THE WALPOLE SOCIETY
1915-1917
THE FIFTH VOLUME
OF
THE WALPOLE SOCIETY
'ORTRAIT OF AN UNKNOWN MAN, RY T. THRUMTON Ashmolean Museum, Oxford
TH)
Fir
WAI
OF
JOG 1 El .
i Q
D
OWING to the increased cost of production and the restrictions on the use of paper due to the war, the Committee have decided, in the interests of the Society, to issue one volume of the ordinary size for the two years, 1915-1916 and 1916-1917, instead of two smaller volumes.
THE ^
kr>OU»-l
FIFTH VOLUME OF THE
f\
WALPOLE SOCIETY
AND
EDITED BY
.A. J. F I N B E R G
ISSUED ONLY TO SUBSCRIBERS
508471
|£> . fo. 50
OXFORD
PRINTED FOR THE WALPOLE SOCIETY BY FREDERICK HALL
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1917
' This country, which does not always err in vaunting its own productions.'
HORACE WALPOLE'S Anecdotes of Painting in England.
N IZ W5 v.5
THE RIGHT HON. THE EARL OF LYTTON
(HTomtmttee:
*AITKEN, CHARLES *ARMSTRONG, SIR WALTER *BAKER, C. H. COLLINS
BARLOW, C. A. MONTAGUE, M.P. *BELL, C. F. *BINYON, LAURENCE
CAW, J. L.
CLAUSEN, GEORGE, R.A.
COCKERELL, SYDNEY C. *COLVIN, SIR SIDNEY
CUST, LIONEL
DlBDIN, L\ RlMBAULT
*DODGSON, CAMPBELL *FINBERG, A. J., Hon. Secretary GIRTIN, THOMAS *HIND, A. M.
*HOLMES, C. J.
*HOLROYD, SIR CHARLES, Chairman
*HUGHES, C. E., Hon. Treasurer IMAGE, PROFESSOR SELWYN LANE, JOHN
LETHABY, PROFESSOR W. R. LYTTON, HON. NEVILLE
MACCOLL, D. S.
NORMAN, PHILIP
OPPK, A. P.
PRIOR, PROFESSOR E. S.
RAWLINSON, W. G.
Ross, ROBERT
SHORT, SIR FRANK, R.A. *SPIELMANN, MARION H. *STRANGE, E. F. *TERRELL, A. A BECKETT *TURNER, C. MALLORD W.
VACHER, SYDNEY
WILLIAMSON, DR. G. C.
Members of the Executive Committee.
All communications and subscriptions should be sent to—
ALEXANDER J. FIN BERG, Hon. Secretary,
47, Holland Road, Kensington, W.
CONTENTS
PAGE
ENGLISH SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY PORTRAIT DRAWINGS IN OXFORD
COLLECTIONS. BY C. F. BELL 1-18
General Account of the Collections i ^
Classification of Portrait Drawings 2
Preliminary Studies for Pictures 2
Drawings Ad Vivum 2
Engravers' Drawings ... .... 3
Pastels ... 3
T. Thrumton 6
Sir Peter Lely 8
Edward Lutterell 9
Unidentified Pastellists, 1660-85 T7
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES. BY CAMPBELL DODGSON . 19-45
Catalogue. A.— Original Etchings.
I. Portraits 25
II. Figure Subjects and Still Life 34
III. Landscapes 36
B. — Copies and Imitations of Old Masters . . -40
FRESH LIGHT ON SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL, DERIVED FROM THE COLLECTION AND PAPERS OF JAMES MOORE, F.S.A. BY C. F. BELL 47~83
George Robertson 54
George Isham Parkyns 60
Jacob Schnebbelie 66
Thomas Girtin 69
J. M. W. Turner 77
Edward Dayes 79
Thomas Hearne 81
Ange Denis Macquin 82
KILPECK CHURCH. BY LIONEL CUST 85-89
A NOTE ON THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH AND GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT.
BY M. H. SPIELMANN 91-108
LIST OF PLATES
PLATE
Frontispiece. Portrait of an Unknown Man. By T. Thrumton.
I. (a) An unidentified Beauty of the Court of Charles II. By Sir Peter
Lely. (b) Mary Carleton. By T. Thrumton.
II. (a) Samuel Butler. By Edward Lutterell. (b) Charles II, about 1660.
ETCHINGS BY ANDREW GEDDES. III-XV.
III. (a) Lady Henrietta Drummond and Child. No. 6. First state. (b) Whim, Peeblesshire. No. 22. Second state.
IV. The Artist's Mother. No. 7. Second state. V. „ ,, ,, Third state.
VI. Alexander Nasmyth. No. 10. Fifth state. VII. Nathaniel Plimer. No. 12. Third state. VIII. (a) John Sheepshanks. No. 13. Third state.
(b) The Black Boy. No. 20. First state. IX. (a) Archibald Skirving. First plate. No. 14. First state,
(b) „ ,, Second plate. No. 15. Fourth state.
X. (a) Child with an Apple. No. 18. Third state.
(b) Sleeping Child and Dog. No. 19. First state. XI. (a) The Field of Bannockburn and the Bore Stone. No. 23. First
state.
(b) Caen Wood, Hampstead. No. 25. First state. XII. (a) Halliford : Group of Trees. No. 30. (b) View on a Hill. No. 28.
XIII. (a) Claude's House in Rome. No. 33. First state. (b) Halliford: Long Row of Trees. No. 31.
XIV. Peckham Rye. No. 32. Third state.
XV. (a) Old Woman looking at a Ring, after Jordaens. No. 37. First
state. (b) Oval Portrait of Rembrandt. No. 44.
Vlll
LIST OF PLATES
PLATE
XVI. XVII.
XVIII.
XIX.
XX.
XXI. XXII.
XXIII. XXIV.
XXV.
XXVI.
XXVII. XXVIII.
XXIX.
XXX. XXXI.
Portrait of James Moore, Esq., F.S.A. By G. Robertson.
(a) Kidwelly Church. Aquatint by G. I. Parkyns, after J. C. Barrow.
(b) Dumbarton. By G. Robertson.
(a) Landscape Composition : Evening. By G. Robertson.
(b) ,, ,, with a stormy sky. By G. Robertson. „ „ Sportsmen resting near a large Oak. By G. Robertson.
Aquatints by G. I. Parkyns, after sketches by J. Moore.
(a) Colchester Castle.
(b) Middleham Castle.
(c) Kirkstall Abbey.
(d) Romborough Priory.
(a) Dunstaffnage Castle. By E. Dayes and J. Moore.
(b) „ „ ByT. Girtin.
(a) Duff House. (Blue and Black.) By T. Girtin.
(b) „ „ (Water Colour.) By T. Girtin. Ely Cathedral from the South-East. By T. Girtin.
(a) West Front of Peterborough Cathedral. By T. Girtin.
(b) „ „ Lichficld Cathedral. By T. Girtin.
(a) Caesar's Tower, Warwick Castle. (Blue and Black.) ByT. Girtin.
(b) Ruined Windows, Kenilworth Castle. (Blue and Black.) By
T. Girtin.
(a) Bexhill Church. By T. Girtin.
(b) Ruins of the Savoy Palace. By T. Girtin. Transept of Tintern Abbey. By J. M. W. Turner.
(a) Porte de Cornillion, Meaux. By A. D. Macquin.
(b) Durham Cathedral, from beneath an Arch of Ralph Flambard's
Bridge : Moonlight. By E. Dayes.
(a) Kilpeck Church
(b) „
(a)
XXXII. (a)
(c}
Portion of West Front.
From the East.
South Door.
Grotesque stop in Corbel Table.
Central portion of Arch over South Door.
Figure on jamb of Arch.
Interior, looking East.
Figures on jamb of Arch.
ENGLISH SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY PORTRAIT DRAWINGS IN OXFORD COLLECTIONS
BY C. F. BELL. PART I
SOME apology may be expected by the members of such a body as the Walpole Society for the unscientific treatment accorded to a subject, so fresh and so interesting as that of English seventeenth-century portrait drawings, in confining the discussion to such examples as chance to find themselves in a single collection. The project of issuing these notes in a form lamentably unrelated to the general history of the subject was, however, suggested by the conspicuous success of the exhibition and publication of the portrait oil-paintings belonging to Oxford collections in stimulating new interest in British iconography, and attract- ing the attention of historians, art critics, and journalists to this branch of study. The ancient origin, extent, variety, and permanent public character of these collections place them in a position all their own, and may be held to excuse an attempt to deal with the whole subject upon the basis of such illustra- tions of it as they afford, especially at a moment when the conditions of life leave few students free to work at such trifling occupations and confine officials closely to the collections under their own care.
GENERAL ACCOUNT OF THE COLLECTIONS.
The portrait drawings belonging to the University of Oxford have accrued to it from many sources and are distributed amongst several institutions. The Ashmolean Museum owns a drawing by William Faithorne, given by the artist to the person portrayed and by him to the Museum, and it also possesses two pastels and a group of exceptionally interesting black-lead portraits derived from more modern benefactions. In the Bodleian Library are a pastel by Edward Lutterell and a chalk drawing by Jonathan Richardson which hang in the Gallery, and a black-lead miniature by Thomas Forster inserted in a manuscript; but the principal treasures in this line are to be found scattered through the volumes of the celebrated Sutherland Collection, a small library of wonderful extra-illustrated books — the most important being copies of Lord Clarendon's History of the
v. B
2 ENGLISH SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY PORTRAIT
Rebellion, and Life, and Bisb.6p Burnet's History of his own Time, bound in sixty- one folio volumes and interleaved with one of the most extensive and splendid series of portraits and views illustrating English history which has ever been got together. Although this consists mainly of prints, it includes many drawings of interest and value. The Hope Collection of Engraved Portraits also possesses a few drawings, and a single portrait by Thomas Forster hangs in the Chapter House at Christ Church.
CLASSIFICATION OF PORTRAIT DRAWINGS.
Portrait drawings may be divided into three classes : the first consisting of painters' preliminary sketches for pictures ; the second, of finished drawings made for their own sake or with the purpose of being copied in engraving ; the third, of engravers' drawings, that is, transcripts as mechanically exact as possible, made generally by the engravers themselves from paintings, to serve as the foundation for the work on the copper plate.
PRELIMINARY STUDIES FOR PICTURES.
In works included in the first category Oxford is not rich. Two Van Dyck studies in the Library of Christ Church, only one of which, the charming but sadly defaced sketch of the Princess Mary (reproduced in the handbook to the Drawings in the Library of Christ Church, 1914, pi. xxxiv), belongs to his English period. A beautiful study of a young man by Sir Peter Lely, and the noble whole-length of Sir Henry de Vic, Chancellor of the Garter (one of a series of about twenty-five similar drawings connected with the Order which is scattered in various cabinets), both in the Sutherland Collection ; a slight pre- liminary sketch for another drawing belonging to this same set, and the attractive pastel head of a lady (reproduced in plate i a) in the Ashmolean Museum. An unattractive mask of a man, attributed to Sir Godfrey Kneller, also in the Ashmolean ; and, finally, the interesting sketch (at Christ Church) for the picture of a musician, in the National Portrait Gallery (no. 1463), usually identified as Henry Purcell and assigned to John Closterman, almost complete the list.
DRAWINGS Ad Vivum.
The drawings belonging to the second class are at once more numerous and more important. The University possesses the only known drawing by Samuel Cooper, one of the finest extant drawings by Faithorne, and another unfinished and unsigned, which may be plausibly attributed to him. Amongst the minia-
DRAWINGS IN OXFORD COLLECTIONS 3
tures in black-lead are four David Loggans of high quality, one of them being
apparently the original of an engraving of great iconographical interest; a
portrait by Robert White, treated with peculiar vigour of characterization ; two
by Thomas Forster ; and two by C. Forster. Faber is represented by two of
his minutely executed pen-and-ink drawings. Still completely in the style
of the seventeenth century are the studies in black-lead on vellum of Jonathan
Richardson the elder; several of particular interest are in the Ashmolean
and Sutherland Collections — the latter also contains a number of works in
the same method by George Vertue ; these, with a drawing by Thomas Worlidge
in the Hope Collection, and two by an anonymous artist signing W. N. in the
Sutherland Clarendon show the last lingering manifestations of an identical
tradition prolonged as late as the third quarter of the eighteenth century. As
all of them are signed or dated they form a series of unassailable pieces justi-
ficaiives for the history of this branch of art. The anonymous works which
may be linked with them are scarcely of less interest. Besides the unfinished
head of Charles II, which has been mentioned as worthy of being attributed to
Faithorne, there is a poignant study of Archbishop Plunket made on the eve of
his execution, apparently by the hand of Edward Lutterell, and an unidentified
portrait of a man which can scarcely have been executed by any one but Loggan
and is assuredly in his best manner.
ENGRAVERS' DRAWINGS.
The engravers' drawings are more numerous, but stand on a far lower plane, being in fact only rarely worthy of independent notice on artistic or on icono- graphic grounds. Their value is due to the fact that although only copies they occasionally afford evidence of the style of hand of certain artists who we know or believe to have executed original portraits from the life. Thus there are here to be found, amongst many drawings of less interest, one by Abraham Blooteling, one signed by George White, and another by John Greenhill, which apparently served as the medium through which a picture by Lely was translated into a mezzotint by Thomson.
PASTELS.
The present instalment of illustrations and notes is confined to early examples of pastel — that is, of work in coloured chalks rubbed and mixed together on the paper with the intention of giving something of the complete colour and tonality of painting. The drawings in black, white, and red chalk — not used in this manner— to be found in the Oxford collections are reserved for subsequent discussion. The developed pastel technique was probably introduced into
B 2
4 ENGLISH SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY PORTRAIT
England from France, as the two French words crayon and pastel still used to define this branch of art suggest, about the period of the Restoration. It makes its first appearance in the hands of some followers of Lely, if not in those of the master himself, and its close similarity of effect with the cognate method of painting in body colour which had been carried to high perfection by the miniaturists, the Olivers and Coopers, contributed no doubt to advance its popularity here. A curious passage in John Evelyn's Diary, 4 August 1694,' shows how that eminent virtuoso regarded the two technical processes as in some sense rivals. In describing the portraits of the ten children of his cousin George Evelyn of Nutfield, 'all painted in one piece, very well, by Mr Lutterel, in crayon on copper,' he adds that it seems ' to be as finely painted as the best miniature '.
Similar ideas as to the relationship of the two branches of art seem to under- lie the detailed but confused directions for making and working with coloured chalks, given by the Author of the Miniatura MSS. and by Sanderson in his Graphice, both of whom obviously drew from a common source of information. We read of portraits executed by Hendrik Goltzius ' in dry colours upon writting vellim after the life ', the faces about the size of a gold Jacobus coin ; and of some equally minute copies from Raphael by Sir Balthazar Gerbier, the faces no bigger than a shilling, all of them described as in full polychromy.2 The Author of the MSS. goes so far as to say that he 'never knew good Lymner but was excellent in this kind ' also, and instances Holbein, Rowland Lockey, the Olivers, Hoskins, and Samuel Cooper as expert in an art which ' may pass for painting when done in proper colours as most commonly it is '.3 Both writers differentiate between the unsatisfactory and fugitive method practised on a life- sized scale by Daniel Dumoustier with powdered pigments ' upon a coarse and slovenly paper rubb'd in with Pencills, stufft with Cotton or bumbast ', which is deprecated as ' a French trifle ', and the use of coloured crayons, made up into sticks with wax and other materials, which it was also possible to blend and manipulate on the paper with stumps or the finger.4 Unfortunately the only instances of the use of the latter process specified by the authors to which it is now possible to refer — the celebrated Holbein drawings at Windsor Castle — only show that the theory of the development of the art was more familiar to them than the practice, none of these being executed in what is now properly meant by pastel. In short, the method used by Lely and his contemporaries was no doubt to some extent the same as that of the French crayonnistes, with, perhaps, grafted upon it a fuller chromatic and pictorial aim derived from the Italian school, and primarily from Baroccio, who seems to have approached
Edit. Dobson, 1906, iii. 312. • Bodleian Library MS., Tanner, 326, p. 70.
MS. cit., p. 68. < Sanderson, Graphice, London, 1658, p. 79.
DRAWINGS IN OXFORD COLLECTIONS 5
more nearly than any other of the Old Masters to discovering the new technical manner. Several details in the directions given by Sanderson indicate that his crayons must have been rather hard, and contemporary references to the exten- sion of the pastellist's palette by Ashfield and Lutterell show that up to their time it was a limited one. Anybody who has handled a common chalk pencil and a stick of fine pastel will realize that the difference in the consistency of the material — the homely proverb about chalk and cheese at once occurs to the mind — is alone enough to account for an advance in the conception of the effect it was possible to achieve, and for a more deliberate attempt at the qualities of painting, definitely marking off the earliest precursors of Rosalba, Peronneau, and Russell.
From the passages quoted and from the fact that most of the early works in pastel which have survived are small in scale, it may be justifiable to infer that there was a certain connexion between the two branches of art and that some miniaturists worked in crayons. But that the pastellists were invariably or even generally miniature painters is an assumption which cannot be proved. Cooper is included, for example, in the list cited above amongst those who worked in crayons. But the specimens of his work described are particularly distinguished as done with ' a white and black chalk upon a coloured paper ', achieving ' likeness, neatness, and roundness abastanza da fare emaravigliare ogni acutissimo tngegno ' 1 ; and this suggests that Cooper did not advance beyond the method of drawing in three chalks (although red is not mentioned) which originated as far back as the time of Correggio and had been carried to per- fection in portraiture by Ottavio Leoni and, in a different style, by Rubens. A well-known pastel portrait of Cooper now in the Dyce Collection (D 91) in the Victoria and Albert Museum has been accepted as his own work. Yet Horace Walpole, who knew and owned this very picture, admits that he could find ' no account of his essays in this way '.2 And it is strange that Cooper, who almost invariably initialled his miniatures, should have left no signed crayon portraits. Lutterell, whose authentic extant pastels are little larger than minia- tures, is said by Vertue to have executed, at least in the latter part of his career, portraits on a life-sized scale, but nobody has yet noted a miniature bearing his monogram.
It is upon the same mistaken train of reasoning that attempts have been made to attribute miniatures to yet another artist who has lately been held to have been the principal exponent of pastel at this period— the recently re-discovered and already largely mythological Edmund Ashfield— and this
1 Bodleian Library MS., Tanner, 326, p. 69. The way in which this passage follows immediately upon the allusions to the works of .Goltzius, Strada, and Gerbier, already quoted, confirms the impression that the Author's ideas about the process were not very clear.
1 Anecdotes of Painting, edit. Dallaway and Wornum, ii. 149.
6 ENGLISH SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY PORTRAIT
although his only ascertained works outside a very small group of crayon portraits are oil-pictures.1
T. THRUMTON.
It must be confessed, in fact, that exceedingly little is known about the circumstances under which the early pastels were executed, and it is to be feared that the information on this subject to be extracted from the very curious and interesting sheet of studies (frontispiece and plate i b) by a hitherto totally unknown artist, T. Thrumton, who was working in London in 1667, is very slight. The author of these two portraits was evidently an accomplished and practised draughtsman very closely allied with the school of Lely, as a comparison of his head of Mary Carleton with that of an unidentified court beauty by Sir Peter (plate i a) clearly shows. The period of this and other similar studies by Lely is unknown. They may be earlier than 1667, but as far as is known the date on the sheet by Thrumton is the earliest upon any English drawing in this medium. The handling of the chalk seems to point to the conclusion that Thrumton was not a miniaturist nor, at this stage of his career, a practising pastellist, but more probably one of the many oil-painters who contributed to build up the immense mass of pictures still indiscriminately assigned to Lely. The excellent full-sized facsimile of the portrait on the recto almost obviates the necessity for any remarks on the technical peculiarities of the work. The paper is pale buff, and has been darkened over a great part of the background and figure with a rubbing of red and black chalk mixed on the paper and then possibly wetted. Most of the drawing is executed in simple strokes of black and red chalk, the pastel treat-
1 It may be permissible to add in this place to the Notes on Edmund Ashfield, contributed by Mr. C. H. C. Baker to the Annual of the Walpole Society, vol. iii, an indication of two more authen- ticable works by this artist and also a contemporary note which, slight as it is, affords more personal information about him than is to be derived from any other source. It occurs in the Diary of Thomas Hearne, the antiquary (July 30, 1709). 'The old Duke of Ormond's Picture in the School Gallery was done by one Ashfield from the original drawn by Sir Peter Lilly. The said Ashfield also drew the Picture of Dun Scotus in the same Gallery, from his own Invention. Mr. Ashfield had a great Genius for Painting, especially for Craons. He liv'd in Holborn Rowe in Lincoln's Inn Field. He was a sober Person & suspected to be a Roman Catholick ' (Remarks and Collections of Thomas Hearne, edit. Oxford Historical Society, ii. 227-8). This portrait of the Duke of Ormonde is a whole-length life-sized oil-picture copied from the original by Lely, in the Duke of Devonshire's Collection. It is known to have been in the Bodleian Gallery in 1679, and is now in the Sheldonian Theatre (Catalogue of Oxford Exhibition of Historical Portraits, 1905, p. 71. Poole, Catalogue of Oxford Portraits, 1912, i, p. 133). The picture of Duns Scotus, a life-sized three-quarters length, also in oil, appears to have been acquired from the artist in 1670 ; it is still in the Bodleian Gallery (Poole, op. cit, p. 3). Mr. J. J. Foster, in his recently published volumes on Samuel Cooper, fixes the year 1700 as that of Ashfield's death. But no authority is given for this statement, and the standard of original research which the book attains is scarcely such as to warrant any hope that the date is derived from newly discovered evidence.
PLATE I
z
8
s
H
a
ft
51 1
S * > §
05 -I
05 <
U
u. O
O U
U
a e-
u. O
H
s
Q
w
z
U Q
S 3
!
w
DRAWINGS IN OXFORD COLLECTIONS 7
ment properly speaking being confined, as in similar works by Lely, to the face. The signature, T. Thrumton fecit Londini i66j, is in ink.
Research has failed to bring to light a single other mention of this artist's name ; no other original work by him seems to be known and, even more strange, not one engraving after him appears to exist.1
The drawing on the verso of the sheet (plate i b) is slighter in execution and less well preserved. The paper is left with its natural buff surface; the head is sketched in black chalk, the shadows (as under the chin) being expressed by hatchings of the same ; but the whole of the rest of the flesh tint is obtained by a rubbed-in mixture of red and white chalk, white itself being employed for the high-lights.
To the left of the head in the same black chalk as the rest of the work is written 'Ye Jarman Prinsis'; some undecypherable words scribbled in the bottom right-hand corner are in a later hand and seem only to refer to a price set upon the drawing or its number in some catalogue. The ' German Princess ' depicted was a person of considerable notoriety in her day. She figures in the Dictionary of National Biography under the name of Mary Carleton, other- wise Moders, and is said to have had more aliases than any other rogue in the kingdom. Her most unedifying career of knavery and impudence ended on the gallows in 1673. The stories of her trickery, impostures, and shameless self-advertisement aroused considerable interest and amusement at the time, and were the theme of a number of ephemeral publications furnishing no less than thirteen items in the Catalogue of the Library of the British Museum. Her memory was prolonged by the fact that some of these were illustrated by a squalid little engraved portrait by John Chantry, this entitling her to a niche in Granger's Biographical History and indeed warranting the re-engraving of this portrait in the golden age of Grangerism for Caulfield's Portraits of Remarkable Persons, 1813 (ii. 183). Probably her surest title to some sort of immortality will henceforward be based upon her being mentioned three times by Pepys : firstly, in allusion to her trial for bigamy in May and June 1663, when the diarist relates that he supported the wit and spirit of her defence in an altercation
1 Mrs. R. L. Poole, to whose researches the writer is greatly indebted for the historical materials of the present paper, has minutely examined the calendars of state papers, printed church registers, wills, and other sources, in the hope of discovering some information which might be connected with the artist. The name itself seems to be of rare occurrence. One Thomas Thrumpton, mentioned as the elder son, is bequeathed a legacy under the will of his father Ralph Thrumpton, husbandman of Statherne in Leicestershire, proved in 1621. It is noteworthy that the second son Roger, who was still living in 1664, inherited his father's real property. It is possible that this Thomas maybe identical with one Thomas Thronton, who was buried in Christ Church, Newgate S*, Oct. n, 1676. He left no will in London. Ralph Thrumpton also mentions his daughter Cassandra, and his grandchildren, unnamed, children of Thomas. It is possible that the artist may have been one of them or, at least, connected with this family.
8 ENGLISH SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY PORTRAIT
with his dearest foe Lady Batten ; l and secondly, when he went with his wife to the Duke's House on April 15, 1664, and saw 'The German Princess acted by the woman herself, the play being founded upon one of her cozening escapades in which she had represented herself to be a German lady of high rank. Pepys adds the comment, ' but never was anything so well done in earnest worse per- formed in jest upon the stage'.2
Supposing that the drawing on the verso of the present sheet is of the same period as that on the recto and the date, 1642 (?), of her birth given by the Dictionary of National Biography is accurate, the age of the 'German Prindess' at the time when she sat to Thrumton would be about twenty-five, which tallies well with her appearance, better than forty-two or thirty-two which would have been her age in 1667 if deduced from the figures, perhaps satirically intended, upon one of the engraved portraits and in The Counterfeit Lady Unveiled, one of the accounts of her life published shortly after her execution. It would seem that the present drawing is not connected with any of the engraved portraits. The prototype of these was the plate, signed by John Chantry, prefixed to the Histoncall Narrative of the German Princess published in 1663 and taken, according to The Counterfeit Lady Unveiled, 'by her own order and appoint- ment ' in that year. The actual position of the head and style of hair-dressing are somewhat similar in both, but the gulf between the artistic and iconographic qualities of the two portraits is profound indeed. A miniature of her husband which she wore at her execution is several times mentioned in the narratives ; and it is tempting to identify the head of the young man on the recto of our sheet as a study for this, but there is unfortunately not a shadow of foundation for such an imaginative excursion.
The drawings on both sides are the same size, 9! x 7! inches. This sheet formed part of the vast collections bequeathed to the University by Francis Douce in 1834 ; nothing is known of its earlier provenance.
SIR PETER LELY.
Upon a similar scale to the last and strikingly resembling it in technique is the bust of an unidentified beauty of the court of Charles II reproduced in plate i a. It belongs to a familiar and fairly numerous class of studies by Lely, of which three exceptionally fine specimens are to be found in the British Museum.3
Little study has been brought to bear upon Sir Peter's drawings, and it is
1 Diary of Samuel Pepys, edit. Wheatley, 1893, "i> PP- X49» J^2.
* Ib., 1894, iv- II1-
3 Binyon, Catalogue of Drawings by British Artists, iii, p. 53, nos. 3, 5, 6 ; Reproductions of Drawings by Old Masters in the British Museum, Part IV, pi. vi ; Burlington Magazine, 1906-7, x. 74, pi. n).
DRAWINGS IN OXFORD COLLECTIONS 9
uncertain whether these particular sketches, none of which are actually dated although many are signed, all belong to one period of his career. But from the similarity of style which they display this seems probable, while the class of subject and fashion of hair-dressing appear to indicate the era of the ascendancy of the Countess of Castlemaine, whose portrait has been identified in one of the British Museum sheets (no. 5) and the painting of the celebrated series of the ' Windsor Beauties ' between 1660 and 1670. The end of this period is rather indicated for the present study by the fact that the attitude and accessories — the shepherdess's large flapped hat and crook— are found in the three-quarters- length portrait of the Duchess of Cleveland engraved by W. Sherwin, dated 1670, and doubtless published at the moment when Lady Castlemaine had been raised to higher rank. The pose and attributes became, as often happened with Lely, part of his stock-in-trade ; a portrait of Queen Catherine in the same style is believed to exist, and there may be those of other ladies. It does not seem possible to identify the present subject with any one of the beauties whose pictures now line King William Ill's bedchamber at Hampton Court. The nearest resemblance it presents is to the enchanting picture variously known as the Princess Mary or Jane Kelleway as Diana, but this may only be due to the air of extreme youthfulness presented by both.
The facsimile, already referred to, of one of the British Museum drawings, gives a good idea of the colour scheme of the present sheet. The paper is chamois buff; red chalk is used in many places to outline the features ; and fine lines of it are mingled with black in the hair. The pastel blending of red and white expresses the colour and modelling of the flesh, and rubbings of white and hatchings of black, with the paper as middle tint, produce a painter-like rendering of the hat and dress. Unfortunately the bloom of surface, which must once have made this study as attractive as those in the British Museum, has been largely destroyed. It measures 10 x 7^ inches. It came to the University by the bequest of the Rev. Robert Finch, 1830 ; its previous history is unknown.
EDWARD LUTTERELL.
If anything were needed to convince students of old British art — such as the members of the Walpole Society— that no real progress in the history of this subject is possible until the manuscripts of George Vertue have been edited and printed in full, or at least made available in the form of a full abstract and completely indexed, a superficial comparison of the printed lives of Lutterell would carry conviction. The foundation of them is Walpole's summary, made with slightly less grasp and intuition than he usually displays, of a somewhat confused note of Vertue's ; some information presumably traditional, since it cannot be substantiated from older sources, given in Pilkington's Dictionary ;
v. c
io ENGLISH SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY PORTRAIT
and a vein of more trustworthy metal, worked for the first time by Chaloner Smith in his British Mezzotinto Portraits, Part II, p. 828, derived from a study of the plates engraved by and after this artist.
From modern accounts, such as those of Redgrave, Mr. Walter Strickland, and Mr. Lionel Cust in the Dictionaries of English and Irish Artists and National Biography, and Mr. Baker in the appendix to his Lely and the Stuart Portrait Painters, extracted or amplified from these materials, there emerge more than one specious-looking figure dressed out in second-hand historical material of undefined provenance which prove, when they come to be scrutinized and compared, to be supported on skeletons with many missing and some redundant bones.
As Lutterell appears to have been held in his day as one of the first pastellists of the time, and as he may yet be disclosed as a more considerable artist than anything now known warrants us to account him, it is worth while to make a digest of the facts of his biography when introducing a reproduction of one of his few authenticated paintings.
Even his Christian name remained for a long while uncertain. Walpole does not mention it. Dallaway, when editing the Anecdotes of Painting, supplied it, doubtless upon the authority of Pilkington, as Henry. This is clearly an error, as Nagler followed by Chaloner Smith pointed out, since all Lutterell's signed works show the initial E. The expansion into Edward, found in the Dictionary of National Biography, was made upon the unimpeachable authority of Vertue's original manuscript, where it has been added in the margin. There appears, moreover, to be no foundation firmer than a tradition of unknown age and origin for the statement that he was born in Dublin. Vertue presents him first to view as a student of the law in New Inn, London.1 Pilkington, himself an Irishman, born in the Irish capital during Lutterell's lifetime and to whom some direct sources of information may have been open, is responsible for the story that he spent a great part of his life in Dublin and afterwards came to London.2
The accounts of his artistic education are equally conflicting. Vertue main- tains that Lutterell ' had no instructor or regular teaching '.3 But Richard Graham, in his notes on Ashfield, says that it was he who was Lutterell's master. It was from Ashfield, he says, that ' the present Mr. Luttrell had his Instruction, who has improv'd that invention, and multiply'd the Variety of Colours to effect anything, as also found out a method unknown before, to draw with those Chalks or Crayons on Copper-Plates, either by the Life or Historically '.* It is Vertue
1 British Museum MSS. Add. 21111 f. 24. All the original records of New Inn have disappeared.
2 Dictionary of Painters, London, 1770, p. 359.
3 British Museum MSS. Add. 21111 f. 24.
An Essay towards an English School of Painters, appended to the Translation of De Piles's Art of Painting, London, 1706, p. 399. Walpole mentions that some, Dallaway says three, works
DRAWINGS IN OXFORD COLLECTIONS n
who provides the information that 'from a small knowledge of drawing by practice for his Pleasure ' Lutterell ' at length persued it and left the practice of the Law'.1
The date of Lutterell's birth is unknown ; no authority for fixing it about 1650, as is sometimes done, seems to exist ; the first question is, therefore, to determine that of his earliest appearance as a practising artist. The facts are not perfectly clear, but a list of his known dated works in chronological order will set them before the reader in the most intelligible form.
1673.
The date upon the mezzotint of Anthony, first Earl of Shaftesbury, from a picture by Greenhill (Chaloner Smith, no. 16). It shows the bust alone, but is doubtless based upon the three-quarters-length seated portrait painted during the year November 1672 to November 1673, when Shaftesbury was Lord Chancellor, and engraved in line by Blooteling in 1673 ; and, as it is in reverse, may possibly itself have been copied from the engraving. It is noticeable that the date on this plate is separated by an interval of some six years from that of the next known to have been scraped by Lutterell, and by one of no less than fifty from the latest year in which he is recorded to have been still living, which would imply that he flourished during an exceptionally long period.
It is not necessary to repeat here the story printed at length by Walpole, following Vertue, and lucidly summarized in the Dictionary of National Biography, of Lutterell's adventures when attempting to discover the secret of laying a mezzo- tint ground and his connexion with the early practitioners of the process. Some discrepancies in it have been pointed out by Chaloner Smith in his account of Lloyd (British Mezzotinto Portraits, Part II, p. 822). And, in fact, a close study of the dates involved leads apparently to the conclusion that Lutterell's attention cannot well have been attracted to mezzotint as early as 1673. Blooteling, whose assistant Blois figures in the story, returned to Amsterdam, according to Wurzbach (Ntederlandisches Kunstlerlexicon), whither according to Vertue's account Blois was preparing to accompany him, in 1676. Paul Van Somer (con- fused by Vertue with his brother John, who never seems to have visited this country) did not come to London until 1675; and Isaac Beckett, to whom Lloyd imparted the process he had learned from Blois when he declined to explain it to Lutterell, began to practise about 1681, not much later than the period when Lutterell's next known plate was presumably executed. It is tempting to imagine that this portrait was really copied, including the date, from
by Lutterell in this manner were in Queen Caroline's Closet at Kensington Palace. (Anecdotes of Painting, ii. 125 note.) 1 MS. cit. aim f. 24.
C 2
12 ENGLISH SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY PORTRAIT
Blooteling's line-engraving, for production at the moment of popular enthusiasm for Shaftesbury following his acquittal in 1681, and belongs to the group of Lutterell's works which centres round the agitated epoch of the Popish and other plots and the personages involved in them. It is, of course, possible that some of these portraits may belong to the era of reaction against plot-discovery instead of to that of the mania itself; this might make them a little later than the dates given below ; they cannot well be earlier.
The plate of Shaftesbury, rough and primitive as it is, is not more so than all excepting the two latest of this engraver's. Like all excepting these and the portrait of the Earl of Yarmouth, it is very small in size, and greatly inferior in workmanship to those of most of his contemporaries ; so much so, in fact, as to arouse amazement at Vertue's statement that Lutterell drew better than Isaac Beckett.
1679 (?).
Mezzotint of Richard Langhorne, after an unnamed painter, probably Lutterell himself (C. S. 12). The subject was one of the Roman Catholic victims of Titus Oates's delations ; he was executed in January of this year.
1680.
In or before this year, if they were taken from life as they have the air of being, must have been painted the two crayon and gouache portraits of Samuel Butler— one in the Bodleian Library (plate n a, and page 16 posf), the other in the National Portrait Gallery (no. 248). Both are signed.
