Crabbe, who owed his rescue from penury to the prompt and substantial help rendered him by Burke, who got his works published, and set him on the road to fortune, looks cheerily up at us as though reciting one of his own “ Tales, ” perhaps “ Phœbe Dawson, ” which cheered the dying hours of C. J. Fox and Sir Walter Scott.
Campbell strikes us as a fitting exponent of the “Pleasures of Hope. ʼʼ This quality seems to be lacking in the dreamy face of Southey, whose fine features, and dark hair and eyes suggest a Jewish extraction. In the face of Coleridge we remark signs of his characteristic irresolution and shiftlessness. These four portraits were from the easel of T. Phillips, R. A., while that of the last of the “Lake poets, ” Wordsworth, a very fine one, was painted for the poet’s college, St. John’s, Cambridge, by Pickersgill, at Rydal Mount in 1831, and is that of a man enjoying a life of learned leisure.
The magnificent portrait of Lord Byron, magnificently painted by Westall, is in strong profile and has “poet ” stamped on every one of his fine features. Hanging below this is the equally grand Sir Walter Scott, by Raeburn, on whose canvas the sturdy features and form of the “ Great Wizard of the North ” live again. Compared with all the poets’ portraits, and especially with that of Sir Walter, how almost girlish in its delicacy and beauty does the fair, oval face of Shelley appear, with those glorious blue eyes that illumine his fine countenance. This portrait was painted from life, in one sitting, at Rome in 1818, by Miss Curran. The posthumous portrait of Keats, by Severn, shows a fine face but cannot be called a success. We must pass S. Laurence’s fine portrait of Leigh Hunt, Romney’s Miss A. Seward and Hoppner’s delicate and charming Henry Kirke White, and notice those of three letter-writers whose chit-chat so well paints their times.
The earliest of these was Lord Hervey, Lord Privy Seal to George II, of whose queen he was the confidant; a small-minded man, and delicate, as seen on Van Loo’s canvas. A friend ascribed all Hervey’s delicacy of constitution to “the use of that detestable and poisonous plant, tea, which had once brought him to death’s door, and if persisted in would carry him through it. ” Hervey and his wife, the beautiful Mary Lepel, were satirized in the “ Dunciad, ” where Pope called him “Lord Fanny. ”
Hogarth evidently caught, on the instant, the indescribable expression of polite scorn seen on the face of Horace Walpole, who, with his head tossed back, giving to the nose and chin a curious pointed look, seems to be having a quiet laugh at some one.
In Fanny Burney’s portrait by her cousin, the small head of the slight, timid little creature, is quite overpowered by her large hat trimmed with a very mountain of bows, a symbol of the awe and reverence with which she regarded her royal mistress, Queen Charlotte, which has left its impress on her countenance.
Supreme among the interpreters of Shakespeare sits Mrs. Siddons, enthroned and immortalized as “ The Tragic Muse ” in Sir Joshua’s famous picture which, besides its other charms, has that of most exquisite coloring. The artist signed his name on the hem of her robe. Harlowe’s picture of the “ Trial of Queen Katherine, ” though not altogether a success is very interesting as containing portraits of the whole Kemble family, besides Miss Stephens and other famous actors. Peg Woffington as “ Penelope ” does not look so charming as in her miniature.
Above the large head of Quin, his coarse face full of humor, hangs the fine portrait of “Kitty Fisher ” with a charming air of simplicity thrown round her beautiful face and figure; while the lustrous eyes of “ Mrs. Billington, ” are not the least attractive features in Hoppner’s portrait of one, who was the most celebrated female singer of her time, and famous for her beauty. Hadyn was, in the latter part of his life, enamoured of this lady, and Sir Joshua painted her portrait for him as “ St. Cecilia. ” When asked what he thought of the picture Hadyn said it was “beautiful, just like her; but there’s a strange mistake. ” “What is that? ” “Why you have painted her listening to the angels, when you ought to have painted the angels listening to her. ”
In Sir Joshua’s altogether charming and exquisite portrait of Mrs. Hartley as “ Elfrida, ” the calm, lovely face, with most melting eyes — in which is no trace of diablerie — would, by the tender expression in it, worthily represent a Madonna.
Of “the greatest of English actors, ” we have two portraits by Sir Joshua: one, lent by the Queen, painted in 1768; the second, lent by Lord Sackville, in 1786, when the actor was worn out by gout and many other troubles. In both we have an example of the artist’s power of catching a momentary expression; in both we see the living Garrick in the twinkling eye, in the mouth, just breaking out into a smile, and the whole figure full of life and humor. There is also a canvas, representing Garrick seated at a table, while Mrs. Garrick, standing behind him, playfully stretches out her beautiful arm over his head to take the pen from his hand. Though both appear to be good portraits, Garrick was so dissatisfied that he quarrelled with Hogarth, who disfigured Garrick’s face with his pencil. It was never paid for, but Mrs. Hogarth sent it home after the artist’s death, and it ultimately came into the possession of George IV. Sir W. Beechey’s portrait of Miss Harriet Mellow, afterwards Duchess of St. Albans, is interesting on account of the romantic history of the lady, to whom the Baroness Burdett-Coutts owes her vast fortune. Of this fortunate actress there is also a very fine miniature exhibited.
There are portraits of our famous song-writers, Charles Dibdin
the inimitable author of nautical ditties, and Thomas Moore, the great master of lyrical poetry, the latter by Sir M. Shee’s powerful hand.
The few musical composers will not detain us long. Oxford University sends a fine full-length portrait, by Hudson, of the somewhat conceited-looking writer of cathedral music, William Boyce, also considered by Lawrence one of Sir Joshua’s finest works; that of Dr. Burney, F. R. S., the father of the literary Fanny, beside which is one, by Beechey, of Crotch as a youth.
Out of more than fifty known portraits of Handel, two are in this gallery; one is by T. Hudson, the other, decidedly superior, by Mercier, who has well delineated his fine, open countenance. Our little sketch would be incomplete without a word about the rival factions formed by the supporters of Handel and Bononcini, well put by Dean Swift in his famous epigram:
“Some say that Signor Bononcini Compared to Handel is a ninny;
While others vow that to him Handel, Is hardly fit to hold a candle.
Strange that such difference should be ’Twixt tweedledum and tweedledee. ”
Of Handel’s irascible temper we give one instance: “ Cuzzoni one day refused to sing a certain air, and, having long been annoyed by her whims, he determined, once for all, to put a stop to them. He flew at her, gave her a good shaking, and cried: ‘Ah, I always knew you were a fery tevil, and I shall now let you know that I am Beelzebub, the prince of de tevils. ’ He was then going to throw her out of a window, when she wisely submitted. ”
Hadyn looks a thorough German Kapellmeister in the single portrait of him lent by the Queen. It was painted by Hoppner for George III, probably when, in the height of his reputation, the great composer visited England for the second time in 1793.
We now proceed to notice the goodly array of artists’ portraits, in almost every case the work of the originals.
That of Sir Godfrey Kneller — who, in his time, painted the portrait of nearly every person of note, besides those of famous foreign potentates — was given by him to the famous “ Kitcat ” Club, of which he was the recognized artist. We trace in Hogarth’s portrait the characteristics of a man fitted to portray scenes of humor or comedy.
Two out of several painted by Reynolds, represent a good-humored, straightforward and unassuming Englishman, with much less of the courtier about him than is noticeable in the more imposing canvas on which the favorite of George III, Benjamin West, is discerned, and splendidly painted by himself.
In Angelica Kauffman’s portrait we are struck by the strong resemblance she bears to the Empress Eugénie, both in face and figure, increased by the similar style of dressing the hair. This painting, as well as a charming miniature elsewhere, also by herself, is distinguished by great delicacy of handling.
What lover of English country life has not felt suddenly transported into its midst when gazing at one of George Morland’s farmyard scenes? Pity that one who so truthfully depicted nature should have fallen a victim to intemperance at the early age of forty, followed in a few days by his wife, from the same cause! “ Many of his best pictures were painted in sponging-houses to clear himself from arrest, or in ale-houses to pay his reckoning. ” This portrait of himself was given to the lady he wished to marry, but his drinking habits, as testified by the bottle and glass at his side, caused her to refuse him. The hat he wears, like that of an Irish peasant, has a broad brim, and casts a strange shadow over the shifty but humorous face.
Looking at the poetic portrait by Reinagle, of John Constable, we cannot but contrast the happy auspices under which he began his career with those of Morland, though he was long in receiving from the public the encouragement he merited. His patron, Sir G. Beaumont, once asked him what style he intended to adopt. “None but God Almighty’s, Sir George. ” He could not have chosen a better. He used to say, “I love every stile, and stump and lane in the village, and as long as I can hold a brush, I shall never cease to paint them. ”
There is a great deal of wit seen in the face of Sir David Wilkie, in the interesting portrait by himself a year previous to his death, and just before he went to Constantinople to paint that of the Sultan.
From his own easel is the charming portrait of Gainsborough, an artist who, whether in landscape where he excelled, or in portraiture in which his style was pure and unaffected, tinged all his works with his own sentiment. He has been styled “the feminine to Reynolds’s masculine. ”
Intellectual power, combined with refinement, characterizes the handsome face of the accomplished John Hoppner, a distinguished portrait painter and contemporary of the latter.
A well-known portrait is that of Sir Thomas Lawrence, who, at the age of ten was very clever at reciting Shakspeare and taking crayon portraits. Chancing once to be at his father’s inn, when, as usual, Thomas was brought in to amuse the guests, Garrick clapped him on the shoulders and said, “ Bravely done, Tommy, whether will ye be a painter or a player, eh? ”
George III having insisted on it, Lawrence was made A. R. A. four years younger than the rules allowed, affording occasion for one of Peter Pindar’s satires on “ A King’s Rights. ”
It is a pity that Sir M. Shee’s cheery-looking portrait of Romney
is not exhibited as well as that by himself. In this extraordinary
Campbell strikes us as a fitting exponent of the “Pleasures of Hope. ʼʼ This quality seems to be lacking in the dreamy face of Southey, whose fine features, and dark hair and eyes suggest a Jewish extraction. In the face of Coleridge we remark signs of his characteristic irresolution and shiftlessness. These four portraits were from the easel of T. Phillips, R. A., while that of the last of the “Lake poets, ” Wordsworth, a very fine one, was painted for the poet’s college, St. John’s, Cambridge, by Pickersgill, at Rydal Mount in 1831, and is that of a man enjoying a life of learned leisure.
The magnificent portrait of Lord Byron, magnificently painted by Westall, is in strong profile and has “poet ” stamped on every one of his fine features. Hanging below this is the equally grand Sir Walter Scott, by Raeburn, on whose canvas the sturdy features and form of the “ Great Wizard of the North ” live again. Compared with all the poets’ portraits, and especially with that of Sir Walter, how almost girlish in its delicacy and beauty does the fair, oval face of Shelley appear, with those glorious blue eyes that illumine his fine countenance. This portrait was painted from life, in one sitting, at Rome in 1818, by Miss Curran. The posthumous portrait of Keats, by Severn, shows a fine face but cannot be called a success. We must pass S. Laurence’s fine portrait of Leigh Hunt, Romney’s Miss A. Seward and Hoppner’s delicate and charming Henry Kirke White, and notice those of three letter-writers whose chit-chat so well paints their times.
The earliest of these was Lord Hervey, Lord Privy Seal to George II, of whose queen he was the confidant; a small-minded man, and delicate, as seen on Van Loo’s canvas. A friend ascribed all Hervey’s delicacy of constitution to “the use of that detestable and poisonous plant, tea, which had once brought him to death’s door, and if persisted in would carry him through it. ” Hervey and his wife, the beautiful Mary Lepel, were satirized in the “ Dunciad, ” where Pope called him “Lord Fanny. ”
Hogarth evidently caught, on the instant, the indescribable expression of polite scorn seen on the face of Horace Walpole, who, with his head tossed back, giving to the nose and chin a curious pointed look, seems to be having a quiet laugh at some one.
In Fanny Burney’s portrait by her cousin, the small head of the slight, timid little creature, is quite overpowered by her large hat trimmed with a very mountain of bows, a symbol of the awe and reverence with which she regarded her royal mistress, Queen Charlotte, which has left its impress on her countenance.
Supreme among the interpreters of Shakespeare sits Mrs. Siddons, enthroned and immortalized as “ The Tragic Muse ” in Sir Joshua’s famous picture which, besides its other charms, has that of most exquisite coloring. The artist signed his name on the hem of her robe. Harlowe’s picture of the “ Trial of Queen Katherine, ” though not altogether a success is very interesting as containing portraits of the whole Kemble family, besides Miss Stephens and other famous actors. Peg Woffington as “ Penelope ” does not look so charming as in her miniature.
Above the large head of Quin, his coarse face full of humor, hangs the fine portrait of “Kitty Fisher ” with a charming air of simplicity thrown round her beautiful face and figure; while the lustrous eyes of “ Mrs. Billington, ” are not the least attractive features in Hoppner’s portrait of one, who was the most celebrated female singer of her time, and famous for her beauty. Hadyn was, in the latter part of his life, enamoured of this lady, and Sir Joshua painted her portrait for him as “ St. Cecilia. ” When asked what he thought of the picture Hadyn said it was “beautiful, just like her; but there’s a strange mistake. ” “What is that? ” “Why you have painted her listening to the angels, when you ought to have painted the angels listening to her. ”
In Sir Joshua’s altogether charming and exquisite portrait of Mrs. Hartley as “ Elfrida, ” the calm, lovely face, with most melting eyes — in which is no trace of diablerie — would, by the tender expression in it, worthily represent a Madonna.
Of “the greatest of English actors, ” we have two portraits by Sir Joshua: one, lent by the Queen, painted in 1768; the second, lent by Lord Sackville, in 1786, when the actor was worn out by gout and many other troubles. In both we have an example of the artist’s power of catching a momentary expression; in both we see the living Garrick in the twinkling eye, in the mouth, just breaking out into a smile, and the whole figure full of life and humor. There is also a canvas, representing Garrick seated at a table, while Mrs. Garrick, standing behind him, playfully stretches out her beautiful arm over his head to take the pen from his hand. Though both appear to be good portraits, Garrick was so dissatisfied that he quarrelled with Hogarth, who disfigured Garrick’s face with his pencil. It was never paid for, but Mrs. Hogarth sent it home after the artist’s death, and it ultimately came into the possession of George IV. Sir W. Beechey’s portrait of Miss Harriet Mellow, afterwards Duchess of St. Albans, is interesting on account of the romantic history of the lady, to whom the Baroness Burdett-Coutts owes her vast fortune. Of this fortunate actress there is also a very fine miniature exhibited.
There are portraits of our famous song-writers, Charles Dibdin
the inimitable author of nautical ditties, and Thomas Moore, the great master of lyrical poetry, the latter by Sir M. Shee’s powerful hand.
The few musical composers will not detain us long. Oxford University sends a fine full-length portrait, by Hudson, of the somewhat conceited-looking writer of cathedral music, William Boyce, also considered by Lawrence one of Sir Joshua’s finest works; that of Dr. Burney, F. R. S., the father of the literary Fanny, beside which is one, by Beechey, of Crotch as a youth.
Out of more than fifty known portraits of Handel, two are in this gallery; one is by T. Hudson, the other, decidedly superior, by Mercier, who has well delineated his fine, open countenance. Our little sketch would be incomplete without a word about the rival factions formed by the supporters of Handel and Bononcini, well put by Dean Swift in his famous epigram:
“Some say that Signor Bononcini Compared to Handel is a ninny;
While others vow that to him Handel, Is hardly fit to hold a candle.
Strange that such difference should be ’Twixt tweedledum and tweedledee. ”
Of Handel’s irascible temper we give one instance: “ Cuzzoni one day refused to sing a certain air, and, having long been annoyed by her whims, he determined, once for all, to put a stop to them. He flew at her, gave her a good shaking, and cried: ‘Ah, I always knew you were a fery tevil, and I shall now let you know that I am Beelzebub, the prince of de tevils. ’ He was then going to throw her out of a window, when she wisely submitted. ”
Hadyn looks a thorough German Kapellmeister in the single portrait of him lent by the Queen. It was painted by Hoppner for George III, probably when, in the height of his reputation, the great composer visited England for the second time in 1793.
We now proceed to notice the goodly array of artists’ portraits, in almost every case the work of the originals.
That of Sir Godfrey Kneller — who, in his time, painted the portrait of nearly every person of note, besides those of famous foreign potentates — was given by him to the famous “ Kitcat ” Club, of which he was the recognized artist. We trace in Hogarth’s portrait the characteristics of a man fitted to portray scenes of humor or comedy.
Two out of several painted by Reynolds, represent a good-humored, straightforward and unassuming Englishman, with much less of the courtier about him than is noticeable in the more imposing canvas on which the favorite of George III, Benjamin West, is discerned, and splendidly painted by himself.
In Angelica Kauffman’s portrait we are struck by the strong resemblance she bears to the Empress Eugénie, both in face and figure, increased by the similar style of dressing the hair. This painting, as well as a charming miniature elsewhere, also by herself, is distinguished by great delicacy of handling.
What lover of English country life has not felt suddenly transported into its midst when gazing at one of George Morland’s farmyard scenes? Pity that one who so truthfully depicted nature should have fallen a victim to intemperance at the early age of forty, followed in a few days by his wife, from the same cause! “ Many of his best pictures were painted in sponging-houses to clear himself from arrest, or in ale-houses to pay his reckoning. ” This portrait of himself was given to the lady he wished to marry, but his drinking habits, as testified by the bottle and glass at his side, caused her to refuse him. The hat he wears, like that of an Irish peasant, has a broad brim, and casts a strange shadow over the shifty but humorous face.
Looking at the poetic portrait by Reinagle, of John Constable, we cannot but contrast the happy auspices under which he began his career with those of Morland, though he was long in receiving from the public the encouragement he merited. His patron, Sir G. Beaumont, once asked him what style he intended to adopt. “None but God Almighty’s, Sir George. ” He could not have chosen a better. He used to say, “I love every stile, and stump and lane in the village, and as long as I can hold a brush, I shall never cease to paint them. ”
There is a great deal of wit seen in the face of Sir David Wilkie, in the interesting portrait by himself a year previous to his death, and just before he went to Constantinople to paint that of the Sultan.
From his own easel is the charming portrait of Gainsborough, an artist who, whether in landscape where he excelled, or in portraiture in which his style was pure and unaffected, tinged all his works with his own sentiment. He has been styled “the feminine to Reynolds’s masculine. ”
Intellectual power, combined with refinement, characterizes the handsome face of the accomplished John Hoppner, a distinguished portrait painter and contemporary of the latter.
A well-known portrait is that of Sir Thomas Lawrence, who, at the age of ten was very clever at reciting Shakspeare and taking crayon portraits. Chancing once to be at his father’s inn, when, as usual, Thomas was brought in to amuse the guests, Garrick clapped him on the shoulders and said, “ Bravely done, Tommy, whether will ye be a painter or a player, eh? ”
George III having insisted on it, Lawrence was made A. R. A. four years younger than the rules allowed, affording occasion for one of Peter Pindar’s satires on “ A King’s Rights. ”
It is a pity that Sir M. Shee’s cheery-looking portrait of Romney
is not exhibited as well as that by himself. In this extraordinary