THE CONNOISSEUR SERIES. EDITED BY GLEESON WHITE. HISTORICAL PORTRAITS. THE CONNOISSEUR SERIES. EDITED BY GLEESON WHITE. PORTRAIT MINIATURES: from the time of Holbein, I53I, to that of Sir William Ross, I860. By GEORGE C. WILLIAMSON, Litt.D. With numerous Illustrations. Demy 8vo. I2s. 6d. net. HISTORICAL PORTRAITS: some Notes on the Painted Portraits of Celebrated Characters of England, Scotland; and Ireland. By H. B. WHEATLEY, F.S;A. With Seventy-one Illustrations taken direct from the origirials. Demy 8vo. los. 6d. net. JAPANESE ILLUSTRATION: being a History of the Arts of Wood-cutting and Colour Printing in Japan. By EDWARD F. STRANGE, M.J.S. With Eight coloured and Eightyeight Black-and-White Illustrations. Demy 8vo. I2s. 6d. net. THE ART OF THE HOUSE. By ROSAMUND MARRIOTT WATSON. With numerous Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 6s. net. PICTURE POSTERS. By CHARLES HIATT. With One Hundred and Fifty Reproductions of the most Artistic Examples of all Countries. Demy 8vo. I2s. 6d. net. LONDON: GEORGE BELL AND SONS. . 'L) 7 I HISTORICAL PORTRAITS SOME NOTES ON THE PAINTED PORTRAITS OF CELEBRATED CHARACTERS OF ENGLAND SCOTLAND AND IRELAND BY HENRY B. WHEATLEY, F.S.A. LONDON: GEORGE BELL AND SONS YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN, MDCCCXCVII ,CHISWICK PRESS -CHARLES WHITTINGHAM AND CO. TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON. PREFACE. IT is well known that England is full of fine pidures, spread about the country in the family mansions of the nobility and gentry, and that these collections are specially rich in portraits of the great men of the past. No general catalogue of these has ever been compiled, and the painted portraits are chiefly known to us by the engravings that have been made from them, and by the catalogues which have been compiled. An organized attempt is now being made to induce the possessors of historical portraits about the country to catalogue their treasures, and Mr. Lionel Cust, DireEtor of the National Portrait Gallery, has drawn up a form for making an inventory on a uniform system, which has been published by the Queen's printers. Lord Chancellor Clarendon was the first Englishman to colle6 a gallery of National Portraits, but few followed that great man in this hobby of his, so that the portraits of celebrities are to be found in the great houses of the country as the ancestors of their owners and not as national charadters. To the 5th Earl Stanhope and the I4th Earl of Derby we are chiefly indebted for the revival of interest in National Portraits. Lord Stanhope was the founder of the National Portrait Gallery, and Lord Derby suggested the grand Exhibitions vi PREFACE of Portraits at South Kensington, in 1865, 1866, and 1867. The re-opening of the National Portrait Gallery in its new home has revived interest in the subject, and the educational effe&t of such a fine colledion has been more-and more realized by those who have visited it. Portrait galleries have been established at Edinburgh and Dublin, and local colle6dions formed in various centres. As one of the chief instruments in this revival, due praise should be' given to Thomas Carlyle. In spite.of all this no handbook to the painted portraits of the country has been published, and the present work is the first attempt to cultivate this vast field, as distin6t from articles and papers in transactions, but in the space at my disposal, I have only been able to scratch the surface, and to indicate the riches that are to be found by those who seek for them. I hope, therefore, that my readers will excuse my shortcomings on the ground that this book is to somie extent a pioneer. The work pradtically divides itself into two parts. The first seven chapters contain a chat about portraits and portrait-painters, and a notice of what has been done to colled and bring the works together, as well as of the difficulties caused by the misnaming of portraits. The succeeding five chapters contain notices of some of the chief portraits of celebrated charadters, beginning 'with the sovereigns and ending with the people. The biographic side of history is universally recognized as the most fascinating, and biography is incomplete without portraits, for a good portrait helps to make the man or woman a living reality tIo us. I am greatly indebted to many friends who PREFACE Vii have kindly assisted me, and to the compilers of the catalogues of portrait collections and exhibitions which have been published. My special thanks are due to Lord Viscount Dillon, to Mr. Lionel Cust, who has kindly given me much valuable information on historical portraits, to Mr. J. Willis Clark, Registrary of the University of Cambridge, who has done so much in the colledtion and exhibition of Cambridge portraits, to Mr. J. W. L. Glaisher, F.R.S., to Mr. Charles Sayle, to Mr. F. Madan, Assistant-Librarian of the Bodleian, and to Mr. Joseph Knight, a member of the Garrick Club, who allowed me to see the fine colletion of dramatic portraits at that club under his able guidance. My best thanks are also due to those authorities who have kindly allowed the portraits in their galleries to be engraved for this book. In conclusion I hope my readers will find these pages, in spite of imperfeltions, to be of some help to them in the study of a large and important branch of our: National History. H. B. W. CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION. CHAPTER II. SPURIOUS AND MISNAMED PORTRAITS. CHAPTER III. BRITISH PORTRAIT-PAINTERS FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE. CHAPTER IV. BRITISH PORTRAIT-PAINTERS FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS. PAGE I 3 24 60 CHAPTER V. AMATEUR PORTRAIT-PAINTERS.. CHAPTER VI. PORTRAIT EXHIBITIONS.. CHAPTER VII. PORTRAIT COLLECTIONS..... CHAPTER VIII. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS.. 00.. 113.. I26.. I35 x CONTENTS CHAPTER IX. PROFESSIONS: CHURCH, LAW AND MEDICINE, ARMY AND NAVY..... PAGE I89 CHAPTER X. SCIENCE, LITERATURE AND ART. CHAPTER XI. ACTORS AND ACTRESSES... CHAPTER XII. MERCHANTS AND THE PEOPLE. INDEX......... 213 *. *.. 235.. 251 261 LIST OF PORTRAITS PORTRAIT. JOHN GRAHAM OF CLAVERHOUSEVISCOUNT DUNDEE FIRST LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH SIR ANTHONY VANDYCK WILLIAM DOBSON ROBERT WALKER SIR PETER LELY SIR GODFREY KNELLER JONATHAN RICHARDSON WILLIAM HOGARTH SIR JOSHUA REYNOLDS THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH. GEORGE R6MNEY.. JOHN HOPPNER.'.. SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE BISHOP. HOADLY. SIR GEORGE SCHARF, K.C.B. HENRY VII.. HENRY VIII. EDWARD VI. (aged six years) MARY I....... ELIZABETH JAMES I. (aged eight years) CHARLES I.. OLIVER CROMWELL CHARLES II.... JAMES II. MARY II...... ANNE GEORGE I. GEORGE II. GEORGE III. GEORGE IV. ARCHBISHOP' CRANMER ARCHBISHOP LAUD. ARCHBISHOP TILLOTSON LORD CHANCEILOR BACON LORD CHANCELLOR JEFFREYS PAINTER. PAGE Unknown... Frontispiece Lely.. 16 Vandyck...38 Dobson.... 40 Walker..... 44 Lely.... 46 Kneller.... 50 Richardson..... 54 Hogarth...... 60 Reynolds.....66 Zoffany....70 Romney... 72 Hoppner....80 Lawrence... 86 Mrs. Hoadly... o W. WV. Ouless, R.A.. 132 Unknown Flemish artist 146 Luke Hornebolt...148 Unknown....54 Joannes Corvus... 56 F. Zucharo... 158..... 66 Vandyck.... 68 R. Walker....70 J. Greenhill.. 17 J. Riley..... 76 William WVissing.. '178 John Closterman... 18 Kneller...... 182 T. Worlidge... 184 Allan Ramsay... 86 Lawrence.... 88 G.'Fliccius.. 9o H. Stone, after Vandyck 192 Mary Beale... 94 P. Vansomer. 96 Kneller....98 Xii LIST OF PORTRAITS PORTRAIT. LORD CHANCELLOR THURIOW SIR EDWARD COKE WILLIAM HARVEY, M.D.. JOHN HUNTER NELSON GEORGE MONK, DUKE OF ALBEMARLE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH. DUKE OF WELLINGTON SIR ISAAC NEWTON.. SIR HANS SLOANE. CHARLES DARWIN. MICHAEL FARADAY.. SHAKESPEARE (Chandos portrait). MILTON ROBERT BURNS.. S. T. COLERIDGE.. JOHN KEATS..... LORD BYRON.. WILLAMW WbRDSWORTH.. SIR WAL;rER SCOTT.. CHARLES DICKENS. W. M. THACKERAY. THOMAS CARIYLE.. REYNOLDS, SIR WILLIAM CHAMBERS, AND JOSEPH WIIJTON. SIR CHRISTOPHER WVREN RICHARD BURBAGE. THOMAS BETTERTON.. NELL GWYN... DAVID GARRICK PEG WOFFINGTON... JOHN PHILIP KEMBLE MRS. SIDDONS.. SIR THOMAS GRESHAM THOMAS BRITTON... PAINTER. PAGE T. Phillips..... 200 Cornelis Janssen van Ceulen....202 Unknown..... 204 Jackson, after Reynolds 206 L. F. Abbott.... 208 Lely Kneller Count d'Orsay J. Vanderbank S. Slaughter The Hon. John Collier. T. Phillips. Unknown Pieter Vander Plaas. Alexander Nasmyth P. Vandyke W. Hilton. T. Phillips. H. W. Pickersgill Sir W. Allan Ary Scheffer S. Laurence J. McNeil Whistler John Francis Rigaud Kneller Burbage. Kneller Lely R. E. Pine. Arthur Pond Gilbert Stuart. Gainsborough. Sir Antonio Moro J. Woolaston. 210 210 212 214 218 220 222 224 224 226 228 230 230 230 230 232 232 232 234 234 236 236 240 242 244 248 250 252 256 The original,,of.-the portrait of.Claverhouse is in a-private colledion; those of Vandyck, Gainsborough, Charles I., and Mrs. Siddons are in the National Gallery, that of Kneller in the Bodleian Gallery, Oxford, those of Hoppner and Lawrence at the Royal Academy, that of Carlyle in the Corporation Art Galleries at Glasgow, that of Burbage in Dulwich Gallery, and of the remainder in the National Portrait Gallery.... BRITISH HISTORICAL PORTRAITS CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION "It is not the untrue imaginary pi6ture of a man and his work that I want... but the actual natural likeness, true as the face itself, nay, truer in a sense, which the artist, if there is one might help to give, and the botcher never can."-CARLYLE'S History of Friedrich II. IN the Middle Ages most nations seem to have been satisfied with a conventional representation of men and women, in which the habit of the period is much more carefully observed than any adual likeness of the particular man or woman, thus in old sepulchral monuments a likeness is seldom attempted. Portraits have come down to us in stained glass windows and on brasses, but these too appear to be mostly conventional in treatment. Still there are exceptions to this general statement, and sometimes the artist produced a specimen of true portraiture for the monument, the brass, or the window. In tracing the evolution of art among the ancient nations, we cannot fail to notice the gradual growth in the beauty of portraiture, and this is not the least interesting of the discoveries which have of late years opened out before the B 2 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS eyes of the student. The Assyrian monuments show a remarkable power of portraiture in the sculptors as do the portrait statues of the ancient Egyptians. These figures were, however, all conventional, and it is the naturalness of the statues during Greece's most artistic period which gives an added charm to their grandeur. Among the Egyptians the portraits painted on the coverings of mummies were evidently in many instances intended as likenesses of the person inclosed within.' Professor Flinders Petrie found in the cemetery of Hawara in the Fayyum, a series of portraits painted in wax on wooden panels placed on the faces of the mummies, and he asserts that the prat6ice of painting these panel portraits was in vogue from about the year 140 to 250 A.D. These were exhibited in London in I889, and some of them are now in the British Museum. We read of the beauties of Greek and Roman portraiture, but time has destroyed the paintings that once were common, and we are therefore unable to judge how far the praises of classic writers are justified. Horace says that Alexander the Great ordained that no one should paint his portrait but Apelles, and no one should mould his head in brass or stone but Lysippus. If we are to judge by the gems and coins we must deplore the faat that the work of Apelles has not come down to us.2 It may have been very fine, but the criticism of the 1 Mr. Hilton Price has contributed to " Archseologia" (vol. liv., p. 363), " Notes upon two Egyptian Portrait Mummy coverings, or Shrouds belonging to the First Century, A.D." One of these is figured, and it apparently exhibits a speaking likeness of a woman. 2, Epistole," lib. ii. epist. I. INTRODUCTION classic writers is not convincing. We do not now hold that the highest art is that which deceives the spectator into supposing the painted scene to be a reality. The durable charadter of stone and marble has enabled us to realize how fine was Greek portrait sculpture. The grandest of these remains of the great period of Greek art is the life-size statue of Sophocles, now in the Lateran, which was found about the year I859, and presented by Count Antonelli to the Pope. The remains of Roman portrait sculpture are very numerous. Hence the great interest of the Roman Gallery at the British Museum, where the busts of Cicero and Julius Caesar, of Nero and Trajan, can be seen by the pleasure-seeker of to-day as these men really appeared to those who knew them in life. In a singularly interesting paper on " Funeral Masks in Europe "1 the Hon. J. Abercromby has given us much information respeding early portrait masks. He refers also to the masks of French kings which were preserved at St. Denis, but destroyed at the period of the great Revolution. St. Louis caused effigies to be made of all the kings who preceded him, and had been buried at St. Denis, but these were not supposed to be portraits. The tomb of Philippe le Hardi (d. 1285) is said to have contained the earliest authentic royal portrait statue at St. Denis. We owe much to the portrait painter who makes those we love and admire live again before our eyes. With masterly insight Cowper has beautifully expressed the feelings of all in those exquisite lines written on receiving a present of his mother's pidure. At first he asks for more and wishes that the portrait could speak to hin, but ends with the 1 "Folk Lore," vol. vii. p. 35I. 4 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS contented feeling of how much this counterfeit presentment has done for him: " And while the wings of fancy still are free And I can view this mimic show of thee, Time has but half succeeded in his theftThyself removed, thy power to soothe me left." Many painters succeed in catching the likeness of their sitters with wonderful skill, but they do nothing more, and are merely the rivals of the photographer. But the great painter gathers into his portrait the various moods of the one man, showing him not as he looks at any particular time, but with all the possibilities of the face, and with all the inner man written on the outward form. Tennyson has beautifully expressed this in the "Idylls of the King": " As when a painter poring on a face, Divinely thro' all hindrance finds the man Behind it, and so paints him, that his face The shape and colour of a mind and life Lives for his children even at its best And fullest." It is generally supposed that portrait painters have often much to put up with owing to the frivolous fancies of their sitters. There is a tale that Nicolas Maes, the Dutch portrait painter visited Jakob Jordaens to see his paintings. When he had expressed his admiration Jordaens asked him what were the objeEts he painted, and when he answered that he was a portrait painter, Jordaens said, "I pity you most sincerely, brother artist, for being a martyr to that branch of art,. where, let your merit be ever so great, you are condemned to suffer the whim, the folly, the impertinence, as well as the ignorance of so large a number of both sexes." INTRODUCTION 5 In consequence of this we sometimes find that a painter with courtly manners who can bear these trials and make himself agreeable to his sitters will outstrip in popular favour a better painter who is more abrupt in his manners. This was the case with William Kent, who with little artistic ability, succeeded Jervas as the favourite painter at Court. The difficulties attendant on the portrait painter's profession are well illustrated in a good story, which, however, like other good stories, must not be too strictly investigated as to its details. A certain artist was instruted to paint a pidlure of St. Francis, but a difficulty arose as to the habit in which he was to be painted, for the saint was connected with three orders. One day the artist received three distinguished visitors, first came the head of the Franciscans, then followed the heads of the other two orders, and each of these sent a habit of his order for the assistance of the painter. The latter went to bed and slept on his trouble, but when he arose the next morning, he had solved his difficulty. When the pi6ure was finished it was found that the saint was painted in bed with the three habits hanging on the wall, and below there was written: " When the saint arises he will know which habit to choose." There is an anecdote of Holbein which has been variously reported, and may or may not be true. The painter was privately drawing a lady's portrait for Henry VIII., when a great lord forced himself into the chamber. With the impetuosity of a masterful man, Holbein threw him downstairs, and then ran diretfly to the king, whom he besought to pardon him. The king bade him wait till he had learned more of the matter. Immediately afterwards the lord arrived and stated his complaint, but suppressed the provocation. Henry 6 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS reproached the lord with his want of truth, adding: "You have not to do with Holbein, but with me. Of seven peasants I can make as many lords, but not one Holbein." Richard Lovelace threw this story into verse. (" Lucasta.") " When to our huffling Henry there complain'd A grieved earl that thought his honour stain'd Away (frown'd he) for your own safeties hast! In one cheap hour ten coronets I'll cast; But Holbein's noble and prodigious worth Onely the pangs of an whole age bring forth." Gainsborough was occasionally very abrupt and outspoken, as when he told Mrs. Siddons that there was no end to her nose. Another story tells of a pompous lord who was sitting for his portrait, and after elaborately composing himself begged the artist not to overlook a dimple on the chin. " Confound your dimple," said Gainsborough, who refused to put another stroke to the portrait. Closterman (1656-1713) had disputes with the fiery Duchess Sarah of Marlborough when he painted a family group for the great Duke of Marlborough, and the latter said to the painter, " It has given me greater trouble to reconcile my wife and you than to fight a battle." Some wish\ to be flattered by the painter, while others, like Cromwell, desire all their blemishes set forth. This was the case with Walter Savage Landor, who addressed the following verses to William Fisher the painter of his portrait, now in the National Portrait Gallery, but which was originally painted for John Kenyon. "Conceal not Time's misdeeds, but on my brow Retrace his mark; Let the retiring hair be silvery now That once was dark; INTRODUCTION 7 Eyes that reflected images too bright Let clouds o'ercast, And from the tablet be abolished quite The cheerful past." It is necessary, however, to bear in mind that it is quite possible for a painter to copy all the points of a face, and yet leave out that which makes a real portrait. Some have an invincible dislike to having their portraits painted, and thus many great men have deprived us of the advantage of seeing them as they really were. Robert Hooke, the great mechanic and philosopher, refused to sit to a painter, although in early life he was himself apprenticed to Lely. No authentic painted portrait of Hampden exists; portraits with his name attached are in existence but they cannot be depended upon. According to Granger Sir Richard Ellis bought an old painting at a stall which he affirmed represented Hampden, and this has been engraved as a genuine portrait. Sometimes what has been lost sight of comes to light after a time. Mr. Walter Tiffin in his " Gossip about Portraits" (1866), asks, "Where now is that 'incomparable painting of Holbein where the Duke of Norfolk, Charles Brandon and Henry VIII. are dauncing with the three ladies with most amorous countenances and sprightly motion exquisitely expressed,' which in 1678 was at the Duke of Norfolk's palace at Weybridge?" Mr. Tiffin appears to have overlooked the reference to this "Dancing Pidture" by Horace Walpole, who describes it as being in the possession of Colonel Sotheby, having been purchased by that gentleman's father at the sale of the Earl of Arundel's colletions in 1701. The picure was lent to the Tudor Exhibition by Major-General F. E. 8 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Sotheby, and is described in the catalogue as containing "six small whole length figures of Henry VIII., Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk, Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, Anne Boleyn, Mary Tudor, Dowager Queen of France, and Margaret, Dowager Queen of Scotland, the three pair dancing in a meadow with Greenwich Palace in the background." It must be added, however, that Sir George Scharf and other experts entirely denied the correctness of this ascription. The vicissitudes of family portraits are very great, and those that are well known at one time are forgotten at another, as Walpole writes: " Portraits that cost twenty, thirty, sixty guineas, and that proudly take possession of the drawing-room, give way in the next generation to those of the new-married couple, descending into the parlour, where they are slightly mentioned as my father's and mother's pictures. When they become my grandfather and grandmother they mount to the two pair of stairs, and then, unless despatched to the mansion house in the country, or crowded into the housekeeper's room, they perish among the lumber of garrets or flutter in rags before a broker's shop in the Seven Dials." 1 On another occasion Walpole wrote to Montagu, "I have given Lady Betty Germaine a very fine portrait that I discovered at Drayton [her own seat] in a wood-house." 2 The decay of old families has been the cause of throwing portraits upon the market, although it is not often that they are distributed in so reckless a manner as that adopted by Charles Surface in the " School for Scandal." Most of the great painters have been supreme in portraiture, and the pi6ture "Anecdotes" (art. Jervas), ed. Wornum, ii. 272. 2 Walpole to Montagu, July 25th, 1763. INTRODUCTION 9 galleries of Europe are filled with portraits which are portraits and something more. Many of the old Italian pi6tures of Holy Families contain fine figure portraits of the patrons and donors of the pidures, but it is only of late years that portraits have been collected as portraits. Our own National Gallery contains some singularly fine portraits by such great masters as Raffaelle, Holbein, Giovanni Bellini, Lorenzo Lotto, Agnolo Bronzino, Alessandro Bonvicino (I1 Moretto), G. B. Moroni, Giacomo de Ponte (II Bassano), Vandyck, Velasquez, Rembrandt and Nicolas Maes. Among the glories of the art are the Pope Julius II. of Raffaelle, the Doge Leonardo Loredano of Giovanni Bellini, the Two Ambassadors of Holbein, Rembrandt's portrait of himself, the Admiral Pulido Pareja of Velasquez, and the so-called Gevartius of Vandyck, now supposed to be the portrait of Cornelis vander Geest. All these are pidtures which once seen can never be forgotten. That remarkable pi6ure by John Van Eyck, of Jan Arnolfini, a Bruges merchant and his wife, is not very flattering to the personal appearance of the subjeCts, but on looking at it the speCtator is filled with a conviCtion that it contains faithful likenesses. This piCture has passed through some vicissitudes. At one time it belonged to a barbersurgeon of Bruges, who presented it to the Queen Regent of the Netherlands. She valued it so highly that she pensioned the donor. Subsequently it passed into humbler hands, and General Hay found it in the room at Brussels to which he was taken in 1815 to recover-from his wounds after the battle of Waterloo. It was purchased for the Gallery in 1842 from General Hay for /630. 'Ihe fame of Giorgione is spread abroad, but our 10 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS National colledion of pictures does not contain a good example of his work. Therefore, some years ago, when a so-called example was added to the gallery much interest was felt in the acquisition, and the disappointment was equally great when it was seen. The pidure is still exhibited, but it is now attributed to the school of Giorgione. After this an exquisite female portrait was exhibited at the British Institution which showed what the artist could do. The speftator stood spellbound before it, and all other pidtures were forgotten. When he was about to leave the gallery the eyes of the fair one followed him so that he found it difficult to get away, "They've pretty faces yet, these same Venetians, Black eyes, arch'd brows, and sweet expression still; Such as of old were copied from the Grecians, In ancient arts by moderns mimick'd ill; And like so many Venuses of Titian's (The best's at, Florence-see it, if ye will,) They look when leaning over the balcony, Or stepp'd from out a picture by Giorgione." BYRON'S -Beppo. It is of little avail to attempt to fix upon one particular portrait painter and to hail him as the greatest of all, for it would be impossible to obtain universal agreement on the point, and nothingwould be gained if we could. Possibly the question as to who was the greatest of portrait painters would resolve itself into a discussion of the respective claims of Titian and Velasquez. Of the former it was said: " To the Emperor Charles V. he stood as Apelles to Alexander the Great, the only man worthy to paint his royal master;" and Reynolds once affirmed that " to possess a really fine pi6ture of that great master, I would willingly ruin myself." In April, 1817, Byron wrote, "To-day I have been INTRODUCTION II over the Manfrini Palace, famous for its piEtures. Amongst them there is a portrait of Ariosto by 'itian,1 surpassing all my anticipation of the power of painting or human expression: it is the poetry of portrait and the portrait of poetry. There was also one of some learned lady centuries old, whose name I forget, but whose features must always be remembered. I never saw greater beauty, or sweetness, or wisdom:-it is the kind of face to go mad for, because it cannot walk out of its frame." Of Velasquez Reynolds said: " What we are all attempting to do with great labour, Velasquez did at once." There is a subtle feeling in the pidures of this great master which must be experienced by all, but which it is not easy to explain. We can prove this any day by a walk through the National Gallery. A few years ago two magnificent pidures from the Longford Collection were added to our national treasures. No one passing through the rooms but must be arrested by the brilliancy and beauty of the "Two Ambassadors" by Holbein. It is one of the most attractive pictures in the whole collection, and a splendid specimen of the master. In an adjoining room is the portrait of a somewhat unprepossessing figure, which any visitor might be excused for overlooking in a cursory view. When once seen, however, the eyes of the spe&tator continually return to it, and it exerts a growing fascination over him. This is the real triumph of the painter; possibly we know nothing of the Spanish admiral, and there are no brilliant colours on the canvas to attral us, but we feel that we are in the presence of the work of a portrait painter who can have few peers, and that piEture will ever after remain a part of our very life. This is really a copy from the original portrait at Cobham Hall. 12 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Much has been done in the past in the way of cataloguing engraved portraits, but little or nothing has been attempted towards the produ&ion of a catalogue of the large number of English painted portraits spread over the country. Mr. George P. Harding began, in 1804, to compile a catalogue "of all historical Portraits in England" classifying them according to localities. The contents of 350 pidure collections in Great Britain were included, and the catalogue extended to four quarto volumes. This MS. was in the possession of Messrs. Evans, the printsellers, in 1858. Suggestions have been made for the accomplishment of this much-needed work by the late Lord Braybrooke and by the late Mr. Albert Way. Lord Braybrooke contributed in 185I a note to "Notes and Queries" on the portraits of distinguished Englishmen, in which he pointed out the want of a general catalogue of the national treasures. In 1853 Mr. Way wrote: "It would be desirable to compile a descriptive catalogue of painted portraits, those especially preserved in the less accessible private colleations in England." 2 A proposal was subsequently made by the Index Society to issue an index of English painted portraits referring to all the printed lists and catalogues known to exist, but various difficulties stood in the way which were found to be insuperable in this case, and the work still remains to be done.3 First Series, iii. 233. 2 "Notes and Queries," First Series, vii. 258. 3 The author of this book still hopes to be able to prepare such an index, and he is engaged in indexing the lists and catalogues that come in his way. This work may be expected to be useful as showing where the pictures have been exhibited, and, in some instances, how they have changed hands. CHAPTER II. SPURIOUS AND MISNAMED PORTRAITS "On the whole it will be perceived as the result of their investigations, that it is necessary to exercise much caution and discrimination if we desire to be supplied with true and faithful historical portraits. As there are many forgeries of coins and medals, so there are many fabricated or mistaken pictures and mis-named engravings. Some of the heads inserted in the National Galleries of historical portraits which go by the names of Houbraken and Lodge are well known to be erroneous; and the same is the case in the more popular book called 'The Pitorial History of England."'"-J. G. NICHOLS, A4rc/eologia, xl. 80. ONE of the great difficulties which the historian has to deal with will be found in the number of spurious portraits that exist in pidture galleries and elsewhere. These are of two kinds: (i) those which are frauds, being painted without authority and intended to deceive; and (2) portraits re-named by mistake or from insufficient evidence. In the first class are the portraits of John Balliol and Devorgilla his wife at Balliol College, Oxford. Granger tells us that Balliol was drawn from a blacksmith who lived at Oxford, and Devorgilla from Jenny Reeks, an apothecary's daughter in the same city. Of the second class is the portrait from Knole, described as Katharine of Aragon by Holbein, which was lent by the Countess of Delawarr to the South Kensington Portrait Exhibition (1866). This is probably the likeness of Margaret Roper (Sir Thomas More's daughter). I4 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS All readers will remember Addison's humbrous description of Sir Roger de Coverley's portrait set up by one of his tenants as the sign of an inn, the "Knight's Head," but which Sir Roger had altered at his own expense, by the addition of moustaches and "a little aggravation of the features," to the "Saracen's Head." The apocryphal series of the kings of Scotland in the long gallery at Holyrood Palace (one hundred and ten in number) was painted in 1684, by a Fleming named James de Witt, and his contrat with the government to supply them on canvas in oil colours is still in existence. The Marquis of Lothian lent to the Stuart Exhibition (1889) six imaginary portraits of Robert II., Robert III., James I., James II., James III., and James V. supposed to have been painted by George Jameson. When Charles I. visited Edinburgh in I633 he was welcomed by the magistrates with an exhibition of portraits by Jameson, to whom the kingsat for a whole-length portrait. According to the Black Book of Taymouth, as quoted by Mr. Bullock in his " Life of Jameson," 1885, p. 92, Sir Colin Campbell employed the "Scottish Van Dyck" to paint sixteen portraits, and later nine more. " Ztem. The saide Coline Campbell gave untoe George Jameson, painter in Edinburgh, for King Robert and King David Bruysses, Kings of Scotland, and Charles Ist King of Great Britain, France and Ireland and his Majesties Quein and for nine more of the Queins of Scotland their portraits, quhilk are set up in the halles of Balloch, the sum of two hundreth thrie scor punds." There was at Kensington Palace a set of English kings all painted by one hand. This was said by Granger to have come from Lord Cornwallis's gallery at Culford in Suffolk, and to have been SPURIOUS AND MISNAMED PORTRAITS I5 begged of him by Queen Caroline. A portrait of Sir William Wallace, with a tartan scarf, and a brooch inscribed " Libertas," may readily be set aside as spurious. This pi6ure was lent to the South Kensington Portrait Exhibition, I866(No. 2) by Mr. Robert Vans Agnew. At Windsor Castle there is a portrait of an old woman by Rembrandt, styled the "Countess of Desmond," which was exhibited at South Kensington in I866 (No. 409). Rembrandt was a child when the venerable Countess was supposed to have died, and could not have painted her portrait from life. It is more likely that the portrait was taken from the painter's mother. Granger mentions a whole-length portrait of a female figure standing on a tortoise, which was engraved by Faber in I741, and inscribed "The most illustrious Princess Elizabeth, crowned Queen of England anno 1558, H. Holbein pinxit I558." Of course if the date is correct the pi6lure could not have been painted by Holbein (who died 1543), but what is more to the purpose, it is very unlikely that it was taken from Elizabeth at all. It appears to have been intended as an emblematical piCture of "the perfect wife." It once belonged to James West, P.R.S., and was exhibited at the Tudor Exhibition, I890 (No. 281). A similar pidture, attributed to Mark Gheeraedts, is preserved at Stanmer Park, and was sent to the same exhibition by the Earl of Chichester. On the frame of the latter pit6ure are inscribed these lines: "Uxor amet, sileat, servet nec ubique vagetur Hoc Testudo docet, claves, labra jundtaque Turtur." This picture formed a part of the Lexington collection and came into the possession of Lord Chichester as a descendant of the sister of Lord i6 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Lexington. Granger says that there was a tradition in the Lexington family that the portrait was painted at the request of Sir Thomas More, who added the verses, and that it was taken from one of his daughters. At the bottom were the words " hzec talis fuit." Inthe" Emblemata"of Hadrianus Junius, 1565, is a similar figure entitled " Uxorize virtutes." Lord Lyttelton lent to the South Kensington Portrait Exhibition, I866 (No. 36) a portrait of a judge, described as Sir Thomas Lyttelton, K.Bo, author of the famous treatise on "Tenures," who died in 148I. This pidure is known to be a copy by Arthur Pond from the pi&ture in the Inner Temple Hall, also described as Judge Lyttelton, but the late Sir George Scharf pointed out the absurdity of the attribution, as the costume proves that it must be the portrait of a man who lived more than a century later. At first he was inclined to suppose that it was a portrait of Sir Edward Lyttelton, Keeper of the Great Seal, who died in 1645, but on comparing it with an undoubted portrait he found that there was no likeness, and he then suggested that the piEture was intended for Sir Timothy Lyttelton, brother of the Lord Keeper, as he saw a likeness to the portrait of that judge by Michael Wright in the Guildhall courts of law.' Mr. Charles Winn lent to the South Kensington Exhibition, I866 (No. 906) a pi&ure attributed to Sir John Medina, containing a group of five persons with musical instruments, and a black servant to the left, which was absurdly described in the catalogue as "the 'Cabal' Ministry." It really only represents a party of musicians. 1 "Lyttelton Legal Portraits. Thomas, Edward, and Timothy." At/zenceium, January 28th, I893. THOMAS, LORD CLIFFORD, BY SIR P. LELY. SPURIOUS AND MISNAMED PORTRAITS 7 Sir George Scharf contributed to the "Atheneum" (March IIth, I893) a most curious and interesting article on the misnaming of a series of portraits of Lord Clifford of Chudleigh, one of the members of the Cabal Ministry, which would have been supposed impossible if it had not been so clearly described by an expert of such great knowledge. In 1865 the Trustees of the National Portrait Gallery purchased a portrait by Lely which was supposed to represent Henry Jermyn, Earl of St. Albans, and it is so described in the edition of the catalogue published as late as 1888. There was no reason to doubt the ascription as the portrait was engraved in the Grammont Memoirs, and other places, as that of Jermyn. In July, 1876, Sir George Scharf was visiting Ham House, formerly the seat of the Duke of Lauderdale, another member of the Cabal, when he noticed in the Long Gallery a counterpart of the national portrait, but on the frame was the name "Lord Maynard." This was sufficiently confusing, but more remained behind. Scharf found at Euston Hall, formerly the seat of a third member of the Cabal, the Earl of Arlington, another counterpart of the Clifford portrait, but this time it was styled the "Duke of Monmouth." He then went to the house of the First Lord of the Treasury, 10, Downing Street, where there are nine historical portraits all inscribed with names but the one which was a counterpart of the Clifford portrait. Scharf then referred to his notes from a MS. catalogue of portraits made by George P. Harding in 1804, and here he found both the Euston and Downing Street portraits described as likenesses of Lord Clifford. Inquiries at Ugbrooke, Devonshire, the seat of the present Lord Clifford of Chudleigh, elicited the fa& that c HISTORICAL PORTRAITS there were there two portraits of the first lord, one of them being a counterpart of the National Portrait Gallery pi6ture, and so the matter was settled, and a most curious instance of the misnaming of portraits was established. It may be here noticed that in his article Sir George Scharf, by a slip of the pen, describes Lord Clifford as Lord High Chancellor-he was Lord High Treasurer. It is rather curious that in the newly published catalogue of the Gallery another instance of correded ascription occurs in the article immediately next to that relating to Lord Clifford. This refers to an interesting portrait by Knellerof the Duchess of Cleveland, represented as the widowof the Earl of Castlemaine, who died in 1705. The idea of Charles II.'s abandoned mistress in mourning for her injured husband appears rather ludicrous. This pidCure was purchased as the portrait of a very different woman, viz, Rachel, Lady Russell. The true ascription is due to Viscount Dillon, P.S.A., who possesses at Ditchley a replica of this pi6ture. As already stated there is no authentic painted portrait of Hampden. Thomas Hollis told Granger that he had made particular inquiry after a genuine portrait with the obje&t of engraving it, but he could never find an undoubted original. At the South Kensington Exhibition, 1866, there were two portraits said to be of Hampden, one lent by the Earl of St. Germains (No. 606) and the other by the Bishop of Hereford (No. 613). A very remarkable instance of misnaming came to light about forty years ago. A portrait at Holland House long passed for that of Addison, and was studied by Sir Richard Westmacott for Mr. Lionel Cust informs the author that there is a miniature of Hampden at Windsor Castle. ERRATUM. Page 19, line 2 from bottom, for "Stevens" read "Stephen." SPURIOUS AND MISNAMED PORTRAITS I9 the statue of Addison eredled in Poets' Corner, Westminster Abbey, in I809. In 1858, however, the original, belonging to Mr. Andrew Fountaine, was exhibited in London, and it was then found that the portrait hitherto supposed to be that of Addison was really the likeness of Sir Andrew Fountaine (an intimate friend of Swift) who succeeded Sir Isaac Newton as Warden of the Mint. The portrait is shown in C. R. Leslie's picture of the Library at Holland House which was exhibited at the Winter Exhibition of the Royal Academy, I896, and in the catalogue it is described as Addison's portrait. In the catalogue of the South Kensington Exhibition, I867, there are two serious cases of misnaming in conne6ion with the Kit Cat Club. No. 137, lent by Mrs. H. W. Hutton, is described as the portrait of Christopher Catt. It really represents Lebeck, a publican who had nothing to do with the Kit Cat Club. This man was originally an apprentice in Bristol, who ran away from home and went to America. He subsequently returned, and is said to have set up with his old master an inn on the Stapleton road, near Bristol, which he named the " Lebeck." After his death the house was taken by a chaff-cutter, and the old inn, called then " The Lebeck and Chaff-cutter," was standing in 1813.' No. 145, lent by the Baroness Windsor, is described as representing the members of the Kit Cat Club, and is attributed to Kneller. It really represents a group of Dutchmen, and was not painted by Kneller. Samuel Richardson sent a portrait of himself to Lady Bradshaigh, which Mr. Leslie Stevens thinks was possibly the portrait afterwards in the posses 1 "Athenaeum," Odober 26th, 1867, p. 542. 20 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS sion of " long " Sir Thomas Robinson of Rokeby, who had a star and blue riband painted upon it and christened it Sir Robert Walpole to fit it for the aristocratic company among which he placed it.l For this great evil of misnaming, which is the cause of endless confusion, the most satisfa6tory remedy is the adoption of a pratice of writing the name of the subje6l on the back of the piCture. This pralice has been frequently advocated, but never generally adopted. Evelyn wrote to Pepys (August I2th, 1689), " Our painters take no care to transmit to posterity the names of the persons they represent." Locke, writing to Collins, says: " Pray get Sir Godfrey to write on the back of my Lady Masham's piSture 'Lady Masham' and on the back of mine 'John Locke.' This he did to Mr. Molyneux; it is necessary to be done, or else the pi6tures of private persons are lost in two or three generations." Lord Braybrooke, in I851, quotes an "awful example " in support of the same plea. He writes: " The practice of writing the name of the artist and person represented on the backs of the frames would probably be better observed, and I may mention, as a proof of this precaution being necessary, the instance of a baronet in our day having inherited an old house full of pidtures which were one and all described in laconic and most unsatisfatory terms as " Portraits of Ladies and Gentlemen unknown." The late Leonard Horner, F.R.S., was sensible of the value of this advice, and he inscribed on the back of the frame of the portrait of Francis Horner, M.P., painted by Raeburn in I812, which is now "Southey's Life and Correspondence," iii. 347. 2 "Notes and Queries," First Series, iii. 233. SPURIOUS AND MISNAMED PORTRAITS 21 in the National Portrait Gallery, the following valuable information: "There are three copies of this piature, but this is the original, for which my brother sat, for my wife and myself. (Signed) " LEONARD HORNER." If there is confusion in respect to the naming of painted portraits, there is still more deception among engraved portraits. We know that the old printers showed little conscience in their use of wood blocks. These were prepared by the printers for their books, and when they were worn they were sold to inferior tradesmen, and at the last came into the possession of the producers of street ballads. These blocks were thus made to represent quite different persons at various periods of their existence. What is even worse, we find sometimes in the same book the blocks repeated to illustrate a variety of scenes or persons. In later times it has been a common pradtice, when a portrait of some celebrity is wanted suddenly and a genuine one is not forthcoming, to use a block or plate that the publisher may have on hand. Sir John Burgh was altered to Gustavus Adolphus, Endymion Porter to Robert, Earl of Essex, Sir Joshua Reynolds's portrait was palmed off as a likeness of that vile creature Renwick, who was known as the " Monster." In 1760 the "Naval Chronicle" made a portrait of Captain William Henry Cranstoun, who induced 1 An instance of the great value of this system of inscription has come under the notice of the author of this book. A friend possesses a small portrait of his grandmother by Sir Joshua Reynolds. This had gone out of the possession of the family and turned up unexpectedly at a pidture dealer's shop in Hastings. It was secured entirely owing to the inscription on the back, which drew the attention of a friend to it. 22 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Mary Blandy to murder her father, do duty for Commodore Howe. A portrait of John Pond, usually known as "' Horse" Pond; was published in 1787, but not selling, the name of Peter Pindar was substituted for Pond's, and the portrait then sold largely.' In the same way the portrait of Lamothe, the French Spy, was sold as that of Hackman, who shot Miss Ray. Sometimes the same thing has been done in the illustrating of standard books; for instance, there are several misnamed portraits in the ordinary editions of the Grammont Memoirs, but perhaps the most flagrant instance of deception is the portrait of Francis Blomefield (1705-I752) which is prefixed to the octavo edition of his ' History of Norfolk." No genuine portrait of this famous topographer is extant. He is said, however, to have so much resembled John Flamsteed (I646 -I7 9) that his friend, Tom Martin, preserved and valued a portrait of the Astronomer Royal for no other reason. In consequence of this likeness, Flamsteed's portrait was used to represent Blomefield. When Hogarth drew his portrait of Fielding after the novelist's death, Garrick sat to him for the likeness, so great was the ator's power of changing his face. On another occasion, Garrick sat to Roubiliac for the statue of Shakespeare, for which he paid the sculptor 300 guineas. He bequeathed it to the British Museum, and it now stands in the entrance hall. Even in the present day, when photographs are plentiful, portraits are common which were never taken from the supposed subjects. It is said that some of the portraits of Prince Bismarck and of the Emperor William I. have been taken from a made-up double. 1 Smith's "Nollekens," i. 354. SPURIOUS AND MISNAMED PORTRAITS 23 When we think over instances such as those referred to above, and there are, of course, many more to be registered, we are apt to become generally sceptical, but it is quite possible to be too incredulous, as may be seen from the following instance. A correspondent of the "Athenaeum," wrote to that journal a letter which was printed in the number for July 7th, I866. In this he stated that there was on exhibition at the British Institution, in that year, a pidture said to be the portrait of Kitty Fisher, by Sir Joshua Reynolds, and, moreover, described as such in Leslie and Taylor's "Life of Reynolds," while proof was afforded in a letter to " The Times," that the portrait really represented a virtuous lady named Woolls, and not the unvirtuous Kitty Fisher. Stranger still, that the picture was not painted by Reynolds, but by Cosway. This all looked very circumstantial, but in the following number of the " Athenaeum " appeared an answer which completely disposed of this really unfounded string of assertions. The piature was the property of the late Lord Crewe, who lent it to the British Institution, and in Reynolds's ledger for April, 1774, was found this entry: "Mr. Crewe for Kitty Fisher's piEture /52 Ios." This was pretty strong evidence, but there was further proof, for the portrait is almost identical with another of Kitty by Reynolds which was then in the Munro Colle6tion. Lord Crewe's portrait was also exhibited at South Kensington in 1867 (No. 613). CHAPTER III.1 BRITISH PORTRAIT-PAINTERS FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE "Genius is chiefly exerted in historical pi6tures, and the art of the painter of portraits is often lost in the obscurity of the subject. But it is in painting as it is in life-what is greatest is not always best. I should grieve to see Reynolds transfer to heroes and goddesses, to empty splendour and to any fiction, that art which is now employed in diffusing friendship, in renewing tenderness, in quickening the affedtions of the absent, and continuing the presence of the dead. Every man is always present to himself, and has therefore little need of his own resemblance, nor can desire it but for the sake of those he loves, and by whom he hopes to be remembered. This use of the art is a rational and reasonable consequence of affection; and though like all other human actions it is often complicated with pride, yet even such pride is more laudable than that by which palaces are covered with pictures that, however excellent, neither imply the owner's virtue, nor excite it."-JOHNSON. THE series of great portrait-painters in England commences with thedistinguished name of Holbein, but good portraits were painted here centuries before he landed on our shores. It has been too ' In this and the following chapter an attempt is made to give a short account of the chief portrait-painters who have flourished in England, Scotland, and Ireland from the time of Holbein to the present day. The names of a large number of portrait-painters of slight merit have been left out, but it is hoped that no artist of any note will be found to be omitted. Some names of little importance have been included because the works of the artists are available and will be found in the ordinary collections. Most great artists have at some time FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 25 much the fashion to suppose that these pictures were the work of foreigners. The inquiry into the artistic labours of our ancestors has been too long negleted, but at last there are signs that inquirers are arising who will be able to place the Englishman in his proper position as an artist. It is strange that the idea should have gone abroad that all early paintings of any merit in this island were the produdion of foreigners, when it has long been acknowledged that the Englishman stood at the head of the miniaturists and manuscript producers of the Middle Ages. We have, in fadt, to go to the manuscripts for the most truthful portraits of our early celebrities. Thus the best portrait we possess of Chaucer is found in the Harleian MS. of the "Canterbury Tales" (4866), and we are under a debt of gratitude to the scribe who produced it. The Society of Antiquaries gathered in the summer of 1896 a most interesting colletion of early paintings and MSS. as a help towards the settlement of this question of how far the pi&ures produced in England were the produ6tion of Englishmen. On June I Ith last Mr. W. R. Lethaby read a most important paper on " the Westminster School of Painting," in which he gave particulars respeting the pictures painted and the amounts paid for them. He was not able to say definitely that the fine portrait of Richard II. in Westminster Abbey was painted by an Englishman, and we must wait for further light on this point. If it can painted portraits, but that has not made them portraitpainters, and their names have been omitted. In the compilation of this chapter that noble work-the "Di&ionary of National Biography "-which contains a large number of excellent biographies of British portrait-painters, written by wellknown experts, has been largely used to verify the fa6ts. 26 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS be proved that this was a native production, we may rest satisfied with the Englishman's artistic position as a great portrait-painter in the fourteenth century. Our earlier sovereigns appear to have obtained the services of the best artists that were available, but none of them showed any marked artistic taste until Charles I., who was the great art colletor of his time. JEAN DE MABUSE is supposed by some to have visited England in the reign of Henry VII., and is said to have painted portraits of the king, of the royal family, and of the nobility, Horace Walpole committed himself unreservedly to this view, and wrote " Henry VII. was of too penurious a chara&ter to patronise artists, and we find that Mabuse was so little satisfied with the encouragement he received that he quitted England after a residence of one year only."' In spite, however, of these remarks, the face of Mabuse's visit to England has been disputed. The grounds for believing in it were never very substantial, and when it was proved that the portraits of three children at Hampton Court, supposed to have been painted by him, were not the children of Henry VII. but of Christian II., King of Denmark, they almost entirely disappeared.2 HANS HOLBEIN (1497-I543) arrived in England at the beginning of the year 1527 with letters of introdudcion from Erasmus to Sir Thomas More, in whose house he was domiciled for a time. The first trace of his being in the service of the king is in 1536, the date when the portrait of Lady Jane Seymour, now at Vienna, was painted, but it is not until I5 38 that there is direa evidence of his official position. 1 "Anecdotes," ed. Wornum, i. i i. 2 For fuller notice of this picture see chapter viii. FROM HIOLIBEIN TO HIGHMORE 27 In I861 Mr. W. H. Black communicated to the Society of Antiquaries his discovery of the will of Holbein, described as "John Holbein, servant to the King's Majesty," which proved that the painter died in Otober or November, I543, instead of 1554, as had previously been believed.' Mr. Black traced the origin of the incorreat date to Carel van Mander's "Schilder Boeck" (or "Lives of Painters,") published at Vienna in i618. This important discovery was at first received with some amount of incredulity, as it was at once seen that a considerable number of pictures attributed to Holbein would have to be given up, and other painters found for them, especially the picture at Bridewell, representing Edward VI. as delivering the royal charter of endowment to the Mayor (1552). Mr. Wornum suggested that Guillim Stretes, painter to Edward VI., may have painted the pidture, but this is nothing more than a conjecture. It does credit to Dr. Waagen's critical acumen that, although he had no suspicion that I554 was incorrect as the date of death, he noticed a considerable change in the style of the pictures attributed to Holbein which were painted after I543. Even in i866, when the first of the three Exhibitions of National Portraits was held at South Kensington, Mr. Black's discovery had not been unhesitatingly accepted, and it was hinted that the will might have referred to some other man with the same name, as he was not described as a painter. In consequence, several portraits were attributed to Holbein in that exhibition which could not possibly have been painted by him. The influence of Holbein upon the men of his time was enormous, and his style was copied by 1 "Archseologia," xxxix. 272. 28 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS all his contemporaries. The consequence was that the fame of these painters has been obscured: by the exceeding lustre of Holbein's name. Experts at once set to work to draw attention to the painters of the time as a help to the discovery of the men who painted the portraits after 1543, which are generally attributed to Holbein. Mr. John Gough Nichols communicated to the Society of Antiquaries a valuable paper entitled " Notices of the Contemporaries and Successors of Holbein," in which he proves that John Browne, Andrew Wright, and Anthony Toto were successively serjeant-painters to Henry VI I. Nicholas Lyzarde (died 1570) was second painter to Edward VI. when Toto was serjeant-painter, and he himself became successively serjeant-painter to Queens Mary and Elizabeth. There is no evidence, however, that he painted portraits. Mr. W. R. Lethaby has found that he received ~5 7 " for painting the great vane [at Windsor] with the king's and queen's arms, with a great crown. Also for painting, priming, stopping, gilding and varnishing a great lion holding up the said vane, first primed with soden oil, secondly with red lead and soden oil, then stopped with oils and red lead, then primed twice and wrought three times in colours, and so gilt with fine gold in oil, and so varnished. Also for painting in the same way the beasts, arms, freezes and cornices." These were part of the regular duties of a serjeant-painter. It is also recorded that Lyzarde painted "a table" " of the history of Ahasuerus," which he presented to Queen Elizabeth as a new year's gift. Levina Terling (or Terlinck) of Bungay was a miniaturist of the time, and Johannes Corvus, Gerbicus(or Gerlach)Fliccius, and Guillim Stretes were able portrait-painters. 1 " Archaeologia," xxxix. I9. FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 29 Mr. (afterwards Sir George) Scharf contributed "Additional Notes on some of the Painters contemporary with Holbein,"l in which he specially referred to Corvus, Girolamo de Treviso, or Trevigi. He was anxious to identify Stretes with some of the portraits of the time, but was unsuccessful. We have the portraits, and we have the names of the possible artists, but with few exceptions the two have not been brought together. Joannes Corvus (flourished 1512-1544) has been identified with Jan Rave, a native of Bruges, who, on coming to England, latinized his name. Vertue discovered this artist by finding his name on the frame of a portrait of Bishop Fox, the founder, at Corpus Christi College, Oxford. The old frame was destroyed in I820, and the pidure placed in a gorgeous new one. In the Dent Colledtion there is fortunately a portrait of Mary Tudor, daughter of Henry VII., which still remains in a similar frame to that described by Vertue, and with an inscription. There are two portraits by Corvus in the National Portrait Gallery, one of the Princess Mary, afterwards Mary I., painted in 1544, the other of Henry Grey, Duke of Suffolk, father of Lady Jane Grey. Besides the painted portraits undoubtedly by Holbein there are among the treasures at Windsor Castle a series of his drawings of men and women of the Court of Henry VIII. These were found by chance in a bureau at Kensington Palace by Queen Caroline. They were engraved by Bartolozzi and published by John Chamberlain, I792 -1800, in two volumes, atlas folio. In 1812 the book was reproduced in a smaller form. The Queen has lately allowed these brilliant drawings 1 " Archaeologia," xxxix. 47. 30 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS to be photographed, and a fine volume entitled "Holbein in Windsor," has been published. The next artist to be mentioned was one of the foremost portrait-painters of the world. The name of SIR ANTHONY MORE (151 2-158 ) has so essentially an English sound that the careless student might easily be deluded into supposing him to be a native of England. The corre& forms of his name, however, are Anthonis Mor or Antonio Moro. Moro was born at Utrecht, and served as a pupil of Jan Schorel.' When young he was sent to Spain to paint for the Emperor Charles V., and he came to England with a commission from Philip II. to paint the portrait of Queen Mary, which is now in the Prado Gallery at Madrid. He painted portraits of Gresham, Sir Henry Lee, and others, but he was so short a time in England that he could not have painted all the portraits of English patrons attributed to him. It is said that Moro received one hundred pounds and a chain of gold for his portrait of the queen. We now come to the reign of Queen Elizabeth, when a large number of foreign and English painters appear to have flourished. LUCAS D'HEERE (I534-I584) having been banished from Ghent on account of his heretical opinions, took refuge in England in 1568, and his pidure of the queen with the three goddesses at Hampton Court was painted in the following year.2 He returned to Ghent in I577. There is some difficulty about the dates of many of the portraits attributed to him, but apparently he 1 There is a portrait of this painter by his pupil, Moro, in the possession of the Society of Antiquaries. 