Mezzotint, probably after an original portrait by the engraver himself, of William Howard, Lord Stafford (C. S. 17), who perished in the Popish plot prosecutions of this year.
1681.
Mezzotint of Oliver Plunket, Archbishop of Armagh (C. S. 14), who also suffered death at this time on similar charges to the last. This plate is based on a crayon drawing said to have been made by Luttrell while the archbishop was in prison. The questions relating to this tradition must be reserved for a later instalment of these notes, when what appears to be the original black-lead sketch, in the Sutherland Collection, comes to be discussed.
1682.
Dated mezzotint, after an original stated on the plate to have been Lutterell's own painting (C. S. 20), of Robert Paston, Earl of Yarmouth, who died in March 1682-3.
Dated mezzotint, after an original by an unnamed artist, presumably the
DRAWINGS IN OXFORD COLLECTIONS 13
engraver, of Hamet Ben Hamet, Ambassador from the Emperor of Fez and Morocco to Charles II (C. S. 8).
Dated mezzotint, after an original by Lutterell ' drawn from the life at the Duke's Theatre ', of Keay Nabee and Keay Abi, Ambassadors from the Sultan of Bantam to Charles II (C. S. 12).
1683.
Dated mezzotint, after Kneller, of William Lord Russell, who was executed in connexion with the Rye House plot this year (C.S. 15).
Mezzotint, after Lely, of Arthur Capel, Earl of Essex, implicated in the same conspiracy, who died in July of this year (C. S. 7).
1684.
Dated mezzotint, after an anonymous artist, possibly Lutterell himself, of Lord Chief Justice Jeffreys (C. S. n). The monogram of the artist upon this plate takes a very unusual form.
ABOUT 1688 (?).
Pastel portrait, signed, of Archbishop Sancroft, in the National Portrait Gallery (no. 301). (See page 16 post.} In the absence of any definite information about the execution of this we are probably justified in supposing it to date from the period of the archbishop's opposition to James II and the acquittal of the seven bishops. It corresponds in its main lines with the numerous popular portraits produced at that time.
1689.
In or before this year Lutterell must have painted the picture of Gilbert Burnet engraved in line by Van der Giest, as the early state of the plate repre- sents Burnet before he was consecrated Bishop of Salisbury in this year. Lutterell's own mezzotint (C. S. i), in which the subject appears in a plain clergy- man's dress, must also date from this period.
1694.
John Evelyn notes in his diary that on August 4 of this year he saw at the house of his cousin a group in pastel (see p. 4 ante) which, as the subjects were then young children, cannot have been painted very long before.1
1 Diary of John Evelyn, edit. A. Dobson, 1906, iii. 312, and Pedigree in vol. i.
i4 ENGLISH SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY PORTRAIT
1694-1700.
Lutterell's portrait of William Russell, Duke of Bedford, engraved in mezzo- tint by R. Williams (C. S., Part IV, p. 1596, no. 6), was presumably painted in this period. The creation of the dukedom dates from 1694. The duke died, as recorded in the title of the print, in 1700.
1699.
Dated and signed portrait, in crayons on copper, of an unknown gentleman, in the National Gallery of Ireland (no. 2352). (See page 17 post.)
1706 (?).
Mezzotint, from a drawing by the engraver, of Francis Higgins, called the ' Irish Sacheverell ', who made himself notorious by his political pulpit-oratory in London at this time. This plate is larger than most of Lutterell's earlier works, and shows a great advance in technique and artistic power.
Publication of the first edition of the History of England, edited by White Kennett, Bishop of Peterborough, in three folio volumes. This contains a series of more or less imaginary heads of English monarchs from William the Conqueror to Charles I, engraved from drawings by Lutterell. It is noteworthy that the portraits of the later sovereigns from Charles II to Queen Anne, whose head forms the frontispiece to the first volume, are from originals by various con- temporary artists amongst whom Lutterell does not figure.
1707.
Dated mezzotint, from a drawing by the engraver, of Dr. Robert Cony (C. S. 6). This plate is on the same scale as the print of Francis Higgins, and is much superior to it in breadth of execution and characterization, especially in what is described by Chaloner Smith as the second and greatly re-worked state.
1710.
About this year, according to the old accounts, Lutterell died, but researches specially made by Mrs. R. L. Poole in the unexplored recesses of Vertue's manuscripts have added two more fixed dates which prolong the artist's career considerably.
1711.
In this year Lutterell's name appears in the list given by Vertue of the members of the Academy of Painting, each person paying one guinea. The
DRAWINGS IN OXFORD COLLECTIONS 15
official position held and the branch of art practised by each subscriber is specified, Lutterell being one of the twelve directors and a painter in crayons.1
1723.
Vertue, in a list of the ' Names of living painters of note in London and their pictures by whom painted ' made at this time, includes ' M' Lutterel, painter in crayons, by himself, several, one head as big as the life'.2
The actual date of his death still remains unknown, and he appears to have left no will.
No mention has been made of the signed mezzotints which cannot be dated ; being mainly portraits of public characters of general interest, or of none at all, they do not throw any light upon the engraver's connexions among his con- temporaries. Nor of the unsigned plates, implied by Vertue to have been exceedingly numerous, a conclusion that the paucity of the signed ones pro- duced by Lutterell during a period of above a quarter of a century (supposing him to have been more than an amateur) tends to support. The task of isolating these from the cloud of contemporary anonymous prints and ranging them in presumptive historical sequence may safely be left to some critic gifted in the science of morphological analysis.
In the region of facts one more remains to be noted, together with an inference which has been drawn from it. The signed plate of Francis Higgins in the first state is inscribed : 'Sold by M. Luttrell in Westminster Hall.' From this, Mr. Cust, in the Dictionary of National Biography, has conjectured that the engraver himself 'would appear to have had a print-stall' in that locality. It this was so, the absence of this address from any of the earlier plates, and the substitution of another in the second state of this one, seems to show that the venture was a short-lived one.
From the data here marshalled three distinct personalities seem to take shape : the struggling Irish pastellist, who after a somewhat extended career of ill-requited industry in Dublin migrated to London and earned a fortune from more appreciative or more wealthy clients; the inquisitive, dilettante London lawyer, filled with the ardour of an age of experiment and discovery, helping in his legal capacity to get young artists out of scrapes, and finding himself a true vocation in the arts which he had begun to practise as an amateur ; and the opportunist business man, a maker and purveyor of portraits of topical interest, without bias to any party, in an age ot swiftly shifting politics. Subsequent discoveries may reveal how far the real Lutterell shared all or any of these characteristics ; fact and tradition, as at present known, leave him an enigma.
Materials for forming an idea of the extent and quality of Lutterell's achieve-
1 British Museum MSS. Add. 23076 f. 2 and 23082 f. 33b. * Ib. 23076 f. iab.
16 ENGLISH SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY PORTRAIT
ments as a pastellist are eyen scantier than those for gauging his development as an engraver. Only four signed specimens of his work in crayons are known to the writer ; the earliest presumably being the two portraits of Samuel Butler, the author of Hudibras — one in the Bodleian Library (plate n a), the other in the National Portrait Gallery. The Oxford picture must always have been strikingly inferior to the other, and it has suffered so severely from damp and restoration that its original quality is much impaired. The technical processes employed in its execution are on this account difficult to define. Much of it appears to be in true pastel — coloured chalks applied dry, and fused by rubbings. The background seems to be in distemper or body-colour laid on with a brush ; it is sea-green in tone ; over this have been laid hatchings of black chalk. The flesh is unduly ruddy and hot in effect, owing to its being shaded with strokes of brownish scarlet chalk. The high-lights on the wig look as if they had been touched in with a brush; those on the lace cravat are in dry white chalk, but they may be restorations. Marks of the whole having been soaked, clearly visible round the edge, do not seem to be accidental ; it is remarkable that they also occur, particularly on the right-hand side, in the picture in the National Portrait Gallery, which has no appearance of having suffered otherwise from damp. The Bodleian portrait is on paper, and measures 9! x y£ inches. It would appear, in point of fact, to be essentially a large miniature begun in distemper colours, finished in coloured chalks, and then possibly flooded with some medium such as gum-water to fix the pastel touches. The signature occurs in a part of the background which has, in the reproduction, the appearance of being a repaired patch, but it is so unusual in form that it is probably genuine ; it reads 3L. In the other three examples the initials are interlaced g£.
The only drawing in the British Museum assigned to the artist is similar in execution but with more distemper and less dry chalk. The flesh is distinguished by the same ruddy coloration. It is unsigned and undated, but is clearly a portrait of an earlier generation than Lutterell's, and is presumably a copy of an original by Van Dyck or one of his contemporaries.1
The picture of Butler in the National Portrait Gallery stands upon a far higher plane than either of these. It is painted directly upon an oak panel and is in good preservation. There is certainly a great deal of brushwork in distemper in it, but the forms of the strokes and touches show that pastel has also been largely employed ; the final process seems to have been a soaking with some sort of fixative liquid. The signature, recently discovered by Mr. C. J. Holmes, is the interlaced monogram in white chalk, now almost effaced.
The third signed work— the portrait of Archbishop Sancroft in the same gallery — is in a totally different style, wholly in dry pastel minutely finished in
1 Binyon, Catalogue of Drawings by British Artists in the British Museum, iii. 85.
PLATE II
X •n
j o
55
W
U) Q
-" £> 2
w \o ^S — M ~
5 H I u o ^
_
w
j
Q
S f
il
DRAWINGS IN OXFORD COLLECTIONS 17
a light key ; the signature is an interlaced monogram. The fourth — the head of an unidentified gentleman, in the National Gallery of Ireland — bears the only signature giving the artist's name in full, and is his only dated pastel ; it is inscribed: E. Lutterell fe. 1699. It is executed upon a copper plate laid with a mezzotint ground in the manner described by Graham. As the present writer has never seen it he is unfortunately unable to give any details of its technical characteristics.
UNIDENTIFIED PASTELLISTS, 1660-85.
The portrait of King Charles II, reproduced in plate n b, is in the Suther- land Collection (Burnet, vol. i. 165), but its earlier history and the name of the artist are alike unknown. It represents the king at a period very little subse- quent to his Restoration in 1660. Vivid and lifelike, it has the air of having been drawn from nature, but being a royal portrait this may not be the case. King Charles seems to be wearing his own hair, which is represented as much fairer than is usual in his portraits or than it probably was, and in even stronger contrast to the black perruque which he wore in later life. The costume is the blue mantle of the Order of the Garter, with the collar, worn over a scarlet surcoat and a \vh\tejuste-au-corps, plain collar, and bands.
The drawing is executed on very fine paper resembling vellum and in true pastel of a primitive type. It measures 10* x yf inches. The background is light grey, obtained by rubbings of black and white ; the hair is rendered by an under-rubbing of hazel brown chalk worked over with fine strokes of black; the face is modelled with red and white fused together and finished with delicate touches of red ; the scarlet surcoat is laid on heavily in chalk, the mantle in bright ultramarine which, if it was put on dry, has been subsequently moistened to fix it. On the whole this picture has the appearance of being the production of a miniaturist working on a large scale rather than of an oil-painter working on a small one. It is in any case an experiment, and doubtless an early one, in the evolutionary stage of the process. There is no evidence to connect it either with Cooper or with Ashfield, yet it obviously belongs to a class intermediate between the types of art represented by the miniatures of the one and the pastels of the other.
The Sutherland Collection possesses another fairly early pastel, also a portrait of Charles II, but it has no original iconographic value, and is too damaged to be reproduced as an illustration of technique. It is a bust-portrait facing three-quarters to the left in an oval spandrel, and closely follows the type of the familiar pictures of the king by Lely. He wears a full black perruque and a steel breastplate over a buff coat ; the background is light brown. The whole is executed in dry pastel on paper ; the dimensions are lof x 8| inches.
v. D
i8 DRAWINGS IN OXFORD COLLECTIONS
It was highly finished on the^scale and in the style commonly associated with Lutterell, although there are no real grounds for attributing this or many other similar pictures to that artist. It can only be said that it belongs to the period when the range of colours obtainable in crayons had been greatly extended, and to a numerous class of small portraits in this medium, such as the little portrait of Sir Matthew Hale in the Bodleian Gallery.1
1 Poole, Catalogue of Oxford Portraits, \, no. 148.
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
BY CAMPBELL DODGSON.
THE very name of Andrew Geddes is unfamiliar to the majority of the English art-loving public, and his etchings are known and appreciated only by the few whom accident or research has led to study them. In Scotland, where he is represented by several pictures in the National Gallery at Edinburgh, patriotism is sufficiently awakened to assure his reputation, and it is recognized on both sides of the border, by all who have considered the subject, that the two Scottish painter-etchers, Wilkie and Geddes, share with the artists of the Norwich school the honours of that early revival of original etching which took place in Great Britain in the first quarter of the nineteenth century.
The life of Geddes is related in the memoir compiled by his widow Adela Geddes and privately printed in 1844 ; in the introduction to the edition of the etchings of Wilkie and Geddes, published by David Laing in 1875 ; and in the Dictionary of National Biography, vol. xxi (article by J. M. Gray). A brief summary will suffice on this occasion. He was born at Edinburgh on April 5, 1783, as the only son of David Geddes, deputy-auditor of excise, by his second wife Agnes Boyd, whose five other children were daughters. His father died in 1803 ; his mother, whom he has immortalized by the picture at Edinburgh and the dry-point, made from it, that ranks by general consent as his masterpiece in etching, survived till 1828. Andrew received a classical education, and became in 1803 a clerk in the excise office. His father collected prints; Andrew when quite a boy imitated him in this pursuit and spent his leisure hours in learning to draw by copying etchings and drawings by old masters. His ambition to become an artist was discouraged by his father, but in 1806 he resigned his position at the excise office, and went to the Royal Academy School in London. He soon began to exhibit pictures, mainly portraits, both in London and Edinburgh, and resided in the two capitals by turns, but chiefly in London, where he lived till 1828 at 58 Brook Street. He visited Paris with John Burnet, the engraver, in 1814. In 1821 an important exhibition of his pictures was held at Edinburgh. About this time he became a candidate for election to the Royal Academy, but his application was unsuccessful and was not renewed till ten years later ; he was elected an associate in 1832. In 1826 he published a set of etchings, of which more will be said presently. In 1827 he married Adela, daughter of Nathaniel Plimer, the miniature-painter (1751-1822). He started in 1828 for a long Continental journey, visiting Paris again on the way to Italy. He spent the
D 2
20 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
winter at Rome, painting many portraits ; the summer of 1829 at Subiaco ; and the second winter again at Rome, residing in the house on the Pincian which had been Poussin's. He afterwards visited Naples and the neighbourhood, and in the autumn of 1830 Siena, Florence, and Venice, then Munich and Paris, returning to London on January 2, 1831. He took a house in Berners Street (no. 15) in 1832 and lived there for the rest of his life, visiting Holland, chiefly for the sake of studying Rembrandt, in the autumn of 1839. In 1843 his health began to fail, and he died of consumption on May 5, 1844.
The memoir of Geddes and the numerous extracts published by Laing from the letters of his friends, show him to have been an amiable and highly cultivated man, with genuine enthusiasm for art and intimate knowledge of the old masters. He was one of those who pleaded zealously for the acquisition by the Govern- ment of the Lawrence collection of drawings. He spent much time in copying pictures by the great artists, and acquired a considerable collection of pictures, drawings, and engravings. The catalogue of the sale of his collection and remaining works, which took place at Christie's in the year after his death (April 8-14, 1845), shows that he had an extensive series of etchings by Rembrandt, who was the special object of his admiration.
It may be conjectured that the copies after Rembrandt are among the earliest of his own etchings, though the first which bears a date (1812) is the portrait of Dr. Chalmers. Of the comparatively few that are actually dated, none are later than 1826 ; but the etching of Claude's House at Rome is known by correspondence to date from 1830, and there is some reason to think that the landscape without a title (no. 34) is connected with his visit to Holland in 1839. In 1826, the year in which he etched The Field of Bannockburn and The Black Boy, Geddes published a set of ten etchings printed on soft, thick, hand-made paper, measuring 17 x n| inches, in a cover of brown boards with reddish- brown leather back. The title —
NO. i. ETCHINGS
BY
A. GEDDES.
LONDON : PUBLISHED BY A. GEDDES, 58 BROOK STREET, GROSVENOR SQUARE.
was printed on a rectangular label framed in woodcut ornament, and attached to the front board of the cover. The copy that I have seen, the property of
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 21
Mr. E. R. Boase, of Edinburgh, has no list of contents, but the etchings con- tained in it differ slightly from those of which Laing gives a list. It is possible that the contents varied in different sets, but I suspect that Laing has quoted the numbers wrongly in two cases. Laing gives the following numbers (of the present catalogue) as composing the set : i, 6, 7, n, 16, 18, 24, 36, 37, 45. The copy mentioned above has 32 and 47 instead of 6 and 36. It is improbable that so fine an etching as 32 should ever have been omitted. Nos. 6 and 36, more- over, are among the lots mentioned separately in the Geddes sale catalogue in addition to the set of ten published plates, which were sold in one lot ; there is no such mention of 32 or 47. I conclude, therefore, that such a set as Mr. Boase now possesses is normal. Laing quotes (p. 27) the text of a leaflet, a copy of which is preserved with Geddes' etchings in the British Museum, that was evidently designed to accompany the publication.
Though lettered ' No. I ', this portfolio had no successor, and no other plates were published during Geddes' lifetime. The portrait of John Sheep- shanks, and the view of Claude's house, were private plates commissioned by that collector, and probably passed into his possession. Plates to the number, apparently, of thirty-six remained in Geddes' hands at his death, and were sold at Christie's in 1845, but dispersed among different buyers. David Laing relates in the preface to his volume on Wilkie and Geddes that the majority of Geddes' plates came into his possession subsequently to the sale, and he resolved, after a long interval, to publish them. The volume that he issued, in an edition of one hundred copies, in 1875,' contains impressions from thirty-five of the original plates, supplemented by photographic reproductions of eight others that were not available. He states in the preface 'that the original coppers, with a few special exceptions, are now destroyed, in order to prevent the chance of their falling into the hands of some one who might, to the prejudice of the artist's reputation, re-issue them in a worn-out state of impression', but he does not name the exceptions. Many of Geddes' plates could hardly be more worn-out than they are in the edition printed by Laing himself, where several, and especially the dry-points, are but ghosts of what they were in the trial proofs and early impressions of the finished states.
Though Laing was assisted in identifying the subjects by Mrs. Geddes, who was still living in 1875, and by W. H. Carpenter, Keeper of Prints and Drawings at the British Museum, who was an intimate friend of Geddes, tradition had become somewhat weak in regard to the titles of the etchings. It is well to test them by what is the earliest printed list, though a very incomplete one — the enumeration of the lots comprised in the Geddes sale of 1845. St. Ann's Hill
1 Etchings by Sir David Wilkie, R.A., Limner to H.M. for Scotland, and by Andrew Geddes, A.R.A., with biographical sketches by David Laing, F.S.A.S., Edinburgh, 1875, fol.
22 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
and Greenwich Park are not Jto be found in Laing's catalogue. I suggest that these two, which have consecutive numbers, as if they went together, are the two very similar views of woodland scenery, in dry-point, which Laing calls views in Richmond Park (nos. 26, 27 — L. 32, 35). I have not, accordingly, given numbers in this catalogue to the two subjects mentioned in 1845. The Whim is obviously no. 22, not mentioned by Laing.1 What Peebles (lot 444) may be, I cannot say ; apparently it is a subject which has eluded my search, but as its existence is vouched for by the sale catalogue, and it cannot be identified with any of the other subjects, I have given it a separate number.
There are not sufficient data available for a chronological arrangement of the etchings, which I have divided into (A) original works and (B) copies and imitations of old masters. The original works fall into three groups : portraits (in alphabetical order), figure subjects and still life, and landscapes.
An attempt has been made here, for the first time, to describe the states, which Laing ignored. Though I have spared no pains to make my description complete, I cannot be sure that I have succeeded, as only a few collections have been available for comparison. Chief among these are the fine collections in the British Museum and Victoria and Albert Museum. The latter is derived entirely from the gift of John Sheepshanks, a friend and patron of Geddes, who presented his collection in 1862. It was acquired direct from the artist, who wrote to Sheepshanks (10 Jan. 1826) : ' I beg to send you a few of my etchings, and I have sent a few variations such as I could find in my portfolio, which are interesting to a collector, as showing the advancement of the plates. The others I will take the liberty of sending you as I print the plates.' The four states of the portrait of Van Laer became detached from the rest, and entered the British Museum with the purchase of the Sheepshanks Collection of Dutch Etchings in 1836.
The rest of the large, though incomplete, collection at the British Museum was acquired, with the exception of two proofs added in 1878 from the Burty sale and three presented in 1916 by Mr. R. K. Blair, entirely during the keepership of William Hookham Carpenter (1845-66), who was an intimate friend of Geddes and perhaps a connection by marriage,for Margaret Carpenter, the artist, wife of the keeper, was a Miss Geddes. Between 1847 and 1858 Carpenter acquired a large number of rare proofs, especially at the A. Stewart sale in 1847 and the E. V. Utterson sale in 1852. It is regrettable that the artist's drawings are not equally well represented.
A third collection of some importance, to which I have had access through the kindness of its present owner, Dr. D. J. Macaulay, of Benbecula, Halifax, is
1 This subject is described in a pencil note on an impression in the Victoria and Albert Museum as ' ist plate '. It is doubtful whether this will bear the interpretation that it is Geddes' first attempt at etching, or whether it only refers to some pair of plates of which this was the first.
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 23
that formed by David Laing and used by him as the chief material for his book. It was subsequently owned by Sir W. Fettes Douglas, P.R.S.A. I have also to thank Mr. R. K. Blair and Mr. W. A. Pye for the loan of etchings from their collections, and Mr. J. L. Caw for information about prints by Geddes in the National Gallery and Scottish National Portrait Gallery at Edinburgh.
The examination of different states is instructive as to Geddes' technical methods. He seems to have scarcely ever rebitten a plate, all alterations subse- quent to the first biting being made with the dry-point. A peculiarity of his is the production of tone by using what at first sight appears to be the roulette, but is found on closer examination to be a rocker, such as is used in grounding a mezzotint plate. This is seen, for instance, in the early states of the portrait of his mother, but there the work of the rocker was concealed, and subsequently worked over with the dry-point. In Claude's House at Rome the rocker was used to produce a toned ground between the etched outlines of the building. In the etching of Christ among the Doctors, after Meldolla, and in the dry-point of Peckham Rye, he experimented in the use of aquatint to give a toned effect to certain parts of the background. Most remarkable, considering the period at which he lived, is his use of pure dry-point in a number of his portraits and landscapes and in the excellent piece of still life, from a cinquecento bronze in his own collection, which he named The Black Boy. The two landscapes called by Laing Views in Richmond Park (nos. 26, 27) are among the most original things in his work, but they appear to be unfinished, as is the case with two other charming dry-points, sketches of trees at Halliford (nos. 30 and 31). More complete, and excellent in their various styles, are the View on a Hill (no. 28) and Peckham Rye (no. 32), which, with the portrait of his mother, is the most generally known and admired of Geddes' etchings. It is surprisingly modern, and anticipates in a remarkable way the manner of a Scottish master of dry-point now living.
Some of his etched portraits, the Chalmers, Martin, and especially the second and more finished plate of Skirving, show a remarkable grasp of character and selection of appropriate line. In dry-point, too, some of his figure subjects, the Child with an Apple, Lady Henrietta Drummond and Child, and the portraits of Nathaniel Plimer and Alexander Nasmyth, have a fine, painter-like quality. His etchings after the old masters interest us less, but there is much power in the Philip IV, after Velasquez, Nicholas Rockox, after Rubens, and Old Woman looking at a Ring, after Jordaens. Even his original etchings, it should be mentioned, were done in the majority of cases after pictures by himself.
It is evident from quotations given by Laing, and from the care with which Sheepshanks and Utterson cherished rare states, that Geddes' etchings were esteemed by his contemporaries. Since the more modern revival of etching in the second half of the nineteenth century, they have been praised by
24 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
P. G. Hamerton,1 Sir Walter Armstrong,2 Mr. J. L. Caw,3 Mr. A. M. Hind,4 and Mr. Malcolm Salaman,5 and they are now being sought for by collectors, especially in Scotland, but it must be supposed that the fine early impressions, apart from those already in museums, are rare. Few, so far as I know, have found their way to the Continent. Mrs. Geddes records in her memoir the gift by Geddes of a selection of his etchings to Baron Verstolk van Soelen at the Hague, in 1839, and some were in the collection of that discriminating and enthusiastic admirer of fine modern prints, Philippe Burty. The collections of these two amateurs were dispersed in 1847 and 1876-8 respectively.
The previous catalogue of the etchings, by David Laing, is not only incom- plete, but makes no attempt to describe the states. This has been partly done, for the first time, in Mr. Martin Hardie's Catalogue of Modern Etchings and Aquatints in the National Art Library, Victoria and Albert Museum, 1906 (pp. 135-41). But that catalogue is intended mainly for use in the museum itself, and the value of the description in this particular instance is much lessened by the fact that the numeration of the states is based solely on the varieties which happen to be represented in the Victoria and Albert Museum. The expression ' first ' or ' third state ' in any particular case denotes, therefore, no more than the first or third of this particular series of proofs of the etching in question. The descriptions of the differences, in accordance with the scheme of the catalogue, are necessarily brief. The new catalogue now published, though it cannot claim to be final, is at least a considerable advance upon anything yet produced.
The abbreviations employed in the catalogue will be readily understood. The two chief London collections are cited as B.M. and V. A. M., and the public collections at Edinburgh as Ed. N. G. and Ed. S. N. P. G. respectively. The dimensions of the plates (height before width) are given both in inches and in millimetres, less important dimensions in inches (and fractions) only. Signa- tures, and all inscriptions etched upon the plate, as well as manuscript notes, when quoted, are printed in italics. Monograms have been resolved ; in the very few cases where the etcher has used separate initials instead of a monogram the fact is stated.
The illustrations have been selected partly for their artistic merit, partly for their rarity ; the states are generally such as have not been published or repro- duced before, as the value of unpublished states is greater to collectors who already have access to Laing's book.
1 Etching and Etchers, 3rd ed., 1880, p. 221.
2 'Scottish Painters', in The Portfolio, 1887, xviii. noff.
3 Scottish Painting, 1908, p. 85.
1 A short History of Engraving and Etching, 2nd ed., 1911, p. 242. 6 The Great Painter- Etchers, 1914.
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 25
CATALOGUE
A.-ORIGINAL ETCHINGS I. PORTRAITS
1. SIR WILLIAM ALLAN. (L. 2.) 1815.
Whole length, walking to r., in Circassian dress, carrying bow and arrows. Landscape background, with stormy sky. Signed at foot, in dry-point : A. Geddes. There is also an indistinct etched signature, with date 1815, to 1., near Allan's r. foot. The subject is enclosed by a border-line.
Etching, touched with dry-point. 8£| x 5! ; 225 x 151. Subject, 8f x 55.
I. The signature, rich in burr, is followed by the date i8th June 1815. B. M., V. A. M.
II. Burr taken off, date effaced. B. M., V. A. M., Ed. N. G. Published by Geddes, 1826.
III. With number 2 in 1. lower corner. In Laing's book, 1875.
Geddes exhibited a picture of this subject at the Royal Academy in 1816 (no. 374). Sir William Allan, born at Edinburgh in 1782, visited Russia and Turkey, returned to Scotland 1814; became A.R.A. 1825, R.A. 1835, President of the Royal Scottish Academy 1838; was knighted 1841 ; died on February 23, 1850.
2. HARRINGTON POPE BLACHFORD. (L. 3.) (1815?).
Bust of a young man, bare-headed, full face, eyes to 1., in uniform. Vignette; no border-line or signature. Dry-point. 63 x 5! ; 160 x 133.
I. With scratches on the plate ; to r. of the head is a slight sketch of a tree, placed side- ways. B. M. (on India paper), V. A. M. (13378, 13379, both on India paper).
II. The plate cleaned. B. M.
III. With number^? in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
Blachford, proprietor of Osborne, I.W., was a Member of Parliament from 1809 till his death, which occurred on May 14, 1816. He married, in 1812, Lady Isabella Fitzroy, who died in 1866, and became in 1814 one of the Commissioners of the Admiralty. His portrait by Geddes was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1815 (no. 344). The plate was sold at Christie's, April 10, 1845 (lot 449).
3. DAVID BRIDGES, junior. (L. 5.) 1816.
Bust, almost full face but a little to 1., of a man with rough hair wearing a wide open collar. Signed 1., upon a patch of shading : A. G.ft. 1816. Dry-point. g| x 6& ; 241 x 158.
I. As described. V. A. M. (13449).
II. With number/ in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
Eldest son of David Bridges, senior, woollen draper at Edinburgh ; a lover of art and friend of artists, b. 1776, d. 1840. Laing quotes a lively description of the man and his surroundings from Peter's Letters to his Kinsfolk, by Lockhart.
V. E
26 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
4. HENRY BROADWOOD. (L. 4.)
Bust of a young man, bare-headed, with long hair, three-quarter face to r., wearing a ruff. Vignette ; no border-line or signature. Dry-point. g| x 6| ; 245 x 156. Plate bevelled.
I. As described. B. M. (early impression, cut, showing irregularities in surface of plate, and an impression as published, after plate was cleaned), V. A. M. (13377, 'first impression taken' ; 13376, with note in pencil: ' Henry Broadwood, Esqr.,from a picture by me. A.G.').
II. With number 4 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
The portrait of Broadwood as Henri Quatre was included in the exhibition of pictures by Geddes at Edinburgh in 1821, and is presumably the ' portrait of a gentleman in the costume of Henri Quatre ' exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1822 (no. 231). The sitter was connected with a firm of brewers, Messrs. Broadwood, Mundell and Co., of 50 Broad Street, Golden Square. The plate was sold at Christie's, April 10, 1845 (lot 448).
5. GEORGE CHALMERS. (L. 6.) 1812.
Bust, bare-headed, nearly full face, long hair, wide collar to coat. Vignette ; signed faintly, low down to r. : A. G.ft. 1812. Etching and dry-point. 8£ x 6f ; 226 x 160.
I. Pure etching. Eyebrows rudimentary; before any dry-point shading on r. side of upper lip, and before the lines slanting down to 1., at a little distance from the r. eye, were carried up so as to meet the eye itself. Before the shading inside the contour of the face on the r. side between the chin and the level of the mouth. Collection of Dr. Macaulay, Halifax.
II. With the additions described ; eyebrows completed with dry-point. Before the dots on upper part of chin, and some of the curved lines under both eyes, especially the left eye. A little shading inserted on lower part of r. side of upper lip. B.M. (on this impression the artist has written in pencil the signature A. G. Jt. 1812, in reverse, with a view to etching it in a subsequent state).
III. With the additions described; the r. side of upper lip more shaded; before any dry-point lines on the hair. Before the signature. B.M. (cut).
IV. The outline of the hair, a little below the topmost tuft, has been carried out further to the left. There are three strong lines, starting from r. to 1., across the inner end of the tuft itself. Fine horizontal lines have been inserted across the hair on the crown of the head, extending from i£ to i^|in. from the top edge of the plate. Signed. B. M. (two impres- sions), V. A. M. (13370, and a touched proof, 13371, on which the collar and patch of shading to 1. are indicated by a wash of Indian ink).
V. A patch of shadow inserted behind the r. shoulder, and the collar of the coat shaded with dry-point ; there is still a large white patch across the 1. side at the level of the shoulder. V. A.M. (13372).
VI. This patch covered up, but parts of the collar to r. of this and below it are still white. B. M., V. A. M. (269 D).
VII. With number 6 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
The plate was sold, with impressions in various states, on April 10, 1845 (lot 437).
The portrait of George Chalmers (1742-1825), author of Caledonia, is from a picture painted by Geddes for the publisher Constable. The letter printed by Laing (pp. 17-18) from the original in the print-room of the British Museum refers to this etching; the
PLATE III
(n) Lady Henrietta Drummond and Child. No. 6. /-"/Vs/
Whim, Peeblesshire. No. 22. Second state
ANDREW GEDDES
PLATK IV
ANDREW GEDDES
The Artist's Mother. No. 7. Second stale
PLATE V
ANDREW GEDDES
The Artist's Mother. No. 7. Third state
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 27
passage to which Laing refers as ' not very clear ' is wrongly transcribed ; instead of ' the Portrait of another Doctor ', we should read ' the Portrait of the Doctor [Dr. Chalmers] '. The statement that ' only four Trial Proofs were taken, the Steel plate having corroded before being printed ', is evidently not accurate as regards the number ; perhaps the artist began to reckon his trial proofs from the moment when he had shaded the collar.
6. LADY HENRIETTA DRUMMOND AND CHILD. (L. 7.)
Lady Henrietta, half length, is seated, holding her little son in her arms. A curtain is draped behind the boy's head. The subject is enclosed by a circular line. No signature.
Dry-point. 8J x 5! ; 225 x 149. Diameter of subject, 5! in. (141 mm.).
I. The heads approximately finished, the bodies in outline. No shading on the fold of the curtain which hangs down 1. No foliage above the round flower r. B. M., V. A. M. (13390).
II. Clothes, hands, &c., more finished. The upper part of the fold shaded, the lower part still very light. Foliage inserted above the flower, but no shading between flower and leaves and the upright post. B. M., V. A. M. (13391).
III. Whole of curtain more deeply shaded. More shading in sky r. ; oblique lines inserted between flower and upright post, and across the lower portion of the post itself. B. M., V. A. M. (13392). Published by Geddes, 1826.
IV. With number 7 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
Lady Henrietta Hay, daughter of Robert, gth Earl of Kinnoull, married in 1807 Henry Drummond, of Albury Park, Guildford, M.P. for West Surrey, and died in 1854. The plate was sold (lot 447) at Geddes' sale on April 10, 1845.
7. AGNES GEDDES, THE ARTIST'S MOTHER. (L. I-A.) 1822.
An elderly lady, half length, three-quarter face to r., wearing a cloak with dark collar, bonnet, and veil. Signed: A. G. ft. 1822 1., and A. Geddes ft. r. The subject is enclosed by a border-line.
Dry-point. 9^ x 6 ; 243 x 153. Subject, 6| x 4||. Plate bevelled.
I. Before background and border-line. Head and bust only ; the clothes over 1. shoulder in outline. Work of mezzotint rocker conspicuous on part of dress and on veil to r. There is a faint sketch of a face above the bonnet, and to r. of this a group of delicate slanting lines. A small patch to 1. of the deep shadow on the cap, £ in. above the r. eye and 3 in. from the 1. side of the plate, is white; so are a small patch, nearly square, near the sharp angle of the veil where it falls over the r. shoulder, and a patch % in. beneath the chin and 2|-3 in. from 1. side of plate. V. A. M. (13365).
II. The three white patches shaded ; no other change. B. M., Mr. R. K. Blair (on India paper, margins masked). The sketch of a face is visible on the B. M. impression, which also shows numerous marks made in trying the dry-point near the 1. margin of the plate. It seems that these additions have been prevented from printing in some of the early proofs, and that their presence or absence is not to be regarded as marking a difference of state. The sketch and group of lines do not appear in III or IV, but are distinctly visible again in V (V. A. M.) and VI.
