over the armour, an ornament of course not de- 
 rived from the original. It is observable, that while Vertue has at- 
 tached the impress of Vandyck to the portrait of Derby, he has not 
 ventured to name any author for the companion head of Montrose. 
 
 England's Tintoret had set no easy task for the engravers. The life- 
 like glowing tints, by means of which he has so admirably preserved 
 the youth of his subject, are beyond the handmaid art. The blood will 
 not circulate under the burine, as it does under the brush, especiallj' 
 such a brush as Dobson's. Montrose was of a fleshy and florid coun- 
 tenance. This artist has chosen to present a full front view of his 
 heroic subject ; an ungraceful phase that could only have been selected 
 by such a master, because of the attractive display of radiant expression, 
 and youthful colour. In the hands of the engraver, the animation fades 
 into a simper, and the lustihood of exuberant youth is lost in elderly 
 obesity. The head of Montrose in the hand of Vertue (a phrase sanc- 
 tioned by his friend Walpole), becomes a stout gentleman advanced in 
 life, the fat of whose countenance is melting into fatuity. Houbraken, 
 engraving subsequently, or rather professing to engrave, from the same 
 original, used his tools with greater vigour, and on a larger scale. Here, 
 indeed, we find both force and expression, but not the expression of the 
 original. Woi'king in Holland from a careless sketch, and unconscious 
 of the masterly performance which he professes to record, that great 
 engraver twaddled about Vandyck, and produced something like a 
 Dutchman reversed. 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. 
 
 29 
 
 This last has done all the mischief. It occurs in the splendid work, 
 entitled, " The Heads of Illustrious Persons of Great Britain." Hou- 
 braken the bold, has given us for Montrose, the chuckle-head and iron- 
 bound shoulders of the blufifest hero in Holland, confined within an 
 oval frame, resting on pilasters, and gorgeousl}^ decorated, all the 
 heroic antecedents tj^pified by a battle-piece in a tablet beneath. This 
 ingenious composition, and it must be confessed masterly engraving, 
 he entitled, — " James Graham, Marquis of Montrose. Ant. Van Dyck 
 pinx. J. Houbraken sculps. Amst. 1740 ; in the possession of his 
 Grace the Duke of Montrose." Minerva, and the helmet, have been 
 turned out of the composition as if de trop ; and all, save proportion, 
 sacrificed to the engraver's own fat and florid taste. 
 
 If Houbraken's famous head of Montrose were a faithful representa- 
 tion of the portrait at Buchanan House, and that portrait by the hand 
 of Vandyck, farewell to all sentiment on the subject of the troubadour 
 warrior's personal appearance. That stout old gentleman, who now-a- 
 days would be voted beyond the age for Crimean glory, wheezing under 
 a load of armour, his mass of cruslied nose and blubber lips suggesting 
 rather an Esquimaux genealogy than the lineaments of the Graham, 
 might pass for some Van Tromp of the Ocean, but never for the youth- 
 ful soldier, who displayed " a singular grace in riding," and whose per- 
 sonal activity was so essential to the many physical feats he is known 
 to have performed. 
 
 Of this celebrated engraving we have before us at this moment an 
 excellent impression, in the midst of no less than nine repetitions, in 
 various reduced forms, engraved from time to time for historical and 
 biographical publications occurring throughout the course of a century. 
 Houbraken shows like a Triton among these ridiculous minnows. His 
 grossness has received ample justice in all of them ; but the slight de- 
 gree of resemblance to the original which he had retained, expires al- 
 together under the hands of most of his trumpery followers. Moreover, 
 these endless contortions which have served to propagate so erroneous 
 an idea of the illustrious subject, while they seem to have been all de- 
 rived from the Dutch prototype, exhibit, when placed in juxta-position, 
 a most ludicrous variety of vulgar feature and coarse expression. Some 
 of them actually resemble frogs which had swollen to bursting in trying 
 to look like Montrose. 
 
