"Came vested all in white, pure as her mind
Her face was veiled; yet to my fancied sight
Love, sweetness, goodness, in her person shined
So clear, as in no face with more delight.
But, oh! as to embrace me she inclined,
I waked, she fled, and day brought back my night."
If, as seems most probable, the attribution of this portrait is correct,
it gives us a view of Milton at a period of his life of which we have no
other portrait, for it must have been painted when he Was about 48, and
it bears out Aubrey's remarks about him, in which he speaks of his
reddish hair, of his "exceeding fayre complexion," of his oval face, and
tells us that he was "a spare man." Apparently it was never engraved,
and Deborah Milton seems to have known nothing about it, but as she was
quite a child when her father's second wife died, and as the portrait
passed away from the Milton family so quickly, it is very natural that
we should have no other record of it than the miniature itself.
We now come to the eighteenth century, and without referring in detail
to the men who preceded the foundation of the Royal Academy, would just
mention one of the prominent miniature painters of the early days of the
century, Christian Richter by name. He was the son of a Swedish
silversmith who came to England in the time of Queen Anne, and settled
down with his brother, who was a medallist and a die-sinker. His work is
luminous and distinguished, marked by rather an excessive brilliance of
red in the carnations, but by a very handsome colour scheme as a rule;
the example we give in our colour plates, the portrait of _Prince
George of Denmark_, the consort of Queen Anne (Plate XI.) from the
Hodgkins collection, setting forth his characteristics in a satisfactory
fashion.
The catalogues of the Royal Academy are full of the names of miniature
painters. The period of its foundation was prolific in the number of
limners it produced. Miniature painting was the fashion. There were
half-a-dozen important painters, and two or three hundred lesser men.
The greater men stand out distinctly. Of the lesser men, many are only
names to us. Here and there we have scraps of information respecting
their history, details concerning the place where they resided, a few
dates, and now and again an inscription on the back of a miniature to
guide us; but of the vast majority of those who exhibited at the early
exhibitions we know little, and of many of them it is not necessary that
we should know very much, as their work was neither especially
remarkable, nor especially praiseworthy. In considering this period,
however, one comment must be made. As a rule, each painter was
individual and characteristic. He allowed the personal equation to take
an important part in his work, and when the expert is once familiar with
the characteristics of the painter, his miniatures can be found quite
readily whether signed or not. It is this special personal quality which
distinguishes the painters of the period from the host of miniature
painters of the present day who have striven to revivify the art, but
who in many cases have become mere copyists, and have not allowed
personal characteristics to distinguish their work. With the names of
the great painters many are familiar, Cosway, Plimer, Smart, Ozias
Humphry, Engleheart, Edridge, and Grimaldi are all well known, and the
collector is more or less familiar with the names of a few of the minor
painters whose works are worth collecting, as, for example, Nathaniel
and Horace Hone, Vaslet, and others. There is neither opportunity nor
need, in an essay of this sort, to refer to them in detail, because we
are not concerned here with anything more than a broad survey of the
miniature art, and must not confine our attention to England only. The
painters of the eighteenth-century offer a sharp contrast to those of
the seventeenth, and comparison only makes the contrast the more
evident. In the work of Cooper we have strength, power, dignity; in that
of Cosway and of the artists of his period is refinement, dexterity,
fascination, a spice of flippancy and at times a certain meretricious
quality, but this latter is far less seen in Cosway himself than in the
work of his followers and admirers. The public demanded something quite
different from the artists of the eighteenth century from that which
they asked of the earlier school; the work had to be done more quickly,
and it must be more charming, sensitive, and radiant. In his skill for
giving his sitters exactly what they wanted, and in setting forth on the
ivory the dainty grace of the women of the eighteenth century, there was
no one who could approach within measurable distance of Cosway himself;
and there is a marvellous fascination about his exquisite work, an
individuality which belongs exactly to the period and represents it in
all its grace, lightness and flippancy.
Undoubtedly the nearest in merit to Cosway was Andrew Plimer, and some
of his works are fascinating in their beauty, but in charm they are
never equal to those of Cosway, and the peculiar mannerisms of the
artist prevent them from being altogether satisfactory. Plimer had very
little power of composition, and he invariably over-accentuated the eyes
of his sitters, and constantly repeated a favourite pose either of head
or figure, while the extraordinary wiry manner in which he delineated
the hair marks out his work at once. Quite as noticeable is his
affection for the appearance of his own daughters, and the very shape of
their necks and brilliance of their eyes can be seen repeated over and
over again in his portraits of other sitters. Less than most of his
contemporaries was he able to break away from a strong personal
characteristic; and eventually it became a species of obsession with
him, so that his female portraits strikingly resemble one another.
John Smart was a painter of a different type, serious, solid,
painstaking. His facial modelling is extraordinary in its accuracy, and
his works, like those of Engleheart, appear to have been preferred by
the more serious persons in society, whereas those of Cosway and Plimer
were particularly appreciated by the gay and frivolous ladies of the
Court circle, whose sun and centre was the Prince Regent.
There are miniatures by Cosway which are of pre-eminent beauty, so
lightly and with such exquisite skill are they floated upon the ivory.