2 Mr. Lionel Cust, F.S.A., contributed a valuable paper to "Archaeologia" (liv. 59-80) entitled "Notice of the Life and Works of Lucas D'Heere, Poet and Painter of Ghent." FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 31 was the painter of some of those attributed to Holbein, and his name is attached to a full-length of Henry VIII. in the Master's Lodge at Trinity College, Cambridge. MARCUS GHEERAERTS, or GARRARD the elder, was a Protestant who took refuge in England at the outbreak of the Alvan persecution in 1568. Marcus Gheeraerts (or Mark Garrard) the younger was born at Bruges, and came to England in 1580 after Zucharo had quitted the country. He died in I635. CORNELIUS KETEL (1548 —1616) came to England in I573 and was one of the most remarkable portrait-painters of his time. He was introduced to Queen Elizabeth by Lord Chancellor Hatton, and worked in London for eight years. He was back again in Holland in 1581. FEDERIGO ZUCHARO, or ZUCCHERO (I543 -1609) was employed by Pope Gregory XIII., but having quarrelled with the Pope's servants, he returned to France, where he entered the service of Cardinal Lorraine. In 1574 he came to England, and painted Queen Elizabeth, and many of the chief persons of her Court. He never, however, signed his works, so that the ascription to him of portraits is always open to doubt. After residing here a few years he returned to Rome, when he founded the well-known academy of St. Luke, to which he bequeathed all his property. FRANS POURBUS the elder (1540-I580) was the son of Peter Pourbus, under whom he studied. He was considered to be one of the most distinguished portrait-painters of his time. He is supposed to have painted a portrait of Knox, and one of George Buchanan by him is in the Royal Society Colle&tion. When Carlyle was investigating the authenticity of the Knox portrait, he tried 32 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS to see all the examples of Pourbus's work he could, and he was much interested in the portrait of Buchanan. GEORGE GOWER, who appears to have flourished about 1575-1585, was her Majesty's serjeantpainter in oil, and it was proposed to grant to him or his deputy the sole privilege to "make, or cause to be made all and all maner of purtraiats and picluers of our person phisiognomy and proporton of our body in oyle cullers on boardes or canvas or to grave the same in copper or to cutt the same in woode or to printe same, being cutt in copper or woode or otherwise," an exception to this order being made in favour of Nicholas Hilliard in respeat to portraits " in small compasse in lymnynge only, and not otherwise." There is, however, no evidence that a patent was really executed. Francis Meres in his remarkably valuable and interesting little work entitled "Comparative Discourse of our English Poets" (I598), written at the end of Elizabeth's reign, gives a list of some of England's great painters. After mentioning Apelles, Zeuxis, and Parrhasius he writes: "As learned and skilful Greece had these excellently renowned for their limning, so England hath these -Hilliard, Isaac Oliver, and John de Creetes, very famous for painting." Further on he adds: " As Greece, moreover, had these painters... so in England we have also these-William and Francis Segar, brothers, Thomas and John Bettes, Lockey, Lyne, Peake, Peter Cole, Arnolde, Marcus, Jacques de Bray, Cornelius, Peter Golchis, Hieronymus, Peter Van de Velde." Some of these names are still held in high resped, but of 1 See communication from Sir Frederick Madden, "Notes and Queries," First Series, vi. 238. FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 33 others we know but little. A portrait by John Bettes, dated I545, was added to the National Gallery in 1897 from the colleftion of the late George Richmond, R.A. The name of the painter, in the writing of the time, is on a portion of the panel which, when the pidure was cut down at some unknown period, was preserved, and is fastened to the back of the pidture. The inscription runs: "fai6d par Johan Bettes Anglois." The subjedt of the portrait was identified by the late Sir George Scharf as that of Edmund Butts, third son of Sir William Butts, physician to Henry VIII. In the above list, Marcus stands for Garrard, and Hieronymus for De Bye. Richard Lyne, painter and engraver, was in the service of Archbishop Parker. The name of Richard Stevens, sculptor, painter, and medallist, might have been added by Meres to his list. We now come to the name of the first English portrait-painter of note, viz. NICHOLAS HILLIARD, the miniaturist (1537-1619). He was very precocious, and at the age of thirteen painted a miniature of himself, which is signed and dated, " N. H. 1550." A miniature of himself in mature life is at Penshurst. Lord Ronald Gower reproduces in his "Great Historic Galleries of England" a series of miniatures by Hilliard of Henry VII., Henry VIII., Edward VI., and Lady Jane Seymour from Windsor Castle. He also painted portraits of Elizabeth, and Mary, Queen of Scots, and Donne refers to him in his poem, "The Storm," I597: "a hand or eye By Hilliard drawn is worth a history By a worse painter made." On May 5th, 1617, he received from James I. a grant giving him for twelve years an exclusive D 34 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS right "to invent, make, grave and imprint any pit6ure or pictures of our image or other representation of our person."1 By this authority Hilliard could grant licences or seize upon such portraits as were not duly authorized. Among the Manchester Art Treasures (1857) was a portrait of Sir Oliver Wallop by Hilliard which was lent by the Earl of Portsmouth. It is noted in the catalogue as " a rare specimen in large of this celebrated miniature painter." Another successful miniaturist was ISAAC OLIVER (1556-1617), a pupil of Hilliard. It is generally supposed that he was an Englishman of French origin, but some believe him to have been a Frenchman, and his name is sometimes written Olivier or Ollivier. ROWLAND LOCKEY (flourished I590- 16o0) was a pupil of Hilliard, "skilful in limning, and in oilworks and perspeftives," and is reputed to have painted a portrait piece of Sir John More, and Sir Thomas More and his family, described in terms from which it would appear to be the group attributed to Holbein, but dates seem to make this assumption rather improbable.2 The surviving painters of Elizabeth's reign found favour at the Court of James I. as we have seen in the case of Hilliard. The same may be said of Mark Garrard the younger, and John de Critz. 1 Rymer's "Fcedera," xvii. 15. 2 As a rule, the names of miniaturists are not included in this chapter, as the subject of miniature portrait-painting is a large one, and requires separate treatment, but some of these miniaturists also painted in large, and it is impossible to leave out the names of Hilliard and Oliver, as they are of the greatest interest in the history of portraiture in England, and prove triumphantly that native born Englishmen were not so much behind in the art production of the country as is sometimes supposed. FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 35 GARRARD was appointed Court Painter to James I and Anne of Denmark, and painted portraits of Prince Henry and Prince Charles. His portrait of Camden (1609) is in the Bodleian Library. The picture of the Conference of English and Spanish Plenipotentiaries in 1604, bought at the Hamilton Sale for the National Portrait Gallery for /2,520, then bore the name of a Spanish painter Pantoja de la Cruz, but Sir George Scharf assigned the work to Garrard, and it now bears his name. JOHN DE CRITZ (d. 1641), a Flemish painter, patronised by Walsingham was subsequently serjeant-painter to James I. and Charles I. He painted a few portraits and scenes from masques. MICHEL JANSZEN MIEREVELDT (1567-1641) was born at Delft, and was several times invited to visit this country, but there is no proof of his having done so. Portraits by him of Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, the Earl of Southampton, and Sir Ralph Winwood, are in the National Portrait Gallery. PAUL VANSOMER, (about 1576-1621) came to England about the year 1606. He painted portraits of James I., and Anne of Denmark, the Lord Chamberlain, Earl of Pembroke, and many other members of their Court. Good portraits by him of the Earl and Countess of Arundel, at Arundel Castle, are dated I618. He died in London, and was buried in the church of St. Martin-in-the-Fields. CORNELIUS JANSSEN VAN CEULEN or CORNELIS JANSZOON VAN KEULEN (I590 —665) is said to have been born in London. He pradised in London in I618, and was engaged in the service of James I. He was a fashionable painter for about twenty years, but his fame was overshadowed by that of Vandyck. On the outbreak of the Civil Wars, he retired to Amsterdam. 36 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS DANIEL MYTENS (I590-1656) came over to England before I618. His earlier works are with difficulty distinguished from those of Vansomer. He received the grant of a house in St. Martin's Lane, and was appointed King's Painter to Charles I. in 1625, but when Vandyck arrived in England, he felt himself to be overmatched, and he begged the king to give him leave to return to Holland, without success. He did, however, go back subsequently and died there. ADRIAEN HANNEMAN (I60o?-1668?), who was born at the Hague, was a pupil and assistant of Mytens, and he may have accompanied his master when he came to this country. He remained here for some years, and returned to the Hague in 1640. His portraits of Charles II. and the Duke of Hamilton, painted in 1650, are at Windsor Castle. He was the favourite painter of Mary, Princess of Orange, daughter of Charles I., and his portrait of her, dated I660, is at St. James's Palace. Portraits of Charles I. and Vandyck by him are at Vienna. A likeness of William III. when a boy, painted in 1664, is at Hampton Court. SIR BALTHASAR GERBIER, the architect and proje&or, was somewhat of a painter. In 1623 he followed Prince Charles and Buckingham to Spain, where he painted a portrait of the Infanta, which he sent over to James I. Lord Ronald Gower believes he has found this portrait in a very charming pi6ture at the Earl of Denbigh's seat, Newnham Paddox, a fine photograph of which he gives in his "Great Historic Galleries of England." If he is corre6l in this ascription, Gerbier must have been a good artist. In the Jones colleetion (South Kensington Museum) is a miniature portrait of Charles I., done by him en grisaille. ROBERT PEAKE the father of the better known FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 37 Sir Robert Peake, printseller and royalist colonel, was serjeant-painter to James I. Although this artist is referred to by Walpole, no work of his was until lately known to exist. The distinguished Henry Bradshaw, who was a good antiquary as well as the most original of modern English bibliographers discovered by research in the Cambridge University registers, that the portrait of Prince Charles (afterwards Charles I.), painted to commemorate his visit to Cambridge, 3rd and 4th of March, 1612-13, when he received the degree of Master of Arts, was really by Robert Peake. Although previously anonymous, it was found that Peake received fI3 6s. 8d. from the University for the portrait.1 JAN LIEVENS (born 1607, died after 1672), a fellow student with Rembrandt at Leyden, came to England in 1631, and was received at Court. He painted portraits of the king, queen, and royal children, and after remaining here three years he returned to Antwerp. GERARD HONTHORST (1592-I662) was the favourite painter of Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, sister of Charles I., and taught her children to paint. He came to England and was patronised by Charles I. He painted the piature of the family of Villiers, Duke of Buckingham (now at Hampton Court), in 1628, just before the duke's assassination. He was known in the Italian school as Gherardo delle Notti. There are several of Honthorst's portraits in the National Portrait Gallery. CORNELIUS DE NEVE, a portrait-painter of Charles Mr. Bradshaw's valuable paper "On the Collection of Portraits belonging to the University before the Civil War " will be found in the Cambridge Antiquarian Society's communications (vol. iii., pp. 275-286) and is reprinted in the volume of his "ColleEted Papers," 1889 (p. 286). 38 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS the Second's reign, is supposed to have been of Dutch origin, although it is not known where he was born. There is a pidure by him at Knole of Richard and Edward Sackville, signed and dated 1637. His portrait of Ashmole is dated 1644, and the portrait of the painter himself at the Ashmolean Museum is inscribed "Mr. Le Neve, a famous painter." At Petworth there are two companion pid6ures by him, one of the artist, his wife, and son, and the other of his eight children. GEORGE GELDORP (flourished 1611-1660), was apprenticed in Antwerp, and came to England apparently before 1623. He was a friend of Vandyck and had a quarrel with Gerbier. He was employed by William Cecil, 2nd Earl of Salisbury, to paint portraits of his family, and a portrait by him of George Carew, Earl of Totnes, is in the National Portrait Gallery. Geldorp was severely criticised by his contemporaries, and he is probably better known as Keeper of the PiCtures of Charles I. than as a portrait-painter. The love of art exhibited by Charles I. was an absorbing passion, and his judgment as a connoisseur equalled his desire of possession, so that in about twenty years he succeeded in collecting one of the finest galleries of piCtures ever brought together, a collection which, unfortunately, owing to political troubles, was broken up and the picures sold at much below their value, as might be expedted from a forced sale. Charles patronised the artists of whose fame he heard, but it was not until he employed Vandyck that he was thoroughly successful in obtaining the services of one who was worthy to paint himself and his Court. NICHOLAS LANIERE (I 588- 1666), a musicianand amateur of art, one of a family of musicians attached to the royal household for several generations, SIR ANTHONY VANDYCK, BY HIMSELF. FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 39 colleted pi6tures and statues for Charles I., and was keeper of the king's miniatures. There is a portrait of him, painted by himself, at Oxford, but his skill as a portrait-painter alone scarcely entitles him to a place in this list. His association with Vandyck, however, deserves special notice. That great painter painted his portrait, which so much pleased the king that he induced the artist to remain in this country. Laniere is alluded to by Herrick in a poem addressed to Henry Lawes. SIR ANTHONY VANDYCK (1599-1641) came to England in I621 and again in 1631, but it was not until 1632, when Charles I. had seen the portrait of Laniere that he determined to attach him permanently to his person. Never was there a more appropriate appointment, and the fame of Charles has gained immeasurably by his painter's labours. It seems impossible, when looking upon the noble features of the king as delineated by Vandyck, to discover the signs of those weaknesses and dissimulations which are so persistently laid to his charge by his enemies. The advantage to the royal cause of such a painter has been immense, and the continued popularity of the royalists has been largely due to his pencil. Vandyck was one of the world's greatest portrait-painters, and it is a source of natural pride to Englishmen that so many of his works are portraits of noble Englishmen and Englishwomen. He placed the land of his adoption under a heavy debt of gratitude when he painted those who made the history of their day. No painter has ever been more successful in giving an air of distin&tion to all his sitters than Vandyck was. If his subjeds were all as distinguished looking in real life as they appear on his canvases, the men and women of that period must have far surpassed those of any other period 40 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS in personal appearance. Mr. Ruskin, as quoted in Mr. E. T. Cook's admirable Handbook to the National Gallery, compares Vandyck with Teniers as representative Flemish artists. " They lived," he writes, "the gentle at court, the simple in the pothouse, and could indeed paint according to their habitation a nobleman or a boor, but wholly unwishful to conceive anything natural or supernatural, beyond the precin6ts of the Presence or the tavern." These are hard words, and one would have thought that " distint6ion," Vandyck's chara&teristic quality, is sadly wanting in the Dutch School generally, and distinction certainly does include some of those higher qualities which Mr. Ruskin finds wanting in Vandyck. To see Vandyck at his best we must visit Windsor Castle, but most of the great historical houses of the country contain fine examples of his art. A large number were shown at the South Kensington Portrait Exhibitions and at the Stuart Exhibition. Special exhibitions of his works have also been held. The National Portrait Gallery only contains one of his pi6tures (Sir Kenelm Digby), although there are several by painters of his school. Time has dealt tenderly with Vandyck's canvases and in many cases has mellowed their charms. A lady, who in her youth sat to Vandyck, and in her age to Richardson, told the latter painter, that she considered Vandyck's pitures had improved by age, as she always thought that the colours of the pidures in his studio were too raw. Vandyck possessed beautifully formed hands, and he paid special attention to that feature. When Margaret de Bourbon, daughter of Henry IV. of France sat to the painter, she asked him why he gave so much more attention to the painting of her .. WILLIAM DOBSON, BY HIMSELF. FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 41 hands than of her head, or, indeed, of anyother detail of the pi6ture. " It is, madam," replied Vandyck with a sly smile, " that I anticipate a rich compensation from those beautiful white hands." GEORGE JAMESON (1586-1644) is known as the "Vandyck of Scotland." According to tradition he studied under Rubens and was a fellow student with Vandyck. He returned to his native town, Aberdeen, in 1620. Scotland therefore produced a native oil painter of distindion, who took rank in the kingdom of art, before England. In I635 he was pradising portrait-painting in Edinburgh, where he died. His portraits, which are numerous and good, are mostly to be found in Scotland. When Charles I. held a parliament in Edinburgh in 1633, and rode from Holyrood Palace to the Parliament House, he was shown a colledion of portraits by Jameson, which had been colle6ted by the city magistrates, and hung on either side of the Netherbow. The king afterwards sat to Jameson for his own portrait. HENRY STONE(died 65 3), known as" Old Stone," was the eldest son of Nicholas Stone the sculptor. He resided many years at Rome. He returned to England in 1642 and pradtised both as a sculptor and as a portrait-painter. DAVID BECK (I621-1656), a native of Arnheim, was a pupil of Vandyck, but he has little claim to rank among English artists. He taught drawing to the children of Charles I., and on one occasion the king said to him, " Faith, Beck! I believe you could paint riding post." He subsequently entered into the service of Christina, Queen of Sweden, and died at the Hague. WILLIAM DOBSON (I6IO-I646) was the first English oil painter of mark. He copied piEtures of Titian and Vandyck, and attracted the attention 42 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS of the latter, who introduced him to the notice of Charles I. On the death of Vandyck, in I641,he was appointed sergeant-painter, and accompanied the king to Oxford. Charles I. called him the English Tintoretto. At one time he was overwhelmed with commissions, and endeavoured to check them by obliging his sitters to pay half the price of the pi&ure before he began the portrait, a praCtice which he is said to have been the first to introduce. Dobson's work has been highly appreciated by his countrymen, and J. Elsum's well-known work1 contains epigrams on his portraits. This is what he says of two of them: "A PORTRAIT OF K. CHARLES I. BY DOBSON. Epig. 79. " Tell me what modern pidture can compare With this for sweetness and majestick air. What lively tints and touches strike the eye, And a Vandykish manner do descry Nothing's more nicely follow'd or more like, In every stroke you see the great Vandyke." "PORTRAIT OF AN OLD GENTLEMAN BY DOBSON. Epig. 147. " A portrait not like paint but flesh and blood, And not to praise Dobson below his merit, This flesh and blood is quickned with a spirit." EDWARD BOWER was a portrait-painter in the reign of Charles I., who painted Lord Finch in 1640, and an equestrian portrait of Lord Fairfax in I647. He also painted a pi6ture of the king seated at his trial. JOHN TAYLOR, nephew of Taylor the water-poet, pratised at Oxford in the middle of the seventeenth century. His portrait, painted by himself, is in the Bodleian Library, as well as two portraits of the water-poet painted by him. 1 " Epigrams upon the Paintings of the most eminent masters antient and modern," by J. E., Esq. London, I700. FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 43 The miniaturists Hilliard and Isaac Oliver have already been noticed, and here those who continued the beautiful art which these great artists adorned must have a passing notice. PETER OLIVER (160I-I660) son of Isaac Oliver was considered to be almost the equal of his father. He did not, however, confine his labours to the produftion of portraits, but was employed in copying in water-colours several of the principal pi&ures in the colle6tion of Charles I. JOHN PETITOT (1607-1691) has been called the inventor of painting in enamel. He was born at Geneva, and came to England under the patronage of his countryman Sir Theodore Mayerne, physician to Charles I. He painted the portraits of Charles I. and the royal family several times, and copied some of Vandyck's portraits, but on the execution of the king he went to Paris. He was recommended to Louis XIV. by Charles II., and received from the former king a pension and a residence in the Louvre, but at the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, being a zealous Protestant, he escaped to Geneva. His brother-in-law, Bordier, assisted him by painting the hair and the backgrounds on his enamels. Bordier was employed by the Parliament to paint a pidture of the Battle of Naseby, which was presented to Fairfax. One of Petitot's many children became a majorgeneral in the English service. JOHN HOSKINS (died 1664) was a miniaturist of great repute, who painted portraits of Charles I., his queen, and many of his Court, as Digby, Falkland, and others. He left a son, John Hoskins the younger, who painted James II. and Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey. SAMUEL COOPER (I609I-672), the nephew of the elder Hoskins, was the most famous of minia 44 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS turists, and richly deserved the epithet applied to him of " Vandyck in little." Walpole, who was a great admirer of Cooper's work, very justly remarked, " If a glass could expand Cooper's pictures to the size of Vandyck's, they would appear to have been painted for that proportion. If his portrait of Cromwell could be so enlarged, I do not know but Vandyck would appear less great by the comparison."' The death of Cooper is registered in Beale's Diary, May 5, 1672, thus: " Mr. Samuel Cooper, the most famous limner of the world, for a face, died." Arts cannot be expedted to flourish in a country devastated by civil wars, but even in unsettled times portraits are required, and during the Commonwealth period, several good portraitpainters flourished. Of these the chief was ROBERT WALKER (died 1660), who was called " Cromwell's painter," and was employed by the Parliamentarians in opposition to Dobson, distinguished as the Royalist painter. A portrait by him of Cromwell is now in the Pitti Palace, Florence, where it is wrongly attributed to Lely. This pidlure was bought by the Grand Duke of Tuscany for ~500 from a lady who fixed that high price, because she did not wish to part with it, and thought that the demand of such an amount would close the negotiations. Misson in his " Travels" tells us that this portrait and that of Thomas, Earl of Ossory, were the only portraits of Englishmen in his time in the gallery of illustrious generals at Florence. Evelyn asserts that the best portrait of Cromwell, by Walker, is the double one with his son Richard, a youth trying on his sash, the idea of which was borrowed from Vandyck's portrait of Lord 1 "Anecdotes," ed. Wornum, ii. I45. :: ROBERT WALKER, BY HIMSELF. FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 45 Goring. It was engraved by Lombart, and absurdly lettered "Cromwell and Lambert." Walker painted, among others, Lambert, Ireton, and Fleetwood. Evelyn sat to him in July, 1648. One line of Elsum's epigram on a portrait of Cromwell, by Walker, may be quoted here: "The sword has made him great, the pencil good." RICHARD GIBSON (I616 —1690), a dwarf of three feet ten inches high, was page to Charles I. and Henrietta Maria. His most admired work is a copy of a head of the queen from Vandyck, now at Hampton Court. He was patronised by Cromwell, and afterwards became a favourite at the court of Charles II. Anne Shepherd, his wife, was as short as himself, but they had nine children, five of whom lived to maturity and were of full height. Waller wrote a poem " On the Marriage of the Dwarfs," which commences thus: "Design or chance makes others wive, But nature did this match contrive; Eve might as well have Adam fled, As she denied her little bed To him, for whom Heaven seemed to frame And measure out this little dame." JOHN BAPTIST GASPARS worked for General Lambert, and after the Restoration, he a6ted as assistant to Lely and was nicknamed "Lely's Baptist." He also was similarly employed by Kneller. There is a portrait of Hobbes by him in the colletion of the Royal Society, which was presented by Aubrey. EDWARD MASCALL was a painter of some merit, to whom Cromwell sat. He made some of the drawings for Dugdale's " Monasticon," and there is an etching of Viscount Falconberg, dated I643. 46 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS There is an engraving by James Gammon of his own portrait by himself. SIR PETER LELY (1617- I680) was essentially the painter of the Restoration period, although he began his career earlier. He came to England in 1641, in the train of William, Prince of Orange, who married Mary, daughter of Charles I. In 1647, when the king was a captive at Hampton Court, he was painted by Lely as holding a note, just received from the hands of his son, the youthful Duke of York, who offers him a penknife to cut the strings. Lely was introduced to Charles by the Earl of Northumberland, and this pidure is now at Sion House, in the possession of the Duke of Northumberland,; who has the receipt for ~30 received in payment for the pidure. Walpole, referring to this, says, " I should have taken it for the hand of Fuller or Dobson. It is certainly very unlike Sir Peter's latter manner, and is stronger than his former. The king has none of the melancholy grace which Vandyck alone, of all his painters, always gave him. It has a sterner countenance and expressive of the tempests he had experienced." Lovelace wrote some special verses on this pi&ure commencing: "See! what a clouded majesty, and eyes Whose glory through their mist doth brighter rise! See! what an humble bravery doth shine, And griefs triumphant breaking through each line, How it commands the face! so sweet a scorne Never did happy misery adorne! So sacred a contempt, that others show To this (oth' height of all the wheele) below, That mightiest monarchs by this shaded booke May coppy out their proudest, richest looke." 2 "Anecdotes," ed. Wornumn, ii. 94. 2 "To my worthy friend Mr. Peter Lilly, on that excellent pihture of his Majesty and the Duke of Yorke, drawne by him at Hampton Court." SIR PETER LELY, BY HIMSELF. FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 47 Although the portrait of Cromwell attributed to Lely at Florence was really by Walker, there is no doubt that the Protedtor sat to the former painter. Captain Winde reported a speech of Cromwell's which is frequently quoted: " Mr. Lely, I desire you would use all your skill to paint my pidture like me, and not flatter me at all; but remark all these roughnesses, pimples, warts, and everything as you see me, otherwise I will never pay a farthing for it." 1 The works by which Lely is best known are portraits of the beauties of the Court of Charles I I., formerly at Windsor Castle, and now at Hampton Court Palace. These portraits were painted for Anne Hyde, Duchess of York. Although they are much admired they cannot be considered as altogether satisfaCtory. They are all so much alike as to be positively monotonous, and when looking at them we are naturally reminded of the remark that Lely "painted many fine pidlures, but few good portraits." It is said that he kept a stock of paintings in hand with the faces blank, to be filled in according to choice. This was really a gross fraud, for a good portrait consists of something more than an accurate presentation of the face. It is not in accordance with popular opinion, but there is some truth in the assertion that Lely was more successful in painting men than women. Some of his portraits of the former are excellent. Lely occupied for several years an unchallenged position as the chief painter of his day, although he was not without rivals. Shortly before his Dallaway, in annotating Walpole, notices "a portrait of Cromwell at Chicksands in Bedfordshire, which was taken after he was Protedtor, as a present to Sir J. Danvers, one of Charles I.'s judges, whose daughter married Sir J. Osborne." Walpole's "Anecdotes," ed. Wornum, ii. 94 (note). 48 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS death, however, he was greatly affe6ted by the success of Kneller. Lely died in Covent Garden, and was buried in the parish church of St. Paul. The sale of his effe6ts in 1682 occupied forty days, and realized ~26,000, The country is greatly indebted to Lely for a vast number of fine portraits illustrating the history of his time in a remarkable manner. As to his position as an artist, he was decidedly inferior to Vandyck, and as decidedly superior to Kneller. Lely had many pupils and followers, and Mrs. Mary Beale and John Greenhill were among the foremost of them. MARY BEALE (I632-I697) copied successfully the works of Vandyck and Lely, and is supposed to have studied for a time under Robert Walker. She painted most of the dignified clergy of her day, and her charges were ~5 for a head and fIo for a half-length. Portraits by her of Bishop Wilkins and Dr. Thomas Paget are in the Royal Society Colledion, and of Charles II., Cowley, Tillotson, and 6th Duke of Norfolk in the National Portrait Gallery. JOHN GREENHILL (1649-1676), like so many other portrait-painters, commenced his studies by copying the works of Vandyck. Two of his works -portraits of Charles I I. and Lord Shaftesburyare in the National Portrait Gallery, and there is a portrait of himself in the Dulwich Gallery. Mrs. Behn wrote an elegy on his death. Other pupils of Lely that may be mentioned are William Claret, Jeremiah Davison, John Dixon, Sir John Gawdie, Matthew Meele, Thomas Sadler, Henry Tilson, and William Wissing. GERARD SOEST (1637-1681), born in Westphalia, came to London about 1656, and obtained FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 49 much employment. There is a portrait of Colonel Blood by him in the National Portrait Gallery, and one of Dr. Wallis at the Royal Society. Walpole says he " was not only an able master himself, but formed Mr. Riley." JAMES GANDY (I619 —1689) is said to have been a pupil of Vandyck, and copied his pictures. He went over to Ireland with the Duke of Ormonde, and his principal portraits were painted in that country. THOMAS FLATMAN (I637-I688) was both a poet and a miniature painter. Granger affirms that "one of his heads is worth a ream of his Pindarics," but he was not altogether a bad poet, and some of his lighter pieces are elegant. JOSEPH MICHAEL WRIGHT was born in Scotland and studied under Jameson. He came to England when young, and afterwards spent some years in Italy. He painted a series of portraits of the judges for Guildhall in place of Lely, who refused to wait on the judges at their own chambers. His well-known portrait of Lacy the a6tor, in three chara6ters, is now at Hampton Court, and there is a fine portrait by him of Hobbes in the National Portrait Gallery. ROBERT STREATER (1624-1680) was appointed serjeant-painter at the Restoration. He painted portraits as well as history, landscape, architeture, and still life. ISAAC FULLER (1606-1672) resided for some time at Oxford, and painted altar-pieces, and portraits of Samuel Butler, Ogilvy, Sir Kenelm Digby, etc. His own portrait is in the Bodleian Library. That his work was not in high repute among his contemporaries may be guessed from Elsum's epigram: "ON A DRUNKEN SOT. "His head does on his shoulder lean, His eyes are sunk and hardly seen; E 50 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Who sees this sot in his own colour, Is apt to say, "Twas done by Fuller."' JOHN RILEY (I646 —I691) was a pupil of Soest and Fuller, and after the death of Lely he was largely employed as portrait-painter. He painted Charles II., James II. and his queen, and was appointed Court Painter to William and Mary. Portraits by him of Bishop Burnet, James II., William, Lord Russell, Waller, Lord Crewe, Bishop of Durham, are in the National Portrait Gallery. FRIEDRICH KERSEBOOM (I632 —I690) was born at Solingen, and studied under Lebrun in Paris. After a residence at Rome he settled in England and obtained considerable employment as a portraitpainter. JOHN HAYLS (died I679) is chiefly known by the allusions to him in Pepys's Diary. He painted the diarist's portrait when a young man, and this is now preserved in the National Portrait Gallery. He was one of the chief rivals of Lely, and had a fair practice. Some of his best portraits are those of the Russell family, which are preserved at Woburn Abbey. NICHOLAS LARGILLIERE (I656-I746) came to England at the age of eighteen, and painted several pictures for Charles II. He returned to France, but came to England again twice. He left this country finally at the Revolution, and settled in Paris where he was largely employed as a portraitpainter. He is said to have painted 1,500 pictures. There are portraits of Prince Charles Edward and Cardinal York attributed to him in the National Portrait Gallery. JOHN SCOUGALL is supposed to have been born in Leith, and to have painted in the latter half of the seventeenth century, but no particulars are known of his life. A portrait by him of Sir SIR GODFREY KNELLER, BY HIMSELF. FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 5 I Archibald Primrose, Lord Clerk Register, in the possession of the Earl of Rosebery, is dated 1670. Portraits by him of William III., Queen Mary, and Anne, are at Glasgow. A portrait of the artist by himself is in the National Gallery of Scotland. HENRI GASCAR came to England about 1674 in the train of the Duchess of Portsmouth. He was the fashion for a short time, but not being an artist of any real merit he had the sense to return to Paris before the tide turned against him. SIR GODFREY KNELLER (1646-1723) came to England after his father's death in I675, and the Duke of Monmouth introduced him to Charles II., whose portrait he painted in competition with Lely. He painted Dryden's portrait which he presented to the poet, and he was rewarded by an epistle in verse. Kneller was greatly admired in his own day, and held an undisputed position, but he is not so highly esteemed now, chiefly because he painted too many pidtures, some of them very pretentious and wanting in good taste. His good work, however, is very good, and it would be hard to better some of his best portraits. Elsum published a laudatory epigram on a pi6ture of St. Catharine by him: " Here you may see a very pretty face Set off with sweet simplicity and grace, The fam'd Sir Godfrey does not only paint The beauty, but the Virgin and the Saint." Ten sovereigns sat to Kneller, and he was the first painter to be created a baronet. MICHAEL DAHL, born at Stockholm in 1656, came to England in 1678. He subsequently travelled and studied in France, and then in Italy. He settled in London in I688, and was patronised 52 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS by the Princess Anne and Prince George of Denmark. He was the rival of Kneller, and succeeded to his practice. He painted many portraits of admirals which are preserved at Greenwich. WILLIAM WISSING (1656-1687) was born at Amsterdam, and came to England in i680, when he was employed by Lely. After the death of the latter he was much patronised and became a formidable rival to Kneller. Portraits by him of Lord Cutts, the Duke of Monmouth, Prince George of Denmark, Mary of Modena and Mary II., are in the National Portrait Gallery. Prior wrote a poem addressed to the Countess of Devonshire on Wissing's last pidure which represented all her grandchildren. JOHN CLOSTERMAN (1656-1713) came to England in I68I, and painted draperies for Riley. When the latter painter died, he finished many of his portraits. He went to Spain in I696, but returned to England. He painted portraits of Dryden, Grinling Gibbons and his wife, Sir William Petty and Sir Richard Blackmore. His portraits of Queen Anne and the Duke of Marlborough are in the National Portrait Gallery. SIMON DuBoIS (died 1708) came to England in 1685 and secured the patronage of Lord Somers. Elsurn wrote an epigram on his portrait of the great lawyer. His portrait of Archbishop Tenison is at Lambeth, and of Wilmot, Earl of Rochester, at Knole. He lived in Covent Garden with his elder brother Edward the landscape painter. SIMON VERELST was a distinguished Flemish flower painter, whose pidures were greatly admired by Pepys. He was immensely vain and called himself the God of Flowers. Others flattered this vanity, and Prior wrote: FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 53 "When fam'd Verelst this little wonder drew, Flora vouchsaf'd the growing work to view, Finding the painter's science at a stand, The goddess snatch'd the pencil from his hand, And finishing the piece, she smiling said, 'Behold one work of mine that ne'er shall fade.'" The Duke of Buckingham patronised him and suggested that he should paint his portrait, with the result that he crowded the canvas with fruit and flowers, so that the king to whom it was shown supposed it to be a flower piece. Although his portraits were bad he became the fashion and injured Lely. Walpole says that he was paid ~ I io for a half-length. SIR JOHN BAPTIST MEDINA (1660-1711) a Fleming, came to England in I686. He found a munificent patron in the Earl of Arran, who induced him to settle in Edinburgh, from which circumstance he obtained the name of the " Kneller of the North." JACOB HUYSMAN, often called HOUSEMAN (I656 -I696),was a native of Antwerp who came to England and was said by an admirer to unite the power and freedom of Vandyck with the grace and feeling of Lely. His portrait of Queen Catherine at Gorhambury was considered by the artist as his best work. His painting of the same queen as a shepherdess is now at Buckingham Palace, and in honour of having painted so many portraits of her, he styled himself queen's painter. His full-length of the Duchess of Richmond as Pallas is in the possession of the Duke of Richmond and Gordon. The portrait of Lady Belasyse at Hampton Court, traditionally known as Lady Byron, was long ascribed to Huysman, but is now assigned to Lely, on the authority of an old catalogue. A good portrait by him of Isaac Walton is in the National Gallery. 54 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS THOMAS MURRAY (1666-1724) studied under Riley and afterwards became a successful painter. Portraits by him of Captain William Dampier, the circumnavigator and Lord Chief Justice, Sir John Pratt, father of Lord Camden, are in the National Portrait Gallery, of Edmund Halley at the Royal Society, and of Sir Hans Sloane at the College of Physicians. THOMAS HILL (1661-1734) was a pupil of W. Faithorne and praftised portrait-painting in London. The fine portrait of Bishop Hooper in the Portrait Exhibition of I867 at South Kensington (No. 229) attributed to Hogarth was really by Hill. NICOLO CASSANA (1659-1713), born at Genoa, painted historical subje6s and portraits. He came to England and painted Queen Anne and many of the nobility. His portrait of James II.'s distinguished natural son, James Fitzjames, Duke of Berwick, was shown at the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 (No. 21). JONATHAN RICHARDSON (1665-1745) was a pupil of Riley and the master of Hudson who married one of his daughters, so that Malone observed that he was the " pi6torial grandfather" of Sir Joshua Reynolds. There are several portraits by him in the National Portrait Gallery, one of them being his own likeness. There were some good examples of his work at the South Kensington Exhibition of I867, viz.: Edward Colston (No. 54) belonging to the Corporation of Bristol, Lady Mary Wortley Montague (No. 250), and William Cheselden (No. 237), belonging to the College of Surgeons. Johnson said he was better known by his books than his pidtures, but this is not the case now for his portraits are highly appreciated and he himself will always hold a high position in the JONATHAN RICHARDSON, BY HIMSELF. FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 55 history of English art, while his books are almost forgotten. Even in his own day the latter were satirised, for Prior, when asked by him what title he should give one of his books, replied: "The memoirs of yourself and your son Jonathan with a word or two about painting." We ought, however, to remember that both Hogarth and Reynolds were stimulated by the reading of the "Essay on the whole art of Criticism as it relates to Painting," I719. JOHN WOOLASTON, born in London about 1672, was happy in his likenesses, but he was not a good portrait-painter. According to Walpole his charge was only five guineas for a three-quarter length. He was a musician, and performed at the concerts of Thomas Britton the small coalman. His portrait of Britton is in the National Portrait Gallery. WILLIAM GANDY (died 1729), son of James Gandy already alluded to, is said to have settled at Exeter about the year 1700. For some years he was a sort of itinerant portrait-painter and many good piCtures by him exist in the west of England. Reynolds has recorded that he was in his youth much impressed by the work of Gandy. SIR JAMES THORNHILL (I676 — 734) was chiefly employed in the decoration of ceilings with designs in the grand style, but he also painted some very good portraits. He was placed by his uncle the celebrated Dr. Sydenham, as a pupil with Thomas Highmore, and succeeded him as serjeant-painter. THOMAS GIBSON (I680-I 75 I) praftised portraitpainting in London during the first part of the eighteenth century, but retired about 1730 to Oxford. He subsequently returned to London, where he died. There is a portrait by him of Archbishop Wake in the National Portrait Exhibition, and an anonymous one of Archbishop HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Potter from Christ Church Oxford, was shown at South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 (No. 380). His portrait of Vertue is at the Society of Antiquaries and that of Flamsteed at the Royal Society. WILLIAM AIKMAN (1682- 73 ) studied at Rome, and on his return to Scotland succeeded to the pra&tice of Sir John Medina in Edinburgh. He settled in London in 1723 on the advice of John, Duke of Argyll. He became acquainted with Kneller, whose style he imitated, and to whose pradice he largely succeeded. Portraits by him of Duncan Forbes and the Duke of Argyll are in the National Portrait Gallery. At the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 were shown his portraits of the Rev. William Carstares (No. I ), John Gay (No. 173, attributed in the catalogue to Boll), Allan Ramsay the poet (No. 245), and James Thomson (No. 333). His own portrait is in the Scottish National Portrait Gallery (Edinburgh), the National Gallery of Scotland, and also in the Gallery of Painters at Florence. EDMUND ASHFIELD was a pupil of Wright and excelled in crayons. He copied Vandyck. CHARLES JERVAS or JARVIS (1675-1739) was born in Ireland and studied under Kneller. He visited Italy and returned to England about 1709. He succeeded Kneller, on that artist's death, as principal painter to George I. He married a widow with a large fortune, and when Kneller heard that he had set up a carriage and four horses he cried: " Ah mine cot, if his horses don't draw better as he does he will never get to his journey's ead." Jervas was well received in literary society and obtained the somewhat uncritical praises of Pope, Swift, and Arbuthnot: FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 57 "Whether thy hand strike out some free design, Where life awakes, and dawns at every line, Or blend in beauteous tints the colour'd mass, And from the canvas call the mimic face." 1 Jervas was exceedingly vain of his talents and person. One day the Countess of Bridgewater was sitting to him for her portrait, when after admiring the beauties of her face he said, " But I cannot help telling your ladyship that you have not a handsome ear." "No," said the Countess; "pray, Mr. Jervas, tell me what is a handsome ear." The painter answered by showing his own. Portraits by Jervas of Queen Caroline, Pope, and Martha Blount, the Duchess of Queensberry, Swift, and William, Duke of Cumberland, are in the National Portrait Gallery. WILLIAM KENT (I684- I748) when young studied in Rome, and he was brought to England by the Architert Earl of Burlington in 1719. He was a poor painter, but a man of taste, and his winning manner made him a favourite at Court. On the death of Jervas he became principal painter to the King. Hogarth said that neither England nor Italy ever produced a more contemptible dauber than Kent, and Lord Chesterfield apparently was much of the same opinion, if we may judge from these lines: "As to Apelles, Ammon's son Would only deign to sit; So to thy pencil Kent! alone Will Brunswick's form submit. "Equal your envied wonders! save This difference we see, One would no other painter haveNo other would have thee." 1 Pope's "Epistle to Mr. Jervas with Dryden's translations of Fresnoy's ' Art of Painting."' 58 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS JEREMIAH DAVIDSON (died I745) studied the works of Lely and obtained a large practice as a portrait-painter both in Scotland and in London. The fine statue of Duncan Forbes in the Parliament House, Edinburgh, was modelled by Roubiliac after a portrait by Davidson. JEAN BAPTISTE VANLOO (I684-I746) was born at Aix in Provence. He painted altar-pieces in his youth and studied in Rome. He came to England in 1737 and became very popular as a portrait-painter. He returned to France in I742 and died in his native town. Portraits by him of Richard Temple, Viscount Cobham, and John Lord Hervey are in the National Portrait Gallery, and one of Sir James Burrow is at the Royal Society. He also painted portraits of Horace Walpole, Colley Cibber, and Peg Woffington. JOSEPH VAN HAAKEN (died 1749) was born at Antwerp where he studied his profession. He came to England and painted the figure and background for several painters. He painted draperies for Vanloo among others, and it is said that the stage coach brought him canvases to complete from all parts of England. Two painters offered him 800 guineas a year to work only for them. Hogarth satirically sketched the supposed funeral of Van Haaken attended by the artists he worked for, who exhibited their grief and despair at his death. JOHN VANDERBANK (I694-I739) was born in England, and was largely employed in portrait-painting in the reigns of Queen Anne and George I. He headed the seceders from Sir James Thornhill's academy, and established one of his own in which he introduced the living model. FROM HOLBEIN TO HIGHMORE 59 JOSEPH HIGHMORE (I692I-780) studied at the Painters' Academy of Great Queen Street, and was noticed by Kneller. He had a large pra6tice, and painted portraits of the Knights of the Bath. There are two portraits of Samuel Richardson by him in the National Portrait Gallery, and portraits of Richardson and his wife at Stationers' Hall. CHAPTER IV. BRITISH PORTRAIT-PAINTERS FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS WILLIAM HOGARTH (1697-1764) was one of our greatest portrait-painters, although he was that and something more. His "Captain Coram" at the Foundling Hospital, "Martin Folkes" at the Royal Society, and " Lord Lovat " at the National Portrait Gallery are fine examples of his art. He is also well represented at the National Gallery by portraits of Lavinia Fenton as Polly Peachum, of his sister, Mary Hogarth, and of himself and the family group of the Strodes, as well as in the incomparable "Marriage a la Mode." He was proud of his success and said: " for the portrait of Garrick I received more than any English artist ever before received for a single portrait" (400o). When Hogarth published his print of "The Times" he offended an old acquaintance-the notorious John Wilkes, who made a savage attack on the painter in the "North Briton" (No. 17, Sept. 25th, I762). In this article Wilkes made assertions which he must have known to be untrue; for instance, how monstrously false was the following passage: "After 'Marriage a la Mode' the public wished for a series of prints of a happy marriage. Hogarth made the attempt but the rancour and malevolence of his mind made him WILLIAM HOGARTH, BY HIMSELF. FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS very soon turn with envy and disgust from objedts of so pleasing contemplation to dwell and feast on others of a hateful cast, which he pursued, for he found them more congenial with the most unabaiting zeal and unrelenting gall." Churchill followed with "An Epistle to William Hogarth," but the attackers had little cause to congratulate themselves. Hogarth was hard hit and he felt the cruel words severely, but he had a bitter revenge. Comparatively few read Churchill, and scarcely anyone reads the pages of the "North Briton," but everyone knows Hogarth's portraits of Wilkes and Churchill, and the reputations of these two men will never recover from the blow given by the publication of their portraits. Wilkes wrote that Hogarth's " Sigismunda" was not human, and as the figure was taken from the painter's wife this criticism was particularly distasteful. It will be remembered that Horace Walpole made some very unflattering remarks on the figure of Sigismunda. Fortunately now we have the pidlure at hand in the National Gallery and can admire the beauty of the figure and the merits of the piature as a whole. We can only feel surprise that Sir Richard Grosvenor was desirous of repudiating his bargain with Hogarth. The artist left injunEtions with his wife that she should not sell the picture under ~500. At the sale of her effects it fetched only ~56 guineas. In 1807 it was sold at Christie's for 400 guineas, and in 1879 it was received at the National Gallery, as a bequest from Mr. J. H. Anderdon. Hogarth succeeded his brother-in-law John Thornhill as serjeant-painter in 1757. JOSEPH FRANCIS NOLLEKENS (1702-1748), the father of Joseph Nollekens the sculptor, was a portrait-painter, and at Windsor Castle there is a 62 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS good portrait group by him of Frederick Prince of Wales, and his sisters. HAMLET WINSTANLEY (I700-I761), son of the proje6tor of the Eddystone lighthouse, studied under Kneller, went to Italy and copied some of the finest pi&tures in the galleries of that country for the Earl of Derby. Several portraits by him will be found at Knowsley. He subsequently devoted himself chiefly to engraving, and published the " Knowsley Gallery" consisting of etchings of family portraits and pitures. GEORGE KNAPTON (I698-I778) was a pupil of Richardson and became portrait-painter to the Society of Dilettanti. There is a portrait by him of Francis, 5th Duke of Leeds, in the National Portrait Gallery, and a poor group of the family of Frederick Prince of Wales at Hampton Court. FRANCIS COTES, R.A. (1726 —1770) was a pupil of Knapton and soon outstripped his master. Like his master he was very successful in crayons, and Hogarth declared that he was a better painter than Reynolds. Cotes lived at No. 32, Cavendish Square, the house afterwards occupied by Romney and then by Sir M. A. Shee. R. BOCKMAN was a portrait-painter and mezzotint engraver of whom little is known. He appears to have come to England from Amsterdam and to have worked here in the early part of the eighteenth century. There are several good portraits by him of Naval Commanders at Hampton Court and at Greenwich. BARTHOLOMEW DANDRIDGE, who was the son of a house painter, obtained a considerable praCtice as a portrait-painter from his facility in taking a likeness. He painted an excellent portrait of George Edwards, F.R.S., the zoologist, which was engraved by J. S. Millar in I754. His portrait of FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 63 Nathaniel Hook is in the National Portrait Gallery. JOHN ELLYS or ELLIS (170-I 757) when about fifteen years of age, was placed with Sir James Thornhill for a time. He was a zealous adherent of the Kneller school and resented Reynolds's departure from it. He was employed in the colle6tion of the Houghton Gallery by Sir Robert Walpole, who rewarded him with the sinecure office of Keeper of the Lions in the Tower. He was a good artist and painted several portraits of celebrated a&ors, as Lavinia Fenton, Thomas Walker as Macheath, Robert Wilks, and Kitty Clive. JOHN GILES ECCARDT, or ECKHARDT (died 1779), was a native of Germany who came to this country in I740 and became a pupil of Vanloo. Horace Walpole patronised him and addressed a little poem to him entitled "The Beauties." Many of his portraits were at Strawberry Hill. Two of theseHorace Walpole and Thomas Gray-and his portrait of Conyers Middleton are in the National Portrait Gallery. THOMAS HUDSON (I70I —I779) was the fashionable portrait-painter of his time, but he is now usually spoken of with contempt, as if his only claim to notice is as the master of Reynolds. Some injustice is possibly done to his works. There is a portrait of Samuel Scott by him in the National Gallery, one of Handel in the Bodleian Library, and several in the National Portrait Gallery. The large piEure of Charles, 2nd Duke of Marlborough, and his family at Blenheim Palace is his chief work. Another effe6tive family pidure by him is at the Earl of Devon's seat Powderham Castle. ARTHUR POND, F.R.S., F.S.A. (1705-1758) painted several portraits that have been engraved, and he copied many others. His portrait of Peg 64 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Woffington when bed-ridden is in the National Portrait Gallery and engraved in this volume. WILLIAM HOARE, R.A. (I707?-I792) studied at London under Grisoni, an Italian artist, and afterwards went to Rome. After an absence of nine years he settled at first in London and then at Bath, and was known as " Hoare of Bath." There are several of his portraits in the National Portrait Gallery. At the Portrait Exhibition of 1867 (No. 95) there was a portrait by him of Thomas Pelham Holles, Duke of Newcastle, which was described in the catalogue as that of his uncle John Holles, Duke of Newcastle. Portraits of the Earl of Chatham, Beau Nash, Samuel Derrick, and Governor Pownall are in the possession of the Corporation of Bath. JAMES LATHAM, a native of Tipperary, studied art at Antwerp and practised in Ireland about 1725-1740, and obtained the honourable designation of the " Irish Vandyck." He praCtised for a time in London, but died in Dublin about 1750. His portraits, which are much esteemed, are frequently met with in Irish mansions, and some of them are engraved. He produced an excellent portrait of Peg Woffington. FRANCIS HAYMAN, R.A. (1708-1776) was a successful portrait-painter whose pid6ures have sometimes been mistaken for Hogarth's. He was scene-painter at Drury Lane Theatre and an illustrator of books. He was the first librarian appointed by the Royal Academy. His portrait of himself, shown while painting a portrait of Sir Robert Walpole, is in the National Portrait Gallery. CHARLES PHILIPS (I708-I 747), son of Richard Philips, a portrait-painter also, painted many persons of distintion, among them Frederick, Prince FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 65 of Wales, and the Princess Augusta of Wales. Some good conversation pieces by him are to be seen at Windsor, Warwick Castle and Knole. A portrait by him of Bishop Warburton is in the National Portrait Gallery. GILES HUSSEY (I7IO-1788) was a pupil of Jonathan Richardson and afterwards studied at Rome. He held some particular theories respe(ting the true principles of beauty and resented public indifference to them. He was famed for his skill in catching likenesses and drew chalk drawings of the young Pretender, Charles Edward, but he came into some property on the death of a brother, and did not need to continue at the work of his profession. ALLAN RAMSAY (1713-1784), the son of the author of the "Gentle Shepherd," was born in Edinburgh, and after studying in London for a time, he visited Rome where he remained for three years. He was patronised by Lord Bute, and on the accession of George III. he was appointed painter to the king. Naturally under these circumstances Wilkes fell foul of him in the " North Briton," and held him up to public contempt. Churchill, in his " Prophecy of Famine" alludes equivocally to the painter: "Thence came the Ramsays, names of worthy note Of whom one paints, as well as t'other wrote." Dr. Johnson said of Ramsay, " You will not find a man in whose conversation there is more instruction, more information, or more elegance than in Ramsay's." There is a portrait by him of David Hume in the National Gallery of Scotland, and portraits of George III., Queen Charlotte, Earl of Bute, and Alexander Monro primus in the Scottish National Portrait Gallery. There are also F 66 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS several portraits of his in the National Portrait Gallery, as George III., Queen Charlotte, Lord Chesterfield, Lord Mansfield, and Dr. Mead. There are three portraits of the painter in the Scottish Portrait Gallery, one by Lilie, another by Alexander Nasmyth and the third by himself. JOHN ROBINSON (1715-1745) was born at Bath and studied under Vanderbank. He took Jervas's house in Cleveland Court, and obtained an extensive praCtice during the few years of his aative life. JOHN SHACKLETON (died I767) succeeded Kent as principal painter to George II. in I749. There are portraits by him at the Foundling Hospital and Fishmongers' Hall. THOMAS LAWRANSON was an Irish artist who practised in London about the middle of the eighteenth century and died after I778. There is a portrait by him of John O'Keefe, the dramatist and aafor, in the National Portrait Gallery. NATHANIEL HONE, R.A. (1718-1784) was born in Dublin but came to England early in life and a6ted for a time as an itinerant painter. He subsequently married a lady of fortune and settled in St. James's Place. Portraits of himself and of Wesley and Horace Walpole are in the National Portrait Gallery. He fell into disgrace in consequence of his piEture entitled "The Conjuror," which was a satire upon Reynolds. MASON CHAMBERLIN, R.A. (died 1787) was a pupil of Francis Hayman, and became a good portrait-painter. His portrait of Dr. William Hunter is in the Diploma Gallery of the Royal Academy, and the Royal Society possess an excellent likeness by him of Dr. Chandler. BENJAMIN WILSON, F.R.S. (I72I-I788) was born at Leeds and came to London early in life, SIR JOSHUA REYNOLDS, BY HIMSELF. I FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 67 but from 1748 to 1750 he painted portraits in Ireland. In the latter year he returned to London and settled in Great Queen Street, where he became a fashionable portrait-painter. He succeeded Hogarth as serjeant-painter. RICHARD BROMPTON (died 1782) was a pupil of Benjamin Wilson and afterwards studied in Rome under Mengs. He painted a good portrait of the great Earl of Chatham, which was presented by the subject to Philip, 2nd Earl of Stanhope, and it is now at Chevening. A portrait by him of Admiral Saunders is at Greenwich. He got into difficulties and was released from the King's Bench by the Empress of Russia who made him her portrait-painter extraordinary. He died at St. Petersburg. SIR JOSHUA REYNOLDS (I723-1792) is England's greatest portrait-painter. Of late years there has been rather a tendency among the general public to set Gainsborough before him, but this can never be the opinion of the connoisseur. It has been said that Gainsborough's work is more feminine than Reynolds's which is essentially masculine. Reynolds was more powerful and more varied than Gainsborough, in fa&t, the latter's exclamation on the former's work, " Damn him, how various he is," exatly sums up his great powers to charm. There is often an element of weakness in the beautiful and elegant conceptions of some of our artists, but this was never the case with Reynolds, for in his work elegance was always combined with strength. How elegant and charming is that pi6ture in the National Gallery of two young connoisseurs-the Rev. George Huddesford and John C. W. Bampfylde-but there is no weakness there. Again, there is nothing forced in the great pi6ture of Mrs. Siddons as the "Tragic Muse," 68 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS with the figures of Crime and Remorse behind the chair, which is a triumphant example of strength and beauty. In the present age allegory is out of fashion, but the allegorical in Reynolds's piftures is always pleasing. Some of the old school did not understand Reynolds at first. Jack Ellys the portrait-painter said to him: " This will never do, you don't paint in the least like Sir Godfrey: Shakespeare in poetry and Kneller in painting." To all who love Reynolds-and who that knows his paintings and the engravings from them, and is familiar with the fads of his life can help loving him?