 To render this confusion worse confounded, a limner of the last cen- 
 tury, of the name of John Alexander, was in the habit of reproducing 
 original portraits of Montrose in oil, from no other materials than this 
 same everlasting caricature from Amsterdam. In the gallfries of more 
 
PORTRAITS OF THE 
 
 than one noble house in Scotland, where loyalty must have outstripped 
 taste, may yet be discovered a swarthy abomination professing to be 
 the great Marquis, but in reality one of these ambitious and terrible 
 Alexandrians, over which the puzzled loyalist ponders with a sigh, and 
 the free covenanter, of easy credulity in such a case, would chuckle with 
 unfeigned delight. And here we may quote an amusing passage from 
 Lord Napier's review of our " Memorials of Montrose," — an historical 
 essay we pride ourselves upon Laving occasioned : — 
 
 " In prosecuting such i-esearches in Scotland, the amateur is often 
 distracted by the multiplicity of pretended originals. This opulence of 
 imposture, is the creation of several painters in the last century, who 
 wandered, with their vagrant and venal easels, from house to house. 
 The younger Medina, and John Alexander, are remembered as the 
 most fertile authors of such fabrications. Not contented with pervert- 
 ing the likeness of the living, it was their delight to supply the hiatus 
 of a careless or obliterated ancestor, and to adorn the wall with the 
 eSigy of some famous personage who represented the hereditai^ affec- 
 tions of the family. The same portfolio contained the traditionary types 
 of the rival deities of the Scottish Pantheon. The same flexible pencil 
 produced, in obedience to the preference of its patron, the martial pre- 
 sence of the ' gi-eat Montrose ;' the solemn features of the ' learned 
 Merchiston ;' the seductive lineaments of ' Mary ;' or the morose and 
 edifying visages of ' godly Knox,' and ' Maister George Buchanan.' 
 In the impartial multiplication of these pictorial Shibholeths, it is ap- 
 parent that the accommodating artist looked not beyond the lucre of 
 gain, unless, indeed, we may be permitted to trace the malicious strokes 
 of a Jacobite brush, in the lamentable countenances of the ' Covenant 
 and the Kirk.' " 
 
 If this last be true, the Kirk has been amply revenged, in these 
 vicious reproductions of the Houbraken horror. That distinguished 
 artist, says Walpole, " living in Holland, ignorant of our history, un- 
 inquisitive into the authenticity of what was transmitted to him, en- 
 graved whatever was sent." Neither did Mr Lodge, in our times, 
 sufficiently cultivate his own opportunity of redeeming that unfortunate 
 blunder. Shrinking from its gross obesity, he had obtained a too 
 hasty sketch from the original, for his " Portraits of Illustrious Per- 
 sonages of Great Britain," and has erred on the other side, by falling 
 into feebleness. That characteristic feature, the expressive mouth, has 
 been sketched and etched into conventional commonplace : while the 
 proportions of the composition have been audaciously restored at the 
 
 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. 31 
 
 expense of truth, without the excuse of having saved the martial and 
 symbolical accessories. 
 
 It is rarely, indeed, that sufficient attention is paid, by the bookseller's 
 engraver at least, to scrupulous accuracy in the engraving of portraits. 
 How often are we made to look at Vandyck, or his great contemporaries 
 and successors, through the imperfect medium of engravings derived 
 from rapid sketches of the original. And even when the original itself 
 is at hand, how often are minute traits slurred over by the best en- 
 gravers, so as to impart a totally diffei-ent expression. We have done 
 what we could, by frequent superintendence, to remedy this, as regards 
 the portraits which illusti-ate oar new biography and present notices. 
 But after all, the most faithful and best executed engraving can aspire 
 to no more than to present a cold and colourless shadow of a great 
 original. 
 
 We may conclude these notices, of the portraits of the Cavalier par 
 excellence of his day, with the facsimile of a characteristic symbol 
 which we find attached to an original manuscript of one of his loyal 
 proclamations, and thus rudely traced with the pen, — 
 
 mate — ' — " — — 'Sfci5>S> 
 
32 
 
 PORTRAITS OF THE 
 
 Ccntrmporar)) |3ortraitfj of i^flontroise m tuntinn:* 
 
 We have thus rapidly and imperfectly, but we trust impartially,. re- 
 corded what the brush and the burine have done to assist, or to con- 
 found, our ideas of the personal appearance of the great Montrose, To 
 these, however, must he added more than one graphic effort of the con- 
 temporary pen ; which may be applied, indeed, as no uncertain test of 
 what is fiiithful, or the reverse, in the productions of the other two 
 mediums of representation. 
 