The quality of the material had, of course, an intimate connection with
the art of the painter. The seventeenth-century artists knew nothing of
the brilliant surface of ivory, although it is possible that one at
least of them had an inkling that a more luminous material than vellum,
cardboard, or chicken-skin, could be found. There are two miniatures in
existence, one of which is in the possession of the author of these
pages, the work of Cooper, which are not painted on any of the materials
usually adopted by him. This latter is painted on what was at first
thought to be a piece of ivory, but microscopic investigation has
revealed the fact that it is polished mutton-bone, and the painter has
so altered his technique to adapt it to this curious experiment, that
for the first moment one would hardly believe the miniature to be by
Cooper at all. Its pedigree is, however, unassailable, and a closer
investigation reveals many of the master's characteristics, but it is
painted with a very fine brush, quite different to the usual broad, full
sweep of his work, and it stands out as an interesting experiment on the
part of the great painter, who was searching for some material more
suitable for a particular style of work. Ivory was not employed until
the time of William III., and it seems probable that one of the Lens
family was the first to make use of it; but, once adopted, its use
became very general, and in the prolific period of the eighteenth
century, almost universal.
Cosway is said to have experimented in enamel, and certainly one enamel
portrait, with his initials, is in existence. He drew very skilfully on
paper, and a few of his miniatures are on that material. One of his
works, signed and dated, is on silk, but all these were only
experiments, and the greater number of his miniatures are on ivory,
which material lends itself perfectly to his craft. In our opinion the
finest miniature Cosway ever produced was his unfinished sketch of
_Madame du Barry_, one of the greatest treasures of Mr. Pierpont
Morgan's collection, and by his kind permission illustrated here in
monotone (Plate XII.). It was painted in 1791 on the occasion when
Madame du Barry came over to England to recover her jewels, and on her
third visit to this country in that year. From this portrait a stipple
engraving was made by Condé in 1794, but the miniature itself came into
the possession of the Vernons, having belonged to a Miss Caroline Vernon
who was maid of honour to Queen Charlotte. It was sold in London in
1902, when it passed to its present owner, and in grace, sweetness, and
fascination, is unrivalled, even amongst his wonderful treasures.
Another delightful portrait from the same collection represents the
oft-painted _Henrietta, Lady Duncannon_, who was afterwards Countess of
Bessborough (Plate XIV., No. 2). She was sister to Georgiana, Duchess of
Devonshire, and seems to have spent a great deal of her time in sitting
for her portrait, all the artists of the day having painted her. This
miniature is remarkable for the fact that it still remains in its
original frame, a very magnificent one, richly set with superb diamonds.
Yet another charming portrait by Cosway (Plate XIV., No. 1) came from
the Truro collection to Mr. Morgan. It represents _Lady Augusta Murray_,
the daughter of Lord Dunmore, who became the wife of the Duke of Sussex,
the 6th son of George III. It was her marriage which, although twice
performed, in Rome and at St. George's, Hanover Square, was declared
null and void under the Royal Marriage Act (12 Geo. III. cap. 11). Her
daughter was Lady Truro. Lady Augusta was only painted twice, and on
both occasions by Cosway.
Our coloured illustrations include three portraits of women by Cosway,
_Viscountess St. Asaph_ (Plate XIII.), the _Countess of Rochford_ (Plate
XV.) and _Princess Charlotte_ (Plate XVI.), all of them distinguished by
Cosway's special method of painting the hair, and marked by that
inimitable grace in which he excelled.
We also illustrate from Lord Hothfield's collection one of Cosway's more
serious portraits of men, _The Earl of Thanet_ (Plate XVII.), set upon
the usual blue cloudy background, in this instance a trifle paler than
usual, and painted with convincing force in a very remarkable colour
scheme.
Of the work of the more sedate painters, Smart and Engleheart, we are
able to give many characteristic examples. From Lord Hothfield's
collection come a splendid pair--_Mr. and Mrs. Percival_ (Plate XIX.),
painted with that striking force which marks the best work of Smart,
upon his usual greenish-grey background, and with very subtle but
well-marked modelling in the features. His carnations were ever a little
brick-dusty in tint, and he delighted in the ruddier tones of the face,
but in depicting the shadows he had few rivals. Although there may be
perhaps a certain want of inspiration in his somewhat quaker-like method
of work, and in the very low tone of his colouring, yet there is an
honesty and a straightforward quality about it which is very attractive,
and perhaps that was the reason why Cosway in the words of praise he
gave to a painter so different from himself, spoke of him as "honest
John Smart."
Engleheart's work has a certain resemblance to that of Reynolds, and the
devotion which Engleheart felt towards the President of the Academy had
an evidently strong effect upon his own art. He copied Sir Joshua's
works over and over again, and gradually a good deal of the influence of
the great master permeated the work of his follower. His miniatures were
nobler, broader, and far better set upon the oval of the ivory than were
those of many of his contemporaries, his draughtsmanship was excellent,
and there was a brilliance about his painting of the eyes which is
particularly attractive. The large portrait of _Earl Beauchamp_ (Plate
XX.), from the collection of Lady Maria Ponsonby, is a fine specimen of
his best work; but those of _Mrs. Sainthill_ and _Mr. Brundish_, from
the collection of Lord Hothfield (Plate XXII.), are good examples of his
smaller miniatures, possessing a great deal of charm and delightful in
colour. His portrait of _Miss Mary Berry_, from Mr. Pierpont Morgan's
collection (Plate XXI.), is quite one of his finest portraits of women.
