top of page
No Collections Here
Sort your projects into collections. Click on "Manage Collections" to get started
Studio of Sir Anthony Van Dyck (1599-1641), The Jermyn Portrait of Queen Henrietta Maria
Studio of Sir Anthony Van Dyck
The Jermyn Portrait of Queen Henrietta Maria
oil on canvas
50 x 40 in.; 128 x 103 cm.
Provenance
Henry Jermyn (1605-1684), Earl of St Albans;
Thence by descent with the Jermyn family at Rushbrooke Hall, Suffolk;
Their sale, ('Rushbrooke Hall near Bury St. Edmunds'), on the premises, Knight, Frank & Rutley, 10-11 December 1919, lot 68 (as 'Van Dyck');
Where purchased by a member of the Jermyn family;
By descent in the family until sold anonymously, Ely, Rowley's, 22 July 2010, lot 345 (as Studio of Van Dyck);
Where purchased by Private Collection, Guernsey;
Until acquired privately therefrom by Whiteman's Fine Art, 2025.
Literature
E. Farrer, Portraits in Suffolk Houses (West), London 1908, p. 295, no. 21 (as Sir Anthony Van Dyck);
O. Millar in Van Dyck, a Complete Catalogue of the Paintings, S. Barnes, N. de Poorter, O. Millar, and H. Vey (eds), New Haven and London 2004, p. 635, ('A copy [of IV.A19] was formerly at Rushbrooke Hall.');
A. Adolf, The King's Henchman: Henry Jermyn, Stuart Spymaster, London 2012, p. 38, reproduced (as Van Dyck and Workshop).
Note
This portrait of Queen Henrietta Maria (1609-1669), daughter of Henry IV of France and wife of the connoisseur and collector King Charles I, is important due to its complete provenance which stretches back into the 17th century. More specifically, this painting was owned by Henry Jermyn, later Earl of St Albans (1605-1684), of Rushbrooke Hall, Suffolk, who was perhaps the most singular figure to the Queen outside of the Royal Family. He was a trusted confidante and member of Her Majesty’s Household, including holder of the posts of Gentleman Usher, Treasurer and Privy Councillor. Unlike the majority of Van Dyck’s studio productions of this popular composition, which have nearly all lost their early provenances, within this artwork lies a fascinating story between Queen and her most loyal servant and friend.
The Queen
Queen Henrietta Maria remains one of the most intriguing and influential consorts in early modern Britain. Born in the Louvre Palace in Paris in November 1609, the daughter of Henry IV and Maria de' Medici, her and her siblings’ illustrious heritage destined greatness. After the assassination of her father in 1610, when the young princess was a mere one year of age, much of her upbringing took place in the palace of St Germain. Tutored in riding, dancing, and singing, the more sprightly aspects of her youth were tempered by her devout Catholic education undertaken by Carmelites which she maintained throughout her life. With her sister Elizabeth married off into the Spanish royal family, Henrietta’s match to Charles, Prince of Wales, in 1624 was unprecedented for a Catholic princess entering into a Protestant court. Her marriage treaty, which Pope Urban VIII interceded in, included vast protections for her and her children’s rights to practise their Catholic faith in a reformed nation. Married with the Duke of Buckingham acting as proxy in May 1625, the eventual arrival of the 16-year-old French princess would leave a mark of the politics of the country for decades to come. Viewed with ever greater suspicion, due to her French entourage and resistance to participating in courtly rituals presided over by protestant prelates, initial tensions eventually subsided especially after the death of King’s favourite Buckingham in 1628.
The Queen’s highly developed individual taste for the arts, which began to flourish in the late 1620s, remained a constant throughout her reign. She bestowed her patronage on the Caravaggist Orazio Gentileschi and others, who visited the island and painted key works for her residences (which numbered no fewer than six palaces) designed in-part by architect Inigo Jones. This is not to mention the design and execution of her private Chapel, a rare 17th century survival found in the St James’ Palace complex today, which was presided over by her own Catholic priests and musicians.
This portrait derives from a composition that was initiated by Sir Anthony Van Dyck in circa 1636. Van Dyck, who was appointed ‘Principalle Paynter in Ordinary’ to King Charles I in 1632, came to dominate and raise the Royal image to a height that would have an afterlife of centuries after his eventual death in 1641. The original of the Queen, often referred to in contemporary documents as ‘Une Reyne vestu en blu’, is believed to be lost. It’s popularity however is attested to the survival of numerous studio versions, including this one created for Henry Jermyn (to be expanded on below). Documents from the period survive attesting to copies of the ‘Queen’s picture in blue’ being given by the King to the Lord Chamberlin [Philip Herbert, 4th Earl of Pembroke] in an exchange, alongside mentions in the King’s own letters regarding a version of ‘My Wives Picture in blew, sitting in a Chair’ which had hung in Hampton Court Palace. The best surviving versions are found in the Duke of Northumberland’s collection at Syon House and formerly at Ingateston Hall and in the Fitzwilliam collection at Wentworth Woodhouse.
The most interesting and compelling detail of this painting’s history is the remains of a cipher which was revealed when the painting was conserved by the present owner. Stamped onto the reverse of the original unlined canvas is the remains of a ‘CP’ or ‘CR’. Although various theories have been tested, including that it may be an abbreviation for ‘Carolus rex’ [King Charles] or ‘Carolus princeps’ [Prince Charles], its visual difference to other surviving royal ciphers from the period impedes a full explanation. As such a trusted member of the Stuart court, it is entirely possible that a Workshop painting by Van Dyck may have been gifted to Jermyn directly from the Royal Collection.
Henry Jermyn, The Owner
This painting’s owner was Henry Jermyn, who was created Earl of St Albans 1659 after serving Queen Henrietta Maria loyally since their meeting in France in 1624-25 as part of her marriage negotiations. Apart from the Queen’s husband and children, there was perhaps no singular figure that remained as steadfast to her concerns than Jermyn. Born the son of the Suffolk politician Sir Thomas Jermyn (1573-1644/5), Henry’s career followed in the footsteps of his courtier father. His aptitude for languages secured several adventures in his youth, including accompanying Lord Bristol’s embassy to Madrid in 1622-3 and eventually Lord Kensington’s mission to Paris where he met the future Charles I’s bride. Jermyn became gentleman usher to the Queen in 1627 and was eventually banished for a small period by the King for refusing to marry Eleanor Villiers, a maid of honour and niece of the Duke of Buckingham. Through Henrietta Maria’s efforts he returned to court in February 1636, the very year the composition for the portrait in question is said to have been devised. During the 1630s his proximity to the Queen became the subject of court gossip with poet William Davenant having even depicted the pair as lovers in his written works. This was fuelled even more so by his appointment as Master of the Horse to the Queen in 1639.
After being discovered as part of a Royalist plot in 1641, in an attempt to bring loyalist armies from the north, Jermyn fled to France and soon after rejoining the Queen in the Hague the following year where he assisted her in pawning jewels and raising loans for the oncoming Civil Wars. After distinguishing himself on the battlefield during several military engagements, the Queen and Jermyn eventually fled from Oxford in 1644 to live out the rest of the war at the Louvre and St Germain-en-Laye. It was Jermyn’s task to inform the Queen of her husband Charles I’s execution in 1649. He remained the monarchy in exile’s staunchest supporters and was created a privy councillor to Charles II in 1652. In December 1662 Samuel Pepys had written in his diary that a marriage had taken place ‘for certain’ and that ‘her being married to my lord of St. Albans is commonly talked of’. Later seventeenth century sources also continued this story, including that Jermyn’s friend the poet Abraham Cowley had been present at their matrimonial union. Others, including the Anglican Windsor clergyman Nathaniel Angelo, had gone so far as to claim the parentage of the Royal Children belonging to Jerymn and not the King. Although rumours of a secret marriage appear to have been unfounded, his keeping of the Queen’s most intimate confidences (including the conversion of her son Prince Henry to Catholicism in 1654) has ever since provided writers and historians with great intrigue.
At the Restoration of the Monarchy in 1660 Jermyn was created ambassador to France, where he presided over key marriage treaties including those of Princess Henriette Anne and Philippe, Duke of Orléans. His influence in London during this period is most felt with his development of his lands in St James’s, including Jermyn Street his centre piece of St James’s Square, modelled on the ideals of Inigo Jones. His commissioning of Christopher Wren in 1665 to design St James’s Church too ranks amongst his lasting achievements in this historic part of London. A plaque dedicated to his memory at 10 St James’s Square, the site of his former London home, describes him as the ‘founder of the West End’.
Jermyn was present at the Queen’s death at the Chateau of Colombes in August 1669, ending his 45-year personal service to the monarch. His status at the court of Charles II continued, as he served as Lord Chamberlain to the King between 1672–4 and was invested as a knight of the Garter on 30 June 1672. His last years were spent both crippled and blind in retirement at Rushbrooke before his death in 1684. He died unmarried and his mortal remains were laid to rest in Rushbrooke Church.
The significance of this portrait, connecting Jermyn to his Queen, is perhaps one of the most compelling survivals from the period in public hands. The painting remained at the family seat at Rushbrooke Hall until 1919 where it was acquired by another Jermyn family member with whom it descended until 2010 (see Provenance). It’s significance was further recognised when it appeared on the front cover of the second edition of Anthony Adolph’s 2012 biography of Jermyn, which has done much to bring to light the life and career of this previously neglected figure in the Stuart court.
The painting’s frame, which may date to the later seventeenth century or perhaps early 18th century, appears to be associated with a later campaign of reframing undertaken on the artworks at Rushbrooke Hall. Notably, an Equestrian Portrait of King Charles I in the very same style frame, which too was sold from the hall in 1919, is now on display at Christchurch Mansion from the collection of Ipswich Council.
We are grateful to Malcolm Rogers CBE for confirming the attribution to Van Dyck’s studio on the basis of photographs.
The Jermyn Portrait of Queen Henrietta Maria
oil on canvas
50 x 40 in.; 128 x 103 cm.
Provenance
Henry Jermyn (1605-1684), Earl of St Albans;
Thence by descent with the Jermyn family at Rushbrooke Hall, Suffolk;
Their sale, ('Rushbrooke Hall near Bury St. Edmunds'), on the premises, Knight, Frank & Rutley, 10-11 December 1919, lot 68 (as 'Van Dyck');
Where purchased by a member of the Jermyn family;
By descent in the family until sold anonymously, Ely, Rowley's, 22 July 2010, lot 345 (as Studio of Van Dyck);
Where purchased by Private Collection, Guernsey;
Until acquired privately therefrom by Whiteman's Fine Art, 2025.
Literature
E. Farrer, Portraits in Suffolk Houses (West), London 1908, p. 295, no. 21 (as Sir Anthony Van Dyck);
O. Millar in Van Dyck, a Complete Catalogue of the Paintings, S. Barnes, N. de Poorter, O. Millar, and H. Vey (eds), New Haven and London 2004, p. 635, ('A copy [of IV.A19] was formerly at Rushbrooke Hall.');
A. Adolf, The King's Henchman: Henry Jermyn, Stuart Spymaster, London 2012, p. 38, reproduced (as Van Dyck and Workshop).
Note
This portrait of Queen Henrietta Maria (1609-1669), daughter of Henry IV of France and wife of the connoisseur and collector King Charles I, is important due to its complete provenance which stretches back into the 17th century. More specifically, this painting was owned by Henry Jermyn, later Earl of St Albans (1605-1684), of Rushbrooke Hall, Suffolk, who was perhaps the most singular figure to the Queen outside of the Royal Family. He was a trusted confidante and member of Her Majesty’s Household, including holder of the posts of Gentleman Usher, Treasurer and Privy Councillor. Unlike the majority of Van Dyck’s studio productions of this popular composition, which have nearly all lost their early provenances, within this artwork lies a fascinating story between Queen and her most loyal servant and friend.
The Queen
Queen Henrietta Maria remains one of the most intriguing and influential consorts in early modern Britain. Born in the Louvre Palace in Paris in November 1609, the daughter of Henry IV and Maria de' Medici, her and her siblings’ illustrious heritage destined greatness. After the assassination of her father in 1610, when the young princess was a mere one year of age, much of her upbringing took place in the palace of St Germain. Tutored in riding, dancing, and singing, the more sprightly aspects of her youth were tempered by her devout Catholic education undertaken by Carmelites which she maintained throughout her life. With her sister Elizabeth married off into the Spanish royal family, Henrietta’s match to Charles, Prince of Wales, in 1624 was unprecedented for a Catholic princess entering into a Protestant court. Her marriage treaty, which Pope Urban VIII interceded in, included vast protections for her and her children’s rights to practise their Catholic faith in a reformed nation. Married with the Duke of Buckingham acting as proxy in May 1625, the eventual arrival of the 16-year-old French princess would leave a mark of the politics of the country for decades to come. Viewed with ever greater suspicion, due to her French entourage and resistance to participating in courtly rituals presided over by protestant prelates, initial tensions eventually subsided especially after the death of King’s favourite Buckingham in 1628.
The Queen’s highly developed individual taste for the arts, which began to flourish in the late 1620s, remained a constant throughout her reign. She bestowed her patronage on the Caravaggist Orazio Gentileschi and others, who visited the island and painted key works for her residences (which numbered no fewer than six palaces) designed in-part by architect Inigo Jones. This is not to mention the design and execution of her private Chapel, a rare 17th century survival found in the St James’ Palace complex today, which was presided over by her own Catholic priests and musicians.
This portrait derives from a composition that was initiated by Sir Anthony Van Dyck in circa 1636. Van Dyck, who was appointed ‘Principalle Paynter in Ordinary’ to King Charles I in 1632, came to dominate and raise the Royal image to a height that would have an afterlife of centuries after his eventual death in 1641. The original of the Queen, often referred to in contemporary documents as ‘Une Reyne vestu en blu’, is believed to be lost. It’s popularity however is attested to the survival of numerous studio versions, including this one created for Henry Jermyn (to be expanded on below). Documents from the period survive attesting to copies of the ‘Queen’s picture in blue’ being given by the King to the Lord Chamberlin [Philip Herbert, 4th Earl of Pembroke] in an exchange, alongside mentions in the King’s own letters regarding a version of ‘My Wives Picture in blew, sitting in a Chair’ which had hung in Hampton Court Palace. The best surviving versions are found in the Duke of Northumberland’s collection at Syon House and formerly at Ingateston Hall and in the Fitzwilliam collection at Wentworth Woodhouse.
The most interesting and compelling detail of this painting’s history is the remains of a cipher which was revealed when the painting was conserved by the present owner. Stamped onto the reverse of the original unlined canvas is the remains of a ‘CP’ or ‘CR’. Although various theories have been tested, including that it may be an abbreviation for ‘Carolus rex’ [King Charles] or ‘Carolus princeps’ [Prince Charles], its visual difference to other surviving royal ciphers from the period impedes a full explanation. As such a trusted member of the Stuart court, it is entirely possible that a Workshop painting by Van Dyck may have been gifted to Jermyn directly from the Royal Collection.
Henry Jermyn, The Owner
This painting’s owner was Henry Jermyn, who was created Earl of St Albans 1659 after serving Queen Henrietta Maria loyally since their meeting in France in 1624-25 as part of her marriage negotiations. Apart from the Queen’s husband and children, there was perhaps no singular figure that remained as steadfast to her concerns than Jermyn. Born the son of the Suffolk politician Sir Thomas Jermyn (1573-1644/5), Henry’s career followed in the footsteps of his courtier father. His aptitude for languages secured several adventures in his youth, including accompanying Lord Bristol’s embassy to Madrid in 1622-3 and eventually Lord Kensington’s mission to Paris where he met the future Charles I’s bride. Jermyn became gentleman usher to the Queen in 1627 and was eventually banished for a small period by the King for refusing to marry Eleanor Villiers, a maid of honour and niece of the Duke of Buckingham. Through Henrietta Maria’s efforts he returned to court in February 1636, the very year the composition for the portrait in question is said to have been devised. During the 1630s his proximity to the Queen became the subject of court gossip with poet William Davenant having even depicted the pair as lovers in his written works. This was fuelled even more so by his appointment as Master of the Horse to the Queen in 1639.
After being discovered as part of a Royalist plot in 1641, in an attempt to bring loyalist armies from the north, Jermyn fled to France and soon after rejoining the Queen in the Hague the following year where he assisted her in pawning jewels and raising loans for the oncoming Civil Wars. After distinguishing himself on the battlefield during several military engagements, the Queen and Jermyn eventually fled from Oxford in 1644 to live out the rest of the war at the Louvre and St Germain-en-Laye. It was Jermyn’s task to inform the Queen of her husband Charles I’s execution in 1649. He remained the monarchy in exile’s staunchest supporters and was created a privy councillor to Charles II in 1652. In December 1662 Samuel Pepys had written in his diary that a marriage had taken place ‘for certain’ and that ‘her being married to my lord of St. Albans is commonly talked of’. Later seventeenth century sources also continued this story, including that Jermyn’s friend the poet Abraham Cowley had been present at their matrimonial union. Others, including the Anglican Windsor clergyman Nathaniel Angelo, had gone so far as to claim the parentage of the Royal Children belonging to Jerymn and not the King. Although rumours of a secret marriage appear to have been unfounded, his keeping of the Queen’s most intimate confidences (including the conversion of her son Prince Henry to Catholicism in 1654) has ever since provided writers and historians with great intrigue.
At the Restoration of the Monarchy in 1660 Jermyn was created ambassador to France, where he presided over key marriage treaties including those of Princess Henriette Anne and Philippe, Duke of Orléans. His influence in London during this period is most felt with his development of his lands in St James’s, including Jermyn Street his centre piece of St James’s Square, modelled on the ideals of Inigo Jones. His commissioning of Christopher Wren in 1665 to design St James’s Church too ranks amongst his lasting achievements in this historic part of London. A plaque dedicated to his memory at 10 St James’s Square, the site of his former London home, describes him as the ‘founder of the West End’.
Jermyn was present at the Queen’s death at the Chateau of Colombes in August 1669, ending his 45-year personal service to the monarch. His status at the court of Charles II continued, as he served as Lord Chamberlain to the King between 1672–4 and was invested as a knight of the Garter on 30 June 1672. His last years were spent both crippled and blind in retirement at Rushbrooke before his death in 1684. He died unmarried and his mortal remains were laid to rest in Rushbrooke Church.
The significance of this portrait, connecting Jermyn to his Queen, is perhaps one of the most compelling survivals from the period in public hands. The painting remained at the family seat at Rushbrooke Hall until 1919 where it was acquired by another Jermyn family member with whom it descended until 2010 (see Provenance). It’s significance was further recognised when it appeared on the front cover of the second edition of Anthony Adolph’s 2012 biography of Jermyn, which has done much to bring to light the life and career of this previously neglected figure in the Stuart court.
The painting’s frame, which may date to the later seventeenth century or perhaps early 18th century, appears to be associated with a later campaign of reframing undertaken on the artworks at Rushbrooke Hall. Notably, an Equestrian Portrait of King Charles I in the very same style frame, which too was sold from the hall in 1919, is now on display at Christchurch Mansion from the collection of Ipswich Council.
We are grateful to Malcolm Rogers CBE for confirming the attribution to Van Dyck’s studio on the basis of photographs.
Attributed to Zachary Kneller (1642-1702), 'The Glorification of William III'
Attributed to Johann Zacharias Kneller, known as Zachary Kneller (1642-1702)
The Glorification of William III
oil on canvas
50 x 37½in
Provenance
With Trafalgar Galleries, London, 1987;
Christie’s, 29.1.1988, Lot 118;
With Whiteman’s Fine Art, 2025.
Note
This painting, titled The Glorification of William III, is an allegory of King William III (1650-1702) and presents a portrait of the British king in apotheosis. Such fantastical images were common in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. They defined what has been called the ‘British Baroque,’ yet were usually confined to mural paintings decorating the walls of country houses and palaces. Artists such as the Italian Antonio Verrio and English Sir James Thornhill typified this meta-pictorial genre, blending portraits of their real patrons with their – often 'chosen' in this dramatic period of dynastic change – monarchs with hosts of mythological Greco-Roman figures. The effect was to thereby elevate the owners’ political or religious agendas to celestial heights.
This rare, but by no means diminutive, example on canvas is dedicated to the memory of William III. As most famously rendered by Thornhill in the Painted Hall at Greenwich, the very Whiggish act of representing William signified an allegiance to the Glorious Revolution, constitutional monarchy, and the end of Stuart absolutism. All of this may be readily deciphered in the allegorical attributes herein. William’s portrait is held by Minerva, the Roman goddess of wisdom, her spear providing a martial dimension to the image; she wields Fame’s attributes of a banner and trumpet and, wearing Victoria’s laurel crown exchanged for her typical Larry are you plumed helmet in the background, proclaims William’s victory over Discord represented by the shackled grotesque below. In blending the attributes of different goddesses, the artist displays a complex knowledge of his craft and weaves together an allegory which would have intellectually delighted his patron.
The painting, which surfaced with the Cohen brothers of the Trafalgar Galleries in the 1980s, was previously attributed to Zachery Kneller by Malcolm Rogers [1]. Few examples of Kneller’s work survive but, as George Vertue recorded, he came to England with his brother, the famed portraitist Sir Godfrey Kneller, and worked in the grand decorative tradition which the present work exemplifies [3].
[1] Heinz Archive, National Portrait Gallery.
[2] Edward Croft-Murray, Decorative Painting in England 1537-1837, vol 1 (London: Country Life, 1962), p. 249.
[3] A self-portrait by Zachery Kneller previously with Philip Mould & Co. displays many of the same stylistic characteristics.
The Glorification of William III
oil on canvas
50 x 37½in
Provenance
With Trafalgar Galleries, London, 1987;
Christie’s, 29.1.1988, Lot 118;
With Whiteman’s Fine Art, 2025.
Note
This painting, titled The Glorification of William III, is an allegory of King William III (1650-1702) and presents a portrait of the British king in apotheosis. Such fantastical images were common in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. They defined what has been called the ‘British Baroque,’ yet were usually confined to mural paintings decorating the walls of country houses and palaces. Artists such as the Italian Antonio Verrio and English Sir James Thornhill typified this meta-pictorial genre, blending portraits of their real patrons with their – often 'chosen' in this dramatic period of dynastic change – monarchs with hosts of mythological Greco-Roman figures. The effect was to thereby elevate the owners’ political or religious agendas to celestial heights.
This rare, but by no means diminutive, example on canvas is dedicated to the memory of William III. As most famously rendered by Thornhill in the Painted Hall at Greenwich, the very Whiggish act of representing William signified an allegiance to the Glorious Revolution, constitutional monarchy, and the end of Stuart absolutism. All of this may be readily deciphered in the allegorical attributes herein. William’s portrait is held by Minerva, the Roman goddess of wisdom, her spear providing a martial dimension to the image; she wields Fame’s attributes of a banner and trumpet and, wearing Victoria’s laurel crown exchanged for her typical Larry are you plumed helmet in the background, proclaims William’s victory over Discord represented by the shackled grotesque below. In blending the attributes of different goddesses, the artist displays a complex knowledge of his craft and weaves together an allegory which would have intellectually delighted his patron.
The painting, which surfaced with the Cohen brothers of the Trafalgar Galleries in the 1980s, was previously attributed to Zachery Kneller by Malcolm Rogers [1]. Few examples of Kneller’s work survive but, as George Vertue recorded, he came to England with his brother, the famed portraitist Sir Godfrey Kneller, and worked in the grand decorative tradition which the present work exemplifies [3].
[1] Heinz Archive, National Portrait Gallery.
[2] Edward Croft-Murray, Decorative Painting in England 1537-1837, vol 1 (London: Country Life, 1962), p. 249.
[3] A self-portrait by Zachery Kneller previously with Philip Mould & Co. displays many of the same stylistic characteristics.
François de Troy (1645–1730), Portrait of Prince James Francis Edward Stuart, 'James III'
François de Troy (1645–1730)
Portrait of Prince James Francis Edward Stuart, 'James III'
1705
Oil on canvas
36 x 30 ins.
Provenance
Horatio William Walpole, 4th Earl of Orford (1813-1894) (collectors label verso);
Gregory & Co., 212, 214 & 216 Regent Street, c.1894-1899 (gallery label verso);
Historical Portraits Ltd., London;
Private Collection, United States of America (Export License application 2007, PAU/00138/07);
Private Collection, Scotland.
This portrait is one of the earliest depictions of James III as a martial adult. He holds a marshal's baton and is dressed in Greenwich armour, distinctive for its black plate and gold highlights, and is therefore represented as ready to restore the Stuarts by force to his ancestral kingdoms. However, James’s position at this date was somewhat precarious. His father, James VII & II who was exiled in the Glorious Revolution of 1688-9, had died in 1701 when James was barely a teenager, and his usurping half-sister, Queen Anne, was proving to be a popular monarch in England. The Jacobite cause, despite the occasionally taciturn support of Louis XIV of France and the papacy, looked somewhat fragile. However, large martial portraits such as this by François de Troy glorified the exiled monarch, showing the now adult king steeped in royal iconography, such as the Garter sash, which declared his legitimacy.
Portraiture played a vital role in keeping the Jacobite cause alive. The great majority of later portraits of James III were commissioned by supporters keen to display their loyalty, either in England or Europe. Early Jacobite portraits, however, were just as likely to be the result of commissions by the Stuarts themselves, particularly those of James III as he grew up. These often dynamic, technically brilliant, and symbolically rich portraits compared favourably to the comparatively dull depictions of the reigning monarchs in Britain.
François de Troy was a leading court artist at Louis XIV’s Versailles and was the artist of choice at the Stuart court-in-exile at the Château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye. Between 1698 and 1711 de Troy produced a series of dynastic portraits, but also painted some of the most notable Jacobite supporters such as Lord Drummond. This autograph portrait was painted by de Troy in 1705 and features the unique Latin inscription in the top right, ‘HIC. VIR. HIC EST. TIBI. QUEM PROMITTI, SLEEPIUS AUDIS.’ This is a famous quote from Book VI of Virgil’s Aeneid, which reads ‘And this in truth is he whom you so often hear promised you.’ This is a small except from the following text, ‘Here is Caesar and all the seed of Iulus destined to pass under heaven’s spacious sphere. And this in truth is he whom you so often hear promised you, Augustus Caesar, son of a god, who will again establish a golden age in Latium amid fields once ruled by Saturn.’ This would have been immediately obvious to many who read the inscription which clearly proclaimed James’s divine right to rule the British Empire, just as the gods had foretold that of Augustus Caesar, Aeneas’s descendent, in Virgil’s epic imperial ode to the Roman Empire as personified in Augustus. The implication is that just as the reign of Augustus – under whom Christ was born, peace restored, and the empire expanded – heralded a new golden age of peace and imperial prosperity, so too would that of James III, the king by divine right.
Probably sent to Scotland at the insistence of Sir David Nairne in 1705 [1], the portrait would later enter the Walpole family. Though of course long established Whigs politically, collecting Stuart portraits was a marked characteristic of the family, and upon the death of Horatio William, 4th Earl of Orford (1813-94), many of these portraits were either sold by the earl's executors, or indeed bequeathed to the nation with a choice selection entering the National Portrait Gallery, London [2].
We would like to express our thanks to Dr. Edward Corp for his assistance.
[1] See Corp, E. 2004. A Court in Exile: The Stuarts in France, 1689-1718. Cambridge University Press, p. 191-192.
[2] https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/explore/by-publication/kerslake/early-georgian-portraits-catalogue-james?_gl=1*1tngcuz*_up*MQ..*_ga*MTc4NzI3OTUwMC4xNzIxNjUzMTU5*_ga_3D53N72CHJ*MTcyMTY1MzE1OS4xLjAuMTcyMTY1MzE1OS4wLjAuMA..#4
Portrait of Prince James Francis Edward Stuart, 'James III'
1705
Oil on canvas
36 x 30 ins.
Provenance
Horatio William Walpole, 4th Earl of Orford (1813-1894) (collectors label verso);
Gregory & Co., 212, 214 & 216 Regent Street, c.1894-1899 (gallery label verso);
Historical Portraits Ltd., London;
Private Collection, United States of America (Export License application 2007, PAU/00138/07);
Private Collection, Scotland.
This portrait is one of the earliest depictions of James III as a martial adult. He holds a marshal's baton and is dressed in Greenwich armour, distinctive for its black plate and gold highlights, and is therefore represented as ready to restore the Stuarts by force to his ancestral kingdoms. However, James’s position at this date was somewhat precarious. His father, James VII & II who was exiled in the Glorious Revolution of 1688-9, had died in 1701 when James was barely a teenager, and his usurping half-sister, Queen Anne, was proving to be a popular monarch in England. The Jacobite cause, despite the occasionally taciturn support of Louis XIV of France and the papacy, looked somewhat fragile. However, large martial portraits such as this by François de Troy glorified the exiled monarch, showing the now adult king steeped in royal iconography, such as the Garter sash, which declared his legitimacy.
Portraiture played a vital role in keeping the Jacobite cause alive. The great majority of later portraits of James III were commissioned by supporters keen to display their loyalty, either in England or Europe. Early Jacobite portraits, however, were just as likely to be the result of commissions by the Stuarts themselves, particularly those of James III as he grew up. These often dynamic, technically brilliant, and symbolically rich portraits compared favourably to the comparatively dull depictions of the reigning monarchs in Britain.
François de Troy was a leading court artist at Louis XIV’s Versailles and was the artist of choice at the Stuart court-in-exile at the Château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye. Between 1698 and 1711 de Troy produced a series of dynastic portraits, but also painted some of the most notable Jacobite supporters such as Lord Drummond. This autograph portrait was painted by de Troy in 1705 and features the unique Latin inscription in the top right, ‘HIC. VIR. HIC EST. TIBI. QUEM PROMITTI, SLEEPIUS AUDIS.’ This is a famous quote from Book VI of Virgil’s Aeneid, which reads ‘And this in truth is he whom you so often hear promised you.’ This is a small except from the following text, ‘Here is Caesar and all the seed of Iulus destined to pass under heaven’s spacious sphere. And this in truth is he whom you so often hear promised you, Augustus Caesar, son of a god, who will again establish a golden age in Latium amid fields once ruled by Saturn.’ This would have been immediately obvious to many who read the inscription which clearly proclaimed James’s divine right to rule the British Empire, just as the gods had foretold that of Augustus Caesar, Aeneas’s descendent, in Virgil’s epic imperial ode to the Roman Empire as personified in Augustus. The implication is that just as the reign of Augustus – under whom Christ was born, peace restored, and the empire expanded – heralded a new golden age of peace and imperial prosperity, so too would that of James III, the king by divine right.
Probably sent to Scotland at the insistence of Sir David Nairne in 1705 [1], the portrait would later enter the Walpole family. Though of course long established Whigs politically, collecting Stuart portraits was a marked characteristic of the family, and upon the death of Horatio William, 4th Earl of Orford (1813-94), many of these portraits were either sold by the earl's executors, or indeed bequeathed to the nation with a choice selection entering the National Portrait Gallery, London [2].
We would like to express our thanks to Dr. Edward Corp for his assistance.
[1] See Corp, E. 2004. A Court in Exile: The Stuarts in France, 1689-1718. Cambridge University Press, p. 191-192.
[2] https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/explore/by-publication/kerslake/early-georgian-portraits-catalogue-james?_gl=1*1tngcuz*_up*MQ..*_ga*MTc4NzI3OTUwMC4xNzIxNjUzMTU5*_ga_3D53N72CHJ*MTcyMTY1MzE1OS4xLjAuMTcyMTY1MzE1OS4wLjAuMA..#4
Alexis Simon Belle (1674–1734), Portrait of Queen Mary of Modena in Exile
Alexis Simon Belle (1674–1734)
Portrait of Queen Mary of Modena in Exile (1658-1718)
c.1709
Oil on canvas
28 3/8 x 24 3/4 in.
Provenance
Queen Mary of Modena (1658-1718);
Lady Lucy Herbert CRSA (1669–1743/44);
English Convent (Monastery of Nazareth) Bruges, until 1967;
Fr Dom Philip Decloedt OSB.
This portrayal of Queen Mary of Modena, the exiled Queen of England, Scotland and Ireland, is a bust portrait by Alexis Simon Belle derived in part from an earlier three-quarter-length by François de Troy (1745-1730). de Troy was an eminent painter at the French court and his portrait celebrated the twenty-fifth wedding anniversary of Mary of Modena and James VII and II. Although this is now lost, a copy survives in the collection at Sizergh Castle, Cumbria. Alexis Simon Belle, then chief court painter to the British court at St Germain, was subsequently intermittently commissioned by the exiled monarchs to paint bust-length versions as presentation pieces for loyal followers eager to show their support for the Jacobite cause. Indeed, this portrait has a particularly important royal and religious provenance. It was bequeathed to the English Convent at Bruges by Queen Mary of Modena, either to mark her old companion Lady Lucy Herbert’s becoming Procuratress of the convent in 1699 or Prioress in 1709. Lady Lucy Herbert CRSA (1669-1743/44) was the daughter of William Herbert, 1st Marquis of Powis, a leading Catholic nobleman, by his wife Elizabeth Somerset, younger daughter of Edward Somerset, 2nd Marquis of Worcester. Powis was loyal to James II in the Revolution of 1688 and continued to serve the exiled monarch in exile (he was subsequently created 1st Duke of Powis in the ‘Jacobite Peerage’). His daughter Lady Lucy entered the English Convent at Bruges shortly after the Revolution in 1690 and there remained an active institutional supporter of Jacobite cause, hence being given this portrait which would remain in the convent’s collection for centuries thereafter. Whiteman’s are grateful to Sr Mary Aline, Prioress and Archivist at The English Convent (Monastery of Nazareth) Bruges, for her help cataloguing this picture who also pointed out that ‘it is mentioned as 'gifts before 1729'. The portrait remained here in the English Convent (Monastery of Nazareth) until it was sold in 1967 to Dom Philip Decloedt OSB then chaplain of the Canonesses of the Holy Sepulchre -Sint Trudo Abbey in Maele(near Bruges). After a while it was sold to a private person.’
When Mary of Modena first learnt that she was to be married to James, Duke of York – the future James II – she burst into tears. Her original wish was to enter a convent, and she tried repeatedly to persuade James’ emissary, the Earl of Peterborough, that she was unwilling to marry, least of all a man she had never met. However, James, heir to Charles II, and by then openly Catholic, was in desperate need of a suitable Catholic wife, and the match was viewed by her family as a good one. Mary was prevailed upon to marry James by proxy and left for London in late 1673. As a future Catholic Queen whose main purpose was to produce a male Catholic heir for James, Mary endured a hostile reception in Protestant England when she arrived in late 1673. She was lampooned in the press and forced to practice mass in private. Nonetheless, she and James swiftly proceeded with the marriage. In 1685 James and Mary ascended to the throne without an heir and the succession seemed destined to pass to James’ Protestant daughter Mary from his first marriage to Anne Hyde.
In 1688 the Queen finally gave birth to a son, James, and the prospect of a secured Catholic succession alarmed the political class. Rumours were quickly spread to undermine the birth, and the baby was alleged to have been smuggled into the Queen’s bed in a warming pan. The many Protestant witnesses who were forced to be present at the child’s birth stood with their backs to the bed, in order to avoid being called as witnesses to the Prince’s legitimacy. The ensuing chaos served as the perfect excuse for William of Orange, husband of James’ elder daughter, Mary, to launch an invasion, and by the end of the year James II had been forced to flee to France. Mary herself had had to escape from St James’ Palace disguised as a washerwoman. From then, until her death in 1718, Mary’s life was spent in exile at the Chateau de Saint-Germain-en-Laye near Paris, where she ceaselessly promoted the cause of her husband and, from 1701, her son, in their fruitless attempts to regain the throne.
Portrait of Queen Mary of Modena in Exile (1658-1718)
c.1709
Oil on canvas
28 3/8 x 24 3/4 in.
Provenance
Queen Mary of Modena (1658-1718);
Lady Lucy Herbert CRSA (1669–1743/44);
English Convent (Monastery of Nazareth) Bruges, until 1967;
Fr Dom Philip Decloedt OSB.
This portrayal of Queen Mary of Modena, the exiled Queen of England, Scotland and Ireland, is a bust portrait by Alexis Simon Belle derived in part from an earlier three-quarter-length by François de Troy (1745-1730). de Troy was an eminent painter at the French court and his portrait celebrated the twenty-fifth wedding anniversary of Mary of Modena and James VII and II. Although this is now lost, a copy survives in the collection at Sizergh Castle, Cumbria. Alexis Simon Belle, then chief court painter to the British court at St Germain, was subsequently intermittently commissioned by the exiled monarchs to paint bust-length versions as presentation pieces for loyal followers eager to show their support for the Jacobite cause. Indeed, this portrait has a particularly important royal and religious provenance. It was bequeathed to the English Convent at Bruges by Queen Mary of Modena, either to mark her old companion Lady Lucy Herbert’s becoming Procuratress of the convent in 1699 or Prioress in 1709. Lady Lucy Herbert CRSA (1669-1743/44) was the daughter of William Herbert, 1st Marquis of Powis, a leading Catholic nobleman, by his wife Elizabeth Somerset, younger daughter of Edward Somerset, 2nd Marquis of Worcester. Powis was loyal to James II in the Revolution of 1688 and continued to serve the exiled monarch in exile (he was subsequently created 1st Duke of Powis in the ‘Jacobite Peerage’). His daughter Lady Lucy entered the English Convent at Bruges shortly after the Revolution in 1690 and there remained an active institutional supporter of Jacobite cause, hence being given this portrait which would remain in the convent’s collection for centuries thereafter. Whiteman’s are grateful to Sr Mary Aline, Prioress and Archivist at The English Convent (Monastery of Nazareth) Bruges, for her help cataloguing this picture who also pointed out that ‘it is mentioned as 'gifts before 1729'. The portrait remained here in the English Convent (Monastery of Nazareth) until it was sold in 1967 to Dom Philip Decloedt OSB then chaplain of the Canonesses of the Holy Sepulchre -Sint Trudo Abbey in Maele(near Bruges). After a while it was sold to a private person.’
When Mary of Modena first learnt that she was to be married to James, Duke of York – the future James II – she burst into tears. Her original wish was to enter a convent, and she tried repeatedly to persuade James’ emissary, the Earl of Peterborough, that she was unwilling to marry, least of all a man she had never met. However, James, heir to Charles II, and by then openly Catholic, was in desperate need of a suitable Catholic wife, and the match was viewed by her family as a good one. Mary was prevailed upon to marry James by proxy and left for London in late 1673. As a future Catholic Queen whose main purpose was to produce a male Catholic heir for James, Mary endured a hostile reception in Protestant England when she arrived in late 1673. She was lampooned in the press and forced to practice mass in private. Nonetheless, she and James swiftly proceeded with the marriage. In 1685 James and Mary ascended to the throne without an heir and the succession seemed destined to pass to James’ Protestant daughter Mary from his first marriage to Anne Hyde.
In 1688 the Queen finally gave birth to a son, James, and the prospect of a secured Catholic succession alarmed the political class. Rumours were quickly spread to undermine the birth, and the baby was alleged to have been smuggled into the Queen’s bed in a warming pan. The many Protestant witnesses who were forced to be present at the child’s birth stood with their backs to the bed, in order to avoid being called as witnesses to the Prince’s legitimacy. The ensuing chaos served as the perfect excuse for William of Orange, husband of James’ elder daughter, Mary, to launch an invasion, and by the end of the year James II had been forced to flee to France. Mary herself had had to escape from St James’ Palace disguised as a washerwoman. From then, until her death in 1718, Mary’s life was spent in exile at the Chateau de Saint-Germain-en-Laye near Paris, where she ceaselessly promoted the cause of her husband and, from 1701, her son, in their fruitless attempts to regain the throne.
Anne Chéron (attr.), Portrait of Prince James Francis Edward Stuart, ‘James VIII & III’
Attributed to Anne Chéron, Portrait of Prince James Francis Edward Stuart, ‘James VIII & III,’ ‘The Old Pretender’
c.1704-1708
Oil on copper
3 ½ x 2 ¾ ins.
This refined and dignified portrait miniature, attributed to female artist Anne Chéron, is rendered meticulously with oil paint on a copper support and portrays Prince James Francis Edward Stuart, claimant to the British throne. The heir of his exiled father, King James VII & II, Prince James’s lineage and lifestyle were fit for a king of England, Scotland, and Ireland, however his steadfast Catholicism, and that of his immediate family, would disqualify them, unconditionally, from ever reigning as such. This unusually large miniature, and many other portraits like it, were objects designed with propaganda in mind; as an exiled claimant to the British throne, ‘James VIII & III’ as he was known to his followers the Jacobites, attempted to curry favour with European courts – usually fellow Catholics – to help them overthrow their Protestant cousins from the throne to which they were legitimately entitled. In order to do so, they commissioned artists to paint portraits that would convince their beholder that the exiled Stuarts were the ‘true’ royal family of Great Britain; in so doing their attractive likenesses could be effectively, and sophisticatedly propagated throughout Europe – and most importantly Britain – to spread their realm of influence and support.
Due to their discreet scale, miniatures were a favoured format for the Jacobite propaganda machine; simply hidden and easy to transport, these portraits were a preferable way of spreading support for the Jacobite claimants to the throne, especially in areas, like Britain, where their name and kind were unwelcome, at least officially. Portrait miniatures were, thus, effective means of secretly distributing a pleasing likeness of a prince attempting to secure his crown. This portrait dates from the early period of James’s ‘de jure’ reign. His title was recognised by Louis XIV who gave him the royal palace of Saint-Germain-en-Laye. At this time Alexis Simon-Belle (1674-1734) was the principal portraitist to the exiled court, however this miniature, which may derive from his work, was probably by his wife, Anne Chéron (1663-1718). According to Dr. Edward Corp, the leading academic authority on Jacobite portraiture, this work conforms closely to ‘the style’ of Anne Chéron who thus supplied the need to disseminate the prince’s image more widely, and discreetly, than her husband’s larger pictures. It is also notable that Anne Chéron was only one of a handful of female artists working professionally in France, let alone Europe, at the turn of the eighteenth century. She is also the only recorded female Jacobite portraitist.
James here wears a fashionable high-peaked wig and dons a lacy cravat above a highly sheened ceremonial breastplate, over which he proudly wears the distinctive blue sash of the Order of the Garter. As the highest chivalric order in England, the Garter sash here represents an unequivocal legitimist claim.
Provenance:
Private Collection, Scotland
*We would like to express our gratitude to Dr. Edward Corp for his assistance cataloguing this picture.
Abraham Cooper (1787-1868), 'The First of October,' 1856
Abraham Cooper (1787-1868)
The First of October 1856, the Artist with his Family
Oil on canvas
18" x 24"in.
Provenance:
With Arthur Ackermann & Peter Johnson Ltd., 1997.
The First of October 1856, the Artist with his Family
Oil on canvas
18" x 24"in.
Provenance:
With Arthur Ackermann & Peter Johnson Ltd., 1997.
Domenico Corvi (1721-1803), Portrait of Prince Henry Benedict Stuart, Cardinal Duke of York
Domenico Corvi (1721-1803)
The Stanford Hall Portrait of Prince Henry Benedict Stuart, Cardinal Duke of York (1725-1807)
1748
Oil on canvas
29 x 24 in.
Provenance
Prince Henry Benedict Stuart, Cardinal Duke of York, ‘King Henry IX’; His executor, Angelo Cesarini;
Marchese Malatesta, Palazzo Malatesta, Rome;
From where purchased by Sarah Otway-Cave, 3rd Baroness Braye in 1842; Thence by descent at Stanford Hall, Leicestershire;
Historical Portraits Ltd;
Private Collection, Scotland.
Literature
Arthur Oswald, ‘Stanford Hall, Leicestershire, the Seat of Lord Braye’ in Country Life, December 11. 1958, p1410-1413.
This important portrait of Prince Henry Benedict Stuart, Cardinal Duke of York is by the acclaimed Italian baroque artist Domenico Corvi, and was painted in 1748. Henry’s first sitting as a Cardinal was to Corvi in 1747, shortly before he sat to another artist Louis Gabriel Blanchet. Portraits from 1747 show him in Cardinal’s robes, but before he had been ordained a priest by Pope Benedict XIV (his godfather) in September 1748. In this portrait Henry is depicted wearing his famed pectoral cross for the first time, thus signifying his elevation to the priesthood and soon thereafter to bishop. The cross is mounted with brilliant diamonds which he inherited from the Polish Crown Jewels vis-à-vis Prince Henry’s maternal grandfather, Prince James Sobieski son of John III Sobieski, King of Poland. His wearing the cross therefore dates the portrait to late 1748. Indeed, that the portrait very visibly celebrates Cardinal York’s episcopal elevation is captured gloriously here by Corvi’s skilful rendering of diamonds glistening in the light over the luxurious folds of Henry’s scarlet silk mantle and intricate lace work.
This portrait was notably purchased from the Malatesta Palace in Rome by Sarah, Baroness Braye in 1842. The Marchese Malatesta had inherited the estate of Angelo Cesarini, who was Prince Henry’s long-time private secretary and later his executor, to whom the late 'de jure' King Henry IX left the bulk of his effects. Many Stuart relics were sold from the Malatesta Palace, including Laurent Pécheux’s portrait of King Charles III painted in 1770, and pendant portraits by Girolamo Pesci of King James III and Maria Clementina Sobieska, which were also brought to Britain by Baroness Braye and still hang in the Braye collection at Stanford Hall, Leicestershire. Baroness Braye also bought numerous Stuart papers, as well as other items and Jacobite relics derivative of the personal collection of King Henry IX (http://www.jacobite.ca/gazetteer/England/Stanford.htm, published 2012-2017). Its acquisition thus represents a unique opportunity to own an exemplary example of Jacobite portraiture with an illustrious provenance chain leading back to the last of the Stuarts, Henry IX himself.
This portrait of Cardinal York has recently benefitted from the analysis of Dr. Edward Corp, the world leading expert on Jacobite portraiture, for the first time. Dr. Corp has both confirmed this portrait as the autograph Domenico Corvi and its having been commissioned by Cardinal York himself, after which the painting subsequently hung in his own collection until his death in 1807. Dr. Corp has written: ‘When Prince Henry was made a cardinal deacon in 1747 he commissioned a portrait from Domenico Corvi showing him seated at a table and holding a quill pen. It is now in the Wadsworth Atheneum. (He also commissioned a full-length one from Louis-Gabriel Blanchet: private collection). Then in 1748, after he had been ordained a cardinal priest, he commissioned Corvi to paint this second portrait showing him with a cross on his chest.’ ‘We do know that the one you have been offered belonged to Cardinal York himself, so we may assume that it is by Corvi and that it should be regarded as the original.’ ‘For over 160 years the portrait was at Stanford Hall.’
Portraits were vitally important to the exiled Stuarts, and acted as a means of keeping the cause alive amongst their Jacobite adherents and supportive governments in Europe. For example, pictures of Prince Henry’s father, King James III, had been particularly important, especially when he was a young man. Although James’s father, the exiled James II, lived until 1701, James III’s central political significance lay in the fact that he was a boy, whereas his Protestant sisters, Mary and Anne, who ruled in his and his father’s place, were conspicuously unable to provide any Stuart heirs themselves. Jacobite portraits thus served as visual reminders of James III’s health, vigour, and ultimate determination to regain the throne. The whole family took their portraits seriously; for example, we have a record that Henry, when he was young, sat for “about 14 Ours” for his. Such was the prominence of Jacobite imagery that Henry’s brother, Prince Charles, was obliged to take extra precautions during the preparations for his 1745 rebellion. When in Paris he wrote to his father: ‘Nobody nose where I am... I am obliged very often not to stur out of my room, for fier of some bodys noing my face.’ For the Stuarts themselves, it was miniature portraits that were particularly useful as family mementoes, as one might expect during their increasingly frenetic and peripatetic lives. When Charles found that he missed his family, he wrote “with a request which is to have your picture, the Queen’s and the Duke’s in miniature so that since I have the misfortune of not seeing you, the pictures will be of some comfort in the meantime, which I hope in God may not be too long.’
Henry’s appointment as Cardinal had a subtle but important effect on Jacobite portraiture. Until then Jacobite portraits had been invariably political or propagandist in nature, often full of crowns and armour, and the sitters pointing wistfully to a ship in the distant sea heading to England. But now Henry’s religious vows and orders precluded the display of such props, including the wearing of the Order of the Garter, which until then had been constantly worn by the exiled Stuarts as an assertion of their legitimacy. Although Henry never renounced his rights to the crown, the changing of his image from before his ordination, as seen in the portraits in which he wears armour, such as the pastel by La Tour in the Scottish National Portrait Gallery, to the more pacific and inherently Catholic presentation, may have been seen as a further signal that he believed the Jacobite’s chances of regaining the throne by force were lost. And of course, it demonstrated most emphatically that Henry, the last Stuart male claimant, would produce no heirs.
Despite becoming a Prince of the Church, Henry never renounced his rightful claim to the crown, however. When his elder brother Charles Edward Stuart, then styled King Charles III, died in 1788 Henry assumed the regnal title of King Henry IX, and insisted on his large household addressing him as ‘Your Majesty’, even on occasion touching for the ‘King’s evil’, or scrofula, whereby the sick would be miraculously healed through the power of divine right kingship. He petitioned the Pope to formally recognise him as King, but to no avail. However his adopted motto would spread through Europe on medals proclaiming his right as King of England, Scotland and Ireland, ‘Non desideriis hominum, sed voluntate Dei’ – ‘Not by the choice of man, but by the will of God.’
The Stanford Hall Portrait of Prince Henry Benedict Stuart, Cardinal Duke of York (1725-1807)
1748
Oil on canvas
29 x 24 in.
Provenance
Prince Henry Benedict Stuart, Cardinal Duke of York, ‘King Henry IX’; His executor, Angelo Cesarini;
Marchese Malatesta, Palazzo Malatesta, Rome;
From where purchased by Sarah Otway-Cave, 3rd Baroness Braye in 1842; Thence by descent at Stanford Hall, Leicestershire;
Historical Portraits Ltd;
Private Collection, Scotland.
Literature
Arthur Oswald, ‘Stanford Hall, Leicestershire, the Seat of Lord Braye’ in Country Life, December 11. 1958, p1410-1413.
This important portrait of Prince Henry Benedict Stuart, Cardinal Duke of York is by the acclaimed Italian baroque artist Domenico Corvi, and was painted in 1748. Henry’s first sitting as a Cardinal was to Corvi in 1747, shortly before he sat to another artist Louis Gabriel Blanchet. Portraits from 1747 show him in Cardinal’s robes, but before he had been ordained a priest by Pope Benedict XIV (his godfather) in September 1748. In this portrait Henry is depicted wearing his famed pectoral cross for the first time, thus signifying his elevation to the priesthood and soon thereafter to bishop. The cross is mounted with brilliant diamonds which he inherited from the Polish Crown Jewels vis-à-vis Prince Henry’s maternal grandfather, Prince James Sobieski son of John III Sobieski, King of Poland. His wearing the cross therefore dates the portrait to late 1748. Indeed, that the portrait very visibly celebrates Cardinal York’s episcopal elevation is captured gloriously here by Corvi’s skilful rendering of diamonds glistening in the light over the luxurious folds of Henry’s scarlet silk mantle and intricate lace work.
This portrait was notably purchased from the Malatesta Palace in Rome by Sarah, Baroness Braye in 1842. The Marchese Malatesta had inherited the estate of Angelo Cesarini, who was Prince Henry’s long-time private secretary and later his executor, to whom the late 'de jure' King Henry IX left the bulk of his effects. Many Stuart relics were sold from the Malatesta Palace, including Laurent Pécheux’s portrait of King Charles III painted in 1770, and pendant portraits by Girolamo Pesci of King James III and Maria Clementina Sobieska, which were also brought to Britain by Baroness Braye and still hang in the Braye collection at Stanford Hall, Leicestershire. Baroness Braye also bought numerous Stuart papers, as well as other items and Jacobite relics derivative of the personal collection of King Henry IX (http://www.jacobite.ca/gazetteer/England/Stanford.htm, published 2012-2017). Its acquisition thus represents a unique opportunity to own an exemplary example of Jacobite portraiture with an illustrious provenance chain leading back to the last of the Stuarts, Henry IX himself.
This portrait of Cardinal York has recently benefitted from the analysis of Dr. Edward Corp, the world leading expert on Jacobite portraiture, for the first time. Dr. Corp has both confirmed this portrait as the autograph Domenico Corvi and its having been commissioned by Cardinal York himself, after which the painting subsequently hung in his own collection until his death in 1807. Dr. Corp has written: ‘When Prince Henry was made a cardinal deacon in 1747 he commissioned a portrait from Domenico Corvi showing him seated at a table and holding a quill pen. It is now in the Wadsworth Atheneum. (He also commissioned a full-length one from Louis-Gabriel Blanchet: private collection). Then in 1748, after he had been ordained a cardinal priest, he commissioned Corvi to paint this second portrait showing him with a cross on his chest.’ ‘We do know that the one you have been offered belonged to Cardinal York himself, so we may assume that it is by Corvi and that it should be regarded as the original.’ ‘For over 160 years the portrait was at Stanford Hall.’
Portraits were vitally important to the exiled Stuarts, and acted as a means of keeping the cause alive amongst their Jacobite adherents and supportive governments in Europe. For example, pictures of Prince Henry’s father, King James III, had been particularly important, especially when he was a young man. Although James’s father, the exiled James II, lived until 1701, James III’s central political significance lay in the fact that he was a boy, whereas his Protestant sisters, Mary and Anne, who ruled in his and his father’s place, were conspicuously unable to provide any Stuart heirs themselves. Jacobite portraits thus served as visual reminders of James III’s health, vigour, and ultimate determination to regain the throne. The whole family took their portraits seriously; for example, we have a record that Henry, when he was young, sat for “about 14 Ours” for his. Such was the prominence of Jacobite imagery that Henry’s brother, Prince Charles, was obliged to take extra precautions during the preparations for his 1745 rebellion. When in Paris he wrote to his father: ‘Nobody nose where I am... I am obliged very often not to stur out of my room, for fier of some bodys noing my face.’ For the Stuarts themselves, it was miniature portraits that were particularly useful as family mementoes, as one might expect during their increasingly frenetic and peripatetic lives. When Charles found that he missed his family, he wrote “with a request which is to have your picture, the Queen’s and the Duke’s in miniature so that since I have the misfortune of not seeing you, the pictures will be of some comfort in the meantime, which I hope in God may not be too long.’
Henry’s appointment as Cardinal had a subtle but important effect on Jacobite portraiture. Until then Jacobite portraits had been invariably political or propagandist in nature, often full of crowns and armour, and the sitters pointing wistfully to a ship in the distant sea heading to England. But now Henry’s religious vows and orders precluded the display of such props, including the wearing of the Order of the Garter, which until then had been constantly worn by the exiled Stuarts as an assertion of their legitimacy. Although Henry never renounced his rights to the crown, the changing of his image from before his ordination, as seen in the portraits in which he wears armour, such as the pastel by La Tour in the Scottish National Portrait Gallery, to the more pacific and inherently Catholic presentation, may have been seen as a further signal that he believed the Jacobite’s chances of regaining the throne by force were lost. And of course, it demonstrated most emphatically that Henry, the last Stuart male claimant, would produce no heirs.
Despite becoming a Prince of the Church, Henry never renounced his rightful claim to the crown, however. When his elder brother Charles Edward Stuart, then styled King Charles III, died in 1788 Henry assumed the regnal title of King Henry IX, and insisted on his large household addressing him as ‘Your Majesty’, even on occasion touching for the ‘King’s evil’, or scrofula, whereby the sick would be miraculously healed through the power of divine right kingship. He petitioned the Pope to formally recognise him as King, but to no avail. However his adopted motto would spread through Europe on medals proclaiming his right as King of England, Scotland and Ireland, ‘Non desideriis hominum, sed voluntate Dei’ – ‘Not by the choice of man, but by the will of God.’
Edward Seago (1910-1974), ‘A Grey Day on the Colne'
Edward Seago RBA ARWS RWS (1910-1974); signed)
A Grey Day on the Colne
20th century
Watercolour on paper
Dimensions: 15 1/2'' x 11'' ins. (24 1/2'' x 21'' ins. framed)
Provenance
P. & D. Colnaghi & Co., London;
John Noott Galleries, Broadway, 1995;
Private Collection, United Kingdom.
Titled 'A Grey Day on the Colne,' Edward Seago has masterfully captured the impression of shimmering light on fishing boats and yachts on the river Colne, reflected here in the intermate interplay between light and shadow, sky and sea. The Colne was one of the artist's favourite subjects, here singularly painted on a drisly English day with the sun only just beginning to break through the clouds, thus making this seascape an important part of Seago's ouvre.
Edward Seago was a member of the Royal Society of British Artists from 1946, and the Royal Society of Painters in Watercolours from 1959. He painted numerous English landscapes, notably in Norfolk, where he settled, but also produced a large body of work abroad. Much of his work was Post-Impressionist in atmosphere. His rapid brushwork captures reflections of light, occassionally enveloping his subjects in a diffuse, Turner-esque haze. He exhibited in London, Glasgow, New York, Toronto, Montreal, Los Angeles, Oslo and Brussels. He held his first solo exhibition in London in 1944; two years later, he exhibited paintings depicting the war in Italy when he was Official Artist to the Italian Campaign. A later exhibition at St. James's Palace in 1957, featured a series of paintings executed during a world tour accompanying the Duke of Edinburgh, a keen patron of the artist's.
A Grey Day on the Colne
20th century
Watercolour on paper
Dimensions: 15 1/2'' x 11'' ins. (24 1/2'' x 21'' ins. framed)
Provenance
P. & D. Colnaghi & Co., London;
John Noott Galleries, Broadway, 1995;
Private Collection, United Kingdom.
Titled 'A Grey Day on the Colne,' Edward Seago has masterfully captured the impression of shimmering light on fishing boats and yachts on the river Colne, reflected here in the intermate interplay between light and shadow, sky and sea. The Colne was one of the artist's favourite subjects, here singularly painted on a drisly English day with the sun only just beginning to break through the clouds, thus making this seascape an important part of Seago's ouvre.
Edward Seago was a member of the Royal Society of British Artists from 1946, and the Royal Society of Painters in Watercolours from 1959. He painted numerous English landscapes, notably in Norfolk, where he settled, but also produced a large body of work abroad. Much of his work was Post-Impressionist in atmosphere. His rapid brushwork captures reflections of light, occassionally enveloping his subjects in a diffuse, Turner-esque haze. He exhibited in London, Glasgow, New York, Toronto, Montreal, Los Angeles, Oslo and Brussels. He held his first solo exhibition in London in 1944; two years later, he exhibited paintings depicting the war in Italy when he was Official Artist to the Italian Campaign. A later exhibition at St. James's Palace in 1957, featured a series of paintings executed during a world tour accompanying the Duke of Edinburgh, a keen patron of the artist's.
Hugh Douglas Hamilton (1739-1808), Portraits of Princes Charles Edward and Henry Benedict Stuart
Hugh Douglas Hamilton (1739-1808)
Pendant portraits of Prince Charles Edward Stuart when ‘King Charles III’ (1720-1788), and Prince Henry Benedict Stuart, Cardinal Duke of York (1725-1807)
Pastel on paper
Charles Edward, 8 ½ x 8 ins. (visible oval), 13 x 12 ins. (framed);
Henry Benedict, 9 ½ x 7 ½ ins. (visible oval), 13 ½ x 12 ins. (framed)
1785-6
Princes Charles Edward and Henry Benedict Stuart were the children of James Francis Edward Stuart, de jure James III and VIII, King of England, Scotland and Ireland. James was the legitimate hereditary heir of his father, James II and VII, who was exiled from his kingdoms during the Revolution of 1688. King James's loyal supporters at home and on the Continent would become known as the ‘Jacobites,’ literally followers of James, and the Jacobite court first began at the royal Palace of Saint-Germain-en-Laye in France, under the patronage of Louis XIV, and later the papal Palazzo Muti in Rome. The princes were born into the exiled British court and its overarching cause, the restoration of the Stuarts, would define their lives. In their formative years, Princes Charles Edward and Henry Benedict enjoyed an intimate friendship, and when Charles acted as his father’s regent in 1745 to reclaim his ancestral kingdoms, Henry was appointed to lead a 10,000 strong invasion force in his support from Dunkirk. When, however, Charles’s startling successes in Scotland and England, which won him the legend of ‘Bonnie Prince Charlie,’ had reversed and ground to a halt in the tragedy of Culloden, Henry’s potentially victory clenching mission was fated never to cross the Channel. After this calamity, Henry Benedict decided with his father’s blessing to follow the vocation he had desired from a young age. He was elected a cardinal in the Catholic Church in 1747 and soon thereafter consecrated as both a priest and bishop. Given that his grandfather had been principally usurped for his adherence to the Old Faith, Prince Charles saw his brother's elevation as a great betrayal, one which would forever undermine their cause in the eyes of their intolerant subjects. Despite Charles Edward becoming the de jure King Charles III on the death of James III in 1766, it would not be until 1785 when these pendant portraits were executed that the two brothers were finally reconciled by Charles’s natural daughter, Charlotte Stuart, Duchess of Albany, upon whose care he had begun to entirely depend (as he had on Henry’s financial support for some years).
Hugh Douglas Hamilton was an Irish artist and one of the great pastellists of the eighteenth century. Although he occasionally painted in oils, his delicate works in pastel, usually feigned ovals housed in gilded neoclassical frames, were popular in London society in the 1750s and 1760s. Receiving commissions from Hanoverian royalty - including Queen Charlotte (1764) - and leading luminaries of the day, his consummate skill as a pastellist was widely celebrated. Costing around six guineas apiece, these pastels were accessible and exhibit a lively freshness often noted by contemporaries. Indeed, they were the ideal medium to supply demand for versions of portraits depicting Hamilton’s famous sitters. In 1779, the artist moved to Italy where he would spend twelve successful years supplying travelling aristocrats with art at the height of the fashionable Grand Tour. As famous personages, portraits of the exiled royal family were in demand and there is a receipt from Hamilton in the Stuart Papers at Windsor Castle, dated 12 July 1786, for ‘A Portrait of His Royal Highness the Cardinal York, 20 Sequins.’ The mention in the account book makes it clear that this was for a portrait ‘in Pastella.’ Indeed, that two drawings were paid for is evinced by 30 1/2 sequins having been paid for ‘three Pictures of Madam the Duchess of Albany’ on the 13 October 1785. Thus - as was established practice - multiple versions were made by the artist of each member of the exiled house to distribute as they pleased. Indeed, an entry from the diary of the banker (and Jacobite sympathiser) Sir William Forbes dated Rome, 1792, mentions a recent visit to the house of Abbé Waters, major domo to Charlotte, Duchess of Albany, where he observed two portraits of Charles Edward as an old man in a brown coat with Garter ribbon and of Henry Benedict done by ‘Mr Hamilton.’ Other versions by Hugh Douglas Hamilton reside in the National Portrait Galleries of England and Scotland, the Dundee Art Gallery and Townley Hall, Drogheda.
These portraits were done shortly after the final reconciliation of the princes in the final years of Charles Edward’s life. They not only poignantly capture the last generation of the legitimate Stuart line nearly a century after James II’s exile, but also the very human relationship between two brothers. Charles, now an aged gentleman - this would be his last portrait - is depicted simply in a frock coat and cravat. However, he wears the rich blue sash of the Order of the Garter and is rendered in full possession of his regal dignity, despite many years of frustrated ambition. Conversely, Prince Henry is portrayed in the rich regalia of an esteemed member of the Roman Curia. At this time, he was an immensely rich and influential prince of the Church and wears the large pectoral cross hanging on a gold chain for which he was famous. The cross is mounted with brilliant diamonds from the Polish Crown Jewels which he inherited in 1737 from his maternal grandfather, Prince James Sobieski (father of Maria Clementina), son of King John III of Poland. And, whereas Charles Edward assuredly confronts the viewers gaze, Cardinal York stares outside of the picture plane with all the contemplative serenity noted as marking his visage throughout his life. Both of their powdered wigs have been exquisitely rendered with the feathery application of pastel that was a trademark of Hamilton’s.
Prince Henry was profoundly grieved by his elder brother’s death on the 31st of January 1788. Despite years of estrangement, Henry never ceased recalling his brother as the hero of the 45’, for whom he rushed to Dunkirk to muster an army. From that morning however, Prince Henry was to be the last of the Stuarts. Although never formally crowned, he was addressed by loyal Jacobites and his large household as His Majesty, King Henry IX. The last pretender’s motto, which he signed with and had inscribed on commemorative medals, read ‘Non desideriis hominum, sed voluntate Dei’ (‘Not by the choice of man, but by the will of God.’). Henry would end his days in 1807, living in great state and touching for the ‘King’s Evil,’ whereby the sick would be miraculously healed by the divine right of kings.
It is remarkable that these pendant portraits have never been separated. This may be merited to their being preserved in the family collection of the Fraser-Tytlers of Aldourie Castle, Scotland, where they hung until 2015 when the castle was sold upon the death of Lady Ann Erskine (née Fraser-Tytler). The Fraser-Tytlers and their kin had a long history of engagement with Jacobitism, with Patrick Fraser-Tytler having welcomed the Sobieski Stuarts (Edward Meyrick Goulburn, John William Burgon: A Biography with Extracts from His Letters and Early Journals (London, 1892), p. 75), whilst ‘Margaret Fraser-Tytler even wrote a biography of Charles Edward published c.1838’ (Neil Jeffares email exchange).
Whiteman’s Fine Art would like to express its gratitude to Dr. William Erskine for his assistance cataloguing these pendant portraits. We would also like to thank the leading academic authority on Hugh Douglas Hamilton’s oeuvre, Neil Jeffares, for his research and confirming this rediscovery, adding the two portraits to his catalogue raisonné of early modern pastellists.
Provenance:
By descent at Aldourie Castle, Loch Ness, Inverness, to Edward Grant Fraser-Tytler (1856-1918);
Lt-Col Neil Fraser-Tytler (1893-1937) m. Christian Fraser-Tytler CBE (1897-1995, the famous ATS officer);
Lady Ann Erskine, née Fraser-Tytler (1920-2015) m. Sir Thomas David Erskine of Cambo, 5th Baronet (1912-2007);
Dr. William Erskine (b. 1952), Fellow, University of Western Australia
(younger brother of Sir Thomas Peter Neil Erskine, 6th Baronet of Cambo, Cambo House, north-east Fife, Scotland), from whom acquired, 2023.
Literature:
Neil Jeffares, “Hugh Douglas Hamilton”, Dictionary of pastellists before 1800, Online edition: Prince Charles Edward Stuart, J.375.11453; Prince Henry Benedict Stuart, J.375.11453
Pendant portraits of Prince Charles Edward Stuart when ‘King Charles III’ (1720-1788), and Prince Henry Benedict Stuart, Cardinal Duke of York (1725-1807)
Pastel on paper
Charles Edward, 8 ½ x 8 ins. (visible oval), 13 x 12 ins. (framed);
Henry Benedict, 9 ½ x 7 ½ ins. (visible oval), 13 ½ x 12 ins. (framed)
1785-6
Princes Charles Edward and Henry Benedict Stuart were the children of James Francis Edward Stuart, de jure James III and VIII, King of England, Scotland and Ireland. James was the legitimate hereditary heir of his father, James II and VII, who was exiled from his kingdoms during the Revolution of 1688. King James's loyal supporters at home and on the Continent would become known as the ‘Jacobites,’ literally followers of James, and the Jacobite court first began at the royal Palace of Saint-Germain-en-Laye in France, under the patronage of Louis XIV, and later the papal Palazzo Muti in Rome. The princes were born into the exiled British court and its overarching cause, the restoration of the Stuarts, would define their lives. In their formative years, Princes Charles Edward and Henry Benedict enjoyed an intimate friendship, and when Charles acted as his father’s regent in 1745 to reclaim his ancestral kingdoms, Henry was appointed to lead a 10,000 strong invasion force in his support from Dunkirk. When, however, Charles’s startling successes in Scotland and England, which won him the legend of ‘Bonnie Prince Charlie,’ had reversed and ground to a halt in the tragedy of Culloden, Henry’s potentially victory clenching mission was fated never to cross the Channel. After this calamity, Henry Benedict decided with his father’s blessing to follow the vocation he had desired from a young age. He was elected a cardinal in the Catholic Church in 1747 and soon thereafter consecrated as both a priest and bishop. Given that his grandfather had been principally usurped for his adherence to the Old Faith, Prince Charles saw his brother's elevation as a great betrayal, one which would forever undermine their cause in the eyes of their intolerant subjects. Despite Charles Edward becoming the de jure King Charles III on the death of James III in 1766, it would not be until 1785 when these pendant portraits were executed that the two brothers were finally reconciled by Charles’s natural daughter, Charlotte Stuart, Duchess of Albany, upon whose care he had begun to entirely depend (as he had on Henry’s financial support for some years).
Hugh Douglas Hamilton was an Irish artist and one of the great pastellists of the eighteenth century. Although he occasionally painted in oils, his delicate works in pastel, usually feigned ovals housed in gilded neoclassical frames, were popular in London society in the 1750s and 1760s. Receiving commissions from Hanoverian royalty - including Queen Charlotte (1764) - and leading luminaries of the day, his consummate skill as a pastellist was widely celebrated. Costing around six guineas apiece, these pastels were accessible and exhibit a lively freshness often noted by contemporaries. Indeed, they were the ideal medium to supply demand for versions of portraits depicting Hamilton’s famous sitters. In 1779, the artist moved to Italy where he would spend twelve successful years supplying travelling aristocrats with art at the height of the fashionable Grand Tour. As famous personages, portraits of the exiled royal family were in demand and there is a receipt from Hamilton in the Stuart Papers at Windsor Castle, dated 12 July 1786, for ‘A Portrait of His Royal Highness the Cardinal York, 20 Sequins.’ The mention in the account book makes it clear that this was for a portrait ‘in Pastella.’ Indeed, that two drawings were paid for is evinced by 30 1/2 sequins having been paid for ‘three Pictures of Madam the Duchess of Albany’ on the 13 October 1785. Thus - as was established practice - multiple versions were made by the artist of each member of the exiled house to distribute as they pleased. Indeed, an entry from the diary of the banker (and Jacobite sympathiser) Sir William Forbes dated Rome, 1792, mentions a recent visit to the house of Abbé Waters, major domo to Charlotte, Duchess of Albany, where he observed two portraits of Charles Edward as an old man in a brown coat with Garter ribbon and of Henry Benedict done by ‘Mr Hamilton.’ Other versions by Hugh Douglas Hamilton reside in the National Portrait Galleries of England and Scotland, the Dundee Art Gallery and Townley Hall, Drogheda.
These portraits were done shortly after the final reconciliation of the princes in the final years of Charles Edward’s life. They not only poignantly capture the last generation of the legitimate Stuart line nearly a century after James II’s exile, but also the very human relationship between two brothers. Charles, now an aged gentleman - this would be his last portrait - is depicted simply in a frock coat and cravat. However, he wears the rich blue sash of the Order of the Garter and is rendered in full possession of his regal dignity, despite many years of frustrated ambition. Conversely, Prince Henry is portrayed in the rich regalia of an esteemed member of the Roman Curia. At this time, he was an immensely rich and influential prince of the Church and wears the large pectoral cross hanging on a gold chain for which he was famous. The cross is mounted with brilliant diamonds from the Polish Crown Jewels which he inherited in 1737 from his maternal grandfather, Prince James Sobieski (father of Maria Clementina), son of King John III of Poland. And, whereas Charles Edward assuredly confronts the viewers gaze, Cardinal York stares outside of the picture plane with all the contemplative serenity noted as marking his visage throughout his life. Both of their powdered wigs have been exquisitely rendered with the feathery application of pastel that was a trademark of Hamilton’s.
Prince Henry was profoundly grieved by his elder brother’s death on the 31st of January 1788. Despite years of estrangement, Henry never ceased recalling his brother as the hero of the 45’, for whom he rushed to Dunkirk to muster an army. From that morning however, Prince Henry was to be the last of the Stuarts. Although never formally crowned, he was addressed by loyal Jacobites and his large household as His Majesty, King Henry IX. The last pretender’s motto, which he signed with and had inscribed on commemorative medals, read ‘Non desideriis hominum, sed voluntate Dei’ (‘Not by the choice of man, but by the will of God.’). Henry would end his days in 1807, living in great state and touching for the ‘King’s Evil,’ whereby the sick would be miraculously healed by the divine right of kings.
It is remarkable that these pendant portraits have never been separated. This may be merited to their being preserved in the family collection of the Fraser-Tytlers of Aldourie Castle, Scotland, where they hung until 2015 when the castle was sold upon the death of Lady Ann Erskine (née Fraser-Tytler). The Fraser-Tytlers and their kin had a long history of engagement with Jacobitism, with Patrick Fraser-Tytler having welcomed the Sobieski Stuarts (Edward Meyrick Goulburn, John William Burgon: A Biography with Extracts from His Letters and Early Journals (London, 1892), p. 75), whilst ‘Margaret Fraser-Tytler even wrote a biography of Charles Edward published c.1838’ (Neil Jeffares email exchange).
Whiteman’s Fine Art would like to express its gratitude to Dr. William Erskine for his assistance cataloguing these pendant portraits. We would also like to thank the leading academic authority on Hugh Douglas Hamilton’s oeuvre, Neil Jeffares, for his research and confirming this rediscovery, adding the two portraits to his catalogue raisonné of early modern pastellists.
Provenance:
By descent at Aldourie Castle, Loch Ness, Inverness, to Edward Grant Fraser-Tytler (1856-1918);
Lt-Col Neil Fraser-Tytler (1893-1937) m. Christian Fraser-Tytler CBE (1897-1995, the famous ATS officer);
Lady Ann Erskine, née Fraser-Tytler (1920-2015) m. Sir Thomas David Erskine of Cambo, 5th Baronet (1912-2007);
Dr. William Erskine (b. 1952), Fellow, University of Western Australia
(younger brother of Sir Thomas Peter Neil Erskine, 6th Baronet of Cambo, Cambo House, north-east Fife, Scotland), from whom acquired, 2023.
Literature:
Neil Jeffares, “Hugh Douglas Hamilton”, Dictionary of pastellists before 1800, Online edition: Prince Charles Edward Stuart, J.375.11453; Prince Henry Benedict Stuart, J.375.11453
Antonio David (1698 – 1750), Portrait of James Francis Edward Stuart, James III (1688 – 1766)
Antonio David (1684 – 1750)
Portrait of Prince James Francis Edward Stuart, The Old Pretender, Jacobite ‘James III’ (1688 – 1766)
Oil on canvas: 17 1⁄4 x 13 in. (44 x 33 cm.) Painted circa 1717-18
Provenance:
Presented by the artist in Rome to Sir David Nairne (1655 – 1740) in February 1718;
sent to his eldest daughter in Paris in March 1718;
by descent to his younger daughter Marie, Lady Ramsay (1701 – c.1761/1776);
by whom bequeathed to John Nairne, Scotland;
by descent through his extended family;
possibly gifted or sold to John Charles Ogilvy-Grant, 7th Earl of Seafield (1815 – 1881), Cullen House, Banffshire;
by whom bequeathed to Major William Baird (1879 – 1933), Lennoxlove House; thence by descent;
Sotheby’s, Old Master’s and Early British Paintings, Lot 200, 14 April 2011;
Weiss Gallery, London;
Private Collection, Scotland.
Literature
Dr. E. Corp, The Jacobites at Urbino, London 2009, pp. 23-25, 68, 87 & 90.
Exhibited
Glasgow, Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum, The Palace of History: Scottish Exhibition of National History, Art and Industry, 1911.
(We would like to thank Dr Edward T. Corp for his assistance with the provenance of this portrait. Sir David Nairne was the Secretary of the King’s Closet and was responsible for handling correspondence from Jacobite supporters to Antonio David’s studio regarding the commissioning of copies of his portraits. He also obtained the warrant for David to become James III’s official portrait painter. As a result, the present portrait was gifted directly from the artist to Nairne.)
Of significant historical interest, this portrait of Prince James Edward Stuart was painted by Antonio David, and commissioned by one of the Old Pretender’s close supporters. As an icon of the Jacobite cause, James Francis Edward Stuart was the subject of numerous works of art during his lifetime. Few however, stand as singularly vibrant as the outstandingly accomplished portrait by David. As an official portrait painter of the exiled Jacobite court in Rome, David formed a close acquaintance with the Stuarts after they decamped to Rome in early 1717. Pre-eminent amongst Italian portraitists, David worked almost exclusively for the House of Stuart for nearly twenty years, also painting the Old Pretender’s two children Prince Charles Edward Stuart, the Young Pretender (1720 – 1788) and Prince Henry Benedict, Cardinal York (1725 – 1807), both painted circa 1732 (Scottish National Portrait Gallery, Edinburgh).
This half-length portrait, painted at the inauguration of David’s association with the Pretender, features him in a fashionably high- peaked wig and donning a lacy cravat above a highly sheened ceremonial breast-plate. An appearance of splendour is increased by the red velvet and fur cloak on which are incorporated the sitter’s distinctions: the blue of the Garter and the rich greens and gold of the Thistle. With David’s emphasis on texture, opulence and colour he achieves a representation which epitomises kingly magnificence and rivals the portraiture of James’s French contemporary, Louis XV; more pertinently, it would have also successfully eclipsed the comparatively lack-luster likenesses of Queen Anne and George I across the channel.
The incorporation of James’s Orders would seem to facilitate the dating of this portrait to post c.1717. Having returned from his unsuccessful campaign in Scotland in 1716, and wishing to recognise the efforts of his Jacobite supporters, James for the first time chose to display the Order of the Thistle as well as the Order of the Garter on his chest. Where previously these Orders were incompatible if worn together, new regulations issued from Avignon in April 1716 decreed that the Thistle could now be worn with the Sash.
After secretly arriving in France with his mother, Mary of Modena in 1688, James Edward, who was the only son of James II (1633 – 1701), spent his earliest years under the protection of Louis XIV. After his father’s death in 1701 James Edward was declared King by Stuart supporters and later attempted officially to claim his title by landing in Scotland in 1715. On his failure, he was offered refuge in Rome by Pope Clement XI, and given the Palazzo Muti as his residence. Continuing their legacy of artistic patronage the Stuarts made their court in Rome an important centre for painting, employing the greatest Italian portraitists, not only including David, but also Francesco Trevisani, Louis-Gabriel Blanchet and Rosalba Carriera. Portraits were a central ingredient of the long campaign of political propaganda to win support for the Jacobite cause, and were disseminated throughout Europe to James’s supporters.
Written by an anonymous poet, whilst alluding to a portrait of James Edward Stuart, the following panegyric leaves no doubt as to the devotional function of these portraits, underlying the Jacobite claim:
‘What Briton can survey that heavenly Face, And doubt his being of the Martyrs Race, Ev’ry fine feature does his birth declare, The Monarch and Saint are shining there.’
(P. Monod, Jacobitism and the English people 1688-1788, 1989, p.70.)
Portrait of Prince James Francis Edward Stuart, The Old Pretender, Jacobite ‘James III’ (1688 – 1766)
Oil on canvas: 17 1⁄4 x 13 in. (44 x 33 cm.) Painted circa 1717-18
Provenance:
Presented by the artist in Rome to Sir David Nairne (1655 – 1740) in February 1718;
sent to his eldest daughter in Paris in March 1718;
by descent to his younger daughter Marie, Lady Ramsay (1701 – c.1761/1776);
by whom bequeathed to John Nairne, Scotland;
by descent through his extended family;
possibly gifted or sold to John Charles Ogilvy-Grant, 7th Earl of Seafield (1815 – 1881), Cullen House, Banffshire;
by whom bequeathed to Major William Baird (1879 – 1933), Lennoxlove House; thence by descent;
Sotheby’s, Old Master’s and Early British Paintings, Lot 200, 14 April 2011;
Weiss Gallery, London;
Private Collection, Scotland.
Literature
Dr. E. Corp, The Jacobites at Urbino, London 2009, pp. 23-25, 68, 87 & 90.
Exhibited
Glasgow, Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum, The Palace of History: Scottish Exhibition of National History, Art and Industry, 1911.
(We would like to thank Dr Edward T. Corp for his assistance with the provenance of this portrait. Sir David Nairne was the Secretary of the King’s Closet and was responsible for handling correspondence from Jacobite supporters to Antonio David’s studio regarding the commissioning of copies of his portraits. He also obtained the warrant for David to become James III’s official portrait painter. As a result, the present portrait was gifted directly from the artist to Nairne.)
Of significant historical interest, this portrait of Prince James Edward Stuart was painted by Antonio David, and commissioned by one of the Old Pretender’s close supporters. As an icon of the Jacobite cause, James Francis Edward Stuart was the subject of numerous works of art during his lifetime. Few however, stand as singularly vibrant as the outstandingly accomplished portrait by David. As an official portrait painter of the exiled Jacobite court in Rome, David formed a close acquaintance with the Stuarts after they decamped to Rome in early 1717. Pre-eminent amongst Italian portraitists, David worked almost exclusively for the House of Stuart for nearly twenty years, also painting the Old Pretender’s two children Prince Charles Edward Stuart, the Young Pretender (1720 – 1788) and Prince Henry Benedict, Cardinal York (1725 – 1807), both painted circa 1732 (Scottish National Portrait Gallery, Edinburgh).
This half-length portrait, painted at the inauguration of David’s association with the Pretender, features him in a fashionably high- peaked wig and donning a lacy cravat above a highly sheened ceremonial breast-plate. An appearance of splendour is increased by the red velvet and fur cloak on which are incorporated the sitter’s distinctions: the blue of the Garter and the rich greens and gold of the Thistle. With David’s emphasis on texture, opulence and colour he achieves a representation which epitomises kingly magnificence and rivals the portraiture of James’s French contemporary, Louis XV; more pertinently, it would have also successfully eclipsed the comparatively lack-luster likenesses of Queen Anne and George I across the channel.
The incorporation of James’s Orders would seem to facilitate the dating of this portrait to post c.1717. Having returned from his unsuccessful campaign in Scotland in 1716, and wishing to recognise the efforts of his Jacobite supporters, James for the first time chose to display the Order of the Thistle as well as the Order of the Garter on his chest. Where previously these Orders were incompatible if worn together, new regulations issued from Avignon in April 1716 decreed that the Thistle could now be worn with the Sash.
After secretly arriving in France with his mother, Mary of Modena in 1688, James Edward, who was the only son of James II (1633 – 1701), spent his earliest years under the protection of Louis XIV. After his father’s death in 1701 James Edward was declared King by Stuart supporters and later attempted officially to claim his title by landing in Scotland in 1715. On his failure, he was offered refuge in Rome by Pope Clement XI, and given the Palazzo Muti as his residence. Continuing their legacy of artistic patronage the Stuarts made their court in Rome an important centre for painting, employing the greatest Italian portraitists, not only including David, but also Francesco Trevisani, Louis-Gabriel Blanchet and Rosalba Carriera. Portraits were a central ingredient of the long campaign of political propaganda to win support for the Jacobite cause, and were disseminated throughout Europe to James’s supporters.
Written by an anonymous poet, whilst alluding to a portrait of James Edward Stuart, the following panegyric leaves no doubt as to the devotional function of these portraits, underlying the Jacobite claim:
‘What Briton can survey that heavenly Face, And doubt his being of the Martyrs Race, Ev’ry fine feature does his birth declare, The Monarch and Saint are shining there.’
(P. Monod, Jacobitism and the English people 1688-1788, 1989, p.70.)
Alexis Simon Belle (1674–1734), Portrait of King James VII & II (1633-1701)
Portrait of King James VII & II
Alexis Simon Belle (1674–1734)
1712
Oil-on-canvas
Half length, 30 x 25 ins.
This portrait depicts King James VII & II. James ascended to the thrones of England, Scotland and Ireland in 1685, however his reign was marked by constitutional turmoil and was cut drastically short when he was usurped in 1688-9 by his Dutch son-in-law, Prince William of Orange. James would die in exile in 1701 and his son, James Francis Edward Stuart, claimed his father’s title as King James III and VIII. His title was recognised by both the papacy and multiple Continental monarchies, famously including that of France. This posthumous portrait of James II was commissioned by his son in 1712 to emphasise the latter’s legitimacy. The commission went to the ‘king over the water’s’ leading court painter, Alexis Simon Belle (1674–1734), thus signifying the political importance of the work.
Acquired by Henry Howard MP (1802-1875), thence by family descent to Murray Howard (b. 1942), current owner of Greystoke Castle, from whom this painting was acquired by Whiteman's Fine Art & Antiques, 2021. With thanks to Murry Howard's nephew and family historian, Henry Howard (b.1972) of Johnby Hall, we know that his great-great grandfather Henry Howard MP would have acquired this painting after the rebuilding and furnishing of Greystoke Castle after the great fire of 1868. Until recently, the portrait hung in the ‘Stuart Room’ to the right of the entrance hall, situated amongst glittering armour and other paintings depicting members of that unfortunate dynasty. As a branch of the leading recusant Howard family – Bernard Howard, the 12th Duke of Norfolk, was Henry Howard MP’s uncle – an affection held for the Roman Catholic Stuarts was natural. Indeed, this portrait hung alongside one of James III’s son and heir, ‘Bonnie Prince Charlie’ - from his Cumbrian bid to buy support for the 45’ - and another of James’s mother, Queen Mary of Modena by Sir Godfrey Kneller (purposely misattributed in the painted script as ‘Queen Anne’). Above the sitter’s head may be found the curious later inscription in gold block capitals, ‘JAMES SON OF JAMES 2nd OBIT ROME,’ perhaps indicating a subsequent confusion between patron and sitter.
Literature: Dr. Edward Corp, ‘The King over the Water: Portraits of the Stuarts in Exile after 1689,’ 2001, p. 50
Alexis Simon Belle (1674–1734)
1712
Oil-on-canvas
Half length, 30 x 25 ins.
This portrait depicts King James VII & II. James ascended to the thrones of England, Scotland and Ireland in 1685, however his reign was marked by constitutional turmoil and was cut drastically short when he was usurped in 1688-9 by his Dutch son-in-law, Prince William of Orange. James would die in exile in 1701 and his son, James Francis Edward Stuart, claimed his father’s title as King James III and VIII. His title was recognised by both the papacy and multiple Continental monarchies, famously including that of France. This posthumous portrait of James II was commissioned by his son in 1712 to emphasise the latter’s legitimacy. The commission went to the ‘king over the water’s’ leading court painter, Alexis Simon Belle (1674–1734), thus signifying the political importance of the work.
Acquired by Henry Howard MP (1802-1875), thence by family descent to Murray Howard (b. 1942), current owner of Greystoke Castle, from whom this painting was acquired by Whiteman's Fine Art & Antiques, 2021. With thanks to Murry Howard's nephew and family historian, Henry Howard (b.1972) of Johnby Hall, we know that his great-great grandfather Henry Howard MP would have acquired this painting after the rebuilding and furnishing of Greystoke Castle after the great fire of 1868. Until recently, the portrait hung in the ‘Stuart Room’ to the right of the entrance hall, situated amongst glittering armour and other paintings depicting members of that unfortunate dynasty. As a branch of the leading recusant Howard family – Bernard Howard, the 12th Duke of Norfolk, was Henry Howard MP’s uncle – an affection held for the Roman Catholic Stuarts was natural. Indeed, this portrait hung alongside one of James III’s son and heir, ‘Bonnie Prince Charlie’ - from his Cumbrian bid to buy support for the 45’ - and another of James’s mother, Queen Mary of Modena by Sir Godfrey Kneller (purposely misattributed in the painted script as ‘Queen Anne’). Above the sitter’s head may be found the curious later inscription in gold block capitals, ‘JAMES SON OF JAMES 2nd OBIT ROME,’ perhaps indicating a subsequent confusion between patron and sitter.
Literature: Dr. Edward Corp, ‘The King over the Water: Portraits of the Stuarts in Exile after 1689,’ 2001, p. 50
Antonio David (1698-1750), Portrait of Prince Charles Edward Stuart, ‘Bonnie Prince Charlie’
Antonio David (1698-1750)
Portrait of Prince Charles Edward Stuart, ‘Bonnie Prince Charlie’
1734-35
Watercolour-on-ivory
2 7/8 x 2 ½ in. (3 3/8 x 2 ¾ in. framed)
This exquisite portrait miniature of Prince Charles Edward Stuart (‘Bonnie Prince Charlie’) was painted by Antonio David (1698-1750), principal painter to the exiled Stuarts in Rome at the time of its execution.
Charles is depicted at the age of 14 when he and his brother Henry Benedict sat for separate portraits by David in the winter of 1734-35. As well as this piece, one larger scaled version of the prince has survived (Hawthorndon Castle), as well as another miniature version in the Drambuie Collection which has been loaned to the Scottish National Portrait Gallery (https://www.nationalgalleries.org/art-and-artists/91121/miniature-three-quarter-length-portrait-prince-charles-edward-stuart-black-armour (previously sold at the Christie’s Fingask Castle sale (26-28.4.93): https://www.christies.com/lot/lot-2691265?ldp_breadcrumb=back&intObjectID=2691265&from=salessummary&lid=1). Charles is depicted looking over his right shoulder wearing full armour for the first time following his partaking in the Siege of Gaeta, 1734, thus exhibiting the prince’s increasingly central role in the Jacobite cause and propaganda campaign as he came of an age to fight for his inheritance. Charles is decorated with a bright blue Garter sash overlayed with his St Andrew medal of the Thistle hanging upon a green riband.
Dr. Edward T. Corp has written in relation to this miniature that, ‘The portrait was painted by Antonio David in 1734-35,’ and that although David operated a busy studio, ‘David would have handed over the miniature as his own work and been paid for producing it. James Edgar, James III’s private secretary, wrote in November 1734 that when the new portrait had been finished it would “be my care” that a copy for one of his friends “shall be done from and as well as possibly can be.”’ The exquisite quality of this piece standing as testimony to this nearly three centuries later. We would like thank Dr. Corp for his assistance (citations from email exchange).
Literature:
Corp, ‘The King Over the Water: Portraits of the Stuart in Exile after 1689’, 2001, p. 63 (for David’s producing several miniatures as well as larger scaled pieces; 70; 110), c. 1634-5.
Provenance:
Darnley Fine Art, London
Portrait of Prince Charles Edward Stuart, ‘Bonnie Prince Charlie’
1734-35
Watercolour-on-ivory
2 7/8 x 2 ½ in. (3 3/8 x 2 ¾ in. framed)
This exquisite portrait miniature of Prince Charles Edward Stuart (‘Bonnie Prince Charlie’) was painted by Antonio David (1698-1750), principal painter to the exiled Stuarts in Rome at the time of its execution.
Charles is depicted at the age of 14 when he and his brother Henry Benedict sat for separate portraits by David in the winter of 1734-35. As well as this piece, one larger scaled version of the prince has survived (Hawthorndon Castle), as well as another miniature version in the Drambuie Collection which has been loaned to the Scottish National Portrait Gallery (https://www.nationalgalleries.org/art-and-artists/91121/miniature-three-quarter-length-portrait-prince-charles-edward-stuart-black-armour (previously sold at the Christie’s Fingask Castle sale (26-28.4.93): https://www.christies.com/lot/lot-2691265?ldp_breadcrumb=back&intObjectID=2691265&from=salessummary&lid=1). Charles is depicted looking over his right shoulder wearing full armour for the first time following his partaking in the Siege of Gaeta, 1734, thus exhibiting the prince’s increasingly central role in the Jacobite cause and propaganda campaign as he came of an age to fight for his inheritance. Charles is decorated with a bright blue Garter sash overlayed with his St Andrew medal of the Thistle hanging upon a green riband.
Dr. Edward T. Corp has written in relation to this miniature that, ‘The portrait was painted by Antonio David in 1734-35,’ and that although David operated a busy studio, ‘David would have handed over the miniature as his own work and been paid for producing it. James Edgar, James III’s private secretary, wrote in November 1734 that when the new portrait had been finished it would “be my care” that a copy for one of his friends “shall be done from and as well as possibly can be.”’ The exquisite quality of this piece standing as testimony to this nearly three centuries later. We would like thank Dr. Corp for his assistance (citations from email exchange).
Literature:
Corp, ‘The King Over the Water: Portraits of the Stuart in Exile after 1689’, 2001, p. 63 (for David’s producing several miniatures as well as larger scaled pieces; 70; 110), c. 1634-5.
Provenance:
Darnley Fine Art, London
bottom of page