 The following portrait is from the pen of Patrick Gordon of Ruthven, 
 a scion of Cluny, whose " Britain's Distemper" has been frequently 
 quoted in our new biographer. He was a close observer, a faithful 
 chronicler, and personally acquainted with Montrose, whom he thus 
 describes : — 
 
 " It cannot be denied but he was an accomplished gentleman, of 
 many excellent parts : A body not tall ; but comely, and well com- 
 posed in all his lineaments: his complexion merely^ white, with flaxen 
 hair : of a stayed, grave, and solid look ; and yet his eyes sparkling 
 and full of life : of speech slow, but witty and full of sense : a presence 
 graitfull (graceful?), courtly, and so winning upon the beholder, as it 
 seemed to claim reverence without suing for it : for he was so affable, 
 so courteous, so benign, as seemed verily to scorn ostentation and the 
 keeping of state ; and therefore he quickly made a conquest of the 
 hearts of all his followers, so as when he list he could have led them in 
 a chain to have followed him with cheerfulness in all his enterprizes," 
 
 Not less trustworthy, is the life-like sketch by his faithful and de- 
 voted follower Saintserf, which occurs in his record as secretary to the 
 grand pageant of the " True Funerals" of Montrose, in 1661 : — 
 
 " But to pass much which might be said of the fame of his progeni- 
 tors, I shall acquaint you with both what I know myself, — having fol- 
 lowed him several years in his expeditions, — and what I have learned 
 from others of good name and credit. 
 
 ' So in the original (p. 76), as printed for the Spalding Club, 1844. The words, as 
 printed, are " vieerlt) whitee which at first suggested a mis-reading for nearly Vjhite. 
 In Shakspear, however, the word mereli/., signifying entireli/, or ahsolutely, frequently oc- 
 curs ; and probably the above signifies a complexion altogether fair. Patrick Gordon's 
 description makes liim still fairer than he is represented in portraits, or in other descrip- 
 tions. 
 
MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. 33 
 
 " He was of a middle stature, and most exquisitely proportioned 
 limbs; his hair of a liglit chesnut ; his complexion betwixt pale and 
 ruddy ; his eye most penetrating, though inclining to gray ; his nose 
 rather acquiline than otherwise ; as he was strong of body and limbs, 
 so was he most agile, which made him excel most others in those exer- 
 cises where these two are required : In riding the great horse, and 
 making use of his arms, he came short of none : I never heard much 
 of his delight in dancing, though his countenance, and other his bodily 
 endowments were equally fitting the Court as the Camp." 
 
 Another description of Montrose appeared in the English continua- 
 tion of Wishart's history (probably by Saintserf), published in 1652, 
 under the title of " Montrose Redivivus :" — 
 
 " Indeed we have not had in this latter age a man of more eminent 
 parts either of body or of mind. He was a man not very tall, nor much 
 exceeding a middle stature ; but of exceeding strong composition of body, 
 and incredible force, with excellent proportion and feature; dark brown 
 hair ; sanguine complexion ; a swift and piercing gray eye ; with a high 
 nose, somewhat like the ancient sign of the Persian King's magnanimity : 
 He was of most resolute and undaunted spirit, which began to appear in 
 him, to the wonder and expectation of all men, even in his childhood : 
 He was a man of a very princely carriage, and excellent address, which 
 made him for the most part be used by all Princes with extraordinary 
 familiarity: A complete horseman, and had a singular grace in riding." 
 
 When young, signing along with his curators, he spelt his name, as 
 his father did, " Montrois," but in after life he wrote it " Montrose." 
 
 5 
 
34 
 
 PORTRAIT OF THE FIRST LORD NAPIER. 
 
