1

ABSTRACTS

Aviva Burnstock Head of the Department of Conservation and Technology, The Courtauld Institute

Interpreting technical and analytical evidence in historical context The presentation will introduce analytical and technical methods for characterisation of materials and techniques used for paintings, illustrated by their application for the study of selected works made in England and the in the 16thC. The examples will illustrate the challenges posed by interpretation of the technical data, how inferences about technique are made and the limitations of the methods. Methods will include high quality technical photography, light microscopy, X-radiography, infrared imaging, preparation of samples for study of pigments, the application of paint layers and surface topography, analysis of organic materials and selected novel techniques.

The significance of the technical evidence for inferring specific origins and processes of manufacture, as well as the assessment of the condition of paintings will be discussed, and how the evaluation of material changes in paintings can be used by conservators and historians.

Ian Tyers Dendrochronologist

Understanding the trade, production and use of wooden panels for paintings in sixteenth and seventeenth century England Using extensive data gathered for the analysis of Tudor and Jacobean panels via Dendrochronology (including over 90 panels for the NPG) this paper will explore a range of issues relating to the trade, production and usage of wooden panel for painted images in England. The trade in oak panels from the Baltic and occasional use of English oak will be explored and preliminary evidence of regarding the construction of surviving panels will be presented. The paper will also hope to set out some of the evidence for patterns in usage at this period particularly addressing evidence for the usage time after felling and questions of interpretations for date ranges.

Victoria Button PhD Student V&A/RCA Conservation (AHRC Doctoral Award Student)

From drawing to painting: an exploration of the function of Holbein’s portrait drawings Accurate characterisation of the materials and techniques utilised by an artist is fundamental if that artist's work is to be understood and interpreted accurately. Whilst the portrait drawings of Hans Holbein the Younger are by no means unexplored, their materials and techniques have never undergone the same systematic scientific and visual scrutiny as his oil paintings. Linking drawing, underdrawing and final painting, this paper will present an overview of research findings made as part of a PhD investigating Holbein’s drawing materials and techniques, establishing the function of his drawings in relation to the finished oils or miniatures.

This research reinstates the portrait drawings as the primary source-material for investigation and has revealed new information on Holbein’s materials and techniques. A 2 comprehensive visual examination of the drawings has helped to reveal evidence of signs of their use as well as clarifying some of the sequence in which the media was laid down. Contouring defined the sitters’ features and played a pivotal role in terms of transfer to panel and as such is reflected in the underdrawings and paintings themselves. However, the contour’s role, media, sequence of application and even their authorship have been much disputed. Assessing similarities and differences, establishing patterns and evidencing signs of use of the drawings has provided more information regarding the use of the drawings and how their form relates to their function. By effectively ‘reading’ a drawing we can better understand its function and method of production.

Lucy Wrapson Conservator and Research Associate, Hamilton Kerr Institute

Sixteenth century East Anglian rood screen production The first fifty years of Tudor dynasty rule coincided with the highest level of production of painted rood screens in East Anglia. Screens, painted both decoratively and with the figures of saints, kings, prophets and angels, survive in large numbers in the region. The paper explores the nature and techniques of screen manufacture in East Anglia during the Tudor period, contextualising it with what came before and looking at the increasing influence that portraiture and continental print sources had on the painted decoration of screens. It also explores the destruction and alterations made to the rood, rood screen and rood loft through succeeding monarchs, until the widespread removal of lofts under .

Elizabeth Goldring Associate Fellow, Centre for the Study of the Renaissance, University of Warwick

Tudor and Jacobean Painter-Heralds This paper will address a range of topics, including the ongoing tensions between the and the Painter-Stainers’ Company in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, together with the often fraught relations between the heralds and other artificers – such as tombmakers, glassmakers, and sculptors – whose work was perceived, on occasion, to infringe on that of the College. In addition, this talk will examine the lives and careers of selected painter-heralds, such as William Segar, who, after enjoying great success as a portrait painter to the Elizabethan elite served as Garter King of Arms (i.e. chief herald) during the reign of James I. Consideration also will be given to relations between the College of Arms and other London institutions, such as the Inns of Court (Segar, for example, forged close ties to Gray’s Inn).

David Taylor Senior Curator Scottish National Portrait Gallery

Gesture Recognition: Adam de Colone and the transmission of portrait types from the Low Countries and England to Scotland The Scottish-born painter Adam de Colone (fl. 1622-28), son of the Netherlandish artist Adrian Vanson, produced a number of distinctive portraits, mostly of Scottish sitters, during the reign of James VI and I. He appears to have begun practicing as a portraitist in Edinburgh before furthering his training in the Low Countries, after which time he painted in both England and Scotland. Like his father who was court painter in Edinburgh, De Colone 3 painted the king, producing two full-length portraits in London in 1623. Most of his work includes inscriptions painted with distinctive lettering and numbering, with dated works belonging to the short period between 1622 and 1628.

By re-examining De Colone’s oeuvre, including unpublished portraits, this paper will consider the artist’s important role in the development of portraiture in Jacobean Scotland, through the transmission of fashionable portrait types from the Low Countries (influenced by artists such as Van Miereveld, Moreelse and Van Ravesteyn) and from Anglo- Netherlandish and possibly Scandinavian examples (Johnson, Van Somer, Mytens and Van Doort), and to what extent these compositions and postures in turn influenced the career of De Colone’s contemporary George Jamesone.

Christine Slottved Kimbriel Conservator, Hamilton Kerr Institute

The Fate of a Board: four paintings from Trinity College In 2009 dendrochronological analysis of 28 portraits on panel in the collection of Trinity College, Cambridge was carried out. The analysis revealed that four of the examined panels were constructed with boards originating from the same tree, and the apparent link between the four portraits was strengthened by similarities in the execution of both underdrawing and painting technique. The four panels are currently receiving conservation treatment at the Hamilton Kerr Institute. This has afforded an opportunity to examine the panels further and thereby supplement the dendrochronological findings with a better understanding of the techniques used for the panel construction, the underdrawing and the paint application. Three of the four sitters, Wolsey, Pole and Gardiner, were all influential men of their time holding important positions within the church. The research carried out during the project will hopefully lead to an identification of the fourth sitter, who is currently unknown. The aim of the research is to gain as extensive an understanding as possible of this 16th century portrait commission and the project constitutes the initial steps in a more comprehensive study of the larger group of 28 early panel portraits in the Trinity College collection.

David Evett Professor of English Emeritus, Cleveland State University

Spes Kneels to the Queen: A remarkable appeal for Elizabeth royal patronage Toward the end of the sixteenth century, a so-far unidentifiable English patron wrote a series of what the British Library manuscript department catalogues as “Instructions to Painters,” highly detailed programmes for five elaborate allegorical paintings. Three of them were addressed to the same painter (also unidentified). The manuscripts have survived but not, as far as is known, any of the works. One of them, probably written about 1585, describes an allegory in which Queen Elizabeth is shown threatened but not damaged by a great tempest. At the bottom of this picture, the painter was to place a group consisting of the Queen, an Italianate lady-in-waiting, and the painter himself, kneeling, labeled Spes. The author's description makes it clear that this addendum to the allegory was to be an appeal for the restoration of a royal patronage previously enjoyed but now lost. The passage raises obvious questions about the possible identity of the painter. Because of the unorthodox way in which the image was to be presented, however, it also has great technical interest. And together with the many other indications throughout the series of a close, mutually respectful relationship between author and painter, it contributes 4 to what is by far the most complete and personal picture of patron-artist interaction that survives from the early modern period.

Frederick Hepburn Independent Scholar

The earliest evidence for portraiture at the court of Henry VII It is usually suggested that the standard portrait types of Henry VII and Elizabeth of York originated fairly late in the king’s reign, c. 1500. The paper proposed here will question this view by looking at the evidence for a portrait painter working at the Tudor court in the late 1480s. An initial piece of circumstantial evidence is provided by a little-known presentation miniature containing a portrait likeness of Henry VII in a MS completed in 1490. Then there is the documentary evidence for a painter known as ‘Antonio Inglés’. In 1488-9 he travelled from England to Spain with the embassy which met the Catholic Monarchs at Medina del Campo. His purpose was evidently to deliver a portrait of Prince Arthur. Antonio was persuaded to stay on at the Spanish court, where he was paid for painting portraits of the royal children in September 1489. Queen Isabella’s chamber accounts for 1499 and 1500 contain references to a number of portraits, including two of Prince Arthur and portraits of his parents. Also relevant here are the portraits of Isabella and Ferdinand at Windsor (possibly Antonio’s work); and the record of the English embassy to Scotland in 1502, which affords an interesting parallel to that of 1488-9. The painter on the latter occasion (‘Mynour’) took portraits of the king and queen as well as Princess Margaret (and Prince Henry) and was, like Antonio before him, poached by the host court. ‘Mynour’ was certainly a Netherlander, as also probably was ‘Antonio’ (Anthonis?).

Robert Tittler 'Distinguished Professor of History Emeritus' Concordia University, Montreal, Qc., Canada and Adjunct Professor, School for the Study of Art and Culture Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Circles of Painters and Patrons: Regional Portrait Activity in Kent and Chester Patterns of portrait patronage in provincial England during the early seventeenth century differ quite sharply from one region to another. Both Chester and east Kent prove lively centres of portrait activity in this era. Contrasting patronage patterns between the two areas illustrate the relative importance of ambient social, economic, and especially geographic factors in the activity of patrons and painters, and ultimately, in the characteristics of portraits produced in each region.

This paper thus suggests further complexities to the patronage and production of portraiture outside of the London metropolis; it contributes as well to our further understanding of vernacular portrait production.

Anita Jansen Art historian and Curator, Het Prinsenhof, Delft and Project Leader of ‘The Factory of Van Mierevelt’ Johanneke Verhave 5

Art historian and paintings restorer, researcher of painting technique for ‘The Factory of Van Mierevelt’

‘Painting for the English’, the English portraits in the oeuvre of Michiel van Mierevelt As one of the leading portrait painters of the Northern-Netherlands, Michiel van Mierevelt (1567-1641) managed a very flourishing portrait business in his hometown Delft. After he became court painter of the House of Orange in 1607 English Royals became interested in his work as well. Efforts made by Prince Henry (in 1611) and King Charles (in 1625) to persuade him to come to England were in vain. Nevertheless Van Mierevelt influenced the English market in different ways. One of his alleged pupils, Daniel Mijtens, made the journey to the English court and painted numerous portraits of Charles I and Henrietta. English ambassadors, governors and supreme commanders who were stationed in the Netherlands travelled to Delft to sit for Van Mierevelt. Returning to England they imported numerous portraits –originals and copies. In the presentation we will discuss how this network of English clients developed. On the basis of a unique bill, exacting nine portraits that Van Mierevelt delivered to Ambassador Dudley Carleton, we will examine details about the type of portrait, the sitter, the patron and the difference -both in description and in price-between portraits ‘nae ‘t leven’ (after life) and ‘copij’ (copy). At least six portraits of Carleton related to Van Mierevelt have survived, of whom two versions belong to the collection of the National Portrait Gallery. In the presentation we will discuss if, and in what way, the English paintings match or deviate from Van Mierevelts standard painting style and technique.