III. Border-line added, limiting subject to size of $\% x 4$! . The portrait extended from bust to half length, the 1. arm being slightly drawn and the sleeve covered with rocked
E 2
28 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
work. Between the rocked work on the front of the dress and that on the sleeve there is much new shading in dry-point. The r. shoulder is heavily shaded, and there is a small triangular patch of shading immediately adjoining it to 1. The background r. is shaded behind the 1. shoulder as far up as the level of the nose. All above this is blank. Before any signature. V. A. M. (13366, on India paper, and another, touched with pencil).
IV. Background shaded all over to a uniform grey by means of short irregular lines in many directions. Work on clothes carried much farther, but still very incomplete on 1. side, where there are large white spaces. Within the border-line 1. is the signature A. G. (monogram)//. 182-2.. B. M.
V. The 1. and r. border-lines prolonged at foot to 6| in. and then connected by a cross line. The rectangular enclosed space thus formed beneath the portrait measures r7^ x 4^! in., and is empty. Much fresh dry-point work upon the background and the veil, especially on the r. side, where all trace of the original work of the rocker is hidden. The 1. portion of the cloak, though still light, is much more shaded. Hatchings extend to the border-line and disguise, but do not wholly conceal, the signature and date. B. M. (cut to 6f X5f in.), V. A. M. (13368, on India paper).
VI. Burr less conspicuous on background and veil. New signature, A. Geddesfl. (A. and G. combined in monogram), inserted at r. end of the white space. B. M. (on India paper), V. A. M. (13369, on India paper).
VII. All the lines enclosing subject and rectangular space reinforced with the graver. New horizontal hatching on background, on upper part of bonnet to 1. of the first large fold in the veil, and on breast. Much new hatching, chiefly oblique from 1. to r., on sleeve and other parts of costume towards the right. Published by Geddes, 1826. Reproduced in M. Salaman, The Great Painter-Etchers, 1914, p. 182, where it is wrongly described as first state. B. M., V. A. M. (13369 A, on India paper), Ed. N. G. (on India paper).
VIII. With number / in 1. lower corner. Publishedby Laing, 1875.
A deceptive reproduction of state VII, in heliogravure by Amand-Durand, was published in The Portfolio, 1887, xviii, 230. The plate, which is not bevelled, measures 9x6^ in., and the paper (14! x 10$) bears as watermark the word PORTFOLIO and the letters MBM.
Agnes Boyd, a native of Kirkcudbright, was married about 1779-80 to David Geddes, deput auditor of excise at Edinburgh. She had one son, the artist Andrew Geddes, and five daughters, and died on January n, 1828.
The dry-point reproduces in reverse the picture by Geddes, 28x24 in., painted in 1813, in the National Gallery of Scotland (no. 159). Mrs. Geddes wears a black bonnet, a white frill under her chin, and a grey-green cloak with black collar over a dark brown gown.
8. FRANCIS JEFFREY. (L. 8.)
Three-quarter length, bare-headed, standing by a table, the right hand resting on some papers. To 1. inkstand, books, and curtain. Signed in lower margin : A. Geddes ft. (dry-point). Subject enclosed by border-line.
Etching and dry-point. g| x 6TV ; 242 x 154. Subject, 6| x 5§.
I. Pure etching. There are light patches on r. side of coat, to 1. of arm, and on r. side of waistcoat, from the second button upwards. B. M., V. A. M. (13399).
II. Dry-point shading on the places mentioned ; also on the front of coat to 1. of waist- coat. The book to 1. is almost entirely white, and there is a white patch on the second book, just over the inkstand. There is a light patch on the trousers, beneath the 1. hand, and an
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 29
upright rectangular white patch in r. lower corner of the space enclosed by border-line. B. M., V.A. M. (13400).
III. All the places just mentioned are shaded, except the book on the left, which remains white for a space of T3B x \ in. Fresh dry-point work on 1. leg of trousers. An oblong patch 'On table-cloth in 1. lower corner is still white. B. M., V. A. M. (13401).
IV. The oblong patch worked over, showing a pattern. There is still a small con- spicuous white patch (a piece of paper?) above the top of the second book. Much new work on curtain. Both hands shaded, but very indistinct. B. M.
V. The hands more defined. Four lines, slanting from r. to 1., reduce the whiteness of the piece of paper. B. M., Ed. S. N. P. G. (on India paper).
VI. R. upper corner of background more closely shaded. Fresh dry-point work on coat. Before some vertical lines, almost touching the top of the plate, that extend about an inch from the 1. upper corner. B. M. (on India paper). Dr. Macaulay, Halifax.
VII. Fresh work, consisting chiefly of strong lines slanting from r. to 1., near r. upper corner of background ; also fresh work of the same character on the curtain. There are still white patches on a prominent fold towards the top of the curtain. Very strong burr. B. M.
VIII. The white patches on the curtain worked over. The book on the left shaded to the top. New vertical shading just over the inkpot. Burr on background and curtain reduced. L. arm more uniformly shaded. B. M.
IX. Light patches on fold of curtain restored. Fine slanting lines inserted on back of first book 1., J in. above top of inkstand. Before the signature. B. M., V.A. M. (13402, on India paper).
X. Signature inserted on lower margin, £ in. below border-line. B. M. (on India paper), V. A. M. (13403).
XI. With number 8 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
Francis Jeffrey, advocate, born at Edinburgh in 1773, became editor of the Edinburgh Review in 1803, and a Lord of Session in 1834. He died in 1851. His portrait by Geddes was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1820 (no. 340). Twenty-one impressions of the etching were sold with the plate, described as unpublished, at Geddes' sale on April 10, 1845 (Iot 434)-
9. WILLIAM MARTIN. (L. 9.)
Bust, bare-headed, looking down. An inch to 1. of the head is a tiny sketch of a man walking to the 1. with arm extended.
Etching and dry-point. 8| xo^g ; 226 x 162.
I. As described. The impression at the B. M. and two at the V. A. M. (13380-81) are all in the same state. No. 13380 bears the autograph note in pencil : IV'" Manin a cele- brated Book & Print Auctioneer at Ed in'1. A. G.
II. With number 9 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
Martin was born in 1744 and died in 1820. Mrs. Geddes, in her privately printed Memoir of Andrew Geddes (1844), relates (p. 7) how her husband when a schoolboy used to buy cheap prints at auction : ' The auctioneer, who was well known in Edinburgh at the time, and whose name was Martin, was a most facetious man, with a remarkably short and merry countenance, and being highly amused with the eagerness of the youthful bidder, used to prelude the sale of any print which he thought would suit the low state of his purse, by a nod, saying— " Now, my bonny man, now's your time ", and when, on the contrary, he
30 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
knew it would bring a higher price, he would shake his head mournfully, and say — " Ye need na fash, wee creetur" : meaning, You need not take the trouble to bid'. The plate was sold on April 10, 1845 (lot 438).
10. ALEXANDER NASMYTH. (L. 10.)
Half length, three-quarter face to r., bare-headed, in light coat, with dark background. Signed : A. Geddesft. r. within outer border-line of subject.
Dry-point. 9! x 6 ; 243 x 152. Subject, 6| x \\. Plate bevelled.
I. Head and shoulders only, well advanced, part of the background inserted and rfart of the border-line at top and on r. side. Before the open vertical lines, crossed at the top by twelve slanting lines from 1. to r., which form an outlying patch, i£ by £ in., to 1. of the other shading near 1. side of head. Rocked work prominent in several places. V. A. M. (273 A, inscribed ist Impress, taken; 2733, inscribed unique state; no difference is perceptible between these two).
II. With this work. Before some regular parallel lines of shading behind the head on 1. side from crown of head to \ in. below the level of the ear. B. M.
III. With this shading, otherwise unaltered. The lines defining the coat are no farther advanced. The line indicating the r. shoulder ends 3! in. beneath the rudimentary border- line at top. V. A. M. (273 D, touched proof).
IV. This line is carried on to 3? in. from the same spot, and the line starting in shadow under the chin and bending slightly to 1. is also a little prolonged. A patch of shading in oblique lines, 1. to r., about i to i^in. to r. of neck, has been added. B. M. (on India paper), V.A. M. (2730).
V. The work on the shoulders carried lower down, but before the arms. Most of the background heavily shaded, but a triangular patch in 1. upper corner remains white, and the r. upper corner is less shaded than the rest. The border-line now exists on three sides, but is imperfect. B. M., V. A. M. (273 E).
VI. Coat and sleeves put in, but still roughly drawn. Background to 1. upper corner roughly shaded. Border-line drawn all round, but before the second line at the foot. B. M.
VII. With outer border-line and signature. Rough shading carried up to r. upper corner, but several patches remain light. B. M., Ed. S. N. P. G.
VIII. R. upper corner further darkened. Light patches still remain on the triangle near 1. upper corner, but one of these at the top, beginning i| in. from 1. corner, has been further shaded. B. M. (fine, from Burty Collection), V.A. M. (273 F, also fine and early).
IX. With number 10 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
Alexander Nasmyth, portrait and landscape painter, was born at Edinburgh in 1758 and died there on April 10, 1840. Five impressions of the etching, in various states, were sold, with the plate, at Geddes' sale on April 10, 1845 (lot 435).
11. MOLESWORTH PHILLIPS. (L. ii.) Before 1826.
An elderly man, bare-headed, three-quarter length, seated by a table on which his 1. hand rests. Behind his head is a curtain, and to r. two large books and a print or map partly rolled up. Signed in lower margin : A. Geddesft.
Etching and dry-point. 9 x 5! ; 228 x 151. Subject, 7! x 5!.
PLATE VI
r
y I
ANDREW GEDDES
Alexander Nasmyth. No. 10. Fifth state
PLATE VII
*'.,
ANDREW GEDDES
Nathaniel Plimer. No. 12. Third state
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 31
I. The background empty. V. A. M. (13393-95 ; these three impressions differ greatly in the printing). Mr. R. K. Blair.
II. Behind the head, to r., is a picture of the death of Captain Cook, in dry-point. Before the shading on the table-cloth. V. A. M. (13396). Mr. R. K. Blair.
III. The table-cloth shaded. Before the signature. B. M. (inscribed by the artist: i1' state. Col. Phillips), V. A. M. (13397).
IV. Signature inserted in dry-point, rich in burr. Mr. W. A. Pye.
V. Picture replaced by curtain and books. Before the dry-point shading with vertical lines extending i in. upwards above the 1. end of the chair-back ; before some re-touching T\ in. below top of plate and f-f in. from 1. side ; before oblique shading commencing i in. from top of plate and £ in. from 1. side of plate. B. M., Ed. N. G. and S. N. P. G.
VI. With these additions. The margin further cleaned. Published by Geddes, 1826. B. M., V. A. M. (13398, on India paper, signature not printed).
VII. With number // in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
Colonel Phillips (1755-1832), as a lieutenant of marines, accompanied Captain Cook on his last voyage round the world, and was on shore when Cook was killed in 1779.
12. NATHANIEL PLIMER. (Not in L.)
Bust of an elderly man, looking to the front, in a wide-brimmed hat, of which the under-side is deeply shaded. The face also is in shadow, and shows traces of reflected light. Signed towards the \.: A. Geddes ft. Towards the r. is a slight sketch of a man hanging from the gallows ; under this the words Give the Devil his due are scratched very faintly in reverse and repeated more legibly in the right direction.
Dry-point. 7i x 5! ; 186 x 136 (edges of plate uneven).
I. Head and 1. shoulder only. Before the fine shading on band round crown of hat, which is only marked off from the crown itself by a single line. Before any cross-hatching on r. shoulder, shadow behind r. shoulder, or shading upon outside of coat collar to r. of neck. Under-side of hat not yet fully shaded. V. A. M. (13418).
II. Band round hat partly shaded. Under-side of hat more shaded. Only a small patch of shading over r. shoulder. Much more work on clothes. Before horizontal shading on the outside of coat-collar r. With the little sketch of man on gallows, but before the signature. V. A. M. (13419, cut to about 5* x 5 in.).
III. Signed. With the inscription under the gallows (this was probably in state II, but the impression described is too much cut to show it). The shadow over the r. shoulder extends up to the hat. The hat-band and under-side of hat more shaded. B. M., V. A. M. (two impressions, 13420-21).
The only evidence for the identification of the sitter is the pencil inscription Mr N. Plimer, apparently in the artist's handwriting, under the impression in the British Museum. The inscription, if inaccurate, would probably have been corrected or removed by Mr. Carpenter, who was well-informed about Geddes' etchings. No certain portrait of Nathaniel Plimer (miniature-painter, 1751-1822) is known. See Andrew and Nathaniel Plimer, by G. C. Williamson, 1903. Geddes married Nathaniel's daughter Adela in 1827. An
32 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
oil-painting by him of Andrew _Plimer (1815), purchased in 1900 from Messrs. P. & D. Colnaghi, is in the National Gallery of Scotland. He painted 'Mr. Plimer' both in 1812 and 1813 (Laing, p. 9).
13. JOHN SHEEPSHANKS. (L. 14.)
Half length, full face ; curly hair, dark coat and stock, high collar ; dark background, cross-hatched.
Etching and dry-point. 5-3% x 4! ; 133 x 113 (the measurements are those of the subject, not the plate).
I. Head and bust only. V. A. M. (13404, 16309).
II. Half length, border-line inserted, but background white. Before cross-hatching on lines projecting upwards in shadow over the 1. shoulder. V. A. M. (13405).
III. The said projecting lines are crossed by fine lines slanting from r. to 1. Work on coat more advanced. V. A. M. (four impressions, 13406-8, 16310).
IV. Background added. Before the cross-hatching to 1. of collar and over r. shoulder. Small white spaces round the hair. V. A. M. (16311).
V. With the cross-hatching. Background generally much more cross-hatched ; white spaces round hair worked over. V. A. M. (13410).
VI. Fresh work on temples and between locks of hair to 1. of brow; also on cheek and chin. A patch on r. shoulder, hitherto white, is partially shaded. V. A. M. (13409, 16312).
Art collector (1787-1863). His large collection of Dutch drawings and etchings was purchased by the British Museum in 1836, and he presented to the nation in 1857 his collection of pictures, now in the Victoria and Albert Museum. He was a friend and patron of Geddes, and formed the fine collection of his etchings which now belongs, by his gift, to the Victoria and Albert Museum. It includes eleven impressions, in six states, of his portrait, which was a private plate and is not represented in the British Museum. The sixth state is reproduced by Laing.
14. ARCHIBALD SKIRVING — first plate. (Not in L.)
Head and shoulders, full face, eyes to 1. The modelling of the r. cheek consists entirely of dots, not lines. Lightly etched ; no background, but a slight tint behind the head, caused by corrosion of the plate. One button of the coat is visible.
Etching and dry-point. 8| x 6| ; 225 x 163.
I. With dry-point marks and sketch on the margin. V. A. M. (13373, inscribed 1st impression taken; dry-point outline of clothes rich in burr: 13374, inscribed Portrait of Skirvin a celebrated Crayon Painter A. G. The plate was never advanced; the burr less strong ; probably the second impression : both show numerous trial strokes of dry-point on margin, including on 13374 a little sketch to 1. of a workman carrying a bag of tools over his back, which in 13373 >s concealed by the mount).
II. The plate cleaned, marks and sketch removed. B. M. (two impressions, one on India paper).
Scottish artist (1749-1819) ; painted miniatures and drew portraits in crayons. The picture of him by Geddes belongs to Mr. A. A. Scot-Skirving, C.M.G., of Edinburgh.
PLATE VIII
(rt) John Sheepshanks. No. 13. Third stale
(b) The Black Boy. No. 20. First state
ANDREW GEDDES
PLATE IX
>O
M
o
o
M S
T3
C O
y
'>
a .o
o
w
I
w cs
Q
z
o Z
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 33
15. ARCHIBALD SKIRVING — second plate. (L. 13.)
From the same picture as no. 14. Nearly half length, full face, eyes to 1., in coat fastened by two buttons ; background shaded with cross-hatching. In states I-IV there is an indistinct etched monogram (?) towards the r. in lower margin.
Etching. 8| x 6| ; 223 x 163. Subject, 6f x 5^.
I. Approximately finished, but before some of the cross-hatching on the breast of the coat towards the 1., and before the horizontal lines which define the limit of the subject, extending if in. inwards from the r. lower corner. B. M.
II. With the additional cross-hatching and lines. There are still conspicuous white patches on the top of the r. shoulder, and both the wide projecting ends of the linen collar are still entirely white. B. M.
III. The head remains as in II. The white patches on shoulder worked over ; other patches near r. lower corner of subject shaded with fine dry-point lines. The coat much more heavily shaded near 1. lower corner. More cross-hatching in background. V. A. M.
IV. Six slanting lines inserted on r. side of the linen collar. More work o hair. Before the border-line defining the subject on the r. side. B. M.
V. Coat further shaded with dry-point. More shading on collar, both above and below the six slanting lines. More work on several parts of the hair, and more modelling on brow and cheeks and beneath the eyes. Border-line inserted on r. side and monogram (?) effaced. B. M. (inscribed in the artist's hand: Mr. Skirving of Edinburgh), V. A. M. (13375 A), Ed. S. N. P. G. Reproduced by Laing.
16. ' DULL READING ' : WITH PORTRAITS OF DANIEL AND ELIZABETH TERRY. (L. 12.) Before 1826.
An interior, with seventeenth-century costumes and furniture. The wife, who is reading aloud, looks up from her book to find that the husband is dozing in his arm-chair. Signed A. Geddes ft. on the wall above a cabinet, towards thel.
Etching and dry-point. 5^ x6£ ; 138 x 176.
I. Before some of the shading on the wife's r. cheek, and before the cord which crosses her bosom diagonally from r. to 1. and back again downwards to r. Before the dry-point shading down the spaces that intervene between the zigzags on the bodice. The patch of shadow just to r. of the waist, extending to |in. above the r. hand, consists only of lines slanting from 1. to r. V. A. M. (13452).
II. With additional shading in all the places mentioned. The oblong space of wall over the cabinet 1. is still blank. B. M., V. A. M. (13453).
III. The oblong space is covered with fine shading and the signature has been inserted. B. M., V. A. M. (13453 A), Ed. N. G. and S. N. P. G. Published by Geddes, 1826.
IV. With number 12 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
Daniel Terry (17807-1829), the celebrated actor, married as his second wife Elizabeth, daughter of Alexander Nasmyth. After his death she married Charles Richardson, the lexicographer.
V. F
34 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
The Catalogue of Modern Etchings in the Victoria and Albert Museum (p. 138) gives the title The Sleepy Listener. The picture which this etching reproduces in reverse was in the Vernon Gallery, and was engraved by W. Greatbach for the Art Journal, 1853, under the title Dry Reading. It was presented by Mr. R. Vernon in 1847 to the National Gallery, where it bears the number 355, and the title Dull Reading, in the abridged catalogue of 1915 ; but it has been on loan at Edinburgh since 1890.
17. A MAN IN ARMOUR, WITH HAT AND FEATHER. (L. 15.) 1827.
Half length, three-quarter face to 1., wearing a cuirass and wide-brimmed hat with long drooping feather. Background heavily cross-hatched. Subject enclosed by an etched line, which is double at the bottom.
Etching. 5! x 3! ; 150 x 100. Subject, 4! x 3!.
I. Pure etching. Background shaded on 1. side only. B. M.
II. Retouched with dry-point on under-side of hat, 1. edge of feather, portions of the cuirass, &c. Signed in dry-point A G ft 1827 just above the shading on the 1. side. B. M., V. A.M. (13424).
III. Background shaded all over. Marks of roulette in upper margin. A portion of the cuirass adjoining the 1. elbow is still lightly shaded with open vertical lines. B. M., V. A. M. ((3425).
IV. Much additional shading on cuirass and background. The light portion adjoining the 1. elbow is now deeply shaded. Eyebrows, nose, lips, chin, and cheek retouched. An additional line has been ruled with the dry-point across the upper margin, | in. above the subject, to correspond with the second line at the foot. B. M., V. A. M. (13426).
V. Upper line effaced and margin cleaned. No. 16 (not //) in 1. lower corner. Pub- lished by Laing, 1875.
This etching was supposed by Mrs. Geddes to be a portrait of Henry Du Fresne, a friend of the artist. The plate was sold on April 10, 1845 (lot 439).
II. FIGURE SUBJECTS AND STILL LIFE
18. CHILD WITH AN APPLE : PORTRAIT OF THE ARTIST'S NIECE, AGNES PAUL. (L. I-B.) Before 1826.
The little girl, in a white frock, sits on the ground, holding out an apple in her 1. hand. Four more apples lie near her r. arm. Dark background with a rock and stems of trees. Signed A Geddes ft in 1. lower corner. Subject enclosed by border-line.
Dry-point. 6i x 5^ ; 159 x 134. Subject, 5^ x 4! .
I. The child completely drawn, the background to 1. and round the child's head roughly drawn in, but all to r. remains blank, save for a slight indication of the lower of the two diverging stems. There are rudiments of the border-line at top and on the 1. side. V. A. M. (13382, untouched, very rich in burr, with the pencil note, Sketch from the Picture of a Child painted by me. A. G. 13383, touched with pencil and with pen and ink ; the border-line drawn in ink).
II. Tree inserted, but the dark branch to 1., starting behind the child's head, is unfinished at the 1. extremity. Before seven short vertical strokes to 1. of the child's 1. knee, and
PLATE X
(a) Child with an Apple. No. 18. Third stale
(b) Sleeping Child and Dog. No. 19. First state
ANDREW GEDDES
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 35
before a patch of dark shading, approximately square, on the side of the rock over the four apples. Before the signature. B. M., V.A. M. (three impressions, 13384-86). The ruled border is incomplete, being left open at the bottom.
III. The branch completed. Lines inserted on frock, and rock shaded over the four applea. Border-line completed and signature inserted. B. M.
IV. The foremost apple of the four heavily shaded with vertical lines. The apple adjoining it on the 1. is also further shaded, with shorter vertical lines, and its upper outline is further defined. Fresh vertical lines have been inserted between some tall blades of grass, to 1. of the apples, and the 1. side of the plate, and there are several patches of additional shading upon the rock above, on a level with the lower side of the apples, and to 1. of the end of the child's frock, where the oblique lines touching the side of the plate have been lengthened upwards from f to nearly £in. B. M. (on India paper), V.A. M. (13388, on India paper).
V. The lines last mentioned are reinforced and carried farther downwards, and additional lines, slanting from 1. to r., inserted between them and the frock. Fresh work on the lock of hair over the brow, and more hair inserted towards the r. side of the head. Nose and cheeks retouched. More shading on stem to r., and to 1. of the bird. Five strong lines inserted, with short irregular lines above them, more than half way up the plate near r. border-line. Shading on the ground, to r. of signature, inserted to disguise patches arising from damage to the plate. Border-line rectified and margins cleaned. B. M., V.A. M. (13387), Ed. N. G. Published by Geddes, 1826.
VI. With number ij in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
The child, Agnes, daughter of Geddes' third sister Katherine by her marriage with Robert Paul, W.S., was married to David Allester, W.S. (d. 1851), and died in 1866.
19. A SLEEPING CHILD AND DOG. (L. i-c.)
The child's head rests against a pillow; its r. hand holds the stalk of a cherry. To r., beyond a shawl, lies a dog with its head to the front. Unsigned.
Dry-point. 4^x7!; 115x180. The length of the subject is 5^ in. ; at that point the plate is divided by a vertical ruled line, the space to r. being blank save for a few scratches. Plate bevelled.
I. Pillow, shawl, and dog in outline. Patches of shading over child's head, to 1. of its 1. hand and arm, and under the arm. Background otherwise almost blank. The boundary- line is already slightly indicated. V.A. M. (13450).
II. As described ; background and additional shading inserted. B. M., V. A. M. (13451, inferior). Reproduced by Laing.
Supposed by Laing to be another portrait of Agnes Paul. The plate was sold on April 10, 1845 (lot 436).
20. THE BLACK BOY. (L. 40.) 1826. A bronze statuette of Cupid, standing on a plinth, and holding a large shell
in both hands above his head. A watch lies in the shell, and the chain hangs down on the L, while a seal rests against the plinth. Signed below on the I: A. G.ft. 1826.
Etching and dry-point. 7x5^; 178 x 139. The plate is bevelled.
F 2
36 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
I. Before the signature. There is only a small patch of shadow, nearly square, to 1. of the plinth. V. A. M. (13460-61). Dr. Macaulay, Halifax.
II. Signed. The shadow extended to the 1. B. M., V. A. M. (13462).
III. With number 38 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
The statuette belonged in 1826 to Geddes himself. It is described in his sale catalogue, April 1845, lot 720, as ' Cupid supporting a shell— a very elegant bronze, of exquisite cinque- cento work '. The plate was sold (lot 450) as ' the black boy '. When Laing wrote (1875) the bronze was the property of Miss James, of Harwood Square, London.
III. LANDSCAPES
21. PEEBLES.
An etching with this title was sold, with the copper-plate, as lot 440 in the Geddes sale, April 10, 1845. It is otherwise unknown to me. It is not identical with 'Whim, Peebles-shire ', which is mentioned as lot 442, and I cannot identify it with any of the known etchings.
22. WHIM, PEEBLES-SHIRE. (Not in L.)
A clump of trees on the grassy bank of a river or piece of water. There are four geese under the bank, close to the water — one to the 1. and three to the r. A post stands in the water near the three. Not signed.
Dry-point. 3^! x 5T3S ; 98 x 132. Edges of plate irregular.
I. Before vertical lines on the water beneath the left-hand goose of the three, and both vertical and horizontal lines on water under the bank a little to 1. of the solitary goose. Under the bank, still more to the 1., there are curved lines on the surface of the water, quite detached from the shore. B. M. (a poor, bare impression), V. A. M. (13432, good).
II. With all the work mentioned; the curved lines are now connected with the bank. A border-line has been inserted close to the 1. edge from horizon down to foot of plate, and along the foot of the plate. B. M. (good), V. A. M. (13431, 13433, both poor).
The impression of the first state in the Victoria and Albert Museum is inscribed Ist plate. Whim seat of Arch'1 Montgomery, Peebles-shire. This identification, being in the artist's writing, is to be preferred to Oatlands, the title written (not by Geddes) under the second state in the British Museum. Moreover, a plate was sold under the title The Whim, at Christie's sale of Geddes' collection and remaining works on April 10, 1845 (^ot 442)-
One of the V. A. M. impressions of the second state bears the note Printed without heat.
23. THE FIELD OF BANNOCKBURN AND THE BORE STONE. (L. 29.) 1826.
In the distance, the Grampian Hills; on the 1., Stirling Castle; on the r., part of the Firth of Forth. Near the foreground, towards the 1., is the large flat stone, pierced by a hole, on which the royal standard of Scotland was raised at the battle on June 25, 1314. Signed in r. lower corner : A. G.ft. 1826.
Etching. 4! x 6£ ; 121 x 165.
I. Before any work in the sky, and with open spaces on the ground and hills left white. B. M., V. A. M. (13443-44). Dr. Macaulay, Halifax (touched with pencil, introducing a cloud, and two seated figures with a dog near r. lower corner).
PLATE XI
(a) The Field of Bannockburn and the Bore Stone. No. 23. First staff
•s
(b) Caen Wood, Hampstead. No. 25. Firsts/ate
ANDREW GEDDES
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 37
II. Faint dry-point shading on sky, hills, trees, and road, and across the strong etched lines of shading on extreme 1. Before the signature. V. A. M. (13445).
III. Signature inserted in dry-point. B. M.
, IV. With number 28 in 1. lower corner. Monogram and date faint. Published by Laing, 1875.
The plate was sold at Christie's on April 10, 1845 t'ot 445>-
24. TREES IN HYDE PARK, WITH A cow FEEDING. (L. 37.) Before 1826. In the foreground water, with trees beyond on slightly rising ground to r.
In the distance 1. more trees, and a small house beyond them. Signed in r. lower corner: A. G.ft.
Etching. 3i x 4$| ; 83 x 125.
I. Very slight traces of clouds in sky to 1. of trees. Two horizontal bands of shading on the ground in middle distance end TSB in. from 1. end of plate. Before two parallel lines which run from roof of small house to £ in. from end of plate. B. M., V. A. M. (13441).
II. Clouds more defined. Fine vertical strokes in sky above the horizon between the trees. Slight additions to foliage and numerous dry-point touches in foreground. Bands of shading extended £ in. to 1., parallel lines inserted. B. M. (two impressions), V. A. M. (13442, 13442 A), Ed. N.G. Published by Geddes, 1826.
III. With the number 37 at foot, near the centre. Published in 1875 by Laing, who remarks that this etching is in the style of Naiwincx.
25. VIEW IN CAEN WOOD, HAMPSTEAD. (L. 33.)
A clump of trees on rising ground to 1., a single tree to r. ; a distant view beyond. Subject enclosed by a border-line. Etching. 3! x 6 ; 99 x 152. Subject, 3! x sf.
I. No work on sky. B. M.
II. Lower part of sky shaded ; a figure inserted under the solitary tree; light shading on ground to 1. of the dark shadow in foreground ; a few details added among the trees in the clump.
III. With number # in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
26. VIEW IN RICHMOND PARK (?), A SMALL BRIDGE TO THE RIGHT. (L. 32.) Trees, lightly sketched, with two dark pines, one detached, the second
embedded amongst the other trees. In the foreground a waterfowl flying over a little stream. Signed in 1. lower margin : A. Geddes ft. Dry-point. 5§x6|; 138x174.
I. Work nearly finished, but the large trees over the bridge and near the r. end of the plate have many white patches, and there are no birds on the top of the former tree. Before the signature. The line at foot stops £f in. from r. end of plate. B. M., V. A. M. (13436).
II. Signed ; the line completed ; three birds at top of tree, and additional branches and foliage drawn. B. M., V. A. M. (13437).
III. With number^ in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
It may be conjectured that this and the following number are the two plates catalogued at the Geddes' sale in 1845 as Greenwich Park and St. Ann's Hill.
38 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
27. VIEW IN RICHMOND PARK {?), A FOUNTAIN ON THE LEFT. (L. 35.)
On the 1. a recumbent lion with a jet of water falling from its mouth into a tank. In the middle a small knoll on which a man and a woman sit. In the background trees. Not signed. Subject enclosed by a border-line.
Dry-point. 6^x9^; 176x242. Subject, 5! x 8. Plate bevelled.
I. Before any lines in the sky. Trees to 1. of knoll very unfinished. Before the two birds at the top of the tree r. Border-line incomplete, except at foot. V. A. M. (13434).
II. The sky shaded. B. M., V. A. M. (13435).
III. With number^?/ in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
See the note on no. 26. The absence of any lion-fountain that can have existed in Geddes' time tells against the identification of this number with Greenwich Park. I am unable to say whether the same difficulty arises in respect of St. Ann's Hill.
28. LANDSCAPE : A VIEW ON A HILL, WITH TREES AND FIGURES. (L. 34.)
On the 1. a woman and child walking along a lane ; on the r. a man, with an axe, standing near the stump of a large tree. Subject enclosed by border-line. Not signed.
Dry-point. 5! x 7 ; 141 x 178. Subject, 5 x 6|. Plate bevelled.
I. As described. V. A. M. (13448, very fine impression). Dr. Macaulay, Halifax.
II. With number^ in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
This is presumably the ' wood scene, with figures ', of which the plate was sold at Christie's on April 10, 1845 (lot 446).
29. HALLIFORD ON THAMES : STUMP OF A TREE IN CENTRE. (L. 30.)
An aged oak-tree, with only its lower branches remaining, is the most conspicuous object. In the distance, across the river, are elms and a low hill. Not signed.
Etching. 3^1 x 6| ; 101 x 158. The plate bevelled.
I. Lightly etched ; no dry-point. The clouds extend only to 2TV in. from lower margin. B. M., V.A.M. (13472 A).
II. Rebitten. V. A. M. (13471).
III. The clouds extend to 2-J in. from lower margin; the lower portion of the newly- added cloud is shaded with vertical lines. Similar lines added above the distant hills and small trees on either side of the oak. Numerous retouches with dry-point in the foreground. B.M., V.A.M. (13472).
IV. With number 30 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875. The plate was lot 443 in the sale of April 10, 1845.
30. HALLIFORD ON THAMES : A GROUP OF TREES WITHIN WHITE PALINGS. (L. 36.) Unfinished. Subject enclosed by a border-line.
Dry-point. 5^ x 7 ; 139 x 178. Subject, 5^ x 6|.
V. A. M. (13447, very fine). Mr. R. K. Blair, Edinburgh, from the Burty collection. Dr. Macaulay, Halifax. Laing gives a photographic reproduction.
PLATE XII
(A)
ANDREW GEDDES
(a) Halliford: Group of Trees. No. 30. (i) View on a Hill. No. 28
PLATE XIII
. fl tr.,i]
I !
. ^il
.
t-
i i TH . . .
(«) Claude's House in Rome. No. 33.
-
(//) Halliford: Long Row of Trees. No. 31
ANDREW GEDDES
PLATE XIV
•fi
(/}
u Q
LJ C3
« 5
Q •£
Z .1)
< PH
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 39
31. HALLIFORD ON THAMES : LONG ROW OF TREES. (Not in L.)
A row of trees extends right across the plate; a fence, white for the most part, extends in front of them two-thirds of the distance from the 1. In the foreground is a boat on shore. Not signed. Unfinished. Subject marked off by a single horizontal line 3 in. below top of plate ; all beneath this line is empty.
Dry-point, slfxg; 150x229.
V.A. M. (13446, fine).
32. PECKHAM RYE. (L. 31.) Before 1826.
Near the middle of the plate is a barn, sheltered by a clump of trees bending to 1. To 1. of the barn a man stands near the wooden gate of a farmyard. Over the buildings is a dark cloud. In the foreground a white road and a little bridge. The subject enclosed by a border-line. Signed, within the line :
A. Geddesft.
Dry-point and aquatint. 6x9; 153x231. Subject, 4! x 7^. Plate bevelled.
I. Before any work in the sky ; the distant field and trees, to r. of the clump, not shaded.
B. M., V.A. M. (13438). Reproduced in M. Salaman, The Great Painter-Etchers, 1914, p. 181.
II. With slanting dry-point lines and contour of a cloud over the farm-buildings, but before the aquatint. Border-line incomplete ; no signature. B. M., V.A. M. (13439, on India paper). Mr. R. K. Blair, Edinburgh. Dr. Macaulay, Halifax.
III. Rain-cloud over farm-buildings darkened with aquatint. A black duck inserted near the bridge. Border-line completed and signature inserted. B. M. (two impressions), V. A. M. (13440 A, on India paper), Ed. N. G. Published by Geddes, 1826.
IV. With number^/ in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
33. CLAUDE'S HOUSE IN ROME. (L. 28.) 1830.
The house fronts a little piazza near the Church of S. Trinita dei Monti, and stands between the two streets, Via Sistina and Via Gregoriana, which open into the piazza. On the r. are two peasants under some small trees. The subject is enclosed by a border-line. Signed A. G.ft. in bottom left-hand margin.
Etching and dry-point ; the tint with which certain portions of the buildings are shaded has been produced by the mezzotint rocker. 5! x 7T3F ; 146 x 183. Subject, 5! x 7.
I. Etched in outline, before any work with the rocker. The height of the plate is 6| in. (162 mm.). Dr. Macaulay, Halifax.
II. Before work in foreground, within border-line, and before the signature. B. M., V.A.M. (13430).
III. With these additions. Plate cut at foot. V. A. M. (287 B). Reproduced by Laing. This etching was commissioned by Sheepshanks, who thought of using it as
frontispiece to a projected catalogue of his prints, in a letter to Geddes at Rome, dated February 22, 1830.
40 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
34. LANDSCAPE, IN THE STYLE OF REMBRANDT. (L. 38.)
To 1. a canal, a windmill and some low houses on the further shore. In the foreground a road leading to a house on the waterside, between trees. To r. of this two windmills, other low buildings and trees. On the r., water-meadows intersected by ditches ; on the left a boat moored. Not signed.
Dry-point. 4x9!; 105x233.
The measurements are not those of the plate, but are taken from the cut impression reproduced in Laing's book, now in the collection of Dr. Macaulay at Halifax. Laing must be mistaken in calling this a view on the Thames; the scenery is thoroughly Dutch. Geddes visited Holland in 1839. The plate looks as if it were done from nature ; if so, it must be much later than any other of his etchings, but it may be a pasticcio from Rembrandt.
35. THREE WILLOWS ON A MOUND. (Not in L., doubtful.)
Two willows grow side by side on the top of a low mound, and a third more to the 1. on the slope. To r. a gate in a fence, and beyond a view over flat country (or sea ?) to the horizon. Unfinished.
Etching. 3! x 4^1 ; 80 x 123.
The only reason for attributing this print to Geddes is the fact of its insertion in the volume of that artist's etchings which was the property of David Laing and now belongs to Dr. Macaulay. One does not see why Laing should have included it unless he knew it to be by Geddes, nor, on the other hand, why he did not describe it in his catalogue if he had that knowledge. In technique it is not much like any of Geddes's etchings ; the lines are very thin and close together, producing dark masses which suggest at first sight the burr of dry-point.
B.— COPIES AND IMITATIONS OF OLD MASTERS
36. CHRIST DISPUTING WITH THE DOCTORS IN THE TEMPLE, after Meldolla. (L. 39.) Before 1826.
A group of ten figures, including Joseph and Mary, who are seen on the r., and a child clinging to one of the doctors who leans forward eagerly towards Christ. On the wall, near the head of Christ, is a scroll inscribed ANDREA M. F. Aquatint on columns and bases in 1. upper corner. The subject is enclosed by a border-line.
Etching, dry-point, and aquatint. 7! x n|; 199x302. Subject, 6£f x n|. Plate bevelled.
I. Almost pure etching. Before any aquatint. Dry-point touches near r. lower corner. B. M.
II. With the aquatint. The stripes on the 1. arm of the doctor who leans forward are white. V.A. M. (13427).
III. The stripes on arm, and the collar and sash darkened with dry-point ; little other alteration. Before cross-hatching on drapery over Christ's right knee. V. A. M. (13429).
PLATE XV
|
. |
1-1 |
|
15 |
|
|
. |
6 •5* |
o 2
tfi
W
§ W
o
i.
£
6 2
o
B
•a
o
<ii
C3
bo
5
«
='
•a O
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 41
IV. Much enriched with dry-point. The hanging lamp darkened ; canopy over Christ's head darkened; drapery over knee cross-hatched. Before some heavy retouches on drapery near 1. lower corner and others near r. lower corner. B. M., V. A. M. (13428).
V. With these retouches. Marks of roulette and dry-point in lower margin. B. M. (a rough trial proof).
VI. Margin cleaned ; carefully printed. B. M. Published by Geddes, 1826.
VII. With number ^9 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
Etched from a picture by A. Meldolla (Schiavone) which belonged to Geddes himself. It is not mentioned in Lilie Frohlich-Bum's recent monograph on this artist (Vienna, 1913).
37. AN OLD WOMAN LOOKING AT A RING, after Jordaens. (L. 20.) Before 1826.
Half length, three-quarter face to r. She holds the ring in her 1. hand ; the r. hand rests on a crutch. Signed A. G.ft. under the handle of the crutch. Etching. 5! x \\\ ; 142 x 122. The corners are cut off.
I. Before the signature. B. M. (on this proof the artist has written Jordaens and his signature A. G.ft. in brownish ink), V. A. M. (13414, on India paper).
II. Signed; not otherwise altered. B. M. (and counterproof), V. A. M. (13415-16-17 and counterproof), Ed. N.G.
III. With dry-point shading, r. to 1. on r. sleeve, \ in. from 1. side of plate, and dry-point lines across r. lower corner of plate. V. A. M. (13414 A). Published by Geddes, 1826.
IV. With number 20 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875. This picture was copied in oil by Geddes.
38. HEAD OF REMBRANDT. (L. 23.)
Full face, in a soft cap, with moustache and curly hair. Not signed. Copy in reverse of Rembrandt's etching (Hind 57), called Rembrandt aux trois moustaches.
Etching. 2^ x 2$ ; 63 x 63.
I. As described. B. M., V. A. M. (13458).
II. With number 2) in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
39. OLD WOMAN ASLEEP, after Rembrandt. (L. 24.)
Copy in reverse of Rembrandt's etching (Hind 129) ; not signed. Described by Middleton, p. 100.
Etching, finished with dry-point. 3! x 2§ ; 79 x 61.
I. As described. B. M., V. A. M. (13454, and a counterproof).
II. With number 24 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
40. THE PANCAKE WOMAN, after Rembrandt. (L. 27.)
A copy, in the same direction, of Rembrandt's etching of 1635 (Hind 141), omitting the signature and date. There is a margin all round the subject, but no ruled line. Not signed.
Etching and dry-point. 4$ x 3^ ; 125 x 95. V. G
42 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
I. With numerous touches of dry-point, strong in burr, on the woman's hat and clothes, the child's hand and clothes, the dog's head, paws, and tail, the cat's ear, &c., and on the border-line at foot and on 1. side. Mr. W. A. Pye.
II. The burr removed ; no trace of dry-point work remains visible. B. M.
III. With number 27 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
41. BEGGAR WOMAN LEANING ON A STICK, after Rembrandt. (L. 25.)
Copy in reverse of Rembrandt's etching of 1646 (Hind 219), omitting the signature and date. Signed A G at the foot on the r. Etching. 3! x 2 ; 83 x 50.
I. As described. B. M., V. A. M. (13457).
II. With number 25 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
42. HEAD OF AN OLD WOMAN, in the style of Rembrandt. (L. 22.)
Bust, full face, in a cap of the seventeenth century. A patch of shadow to r. of head. Not signed.
Etching and dry-point. 3! x s| ; 96 x 70.
I. As described. B. M. (and counterproof), V. A. M. (a clear impression, 13412, with a counterproof, and another, 13411, in which there is much burr on the shadow to the r.).
II. With number 22 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
In the style of Rembrandt's early etchings and pictures of his mother, but no exact original has been recognized.
43. OVAL PORTRAIT OF REMBRANDT. (L. 21.)
Head and shoulders, nearly full face, turning slightly to r., wearing a cap, and a scarf round his neck over a steel gorget. Edges of oval rough, background cross-hatched, margin white. Not signed.
Etching. 5f x 4 ; 145 x 102. Subject, 3! x 3!.
I. As described.
II. With number 21 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875. In the manner of Rembrandt's early etched and painted portraits of himself, but the original (if any) from which Geddes took the subject has not been ascertained.
44. OVAL PORTRAIT OF REMBRANDT — second plate, undescribed.
The same subject as no. 43 (Laing, no. 21), but much more delicately etched, and finished with the dry-point. Both plate and subject larger. In the lower margin are two pairs of lines scratched with the dry-point.
Etching. 6| x 4! ; 156 x 123. Subject, 4 x 3*-.
B. M. Mr. W. A. Pye. The existence of another plate has not hitherto been noticed. From the superiority of its execution it must be supposed that this was a second plate, and that the plate acquired by Laing was a discarded one.
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 43
45. NICHOLAS ROCKOX, after Rubens. (L. 18.) 1822.
Bust, three-quarter face to r., in ruff, bare-headed. Dark background. Subject enclosed by a border-line. Signed A G ft 1822 in lower margin.
Etching. 9 x 6| ; 228 x 165. Subject, 6| x 5^.
I. Very unfinished. Clothes in outline. Background lightly hatched; the shadow behind the head forms a dark irregular patch in contrast to the rest, which is lighter. B. M., V. A. M. (13353-54). Dr. Macaulay, Halifax (with autograph in ink, Rubens pinxt. A. G.ft. Nicolas Rockocks, Burgomaster of Antwerp, from the original picture in the possession of A. Geddes. This impression belonged to Laing, who quotes the inscription inaccurately).
II. Clothes partly shaded, head unaltered. There is still a narrow white patch round the outline of the head on 1. side. V. A. M. (13355).
III. Dry-point work on hair and on clothes ; also on background, especially in r. lower corner (V. A. M. 13356). Dr. D. J. Macaulay. The patch of shadow on background is still distinctly perceptible, though somewhat modified.
IV. Much additional dry-point work on clothes and background, which is now almost evenly hatched all over. Before signature. B. M. (inscribed in pencil Nicolas Rockox, Burgomaster of Antwerp, from the portrait by Rubens in the possession of A. G. (monogram), V. A. M. (13357).
V. Hair, clothes, and background very much darkened. Before the cross-hatching on the ruff, below the end of the beard. Signature inserted. B. M., V. A. M. (13358, inscribed Portrait of Rockox Burgomaster from a picture of Rubens in my Possession A G.).
VI. With the cross-hatching on ruff. B. M. (two impressions), V. A. M. (13358 A, on India paper), Ed. N. G. (on India paper). Published by Geddes, 1826.
VII. With number 18 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
N. Rockox (1560-1640) was burgomaster of Antwerp. No portrait of him by Rubens is recorded by Rooses.
46. THE INFANTA ISABELLA, after Van Dyck. (L. 17.)
In the habit of the Order of St. Clare. Head only, with outline of veil. Not signed.
Dry-point. 8j x 5$ ; 225 x 150.
I. Before the addition of some fine dry-point lines to the end of the shadow on the 1. That shadow, 5 mm. to r. of the outline of the veil, extends to 12 mm. from the outline of the cheek. B. M., V. A. M. (13468).
II. With these lines ; shadow prolonged to 15 mm. from the cheek. Before any work outside the outline of the veil. B. M. (two impressions).
III. Fine dry-point lines all round the head and veil and across the brow, producing an untidy appearance. The shadow to 1. darkened. B. M., V. A. M. (13467).
IV. The shadow to 1. prolonged downwards, terminating in a row of strokes of even length. The outline of veil to 1. extended both upwards and downwards. The plate outside the limits of subject partially cleaned again. The name Infanta Isabella inserted at top of plate 1. B. M., V. A. M. (13469-70).
V. With number 77 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
G 2
44 THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES
This portrait of the Infanta Isabella Clara Eugenia (1566-1633), daughter of Philip II of Spain and Governess of the Netherlands, was engraved from one of the versions of the picture by Van Dyck representing her after her widowhood (1621) in the robes of the Order of St. Clare. The picture belonged to Geddes himself, who exhibited it in 1819. The plate was sold on April 10, 1845 (lot 451).
47. PHILIP IV OF SPAIN, after Van Dyck. (L. 19.)
Half length, standing, three-quarter face to L, bare-headed, in wide, open collar ; background cross-hatched. Subject enclosed by border-line. In lower margin to 1. Vandyke, to r. A. Geddes ft.
Etching. 8£f x 6 ; 227 x 152. Subject, 6f| x 5^.
I. The clothes in outline. B. M., V. A. M. (13359, Z336o)-
II. Clothes shaded all over ; more hatching on background ; no additional work on face or hair. Vandyke inserted in dry-point. B. M., V. A. M. (13361, 13362).
III. Hair darkened; moustache and shadow under nose and lower lip darkened. Dry- point work on lace fringe of collar. Clothes darkened. Background again more shaded, but before fine vertical lines close to upper margin near r. upper corner. B. M.
IV. With the lines last mentioned. V. A. M. (13363).
V. Background and clothes darker still. New dry-point work on r. sleeve. R. upper corner now filled in completely with strong horizontal lines across the fine vertical ones. Before the signature. B. M., V. A. M. (13364, inscribed From a Picture of Vandyke in my possession. A. G.).
VI. Additional work on collar, reducing the white spaces ; some cross-hatching near r. lower corner of collar over 1. shoulder. Signed. B. M. (inscriptions in margin not inked), V. A. M. (13364 A, on India paper), Ed. N. G. (on India paper).
VII. With number 79 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
48. PORTRAIT OF VAN DYCK, after Van Dyck. (L. 16.)
Half length, three-quarter face to 1., eyes full, bare-headed. R. arm resting on a ledge, the hand turned back, showing a ring on little finger. Subject enclosed by a border-line. Not signed.
Etching. 6x4!; 153 x 124. Subject, 4! x 4^.
I. Almost pure etching; very slight touches of dry-point on hair and clothes. Before some vertical hatching on background to 1. of the wrist. V. A. M. (13422).
II. With the vertical hatching and light dry-point shading on wrist. Collar of coat, ring, and r. sleeve heavily retouched with dry-point. The lower part of that sleeve is shaded with light, open lines, slanting from 1. to r., which cross a narrow patch upon the sleeve, beginning i£ in. from 1. border-line, which was white in the first state. The patch of shadow touching the sleeve on the 1. side is also darkened with dry-point. Dr. Macaulay, Halifax. Reproduced by Laing.
The portrait has been engraved by Pontius, Van der Gucht, and W. H. Worthington (1826) — all half length. The complete picture, in possession of the Duke of Grafton, is reproduced in photogravure in Mr. L. Gust's Van Dyck, p. 20.
THE ETCHINGS OF ANDREW GEDDES 45
49. PORTRAIT OF PIETER VAN LAER, after Pieter van Laer. (L. 19 B.)
Head and shoulders, full face, the head leaning to 1. Thick, dark hair. The background shaded. Subject enclosed by a border-line. Signed 1. in lower margin, A. G.ft.
Etching. 5f| x 4 ; 145 x 102. Subject, 5^ x 34.
I. With light patches on the hair. B. M.
II. The hair worked over. New work on the face. Before the completion of the border-line. B. M.
III. Border-line completed. Signed. Before some additional hatching on the 1. B. M.
IV. With additional hatching. New dry-point lines, slanting from r. to L, can be observed near the 1. upper corner and 1. shoulder. B. M., V. A. M. (13423). Reproduced in Laing's book.
Etched from the portrait of himself by P. van Laer (il Bamboccio), in the Uffizi. A drawing of this subject by Geddes in red, black, and white chalk, inscribed P. de Laer. From the Picture in the Florentine Gallery. A. G. is in the British Museum, derived, with the four states of the etching, from the Sheepshanks collection.
50. BOY WITH SPOON AND PITCHER, probably after a Dutch artist. (L. 26.)
He walks to 1., holding a spoon to his lips. Near his 1. leg stands a pitcher. Signed A. G. (not a monogram) to r.
Etching, slightly touched with dry-point. 3! x 2^ ; 93 x 60.
I. As described. V. A. M. (13459).
II. With number 26 in 1. lower corner. Published by Laing, 1875.
It is unlikely that this is an original composition by Geddes, but there is no evidence to show whence it is derived.
PLATE XVI
PORTRAIT OF JAMES MOORE, ESQ., F.S.A., BY G. ROBERTSON Ashmolean Museum. (Original *j\ x sf in.)
FRESH LIGHT ON SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL, DERIVED FROM
THE COLLECTION AND PAPERS OF
JAMES MOORE, F.S.A.
BY C. F. BELL.
ON the rare occasions when a collection of works of contemporary artists remains intact long after the disappearance of the connoisseur who formed it, we generally find that some precious fragments of history or tradition have been preserved with it ; laid by, as it were, like flowers between the leaves of a volume, still retaining, when examined in connexion with the contiguous pages, the power of resuscitating the spiritual fellowship of the author with coeval readers, and revivifying something of the personality of each and of the sympathy which bound them to each other.
Students of the Old British School of Water-colour Painting count them- selves especially favoured with sources of knowledge of this sort. The collection of Dr. Thomas Monro (1759-1833), the most famous contemporary patron of this branch of art, was, it is true, dispersed long ago, but not before so much had been recorded about it that it is possible to reconstitute it in imagination and test the traditional commentary which had crystallized about it. The kindred accumulations of Mr. George Keate (1729-97) and Mr. John Henderson (1764-1843) have been preserved in something like their original form, with the legendary history of their formation still clinging round them. Although far from being so well known, the gallery and portfolios of yet another amateur of the same period — Mr. James Moore, F.S.A. — have. held stored up for above a century historical and artistic materials certainly not inferior to these in interest and authenticity.
James Moore was born, according to family records, in 1762, and a brief obituary notice in the Gentleman's Magazine states that he was the son of ' the late Mr. Moore of mechanical memory'.1 His means, which were apparently
1 Gentleman's Magazine, Ixix, pt. i, p. 446. I have been unable to glean any further particulars of Mr. Moore's father or of the inventions or contrivances which give him a claim to the above epithet.
48 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
ample, were derived from business as a wholesale linen-draper in Cheapside, carried on in partnership with a Mr. Lambert. His residence was in Stamford Street in Southwark, near the south end of Blackfriars Bridge. The name of his wife, Mary Howett, whom he married in 1786, and the date of his death, May n, 1799, complete the scanty facts of his biography, excepting what can be gathered from the books and engravings he published, his sketches, and a few letters, belonging to the last years of his life, which have come down with them. These materials, however, make it possible to build up a definite series of conclusions respecting his own qualifications as a draughtsman, and his relation to the professional painters whose works he acquired, and the antiquarian world in which he moved. It would appear that he suffered from delicate health ; the portrait executed by George Robertson (pi. xvi) shows him as a young man of twenty-five or thereabouts with a fragile, even cadaverous, set of features. The frequent and prolonged journeyings about Great Britain which he was in the habit of making must, unless they were undertaken for purposes of business, which is scarcely probable, have withdrawn his attention, to an extent highly unusual at that period, from his affairs in the City ; and it seems likely that his absence in earlier years was enforced, as it certainly was towards the end of his life, by the state of his health. The allusions in his letters to his gradually failing strength indicate that it was to pulmonary disease that his death, at the age of thirty-seven, was due.
To his contemporaries, as represented by the writer of the obituary already quoted, he had made his mark as the author of two books entitling him 'to a distinguished rank among the picturesque topographers of this country'. These were 'A List oftheAbbies, Priories and other Religious Houses, Castles, etc. in England and Wales, collected from Dugdale, etc., etc.', the first edition, a small octavo brochure — little more than a pamphlet — published in London in I786,1 reissued in an enlarged and remodelled form in 1798; and ' Monastic Remains and Ancient Castles in England and Wales. Drawn on the Spot by James Moore, Esq., F.A.S., and executed in aquatinta by G. I. Parkyns, Esq. Vol. I, London, 1792' — a series of sixty small octavo-sized plates, each with an accompanying leaf of text. The project provided for the issue of these in ten parts at regular monthly intervals between July, 1791, and March, 1792; and the publication lines make it appear that they were produced in this order, but we know from a review in the Gentleman's Magazine* that as usual in such cases punctuality was not rigorously observed. The date of the dedication to the Earl of Leicester,
1 The only interest which this now possesses is confined to the autobiographical facts in the preface and epistle dedicating it to George Robertson. See pp. 50, 55 post.
2 *795 vol-i Pt. I, pp. 410, 411. This review, which contains some unfavourable reflections upon Moore's character as a collaborator, will be more fully discussed in a note on Jacob Schnebbelie (p. 66 post).
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 49
May i, 1792, doubtless records the actual completion of the first volume. A beginning of a second was made by the publication of twelve plates on May i, 1793. Although this was carried no farther in Moore's lifetime, it was taken up again by Parkyns ' some years later. In addition to these works Moore, in conjunction with Macklin the publisher, embarked upon another, of which one fasciculus alone appeared (April 20, 1794), under the title of 'Twenty-five Views in the Southern Part of Scotland from a Collection of Drawings made by James Moore, Esq., F.A.S., in the year 1^2. Engraved by and under the Direction of Mr. John Landseer'. Moore's remaining publications consisted of twelve drawings engraved for Walker's Copper Plate Magazine, and issued at various times between March i, 1796, and June 2, 1800. Besides these, he provided a sketch of Crowland Abbey to form the foundation of a drawing by Girtin, engraved for Hewlett's Selection of Views in the County of Lincoln (August 22, 1797), and another of Kidwelly Church, upon which was based a drawing by J. C. Barrow engraved by Parkyns for Picturesque Views of Churches and Other Buildings (January 2, 1792). To both of these plates are related historical problems of some interest, which will be discussed later on in connexion with the names of the artists who dressed Moore's memoranda for public appearance.2
Earlier than any of the foregoing, being indeed, as far as is known, the first published prints after Moore, but otherwise of less interest, are the nine subjects views of Leicester Abbey (drawn in 1784); Ruins at Crowhurst and at Robertsbridge (1785); Burnham Abbey (two aspects), a gate at Old Ford, Harewood Castle (two aspects), and Egglestone Abbey (all drawn in 1786) — engraved for the supplementary volumes of Captain Francis Grose's Antiquities of England and Wales (1787).
Like other amateurs, or, as they were called, honorary contributors, Moore also sent several pictures to the exhibition. The Society of Artists accepted two of his stained drawings, one representing the gate of Bath Abbey,3 the other a view of Matlock, in 1790, and a third, a Landscape, in the followingyear.4 Such water-colour drawings and pencil sketches of his as have survived (there is a volume containing above fifty of various dates in the Ashmolean Museum) show that he was an ambitious but not very accomplished draughtsman with the amateur's usual failing of assimilating in a superficial way the mannerisms of the master to whose influence he was at the moment subjected.8 It may
1 See p. 65 post. « See pp. 62, 63, 64, 80 post.
3 Possibly a misprint for Battle, the gateway of this abbey being the subject of the only large finished water-colour by Moore now extant.
4 Some of the contributions of earlier dates, clearly the productions of juvenile hands, indexed, under the names Moor and Moore, by Mr. Graves in his volume on the Free Society and Society of Artists, may have been works of James Moore, but there is no evidence whatever either for or against the supposition.
" Allowing for the effect of reduction by nearly £ linear, the illustration of Croxden Abbey V. H
50 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
have been to Francis Grose that Moore, along with other young dilettanti of the time, Parkyns as we shall see amongst them, owed the first impulse to dedicate himself to sketching ancient architecture. But it was George Robertson, whose pupil and whole-hearted admirer he had become some time before 1786, who fixed his taste and taught him to express himself with his pencil. In dedicating the first edition of his List to Robertson, Moore acknowledges in warm terms the great obligation he considered himself under to the artist by whose kind instruction he had been led to take so much pleasure in the study of antiquities ; and in the text of Monastic Remains J he returns to the subject with a tri'oute of gratitude to the memory of one to whose instructions the origin of the book was owing. It will shortly appear, however, that Moore's talent was seldom if ever equal to producing drawings sufficiently comprehensible or effective to be handed over to the engravers before they had been freely touched up by pro- fessional hands. Grose's engravers were in general little skilled to render any artistic quality which the subject before them might possess, and their crude copies probably did bare justice to Moore's early sketches. But G. I. Parkyns, in whose aquatints by far the greater number of Moore's drawings have been embalmed, was an extremely clever artist, and there is some reason to suppose that a series of accomplished water-colours and pencil outlines forming part of the Turner Bequest in the National Gallery, which have borne attributions to the greatest names, are probably his rifacimenti of Moore's studies. The share taken by Dayes and Girtin in building up other drawings which were published under Moore's name is not always easy to determine, but the elements of the problem will be set out in the notes on these two artists.
It is, in fact, to his connexion with professional painters, as revealed by a scrutiny of his artistic and literary remains, much more than to any actual achievement of his own, that such historical significance as Moore's figure presents is due. Such scrutiny adds to our knowledge under three heads. Firstly, the records of the journeys upon which Girtin was Moore's travelling companion afford the only external dated evidence for following the develop- ment of Girtin's early style between 1792 and 1795. Secondly, the assemblage of works by George Robertson which he formed and the eulogistic references to them in his writings have kept alive an artistic personality of no little originality and historic interest otherwise almost totally unknown. Thirdly, the disinterring of Moore's topographical works has brought to light yet another forgotten figure in G. I. Parkyns, and led to the attribution to him of a puzzling
given in the Annual of the Walpole Society, vol. ii, pi. LXXIII b, gives a fair but not a favourable idea of Moore's qualifications. It is possible that the amateur sketch at the root of the view of Lindis- farne (ib., ph LXIV) may also have been Moore's work, but it is so transfigured by the vigorous retouching of Girtin or some other master that it is difficult to disentangle it. 1 P. 94-
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 51
group of drawings long accepted as Turner's and recently assigned on the basis of much erudite and specious reasoning to Girtin.
Moore, in his Monastic Remains, followed the admirable example of Grose and Hearne in appending the date when each original drawing was made. From a collation of these dates and of others taken from sketches, a manu- script itinerary of the Scottish tour of 1792, and other sources, it has been possible to put together a list, in chronological order, of nearly two hundred places of antiquarian interest in Great Britain visited by Moore between 1784 and 1797, giving a conspectus of his sketching expeditions during that period. As it is only here and there in connexion mainly with Girtin's movements, which will be discussed later on, that these dates have any real interest, it is not proposed to give any detailed analysis of them here. It will be sufficient on general grounds to indicate briefly the extent and direction of Moore's trips. In 1784 he was in Sussex, and also visited Leicester and Oxfordshire. In 1785 he was again in Sussex, and made his first journey to Scotland, returning by way of Northumberland, Cumberland, and Westmoreland. In the following year he seems to have made excursions to Kent, Buckinghamshire, Somerset, and Yorkshire. His time between May and September, 1787, was spent in Monmouthshire, Staffordshire, and Shropshire; in August, 1788, in the south- western parts of Wales. In 1789 he travelled northwards, and, after a fortnight in the East and North Ridings of Yorkshire, returned homewards through Warwickshire. July of the next year saw him again in Kent, and later on he visited Essex, Suffolk, and Norfolk. Two impressive sketches, executed on February 27, 1791, of the still-smoking ruins of the Albion Mills, which stood in the immediate neighbourhood of Moore's own house, and some other views of buildings in London, show that he was not insensible to the picturesque aspects of familiar surroundings, however far afield he might search for more romantic and remote materials for the plates of Monastic Remains, which he was steadily producing at this time. It was no doubt in quest of such that he was absent first of all in Hampshire, Dorsetshire, and Devonshire, and afterwards in North Wales, throughout July and August of this same year. On May i, 1792, the first volume of the book was completed, and in August Moore, accompanied by John Charles Brooke, the herald, and, as there is good reason to believe, by the youthful Girtin, set out upon his longest and most interesting journey to Scotland. His excursions during the following year appear to have been confined to Sussex and Surrey. There is contemporary evidence that he and Girtin were again together in 1794; they are certainly known to have visited Lincoln, and there can be no doubt that Peterborough, Lichfield, and Warwick were also included in their tour. The survival of the greater portion of a sketch-book filled by Moore at Hastings, Rye, and Winchelsea has preserved a daily record of his indefatigable industry during the summer of 1795, when there is ground
H 2
52 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
for supposing that Girtin was once more his companion. These are the latest drawings of his which we have, and it is probable that it was shortly after this that his health began to fail seriously. 1796 is silence. During the following summer he passed two months at Ramsgate ; but, although able to enjoy seeing the sights of the neighbourhood, he was too weak to sketch. Evidence to this effect is derived from a correspondence in rhymed doggerel dating from July, 1797, to January, 1799, which has survived. No doubt we are indebted to the fashionable mania for the ingenious pastime of verse-making for the preservation of these, as of many similar epistles which students of the social life of that period have become accustomed to sift for a few grains of interesting matter lurking in an intolerable deal of chaff. Readers interested in the Old British water-colour painters will at once recall the melancholy specimens of Hudibrastic metre with which filial piety prompted the author of that charming book, Thomas and Paul Sandby, to oblige the public at some length. The jingling rhymes of Moore and his friends are possibly even sadder stuff than those of Thomas Sandby. Incidentally, however, they give attractive glimpses of the invalid still vivaciously interested in the archaeological pursuits of his many friends, the proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, and his own collection. The correspondence originated with John Carter, the well-known antiquary, who gives a burlesque account of the blackballing of James Wyatt — the infa- mously destructive 'restorer' of Salisbury and Durham Cathedrals — as a candidate for Fellowship of the Society. And it was mainly between Moore and Carter that the interchange of these epistles took place. They contain, unfortunately, very few allusions to artistic matters, but amusing references to topics of public interest— the Battle of the Nile, the trial of Arthur O'Connor, the arrest of Lord Edward Fitzgerald, a visit of George, Prince of Wales, to Canterbury Cathedral, and so forth. The most spirited contributions to the correspondence are those of Ange Denis Macquin, an emigre who became heraldic draughtsman to the College of Arms, and also, as a drawing once in the Moore Collection shows, occasionally tried his hand at landscape painting in water-colours.
Moore's last active occupation was the preparation for the press of the second revised and enlarged edition of his List of ancient buildings in Great Britain, which was published on January 18, 1798. It is embellished with an engraved title-page with ornamental lettering by John Girtin surrounding an oval view of Holy Island Cathedral, by Hewlett after a drawing by Hearne, founded on a sketch by the author ; and the tailpiece of the volume is a small vignette of Cawdor Castle, also engraved by Hewlett from a version by Dayes of one of Moore's sketches. The text is no longer of much value, but some fragmentary and incomplete annotations added by the author during the last months of his life to an interleaved copy, now in the Ashmolean Museum, afford
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 53
some curious information which has been worked into the materials of the present paper. These annotations are references to views by contemporary draughtsmen of places mentioned in the text, and seem, as far as they go, to amount to evidence of the existence of drawings of certain localities by particular artists, executed previously to the date of the notes, and not otherwise known.
The engravings from Moore's sketches continued to appear in the Copper Plate Magazine at irregular intervals until more than a year after his decease, the twelfth and last having been issued on June 2, 1800.
Before proceeding to piece together the historical materials extracted from them, a brief summary of the adventures of Moore's Collection and papers up to the present time may be given. After his death they passed to his widow, who survived him for thirty-six years and in turn bequeathed them to Miss Anne Miller, daughter of her first cousin, Mrs. Rebecca Miller. During the long life of Miss Anne Miller the collection, a family relic, the travelling memoranda of an antiquarian forbear, acquired interest and importance of a different character. Drawings selected from it were shown at the Manchester Art Treasures Exhi- bition in 1857, and at the Exhibition of Girtin's works held at the Burlington Fine Arts Club in 1875 ; but none of the critics who busied themselves with the art of Girtin and his contemporaries seem to have examined the collection in detail. Miss Miller died in 1890, at the age of eighty-eight, and left the drawings in the joint possession of her nephew, Mr. Edward Mansel Miller, sometime Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford, and his sister, Miss Helen Louisa Miller. At this time the series still existed practically complete as it had been left by Mr. Moore. Old lists show that a few drawings must have been given away or lost, but there remained, when the collection was first studied by the present writer, close upon ninety drawings and sketches by Girtin, sixty by Robertson, an important early Turner, and interesting works by Hearne and Dayes, besides twenty-seven curious Scottish views executed by Dayes and Mr. Moore in collaboration, and above fifty of Moore's own sketches. After the death of Mr. Miller in 1912 Miss Miller decided to part with that portion of the drawings by Girtin which had not originally been framed or exhibited. These, with some miscellaneous things, such as the Dayes-Moore Scottish views already mentioned, which had always been kept in the same portfolios, amounted to one hundred and one, and included about twenty drawings, the fruit of the northern expedition of 1792, a dozen or so of Welsh and English subjects executed about the same time, doubtless from materials collected by Moore, and a most important series of studies and completed water-colours, views of places in the district of Hastings, Rye, and Saltwood. Miss Miller was fully alive to the interest of the whole as a collection, and endeavoured to the utmost to secure its being kept together. Unluckily this did not prove practicable. Many of the specimens,
54 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
especially those of the historically invaluable Cinque Ports group, were dispersed.1
Fortunately, however, all the most beautiful individual works passed into the rich collections of two great-grandsons of the artist, Mr. Thomas Girtin and Mr. F. P. Barnard, by whose generous courtesy several are already familiar to members of the Walpole Society.2 Miss Miller still retained the whole of the framed drawings as well as the sketch-books of Robertson and Mr. Moore. In the hope that these might be kept permanently together, if possible in the museum of the University of which her brother had long been a membei' she arranged by the terms of her will that the Ashmolean Museum might upon most generous terms become the possessor of any which it chose to acquire. By a sort of poetic justice, the liberality of the college to which Mr. Miller had belonged enabled the Museum to secure everything of first-rate historical interest, both drawings and papers, and it is from a study of these that the following notes have originated.
GEORGE ROBERTSON.
This artist has persistently survived, if only as the shadow of a name, in every biographical dictionary from Edwards's Anecdotes of Painters to the Dictionary of National Biography, indeed Redgrave's Dictionary of Artists of the English School bestows two articles upon him, one under the name of Roberts as well as that under the proper title. The outlines of his life are therefore common property. A fuller account published in the Gentleman's Magazine directly after the painter's death fills in the details of a not very happy career, clouded by ill-health and lack of encouragement and cut short at forty years, 'when others hardly begin to know what living is', on September 26, 1788. Robertson had, it is said, 'no very brilliant success with the publick. The knowledge of his real worth was confined within the very narrow circle of his acquaintance.' Yet he had in Mr. William Beckford, of Somerley Hall, a wealthy and munificent patron who not only took him to Italy, and appears to have maintained him there for some time, but afterwards took him to Jamaica and ' made him the most generous offers of settlement in the Island ', which Robertson chose not to accept.3 Finding himself in these circumstances under the necessity of making his own way in London, he was inevitably drawn into the undercurrent of the teaching profession, upon which even the first artistic
1 About this time some drawings from the Moore and Miller inheritance made an undignified debut in the gallery of a London picture-dealer, and a puff, announcing the ' discovery ' of the collection, appeared in several newspapers.
2 Annual of the Walpole Society, vol. ii, pis. LXXI b, LXXII b, LXXIII a, LXXVI b, LXXVII b.
3 Gentleman's Magazine, Iviii, pt. 2, p. 934.
PLATE XVII
(rt) KIDWELLY CHURCH. AQUATINT BY G. I. PARKYNS, AFTER A DRAWING BY J. C. BARROW FROM A SKETCH TAKEN ON THE SPOT BY J. MOORE Published ill ' Picturesque Views of Churches' , &>c.,Jan. 2, 1792 (Original 8J x 11} in.)
(b) DUMBARTON. WATER-COLOUR BY G. ROBERTSON, 1787, FROM A SKETCH BY J. MOORE Ashmolean Museum. (Original uj x 16*. in.)
s
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 55
reputations were often at that time perforce content to be borne up or carried along. He seems to have been not unprosperous although discontented as a drawing-master, and his ultimate election to the Presidency of the Society of Artists shows that he was respected in his profession ; but his leisure hours are admitted to have been 'cheared now and then by executing some orders for drawings for printsellers and engravers ' — a somewhat grudging recognition of the generosity of Alderman Boydell, who not only acquired and probably com- missioned several large and elaborate works, but employed Fittler, Lerpiniere, Vivare"s, Mason, and others of the ablest line-engravers of the time, to reproduce them on an imposing scale. These plates deserved to be, and probably were, successful; some of them, especially two oval views of Windsor Castle (1782-3), are still sought after and prized, that representing the South Terrace with the Royal Family promenading having recently been given a fresh lease of popu- larity in a reproduction accompanying the new edition of Madame D'Arblay's Diary, which it illustrates so vividly. According to the obituary Robertson's drawings in colour were very few in number. In addition to those then in Boydell's gallery, which presumably included the pair described, an earlier corresponding pair representing London from Hampstead and from Denmark Hill (1781), six views in the Black Country of Staffordshire (1788), and the six Jamaican subjects, others had been sent abroad — not improbably to Russia - and some were in the possession of connoisseurs. Amongst the private col- lections Moore's must have taken a prominent place, since it originally contained nearly twenty considerable completed paintings besides a volume of sketches more than forty in number, mostly carried some way towards completion in tint. Even now that it has been broken up, the best and most numerous speci- mens, divided between the Ashmolean and British Museums, still provide abundant materials for estimating the artist's powers. The causes of his lack of brilliant success with the public are patent enough. A man of romantic and poetic temperament and considerable range of expression, he was to some extent spiritually in advance of his time, although far behind his less imaginative con- temporaries in executive power. During his residence in Rome his communion with the cosmopolitan following of Pannini and Joseph Vernet and the classical school may be presumed to have been extremely close ; l yet on his return to England he was clearly infected with Ossianic romanticism in a fervent degree. An analogous attempt to reconcile incompatible elements distracted his technique ; the process of body-colour painting commanded his allegiance because it had been
1 Not only do the titles of Robertson's exhibited pictures bear witness to his preference for classical scenery, but Moore in the dedication to his List, already cited, felt it necessary to deprecate his own boldness in suggesting that one whose subjects had been ' Italian ruins of much greater antiquity and grandeur' than anything in his own country, might yet find English remains of the same kind not unworthy of his pencil.
56 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
rendered classical by Caspar Poussin and his Continental followers, but the method of working in transparent tints, which English painters have generally cultivated with particular success, also attracted him by its possibilities of render- ing mystery and space. His style is a hybrid not altogether attractive in itself but full of suggestion to contemporary artists because it imported new elements into English landscape painting, and interesting to modern students of art history because it carries our knowledge of the sources of these elements, some of them ultimately of importance, back to their origins. In short, Robertson's work may be said to have helped to generate dynamic forces immeasurably greater than the actual quality of the performance itself would seem to warrant. His artistic ineffectiveness being thus accounted for, it is not difficult to see why he has dropped out of his due place in history ; the foreign characteristics in his art prevent it from being fitted precisely into any of the neatly-planned categories into which the Old British school has been divided. It is rather unfortunate that water-colour, the avenue of approach to practical art from the nursery, has become the accepted breaking-in ground of all young colts in training for the pursuit of art history and criticism. Always supposed to be an exclusively British possession, no hardly-won knowledge of foreign languages or collections was required for its mastery. In the same way that youthful archaeologists cut their teeth on the conveniently circumscribed subject of monumental brasses, budding art-historians have become used to make their first push for fame by dogmatizing on water-colour painting, with the result that the subject has become surrounded by an atmosphere of parochialism and prejudice. In the anxiety to squeeze facts into a preconceived historic framework and to suppress the inconvenient tendency of some problems to fray themselves out on the borders of wider areas, the truth has often been maimed. The existence of two distinct streams of water-colour tradition long before they became amalgamated in the British school has been ignored or at best slightly alluded to. One, the Netherlandish naturalistic style, already perfectly developed in landscape art in the calendars of the late mediaeval Horae, was represented concurrently in Holland by such artists as Paul van Liender (1731-97), Jacob Cats (1741-99), Wybrand Hendriks (1744-1831), Cornelis van Hardenberg (1755-1843), and J. H. Prins (I757-I8O6),1 and in England by Hearne, Rooker, and Dayes as well as by Paul Sandby in one phase of his productions and Turner and Girtin in their early youth. The other, the classical convention derived from Claude and the Poussins, and distinguished by that deliberate self-abnegation in the matter of colour which is a conspicuous characteristic of its greatest ex- ponent— J. R. Cozens — had a numerous following in France and Switzerland,
' These draughtsmen can probably only be studied adequately in their native country, especially in the Teyler Museum at Haarlem, but all of them are in some sort represented in the British Museum.
PLATE XVI II
(a) LANDSCAPE COMPOSITION : EVENING, BY G. ROBERTSON Aslintolean Muse-im. (Original u£ x i6J ;';/ )
(!>} LANDSCAPE COMPOSITION WITH A STORMY SKY, BY G. ROBERTSON Ashnwlean Museum. (Original nf x 16] ;'«.)
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 57
including men like Hubert Robert (1733-1808), A. L. R. Ducroz (1748-1810), J. L. Aberli (1723-86), and Birmann (fl. I782-I8I5).1
Apart from any individual aesthetic preference for archaism or disapproval of- the later developments of water-colour in Victorian times, the outstanding historical feature is the fusion, primarily by the genius of Turner, of these two traditions. It is useless to dispute whether artistic convictions or technical considerations were the more responsible for the chromatic restraint of the classical convention; futile to argue that Cozens might or might not have painted in the style of Turner's England and Wales subjects if the means had been at his disposal, or to assert that Turner would never have abandoned the reticent tonality of Cozens had he not been urged on by the vulgar taste of the public for whom he worked. The simple fact remains that but for the gradual removal of certain mechanical disabilities on the one hand and the revolution in artistic ideals which was taking place at the same time, on the other — two contributory causes persistently confounded or pitted against each other by critics — this fusion could never have been accomplished so completely as it was.
The direct precursors of the apotheosis have all a certain historical importance, and a place among them must be claimed for Robertson artistically as the transmitter of Continental influence, and technically as the originator — as it would seem — of the use of scratched-out high-lights. Almost every writer on the subject has quoted the somewhat overcharged statement of W. H. Pyne assigning to Girtin the honour, or as many modern authorities consider, the discredit, of having first taught water-colours to compete in strength and rich- ness with oils.2 Historical theories based on the assumption that he did so are dislocated by the fact that precisely similar claims have been advanced by Swiss critics in favour of Ducroz, a painter of the same age as Robertson and therefore more than a quarter of a century senior to Girtin.3 Ducroz, who lived for thirty years in Italy, seems to have arrived in Rome shortly after Robertson is pre- sumed to have returned to England, so that it is unlikely that there was per- sonal intercourse between them. But he was not the only Swiss aquarelliste
1 None of the Swiss aquarellistes are worthily represented in English public collections, although albums of their drawings are doubtless stored up in the libraries of old country houses, as it is largely from such repositories that those now in Switzerland — notably the fine series formed by Dr. Paul Ganz, the present director, for the museum at Basle — have been drawn. Ducroz, the most interesting and capable artist of the school, can best be studied in the museum at Lausanne.
* Quoted and commented upon in Mr. Finberg's English Water-colour Painters, 1906, p. 55. The germ of Pyne's argument, less flamboyantly expressed, is to be found in the Gentleman's Magazine obituary of Girtin.
8 ' Le premier il porta les couleurs a 1'eau au point de vigueur qui leur permet de rivaliser avec la peinture a 1'huile, et son imagination grandiose ne recula devant aucune des difficulte's de 1'architecture et des paysages les plus etendus.' (Revue Suisse, 1841, tome iv, p. 173, quoted in Brun's Schweizerisches Kunstlerlexikon.) Ducroz's works in the museum at Lausanne prove the justice of this claim.
V. I
58 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
who found Italy a profitable as well as an inspiring place oi sojourn, where they and their productions filled a position all their own in the cosmopolitan tourist life. Neither would it be reasonable to claim that Robertson was the only English artist who was influenced by the Swiss school, or to exaggerate the importance of the fact that Girtin, who was only thirteen when Robertson died and may never have been brought into personal contact with him, certainly must have known and studied the collection of the elder painter's productions in Moore's possession. It is difficult to convey in words the impression of this foreign inspiration which Robertson's work produces, but every critic who examines a number of his works must feel that it exists. The Landscape Composition with a Stormy Sky in the Ashmolean Museum (pi. xvm b) displays it in concentrated form. The spirit of Salvator Rosa, one of the greater gods of the Panninesque school, whose works Robertson copied and paraphrased, has been here not unskilfully recaptured.
Foreign elements in technique are more readily detected. It is interesting to note that the Swiss school, like the English, devoted itself mainly to working in transparent tints, with or without monochromatic underpainting. But some Swiss and many Italian and French painters used distemper or body colours almost exclusively.1 Amongst these was Charles Louis Cle"risseau (1722-1820), the best known aquarelliste of his time, who worked extensively for English patrons in Italy, and visited London about the period of Robertson's return from Rome,2 their only contributions to the Royal Academy Exhibition having been made in the same year — 1772. The gouache process had indeed many sterling merits; time had proved its permanence, and its employment by the Old Masters — notably by Caspar Poussin in the twelve justly celebrated and very beautiful landscapes now in the Colonna Gallery — had endowed it with a certain classical standing, well illustrated by the attitude of Paul Sandby, whose confi- dence in establishing a lasting reputation rested upon his achievements in this medium.3 Robertson, who had acquired, doubtless as a student in Rome, a mastery of this method, found, when he settled in London, the stained drawing with all its national characteristics of a compromise so firmly established as an
1 Consummate mastery in the use of body colours in landscape painting had been achieved long before by the late mediaeval Flemish illuminators already alluded to. It is possible that some active connexion between the Northern and Southern schools at a later period may be traced through Kasper van Wittel of Utrecht (1647-1736), who migrated to Naples, italianizing his name as Vanvitelli, and may conceivably have been the founder of the line of gouache painters which long flourished there ; dissipating itself finally towards the middle of the last century in fan-painting and the production of the stock tourists' albums, views of Vesuvius, and so forth.
2 The obituary fixes his return from Italy at 'about eighteen years' before his death. His voyage to Jamaica was made before 1775.
3 W. Sandby, Thomas and Paul Sandby, 1892, p. 1 15. See also, for the critical rather than the historical aspect of the question, Mr. A. J. Finberg's English Water-colour Painters, pp. 28-30.
PLATE XLX
g
05
w
H O 05
23
uT
<j
o
w O
J
< o:
u
h (/l U
X
W
K x
2 ?
o
3 |
W ">
CU ~
< 5
s 1
3 I
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 59
English institution that even CleYisseau himself found it advisable to court fashion by exhibiting his skill in this branch of art. Robertson set to work to hybridize it with some of the elements of body-colour technique, and endow it with some of the qualities of brilliance and depth in which it was lacking. His most ambitious effort, the Journey to Emmaus, in the British Museum, is a typical example of the mixed method he evolved. The principal object in this picture, a large tree occupying the right centre, is entirely in opaque colour, and the figures, mainly drawn in pen and ink, have also some body colour about them, the more distant landscape being painted in transparent tints. The two Italian views, formerly in the Moore Collection, sold at Christie's February 25, 1916, are executed in much the same process. The nearest approach to a work completely in the stained manner is the drawing of Chepstow Castle, with the figure of a lady in a scarlet riding-habit in the foreground, also in the same sale, well known from the fine engraving by Fittler. This has the pen-work, the underpainting in grey, and all the other features of the orthodox stained drawing ; but even here there are touches of body colour in the figure at the extreme left. It is remarkable that many of Robertson's drawings where opaque pigments have been used very little, if at all, show no trace of monochromatic underpainting, and thus anticipate the advance attributed, on grounds which have been hotly debated, to Girtin. A less contestable and far more interesting technical innovation resorted to by Robertson has yet to be mentioned. This is the use of scratched-out high-lights. As he never signed or dated his drawings, and the exhibition titles are generally somewhat vague, it is impossible to fix their chronological sequence. He seems to have been in the habit of repeating his stock Italian subjects throughout the later years of his life in England. The views of Tivoli and Terni, already mentioned, are therefore not necessarily early works. Both show a free use of scratched-out lights ; so does the Journey to Emmaus, where the brook in the foreground owes all its movement and sparkle to them ; they are, in fact, found in nearly all the finished pictures in the Moore series. As Robertson died some years before the first adoption of the process hitherto detected elsewhere, by Girtin in the Duff House, 1794, and by Turner in the view of Lincoln Cathedral, 1795, in the British Museum,1 his priority in its practice cannot be contested. It has not been observed in the drawings of any of the Swiss painters already mentioned. The far more subtle and eventful discovery of wiped-out lights is equally absent from their works and from Robertson's.
1 C. F. Bell, Exhibited Works of Turner, 1901, p. 19.
I 2
60 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
s
GEORGE ISHAM PARKYNS.
Mr. Moore's reiterated expressions of gratitude show that he at least be- lieved his original work to have derived much benefit from the instruction and encouragement he had received from Robertson. A dispassionate comparison of such of his sketches as have survived with the aquatints by Parkyns, which preserve records of a greater number that have perished, compels us to a/lmit that Moore's reputation as a draughtsman would have stood higher if it were supported on the evidence of these extremely clever pasticci alone. Parkyns's name is not to be found in any of the dictionaries or biographical anecdotes where the writer has searched for it, and his death apparently passed unnoticed even by the Gentleman's Magazine. Yet the presumptive manufacturer of a considerable series of drawings, accepted by all the most eminent critics for fifty years as authentic works of Turner, and only lately dethroned from that eminence to be assigned to Girtin, and the principal collaborator in the truncated fragment of one of the most beautiful topographical works produced in the golden age of such publications surely deserves to be remembered. Fortunately he took the public into his confidence in some brief autobiographical notes in the prefaces to his books ; and with the aid of these, of the inscriptions on his prints and the lists of his exhibited works, it is possible to construct an outline of his career.
George Isham Parkyns was born probably in February, 1749-50, at Notting- ham, where his baptism on the 25th of that month is recorded in the registers of St. Mary's parish.1 He belonged to the ancient family of baronets, ennobled in one branch, seated at Bunney Park. Nottingham is the address from which he contributed to the exhibition of the Society of Artists in 1772, and whence he continued to publish his prints until September, 1791 ; and he is always distin- guished with the adjunct ' Esquire ' to mark his amateur standing. His only exhibit in 1772 was a view of the hermitage in Nottingham Park, whether a drawing or an engraving is not clear.2 He then disappears from the catalogues for nineteen years. A paragraph in the preface to his Monastic and Baronial Remains, with other interesting fragments of antiquity in England, Wales, and Scotland, illustrated by upwards of one hundred plates (two volumes, London, 1816) indicates the main features of his life during this period, and is so interest- ing in the details it gives of his connexion with Moore that it must be quoted at length. ' An early intimacy with the late Captain Grose, arising from a similarity
1 John T. Godfrey, Notes on the Parish Registers of St. Mary's, Nottingham, 1901, p. 61. Parkyns is here alluded to as an accomplished engraver, the only mention of his achievements as an artist which the writer has come across.
2 Mr. Algernon Graves, from whose invaluable indexes this and other references to exhibited works have been taken, classifies Parkyns once as an engraver, doubtless on the strength of his later and more numerous contributions of aquatint views, and in a second entry as a painter.
PLATE XX
u
E
CS
T3
•a
OH
JC
D O
.
o OS
I
u
U t/3
g 1
«
</J u
W M
«
UJ
> £ K «
2 I
6 S I
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 61
of ideas, matured into friendship whilst the regiments,1 to which the author and he respectively belonged, were encamped on the same ground, towards the conclusion of the war in 1782, afterwards procured for him an acquaintance with Mr. James Moore, a gentleman whose talents as an amateur draughtsman claimed every consideration, and whose abilities at length riveted the attention of the author to these subjects.' Parky ns then proceeds to relate how, after Grose's death, he had been urged by Moore to continue in some sort Grose's work, using as a foundation the ' extensive collection of sketches ' made by Moore himself ' in various summer excursions ' ; and how, as a result, the first volume of Monastic Remains and Ancient Castles had been issued with a success ' more than commensurate with the most sanguine wishes of its friends'. He mentions that the greater part of the edition had been 'disposed of in the short space of four months even without an advertisement ', and that this prosperous beginning had induced the two friends to plan the regular publication of annual volumes. As we have already seen, twelve plates of a second volume were actually issued. But circumstances arose 'to retard its continuation, amongst them a fire at the copper-plate printer's, which destroyed a considerable number of impressions and many of the plates '.2
There may yet come to light materials for reconstructing more completely the previous stages of this artist's history. At present his earliest appearance is as an exceedingly accomplished aquatint engraver in the four prints composing the first part of a work called Picturesque Views of Churches and other Buildings from Drawings by J. C. Barrow, F.S.A ., engraved in Aqua Tinta by G. I. Parkyns, planned to ' consist of six numbers each to contain four views engraved in the manner of high-finished drawings i4|xio| inches'.3 This was published on December i, 1790, exactly six months before the first part of Monastic Remains and Ancient Castles. Twelve more plates, making four parts in all, were issued
1 Parkyns commanded a company in the Nottinghamshire Militia, and amused his leisure during ' a five years desultory tour in this capacity ' by cultivating ' an early propensity to indulge in rural embellishments ' and propounding ideal schemes for improvements in landscape gardening, six of which were published in a series of anonymous line-engravings — delicately executed maps, sections, and views — in January, 1793.
a This printer was, most probably, John Girtin, elder brother of Thomas Girtin, who was a copper-plate printer as well as an engraver, and whose workshop is known to have been burnt down.
5 This is the size of the plates, but as each is surrounded by a tastefully ruled and tinted border the subjects are rather smaller. Although the aquatints were all executed by Parkyns, excepting presumably the figures which have been added in a masterly manner, no doubt by an accomplished professional etcher or line-engraver, the drawings are not all Barrow's work. One of St. Albans is by Malton, another by T. R. Underwood represents Waltham Cross. This is the celebrated little drawing exhibited in the Royal Academy 1793, in the Victoria and Albert Museum (no. 407-85), enthusiastically praised by Mr. Monkhouse (Earlier English Water-colour Painters, 1890, p. 31); hitherto assigned to Thomas Malton, the younger, but now restored to its true author.
62 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
at intervals between April 30, 1791, and February i, 1793 ; on the wrapper of the fourth part is printed a list of the plates to be issued in the fifth, but this never appeared, and an admirable series of prints promising to rival Farington's Views on the Thames and Hearne and Byrne's Antiquities amongst the English topographical publications of the eighteenth century was brought to a premature close.
It has already been noted that one of Barrow's drawings for this book — the Kidwelly Church (pi. xvn a) — was founded on a sketch ' taken on the spof by Moore. A comparison of this with the pencil and water-colour views of the same place, once the property of Turner and believed also to be his work, and lately attributed on grounds of style to Girtin and reproduced as his in the Second Annual Volume of the Walpole Society (1912-13, pi. LXVII), shows that they are identical. There is also a close resemblance between others of the pencil outlines and water-colours on card described and illustrated in the same article, and the views of the same spots in Moore and Parkyns's Monastic Remains (Walpole, Vol. V, pi. xx); the drawings of Walsingham Abbey — misnamed, as in the book, Chapel (Vol. II, pi. LXVI), correspond with the aquatint; so do those of Middleham Castle— misnamed Netley Abbey (pi. LXIX), and the Holy Ghost Chapel, Basingstoke — called Ruined Wall of a Church (Finberg, Inventory of Turner Drawings, CCCLXXVII, 24); while some others, the Kirkstall Abbey (pi. LXXI), Romborough Priory — called Hinton Charter House (pi. LXXIV b), and possibly the Colchester Castle (pi. LXXVI), are surely connected, although less closely, with the book.1
This points to a very intimate relationship between the artist of this group of drawings and that of the prints. Mr. Finberg, the author of the article, had already detected the association of some of the subjects with Moore, but decided that the drawings were certainly not his work, a conclusion with which the present writer is in complete agreement. The improbability of another artist having made sketches of some half a dozen buildings from precisely the same point that Moore had pitched upon is so great that any suggestion that they are a totally distinct set of studies from nature may be dismissed. Besides, a scrutiny of yet two other subjects of the series affords evidence that these, although not borrowed from Moore, were equally not taken from nature. The Glasgow Cathedral (Walpole, Vol. II, pi. LXV) is in fact a modified and blundering copy of the view (drawn 1778, published 1783) in Hearne and Byrne's Antiquities;
1 There is also in the Hope Collection at Oxford an impression of the plate of Maxstoke Priory, one of those only used for the first edition of Monastic Remains, which presumably disappeared in the fire at John Girtin's, tinted in water-colours in the same conspicuous and unusual scheme of crude green, yellow, and red, seen in the water-colours on card. As the prints do not seem to have been issued in a coloured edition this isolated specimen may be said to show either that there once existed a water-colour on card of this subject, or that the artist who tinted the print was familiar with if he was not the author of the rest of the series of water-colours.
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 63
the figures introduced, even the ill-expressed form of the woman seated in the doorway of the house on the right, being summarized from Hearne by the copyist. In the Barnard Castle, Durham (Walpole, Vol. II, pi. LXXV£), we have apparently a mistranslation of another of Hearne's subjects ; the absurd tower, with its flat wall against the stream in the middle of the bridge, instead of the angular Sperling actually there and shown by Hearne, and the summary and incorrect treatment of the ruins are alone sufficient to prove that the draughtsman in this instance again was not working on the spot and suggest that he was not doing so in any other.1
Again the outlines and water-colours may be copies by an unknown hand from the prints in Monastic Remains and other books. But, if they are such, why should Kidwelly Church, Moore's only contribution to Picturesque Views, alone have been picked out from amongst the subjects in that volume, and how did it come about that the copyist was able to reproduce two views of Kirkstall Abbey (Walpole, Vol. II, pi. LXXI« and c) taken from precisely the same point from which there is good reason to believe that Moore may have sketched the ruins although his sketch (no longer existing) had never been engraved ; and to evolve an outline of Dumbarton (Walpole, pi. LXXIV«) corresponding so closely with yet another unpublished sketch of Moore's (also vanished) still preserved in a water-colour rendering by Robertson now in the Ashmolean Museum (Walpole, Vol. V, pi. xvn b}l In the presence of this accumulated evidence there is no avoiding the conclusion that all these little water-colours on card in the National Gallery and elsewhere, and the pencil outlines corresponding with them, must have been the work of some unidentified intermediary between Moore's sketch-books and Parkyns's aquatint plates.
It is known that Jacob Schnebbelie, Draughtsman to the Society of Antiquaries, was employed in some capacity as a middleman in the pro- duction of the earlier numbers of Monastic Remains. For he is described in a notice of the first part of that publication in the Gentleman's Magazine* as having been employed to finish and etch the plates. But some serious disagreement between him and his employers seems to have arisen, and his connexion with the work was terminated finally after the first five parts had been issued. An examination of Schnebbelie's authenticated original works makes it safe to assert that the water-colours and outlines under consideration are not in the least in his style.
1 Hearne's drawing was made in 1778, but the plate by Byrne was not published until 1799, a late date, perhaps, to assign to any of the group under discussion. It is possible that the copyist had access to the original drawings ; the likelihood that Moore was acquainted with them is suggested later on in the note on his relations with Hearne (see p. 81, post). Or this subject may have been one intended by Parkyns for his later continuation, Monastic and Baronial Remains (see p. 65 post).
2 1791. Vol. Ixi, pt. 2, p. 743.
64 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
Although Barrow is not known to have been in any way connected with Monastic Remains, the mention of his name in the very precisely-worded publication-line of the Kidwelly Church (the only subject upon which he, Moore, and Parkyns are all definitely known to have worked), a subject still existing in both a pencil outline and a water-colour on card in the National Gallery as well as in the aquatint by Parkyns, brings him into the circle of those to whom this group of drawings must be assigned. There are three authentic drawings by Barrow in the British Museum representing as many widely different manners of working in water-colours it is true, but none of them showing any resemblance to the very distinctive style of the pencil outlines or the water-colours on card.
After demonstrating at length the danger of making ascriptions such as the surely erroneous one of these drawings to Girtin, on the grounds of style, the writer is well aware that he is exposing himself to an accusation of similar rashness when he gives it as his opinion that the internal evidence seems to him to point to the probability that they are Parkyns's work. The closeness with which certain tricks of drawing are rendered by the engraver, while at the same time modifying the general effect, would surely be very remarkable if he was copying another artist's work, and these mannerisms recur in the plates with which Parkyns, long after Moore and Barrow were both dead, continued the series from designs certainly his own.
A curious piece of corroborative evidence which might favour the attribution to either Parkyns or Barrow, but in any case definitely indicates the source of this group in the school of the latter artist — who kept, as is well known, one of the most successful drawing academies of the time — is to be found in Mr. C. E. Hughes's account of John Varley.1 This most perspicacious critic notes that instances of a particular type of tree characteristic of Varley may be seen ' among the early pencil sketches by Girtin which the expert eye of Mr. A. J. Finberg has sorted from those of Turner in the Nation's collection '. He goes on to suggest that Girtin and Varley may have adopted this type from something which they had studied together at Dr. Monro's. Assuming that these sketches are not after all by Girtin but rather by Parkyns or Barrow, it may well be that this particular tree, perfect examples of which occur in the view of Lancaster (Walpole, Vol. II, pi. LXVIII, misnamed Windsor Castle) and in Barrow and Parkyns's plate of Quendon, in Select Views, was a stock copy-book model in Barrow's Academy where it might have been picked up by Varley, who was trained in this school, but scarcely by Girtin, who, so far as is known, was never a pupil there.
Although we have now explored, as fully as the materials admit, that portion
1 Early English Water-colour, p. 51.
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 65
of Parkyns's career when he was in artistic intimacy with Moore, yet as so little about him is to be found elsewhere in print, a few paragraphs may excusably be devoted to a summary of the remaining facts of his history. It would appear that his energy, far from being absorbed in the two publications, Picturesque Views and Monastic Remains, progressing simultaneously during 1790-3, impelled him to undertake yet a third series of aquatints — already alluded to above — under the title of Select Views; Two English, Two Foreign, to be continued occasionally. The first number appeared on October i, the second on Novem- ber 20, 1792, and the third and last on February i, 1793. The English subjects —curious and interesting views in what were then the outskirts of London — are from drawings by Barrow, the foreign ones — scenes in the neighbourhood of Spa and Rouen — from Parkyns's own sketches. Two of his contributions as an honorary exhibitor with the Society of Artists in 1791, the only year between 1772 and 1808 when he exhibited in public, show that he had been in Belgium ; the others were views of Ilfracombe and Douglas, and two of the prints for Picturesque Views.
In the autobiographical note already quoted the artist mentions, amongst the disasters which occurred to cut short the projected continuation of Monastic Remains, that he had been compelled, as the result of an unfortunate speculation in land in North America, to cross the Atlantic and spend several years attending to his affairs in the United States. It may well have been this journey that abruptly brought the publication of both the Picturesque and the Select Views to a close. By the end of the century Parkyns would seem to have been back in this country, making sketching expeditions, something on the lines of those undertaken by Moore, with the intention of reviving the production of Monastic Remains, the success of which, he tells us, and the long silence of the originators, had encouraged the appearance of piratical imitations. The first sketches engraved in the new series of Monastic and Baronial Remains were made in 1801, the others between 1803 and 1808. In 1806 preparations for publication were begun ; the old plates, or such as remained of them, were cleaned up, some furnished with new publication-lines; others were heavily re-worked, like the Mayfield Palace, which was converted from a daylight to a moonlight effect. As far as the publication-lines give clues to the dates of issue, actual or intended, the prints do not appear to have been produced in parts, but in irregular batches in 1806, 1808, 1811, and 1815, the two volumes being published complete in 1816. The first consists almost entirely of impressions of the old Moore and Parkyns aquatints, tinted with a wash of warm bistre to disguise the poverty of effect due to the worn and damaged state of the plates ; the second contains most of the engraver's new subjects, about forty in number.
About this time Parkyns seems to have achieved a certain position as a professional artist, for he appears as an exhibitor at the Royal Academy in 1808,
v. K
66 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
1812, and the following year with the title of Draughtsman to T.R.H. the Dukes of York and Kent. The productions by which he secured this rank have been entirely lost sight of. They may have been battle-pieces of a more or less official character, as one of the subjects he exhibited was an English Flotilla burning an enemy's Frigate on the Coast of France, the other two being American landscapes. From the middle of 1791 until his departure for America Parkyns appears to have lived in London ; where he resided after his return is unknown. , His name is not in the Nottingham Directory of 1799, nor is he mentioned as either a painter or an engraver in the very complete and useful lists of artists working in London published annually in Elmes's Annals of the Fine Arts, 1816-19; but this omission may have been due to his status as an amateur. His latest known production, which gives a high idea of his abilities, indicates that he was living at Cambridge. This is a very striking and well-composed picture of the Cathedral and City of Ely, seen from the Cam, painted for Dr. William Pearce, Dean of Ely, who is described in the title of the brilliant aquatint engraved from it by Daniel Havell as 'the late'. As the dean died in November, 1820, the print which has Parkyns's name, with the title ' Esquire ', but no other, in the publication-line, must have been produced after that date, when the artist, whose earliest public appearance had been made forty-eight years before, was above seventy years of age.
JACOB SCHNEBBELIE.
The intrusion of Jacob Sohnebbelie (b. 1760, d. 1792) into these notes would scarcely be warranted, so extremely slight was his association with Moore, were it not that his brief connexion with Monastic Remains gave an anonymous writer in the Gentleman's Magazine what were apparently considered justifiable grounds for an attack upon Moore's good faith as an author; and that this same connexion provides Schnebbelie with a claim to be considered as one of those who may have executed the water-colours on card and pencil outlines in the Turner Collection. The details of Schnebbelie's life are to be found in every biographical dictionary. He probably owed his introduction to Moore to the same stroke of good fortune which had brought him to the notice of some influential Fellows of the Society of Antiquaries, and notably to that of the President, the Earl of Leicester, and procured his appointment as official draughtsman to that body. When he died of rheumatic fever at the age of thirty-two, leaving a widow and several children in the direst poverty, his friends in the society circulated an appeal and raised a subscription to assist the widow and her family, and several of them took over the task of carrying on the publica- tion of the Antiquaries' Museum, a collection of miscellaneous plates relating to
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 67
mediaeval antiquities, left unfinished at his death, and completed the work with a memoir of the author. This memoir is practically a reprint of an obituary which had appeared just after Schnebbelie's death in the Gentleman's Magazine, admirably calculated to stir the compassion of the charitable at a timely moment to come to the aid of Schnebbelie's widow and orphans, but, it must be admitted, claiming for him as an artist a position which cannot fairly be accorded to his merit.
For some reasons it is now scarcely profitable even to guess at, but possibly connected with some bitter feeling in the Society of Antiquaries such as that known to have arisen over the blackballing of James Wyatt (an incident several times referred to in Moore's correspondence), an anonymous critic made use of the catastrophe of which the unhappy Schnebbelie was the centre to cover a spiteful attack upon Moore. Neither that gentleman nor his friends seem to have thought it worth while to repel the accusations ; and, so far as it is now possible to judge, they were altogether ill-founded and unjust. It is vaguely insinuated that Moore had been lacking in good faith to his subscribers in discontinuing the publication of Monastic Remains before the plan was completed, and in beginning another, the Twenty-five Views, in a different style— line- engraving instead of aquatint ; and he is directly charged with disingenuously concealing his indebtedness to his collaborators in the former work by sinking all mention of their names in his preface. ' Indeed,' wrote the assailant, 'one of them' — that is Schnebbelie — 'relinquished the work after four numbers had been completed ; and sorry we are to add that the uneasiness which he suffered during this engagement contributed not a little to his decease soon after. It should seem too, that the other'— that is to say Parkyns — 'continued an associate as long as the work went on ; another ' — Landseer — ' has been substituted to him in the Scottish views.'
Parkyns, as his autobiographical notes already quoted prove, invariably speaks of Moore as a collaborator in the most kindly and generous terms, never showing the least disposition to make use of the grievances thus liberally placed at his disposal ; and there is no reason for supposing that his account of the circumstances which led to the collapse of Monastic Remains is not true. With regard to Schnebbelie it is permissible to doubt whether his aid had ever been of serious value in the case of that work. And as he had been dead two years when the Twenty-five Views appeared, and Parkyns was absent in America at this period, neither of them could possibly have been associated in any way with this production.
Superabundant materials exist, not only in the form of original drawings and etchings, but in letters, estimates, and notes of payment preserved amongst the archives of the Society of Antiquaries and the Gough papers in the Bodleian Library, for determining Schnebbelie's condition of life and his rank as a
K 2
68 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
draughtsman and engraver.1 When, therefore, we are assured in his obituary that 'early in 1791' he had 'made himself master in the art of aquatinting ', and elsewhere are led, by the dark hints of the anonymous assailant, to conclude that the assistance he afforded was greater than Moore was willing to acknow- ledge, we naturally turn to his recognized works expecting to find there some- thing to compare with the earlier plates in Monastic Remains, and to explain what his share in these actually amounted to. Only two plates in the Anti- quaries' Museum (nos. vi and vn) show any trace of aquatint, and those only in a very rudimentary form ; whilst of the two aquatints in N ichols's History of Leicestershire for which Schnebbelie was responsible — the views of Coston and Buckminster Churches — the first is childishly primitive and the second, a little less crude it is true, bears, in the later states at least, the signature of another engraver, Liparotti. It is difficult to imagine what help such an unskilled beginner can have given to a practised craftsman such as Parkyns. As far, therefore, as the aquatinting is concerned, it seems impossible to detect a difference between the earlier plates which Schnebbelie assisted in producing and those in which he had no hand ; nor can it be said that his characteristically refined and timid etching is anywhere traceable in them. The quality of all, in both the first and the later series, is, considering the long period covered by their execution, remark- ably even, and they are stamped throughout with the individual mannerisms of Parkyns.
Schnebbelie's capacity as a draughtsman is well displayed in numerous important water-colours, mostly designed for Vetusta Monumenta, in the col- lection of the Society of Antiquaries. He was ambitious and painstaking, but his perspective is erratic, his comprehension of the forms of architecture exceedingly limited, and his handling of the conventional pen-and-ink outline persistently employed is somewhat niggling and expressionless. It seems safe to assert that the fluent calligraphic style of the water-colours on card and pencil outlines must always have been quite outside the range of his abilities. His style, although not his actual handiwork in landscape, is fairly illustrated by the two little sketches in ink, pen, and wash, one of Kirkstall Abbey (in Mr. Barnard's Collection, reproduced in the Annual of the Walpole Society, II, pi. LXXII a), the other of Neath Abbey (in the Ashmolean Museum). Both came from the Moore Collection and are connected with plates in the earliest numbers of Monastic Remains.
' The writer is exceedingly indebted to Mr. H. S. Kingsford, assistant secretary to the Society of Antiquaries, for the trouble he kindly took in extracting references to Schnebbelie from the minutes of the Society, and searching for his drawings in its folios, thus getting together a mass of evidence which it has only been possible to present here in a very summary form.
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 69
THOMAS GIRTIN.
The personalities of the inheritors of unfulfilled renown have a habit of assuming the transfiguring aureole of legend and tradition, and Girtin is no exception to this well-known custom. His precocious genius and his influence on the course of landscape art and upon the development of modern water-colour painting have been written about at immense length, and an heroic being has been very speciously reconstituted from scattered anecdotes and vague hypotheses. Some records of his relations with Moore have been worked into the image, notably by Mr. J. L. Roget in his invaluable book on the History of the Old Water-colour Society, where several pages are devoted to an account of Girtin's youth, carefully pieced together and supported on far-sought references to the older authorities. But the difficulty of distinguishing facts through the dis- turbing medium of literary tradition has proved so baffling that even this minutely accurate and conscientious author has, in this instance, taken refuge from indefiniteness in mis-statement. The study of the actual artistic docu- ments in the Moore Collection in the light of the little genuine contemporary biographical material existing makes it possible to produce a new outline, a mere sketch, it is true, but distinct and correct as far as it goes, of the period, the most interesting historically, although not artistically the most important, of Girtin's development; that is of the four years from 1792-6.
The extent to which writers on this painter have been preoccupied by critical estimates of his work and influence to the prejudice of underlying biographical questions, may be gauged by the fact that not one of them has ever consulted or printed the original entry of his baptism which fixes the hitherto undetermined year of his birth. It occurs in the register of St. Saviour's Cathedral, Southwark, under the date March 17, 1775: 'Thomas Son of John Girtin, Brushmaker, and Rose Hannah.' Mr. Roget and other authorities affirm that John Girtin was a rope-maker or an 'extensive cordage manu- facturer ', but it is not so that he is described in the register. The same record proves that the statement that Thomas Girtin was the elder son of his father is erroneous, since the baptism of his brother John — afterwards the engraver — is entered on April 19, 1773. The day of Girtin's birth — February 18 — is given, doubtless correctly, in the additional obituary in the Gentleman's Maga- zine for February, 1803 (vol. Ixxiii, Pt. I, p. 187), which, with the brief notice published in the previous December (vol. Ixxii, Pt. II, p. 1163), is, it seems almost necessary to point out, the only contemporary account of the artist that we have, written before the pathetic suggestion of his untimely death, and the glamour of his association with Turner as a titular founder of water-colour painting, had wrapt him about with the atmosphere of mythology. The
yo SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
accuracy of these notices where it can be tested is so conclusively proved — the only striking error, 1773 instead of 1775 for the date of Girtin's birth, being no doubt due to a common misprint — that it is justifiable to assume that they were compiled by somebody who had been in close touch with the painter and his circle, and to accept the information they give as veritable and authentic. The information about the painter's connexion with Moore which they afford is very explicit. 'Mr. Moore was', it is said, 'his first patron, and with him he went a tour into Scotland. The prospects he saw in that country gave 'that wildness of imagery to the scenery of his drawings by which they are so pre-eminently distinguished. He also went with Mr. Moore to Peterborough, Lichfield, and Lincoln, and indeed to many other places remarkable for their rich scenery, either in nature or architecture. That gentlemen had a drawing that Girtin made of Exeter Cathedral which was principally coloured on the spot where it was drawn ; for he was so uncommonly indefatigable, that when he had made a sketch of any place he never wished to quit it until he had given it all the proper tints.'
The origin of the acquaintance of Moore and Girtin is easy to guess. Girtin was a native of Southwark, and even as a child is said to have shown a passion for painting, Moore a well-to-do and. enthusiastic amateur living in the Borough. The whole world of London was then limited and its artistic circles restricted in extent, and even supposing that the boy's removal into the City took place, as has generally been assumed, when he was too young for even his precocious genius to have given much sign of its future bent, his new home was as close to Moore's place of business as his earlier one had been to Moore's residence. There are, however, no childish essays of Girtin's in the collection to support a conjecture that he may in the first instance have attracted Moore's attention as a local prodigy.
The principal interest of the present series of Girtin drawings arises from the fact that most of them can be accurately dated from external evidence of indisputable authenticity, and all upon internal evidence of almost equal cogency. After studying them the present writer dares to assert his belief that it is possible to assign any drawing executed by the artist within the time that they cover, to a definite year with certainty, and between 1793 and 1795, the moment of Girtin's intensest development, to a period of six months with great probability. It is clear that the earliest group is that connected with Moore's Scottish expedition of 1792, and half a dozen views of ruins in Wales and the Marches, intimately associated with them in point of style and obviously works of the same period. These latter represent places visited and sketched by Moore between 1787 and 1791 — Chepstow and Goodrich in the former year, Carew and Pembroke in 1788, Denbigh and Conway in 1791, in which year Girtin was, it must be remembered, only sixteen. It is therefore probable that
PLATE XXI
(d) DUNSTAFFNAGE CASTLE, BY J. MOORE AND E. DAYES, 1792 Ashinolfxn Museum. (Original 6<j x 8?, in.)
(/>) nUNSTAFFNAGE CASTLE, BY T. GIRTIN, 1792-3 Collection of Professor F. P. Barnard. (Original 6g x 8J in.)
PLATE XXII
(a) DUFF HOUSE. DRAWING IN GREY AND BLUE BY T. GIRT1N, 1792-4
Ashmolean Museum. (Original 6 x 8J- /'«.)
(/>> DUFF HOUSE. WATER-COLOUR BY T. GIRTIN, 1794 Ashmolean Museum. (Original 5 x 6J in.}
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 71
in them we have merely works founded by Girtin upon Moore's sketches. Having admitted this theory of relationship in the case of the Welsh subjects it may seem illogical to attempt to disprove it in that of the Scottish views where it has been hitherto generally accepted by critics. Yet there are strong reasons for believing that far from being nothing but transcripts they are in fact Girtin's own renderings of nature. Nobody acquainted with the artist's work could maintain that any of this group belong to a period later than 1792-3, for not only are they in a striking degree more primitive in conception and execution than the Ely Cathedral, exhibited in 1794, but much more so than the Lichfield and Peterborough, both dated in that and exhibited the next year. The only doubtful point, then, is whether they were or were not inspired by personal knowledge of the places depicted. It is well known that the artist's biographers have invariably assumed that he did not visit Scotland until 1796. A sketch, in the British Museum, signed and dated 'Jedborough, Scotd., T. Girtin, I796,'1 is evidence that he crossed the border in that year ; but the reasons given for concluding that he then did so for the first time are less convincing. That most generally advanced is drawn from the conspicuous absence before 1797 of any Scottish subjects from the list of works, a very slender and unsug- gestive one, exhibited by Girtin in the Academy. It is only necessary to point out that, so far as any positive conclusions can be drawn from the exhibition catalogues, Girtin need never at any time have penetrated farther north than Jedburgh, whence his only three Scottish subjects — two in 1797, the third in 1800— were taken. On the other side of the question we have the definite statement of the obituary that Girtin visited Scotland in company with Moore, who, it is practically certain, was only there twice — in 1785 (when Girtin was ten years old) and in 1792. It must be admitted that there is no possibility of proving by an alibi that Moore was not there in 1796, for, as we have already seen (p. 52 ante), his movements during that year are unrecorded. But his last known sketches were made in the previous summer; there is reason to believe that the decline of which he died had already set in, and it is highly improbable that his health was equal to an expedition at that time lengthy, arduous, and fatiguing. It must also be remembered that although Moore's connexion with Girtin had its friendly and educational aspects, his primary object in making him his travelling companion was to secure views of the spots they visited. Now although we have in the collection abundant and important records of the tour which they are known to have made in the Midlands in 1794 and of their presumed joint visit to the Cinque Ports in 1795, there is not a single sketch to account for any expedition in the following year. There is yet another point to be made. Moore has written on the fly-leaf of the
1 Binyon, Catalogue of Drawings by British Artists, II, p. 231, no 163.
72 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
portfolio in which he kept the views of places visited in 1792 a very elaborate itinerary of the whole tour. It is clear from this that he travelled very rapidly and at the same time amassed a very large number of drawings, so many in fact, that, rapid sketcher as we know from other evidence that he was, it is incredible that he should have recorded with his own hand all the scenes which figured in his portfolio.1 There is indeed a tradition that a third artist, Dayes, formed one of the party, but this is quite unsupported by any external testimony ^ such as the statement of the obituary in the case of Girtin, that Dayes was ever in Scotland, and the internal evidence of certain works in the collection, while clearly demonstrating that Dayes re-drew or retouched and completed the sketches made by Moore, does not prove that he was on the spot at the time.2 In short the cumulative arguments in favour of the theory that the Scottish landscapes dating from Girtin's youthful period are not renderings at second- hand, but his own sketches made in the face of nature if not actually completed on the spot, must be admitted to be very strong.
That Girtin did, however, occasionally prepare finished drawings from Moore's memoranda is quite as certain. An account, written inside the cover of a portfolio, is made up of items of payments, doubtless for work of this kind, on twenty-six days in October, November, December, and January (unfortunately no year is specified), and shows that Girtin received three shillings for half-a-day's and six shillings for a whole day's labour. It was probably under such condi- tions that he produced the views in Wales and the Marches already mentioned, for they possess every characteristic of the 1792-3 period and cannot conceivably have been executed by a child as young as Girtin was when Moore visited the spots they represent. There are also three or four other drawings, precisely similar in style; two water-colours of Kirkstall Abbey in the collections of Mr. F. P. Barnard and Mr. Thomas Girtin (reproduced in the Walpole Society's Annual, II, 1912-13, pi. LXXI and LXXII), one of Colchester Castle and another of Bolton Castle, both in Mr. Barnard's possession (ib., pi. LXXVI and LXXVII), the last being accompanied by Girtin's pencil outline of the subject. Other pencil outlines by Girtin belonging to the same group, can, in the writer's
1 This evidence would be tedious to discuss in detail, but although conflicting it is not without weight. Thus Moore visited Jedburgh as a day's excursion from Kelso, making a journey of twenty miles and bringing back two views, one of which is only known in the form of a drawing by Girtin. He paid a similar flying visit to St. Andrews from Cupar in Fife, travelling eighteen miles and securing two sketches of the cathedral, from different points of view, one of them only now extant as a water-colour, quite certainly of this period, by Girtin, &c., &c. On the other hand, the itinerary often records sojourns of two or three days in the same spot with one sketch or more to the credit of Moore's activity, but with nothing to account for Girtin's presence there.
5 In the advertisement to Twenty-five Views, Moore mentions that he was accompanied by J. C. Brooke, Somerset herald, but only expresses his gratitude to Dayes for assistance in his work. This help was considerable (see p. 79 post), but may well have been rendered when Moore was furbishing up his drawings after his return to London.
PLATE XXIII
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 73
opinion, be isolated from amongst that particular portion of the very mixed contents of Box no. ccclxxvii of the Turner Bequest in the National Gallery, which has been assigned by Mr. Finberg to Girtin, although most of the oth r drawings in this same portion may be attributed with considerable proba- bility, on the grounds already brought forward in this article, to G. I. Parkyns.
Students of calligraphy are well aware that the periods when a set conven- tional hand was generally admired and adopted are those when the writing of individuals is most difficult, if not impossible to identify. The English pencil draughtsmanship of the period of Girtin partook of the nature of accomplished calligraphy. We are accustomed to dwell upon its particular beauty in the hands of Turner, but, as a fact, very many professionals and not a few amateurs were capable of producing work little less dexterous and brilliant in effect. The paragraphs in this paper already dedicated to Parkyns have at least indicated the dangers besetting the scientific connoisseur or morphological analyst when attempting to build up hypotheses on the strength of stylistic resemblance in works of this type. The present writer is only offering a personal opinion, the insecurity of which he is fully aware, when he states that it appears to him inconceivable that the five sketches reproduced in plates LXXIV, LXXV, and Lxxvna of the second volume of the Walpole Society's Annual can all be the work of the same hand. But if the Bolton Castle be authentically Girtin's, as there is every reason to believe that it is, then he ventures to think that the Rom- borough Priory (pi. LXXIV b) and the Rochester Castle (pi. LXXV b) must also be assigned to that artist. Three of the water-colours — the Kirkstall, the Colchester, and the Bolton — as well as the Romborough and Bolton outlines, are closely con- nected with the Moore- Parkyns plates in Monastic Remains, but in what degree it is, as we have seen,1 difficult to determine. Moore's sketch of Bolton was made in September and those of Kirkstall in October, 1789; those of Rom- borough and Colchester in August, 1790. Parkyns's aquatints from them were issued respectively in June, July, and October, 1791, and January, 1792. So that if these particular drawings of Girtin's are neither later rifacimenti from the sketches, copies of the prints, or, possibly, fresh studies from nature made when he and Moore visited the places together, in Yorkshire in 1792, and in the eastern counties in 1794 — as they may have done although there is no evidence that they did so — these works must be two or three years earlier than any others from his hand in the collection. But as they do not in any way differ in style from the group dating from 1792-3, they may be fairly assumed to be versions made by Girtin about that time from Moore's memoranda of a somewhat earlier period.
The chronological sequence of drawings executed in 1794 is very completely
1 See p. 62 ante. V. L
74 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
illustrated. Firstly, there is the large view of Ely Cathedral, based, as we learn from a manuscript note in Moore's copy of his List of the Principal Castles, &c., upon a sketch of his own ; this was Girtin's first exhibited work, completed in time to appear in the Academy of that year. Next come the pair of important paintings of the West fronts of Peterborough and Lichfield Cathedrals, both dated 1794 and exhibited in the Academy the following year. These were some of the fruits of his autumn tour with Moore, others were the impressive water-colour of the Ancient Charnel-house, Stratford-upon-Avon Church, and the two studies of Warwick and Kenilworth Castles carried to completion only as far as the grey underpainting is concerned. Dated also ' '94 ', but in the most advanced tech- nique of this period, is the little Duff House, and the preparation, dead coloured in grey, of precisely the same subject, cannot be separated from it. Lastly, there are the drawings of Lincoln, including those engraved for Hewlett's Selection of Views, it being definitely stated in the text of the book that Girtin and Moore together visited the city in that year.
The Ely (pi. xxm) in spite of its hesitant draughtsmanship, due in all proba- bility to the imperfection of the memoranda serving for its foundation, is an astonishing work for a boy of nineteen. It shows, naturally enough, the influence of Dayes, the youth's master ; in fact it is impossible not to fancy that in the admirable group of figures in the foreground — the bishop conversing with two gentlemen dressed in the pea-green which Dayes loved to introduce — the master's assistance may be detected. But in the breadth of effect, subordination of detail and general sense of mood, the great characteristics of the later Girtin are unmis- takably foreshadowed. If these qualities are conspicuous in the Ely, how much more do they shine forth from the Peterborough, the Lichfield (pi. xxiv), and the Stratford-upon-Avon \ The first may be described as the perfect example of the old stained drawing, the Lichfield, perhaps less completely beautiful in the abstract, is far more interesting as a daring advance in conception and technique and may be described as the complete type of the earliest modern water-colour.1 The Ancient Charnel-house, a less ambitious subject, has for this reason achieved that perfect unity of sentiment and handling which becomes yearly rarer in English landscape art as the star of Turner ascends the firmament.
1 Moore not only purchased what are doubtless the original pair of drawings of Peterborough and Lichfield exhibited in the Royal Academy, but he acquired, either for himself or on behalf of some other amateur, a replica of the Peterborough. This most interesting work, which is a duplicate of that now in the Ashmolean excepting for some slight changes in the figures, is also signed and dated 1794, and on the back has been preserved the original receipt, dated April 3, 1795, in Moore's handwriting, signed by Girtin, for one guinea and a-half in payment for it. This drawing passed through the hands of Messrs. Falser in 1914. I am indebted to Mr. Finberg for calling my attention to it. No contemporary repetition of the Lichfield seems to be known ; the pair, repre- senting the same subjects, in the Whitworth Institute at Manchester, although no doubt founded on the same sketches, are a little different in composition and clearly somewhat later in date.
PLATE XXIV
•s.
p
3
H
s
as Q
u
s
c *--
_)
w
t<^
^ £ ! Ill
o u, |
os -J S;
U: < <^
H S ^
« g I
^ 8 ^
— - rj O ~S 7) O
H
as
3
at a
u
a o u o os o
H
u
-
£ S
§ JS
EST
!
? o
CJ 'P W
•S t«
Q -I
x 2
PLATE XXV
as
O
X.
o
Q W
10
- f-
g *
o
0
NED
£5 -
3
f-> a
S3
U
D
c jx- '/:
I
3
t/> < u
^ u
Ui ^
O J
— ^
o
— ? 3 -5
^ "J '*
U
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 75
Historically, the monochromes of Caesars Tower, Warwick, and Ruined Windows, Kemlworth (pl.xxv), one in pure wash, the other with pen outline, are of great value, for they stand as authenticated types of grey drawings by Girtin such as have been attributed in considerable numbers to Turner. There can be little doubt that these, like most others of their class, are underpainted prepara- tions intended to be finished in colour. Two curious passages in the letters of Gilbert White of Selborne serve to show in what high estimation such half- completed works were originally held, and account to some extent for their present abundance. He is writing of some landscapes executed for him by S. H. Grimm, and after an interesting description of the process of their creation he adds : ' The scapes, many of them at least, looked so lovely in their Indian ink shading that it was with difficulty the artist could prevail on me to permit him to tinge them ' ; and again ' his pieces were so engaging in Indian ink that it was with regret that I submitted to have some of them coloured V
Another work of the same class, the Duff House (pi. xxn) in monochrome, is now fixed upon the same mount as the coloured rendering of the same subject, a little drawing of great force of tone and richness of polychromy, its shadows deepened with gum and the high-lights produced by scratching with a knife, a process rarely made use of by Girtin. These two drawings, undoubtedly founded upon a sketch made in 1792 by Moore, or by Girtin himself at the same time, are amongst those that raise the dark and complicated question of the connexion between the later subjects engraved with Moore's name, for the Copper Plate Magazine and other publications, and the extant water-colours by Girtin and others founded upon the same sketches. As it is round Moore's association with Dayes that the facts and conjectures related to this point become least obscure, the discussion of it may best be postponed to the note on that artist.
The Lincolnshire drawings — that is those of them executed in the last months of 1794 and in the following year, and the water-colours belonging to the Cinque Ports tour of the autumn of 1795, are in a style so different from that of the previous and subsequent periods as to look almost like the work of another man. Their most striking characteristic is a not perfectly successful combination of cold blues in the skies with hot sandy-hued tones in the landscape, due to the substitution of warm tints, such as sepia and burnt-sienna in the underpainting. But this is accompanied by an increase of force and intelligence of draughtsman- ship so great that it almost neutralizes the somewhat unhappy chromatic effect.
1 Life and Letters of Gilbert White of Selborne, by G. Holt-White, 1901, i. 326 and ii. 3. White adds, 'I feared these colours might puzzle the engravers,' but Grimm 'assures me to the contrary'; a statement which seems to undermine the contention sometimes advanced — as by Mr. C. E. Hughes (Early English Water-colour, p. 9) — ' that the subdued tones of much eighteenth-century draughts- manship may have been due to the unsatisfactory way in which more highly coloured drawings were rendered by the engravers.'
L 2
76 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
This change of method was not adopted suddenly, for of nearly twenty drawings the fruits of Girtin's presumed sojourn with Moore at Hastings, Dover, and other places in that neighbourhood, about a quarter have been prepared and left in the grey like the sketches of Warwick and Kemlworth already described. And even the finest and in certain respects most advanced drawing of this period in the collection, the superb Ruins of the Savoy Palace (now the property of Mr. F. P. Barnard) (pi. xxvi b),1 which displays the beauties of the new style in a consummate degree, was accompanied by an admirable study in grey (now fn the possession of Mr. T. Girtin) of another aspect of the same buildings. There is no direct literary evidence for the assertion that Moore was accompanied by Girtin while he was collecting, during August and September, 1795, his sketches of Cinque Ports subjects now in the Ashmolean Museum, but there are strong grounds for believing that he was. For the style of Girtin's drawings of the same places fitting on to and developing out of the Lincoln series shows that they belong to that period, and the abundance of them in the collection may be said to prove something more ; while the presence of his handiwork, assisting Moore in the production of one of his outlines, and enforcing by brilliant illustra- tions some instructions in the use of the lead pencil, on the back of another, points clearly to the conclusion that the friends were working side by side. Other sheets seem to provide an instance of a sort of division of labour between them such as has already been presumed to have been practised during the Scottish expedition of 1792. Moore desired to have a finished drawing by Girtin of the tomb of Gervase Alard, in Winchelsea Church, and in fact ultimately achieved this wish in the water-colour now belonging to Mr. Barnard. During the time at their disposal, Girtin, we may venture to conjecture, was employed elsewhere about the place, while Moore was making a careful pencil study of the monu- ment ; and, finding that his skill was unequal to indicating all the details which the artist would require, in their proper places, he proceeded to note those points minutely on another page of his book.
With this series the active association of Girtin and Moore comes, so far as is known, to an end. References in the rhymed epistles show that Moore continued to take a friendly interest in the young artist, and in 1798 he seems to have bought the large drawing of the Interior of Exeter Cathedral by him, probably the last added to his collection, from the Royal Academy exhibition.
' The bold pen-work in this, in the Ruined Windows, Kenilworth, and other drawings of the year 1795, shows in a marked manner the influence of Canaletto, and justifies the assumption that it was at this period that Girtin became acquainted with Mr. Henderson and devoted himself to making those copies from that master's drawings in the Henderson Collection, several of which are now in the British Museum. The date hitherto fixed for these, 'about 1793 or earlier,' is clearly too early ; indeed Mr. Binyon, in the pages of his Catalogue where these and other copies made at the same time are described (Vol. II, pp. 233-4, n°s- 84-105), states that one of them is taken from an original by Malton of the year 1795.
PLATE XXVI
(a) BEXHILL CHURCH, BY T. GIRTIN, SECOND HALF OF 1795 Ashinolean Museum. (Original 6J x 8}, in.)
(l>) RUINS OF THE SAVOY PALACE, BY T. GIRTIN, 1795 6 Collection of Professor F. P. Barnard. (Original 8J x u» in.)
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 77
This somewhat unattractive picture was sold at Christie's on February 25, 1916. It is of historical interest, not only because we learn from the obituary in the Gentleman's Magazine that it was completed on the spot, but as a dated example of Girtin's mature style executed on cartridge-paper with most of the detail drawn with a reed pen and, what is very unusual, the lights heightened with body colour.1
The fact that Girtin's celebrated panorama of London was taken from a spot in the immediate neighbourhood of Moore's residence, and included in its foreground the ruins of the Albion Mills, whose picturesque interest the amateur had perceived and recorded while they were yet smoking, may well have given rise to a vague tradition that the inception of the immense painting was in some degree due to Moore's suggestion. The latent existence of some such dim idea seems to underlie Mr. Roget's notes on the panorama. It is there stated that 'the outline of this work is or was in the possession of Miss Miller '.2 This is an error ; no such outline was ever in the possession of Moore or his descendants. All that they possessed was a set of the six aquatints by Birnie from Barker's panorama taken from almost the same spot. There is evidence that Miss Anne Miller, to whom the tradition recorded by Roget can be traced, mistakenly imagined these to represent Girtin's work. This was taken from a building nearer to the Thames than Moore's house in Stamford Street, the back of which, or of its opposite neighbours, figures in the foreground of Girtin's sketch for the Westminster and Lambeth section of the panorama in the British Museum.3
J. M. W. TURNER.
The points of contact between Moore and Turner were regrettably few, and indeed, so far as is certainly known, are confined to the purchase of the beautiful drawing of the Transept of Tintern Abbey (pi. xxvn) from the Royal Academy Exhibition of 1795. Owing to a mistake in the catalogue of the Winter Exhibi- tion of the Academy in 1887, this drawing has been wrongly identified with one lent by the late Mr. John Edward Taylor on that occasion. But according to Mr. Finberg4 the drawing in the Taylor Collection does not represent the transept of the abbey and is not by Turner, and, as there can be no doubt, that from the Moore and Miller Collections, now in the Ashmolean Museum, is the true original.
1 Another drawing in which white paint has been used is the Star Cross, Devonshire, in the British Museum ; probably both were experiments made at the same time. ' Roget, History of the Old Water-colour Society, i. 107.
3 Binyon, Catalogue of Drawings by British Artists ii. 228, no. 31.
4 Inventory, i, p. 37, no. xxni A.
78 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
The statement made by Mr. Roget, on the authority of Mr. Jenkins, that Turner 'travelled with Mr. Moore to execute drawings for him for his topo- graphical works ' l may be dismissed as apocryphal. The movements of Turner during the years of Moore's activity are recorded; they do not coincide with those of the amateur excepting in the summer of 1794, when Turner certainly was sketching in some of the same towns in the Midlands as Moore and Girtin. But the absence from the collection of any work of the master's, excepting the single drawing of Tintern, and the fact that his name nowhere occurs in connexion with engravings after Moore, may be held to justify the conclusion that they never worked together.
The influence of the Swiss school of aquarellistes upon Turner has never been traced in detail or its force determined. That it was a factor in his development is highly probable; but whether imbibed at first-hand through drawings imported into England, as well as revived at the fountain-head when Turner visited the Continent in 1802, or received at second-hand, through the example of painters like Robertson, it is impossible to tell. The priority of Robertson in making use of scratched-out lights, hitherto first detected in Girtin's Duff House (1794) and Turner's Lincoln Cathedral of the following year, has already been noticed. It is conceivable that Turner may have studied the works of Robertson in Moore's Collection, and borrowed the suggestion amongst others from them.
The remaining details relating to Turner are gathered from the manuscript annotations to Moore's own copy of his List of the Principal Castles, &c. The notes, as far as they can be checked, refer solely to views exhibited, engraved, or existing in Moore's own collection before the summer of 1798 or thereabouts; there is no reason to suppose that he took into consideration unpublished sketches of the spots in his list or information that particular artists had visited them. Incomplete and imperfect as these notes, made during the last months of the author's illness, are, it would be too much, perhaps, to assume that the fact that they record the writer's remembrance of views of certain places made by Turner amounts to positive evidence that such drawings actually existed. At the same time, if such works ever come to light, the notes might afford grounds for dating them. The localities against which Turner's name is set, although no representations of them by him of this very early period seem at present to be known, are : Tewkesbury Abbey, Carisbrooke Castle, Boston Church, Egglestone Abbey, Ripon, York and Beverley Minsters, and Harewood Castle.2
1 Ht'story of the Old Water-colour Society, i. 88.
! Turner is not certainly known to have ever visited Tewkesbury, although he planned to include it in a sketching-tour of 1792-3 (Finberg, Inventory, \, 18, no. xm H). His sketches of Carisbrooke and Boston, made in 1795-7, served, at a much later period, as the foundations for two
PLATE XXVII
TRANSEPT OF TINTERN ABBEY, BY J. M. W. TURNER, 1795 Ashmolean Museum. (Original 14 x lojj in.)
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 79
EDWARD DAYES.
The intercourse of Moore with Dayes, although, perhaps, not so interesting as that with the artists already mentioned, excites curiosity because it appears to afford some clue to the relations of the professional draughtsmen, the en- gravers and the amateurs, in their combined undertakings in that golden age of dilettantism. Moore, besides acquiring one small but particularly exquisite drawing by Dayes— the Durham by Moonlight, signed and dated 1797 (pi. xxvm b) —employed the artist to paint from his memoranda a large water-colour of Castle Acre Priory, and to stiffen the weak drawing and possibly also enliven the feeble colouring of twenty-eight of his sketches made on the Scottish tour of J792 — at least that appears to be the safest conclusion to draw from the uncer- tain evidence afforded by these drawings themselves. Upon the original tinted border of all excepting one is the signature of Dayes and the date 1792, and also the signature of Moore with the day of the month and year — corresponding with those in the manuscript itinerary — when the sketch from nature was made (pi. xxi a). What was the share of each artist in these productions ? The ample materials for taking the measure of Moore's powers make it safe to assert that the water-colours as they stand are not his work. No painter who ever lived was more unequal than Dayes, his inequable temperament and uncertain health being clearly reflected in his art, which ranges from a pitch of excellence almost equal to the highest in precision of draughtsmanship and delicacy of tonality, down to almost incredible slovenliness. Still even at his worst he can seldom have been guilty of such unstable perspective and phantasmal chiaroscuro as this. Either these views were mechanically copied from Moore's studies, or, beneath the work at present visible, there was once a vague sketch, possibly merely a half-effaced outline traced by him.
Several of them were engraved by or under the direction of John Landseer for Twenty-five Views in the Southern part of Scotland, and it is possible that all would ultimately have been made use of in the publication had it been extended farther. Moore's name is given in the underlines of the prints as that of the only artist concerned in the production of the drawings, although his indebtedness to Dayes for undefined assistance is acknowledged in the preface ; but it seems certain that these compound productions were the actual originals from which
celebrated drawings ; but it is particularly strange that none of this early time seem to exist, as the orders for them, one to be engraved in John Landseer's Views in the Isle of Wight, the other in Hewlett's Selection of Views in the County of Lincoln, were received and booked by Turner in his usual methodical way. (Finberg, i, pp. 41-2, no. xxiv, pp. 69-73, no- xxxiv). His youthful sketches of all the other places named are found in his North of England Sketch Book of 1797, wilh notes of orders for three views of Harewood Castle (Finberg, ib.), but the finished water-colours known are of subsequent dates.
8o SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
the engravers worked. It is curious to notice the liberties which they in their turn felt entitled to take with the materials provided. Almost without exception the views are altered in their general proportions by expansion or curtailment on one side or the other, and in one case two plates, those of Dryburgh Abbey, have been carved out of a single drawing.
Two subjects also engraved in this series under Moore's name (Craigmillar Castle in Mr. Barnard's Collection and Edinburgh Castle in Mr. Girtin's) are now only known to exist in the form of water-colours by Girtin; and from Moore's list of his collection it is justifiable to infer that he never possessed them in any other. Perhaps the most puzzling questions surround the drawing of Dumbarton (in the Ashmolean Museum) ; this bears neither signature nor date. It has always been assigned by tradition to Girtin, with whose work of this period certain portions — particularly the sky— bear a strong resemblance. But the landscape — especially the foreground — is extremely characteristic of Dayes and Moore in collaboration.
The general question as to how far the making of mere memoranda from nature may be considered sufficient to entitle the amateur sketcher to claim the authorship of the subject of an engraving, probably presented a different moral aspect at that time to that which it presents now. Evidence for Assuming that an important link in the chain of production in the case of Monastic Remains was sunk out of sight, where the labour was apparently shared on an equal footing by two dilettanti, with a not very skilful professional artist in the back- ground, has already been brought forward. Yet a critic writing in the Gentle- man's Magazine? which was occasionally, as has been seen, far from lenient in dealing with Moore, speaks of the work as a selection from his sketches ' undertaken by ' Schnebbelie and Parkyns, as if it were a matter of course that Moore, although not interested financially in the publication, should be considered as the contributor of its most important element. The advertisement to Twenty-five Views gives him a somewhat similar position as the collector of the original materials. The underlines of the plates in Picturesque Views and in Hewlett's County of Lincoln are punctilious in assigning the precise share to each contributor. Yet in the Copper Plate Magazine we find nearly a dozen subjects with Moore's name which seem certainly to have been engraved from originals still existing by professional draughtsmen, based no doubt on sketches of Moore's, although these may have been very slight.2 It is possible that Walker,
1 Vol. Ixi, pt. 2, p. 743.
" Of the twelve subjects, five — Castle Stewart, Glames, Cawdor, Elgin, and Old Aberdeen Cathedral, are extant in Dayes's revised versions ; three — Lincoln, Duff" House, and Jedburgh, in original water-colours, by Girtin ; one — Glasgow — in a varied rendering, by Girtin ; another — Rye — in a grey drawing, by Girtin, and a pencil outline by Moore ; and the Saltwood in Moore's out- line alone ; the original of the Exeter has disappeared, but it seems safe to assert that the elaborate
PLATE XXVI 1 1
(ft) PORTE DE CORN1LLION, MEAUX, BY A. D. MACQUIN, 1796 Ashniolean Museum. (Original 5; x 4 in.)
(l>) DURHAM CATHEDRAL, FROM BENEATH AN ARCH OF RALPH FLAMBARD's BRIDGE: MOONLIGHT
BY E. DAYES, 1797
Ashniolean Museum. (Original 4} x 6;,' in.)
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 81
the engraver and proprietor of the magazine, found that, by borrowing drawings which the amateurs had caused to be made from their own sketches for their -own satisfaction, he was able to save the cost of himself commissioning the subjects he required and paying the travelling expenses of artists, and that the prominence given to the names of Moore and, no doubt, of other dilettanti, although it appears rather disingenuous to us, was then accepted as no more than a flattering recognition of the value of their support to the undertaking in this and other ways. Considering the conscientiousness in this matter shown by Moore on other occasions, we are at least justified in hoping that he had no wish or intention of claiming other men's work as his own ; while the protests in the prefaces to every one of his books show that he, like the other genteel artistic and literary amateurs of his day, set store by the financial disinterested- ness of his position to a degree which seems rather far-fetched to the sensibilities of our time, less scrupulous in this respect if more so in the other.
THOMAS HEARNE.
As fellow-members of the Society of Antiquaries Moore and Hearne were known to each other, but records of their acquaintance are very fragmentary. Hearne made a small finished water-colour from Moore's sketch of the inside of the ruins of Lindisfarne or Holy-Island Cathedral, and an oval vignette engraved from it by Howlett decorates the title-page of Moore's List of the Principal Castles, &c., 1798. This work, now in the Ashmolean Museum, is an example of the unprepossessing, dusty, ashen-hued scheme of colouring affected by Hearne about this period. That this effect is not due to fading but was deliberate is proved by such drawings as those of Wells and Glastonbury, dated 1795, in the collection of Captain Churchill at Northwick Park ; these have always been carefully guarded from light, but in spite of admirable draughtsmanship and a very fine sense of pictorial effect, are marred by the combination of the cork- coloured landscape with brightly-tinted figures in the foreground.
Although not one of the original subscribers, Moore followed the fortunes of Hearne and Byrne's great work of Antiquities with sympathetic interest. In the preface to the first edition of his List (1786) he mentions with regret that the faint encouragement received had made Hearne doubtful whether it would be possible to continue the publication farther than the first volume, doubts which, fortunately for us, he was able to overcome. It would also appear that Moore was privileged to see the drawings intended for the work before they were exhibited or engraved, and was acquainted with Hearne's intentions, since in the manuscript additions to his own copy of the second edition of his List,
group of figures in the foreground cannot represent Moore's unaided work even if the architecture in the background be his.
V. M
82 SOME WATER-COLOUR PAINTERS
already mentioned, Hearne's name is set against some subjects which were not engraved until after Moore's death and others that were never included in the Antiquities at all.
ANGE DENIS MACQUIN.
The last name on our list is one known in other connexions, but not hitherto suspected of having had anything to do with the Old British water-colour school. Macquin has his place in the Dictionary of National Biography as an ' abbe and miscellaneous writer ' ; but when a water-colour of the Gate of Meaux, the place of his birth, bearing his name, came to light some years ago in the Moore Collection it did not occur to anybody to connect it with the Heraldic Draughtsman to the College of Arms, for this was the office held by Macquin, until the discovery of the rhymed correspondence revealed the intimacy of his friendship with Moore and his circle. Since that time the labours of Mr. Algernon Graves, which have gone far towards creating new sources for the history of British art by their methodical exploitation and arrangement of the original materials hitherto existing in an unworkable and chaotic condition, have dis- interred Macquin's artistic personality as an Honorary Exhibitor at the Royal Academy in 1801, 1806, and the two following years. On one occasion he exhibited a view near Meaux on another one of Fonthill Abbey ; his other two contributions were more ambitious subject pictures. The unpretending little water-colour from the Moore Collection (now in the Ashmolean Museum) (pi. xxvm a) is the work of a practised hand. It is not unlikely that others, representing, as his biography gives reason to expect, scenes in the neighbourhood of Hastings, are in existence, decked with the names of more eminent contemporary artists.