 ^iortrait of Sirrftibalti firgit iLorU papier, bp Same- 
 sion, ut })ossc£is!ioit of ti)t Eort! i^lapicn 
 
 The first Lord Napier was highly distinguished, both as a courtier 
 and a statesman, in the reign of James VI. (whom he served for seven- 
 teen years in the Bedchamber), and also in the reign of Charles, I. who 
 selected him as the first Scotsman to be honoured with elevation to the 
 Peerage. It was not likely, therefore, that the omission should have 
 occurred of no portrait of him having been taken by the Vandyck of 
 Scotland. Accordingly, two portraits of this Lord Napier by Jame- 
 son are yet preserved ; the one (which has been very well engraved by 
 Mr Banks), being that possessed by the family; and the other, that 
 which appears among the fine collection of portraits by Jameson which 
 decorate the baronial halls of Taymouth. This last, which we have 
 only seen as a fixture forming a pannel above a lofty door, has every 
 appearance of originality, and although obviously representing the 
 same individual, does not appear to be a duplicate of the one possessed 
 by Lord Napier. Wliy it is found at Taymouth, is accounted for by 
 the fact, that Alexander Napier, sixth of Merchiston, who fell at Pinkie 
 in 1547, was married to Anabella Campbell, daughter of Sir Duncan 
 Campbell of Glenorchy. Both her husband's father (Alexander fifth 
 of Merchiston), and her own father, Sir Duncan, died at Flodden. 
 Through this marriage, the first Lord Napier was great-great grandson 
 of Sir Duncan Campbell of Glenorchy, the owner of ancient Balloch, 
 now called Taymouth. One of his successors. Sir Colin Campbell of 
 Glenorchy, was, says Walpole, " the chief and earliest patron of Jame- 
 son, who had attended that gentleman on his travels." Hence this 
 artist came to paint a large genealogical tree of the family of Glenorchy, 
 and also portraits of many distinguished personages who could claim a 
 medal among its branches. 
 
 Both of the portraits mentioned above are only head-size, as here 
 engraved. But that possessed by the present Lord Napier has not 
 been well preserved, and presents much of the appearance of having 
 been cut down from a larger size. The healing of wounds in an an- 
 cient portrait was not so well understood in those days as now. 
 
PORTRAIT OF THE SECOND LORD NAPIER. 35 
 
 iSon, m possfE^sicn of tin 3Lor53 ^-^apiri% 
 
 This interesting portrait, of a very interesting personage, has, like 
 that of his father, suffered severely between gallery and garret, in the 
 hands of heedless though not headless generations. Fortunately the 
 features, complexion, and costume of both have been so far preserved, 
 as to enable the engraver to accomplish accurate repi-esentations of the 
 original. But in both of these instances, Jameson's tender back- grounds, 
 never made for the " Troubles," either of nation or nursery, have nearly 
 vanished, so as to baffle all attempts at discovering date or signature. 
 Yet the hand of Jameson may be detected even under the ribs of death, 
 and these melancholy remains have considerable life in them still. 
 Moi'eover, the portrait of the first Lord Napier is mentioned in the 
 catalogue of Jameson's works ; and that of the second Lord is ob- 
 viously from the same pallet. The inscription under the engraving is 
 a fac-simile of that interesting sentence occurring in the exiled noble- 
 man's very affecting letter to his wife — " It was ever said, that Mon- 
 trose and his nephew were like the Pope and the Church, who would 
 be inseparable." They were necessarily separated, however, in the 
 service of Charles II., very shortly before the last descent of Montrose 
 upon Scotland. Otherwise, even in death, they would not have been 
 divided. In company with his cousin the second Marquis of Montrose, 
 he attempted a rising in Scotland, during the Usurpation, under the 
 leadership of Middleton, who was second in command to David Leslie 
 at Phlliphaugh. After the failure of that ill managed attempt, he re- 
 turned to Holland, where he died sliortly before the Restoration, when 
 about thirty-six years of age. 
 