-must be delighted at the judicious and yet unmeasured praise which Mr. Ruskin gives him. " Considered as a painter of individuality in the human form and mind, I think him, even as it is, the prince of portrait-painters. Titian paints nobler pictures, and Vandyck had nobler subjeds, but neither of them entered so subtly as Sir Joshua did in the minor varieties of heart and temper; and when you consider that, with a frightful conventionality of social habitude all around him, he yet conceived the simplest types of all feminine and childish loveliness; that in a northern climate, and with gray and white and black as the principal colours around him, he yet became a colourist who can be crushed by none, even of the Venetians; and that with Dutch and Dresden China for the prevailing types of art in the saloons of the day, he threw himself at once at the feet of the great masters of Italy, and arose from their feet to share their thrones. I know not that in the whole history of art you can produce another instance of so strong, so unaided, so unerring an instin&t for all that was true, pure and noble."-RUSKIN's Two Paths. FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 69 Some of Reynolds's canvases are now sad wrecks, and the colours of a few of his pidures had faded in his lifetime. Walpole remarked on this in his cynical manner; and Peter Pindar wrote of the portrait of Sophia Heywood (Mrs. Musters), which was exhibited in 1785: " Works, I'm afraid, like beauty of rare quality, Born soon to fade, too subject to mortality." Like all successful painters, Reynolds gradually raised his prices, but how glad would buyers of the present day be to get his pictures at the price he charged for them. His price for a head was originally 5 guineas. In I755 this was raised to 25 guineas; ten years later the price was 35 guineas; whilst in his last years it was 50 guineas. When his price was 25 guineas he told Johnson that he was making /6,ooo a year. Horace Walpole, referring to one of Reynolds's masterpieces, the portraits of the three grand-nieces of Walpole (Lady Elizabeth Laura Waldegrave, Viscountess Chewton and afterwards Countess Waldegrave; Lady Charlotte Maria Waldegrave, Countess of Euston; and Lady Horatia Conway) complained to Pinkerton: ' Sir Joshua gets avaricious in his old age; my pi6ure of the young ladies Waldegrave is doubtless very fine and graceful, but it cost me 8oo guineas."l Walpole, writing to Mason, May 28th, I780, says: "Sir Joshua began a charming picture of my three fair nieces, the Waldegraves, and very like. They are embroidering and winding silk; I rather wished "Walpoliana," p. 159. Mr. Cosmo Monkhouse, in his article in the "Dictionary of National Biography," doubts Walpole's statement, and thinks he must have made a mistake in the figures. He believes that the largest sum Reynolds received for a portrait group was 700 guineas for the great Marlborough group. 70 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS to have them drawn like the graces adorning a bust of the Duchess as the magna mater, but my ideas were not adopted."' We can see by a visit to the National Gallery how far better Reynolds's judgment as totreatment was than Walpole's. There is the famous fancy pidure of the three daughters of Sir William Montgomery as the Graces, decorating a statue of Hymen. This is a beautiful piture, but it cannot compare with the exquisite naturalness of the Waldegraves. The latter pidure was bought at the Strawberry Hill sale by Lord Waldegrave for 577 Ios. All know how different are the prices realized for men's and women's portraits, but a very striking example may be cited from the Strawberry Hill sale. Walpole possessed two fine companion portraits by Reynolds-one of James, 2nd Earl of Waldegrave, and the other of his wife Maria, daughter of Sir Edward Walpole and afterwards Duchess of Gloucester. The Earl of Waldegrave bought the pair at the sale; he got the husband for ~73 Ios., but he had to give ~735 for the wife. In 1894 Reynolds's portrait of Lady Betty Delme was sold at Christie's for I,550 guineas, the largest price ever realised for one of his pidtures. THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH (1727-1788) was the rival of Reynolds, but he never raised his prices to the level of that master's, and he was never seriously supposed to be Reynolds's equal. Mr. Ruskin calls Gainsborough " the greatest colourist since Rubens." It is difficult to explain the pervading charm of Gainsborough's female portraits; they appeal to all, and there is undoubtedly that in them which is unlike any other painter. Sometimes they are too sketchy, 1 "Letters," vol. vii., p. 370. THOMAS GAINSBOROUJGH, BY J. ZOFFANY. I FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 7I but for beauty and a quiet sense of purity and domesticity the pidture at Dulwich containing the portraits of Mrs. Sheridan and Mrs. Tickell is above all praise. His portraits of men are very powerful. There are two fine ones at Hampton Court —Colonel St. Leger, in his red coat, is the most popular, but Johann Christian Fischer, the oboe player, is the better pi&ture. In 1760 Gainsborough removed to Bath, and raised his price for portraits to 8 and ultimately to 40 guineas, or Ioo guineas for a full-length. He exhibited at the Royal Academy, and sent his pi&ures to London by the Bath carrier, named Wiltshire, who was a lover of pictures and refused to take money for conveying them, so the painter used to pay him in Gainsboroughs instead of cash. This painter is well represented at the National Gallery, where are his magnificent portraits of Edward Orpin, the parish clerk of Bradford-onAvon (one of the pidtures given to Wiltshire), the glorious Mrs. Siddons, and the fine Rev. H. Bate Dudley. One is not surprised at Gainsborough's last words to Reynolds: "We are all going to heaven, and Vandyck is of the party," for his works give evidence of his admiration of that great painter. The "Blue Boy" could scarcely have been painted had Vandyck not lived. GEORGE ROMNEY (1734- 1802), a Lancashire man, settled in London in I762, and obtained premiums from the Society of Arts. He visited Rome in company with Ozias Humphrey in I773, and on his return to London, in I775, he established himself in Cavendish Square. He charged 15 guineas for a head life-size, and proportionately for whole and half-lengths, and soon obtained a large pradtice. In I785 he had raised his prices to 80 guineas for full-length, 60 guineas for half whole-length, 40 72 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS guineas for half-length, 30 guineas for a kit-cat, and 20 guineas for a head. Romney painted with a simple palette, and was careful in the selection of his pigments, so that his portraits now often outvalue those of his rivalsReynolds and Gainsborough. Some of them look as if they were painted yesterday. It has been said that his three chief chara&teristics are: (I) severe taste, (2) manly drawing, and (3) feeling for charater. The appreciation of his beautiful work has largely grown of late years, and his pidtures realize immense prices. In 1896 a pidture containing portraits of Lady Elizabeth Spencer and her sister, Viscountess Clifden, sold for 1 I,025, and in the same year a pi6ure containing portraits of Maria and Catherine Thurlow, the two daughters of Lord Thurlow, fetched /2,677. Romney was not only a portrait-painter; and Lord Ronald Gower writes: "He was a true artist, and his fame would stand high had he never painted a portrait." PETER VANDYKE (born 1729) was a native of Antwerp, and was invited over from Holland by Sir Joshua Reynolds to assist him particularly in his draperies. He afterwards settled in Bristol, and praftised as a portrait-painter. He painted a portrait of Robert Hall, and his portraits of Coleridge and Southey are in the National Portrait Gallery. GAVIN HAMILTON (730-I 797), the connoisseur and classical painter, resided chiefly in Rome, where he died. He painted some portraits, the best known being those of the two Gunning beautiesthe Duchess of Hamilton and the Countess of Coventry. JOHN ASTLEY (I730?-I787) was a pupil of Hudson, and a fellow student at Rome with GEORGE ROMNEY, BY HIMSELF. FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 73 Reynolds, Wilson, and others. He married a rich widow and was fortunate in life, but he was a conceited, reckless man, with little talent. ROBERT EDGE PINE (1730-1788) was the son of John Pine the engraver. He devoted himself to the painting of historical subjects and portraits. He painted several of the well-known adtors of his day; for instance, Mrs. Pritchard as Hermione, Mrs. Yates as Medea, Samuel Reddish as Posthumus, and Thomas Love and Mrs. Chambers as Captain Macheath and Polly (engraved in 1752). His portrait of Garrick is in the National Portrait Gallery. Pine went to Bath in 1772, and to Philadelphia in 1783, where he died. JOHANN ZOFFANY, R.A. (I733-1I8I) was born at Frankfort-on-Main, and at an early age went to study in Rome. He arrived in England in 1758, and attained great success as a portrait-painter, his theatrical groups being highly esteemed. He was well represented at the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867; there were there excellent portraits of George III. (No. 464) and Queen Charlotte (No. 458), John Wilkes and his daughter (No. 654), a curious and interesting piCture of the family of William Sharpe, a musical party on the Thames, with Fulham Church in the distance (No. 502), and the Royal Academy in I778. Zoffany proceeded to India in 1783, and remained there seven years. J. S. C. SCHAAK was a portrait-painter, who exhibited from I765 to I769. He lived in College Street, Westminster. Portraits by him of Charles Churchill and General Wolfe are in the National Portrait Gallery. JOSEPH WRIGHT, A.R.A., known as Wright of Derby (I734-I797), was a scholar of Hudson. He established himself as a portrait-painter and 74 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS obtained considerable success. His portraits of Arkwright and Erasmus Darwin, and of himself are in the National Portrait Gallery. HUGH DOUGLAS HAMILTON, R.H.A. (I734 -I806) was a native of Dublin, where he commenced pradtice as a portrait-painter. He afterwards took up his residence in London, but in 1778 he went to Rome, where he painted many of the English and Irish visitors to that city. Soon after I791 he returned and settled in Dublin, where he died, He worked principally in crayons. SIR NATHANIEL DANCE HOLLAND, R.A. (I735 -181 I) studied under Francis Hayman, and for some years in Italy. He acquired a large fortune by marriage with a widow, and relinquished his profession. He entered Parliament and was created a baronet, but continued to paint as an amateur. Many of his portraits are exceedingly good, and are sometimes mistaken for the work of Reynolds. There are several in the National Portrait Gallery. JOHN SINGLETON COPLEY, R.A. (1737 — 815) painted a multitude of portraits in America before he came to England. He settled in Lincoln's Inn Fields in I777, and removed in a year or two afterwards to 25, George Street, Hanover Square, where he remained to the end of his life, and where his distinguished son, Lord Lyndhurst, lived and died. Copley when well off was glad to leave portrait-painting for subjeat pi6Cures, but in all his historical pieces he spared no pains in adding to their interest by the introdu6tion of aatual portraiture; for this purpose he visited country houses in order to copy such of the family pi&tures as he required for his purpose. His best known piEtures are the two in the National Gallery, of the socalled " Death of Chatham "-more properly, "After FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 75 his Last Speech"-and the "Death of Major Peirson." In the latter pi6ture he introduced portraits of Mrs. Copley, his son (afterwards Lord Lyndhurst), and their nurse. The "Chatham" was presented to the nation by Lord Liverpool in I828, and the "Peirson" was bought at Lord Lyndhurst's sale in 1864 for ~ I,600. Copley's industry never flagged, and he is said to have painted at least 290 oil paintings, 40 crayon portraits, and 19 miniatures. His portraits of Lord Heathfield and the Earl of Mansfield are in the National Portrait Gallery. DAVID MARTIN (1737-1797) was a pupil of Allan Ramsay, whom he accompanied to Rome. He afterwards settled in London, but returned to Scotland about 1775, settling in Edinburgh, where he remained till his death (with the exception of a period when he lived in Dean Street, Soho). He was appointed limner to the Prince of Wales for Scotland. Raeburn is said to have received some instrudion from him. His portrait by himself is in the National Gallery of Scotland. BENJAMIN WEST, P.R.A. (1738-I820) was born at Springfield near Philadelphia a year after Copley's birth, but he preceded the latter in his settlement in England. West was a good portrait-painter, and the portraits by him of the royal family at Hampton Court are excellent. There is a good portrait of Dr. Price at the Royal Society, and one of Samuel More at the Society of Arts. There is nothing by him in the National Portrait Gallery. Equally appreciated in his own day by his compeers and by the public, his art is now scoffed at and his works are put out of sight. His " Death on the Pale Horse" was one of the sights of London and became the talk of the town. The British Institu 76 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS tion gave 3,000 guineas for his picture of the "Saviour healing the sick in the Temple," for the purpose of engraving it; and twenty years after his death his " Annunciation," for which 80oo was paid, was sold by public aution for 10o. West is seen to advantage in Queen Anne's drawingroom at Hampton Court, which is entirely devoted to his pi&tures. The " Death of Bayard" and the "Death of Wolfe" are pleasing, but certainly rather " tea-boardy "in appearance.l West's chief claim for honourable mention in the history of English art is that he was the first to introduce modern costume into pi6tures of modern history. TILLY KETTLE (1740-1786) was a creditable painter, whose pictures have sometimes been mistaken for Reynolds's. He went to India in I770 and made a fortune there. He returned to England in 1777, but not meeting with success he started again for the East, and died at Aleppo. His portrait of Warren Hastings is in the National Portrait Gallery. His two best portraits are of Admiral Kempenfelt, who went down in the "Royal George," and Sir William Blackstone, the former at Greenwich and the latter at Oxford. He also painted portraits of Mrs. Yates, Mr. Powell, and other actors and a6tresses. THOMAS BEACH (I738 —I806) became a pupil of Reynolds in 1760, and exhibited portraits at the 1 The allusion contained in this expression can scarcely be appreciated by the present generation, as no tea-boards (or teatrays) covered with pictures are now seen except in colleftions. Some of these piCtures were well painted, although too smooth and pretty. There is a good story of one of the artists whose pay was constantly being cut down by the tradesman. At last the latter complained that the picture was nothing but smoke, and the artist replied, "As you cut down my price I reduced the details of the battle, and now I can only give smoke for the pay you allow." FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 77 Royal Academy from 1785 to 1790, and again in I797. He painted portraits of Mrs. Siddons and John Kemble in the dagger scene in " Macbeth" of which Mrs. Siddons herself said, " My brother's head is the finest I have ever seen, and the likest of the two." His portrait of Richard Tattersall the horse dealer, was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 and that of William Woodfall, the earliest parliamentary reporter, is in the National Portrait Gallery. RICHARD COSWAY, R.A. (1740-1821) studied under Hudson and soon became exceedingly successful among fashionable people, who made his studio a morning lounge. He lived in Stratford Place, at the house facing Oxford Street with the sculptured lions above the doorway. He was very ridiculous and affeEted in his manners, and one day the following lines, supposed to have been written by Dr. Wolcot (Peter Pindar), were posted on his door: "When a man to a fair for a show brings a lion, 'Tis usual a monkey the signpost to tie on; But here the old custom reversed is seen, For the lion's without, and the monkey's within." This epigram is said to have sent Cosway from this house to No. 20 in the same street. Cosway's miniatures are now in great request, and there is one of himself in the National Portrait Gallery. There are two good portraits in oils by him at the Society of Arts, viz., William Shipley and Dr. Templeman. JAMES BARRY (1741-1806) went to Italy in 1766 with an allowance from Edmund Burke and his brother. He painted a portrait of Burke in 1774, but his enthusiasm for historic art, combined with a contempt for all who followed what he deemed the lower branches of the profession, 78 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS especially those who made large profits like Reynolds out of portrait-painting, kept him poor. When asked to paint a portrait he was in the habit of saying, " Go to the fellow in Leicester Square." It is pleasant to know that at last these two men were reconciled, and when Reynolds died in 1782 Barry went to the Academy and pronounced a glowing eulogium on him as a man and as an artist. The portraits which Barry introduced into his pi&ures on the walls of the Society of Arts' great room in the Adelphi are of great interest and value, and we can see from the pose of the elegant dancer in the foreground of the " Village Festival " that if he had chosen he might have rivalled Romney and Hoppner in the delineation of beautiful female figures. PIERRE FALCONET (I74I-I79I), son of Etienne Falconet, sculptor of the great statue of Peter the Great at St. Petersburg, was born in Paris, but came to London about I766, where he pra6ised for some years as a portrait-painter. He drew the portraits of twelve of the best-known artists, which were engraved, and the portrait of the Rev. James Granger the author of the " Biographical History of England." Falconet returned to France before his death. MARIA ANNA ANGELICA KAUFFMANN, R.A. (I 74 -1807) was born at Chur, Switzerland, and arrived in London in I766. Her works were chiefly portraits and classical subjedis, and the brothers Adam employed her to paint ceilings. One of her best portraits is of the Princess of Brunswick and her infant at Hampton Court. Her portrait of Novosielski the architert of Her Majesty's Theatre in the Haymarket, is in the National Gallery of Scotland. FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 79 OZIAS HUMPHRY, R.A. (I742-I8IO) lived for a time at Bath, where he lodged with the Linleys. He went to India in 1785, and returned to England in I788. At Knole is a portrait of the Duke of Dorset which is inscribed on the back " The first portrait in crayons painted by Ozias Humphry, R.A." It was begun in May and finished early in June, I791. At Knole also is a fine portrait of Humphry by Romney. JOHN RUSSELL, R.A. (I744-1806), worked chiefly in crayons, in which he excelled. He was appointed portrait-painter in ordinary to George I I I., and Prince of Wales. His portraits of Dr. Dodd, Sheridan and Wilberforce are in the National Portrait Gallery. DAVID ALLAN (I744-1796) was born at Alloa, and went to study in Italy in 1 764. He remained there till I777, when he came to London and practised portrait-painting. In 1780 he settled in Edinburgh, and became popular for his paintings of domestic subje&s, which gained him the name of the Scottish Hogarth. His portrait by himself is in the National Gallery of Scotland. His portrait of Sir William Hamilton, K.B., is in the National Portrait Gallery. JAMES NORTHCOTE, R.A. (I746-I83I) was a devoted pupil of Reynolds, and painted many portraits of eminent men as well as large and uninteresting pictures on historical subjects. Hoppner once said: " I can fancy a man to be fond of his art who paints like Reynolds, but how any man can be fond of his art who paints like that fellow Northcote heaven only knows." He was successful in painting the heads of children and angels. WILLIAM LANE (I746-I8I9) painted in crayons a portrait of Mrs. Siddons in 1785. WILLIAM HAMILTON, R.A. (1751-1801) first 80 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1774. He was an historical painter, but occasionally painted portraits, especially of theatrical stars, one of these being of Mrs. Siddons. SIR WILLIAM BEECHEY, R.A. (1753-I839) exhibited some portraits in I775, and from that time he pra6tised in London with fair success. He painted a portrait of Queen Charlotte, which procured him the appointment of portrait-painter to her majesty. After painting his successful equestrian group of George III. with the Prince of Wales and the Duke of York, now at Hampton Court, he was knighted. He was a good painter, but his fame paled before that of Lawrence. There is a portrait by him of Mrs. Siddons in the National Portrait Gallery, and portraits of John,Kemble, Charles S. Pybus and Sir Francis Bourgeois at Dulwich. Sir William Beechey's son, George D. Beechey, was brought up as a portrait-painter; and during the life of-his father he had many sitters. SIR HENRY RAEBURN, R.A. (I756-1823) was one of our greatest portrait-painters, but as he resided in Edinburgh he scarcely took the position in general esteem during his lifetime that he deserved. His fame was locally very great, but it was less widely spread in the great world. By the advice of Reynolds he proceeded to Rome in early life, and the great painter offered to help him with funds, but Raeburn did not need assistance. After studying two years in Italy, he settled in Edinburgh in I787. It is said that later in life Lawrence dissuaded him from fixing his residence in London. He lived at a time when Edinburgh was full of great men, and he painted them all. In 1822 he was knighted, and in 1823 was- appointed his majesty's limner for Scotland. How great was his power of portraiture may be seen from the fa6t JOHN HOPPNER, BY HIMSELF. FROM' HOGARTH TO MILLAIS that when Wilkie studied the work of Velasquez in the gallery at Madrid he was reminded of Raeburn. Mr. W. E. Henley writes: " Of the mere capacity of portraiture-the gift of perceiving and representing individual chara&ter and formhe had more perhaps than any portrait-painter that has lived."' Doubtless this was his great characteristic, and it may be said that he read the secret of men's lives and wrote it on his canvas. Scotsmen claim for Raeburn the second place after Reynolds, and there is much to be said for this view. After his death an exhibition of fifty-seven of his works was held, and another in I876, when 325 pictures were gathered together. The National Gallery contains a fine portrait of Colonel MacMurdo by him, and a beautiful portrait of a lady which reminds one of Hoppner. He is represented at the National Portrait Gallery by portraits of Francis Horner, the Rev. John Home, Sir John Sinclair, Prof. Playfair, Hugh W. Williams, and Henry Mackenzie. ALEXANDER NASMYTH (1758-1840), the celebrated landscape painter, was born at Edinburgh, but he came to London to study under Allan Ramsay. On his return to Edinburgh he at first practised as a portrait-painter; one of his portraits was the most trustworthy likeness of the poet Burns. JOHN HOPPNER, R.A. (I758 —181) was originally a chorister at the Chapel Royal, but George III. made him a small allowance to enable him to commence his studies as a painter. In I780 he began to exhibit at the Royal Academy, and in 1784 he was living in Charles Street, St. James's Square, where his studio was besieged by the "Sir Henry Raeburn" (I890), pp. 11-12. G 82 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS fashionable crowd. He was a daring plagiarist of Reynolds, and the boldest rival of Lawrence. The factions of Reynolds and Romney were revived in those of Lawrence and Hoppner. Lawrence wrote in I8IO: " You will be sorry to hear it, my most powerful competitor, he whom only (to my friends) I have acknowledged as my rival, is I fear sinking to the grave-I mean, of course, Hoppner." Hoppner was portrait-painter to the Prince of Wales, and painted many of the royal family. His best works are in St. James's Palace. He painted Nelson, Rodney, Duke of Wellington, and Pitt, also Mrs. Gwyn (Goldsmith's Jessamy Bride), and Mrs. Draper (Sterne's Eliza). His female portraits are in high estimation at the present day. HUGH ROBINSON (about I760-1790), an artist of great promise, was the eldest son of Henry Robinson, Esq., of Malton, Yorkshire. He early praftised art, and in 1780 sent the " Portrait of a Gentleman" to the Royal Academy; two years later he contributed the " Head of a Beggar" and a " Portrait of a Gentleman." The Rev. John Cleaver, Redor of Malton, whose portrait he painted, was a true friend to Robinson and helped to send him to Italy. He returned home in I790, but he and the piftures he had with him were lost in the ship that foundered at sea. A fine pi&dure, entitled " The Piping Boy," was painted before he was twenty-four years of age. His masterpiece is a beautiful portrait of Thomas Teesdale, a boy in green tugging at a kite string, which is in the possession of Mr. J. M. Teesdale at Downe Hall, and was photographed for Lord Ronald Gower's "Great Historic Galleries of England." LEMUEL FRANCIS ABBOTT (1760-1803) at the age of fourteen became a pupil of Francis Hayman. In 1780 he set up as a portrait-painter in Caroline FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 83 Street, and exhibited occasionally at the Royal Academy from 1788 to 800o. There is a portrait of his in the National Gallery (Henry Byne) and several in the National Portrait Gallery. Among these are Nelson, Vancouver, Sir William Herschel, and Nollekens. JOHN OPIE (1761-1807) had, curiously enough, a mathematical bent as a boy, so that he was called by an uncle " the young Sir Isaac." Art, however, claimed him for her own, and he was a travelling portrait-painter till he attra&ed the attention of Dr. Wolcot (Peter Pindar). He soon obtained several patrons, and was known as the " Cornish Wonder." Reynolds told Northcote, who asked what Opie was like, " Why, like Caravaggio and Velasquez in one." Amongst the celebrities who sat to him were Burke, Fox, Southey, Jack Bannister, Girtin, etc. On his portrait of William Jackson the organist of Exeter Cathedral, Wolcot wrote: " Speak, Muse, who formed that matchless head? The Cornish boy in tin mines bred, Whose native genius, like her diamond, shone In secret, till chance gave him to the Sun. 'Tis Jackson's portrait-put the laurel on it, Whilst to that tuneful swain I form a sonnet." WILLIAM CHAMBERLAIN (died I807) was a student of the Royal Academy and afterwards a pupil of Opie. He pra(tised as a portrait-painter, and was for a short time at Hull. SAMUEL DRUMMOND, A.R.A. (I763-1844) was employed for some years on the portraits in the "European Magazine." His piCture "Admiral Duncan receiving the sword of Admiral DeWinter" is at Greenwich. His portraits of Sir Marc Isambard Brunel and Mrs. Fry are in the National Portrait Gallery. 84 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS GEORGE FRANCIS JOSEPH, A.R.A. (1764-1846) pra&dised chiefly as a portrait-painter, and in 1834 he retired to Cambridge, where he died. Portraits by him of Spencer Perceval, painted from a mask taken after death, and of Sir Stamford Raffles, are in the National Portrait Gallery. HENRY SINGLETON (1766-1839) had some fame in his day on account of his historical pi6tures. In the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 his portraits of James Boswell, wife and three children (No. 549), Thomas Sandby, R.A. (No. 516), and the General Assembly of the Royal Academy with President West in the Chair (No. 520), were shown. His portrait of Earl Howe is in the National Portrait Gallery. GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT (I767-I797), maternal nephew of Thomas Gainsborough (whom he assisted), exhibited at the Royal Academy. His chief work was a group of the Masters of the Trinity House, for which he received ~500. It is now in the Court Room of the Corporation. GEORGE WATSON, P.R.S.A. (1767-1837) was born at Overmains in Berwickshire, and after receiving some elementary instrut6ion from Alexander Nasmyth came to London and painted in Reynolds's studio. He afterwards settled in Edinburgh and maintained an honourable rivalry with Raeburn. MATHER BROWN (died 183 I) was born in America, but came to England when young and studied under West. He obtained considerable patronage as a portrait-painter, and George III. and Queen Caroline were among his sitters. He continued to paint after his powers had deserted him, and pictures accumulated around him. C. R. Leslie, R.A., visited him in his decay, and remarked on the number that he had on his hands. His portrait of FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 85 John Howard, Judge Buller, and Admiral Popham are in the National Portrait Gallery. WILLIAM OWEN, R.A. (I769-I825) was a pupil of Charles Cotton, R.A., and attra6ted the notice of Reynolds. He was appointed portraitpainter to the Prince of Wales in I8Io, and afterwards principal portrait-painter to the Prince Regent. He refused knighthood, although his average income was said to be /3,ooo a year. A portrait by him of Wedderburn, Earl of Rosslyn, is in the National Portrait Gallery. SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE, P.R.A. (1769-1830) fascinated all who came in contadt, with him, and his career was one long triumph. When he was twelve years old he had a studio at 2, Alfred Place, Bath, which was the favourite resort of the beauty and fashion of that city. We can guess how great was the fascination of himself and of his art when we learn that after painting Cowper's portrait the poet pressed him to stay with him at Olney. Campbell said, "this is the merit of Lawrence's painting: he makes one seem to have got into a drawing-room in the mansions of the blest, and to be looking at oneself in the mirrors." After his death fashion turned against him for a time, and he has been described as an " exceedingly clever but thoroughly vicious artist." This is much too severe a criticism, for although there can be no doubt that the decay for a time of English portraiture commenced with Lawrence, his faces of men and women are truly excellent. He was often however contented to paint the face with skill and leave the rest of the pidture to be finished by his assistants; but some of his work was in every way satisfactory, and fashion has now turned in his favour. This is strikingly illustrated by the sale at Christie's on Saturday, March 6th, I897, of 86 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS his portrait of Miss Farren (afterwards Countess of Derby), in a white silk dress lined with fur, for 2,415 guineas. This same pidture sold at Sir Francis Grant's sale in 1863, for 79 guineas. There are some fine portraits by him in the National Gallery, more particularly that of the founder of the gallery-John Julius Angerstein. In 1806 he raised his prices from 30 to 50 guineas for a three-quarter length. In 1808 he again raised them, the smallest size from 80 to Io6 guineas, and full-lengths from 200 to 400 guineas. In 1817 he was sent by the Prince Regent to Aix-la-Chapelle (where the European Powers were assembled) to paint portraits for the Waterloo Gallery at Windsor. He was allowed 1I,ooo a year for contingent expenses and was paid his usual terms for the portraits. Lawrence, not contented to be merely a portraitpainter, attempted a subjed piece, and exhibited in 1797 "Satan calling his legions," which was highly praised. In the guide to the exhibition of this date we read: " Mr. Lawrence has been hitherto chiefly known as a portrait-painter; he has, however, in this pi~ture soared into the higher branch of the art with the greatest success. The figure of Satan is truly sublime, and that of the attendant fiend Beelzebub is all that the mind of the poet framed.... Upon the whole this performance must place Mr. Lawrence among the first artists of the English school." The painter was well satisfied, and he wrote to Miss Lee: " The Satan answered my secret motives in attempting it; my success in portraits will no longer be thought accident or fortune; and if I have trod a second path with honour it is because my limbs are strong. My claims are acknowledged by the circle of taste, and are undisputed by competitors SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE, BY HIMSELF. FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 87 and rivals." His friend Fuseli, however, said: "it was a damned thing certainly, but not the devil." He added further that the idea was borrowed from him. In consequence there was for a time a coolness between the two friends, but Lawrence proved by a sketch which he had taken of Fuseli as he stood in a wild position on a rock at Bristol that his idea of Satan was taken from Fuseli himself and not from his paintings. Those who see this picture as it appears now on the staircase at the Royal Academy leading to the Diploma Gallery, will be inclined to agree with Fuseli's criticism. SIR MARTIN ARCHER SHEE, P.R.A. (I769 -1850) was born in Dublin and came to London in 1788, where he was introduced to Reynolds by Burke. He published verses in 1805, 1809, and I814, and succeeded Lawrence as President of the Royal Academy in 1830; this union of the highest honour in his profession with a very low poetic position, gave rise to an uncomplimentary epigram: "See Painting crowns her sister Poesy! The world is all astonished! So is Shee " His portraits of Sir Thomas Picton, Lord Denman, Thomas Morton the dramatist, and of himself, are in the National Portrait Gallery, and of "Gentleman" Lewis as the marquis in the "Midnight Hour" in the National Gallery. There is also a fine portrait by him of the queen in the colleation of the Royal Academy, and one of William IV. at Windsor Castle. HENRY HOWARD, R.A. (I769 — 847) was a pupil of Philip Reinagle, R.A., and in 1790 gained both the gold and silver medals at the Royal Academy. Between i798 and 1824 he exhibited HISTORICAL PORTRAITS a considerable number of portraits at the Academy. There are portraits by him of James Watt, Hayley, Flaxman, and Mrs. Trimmer in the National Portrait Gallery. GEORGE CLINT, A.R.A. (1770-1854) portrait, painter and engraver, was highly successful in the portraiture of actors. At the South Kensington Museum are his portraits of Charles Young as Hamlet, and Miss Glover as Ophelia; and scenes from "Paul Pry," the " Honeymoon,"' and the "Clandestine Marriage." THOMAS PHILLIPS, R.A. (I770 — 845) came to London in 1786 and became a student at the Royal Academy. At first he attempted historical subjedts, but afterwards took to portrait-painting, in which he gained great success. He painted portraits of William Blake, Byron, Chantrey, Faraday, Lord Thurlow, and Sir Francis Burdett, all of which are in the National Portrait Gallery. His portrait of Sir David Wilkie is in the National Gallery. JAMES SAXON was born at Manchester and practised for a time in London, exhibiting portraits at the Royal Academy in 1795-96. In I803 he settled in Edinburgh, and afterwards for several years in St. Petersburg. He died in London about I817. His best known work is his portrait of Sir Walter Scott holding a large dog, with a landscape background ( 805); it was engraved by James Heath. His portrait of Sir Richard Phillips is in the National Portrait Gallery, and one of John Clark of Eldin in the Scottish National Portrait Gallery. JAMES LONSDALE (1777-1839) was a pupil of Romney. He devoted himself with great success to portraiture, and took the house in Berners Street where Opie had formerly lived. He was one of FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 89 the founders of the Society of British Artists. Several of his portraits are in the National Portrait Gallery. JOHN JACKSON, R.A. (I 778-I83 i) drew portraits of his boyish associates. His father was a tailor, to whom he was apprenticed, and through the kindness of Sir George Beaumont, he was enabled to leave a business he disliked and to study at the Royal Academy. I-e first exhibited there in 1804, between which year and 1830 he exhibited no less than I45 pidures. He was a Wesleyan, and for years executed the monthly portrait in the " Evangelical MIagazine." Although a first-rate artist he did not charge more than fifty guineas for a portrait, and is supposed not to have made more than ~I,500 a year by the praftice of his profession. His finest female portrait is that of Lady Dover, and his best man's portrait that of Flaxman, painted for Lord Dover. At the Academy dinner in 1827 Lawrence charafterized the latter as "a piture which Vandyck might have felt proud to own himself the author." WASHINGTON ALLSTON, A.R.A. (I779-1843) was born in South Carolina and came to England in I801. He went to Paris in 1804 and afterwards spent four years in Italy. He was ele6ted an Associate of the Royal Academy in 1818, and finally returned to his native country. His portrait of Coleridge is in the National Portrait Gallery. SAMUEL LANE (1780-1859) was one of the ablest of Sir Thomas Lawrence's assistants. GEORGE DAWE, R.A. (178I-1829) began life as a mezzotint engraver. In I8I6 he painted a charming portrait of Miss O'Neil as Juliet, which was engraved in colours and became very popular. In 18 9 he went to Russia on the invitation of the Emperor Alexander, and painted 400 portraits of 9o HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Russian officers. A gallery in the Winter Palace at St. Petersburg was erected for the exhibition of these portraits. THOMAS STEWARDSON (I781 —I859) was a pupil of Romney, and first exhibited at the Academy in 1804. He was appointed portrait-painter to Queen Caroline. His portrait of George Grote the historian is in the National Portrait Gallery. SIR WILLIAM ALLAN, P.R.S.A., R.A. (I782 -I850) was born in Edinburgh, but after being apprenticed to a coachbuilder in that city, came to London to study in the schools of the Royal Academy. He subsequently settled in St. Petersburg, where he painted many portraits. He returned to Edinburgh in I814, and became President of the Royal Scottish Academy in 1838. On Wilkie's death he was made limner to the queen in Scotland, and knighted in I842. His portrait by himself is in the National Gallery of Scotland. His portrait of Scott in his study at Abbotsford, painted in 1832, is in the National Portrait Gallery. HENRY WILLIAM PICKERSGILL, R.A. (1782 -1875) succeeded Phillips as the fashionable portraitpainter of his day. Portraits by him of Wordsworth, Godwin, Jeremy Bentham, " Monk" Lewis, Hannah More, George Stephenson, and Talfourd, are in the National Portrait Gallery, and of Mr. Vernon in the National Gallery. WILLIAM DERBY (1786-1847) was born at Birmingham, and came to London in i808. He made drawings for Lodge's Portraits when William Hilton, R.A. relinquished the work. He painted in water-colours a series of portraits of the Stanley family, copied from the great collections, and these are preserved at Knowsley. Derby was an equal proficient in oils, water-colours, and in miniature painting. FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 9 I JAMES RAMSAY (I784-I854) commenced to praftice portrait-painting in London, and had many eminent sitters. He exhibited for the first time at the Royal Academy in 1803. He retired to Newcastle-on-Tyne in I847, and died in that city. His portrait of Thomas Bewick is in the National Portrait Gallery. GEORGE HENRY HARLOW (1787 —819) was a pupil of Lawrence, and a highly successful portraitpainter. One of his feats was the painting of the portrait of a Mr. Hare after his death, although he had only once met him in the street. He is chiefly remembered by his portraits of the Kemble family in the picture of the "Trial of Queen Katharine" in the play of " Henry VIII." SIR JOHN WATSON GORDON, R.A., P.R.S.A. (1788-1864) was a native of Edinburgh, and settled there as a portrait-painter. He painted Scott and Lockhart in 182 I, John Wilson in 1822. Many distinguished Englishmen visited Edinburgh in order to be painted by him, one of them being David Cox. He began to exhibit at the Royal Academy in 1827, and painted Dr. Chalmers's portrait in I844. He was appointed queen's limner in Scotland, and was knighted. In the National Portrait Gallery there are portraits by him of the Marquis of Dalhousie, De Quincey, John Wilson, and Sir David Brewster, and several are in the National Gallery of Scotland. JOHN PARTRIDGE (1790-1872) was born at Glasgow, and came to London about 18I4 when he studied under Thomas Phillips, R.A. After a few years' residence in Italy he settled in London as a portrait-painter and was highly successful. He was appointed portrait-painter extraordinary to the queen in I845. Several of his portraits are in the National Portrait Gallery. 92 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS HENRY PERRONET BR-IGGS, R.A. (1793-1844) exhibited regularly at the Royal Academy from 1814 portraits and historical subjects. His picture of " George III. and Lord Howe on board the Vitory" is at Greenwich. His portrait of Admiral Sir Edward Codrington is in the National Portrait Gallery, and that of Charles Kemble at Dulwich is an excellent likeness. John Kemble and Mrs. Siddons also sat to him. SIR GEORGE HAYTER (I792-1871) was appointed portrait and historical painter in ordinary to her majesty, I837, and knighted in 1842. On the death of Wilkie in 1841 he became principal painter in ordinary to the queen. His picures of the " Trial of Queen Caroline" and the " Meeting of the first Reformed Parliament" are in the National Portrait Gallery. MRS. MARGARET SARAH CARPENTER (1793 -1872), wife of W. H. Carpenter, Keeper of the Prints in the British Museum, painted a large number of portraits, that of Dr. Whewell being her last work. Her portraits of Patrick Fraser Tytler the historian, John Gibson, R.A., and Richard Parkes Bonington the painter, are in the National Portrait Gallery. SIR WILLIAM Ross (I794 —I860) painted some portraits in large, although his fame rests upon his miniatures. There is a portrait by him of Lord Erskine in oils in the National Portrait Gallery. JOHN GRAHAM GILBERT (I794-1866) was born at Glasgow, and came to London, when he entered the Royal Academy Schools, where he gained prizes. He contributed many portraits to the exhibitions 1820-I823, and went to Italy, where he spent two years in study. He settled in Edinburgh in 1827 and obtained a good praftice in portraitpainting. His portraits of Sir John Watson Gor FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 93 don, and John Gibson, R.A., are in the National Gallery of Scotland, and of Scott in the National Portrait Gallery. CHARLES ROBERT LESLIE, R.A. (1794-I859) began his artistic career by painting portraits, and through life continued occasionally to paint them. GILBERT STUART NEWTON, R.A. (I794 —I835) was a nephew of Gilbert Stuart, and born at Halifax, Nova Scotia. He studied at Florence and came to England in 1818, entering the Royal Academy Schools. He painted portraits of Moore, Scott, and Lady Theresa Lister. JAMES SYME (1795-I861) was a pupil of Raeburn, at whose death he completed that painter's unfinished works. His portrait of Rev. John Barclay, M.D., is in the National Gallery of Scotland. COLVIN SMITH (I795-I875)was born at Brechin, but came early to London to study in the Schools of the Royal Academy; afterwards he studied in Rome. In 1827 he returned to his native country, and settled in Edinburgh as a portrait-painter. He painted most of the remarkable men of his day, among them Sir Walter Scott, Henry Mackenzie, and Lord Jeffrey. His portraits of the second Viscount Melville, Sir Ralph Abercromby, and Sir James Mackintosh are in the National Gallery of Scotland. WILLIAM BEWICK (1795-1866) became a pupil of Haydon. Lawrence sent him to Rome to paint copies for him, and on his return he pra6tised as a portrait-painter in London. His portrait of J. R. McCulloch, the political economist, is in the Scottish National Portrait Gallery, and one of Patrick Nasmyth is in the National Portrait Gallery. THOMAS HENRY ILLIDGE (1799-1855) was well employed as a portrait-painter in Lancashire till he 94 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS came to London in 1842. He took Briggs's house in Bruton Street. SIR WILLIAM BOXALL, R.A. (1800 — 879) was born at Oxford 'and entered the Schools of the Royal Academy. He went to Rome in I827, and stayed there about two years. He was Dire6or of the National Gallery from 1865 to 1874, when he resigned owing to ill-health, and was knighted in I867. He exhibited 86 portraits at the Royal Academy. The National Portrait Gallery contains his portrait of Copley Fielding, and that of Richard Gibson is in the Diploma Gallery of the Royal Academy. JOHN WOOD (1801-1870) painted portraits in the manner of Lawrence. There is a portrait by him of John Britton in the National Portrait Gallery, and one of Stothard at Dulwich. SIR EDWIN LANDSEER R.A. (1802- I873) painted his first portrait in 1823, and continued occasionally to paint them through life. There is in the National Portrait Gallery a good likeness of John Allen (Lord Holland's Allen). It may surprise some to see Landseer's name in this list, but the well-known story of the celebrity who, on being asked to have his portrait painted by Landseer, answered: "Is thy servant a dog that he should do this thing?" is sufficient justification for its being here. JOHN PRESCOTT KNIGHT, R.A. (I803 —I88I) was a pupil of Clint and was for many years a successful portrait-painter. SIR FRANCIS GRANT, P.R.A. (1803-1878) excelled in sporting subjedls, and his favourite pi&ures-" Breakfast at Melton," " Melton Hunt," and "Ascot Hunt," contain a large number of portraits. In the National Portrait Gallery are portraits by him of Lord Campbell, Sir Edwin FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 95 Landseer, Viscount Hardinge, Lord Macaulay, and his brother Sir J. Hope Grant. THOMAS DUNCAN, A.R.A. (I807-1845) studied in the Trustees' Academy, Edinburgh, under Sir William Allan. His portraits, especially of female beauties, were much appreciated. His own portrait by himself is in the National Gallery of Scotland. STEPHEN CATTERSON SMITH, P.R.H.A. (I807 -1872) was an Englishman by birth, and a student of the Royal Academy, but he settled as a portraitpainter in Derry, and afterwards in Dublin, where he died. His portrait of the queen is in the Dublin Mansion House, of Daniel O'Connell in the City Hall, and of various Lord-Lieutenants in the Castle. A portrait by him of the Earl of Rosse, P.R.S., is at the Royal Society. GEORGE RICHMOND, R.A. (I809-I896) was a portrait-painter of great charm, who brilliantly reproduced the features of most of the great men of his time. He is said to have drawn and painted between 2,000 and 3,000 portraits, hundreds of which have been engraved. His portraits of Lords Cardwell, Cranworth, and Hatherley, as well as some heads in chalk, are in the National Portrait Gallery. Many of his portraits are in crayons and water-colours. DANIEL MACLISE, R.A. (181 I1870) was a portrait-painter, as well as an historical and subject painter and his two grand pi5dures-" The Meeting of Wellington and Blucher after Waterloo" and "The Death of Nelson"-contain portraits. He also produced under the assumed name of Alfred Croquis, for "Fraser's Magazine" a remarkable series of portraits of the literary and scientific men of his day. SAMUEL LAURENCE (1812-1884) an intimate friend of James Spedding, was brought into close 96 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS relations with the literary men of his time, many of whom were among his sitters. CHARLES LUCY (I814-I873) was commissioned by Sir Joshua Walmsley to paint portraits of John Bright, Cobden, W. E. Gladstone, Hume, Disraeli, Nelson, Cromwell, and Garibaldi. These were bequeathed to the nation, and are now in the South Kensington Museum. SIR FREDERIC BURTON (b. I816) succeeded Sir William Boxall as Diretor of the National Gallery in 1874; he was knighted in 1884, and resigned office in 1894. He painted a large number of portraits, and a drawing by him of " George Eliot," is in the National Portrait Gallery. JOHN PHILLIP, R.A. (1817-1867), although his great fame rests on the beauty of his Spanish pi6tures and interiors of cathedrals, also painted some good portraits. WILLIAM HENRY KNIGHT (1823 —863) excelled in the painting of children's portraits. EDWIN LONG, R.A. (I829-189I). Besides his subjedt pictures he painted some good portraits. JOHN PETTIE (I839-I893), although his great fame arose from his historical and romantic pictures, occasionally painted portraits. FRANK HOLL, R.A. (I845-I888). After the death of this excellent portrait-painter, the Royal Academy collected a special exhibition of his pi6tures. LORD LEIGHTON, P.R.A. (I830-I895) cannot be called a portrait-painter, although he painted a few portraits. Some were to be found in the noble exhibition at the Royal Academy which showed his life's work to such advantage, and the portrait of Sir Richard Burton was specially remarkable both as a portrait and as a picture. This is now in the National Portrait Gallery. FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 97 Here ends the catalogue of portrait-painters, and this seems to be the proper place to sum up the effedts of the changes in the artistic history of portrait-painting in England. The early history has still to be written, and therefore the consecutive calendar of artists commences with Holbein, who formed a school which affeded all his contemporaries, and existed for many years after his death. After him a long series of foreigners found this country a profitable field for their labours, but although they obtained the larger portion of the pra&tice, Englishmen were ready to fight for a place. In miniature painting Englishmen always held the first position, and Hilliard was the earliest prominent English painter. Vandyck was the greatest painter Europe had lent to England since the days of Holbein, and, like Holbein, he founded a school which influenced succeeding painters. Then arose some excellent native painters as, for instance, Dobson and Walker. From the time of Vandyck there was a gradual fall in artistic talent. Lely was not the equal of Vandyck, and Kneller (except in a few instances) was not the equal of Lely. It is difficult to understand how artistic revivals come about, for they often arise entirely from the advent of some genius without warning or expedtation, and he sometimes is followed by other geniuses, but the appearance after a period of darkness of such painters as Hogarth, Reynolds, Gainsborough, and Romney must ever remain unexplained, for no natural laws apply here. We hear much of the deadness of the eighteenth century, and of the revival originated by the French Revolution, and there can be no doubt that the revival in poetry was largely caused by hopes originated at that time; but art revived in the: middle of the eighteenth century, and the French H 98 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Revolution killed whatever little art was left in France. One advantage of the chronological method adopted in these chapters is that the smaller men, who are likely to be overlooked on account of the fame of the great ones, get a hearing, and we see that even in dark times there have been those who have kept the torch of art alight. We must allow, however, that the English have been very much behind in the production of a school of painting. Little or nothing in the way of subje6d painting was produced in England before the time of Thornhill and Hogarth. After all we may say, there can be no doubt that the encouragement given to portrait-painting has a motive far removed from artistic feeling. A large number of men and women for centuries have desired to have their portraits painted, and have been willing to pay for the privilege, with the result that the succession of painters has never failed. The level of artistic merit has greatly varied, but painters have always been found to do the work required of them. Happily, we are living in a time of artistic wealth. Never has there been a time when so many firstrate painters have been working on portraits as now. This may be seen from the following remarkable list: Frank Bramley, A.R.A., George Clausen, A.R.A., Hon. John Collier, Arthur S. Cope, Lowes Dickinson, Frank Dicksee, R.A., Luke Fildes, R.A., William Powell Frith, R.A., Frederick Goodall, R. A., Arthur Hacker, A.R.A., Herman G. Herkomer, Hubert Herkomer, R.A., J. C. Hook, R.A., Holman Hunt, J. Seymour Lucas, A.R.A., Robert W. Macbeth, A.R.A., Phil Morris, William Quiller Orchardson, R.A., Walter William Ouless, R.A., Sir E. J. Poynter, P.R.A., Sir George Reid, P.R.S.A. (who has painted all the celebrated Scotsmen of the last FROM HOGARTH TO MILLAIS 99 three decades), Sir William Blake Richmond, K.C.B., R.A., Briton Riviere, R.A., James Sant, R.A., John S. Sargent, R.A., J. J. Shannon, A.R.A., Solomon J. Solomon, A.R.A., L. Alma Tadema, R.A., George Frederick Watts, R.A., Henry Weigall, Henry Tanworth Wells, R.A., James Abbott McNeill Whistler. Few of these men are exclusively portrait-painters, but none of them disdain to lay aside for a time the study of the ideal, and produce for us portraits that are pidures. Sad that the chief of all cannot be included in this list. His name must therefore stand alone at the end of this chapter. The art of Millais is so intertwined with the life of most living men and women that it is a painful effort to realize that he is dead. It is not needful to expatiate on our loss, for all feel that; but it does seem worthy of mention that he worked to the last, and that the exhibition which closed on August 3rd, 1896, was brightened by the presence of several produds of his brush. We have here only to do with the portrait-painter, and as we think of his numerous works, his " Hearts are Trumps," his portrait of a brother Academician, J. C. Hook, and his many pidures of beautiful children, we call to mind Gainsborough's remark on Reynolds " how various he is," and we feel how appropriately this remark can be applied to JOHN EVERETT MILLAIS. CHAPTER V. AMATEUR PO1TRAIT-PAINTERS " Born to the spacious empire of the nine, One would have thought she should have been content To manage well that mighty government; But what can young ambitious souls confine? To the next realm she stretch'd her sway, For Painture near adjoining lay, A plenteous province, and alluring prey." DRYDEN, To t/ie pliois J1emooly of the Accolmplished Young LadyJ, zlirs. Anne Kizhi-rezo, excellent in the telo sister A-rts of Poetiy anld Painting. Anl Ode. THE number of good amateur portrait-painters is not great, but a small list can be made out of those who have followed painting for their amusement. It is true that they have not done much to advance the position of the arts in this country. Walpole attempted in his ' Anecdotes" to associate many of the courtiers of a past age with the arts, and he has included in his book, on very slender grounds, the names of several as amateur painters. The unfortunate Edward Courtenay, the last Earl of Devonshire, was a prisoner in the Tower from the early age of twelve until he was twentyseven years old. He was the son of Henry, Marquis of Exeter and Earl of Devonshire, and was imprisoned with his father and mother in 1538. He was released from the Tower in 1553 by Queen Mary, who is said at this time to have wished to AMATEUR PORTRAIT-PAINTERS IOI marry him. He was bearer of the Sword of State at the Coronation on Ot&ober ist, but shortly after he was implicated in Wyatt's rebellion, and imprisoned in Fotheringay Castle, from which place he was sent to the Tower. On the mediation of Philip II. he was released in 1555, but exiled. He died at Padua on September i8th, I556, after a short and unhappy life. Walpole says that "it was a happiness peculiar to him to be able to amuse himself with drawing, in an age in which there were so many prisoners and so few resources." Dallaway notes on this passage: " This accomplished and ill-fated nobleman has surely very slight pretensions to a niche among the professors in the temple of Art. All that the Funeral Oration (seldom the best authority) would insinuate is rather that the Earl possessed a love of painting than the power of producing a piture. It is more than probable, that among the avocations of his sad and unjust confinement, he amused himself with sketching with his pencil, but no tradition authenticates any portrait by his hand." Walpole includes in his book the name of a divine, Dr. John Twisden (who died at the age of eighty-five, in 1588), as an amateur artist, on the strength of Vertue having seen a small portrait of him, done by himself, in oil on copper about forty years before his death. A distinguished man with a better claim to admission in this chapter was Richard Burbage, the great a6lor. At Dulwich College are two portraits among those bequeathed by William Cartwright which are attributed to Burbage-one a portrait of himself, and the other a woman's head. On less authority the celebrated Chandos portrait of Shakespeare, now in the National Portrait Gallery, is also attributed to him, as well as to John Taylor 102 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS the a6tor, whose property it was. Taylor left the portrait to Betterton, at whose death it was bought by Mr. Keck of the Temple for forty guineas. At the Stowe sale (it came into the possession of the Grenvilles through Anne Eliza, Duchess of Buckingham, daughter of the Duke of Chandos, who possessed it for a time) it was bought by the Earl of Ellesmere for 355 guineas, and he presented it to the National Portrait Gallery in March, 1856. Whilst in Betterton's possession it was copied by Kneller as a present to Dryden, who acknowledged the gift in the following lines, written between 1683 and 1692: " Shakespeare, thy gift, I place before my sight; With awe, I ask his blessing ere I write; With reverence look on his majestic face, Proud to be less, but of his godlike man, His soul inspires me, while thy praise I write." Epist. xiv. To Kneller. Kneller's copy is now at Wentworth Woodhouse, Yorkshire, in the collection of Earl FitzWilliam. There are several references to Burbage's skill as a painter. In Overbury's charat6er of "An Excellent Atlor," which is known to refer to him, we read: " Hee is much affeded to painting, and 'tis a question whether that make him an excellent player, or his playing an exquisite painter." In "A Funeral Elegy on the Death of the Famous Actor, Richard Burbage," quoted by J. Payne Collier from a MS. formerly in the possession of Mr. Heber, we read: " Some skilful limner help me! If not so, Some sad tragedian to express my woe! Alas, he's gone, that could the best, both limn And adt my grief..." Collier's " Memoirs of Adtors in Shakespeare's Plays," 1846, p. 52. AMATEUR PORTRAIT-PAINTERS Io3 Walpole includes SIR TOBY MATTHEW in his book under a misapprehension, for his " piftures " were merely included in letters. In a letter from the Duchess to the Duke of Buckingham she tells him that she has not yet seen "the picture" which Toby Matthew had drawn of the Infanta and sent over. SIR WILLIAM BURLASE (of whom little or nothing is known) appears to have painted a portrait of Ben Jonson, which he sent to the poet with some poor verse commencing: " To paint thy worth, if rightly I did know it, And were but painter half like thee, a poet; Ben, I would shew it." To this Ben Jonson returned an answer in which he remarks on his own size, and likens himself to the Tun at Heidelberg. He ends his verses from "The Poet to the Painter" thus: "But you are he can paint, I can but write: A poet hath no more but black and white, Ne knows he flattering colours, or false light, Yet when of friendship I would draw the face, A letter'd mind, and a large heart would place To all posterity; I will write Burlase." The most interesting among the amateur artists was SIR NATHANIEL BACON, who did very creditable work. Unfortunately, Walpole made a mistake as to his date, and supposed him to be the halfbrother of Francis Bacon, instead of his nephew. Had he been what Walpole supposes, he would have been one of the earliest native portraitpainters after Holbein. Sir Nathaniel Bacon was the seventh son of Sir Nicholas Bacon, the first baronet made by James I., who was eldest son of Sir Nicholas, Lord Keeper. He entered Corpus 104 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Christi College, Cambridge, in 1621, and took his M.A. degree in 1628. He studied painting in Italy, and showed considerable skill in prat6ice. His own portrait (a drawing on paper), now at Gorhambury, has several times been exhibited, and his mother's portrait, also by him, is considered equally good. He painted in oil a pidture of a cookmaid with dead fowl, which has been highly praised. He lived at Culford in Suffolk, on an estate given him by his father. On the monument to him in the parish church he is described as ("well skilled in the history of plants, and in delineating them. with his pencil." He was created a Knight of the Bath at the coronation of Charles I., and was living' in 1648. His daughter and heiress, Anne, married secondly Sir Harbottle Grimston, and from this marriage is descended the Earl of Verulam, owner of Gorhambury. Edward Norgate describes the colours used by Bacon with some enthusiasm, and writes, "pinke which is colour soe usefull and hard to get good, as gave occasion to my late deare friend Sir N. Bacon, K.B. (a gentleman whose rare parts and generous disposition, whose excellent learning and great skill in this and good art, deserves a never dyinge memory), to make or finde a pinke, so very good, as my cousinell P. Oliver (without disparagement to any the most excellent in this art), making proofe of some that I gave him, did highly commend it, and used none other to his dyinge day." Henry Peacham in his " Compleat Gentleman" (of drawing, limning, and painting, p. 126) writes: "but none in my opinion, who deserveth more respeat and admiration for his skill and pra(tice herein than Master Nathaniel Bacon of Broome in Suffolke (younger sonne to the most honourable and bountifull minded Sir Nicholas Bacon, Knight AMATEUR PORTRAIT-PAINTERS Io5 and eldest Barronet) not inferiour in my judgement to our skillfullest masters." HENRY PEACIIAM himself is said to have painted in oil, and to have taken a likeness of James I. as he sat at dinner. SAMUEL BUTLER, the poet, has also been placed among the painters by Walpole, and Johnson remarks that "his amusements were music and painting, and the reward of his pencil was the friendship of the inimitable Cooper." SIR RALPH COLE, BART. (I625?