Although not endowed with the rough originality and brio of John Carter, Macquin, of all Mr. Moore's poetical correspondents, certainly showed most ability in turning the neatest and most humorous verses; and the scene may be closed in the approved manner with a rhymed tag, quoted from them, which felicitously sums up the humble primary aims of amateur and professional typo- graphers and draughtsmen in the classical period of Old British water-colour painting. The letters are full of heraldic quips, and one, blazoning at length an imaginary honorific coat for 'Nelson of the Nile', recalls the fact that it ultimately fell to Macquin's lot to design the funeral car of the Admiral ; references to social meetings are also much in evidence ; and it is after accepting an invitation that the versifier proceeds :
My wand'ring Fancy now at work Feasts, but not as with knife and fork, Feasts on some fresh beautiful Drawing Of mould'ring towers, which tho' destroying
OF THE OLD BRITISH SCHOOL 83
The F*a#-hand l of Time has left
With ivy mantle and many a cleft;
Has left to Pious Carter's hand
Or Dayes's pencil to withstand.
Be blessed ye, whose wond'rous skill
Bids fleeting time stop and be still !
For henceforth, when thick cov'ring dust
Shall bury to the smallest bust
The Gothic pride of Castles Drear,
Of abbeys old with cloisters near,
The magic spell of Indian ink,
The simple cake of Brown or Pink,
In Dayes's or in Carter's pages,
Shall still retain the dear images,
And to our wond'ring offspring show
What could a Dayes, a Carter do
To preserve what or time or Viatt would o'erthrow.
1 See p. 52 ante.
M 2
KILPECK CHURCH
BY LIONEL CUST.
THE little church of Kilpeck in Herefordshire, not far from the River Wye at St. Devereux, is well known to many antiquaries, and is frequently visited on account of its peculiar interest. Small as the church is, it has a number of special features which command attention. Though only some sixty feet or so long from west to east, it is divided into three sections — a nave, a pre-chancel, and an apsidal chancel. The style and ordinary decoration belongs to the familiar period in architecture which we call Norman, but the special interest lies in the extra ornamentation in sculpture, especially on the exterior of the church.
The church at Kilpeck has been often described, and in 1842 a series of lithographic views was published by Mr. G. R. Lewis. It was completely restored early in the nineteenth century, but the ornamentation was carefully preserved. Recent references to the church will be found in a paper by the Rev. Sir G. H. Cornewall, Bart., of Moccas, in the Transactions of the Woolhope Club, 1886-9, PP- r37-44» ancl by the Rev. M. G. Watkins in the Hereford Diocesan Messenger for September, 1900.
Kilpeck, or Kilpec, comprised both a castle and a priory. In both cases the historical information is very scanty. The castle was built for defensive purposes and occupied a strong position, but only a few blocks of masonry remain. This castle is described in G. T. Clark's Mediaeval and Modern Archi- tecture, vol. ii, p. 162. A manor of Chipecc was existing at the time of the Conquest in the possession of Cadiand, an Englishman, who was dispossessed and the manor granted to William Fitz-Norman. A church was also in exist- ence, at all events shortly after this date, dedicated to St. Mary and St. David, and this was bestowed by Hugh, son of William Fitz-Norman, on the Church of St. Peter, Gloucester. As St. David was not canonized until 1120 A.D. the church at Kilpeck must have been one of the earliest dedicated to him, as the patron saint of Wales and the Marches.
A priory also existed at Kilpeck, but there seems to be no trace of any actual connexion between the existing church and the priory. It is stated that the priory was suppressed and destroyed early in the fifteenth century.
The castle and demesne of Kilpeck was in 1248 the property of Hugh de Kilpeck, probably a descendant of the original Norman family, whose daughter Jane was the wife of Philip Marmion, champion of England, who was taken prisoner at the battle of Lewes in 1264. Philip Marmion's granddaughter married Baldwin de Freville, whose eventual heiress married Sir Hugh Wil-
86 KILPECK CHURCH
loughby. The Kilpeck property eventually passed, with the neighbouring estates of Wormbridge and Whitfield, to their present owner, Captain Percy Archer Clive, M.P.
This scanty historical information shows that at the beginning of the twelfth century there were at Kilpeck a manor and a castle, occupied by a Norman family of knightly rank, and a church, perhaps dating from a pre-Conquest period. It is an interesting question as to how far the new Norman settlers conyerted, or entirely rebuilt, the Anglo-Saxon churches which they found already in existence. The gradations from the Anglo-Saxon to the Norman or Romanesque were much less marked than those from the Norman to the Gothic. It would seem therefore as if the original Anglo-Saxon style, such as it was, with its Northern ingredients became quietly absorbed into the Romanesque, as intro- duced by the Norman invaders. At Kilpeck there are traces of the nascent Gothic or ogival style, which was so soon to supplant the Romanesque altogether.
Bearing this in mind, it makes it easier for the student to examine the curious and copious ornamentation of this little church at Kilpeck. The chief features of this decorative work are the carvings of the principal door on the south-west, the corbel-table running round the exterior of the church, with its grotesque heads and monsters, the figures carved on the chancel arch in the interior, and the plaited carving of the small window on the west front.
Taking the south-west door first, this is surmounted by a round-headed arch encasing a tympanum. The arch itself, as well as its base, forming the lintel of the doorway is carved in the familiar zig-zag pattern of the Norman period. The tympanum is carved into the form of a vine with conventional foliage and fruit, and resembles other carvings in similar positions or doorways in the immediate neighbourhood, Moccas, Rowleston, and elsewhere. Round the inner arch is a double band of carved ornamental work. The inner of these two bands contains thirteen carved bosses, grotesque masks, birds, and animals, within a grotesque recumbent human figure in the centre of the arch. The outer band of ornament contains a series of grotesque fishes, birds, and zodiacal ornaments with a chain of rings linked together by an elaborate carved scroll. These outer arches rest on two carved bases, supported by double jambs or pilasters on either side of the stone doorway. The outer jamb is in each case carved with a design of twisted snakes and tendrils. Of the inner jamb, that on the left on entering is carved with the figures of two men clad in coats of mail and helmets and carrying swords, placed one above the other, the whole terminating in a capital carved with two grotesque animals like wolves. The jamb on the right is carved at the base with a pair of birds facing each other, and above them an interlaced scheme of leaves and tendrils up to a capital on which is carved a grotesque face amid conventional foliage.
Under the wall-plate, which runs round the church outside, is a series of
PLATE XXIX
(a) Portion of West front
(b) From the East
KILPECK CHURCH
PLATE XXX
South door
KILPECK CHURCH
KILPECK CHURCH 87
corbel-heads of a grotesque nature, resembling the heads in the corbel-table of the choir in Romsey Abbey. These are mostly human heads or monsters, but one of them represents the Paschal Lamb bearing a cross. This is very similar to the well-known badge of the Lamb bearing a banner, adopted by the Order of the Knights Templars, which Order was founded in 1120, about the date at which the church of Kilpeck was completed.
On entering the church ornamentation is more sparingly employed, but on the jambs of the chancel arch are carved on each side three figures of saints, superimposed, all in ecclesiastical dress. The lower figures carry scourges and palm brandies, one holds a key, another a cross. There is also a font of conglomerate stone in the Norman style, evidently of local manufacture.
Much time and no little ingenuity have been spent in trying to interpret the symbolism of these various ornaments and decorative carvings. Symbolism has been pre-supposed, but the haphazard position of the various ornaments has made any such interpretation merely a matter of rather forced and baseless guess-work. The vine in the tympanum has been interpreted as the Tree of Life, which again has been discovered in one of the capitals of the doorway, issuing from the mouth of a grotesque mask, solemnly described as that of the Son of Man. The six figures carved on the chancel arch have been described as six of the Apostles. The Temptation of Adam and Eve has been discovered on one of the carved pilasters of the doorway. The two warriors in armour seem to have baffled all such solutions.
Repeated visits to this interesting church led to a belief that no symbolism could be intended at all, or at all events that if any had existed it was quite insoluble at the present day. It is the more satisfactory therefore to find that a reasonable and fairly convincing solution has been put forward by Prof. E. S. Prior and Mr. Arthur Gardner in their monumental work on Mediaeval Figure Sculpture in England.
A glance at any reproductions of the ornamental sculpture on Kilpeck Church is sufficient to show that a great part of it is of Scandinavian origin. The corbel-tables end at the north and south ends in three projecting stops, like gargoyles, resembling large jaws with a curled tongue within. These objects are clearly derived from the dragon's heads so familiar in all Viking ornamenta- tion, especially on the prows of their vessels. The mixture of beasts, birds, and monsters is again characteristic of Viking ornament, and the interlacing tendrils of the Keltic art, so prevalent in Ireland, through which country the Scandina- vian influence probably penetrated into Wales and the West of England. The two warriors suggest the Northmen of the Conquest, and may be compared to the mail-clad warriors of the Bayeux tapestry and of the seal of Milo de Gloucester in the time of Henry I. The long skirts under the armour suggest the time of the earliest Crusades and of the Knights Templar of the date. The Zodiac
88 KILPRCK CHURCH
.
figures are also derived from France, where they are used in more definite forms in Romanesque decoration. The figures of the saints on the chancel arch and that in the centre of the doorway show a Byzantine influence, probably derived also from Merovingian or Othonian sources through Western Europe. There is in fact at Kilpeck Church a medley of Northern and Southern ornament of approximately the same period, for which it would be difficult to account in any other way than that put forward by Messrs. Prior and Gardner.
According to these authorities the Kilpeck carvings and others of a similar nature are the work of masons, copying from certain objects placed before them for this purpose. They show from technical comparison that many of these carvings repeat work on metal or wood or ivory, which are rendered into stone with mere mechanical skill. They are carved but not plastic. Such works in metal, or ivory, or wood, being portable, would be available in the treasury of any large religious house. Messrs. Prior and Gardner show that the special features of the Kilpeck ornamentation occur in the personal ornaments of the Anglo-Saxon and Viking ages, and in such pieces of metal work as the splendid Gloucester Candlestick in the Victoria and Albert Museum. It should be noted that this famous candlestick was originally given to the Church of St. Peter in Gloucester by the Abbot Peter (1109-12), the same church to which Hugh Fitz- Norman gave the church of Kilpeck a few years later. Some of the motives also occur in Anglo-Saxon or Early English illuminated manuscripts.
So far, therefore, as surmise is permissible in any question of archaeology it may be conjectured that the Lord of Kilpeck built the church at Kilpeck as a thank-offering, perhaps for his preservation during the second Crusade, in which he may have served as a Knight Templar. Local workmen were probably employed, for English workmen were always good to employ, but as they possessed no artistic education or knowledge, or power of design, they were provided with objects from the treasure-chests in the castle or the priory, or perhaps illuminated service books, from which drawings could be made to guide the stonemasons in their copies. The fact that there is nothing specially sacred in the way of symbolism would seem to point to the sculptures being made under the eye of a lay authority, rather than of a religious body like the Bene- dictines or Cistercians, though Romanesque sculpture is less didactic than the classical or the Gothic. It is clear that there is no meaning at all to be extracted from these sculptured ornaments at Kilpeck. They are just ornaments, picked here and there as suggested, or maybe from an architect's sketch-book, like that of Villars de Honnecourt.
England was notoriously slow in the development of the arts of design. Her craftsmen were always serviceable, but lacking in imagination. The Briton could only copy and coarsen, where the Frenchman would create. It took two or three centuries of blending the stolid Anglo-Saxon nature with Keltic,
PLATE XXXI
(a) Grotesque stop in corbel table
Central portion of arch over South door
KII.PECK CHURCH
PLATE XXXII
c o in
e
3 bo
1
D
K
U
id
n W bo
'
2
' ~
u
KILPECK CHURCH 89
Scandinavian, Merovingian and Byzantine influences, before a real English school of design came into being, a school which for a short period was to be looked upon with admiration by other nations. The Roman settlement in Britain left but little permanent trace, but the Britons went on copying, for instance, Roman coins without any understanding, until they became charged with unintelligible figures. So, later on, the carver and mason copied without understanding, until an expressive object like a Viking dragon's head degenerated into a mere meaningless ornament, as in the three projecting ornaments on the west front of Kilpeck Church, which do not even perform the usual function of a gargoyle. Thus the signs of the Zodiac, when selected because of the animals represented, ceased to have any meaning. The double bird or animal, facing each other, so familiar a symbol in the early church, has no meaning in sculp- tures as at Kilpeck, but is used merely for decorative purposes. One of the besetting sins of architects is to use ornament which should mean something, but does not, or which is but a debased form of something better. The only excuse can be when, as in the case of Kilpeck, such ornament is used with a real decorative effect which is satisfactory to the eye, without any necessary appeal to the intellect in order to explain its meaning.
v. N
A NOTE ON THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH AND GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT
COMPRISING A COMPLETE LIST OF THE WORKS BY BOTH ARTISTS FORMERLY IN THE POSSESSION OF THE GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT FAMILY, AND DISPOSED OF IN THE YEARS 1797, 1874, AND 1892.
BY M. H. SPIELMANN.
WRITING in May 1908, Dr. Richard W. Waring, formerly of the Greys, Cavendish, Suffolk, son-in-law of the late Mr. Richard Gainsborough Dupont, placed in my hands the auction catalogues of three sales of numerous works by Gainsborough and Gainsborough Dupont which seem to a great extent to have escaped the notice of biographers of Gainsborough and his nephew.1 Many years ago I acquired a curious collection of contemporary journalistic references to the work of the two painters, continued from year to year, with particular relation to their exhibits at the Royal Academy from 1769 onwards. Among these records was an important newspaper report printed a few days after Gainsborough's death of the pictures, finished and unfinished, that stood around in the studio of the deceased painter in Schomberg House. Some of these, judged by their titles, seem to have been completed by Dupont, and (unless they be copies) to have been exhibited by him subsequently under his own name. It was my intention to await an opportunity for dealing with the material as a whole. Within the last year, however, further inquiry into the work of the two artists has been made and the results published with references to contemporary press comment, so that it seems desirable to postpone the matter no longer, but to set forth in full detail the little-known sale of 1797 and the almost equally neglected dispersal of 1874, for the benefit of such persons as might desire to take advan- tage of the information. The few pictures that remained for sale in October 1892 were those which belonged to Mr. R. G. Dupont's widow — or, rather, which were held in trust by the widow's trustees.
In the catalogue of the 1797 sale preserved by the Gainsborough Dupont family, as represented by Dr. Richard Waring, there is bound up a letter written by the artist, a few months before his death, to Mr. Richard Dupont of Sudbury.
1 When this paper was compiled Mr. W. T. Whitley's excellent Thomas Gainsborough had not appeared. Mr. Whitley refers to the sale of 1797, which, he curiously says, was ' in fact, though not in name, a Gainsborough sale '. It should be noted that 58 Lots were sent into Christie's
N 2
92 A NOTE ON THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH
This letter, it will be seen, has a special significance in its main reference to Royal patronage : it is dated from ' Grafton Street, Novr 6, 1796'.
' .... I was in hopes of taking a look at you this Autumn, but having been employed at different times more than four Months past at Windsor in Painting a set of pictures of all the Princesses for the Queen, put it out of my power .... With best love to sister Dupont & the Young Folks — believe me, Dear Richard,
Most affectionately yours,
Gainsbro: Dupont.' 1
It may be worth while to transcribe the title of the catalogue, a copy of which the auctioneers delivered to the ' Exor" of Gainsborough Dupont esqr decd : '
'A Catalogue of a Valuable Collection of Pictures, Drawings, Copperplates, &c., The Property, and Principally the Works of that esteemed and excellent artist Mr. GAINS-
as the property of Mrs. Gainsborough, and 94 as that of G. Dupont— the latter, however, including
not only copper-plates (with impressions) but his models and plaster-casts, eleven in number.
The gross amount fetched by these 58 'Mrs. Gainsborough Lots' was £347 i6s., that by the
'Dupont Lots', £519 145.
In the Morning Herald, No. 5622, there appeared on the morning of the sale the following
unsigned paragraph (and list), so designed as inaccurately to convey the idea that the auction was
essentially a Gainsborough sale : —
'The remaining Works of our highly distinguished countryman, Mr. Gainsborough, are to be brought forward for sale This Day, April 10, at Mr. Christie's Rooms. Amongst these are some Pictures of special merit ; and, what is particularly deserving the regard of the amateur, a few dead-coloured Landscapes, sketched out a short time previously to his death, and enriched with his best ideas. Several Portraits are also in the Collection ; and, as these principally appertain to names and conditions of high note, it will be rather extraordinary if neither personal regard, family affections, nor friendship, should not be so far awakened as to restore them to their original alliance. Some of the Portraits are as follow : '
' Duke of Gloucester, full length ; Duchess of Gloucester, kit-cat ; Lord Abingdon, full length ; Duke of Cumberland, a head, on three-quarters canvas ; Duchess of Cumberland, half length ; Lady Eardley and Child, full length ; Dowager Lady Aylesford and Child, full length ; Lord Jersey, a head ; Duke of Bedford, a head ; Lady Clive, a head ; Lady Powis, a head ; Lady Berkeley, a head ; Lady Hanam, a head ; Lord Stopford, a head ; Sir Christopher Witchcote, half length ; ditto, a head ; Lady Maynard, kit-cat ; Lady Clarges, a head ; Lady Lyttleton, a head ; Lady Clifford, a head ; Mrs. Howard, a head ; Mr. Wade, of Brighton, a full length; Mrs. Oswald, a head; Mrs. Methewin, a head; Marquis Champain, a head; Signer Savoi [? Savoir], a head; Mrs. Ibbetson, a head; Mr. Abel, a head; Mr. Quin, Comedian, a head.'
' In addition to the above Portraits are some very fine Landscapes, also for Sale, in the same Rooms, by the pencil of Mr. Gainsborough Dupont, as well as the following Portraits, viz.— Miss Fowler, a head ; Miss Townsend, a head ; with several others.' This list is of great importance as it reveals the notable fact that of the twenty-nine portraits
here attributed to Gainsborough all but nine were heads only ; perhaps they were but trial portraits
for big pictures. This, of course, enormously discounts the claim to the auction being in reality
'a Gainsborough sale' and re-establishes the good faith of Christie's catalogue in casting
Gainsborough Dupont for the title-role.
1 Frederick Seguier, it will be remembered, used to insist, on no clear grounds, that the
surname correctly spelt was ' Dupon '.
AND GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT 93
BOROUGH DUPONT, dec. Removed from his late Dwelling House in Fitzroy Street, Amongst which are included several of the MOST CAPITAL & FINE PRODUCTIONS of his late Uncle Mr. GAINSBOROUGH, of Pall Mall, dec., comprising an Assemblage of Finished & Unfinished PORTRAITS of MANY PERSONS of DISTINCTION, Together with a Selection of CABINET PICTURES, The works of the old esteemed masters ALSO, A GRAND SELECTION of VIEWS IN INDIA, by the late ingenious Artist Mr. Hodges — Portraits by Kettle, etc. the Property of WARREN HASTINGS, ESQ. Brought from his house in Park Lane, which will be sold by Auction By Messrs Christie, Sharp, & Harper, at the Great Room, Pall Mall, on Monday, April ibth., 1797, and following Day, at twelve o'clock.'
Then follows the catalogue, with such prices added as were noted by the representative of Dupont's family who attended the sale. This catalogue, sent by the auctioneers to their clients, appears to be a proof, with errors and omissions put right in Christie's own complete and annotated copy. The printer or compiler was careless, for all the portraits at the first day's sale appear to have been unfinished; yet the special note 'unfinished' to Lots (i and 2 in Christie's c°Py) 35, 36, and 41 would leave the matter in some doubt were it not that a certain degree of looseness in the drawing up of the catalogue even in its final form forbids us to accord too much importance to the circumstance. For example, seeing that only Lots 34 to 43 inclusive are described as being by Gainsborough, it seems to be left to us to conclude that the remainder of the portraits in this section, in addition to a couple of fancy pictures, are by Dupont : that is to say, the remaining thirty-two. Yet it is hard to believe that so many portraits 'on the way' — and those of Gainsborough's known sitters — should have been left by the younger man, much of whose time had been occupied with the scraping of plates and, as we know now, with the painting of land- scapes. The ownership of these pictures may afford us some slight assistance : this point will be referred to later on.
Unfinished portraits Lot1
2 Marquess Champain
3 Lady unknown [in MS. — Hanham]
4 Small portrait of Marquess of Buckingham and spaniel )
5 Small whole length of Mr. Beaufoy j ^'
6 Miss Fowler I
7 Small whole length Mrs. Robinson
8 Lady Littleton
9 late Lord Jersey
11 - Bryan Esq. 12 shillings
12 Mrs. Methuen
1 Lot i not specified. For convenience" sake, the items are here separated : the ' lots ' com- prising paintings specifically declared to be by Gainsborough are given later on.
94 A NOTE ON THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH
13 Mrs. Oswald
14 Lord Stopford
15 Mr. Ibbetson
16 Mr. Able [sic]
17 Mr. Quin
18 Lady Clifford
19 Mrs. Howard
20 Signer Savoi
20* Miss Townsend 5 shillings.
21 The late Mrs. Sheridan
22 Lady Clarges
24 Duchess of Cumberland, half length
25 Duke of Cumberland (a head)
27 Duchess of Gloucester, Kitcat
28 Lady Marquard, Kitcat [sic Lady Maynard]
29 Sir Christopher Witchcot
30 Sir Christopher Witchcot
31 late Duke of Bedford
32 Lady Clive
33 Lord Powis
Then follow a number of chalk drawings, and Lots 78 to 90 (Lot 86, being by Bartolozzi, is omitted), all of which were copper-plates, mostly with printed impressions, and, according to the family catalogue, were bought in. This, however, we now know, must be untrue. The list is an interesting one, as it includes the Gainsborough portraits :
Lot 78 2 copper-plates, full-length portraits of His Majesty and proof ) impressions
79 i copper-plate, do. — of Her Majesty and proof impressions
80 i ,, of the three eldest Princesses ; 93 prints .£8 18 6
81 i ,, „ Duke of Northumberland ^220
82 i „ „ Rev. Mr. Bate Dudley ^33°
83 i ,, Mr. Shenday \sic Mrs. Sheridan] (delivered
to Miss Gainsborough)
84 i ,, General St. Leger, with 49 prints £17 6 6
85 i ,, Lord Rodney, 13 proof impressions £120
87 i ,, Baron Perryn, 14 prints .£33°
88 i „ Judge Blackstone1 (delivered to Miss Gainsborough)
89 i „ Duke of Clarence
9° J ,, Boy & Dogs (delivered to Miss Gainsborough)
1 This name, in Christie's catalogue, is erased and that of Judge Skinner substituted.
AND GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT 95
Second Days Sale.
52 Portraits of Lord Rodney's [Romney's] family £6 6 o
56 A small upright landscape, with cottage, peasants, &c. £7 7 o
60 A poor man begging at a cottage door /6 10 o
64 A pair of landscapes and figures, very spirited pictures /9 9 o
67 A pair of small pleasing landscapes and figures ^16 5 6
72 A small landscape, a mountainous view, with a waggon
and figures, painted with all the boldness and effect of
his admired master, and truly a cabinet picture /n n o '
73 A ditto, with road labourers, its companion ^5 15 6
76 A Schoolboy, and infant nurse, painted with masterly
effect, and great richness of colouring £4 4 o
77 The Woodman and girl milking cows, a beautiful picture ^15 15 o
78 The Companion — of equal merit £14 14 o
87 Halt of travelling peasants by a woodside, painted with
great richness and warmth of colouring ^"10 10 o
88 The Companion — of equal merit 990 100 A Shepherd boy listening to a magpie — his sheep beside
him ,£18 18 o
The simplicity of this young peasant is sweetly depicted, (bought in
This is a highly creditable specimen of the late Mr. in the name
Dupont's pencil. of Crofts.)
According to the family records, the total amount realized for Dupont's pictures was ^390 19 5, being given as .£514 19 6, less ^66 14 ' bought in ', less ^38 12 6 commission at 7*- per cent., less Duty at iod in the pound on ,£448 5 6 sold. (Also ' bought in ', likewise in the name of ' Crofts ', was Gains- borough's The Haymaker, Lot 103, catalogued further on.) The total sum here given included a number of plaster casts and models. The Lots ' bought in ' are specifically recorded thus :
First Day.
Lot 50 Six drawings by G. Dupont (in the name of Puree) £2 5 o 58 A pair „ ( „ „ Nixon) £i 16 o 81 Plate of the Duke of North- umberland ( „ ,, ,, ) £2, 2 O
1 ' Bought in ' in the name of ' Nixon '. In addition to this and to the others mentioned on this page there should apparently be added the further Lots in the name of ' Croft ' or ' Crofts ' — i, 4, and 5, 14, 22, and 77 ; and in that of ' Puree ', Lots 59 (first day's sale) and 93 (second day).
96 A NOTE ON THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH
Second Day.
Lot 19 Apollo and Daphne (artist
unnamed) (in the name of Nixon) £ — 14 o
72 A Landscape ( ,, „ ,, ) £n n o 100 A Shepherd boy listening to
a magpie ( ,, ,, Croft) £18 18 o
103 The Haymaker1 ( ,, „ Crofts) .£29 ' 8 o
£66 14 o
It need scarcely be said that several of these pictures, if we are to accept them as by G. Dupont, remind us of similar subjects by his uncle — such as Mr. 'Able' (Lot 16), Mr. Quin (Lot 17), Mrs. Sheridan (Lot 21), Lady Clarges (Lot 22), and others. They may have been copies made from Gainsborough's pictures, likely enough for engraving purposes, as was a common practice. We are reminded also by A Poor Man begging at a Cottage Door (Lot 60) of Gains- borough's picture entitled Door of an English Mansion, with a Beggar's Family receiving Relief, which was in the sale of Sir Francis Freeling's Collection in 1837. These instances, still more several of the landscape-subjects, are hardly needed to illustrate the humility, almost servility, with which the younger man drew inspiration from Gainsborough with every touch, and with every breath.
PICTURES EXPLICITLY STATED TO BE BY THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH, FINISHED AND UNFINISHED.
First Day.
Lot 34 [see later]
35 The Duke of Gloucester, in full length, unfinished
36 Lord Abingdon, in full length, unfinished
37 Dowager Lady Aylesford and child, full length
38 Lady Eardley & child
39 Mr. Wade of Brighton
40 A Young Nobleman whole length
1 In the latest serious biography of Gainsborough it is said that — ' of the Gainsboroughs sold in 1797 only the unfinished Haymaker and Sleepiiig Girl was catalogued as Dupont's '. In the catalogue no printed mention of the proprietorship is so made, but in the MS. annotation in Christie's own copy it is given ; but so far from it being the only one the following are similarly described : (a)— if we take the 'Unfinished' list as being wholly Gainsborough's work — Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, n, 20 A, si, 43 A, and 438 (but the last two are almost certainly by Dupont); and (l>) the unquestioned works by Gainsborough belonging to Dupont : Lots 56 (first day) and 68, 81, 99, 101, and 103 (second day).
AND GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT 97
41 A fancy whole length of a housemaid, unfinished
42 The Assumption of the Virgin, a sketch
43 Diana and Actaeon
56 A small landscape in chalks 13 shillings [57-63 Fourteen landscape drawings, sold for ^15 6 o, of which Lot 58
(.£1 16 o) was bought in. These are apparently by Gainsborough, although not clearly stated to be so.]
Second Day.
Lot 18 Picture. Sketch for a landscape
53 An unfinished picture with a jackass
54 An unfinished landscape with a waggon, a rich warm scene
55 A cottage with figures, etc. unfinished, its companion
57 A peasant girl with sticks, unfinished
58 Girl gathering mushrooms, unfinished, but sketched with great ease
& sweetness
59 Its companion
[64 Copy after Rubens — see later]
65 A landscape with figures, unfinished, one of his very ready & elegant
effusions of genius
66 Its companion, a picturesque scene of great extent
68 The original sketch for the celebrated picture of the Gipsies, very
fine effect ^15 4 6
69 A mountainous landscape, with a bridge, cascade, and figures,
unfinished, a fine poetic scene
70 A landscape, with buildings & figures, its companion
81 A large & very fine drawing — A landscape, with cows in a lane
/io 10 o
82 A nymph at the Bath, a large oval
[93 Copy after Vandyck— see infra]
96 A landscape, a woody scene, with a cart and figure[s]— painted with
great spirit
97 A view in St. James's Park. Nothing can exceed the airiness of this
artist's foliage ; the figures are probably known portraits of the times
98 A landscape, with figures, a clear, brilliant picture. This artist whose
prolific imagination could ' body forth ' nature in her most wild & varied forms, always found a ready conveyance for them to the canvas, by a wonderful facility of pencil, which was ripened by the happiest execution. This Picture is a charming proof of the excellence of the admired master v. o
98 A NOTE ON THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH
99 A landscape with figures, and sheep coming down to a brook. A grand & romantic woody scene ,£31 10 o
The favourite stile of Gainsborough was undoubtedly the Dignified Pastoral. This specimen of him is replete ivith picturesque grandeur.
101 A hilly landscape, with a waggon, horses, and figures stopping at
a ford, a sultry evening scene ,£50 8 o
The heat of the atmosphere is admirably expressed, and the varied elevations of ground, and foreshortening of the waggon and figures are strong characters of true genius.
102 A landscape with cattle watering at sunset, painted with uncommon
spirit. The choice of subject, the freedom of execution, and the warm colouring that pervades the zvhole,form a rich repast that the eye must dwell upon zvith pleasure. This picture is perhaps one of the very finest productions of this great artist.
103 ' The Haymaker, and sleeping girl. A fresh morning scene — unfinished,
but touched with great freedom and beautiful expression
.£29 18 o
The identification of a number of the pictures here enumerated — in several cases obvious enough — would be outside the object of these notes ; but at least we may acknowledge with appreciation the delightful efforts at criticism in ' the grand style ' of the auctioneer writing in emulation of the splendid achievements of his great rival, 'the specious orator/ Mr. Robins.
Finally comes an important group of copies of old masters made by Gains- borough, the first series comprised in the first sale of 1797 and the second in that of 1874. It is difficult to see why, unless they were wholly original works, ' the Assumption of the Virgin ' (Lot 42) and ' Diana and Actaeon ' (Lot 43) should have been passed over.
COPIES OF OLD MASTERS BY GAINSBOROUGH.
First Day. Lot 34 A portrait /3 5 o after Vandyck
Second Day.
2 A small landscape & figures, an imitation (Sshillings) after Michaud
16 A landscape with Cattle [,£150] ) after C. du Jardin together with a view on the banks of a river j after Cuyp
[and King Charles's Children (? after Vandyck)]
17 A Conversation ) after Cuyp
I / ^ *
) a
I / y^2 *7 ol
! f
A portrait of a lady & a copy! from Teniers
See supra. A pencil note states that this picture, after it was bought in, went to Gainsborough Dupont's nephew and remained with his family until 1872, when it was sold at Christie's.
AND GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT
(no price)
99
63 A descent from the Cross, unfinished, after the celebrated one of
93 A Portrait of James Stuart, Duke of Richmond & Lenox, whole length
Rubens
after Vandyck
When we come to the later sales, held locally, of works by Gainsborough and Gainsborough Dupont still in the possession of the heir of the former artist— Mr. Richard Gainsborough Dupont, as I have said, father-in-law of Dr. Richard W. Waring — we find that the records (hitherto unpublished, as I believe) bring us as late as 1874 and 1892. A very few of the items in the first sale were duly recorded in Redford's Art Sales, while those of 1874 the compiler passed over in silence. Here is the list complete of the last two sales. The detail in which they are given will probably shed light upon certain pictures and sketches the authorship of which has hitherto been in doubt ; especially will more than one reputed ' replica ' by Gainsborough now be recognized as a frank copy by Dupont. They were sold at Sudbury on May 29, 1874 :
PICTURES BY GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT.
Lot 112 The Agony in the Garden
114 View of Sudbury from Bulmar
115 A Composition
116 The Wood Gatherers
117 Avenue leading to the Auberies 125 The Market Cart
135 Head of the Messiah
140 A Cottage Door with Children at Play
142 Portraits of two Gentlemen
143 The Carrier's Cart [Probably the figures
were painted by Gainsborough]
151 Head of an Old Man
161 Portrait of Miss Gainsborough
163 Portrait of his Father
164 Ruins on the Sea Shore 167 Evening
172 Portrait of a Lady
175 Portrait of Humphry Gainsborough
176 Portrait of a Gentleman
177 A View of the Pyrenees
39x32 63X4
30x24
18 x 14 (after Gainsborough)
j_i x j™
19 x 15 (after Gainsborough) 29 x 242
18* x 24 (after Gainsborough)
.i v _i 4z x 52
24 x 29 (after Gainsborough)
163 x 14
17* x 14 (after Gainsborough)
30x25
20x24
24x25
24 x 19* (after Gainsborough)
29 x 24' (after Gainsborough)
29 x 24 (after De Crayer)
18x24
There is here sufficient evidence (Lots 112, 135, and 176) that Gainsborough
o 2
ioo A NOTE ON THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH
imposed upon his pupil the task he so frequently and so brilliantly assumed himself — that of copying fine examples of the old masters without any restriction to particular schools or characteristic styles.
PICTURES BY GAINSBOROUGH.
Lot 107 Mr. Blyth of Norfolk, called ' Pilgrim Blythe ' 21 x 16*
120 A Forest scene, with figures gathering wood 15 x 17
124 Portrait of the Artist's brother John (vide Fulcher's Life) 24 x 19
126 Mr. Philip Dupont — the artist's nephew 30 x 24^
127 Mrs. Philip Dupont, wife of the above (vide Fulcher, p. 210) 30 x 24-
130 Study for his own portrait 2o| x 16
131 Portrait of Philip Dupont 26 x 24! 133 Study for a portrait of himself 20 x 15 141 Rocks near Cheddar (oil on paper) 12* x 16* 148 A Fisherman putting off in a Punt — an early picture 9xn| 150 Portrait of Gainsborough, sketch for his own portrait i6| x 14* 173 Portrait of a Gentleman with a dog 30 x 22^
On October 4, 1892, a further sale of three pictures by Gainsborough, the property of ' Mr. Richard Gainsborough Dupont dcd at Sudbury, Suffolk ', was held in the Corn Exchange of that town. Other pictures were bought in :
Lot 203 Portrait of Gainsborough (a sketch painted by
himself) 20x16 116 guineas
i77A Sketch in oil for the Wrestlers 177° Portrait of Mr. Burroughs with Dog.
(Although the last two items are entered in the 1892 sale they seem to follow naturally at the end of the sale of May 1874.)
DITTO : at the Sale of Richard Gainsborough Dupont Esq; Sudbury Suffolk, 29 May, 1874 (by Wheeler & Westoby] the following ivere brought to the hammer :
no Sheep & Cattle ; 42 x 34! after Berghem [bought in, and sold at sale, at same place, in 1892
—54 guineas]
118 The Infant Saviour 18x24 after Albano
i77c Charles I (?) after Vandyck
i77b Picture after Claude
AND GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT 101
Lastly, the remaining prints by G. Dupont were disposed of :
PRINTS BY GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT, SOLD 29 MAY, 1874.