 II 
 
36 
 
 PORTRAIT OF 
 
 ^on, in po5>sc60ion of MliUiam ^tirlmg, (25!5q» 
 
 This head-size portrait is in very good preservation, and, as well as 
 the companion portrait, Lady Stirling, presents a good specimen of the 
 costume of well- conditioned people in Scotland of that period. It is 
 signed, in the lower corner next the left arm, " Jameson ;" and dated, 
 in the upper and opposite corner above the head, " Anno 1637, yEtatis 
 22." The first year of "The Troubles." Most probably both of these, 
 which originally occupied one frame, with a slip between, were mar- 
 riage portraits, and painted in their wedding gai'b. Jameson has af- 
 fixed his signature to each of them, but has only dated the husband's. 
 The deeds of the marriage-settlement are preserved in the Napier 
 charter-chest, and bear date 2d January 1637, the same year as the 
 date on Sir George's portrait. That laird of Keir thus became the 
 nephew of Montrose by marriage. He was beloved and respected by 
 our hero, and suffered persecution along with him, although he appears 
 never to have served in arms. Montrose, in corresponding v/ith him, 
 used to address him as " Mon Frere ;" a style which, through the mis- 
 take of a transcriber, we had inadvertently printed " lionble Sii'," in 
 the " Memorials of Montrose." 
 
 Sir George Stirling was twice married. Young as he was in the year 
 1637, Margaret Napier was his second wife. There is a melancholy 
 stoiy attached to Sir George in early life. The following affecting in- 
 scription, of date four years earlier than his second marriage in 1637 
 when he was but twenty-two years of age, is preserved in " Monteith's 
 Theater of Mortality," p. 54 :— 
 
 " Here lyeth Dame Margaret Ross, daughter to James Lord Ross and 
 Dame Margaret Scot (daughter to Walter Lord Buccleugh, and sister 
 to Walter Scot Earl of Buccleugh). She was married to Sir George 
 Sterline of Keir, Knight, and chief of his name ; and, having lived a 
 pattern and paragon, for piety, and debonaritie beyond her sex and age, 
 when she had accomplished seventeen years she was called from this 
 transitory life to that eternal, 10th March 1633. She left behind her 
 only one daughter, Margaret ; who, in her pure iuuocency, soon fol- 
 lowed her mother, the 11th day of May thereafter, when she had been 
 
SIR GEORGE STIRLING OF KEIR, 
 
 37 
 
 twelve months showen to this world, and here lyeth near unto her 
 interred. 
 
 " Dominus Oeorgius Sterline, de Keir, Eques auratus, famiUce prin- 
 ceps, conjugi dulcissimce poni curavit, m.dc.xxxiii." 
 
 " ||(ors Scutibus itquat." 
 " Though marble, porphirie, and mourning touch. 
 May praise these spoils ; yet can they not so much : 
 For beauty, last and fame, this stone doth close 
 One, earth's delight, heav'n's care, a purest rose. 
 And shouldst thou, reader, but vouchsafe a tear 
 Upon it, other flow'rs shall soon appear ; 
 Sad violets and hyacinths, which grow 
 With marks of grief, a publick loss to show." 
 
 Thus heavily had the hand of God visited this chief of " Ancient 
 Keir," when he was but eighteen years of age. The above date is 
 immediately prior to the advent of Charles the First to his coronation 
 in Scotland, and to Montrose's departure upon his travels abroad three 
 years after his own boyish marriage. 
 
 The ancient Scotch families of Keir and Merchiston were very closely 
 allied. The first Lord Napier was only son of the marriage between 
 the Inventor of the Logarithms and Elizabeth Stirling of Keir, the 
 paternal grand-aunt of the above Sir George Stirling of Keir who 
 married his cousin the eldest daughter of that Lord Napier. 
 
38 PORTRAIT OF LADY STIRLING OF KEIR. 
 
 Stirling of l^itir, hv Saine^cin, m jjosstsi^ion of 
 2329illiam ^tirlmtj: of litiVy Csiq* M* 
 
 This is the companion portrait to the one just mentioned, and in 
 former days used to be framed along with it, as arms matrimonial are 
 sometimes impaled in the same shield. We demur to the propriety of 
 separating such ancient couples, for the sake of separate modern esta- 
 blishments. The dress of this portrait is very perfect, and displays the 
 delicate and accurate penciling of Jameson. But the fair complexion, 
 and the details and texture of the golden hair, have suffered much ; and 
 probably more from modern attention than ancient neglect. The hair 
 is dressed, doubtless after the fashion of the day, in a very unbecoming 
 manner. But the details were ditEcult to make out ; and the engraver's 
 laudable attempt to re-unite the broken surface, has imparted a coarse- 
 ness of texture, and stiffness of form, the appearance of which would 
 pi'obably have shocked the fair loyalist herself even more than her 
 summons before the Vehm Gericht of Scotland. We doubt if her re- 
 dundant tresses, — a lock of which probably composed the " well known 
 token " she sent to Montrose at the risk of her life, — did in reality so 
 very nearly resemble one of those ingenious varieties of judicial wigs 
 which may be observed on the Supreme Bench of Scotland in the pre- 
 sent day. The signature under the engraving is a fac-simile from the 
 original attached to that loyal and persecuted lady's declaration, taken 
 from her by the inquisitorial committee, in 1645, consisting of Lord 
 Burleigh ; Sir James Stewart of Coltness, Provost of Edinburgh ; and 
 Sir John Hope of Craighall, President of the Session. Lanerick, too, 
 the second Duke of Hamilton, who was only redeemed by his mortal 
 wounds at the battle of Worcester, did, for a time, and from miserable 
 pique at just displeasure, adhere so very closely to covenanting pitch, 
 as to preside at some of the Committees that persecuted this noble lady. 
 
Jameson 
 
PORTRAIT OF ARGYLE. 
 
 39 
 
 portrait of Slrtjijle ♦ 
 
 To these notices of the portraits of Montrose, and some of the best 
 beloved of his family circle, we have only to add all that we can tell of 
 that of his arch-enemy Argyle, of which we have been enabled to 
 present our readers with a woodcut. It is no fault of ours that it does 
 not belie that memorable character which, Clarendon assures us, Ar- 
 gyle's own father thus certified to Charles the First : — 
 
 " Sir, I must know this young man better than you can do. You 
 have brought me low, that you may raise him ; which I doubt you will 
 live to repent ; for he is a man of craft, subtilty and falsehood, and can 
 love no man ; and if ever he finds it in his power to do you mischief, 
 he will be sure to do it." 
 
 The portrait itself belonged to the late Chaides Kirkpatrick Sharp of 
 Hoddam. That accomplished historical antiquary, and amateur artist, 
 considered it an original. When his valuable collection became dis- 
 persed at his death, the portrait was acquired by Mr William Fraser 
 of the Register House, to whose researches into the domestic histories 
 of Scotland, this biography has been indebted on more occasions than 
 one. It bears every mark of being contemporai'y with the subject. It 
 has been re-lined many years ago ; and the surface of the empasto is 
 scoured, broken, and rudely patched. Nevertheless, all the features, 
 with the very characteristic expression, are quite entire. The style of 
 the portrait (head size), what remains of the original flesh colour, and 
 the red priming, are such as characterise portraits of a like kind by 
 Jameson. Our own opinion is, that it will prove to be a duplicate, or 
 contemporary copy, of the portrait in possession of the Duke of Argyle 
 which Lodge has engraved as the Marquis's weaker and less vicious 
 son. We do not know how this mistake has happened ; but a mistake 
 we have little hesitation in pronouncing it to be. The same has been 
 more than once engraved, and with more severity of truth than in the 
 courtly gallery of Lodge, as the grim Marquis himself. See frontis- 
 piece to Buchanan's History of Scotland, by Aikman, 1848. Lodge 
 seems to have been playing at hand-ball with these loose heads. We 
 have from him, as the Marquis of Argyle, one of the finest heads in his 
 collection, with moustache and imperial that Charles the First might 
 have coveted ; probably the father of the Marquis. 
 
V 
 
 GETTY RESEARCH INSTITUTE 
 
 3 3125 01430 3537