He painted both these sisters, and for a long time the two portraits
were in one case, facing one another, but they have now been separated,
and lie side by side in the cabinet. The two ladies were well known as
being the close friends of Horace Walpole, who treated them with the
greatest tenderness and affection, addressed to them many of his most
brilliant letters, and persuaded them to settle down near him at
Strawberry Hill. To them he dedicated his catalogue of treasures, and
bequeathed a considerable sum of money, and his works and letters were,
after his death, edited by Mary Berry, one of the sisters, who lived
down till 1852, and died at the advanced age of ninety. From the same
collection we have selected two delightful works by Smart, those
representing _Sir Charles Oakeley_ and a lady whose name is unknown
(Plate XVIII.), both distinguished by the elaboration of flesh tints, so
quietly and so accurately applied.
The very brilliant, if somewhat flashy, work of Andrew Plimer is
particularly well represented in Mr. Pierpont Morgan's famous
collection, because it includes the notable series representing Rebecca,
Lady Northwick, and her three daughters, all of which are given in our
monotone illustrations (Plates XXIII. and XXIV.). Plimer was an adept at
flattery, and in this particular case the mother looks hardly older than
her daughters, and the three girls are so much alike that one has to
look exceedingly closely to notice the position of the band round the
head, or of the curl which falls upon the neck, before one girl can be
distinguished from another. The same unfortunate mannerism belonging to
this clever painter can be seen in _The Three Sisters Ellis_, brilliant
works by Andrew Plimer from the collection of Lord Hothfield, and here
illustrated in colour (Plate XXV.). When closely regarded it is quite
evident that the three girls are very different from one another, but at
the first glance we almost wonder how their parents could have known
them apart. The painter himself has been led to make little changes in
their costume in order that each girl's identity should be preserved,
and our remark respecting the exaggeration of the eyes is exemplified in
these three very beautiful portraits. By the same painter is the
charming representation of _Selina Plimer_, the artist's youngest child,
from the collection of the writer of this essay (Plate XXVI.). This
miniature came from Plimer's own portfolio, and bears his handwriting
upon it. It is very graceful and light in its treatment. The Rushout
girls form the subject of the largest painting ever executed by Plimer.
His well-known group showing these three girls in one miniature now
belongs to Mr. George J. Gould, and is fully described in the life of
Andrew Plimer.
In Lord Hothfield's collection, however, is an interesting sketch (Plate
XXVII.), a group of the three sisters, evidently his first idea, quite
different both in composition and in execution to the finished picture.
It came from Plimer's studio, is unmistakably his work, and
particularly interesting as a fresh and original idea, even more
charming in many ways than the finished picture. In the latter, the
girls dress their hair quite differently to what they had it in the
sketch, and very possibly the _esquisse_ was made on their first visit
to the studio, as they stood together that the artist might get an idea
of how they looked. Another example of Plimer's work illustrated here in
colour is from the same collection, and represents _Mrs. Bailey_ (Plate
XXVIII.). It is a pleasing picture, though the curious wiriness of hair
to which we have drawn attention is very noticeable in it. One of the
prettiest pictures that Plimer ever painted of a child is the one which
we illustrate in reduced size from the collection of Lady Maria Ponsonby
(Plate XXIX., No. 1). It represents _Sir Charles Kent as a Boy_, playing
upon a drum, and is a bright, piquant little picture.
Nathaniel Plimer's work is rarer than that of his brother, and we know
very little indeed of the history of the artist. He was a curiously
unequal painter. There were times when he could paint far better than
his brother, but there are not perhaps more than two or three of his
miniatures to which this high praise can be given. His general work is
pleasing and agreeable, but does not betoken extraordinary skill. One of
the best of his ordinary miniatures is in Lord Hothfield's collection
(Plate XXIX., No. 2), and represents _Mrs. Dawes_. It is dated 1798, and
is quite a fine picture, but not equal in high merit to two works by
this master in the late Mr. Salting's collection, the finest examples of
Nathaniel's work we have yet seen.
Ozias Humphry was a greater man than Plimer, but his work in miniature
is rare. His draughtsmanship was exceedingly good, his colouring quiet
and restrained, and his technique so elaborate, with such fine stipple
work, that it has a general resemblance to that of enamel, but differs
from this latter because it is not hard in its execution; and there is,
moreover, an atmospheric quality about it very attractive. One of
Humphry's peculiarities is to be noticed in the elongated shape he gave
to the eyes of his sitters, what has been well termed "a greyhound eye,"
affording a marked contrast to the exceedingly round, over-bold eye,
which Plimer was so fond of accentuating. Humphry drew children
exquisitely, and his portrait of the _Duchess of Albany_ as a child
(Plate XXX., No. 1), in the possession of Lord Hothfield, is one of the
most delightful miniatures with which we are acquainted. In it his
accuracy of draughtsmanship is seen to perfection, and the modelling on
the face is so dainty and delicate that the miniature is quite a little
gem full of life and vivacity, while the child is represented with a
demure, amused look, which is refreshing and natural. There is a very
interesting history connected with this miniature. It was painted in
Rome in 1773, when Humphry was there with Romney, and it eventually
belonged to Horace Walpole, and was in his collection at Strawberry
Hill. He is said to have received it from Sir Horace Mann, his great
friend and correspondent, who was watching Prince Charles Edward (_de
jure_ Charles III.), on behalf of the English Government. The other
Humphry, which we illustrate from the same collection, represents the
_Countess of Thanet_ (Plate XXX., No. 2), and is an excellent example of
the manner in which Ozias painted a noble lady of a quiet, studious
character. The colour scheme in this, again, is very pleasing.