-I704), M.P. for Durham, was an amateur artist, who studied under Vandyck, and painted in 1677 a portrait of Thomas Wyndham, F.R.S., which is at Petworth, and was engraved in mezzotint by R. Tompson. His own portrait was painted by Lely. He retained several Italian painters in his service at the expense of 500 guineas a year, and spent his whole fortune in consequence of his enthusiasm for painting. SIR JOHN GAWDIE, BART. (1639- I708), the second son of Sir William Gawdie of West Harling, Norfolk, was deaf and dumb, and entered himself as a pupil of Lely, as he intended to become a professional portrait-painter. On the death, however, of his elder brother, he succeeded to the family estate, when he continued the praFice of his art as an amusement. Evelyn refers to him in his Diary under date September 7th, 1677, as follows: "There din'd this day at my Lord's [the Earl of Arlington's] one Sir John Gaudy, a very handsome person, but quite dumb, yet very intelligent by signs, and a very fine painter: he was so civil and well bred as it was not possible to discerne any imperfection in him. His lady and children were also there, and he was at church in the morning with us." The ELECTRESS SOPIIIA and her sister the io6 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS PRINCESS LOUISE were taught painting by Gerard Honthorst (I592-1660), the favourite painter of their mother, the Queen of Bohemia. A portrait by Sophia of her son (afterwards George I.) as Cupid was sent to the Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition (244). There are several portraits by the Princess Louise at Combe Abbey, the seat of the Earl of Craven. MARY MORE painted for her amusement portraits of herself and husband. She presented to the Bodleian a portrait which is said to be intended for Sir Thomas More, but is probably a copy from one of Cromwell, Earl of Essex. Robert Whitehall wrote verses to her in I674, on her presentation of this supposed picture of Sir Thomas More. ANNE KILLIGREW (I660-i685), daughter of Dr. Henry Killigrew, master of the Savoy, and Maidof-Honour to Mary of Modena, Duchess of York, was a bright and pure spirit in a corrupt court. The crabbed Anthony Wood was warmed into enthusiasm by the consideration of her accomplishments. He calls her "a grace for beauty and a muse for wit," and adds, "there is nothing spoken of her, which she was not equal to, if not superior." Dryden, in the ode referred to at the head of this chapter, becomes enthusiastic on her portraits of the king and queen: "The scene then chang'd, with bold, ere6ted look Our martial king the sight with reverence strook; For not content to express his outward part, Her hand call'd out the image of his heart; His warlike mind, his soul devoid of fear, His high designing thoughts were figur'd there, As when by magic ghosts are made appear. Our phcenix queen was portray'd, too, so bright, Beauty alone could beauty take so right: Her dress, her shape, her matchless grace, Were all observ'd as well as heavenly'face. AMATEUR PORTRAIT-PAINTERS Io7 With such a peerless majesty she stands, As in that day she took the crown from sacred hands; Before a train of heroines was seen, In beauty foremost, as in rank, the queen." These are said to be James II. and his queen, but if so Mistress Killigrew must have painted them when they were Duke and Duchess of York. Jervas, the painter, instructed POPE to draw and paint. The poet presented Mr. Murray (afterwards Lord Mansfield) with a head of Betterton, which is now at Caen Wood. It was copied from Kneller's portrait, now in the National Portrait Gallery. POPE also copied from Vandyck a head of the Earl of Strafford, thought to have some merit. He painted a fan for Martha Blount, which Reynolds is said to have bought and lost. Writing to Gay in 1713 he says: " I have thrown away three Swifts, each of which was once my vanity, two Lady Bridgewaters, a Duchess of Montague, half-a-dozen Earls, and a Knight of the Garter." 'This shows, at least, that he was industrious. Peter Tillemans was engaged in painting a landscape for Lord Radnor into which Pope, by stealth, inserted some strokes which the prudent painter did not appear to observe. The poet was no little proud of this circumstance. LADY DOROTHY SAVILE, daughter of William, Marquis of Halifax, and granddaughter of the great "Trimmer," married the architect Earl of Burlington in 1721, and she appears to have thoroughly sympathized with her husband's love for the fine arts. She drew in crayons, and was said to be very successful in catching likenesses. A portrait of the Princess Amelia (second daughter of George II.), in hunting costume, by Lady Burlington, was shown at the Guelph Ex io8 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS hibition. The pifture is signed " D. Burlington," and the painter wrote under the portrait: " Let others seek the Royal Maid to prize, See what Emilia is in Saville's eyes." Another of Lady Burlington's works has a pathetic interest. It was a portrait of her daughter, Lady Dorothy Boyle, who married George, Earl of Euston, a man of the most odious character. She died in 1742, from the effedts of her husband's brutality, and her mother distributed to the friends of the family copies of the portrait of her, now in possession of the Duke of Devonshire, with the following inscription, said to have been written by Pope: " LADY DOROTHY BOYLE, "Born May the I4th, 1724. "She was the comfort and joy of her parents, the delight of all who knew her angelick temper, and the admiration of all who saw her beauty. She was married O&tober the Ioth, I74, and delivered (by death) from misery, " May the 2nd, 1742. This print was taken from a pitiure drawn by memory seven weeks after her death by her most affedionate mother, " DOROTHY BURLINGTON." Another accomplishment of Lady Burlington appears to have been the cutting of figures in paper, respedting which Pope was mildly satirical: "Pallas grew vapourish once, and odd, She would not do the least right thing, Either for goddess or for god, Nor work, nor play, nor paint, nor sing. * * * *Pallas, you give yourself strange airs, But sure you'll find it hard to spoil The sense and taste of one that bears The name of Saville and of Boyle." AMATEUR PORTRAIT-PAINTERS IO9 MRS. HOADLY, the first wife of Bishop Hoadly, was, as Sarah Curtis, a pupil of Mary Beale and a painter of portraits by profession. When she married she continued to paint for amusement. Among her sitters were Whiston, Burnet, and her husband. The portrait of the bishop, supposed to have been touched upon by Hogarth, is in the National Portrait Gallery. Another portrait is in the archbishop's dining-room at Lambeth Palace. JAMES FERGUSON the astronomer (I710-1776) followed the profession of portrait-painting for twenty-six years, and does not rightly come under the designation of an amateur, but as he subsequently took to other and very different pursuits, perhaps the classification may be allowed to stand. FRANCIS BINDON (died 1765), a native of Ireland, is styled in the catalogue of the National Portrait Gallery (where there is a poor portrait by him of Archbishop Boulter) an amateur, but he appears to have been paid for some at least of his portraits. He painted the portrait of the Duke of Dorset, lord-lieutenant in 1734, and, in the following year, a full-length of Swift, with " Halfpenny" Wood writhing in agony at his feet. Another full-length of Swift was painted by him in 1738 for the Chapter of St. Patrick's, and he received /36 i6s. for the picture. IHE REV. JAMES WILLS (died 1777) was for many years curate, and afterwards Vicar of Canons, Middlesex. He contributed pictures to the Society of Artists exhibitions, and for a short time he was Chaplain of the Society, with a salary of 430 a year. His large painting, entitled "Suffer little children to come unto Me," he presented to the Foundling Hospital. Some of his portraits have been engraved. THE REV. WVILLIAM MASON, the biographer of I IO HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Gray, and the friend of Horace Walpole, possessed a considerable taste for art, and painted portraits of some of his friends. Miss FRANCES REYNOLDS, the youngest surviving sister of Sir Joshua, and his housekeeper, painted miniatures, and found much pleasure in copying her brother's pictures. In 1758 Dr. Johnson wrote, "Miss is much employed in miniatures," and twenty-five years later (1783) he said: " I sat for my pidture, a three-quarter painted in oil, to Miss Reynolds, perhaps for the tenth time, and I sat for near three hours with the patience of mortal born to bear. At last she declared it finished, and seems to think it fine." The patient himself told her it was " Johnson's grimly ghost." Goldsmith offended the artist by telling her that she loved pi&tures better than she understood them. Northcote affirmed that " nothing made Sir Joshua so mad as Miss Reynolds's portraits, which were an exadt imitation of all his defedts. Indeed, she was obliged to keep them out of his way. He said (jestingly) they made everyone else laugh and him cry!" MRS. MARY DELANY (1700 —I788), whose autobiography is most interesting reading, was a very accomplished woman, and she copied very cleverly many portraits in oil. Besides these she painted some originals, which are said to be good; one of these was of the famous Duchess of Queensberry-Gay's duchess. LADY DIANA BEAUCLERK (1734-1808) is wellknown as an amateur artist, for the reception of whose drawings Horace Walpole built a closet at Strawberry Hill. She made a drawing of her two daughters as " L'Allegro" and " I1 Penseroso," which was engraved by Bartolozzi. THE HON. ANNE SEYMOUR DAWSON DAMER BISHOP HOADLY, B3Y MRS. HOADLY. AMATEUR PORTRAIT-PAINTERS I II (1748 —I828), widow of the worthless Hon. John Damer, daughter of Marshal Conway and cousin of Horace Walpole, who was well known as an amateur sculptor, was a proficient with the brush as well as with the chisel. At Panshanger there is a picture painted by her representing witches round a cauldron, which contains portraits of Lady Melbourne, wife of the first Viscount, the beautiful Duchess of Devonshire, and herself. MARGARET, COUNTESS OF LUCAN, was a clever copyist of the early miniaturists-Hoskins, Oliver, and Cooper,-and also painted some good originals. Walpole praised her highly, which caused Dr. Wolcot to address him thus: " Do not to Lady Lucan pay such court, Her wisdom will not surely thank thee for't; Ah! don't endeavour thus to dupe her By swearing that she equals Cooper." LADY BELL, sister of William Hamilton, R.A., and wife of Sir Thomas Bell, Sheriff of London, was a clever amateur. She was instruCed by her brother, and had some assistance from Sir Joshua Reynolds. She made some good copies of oil paintings, one of them being " A Holy Family," by Rubens, and exhibited two busts at the Royal Academy in I819. Her portrait of her husband has been engraved. WILLIAM HAZLITT, the essayist (1778-1830), commenced life as an artist, and in I802 exhibited at the Royal Academy a portrait of his father. He abandoned art for literature, and the portrait of Lamb as a Venetian senator, now at the National Portrait Gallery, was his last attempt. Crabb Robinson refers to this pidture in his Diary, vol. i., p. 368: " Hazlitt had in vain striven to become a painter. He had obtained the patronage of Clarkson, who said he had heard Hazlitt was more able I I2 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS to paint like Titian than any living painter; someone had said that this portrait of Lamb had a Titianesque air about it. And certainly this is the only painting by Hazlitt I have ever seen with pleasure." " Titianesque " is about the last expression anyone would be likely now to use in conne6lion with this picture. It once belonged to Coleridge, and afterwards to Mr. J. Gillman. Hazlitt also painted portraits of Hartley Coleridge and Wordsworth, the latter being destroyed as unsatisfa6tory. The last amateur portrait-painter to be mentioned is JOHN THOMAS WOODHOUSE, M.D., a senior Fellow of Caius College, Cambridge, who died at his college on March 20th, 1845, at the age of sixty-five years. He painted the portraits of his many friends and distinguished contemporaries, and is said to have excelled in his art. CHAPTER VI. PORTRAIT EXHIBITIONS "We never read of the actions of any distinguished individual without feeling a desire to see a resemblance of his person. We often imagine that we can trace the charadter of the man in the expression of his countenance; and we retain a more corredt recollection of his actions by keeping in our minds a lively impression of his general appearance."-Preface to the Historical Catalogue of Portraits, I820 (British Institution). IT was not until the second half of the eighteenth century that pid6ure exhibitions became popular, and the first public exhibition was opened under the auspices of the Society of Arts in the year I 760. There were here shown I30 works in all, and among these were four portraits by Reynolds, three by B. Wilson, three by Highmore, and four portraits in crayons by Cotes. Hayman sent his portrait of Garrick as Richard III., Cosway his of Shipley, and Pine his of Mrs. Pritchard as Hermione. There was no charge for admission, but the catalogue was sold for 6d. There was a division among the artists after the exhibition of 1760. One party continued to exhibit for a year or two at the Society of Arts, and the others went to Spring Gardens. Out of this 1 "A Catalogue of the Piatures, Sculptures, Models, Drawings, Prints, &c., of the present Artists, exhibited at the Great Room of the Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce, on the 2Ist of April, 760." I 114 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS feud grew the Royal Academy, which was instituted in I768. The first attempt in England to get together a collection of National Portraits for exhibition was in 1820, when 183 fine portraits were exhibited at the British Institution.' The interesting portrait of Sir Nathaniel Bacon, already referred to (see p. 103), was lent to this exhibition; Mr. William Baker lent the valuable series of Kit Cat Club portraits by Kneller, but the authorities of the British Institution, oddly enough, seem to have thought it necessary to make an excuse for their appearance: "These portraits... are not offered to the public as the highest specimens of the art of painting, but we could not omit the best representation we could find of these men of genius and good breeding." In 1846 a second attempt was made by the British Institution, when 215 portraits were exhibited, but these were not exclusively English.2 As early as 18 3 the Governors of the Institution formed an exhibition of 143 pictures by Sir Joshua Reynolds, and in the following year they opened an exhibition of piCtures by Hogarth, Richard Wilson, Gainsborough, and Zoffany. In 1823 sixty-four pi6tures by Reynolds were exhibited; and in 1830 ninety-one pit6ures by Sir Thomas Lawrence. In 1833 a seleCtion of the works of Sir Joshua Reynolds, Benjamin West, and Sir Thomas Lawrence-"the three last presidents of the Royal Academy" — was exhibited. There were here fifty piCtures by Reynolds, fifty-one by 1 "An Historical Catalogue of Portraits representing distinguished Persons in the History and Literature of the United Kingdom. London: W. Bulmer and W. Nicol, 1820." 2 "( Catalogue of Portraits of Illustrious and Eminent Persons in History, Literature, and Art. 1846." PORTRAIT EXHIBITIONS I I5 West, and forty-three by Lawrence. In i842 a colleEtion of the works of Sir David Wilkie was exhibited at the British Institution, and in 1843 another selection of sixty pictures by Reynolds. The Great Exhibition of I85I was essentially industrial, and no pidures were exhibited there. In 1854 there was some talk of an exhibition of Scottish historical portraits, but the scheme then came to naught, except that it has been the cause of our possessing a racy exposition of Carlyle's views on the subje6t. In his letter to David Laing he wrote: " First of all, then, I have to tell you, as a fa6 of personal experience, that in all my poor historical investigations it has been, and always is, one of the most primary wants to procure a bodily likeness of the person inquired after; a goodportrait if such exists; failing that, even an indifferent if sincere one. In short, any representation made by a faithful human creature, of that face and figure which he saw with his eyes, and which I can never see with mine, is now valuable to me, and much better than none at all. This, which is my own deep experience, I believe to be in a deeper or less deep degree, the universal one; and that every student and reader of history, who strives earnestly to conceive for himself what manner of fad and man this or the other vague historical name can have been, will, as the first and dire6test indication of all, search eagerly for a portrait, for all the reasonable portraits there are, and never rest till he have made out, if possible, what a man's natural face was like. Often I have found a portrait superior in real instruicion to half-a-dozen written biographies, as biographies are written,-or rather let me say, I have found that the portrait was as a small lighted candle by which the biographies could for the first time be I 6 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS read, and some human interpretation be made of them." Carlyle went on to say that in the great pi6ture galleries he has found " Flayings of Bartholomew, Flayings of Marsyas, Rapes of the Sabines," but few, if any, portraits of the great ones of the earth; he then pointed out how an exhibition of historical portraits should be seledted, and laid special stress on the value of the catalogue which should give not only the essence of the subjet's history, condensed to the very utmost, but also the history of the piCture as far as known. Carlyle was wrong in one statement he made: "Scotland, unlike some other countries, has a history of a very readable nature, and has never published even an ezgraved series of national portraits "-for John Pinkerton published in 1795 an " Iconographia Scotica," and, in I 799, a " Scottish Gallery of Portraits." At the Art Treasures Exhibition, held in Manchester in I857, a strenuous effort was made to form a satisfadtory collection of British Portraits, and the work was placed in the competent hands of the late Mr. Peter Cunningham. He claimed that "anything like so large and important series" had "never before been brought together." "At no no time" had " so many Vandycks been under one roof." " Edge Hill and Naseby did not see so many Cavaliers and Roundheads of note in real buff and armour as are here assembled upon canvas. Windsor and Hampton Court cannot vie with the Lely and Kneller beauties of the Restoration that smile (in the central hall of the Manchester Exhibition) upon the heroes of the Civil War." Cunningham explained the plan upon which he worked thus: "In colleting and arranging a portrait gallery of persons distinguished in British PORTRAIT EXHIBITIONS I 7 history, or British biography, I have sought assiduously to obtain specimens of every class of worthies (in Fuller's large acceptation of the term): to call the illustrious or infamous dead before the speEtator in their habits as they lived, to group them in chronological order, and bring friends together on canvas upon one wall, who have long ceased to sit together in the flesh in the same room." In this portrait gallery there were 386 pidtures in all, and all the great portrait-painters were represented. Besides these there was a collection of miniatures and enamels lent by the Duke of Portland, the Duke of Buccleuch, and others. An Exhibition of Pitures, Drawings, Sketches, etc., of John James Chalon, R.A., and Alfred Edward Chalon, R.A., was arranged by the Society of Arts in I855. About this period there were several exhibitions of miniatures. The Society of Arts formed a colle6tion of the works of Sir William Ross in I86o. Two fine exhibitions of historical miniatures were held in the South Kensington Museum in I862 and I865. The International Exhibition of 1862 had no special colle6tion of portraits, but there were many among the piEtures in the British division by Hogarth, Reynolds, Gainsborough, Copley, Raeburn, Lawrence, Shee, Boxall, etc. There were also portraits among the water-colours. In 1865 the Earl of Derby made the excellent suggestion that a series of loan exhibitions of National Portraits should be held. In his letter, dated 6th May, he wrote: " I have long thought that a National Portrait Exhibition, chronologically arranged, might not only possess great historical, interest by bringing together portraits of all the most eminent contemporaries of their respeEtive eras, but might also serve to illustrate the progress HISTORICAL PORTRAITS and condition, at various periods, of British Art. My idea, therefore, would be to admit either portraits of eminent men, though by inferior or unknown artists, or portraits by eminent artists, though of obscure or unknown individuals. I have, of course, no means of knowing, or estimating, the number of such portraits which may exist in the country; but I am persuaded that, exclusive of the large colle&tions in many great houses, there are very many scattered about by ones and twos and threes in private families, the owners of which, though they could not be persuaded to part with them, would willingly spare them for a few months for a public objeCt." This proposal met with the approval of the Lords of the Committee of Council on Education, with the result that three exhibitions were held in successive years with great success. In 1866 were exhibited portraits from 1152 to the end of the reign of James I I.; in 1867 from the reign of William and Mary to 1800; and in i868 from 1800 to 1867, and a supplement of earlier portraits was included in this the last exhibition. I,030 portraits were exhibited in I866, 866 in 1867, and 946 in 1868, or no less than 2,842 portraits or portrait groups in the three years. These exhibitions were of the greatest interest and value, and revealed to visitors the great artistic riches of the country. Never before had been seen such a colledion of fine portraits, and the reputation of many portrait-painters, almost forgotten, were revived. The catalogues of these exhibitions are most valuable as an indication of the possessors of these portraits. They must, however, be used with care because the compilers were not authorized to dispute the ascription of the lenders. The critics were not so considerate, and several of PORTRAIT EXHIBITIONS II9 the portraits were proved to be wrongly named, and attributed to painters who had nothing to do with painting them. This was especially the case in respe& to Holbein, to whom were attributed portraits painted after his death. It is not necessary here to refer specially to the various false ascriptions, but two instances may be given. In the i866 exhibition, a picture representing a party of musicians was styled "The Cabal Ministry" (No. 906), and in the 1867 exhibition a party of Dutchmen was described as "Members of the Kit Cat Club" (No. I45). A generation has passed since these exhibitions were held, and it would be a great public benefit if a new series could be arranged within the next few years. In I868 an interesting Exhibition of Local Portraits was held at Glasgow, the catalogue of which, compiled by Mr. Charles Heath Wilson, has been described as "a valuable summary of Glasgow family history." In I869 a very interesting Exhibition was held at Leeds. A fine collection of miniatures was shown, and there-were some portraits:, among the pitures of British painters; but a new departure was made by the colletion of 281 painted portraits of Yorkshire worthies. The catalogue was prefixed by an extraF from a sermon preached by Dr. George Hickes in I682, where he says, " God hath pleased to make it [the county] the birthplace and nursery of many great men." Among the distinguished Englishmen who were natives of Yorkshire are Sir Henry Savile, John Wycliffe, John Gower, General Lambert, Dr. George Hickes, Roger Gale, Andrew Marvell, Dr. Radcliffe, Captain Cook, Dr. Priestley, Dr. Fothergill, I20 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Dr. Paley, Flaxman, Jesse Ramsden, James Montgomery, John Jackson, R.A., William Wilberforce, the two Scoresbys, etc. The portraits of Archbishops of York were also included in the series. In 1870 the Royal Academy commenced the annual series of exhibitions of old masters, held in the winter, in which exhibitions a considerable number of important historical portraits have been shown. A general index to the catalogues of the exhibition from 1870 to 1879 shows that during that period the following numbers of paintings by the great portrait-painters were exhibited: Reynolds, I75; Vandyck, 126; Gainsborough, 103; Romney, 46;' Raeburn, 29 (twelve of these were exhibited in 1877); Hogarth, 27; Lawrence, 14; Opie, I4; Zoffany, 12; and Hoppner, 9. Of special exhibitions the works of Charles Robert Leslie, R.A., and Clarkson Stanfield, R.A., were shown in 1870, and in 1874 the whole exhibition was devoted to the works of Sir Edwin Landseer, R.A., and among the 532 articles there were several portraits. In 1875 there was a selection of the works of Sir A. W. Callcott and D. Maclise, and in I880 a colleEtion of the works of Holbein and his school were exhibited. In 1896-97 a choice sele&tion of Lord Leighton's works were exhibited, among which were a few portraits, and this year the winter exhibition is to be entirely devoted to the works of Sir John Everett Millais, late President of the Royal Academy. 1 Romney refused to send any of his works to the Royal Academy, and Mr. Walter Armstrong in his life of the painter in the " Dictionary of National Biography," says, " no picture of Romney's was seen on the academy walls till I871, sixty-nine years after his death." PORTRAIT EXHIBITIONS 121 An exhibition of the works of Sir Henry Raeburn, R.A., was, in October and November 1876, held in the Edinburgh National Gallery, and attra&ed much attention. R. L. Stevenson was one of those who sang its praises. " Lords and Ladies," he wrote, "soldiers and do&ors, hanging judges and heretical divines, a whole generation of good society was resuscitated; and the Scotchman of to-day walked about among the Scotchmen of two generations ago. The moment was well chosen, neither too late nor too early. The people who sat for these pi6tures are not yet ancestors, they are still relations." He adds, " I hear a story of a lady who returned the other day to Edinburgh after an absence of sixty years: ' I could see none of my old friends,' she said, 'until I went into the Raeburn Gallery, and found them all there.'" 1 The great men of the end of the last and the first quarter of the present century, who were the glories of the " Modern Athens," lived again in the canvases of one of Scotland's greatest painters. On the walls of the Royal Scottish Academy were seen the faithful portraiture of Hugh Blair, Principal Robertson, John Playfair, Sir Walter Scott, Francis Jeffrey, Henry Cockburn, Francis Horner, Sir David Brewster, Archibald Constable, and many others of more or less fame. Some of Raeburn's miniatures were included in this exhibition. In I882 an interesting Worcestershire Exhibition was held at the county town or rather city of Worcester. Here was one of the most perfe& local colledtions that had been got together since that at the famous Leeds Exhibition in I869. A fine series of portraits of Worcestershire worthies 1 "Virginibus Puerisque," I887, p. 206. 122 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS was hung on the walls, and a leading feature of the exhibition was an extensive and valuable collection of portraits of the Bishops of Worcester arranged in chronological order. The Grosvenor Gallery, in New Bond Street, was opened in 1877, and soon afterwards winter exhibitions were arranged, in addition to the ordinary summer exhibitions. In the winter of 188i-2 a collection of 204 pictures by G. F. Watts, R.A., was exhibited, and many of this great painter's portraits were included in the show. In the following year there was an exhibition of 130 pictures by L. Alma Tadema, R.A., and among these were several portraits. In 1883-4 the winter exhibition was devoted to the works of Sir Joshua Reynolds, which numbered 209 paintings, and consisted of the most famous and valued examples of the master. Among the pictures were nine portraits of the painter by himself. It is known that he painted at least eighteen portraits of himself, and it is probable that he painted more. This was the largest colletion of Reynolds's works gathered into one gallery, and it was of great interest from many points of view. Many of the pictures were in a fine state of preservation, but others had faded, and one pi6ture at least was a perfed6 wreck. In the following year a fine collection of 216 pi6tures by Gainsborough were exhibited, which consisted of landscapes as well as portraits. The Duke of Westminster's beautiful " Blue Boy" was here, as well as a large number of the painter's finest works. In 1886 Sir Coutts Lindsay and the Diredors of the Grosvenor Gallery formed an exhibition of Sir John Millais' works, containing all his finest portraits painted up to that date. Here was PORTRAIT EXHIBITIONS 123 the beautiful "Hearts are Trumps" (the three Misses Armstrong), which emulates the charm of Reynolds's grand Waldegrave picure (Horace Walpole's three grand nieces). In 1887 this grand series of exhibitions of our great portrait-painters was completed by a selection of the works of Vandyck. In 1888 a Century of British Art, 737 to 1837, was seen at the Grosvenor Gallery, and a second series of the same in 1889. Many portraits were included in these exhibitions. In 1889 the splendid series of historical exhibitions was commenced at the New Gallery with that of the Royal House of Stuart, which was succeeded in 1890 by the Royal House of Tudor, and in 1891 by the Royal House of GuelphGeorge I. to William IV. In 1892 the series was completed by a Victorian exhibition devoted to the history of fifty years of the Queen's reign. Although these exhibitions did not consist entirely of portraits, they formed an important division of the whole, numbering 214 portraits in the Stuart, 490 in the Tudor, 355 in the Guelph, and 340 in the Vitorian (without counting drawings). These numbers are exclusive of miniatures, which were also numerous. In the present year an exhibition of the pidtures of George Frederick Watts, R.A., has filled the New Gallery, and a representative colledtion of his fine portraits was shown. In 1890 the highly successful Military Exhibition was held at Chelsea Hospital, but there were here only a few portraits. In the following year, in the gardens of the same place, was held the Royal Naval Exhibition, where was shown a very valuable collecion of portraits of naval officers, including the set of admirals from Greenwich. In 1894 two charming exhibitions of portraits of 124 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS " Fair Women" (foreign as well as English) were held at the Grafton Galleries. Holbein, Mytens, Lucas de Heere, Moro, Vandyck, Van Somer, Lely, Kneller, Hogarth, Allan Ramsay, Cosway, Reynolds, Gainsborough, Romney, Hoppner, Lawrence, Shee, Harlow, Watts, Millais, Herkomer, W. B. Richmond, and many more were represented. With respedt to the title, the dire&ors appear to have felt some doubts as to its entire appropriateness, for they wrote: "As there are included certain pidtures of women possibly more celebrated for their historical interest, their influence or their wit, than for their beauty, some exception has been taken to the title of the exhibition. The directors, however, do not know of any fixed standard by which such piCtures can be judged, and further, they believe that in the eyes of some one person, at least, almost every woman has been considered fair." In I895 an exhibition of "Fair Children" was held at the Grafton Galleries, and here such celebrated portrait-painters as Vandyck, Kneller, Hudson, John Wootton, Singleton, Reynolds, Gainsborough, Hoppner, Lawrence, Northcote, Raeburn, Zoffany, Opie, Millais, Watts, Sant, W. B. Richmond, and others were represented. In the preface of the catalogue we find another excuse: " As to the title, the dire&ors have after much discussion and many suggestions decided on using the same epithet as last year, and calling the exhibition 'Fair Children.' If they were right in thinking that every woman has at least one admirer, they feel they are doubly justified in the present case, as it is obvious that no child has been without two. They had almost written tfhree, but they cannot help feeling doubt as whether the inevitable laudation on the part of the nurse is in PORTRAIT EXHIBITIONS 125 every case the expression of an honest conviction." In the winter of this same year (I895) a very interesting exhibition was held at the Grafton Galleries of the works of the old Scottish portraitpainters, including works of George Jameson, William Aikman, Hercules Sanders (1653), D. Scougall (1654), Gavin Hamilton, Allan Ramsay, David Martin, Sir H. Raeburn, Sir John Watson Gordon, Sir Daniel Macnee, John Phillip, W. Dyce, George P. Chalmers, etc. Other exhibitions might be mentioned, as those of the Society of Portrait Painters and of the Society of Miniature Painters, but it is hoped that the above list of portrait exhibitions is fairly complete. CHAPTER VII. PORTRAIT COLLECTIONS "It has always struck me that historical portrait galleries far transcend in worth all other kinds of national collections of pictures whatever; that in fad they ought to exist (for many reasons of all degrees of weight) in every country as among the most popular and cherished national possessions: and it is not a joyful reflection, but an extremely mournful one, that in no country is there at present such a thing to be found. What Louis-Philippe may have collected, in the way of French historical portraits, at Versailles I did not see: if worth much (which I hear it is not) it might have proved the best memorial left by him, one day. Chancellor Clarendon made a brave attempt in that kind for England; but his house and gallery fell all asunder, in a sad way; and as yet there has been no second attempt that I can hear of. As matters stand, historical portraits abound in England; but where they are, where any individual of them is, no man knows or can discover except by groping and hunting (underground as it were, and like the mole!) in an almost desperate manner: even among the intelligent and learned among your acquaintance, you inquire to no purpose."-CARLYLE, Projedt of a National Exhibition of Scottish Portraits, Letter to David Lainzg, 854. ("Critical and Miscellaneous Essays," 1872, vol. vii., p. I29-137.) GEORGE VILLIERS, Ist Duke of Buckingham, formed a collecion of piEtures, among which were many portraits. These, however, were sold gradually by the second duke, as he required money, and many of them came into the possession of Sir Peter Lely, who was the owner of a large number of valuable portraits by Vandyck and others. The first real attempt, however, to form a PORTRAIT COLLECTIONS I27 national colleEtion of portraits was that made by the great Earl of Clarendon, whose taste through life was for the society of eminent men. He used to say "that he never was so proud or thought himself so good a man as when he was the worst man in the company;" and further, that he " never knew a man arrive at any degree of reputation in the world who made choice or delighted in the company or conversation of those who in their qualities were inferior, or in their parts not much superior to himself." The same taste guided Clarendon in the selection of his portrait gallery, and he was careful to obtain good portraits of great men, even if they were not also fine pi6Eures. Evelyn helped him with suggestions, and in 1667 he sent a list of celebrities arranged under the three heads of " Learned, Politicians, Souldiers."' Rather later, when Clarendon had fled the country, Evelyn wrote in his Diary, "I dined with my Lord Cornbury at Clarendon House, now bravely furnish'd, especially with the pi&ures of most of our ancient and modern witts, poets, philosophers, famous and learned Englishmen: which colleftion of the Chancellor's I much commended and gave his Lordship a Catalogue of more to be added." The second Lord Dartmouth and first earl of that title (I 672-1750) accused Clarendon of sharp pra&ice in obtaining his portraits, but little weight is due to this lord's opinion, for, as Hallam says of him, he was " one whom splenetic humour makes no good witness against any one." On the demolition of Clarendon House the pictures were removed to the family residence in Oxfordshire-Cornbury House. Lord Cornbury succeeded to the title and property of his father, but his extravagance involved him in difficulties. Executions were put in his house, and several of 128 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS the portraits were sacrificed to the creditors. The others were saved by an arrangement between Henry, Earl of Clarendon, and his brother Laurence, Earl of Rochester, by which Cornbury became the property of the latter during the lifetime of the elder brother. Henry, 4th Earl of Clarendon, was even more of a spendthrift than the second earl, and again the portraits were in danger of dispersion. To prevent this calamity the property was transferred by the earl to his son, Lord Hyde, who wished to retain the portraits as heirlooms. Subsequently, the Duchess of Queensberry, daughter of the earl, disputed the will and deed poll, and was so far successful that the portraits were divided between the duchess and the representatives of another -daughter, who had married the Earl of Essex. The Duchess's half went to Lord Douglas, and.are now at Bothwell Castle, while the other half.are in the possession of the Earl of Clarendon at " The Grove," Watford. About the middle of the last century a younger son of William Villiers, 2nd Earl of Jersey, married.a daughter of the Earl of Essex, whose countess was heiress of the Hydes, and in 1776 he was created Earl of Clarendon. Such are the vicissitudes of the noble gallery of national portraits, which is described by Lady Theresa Lewis in a charming book, entitled -" Friends and Contemporaries of Lord Chancellor -Clarendon," I852 (3 vols.). It was not until the second half of the present century had commenced that the Nation awoke to the necessity of colle(ting the portraits of its great men. In March, 1856, the late Earl Stanhope made a motion in the House of Lords for the foundation of a National Portrait Gallery. Pre PORTRAIT COLLECTIONS I29 viously, that is, on February 27th, after giving notice of motion, he wrote to the late Prince Consort, requesting his support in these words: "It seems to me that if a space were at once obtained a yearly grant of /500 in the estimates would suffice for purchases, and that the sele&ion might be most properly confided to the present Fine Art Commissioners or any new commission over which your Royal Highness might be prevailed on to preside." The prince at once cordially concurred in Lord Stanhope's scheme. It would appear, from an extraa from a letter written by Sir Charles Eastlake to Lord Stanhope in January, 1856, which is printed in the catalogue of the National Portrait Gallery (1888), that the original suggestion came from the then President of the Royal Academy. Sir Charles Eastlake wrote: " I cannot help wishing that a gallery could be formed exclusively for authentic likenesses of celebrated individuals, not necessarily with reference to the merits of the works of art. I believe that an extensive gallery of portraits, with catalogues containing good and short biographical notices, would be useful in many ways, and especially as a not unimportant element of education." In the debate in the House of Lords on March 4th, I856, Lord Ellenborough expressed a hope that "the management [would] studiously and carefully endeavour to secure the exclusion of all unworthy persons." This appears to be a very mistaken view, and one which, happily, has not been adopted. What a strange history of England that would be in which all account of " unworthy persons" was omitted. The first purchase made by the trustees was a portrait of Sir Walter Raleigh, in March, 1857, the earliest donation having been the celebrated K 130 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Chandos Shakespeare, presented by the Earl of Ellesmere. Temporary apartments for the reception of the piEtures were provided at 29, Great George Street, Westminster, and the day of opening for the public was the s5th of January, 1859. In 1869, when the portraits amounted to 288, the collection was removed to the long building at South Kensington, which, during the great exhibition of 1862, had formed the southern boundary of the Horticultural Gardens. In this provisional building the gallery remained till the autumn of I885. In 1882 the accessions from Serjeant's Inn and the British Museum were united with the rest of the piCdures in chronological order. A small fire in the Inventions Exhibition caused considerable alarm for the safety of the portraits, and their temporary removal to the Bethnal Green Museum was decided upon. There they remained till 1895, when they were removed to the new gallery in St. Martin's Place, presented by Mr. W. H. Alexander, which was opened April, 1896. Several portraits were obtained during the ten years the colleCion remained at Bethnal Green, and these were temporarily housed in the lower rooms at the National Gallery in Trafalgar Square, or in the temporary offices at 20, Great George Street. The new gallery is not very satisfaltory, as the light in some of the rooms is quite insufficient, and the amount of space is inadequate for the proper housing of the collecion, so that we have the authority of the director for saying that it is difficult to find room for some of the most recent additions. In spite, however, of the defets of the new building, the Nation may well be proud of the collection, which forms one of the most instructive and interesting exhibitions in the country. PORTRAIT COLLECTIONS I3I It is a remarkable circumstance that in the forty years of its existence so large a collection of important pi&tures should have been brought together by purchase and donation. The gallery was fortunate in having for its guiding spirit from the first foundation so thoroughly competent an expert as Sir George Scharf, whose previous life had been a preparation for making him an ideal head of such an institution. It must ever be a source of regret that his life was not spared to see the collettion in which he took so great a pride housed in its new gallery. It is fortunate for the public that his successor (Mr. Lionel Cust) is one who will carry on the traditions of his office. It is not necessary to refer specially to various pidtures as this will be done in subsequent chapters, but a passing note must be made of the munificent present by Mr. G. F. Watts, R.A., of the matchless series of distinguished friends painted by him and now given to the Nation. On the 3rd and 4th of May, 1838, Messrs. Christie and Manson sold a most interesting " Collecion of Drawings from the original Portraits of Illustrious Persons in British History," made by NW. Hilton, R.A., W. Derby, R. W. Tatwell, William Haines and others, for the purposes of the engravers of Lodge's portraits. These drawings numbered 241, and realized at the sale from 8 guineas to /20 each. It is a pity that the series could not have been kept together, for it would have formed an invaluable addition to the National Portrait Gallery. Edinburgh and Dublin have followed the example of London, and a fine collecdion of portraits can be seen in the Scottish National Portrait Gallery;. while a sedion of the National Gallery of Ireland 132 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS has been devoted to the portraits of eminent Irishmen. There is an interesting colledion of portraits in the University of Glasgow, where are preserved those which formerly belonged to the celebrated Dr. William Hunter. The National Gallery in London contains some portraits which might with advantage be transferred to the National Portrait Gallery. There are, however, difficulties in the way, for the masterpieces of Hogarth, Reynolds, Gainsborough, and Copley must remain as fine illustrations of the English school of painting. The South Kensington Museum also contains some good portraits which should not be overlooked. Having referred to the chief public colleEtions, it is necessary to mention, though in a somewhat summary manner, the more special collections of the country. The portraits of royal personages and their courts are mostly to be found in the royal palaces. A large number of interesting portraits are housed in St. James's Palace and Buckingham Palace; Windsor Castle is filled with magnificent pidtures by Holbein, Rubens, Vandyck, Lawrence and others, but probably those most intimately associated with that splendid palace, and the best remembered by visitors, are the Vandycks. Hampton Court is a very museum of portraits, many of them fine and of great historical value, while others are of a somewhat doubtful charader. The Lely " Beauties," and those by Kneller, are among the chief treasures of this charming old palace. A valuable series of portraits of kings and queens is to be found in the collection of the Society of Antiquaries. In continuing, the references to the various classes of portraits in the order in which they are SIR GEORGE SCHARF', K.C.B., BY W. W. OULESS, R.A. PORTRAIT COLLECTIONS I33 I I I ^J arranged in the following chapters, attention may first be drawn to the dignitaries of the Church. A fine gallery of portraits is preserved at Lambeth Palace, which contains most of the archbishops from Warham (whose likeness by Holbein is said by Wornum to be a remarkable specimen of the painter's powers-a pidure as well as a portrait) down to the present time. There are portraits of earlier archbishops than Warham, but they are not of much authority, save that of Archbishop Chicheley (died 1443), which may be a likeness. There are also portraits of other churchmen more or less conneted with Lambeth. Other palaces and deaneries of the various dioceses contain series of portraits of the bishops and deans. The portraits at Chichester are said to form a very complete colleCtion, but the early ones are of no authority, as they were painted by Theodor orDirk Barentsen (in Latin Bernardi) in the sixteenth century, and the earliest authentic likeness is said to have been that of Bishop Sherburn (1508-36). Portraits of lawyers are to be found at the different Inns of Court, and of medical men at the Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons. At Greenwich Hospital is to be seen a singularly fine collection of portraits of naval commanders. This gallery was founded in 1823, and to form it, portraits were taken from Windsor Castle and Hampton Court, the gift of George IV. There is no such colletion of portraits of soldiers, although there are some portraits at Chelsea Hospital. Portraits of soldiers and sailors will also be found at the United Service Clubs. The Royal Society possesses a fine colledion of portraits of scientific men, and many good portraits of painters are preserved at the Royal Academy. I34 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS The Oriental Club contains a series of portraits of Orientalists. The gallery of portraits of aCtors and actresses at the Garrick Club (the foundation of which was that formed by the elder Charles Mathews) is famous, and there is also a curious colledion of old adtors' portraits in the Dulwich Gallery. At Oxford an interesting colleCtion of portraits of the older musicians is still preserved in the Schools. It was for many years attached to the Music School at the Bodleian Library. There are some curious old portraits in the Ashmolean Museum, and a fine portrait gallery is attached to the Bodleian. Few finer collections of portraits are to be found than those preserved in the halls and lodges of the various Oxford and Cambridge Colleges. The great companies of the City of London must also be noticed as possessing a considerable number of portraits of interest in their various halls. It is impossible to give any adequate account of the fine colledions of family portraits preserved in the great mansions of the country, but reference will be made to the contents of some of these in subsequent chapters. CHAPTER VIII. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS "Let a man read a character in my Lord Clarendon, and certainly never was there a better painter in that kind; he will find it improved by seeing a picture of the same person by Vandyck."-JONATHAN RICHARDSON. THE demand for portraits of our early kings and queens has naturally produced a supply, but many of them are of very little value, being merely reproduCtions from figures on tombs, heads on coins, and. other sources, while some are purely imaginary.' At Dulwich College are a series of portraits which were purchased by Edward Alleyn,; commencing with William the Conqueror and ending with Mary I. These are interesting from being of some antiquity, but otherwise they are of little value from having been painted long after the reigns of most of these monarchs. Horace Walpole was very proud of his piCtures which he supposed to represent Henry V., Henry VI., Henry VII., and Henry VIII., and he wrote to the Rev. William Cole on April 7th, '773, respecting the sale of the property of James West, President of the Royal Society: " In short I have bought his two pictures of Henry V. and Henry VIII. and their families, the first of which is engraved in my 'Anecdotes,' or as the catalogue See Chapter II., where the apocryphal series of the Kings of Scotland at Holyrood Palace is mentioned. I36 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS says, 'engraved by Mr. H. Walpole,' and the second described there. The first cost me /'38 and the last /84, though I knew Mr. West bought it for six guineas. But in faat these two, with my marriages of Henry VI. and VII., compose such a suite of the House of Lancaster, and enrich my Gothic house so completely, that I would not deny myself. The Henry VII. cost me as much and is less curious: the price of antiquities is so exceedingly risen too at present, that I expected to have paid more. I have bought much cheaper at the same sale, a picture of Henry VIII. and Charles V. in one piece, both much younger than ever I saw any portrait of either." Walpole was one of the first to take an interest in pidures of this charader, and as his critical power in respeat to art was not very acute, he was apt to believe what he wished to be the history of his treasures. The description of these picures occupies an important position in Walpole's " Anecdotes of Painting," in which book the author made available the researches of Vertue by placing them before the public in a readable form. It is unfortunate that his editors have not pointed out the erroneous charader of his various ascriptions. The first of these pidtures came from Tart Hall, St. James's Park, where it was sold in 17I9, and among Vertue's manuscripts it is described as consisting of "5 princes and 4 ladies kneeling, St. George on horseback." It was Walpole who asserted that it represented Henry V., and stated that it was originally an altar-piece at Shene, "and in all probability was painted by order of Henry VII. for the chapel of his palace there." Mr. John Gough Nichols pointed out in the ' Walpole's " Letters," ed. Cunningham, vol. v., p. 455. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I37 " Gentleman's Magazine" for 1842, at the time of the sale of the Strawberry Hill colletions, that Walpole was completely mistaken, and that the figures represented Henry VII. (and not Henry V.) and his family. Sir George Scharf followed up this identification with a full account of the pidure in an elaborate paper published in " Archaeologia" (vol. xlix. 243-300), entitled " On a Votive Painting of St. George and the Dragon, with kneeling figures of Henry VII., his Queen and Children, formerly at Strawberry Hill, and now in the possession of Her Majesty the Queen." Sir George Scharf supposes the pidure to be the work of a foreign artist, and painted between the years 1503 and I509. He says that there is no authority for supposing it to have been an altarpiece at Shene. The pidcure was bought by the Earl of Waldegrave at the Strawberry Hill Sale for 131 5s., and it was bequeathed by his widow to her last husband, Lord Carlingford. It was purchased by the Queen in 1883, and is now at Windsor Castle, hanging on one of the side staircases in the State apartments. "The marriage of Henry VI. and Margaret of Anjou," as Walpole erroneously called his pidture, was bought at the Strawberry Hill Sale by the Duke of Sutherland for /84. It was probably of foreign manufadture, and there is no kind of authority for the ascription. Walpole appears to have felt this, for he placed an inscription on the pidture which answered to the description in his own work. Mr. J. Gough Nichols supposed the subjedt to be " The Marriage of the Virgin." The painting which Walpole styled "The Marriage of Henry VII. and Elizabeth of York," and wrongly attributed to Mabuse, is an interesting I38 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS pidure, and is engraved in the "Anecdotes of Painting," as is the painting of Henry VII. and his family. It was bought for ~200 by Henrietta Louisa, Countess of Pomfret, and hung for some years at Easton Neston, Northamptonshire. The Earl of Oxford (according to Walpole) offered 500oo for the pidure, but his offer was not accepted; and Walpole bought it at Lord Pomfret's sale for /84. Mr. J. Dent bought it at the Strawberry Hill Sale in 1842 for /I78 ios., and Mrs. Dent of Sudeley lent it to the Tudor Exhibition in I890. This is really no marriage at all, but the arms (if genuine) show that Henry and Elizabeth are represented in it. The saint walking with the queen appears to be intended for St. Thomas the Apostle, and the other figure for St. Thomas of Canterbury. It is probable, however, that the arms have been added, and the figures converted. Mr. Cust believes the original to have been a madonna and saints, of which the central part has been painted out. Walpole's pi6lure, supposed to represent Princess Margaret, Prince Arthur, and Prince Henry, the three children of Henry VII., and attributed to Mabuse, was bought by Walpole from the collection of Richard Cosway: at the Strawberry Hill Sale it was bought for thirty guineas by Mr. J. Dent. There are several copies of this pidure in England, one at Hampton Court; and Sir George Scharf proved by reference to an old catalogue of the time of Henry VIII., that the picture really represented the three children of Christian II., King of Denmark, whose wife was the niece of Katharine of Aragon. Mrs. Dent lent this pi&6ure to the Tudor Exhibition, but in the description SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS 139 asserted her belief in the old ascription, and wrote: " The fad of there being four replicas in England and not one abroad favours the opinion that the figures are those of the children of Henry VII. There can, however, be no doubt that Sir George Scharf is corred, and his description is generally accepted. By far the most interesting of the portraits of our early kings is the beautiful full-length sitting figure of Richard II. in Westminster Abbey, which possibly is the work of an English artist. It may almost be said that this is the most valuable of English historical portraits, and as its history is very instrudive it will be well to set down the chief particulars that are known of this picture. It appears to have been always highly appreciated, although it was not always treated with the care that it deserved. John Weever alludes to it in his "Ancient Funerall Monuments " (I63 ), where he writes: "That beautiful pidure of a King sighing [sitting], crowned in a chaire of estate at the upper end of the quire in this church [Westminster Abbey] is said to be of him, which witnesseth how goodly a creature he was in outward lineament." In 1718 Vertue made an engraving of this portrait, but it was copied from a drawing taken by Grisoni (then in the possession of John Talman) and not dired from the pidure. John Dart reproduced this engraving in his " History and Antiquities of the Abbey Church of St. Peter's, Westminster," and stated in his description of the pidture that the lower part "is much defaced by the backs of those that fill that stall, which, if I mistake not, is usually the place of the Lord Chancellor when the House of Lords repair hither." Soon afterwards the pid6ure was restored and its I40 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS beauty destroyed by one Captain Broome, a printseller. The original piFture was painted in pure tempera on a gesso ground, and a coarse oil painting was placed over this, which has now happily been removed. - The oak panel upon which the picture is painted is 7 ft. by 3 ft. 7 in., and is " composed of six planks joined vertically, but so admirably bound together as to appear one solid mass." The piture was exhibited among the "Art Treasures" at Manchester in 1857, and again at the South Kensington Portrait Exhibition in 1866. Much attention was direated to it, and critics pointed out the crude painting over the original pidture. The late Mr. George Richmond, R.A., induced the Dean of Westminster to allow the picture to be cleaned and the modern painting cleared away, and for this purpose it was removed to the studio of Mr. Henry Merritt. Mr. Merritt kept a daily record of the operations, which is quoted in Sir George Scharf's interesting " Observations on the Westminster Abbey Portrait and other representations of King Richard II." (1867). On September 25th, 1866, Mr. Richmond noted in Mr. Merritt's record: " Mr. Merritt with great courage and equal skill removed the thick coating of re-paint from the left side of the face, revealing one quite unlike that which was taken off: hair red, colour of the eyes gone, but the colour of the flesh quite that of a red-haired person, and I think the eyes have been blue." The result of the labours of Messrs. Richmond and Merritt was the revelation of a beautiful pi(ture. Sir George Scharf in describing this restoration says: "Instead of a large, coarse, heavy-toned figure with very deep, solid shadows, strongly marked eyebrows, and a confident expression SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I41 (almost amounting to a stare) in the dark-brown sparkling eyes, we now have a delicate pale pidcure in carefully modelled form, with a placid and somewhat sad expression of countenance, gray eyes partially lost under heavy lids, pale yellow eyebrows, and golden-brown hair." " The well-devised folds of drapery " of the original "were quite destroyed" by the restorer, "through ignorance." In the Exhibition of 1868 the renewed piture was shown and was greatly admired. The work was a great success, but two mistakes were made: (I) no copy was taken before the restoration was put in hand, (2) the diaper work in the background was unnecessarily removed, so that the effedt of the gold ground is now much marred. In connedion with other portraits of Richard I I., Scharf quotes an interesting conversation between Queen Elizabeth and William Lambarde at Greenwich on the 4th of August, I60 I. Lambarde had rendered the queen an account of the rolls and documents deposited in the Tower of London when the conversation turned on Richard II. The queen said: ' I am Richard II., know ye not that?" " Lambarde. Such a wicked imagination was determined and attempted by a most unkind gent., the most adorned creature that ever your Majestie made. "Her Majestie. He that will forget God will also forget his benefa6tors; this tragedy was played 4otie times in open streets and houses." The queen then asked if Lambarde knew of any portrait of Richard, and told him of one which Lord Lumley had presented to her. At the end of her interview she forbad him falling upon his knee before her, and said: "Farewell, good and honest Lambarde." This quotation is of con 142 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS siderable interest' in connetion with aeting of a play on Richard II. (Shakespeare's or another's) at the time of Essex's rebellion. There were two portraits of Henry IV. at the South Kensington Exhibition of I866, one from Windsor Castle and the other belonging to the Earl of Essex. The latter pifture has a pedigree recording the gift from the king himself to Rowland Lentall, his yeoman of the robes, who distinguished himself at Agincourt. The inscription on the piEture is as follows: " Henry the Fourth, King of England, who layd the first stone of this hous [Hampton Court, Herefordshire], and left this pidture in it when he gave it to Lentall, whoe sold it to Cornwall of Burford, who sold it to the Auncestors of the Lord Coningesby in the reign of Henry the 6th." The very interesting series of portraits of early kings of England, belonging to the Society of Antiquaries, commences with a good one of Henry V. There are other portraits of this king at Eton College, the National Portrait Gallery, and elsewhere. Of Henry VI. there are portraits at Windsor Castle, Eton College, the National Portrait Gallery, and the Society of Antiquaries. The picture styled by Walpole the "Marriage of Henry VI. with Margaret of Anjou" (already alluded to) which was formerly at Strawberry Hill and was fully described by Walpole in his "Anecdotes of Painting," is now in the possession of the Duke of Sutherland. In 1442 an artist named Hans or Hansa (probably a German or Fleming) was engaged to paint the portraits of the three daughters of the Count ' "Bibl. Topog. Brit." Nichols, I790, vol. i., p. 525 (Appendix). SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS 143 of Armagnac, to guide the king in the choice of a wife. The instrudtions were as follows: "At your first comming thider, in al haste possible, that ye do portraie the iij doughters in their kertelles simple, and their visages lyk as ye see, their stature and their beaulte and color of skynne and their countenaunces, with al maner of features; and that one be delivered in al haste with the said portratur to bring it unto the Kinge, and he t' appointe and signe which hym lyketh, and therupon to sende you word how ye shall be governed." ("Journal by one of the suite of Thomas Beckington, A.D. 1442," ed. Nicholas Harris Nicolas, I828, p. IO.) On the 3rd of November Sir Robert Roos wrote to the count, stating that he had sent Hans to him, and begged that he would cause the business to be hastened. On the 22nd John de Batutz, Archdeacon of St. Antonin, wrote to the ambassadors describing the progress of the pi&ture. Sir George Scharf adds: " It is not known that the pitures ever arrived in England; the marriage was broken off, and shortly after King Henry received a portrait of Mlargaret of Anjou, his future wife, painted through the intervention of the Earl of Suffolk, by one of the first artists of France." It has been said that the artist was her father, King Rene d'Anjou. At Gorhambury, the seat of the Earl of Verulam,, there is a very interesting portrait of Edward Grimston, one of Henry VI.'s courtiers, by Petrus Christus, which is dated 1446, and respe&ting which the late Sir George Scharf wrote: " In one 1 Observations on the portrait of Edward Grimston and other portraits of the same period by George Scharf.