Ikons and images
ANTONIA FRASER
Tudor and Jacobean Portraits Roy Strong (Hmso 2 vols 15 gns) Rich as the external appearance of these two mighty and heraldic-looking volumes may be—with majestic slip cover based on the design of the Lyte Jewel in the British Museum—this is as nothing compared to the wealth within. In fact, for students of the period, it is as though a new gold mine had been thrown open, not only without restrictions, but with the addition of the most comprehensive system of signposts, and notices: Treasureseekers this way.
Tudor and Jacobean Portraits is the work of the new Director of the National Portrait Gallery, in essence a catalogue of the gallery's contents down to 1625. The first volume lists the subjects in alphabetical order, roughly speaking King Alfred down to Cardinal Wolsey. Each subject receives first a potted biography; secondly a list of the actual pictures in the National Portrait Gallery; thirdly a summary of contemporary accounts of the subject's physical appear- ance. The latter may be fairly said to con- sist, in the memorable phrase of another his- torical character, born too late for inclusion in this catalogue, of warts—or royal warts— and all. Even if every character is not distin- guished by some deformity or other (an impression one receives at times, however unfairly), Dr Strong definitely has a way with a wart. I shall not easily forget to look for the blemish on the side of Drake's nose, or pretty Anne Boleyn's wen (or goitre). Fourthly and most valuably, we are given the full iconography of each subject, including all the portraits known to exist, not only those within the gallery itself. And the second volume supplements the first with plates, some of which illustrate common misattributions for the sake of fur- ther clarity.
The result is an extraordinary corpus of material. Dr Strong says of his own work that 'it is intended primarily as a working tool for students of the period regardless of the field in which they are active'. He has certainly provided an instrument which will cut the corners of many a future histo- rian's task. But he also shows that the incli- nation of the general public to demand more and more illustrations to help their assimila- tion of knowledge is based on a perfectly sound instinct. For, in this period at any rate, portraits were of enormous importance as a clue not only to the authority of the person, but also to the manner in which he wished to present himself to the world.
Dr Strong points out how preoccupied many of the Tudor portraits were with rank : in this context, it seems logical to find that more portraits of Burghley exist than of any other Elizabethan character except the Queen herself. Leicester, who was also the subject of innumerable por- traits, was sufficiently interested in art to sit for many different painters: but Iturghley depended on three artists alone
for the innumerable versions of (definitely dour) image. Both gentler extended enormous quantities of patron; and the contemporary ethic demanded I you hung the portrait of your pat on your newly enriched walls.
The apogee of the use of the portrait, of course reached by the Tudor monar, itself, who enshrined it as a propau weapon. Elsewhere Dr Strong has cal attention to the use of the portraiture Holbein by Henry VIII as a method imposing a new image of monarchy on English people, as a substitute for the Catholic pre-Reformation images wh had previously obsessed their minds. I catalogue confirms and extends this jj From the time of Henry VIII onwards, possession of a royal portrait becann proof of loyalty, hence the enorm increase in their numbers—the first s of a trend continued down to the pres day, with Annigonis of the Queen h ing in Embassies all round the wor is fascinating to discover the weedy } Edward VI copying the characteristic dog stance of his father in his own port not so much out of filial admiration as of a desire to indicate the continuan the Protestant monarchy.
This artistic policy reached its h under Queen Elizabeth: her por towards the end of her life exhi hieratic, even Byzantine posture. She gli like the very ikon she wished represent in the minds of her subjects, attitude which sprang as much deliberate political policy as from feminine vanity so often attributed to In view of the apparent differences in plethora of portraits here illustrated, is fascinated to discover that the 'face masks' were few, but there was unwritten law that costumes should different. As a result of this prolifera twice in the reign, in 1563 and 1596, were crises when it was felt that the image had been 'debased'. 'Great off was caused and the debased port restored.
Debasing could of course take even unpleasant forms than losing the like of the original: in 1583 an anti-Elizabe pro-Catholic campaign on the Cont took the form of 'licentious' pictur Elizabeth and Anjou. There was a wave of such unpleasant manifesta after the execution of Mary Queen of in 1587: at the same moment the pi of the beheaded Queen were being d up by Catholics in all the pictorial trap appropriate to martyrdom.
Every now and then—and who blame him in the vision of yea industry, collation and meditation these volumes invoke—Dr Strong a himself the luxury of inveighing a those with less high standards than h For example poor Arabella Stuarts teenth-century biographers, who that her 'authentic painted image not harmonise with the romantic ima her which they had created and the produced some prettier portraits to their fantasies, receive short shrift for 'lunatic labelling'. Mary Queen of an even more prominent victim of the process and Dr Strong rightly polo that she is foremost among the subt need of a modern iconography. hi meantime let him take some cheer the fact that there will be less 'lunatic ling' in future from those who have ed these remarkable volumes.
Previous page
