7/25/2019 byzantine icons.pdf

1/3

Byzantine IconsAuthor(s): D. Talbot RiceSource: The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, Vol. 86, No. 506 (May, 1945), pp. 127-128Published by: The Burlington Magazine Publications, Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/868885

Accessed: 15/12/2008 08:46

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bmpl.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that

promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Burlington Magazine Publications, Ltd.is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/868885?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bmplhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bmplhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/868885?origin=JSTOR-pdf

7/25/2019 byzantine icons.pdf

2/3

The

Early

Work

of

Sir

Peter

Lely

he

Early

Work

of

Sir

Peter

Lely

England.

But

if that were the

case,

we

should

have

expected

to find

other evidence

of his Court

activities

at this

period.

Again,

it is

perfectly

true that

Dobson,

whose

position

as Court

painter

par

excellence t Oxford

is

well

known,

did

execute

a

portrait

of Prince Charles

(now

belonging

to the National

Gallery

of

Scotland)

quite

early

in the Civil War.

But

Charles,

after

all,

was

the

Prince of Wales

and this

picture

was

specially

commissioned

as a

gift

to William

Harvey.

The Duke

of

York was not

portrayed

by

Dobson

until later

for,

judging by James's appearance,

it

would seem

that

the

delightful

painting

at

Windsor Castle

cannot be before

I644

at least.

Secondly,

why

should the

Syon

picture

have come

into

the

possession

of the

Percy family

if it had

no connexion

with the

period

of Northumber-

land's

guardianship

of

James?

It seems

unlikely,

under

the

circumstances,

that the Duke would have

brought

it

with

him from Oxford.

The fact

that two different

dates have been

read

shows

that

the last

figure

cannot be

easy

to

decipher.

Might

not

a 2

or

a

3 prove

to be

a

7

or

an 8 ? At

any

rate,

pending

ocular

proof,

I

must

be allowed

to

have

a

feeling

in

the

pit

of

the

stomach

and

to believe

that

Walpole

was

right

in

saying,

when

he saw

the

pictures

at

Syon

in

1761,

a

pretty

head of

James,

Duke

of

York,

young,

and

the

Lady

Elizabeth,

painted

while

they

were under

the

care

of

Lord

Northumberland.

That

this was

the

tradition

at

Syon

is borne out

by

the fact

that in

the

Catalogue

f

the

Stuart

Exhibition,

where

the

picture

was shown

(No.

125), James

is described

as

aged

14.

And

if

painted

then-as

the

Elizabeth

must have

been

since

the Princess

did not cease to be

Northumberland's

ward

until

June, 1649,

and

her

appearance

in

the

picture

makes it

absolutely

certain

that it

was

executed

before

the

death

of Charles

I in

January,

i649-who

but the

Earl,

to whose descendants

they belong,

would

have commissioned

the

portraits

?

The

James

is

reproduced

in Mr. Collins Baker's

Connoisseur rticle

mentioned

above.

(4)

Princess

Elizabeth.

This

picture

(whether

it is

signed

or not I

cannot

say)

would

seem to

be

even less well

known

than

the

Petworth

group.

It is not

mentioned

by

Mr.

Collins

Baker

either

in his

book or

in his

Connoisseurrticle.

The

Princess

is shown at

half-length,

wearing

a

low-cut

blue

dress,

her left

hand on her

breast.

Although

full

of

charm,

and

extremely

valuable

from

the

iconogra-

phical

point

of

view,

since

it is

the

only

life-size

single

painted

portrait

of

Elizabeth

extant,

it is a

more

sophisticated

painting

than

the

others in the

series.

We

can

already

see

foreshadowed

in

this

essentially

artless

little

girl,

made

over-fine

for the

occasion,

the

Lely

ladies

of

a

somewhat later

date. From

the

grown-up

dress

and

greater

elaboration

in the

style

of

hairdressing,

I should say that the picture was commissioned by

Northumberland

later than the

Petworth

group,

though

it

may

not be

later

than

the

end

of

I647.

It was

exhibited

at

South

Kensington

in

I866

(No. 580)

and

at

SHORTER NOTICES

BYZANTINE

ICONS.

By

D.

Talbot

Rice.

Shortly

before the

war a

find

of the

very

first

importance regarding

the

history

of

Byzantine

panel

painting

was

announced

by

Prof.

Sotiriou,

Director

of

England.

But

if that were the

case,

we

should

have

expected

to find

other evidence

of his Court

activities

at this

period.

Again,

it is

perfectly

true that

Dobson,

whose

position

as Court

painter

par

excellence t Oxford

is

well

known,

did

execute

a

portrait

of Prince Charles

(now

belonging

to the National

Gallery

of

Scotland)

quite

early

in the Civil War.

But

Charles,

after

all,

was

the

Prince of Wales

and this

picture

was

specially

commissioned

as a

gift

to William

Harvey.

The Duke

of

York was not

portrayed

by

Dobson

until later

for,

judging by James's appearance,

it

would seem

that

the

delightful

painting

at

Windsor Castle

cannot be before

I644

at least.

Secondly,

why

should the

Syon

picture

have come

into

the

possession

of the

Percy family

if it had

no connexion

with the

period

of Northumber-

land's

guardianship

of

James?

It seems

unlikely,

under

the

circumstances,

that the Duke would have

brought

it

with

him from Oxford.

The fact

that two different

dates have been

read

shows

that

the last

figure

cannot be

easy

to

decipher.

Might

not

a 2

or

a

3 prove

to be

a

7

or

an 8 ? At

any

rate,

pending

ocular

proof,

I

must

be allowed

to

have

a

feeling

in

the

pit

of

the

stomach

and

to believe

that

Walpole

was

right

in

saying,

when

he saw

the

pictures

at

Syon

in

1761,

a

pretty

head of

James,

Duke

of

York,

young,

and

the

Lady

Elizabeth,

painted

while

they

were under

the

care

of

Lord

Northumberland.

That

this was

the

tradition

at

Syon

is borne out

by

the fact

that in

the

Catalogue

f

the

Stuart

Exhibition,

where

the

picture

was shown

(No.

125), James

is described

as

aged

14.

And

if

painted

then-as

the

Elizabeth

must have

been

since

the Princess

did not cease to be

Northumberland's

ward

until

June, 1649,

and

her

appearance

in

the

picture

makes it

absolutely

certain

that it

was

executed

before

the

death

of Charles

I in

January,

i649-who

but the

Earl,

to whose descendants

they belong,

would

have commissioned

the

portraits

?

The

James

is

reproduced

in Mr. Collins Baker's

Connoisseur rticle

mentioned

above.

(4)

Princess

Elizabeth.

This

picture

(whether

it is

signed

or not I

cannot

say)

would

seem to

be

even less well

known

than

the

Petworth

group.

It is not

mentioned

by

Mr.

Collins

Baker

either

in his

book or

in his

Connoisseurrticle.

The

Princess

is shown at

half-length,

wearing

a

low-cut

blue

dress,

her left

hand on her

breast.

Although

full

of

charm,

and

extremely

valuable

from

the

iconogra-

phical

point

of

view,

since

it is

the

only

life-size

single

painted

portrait

of

Elizabeth

extant,

it is a

more

sophisticated

painting

than

the

others in the

series.

We

can

already

see

foreshadowed

in

this

essentially

artless

little

girl,

made

over-fine

for the

occasion,

the

Lely

ladies

of

a

somewhat later

date. From

the

grown-up

dress

and

greater

elaboration

in the

style

of

hairdressing,

I should say that the picture was commissioned by

Northumberland

later than the

Petworth

group,

though

it

may

not be

later

than

the

end

of

I647.

It was

exhibited

at

South

Kensington

in

I866

(No. 580)

and

at

SHORTER NOTICES

BYZANTINE

ICONS.

By

D.

Talbot

Rice.

Shortly

before the

war a

find

of the

very

first

importance regarding

the

history

of

Byzantine

panel

painting

was

announced

by

Prof.

Sotiriou,

Director

of

the

Stuart Exhibition

(No. 93)

and

is

finely

reproduced

in

Foster,

Vol.

ii,

Plate

lxxii.

The

painting

catalogued

Henry,

Duke of

Gloucester

by

Sir Peter

Lely

from

Syon

House

at

the Stuart

Exhibition

(No.

io6)

is,

I

understand,

in

reality

a

portrait

of

Lady

Elizabeth

Percy (born

1667)

as

a

child.

But that

Henry

was

painted

by

Lely

singly

as

a

child

we know

from

the

entry among

the

Windsor

pictures

in

James

II's

Catalogue (No. 739).

What

painting

is

here intended

it is

impossible

to

say

with

certainty,

but

Mrs.

Jameson1?

may

have been

right

in

identifying

it with the

picture

of

the

Duke

which was

at Windsor as late

as

I866,

when

it was exhibited

at

South

Kensington

as

by

Van

Dvck

(No.

63I),

and

which

may

still

be

stored

at the Castle for

all

I

know.

I

possess

a

poor

reproduction

of this

picture,

which

shows

a child

standing

at

full-length,

wearing

a lace

cap,

coats,

and

an

apron,

and

holding

fruit

and

flowers

in his

left

hand.

As far

as this

photograph

will

allow

one

to

judge,

I think that we

may

well

have

here

yet

a sixth

royal

pre-Commonwealth

Lely.

Of the

doubtful

James,

Duke of

York

and

Princess

Elizabeth

from Melbourne

Hall,

Derby,

listed

by

Mr.

Collins

Baker as about

I649,

I

can

say

nothing except

that

if

they

are

genuine

representations

of the brother and

sister

the

date

is

impossible.

In order to

study

the

early

work

of

Lely

adequately

it is essential that

it should be

exhibited.

Therefore,

we

may

hope

that the

Duke

of

Northumberland,

Lord

Leconfield,

and

Mr. de

Chair

will allow

their

pictures

to

be

shown

together

in London

after

the War. If

His

Majesty

the

King

would

be

graciously

pleased

to lend

his

Henry,

Duke

of

Gloucester,

o

appear

with

them,

that would

be

a still

greater gain

to students.

Personally,

I should also like to

see

displayed

on the

same walls with

the

Lelys

the

Dobson

James

from

Windsor and

the Dobson

Charles

from

Edinburgh.

We

should

then have

an excellent

opportunity

of

com-

paring

and

contrasting

the

styles

of these two artists

and of

estimating

better

the measure of

Lely's

debt

to Dobson. I would add that to have

good

photographs

of

all

these

pictures

made

available-and

I

venture

to

suggest

the

publication

of

the

whole series

in

THE

BURLINGTON MAGAZINE-would

be of untold

value.

It

might

even be

possible

to

remove

the

Syon

James

temporarily

from its frame so

that

the

full

signature

(only ly

Fecit and the date

are

visible) might

be

examined and

photographically

recorded.

Finally,

I come

back

to the Amsterdam

double

portrait

with which

I

began.

Another

very

interesting

example

of the solemn dextrarum

unctio

there

shown

is to

be

found

in the

picture

of an

unknown

boy

and

girl,

dated

1647,

the

property

of Sir

John

Prestige,

of Bourne

Park,

Kent,

which was

illustrated in

Country

Life,

2nd

January,

I942.

I

have

been

trying,

so far

without

success,

to

identify

the

children,

but

a

photo-

graph

of the

signature

has revealed a

veryinteresting

monogram,

about which

I

shall

hope

to

have

something

to

sav

at a later

date.

o1

Handbook

o the Public

Galleries

of

Art,

pp.

235-6

[1845].

the

Stuart Exhibition

(No. 93)

and

is

finely

reproduced

in

Foster,

Vol.

ii,

Plate

lxxii.

The

painting

catalogued

Henry,

Duke of

Gloucester

by

Sir Peter

Lely

from

Syon

House

at

the Stuart

Exhibition

(No.

io6)

is,

I

understand,

in

reality

a

portrait

of

Lady

Elizabeth

Percy (born

1667)

as

a

child.

But that

Henry

was

painted

by

Lely

singly

as

a

child

we know

from

the

entry among

the

Windsor

pictures

in

James

II's

Catalogue (No. 739).

What

painting

is

here intended

it is

impossible

to

say

with

certainty,

but

Mrs.

Jameson1?

may

have been

right

in

identifying

it with the

picture

of

the

Duke

which was

at Windsor as late

as

I866,

when

it was exhibited

at

South

Kensington

as

by

Van

Dvck

(No.

63I),

and

which

may

still

be

stored

at the Castle for

all

I

know.

I

possess

a

poor

reproduction

of this

picture,

which

shows

a child

standing

at

full-length,

wearing

a lace

cap,

coats,

and

an

apron,

and

holding

fruit

and

flowers

in his

left

hand.

As far

as this

photograph

will

allow

one

to

judge,

I think that we

may

well

have

here

yet

a sixth

royal

pre-Commonwealth

Lely.

Of the

doubtful

James,

Duke of

York

and

Princess

Elizabeth

from Melbourne

Hall,

Derby,

listed

by

Mr.

Collins

Baker as about

I649,

I

can

say

nothing except

that

if

they

are

genuine

representations

of the brother and

sister

the

date

is

impossible.

In order to

study

the

early

work

of

Lely

adequately

it is essential that

it should be

exhibited.

Therefore,

we

may

hope

that the

Duke

of

Northumberland,

Lord

Leconfield,

and

Mr. de

Chair

will allow

their

pictures

to

be

shown

together

in London

after

the War. If

His

Majesty

the

King

would

be

graciously

pleased

to lend

his

Henry,

Duke

of

Gloucester,

o

appear

with

them,

that would

be

a still

greater gain

to students.

Personally,

I should also like to

see

displayed

on the

same walls with

the

Lelys

the

Dobson

James

from

Windsor and

the Dobson

Charles

from

Edinburgh.

We

should

then have

an excellent

opportunity

of

com-

paring

and

contrasting

the

styles

of these two artists

and of

estimating

better

the measure of

Lely's

debt

to Dobson. I would add that to have

good

photographs

of

all

these

pictures

made

available-and

I

venture

to

suggest

the

publication

of

the

whole series

in

THE

BURLINGTON MAGAZINE-would

be of untold

value.

It

might

even be

possible

to

remove

the

Syon

James

temporarily

from its frame so

that

the

full

signature

(only ly

Fecit and the date

are

visible) might

be

examined and

photographically

recorded.

Finally,

I come

back

to the Amsterdam

double

portrait

with which

I

began.

Another

very

interesting

example

of the solemn dextrarum

unctio

there

shown

is to

be

found

in the

picture

of an

unknown

boy

and

girl,

dated

1647,

the

property

of Sir

John

Prestige,

of Bourne

Park,

Kent,

which was

illustrated in

Country

Life,

2nd

January,

I942.

I

have

been

trying,

so far

without

success,

to

identify

the

children,

but

a

photo-

graph

of the

signature

has revealed a

veryinteresting

monogram,

about which

I

shall

hope

to

have

something

to

sav

at a later

date.

o1

Handbook

o the Public

Galleries

of

Art,

pp.

235-6

[1845].

the

Byzantine

Museum

at Athens. It

consisted

of

the

discovery

in the

famous

monastery

on Mount Sinai of

a

series

of

some

200oo

icons,

all

unrestored

and

most

of

them

in

good

condition,

and

dating

from

various

periods

the

Byzantine

Museum

at Athens. It

consisted

of

the

discovery

in the

famous

monastery

on Mount Sinai of

a

series

of

some

200oo

icons,

all

unrestored

and

most

of

them

in

good

condition,

and

dating

from

various

periods

12727

7/25/2019 byzantine icons.pdf

3/3