-"Archaeologia," vol. xxxix., pp. 471-482. 144 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS respedt it stands alone in English portraiture, being a solitary instance in the fifteenth century of a pi&ure having a date, the name of the painter, and the person represented, equally well defined. The dated signature of Petrus Christus, combined with the shield of Grimston at the back, clearly establish the fad."l Grimston was ambassador to the Duchess of Burgundy in 1449, and was (writes Dr. Thomas Kent) the framer of the treaty of intercourse between England and Burgundy.' Petrus Christus was born at Baerle, and probably went to Bruges in I443, since he purchased the right of citizenship between September 2nd, I443, and September 2nd, 1449. He was a fellow-pupil of Jan Van Eyck under his brother Hubert, and he subsequently obtained considerable fame as a painter. It is probable that Grimston engaged him to paint his portrait when on a visit to Bruges. The pidture was exhibited at a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries in June, 1863, and a water-colour copy was made by Miss Odiavia Hill in I864 for the purpose of illustrating Scharf's paper published in "Archaeologia." Scharf thus describes this most interesting portrait: "Edward Grimston appears standing in a room with a raftered ceiling, having a circular 1 "Archaeologia," vol. xl., p. 471. 2 Instrucciones yeven by the Kynge oure souverain lorde to his trusty and welbeloved Johan Marney knyghte, Maistre Thomas Kent dofoure of lawe, William Pyrton, Edward Grymeston andJohnWodehous squyers iiij, iij or twaine of thaim, whom he sendeth his ambassatours at this tyme to his Towne of Calais for to commune trete appointe and conclude with the commissaries of the Duchasses of Bourgoigne in the -maters that foloweth." [May, I449.] Communicated to the Society of Antiquaries by XV. J. Thorns. "Archxeologia," vol. xxxix, p. 451. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS 145 window on the right-hand side. His figure is seen to the waist; he wears a black turbanlike cap with a long pendant of the same colour hanging in front of his left shoulder. His face is brownish and entirely divested of hair,-the head is slightly turned to the right; but the eyes are fixed on the spectator. There is a large proportion of shadow on the face, the light being admitted from the right. His outer dress is bright grass-green; the sleeves scarlet. Between the upper and under dress, which is white with a red collar, he wears a chain composed of massive gold rings. In his right hand he holds a small chain composed of the letters SS; beautifully wrought in silver and curiously linked together. On a string course, along the dado of the back of the room, are two peculiarly-shaped shields (in the Spanish fashion) bearing the Grimston arms; namely, argent on a fesse sable, three mullets of six points, or pierced gules. On the shield, at the back of the pidture, is the addition of a spot of ermine in the dexter chief points."' The pidturewas also shown at the South Kensington Exhibition of I866, where it hung next to a triptych containing portraits of Sir John Donne and his wife Elizabeth Hastings, accompanied by their daughter, kneeling in adoration before the Virgin, who is holding the infant Saviour, a piture attributed to Van Eyck, but which is really the work of Christus, although Dr. Waagen attributed it to Memling. It belongs to the Duke of Devonshire, and curiously enough it was for some time misnamed as containing portraits of Lord and Lady Clifford. There are two portraits of Edward IV. in the colle&tion of the Society of Antiquaries, one of "Catalogue of the Pidtures belonging to the Society of Antiquaries," by George Scharf, 1865. L 146 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS which is excellent, and similar, although on a smaller scale, to one at Windsor Castle. The latter was exhibited at South Kensington in 1866, and there is also at the National Portrait Gallery the portrait lent by the Society of Antiquaries. There are portraits of Edward's queen (Elizabeth Woodville) at Hampton Court, Windsor Castle, and Queens' College, Cambridge, and all three were exhibited at South Kensington in 1866. At the Society of Antiquaries there is a portrait of Margaret of York, the sister of Edward IV. and the third wife of Charles the Bold of Burgundy, to whom she was married in 1468. There are portraits of Edward's mistress, Jane Shore, at Hampton Court, Eton College, and King's College, Cambridge, but none of these can be said to be at all satisfatory, and they are all probably taken from Diane de Poi&iers. There is an excellent portrait of Richard III. at the Society of Antiquaries, and others at Windsor Castle, the National Portrait Gallery, and Knowsley, in the possession of the Earl of Derby; the latter was exhibited at South Kensington in I866. The number of portraits of Henry VII. are very considerable. Windsor Castle, Christ Church, Oxford, the National Portrait Gallery, the Society of Antiquaries, and many other galleries can show examples. A portrait lent by the Hon. Mrs. Greville Howard to the South Kensington Exhibition of i866 is inscribed: " Kynge Henry ye seventh, Johan de Maubeuse F." The pidure lent by Mr. Henry Musgrave to this same exhibition and described as "Henry VII. and Ferdinand of Arragon, by Hans Holbein," was not by Holbein, but represented Charles V. and probably his. brother Ferdinand. awd - HENRY VII., BY AN UNKNOWN FLEMISH ARTIST. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I47 The portrait of Henry's queen, Elizabeth of York, daughter of Edward IV. and Elizabeth Woodville, was frequently painted, and examples may be seen at Christ Church, Oxford, and at the National Portrait Gallery. The portraits of Arthur, Prince of Wales, the elder son of Henry VI I., are extremely rare, but Sir George Scharf found at Windsor a portrait not designated, which he supposed to represent this prince, and his attribution is corroborated by Henry VIII.'s catalogue, although in Charles I.'s catalogue the portrait is described as Henry VIII. Prince Arthur has a red cap and a collar of red and white roses.' This pifture was shown at the Tudor Exhibition. A water-colour drawing by E. Edwards of Prince Arthur, formerly at Strawberry Hill and now at Knowsley, was supposed by Walpole to represent Henry, Duke of Richmond, the natural son of Henry VIII. The original picture from which this drawing was taken was in the possession of the Countess Dowager of Jersey at Middleton Park. Scharf considered the copy to be the better of the two, as the original has been restored and re-painted.2 It was once supposed that there was a portrait of Prince Arthur in the pic6ure described as the three children of Henry VII., but as already mentioned this was a false ascription, and the picture really represented the three children of Christian II. of Denmark. The portraits of Henry VIII. were a special feature of the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866, from their strongly marked characteristics, which seemed to make that king the dominating 1 "Archaeologia," xxxix. 246. 2 " Archaeologia," xxxix. 458. I48 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS personage in every room in which his portrait was hung. One of these portraits was lent by the Earl of Warwick, and in the catalogue no painter's name was given, but the same pi&ture was described by Dr. Waagen as a masterpiece of Holbein, " as true in the smallest details as if the king himself stood before you. There is in these features a brutal egotism, an obstinacy, and a harshness of feeling, such as I have never yet seen in any human countenance. In the eyes, too, there is the suspicious watchfulness of a wild beast, so that I became uncomfortable from looking at it a long time; the want of simplicity of the forms, the little rounding of the whole, notwithstanding the wonderful modelling of all the details, the brownishred local tone of the flesh, the gray of the shadows, and the very light general effed show this pi6lure to be a transition from the second to the third manner of Holbein, and that it may have been painted about I530." This pidure was lent to the Tudor Exhibition by Lord Warwick. In 1861 Sir George Scharfgave in the "Archaeologia" a note of such portraits of Henry VIII. as are deserving of special notice, from bearing indications of the dates at which they were executed. They are thirteen in number, and may be shortly indicated as follows: I. The first portrait mentioned by Scharf, ' although not perhaps the earliest, is a kneeling figure of a monarch in the great east window of St. Margaret's Church, Westminster, to which the names of Henry VII. and Prince Arthur have been assigned. I feel, however, satisfied that it really represents Henry VIII. as a young man, and that the kneeling queen on the opposite side of the window is Catherine of Arragon." HENRY VIII., BY LUKE HORNEBOLT. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I49 2. A large picture, finely painted on panel, at Hampton Court (No. 313). 3. A fine pi6ture on panel, belonging to Earl Spencer. 4. A circular miniature at Windsor, " An0 etatis XXXV~. 5. A portrait in a finely illuminated page of the Liber Niger, or Records of the Order of the Garter, by Dr. Robert Aldrydge, I534-38. 6. The next portrait bearing a date is not contemporary, but evidently taken from some authentic representation of the king. It is at Windsor, and is painted on the back of a playing card by Nicholas Hilliard, who was not born till I547. Inscribed in golden letters on the dark blue-black ground " 1536, aetatis sure 46." 7. A miniature in the royal colle6tion at Windsor, inscribed " An~ xxxv." Scharf considers this to be the year of the King's reign (I543-4). 8. A much finer miniature, probably the original of No. 7, belonging to Mr. Magniac when exhibited in the Loan Collection at South Kensington, 1862. 9. Portrait at Windsor, when the king was beardless, but without a date. 10. An important portrait of the king in the court room of St. Bartholomew's Hospital, London, which is inscribed "Anno Dni. 1544. IEtatis sua 55," engraved in Ellis's "Original Letters" (3rd series, vol. iii.). I I. A half-length portrait, life-size, on panel at Longleat (Marquis of Bath's), inscribed "Anno reg. 36. Etatis 54." 12. Miniature at Windsor, painted in oil colours on a circular piece of oak 2- in. in diameter, inscribed " Henr. 8 Rex. Angl., aeta. s. 57." I3. " The latest portrait of the king is a curious 15o HISTORICAL PORTRAITS engraving described by Granger, vol. i., p. 95, and bearing date I548. It is the work of Cornelius Matsis and expresses the peculiar charat6er of the king so strongly as to have been considered by some as a mere caricature. It is, however, exceedingly well drawn, and accords very much in style of costume, fur tippet, small moustaches and bloated countenance with the last-named painting." " From a comparison of these portraits there can be little doubt that Henry's eyes were of a clear blue-gray."' Scharf does not mention the fine full-length portrait by Lucas de Heere in the Master's Lodge, Trinity College, Cambridge, and apparently he was not acquainted with the picture as the work of that artist, nor the important full-length portrait at Ditchley (Viscount Dillon). Mr. J. G. Nichols and Sir George Scharf contributed valuable papers to "Archaeologia" on Holbein's portraits of the royal family of England, and more particularly upon the several portraits of the queens of Henry VIII.2 The era of Holbein as a painter of English portraits is limited within a period of sixteen years, extending from 1527 to 1543. He could scarcely have painted Katharine of Arragon, because she was ill and living in retirement when he came to England, nor Catharine Parr, as she was not married until July, I543, only a month or two before his death. The names written upon the 1 Remarks on some portraits from Windsor Castle, Hampton Court, and Wilton House, by George Scharf.-" Archaeologia,' vol. xxxix. pp. 245-27I. 2 Remarks upon Holbein's portraits of the royal family of England, by J. G. Nichols, "Archeologia," xl. 7i-80. Notes on several of the portraits described in the preceding memoir, and on some others of the like nature, by George Scharf, " Archeologia," xl. 8 -85. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I 5 I Holbein drawings are little to be relied upon, and in particular no faith can be placed in those described as Anne Boleyn, Anne of Cleves, and Katharine Howard. These were purchased at Dr. Mead's sale in I755, and do not belong to Queen Caroline's series. The pi&ture lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of I866 by Sir Montague J. Cholmeley, Bart., and described as a portrait of Queen Anne Boleyn by Holbein, really represents Anne, daughter of Ladislaus, who succeeded her brother, Louis I I., as Queen of Hungary and Bohemia, and married Ferdinand, the brother of the Emperor Charles V. The pisture is dated 1530, and signed by the monogram IB, which stands for Hans Baldung, Binck, or Brosamer. Sir George Scharf believed a circular miniature, belonging to Mr. Charles Sackville Bale in 1863, inscribed in gold across the blue background " an0 XXV," to be a true portrait of Anne Boleyn. The date represents the twenty-fifth yearof Henry's reign (April 22nd, 1533, to April 2Ist, I534), and Anne was publicly crowned June Ist, I533. The piature of Jane Seymour by Holbein in the Imperial Gallery at Vienna is dated I537, and there is a fine piture of her by Holbein at Woburn. Holbein also painted, in I537, on the wall of the Privy Chamber at Whitehall, a picture of Henry VIII. and Queen Jane Seymour, and Henry VII. and Elizabeth of York in the background. This was destroyed in the fire of 1698, but a reduced copy of it was made in 1667 by Remigius (Remee) van Leemput, which is preserved at Hampton Court. An engraving was made by Vertue and published by the Society of Antiquaries. The present Duke of Devonshire possesses Holbein's original cartoon for the Whitehall fresco, which he lent to the Tudor Exhibition (I890). I52 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS In the Strawberry Hill ColledCion was a fine miniature by Holbein described in the catalogue (p. 146, No. 69) as a very rare and original portrait of Katharine Parr. It was bought by Mr. J. Dent for ten guineas. Sir George Scharf points out that the inscription " an0 XXXII " is to be found in the background, which represents the regnal year of Henry VIII., or 1540-4I. Now the king married Katharine Howard in August of this year, and therefore Scharf believes this to be her portrait. There are miniatures of Katharine Howard by Holbein at Windsor, and in the collection of the Duke of Buccleuch. Respecting the portrait of Anne of Cleves, which has become historical, Dr. Nicholas Wotton wrote from Duren to the king, August I Ith, 1539: "Your Grace's servant Hanze Albein hath taken th' effigies of my Lady Anne and the Ladye Amelye [her sister], and hathe expressed their images verye livelye."' This is probably the pifture now at Paris. Another possible wife for Henry VIII. was the subjed of one of Holbein's finest portraits. This was Christina of Denmark, Duchess of Milan, who, after the death of Jane Seymour, was looked upon as a suitable consort for the king. Holbein was sent to Brussels where the duchess was staying with her aunt Mary, Regent of the Netherlands, for the express purpose of taking her portrait, and he acquitted himself of his task in three hours. Another portrait had been sent off by desire of the duchess, but it was very inferior to Holbein's sketch, and she tried to get it back. John Hutton, diplomatic agent from the British Court, wrote as 1 Archaeologia," vol. xl. p. 77. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I53 follows to Cromwell: "Mr. Haunce having but three hours'space hath showed himself to be master of that science (the making of physiognomies) for it is very perfeat, the other is but slobbered in comparison to it, as by the sight of both your lordship shall well apperceive." It was difficult to associate this account of a three hours' sketch with the large finished pi&dure belonging to the Duke of Norfolk, which was exhibited for some years in the National Gallery; but Sir George Scharf thought he had solved the difficulty. One day when he was in the waitingroom situated close by the entrance to the royal pew in the Private Chapel at Windsor Castle, he noticed a pi6lure in a prominent position which was unnamed. He was struck by the manner of holding the gloves adopted in this portrait, which reminded him at once of the portrait of the Duchess of Milan at Arundel Castle. On further inspe&tion he came to the conclusion that this was the original three hours' sketch from which the Duke of Norfolk's finished pidture was afterwards copied.1 Henry VIII. and his advisers were anxious for the marriage, but after long negotiations Charles V. broke off the match. The good story of the duchess's message to the king, " that she had but one head, had she had two one should be at the service of his majesty," is not now supposed to be true. Her adual answer was, " You know I am the emperor's poor servant and must follow his pleasure." The duchess afterwards married Francis, Duke of Lorraine and Bar. She was daughter of "Remarks on a portrait of the Duchess of Milan recently discovered at Windsor Castle, probably painted by Holbein at Brussels in the year I538." " Archaeologia," xl. Io6-II2. I54 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Christian of Denmark, and one of the three children called erroneously the children of Henry VII. Scharf identified her with the little black-eyed girl wearing a peculiar hood, on the right-hand side in the Hampton Court pidture. Scharf says in his paper that the authority for many of the portraits accepted as portraits of the wives of Henry VIII. is very vague and uncertain, and he adds that none of these queens were honoured with a monumental effigy. Mr. Nichols refers to a fine whole-length of Katharine Parr at Newnham Paddox, the seat of the Earl of Denbigh, and to an identical picure at Glendon Hall, Northamptonshire. The supposed representation of this queen in Lodge's " Portraits" is not authentic. The great picture at Hampton Court. " Henry VI II. and his Family," now in the queen's audience chamber, represents Katharine Parr seated by the king, with Prince Edward, the Princesses Mary and Elizabeth, and Will Somers and Jane the fool. It was shown at the Tudor Exhibition, in the catalogue of which it is attributed to Gwillim Stretes (?). Scharf is of opinion that the head called Princess Mary among the drawings at Windsor was a study of Katharine Parr for this picture. There is a miniature of Jane Seymour by Hilliard at Windsor, which is inscribed " 1536, aetatis sume 27." To return to Holbein. Mr. Nichols believes that there is little doubt that that artist drew the king's natural son, Henry Fitz-Roy, Duke of Richmond, who lived till 1536, though his portrait, if existing, is not now recognized. At the Pinakothek, Munich, is a portrait of Sir Bryan Tuke, treasurer of Henry VIII., which is signed "Jo. HIolpein," a replica of which is, in the /.A:.{: EDWARD VI. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS 155 possession of the Duke of Westminster. At the Louvre there are four Holbeins: (I) of William Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury, (2) Sir Thomas More, (3) Sir Robert Southwell, (4) Anne of Cleves. At Longleat (the Marquis of Bath's) there is a portrait of the Lord Admiral, Thomas Lord Seymour of Sudeley, which has been wrongly attributed to Holbein. Of this statesman Latimer said he was "a man furthest from the fear of God that ever he heard of in England." The fine pi6ture at Strawberry Hill containing portraits of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, and Mary, Queen Dowager of France, was bought by Walpole at Lord Granville's sale. At his own sale the Duke of Bedford bought it for O535 IOS.' There are many portraits of Edward VI., and several of these were shown at the South Kensington Exhibition of I866, and at the Tudor Exhibition, I890. Most of the portraits attributed to Holbein he could not have painted, but some few, painted when the prince was very young, may have been by him. The pi6ure belonging to Bridewell Hospital of Edward VI. presenting the charter to that institution, I553, was long Sir George Scharf concludes one of his important articles in "Archaeologia," in which he had largely used for identification of certain portraits an inventory of royal furniture and property made in the reign of Henry VIII. (1542), with this valuable suggestion: "I must further point out the great value of the manuscript catalogue of King Henry's pidtures, as affording a very important means of obtaining information on pictures in England than any hitherto published. It would in my opinion -from the variety of works of art incidentally mentioned, and sometimes even carefully recorded in its pages-admit of illustration and editing from various sources; and, if printed, would form a volume of extreme usefulness for the guidance and service of all who are interested in subjects of this nature.""Archaeologia," vol. xxxix. p. 264. I56 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS attributed to Holbein, but is now supposed by some to have been painted by Gwillim Stretes. Although, however, this ascription is possible it is only a guess. The portrait in this book is taken from the pidture in the National Portrait Gallery, which represents the prince at the age of six years. There is a drawing at Windsor of Mary I. (when the Lady Mary) by Holbein. Sir Antonio Moro's portrait of this queen is at the Gallery at Madrid, but Van Mander states that Moro made many copies of the pidture, and one of these, which was exhibited at the Tudor Exhibition, belongs to the Dean and Chapter of Durham. At Woburn Abbey there is a portrait of the Queen, represented as in an apartment with her husband Philip II., which Mr. Lionel Cust believes to be the work of Lucas de Heere. The Society of Antiquaries possesses an interesting portrait of her, also by Lucas de Heere, dated I554. Sir George Scharf says that it is the largest signed pi&ture that he had met with by the hand of Lucas de Heere, but in saying this he overlooked the full-length of Henry VIII. in the Master's Lodge, Trinity College, Cambridge, which is signed by De Heere. Queen Elizabeth was fortunate in having the opportunity of being painted by several first-rate artists who came from abroad to her Court. Mr. J. G. Nichols, in discussing the authenticity of some of the pidtures attributed to Holbein, points out that Elizabeth was not quite ten years old when this painter died, and says that he was not acquainted with any pidure or miniature of the Lady Elizabeth from the hands of Holbein. Very early in her reign, I563, she appears to have been dissatisfied with the portraits painted of her, and it was proposed to issue a proclamation QUEEN MARY I., BY JOANNES CORVUS. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I57 on the subjeEt, but from some reason or other it does not appear to have been published. The draught in the handwriting of Cecil is a very curious document, and runs as follows: " Forasmuch as thrugh the natural desire that all sorts of subjedts and people, both noble and mean, have to procure the portrait and pifure of the Queen's Majestie, great nomber of Paynters, and some Printers and gravers, have alredy, and doe dayly attempt to make in divers manners portraitures of hir Majestie in paynting, graving and prynting, wherein is evidently shewn that hytherto none hath sufficiently expressed the naturall representation of hir Majestie's person, favor or grace, but for the most part have also erred therein, as thereof dayly complaints are made amongst hir Majestie's loving subjedis, in so much that for redress hereof hir Majestie hath lately bene so instantly and so importunately sued unto by the Lords of hir Consell and others of hir nobility, in resped of the great disorder herein used, not only to be content that some speciall coning payntor might be permitted by access to hir Majestie to take the natural representation of hir Majestie whereof she hath bene allwise of her own right disposition very unwillyng, but also to prohibit all manner of other persons to draw, paynt, grave or pourtrayet hir Majestie's personage or visage for a time, untill by some perfed patron and example the same may be by others followed. "Therefor hir Majestie being herein as it were overcome with the contynuall requests of so many of hir Nobility and Lords, whom she cannot well deny, is pleased that for their contentations some coning person mete therefor, shall shortly make a pourtraidt of hir person or visage to be participated to others for satisfation of hir loving subjeds, and 158 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS furdermore commandeth all manner of persons in the mean tyme to forbear from paynting, graving, printing or making of any pourtrait of hir Majestie, until some speciall person that shall be by hir allowed shall have first finished a pourtraidture thereof, after which fynished, hir Majestie will be content that all other painters, printers, or gravers, that shall be known men of understanding, and so thereto licensed by the hed officers of the plaices where they shall dwell (as reason it is that every person should not without consideration attempt the same) shall and maye at their pleasures follow the sayd patron or first pourtraiature. And for.that hir Majestie perceiveth that a grete nomber of hir loving subjeCds are much greved and take great offence with the errors and deformities allredy committed by sondry persons in this behalf, she straitly chargeth all hir officers and ministers to see to the due observation hereof, and as soon as maybe to reform the errors already committed, and in the mean tyme to forbydd and prohibit the shewing or publication of such as are apparently deformed, until they may be reformed which are reformable." 1 We do not know exatly what was done, but Raleigh, in the preface to his " History of the World," states that "by the Queen's own commandment all pidtures by unskilful and common painters were knocked in pieces and cast in the fire; ' and John Evelyn at a later date makes the same statementwith fuller detail in his " Sculptura." 1 "The Draught of a Proclamation in the year 1563, relating to Persons making Portraits of Queen Elizabeth. From the: original in the Paper Office, in the Hand-writing of Secretary Cecil, with his Corrections, and among his papers. Communicated bySir Joseph Ayloffe, Bart." —"Archaeologia," vol. ii.. p. I69. QUEEN ELIZABETH) BY F. ZUCHIARO. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I59 He writes: "Had Queen Elizabeth been thus circumspeat [as Alexander the Great was] there had not been so many vile copies multiplied from an ill painting, as being called in and brought to Essex House did for several years furnish the pastry men with peels for the use of their ovens." Twenty years later a draught of a warrant to George Gower, the queen's serjeant-painter, was prepared, giving him sole authority to paint the queen, as alluded to on a previous page; this is preserved among the Cottonian Charters in the British Museum, and was printed by Sir Frederick Madden, in " Notes and Queries" (Ist Series, vi. 238); but this has no seal, and the date is left blank, so that it does not appear to have been executed. Considering the famous painters who had been, or were, in England, it is strange that such a privilege should have been proposed in favour of Gower, of whose talents we know nothing. Mr. Freeman M. O'Donoghue, to whom we owe a most valuable " Descriptive and Classified Catalogue of Portraits of Queen Elizabeth" (1894), writes that "It may fairly be said that of no other sovereign of this or any foreign country are the portraits taken at all periods of life so numerous as. those of Elizabeth, Queen of England." Probably most readers will come to the same conclusion from their own experience. Mr. O'Donoghue has arranged the painted portraits in the following order: (a) when princess, (b) wearing a small frill ruff, (c) with radiating ruff unbroken, (d) with, radiating ruff, open in front, (e) with high ruff, openin front, (f) in fancy dress. These number seventynine, and in addition there are five drawings and thirty-four miniatures. In the first class there are three pi6tures. The first is a life-size, standing, and seen to below the knees, a piature at Windsor I6o HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Castle, which was at the National Portrait Exhibition of I866 (No. 247). The next is in the pidture at Hampton Court, of Henry VIII. and his family. The third, which is not a contemporary pi&6ure, was lent by the Dowager Duchess of Buccleuch from Ditton Park, Slough. It represents Henry VIII., his children, and Will Somers, and was at the Tudor Exhibition of I890. Two very interesting pi6tures are the allegorical one at Hampton Court, by Lucas de Heere, where the three goddesses-Juno, Minerva, and Venusare dismayed at the beauties of Elizabeth, and the emblematical picture of Henry VIII. and his successors, also attributed to Lucas de Heere, which belongs to Mrs. Dent of Sudeley Castle, and was formerly in the possession of Horace Walpole. On the frame of this picture are painted in gold letters these lines: "A face of muche nobilitye loe in a little roome, Four states with theyr conditions hear shadowed in a showe, A father more than valyant, a rare and virtuous son, A zealous daughter in her kind what els the world doth knowe, And last of all a virgin queen to England's joy we see, Successively to hold the right and virtues of the three." In smaller letters at the foot of the pi6ture is: "The Queen to Walsingham this Tablet sent, Mark of her people and her own contente." The famous " Rainbow" portrait by Zucharo, at Hatfield House (Marquis of Salisbury), must be specially mentioned. This life-size piture of the queen, holding in her right hand a rainbow over which are the words: " Non sine sole iris." It was exhibited at the National Portrait Exhibition of I866 (No. 267), and at the Tudor Exhibition, 1890,(No. I410 B), and was greatly admired at both SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I6i places. Mr. O'Donoghue writes of the queen's personal appearance: "A study of Elizabeth's portraits and of the verbal descriptions put on record by her contemporaries, leads to the conclusion that, though never really beautiful, in her youth she possessed considerable personal attractions; she was slightly above the middle height ('neither too high nor too low,' as she complacently observed to Sir James Melvill), with a graceful figure and long delicate hands, of which she was very proud; she had a fair, clear complexion, with pale auburn hair and black eyes (a somewhat unusual combination), her mouth was small, with thin close-set lips, her forehead broad and high, and her nose aquiline, a form which became strongly marked in old age. Her eyebrows must have been very light both in colour and quantity, as in most of her portraits they are scarcely indicated; her hair was always dressed in short, crisp curls, and in her later years were certainly false; in the inventory of her wardrobe, taken after her death, mention is made of a large assortment of wigs." Certainly the queen is very attra6tive looking in the beautiful portrait by Zucharo at Jesus College, Oxford, where there are two other portraits of the queen. It is the general opinion that Elizabeth was flattered by the portrait painters, but this was not the case with Mark Garrard. Mr. O'Donoghue writes, " The majority of the portraits of the queen, which represent her in old age, were painted by or in the school of Marc Gheeraerdts... his works are distinguished by their hard uncompromising truth and careful elaboration of the details of the costume. Of all the portraits of Elizabeth those at Welbeck [South Kensington Loan Exhibition, 1862, No. 2573, and Tudor M I62 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Exhibition, 1890, No. 465] and Cambridge [University Gallery, National Portrait Exhibition, I866, No. 363, and Tudor Exhibition, No. 460] by Gheeraerdts, may be considered to give the most perfe(tly accurate idea of her appearance." The queen objet6ed to shadows in her pi&tures, and preferred to be painted in the open air, where the different light and absence of shade were favourable to her too strongly marked features. She expressed her opinion very definitely to Nicholas Hilliard, who has recorded it in his MS. treatise on miniature painting: This makes me to remember the words also and reasoning of her Matie, when first I came in her highness presence to drawe, whoe after showing me howe shee notied great difference of shadowing in the works, and diversity of Drawers of sundry nations, and that the Italians [who] had the name to the cunningest and to drawe best, shadowed not, requiring of me, the reason of it, seeing that best to shewe ones selfe nedeth no shadow of place but rather the oppen light, to which I graunted, affirmed that shadowes in pidtures were indeed caused by the shadow of the place, or coming in of the light as only one waye into the place at some small or highe windowe which many workmen covet to werke in for ease to their sight, and to give unto them a grosser lyne and a more aparent lyne to be deserned, and maketh the werke imborse well, and showe very wel afar of, which to Limning work nedeth not, because it is to be veewed of necessity in hand neare unto the eye, heer her Matie conseued the reason, and therfore chosse her place to sit in for that perposse in the open ally of a goodly garden where no tree was neere, nor anye shadowe at all save that as the heaven is lighter then the earthe soe must that littel shadowe that was from SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I63 the earthe, this her Maties curiouse Demaund hath greatly bettered my Judgment besides divers other like questions in Art by her most excellent Matie which to speak or writ of weare fitter for some better clarke," etc. The number of interesting historical characters conneEted with the Court of Elizabeth is so great that notice of the portraits of a few of them only can be given here. The famous Frances Brandon, duchess of Suffolk (mother of Lady Jane Grey), who ventured to send a spirited retort to Queen Elizabeth, is worthy of first mention. The duchess married, as her second husband, Adrian Stokes, her master of the horse. When the queen heard of this she said, "What, has she married her horse-keeper?" Here was too good an opportunity for a retort to be passed by, as the Earl of Leicester was the queen's master of the horse, so Sir William Cecil (afterwards Lord Burghley) answered, " Yes, madam, and she says your Majesty would like to do so too." So Walpole, who possessed a picture by Lucas de Heere containing portraits of the duchess and her second husband, tells the story in his "Anecdotes of Painting." The picture was purchased at the Strawberry Hill Sale by the Hon. and Rev. Heneage Finch for eighty-eight guineas. It was exhibited at South Kensington in 1868 (No. 644) by Mr. C. Wynne Finch, and at the Tudor Exhibition in 1890 by Colonel Wynne Finch. A good portrait of Lord Burghley, attributed to Mark Garrard and belonging to the Marquis of Exeter, was shown at South Kensington in i866, as was also the curious portrait of the minister riding on a mule, which is in the Pi6ture Gallery at the Bodleian Library. At the Tudor Exhibition there were nine portraits of Lord Burghley. i64 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS A portrait of Mildred, daughter of Sir Anthony Coke, and wife for nearly fifty years of Sir William Cecil, Lord Burghley, by Zucharo, was lent by the Marquis of Salisbury to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866. A very fine portrait of Walter Devereux, I st Earl of Essex, by Sir Antonio Moro, belonging to the Earl of Yarborough, was exhibited in 1866. A portrait of his widow, Lettice Knollys, who afterwards married Dudley, Earl of Leicester, belonging to the Marquis Townsend, was not shown till 1868. A singularly beautiful portrait of their son, Robert, 2nd Earl of Essex, is preserved at the Master's Lodge, Trinity Lodge, Cambridge; this was one of the eleven portraits of Essex lent to the Tudor Exhibition. There is a remarkable contrast between the outward appearance of the two favourites of Elizabeth; in fad, so great a diversity is there in their different expressions that it is difficult to understand how, if she liked the one she could have cared for the other. Leicester's portrait in the Bodleian Gallery is that of a man in whom there is little to admire,-there is a bold, reckless look in the features that have little handsomeness about them; while the portrait of Essex at Cambridge shows a refined though weak man, full of poetical feeling, to whom the spedator is instin(tively drawn. Although we know little about her, there is a romantic interest about Elizabeth Vernon, cousin of Essex and wife of Henry Wriothesley, 3rd Earl of Southampton, the friend and patron of Shakespeare, whose portrait was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of i866 by Mr. G. Digby Wingfield Digby, and to the Tudor Exhibition by Mr. J. D. Wentworth Digby. Her maiden name SOVEREIGNS AND TI-IEIR COURTS I65 still survives in Vernon Place, Bloomsbury (formerly Southampton) Square. Queen Elizabeth's maids of honour were a lively and interesting body of young ladies, and Elizabeth Throckmorton, who married Sir Walter Raleigh and fell into disgrace at Court, was one of the most interesting of them. Her portrait was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of i868 by Mr. J. T. Gibson Craig. Some of these maids of honour, however, had very faint ideas of morality or decency. There was Anne Vavasour, who was gentlewoman of the bedchamber to Queen Elizabeth in 1580, and maid of honour in I590, and whose portrait was sent to the Tudor Exhibition by Sir Henry Vavasour, Bart. She married John Finch and then left him to keep house for Sir Henry Lee, K.G. In I618 she incurred penalties under the High Commission Court for having two husbands alive, but in 1622 she received a partial pardon. Another maid of honour of ill repute was Mary Fitton, who got into trouble with William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke, who was banished from Court for a time for having a child by her. Her name was brought prominently forward a few years ago under the supposition that she was the dark lady of Shakespeare's sonnets. An excuse for mentioning her here may be found in the facet that her claims to conneHion with Shakespeare were shattered by means of her portrait. Search was long made for this and at last one was-found, with the result that Mary Fitton was discovered to be fair and not dark. The good fame of maids of honour-had not risen much in the eighteenth century, when a coachman left his son 300o on condition that he never married one of them. The portrait of Queen Elizabeth's giant porter, I66 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS whose height was 8- feet, and his hand 17 inches long, is still preserved at Hampton Court. It would have been sold with Charles I.'s gallery during the Rebellion, but Cromwell was interested in it, and commanded that it should be kept. Portraits said to be likenesses of Mary Queen of Scots are so numerous, and so unlike one another, that they have long been the puzzle of experts. If we are to judge by the appearance of many of them the Queen was by no means so beautiful as she has been described by enthusiastic admirers. The portraits of James I. are numerous, but none of them are attra&tive. The one engraved for this book is attributed to Zucharo, and was taken when James was a boy. There is another portrait of him at the age of fifty-five by Van Somer, in the National Portrait Gallery, and the Marquis of Lothian has one by J. Jameson. At Hampton Court there is a portrait of James's queen, Anne of Denmark, dressed for the chase, by Van Somer. It was her habit to go out with a crossbow and shoot at the deer, but her success was not great, and on one occasion she killed the king's favourite dog. At this same palace there is an interesting pi6ture to which an anecdote is attached. It represents Henry, Prince of Wales, and Robert Devereux, 3rd Earl of Essex, as hunting, and it is related that one day when these two were playing tennis they fell out over the score. The prince so far lost his temper as to call Essex the son of a traitor, upon which the earl took up his racket and hit the prince across the head. Mr. A. Stirling of Keir showed at the Stuart Exhibition a small pidture containing portraits of the prince and his mother, Anne of Denmark. JAMES I. (AGED 8 YEARS), BY F. ZUCHARO. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS i67 At Longleat is a portrait of the prince attributed, probably incorretly, to Zucharo. When Prince Henry died, Richard, Earl of Dorset, exclaimed: "Our rising sun is set; it had scarcely shone, and with him all our glory lies buried." Another child of James I. was even more popular than the Prince of Wales. Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, popularly known as " the Queen of Hearts," was extolled in these lines by Sir Harry Wotton, Provost of Eton: " You meaner beauties of the night, That poorly satisfy our eyes, More by your number than your light; You common people of the skies, What are you when the moon shall rise?" The portrait of her by Honthorst at Hampton Court is good. At this palace there is a small pidure, by Van Bassen, representing her and her husband dining in public. There are two portraits of this queen at the National Portrait Gallery-one by Miereveldt and the other by Honthorst. Viscount Powerscourt showed a portrait of her by Mytens at the Stuart Exhibition. Sir George Scharf mentions a pidture at Buckingham Palace which was pointed out to him as representing Prince Arthur, Prince Henry, and Princess Margaret. He saw at once from the costume and certain other points about the piEture that it belonged to a later period. Next it was clear that one child only was a boy, the other two being girls. The pic6ure belonged to Charles I. and was accurately described in Van der Noort's catalogue as the children of the King and Queen of Bohemia-"the Palgrave's three first born children at Heydelberch." It was brought from Heidel I68 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS berg and given to King James by Sir Henry Wotton. James I.'s jovial brother-in-law, Christian IV., King of Denmark, who set so bad an example to the English Court by his pronounced drinking habits, is well represented in Van Somer's portrait at Hampton Court. Charles I. was painted by Mytens when a child, and by Lely in his last days. The Duke of Northumberland is the possessor of the famous piEture of Charles I. and his son James, Duke of York (aged 14), which was painted by Lely for the Earl of Northumberland. It is, however,. Vandyck who has given us the portraits by which alone we wish to know Charles I. The engraving in this book is taken from the fine equestrian portrait in the National Gallery, which was bought from the Duke of Marlborough for 1I7,500 in 1884.: At Windsor, Warwick Castle, Hampton Court, andin other great colledions there are other equestrian portraits by Vandyck. Vandyck's beautiful pidture of three heads of the king, arranged in profile, full, and three-quarter views, is now at Windsor Castle. The pi(ture was sent to Rome for Bernini the sculptor to make a marble bust from it. This was done, but the bust was destroyed in the fire at Whitehall Palace in I69I. The pi6ture itself remained in the Bernini Palace at Rome until the end of the last century. Mr. Irvine bought it for Mr. W. Buchanan about I796, and it was sold by Mr. W. Wells in 1822 to George IV. for 1,000 guineas. Henrietta Maria was a beautiful woman, and she looks well in Vandyck's portraits of her, both alone and with the king, but when she grew old she became ugly. Mr. Alfred Morrison sent to CHARLES I., BY SIR A. VANDYCK. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS!69 the Stuart Exhibition a portrait of her, when aged, by Claude Le Fevre. The pifture by Vandyck containing portraits of Lady Dorothy Percy, Countess of Leicester, and of her sister Lady Lucy, the famous Countess of Carlisle, was sold in I764 from the colle&ion at Penshurst by Lady Yonge, when she inherited the half of that ancient seat by the will of Lady Brownlow. Walpole gave twenty-nine guineas for it,' and it sold at his sale for /23I, being bought by a dealer-Norton of Soho Square. At Longleat there is a portrait by Vandyck of that queer character the beautiful Frances Howard, Duchess of Richmond and Lennox, who married the son of a vintner, an earl, and a duke, and wanted to marry James I. Her first husband was Henry Prannel, her second, Edward Seymour, Earl of HIertford, and when she married him, Sir George Romney of Somersetshire killed himself in despair. This pi&ture was lent by the Marquis of Bath to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866. There is a curious portrait by Vandyck of the beautiful Lady Venetia Digby, who died in 1635, at the Dulwich Gallery. She was found dead in her bed one morning, and her husband, Sir Kenelm Digby, sent off for his friend the painter, who made a portrait of her in the attitude in which she was found. At Windsor Castle there is a full-length by Vandyck of Lady Digby, seated, with cupids holding a wreath of laurel over her head, Envy bound, and cupids at her feet, a serpent in her right hand and a dove in her left. This allegory alludes to her presumed triumph over calumny. Walpole Walpole to G. Montagu, May Ioth, 1764 ("Letters," IV., 253). I7o HISTORICAL PORTRAITS describes the small study for this pidure, which is exquisitely finished. All the Court of Charles I. were painted by Vandyck, and many of these men and women were those who made history, and it is, therefore, only possible in the space at our disposal to allude to a few of these pi&tures. In the Louvre there are several portraits by Vandyck, viz., a full-length of Charles I., the Duke of Richmond, three of the children of Charles I., and a portrait of the painter by himself. At Knowsley there are several portraits of Charlotte de la Tremouille, Countess of Derby, the brave defender of Lathom Castle. One of these shows her in the ad of tearing the Parliamentary summons to surrender, a good subje6t for a painter, which has been described as follows: " 1644, April 25th. On Thursday, he (Rigby) sends his last message, as he calls it, a furious summons to her ladyship to yield up Lathom House, all the persons, goods and arms within it into his hands, to receive the mercy of Parliament, and to return her final answer the next day before two o'clock; which her ladyship having read, with a brave indignation calls for the drum, and tells him 'a due reward for his pains is to be hanged up at her gates; but,' says she, 'thou art but a foolish instrument of a traitor's pride; carry this answer to Rigby,' (with a double scorn tearing the paper in his sight) and 'tell that insolent rebel he shall neither have persons, goods, nor house: when our strength and provision is spent, we shall find a fire more merciful than Rigby, and then, if the providence of God prevent it not, my goods and home shall burn in his sight: myself, children, and soldiers, rather than fall into OLIVER CROMWELL, BY R. WALKER. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I7I his hands will seal our religion and loyalty in the same flame." 1 During the Commonwealth there were several portrait-painters of merit, and the portraits painted during the period prove how mistaken is the common idea that all the Parliamentary leaders had their heads cropped. Cromwell, by Robert Walker, and Lambert by the same, at the National Portrait Gallery, have long hair, and John Pym has flowing brown hair in the portrait lent by Sir Henry Wilmot to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866. Cromwell told the painter to whom he sat not to slur over any blemish, but to represent every wart and wrinkle on his face. Some say this painter was Cooper, but Granger says it was Lely. Cooper's miniatures of Cromwell are perfe&t, and they were so much admired that there was a considerable demand for them. On one occasion Cromwell found Cooper surreptitiously copying one for sale, and he forbade the praEtice. Granger says that in a print of Charles I. and the supposed Duke of Espernon the face of Charles I. was altered to that of Cromwell, so that this print of P. Lombart's cannot be a very accurate likeness of the Proteator. The crayon portrait of Cromwell by Samuel Cooper in the Master's Lodge, Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, was presented anonymously by Thomas Hollis, the Republican. The pidture was accompanied by a letter to this effet: " An Englishman, an Asserter of Liberty, Citizen of the World, is desirous of having the honour to present an original portrait in crayons of the head of 1 Peter Draper's "House of Stanley, and the Sieges of Lathom House," 1864, p. 129. 172 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS O. Cromwell, Proteltor, drawn by Cooper, to Sydney Sussex College, in Cambridge. "London, Jan. I5, 1766. "I freely declare it, I am for old Noll; Though his Government did a Tyrant resemble, He made England great, and his enemies tremble. " A. MARVELL." "It is requested that the Portrait may be placed so as to receive the Light from Left to Right; and to be free from Sunshine. "Also the favour of a line may be written on the arrival of it, directed ' To Pierce Delver, at Mr. Shove's, Bookbinder in Maiden Lane, Covent Garden, London."' It was not until the publication of the " Memoirs of Thomas Hollis," in 1780, where the presentation is mentioned, that it was known to whom the college was indebted. The late Sir George Scharf was inclined to think that this portrait was by Lely and not by Cooper, but surely in this pit6ure in large there is a great likeness to the marvellous miniatures of the latter artist. Thelater portraits of Charles II. show him as an ugly man, and it appears from his recorded sayings that he realized the fa6 himself. The engraving in this book is taken from the pidture by John Greenhill in the National Portrait Gallery. He was handsome as a young man, and there is a fine portrait of him by Adrian Hanneman at St. James's Palace, in which he is drawn with a very ingenuous countenance. There is another interesting portrait of Charles which hangs on the principal staircase of this palace. It represents the king on his throne in the robes of the Order of the Garter and wear CHARLES II., BY J. GREENHILL. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I73 ing the crown. It was painted by Pieter Nason,. a Dutch artist who came over from Holland at the Restoration. There were four painted portraits and seven miniatures of Charles's queen, Katharine of Braganza, shown at the Tudor Exhibition. The famous portrait which was sent to Charles II. from Portugal before her marriage is in the Clarendon Gallery at the Grove, Watford, and it was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of I866 by the Earl of Clarendon. It was painted by Dirk Stoop, a Flemish artist settled in Portugal, who came over to England with Katharine, and resided here till 1678, when he retired to Flanders,. where he died in I686. The Clarendon pidure had, until it was cleaned some fifty years ago, an inscription nailed on the back stating that it was the original pidure. There is a replica of this. picture in the National Portrait Gallery. Stoop, himself made an etching of this portrait, which is. scarce.1 The picture is described as " Head and shoulders; head uncovered, dark brown hair,. falling on each side in a waving mass, with a single lock twisted round on the forehead, and a small white bow on the back of the head. She wears a black gown slashed in the sleeves with a high, broad, white, straight trimming of lace over her chest. Stoop made a series of etchings illustrating Katharine's departure from Portugal, her voyage,. arrival, and landing at Portsmouth, and progress from Portsmouth to London, which curiously con' Walpole got into confusion with the name of this artist. He supposes the painter was Peter and his two brothers, engravers, named Roderigo and Theodore. There was only one man, and his name was not Peter, but Thierry, or Dirk in Dutch, Roderigo in Portuguese, and Theodoricus in Latin. 174 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS firm a passage in Clarendon's " Life," where the Lord Chancellor writes: "She was resolved on first landing to adhere to this costume, nor could she be persuaded to be dressed out of the wardrobe that the king had sent to her, but would wear the clothes which she had brought until she found that the King was displeased and would be obeyed. Whereupon she conformed against the advice of her women, who continued their opiniatrety, without any one of them receding from her own mode, which exposed them the more to reproach."' The figure of the queen is drawn throughout Stoop's etchings in the Portuguese costume till the departure from Portsmouth, when she appears dressed in the fashion of the Court of Charles II. The favourite portraits of the Restoration period are those of ladies, and the most famous of them are the pictures by Lely which were long known as the Windsor Beauties, but as they are now hung at Hampton Court they do not at present deserve that title. The series consists of portraits of Lady Bellasys as St. Catherine (which was long supposed, erroneously, to be the likeness of Elinor, Lady Byron. In honour of the queen it was the fashion at this time to be painted as St. Catherine; the Duchess of Cleveland was so painted, as also was Mrs. Pepys; Anne Hyde, Duchess of York; Frances Stewart, Duchess of Richmond; Henrietta Boyle, Countess of Rochester; Mrs. Jane Middleton; Frances Brooke, afterwards Lady Whitmore; Elizabeth, Countess of Northumberland; Countess of Falmouth (misnamed Countess of Ossory); Elizabeth Brooke, Lady Denham; Barbara, Duchess of Cleveland; Anne, Countess of Sunderland; 1 Vol. ii., p. 320. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I75 Elizabeth Hamilton, Countess of Grammont. Sir John Reresby at one time (when in France during the Commonwealth) was much in love with Elizabeth Hamilton, and would probably have married her had he not been persuaded against the match by his friends.l Another of the series is the portrait of a young lady in the charadter of Diana, this has been described as Jane Kelleway or the Princess Mary. The most notorious of this group was the king's abandoned mistress, the Duchess of Cleveland, who had a fancy for being painted in different charaders. The late Mr. Steinman, who wrote and printed privately a life of the duchess, gave in his work and its appendices a full account of her portraits, in which she is said to appear like " an angel but half dressed." He mentions a portrait at Panshanger, where she appears as Mary Magdalene. Granger refers to a pi&dure at Dalkeith Palace where she is represented as a Madonna with her infant son, and adds: " It is said that her grace sent such a pi6ture to a female convent in France as an altar-piece, but that the nuns, discovering whose portrait it was, sent it back with indignation." In the National Portrait Gallery is a portrait of the duchess by Kneller, represented as in mourning for her husband, the Earl of Castlemaine (who died in I705). Four months after his death she married " Beau" Fielding, but soon escaped from this marriage, as the beau was proved to be a bigamist. At the Earl of Sandwich's seat at Hinchingbroke there is a fine portrait of the duchess, painted by Lely, when she was Countess of Castlemaine. 