Time would fail to describe the host of minor men who exhibited at the
Academy, and it would be impossible to illustrate works by even the
chief of them. We have selected just a few; first, an example of the
work of John Smart the younger, who is especially well known for his
fine pencil work, and for some wonderful copies from drawings by
Holbein. There are very few of his miniatures in existence; and the one
of _Lieutenant Lygon_ (Plate XXXI.), in the collection of Lady Maria
Ponsonby which is signed and dated, is a good, natural, life-like
portrait, well drawn and composed. Then we would refer to Nathaniel
Hone, who was an interesting person, and deserves to be remembered
because he was the first artist in the eighteenth century to have what
we now call a "one-man show." There is not a great deal of credit
belonging to him for this adventure, because, had he not been a very
sensitive and passionate man, and painted a picture which annoyed the
Academy, the one-man show would never have come off.
In a painting called "The Conjuror" Hone was considered to have made an
attack upon the President and upon Angelica Kauffman. It was rejected by
the Academy, and in 1775 Hone opened his exhibition at 70, St. Martin's
Lane, issued a catalogue, to which he affixed a preface, telling the
story of his discomfiture from his own point of view, and appealing to
the people respecting the merits of his paintings. The result was not
particularly satisfactory, because it was felt that he had been in the
wrong. The catalogue is a very rare one, and the whole story is rather
interesting in its details.
A fine portrait by Horace Hone, the elder son of Nathaniel, representing
William Pitt is in the collection of Lady Maria Ponsonby, and appears in
our coloured illustrations (Plate XXXII., No. 2). Horace Hone was a
better painter than his father. He excelled in enamel work, and his
finest portraits are in that medium. He had a fine sense of colour and
loved rich effects of velvet brocade, satin, or fur. Another of his
miniatures is in Lord Hothfield's collection, and represents _Lady Mary
Nugent_; it is signed and dated, and the owner has kindly permitted us
to illustrate it in these pages (Plate XXXII., No. 1).
Yet another miniature from Lord Hothfield's collection illustrates the
work of Vaslet (Plate XXXIII.), of whom we know hardly anything, save
that he lived in York and Bath and that he was a clever worker in
pastel. He seems to have visited Oxford in 1779, 1780, and 1789, and
there is a good collection of his pastel portraits on paper in the
Warden's Lodge at Merton College, the portraits carefully signed and
dated; on the majority of them the artist calls himself as L. Vaslet of
Bath. There are other collectors in Oxford who have specimens of his
work in pastel, but in miniature his paintings are very rare. They are
distinguished by a cloudy, flocculent appearance, very much resembling
pastel work, and making it evident that the artist was more at home in
the use of that material than he was in water-colour.
Our very brief survey of English miniature work must end with Sir George
Hayter, by whom we illustrate a portrait of the _Countess of Jersey_,
from the collection of Lady Maria Ponsonby (Plate XXXIV.). He was
portrait painter to Princess Charlotte and Prince Leopold of
Saxe-Coburg, but is better known for his historical paintings than for
portraits, and he is almost the last of the nineteenth-century miniature
painters whose work possesses any special attraction. After his time and
that of his contemporaries Sir William Ross, J. D. Engleheart,
Robertson, Newton, and Thorburn, the art of miniature painting died away
until its revival in recent times.
The painters who worked in enamel occupy a section of miniature work
apart, although in many instances the best known enamellers painted
portraits also on ivory or on vellum, but they are especially known for
their works in enamel. There is little need for us here to do more than
define enamel work as a vitreous glaze attached by fusion to a metallic
ground, but only those who have attempted to paint portraits in enamel
can have any idea of the enormous difficulty of this method of
portraiture when fine results are desired. Of all the men who were
successful in this most complicated process, Jean Petitot stands out
supreme, and his portraits, as a rule excessively minute in size, are
distinguished by a delicacy of detail, marvellous in its microscopic
exactitude. When it is remembered that the colours were painted on to
the panel of gold in the form of a powder, only slightly mingled with a
medium, that they did not represent by their tint the colour they were
to present when fused, and that the slightest error in the fusing would
ruin the plate and cause the colours to run into one another, the
marvel is but enhanced when the exquisite works produced by this
incomparable artist are examined. The specimen from Mr. Ward Usher's
collection (Plate XXXV.), which is illustrated in colour, is a good
example of Petitot's portrait of _Louis XIV._ He painted the face of
"_Le Roi Soleil_" so often that he must have become familiar with every
detail of it, and there is hardly any collection of his works which
cannot boast of one of these wonderful little enamels. The story of the
painter himself is of considerable interest, and the details of his
religious difficulties and of his return to Geneva are well set forth in
a book about him written by E. Stroehlin, and published in Geneva in
1905; while some further special information more recently discovered
can be found in an article by the writer of this essay in the
"Nineteenth Century" for January 1908. He left behind him a wonderful
little pocket-book containing his own and his wife's portraits, and a
narrative of part of his career, written by him in beautiful
handwriting. His own portrait belongs to the Earl of Dartrey, and there
are some wonderful examples of his work in the Louvre; but the best of
his portraits are in England, and there is no collection to rival that
of South Kensington in this respect. Perhaps his most extraordinary work
is the box belonging to Mr. Alfred de Rothschild, which has fourteen
portraits upon it; but his largest, with one exception, is that of
_Mary, Duchess of Richmond and Lenox_, which we illustrate from Mr.
Pierpont Morgan's collection (Plate XXXVI., No. 2). It is signed and
dated 1643 and is 5-1/2 inches square, the only miniature exceeding it
in size being that at Chatsworth, representing the Countess of
Southampton, and dated 1642. The latter is, however, unfortunately
damaged, whereas the one in Mr. Pierpont Morgan's collection is quite
perfect. With these two exceptions, almost all Petitot's miniatures are
exceedingly tiny in size. The only other enameller whose work we
illustrate was named Prieur, and he married, as her second husband,
Marie, the only sister of Jean Petitot. Prieur was a wanderer; we find
his work in Poland, Denmark, Russia, Spain, and especially in Denmark,
where there are many of his portraits, and where he is believed to have
died in 1677. He visited England charged with commissions from the King
of Denmark, and, while there, painted a portrait of Charles II. and
another of Lady Castlemaine, both from Cooper's miniatures. He was also
responsible for a portrait of _Charles I._ (Plate XXXVI., No. 1), but
whether contemporary or not we cannot say, for so little is known of
Prieur's history, that he may have visited England before 1669, when we
know he came over to paint Charles II. In all probability, however, this
delightful work, which now belongs to Mr. Pierpont Morgan, is a copy by
Prieur from the portrait of the King by Vandyck. Prieur executed
several delightful enamel badges for the Danish Orders, and appears to
have been in high repute at the courts both of Frederik III. and
Christian V.
We have now to deal briefly with the long range of foreign miniature
painters, the chief of whom were resident in France, although not always
natives of that country. There was a regular tradition of miniature
painting in France, extending from the times of the Clouets down to
those of the great painters Isabey and Augustin. The works by Jean
Clouet were, of course, more of the nature of paintings in manuscripts,
and if we are accurate in attributing one of the great gems of Mr.
Morgan's collection to Jean Clouet himself, it adds one to the only
other seven portraits which have been, with any amount of accuracy,
given to this painter. All of the seven are illustrations in one
manuscript volume, and probably this eighth was either executed for the
same purpose, or has actually been removed from a contemporary work of
that kind. When we come to the later Clouets, François especially, we
have actual miniatures, and in several instances the drawings for the
portraits exist, also enabling us to identify whom the miniatures
represent. It would be impossible within the limits of this short essay
to deal with all those who succeeded the sixteenth-century men, and we
have to make a big jump to the eighteenth century, because it was during
that time that the most notable of the French miniature painters
flourished, and their works are by far the most important.
Nattier began as a miniature painter, and his mother painted miniatures,
and is said to have taught him his art. Later on, he became a well-known
portrait painter, but speculating in the wild schemes of John Law, lost
his fortune, and a good many of his friends. Once he took up with
miniature painting to re-introduce himself to the clients he had lost
when he neglected art for the excitement of finance, then dropped it
again, and confined his attention down to the time of his death to
portrait painting. We illustrate a delightful portrait of _Madame Dupin_
(Plate XXXVII., No. 1), the wife of a writer on finance, whose book was
suppressed by the order of Madame de Pompadour; but we remember the fair
lady who is set forth in this portrait more by reason of the fact that
Rousseau was at one time her secretary, and was very much attached to
her. The portrait shows her in the hey-day of beauty.
By Hall, the Swede, who lived in Paris, and is generally regarded as a
Frenchman, we illustrate a portrait of the _Countess Sophie Potoçki_
(Plate XXXVII., No. 2), the celebrated Greek beauty, who became a member
of one of the noblest families of the Polish aristocracy. Her story is a
strange one. She was born of Greek parents at Constantinople, purchased
as a slave by the Russian general De Witte, who made her his mistress;
but one night, losing a considerable sum of money at cards, when playing
against Count Felix Potoçki, he received an offer from his opponent to
waive all claims if the Russian general would pass over his slave to
Count Felix. The offer was accepted, and Sophie Clavona became the
property of the Polish Count, who was already deeply in love with her.
Despite the expostulations of his friends, he promptly made her his
second wife, and they lived happily together for many years, while her
heritage of beauty has been handed down through succeeding generations.
Her portrait was painted over and over again, and the example of it
which we illustrate remained for a long time in the private gallery of
the family at Warsaw, together with a replica which is still there. It
was finally sold to a French dealer, from whom it passed into the hands
of its present owner. The famous beauty is in a deep red costume, which
wonderfully sets off the charm of her countenance. Another work by Hall
from the same famous collection (Plate XXXVII., No. 3), represents the
ill-fated _Princesse de Lamballe_, "beauty, goodness and virtue
personified, but all her goodness and gentleness could not soften the
hearts of those inhuman tigers who immolated her on the altar of
Equality." Few scenes are more pitiable than that of the execution of
this beautiful woman. She had never committed any action which could
have incurred the hatred of the people, but she was the friend of the
Queen, and the possessor of considerable wealth; reasons enough to bring
upon her head the wrath of the tyrants who preached freedom to France.
This miniature is particularly charming in its domestic quality. Madame
de Lamballe is shown in her room, engaged in making a wreath of flowers,
and every detail concerning her occupation, and the room in which she is
seated, is delightfully rendered; but the whole composition is kept so
well in hand that the details do not obtrude, nor in any way draw aside
the attention from the fair countenance of the lady herself.
The work of Pierre Pasquier is very rare, and not a single example of it
is to be seen in the Louvre. He was born in 1731, and died in 1806. He
worked largely in enamel, and a great many of his portraits appear on
the wonderful snuff-boxes which were given to ministers or eminent
diplomatists. Several of them are in Russia. He was distinguished by an
unerring perfection of draughtsmanship, and this is especially set forth
in his profile portraits, one of which, signed and dated, we illustrate
from Mr. Morgan's collection (Plate XXXVIII., No. 2). It is probably the
finest example of Pasquier's work in existence, and is little more than
a sketch in black on ivory, with a steel-blue background, the ivory
being left clear where the portrait appears. We do not know who it
represents, but it was probably a study for an enamel left incomplete.
It is dated 1786, and in its rigid economy of line, exquisite low-toned
scheme of colour, and perfection of drawing, occupies an exceedingly
high place in miniature painting, and leaves us only regretful that we
are ignorant of the name of the sitter.
The example we illustrate of the miniature work of Fragonard must also
be anonymous (Plate XXXVIII., No. 1). It is a boy's portrait, and has
been said, with a certain amount of evidence, to represent one of his
own sons, it certainly does resemble a sketch of one of Fragonard's
children, which the artist has named, but not sufficiently for us to be
sure respecting the accuracy of the attribution. No one, however, but
Fragonard could have painted it, the colour is so daintily placed upon
the ivory as to give the effect of having been wafted upon the material,
and resting upon it with a feathery lightness. There is generally a good
deal of yellow in Fragonard's portraits, or else the colour scheme is
mainly grey and white, and this portrait belongs to the second division
we have mentioned. It is very pleasing, the face of a quiet, thoughtful
child, charmingly represented, and a good example of the work of one of
the greatest decorators France ever knew. Fragonard's miniatures are
rare, we may add, very rare, and probably no one has such a collection
of them as is to be found in the cabinets of Mr. Pierpont Morgan.
By Garriot, a painter who was born in 1811 at Toulouse, studied at
Madrid, and painted in Geneva, we illustrate from Mr. Pierpont Morgan's
collection a portrait of the _Marquise de Villette_ (Plate XXXIX., No.
2), better known as "Belle et Bonne," who was practically adopted as a
daughter by Voltaire, and married to the Marquis de Villette at
midnight, in November 1777, in the great man's chapel of Ferney, her six
uncles being present on the occasion. Ferney had belonged to her and her
six uncles, and Voltaire was the means of reclaiming it from the
possession of certain of his neighbours into whose hands it had
illegally passed in 1761. It was in the arms of "Belle et Bonne" that
Voltaire passed away on the 30th of May 1778, when he was eighty-four
years old.
A very interesting miniature from the same collection is the one
representing a granddaughter of Nattier the artist, painted by Louis
Sicardi (Plate XXXIX., No. 1), one of the best miniaturists of the time
of Louis XVI. Sicardi painted for over fifty years, produced a great
many delightful works, and was responsible for the decoration and
portraits that, set upon gold snuff-boxes, were such favourite presents
at the French Court.
The two greatest, however, of the painters of the French school were
Isabey and Augustin, and Isabey, who was born in 1767, forms a curious
link between the eighteenth and the twentieth centuries. He painted
Marie Antoinette, Buonaparte, the King of Rome, and the Empress Marie
Louise; he also worked for Louis XVIII., received high distinctions from
Charles X. and from Louis Philippe, and was appointed Commander of the
Legion of Honour by Napoleon III.: moreover, he had a long conversation
with the Empress Eugénie (who is still living) in 1854, the year in
which he died at the advanced age of eighty-eight. He exhibited between
1793 and 1841, painting portraits of all the eminent persons in France
during his long career. Of his earlier work we exhibit in colour two
charming companion miniatures from the collection of Mr. Ward Usher,
representing the _Empress Josephine_, and the _Empress Marie Louise_
(Plate XL.), while of his later, somewhat more florid work, almost
invariably distinguished by the presence of a light gauzy scarf which he
wound about his sitter, and which he painted to perfection, we give two
portraits, one a portrait of _Catherine, Countess Beauchamp_, from the
collection of Lady Maria Ponsonby (Plate XLI.), and the other depicting
_Fürstin Katharina Bagration Shawronska_ (Plate XLII.), from the
collection of Fürst Franz Auersperg.
One of the loveliest miniatures Isabey ever painted is that representing
_Queen Hortense and her son Napoleon III._, in the collection of Mr. J.
Pierpont Morgan. It contains autograph information in the Emperor's
handwriting attesting to its history, and is a lovely example of
Isabey's easy, graceful, pleasing work. It is illustrated on Plate
XLIII.
An interesting feature of some of Isabey's miniatures is the fact that
he worked in conjunction with two Dutch artists, the brothers Van
Spaendonck. They were expert painters of flowers and fruit, often
employed at the Sévres porcelain factories, one of them being as well a
professor of natural history and lecturer on flowers in Paris, and the
author of one or two books on flowers and flower-painting. There are
several examples of the work of Isabey in which one or other of these
brothers has supplied the floral decoration, or a group of fruit in the
background.
We now come to Jean Baptiste Jacques Augustin, one of the noblest of the
miniature painters of France. He was born in 1759, upon the same day,
although separated from him by an interval of ten years, as that on
which the great Napoleon, whose portrait Augustin was afterwards to
paint, came into the world. He came over to Paris as quite a boy, and
lived in a house in that city to which he returned many years
afterwards, bringing with him a bride, and where, as a married man, he
resided for a considerable time. For a while he found life a hard
struggle, but his rare merit soon brought him many clients, and from
about 1790 onward until the close of his life, he seems to have had a
succession of sitters, including all the notabilities of the day. He
left behind him a wonderful collection of sketches, contained in various
books, and a large number of unfinished miniatures. Some few years ago
the members of the family, in whose possession this great collection had
remained, desirous of portioning off two of their daughters, offered the
collection for sale. The Directors of the Louvre very much desired to
purchase it, as it included many works of great importance, but the
whole collection passed into the hands of Mr. Pierpont Morgan, and fills
one entire cabinet, giving a view of this artist's work altogether
unrivalled. The illustrations which we give are of Augustin's later work
rather than those of the early years, although with them is included a
brilliant unfinished sketch, representing _The Father of Madame Seguin_
(Plate XLIV., No. 2). The one from Mr. Ward Usher's collection
represented in colour is a portrait of _Madame Récamier_ (Plate XLV.),
that from Mr. Morgan's collection in monotone, the famous _Madame de
Boufflers_ (Plate XLIV., No. 1), the friend of David Hume, who
introduced the historian to J. J. Rousseau, and is so frequently alluded
to in Horace Walpole's letters. When she fled from France, Madame de
Boufflers resided for some time in or near London, and Walpole spoke of
her as the most agreeable and sensible woman he ever saw, but he was
greatly amused at her want of appreciation of his house. She had never
seen a printing press until she came to Strawberry Hill, and Walpole
arranged that on the occasion of her visit his private press should
print a few lines of French poetry in her praise. In one of his gossipy
letters we are told that Madame de Boufflers informed Lord Onslow of the
birth of Lord Salisbury two hours after his mother had come from the
Opera House, and that from Lord Onslow Walpole himself heard the news.
Of E. W. Thompson, an Englishman, who spent very much of his time in
France, and is regarded by the French critics almost as one of
themselves, we know very little, but the _Princess de Lieven_, whose
portrait he painted (Plate XLIII.), was one of the great ladies of
Europe in the nineteenth century. She was a personal friend of Count
Metternich and afterwards of Guizot, and Madame de Lieven kept up a
steady correspondence with both these statesmen, and exercised, without
doubt, a very considerable influence upon European politics.
Two artists of Italian parentage deserve mention, especially as we are
able to illustrate, by the permission of their owner, Mr. Ward Usher,
delightfully signed examples of their work. By Costa we show an
interesting portrait of _Marie Antoinette_ (Plate XLVI.) which came from
the Bentinck-Hawkins collection; and by Anguissola, the favourite
miniature painter to the court of the great Napoleon, we illustrate, in
reduced size, a fine portrait of the Emperor's sister, _Princess Pauline
Borghese_ (Plate XLVII.).
Special attention has been given in our illustrations to the work of the
great Viennese miniature painter Füger, because very little is known of
his work in England, and there are so few examples of it to be found in
English collections. The Viennese collectors seem determined that all
the finest works by Füger shall remain in their own city, and they are
prepared to give high prices in order that they may carry out this
desire. One of the chief collectors in Vienna is Dr. Figdor, and he has
been exceedingly kind in allowing many miniatures from his collection to
be illustrated for the purpose of this essay, amongst them, five by
Füger, perhaps a rather large proportion; but it has been felt that, as
the work of the painter is so little known in England, it was well in
our illustrations to err on the right side, and give several examples of
his delightful workmanship. For a long time the details of his life were
buried in obscurity, and all sorts of mistakes were made respecting his
work, which was confused with that of other painters, and in some
instances not recognised at all. It was not until 1905, when Herr Doktor
Ferdinand Laban published a very important article upon him, that
Füger's true position was apparent, and Dr. Laban was able from family
records to set right the errors of those writers, amongst whom we must
include ourselves, who had gone astray from lack of the very material
Dr. Laban was able to discover. Since then, Herr Eduard Leisching has
added considerably to our information in a splendid book he published on
Austrian miniature painters, and he has discovered many more examples of
Füger's work, who can now be justly recognised as the greatest of the
Continental eighteenth-century miniaturists. He has been called the
Viennese Cosway, but the work of Füger has very little affinity with
that of our English painter. It is far stronger and more severe, and his
more graceful portraits are richer in their colour scheme, and far more
elaborate in their decorative effect than anything ever painted by
Cosway. There are two wonderful miniatures by Füger in Mr. Pierpont
Morgan's collection, one representing three sisters, the Countesses
Thun-Hohenstein, and the other Madame Rousbaeck, a lady-in-waiting to
the Empress Marie Theresa, but Dr. Figdor's illustrations set forth in
excellent manner both the strength and the charm of this wonderful
painter. Nothing can be more forcible than the sketch of _Prince
Hohenlohe_ (Plate XLVIII.), and we realise the power and dignity of the
sitter when we regard this marvellous delineation of character. For
dainty grace it is difficult to excel the portrait of the anonymous lady
(Plate XLIX.), for strength and gracious dignity that of the _Empress
Maria_ (Plate L.), while the portrait of _Marie Theresia, Countess von
Dietrichstein_ (Plate LI.) is that of a noble dignified lady of high
position, splendid courage, and great charm, and that of _Princess Anna
Liechtenstein_ (Plate LII.) shows us a thoughtful, learned, and musical
lady, a portrait very decorative in colour scheme, and charmingly set
upon its oval of ivory.
Another painter whose work was exceedingly popular in Vienna, was
Giovanni Battista de Lampi, an Italian born near Trent in 1751, a man
very little known outside the narrow limits of the Viennese collectors.
He was a wanderer for a few years, painting in Verona, and moving on
until he reached St. Petersburg, but when in 1783 he came to Vienna, he
was received with open arms, was welcomed by the court and the nobility
to such an extent that practically for the rest of his life he resided
either in Vienna, or in various towns of Poland from which he could
easily reach the capital itself. It was in Vienna that he died at the
age of eighty, universally respected and greatly beloved. His wife's
portrait is in the gallery at Innsbrück, one of three replicas. The
original Lampi retained for himself. His two sons each had replicas, and
the remaining one went to his granddaughter, the Baroness Hell, who left
it to the museum. One of the replicas which came into the possession of
his sons is now a great treasure in Mr. Pierpont Morgan's collection.
The portrait from that of Dr. Figdor, which we illustrate in colour,
represents Lampi himself (Plate LIII.), and is not only a fine example
of the artist's work, serious, and almost solemn in its aspect, but also
peculiarly interesting as showing us what the painter himself was like.
Another Viennese miniature painter whose work we illustrate is Moritz
Michael Daffinger, who has been called the Austrian Isabey, but these
comparisons, like that applied to Füger, are of little significance.
What is of special interest with regard to Daffinger is the fact that he
adopted the manner of Sir Thomas Lawrence as his own. Lawrence visited
Vienna in 1814, and was received with great honour. While there he
painted some portraits. Daffinger admired his work immensely, and
undoubtedly some of his best miniatures are reminiscent of Lawrence.
Especially is this the case with a beautiful girl's portrait
from the collection of another Viennese collector, Gräfin Emma
Wilczek-Emo-Capodilista; and for permission to illustrate this
delightful miniature (Plate LIV.) we are particularly grateful, as it is
a charming specimen of the best work of the nineteenth century, a
pleasing portrait, and very agreeable in its colour scheme.
Daffinger had many pupils, and one of them, Emanuel Peter, exceeded all
the rest in skill. We illustrate two clever portraits by him (Plate
LV.), from Dr. Figdor's collection, in which the ladies are wearing very
decorative head-dresses. It is suggested that the two fair sitters were
relatives, probably cousins, and were painted for some exceptional
occasion, perhaps a masquerade, as the custom to wear fantastic
head-dresses for such special entertainments still prevails in Vienna.
Finally we must mention Ferdinand Georg Waldmüller, whose own portrait
by himself appears on Plate LVI. He was one of Lampi's pupils, but, like
Daffinger, a profound admirer of Sir Thomas Lawrence. His early days
were one continual struggle, and he earned his living by painting
bon-bon boxes, and by giving lessons in drawing in girls' schools, until
his skill was recognised and he had won a position for himself in
Vienna. He even went on the stage in a travelling troupe with his
beautiful wife, who was an actress, but forced the attention of critics
by his splendid portrait studies, and at length was appointed curator of
the Lamberg Gallery, became a popular portrait painter, and died in 1865
justly esteemed for his skill and ability.
Our survey of this fascinating art of the miniature painter has
necessarily been brief. There is still a good deal of information to be
gathered up concerning the eighteenth-century artists, and probably some
of their descendants possess papers and records of vast interest, hidden
away amongst family treasures. Perchance this essay may encourage some
of them to make the necessary search, and so add to the information
available on the lives and careers, especially of our English miniature
painters.
Of the earlier men there is not much chance of obtaining new information
now, but there is always a possibility that letters or sketches by such
a painter as Cooper may again come to light, and if such so fortunate a
circumstance were to take place we should delight to learn more of the
greatest of our British miniature painters, whose portraits were for so
many years ignored in favour of the more brilliant, but far less
important, works of the painters who exhibited in the early days of the
Royal Academy.