Lot 85 Views near Sudbury ; 13 proofs
92 The Countess of Salisbury
93 H.R.H. Prince William Henry (William IV) 95 The Prince of Wales
APPENDIX
THE antecedent notes, it will have been seen, are based upon the Catalogue (the text of which was but a proof) still in the possession of the Dupont family and annotated presumably by one of its members. By the courtesy of Messrs. Christie, Manson, and Woods, their original corrected catalogue of the sale is given below, carefully transcribed, rendered specially valuable by reason of its annotations. We thus have not only the full description of the Lots but also details of ownership, price, and name of purchaser of each Lot. To these I have appended one or two explanatory notes. It should be added that the omitted Lots were all the property of Warren Hastings with one unimportant exception— that of Lot 77, a fine impression of Zoffany's plate of the interior of the Royal Academy, bought in by the owner for six shillings.
It will be observed that in the two-days sale forty lots are specifically assigned by name to Gainsborough (if Lots 57 to 63 inclusive are by him, as indeed it would appear) and thirty to Gainsborough Dupont. Of the 40 Gainsboroughs 32 (or 35 with Lots 2, 16, and 17, second day) are oils ; and of the 30 Duponts, 14 Lots (comprising 16 pictures) are oils.
It will also be noted that three Lots (21, 66, and 83), all portraits by Dupont of ' the late Mrs. Sheridan ' — the first in oil, the second a drawing, and the third a copper-plate, and all of them the Dupont property— were withdrawn from the sale and ' delivered to Miss Gains- borough,' but whether as gift or purchase by private treaty is not indicated. Other Lots, or portions of Lots, similarly delivered to Miss Gainsborough are (43*) 'Captain Money', (80) a print of ' The Three Eldest Princesses ', (84) print of 'General St. Leger ', (85) plate and one impression of ' Lord Rodney ', (88) plate of ' Judge Skinner ' (incorrectly catalogued as ' Judge Blackstone ' and altered in manuscript), and (90) plate of ' Boy and Dogs '.
We are left uncertain whether the absurdly low prices realized are to be attributed to the fact that the portraits were for the most part unfinished and many of the landscapes were only sketches and ' dead-coloured ', or else were in unspecified cases really the work of Dupont, as frequently seems to be implied. In any case, to seek to identify several of them — as has been done— with pictures now in famous collections, mainly or solely on account of their titles, is in the highest degree speculative and dangerous. Perhaps the names of the purchasers — now here published for the first time— may in some cases afford a clue whereby the point may be determined ; but the description ' unfinished ' may perhaps be an easier and quicker guide. The probability is that they were true sketches — as we are told — or else the beginnings of pictures abandoned as they were not ' coming right ', as so often occurs in the practice of even the most accomplished painters.
IO2
A NOTE ON THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH
[Property of] Mrs. G. i.
Mrs. G.
G.D.
G.D.
Mrs. G.
/•
4-
5- 6.
Mrs. G.
G.D.
G. D.-'
A CATALOGUE
FIRST DAY'S SALE
MONDAY, APRIL the loth, 1797.
Unfinished Portraits.
[Price Purchaser] - 10. 6 Crofts l
-8.0 Walton
- 14. 6 Crofts
r Colonel
J. fy Q _
Hamilton
£i. 7. - Lord Maiden
- 12. - Griffith £i. 2. - Whiteford
£7. 77. 6 Crofts
, Colonel
** 4' Kilpatrick
£6. 6. o Puree 2
- i}. - Whiteford -/. - Barnard
-/. - Crofts
- 10. 6 Walten
[see note below]
£4. 6. - Hammond
1. A Fancy head, unfinished.
2. A portrait of the Marquis Champian [sic], un-
finished.
3. A ditto of Lady Hanham.
4. A small Portrait of the Marquis of Buckingham,
and a spaniel dog.
5. A small whole length of Mr. Beaufoy.-
6. Portrait of Miss Fowler.
7. Ditto, small whole length of Mrs. Robinson.
8. Ditto of Lady Littleton.
9. Ditto of the late Lord Jersey.
10. Ditto of a lady unknown.
11. Ditto of — Bryan, Esq.
12. Ditto of Mrs. Methuen.
13. Ditto of Mrs. Oswald.
14. Ditto of Lord Stopford.
15. Ditto of Mrs. Ibbetson.
16. Ditto of Mr. Able.
17. Ditto of Mr. Quin.3
18. Ditto of Lady Clifford.
19. Ditto of Mrs. Howard.
20. Ditto of Signer Savoi. 20". A Lady, Miss Townsend.
21. Ditto of the late Mrs. Sheridan.
Delivered to Miss Gainsborough.
22. Ditto of Lady Clarges.
23. A fancy picture, Kitcat.
24". Portrait of Lady Berkeley, finished. ~| 24b. Portrait of Miss Townshend, finished..]
24. Duchess of Cumberland, half length, and the
Duke of Cumberland.
25. Duke of Cumberland, a head (latter part of 24}.
1 See supra ' Crofts ' as signifying ' bought in '.
2 „ ,, ' Puree ' as having occasionally ' bought in '.
3 In this instance the purchaser actually paid £2.
4 See supra. This lot was withdrawn. Other portraits of Mrs. Sheridan were likewise with- drawn wholly or in part.
6 These two lots are erased in the Catalogue and were not put up to auction.
AND GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT
103
|
[Property |
of] |
[Price |
Purchaser] |
|
|
Mrs. G. |
26. |
-77.- |
Steers |
26. |
|
Mrs. G. |
27. |
£2. 10. - |
Dr. Duval |
27. |
|
Mrs. G. |
28. |
£a.j.- |
Col. Byde |
28. |
|
Mrs. G. |
29. |
-8.- |
Walten |
29. |
|
Mrs. G. |
30- |
-6.- |
Ditto |
3°- |
|
Mrs. G. |
31- |
£l. 2. - |
Lord Maiden |
31- |
|
Mrs. G. | |
32. |
£2. 2. - |
Hodson |
32- |
|
1 |
33- |
33- |
||
|
Mrs. G. |
34- |
*>./•- |
Bryan |
34- |
|
Mrs. G. |
35- |
£6.-- |
Hammond |
35- |
|
Mrs. G. |
36. |
£2. 12. 6 |
Morozani |
36. |
|
Mrs. G. |
37- |
£2. 2. - |
Calder |
37- |
|
Mrs. G. |
j8. |
£6. 16. - |
Walten |
38. |
|
Mrs. G. |
39- |
£j. 10. - |
Puree |
39- |
|
Mrs. G. |
40. |
- 10. 6 |
Whiteford |
40. |
|
Mrs. G. |
41. |
£4. 14. 6 |
Bryan |
4i- |
|
Mrs. G. |
42. |
£l. 2. - |
Walten |
42. |
|
Mrs. G. |
43- |
£2.j.- |
Hammond |
43- |
|
G.D. |
43>- |
['] |
43* |
G. D.
[no price or purchaser recorded]
26. A fancy picture, half length.
27. Duchess of Gloucester, Kitcat.
28. Lady Maynard, ditto.
29. Portrait of Sir Christopher Witchest. Ditto of ditto.
Ditto of the late Duke of Bedford. 32. Ditto of Lady Clive. Ditto of Lord Powis.
A ditto by T. Gainsborough, after V. Dyck. Ditto of the Duke of Gloucester, in full length,
unfinished. Gainsborough.
36. Ditto of Lord Abingdon, ditto. Gainsborough. Dowager Lady Aylesford and child, full length.
Gainsborough.
38. Lady Eardley and child, ditto. Gainsborough. Portrait of Mr. Wade of Brighton. Gains- borough. 40. Whole length portrait of a young nobleman.
Gainsborough.
A fancy whole length of a housemaid, un- finished. Gainsborough. The assumption of the Virgin, a sketch. Thos.
Gainsborough.
Diana and Actaeon. T. Gainsborough. Portrait of Captain Money, an elder brother of the Trinity House.
Delivered to Miss Gainsborough.1 43b. A ditto.
LOOSE DRAWINGS, AND FRAMED AND GLAZED DITTO.
|
G.D. |
44- |
£i. 14. - |
Kilpatrick |
44- |
|
G.D. |
45- |
-18.- |
W. Young |
45- |
|
G.D. |
46. |
£i. 16. - |
Ditto |
46. |
|
G.D. |
47- |
£i. a. - |
Legr [sic] |
47- |
|
G.D. |
48. |
£l. 12. - |
Smith |
48. |
|
G.D. |
49- |
£i. 7. - |
Dixon |
49- |
|
G.D. |
/o. |
£2. j. - |
Puree |
5°- |
|
G.D. |
51- |
£*./.- |
Ditto |
5i- |
|
G.D. |
/2. |
£2. 6. - |
Casivell |
52- |
|
G.D. |
53- |
£i. 7. - |
Leules |
53- |
|
G.D. |
54- |
£i. 16. - |
Smith |
54- |
|
G.D. |
55- |
- 12. - |
Ditto. |
55- |
|
G.D. |
56. |
-I).- |
Russell |
56. |
|
G.D. |
51- |
£2. 12. 6 |
Dixon |
57- |
Two academy figures and 21 sketches.
Twenty-four sketches of figures.
Ditto.
Ditto.
Six Drawings and six black-lead Sketches.
Two black chalk drawings. G. Dupont.
Six ditto. G. Dupont.
Five ditto. G. Dupont.
Five ditto ditto.
Four ditto ditto.
Three Indian chalk drawings. G. Dupont.
Portrait of a lady, whole length, in chalk.
A small landscape in chalks. Gainsborough.
A pair of ditto.
Gainsborough Dupont, it will be remembered, painted a group of the Elder Brethren.
IO4
A NOTE ON THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH
[Property of] G. D. j8. G. D. j9. G.D. G.D. G.D. G.D. G.D.
G.D. G.D.
G.D. G.D. G.D.
G.D. G.D. G.D.
G.D. G.D.
G.D. G.D.
60. 61. 62. 63. 64.
6j. 66.
67. 68. 69.
jo.
7Z-
72.
71- 74-
75-
77a-
[Price £i. 16. -
£2. 3. - £i. ii. 6
£2. 2. - £i. 16. -
£j.j.-
£2. 2. -
Purchaser]
Nixon
Dr. Murray
Baker
Kirkby
Do.
Baker
Lash
60. 61.
[ No name or price.]
[•]
£i. ii. 6 Hammond £2. if. - Ditto £2. - Evans
£i. f. - Whiteford £2. 12. 6 Lord Dude £2. ij. 6 Cohn
£i. ii. 6 Ditto. £i. 4. - Ditto.
£i. j. - Hollingsworth - 12. - Crofts
58. Ditto.
59. Ditto. Ditto. Ditto.
62. Ditto.
63. Ditto.
64. A landscape with cattle in chalks, an original
drawing for a picture in the possession of the late Lady Duncan.
65. J[udge] Skinner, drawing.1
66. A whole length ditto of Mrs. Sheridan, ditto.
Delivered to Miss Gainsborough.
67. A ditto of Lord Rodney, ditto.
68. Ditto of the Earl of Moira. Ditto.
69. Whole length portrait of His Majesty, a painted
print.
Ditto for ditto of Lord Rodney. Ditto in colours.
72. A pair of whole length prints of the King and
Queen, framed and glazed.
73. A ditto in colours in one frame.
74. A print of the three elder princesses, framed
and glazed.
75. Ditto.
77s. Portrait of Mr. Mainwaring, fine impression.
70. 7*-
VALUABLE COPPER PLATES.
G.D. G.D. G. D.
G.D.
G.D. G.D.
G.D.
7<§a. a 18. 7. 6 [sic]Mrs. Jones 78.
79.
£42. -. - Todd
80. £8. 18. 6 Ditto
81. £2. 2. - Nixon
82. £3. 3. - Evans
83. [no price— withdrawn]
84. £i7. 6. 6 Todd
78". a. One the Gipsies, and a Print.
78. Two copper plates, full length portraits of His
Majesty, 2 prints, and 68 proof impressions from ditto. G. Dupont.
79. One ditto of Her Majesty, 16 prints, and 30
proof impressions of ditto. G. Dupont.
80. Ditto of the three eldest princesses with 92
prints. G. Dupont. (i print delivered to Miss Gainsborough.)
81. Ditto of the Duke of Northumberland. G.
Dupont.
82. Ditto of the Rev. Mr. Bate Dudley. G. Dupont.
83. Ditto of Mrs. Sheridan. G. Dupont.
(Delivered to Miss Gainsborough.)
84. Ditto of Gen. St. Leger with 48 prints. G.
Dupont
(i print delivered to Miss Gainsborough.)
Originally ' Portrait of Judge Blackstone, a drawing.' Lot withdrawn.
Lot withdrawn.
AND GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT
105
[Property of] G. D. 85.
[Price Purchaser] £i. 2. - Evans
G. D. 86. £68. ;. - Todd
G.D.
G.D.
G.D.
G.D. G.D. G.D.
G.D. G.D.
8j. £j-j- - Molteno
88. [no price — withdrawn]
8g. [no price — no buyer} go. [withdrawn]
gi. \ £i. i. - Clark
92. J
93. - //. - Evans
94. - //. - Evans 9f. £3. 10. - Gardner
|
G.D. |
i. |
|
G. D. |
2. |
|
G.D. |
3- |
|
G. D. |
4- |
|
G.D. |
j. |
|
G.D. |
6. |
|
G.D. |
7- |
|
G.D. |
8. |
|
G.D. |
Q. |
85. Lord Rodney, 12 proof impressions. G. Du-
pont.
(Plate and i impression delivered to Miss Gainsborough.)
86. A three-quarter portrait of Mr. Pitt, with 32
prints, and 33 proof impressions from ditto. F. Bartolozzi.
87. One ditto of Baron Perryn with 14 prints from
ditto. G. Dupont.
88. J. Skinner [formerly J udge Blackstone, erased].
(Delivered to Miss Gainsborough.)
89. Ditto Duke of Clarence with i ditto. G. Dupont.
90. [Boy and Dogs.]
(Delivered to Miss Gainsborough.)
91. One unfinished plate.
92. Six plates not engraved.
93. A print of Mr. Pitt on Sattin.
94. A ditto.
95. Forty-four loose prints.
MODELS, PLASTER-CASTS, ETC.
10. ii.
f. - Smith
/. - Dr. Paul
4. - Ditto
• 4. - Ditto
2. 6 Radley
f. - Alexander
3. - Radley /. - Smith /. - Ditto
8. - Alexander
2. 6 Dr. Paul
1. Seven of animals.
2. Twenty-one of hands, etc.
3. Thirteen arms, etc.
4. Fifteen legs, feet, etc.
5. Ten torsi, etc. etc.
6. Nine of children's heads.
7. Eleven Young heads and Faun.
8. Sixteen Heads, River God and Masque.
9. Four large Busts, a Head and a Masque of
S. S. Newton.
10. Five Vandyck and four others.
11. Two, Venus bathing and a Faun.
SECOND DAY'S SALE TUESDAY, APRIL the nth., 1797.
PICTURES
2. - <?. - Garvey 2. Michaud : a small landscape and figures, with
the imitation of ditto by Gainsborough.
16. £i. j. - Smith 16. C. du Jardin : a landscape with cattle (after) by
Gainsborough ; and King Charles's children.2
77. £2.7.- Hammond 17. Cuyp. A conversation, after, by ditto; a portrait
of a lady, and a copy from Teniers by Ditto.
1 Not annotated as being Gainsborough or Dupont property, though evidently belonging to it.
2 Clearly after Van Dyck.
V. P
106 A NOTE ON THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH
[Property of] [Price Purchaser]
Mrs. G. 18. £i. 2. - Dixon 18. Sketch for a landscape. T. Gainsborough.
G. D. 79. 14. - Nixon 19. Apollo and Daphne.
G. D. 52. £6. 6. - Tholden 52. Portraits of Lord Romney's family. Dupont.
Mrs. G. 53. £j. ij. - Elwin 53. An unfinished landscape with a jackass. Gains-
borough.
Mrs. G. $4. £8. 18. 6 S. IV. Y. 54. A ditto with a waggon, a rich warm scene.
Gainsborough.
Mrs. G. //. £ij. 77. - ditto 55. A cottage with figures, etc. unfinished, its
companion. Gainsborough.
? Jj*. £,!<). 79. - bought in ] 55*. A pair of marble busts.
G. D. j6. £j. 7. - Hingeston 56. A small upright landscape, with cottage and
peasants, etc. Dupont.
Mrs. G. jj. £j. j. - Steers 57. A peasant girl with sticks, unfinished. T.
Gainsborough.
Mrs. G. j8. £3.3. - Mitchell 58. Girl gathering mushrooms, unfinished, but
sketched with great ease and sweetness. T. Gainsborough.
Mrs. G. /9- £8. 8. - Steers 59. Its companion. Gainsborough.
G. D. 60. £6. 10. - Lynd 60. A poor man begging at a cottage door. G.
Dupont.
Mrs. G. 6). £10. 10. - Steers 63. A descent from the cross, unfinished, after the
celebrated one of Rubens. T.Gainsborough.
G. D. 64. £9. 9. - Williamson 64. A pair of landscapes and figures, very spirited
Pictures. G. Dupont.
Mrs. G. 6j. £i. if. - Dixon 65. A landscape with figures, unfinished, one of his
very ready and elegant effusions of genius. T. Gainsborough.
Mrs. G. 66. £f. j. - Lambert 66. Its companion, a picturesque scene of great
extent. T. Gainsborough.
G. D. 67. £16. j. 6 Barrett 67. A pair of small pleasing landscapes and
figures. G. Dupont.
G. D. 68. £ij. 4. 6 Williamson 68. The original sketch for the celebrated Picture
of the Gipsies, very fine effect. Th. Gains- borough.
Mrs. G. 69. £9. 79. 6 Sir I. Leicester 69. A mountainous landscape with a bridge, cas- cade and figures, unfinished, a fine poetic scene. Th. Gainsborough.
Mrs. G. jo. £j. 7. - Champrener 70. A landscape with buildings and figures, its
companion. Th. Gainsborough.
Mrs. G. 77. £4. 14. 6 S. W. Y. 71. A large unfinished landscape.
G. D. 72. £77. 77. - Nixon 72. A small landscape, a mountainous view, with a
waggon and figures ; painted with all the boldness and effect of his admired master, and truly a cabinet Picture. G. Dupont.
G. D. 77. £j. zj. 6 French 73. A ditto, with road labourers, its companion.
G. Dupont.
1 Not carried into total.
AND GAINSBOROUGH DUPONT
107
[Property of] [Price Purchaser]
G. D. 76. £,4. 4. - Chapean
^
G. D. 77. £if. 15. - Caswell
G. D. 7<9. £14. 14. - Ditto
G. D. ST. £10. TO. - Lambert
Mrs. G. 82. £j. j. - Earle
G. D. 87. £10. TO. - White
G. D. 88. £9. <). - Ditto G. D. 92. £21. - Walten
|
Mrs. G. Mrs. G. Mrs. G. |
93- 96. 97- |
£a.j.- £16. 16. - £jT. TO. - |
Puree Williamson Ditto |
Mrs. G. 98. £jj. 12. - Long
G. D. 99. £ji. 10. - S. W. Y.
76. A School-boy, and an infant nurse, painted with
masterly effect, and of great richness of colouring. G. Dupont.
77. The woodman and girl, milking cows, a beau-
tiful picture. G. Dupont.
78. The companion to ditto, of equal merit. G.
Dupont.
81. A landscape with cows in a lane, a large and
very fine drawing. T. Gainsborough.
82. A nymph at the Bath, a large oval. T. Gains-
borough.
87. Halt of travelling peasants by a woodside,— a
pleasing composition, and painted with great richness and warmth of colouring. G. Dupont.
88. Its companion of equal merit. G. Dupont.
92. A landscape, with milkmaids and cows, etc., by
G. Dupont after Gainsborough.1
93. A portrait of James Stuart, Duke of Richmond
and Lenox, whole length, by Th. Gains- borough, after V. Dyck.
96. A landscape, a woody scene, with a cart and
figures, — painted with great spirit. Th. Gainsborough.
97. A view in St. James's Park. Nothing can
exceed the airiness of this artist's foliage ; the figures are probably known portraits of the time. Th. Gainsborough.
98. A landscape with figures, a clear brilliant
Picture. This artist, whose prolific imagin- ation could ' body forth ' nature in her most wild and varied forms, always found a ready conveyance for them to the canvas, by a wonderful facility of pencil, which was ripened by the happiest execution. This Picture is a charming proof of the excel- lence of the admired master. Th. Gains- borough.
99. A landscape, with figures, and sheep coming
down to a brook. A grand and romantic woody scene.
The favourite stile of Gainsborough was un- doubtedly the Dignified Pastoral. This specimen of him is replete with picturesque grandeur. Th. Gainsborough.
1 This does not appear in the family list recorded supra.
loS A NOTE ON THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH, ETC.
[Property of J [Price Purchaser]
G. D. 100. £18. 18. - Croft 100. A shepherd boy listening to a magpie — his
sheep by him.
The Simplicity of the young peasant is sweetly depicted. This is a highly creditable speci- men of the late Mr. Dupont's pencil. G. Dupont.
G. D. 101. £jo. <?. - Steers 101. A hilly landscape, with a waggon, horses and
figures, stopping at a ford, a sultry^ evening scene. The heat of the atmosphere is admirably expressed, and the varied eleva- tions of the ground, and foreshortening of the waggon and figures are strong charac- ters of true genius. Th. Gainsborough.
Mrs. G. 102. £101. 77. - Long 102. A landscape with cattle watering at sunset,
painted with uncommon spirit. The choice of subject, the freedom of execution, and the warm colouring that pervades the whole, form a rich repast that the eye must dwell upon with pleasure.
This Picture is perhaps one of the very finest productions of this great artist. Th. Gains- borough.
G. D. 10 j. £29. 8. - Crofts 103. The Haymaker, and sleeping girl. A fresh
morning scene — unfinished, but touched with great freedom and beautiful expression.
G. D. 104. £i. 2. - Stevens 104. Three Plaster Busts.
List of Members of the Walpole Society
1916-1917.
The Rt. Hon. Lord Aberdare,
G.C.B., P.C. Royal Academy of Arts, The
Library of.
C. Morland Agnew, Esq. Sir George W. Agnew, Bart. Charles Aitken, Esq., Keeper, The
National Gallery, British Art. A. A. Allen, Esq., M.P. Messrs. Edw. G. Allen & Son. Herren Amsler & Ruthardt. Sir Walter Armstrong. Thomas Ashby, Esq., M.A., Litt.D. Messrs. Asher & Co.
Sir Hickman Beckett Bacon, Bart.
J. W. Bacon, Esq.
C. H. Collins Baker, Esq., Keeper and
Secretary, The National Gallery. Mrs. Sidney Ball. John Ballinger, Esq. Mrs. Mary M. Banks. C. A. Montague Barlow, Esq., M.P. Francis Pierrepont Barnard, Esq.,
M.A. Oxon., F.S.A. R. Bateman, Esq., Curator, Man- chester Whilworth Institute. Earl Bathurst, C.M.G. A.R.Bayley.Esq., B.A., F.R.Hist.S. Harold Bay ley, Esq. Earl Beauchamp, K.G. Arthur C. Behrend, Esq. C. F. Bell, Esq., F.S. A., Keeper, The
Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. Mrs. Clara Bell. Anthony Belt, Esq. Laurence Binyon, Esq., Asst. Keeper
of Prints and Drawings, British
Museum.
F. Frost Blackman, Esq., F.R.S. R. K. Blair, Esq. Sam D. Bles, Esq. Bodleian Library, Oxford. Bootle. Public Library. Boston Athenaeum, Boston, Mass.,
U.S.A. Boston Museum of Fine Arts,
Mass., U.S.A.
Boston Public Library, Mass., U.S.A. V.
The Rev. F. C. Bozman. Allan H. Bright, Esq. The Rev. F. E. Brightman. Brighton. Public Library. British Museum, The Library of. James Britten, Esq. Miss Margaret Brooke. Mrs. Beatrice Brooksbank. Miss Henrietta Brown. Oliver F. Brown, Esq. Messrs. Browne & Browne. M. J. Buchanan, Esq. Charles Richard Buckley, Esq. The Rev. Herbert Bull. Miss Louise Bulley. Miss Margaret H. Bulley. Burlington Fine Arts Club.
H. J. Campbell, Esq. A. C. R. Carter, Esq. James L. Caw, Esq., Director,
National Gallery of Scotland. Arthur B. Chamberlain, Esq. John E. Champney, Esq. G. A. F. M. Chatwin, Esq. Miss Alice D. Clarke. George Clausen, Esq., R.A. A. B. Clifton, Esq. Sydney C. Cockerel!, Esq., Director,
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge. Sir Sidney Colvin, M.A., D.Litt. Sir E. T. Cook. Herbert F. Cook, Esq., M.A. Royal Cortissoz, Esq. The Earl of Crawford, K.T., V.D.,
LL.D., Trustee of the National
Portrait Gallery. Wilson Crewdson, Esq. TheEarlofCrewe, K.G. R. H. Curtis, Esq. Earl Curzon of Kedleston, G.C.S.I.,
G.C.I. E., Trustee of the National
Gallery. Lionel Cust, Esq., C.V.O., F.S.A.
Sir Thomas L. Devitt, Bart. E. Rimbault Dibdin, Esq., Curator, The Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool.
Viscount Dillon, Chairman of Board
of Trustees of National Portrait
Gallery.
Arthur Dixon, Esq. Campbell Dodgson, Esq., Keeper of
Prints and Drawings, British
Museum. R. Langton Douglas, Esq., Director,
National Gallery of Ireland. Messrs. Dowdeswell & Dowdeswells. Dundee Free Library Committee. Alfred P. Durlacher, Esq. George L. Durlacher, Esq. Lady Durning-Lawrence.
H. L. Ehrich, Esq. Countess of Elgin. The Rev. William C. Emeris. H. C. Erhardt, Esq. George Eumorfopoulos, Esq. Exeter. The Royal Albert Memorial Public Library.
Arnold Fairbairns, Esq. Miss Helen Farquhar. Miss Feilding. Miss Emily Fellowes. Miss C. Jocelyn Ffoulkes. A. J. Finberg, Esq. The Fitzwilliam Museum, Cam- bridge.
The Hon. J. W. Fortescue. Charles Frederick Fox, Esq. E. L. Franklin, Esq.
The Galignani Library, Paris. The Rev. A. H. Gallon. Mrs. A. P. Gascoyne. Percival Gaskell, Esq., R.E. J. P. Gilson, Esq., M.A. Thomas Girtin, Esq. Richard Glazier, Esq. The Rev. F. W. Goodenough. G. Bruce Gosling, Esq. Richard W. Goulding, Esq. Algernon Graves, Esq., F.S.A. The Rev. John Gray. Albert Gray, Esq., K.C. James Greig, Esq. George J. Gribble, Esq. Mrs. Noel Guinness. O. Gutekunst, Esq. Martin Hardie, Esq., A.R.E. Dr. H. Nazeby Harrington.
The Rt. Hon. Frederick Leverton
Harris, M.P. T. Erat Harrison, Esq. Charles Henry Hart, Esq. Harold Hartley, Esq. Harvard College, Cambridge, Mass.,
U.S.A.
EdwardHasell,Esq.,M.R.C.S.(Eng.). The Rev. Stewart D. Headlam. Voltelin Percy Heath, Esq. Joseph Heaton, Esq. George Henderson, Esq. Mrs. G. Walker Heneage. Henry Hering, Esq. Miss Mary F. S. Hervey. Ivystan Hetherington, Esq. Arthur M. Hind, Esq. C. Lewis Hind, Esq. Leopold Hirsch, Esq. Victor T. Hodgson, Esq. W. A. Holder, Esq. J. R. Holliday, Esq. C. J. Holmes, Esq., M.A., Director,
National Gallery. Sir Charles Holroyd, R.E. Hope Collection of Engravings,
Bodleian Library, Oxford. W. Edgar Home, Esq., M.P. Mrs. Francis Howard. Henry Howard, Esq. The Hon. Hugh Howard. James Howell, Esq. C. E. Hughes, Esq. Talbot Hughes, Esq. T. Cann Hughes, Esq., M.A.,
F.S.A.
H. Hughes-Stanton, Esq., A.R.A. Chas. Henry Hunt, Esq. Mrs. Charles Hunter. J. Hutchinson, Esq. The Venble. Archdeacon W. H.
Hutton. James H. Hyde, Esq.
The Earl of Ilchester. Selwyn Image, Esq.
Fred W. Jackson, Esq.
T. Pearce Jacomb, Esq.
The Hon. Walter J. James, R.E.
Col. Sir Herbert Jekyll, K.C.M.G.
Lady Margaret Jenkins.
Herbert S. Job, Esq.
John G. Johnson, Esq.
Miss Lorna A. Johnson.
Arthur Kay, Esq., F.S.A. Lond. & Scot.
Miss Emily G. Kemp.
Edward G. Kennedy, Esq.
Sir Frederic G. Kenyon, K.C.B., D.Litt., Director and Principal Librarian of the British Museum.
Basil King, Esq.
Messrs. Knoedler & Co.
Dr. James H. W. Laing.
John Lane, Esq.
P. P. Laurie, Esq.
Adrian Leach, Esq.
Messrs. Leggatt Bros.
Thomas Barrett Lennard, Esq.
George E. Leon, Esq.
W. R. Lethaby, Esq.
Howard C. Levis, Esq.
The London Library.
H. Longden, Esq.
H. Walter Lonsdale, Esq.
Mrs. Julian G. Lousada.
A. K. Loyd, Esq.
Edward V. Lucas, Esq.
Theodore Lucas, Esq.
Frits Lugt, Esq.
Henry E. Luxmoore, Esq.
Herbert Lyndon, Esq.
Lt.-CoI. George B. Croft Lyons.
The Earl of Lytton.
The Hon. Neville Lytton.
D. J. Macaulay, Esq., M.D.
D. S. MacColl, Esq., M.A., LL.D., Keeper, The Wallace Collection.
Major Roderick Mackenzie.
Allan McLean, Esq.
Miss E. Winifred Madder.
John Maddocks, Esq., J.P.
Manchester. Department of Educa- tion.
Manchester Public Libraries.
Manchester Society of Architects.
Manchester Whitworth Institute.
John Margetson, Esq.
Murray Marks, Esq.
Edward Marsh, Esq.
Prof. C. R. Marshall.
Miss M. Kathleen Martin.
Robert Martin-Holland, Esq., C.B.
Mrs. Ena Mathias.
The Medici Society, Ltd.
Brigr.- General Horatio Mends.
Zachary Merton, Esq.
L. R. C. Messel, Esq. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New
York, U.S.A. Dr. A. H. Millar. G. G. Milner-Gibson-Cullum, Esq.,
F.S.A. James D. Milner, Esq., Director,
National Portrait Gallery. Mrs. F. Morrell. Harrison Morris, Esq. Lionel B. Mozley, Esq.
National Portrait Gallery. Francis A. N. Newdegate, Esq., M. P. New South Wales. Public Library. New York. Metropolitan Museum
of Art.
Paul Nijhoff, Esq. Wouter Nijhoff, Esq. Philip Norman, Esq., Hon. LL.D.,
F.S.A.
Robert F. Norton, Esq., K.C. T. Percy Nunn, Esq., M.A., D.Sc.
Sir John Robert O'Connell, LL.D. Mrs. Roger Oldham. A. P. Oppe", Esq.
Messrs. J. Palser & Sons.
Colonel John W. R. Parker, C.B.,
F.S.A.
Messrs. E. Parsons & Sons. Dr. A. V. Peatling. Mrs. John Douglas Peel. J. Thursby Pelham, Esq. R. William Pettigrew, Esq. Henry J. Pfungst, Esq., F.S.A. Richard A. Pfungst, Esq. Sir Claude Phillips. The Earl of Plymouth, C.B., P.C.,
Trustee of the National Gallery. Mrs. R. L. Poole. Prof. Arthur Pope. W. M. Power, Esq., M.R.S.A. Prof. F. M. Powicke. Prof. Edward S. Prior, A. R. A., Slade
Professor, Cambridge.
Bernard Quaritch, Esq.
Sir Herbert H. Raphael, Bart., M.P.
Mrs. C. Rashdall.
W. G. Rawlinson, Esq.
John Rennie, Esq.
H. Douglas Rhodes, Esq.
T. H. Riches, Esq.
Messrs. James Rimell & Son.
Frank Kinder, Esq.
H. D. Roberts, Esq., Director, Public
Library, Museums and Fine Art
Galleries, Brighton. Miss Margaret W. Roberts. W. Roberts, Esq. Robert Ross, Esq. The Royal Library, Windsor Castle. John Lewis Rutley, Esq.
Sale and Ashton-upon-Mersey Joint
Free Library. The Sailers' Company. The Earl of Scarbrough, K.C.B. Charles H. Scott, Esq. Edgar Seligman, Esq. Monsieur Georges Seligman. J. Henry Sellers, Esq. George H. Shepherd, Esq. Sir Frank Short, R.A., P.R.E. R. Skinner, Esq. Miss Alice Smith. H. Watson Smith, Esq. The Duchess of Somerset. Robert Spence, Esq., R.E. The Earl Spencer, P.C., G.C.V.O. Edward Speyer, Esq. Marion H. Spielmann, Esq., F.S.A. Sir Isidore Spielmann, C.M.G., F.S.A. Walter L. Spiers, Esq. Mrs. A. H. Spokes. William Barclay Squire, Esq. Prof. E. Steinmann. The Lady Alice Shaw Stewart. Edward Stott, Esq., A.R.A. Edward F. Strange, Esq., Keeper
of Ironwork, Victoria and Albert
Museum.
Walter G. Strickland, Esq. Swansea, County Borough of. Edmund G. Sykes, Esq.
Arthur a B. Terrell, Esq.
Sir Herbert Thompson, Bart.
Arthur Tooth, Esq.
W. G. Paulson Townsend, Esq.
James Tregaskis, Esq.
E. W. Tristram, Esq.
C. Mallord W. Turner, Esq.
Miss M. H. Turner. ^
Sydney Vacher, Esq.
The Victoria and Albert Museum.
G. E. Wainwright, Esq. Sir Charles Waldstein, Litt.D. The National Library of Wales. The National Museum of Wales. Emery Walker, Esq. William Ward, Esq. Washington, D.C., Library of Con- gress.
Vernon Watney, Esq. Mrs. H. M. Spencer Watson. Robert W. S. Weir, Esq. Welbeck Abbey. The Library. Francis Wellesley, Esq., J.P. Westminster Public Libraries. Mrs. S. H. Whitbread. Fred. A. White, Esq. Thomas Whittaker, Esq. Dr. G. C. Williamson. Messrs. S. and A. B. Willson. Sir H. F. Wilson, K.C.M.G. Percy Withers, Esq. T. Martin Wood, Esq. John Wormald, Esq.
Members are particularly requested to draw the attention of the Hon. Secretary, MR. A. J. FINBERG, 47 Holland Road, Kensing- ton, W., London, to any omissions or errors in the above list.
N
12 W3 v.5
Valpole Society, The volume of Valpole Society
PLEASE DO NOT REM< CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THI
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO