£ 6,550.00
Marie-Anne Fragonard
£ 6,550
In this exquisitely preserved early Jacobean miniature of an unknown lady, court fashion meets sartorial fantasy. [3] The standing open ruff and upswept hairstyle were in vogue at court at this date, but here they are combined with a daringly low neckline of a type normally associated with masque costume. The honeysuckle – symbolic of love and devotion – pinned to her ruff may indicate betrothal and her exposed breasts suggest that this was a very private portrait, intended only for the eyes of her lover. This playful, erotised mode of depiction is unusual for this period and is a pertinent reminder of the uniqueness of this genre of portraiture.
One of the most striking aspects of this portrait is the abundance of jewellery and pearls. Pinned to the sitter’s hair is a large table-cut diamond with an accompanying brooch at her breast comprised of three further diamonds, which were originally depicted using silver, now appear black due to tarnishing...
In this exquisitely preserved early Jacobean miniature of an unknown lady, court fashion meets sartorial fantasy. [3] The standing open ruff and upswept hairstyle were in vogue at court at this date, but here they are combined with a daringly low neckline of a type normally associated with masque costume. The honeysuckle – symbolic of love and devotion – pinned to her ruff may indicate betrothal and her exposed breasts suggest that this was a very private portrait, intended only for the eyes of her lover. This playful, erotised mode of depiction is unusual for this period and is a pertinent reminder of the uniqueness of this genre of portraiture.
One of the most striking aspects of this portrait is the abundance of jewellery and pearls. Pinned to the sitter’s hair is a large table-cut diamond with an accompanying brooch at her breast comprised of three further diamonds, which were originally depicted using silver, now appear black due to tarnishing over time. Around her neck, the sitter flaunts a pearl necklace, similar to those observed in several portraits from the period, from which six rubies hang.[4] Loops of pearls, each with a suspended ruby, adorn the sitter’s ears, while another string of pearls encircles her elevated hairstyle, surmounted by a ‘tire’ - a wired headdress designed to shimmer as she moved. The large ruff was secured at the back by the hair ornament, reflecting the elaborate complexity of women’s fashion at this date – particularly when, as in the present work, it was further enhanced with theatrical elements.
That love and devotion was the intended message in this portrait is confirmed by the presence of a small gold ‘S’ in the middle-left background which is crossed through diagonally (fig.2). This closed ‘S’, or S fermé (fermesse in French, translating to ‘steadfastness’) was often incorporated into costume and jewellery and was considered a symbol of love, affection and fidelity.[5] However, this symbol caused considerable confusion in the past, as it was erroneously interpreted as an artist’s monogram. Consequently, the miniature was attributed for over a century to John Shute, an artist who died in 1563, many years before this work was painted.[6]
A more likely contender is Rowland Lockey, an apprentice of Hilliard whose influence is clearly discernible in this work.[7 ] We can observe, for example, the meticulous highlighting of the pearls with silver, again now tarnished, and the edging of the lace ruff, built up in multiple layers, as in Hilliard’s portraits, to create a striking three-dimensional effect Lockey was apprenticed to Hilliard for eight years from 1581, and by the 1590s had established himself as a talented painter in his own right. Like his master, he worked in both oils and miniature. He was commended ‘for oil and limning in some measure’ by Richard Haydocke in the preface to his translation of Lomazzo (1598) and was mentioned by Francis Meres in his Palladis Tamia (1598) as one of the eminent artists working in England at the time.[8]
Although numerous payments to Lockey for portraits are documented, only a few works can be securely attributed to him and no signed miniatures by him have yet come to light.[9] However, a compelling case can be made for Lockey as the artist of a large cabinet miniature in the collection at the V&A.[10] The miniature is a copy of Holbein’s now-lost group portrait of Thomas More and his family, which Lockey is known to have copied fullscale in oils twice.[11] Lockey’s familiarity with Holbein’s original, coupled with the evident talent of the artist working on this scale, has been the basis of the attribution. [12] Using the More family group as a touchstone work, Sir Roy Strong, in his 1983 catalogue for the exhibition Artists of the Tudor Court: The Portrait Miniature Rediscovered 1520–1620, attempted to assemble an oeuvre for the artist.[13] One of the works he included was a portrait of Lady Ann Cobham, which shows striking similarities with the drawing of the figures in the More family group, notably the relatively thick handling of paint and the firm Fig. 2 | Deatail of Portrait of a Lady 3 drawing of the sitter’s eyelids. The Cobham portrait, in turn, makes an interesting stylistic comparison with the present work, especially in the drawing of the physiognomy, with the treatment of the eyes and lips a distinguishing commonality. Likewise, the painting of the upswept hair and the shadowing of the pearls. A further work in a private collection, depicting a lady thought to be Bridget Morrison, Countess of Sussex, also bears obvious similarities with both the Cobham and the present work (fig.3).[14] Although the condition of the miniature is poor, there are stylistic parallels to be found in the delineation of the head, eyes, mouth and nose, not to mention the depiction of the pearls and rubies, which appear to be constructed in the same manner as Hilliard. Of equal intrigue is the similarly elaborate style of dress which likewise blends formality with playful theatrics.