Natasha Walker, Paintings Conservator, Tate (to present) Jacqueline Ridge, Keeper of Conservation, National Galleries of Scotland Karen Hearn, Curator of Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century British Art, Tate Joyce Townsend, Senior Conservation Scientist, Tate

The Face of a “Thug”: an example of sixteenth century portraiture or a nineteenth century pastiche

In the early 20th century this striking three-quarter length portrait helped to represent British art of the Tudor period in the old Tate Gallery. Later the painting fell out of favour and, in poor condition, was dismissed by some as a 19th century fake. More recently, technical examination and dendrochronology have helped to reinstate the painting’s dating to the mid-16th century. Removal of varnish and overpaint has prompted reassessment of the portrait, whose painter and sitter have long been a puzzle.

In the third Exhibition of National Portraits at the South Kensington Museum in 1868, the painting was identified as a portrait of 'William West, 1st Lord Delawarr by Hans Holbein’. Although the sitter's square-on posture is indeed reminiscent of Holbein's depiction of Henry VIII in the (now lost) Whitehall Mural, the attribution to Holbein cannot be sustained. It is not even clear whether the painting was made by an artist who worked in England.

Each element of the costume, from the acorn design on the shirt to the shield motif on the ring, has been studied to try to identify the sitter. The arms on the ring seems to have prompted the 19th -century association with William West (born c.1519), a gentleman who tried to poison his uncle the 9th Lord de la Warre (sic), in order to gain his title and estates. It has not so far been possible to confirm the sitter as this colourful rogue, nor to attribute the painting to a specific 16th -century artist, but technical and curatorial investigations, in conjunction with conservation treatment, continue. 6

Marie Louise Sauerberg Assistant to Director, Hamilton Kerr Institute

On 18th-century representations of Elizabeth I – a case study of a repainted Tudor portrait

Based on the study of a late-16th century painting from Westminster Abbey, this talk examines portraits of Queen Elizabeth I that, although overpainted in later centuries, were clearly still intended to be recognised as the Queen.

An inscription identifies the Westminster sitter as Elizabeth I, and states that it was painted in the 1590s - when the Queen was in her sixties. However, the portrait now depicts a woman half that age, with her hands and face having been totally, and more plumply, repainted. There is a marked discrepancy between the quality of the original painting, executed at the apogee of the Anglo-Netherlandish tradition of the late 1500s, and the crude and quite formulaic overpaint. Research into other versions of the same painting and their interrelations seem to suggest that the alterations took place around 1700. Updating portrait to bring it in more in line with contemporary notions of courtly taste is probably part of the explanation for the work, although there may also be other factors behind the changes.

While the Westminster portrait is an interesting case study, it is far from an isolated incident. The collection of National Portrait Gallery, for instance, contains several examples of Elizabeth I, which were also revamped in the late 1600s or the 1700s. These representations raise intriguing questions concerning the longevity of the portraits of the Virgin Queen, and the changes in the ways in which these images must have functioned within the visual culture of the later centuries.

Claire Chorley Paintings Conservator, The Royal Collection

Hans Holbein ‘Hans of Antwerp’ In his inventory of Charles’ I’s paintings, written during the 1620s, Abraham Van der Doort describes this painting as being:

‘Done by Holbin…upon a Crackt board...’ indicating an early date for the start of the conservation history of the Royal Collection’s’ Hans of Antwerp.

The forthcoming Royal Collection exhibition: The Age of Durer and Holbein prompted a re- examination of this painting. Infra-red reflectography has revealed varied underdrawing: both the tight, sophisticated drawing we associate with Holbein in his capture of a likeness and the indication of the placement of objects on the table, executed freely, with a broad brush. Examination was undertaken of some of the drawings in the Royal Library, leading to speculation regarding Holbein’s technique which is not visible in his finished paintings.

A number of changes to the initial composition were revealed during visual, stereomicroscope and x- radiograph examination. Cross sections provided information regarding technique. Cleaning revealed a probable original varnish layer under early restoration of the background. The history of the restoration of the painting consists of accretion rather than cleaning, resulting in excellent preservation of those parts of the painting which did not receive the initial catastrophic damage.

7

It is hoped that these findings will usefully add to the existing corpus of knowledge on Holbein’s working practice.