1 " Memoirs," ed. Cartwright, p. 43. r76 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS She is dressed in a white satin dress, and is shown seated at a table with her head resting on her hand. This is the portrait referred to by Pepys on July Io, 1664: " Here my Lady showed us my Lady Castlemayne's piCture finely done, given my Lord, and a most beautiful piCture it is." In the same room with the Lely Beauties at Hampton Court is a portrait by Wissing of Mrs. Knott, who is supposed to have been one of the few virtuous women at Charles II.'s Court. At Hampton Court there is a portrait of another mistress of Charles II., the Duchess of Portsmouth, painted as Flora by the well-known flower painter Verelst (see ante, p. 52). The eccentric and virtuous Margaret, Duchess of Newcastle (one of Charles Lamb's heroines), belongs partly to an earlier period, but we hear most of her in Charles's reign. Her portrait by Lely was exhibited at South Kensington in I866. There is an amusing anecdote of her and Bishop Wilkins, who wrote a work on the possibility of travelling to the moon. The duchess asked: " Dodor, where am I to find a place for halting at on the way up to that planet?" The bishop answered: " Madam, of all the people in the world, I never expedted that question from you, who have built so many castles in the air, that you may lie every night at one of your own." The duchess wrote a life of her husband which she published in 1667, and dedicated to the king and to the duke. In the latter dedication she says: "My noble Lord, It hath always been my hearty prayer to God, since I have been your wife, that first I might prove an honest and good wife, whereof Your Grace must be the onely Judg. Next that God would be pleased to enable me to set JAMES II., BY J. RILEY. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I77 forth and declare to after ages, the truth of your loyal adions and endeavours, for the service of your King and Country." Before leaving Charles's reign we must mention the king's beautiful sister Henrietta, Duchess of Orleans. There is a portrait of her by Pierre Mignard at the National Portrait.Gallery, and five paintings and five miniatures of her were shown at the Tudor Exhibition. James II. was, like his brother Charles, handsome as a young man, but when old he was by no means so ugly. There were several portraits of him at the Stuart Exhibition, and one of these, by Dobson, was taken when he was a boy. This piCure came from Windsor Castle. The portrait here reproduced is taken from a painting by Riley in the National Portrait Gallery. Anne Hyde, James's first wife, was one among the Lely Beauties, and a portrait of his second wife-Mary of Modena, by Lely, was lent by the Earl of Aberdeen to the Stuart Exhibition. Another by Wissing is at the National Portrait Gallery. Several portraits of James's son, the Chevalier St. George, known among the Hanoverians as the Pretender, and among the Jacobites as James III., were shown at the Stuart Exhibition; one of them was a picture by Carlo Maratti of his marriage with the Princess Maria Clementina Sobieska. The warming-pan story (which gave rise to the title of Pretender) has long been exploded, and nobody now doubts the parentage of Prince James, but it is interesting to have the testimony of so good a judge as Sir Godfrey Kneller, as to his likeness to his father and mother. Dr. Wallis told a friend that he had seen original letters under the queen's own hand, from the bricklayer's wife, N I78 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS supposed to be the prince's mother, and others concerned in the imposture, which made it clear to him that it was all a cheat. It happened at this time that Kneller was at Oxford (having been sent there by Samuel Pepys to paint Dr. Wallis's portrait for presentation to the University), and present when Wallis made the statement. He at once spoke out in his vehement manner and said: " Wat de devil, de Prince Wales te son of a brickbat woman, be got it is a ly. I am not of his party, nor shall not be for him, I am satisfiet wit wat I am sure of, and in wat I cannot be mistaken. His fader and moder have sate to me about 36. time apiece, and I know every line and bit in their faces. Be got I could paint King James just now by memory. I say the child is so like both, that there is not a feature in his face, but wat belongs either to fader or moder, this I'm sure of, and be got I cannot be mistaken. Nay, the nails of his fingers are his moders, the Queen that was. Do&tor, you may be out in your letters, but be got I can't be out in my lines." Hearne makes a special note of this in his Diary, and added that Kneller said that upon the sight of the pi6ture of the Prince of Wales sent from Paris to England, he was fully satisfied of what others seemed to doubt so much. Hearne says that at the dinner where this occurred, Dr. Aldrich, Dean of Christchurch, Dr. Charlett, Master of University College, Dr. Hudson, Head Library Keeper, and Dr. Gregory, one of the Savilian Professors, were present.There are three portraits of William III. in the National Portrait Gallery, and at Hampton Court there is a large and poor pi6ture of the king land 1 "Letters by Eminent Persons," 183, vol. ii., pp. 137-8. QUEEN MARY II., BY WILLIAM WISSING. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS - I 79 ing at Margate in I697, by Kneller, a painting full of allegory and with a very blue sky. At the same palace there is a portrait of William as a boy, by Adrian Hanneman. Of Mary II. only one portrait by Wissing from Hampton Court was exhibited at South Kensington in I867 (No. 46). At the Stuart Exhibition there were three paintings of her by Van Boll, Kneller, and Wissing, and five miniatures. It was this queen's idea to engage Sir Godfrey Kneller to paint the beauties of her Court, viz., Lady Diana de Vere, Duchess of St. Albans; Lady Mary Bentinck, Countess of Essex; Carey Fraser, Countess of Peterborough; Lady Margaret Cecil, Countess of Ranelagh; Miss Pitt, afterwards Mrs. Scroop; Lady Isabella Bennet, Duchess of Grafton; Lady Mary Compton, Countess of Dorset, and Lady Middleton. These were called the Hampton Court Beauties to distinguish them from the Lely series, which were styled the Windsor Beauties. Lady Dorchester is said to have advised the queen not to carry out her scheme, adding, "Madam, if the king were to ask for the portraits of all the wits of his court, would not the rest think he called them fools?" Walpole, in a letter to Mann, tells an amusing story connected with these portraits. "As you talk of our Beauties I shall tell you a new story of the Gunnings, who make more noise than any of their predecessors since the days of Helen, though neither of them, nor anything about them, have yet been teterrima belli causa. They went the other day to see Hampton Court; as they were going into the Beauty room another company arrived; the housekeeper said, 'This way, ladies, here are the Beauties.' The Gunnings flew into a passion; and asked her what she meant, that I8o HISTORICAL PORTRAITS they came to see the palace, not to be showed as a sight themselves." There were two portraits of Queen Anne at South Kensington in I867, one by E. Lilly, lent by the Duke of Marlborough, and the other with her son, William, Duke of Gloucester, by Michael Dahl, which was lent by Earl Spencer. There were two paintings and several miniatures of her at the Stuart Exhibition. The great Sarah Jennings, Duchess of Marlborough, was exhibited in four portraits at South Kensington in 1867. One of these (No. go), by Kneller, was lent by Earl Spencer; it shows the duchess supporting her long hair in her right hand, that hair which she cut off to spite her husband, and which he kept. Neither at South Kensington in 1867, nor at the Stuart Exhibition, was there any portrait of Mrs. (afterwards Lady) Masham, who supplanted the Duchess of Marlborough in the favour of Queen Anne, and she is not represented at the National Portrait Gallery. The celebrated men at Anne's Court were very numerous, and it is not possible here to take note of their portraits. Lord Cornbury, grandson of the great Clarendon, was a worthless man of dissolute habits and ignoble tastes. He fell away from James II. and supported William III., who, as a reward, made him Governor of New York. Here he disgusted the people and " affronted public decency by rambling abroad in the dress of a woman." He was painted thus, and this portrait was in the possession of the late Lord Hampton, at Westwood, co. Worcester. Queen Anne was obliged to recall him from his post. He succeeded to his father's title as 3rd 1 Letter to Mann, August 3Ist, I75I. "Letters," vol. ii., p. 265. QUEEN ANNE, BY JOHN CLOSTERMAN. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS i8i Earl of Clarendon in I709, and in 1714 he was appointed Envoy Extraordinary to Hanover, but he died in obscurity at Chelsea, March 3ISt, 1724. Earl Spencer contributed to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 a portrait by Jervas of Elizabeth Churchill, Countess of Bridgewater, third daughter of the great Duke of Marlborough (No. 160). " Thence beauty, waking all her forms, supplies An angel's sweetness, or Bridgewater's eyes." This is probably the pidture referred to by Pope in his " Epistle to Mr. Jervas," from which the above two lines are taken: " With Zeuxis' Helen thy Bridgewater vie." At the same exhibition was a piCture containing portraits of Martha and Theresa Blount (No. 152). "The fair-haired Martha and Teresa brown." This was probably painted by Jervas, and is doubtless referred to by Pope in this same epistle: "Each pleasing Blount shall endless smiles bestow." We now come to the period of the four Georges -a period of great interest on account of the distinguished men it produced, as is seen from the value of the contents of the Guelph Exhibition of I891. Kneller painted George I. and George II., but most of the portrait-painters in their reigns were on a much lower level of artistic attainment. Little patronage was to be expected from George II., who slighted Hogarth, and expressed his contempt for " boetry and bainting." The rather pretentious pifture by Eckardt and Wootton containing the portraits of Sir Robert 182 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Walpole and Catherine Shorter (Lady Walpole), although in a frame carved by Gibbons, only sold at the Strawberry Hill Sale for /5I 9s., and was bought by the Marquis of Lansdowne. The portraits were taken from miniatures by Zincke, and the pidure itself was engraved in the collected edition of Walpole's " Letters." The famous piCture of the House of Commons in 1730, attributed to Hogarth and Thornhill, was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 by the Earl of Hardwicke. It contains portraits of the Speaker, Arthur Onslow, Sir Robert Walpole, Sidney Godolphin, the father of the House of Commons, Colonel Richard Onslow, and Sir James Thornhill, as well as the clerks. At Hinchingbroke, the Huntingdonshire seat of the Earls of Sandwich, there are many interesting portraits, for several of the family have made their mark in the world, from the ist earl, who assisted greatly in the Restoration of Charles II., and is known to us all as the " My Lord" of Samuel Pepys's " Diary." There is a full-length portrait by John Liotard of John, 4th Earl of Sandwich (1718-I792) in Turkish costume, with a white turban and yellow slippers. This earl lived to be painted by Gainsborough, and he is best known to us as First Lord of the Admiralty in George III.'s reign, and for his not very creditable condud towards John Wilkes. He was, however, a well known man in the reign of George II., and was Ambassador Extraordinary to the Hague, 1746- 748, and Minister Plenipotentiary to the Congress of Aix la Chapelle in November, I746. On the latter occasion he showed his ready wit at a dinner to which the various Envoys were invited. The Frenchman is said to have given as a toast, " His royal master GEORGE I., BY SIR G. KNELLER. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS i83 -the sun who illuminates the whole world." The Spaniard followed with " His master-the moon, scarcely inferior in brilliancy or influence." Sandwich at once started up and proposed, "His master-Joshua, who made both the sun and the moon to stand still." In George I.'s reign, as there was no queen, the great ladies did not make so much show at Court as when Anne was on the throne. A portrait of Sophia Dorothea, who was imprisoned at the Schloss of Ahlden when her husband came to England to take the crown, painted by H. H. Quitter, was lent by the Duke of Marlborough to the Guelph Exhibition. It is said that George II. hung up a portrait of his mother in Leicester House as soon as he heard of the death of his father. Two portraits of Queen Caroline (wife of George II.), one by Amiconi and the other by Hudson, were shown at the Guelph Exhibition. There are also portraits of her at Hampton Court and in the National Portrait Gallery. Allusion has already been made to the beautiful Gunnings (Maria and Elizabeth) about whom the English world went mad. Horace Walpole was not carried away by the popular enthusiasm, but said that they were not thought much of in Paris. He called the Duchess of Hamilton (Elizabeth) a doll-maker's Venus. In a letter to Mann (June 18th, 1751) he wrote: " There are two Irish girls, of no fortune, who are declared the handsomest women alive. I think their being two so handsome and both such perfed6 figures is their chief excellence, for, singly, I have seen much handsomer women than either; however, they can't walk in the park or go to Vauxhall, but such mobs follow them that they are generally driven away." 184 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Walpole's explanation is not satisfacory, for the two beauties were as much thought of and run after when they were married and separated as when they were together. Their good fortune was very remarkable. They had no money, and at one time intended to go on the stage. It was said that when they attended the Court of the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland they borrowed dresses from Peg Woffington. The elder, Maria, married the Earl of Coventry, and Elizabeth married the Duke of Hamilton and afterwards the Duke of Argyll, and was the mother of four dukes. It was Lady Coventry who made a famous mal a propos speech to George II. The king was conversing with her on the dulness of the town, and regretting for her sake, that there had been no masquerades during the year. "As for sights," said the beauty, " I am quite satisfied with them, there is only one which I am eager to see, and that is a coronation." George is reported to have been highly diverted with the awkward blunder, and repeated -it to his family with great good humour. As a fad, Lady Coventry did not herself live to see the coronation of George III. The duchess was one of the Ladies of the Bedchamber to Queen Charlotte, whom she accompanied to England from Mecklenburg-Strelitz previous to her marriage with George III. Francis Cotes and Gavin Hamilton painted portraits of the Countess of Coventry, and the present Earl of Coventry lent to the Guelph Exhibition a pidture by Hogarth containing portraits of the 6th earl with his wife, Maria Gunning. At the same exhibition was a portrait of the Duchess of Hamilton by Reynolds. The portraits of George III. are very numerous GEORGE IL., BY T. WORLIDGE. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I85 and of very unequal merit. He was painted by Vanloo- in his childhood, and at Buckingham Palace is a group by that artist of the Princess Augusta of Wales and her children-the Princess Augusta, afterwards Duchess of Brunswick, Prince George, Prince Edward, afterwards Duke of York, and others. A similar pidure by Knapton is at Hampton Court. At the National Portrait Gallery is a pidture by Richard Wilson containing portraits of the king as Prince of Wales, and of Prince Edward as Duke of York. The admirable pi&ure of the king reviewing the Tenth, for painting which Beechey obtained his knighthood is at Hampton Court. Later in life George III. was painted by Allan Ramsay, Reynolds, Gainsborough, Zoffany, and others. Queen Charlotte was painted by Allan Ramsay, Reynolds, Gainsborough, Zoffany, Cotes, and others. West's portraits of George III. and Queen Charlotte, and of their sons and daughters, in Queen Anne's Drawing-Room at Hampton Court, are excellent. In one pidture the Queen and her thirteen children are depiF6ed. The Prince of Wales (George IV.) and the Duke of York, the Duke of Clarence (William IV.) and the Duke of Kent, the Dukes of Cumberland, Sussex, and Cambridge, the Princess Royal, the Princesses Charlotte, Augusta Sophia, Elizabeth and Mary, are shown in- other pidures in this room. Public opinion, which now depreciates West, is as unjust as it was uncritically favourable to him during his lifetime. Mr. Ernest Law, in his "Guide to Hampton Court Palace" quotes the following anecdote: " I wonder," observed the Duke of Sussex while passing through the apartment, " in which of these rooms it was that George II. struck my father. I86 HIST'ORICAL PORTRAITS The blow so disgusted him with the place that never afterwards could he be induced to think of it as a residence." George III.'s reign was a glorious one for artistic portraiture, and as Reynolds, Gainsborough, and Romney, and later Iawrence, Raeburn, and Hoppner painted every one famous for parts and beauty in Great Britain, it is clearly impossible here to do more than refer in general terms to the splendid portraits with which every public and private gallery of any pretence is full. To the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 the late Lord Sherborne lent a portrait (No. 419) of the Right Hon. Henry Bilson Legge, third son of the ist Earl of Dartmouth, who was Chancellor of the Exchequer in George II.'s reign, and who died soon after George III. came to the throne. The painter of this pi&ture is not mentioned in the catalogue, but it is supposed to have been Hoare of Bath. Legge had three fair relatives of the next generation; two of these were married, but the third remained a spinster, and the wits called her " the left Legge." A portrait of Legge's nephew, William, 2nd Earl of Dartmouth, by Pompeio Battoni, was shown at the same exhibition (No. 419). Among the " Dartmouth Papers," published by the Historical Manuscripts Commission, are some interesting letters from Gainsborough to this earl in I771. A difference of opinion had arisen between his lordship and Gainsborough as to the likeness of a portrait of the Countess of Dartmouth painted by the latter. In the course of the correspondence the artist expressed his readiness to make any alterations his lordship might require, and a discussion took place concerning the costume in which the countess could be portrayed to greatest ad GEORGE III.; BY ALLAN RAMSAY. SOVEREIGNS AND THEIR COURTS I87 vantage-whether fancy or adtual. Gainsborough speaks of " the ridiculous use of fancy dresses in portraits," and begs to be permitted to try an experiment on the canvas in question, undertaking to paint a fresh pidture for nothing if he spoilt this one. " I mean," he says, " to treat it as a cast-off picure and dress it (contrary, I know, to Lady Dartmouth's taste) in the modern way. The worse consequence that can attend it will be her ladyship's being angry with me for a time. I am vastly out in my notion of the thing, if the face does not immediately look like; but I must know if Lady Dartmouth powders or not in common; I only beg to know that, and to have the piture sent down to me. I promise this, my lord, that if I boggle a month by way of experiment to please myself, it shall not in the least abate my desire of attempting another to please your lordship when I can be in London for that purpose, or Lady Dartmouth comes to Bath. I am very well aware of the objedtion to modern dresses in pi6tures that they are soon out of fashion and look awkward, but, as that misfortune cannot be helped, we must set it against the unluckiness of fancy dresses taking away likenesses, the principal beauty and intention of a portrait." At Panshanger there is a portrait of the Hon. Peniston Lamb (1770-1805), eldest son of the Ist Viscount Melbourne, by Romney. Lamb was the idol of his father, who was never tired of telling how Pen had led the field, or put his pony at the stiffest " bullfinch." Reynolds, Romney, Mrs. Cosway, and Stubbs all painted his portrait. He was never strong, and in I805, at the age of thirty-five, he was suddenly attacked byillness which killed him. Reynolds painted the three sons of the ist Lord Melbourne- Peniston, William, and Frederick i88 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Lamb —in a garden, but the father was not pleased with the pi&ure and returned it to the painter. It was engraved under the title of" The Affe&tionate Brothers;" and Peter Leopold, 5th Earl Cowper, bought the pi6Cure from Sir Joshua's executors for /8oo. George IV. was frequently painted by Reynolds, Gainsborough, Lawrence, and Hoppner. Sir Robert Peel possessed at Whitehall Gardens the head of George IV. when Prince of Wales, by Reynolds, and on one occasion at a reception in Whitehall Gardens the Duke of Wellington exclaimed: "Ah! my old master, and very like him." The pidure is now in the National Gallery. In 1830 Wilkie painted a full-length of the king in full Highland costume; this pidure belongs to the Duke of Wellington, and was exhibited at South Kensington in I868. Lawrence was largely patronised by George IV., and engaged to paint the valuable series of portraits in the Waterloo Gallery at Windsor Castle. There are two portraits of George IV.'s unfortunate wife, Caroline of Brunswick, at the National Portrait Gallery, one by Sir Thomas Lawrence and the other by James Lonsdale. At Hampton Court is a pidture of the Duke of Clarence (afterwards William IV.) by Hoppner, which was greatly injured by the fire at Carlton House in 1824. In 1874 it was repaired with sufficient success to give some idea of what the pi&ture was originally like. At the Victorian Exhibition there were colle&ed several portraits of the Queen, the Prince Consort, and the members of the Royal family. :-.:,: - - IGEORGE,....... t,5...., B.. SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. * ii GEORGE IV., BY SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE. CHAPTER IX. THE PROFESSIONS "A collection, showing us by the pencil how the most distinguished of our ancestors looked, moved, and dressed."-SIR WALTER SCOTT (on0 Lodge's Portraits). THE learned professions-the Church, the Law, and Medicine-which, in an old comic song, were styled the "three black graces," have been well represented by distinguished men. In the case of the first two there are great prizes, such as archbishoprics and lord chancellorships, but it is only quite lately that a peerage has gone to a medical man. There was formerly some talk of raising Sir Benjamin Brodie to the peerage, but the proposal was never carried out, and Lord Lister, P.R.S., is the first medical peer. CLERGY. Attention has already been drawn to the fad6 that the series of authentic portraits of Archbishops of Canterbury at Lambeth Palace begins with William Warham, who was seledced for his high office by Henry VIII. on account of "his profound cunning, virtuous conversation, and approved great wisdom." Lord Dillon sent a portrait of this archbishop, attributed to Holbein, to the Tudor Exhibition. Evelyn, in his " Diary," describes a visit to Ditchley on O&ober 2oth, 1664, and he strangely describes this portrait as 190o HISTORICAL PORTRAITS "the pi&ture of a Pope." The Lambeth portrait was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of I866. Warham's successor in the see of Canterbury was Cranmer, of whom three portraits were lent to the Tudor Exhibition, one attributed to Lucas Cranach, by Mr. Edward Frewen; one attributed to Holbein, by Jesus College, Cambridge; and the third anonymous, by Mr. W. Holman Hunt. The portrait by G. Fliccius in the National Portrait Gallery is engraved for this book. Four portraits of Cardinal Pole were lent to the Tudor Exhibition, where was shown the portrait of the munificent Archbishop Parker, lent by Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. Lord Sackville lent a portrait of Whitgift to the Tudor Exhibition. Bancroft was the first Archbishop of Canterbury appointed in the reign of James I., and his portrait was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of I866 by the University of Cambridge. There is one of him also in the National Portrait Gallery, the painter of which is unknown. Archbishop Laud was one of the most distinguished men among those who have held the see of Canterbury, but being very deficient in judgment he offended many by changes which to a certain extent were necessary after the laxity of his predecessor. He paid dearly for his unpopular actions, and he has been severely condemned by historians, Macaulay going so far as to call him " a poor creature, who never did, said, or wrote anything indicating more than the ordinary capacity of an old woman," a prejudiced criticism that is more likely to injure the memory of the writer than the subje& of his criticism. The revived interest in Laud, and the devotion to ARCHBISHOP CRANMER BY G. FLICCIUS THE PROFESSIONS. I9I his memory of a party in the Church of England, is a remarkable sign of the times. His striking features are known to all by Vandyck's portrait of him at Lambeth, respedting which pidure he wrote in his diary, Otober 27th, I640: "In my upper stud)y hung my piEtlre, taken by the life, and coming in I found it fallen down upon the face and lying on the floor, the string being broken, by which it was hanged against the wall. I am almost every day threatened with my ruin in Parliament; 'God grant this be no omen.' " There is a copy by Henry Stone from the original picture in the National Portrait Gallery. Archbishop Juxon, who was so intimately associated with the last moments of Charles I., succeeded his friend Laud at Lambeth after the vacancy caused by the Commonwealth. His portrait at St. John's College, Oxford, of which he was President, has no painter's name attached to it. Portraits of Sancroft, Tillotson, Wake, and Secker are in the National Portrait Gallery. Archbishop Manners Sutton was appointed dire6tly by George III., who was determined that a " gentleman" should hold the see of Canterbury. On the death of Archbishop Moore the king at once visited Manners Sutton, then Bishop of Norwich, and promised him the Archbishopric, so that when Pitt came to him to propose Dr. Pretyman Tomline, then Bishop of Lincoln, he was ready with the excuse that he was committed by a previous promise. A portrait of Archbishop Manners Sutton, by Lawrence, belongs to Viscount Canterbury, and was lent by him to the South Kensington Exhibition of I867. Portraits of Archbishops Howley, Sumner, Longley, and Tait, were shown at the Victorian Exhibition of 189I-2. 192 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Many other distinguished bishops might be mentioned, but we have only space to notice a few. A fine portrait of the saintly Cardinal Fisher, painted when he had attained the age of 74, and attributed to Holbein, is preserved at St. John's College, Cambridge, and it was lent to the Tudor Exhibition. Wolsey was painted by Holbein and others, and his figure is well known from the familiar portraits. One of the most familiar is that at Christ Church College, Oxford. The portrait belonging to the College of Physicians, whose foundation he supported, is a fine one. Portraits of Jewel and Latimer are at the National Portrait Gallery, and Lely's portraits of Dr. Dolben, Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Richard Allestry, Provost of Eton, and Dr. John Fell, Bishop of Oxford (" I do not love thee, Dr. Fell"), in one pidture at Christ Church, Oxford, are of great interest. At Longleat (Marquis of Bath's) there is a portrait of Bishop Ken by Lely. When Ken lost his bishopric of Bath and Wells on account of his conscientious obje6tions to taking the oath, he obtained refuge at the seat of his fellow collegian and life-long friend, the first Viscount Weymouth. Of this saintly man Keble wrote, " We shall scarcely find in all ecclesiastical history a greener spot than the latter years of this courageous and affetionate pastor, persecuted alternately by both parties, and driven from his station in his declining age, yet singing on with unabated cheerfulness to the last." Dr. White Kennet, Bishop of Peterborough was a man of mark in his day, both in politics and as an author, but he had enemies. His portrait was lent by the Rev. Emilius Bayley to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867. ARCIIBISHOP LAUD. COPY OF VANDYCK'S PORTRAIT BY HENRY STONE. THE PROFESSIONS I93 Early in the eighteenth century Dr. Walton; Re&or of Whitechapel, created a great scandal by setting up an altar-piece of the Last Supper in which he had caused the painter to represent White Kennet, then Dean of Peterborough, as Judas Iscariot. It is said that Walton's first intention was to have put Bishop Burnet in the pidture, but the painter, fearing the consequences, declined, and the dean was substituted. Crowds flocked to the church to see the picture until the Bishop of London ordered its removal. Lady Cowper, the wife of the Lord Chancellor, alludes to the circumstance in her correspondence: " Dr. Walton.. who was suspefted to be a Jesuit, upon a quarrel with Dr. Kennet, Dean of Peterborough, had got an altar-piece painted and set up in his church where Dr. Kennet's pidture was drawn for Judas Iscariot, and to make it the more sure, had the DoFtor's great black patch put under the wig upon the forehead." There is a portrait of one of George III.'s favourite bishops, Richard Hurd, of Worcester, by Gainsborough, at Hampton Court, but it is not a striking pifture. Several portraits of the bishops of the ViEtorian era, as Blomfield of London, Philpotts of Exeter, Wilberforce of Oxford, and afterwards of Winchester, Selwyn of Lichfield, and many others who have greatly influenced the history of the nineteenth century, were to be seen at the Victorian Exhibition. It would be impossible here to go through all the grades of the clergy and mention those who have been famous, and of whom we naturally wish to see good portraits; but two great Deans of St. Paul's must not be passed by unnoticed. John Colet, the friend of Budaeus and Erasmus, and, himself one of the shining lights among the 0 "1 94 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS labourers for the revival of learning, will ever be remembered as the founder of St. Paul's School. His portrait is at the University Library, Cambridge; Alexander Nowell was a worthy successor of Colet, and his portrait was lent to the Tudor Ex-hibition by Westminster School, of which he was 'head master. In this connetion a passing notice must be taken of three great head masters-Lily, Busby, and Arnold. William Lily, the first master of St. Paul's School, will ever be remembered as the author of Lily's Grammar. Evelyn recommended Clarendon to get his portrait, but he does not appear to have been successful in obtaining one. Dr. Richard Busby, one of the greatest schoolmasters that ever lived, who boasted that at one time sixteen out of the whole bench of bishops had been educated by him, would not sit for his portrait, but fortunately we have characteristic likenesses of him which were taken after death: the chief of these is the fine portrait attributed to John Riley, which is one of the chief ornaments of the grand hall of Christ Church, Oxford. The face in the background is supposed to be that of the Rev. Philip Henry, who was in his time Busby's favourite pupil, and who always spoke enthusiastically of his obligations to his master, "The Lord -recompense it a thousandfold into his bosom," but this is doubtful. At the Vidorian Exhibition was shown a portrait by J. Phillips, R.A., of the great Arnold of Rugby, which was lent by Mrs. Frances Arnold. The uncertainty connedted with the portraits of John Knox gave Carlyle material for the compilation of an interesting essay.' This inquiry illus'"The Portraits of John Knox." By Thomas Carlyle (" The Early Kings of Norway," etc., 1875). J'... ARCHBISHOP TILLOTSON, BY MARY BEALE. THE PROFESSIONS '195 trates in a remarkable manner the dishonesty of compilers who have foisted so many false portraits upon the public. Knox died in 1572, and Beza's "Icones," published at Geneva in 1580, contains an unsatisfactory portrait of him inscribed "Joannes Cnoxus." David Laing found an entry in the Scottish Royal Treasurer's accounts, June, I58I, which throws some light upon the compilation of Beza's book: "Itim, To Adriane Vaensoun, Flemish painter for twa piEturis painted be him, and send to Theodorus Besa conforme to ane precept ~8 Ios.:[I4S. 2d. sterling]." If pictures were sent out from Scotland to Beza in 1581, one of Knox might have been forwarded to him at an earlier period, but this is scarcely probable, as the authenticity of the portrait was evidently doubted. -Goulart, who published a French translation of the "Icones" in the year after Beza's work appeared, suppressed the original portrait and replaced it by a quite different one, which apparently really represented William Tyndale. In Verheiden's "Effigies," 1602, engraved by Hondius, Beza's portrait of Knox is again brought forward. Wilkie followed this in his pilure of Knox preaching before Queen Mary, which is called by Carlyle one of the most impossible picdures ever painted by a man of such indubitable genius. The historian seems, when he wrote this, to have overlooked James Melville's description of the preacher, which was evidently followed by Wilkie: " Ere he was done with his sermon, he was so ative and vigorous that he was like to ding the pulpit in blads, and fly out of it." In 1673, when "Les Portraits des Hommes Jllustres" was published at Geneva, a new com 196 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS plication occurred. Beza's Knox was given, but Goulart's Knox was added as a portrait of Beza. The Torphichen portrait at Calder House was exhibited at the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866. Carlyle liked this as little as the Beza portrait, from which he supposed it to be copied, and described it as " having no worth in it as a painting." He considered the portrait at the Glasgow University, and that by De Vos in the possession of Miss Knox of Edinburgh, to be of no value. That at Hamilton Palace he altogether repudiated, supposing it to be a portrait of the professed Merry Andrew of the family. The portrait in the National Portrait Gallery was presented by the Duke of Buccleuch in 1859, but Carlyle does not refer to this. Charles Knight has the credit of bringing forward the only satisfa&tory portrait of Knox, known as the Somerville portrait. He published an engraving from it in a colledion of portraits for the Society for diffusing Useful Knowledge in I836, and again in the '' Pi&torial History" of England in I849. On the death of the last Baron Somerville the peerage, after four centuries of existence, became extin&t, and this piCture came into the possession of the Hon. Mrs. Ralph Smyth, of Gaybrook, Mullingar, Ireland. Tradition reports that it was brought into the family by James, I3th Lord Somerville, who is mentioned in Boswell's '"Life of Johnson." The pifture is roughly executed, and is probably a copy made, certainlynot earlier, and perhaps later, than Kneller's time. There is no direct evidence in favour of the likeness, but when Carlyle consulted Sir J. E, Boehm' on the point, that artist suggested that this was a:copy from an original portrait by Francis LORD CHANCELLOR BACON, BY P. VAN SOMER. THE PROFESSIONS I97 Pourbus, and to corroborate his opinion he sought for all the portraits by Pourbus that he could meet with. In this search he and Carlyle visited the Royal Society to study the small portrait of Buchanan at Burlington House, which was painted by Pourbus. In closing this notice of the clergy mention may be made of portraits of such distinguished preachers as Wesley and Whitefield, which will be found in the National Portrait Gallery. LAW. Early chancellors were churchmen, as were most officials, and Sir Thomas More was the first lawyer to hold the office who was competent to aft as a judge; but after him several bishops were again chancellors. The beautiful portrait of More by Holbein, which belongs to Mr. Huth, is well known, as it has been several times exhibited. It is one of those real portraits which you feel to be likenesses, and which help you to understand the man. More was succeeded by Sir Thomas Audley (afterwards Lord Audley), part founder of Magdalene College; Cambridge, where will be found a portrait of him. Sir Nicholas Bacon was only Lord Keeper, and never attained to the higher office of Lord Chancellor. A portrait of him was lent to the Tudor Exhibition by Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. He grew fat in his later years, and when he took his seat on the bench he was in the habit of giving three taps with his staff on the floor as a sign that he had recovered his breath and that business might proceed. On one occasion Queen Elizabeth remarked, " Sir Nicholas's soul lodges well," and on another, when she visited him at Gorhambury, she remarked that the house was too little for him, '98 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS biit he quickly rejoined, "No, madam, but you have made me too big for my house." There is a portrait of Bacon in the National Portrait Gallery. Sir Thomas Bromley succeeded Bacon, and a portrait of him was lent to the Tudor Exhibition in I890 by Mr. G. E. Martin. Sir Christopher Hatton, who knew very little of law, was helped by a Master in Chancery, who sat with him on the bench. His portrait by: Cornelius Ketel was lent to the Tudor Exhibition by the Earl of Winchilsea. Sir Thomas Egerton, afterwards Lord Ellesmere and Viscount Brackley, was not liked by some of the attendants at his court, and the wits of Westminster styled him " Lord Breaklaw." James I. promised to create him Earl of Bridgewater, but he died before the patent could be made out. The earldom was conferred upon his son. His portrait is at St. John's College, Cambridge, and another belongs to Earl Brownlow. Lord Chancellor Bacon was so many-sided a man that he may be mentioned here or amongst scientific men or amongst literary men. There are many portraits of him; one by Van Somer in the National Portrait Gallery, and another by the same artist at the Royal Society. We generally expe6t a good portrait to give us an idea of the charaSter of the man, but few could expe&t to find the features of the odious judge, George, Lord Jeffreys, in the pleasing pi&ure by Klieller in the: National Portrait Gallery, which is engraved for this book. The portrait was painted when Sir George Jeffreys was thirty years of age, and hadjust been appointed Recorder of London. It is possible that his appearance became more repulsive as he grew older, for we are told of the horror of his frown,..... LORD CHANCELLOR JEFFREYS, B1Y SIR G. KNELLER. THE PROFESSIONS I99 Two portraits of Lord Somers were lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867, one by Kneller, sent by Earl Cowper, and the other lent by the Earl of Malmesbury. There is a portrait by Kneller in the National Portrait Gallery. and another, also by that painter, at the Royal Society, of which institution Lord Somers was president. A portrait of Earl Cowper by Jonathan Richardson, was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 by his descendant, the Earl Cowper, and another by the same artist is in the National Portrait Gallery. The Earl of Hardwicke was painted by Allan Ramsay, William Hoare, R.A., and Thomas Hudson among others. The Duke of Grafton lent his portrait of Earl Camden, painted by Reynolds, to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867, and to the Guelph Exhibition. There are two portraits of this great judge at the National Portrait Gallery, one by Nathaniel Dance, R.A., and the other a copy from Reynolds's picture at Bayham Abbey, belonging to the Marquis Camden. Lord Thurlow was painted by Reynolds, Lawrence and Thomas Phillips among others, and the portrait in this book is taken from a pifture by the latter artist in the National Portrait Gallery. Sir Thomas Lawrence's portrait of Lord Eldon,. which belongs to the present Earl of Eldon, is one of Lawrence's really good piftures. There is a portrait of the Chancellor by W. Owen, R.A., at University College, Oxford. At the South Kensington Exhibition of i868 there were two portraits of Lord Erskine, one by Gainsborough and the other by Lawrence; there is one by Sir William Ross in the National 200 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Portrait Gallery. Portraits of Lords Lyndhurst, Brougham, Chelmsford, and Cairns, were shown at the Vi&dorian Exhibition, I891-2. There are many other distinguished lawyers and judges who should be mentioned here, but space will only allow of reference to three. Lord Chief Justice Coke's portrait here reproduced is in the National Portrait Gallery. There is a fine portrait of Sir Samuel Romilly by Lawrence in the National Gallery, and at the Bodleian Gallery is a portrait of Sir William Blackstone by Tilly Kettle. Another by Reynolds is in the National Portrait Gallery. MEDICINE. The College of Physicians have a fine colletion of the portraits of great physicians, and at the College of Surgeons are some portraits of celebrated surgeons. Linacre is the first great English physician, and he served both Henry VII. and Henry VIII, His portrait is at Windsor Castle, and it was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of I866. The portrait at the College of Physicians is, according to Dr. Munk, a copy made in I81o by William Miller, the College bedel, an amateur artist of considerable merit, from an original picture in Kensington Palace. Another physician to Henry VIII., who seems to have been a man of mark in his day, was Sir William Butts, whose name is immortalized by appearing in the play of "Henry VIII." He was the friend of Wolsey, Cranmer, and Latimer, and a patron of Cheke and Thirlby. His portrait by Holbein was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of I866 by Mr. W. H. Pole Carew, and his altar tomb, which was ereEted in Fulham LLORD CHANCELLOR THURLOW, BY T. PHILLIPS. THE PROFESSIONS 201 Church, was surmounted with his effigy in brass, clad in armour. The portrait of Dr. Butts is introduced into the large piture of Henry VIII. granting the charter to the Barber Surgeons Company, still in the possession of the company, a pi6ture which is supposed to have been commenced by Holbein and finished by a later and inferior hand. John Chambre, M.D., the first in order of the six physicians specially mentioned in the letters patent of Henry VIII. for the foundation of the Royal College of Physicians is also introduced into the pidure. A portrait of Lady Butts (Margaret Bacon), who was a gentlewoman in the service of the Princess Mary (afterwards queen), by Holbein, was shown at the Tudor Exhibition. The next English physician of commanding importance was William Harvey, physician to James I. and Charles I., and the discoverer of the circulation of the blood. There is a painting of him at Jesus College, Cambridge, one at the College of Physicians, attributed to Jansen, and another at the Royal Society by J. de Reyn; but the portrait which has the best pedigree, tracing it to Harvey's second brother, is at the University College, London, and was painted by Mirevelt. A contemporary of Harvey was Sir Theodore Turquet de Mayerne, who, on the death of Henry IV. of France, to whom he was physician, came to England and was physician successively to James I., Charles I., and Charles II. He was a chemist as well as a physician, and helped his countryman, Jean Petitot, the enamel painter, to prepare colours for his miniatures. There was a great deal of the quack in his character, and he was not greatly esteemed. There is a portrait of him at the College of Physicians, where is also one of the great Thomas Sydenham, M.D., "the English 202 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Hippocrates," by Mary Beale. Of Sir Edmun-d King, M.D., physician to Charles II., whose portrait is in the dining-room of the college, an interesting anecdote is told in Macmichael's "Gold Headed Cane": "When the king was first seized with his last illness, it was in his bedchamber, where he was surprised by an apople6tic fit, so that if by God's providence Dr. King had not been accidentally present to let him blood (having his lancet in his pocket) His Majesty had certainly died that moment; which might have been of direful consequence, there being nobody with the king save this do6lor and one more. It was considered a mark of extraordinary dexterity, resolution, and presence of mind in the dodtor to let him blood in the very paroxysm, without staying the coming of other physicians, which regularly should have been done, and for want of which it was at first thought that he would require a regular pardon. The Privy Council, however, approved of what he had done, and ordered him I,ooo0 -which, by the bye, was never paid him." There is a portrait of John Radcliffe, M.D., by Kneller at the college, and one at the Radcliffe Library, Oxford, which was shown at the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867, where was also, a portrait of Richard Mead, M.D., by Michael Dahl. Zoffany painted several pictures of medical men, particularly of Dr. William Hunter le6uring in,the life school of the Royal Academy with a living model, and the pifture of a musical party on the Thames, which represents the family of William Sharp the eminent surgeon, who declined a baronetcy offered him by George III. for his. successful attendance on the Princess Amelia, Both of these, pi6tures were shown at the South SIR EDWARD COKE, BY CORNELIS JANSSEN VAN CEULEN. THE PROFESSIONS 203 Kensington Exhibition of 1867, where also was the portrait of the renowned surgeon William Cheselden, by Jonathan Richardson, lent by the.College of Surgeons. Reynolds's portrait of John Hunter, the greatest of surgeons, is in the council room of the college, and a copy by John Jackson, R.A., is in the National Portrait Gallery, from which the engraving in this book is taken. There is a story conne6ted with this picure which is worth quoting here. Northcote once showed C. R. Leslie, R.A., what he supposed to be a picture by Reynolds, but whichwas really a copy by Jackson. Northcote told Leslie that he had often been deceived himself by Jackson's copies. Leslie mentions in his autobiography that he and Jackson, when young men, both copied Reynolds's portrait of Hunter. Jackson's might have deceived the best judges, but Leslie modestly adds that no one would have been deceived by his. Other portraits at the College of Physicians which should not be overlooked are of John Arbuthnot, M.D., Physician to Queen Anne, but better known to us as an author, painted by Jervas; of Matthew Baillie, M.D., the brother of Joanna Baillie, author of the once-famous " Plays on the Passions," painted by Lawrence; of John Fothergill, M.D., by Hogarth; of Sir Samuel Garth, another literary physician, by Kneller; of William Heberden, M.D., by Sir William Beechey; of David Pitcairn, M.D., by Hoppner; of William Pitcairn, M.D., by Reynolds; of Sir Hans Sloane, M.D., by Thomas Murray; and of Sir Thomas Watson, M.D., by G. Richmond, R.A. Portraits of Sir Benjamin Brodie and Sir William Fergusson were shown at the Vitorian Exhibition. 204 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS THE NAVY. After the learned professions naturally follow the fighting professions, and of these the sailors have much the best of the soldiers in respe6t to exhibited portraits. As already noted, there is no gallery of the latter such as the Naval Gallery at Greenwich Hospital. A portrait of Admiral Sir John Wallop, K.G., by Holbein, was lent by the Earl of Portsmouth to the South Kensington Museum of 1866. Wallop was Governor of Calais, and made a Knight of the Garter in I543. He served his king all his " lief truly and faithfully," and " spent the revenues and profytts of his owne lands in that service." Charles, 2nd Lord Howard of Effingham (afterwards Earl of Nottingham), Lord High Admiral, and vanquisher of the Spanish Armada, stands out in history as one of our greatest sailors. His portrait was lent by the Lords of the Admiralty to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866. Sir Martin Frobisher, the great navigator, was knighted by Lord Howard the day after the third sea-fight with the Armada, 1588. His portrait is at Dulwich College, and another, by Cornelius Ketel, in the Bodleian Gallery, Oxford. There is a pidture of Sir John Hawkins, Sir Francis Drake, and Thomas Cavendish at Greenwich, which is a copy from the original by Mytens at Newbattle Abbey. Admiral Robert Blake's portrait by Hanneman was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866 by Mr. Andrew Fountaine; another portrait, anonymous, is at Wadham College, Oxford. When Blake first went to sea his fame soon eclipsed that which he had previously gained on land as General Blake. WILLIAM HARVEY, M.D. THE PROFESSIONS 205 The most interesting series of portraits at Greenwich are those of the admirals of the Restoration, by Lely, which are referred to by Pepys as the "Flagmen." They were painted for James, Duke of York, and consist of portraits of the Duke of Albemarle, Sir Thomas Allin, Sir George Ayscue, Sir William Berkeley, Sir John Harman, Sir Joseph Jordan, Sir Christopher Myngs, Sir William Penn, Prince Rupert, the Earl of Sandwich, Sir Jeremy Smith, and Sir Thomas Teddiman. All these, with the exception of Prince Rupert, were taken from Windsor Castle and presented by George IV. in I824. A copy of a full-length portrait of Prince Rupert, by Lely, was presented by William IV. in I835. At Hampton Court there is a portrait by Lely of Sir John Lawson, who was not included among the admirals painted for the Duke of York. There are several portraits of the Earl of Sandwich by Lely at Hinchingbroke, where there is also one by Feliziano, painted during his embassy in Spain. Pepys was told by Creed on September 27th, 1667, that "'my lord' wears a beard now, turned up in the Spanish manner," and so he is shown in this portrait. When Ambassador Extraordinary at Madrid, Lord Sandwich received from the Queen Mother full-length portraits of herself in a religious habit (the "widow's weeds " worn in Spain), and of her son the child King Charles I., painted by the Court painter, Don Sebastian de Herrera. These are at Hinchingbroke, where is also a pidsure by W. Vander Velde of the Battle of Southwold Bay, in which Lord Sandwich.perished, May 28th, I672. A case hangs near this pi&ure containing miniatures by'Cooper, of Edward, Ist Earl of Sand. wich, and.Jemima his wife, also a fragment bf 2o6 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS a ribbon of the Order of the Garter and a vwatch, both of which were found on the body of Lord Sandwich when washed ashore. There are also portraits of Sandwich at Hampton Court and in the National Portrait Gallery. A portrait of the famous Sir Cloudesley Shovel by Michael Dahl, taken from Hampton Court, is now in the Painted Gallery at Greenwich. A portrait of Captain William Dampier, who served in the Dutch War, but is better known as a navigator than as a fighting sailor, by Thomas Murray, was formerly in the British Museum, but is now deposited in the National Portrait Gallery. It was Dampier who rescued Alexander Selkirk from the Island of Juan Fernandez. Admiral Edward Russell, Earl of Orford, the victor of La Hogue, i692, was painted by Kneller, and the portrait is at Hampton Court. Admiral Edward Vernon, the hero of Portobello, sat to Gainsborough. Philip Thicknesse, who visited Ipswich in 1758, wrote: "I immediately... visited Mr. Gainsborough. He received me in his painting room, in which stood several portraits, truly drawn, perfel6y like, but stiffly painted and worse coloured. Among them was the late Admiral Vernon's, for it was not many years after he had taken Porto Bello with six ships only." One of Gainsborough's portraits is in the National Portrait Gallery, and another was lent by Mr. B. B. Hunter Rodwell, Q.C., to the Guelph Exhibition. A considerable number of portraits of naval heroes were painted by Bockman: several of these are at Hampton Court, as Lord Anson, Admiral John Benbow, Sir John Jennings, etc. The last named, who was Governor of Greenwich Hospital and Ranger of Greenwich Park, was also JOHN HUNTER, AFTER REYNOLDS, BY JOHN JACKSON, R.A. THE PROFESSIONS 207 painted by Jonathan Richardson, and this portrait is in the Painted Hall. A portrait of the unfortunate Admiral John Byng, who was shot at Portsmouth, I757, to serve a political purpose, 'was lent by the Earl of Strafford to the Guelph Exhibition. A portrait of the Hon. Edward Boscawen, who condufted the siege of Pondicherry and recovered Madras from the French, painted by Reynolds, was presented to the National Portrait Gallery by Viscount Falmouth in 1858; another of Reynolds's paintings was lent to the Guelph Exhibition by Mr. John Leveson-Gower. Richard, Earl Howe, K.G., who served under Vernon, and was a colleague of Boscawen, subsequently gained that great vidory over the French which has given for all time to the first of June the distinftion of being styled "glorious." Reynolds's portrait of the great Lord Rodney, who gained his vi6ory over Count de Grasse, April I2th, 1782, saving Jamaica and ruining the naval power of France and Spain, is at St. James's Palace. Viscount Hood lent to the Guelph Exhibition portraits of the two great admirals bearing the names of Hood, viz., Samuel, Ist Viscount Hood, 'who was rear-admiral to Rodney when De Grasse was defeated, and subsequently took Toulon and Corsica when in command of the Mediterranean Fleet, a painting by Benjamin West; and Alexander, Ist Viscount Bridport, who bore a part in Lord Howe's celebrated victory, June Ist, I794, and also subsequently greatly distinguished himself. His portrait was painted by L. F. Abbott. Viscount Keppel was one of the most popular sailors that ever lived. We are told that he was "' the idol of the people, and possessed in a greater 208 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS extent than any officer in the service of the affection of the navy." There is an amusing story told of him when he was quite a young man, which, although well known, will bear repetition. At the age of twenty-four he undertook a mission to the Dey of Algiers, who, disgusted at his youth, said, "I wonder at the English king's insolence in sending me such a foolish, beardless boy." Keppel's answer was to the point if scarcely diplomatic: " Had my master supposed wisdom to be measured by length of beard he would have sent a he-goat." Keppel was an early patron of Reynolds, and when he was appointed in 1749 to the command of the Mediterranean Squadron he took the painter with him. In I778 an unfortunate quarrel with his second in command, Sir Hugh Palliser, respecting the result of an engagement with the French fleet, ended in a court-martial. Keppel was acquitted, and in gratitude for the exertions of his counsel, " Honest Jack Lee," John Dunning (afterwards Lord Ashburton), and Thomas Erskine (afterwards Lord Chancellor), he sat to Reynolds for a three-quarter length portrait, and had four repetitions of it painted. Three went to the three counsel, and the other to Burke. Lee had asked for a portrait by Dance, "who takes excellent likenesses," but he got a Reynolds instead. Burke wrote, " I assure you, my dear sir, that though I possess the portraits of friends highly honoured by me, and very dear to me on all accounts, yours stands alone, and I intend that it shall so continue, to mark the impression I have received of this most flattering mark of your friendship." This copy was preserved at Beaconsfield whilst Burke lived. His widow left it to Earl Fitzwilliam. Lee's own portrait was painted by Reynolds in I786, and since that time the portraits of Keppel NELSON, BY L. F. ABBOTT. THE PROFESSIONS 209 and himself have hung side by side. When the Hon. F. B. Massey Mainwaring lent the two portraits to the Guelph Exhibition the condition was that they should not be separated. Dunning's copy is in the National Portrait Gallery. The copy in the National Gallery was one of Sir Robert Peel's pidtures, and may have been Erskine's. The original belongs to the Earl of Albemarle. The Corporation of the City of London possess a portrait by Sir W. Beechey of Admiral Jervis, who took the title of his earldom from his famous vi&ory over the Spanish fleet off Cape St. Vincent, I797. The number of portraits of England's greatest sailor, Horatio Nelson, is too great to describe, it is sufficient to note that there are three in the National Portrait Gallery. Portraits by J. F. Rigaud and L. Guzzaldi belong to Earl Nelson, and Hoppner's portrait is at St. James's Palace. At the Victorian Exhibition in I89I-2 there were portraits of several great sailors, as for instance Lord Lyons and Sir Charles J. Napier. THE ARMY. It was not until the end of the seventeenth century that the distinction between generals and admirals was finally settled. Previous to that time there were generals at sea as well as on land, and Albemarle and Rupert took charge of fleets in the manoeuvring of which they had little experience. Peregrine Bertie, Lord Willoughby of Eresby, was the son of Katherine, Duchess of Suffolk, and her second husband, Robert Bertie. He distinguished himself at the Battle of Zutphen, when Sir Philip Sidney received his death-wound, and succeeded that distinguished soldier as Governor of Bergen op Zoom. Lord Willoughby's career P 210 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS was distinguished, and we may believe him to have been popular, as the ballad-makers styled him the "good Lord Willobie," and the " brave Lord Willoughbey." The last lines of the first stanza of the ballad of " Brave Lord Willoughbey " run: "But the bravest man in battel Was brave Lord Willoughbey." His portrait was lent to the Tudor Exhibition (1890) by the present Earl of Ancaster, then Lord Willoughby de Eresby. At the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866 there was an excellent portrait of General Harry Vaughan, Governor of Brecknock Castle and LordLieutenant of Breconshire, in the reign of Elizabeth, lent by Lady Frances Vaughan. The pidure was anonymous, but it appears to have been the work of Mark Gerrard. On the frame was inscribed these words: "Remember them that wache and waite for you: their prince and realme: and suche as doe withe bludy swete: ofte times deserve to gayne. MDCXI." The portrait of the parliamentary general, Robert Devereux, 3rd Earl of Essex, was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866 by the Rev. Lord John Thynne. The Earl of Hardwicke lent to the same exhibition a portrait of General Lambert by Robert Walker, and the Earl of Sandwich lent a portrait of Monk, Duke of Albemarle, by the same artist. We have another means of judging of the appearance of Monk by looking at the wax figure in Westminster Abbey, which shows him to have been of a short stout figure. We generally suppose that Walker painted the Roundheads and Dobson the Royalists, but there 1 Percy's "Reliques," Series ii., Book 2. , "I/ GEORGE MONCK, DUKE OF ALBEMARLE, BY SIR P. LELY. DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH, BY SIR G. KNELLER. THE PROFESSIONS 2 I I were exceptions to this rule, for Mr. G. J. A. Walker sent to South Kensington a portrait of Cornet Joyce by Dobson, and in the National Portrait Gallery is one of Thomas, Lord Fairfax, with his wife, which was painted by this artist. There are three or four portraits of the great Duke of Marlborough in the National Portrait Gallery, one painted at an early age by Jan Wyck, another by John Closterman, and two others by Kneller. One of these is a sketch in oil for an equestrian portrait, surrounded by allegorical figures. The picture of which this is a sketch belongs to the Earl of Chichester, and was lent to the Guelph Exhibition. Earl Spencer has a portrait by Vanloo. The present Duke of Marlborough has, among other portraits, one by Kneller, where the duke is seated at a table, and General John Armstrong is showing him the plan of the siege of Bjouchain. Admiral Warde lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of I868 a portrait of General James Wolfe, the hero of Quebec, by Benjamin West. The Duke of Sutherland possesses a portrait of John, Ist Earl Ligonier, who served through Marlborough's campaigns with distin&ion, and -was subsequently a field-marshal and commanderin-chief; it was painted by Reynolds. One of Reynolds's finest portraits is that of George Eliot, Lord Heathfield, the defender of Gibraltar, in