Although we are unable to say for certain if Lockey was the artist responsible for this entrancing work, it is undoubtedly the best-preserved among the small group now attributed to his hand and serves as a vivid reminder of how many interesting discoveries are still to be made in portrait miniature painting during this period.
[1] When consigned to this sale, the miniature was framed back-to-back in a simple gold locket with a miniature by Isaac Oliver of a gentleman erroneously identified as Henry, Prince of Wales. The pair of works were illustrated in an article in The Connoisseur in 1906 (see Literature). The Oliver miniature was sold at Christie’s, 13 November 2019, lot 161.
[2] Sir Alec Martin was a director at Christie’s and often bid on behalf of Viscount Bearsted. See Simon Murray, Heather Aston and Alan Powers, Upton House and Gardens, Warwickshire: National Trust Guidebook (Oxford: National Trust, 2009), pp. 8-9.
[3] I am grateful to Jacqui Ansell for proving the information relating to the sitter’s costume in this miniature.
[4] For similar necklaces see Nicholas Hilliard’s portrait of Elizabeth I (c.1600), V&A (4404 to B-1857) and Isaac Oliver’s portrait A Lady as Flora (c.1605), Rijksmuseum (SK-A-4347)
[5] I am grateful to Edward Town for sharing his thoughts on this symbol. For similar uses of the closed ‘S’ in relation to fidelity and marriage see the casket by Jean Limosin in the V&A (13:1, 2-1864), thought to have been commissioned as a wedding gift and extensively decorated on the reverse with similar motifs.
[6] The earliest record of this attribution appears in The Connoisseur in 1906 (see Literature). The identity of the author is not stated. The attribution was upheld by Williamson, who was an advisor to J.P Morgan, and was published as such in Williamson’s catalogue of Morgan’s collection (see Literature). The attribution remained in place throughout the ownership of Viscount Bearsted and his descendants.
[7] For the most up to date biography on Rowland Lockey see Edward Town, A Biographical Dictionary of London Painters 1547-1625, The Walpole Society, vol. 76, 2014, pp. 133-134.
[8] Town, ‘A Biographical Dictionary,’ 2014, p. 133.
[9]For a list of documented payments see Town, ‘A Biographical Dictionary,’ 2014, pp. 133–34.
[10] P.15-1973.
[11] One version is at Nostell Priory, Yorkshire (dated 1592) and another in at the National Portrait Gallery, London (dated 1593) (NPG 2765). The miniature in the V&A closely relates to the composition in the National Portrait Gallery, but with minor variants, such as the introduction of a garden view through an arch to the right.
[12] For further information on the attribution, see Strong, Artists of the Tudor Court, pp. 157–61.
[13] Strong, Artists of the Tudor Court, pp. 92–96.
[14] Roseberys, London, 4 June 2020, lot 4.