the National Gallery; he is seen with the key of the fortress firmly grasped in his hand,.and Constable said the pihture was "almost a history of the defence of Gibraltar." Mr. Ruskin, however, refers to the pi&ture as " nothing more than an English gentleman in an obstinate state of mind about keys, with an expression which I,can conceive so exceedingly stout a gentleman of 212 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS that age as occasionally putting on, even respeding the keys of the cellaret." Sir R. Shafto Adair lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 a portrait of the unfortunate Major John Andre by Reynolds. The fine portrait of Colonel St. Leger, who is better known from his connedion with racing than as a soldier, painted by Gainsborough, is at Hampton Court. The great Duke of Wellington was painted by Lawrence and by many other portrait-painters. At the Vidorian Exhibition Lawrence's portrait, painted for Sir Robert Peel, was shown. In the Bodleian Gallery there is rather a weak portrait by Lucas, respeding which a story is told. The artist had commenced drawing the duke's head larger than life, and was proceeding to arrange the gown more artistically, when Wellington prevented him by saying, " You will paint my head no larger than it is, and you will arrange my gown as I wear it when at Oxford." At the Vi&orian Exhibition were portraits of many of the great generals of this era, as Napier, Havelock, Lord Clyde, Gordon, etc. WELLINGTON, BY COUNT D'ORSAY. CHAPTER X. SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND ART. "In every age and nation distinguished for arts and learning, the inclination of transmitting the memory, and even the features of illustrious persons to posterity, has uniformly prevailed. The greatest poets, orators, and historians, were contemporaries with the most celebrated painters, statuaries, and engravers of gems and medals; and the desire to be acquainted with a man's aspe&t has ever risen, in proportion to the known excellence of his character, and the admiration of his writings." -GRANGER'S Biographical History of England (Preface). THE portrait gallery of the Royal Society stands alone as containing a fine colledion of portraits of scientific men, and its great interest is being gradually increased by the addition of portraits of the scientific men of the present day. There are some portraits of celebrated men who flourished before the foundation of the society, but, with the exception of Bacon, these were mostly of antiquaries, as Thomas Howard, Earl of Arundel, by T. Murray (a pidure presented to the society by Sir Isaac Newton), George Buchanan by Francis Pourbus, and Sir Henry Spelman by D. Mytens. At the Tudor Exhibition was a portrait of Nicholas Kratzer by Holbein, which was lent by Viscount Galway. Kratzer was a German, who came to England with an introduCtion to Bishop Foxe, and was made a Fellow of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, in 1517. Henry VIII. appointed him his astronomer, and he became le&turer on 214 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS astronomy and mathematics at Oxford through the influence of Cardinal Wolsey. There is a similar portrait of Kratzer by Holbein in the Louvre, and Albert Direr made a drawing of him in 1520, to which he alludes in his " Diary": In Antwerp " I took the portrait of Master Nicolas the astronomer, who resides with the King of England; he was very useful to me." Kratzer never mastered the language of his adopted country, and when the king asked him how that happened, he replied: "I beseech your highness to pardon me; what can a man learn in only thirty years?" It was long before a king of England appointed an official astronomer, and it was not until 1676 that the Rev. John Flamsteed took up his residence at the newly-established Royal Observatory at Greenwich as "Astronomical observator." His portrait was painted by T. Gibson. Flamsteed quarrelled with Newton, but to his successor as Astronomer Royal-Edmund Halley-we owe the publication of the " Principia." Halley led a strangely diversified life, for at twenty he went to St. Helena and made astronomical observations for two years. In 1687 he became clerk to the Royal Society, an office which he held for thirteen years, and in 17I3 he was ele6ted secretary. He succeeded Flamsteed in I719, and died at Greenwich in 1742. At one time of his life he was in command of a king's ship, and made a scientific voyage, so that he was entitled to be styled "Captain Halley, R.N." His portrait was painted by Michael Dahl and also by Thomas Murray. James Bradley, D.D., was appointed Savilian Professor of Astronomy in 1721, and he succeeded Halley as Astronomer Royal in 1742. His portrait was painted by Jonathan Richardson. Nevil Maskelyne, D.D., was led to the study of SIR ISAAC NEWTON, BY J. VANDERBANK. SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND ART 215, astronomy by reason of his acquaintance withL Bradley, and he became Astronomer Royal in I765. His portrait, painted by Vanderburgh, is at the Royal Society, as are the portraits of the: previous Astronomers Royal already mentioned. Among the distinguished men who, with rare sagacity, founded the Royal Society, were the following, whose portraits are specially worthy of mention. The Hon. Robert Boyle, who has been described as " the father of chemistry and brother of the Earl of Cork!" was the first Englishman to write a book on electricity. He was chosen President of the Royal Society in 1680, but reludtantly declined the office from conscientious scruples respeEting the oaths required to be taken. His portrait, painted by F. Kerseboom, is at the Royal Society, and another by the same artist is in the National Portrait Gallery. John Evelyn's portrait was frequently paintedby Chanterell in 1626, by Vanderborcht in 1641, and by Robert Walker in 1648. Mr. Evelyn, of Wotton, lent the latter to the South Kensington Exhibition in 1866. Kneller painted Evelyn twice, once in 1685, and again in I689; the latter portrait was for Samuel Pepys. The portrait at the Royal Society appears to be a copy from the former pi6ture of Kneller, by Frederic Kerseboom. Evelyn always took the greatest interest in the prosperity of the society, and he was twice solicited, though in vain, to take the office of president. Theodore Haak's portrait, by J. Richardson, is at the Royal Society. The learned Henry More, D.D., contributed papers to the Philosophical Transa6ions, but he usually resided in retirement at Christ's College, Cambridge, of which he was Fellow. He declined the mastership of the college which was offered 216 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS him in 1654. His portrait, by Lely, is at the Royal Society. John Wallis, D.D., was one of the foremost of the founders, and he described the origin of the society in an account written in 1697: "About the year 1645 while I lived in London... I had the opportunity of being acquainted with divers worthy persons, inquisitive into natural philosophy and other parts of human learning, and particularly of what hath been called the New Philosophy or Experimental Philosophy. We did by agreements, divers of us meet weekly in London on a certain day to treat and discourse of such affairs, of which number were Dr. John Wilkins, Dr. Jonathan Goddard, Dr. George Ent, Dr. Glisson, Dr. Merret, Mr. Samuel Foster, Mr. Theodore Haak.. About the year 1648, 1649, some of our company being removed to Oxford (first Dr. Wilkins, then I, and soon after Dr. Goddard) our company divided. Those in London continued to meet there as before (and we with them when we had occasion to be with them, when we had occasion to be there), and those of us at Oxford, with Dr. Ward... Dr. Ralph Bathurst... Dr. Petty, Dr. Willis... and divers others, continued such meetings in Oxford, and brought those studies into fashion there." Dr. Wallis's portrait by Gerard Soest is at the Royal Society, and the painting by Kneller, which was presented to the University of Oxford by Pepys, is now in the Bodleian Gallery. Mary Beale painted the portrait of Dr. John Wilkins, Bishop of Chester, and Sir Peter Lely that of Sir Christopher Wren, who for several years was the mainstay of the society's meetings. The portrait of Seth Ward, Bishop of Salisbury, who was one.of the ablest of the founders, is not found on the SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND ART 217 walls of the society, but there is one at Oriel College, Oxford, which was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866. Lord Viscount Brouncker, who occupies so prominent a position in Pepys's" Diary," was the first president of the Royal Society, and an excellent portrait of him by Lely hangs on its walls. The list of presidents is a very distinguished one, but on it are the names of several men that we should not expe&t to find there, and of some there are no portraits in the gallery. Sir Joseph Williamson was the second president, and his portrait by Kneller was presented by himself. He filled the office of Secretary of State, and although he was at all times immersed in business, it is said that he presided at every meeting of the council, and generally at the ordinary meetings during his presidency. Wren was the next president, and of his successors, Sir John Hoskyns and Sir Cyril Wyche, there are no portraits at the society. Samuel Pepys, who was president in 1684, presented his portrait by Kneller. His successors, John, Earl of Casbery, and Thomas, Earl of Pembroke, are not represented on the walls. Of the next president, Sir Robert Southwell, there is a portrait by Kneller. Charles Montague (afterwards Earl of Halifax), the friend of Newton, was president in 1695, but there is no portrait of him at the society. There is a portrait by Kneller at Trinity College, Cambridge. Lord Somers succeeded Montague, and his portrait by Kneller will be found on the society's walls. Earl Cowper also possesses a portrait of Somers by Kneller. We now come to the greatest of all the presidents 2 8 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS -Sir Isaac Newton-respe&ing whose portraits it is necessary to enter into rather fuller detail. There are in existence a large number of these by painters of various abilities, and some are of but little value. Amongst those which are of undoubted authority there is a considerable difference in appearance, from which we are able to judge that Newton, when writing the " Principia," was a very different looking man from Newton when he held the office of Master of the Mint. Unquestionably the finest portrait of Newton is that painted by Kneller in I689, and now in the possession of the Earl of Portsmouth.1 This shows the eager face of the philosopher, and his chara6teristic hair, which seems also to be alive, and adds to the interest of the portrait. As Wordsworth detedeed in the silent face of Roubiliac's fine statue"The marble index of a mind for ever Voyaging through strange seas of thought, alone." so we can see in this portrait the very living man who wrested from nature her most hidden secrets. The next best portrait is that which is given the place of honour behind the president's seat in the meeting room of the Royal Society. This was painted by Jervas, and presented by Newton himself. How different is the appearance of the sitter. Here the fire of the former pidture has burnt out, and we see only the staid and calm exterior of the official. These two portraits of Newton account for the 1 The author has not seen this portrait since it was exhibited at the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866, but his impression of it is still vivid. It is no exaggeration to say that not only is it the best portrait of Newton, but one of the finest portraits that Kneller ever painted. It has been engraved by T. O, Barlow. SIR HANS SLOANE, BY S. SLAUGHTEP. SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND ART 219 differenit judgment on his personal appearance by those who knew him-thus his colleague and connedion, Conduitt, said "he had a very lively and piercing eye, a comely and gracious aspe6t, with a fine head of hair as white as silver," while Bishop Atterbury wrote: "In the whole air of his face and make there was nothing of that penetrating sagacity which appears in his compositions." Mr. R. T. Glazebrook, F.R.S., has given at the end of his valuable life of Newton in the " Dictionary of National Biography," a list of portraits. There are two by Kneller and one by Thornhill in the possession of the Earl of Portsmouth, at Hurstbourne Priors. One of the Knellers is that just referred to as painted in I689, and the other was painted in I702. One by Kneller in the possession of Lord Leconfield at Petworth House. Three portraits at the Royal Society, one by Jervas, and two by Vanderbank. Seven portraits at Trinity College, Cambridge, by Thornhill, Enoch, Seeman, Ritts, and Vanderbank. In Glazebrook's list no mention is made of the portrait by Lely belonging to the Earl of Dartrey, of the one by Lewis Crosse belonging to the Earl of Exeter, or of the one by Vanderbank in the National Portrait Gallery which is reproduced here. Sir Hans Sloane, the first English physician who obtained a baronetcy, succeeded Newton as President of the Royal Society. A few years previously he had been ele&ed President of the College of Physicians, but his chief claim to our consideration now is as the founder of the British Museum. His portrait by Kneller hangs in the society's rooms. Master Ffolkes's portrait by Hogarth is one of the finest in the colleEtion, and is remarkable for the beauty of the drawing of the hand. When at 220 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS college Ffolkes was remarkable for his knowledge of mathematics, but in after life he was known more as an antiquary, and his election as President of the Royal Society seems now to be inappropriate, but we must remember that formerly distindion in physical science was not essential in those who had the ambition to be Fellows of the Society, or to hold office therein. The Earl of Macclesfield, who, with the Earl of Chesterfield, introduced the bill for a reformation of the Calendar, and thus gained the ill-will of the populace, who clamoured for the return of their eleven days, was the next president. His portrait was painted by Hudson. The society have no portraits of the two presidents, James, Earl of Morton, and James West, but they possess a poor one by Vanloo of Sir James Burrow, who was president for a few months in I768 and 1772, having been ele&ed to fill a gap till the next anniversaries. The portrait of Sir John Pringle, the next president, was painted by Reynolds. Sir Joseph Banks was autocrat of the society for forty-one years, the next longest period being Newton's twenty-four years. His portrait was painted by Thomas Phillips, R.A. Other portraits are at the Linnean Society and the National Portrait Gallery. Banks was succeeded by William Hyde Wollaston, M.D., who only held office for a few months. He was a most distinguished chemist, but he had a great objetion to letting any one see his laboratory. On one occasion, when asked to show it, he rang the bell and had a tray with a few bottles and apparatus brought in. His portrait by Jackson hangs in the meeting room. Sir Humphry Davy's portrait by Lawrence is charming so far as the face is concerned, but the CHARLES DARWIN, BY THE HON. JOHN COLLIER. SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND ART 221 rest of the pi6ture is carelessly painted, and the hands are represented by smudges. Davies Gilbert succeeded Davy, and was succeeded by the Duke of Sussex. Portraits of both these presidents were painted by Phillips. Of later presidents there are portraits of the Marquis of Northampton, by Phillips, of the Earl of Rosse, by Catterson Smith, of Sir Benjamin Brodie, by A. Thompson, after Watts, of Sir Edward Sabine, by Stephen Pearce, of Sir Joseph Hooker, by the Hon. John Collier, of William Spottiswoode, by the same, and of Sir George Gabriel Stokes, by Herkomer. Besides the portraits of the presidents, there are those of such distinguished Fellows as Abraham de Moivre, the author of " The Dodrine of Chances," to whom Newton was accustomed to send those who asked him questions about the " Principia"; Benjamin Franklin, John Smeaton, Jesse Ramsden, John Dalton, and Dr. Thomas Young. De Moivre's portrait was by Highmore, Smeaton's by Mather Brown, Dalton's by B. R. Faulkner, and Young's by H. P. Briggs, R.A., after Lawrence. Ramsden's was by Edward Home, and Captain Sir Everard Home, RN., when presenting the portrait to the society, wrote: " Mr. Ramsden has his dividing instrument before him. In the background is the great circle now in the Palermo observatory. The fur upon the coat was put in consequence of Mr. Ramsden's having then lately executed an order for the Emperor of Russia-at which he was much offended, declaring that he had never worn such a thing in his life. The piSture is engraved, and no other likeness exists of him." The portrait of Darwin in this book is taken from the original by the Hon. John Collier at the 222 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS National Portrait Gallery; there is no oil painting at the Royal Society. The portrait of Faraday is from the pi&ture Phillips painted in 1842, also from the Portrait Gallery. The pidure at the Royal Society was painted by A. Blaikley between I851 and 8.55. Mr. J. P. Gassiot, who presented this, also presented a pidure by E. Armitage, R.A., which is of historic interest as it represents a deputation from the Council of the Royal Society, consisting of the President (Lord Wrottesley), Mr. (afterwards Sir William) Grove, and Mr. Gassiot, to Mr. Faraday to urge him to accept the Presidentship, May, 1857. Franklin's portrait at the Royal Society is anonymous. The Marquis of Lansdowne has a fine one by Gainsborough, Earl Stanhope one by D. Martin, and the National Portrait Gallery one by F. Baricolo. A distinguished but little known savant was William Sturgeon, the inventor of the eledtromagnet. Professor Silvanus Thompson, F.R.S., who has sought for a portrait of this scientific man, has not been successful in his search. LITERATURE. Chaucer, Shakespeare, and Milton are universally acknowledged as the three greatest English poets, but although some critics have been so presumptuous as to add a fourth, it is not likely that there will ever be unanimity as to who that fourth shall be. We are singularly fortunate in having an excellent contemporary portrait of Chaucer in an Harleian manuscript (4866) in the British Museum. Perhaps it is a mere assumption to attribute the drawing to Occleve. At all events the portrait comes to us with his sandion, but without that it MICHAEL FARADAY, BY T. PHILLIPS. SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND ART 223 would carry convition to the minds of all that look at it that here we have the a6tual likeness of the morning star of English poetry. The two portraits of Shakespeare which come to us with the strongest claims to authenticity, are the Chandos portrait (now in the National Portrait Gallery), which has an excellent pedigree, and the Droeshout portrait on the title-page of the folio editions of Shakespeare's plays. The original may not be much of a work of art, but we have the highest authority for believing it to be a likeness. The late Mr. J. O. Halliwell Phillipps possessed what he considered to be the gem of his colle&ion, viz., the original proof of the engraving " before it was altered by an inferior hand into the vitiated form in which it has been so long familiar to the public." Mr. Phillipps further wrote, " This is the earliest engraved portrait of the great dramatist, and differs so much from the later impressions, that it gives a new and more pleasing idea of his features. Here we have the most reliable likeness of Shakespeare in existence, the only one which has not been injuriously tampered with, while, at the same time, the evidences of its genuineness and its antiquity are incontestable. Although it is not likely to be absolutely unique, it is certainly of the most excessive rarity, being the only copy that has yet been noticed."1 If we want contemporary corroboration for these portraits we can find it in the bust in Stratford Church. There is great difficulty in deciding as to the most trustworthy likenesses of Milton. Doubtless he was a beautiful boy and handsome as a young 1 " Hand-List of Shakespearian Drawings, etc., at Holling bury Copse, Brighton," I884, p. 8. 224 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS man, but the received portrait of him as an old man is most probably largely idealized. The portrait by Pieter Van der Plaas in the National Portrait Gallery, which is engraved for this book, shows an ugly and cross-grained man. How far it is accurate cannot be affirmed, but it certainly differs much from the received portrait which perhaps represents what the poet ought to have been like. Mr. John Fitchett Marsh contributed to the "Transactions of the Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire" (vol. xii.) a valuable article " On the Engraved Portraits and Pretended Portraits of Milton," in which he discusses the claims to authenticity of those known to us. He does not mention the Van de Plaas pidture, which appears not to have been much known, although it was presented to the National 'Gallery in 1832 by Capel Lofft, and has been at the National Portrait Gallery since 1883. Mr. Marsh wrote: " The portrait painted at the age of ten, now in the possession of Mr. Disney; that at the age of twenty-one, purchased from the executor of Milton's widow by Speaker Onslow; the print engraved by Marshal for the first edition of the minor poems in 1645; and that prefixed to the first edition of the ' History of Britain,' inscribed, 'Gul. Faithorne ad vivum delin. et sculpsit 1670,' at the age of sixty-nine, form a series of unquestionable authenticity, taken at various periods of the poet's life, and presenting such marked difference of feature as to create no risk of mistake or confusion among them." Three portraits of Milton were shown at the South Kensington Exhibition of I866, two anonymous, and one by Jonathan Richardson, lent by the Countess of Delawarr. With respe&t to Richardson's etching from an WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, "CHANDOS PORTRAIT." JOHN MILTON, BY PIETER VANDER PLAAS. SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND ART 225 original in crayons, which he believed Milton to have sat for not long before his death, De Quincey made a most remarkable statement in his " Autobiographic Sketches": " In this portrait of Milton I saw a likeness nearly perfedt of Wordsworth, better by much than any which I have since seen of those expressly painted for himself.... I would observe that this Richardson engraving of Milton has the advantage of presenting not only by far the best likeness of Wordsworth, but of Wordsworth in the prime of his powers-a point essential in the case of one so liable to premature decay. It may be supposed that I took an early opportunity of carrying the book down to Grasmere, and calling for the opinions of Wordsworth's family upon this most remarkable coincidence. Not one member of that family but was as much impressed as myself with the accuracy of the likeness. All the peculiarities even were retained — a drooping appearance of the eyelids, that remarkable swell which I have noticed about the mouth, the way in which the hair lay upon the forehead. In two points only there was a deviation from the vigorous truth of Wordsworth's features-the face was a little too short and too broad, and the eyes were two large. There was also a wreath of laurel about the head, which (as Wordsworth remarked) disturbed the natural expression of the whole piature; else and with these few allowances, he also admitted that the resemblance was Jbr that pieriod of his life perfe6l, or as nearly so as art could accomplish." Sir Brian Tuke, Treasurer of the Chamber to Henry VIII., was painted by Holbein, and this portrait was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of I868 by the Marquis of Westminster. According to Wornum the marquis bought this Q 226 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS portrait at Christie's in I848 for /74 IIS. A critic of the exhibition, in the "Athenaeum," expressed the opinion that the artist was likely to take especial pains for the dignatary through whose hands his annual payment of;50 from the king's purse would pass. From Tuke's account it seems that at midsummer in the thirtieth year of Henry V II.'s reign, he "advanced part of a hole yere's annuitie" to "Hans Holbein paynter," to be " accomptedde from our Ladye day last past." Tuke was a lover of Chaucer, and wrote the dedication to Thynne's edition of the poet's works. A portrait of Sir John Bourchier, 2nd Lord Berners, the first English translator of Froissart, was lent to the Tudor Exhibition, where were shown three portraits of the unfortunate poet Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey: one by Holbein dated I534, the same year that the painter did that of Surrey's father, the Duke of Norfolk, which is preserved at Arundel; another by Gwillim Stretes, which was purchased in I720 at the sale of the Earl of Arundel's gallery by Sir Robert Walpole, who presented it to Edward, Duke of Norfolk; the third was the striking pidure in red, which hangs in the Communication Gallery at Hampton Court, where are Mantegna's ( Triumphs of Julius Caesar." This used to be attributed to Holbein, but it is probably the work of Stretes, from whom Edward VI., in 1557, bought "a pi6fure of the late Earl of Surrey attainted, which by the Council's commandment had been fetched from the said Gwillim's house." Many of the great Elizabethans whose portraits were brought together in the Tudor Exhibition ought to be mentioned here, but there is only space for a very casual notice of those of William L ROBERT BURNS, BYT ALEXAXNDER NASMYTH. SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND ART 227 Camden, and his pupil Ben Jonson. There were two portraits of Camden, one anonymous, lent by the Baroness Burdett-Coutts, and one by Marc Gheerardts from the Bodleian Gallery. Lord Sackville and the Baroness Burdett-Coutts each sent a portrait of Ben Jonson, and Mr. S. Evelyn Shirley lent a miniature of the poet by Isaac Oliver. There were several portraits of Shakespeare, but they were not of much authority. It is impossible to give anything like an adequate idea of the vast mass of portraits of celebrated authors, and a few only can be mentioned as an indication of the riches of the country in this respeft. Dobson's portrait of Sir John Suckling is in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, and Vandyck's Thomas Carew and Sir William Killigrew, in one piaure, at Windsor Castle. At the National Portrait Gallery there are two portraits of Dryden, one by Kneller, and the other attributed to James Maubert; also two of Cowley, one representing him as a young man, painted either by Sir Peter Lely or Mrs. Mary Beale, and the other, when older, by the latter artist. A portrait of John Bunyan at the age of fifty-six, by John Sadler, was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1866 by the Rev. John Olive; and in the National Gallery is one of Isaac Walton by Jacob Huysman, which was painted for the famous angler's family. Matthew Prior was painted by Kneller, and the piEture is now in Stationers' Hall. It was lent to the Guelph Exhibition, where was shown a portrait of John Gay, which was sent by the Earl of Loudoun. Several portraits of Pope were colledted and exhibited at the Town Hall, Twickenham, on the occasion of the Pope Commemoration in I888. 228 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Three of the pidtures were by Jervas, one by W. Hoare, and one was anonymous. There are several portraits in the National Portrait Gallery, one by Jervas, one by Richardson, and two by W. Hoare. Kneller painted a portrait of Pope in 1723, for Simon, Lord Harcourt, in whose catalogue it is described as "' the best portrait of him, and one of the best works of that master." On the back of the pidture there was formerly a transcript of a letter from Pope to Harcourt, as follows: ' August 22, 1723. "My Lord,-It is a satisfaction to me to tell your Lordship that I shall not be in any way disappointed of the honour you intend me, of filling a place in your library with my pidure. I came to town yesterday and got admission to Sir Godfrey Kneller, who assured me the original was done for your Lordship; and that you, and no man but you, should have it. I saw the pidlure there afterwards, and was told by his man that you had sent and put a seal upon it. Give me leave, my Lord, with great sincerity, to thank you for so obliging a thought..." The pidure was lent by Mr. E. W. Harcourt to the Guelph Exhibition. The interesting colleCdion of portraits (fortyeight in number) of the members of the Kit-Cat Club, by Kneller, has been frequently exhibited. The pidures were painted for presentation to Jacob Tonson, the secretary of the club, and they still remain in the possession of a descendant of Tonson's nephew —Mr. Baker, of Bayfordbury, Herts. Congreve, Vanbrugh, Addison, and Steele were members of the club. There is at Panshanger an interesting portrait S. T. COLERIDGE, BY P. VANDYKE. SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND ART 229 by Kneller of John Hughes (1677-1720) the dramatist and contributor to the " Spe&tator," who was eulogized by Steele. Lord Chancellor Cowper was his patron, and to him, a few days before his death, Hughes sent this portrait. The letter of thanks was as follows: "Sir,-I thank you for your most acceptable present of your pidture, and assure you that none of this age can set a higher value on it than I do, and shall while I live-though I am sensible posterity will outdo me in that particular. I am, with the greatest esteem and sincerity, sir, your most affetionate and obliged humble servant, ' COWPER. "January 24th, I720." There are many portraits of Swift, but one of the best known is that by Jervas in the Bodleian Gallery. One by Bindon will be found in the Dublin National Gallery. Gray's portrait by Benjamin Wilson is at Pembroke College, and Samuel Richardson's, by Highmore, at Stationers' Hall. The fine portrait of Smollett by Verelst is still in the possession of his family, and was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of i867 by Mr. A. Smollett. The Marquis of Lansdowne contributed to the Guelph Exhibition a portrait of Sterne by Reynolds, which was painted in I760 for Lord Ossory. It then passed to Lord Holland, on whose death, in 1840, it was purchased by the marquis for 500 guineas. On one occasion Sterne, writing to a friend, who wished for his portrait, said: "You must mention the business to Reynolds yourself, for I will tell you why I cannot. He has already painted a very excellent portrait of me, which, when I went to 230 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS pay him for, he desired me to accept as a tribute (to use his own elegant and flattering expression) that his heart wished to pay to my genius. That man's way of thinking and manners' are at least equal to his pencil." The portraits of Dr. Johnson by Reynolds are numerous, but one of the best is that from the Peel collection in the National Gallery. It has been said that one of the chief glories of Bowood, the Marquis of Lansdowne's seat, is Reynolds's portrait of the infant Johnson which was painted as a joke. The question was raised one evening at a convivial meeting whether the dotor could ever have been a baby. "No doubt about it," said Reynolds; "I know exatly what he looked like, and I will show you some day." The portrait by Reynolds of Bennet Langton (about whom Johnson said, "who will go to heaven if Langton does not?") was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of I868 by Mr. J. H. Hollway. Reynolds's portrait of Gibbon in a scarlet coat and waistcoat, which belongs to the Earl of Sheffield, was said, by Malone, to be as like the original as it is possible to be, and yet there are those who prefer Romney's portrait which was painted for Hayley before Gibbon left England for Lausanne. This was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 by Mr. Henry Willett. At the National Gallery is an admirable portrait of Boswell by Reynolds, which was painted for the sitter under conditions explained in the following letter, written in 1785 by Boswell, which was found among Reynolds's papers, endorsed with his signature and the words, "I agree to the above conditions:" JOHN KEAT$, BY W. HILTON. I ili LORD BYRON, BY T. PHILLIPS. WILLIAM WORDSWORTH) BY H. W. PICKERSGILL. SIR WALTER SCOTT, BY SIR W. ALLAN. SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND ART 231 "My dear Sir,-The debts which I contradted in my father's lifetime will not be cleared off by me for some years. I therefore think it unconscientious to indulge myself in any article of elegant luxury. But in the meantime you may die or I may die, and I should regret very much that there should not be at Auchinleck my portrait painted by Sir Joshua Reynolds, with whom I have the felicity of living in social intercourse. I have a proposal to make to you. I am for certain to be called to the English bar next February. Will you now do my pifture, and the price shall be paid out of the first fees that I receive as a barrister in Westminster Hall? or if that fund should fail, it shall be paid at any rate in five years hence, by myself or my representatives." At the South Kensington Exhibition of I868 were a portrait of Cowper by Romney, and one of the poet's mother, a piEture of miniature size (the canvas being 6 in. by 5 in.). The latter is the memorable piture to which Cowper addressed his beautiful lines, "On the receipt of my mother's piCture out of Norfolk." It was sent to the poet at Weston in 1790 by his cousin Ann Bodham, and was returned to her after his death. The best portrait of Burns is that by Alexander Nasmyth, which was painted for Burns's friend, George Thomson. The engraving in this book is taken from the original in the National Portrait Gallery. In this colleCtion there are a considerable number of portraits of our poets, novelists, and literary men, as Byron, by Thomas Phillips, R.A., and by R. Westall, R.A. There is no portrait of Shelley (one by Miss Amelia Curran was lent to 232 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS the Guelph Exhibition by Lady Shelley). Keats, by J. Severn and by Hilton; Campbell, by Sir Thomas Lawrence; Coleridge, by Washington Allston, by Peter Vandyke, and by Robert Hancock; Wordsworth,by H. W. Pickersgill; Southey, by H. Eldridge, by Peter Vandyke, and by R. Hancock; De Quincey, by Sir J. Watson Gordon; Scott, by Sir William Allan, by J. Graham Gilbert, and by Sir Edwin Landseer; Dickens, by Ary Scheffer; Thackeray, by Samuel Laurence; and George Eliot, by Sir Frederick Burton. But the gems of modern portraiture are the series of pidures presented by Mr. G. F. Watts, R.A., which contains among others the portraits of Browning, Tennyson, Matthew Arnold, and Carlyle. There is another portrait of Carlyle by Millais. The excellent one by Mr. Whistler, reproduced in this book, is in the Glasgow Cor — poration Gallery. ART. In the third and fourth chapters of this book there is a series of engravings of the chief portraitpainters from Vandyck to Lawrence. Here a few other portraits of painters may be mentioned. There is a portrait of Holbein, by himself, at Windsor Castle, and Earl Spencer possesses a fine portrait of Sir Antonio Moro by himself. At Hampton Court there are portraits of Mytens, by himself, Cornelius Ketel, by himself, Peter Oliver, by Hanneman, Robert Walker, by himself, Dobson and his wife, by Dobson, Lely, by himself, and several others. At the several South Kensington Exhibitions there were many portraits of artists. In the National Gallery are the portraits of Vandyck, by himself, Hogarth, by himself, Rey CHARLES DICKENS, BY ARY SCHEFFER. ................. W. M. THACKERAY, BY S. LAURENCE. THOMAS CARLYLE, BY J. MCNEILL WHISTLER. By permission of the Corporation of Glasgow. SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND ART 233 nolds, by himself, full-length of West, by Lawrence, Samuel Scott, by Hudson, Wilkie, by Phillips, and Thomas Daniell, R.A., by Wilkie. The piture by Rigaud, of Reynolds, with Sir William Chambers the architert, and Joseph Wilton the sculptor, reproduced in this book, is in the National Portrait Gallery. A considerable number of valuable and interesting portraits of artists are preserved in the rooms of the Royal Academy at Burlington House, and one of the most valuable of these is the superb portrait of Lord Leighton by Mr. Watts. There are also several pidtures containing groups of artists, most of which are well known from having been often exhibited. The Dilettanti Society possess a considerable number of portraits painted by the successive painters who have been appointed painters to the Society. George Knapton (I698-I778), a pupil of Richardson, was an original member of the Dilettanti Society, and was appointed painter to the Society in I740. At a meeting in February, 1744, it was ordered " that every member who has not had his pi&ture painted by Mr. Knapton by the meeting in February next year, shall pay one guinea per annum till his picture be delivered in to the Secretary, unless Mr. Knapton declares it owing to his want of time to finish the same." Twenty-three portraits were painted by Knapton. James Stuart, F.R.S., was appointed painter to the Society in the room of Knapton, who had resigned. He does not, however, appear to have painted any portraits for the Society. Mr. (afterwards Sir Joshua) Reynolds was ele6ted a member in May, 1766, and on the 5th March, I769, "Mr. Reynolds is declared painter to the Society, Mr. Stuart declining." The beautiful 234 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS groups of members painted by Reynolds are well known. Mr. (afterwards Sir Thomas) Lawrence was appointed painter to the Society in March, 1792, and painted portraits of Richard Payne Knight, Sir Henry Englefield, and Thomas, ist Lord Dundas. On the 17th of May, 1812, it was " Resolved that the Secretary (Sir Henry Englefield) is commanded with all possible expedition to put his face into the most picturesque order in his power, and as soon as he shall have succeeded in this great and difficult work, to present himself to Mr. Lawrence the painter to the Society to the end that a Portrait of the said Secretary be painted with all speed by him for the use of the Society. "N.B.-The Father of the Society ordered that instead of the word use the word ornament be inserted in the motion. Ordered nerm. con." Benjamin West's portrait was painted by himself and presented to the Society on the 26th of April, 18i8. On this occasion Mr. West wrote to the secretary, "I have been solicited for two portraits of myself, one to be placed in the Capitol in Rome, and the other in the Gallery at Florence," and "' I request the indulgence of painting the two pictures from the one I have now the honour of sending the Society." John B. S. Morritt of Rokeby was painted by Sir Martin Archer Shee in 1832. The Right Hon. Sir Edward Ryan, Secretary, was painted by Sir Frederic Leighton, and Lord Broughton, G.C.B., by the Hon. Henry Graves. SIR JOSHUA REYNOLDS, SIR WILLIAM CHAMBERS, AND JOSEPH WILTON, BY JOHN FRANCIS RIGAUD. SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN, BY SIR G. KNELLER. CHAPTER XI. ACTORS AND ACTRESSES. "The casual sight of an old Play Bill which I picked up the other day-I know not by what chance it was preserved so long -tempts me to call to mind a few of the Players who make the principal figure in it.... There is something very touching in these old remembrances. They make us think how we once used to read a play bill-not as now peradventure, singling out a favourite performer and casting a negligent eye over the rest, but spelling out every name down to the very mutes"and servants of the scene."-On some of the old Al7ors (LAMB'S " Essays of Elia.") TIE history of the English stage is largely written in the portraits of actors and a&tresses, and we can see from the eminence of the artists who painted them the varying esteem in which the followers of the dramatic art were held. There has been from the first establishment of the stage a line of monarchs standing high in the public esteem as its representatives, and likenesses of these are of special interest. Richard Burbage and Edward Alleyn were the first acknowledged leaders. The portraits of these two distinguished adtors are at Dulwich College; that of Burbage, which is supposed to have been painted by himself, is here reproduced, and an etching of Alleyn's will be found in Fleay's "Life and Work of Shakespeare." At the Restoration Betterton ruled the newlyrevived stage, and it is worthy of special record 236 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS that when the stage was in its most depraved condition its leader was a clean-living man, who was respe&ted by all. Great a&ors followed Betterton, but none took the undisputed position which he held, and it was not until Garrick came on the scene that the stage had a leader whom all accepted as their chief. Then followed John Kemble, and though Edmund Kean disputed his position, it was the followers of Kemble that held possession of the boards for many years. Charles Young and Macready carried on the traditions, to be succeeded by Phelps and Charles Kean, and now Sir Henry Irving, who has obtained official recognition both of his own genius and of the position of the stage, reigns supreme. There are two classes of theatrical portraits, those which show the alior as he is in private life, and those where he is seen in character. Examples of both these classes are abundant, and many of them are excellent. There is another class consisting of pi&ures of scenes from plays as a&ed on the stage. It requires a good painter to make these successful, for they are too apt to look unreal, and to appear. as "shadows of a shade"; but there are several excellent examples of this class. Maclise's pi&ure of the play scene in Hamlet, now in the Tate Gallery, is good, but still it is somewhat stagey. Mr. E. A. Abbey, R.A., tried in the Royal Academy Exhibition of I897 to depi6 the scene as it might have happened, but he was not very successful, for we care nothing for the archaic scene-our interest is in the scene that Shakespeare drew, and that is of no date. The room to the left of the entrance to the Dulwich Gallery is of great interest, because of the portraits of early a&ors there. These piftures RICHARD BURBAGE, BY HIMSEIF. THOMVAS BETTERTON, BY SIR G. KNELLER. ACTORS AND ACTRESSES 237 are not works of art, and compare unfavourably with the beautiful pidures in the adjoining rooms, but they are of the greatest value as giving us authentic portraits of the early a6tors. Here are portraits of William Sly, who a6ted with Shakespeare, Nathaniel Field, Tom Bond, Richard Perkins; and William Cartwright, who presented these pictures to Dulwich College. No such colleCion of theatrical portraits exists as that preserved at the Garrick Club. The gallery was originally formed by Charles Mathews the elder, who publicly exhibited it in Oxford Street in 1833, where was published a " Catalogue Raisonne of Mr. Mathews's Gallery of Theatrical Portraits, now exhibited for the first time, and forming a nearly complete Dramatic Record from the year I659 down to the present time. Queen's Bazaar, Oxford Street." Mathews's colle&tion was presented to the Garrick Club in 1852 by Mr. John Dowland Durrant, and it has been largely added to by gifts at different times. The aftors owe much to the painters, for they themselves appeal to the eyes and ears of an audience, and, however famous in their own day, are apt to be forgotten as time passes. But the painters have made good pidtures, in which the players aFt and live again. Hogarth stands at the head of these historians of the English stage, and we can never tire of his portraits and representations of the scenes of the theatre. They inspire us with a desire to know more of these men and women who delighted a former age. Hayman, though not so good an artist, did almost as much in the same way. Reynolds and Gainsborough found some of their finest inspirations in connedion with the 238 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS stage, and Zoffany was so highly successful in dramatic portraiture that he has been styled "the historian of the Stage of Garrick." Of later artists who have devoted themselves to the illustration of the stage, special mention must be made of George Clint, A.R.A., whose studio in Gower Street was the rendezvous of the leading adtors and adresses of his day. William Hilton, R.A., the historical painter, immortalized a worthy adtress who had been kind to him. At an exhibition in Wisbech in 1866 this portrait of Mrs. Robertson (who died in the town), in the charader of Beatrice removing her mask, was shown, and the following anecdote told by Canon Hopkins at the opening meeting:Mrs. Robertson was the wife of the manager, and they went about the country from Lynn to Wisbech, Peterborough, and other places, with a provincial company of artistes. In the company there was a man of the name of Hilton, who painted and repaired the scenes. He had a boy who showed some capacity as an artist. When he was about twelve or thirteen his father said he would apprentice him to a shoemaker. The boy wept, and entreated his father not to do so, and he went to Mrs. Robertson, his friend, to ask her to intercede with his father. " Well," said the father, "I am willing to indulge him in anything that is reasonable, but I do not wish him to become a vagabond as I have been myself. I wish to train him up to an honest living." Mrs. Robertson promised to do something for the boy. Lessons in drawing were given to him, and partly by the assistance of Mrs. Robertson and partly by that of other friends, he became an artist, went to London, and rose to be a Royal Academician. When he had attained ACTORS AND ACTRESSES 239 to distinction, he visited his benefaltress, and as a mark of gratitude painted her portrait. The portraits of Betterton and Nell Gwyn here reproduced are taken from the portraits in the National Portrait Gallery; the first by Kneller, and the second by Lely. The Earl of Mansfield showed Pope's copy of Kneller's portrait of Betterton at the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867. The portraits of Nell Gwyn, by Lely, are numerous. There is one at Hampton Court, Earl Spencer has another, and the Marquis of Hastings a third. Moll Davis, the dancer and aCtress of the Duke's Theatre, who became Charles II.'s mistress, and grandmother of the Earl of Derwentwater, who was beheaded on Tower Hill, was painted by Lely more than once. The Earl of Essex has one of these, and there is another in the National Portrait Gallery. A very interesting piCture of John Lacy in three characters, by Michael Wright, is still preserved at Hampton Court, and has been frequently copied. There is a small copy at the Garrick Club. It is strange that Langbaine and Aubrey blunder in their description of this pidure. They both say that Lacy was a favourite of Charles II., who caused his piCture to be painted in three of his best characters, but they both describe the charaaters wrongly. Langbaine says they are " Teague in the Commitlee, Scruple in the Cheals, and Galliard in Varzety." Aubrey says they are Teague, Lord Vaux, and the Puritan. Planche, in his " History of Costume," pointed out that one of the charaters was evidently a Scotchman, and not an Irishman, and quoted Evelyn's Diary in this connetion. The diarist visited the painter on October 3, 1662, and he 240 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS states that in his opinion Wright's best portrait is that of " Lacy, the famous Roscius or Comedian, whom he had painted in three dresses: as a gallant, a Presbyterian minister, and a Scotch Highlander in his plaid." Planche then goes on to express the opinion that this was Sauny, a chara&der in Lacy's own alteration of Shakespeare's " Taming of the Shrew," entitled, " Sauny the Scot, or the Taming of the Shrew." Planche evidently was not aware that in the lower right hand of the pidSure is this inscription corroborating his view: "John Lacy, one of His Majties Comedians, representing Parson Scruple in the Cheats, Sandy in the Taming of the Shrew, and Monsieur de Vice in the Country Captaine." The latter play was by the Duke of Newcastle, and the " Cheats " by John Wilson. There are a few portraits of the earlier adors and actresses at the Garrick Club, such as Barton Booth by Vanderbank; Cave Underhill as Obadiah in the " Committee," by R. Bing; Nat Lee, which looks as if it were painted when he was mad, and is attributed to Dobson: but this ascription is impossible, as that painter died in 1646, and Lee was not a scholar at Trinity College, Cambridge, until 1668; Henry Harris, the friend of Pepys and rival of Betterton, as Cardinal Wolsey; and " the famous Mr. Anthony Leigh" in the " Spanish Friar"; and the two beautiful women, great atdresses and great rivals, Mrs. Bracegirdle and Mrs. Oldfield. A portrait of Colley Cibber as Lord Foppington in the "Relapse," by Grisoni, is worthy of special attention, as an admirable picture, and one which every lover of that delightful book the "Apology for his Life," must be pleased to see, as it brings before us in bodily form the remarkable man who entered so thoroughly into the spirit of the character he acted, that he adtually made affedation NELL GWVN, BY SIR P. LELY. ACTORS AND ACTRESSES 241 natural. Pope made a great mistake when he supposed that an affeEted man must necessarily be a fool, and when he found out his mistake the world sympathised more with the misunderstood adtor and laureate than with the waspish little poet. Another masterpiece is the fine portrait of Foote by Reynolds, in which the man of unrivalled wit, who was hated by many and respeated by none, is portrayed to the very life. There is an excellent portrait of Garrick by Reynolds which was presented to the club by the Duke of Fife. There is another portrait by Pine, and one by the elder Morland, of Garrick as Richard I I I., also representations of several scenes from plays in which he acted, as two by Zoffany: in one he is with Mrs. Pritchard in " Macbeth," and in the other with Mrs. Cibber in "Venice Preserved." Another piture, showing Garrick with Mrs. Pritchard in the " Suspicious Husband," by Hayman. Hogarth painted several portraits of Garrick; one of these as Richard III. was lent by Lord Feversham to the South Kensington Exhibition of i868. Another portrait in the same exhibition was by P. J. de Loutherbourg. One of Reynolds's portraits was lent to the 1867 exhibition by the Marquis of Lansdowne. Mr. T. Grissell sent a piCture by Reynolds which was described as "Mr. and Mrs. Garrick and Child" in the catalogue, but no explanation is given of the presence of a baby on Mrs. Garrick's knee. Mr. William Angerstein lent to this exhibition Reynolds's pidture of " Garrick between Tragedy and Comedy," and the Marquis of Exeter lent a portrait of Garrick by Nathaniel Dance. In the National Gallery is a portrait by Zoffany. Hogarth's portrait of Mrs. Garrick was lent to the Guelph Exhibition by Dr. Edward Hamilton. R 242 H-ISTORICAL PORTRAITS One of Hogarth's most charming dramatic pictures is the portrait of Miss Rich, the daughter of manager Rich, and an adtress. It was lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867 by Mr. J. Heywood Hawkins. A portrait of Ricl as harlequin in 1753 is at the Garrick Club. There is a portrait of Quin by Hogarth at the club, and one by Gainsborough at Buckingham Palace. It is appropriate that the portrait of this great at6or should find a home there, for it was he who taught George III. elocution, and when he heard the king praised for the delivery of his first speech, he exclaimed, " I taught the boy!" There is a portrait of Spranger Barry, and also a piCture of him and MIrs. Barry in " Hamlet" at the Garrick Club. Barry surpassed most adtors as a lover, and was superb in Othello. Here also is a portrait by Opie of Charles Macklin, painted in his old age. Garrick was particularly fortunate in the adtresses that acted with him, both in tragedy and comedy, but he often came in collision with them, for they occasionally offended him, and he often offended them. His marriage was his first cause of offence, as each of them individually had proposed to herself the filling of the position of his wife. Garrick's relations with Mrs. Abington were constantly strained, and on the back of one of her letters he wrote that she was " the worst of bad women," but then he was rather fond of writing uncomplimentary notes on the backs of the letters he received. Mrs. Abington was celebrated for her representation of the queens of comedy, and she was the original Lady Teazle; but she also charmed her audience as romps and pert chambermaids, and Reynolds's perfect portrait of her as Miss Prue in " Love for Love," is one of his most successful and humorous performances. This was lent by DAVID GARRICK, BY R. E. PINE. ACTORS AND ACTRESSES 243 the Earl of Morley to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867. Nothing shows more clearly than the career of Mrs. Abington how transitory is the a6tor's fame. Johnson was charmed with her, and attended her benefit in a seat where he could neither see nor hear, so that Boswell naturally asked him why he went. The answer was, "Because, sir, Mrs. Abington is a favourite of the public, and when the public care one-thousandth part for you that it does for her, I will go to your benefit too." Now the public care for Boswell a thousand times as much as for Mrs. Abington, because most of them only know her from the engraving of Reynolds's charming pidture. There is a portrait of her by Hickey at the Garrick Club. Peg Woffington, whose breezy philanthrophy, as delineated by Charles Reade, has been brought before the eyes of the public of to-day by two distinguished atdresses- Mrs. Stirling (the late Lady Gregory) and Lady Bancroft-is represented in three portraits at the club, one by Hogarth and the others by Wilson and Mercier. The pit6ure by Pond, here reproduced, is in the National Portrait Gallery. Mrs. Cibber, one of the most interesting women who ever trod the stage, and of whom Quin said, "that woman has a heart and can do anything when passion is required," was frequently painted. There is a portrait of her by Hudson at the club, and also the pid6ure by Zoffany, showing her as adting with Garrick in " Venice Preserved." Mrs. Pritchard, whose fame as Lady Macbeth is still remembered and even compared with Mrs. Siddons's triumphant impersonation of the part, was painted by Zoffany with Garrick as Macbeth, and also with him in the " Suspicious Husband." 244. HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Kitty Clive, the Clivy Pivy (contraded to Pivy) of Garrick, was painted by Hogarth. Her portrait at the Garrick Club is supposed by Sir Theodore Martin to have been painted by Van Haacken, but in Matthews's original catalogue it is attributed to Verelst, that is William, the grandson of the elder brother of Simon, who styled himself "The God of Flowers." The woman who could appreciate Dr. Johnson, and hold her own in the fashionable society that surrounded Horace Walpole at Strawberry Hill, must have been something more even than a great actress. The portrait of Mrs. George Anne Bellamy by Linton is also at the club, but although she played Juliet to Garrick's Romeo, she cannot be put on a level as an adress with any of those just mentioned. If the stage owes much to the artists it also owes much to the authors who have committed to paper their impressions of the at6ors. Foremost among these is Charles Lamb, whose "Essays of Elia" are full of vivid recollecions of the old abtors instindt with true insight. It is delightful after reading these sketches to look at the men as they appear upon the canvas, and most of them are represented on the walls of the Garrick Club. Joseph Shepherd Munden was the most celebrated comedian of his day, and shone as Sir Anthony Absolute in "The Rivals," and as Old Dornton in "The Road to Ruin." Of the latter charader Lamb says, "I have seen this gifted ador in Sir Christopher Curry-in Old Dornton, diffuse a glow of sentiment which has made the pulse of a crowded theatre beat like that of one man; when he has come in aid of the pulpit, doing good to the moral heart of a people. I have seen some faint approaches to this sort of excellence in PEG WOFFINGTON, BY ARTHUR POND. ACTORS AND ACTRESSES 245 other players. But in the grand grotesque of farce, Munden stands out as single and unaccompanied as Hogarth. Hogarth, strange to tell, had no followers. The school of Munden began and must end, with himself." Again, with regard to his remarkable power of " making faces," Lamb says, " There is one face of Farley, one face of Knight, one (but what a one it is!) of Liston; but Munden has none that you can properly pin down and call his. When you think he has exhausted his battery of looks, in unaccountable warfare with your gravity, suddenly he sprouts out an entirely new set of features like Hydra. He is not one but legion; not so much a comedian as a company. If his name could be multiplied like his countenance it might fill a playbill." There are eight portraits of Munden at the Garrick Club, one of them by Opie was painted about i80o. William Parsons, the original Sir Fretful Plagiary, was styled the "Comic Roscius." He is mentioned by Lamb, but he does not seem to have been so great a favourite with the essayist as some of the other a6tors. He was famed for his presentation of Lord Ogleby in the "Clandestine Marriage," Mawworm and Old Hardcastle. At the Garrick Club there are portraits of him in his private dress, as Foresight, by DeWilde, as Dumps, in the "Natural Son," by Zoffany, and as Obadiah, in the "Committee," with Moody as Teague. John Palmer, generally known as "Plausible Jack," succeeded to the high comedy parts of Gentleman Smith after the retirement of that favourite at6or, but Lamb says he.was a gentleman with a slight infusion of the footman. He was the original Joseph Surface, and according to 246 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Lamb, unapproachable in that character-in fa6l the hero of the play when he a6ted in it. At the Garrick Club there is a piture of the screen scene in "The School for Scandal," with Palmer as Joseph, King as Sir Peter, Smith as Charles, and Mrs. Abington as Lady Teazle. There are also portraits of Palmer, by Russell, as Cohenberg, in "The Siege of Belgrade," by Arrowsmith, and as Iachimo, by Parkinson. Zoffany's pidture of a scene in "The Alchemist," with Palmer as Face, Garrick as Abel Drugger, and Burton as Subtle, belongs to the Earl of Carlisle. There is a good story of Palmer which shows how justly he was entitled to the title of Plausible Jack, and how completely he carried the spirit of Joseph Surface into private life. He and Sheridan having quarrelled he wished to be friends, so he said, " If you could see my heart, Mr. Sheridan." The manager replied, "Why, Jack, you forget I wrote it." Robert William Elliston was a thriftless creature as well as a good actor, and little is to be said in his favour as a man, but what little there is Lamb says. He shows that while some a6tors are the same easy creatures on the stage that they are off, so he was the same off that he was on; and this is not quite the same thing although Elliston thought it was. Lamb says, "In truth this was the charm of Elliston's private deportment. You had spirited performance always going on before your eyes, with nothing to pay. As where a monarch takes up his casual abode for a night, the poorest hovel which he honours by his sleeping in it, becomes zfpso faflo for that time a palace, so wherever Elliston walked, sate, or stood still, there was the theatre. He carried about with him his pit, boxes, ACTORS AND ACTRESSES 247 and galleries, and set up his portable playhouse at corners of street, and in the market places." There is at the Garrick Club a drawing of Elliston by Harlow, and a painting of him as Odtavian in "The Mutineers," by H. Singleton, R.A. Jack Bannister was a universal favourite, and Lamb specially praises his cowards. " Could anything be more agreeable, more pleasant? We loved the rogues. How was this effeRed but by the exquisite art of the a6tor in a perpetual subinsinuation to us the spectators, even in the extremity of the shaking fit, that he was not half such a coward as we took him for?" Opie painted three portraits of Bannister, and a portrait by Reynolds was lent to the Guelph Exhibition by Mr. T. Hutchinson Lee. Lamb was enthusiastic over the merits of Dodd and Dickey Suett in the respecive parts of Sir Andrew Aguecheek and the clown in "Twelfth Night." Of the former he says: "In expressing slowness of apprehension, this aFtor surpassed all others. You could see the first dawn of an idea stealing slowly over his countenance, climbing up by little and little with a painful process, till it cleared up at last to the fullness of a twilight conception-its highest meridian." There is a portrait of Dodd in private dress at the Garrick Club, also pictures of him as Abel Drugger in " The Alchemist," and Lord Foppington in the " Trip to Scarborough." There is also a portrait of Suett. Lamb's finest bit of dramatic criticism is contained in his remarks on Bensley: "Of all the ators who flourished in my time-a melancholy phrase if taken aright, reader-Bensley had most of the swell of soul, was greatest in the delivery of heroic conceptions, the emotions consequent upon the presentment of a great idea to 248 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS the fancy. He had the true poetical enthusiasmthe rarest faculty among players." The description of the way in which the a6tor unfolded the character of Iago is admirable, "It was not a man setting his wits at a child, and winking all the while at other children who are mightily pleased at being let into the secret; but a consummate villain entrapping a noble nature into toils against which no discernment was available, where the manner was as fathomless as the purpose seemed dark and without motive." Again, the evolution of Malvolio shows a true understanding of a much misunderstood charader: "Bensley threw over the part an air of Spanish loftiness. He looked, spake, and moved, like an old'Castilian. He was starch, spruce, opiniated, but his superstructure of pride seemed bottomed upon a sense of worth. There was something in it beyond the coxcomb. It was big and swelling, but you could not be sure it was hollow. You might wish to see it taken down, but you felt that it was upon an elevation." Mr. Knight thinks Lamb's praise is excessive, but he brings forward in the "Dictionary of National Biography" corroborative testimony to the excellence of Bensley's Malvolio, which was his masterpiece. At the Garrick Club is a piature of a scene from "King John" by Mortimer, in which Bensley, Powell, and Smith are represented. Lamb makes some laudatory remarks respecting John Kemble, of whose aCting he was a genuine admirer. At the National Portrait Gallery there are two good portraits of Kemble, one by Gilbert Stuart, which is here reproduced, and Lawrence's full-length piCture of the a6tor as Hamlet. At the Garrick Club there is Lawrence's Kemble as Cato. JOHN PHILIP KEMBLE, BY GILBERT STUART. ACTORS AND ACTRESSES 249 The National Gallery contains the beautiful portrait of Mrs. Siddons, by Gainsborough, which is here reproduced, and also one by Lawrence. She is represented as Lady Macbeth in a pi6ture by Harlow at the Garrick Club. At the National Portrait Gallery are Sir William Beechey's portrait, and Lawrence's full-length figure. At the Dulwich Gallery is Reynolds's fine pidure of Mrs. Siddons as the "Tragic Muse," similar to the Duke of Westminster's pieture, and there has been some doubt as to which of these two is the original. Every great painter was anxious to paint the greatest of English aa6resses. G. H. Harlow's "Trial Scene of Queen Katharine," from " Henry VIII.," containing portraits of the members of the Kemble family. This pidture was lent to the Guelph Exhibition by Mrs. Morrison of Basildon Park, Berks. It was engraved by George Clint, who, finding the publication to be a success, was induced to paint a similar piFture of a scene from Massinger's " New Way to pay old Debts," with Kean as Sir Giles Over-reach. This, which is considered to be Clint's best work, is at the Garrick Club. There is a portrait of William Siddons (Mrs. Siddons's husband), by Opie, in the National Gallery, and one of Charles Kemble, by H. P. Briggs, at Dulwich. Another of the latter as Macbeth is at the Garrick Club. Several actors have had the distindion of being known specially as " Gentleman." The elder John Palmer was styled Gentleman Palmer. Gentleman Smith, who figures in Churchill's " Rosciad" as " Smith the genteel, the airy and the smart," has his portrait by Hoppner in the National Portrait Gallery, and in the National Gallery is a portrait of Gentleman Lewis as the marquis in 250 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS the " Midnight Hour," by Shee. Another portrait by Shee is at the Garrick Club. There is only room to allude shortly to some of the other portraits at the club. Here are the Infant Roscius-William Henry West Betty as Norval, by Opie; Henderson by Gainsborough and also by Beach, and as Macbeth by Romney; Cooke as Shylock; Charles Young as King John, by Sir Edwin Landseer; Liston by Clint; Charles Mathews senior, as Somno and as Sir Fretful Plagiary, by De Wilde, and in various charaders by Harlow; Charles Mathews junior, in various chara6ters, a large series of coloured drawings presented by Mr. Robert Walters. Of beautiful women there is a portrait of Mrs. Elizabeth Hartley by Angelica Kauffmann, and another as Andromache in the " Distressed Mother," by Sherwin: Mrs. Hartley was a favourite subje&t With Reynolds, and she appears as an example of female beauty in many of his piltures; Mrs. Inchbald, by Harlow; Miss O'Neill (afterwards Lady Becher), by Joseph; and Mrs. Pope, by Shee and by Clint. Of the portraits of modern a6tors, still remembered by many playgoers who have constantly seen them with delight, mention may be made of Macready as Henry IV.,by Jackson, R.A.; Phelps as Wolsey, by Mr. J. Forbes-Robertson (an amateur painter as well as a distinguished actor); Harley, by Clint; Walter Lacy, by Cope; Keeley, by H. O'Neill; Buckstone, by Knight. E.A. Sothern, Mrs. Stirling, and Mrs. Keeley. Of living a(tors there is a fine portrait of Sir Henry Irving, by Millais, and one of Mr. Toole, by the Hon. John Collier. There are also busts of Fechter by himself, and of Sir Squire and Lady Bancroft by the late Count Gleichen. MRS. SIDDONS, BY T. GAINSBOROUGH. CHAPTER XII. MERCHANTS AND THE PEOPLE. " Were thejus nagzizum limited as at Rome to the great and noble, not only would many worthy citizens, limners, oilmen, colourmen, dealers in canvas, etc., be deprived of their bread, but a vast store of innocent pleasure would be lost to good people; and what is worse our hearts would miss many profitable hints and salutary influences."-HARTLEY COLERIDGE'S Essayss, i. 292. TIIS chapter consists of some notes on the portraits of those persons who do not of right belong to the previous ones, and it will therefore of necessity be somewhat miscellaneous in character. Sir Thomas Gresham was one of our first great merchants, and his fame has increased rather than waned, so that in popular imagination he remains the representative of the merchant princes of the country. There are some excellent portraits of him, several by Sir Antonio Moro, which are mostly in private hands. The Mercers' Company possess a good portrait of their early member. Sir Hugh Middleton will always be remembered as founder of the New River Company, and the introducer of a satisfa6tory water supply to London. There is a portrait of him at Goldsmiths' Hall. William Portington, "carpenter in the office of His Majesty's buildings, served in the place 40 yeares," was a good example of a seventeenth century official. His portrait, painted when he was eighty-one years of age, in 1626, is preserved at Carpenters' Hall. 252 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS Of the earlier lord mayors Whittington is one of the most famous, but his portrait, painted with his favourite cat, cannot be said to be of any authority. Sir Martin Bowes, lord mayor in i545, was painted by William Faithorne, who presented the picture to the Goldsmiths' Company, to which Bowes was a munificent benefa6tor. The portrait of Sir Rowland Hill, lord mayor in I549, was lent to the Tudor Exhibition by Lord Egerton of Tatton. Sir Thomas White, the founder of St. John's College, Oxford, was lord mayor in I553, in which year he was knighted for preserving peace in the City of London during Sir Thomas Wyat's rebellion. There are portraits of him in the Town Hall at Salisbury, at Reading, at St. John's College, and at Merchant Taylors' Hall. Sir William Hewett, who held office in 1559, was ancestor to the Duke of Leeds, his daughter marrying Sir Thomas Osborne. His portrait was lent by the Duke of Leeds to the Tudor Exhibition. There is a portrait at Hampton Court of Sir John Leman, who was lord mayor in 1616, and entertained the Knights of the Bath with a supper and a play at Drapers' Hall. Some of the knights were insolent to the citizens and to their wives so that there was a scene of great disorder, and the entertainment was broken up. Sir John Houblou (one of the brothers whowere all great friends of Samuel Pepys) was lord mayor in 1695. He was the first Governor of the Bank of England, and there is a portrait of him at the Bank. The celebrated William Beckford was twice lord mayor, in 1762 and 1769, and he died during his second term of office on 2ISt June, I770. His portrait was painted by Reynolds in 1755, and the :. SIR THOMAS GRESHAM, BY SIR ANTONIO MORO. MERCHANTS AND THE PEOPLE 253 picture is in the possession of his descendant the Duke of Hamilton. His statue at Guildhall, inscribed with a speech which it is doubtful whether he delivered or no, is well known. John Boydell, Lord Mayor in 1790, to whom English art is deeply indebted for his judicious patronage, succeeded in establishing a school of engraving in England. There are portraits of him at Guildhall and at Stationers' Hall, and Mr. Henry Graves lent one, by William Miller, to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867. Portraits of many of the other lord mayors are to be found in the halls of the city companies and in the mansions of their descendants, but more cannot be mentioned here. Some notice must be taken of local celebrities outside London. A very famous man in his day was Thomas Hobson, the Cambridge carrier, who has added a phrase to the English language. All know that his rigid rule, that the horse next the stable door must be the one taken out for hire gave rise to the expression " Hobson's choice." The Corporation of Cambridge lent to the South Kensington Exhibition of i866 a portrait of Hobson, on the back of which was this inscription: " This pi6ture was hung up at the Black Bull in Bishopsgate, London, upwards of 100 years before it was given to J. Burleigh, I787." Hobson travelled monthly between the Black Bull and Cambridge, and Steele, in a paper in the "Spedator" (No. 509), mentions a fresco of him which was at the same inn. The portrait of John Middleton, the Lancashire giant, known as the " Child of Hale" (1578-1623), is preserved in the buttery of Brasenose College, Oxford; and also the piture of his hand, full size (I7 inches). Sir Gilbert Ireland took Middleton to Court about I617, where he threw the king's 254 -IISTORICAL PORTRAITS wrestler and put out his thumb. His height was 9 feet 3 inches. Pepys went to the cellar of Brasenose on June 9, I668, to see the outline of Middleton's hand. Humphry Chetham, the wealthy Manchester merchant, who founded the Chetham Library, and died in I653, was painted in a yellow embroidered cap, and his portrait was sent to the South Kensington Exhibition, 1866, by Chetham's Hospital and Library. At the Guelph Exhibition there were several portraits of famous publishers and printers. Mr. Baker lent Kneller's Jacob Tonson; Mrs. Arthur Lemon Reynolds's William Strahan, M.P., the king's printer; and the Stationers' Company W. Lane's Luke Hansard, printer to the House of Commons. At the South Kensington Exhibition of 1868 there were Pickersgill's portrait of the second John Murray, the founder of "The Quarterly Review " and Byron's publisher, and Phillips's Thomas Norton Longman, head of the great firm of Longmans. Robert Chambers's portrait by Sir J. Watson Gordon, P.R.S.A., was shown at the ViXtorian Exhibition. The inventors and engineers who have done so much for the welfare of the England of the last.and present centuries, have been well represented at the various exhibitions. The portrait of Sir Richard Arkwright, by J. Wright of Derby, A.R.A., was sent to the Guelph Exhibition. Portraits of *George Stephenson by William Daniels, of Robert.Stephenson by H. W. Phillips, of Sir Marc Isambard Brunel by Northcote, of Isambard Kingdom Brunel by J. C. Horsley, and of John Rennie by Sir Henry Raeburn, were contributed,to the South Kensington Exhibition of 1868. The portrait of Robert Scarlett, the Sexton of MERCHANTS AND THE PEOPLE 255 Peterborough Cathedral, who interred two queens.-Katharine of Aragon and Mary, Queen of Scotsand "the town's householders twice over," is one of the sights at the cathedral, fixed as it is at the end of the nave. Edward Orpin, parish clerk of Bradford in Wiltshire, was painted by Gainsborough, and the beautiful piSture was given by the painter to Wiltshire the carrier. It is now one of the chief ornaments of the National Gallery. Ignatius Sancho, the black, whose portrait was painted by Gainsborough, was made much of by the literary men of his acquaintance. The portrait was exhibited at the Grosvenor Gallery in I885, and was engraved as a frontispiece to the edition of his " Letters," published in 1784. He was born in I729, on board a slave ship, a few days after it had quitted the coast of Guinea for the Spanish West Indies. At Carthagena he was baptized by the bishop under the name of Ignatius. His master brought him to England when he was two years old, nd gave him to three maiden sisters who lived at Greenwich. They surnamed him Sancho, from a fancied resemblance to the squire of Don Quixote. The Duke of Montagu, who lived at Blackheath, was kind to him, and on his death Sancho threw himself on the protedtion of the duchess, who employed him as butler, and he remained in her service till her death. He is said to have spent his last shilling to see Garrick as Richard III., and was himself offered an engagement to adt Othello and Oronoko, but his imperfect articulation prevented him from appearing on the stage. He married, and was set up in a grocery shop by the Duke of Montagu. Hogarth painted him as a boy, as Gainsborough did as a man. Frank Barber, Dr. Johnson's black servant and 256 IIISTORICAL PORTRAITS friend, was painted by Reynolds, who also painted his own black footman. At the Reynolds Exhibition in the Grosvenor Gallery Mr. H. L. Bischoffsheim lent a portrait of Tiu-che-quu, a Chinese, who was ele6ted an Honorary Royal Academician at the foundation of the Academy. Thomas Britton, the small coal man, was a most interesting charater, and his reception by the polite world at his own valuation is a unique circumstance in history. He never altered his mode of life, and continued to sell coals in small quantities in the streets while he was receiving men and women of the first quality at his house in Clerkenwell. For forty years he held on Thursdays weekly concerts, which were attended by the most fashionable company. Handel and Pepusch performed at these concerts, as did all the amateurs of the day. J. Woolaston, who painted the portrait in the National Portrait Gallery, which is here reproduced, was one of the company that frequented Britton's house. Besides being a musician Britton was also a book colleCtor, and is said to have gathered the valuable colleetion of pamphlets which he sold to Lord Somers for over 500o, and which is known to us as the Somers TraFts. The Earl of Oxford, the Duke of Devonshire, and the Earls of Pembroke, Winchelsea, and Sunderland, and other book colledors, were in the habit of spending Thursdays in book-hunting in the city, and of meeting afterwards at a tavern in Paternoster Row. Britton frequently met them, and he entered their company with his coalsack under his arm. Mention has already been made of Lawrence's fine portrait of Angerstein, and next to the latter, as a great piaure collector, notice must be taken of Sir George Beaumont, the elegant amateur THOMAS BRITTON, BY J. WOLLASTON. MERCHANTS AND THE PEOPLE 257 (who had taken lessons of Richard Wilson), and the most kind-hearted patron of painters, who may be considered as a joint founder of the National Gallery. When the question of buying the Angerstein Gallery was before the prime minister, Lord Liverpool, Sir George Beaumont went to him and said: " Buy them and I will add mine."' The result was that he presented sixteen fine pictures to the nation. His portrait by Reynolds was shown at the South Kensington Exhibition of 1867. The portrait of another munificent benefactor-. the Rev. William Holwell Carr-by John Jackson, R.A., is hung in the National Gallery, to which he bequeathed a large number of fine pi&ures. Robert Vernon, a horse-dealer, made a fortune by supplying the army with horses during the great war. He spent over ~150,000 on the works of contemporary artists, and presented to the nation in 1847 his colletion of 157 pictures. Amongst the piCtures presented to the South Kensington Exhibition by John Sheepshanks was a portrait of the donor by Mulready. Much more might be said of the various classes which constitute the great world, but it is necessary to make a sele&tion, and this must needs be to some extent arbitrary. We will therefore bring this chapter and this book to a conclusion with some notes on the portraits of children. " Sir Joshua Reynolds delighted in children, and appears thoroughly to have understood them. It is related that the parents of the beautiful Miss Bowles had settled that their darling should sit to Romney, but Sir George Beaumont urged them to go to Reynolds. The little lady was shy and coy, so the painter was invited to dinner in order that she might get used to him. Reynolds came S 258 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS and sat at table by the daughter of the house. He paid her the most assiduous court, told her stories, and showed her tricks. Her plate was juggled away and brought back from unexpedted quarters. The child's senses were dazzled, and the conquest was complete. She thought her admirer the most captivating of men, and was only too ready to be taken to his house on the next day. She arrived in an ecstacy of expedation and delight, and gave herself up to Sir Joshua's blandishments. He seized his opportunity, caught the radiant expression, and made his little friend immortal." Northcote, who was also a lover of children, wrote of Reynolds: "He delighted much in marking the dawning traits of the youthful mind, and the actions and bodily movements even of infants, and it was by these means that he acquired the ability which enabled him to portray children with such exquisite happiness, truth, and variety. A circumstance, as related by himself, occurs to my remembrance which may serve to prove the truth of the above observation, as well as to show how watchful his mind was to catch instruEtion wherever it was to be gained. Sir Joshua being in company with a party of ladies and gentlemen who were viewing a nobleman's house, they passed through a gallery of portraits, when a little girl who belonged to one of the party attraded the particular attention of Sir Joshua by her vivacity and the sensible drollery of her observations; for whenever the company made a stand to look at each portrait in particular, the child, unconscious of being observed by anyone, imitated by her aCtions the air of the head and sometimes awkward effe&t of the ill-disposed positions of the limbs in each piCture, and this she did with so much innocence and true feeling that it was the MERCHANTS AND THE PEOPLE 259 most just and incontrovertible criticism that could be made on the pi&tures." With this insight into a world respeEting which many are profoundly ignorant, we cannot be surprised that Reynolds surpassed all other painters in the painting of children. Mr. Frederic G. Stephens in an interesting book, full of anecdotes and valuable criticism, entitled " English Children as painted by Sir Joshua Reynolds," 1884, says: "It must have occurred to the minds of many among my readers that Reynolds of all artists painted children best-that the childless man knew most of childhood, depi6ted its beauty in the truest and happiest spirit of comedy, entered into its changeful soul with the tenderest, heartiest sympathy, played with the playful, sighed with the sorrowful, and mastered all the craft of infancy." The delightful pidure in the National Gallery of "Heads of Angels," was really the portrait of Miss Frances Isabella Ker Gordon, daughter of Lord William Gordon, taken in different positions. The picture entitled "Simplicity," exhibited at the Grosvenor Gallery in 1884, was the portrait of Miss Gwatkin, daughterof Reynolds's niece "Offy." Reynolds painted the little Penelope Boothby, the only child of Sir Brooke Boothby, who died in 1791 at the early age of six years, and was buried in Ashbourne Church, Derbyshire, where a well-known monument to her memory by Banks was eredted. The parent keenly felt his bereavement and the distress was lasting. He printed, in 1796, a folio volume entitled "Sorrows sacred to the memory of Penelope." Reynolds's portrait of the child belongs to Earl Dudley, and was exhibited at the International Exhibition of I862. The variety of charming positions into which Reynolds put his subjects is most astonishing. 260 HISTORICAL PORTRAITS He produced pidures of mothers with their children, and boys and girls by themselves, in the utmost profusion. Of the one class the pidture called "Pick-a-pack" (Mrs. Payne-Gallwey and child) is a delightful example, and the "Age of Innocence,"in the National Gallery, well represents the other. An anecdote told by Mr. F. G. Stephens may well be added here as it relates to two distinguished portrait-painters: "The Master Wynn, who sat to Reynolds for 'St. John at the Spring' (Grosvenor Exhibition, 1884), grew up and had a grandson, who sat to Lawrence while yet a boy. In the middle of the operation this lad, with the most evident gravity, and as if after long meditation, suddenly demanded of that President, who above all things dreaded a blunder in talt, and was not a little sensitive about his own age and appearance,-' Are you the man who painted my grandfather?'" INDEX. ABBEY, E. A., R.A., picture of the play- scene in Hamlet, 236. Abbott, Lemuel Francis, 83. Abington, Mrs., 242, 246; Johnson's opinion of her, 243. -Actors and Actresses, 235-250. Addison, Joseph, portrait of Andrew Fountaine supposed to be intended for him, 19. Aikman, William, portraitpainter, 56. Albemarle, George Monk, Duke of, 205, 210. Allan, David, 79. Allan, Sir William, P.R S.A., 90. Allestry, Dr. Richard, Provost of Eton, I92. Alleyn, Edward, 235. Allin, Sir Thomas, 205. Allston, Washington, A.R.A., 89. Amelia, Princess, daughter of George II., her portrait by Lady Burlington, 107. Andre, Major John, 212. Angerstein, J. J., portrait by Lawrence, 86, 256. Anne, Queen, her portraits, I8o. Anne of Cleves, her portraits, I51, 152, I55 -Anne of Denmark, i66. Anson, Lord, 206. Antiquaries, Society of, portraits of kings and queens at, 132. Arbuthnot, John, M.D., 203. Arkwright, Sir Richard, 254. Arnold, Dr., of Rugby, I94. Arnold, Matthew, by Watts, 232. Arthur, Prince of Wales, his portrait, 147. Arts, Society of, first exhibition of pictures, II3; exhibition of works of J. J. Chalon and A. E. Chalon, I855, 117; exhibition of works of SirWilliam Ross, 1860, 117. Arundel, Thomas Howard, Earl of, 213. Ashfield, William, 56. Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, portraits at, 134. Astley, John, 72. Audley, Sir Thomas, 197. Augusta, Princess, of Wales, her portrait with her family, 185. Ayscue, Sir George, 205. Bacon, Lord Chancellor, 198. Bacon, Sir Nathaniel, his portrait by himself, 103, I 14. Bacon, Sir Nicholas, his portraits, 197. Baillie, Matthew, M.D., 203. Balliol, John, and Devorgilla, false portraits at Balliol College, 13. Bancroft, Archbishop, his portraits, I90. Bancroft, Sir Squire and Lady, busts, 250. Banks, Sir Joseph, P.R.S., 220. Bannister, Jack, 247. Barber, Frank, 255. Barry, James, 77. Barry, Spranger, and Mrs. Barry, 242. Beach, Thomas, portrait-painter, 76. Beale, Mrs. Mary, portraitpainter, 48. Beauclerk, Lady Diana, i Io. 262 INDEX Beaumont, Sir George, 256. Beck, David, portrait-painter, 41. Beckford, William, Lord Mayor, 252. Beechey, Sir William, 80. Bell, Lady, I I I. Bellamy, Mrs. George Anne, 244. Bellasys, Lady, her portrait as St. Catherine by Lely, I74. Benbow, Admiral John, 206. Bensley, Robert, 247; as Iago, 248; as Malvolio, 248. Berkeley, Sir William, 205. Berners, Sir John Bourchier, 2nd Lord, 226. Betterton, Thomas, 235, 239. Bettes, John, portrait-painter, 33. Betty, W. H. W., as Norval, 250. Bewick, William, 93. Bindon, Francis, I09. Blackstone, Sir William, 200. Blake, Robert, portraits, 204. Blomefield, Francis, portrait of Flamsteed made to do duty for his portrait, 22. Blount, Martha and Theresa, their portraits, 181. Bockman, R., portrait-painter, 62. Bodleian Library, portraits at, I34. Boleyn, Anne, supposed portrait of her said to be by Holbein really Anne, daughter of Ladislaus, by Baldung Binck or Brosamer, 151; true portrait, 151. Bond, Tom, 237. Booth, Barton, 240. Boothby, Penelope, painted by Reynolds, 259. Boscawen, Hon. Edward, 207. Boswell, J., portrait by Reynolds, 230; his letter to Reynolds, 231. Bower, Edward, portrait-painter, 42. Bowes, Sir Martin, Lord Mayor, 252. Bowles, Miss, painted by Reynolds, 257. Boxall, Sir William, R.A., 94. Boydell, John, Lord Mayor, 253. Boyle, Hon. Robert, 2I5. Bracegirdle, Mrs. 240. Bradley, Rev. James, 214. Bridgewater, Elizabeth Churchill, Countess of, 181. Bridport, Alexander, Ist Viscount, 207. Briggs, Henry Perronet, R.A., 92. British Institution, first exhibition of portraits, I820, I 14; second exhibition, 1846, 11 4; exhibitions of Reynolds's pictures, I813, 1823, 1833, 1843, 114, I 15; exhibition of pictures by Hogarth, Wilson, Gainsborough, and Zoffany, 1814, I 4; exhibition of Lawrence's pictures, I824, I14; exhibition of pictures by Reynolds, West;, and Lawrence, 1833, 14; exhibition of Wilkie's pictures, 1842, 115. Britton, Thomas, small coal man, 256. Brodie, Sir Benjamin, P.R.S., 203, 221. Bromley, Sir Thomas, I98. Brompton, Richard, 67. Brougham, Lord, 200. Broughton, Lord, 234. Brouncker, Viscount, P.R.S., 217. Brown, Mather, 84. Browne, John, sergeant painter to Henry VI II., 28. Browning, Robert, by Watts, 232. Brunel, Isambard Kingdom,254. Brunel, Sir Marc Isambard, 254. Buchanan, George, 213. Buckingham, George Villiers, ist Duke of, his collection of pictures, 126. Buckingham, George Villiers, 2nd Duke of, portrait by Verelst, 53. Buckingham Palace, portraits in, 132. INDEX 263 Buckstone, J. B., 250. Bunyan, John, 227. Burbage, Richard, actor and amateur painter, II01, 235; his portrait by himself, IoI. Burghley, Lord, portraits, I63. Burghley, Lady Mildred, portrait by Zucharo, 164. Burlase, Sir William, his portrait of Ben Jonson, Io3. Burlington, Dorothy, Countess of, Io7. Burns, R., portrait by Alex. Nasmyth, 231. Burrow, Sir James, P.R.S., 220. Burton, William E., as Subtle, 246. Burton, Sir Frederic, 96. Busby, Dr. Richard, I94. Butler, Samuel, I05. Butts, Edmund, his portrait by John Bettes, 33. Butts, Sir William, portrait by Holbein, 20I; introduced into picture of Henry VIII. and Barber Surgeons, 201. Byrig, Admiral John, 207. Byron, Lord, portrait, 231. Cabal Ministry, portraits wrongly described as the, 16. Cairns, Earl, 20o. Callcott, Sir A. W., R.A., exhibition of his works at the Royal Academy, I875, I20. Cambridge Colleges, portraits at, 134. Camden, Earl, portraits, I99. Camden, William, 226. Campbell, Sir Colin, employed George Jameson to paint portraits of Kings of Scotland, I4. Carew, Sir Thomas, 227. Carlisle, Lady Lucy Percy, Countess of, 169. Carlyle, Thomas, his portraits, 232; on Scottish historical portraits, I15. Caroline of Brandenburg, Queen of George II., her portraits, I83. Caroline of Brunswick, Queen of George IV., her portraits, I88. Carpenter, Mrs. Margaret Sarah, 92. Carr, Rev. William Holwell, 257. Cartwright, William, 237. Cassana, N i colo, portrait-painter, 54. Castlemaine, Countess of, her portraits, 18, 175. Catalogue of Henry VIII.'s pictures, Scharf's suggestion that it should be edited, I55. Cavendish, Thomas, 204. Chalon, J. J. and A. E., exhibition of their works, I855, I I7. Chamberlain, William, 83. Chamberlin, Mason, R.A., 66. Chambers, Robert, 254. Chambers, Sir William, 232. Chambre, John, M.D., portrait introduced into picture of Henry VII. and Barber Surgeons, 201. Charles I., his portraits, I68; portrait changed to Cromwell, 171; portraits of his children, I70. Charles II., his portraits, I72. Charlotte, Queen, her portraits, I85. Chaucer, his portrait in Harleian MS., 25, 222. Chelmsford, Lord Chancellor, 200. Chetham, Humphry, 254. Chicheley, Archbishop, I33. Chichester, Bishops of, their portraits, 133. Christian II., picture of his three children, 138, 147, 154. Christian IV., King of Denmark, I68. Christina of Denmark, Duchess of Milan, her portrait by Holbein, 152. Christus,Petrus, portrait-painter, 144, 145. Cibber, Colley, as Lord Foppington, by Grisoni, 240. .264 INDEX Cibber, Mrs., 243; with Garrick, 243. Clarendon, Ist Earl of, his collection of portraits, 127; vicissitudes of the gallery, 127, 128. Clarendon, 3rd Earl of, his portrait as a woman, I80. Clergy, portraits of the, 189-197. Cleveland, Duchess of. See Castlemaine. Clifford, Lord, of Chudleigh, copies of his portrait renamed, I7. Clint, George, A.R.A., painter of theatrical pictures, 88, 238. Clive, Kitty, 243; friend of Johnson and Walpole, 244. Closterman, John, portraitpainter, 52. Clyde, Lord, 212. Coke, Sir Edward, 200. Cole, Sir Ralph, Bart., Io5. Coleridge, S. T., portraits, 232. Colet, Dean John, 193. Commons, House of, picture by Thornhill and Hogarth, 182. Cooke, G. F., as Shylock, 250. Cooper, Samuel, miniaturist, 43. Copley, John Singleton, R.A., 74. Corvus, Johannes, portraitpainter, 29. Cosway, Richard, 77. Cotes, Francis, R.A., 62. Coverley's, Sir Rogerde,portrait, 14. Cowley, A., 227. Cowper, Earl, portraits, 199. Cowper, William, portrait by Romney, 231; portrait of his mother, 231. Cranmer, Archbishop, his portraits, I90. Critz, John de, portrait-painter, 34, 35. Cromwell, his portraits, 47, I71. Cunningham, Peter, his collection of British Portraits at Manchester, 116. Cust, Lionel, Director of the National Portrait Gallery, 131. Dahl, Michael, portrait-painter, 5I. Dalton, John, 221. Damer, Hon. Mrs. Anne, I o. Dampier, Captain William, 206. Dandridge, Bartholomew, 62. Daniell, Thomas, R.A., 232. Dartmouth, Countess of, her portrait by Gainsborough, I86. Dartmouth, William, Earl of, 186. Darwin, Charles, 221. Davidson, Jeremiah, portraitpainter, 58. Davis, Moll, 239. Davy, Sir Humphry, P.R.S., 220. Dawe, George, R.A., 89. De Bye, Hieronymus, portraitpainter, 33. Delany, Miss Mary, I o. De Moivre, Abraham, 221. Denham, Elizabeth Brooke, Lady, her portrait by Lely, I74. De Quincey, T., 232. Derby, Charlotte de la Tremouille, Countess of, her portraits, 170. Derby's, Earl of, suggestion of National Portrait Exhibitions, 117. Derby, William, 90. Desmond, Countess of, spurious portrait of, 15. Devonshire, Edward Courtenay, Earl of, Ioo. Dickens, Charles, 232. Digby, Lady Venetia, her portraits, 169. Dilettanti Society portraits, 233. Dillon, Viscount, I8. Dobson, William, portraitpainter, 4I, 232. Dodd, J.XW., 247; as Sir Andrew Aguecheek, 247. Dolben, Archbishop, his portrait, 192. Donne, Sir John, and his wife, their portraits, I45. Dorchester's, Lady, opinion as to the painting of the Hampton Court Beauties, 179. INDEX 26-5 Dorset, Lady Mary Compton, Countess of, her portrait by Kneller, 179. Drummond, Samuel, A.R.A., 83. Dryden, John, portraits, 227. Du Bois, Simon,portrait-painter, 52. Dulwich College, portraits at, I34, I35 -Duncan, Thomas, A.R.A., 95. Dundas, Thomas, Ist Lord, 233. Dupont, Gainsborough, 84. Eastlake's, Sir Charles, suggestion of the National Portrait Gallery, 129. Eccardt, John Giles, 63. Edward IV., portraits, I45. Edward VI., portraits, 155; picture at Bridewell Hospital, 155. Egerton, Sir Thomas, 198. Eldon, Earl of, portraits, I99. Eliot, George, portrait, 232. Elizabeth, Queen, classification of her portraits by F. M. O'Donoghue, 159; not painted by Holbein, 156; proclamation concerning her portraits, 157; portraits by Lucas de Heere and Zucharo, I60; spurious portrait of, 15; a good - looking woman, I6I; her remarks on Richard II., 141; portrait of her giant porter, I65. Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, her portraits, 167; picture of her children, I67. Elizabeth Woodville, queen of Edward IV., her portraits, 146. Elizabeth of York, Henry VII.'s queen, her portraits, I47. Elliston, Robert William, 246. Ellys, John, portrait-painter, 63, 68. England, Kings of, apocryphal portraits of, 14. Englefield, Sir Henry, his portrait by Lawrence, 233-234. Erskine, Lord, 199..Essex, Lettice Knollys, Countess of, 164. Essex, Lady Mary Bentinck, Countess of, 179. Essex, Walter Devereux, Ist Earl of, 164. Essex, Robert, 2nd Earl of, 164. Essex, Robert, 3rd Earl of, I66, 210. Euston, Lady Dorothy Boyle, Countess of, her portrait by her mother, Io8. Evelyn, John, his portrait, 215; on Queen Elizabeth's portraits, 158. Exhibition of I862, portraits at, 117. "Fair Children" Exhibition at Grafton Gallery, 124. "Fair Women" Exhibition at Grafton Gallery, I23. Fairfax, Thomas Lord, and his wife, 211. Falconet, Pierre, 78. Falmouth, Countess of, her por. trait by Lely, 174. Faraday, M., portraits, 221; picture of deputation to him urging him to accept the Presidency ofthe Royal Society, 222. Fechter, bust by himself, 250. Fell, Bishop John, his portrait, I92. Ferguson, James, o09. Fergusson, Sir William, 203. Ffolkes, Martin, Ip.R.S., 219. Field, Nathaniel, actor, 237. Fielding's portrait by Hogarth, drawn from Garrick, 22. Fisher, Cardinal, his portraits, I92. Fisher, Kitty, 23. Fitton, Mary, maid of honour to Queen Elizabeth, her portrait, I65. Flamsteed, Rev. John, 214; his portrait made to do duty for Francis Blomefield, 22. Flatman, Thomas, miniaturist, 49. 266 INDEX Fliccius, Gerbicus, portraitpainter, 28. Foote, S., his portrait by Reynolds, 241. Fothergill, John, M.D., portrait by Hogarth, 203. Fountaine, Andrew, his portrait at Holland House wrongly supposed to be Addison's, 18. Franklin, Benjamin, 221. Frobisher, Sir Martin, 204. Fuller, Isaac, portrait-painter, 49. Gainsborough, Thomas, 70; painter of theatrical portraits, 237; exhibition of his works at the British Institution, 1814, I 4; at Grosvenor Gallery, I884-5, 122. Gandy, James, portrait-painter, 49. Gandy,William, portrait-painter, 55. Garrard, Mark, the elder, portrait-painter, 15, 3, I61. Garrard, Mark, the younger, portrait-painter, 31, 35. Garrick, David, his portraits, 113, 241, 246; relations with his actresses, 242; sat for Fielding and for Shakespeare, 22. Garrick, Mrs., 241. Garrick Club, theatrical portraits at, 134, 237. Garth, Sir Samuel, 203. Gascar, Henri, portrait-painter, 5I. Gaspars, John Baptist, portraitpainter, 45. Gassiot, J. P., 222. Gawdie, Sir John, Bart., Io5. Gay, John, 227. Geldorp, George, portraitpainter, 38. George I., portraits, 106, I8I. George II., portraits, 18I. George III., portraits, 184. George IV., portraits, I88. Gerbier, Sir Balthasar, his portrait of the Infanta, 36. Gheeraedts, Mark. See Garrard. Gibbon, E., portrait by Reynolds, 230; by Romney, 230. Gibson, Richard, portraitpainter, 45. Gibson, Thomas, portraitpainter, 55. Gilbert, Davies, P.R.S., 221. Gilbert, John Graham, 92. Glasgow Exhibition of portraits of local celebrities, 1868, I 19. Glasgow University, portraits in, 132. Gordon, Francis Isabella Ker, 259. Gordon, General, 212. Gordon, Sir John Watson, P.R.S.A., 9I. Gower, George, sergeant painter to Queen Elizabeth, 32, I59. Grafton, Lady Isabella Bennet, Duchess of, I79. Grafton Gallery, Exhibitions of "Fair Women" and " Fair Children," 123-4; works of old Scottish portrait-painters, 125. Grammont, Elizabeth Hamilton, Countess of, I75. Grant, Sir Francis, P.R.A., 94. Graves, Hon. Henry, portrait of Lord Broughton, 234. Gray, Thomas, 229. Greenhill, John, portrait-painter, 48. Greenwich Hospital, portraits in the Painted Hall, I33. Gresham, Sir Thomas, 251. Grimston, Edward, his portrait by Petrus Christus, 143. Grisoni's portrait of Colley Cibber as Lord Foppington, 240. Grosvenor Gallery winter exhibitions, 122. Grove, Sir William, 222. Guelph Exhibition at the New Gallery, I891, 123. Gunnings, the Miss, in the Beauty Room at Hampton Court, I79; their good fortune, I83; their portraits, 184. INDEX 267 Gwatkin, Miss, as " Simplicity," by Reynolds, 259. Gwyn, Nell, 239. Halifax, Charles Montague, Earl of, P.R.S., 217. Halley, Edmund, 214. Hamilton, Gavin, 72. Hamilton, Hugh Douglas, 74. Hamilton, William, R.A., 79. Hamlet, play scene in, by Maclise, 236; by E. A. Abbey, 236. Hampden, John, no authentic painted portrait of him, I8; miniature at Windsor Castle, 18, note. Hampton Court, portraits at, 132. Hanneman, Adriaen, portraitpainter, 36. Hans or Hansa, engaged to paint portraits of three daughters of the Count d'Armagnac for Henry VI., I43. Hansard, Luke, 254. Hardwicke, Earl of, portraits, I99. Harley, J. P., 250. Harlow, G. H., 9I; picture of the Trial Scene in "Henry VIII.," 249. Harman, Sir John, 205. Harris, Henry, as Cardinal Wolsey, 240. Hartley, Mrs. Elizabeth, 250. Harvey, Dr. William, portraits, 201. Hatton, Sir Christopher, I98. Havelock, Sir Henry, 212. Hawkins, Sir John, 204. Hayls, John, portrait-painter, 50. Hayman, Francis, R.A., 64, 237. Hayter, Sir George, 92. Hazlitt, William, I II. Heathfield, George Eliot, Lord, 211. Heberden, William, M.D., 203. Heere, Lucas d', portrait-painter, 30 -Henderson, John, actor, 250. Henrietta Maria, her portraits, i68. Henry IV., portraits, 142. Henry V., portraits, I42. Henry VI., portraits, 142; his marriage with Margaret of Anjou, Walpole's picture, no authority for this ascription, 137. Henry VII., portraits of, 146; his marriage with Elizabeth of York, Walpole's picture, no authority for this ascription, 137; his three children, picture wrongly so called, 138; and his family, picture of, described by Walpole as Henry V., 136. Henry VIII., portraits, 147, 150; Scharfs note on dated portraits, 148; and his family at Hampton Court, attributed to Gwillim Stretes, 154; and Jane Seymour with Henry VII. and Elizabeth of York, picture by Holbein burnt at Whitehall Palace, 51; and his successors, emblematical portrait by Lucas de Heere, I60. Henry, Prince of Wales, his portraits, I66; picture of him with Robert Devereux, 3rd Earl of Essex, I66. Henry, Philip, his portrait, I94. Hewett, Sir William, Lord Mayor, 252. Highmore, Joseph, portraitpainter, 59. Hill, Sir Rowland, Lord Mayor, 252. Hill, Thomas, portrait-painter, 54. Hilliard, Nicholas, miniaturist, 32, 33, I54; his report of Queen Elizabeth's objections to shadows in her pictures, 162. Hilton, William, his portrait of Mrs. Robertson as Beatrice, 238. Hoadly, Mrs., Io9. 268 INDEX Hoare, William, RA., 64. Hobson, Thomas, Cambridge carrier, 253. Hogarth, William, 60, 237; attacked by Wilkes, 60; his " Sigismunda," 61; exhibition of his works at the British Institution, 1814, 114. Holbein, Hans, arrival in England, 26; date of his death, 27; his influence on the painters of his time, 28; portrait by himself, 232; his portraits of the wives of Henry VI II., 150; and his school, exhibition of their works at the Royal Academy, I880, I20. Holl, Frank, R.A., 96. Holland, Sir Nathaniel Dance, 74. Holyrood Palace, apocryphal series of portraits of the kings of Scotland, 14. Hone, Nicholas, R.A., 66. Honthorst, Gerard, 37; taught the Electress Sophia and the Princess Louise, 106. Hood, Samuel, Ist Viscount, 207. Hooker, Sir Joseph, P.R.S., 221. Hoppner, John, R.A., 8I. Horner, Francis, his portrait by Raeburn, 20. Horner, Leonard, his inscription on his brother's portrait, 20. Hoskins, John, miniaturist, 43. Hoskyns, Sir John, P.R.S., 217. Houblou, Sir John, Lord Mayor, 252. Howard, Henry, R.A., 87. Howard, Katharine, her portrait, 151; her portrait described as that of Katharine Parr, 152; miniatures of her, 152. Howard of Effingham, Charles, 2nd Lord, 204. Howe, Richard, Earl, K.G., 207. Howley, Archbishop, I9I. Hudson, Thomas, portraitpainter, 63. Hughes, John, 229; Lord Cowper's letter of thanks for his portrait, 229. Humphrey, Ozias, R.A., 79. Hunter, John, Reynolds's portrait copied by Jackson, 203. Hunter, Dr. William, portrait by Zoffany, 202. Hurd, Bishop, his portrait, I93. Hussey, Giles, 65. Huysman, Jacob, portrait-painter to Queen Katharine of Braganza, 53. Illidge, Thomas Henry, 93. Inchbald, Mrs., 250. Inns of Court, portraits, I33. Irving, Sir Henry, 236, 250. Jackson, John, R.A., 89; his copies of Reynolds, etc., deceived the best judges, 203. James I., portraits, 166. James II., portraits, I77. James, Prince of Wales (Chevalier St. George), portraits, 177; Lely's opinion as to his parentage, 177. Jameson, George, portrait-painter, 41; his portraits of the kings of Scotland, 14. Janssen, Cornelius, van Ceulen, portrait-painter, 35. Jeffreys, George, Lord, I98. Jennings, Sir John, 206. Jervas, Charles, portrait-painter, 56; taught Pope to paint, 107. Jewel, Bishop, his portrait, 192. Johnson, Dr. S., portraits by Reynolds, 230; as an infant, 230. Jonson, Ben, portraits, 227; miniature by J. Oliver, 227. Jordan, Sir Joseph, 205. Joseph, George Francis, A.R.A., 84. Joyce, Cornet, portrait by Dobson, 211. Juxon, Archbishop, 19I. Katharine of Arragon, not painted by Holbein, 150; spurious portrait of, at Knole, I3. Katharine of Braganza, her portraits, 173. INDEX 269 Kauffmann, Maria Anna Angelica, 78. Kean, Charles, 236. Kean, Edmund, 236, 249. Keats, J., portraits, 232. Keeley, Robert, 250. Kelleway, Jane (?), as Diana, by Lely, I75. Kemble, Charles, 249. Kemble, John, 236, 248. Kemble family represented in Harlow's Trial Scene in "Henry VI II.," 249. Ken, Bishop, his portrait by Lely, 192. Kennet, Bishop White, portraits, 192, I93. Kent, William, portrait-painter, 57. Keppel, Viscount, Reynolds's portraits of him, 207. Kerseboom, Friedrich, 50. Ketel, Cornelius, portrait-painter, 31, 232. Kettle, Tilly, 76. Killigrew, Anne, I00, 106. Killigrew, Sir William, 227. King, Sir Edmund, 202; anecdote of him, 202. King, T., as Sir Peter Teazle, 246. Kit- Cat Club, picture so described incorrectly, I9; portraits by Kneller, exhibition of, 114, 228. Knapton, George, 62, 233. Kneller, Sir Godfrey, 51; his Hampton Court Beauties, 179. Knight, John Prescott, R.A. 94. Knight, Richard Payne, 233. Knight, William Henry, 96. Knott, Mrs., her portrait by Wissing, 176. Knox, John, Carlyle's valuation of his portraits, I94. Kratzer, Nicholas, 2I3. Lacy, John, in three characters by M. Wright, 239. Lacy, Walter, 250. Lamb's, Charles, admirable criticism of actors and acting, 244. Lamb, Hon. Peniston, his portrait, 187. Lambarde's conversation with Queen Elizabeth respecting Richard II., I41. Lambert, General, portrait by Walker, 171, 210. Lambeth Palace, portraits at, I33. Landseer, Sir Edwin, R.A., 94. Lane, Samuel, 89. Lane, William, 79. Langton, Bennet, portrait by Reynolds, 230. Laniere, Nicholas, portraitpainter, 38. Largilliere, Nicholas, 50. Latham, James, 64. Latimer, Bishop, 192. Laud, Archbishop, I90. Laurence, Samuel, 95. Lawranson, Thomas, 66. Lawrence, Sir Thomas, 85, 233; exhibitions of his works at the British Institution, 1830, 1833, I 4. Lawson, Sir John, 205. Lawyers, portraits of, 133, I97 -200. Lebeck, his portrait described as of Christopher Catt, I9. Lee, Nat, 240. Leeds, Exhibition of portraits of Yorkshire Worthies, 1869, 119. Leemput, Remigius (Remee) van, reduced copy of Holbein's picture of Henry VIII. and Jane Seymour, with Henry VII. and Elizabeth of York, I51. Legge, Rt. Hon. Henry Bilson, his portrait, I86. Leicester, Lady Dorothy Percy, Countess of, 169. Leicester, Robert Dudley, Earl of, 164. Leigh, Anthony, in the "Spanish Friar," 240. Leighton, Lord, P.R.A., 96, 233; exhibition of his works at the Royal Academy, I896-7, 120. 270 INDEX Lely, Sir Peter, portrait-painter, 46, 232; portraits known as the " Windsor Beauties," I74; his pupils, 48. Leman, Sir John, Lord Mayor, 252. Leslie, Charles Robert, R.A., 93; exhibition of his works at the Royal Academy, 1870, 120. Lethaby's, W. R., paper on the "Westminster School of Painting," 25. Lewis, "Gentleman," 249. Lewis's, Lady Theresa, account of the Clarendon Gallery, 128. Lievens, Jan, portrait-painter, 37. Ligonier, John, Earl, 211. Lily, William, I94. Linacre, portraits, 200. Liston, John, 250. Lockey, Rowland, portraitpainter, 34. Lodge's portraits, sale of the drawings for, 13I. London, City Companies, portraits, 134. Long, Edwin, R.A., 96. Longley, Archbishop, his portrait, I9I. Longman, Thomas Norton, 254. Lonsdale, James, 88. Lord Chancellors, portraits of, 197. Louise, Princess, sister of the Electress Sophia, o06. Lucan, Margaret, Countess of, III. Lucy, Charles, 96. Lyons, Lord, 209. Lyndhurst, Lord, 200. Lyttelton, Sir Thomas, K.B., spurious portrait of, I6. Lyttelton, SirTimothy, supposed portrait of, I6. Lyzarde, Nicholas, r sergeant painter to Queens Mary and Elizabeth, 28. Mabuse, Jean de, doubtful if he were ever in England, 26; portrait of Henry VII. inscribed as painted by him, 146. Macclesfield, Earl of, P.R.S., 220. Macklin, Charles, 242. Maclise, Daniel, R.A., 95; his picture of the Play Scene in "Hamlet," 236; exhibition of his works at the Royal Academy, 1875, 120. Macready, W. C., 236, 250. Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition, I857, British portraits, I I6. Margaret of York, wife of Charles the Bold of Burgundy, her portrait, I46. Marlborough, John, ist Duke of, portraits, 21; with General John Armstrong, 211. Marlborough, Sarah Jennings, Duchess of, her portraits, I80. Martin, David, 75. Mary I., portrait by Holbein,' 156; by Moro, 156; by Lucas de Heere, 156; with Philip II., attributed to Lucas de Heere, 156. Mary II., her portraits, I75, 179. Mary of Modena, James II.'s second wife, her portrait by Lely, I77. Mary, Queen of Scots, her portraits, I66. Mascall, Edward, portraitpainter, 45. Masham, Lady, 180. Maskelyne, Nevil, 214. Mason, Rev. William, amateur portrait-painter, 109. Massinger's " New Way to pay Old Debts," Clint's picture, 249. Mathews, Charles, sen., 250; his collection of theatrical portraits, exhibited in 1833, 237; now at the Garrick Club, 237. Mathews, Charles, jun., 250. Matthew, Sir Toby, 103. Mayerne, Sir Theodore, 20I. INDEX 27I Mead, Richard, M.D., 202. Medical men, portraits of, 133, 200-203. Medina, Sir John Baptist, portrait-painter, i6, 53. Melbourne, Viscount, portraits of his sons, I88. Merchants and the Peofile, 251 -260. Middleton, Lady, her portrait by Kneller, I79. Middleton, Sir Hugh, 251. Middleton, Miss Jane, her portrait by Lely, 174. Middleton, John, " the Child of Hale," 253. Miereveldt, Michel Janszen, portrait-painter, 35. Military Exhibition at Chelsea, 123. Millais, Sir John Everett, P.R.A., 99; exhibition of his works at the Grosvenor Gallery, I886, 122. Milton, John, portraits, 223; likeness to Wordsworth, 225. Miniature Painters, Society of, 125. Miniatures at the Manchester Exhibition, 1857, 117; exhibitions of, at South Kensington, 1862, 1865, 117. More, Henry, D.D., 215. More, Mary, io6. More, Sir Thomas, portrait by Holbein, 155, 197; supposed portraits of his daughters, I3, i6. Moro, Sir Antonio, portraitpainter, 30, 232. Morritt, John B. S., portrait by Sir M. A. Shee, 234. Munden, J. S., 244; his power of "making faces," 245. Murray, John, 254. Murray, Thomas, portraitpainter, 54. Musicians, portraits of, at Oxford, 134. Myngs, Sir Christopher, 205. Mytens, Daniel, portrait-painter, 36, 232. Napier, Admiral Sir Charles, 209. Napier, General SirCharles,2 I2. Nasmyth, Alexander, 8I. Nason, Pieter, his portrait of Charles II., 173. National Gallery, portraits in, 132. Naval commanders, portraits of, 133, 204-209. Naval Exhibition at Chelsea,, 123. Nelson, Lord, his portrait, 209. Neve, Cornelius de, portraitpainter, 37. New Gallery, Tudor, Stuart,. Guelph, and Victorian Exhibitions, 123. Newcastle, Margaret, Duchess. of, her portrait by Lely, 176. Newton, Gilbert Stuart, R.A., 93. Newton, Sir Isaac, various portraits, 218. Norfolk, Duke of, father of the poet Surrey, 226. Nollekens, Joseph Francis, 6I. Northampton, Marquis of, P.R.S., 221. Northcote James, R.A., 79. Northumberland, Elizabeth, Countess of, her portrait by Lely, I74. Nowell, Dean Alexander, his portrait, 194. O'Donoghue, F. M., his Catalogue of Portraits of Queen Elizabeth, 159. Oldfield, Mrs., 240. Oliver, Isaac, miniaturist, 34. Oliver, Peter, miniaturist, 43, 232. O'Neill, Miss, afterwards Lady Becher, 250. Opie, John, portrait-painter, 83. Orford, Edward Russell, Earl of, 206. Orientalists, portraits of, I34. Orleans, Henrietta, Duchess of, her portraits, I77. Orpin, Edward, parish clerk, 255. 272 INDEX Owen, William, R.A., 85. Oxford Colleges, portraits at, I34. Palmer, "Gentleman," 249. Palmer, John, 245. Parker, Archbishop, his portrait, I90. Parr, Katharine, not painted by Holbein, 150; portrait of Katharine Howard described as her's, 152; portrait at Newnham Paddox, 154; portrait in Lodge not authentic, I54. Parsons, William, 245. Partridge, John, 9I. Payne-Gallwey, Mrs., and child (';Pick-a-pack"), 260. Peacham, Henry, o05. Peake, Robert, portrait-painter, 36. Penn, Sir William, 205. Pepys, Samuel, P.R.S., 217. Perkins, Richard, 237. Peterborough, Carey Foster, Countess of, her portrait by Kneller, 179. Petitot, John, painter in enamel, 43. Pettie, John, R.A., 96. Phelps, Samuel, 236, 250. Philips, Charles, 64. Phillip, John, R.A., 96 Phillips, Thomas, R.A., 88. Philpotts, Bishop, portrait, I93. Physicians, College of, portraits at, 200. Pickersgill, HenryWilliam, R.A., 90. Pine, Robert Edge, 73. Pitcairn, William, M.D., 203. Pitt, Miss, afterwards Mrs. Scroop, her portrait by Kneller, 179. Pole, Cardinal, his portraits, I90. Pond, Arthur, 63. Pope, Alexander, portraits, 227; letter respecting Kneller's portrait of him, 228. Pope, Alexander, an amateur portrait-painter, I07. Pope, Mrs., 250. Portington, William, carpenter; 251. Portrait Collections, 126-134. Portrait Exhibitions, I 13-125. Portrait, National, Gallery, foundation, 128; collection removed to South Kensington, I869, I30; to Bethnal Green, 1885, I30; to new Gallery in St. Martin's Place, 1896, I30. Portrait, National, Gallery at Edinburgh, I3I; at National Gallery, Dublin, 131. Portrait-Painters from Holbein to Hig,;hmor e, 24-59; from Hogarth to Millais, 60-99; Amateur, I 00-12. Portrait Painters, Society of, 125. Portraits should have the names written on the back, 20. Portraits, SSpurious and Misnamed, 13-24. Portsmouth, Duchess of, portrait as Flora, by Verelst, 176. Pourbus, Frans, the elder, portrait-painter, 31. Pretender, The. See James, Prince of Wales. Pringle, Sir John, P.R.S., 220. Prior, Matthew, 227. Pritchard, Mrs., II3, 243; with Garrick, 243. Professions, 7he, 189-212. Pym, John, I7I. Queen, The, her portraits at the Victorian Exhibition, I88. Quin, James, 242. Radcliffe, John, M.D., portraits, 202. Raeburn, Sir Henry, R.A., 80; exhibition of his works at the Edinburgh National Gallery, 1876, 121. Raleigh, Elizabeth Throckmorton, Lady, her portrait, I65. Raleigh, Sir W., on Queen Elizabeth's portrait, I58. Ramsay, Allan, portrait-painter, 65. INDEX 273 Ramsay, James, 91. Ramrsden, Jesse, 221. Ranelagh, Lady Margaret Cecil, Countess of, her portrait by Kneller, 179. Rave, Jan (Johannes Corvus), portrait-painter, 29. Rennie, John, 254. Reynolds, Frances, sister of Sir Joshua, IIo. Reynolds, Sir Joshua, 67; his prices, 69, 232, 233, 237; his success in painting children, 257; exhibitions of his pictures at the British Institution, 1813, 1823, 1833, 1843, 114, 115; at Grosvenor Gallery, 1883-4, 122. Rich, Miss, portrait by Hogarth, 242. Richard II., his portrait at Westminster Abbey, 25, 139; restored, and the modern painting above the original cleared away, 140. Richard I II., portraits, 146. Richardson, Jonathan, portraitpainter, 54. Richardson, Samuel, 19, 229. Richmond, George, R.A., 95. Richmond, Frances Stewart, Duchess of, her portrait by Lely, 174. Richmond, Henry Fitz-Roy, Duke of, supposed to have been painted by Holbein, 154. Richmond, James Stuart, Duke of, portrait by Vandyck, I70. Richmond and Lennox, Frances Howard, Duchess of, her portrait, 169. Riley, John, portrait-painter, 50. Robertson, Mrs., painted as Beatrice by W. Hilton, 238. Robinson, Hugh, 82. Robinson, John, 66. Rochester, Henrietta Boyle, Countess of, her portrait by Lely, 174. Rodney, Lord, 207. Romilly, Sir Samuel, 200. Romney, George, 71. Roper, Margaret, portraits, 13. Ross, SirWilliam, 92; exhibition of his works, 1860, I 17. Rosse, Earl of, P.R.S., 221. Royal Academy, portraits at, 233; exhibitions of old masters, 120. Royal Society, portraits at, 133, 213-222. Rupert, Prince, 205. Russell, John, R.A., 79. Russell, Lady Rachel, portrait of Lady Castlemaine, supposed to be intended for her, 18. Ryan, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward, portrait by Leighton, 234. Sabine, Sir Edward, P.R.S., 22 1. Sadler's, John, portrait of Bunyan, 227. St. Alban's, Lady I)iana deVere, Duchess of, her portrait by Kneller, 179. St. James's Palace, portraits in, 132. St. Leger, Colonel, 212. St. Vincent, Admiral Jervis, Earl,' 209. Sancho, Ignatius, 255. Sancroft, Archbishop, 191. Sandwich, ist Earl of, his portrait, 182, 205; miniature by S. Cooper, 205. Sandwich, John, 4th Earl of, his portrait, I82. Saxon, James, 88. Scarlett, Robert, of Peterborough Cathedral, 254. Schaak, J. S. C., 73. Scharf, Sir George, K.C.B., the guiding spirit at the National Portrait Gallery, 131; his contributions to the history of portraits, I7, I37, 138, 139, 140, 143, 144 Science, Literature and A rt, 213 -234. Scotland, kings of, apocryphal series of portraits of, 14. Scott, Samuel, portrait by Hudson, 232. T 274 INDEX Scott, Sir Walter, portraits, 232. Scottish Portrait Painters, Exhibition of their works, 125. Scougall, John, 50. Secker, Archbishop, 191. Selwyn, Bishop, I93. Seymour, Jane, her portraits by Holbein, 151; miniature by Hilliard, 154. Seymour of Sudeley, Thomas, Lord, 155. Shackleton, John, 66. Shakespeare, W., portraits, IO1, 223, 227. Sharp, William, and his family, 202. Shee, Sir Martin Archer, 87. Sheepshanks, John, 257. Shelley, R. B., portrait by Miss Curran, 231. Sherburn, Bishop, 133. Shipley, W., portrait by Cosway, "I3. Shore, Jane, her supposed portraits, 146. Shovel, Sir Cloudesley, 206. Siddons, Mrs., her portraits, 248. Siddons, William, portrait by Opie, 249. Singleton, Henry, 84. Sloane, Sir Hans, P.R.S., 203, 219. Sly, William, actor, 237. Smeaton, John, 221. Smith, Colvin, 93. Smith, " Gentleman," as Charles Surface, 246, 249. Smith, Sir Jeremy, 205. Smith, Stephen Catterson, P.R.H.A., 95. Smollett, T., portrait by Verelst, 229. Soest, Gerard, portrait-painter, 48. Soldiers, portraits of, 133, 209 -212. Somers, Lord, portraits, I99. Somerville, portrait of Knox, I96; supposed to be by Pourbus, 197. Sophia, Electress, her portrait of her son George I., Io5. Sophia Dorothea, wife of George I., her portrait, 183. Sothern, E. A., 250. South Kensington Exhibitions of Portraits, 1866, 1867, I868, 117-118. South Kensington Museum, portraits in, 132; exhibitions of miniatures, 1862, 1865, 117. Southampton, Elizabeth Vernon, Countess of, her portrait, I64. Southey, Robert, portraits, 202. Southwell, Sir Robert, portrait by Holbein, I55. Southwell, Sir Robert, P.R.S., 217. Sovereigns anz their Courts, 135-188. Spelman, Sir Henry, 213. Spottiswoode, William, P.R.S., 221. Stanfield, Clarkson, R.A., exhibition of his works at the Royal Academy, I870, 120. Stanhope, Earl, founder of the National Portrait Gallery, 128. Stephenson, George, 254. Stephenson, Robert, 254. Sterne, L., portrait by Reynolds, 229; his letter on Reynolds, 229. Stewardson, Thomas, 90. Stirling, Mrs., Lady Gregory, 243, 250. Stokes, Adrian, second husband of the Duchess of Suffolk, I63. Stokes, Sir George Gabriel, P.R.S., 221. Stone, Henry, portrait-painter, 41. Stoop, Dirk, his picture of Katharine of Braganza, 173; confusion as to his Christian name, 173 n. Strahan, William, M.P., 254. Streater, Robert, portrait-painter, 49. Stretes,Gwillim,portrait-painter, 28, I54, I56. Stuart, James, painter to the Dilettanti Society, 233. INDEX 275 Stuart Exhibition at the New Gallery, 1887, I23. Sturgeon, William, no portrait of the inventor of the electromagnet known, 222. Suckling, Sir John, 227. Suctt, Dickey, as the clown in "Twelfth Night,;' 247. Suffolk, Charles Brandon, Duke of, and Mary, Queen Dowager of France, 155. Suffolk, Frances Brandon, Duchess of, and her second husband, Adrian Stokes, picture of them by Lucas de -Heere, 163. Sumner, Archbishop, I91. Sunderland, Anne, Countess of, her portrait by Lely, I74. Surgeons, College of, portraits at, 20o. Surrey, Henry Howard, Earl of, portraits, 226. Sussex, Duke of, P R.S., 221. Sutton, Archbishop Manners, his portrait, 19I. Swift, Dean, 229. Sydenham, Thomas, M.D., 201. Syme, James, 93. Tadema, L. Alma, R.A., exhibition of his works at the Grosvenor Gallery, I882-3, 122. Tait, Archbishop, 191. Taylor, John, portrait-painter,42. Teddiman, Sir Thomas, 205. Tennyson, Lord, by Watts, 232. Terling, Levina, miniaturist, 28. Thackeray, W. M., 232. Thornhill, Sir James, 55. Tillotson, Archbishop, 19I. Tiu-che-quu, Honorary Royal Academician, 256. Tonson, Jacob, 254. Toole, J. L., 250. Toto, Anthony, sergeant painter to Henry VIII and Edward VI, 28. Treviso, Girolamo de, portraitpainter, 29. Tudor Exhibition at the New Gallery, I890, 123. Tuke, Sir Brian, his portrait by Holbein, 154, 225. Twisden, Dr. John, amateur portrait-painter, IOI. Underhill, Cave, as Obadiah in the " Committee," 240. Vanderbank, John, portraitpainter, 58. Vandyck, Sir Anthony, 39, 170, 232; his portraits of Charles I. and his Court, I68-I70; exhibition of his works at the Grosvenor Gallery, 1887, I23. Vandyke, Peter, 72. Van Haaken, Joseph, 58. Vanloo, Jean Baptiste, portraitpainter, 58. Vansomer, Paul, portrait-painter, 35. Vaughan, General Harry, 210. Vavasour, Anne, maid of honour to Queen Elizabeth, her portrait, 165. Verelst, Simon, portrait-painter, 52. Vernon, Admiral Edward, 206. Vernon, Robert, 257. Victorian Exhibition at the New Gallery, 1892, 123. Wake, Archbishop, I9. Walker, Robert, portrait-painter, 44, 232. Wallace, Sir William, his portrait, 15. Wallis, John, D.D., 216. Wallop, Sir John, K.G., 204. Wallop, Sir Oliver, his portrait in large by Hilliard, 34. Walpole's, Horace, portraits of kings and queens, 135; wrongly described by their owner, I36. Walpole, Sir Robert, portrait of S. Richardson altered to that of, 9g; Sir Robert and his wife Catherine Shorter, their portraits, I8I. Walton, Dr., Rector of Whitechapel, 193. 276 INDEX Walton, Isaac, 227. Ward, Bishop Seth, 216. Warham, Archbishop, 133, 155, 189. Watson, George, 84. Watson, Sir Thomas, 203. Watts, G. F., R.A., exhibition of his works at the Grosvenor Gallery, 1881-2, 122; at the New Gallery, I897, 123; his munificent present to the National Portrait Gallery, 131. Wellington, Ist Duke of, portraits, 212. Wesley, Rev. John, portrait, I97. West, Benjamin, P.R.A., 75, 232, 234; his portraits of the Royal Family at Hampton Court, 185; exhibition of his works at the British Institution, 1833, 114. Westminster School of Painting, 25. White, Sir Thomas, Lord Mayor, 252. Whitefield, Rev. G., his portrait, 197. Whitmore, Frances BrookeLady, her portrait by Lely, 174. Whittington, Sir Richard, Lord Mayor, 252. Wilberforce, Bishop, portrait, 193. Wilkes, John, attack on Hogarth, 60o; on Allan Ramsay, 65. Wilkie, Sir David, portrait by Phillips, 232; exhibition of his works at the British Institution, 1842, I 5. Wilkins, Bishop John, 176, 216. William III., his portraits, T78. William IV., his portrait when Duke of Clarence, I88. Williamson, Sir Joseph, P.R.S., 217. Willoughby of Eresby, Peregrine Bertie, Lord, 2c9. Wills, Rev. James, o09. Wilson, Benjamin, F.R.S., 66. Wilson, Richard, exhibition of his works at the British Institution, 1814, 114. Wilton, Joseph, 232. Windsor Castle, portraits in, 132. Winstanley, Hamlet, 62. Wissing, William, portraitpainter, 52. Woffington, Peg, portraits, 243. Wolfe, General James, 211. Wolsey, Cardinal, his portraits, 192. Wood, John, 94. Woodhouse, John Thomas, M.D., 112. Woolaston, John, portraitpainter, 55. Worcester, exhibition of portraits of Worcestershire Worthies, 121. Wordsworth, William, likeness to Milton, 225; portrait by Pickersgill, 232. Wren, Sir Christopher, 216, 217. Wright, Andrew, sergeant painter to Henry VIII., 28. Wright, Joseph, A.R.A., 73. Wright, Joseph Michael, portrait-painter, 49. Wrottesley, Lord, P.R.S., 222. WVyche, Sir Cyril, P.R.S., 217. Wynn, Master, sat to Reynolds for "St. John at the Spring," 260; his grandson sat to Lawrence, 260. York, Anne Hyde, Duchess of, I74, 177. Young, Charles, 236, 250. Young, Dr. Thomas, 221. Zoffany, Johann, R.A., 73; painter of theatrical portraits, 237; exhibition of his works at the British Institution, 1814, I I4. Zucharo, Federigo, portraitpain.er, 31. CIISWICK PRESS:-CHARLES WHITTINGHAMI AND CC. TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON.