Rethinking Nathaniel Dance’s Portraiture: Sociability, Masculinity and Celebrity Margaret Gaye Prescott A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy of the Australian National University. 15 May 2018 Page 1 Statement of Originality This thesis was submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the Master of Philosophy in Art History and Curatorship in the Centre for Art History and Art Theory, School of Art. Unless cited, this document is the original work of the author and does not include material from public sources without proper acknowledgment. Margaret G Prescott: Page i Acknowledgements I would like to thank the Australian National University, which kindly accepted my application and the opportunity to develop my thoughts into the dissertation now before you. Until undertaking the monumental task of researching and writing a master’s thesis it is impossible to understand how many people are essential to its completion or the number of life lessons that are learned along the way. My first challenge was submitting the application, which without the guidance and insistence of Professor Sasha Grishin, this thesis may never have been completed. The research in many ways is the simplest challenge in this exercise; for me it is the most exhilarating part of scholarship. Guiding me through the turbulence of defining this research and writing it in a cohesive form, my great appreciation and thanks is to my untiring primary supervisors, Dr Charlotte Galloway, Associate Professor David Hansen, and Associate Professor Elisabeth Findlay. Through the first half of my candidature Dr Findlay was patient, calm and kept me focused. Listening, questioning and chatting until my thoughts crystallised. Even when she had the opportunity to ‘cut and run’, by changing universities, she remained a mentor. Thank you for reminding me to take each monumental problem and break it into small workable pieces. Dr Hansen’s guidance and patience has been essential to my completion during the second phase of my candidature. Many thanks to Dr Galloway for her down-to-earth feedback and for stepping in to take on the chair position for the remained of my candidature, enabling this work to be completed. I also wish to thank my other panellist, Michelle Hetherington who provided some useful insights early in my research regarding celebrity and sociability. My other mainstay of support throughout this journey is my husband and first proof-reader Neale; calmly nudging me back to the computer and learning more about eighteenth-century art history than any electrical engineer ever wanted to know. I owe Page ii him more thank-you than I can possibly say. My endless gratitude warmly extends to my boss Director of Scholarly Information, Roxanne Missingham and Associate Director Library Services, Heather Jenks. Many generous institutions allowed me complete access to their collections and without them I could never have finished this mammoth task. The list to thank is long, but each have their highlights: the National Portrait Gallery, London, Heinz Archive whose staff were eminently helpful, directing me to parts of their collection I did not know existed and allowing me weeks of access, which I was happily able to repay by adding to its collection of artist box knowledge from my research; the British Museum whose immense patience with the ‘Aussie’ who didn’t understand its paper-based cataloguing system; the Tate Britain which allowed me time and space to explore Dance’s drawings from its collection; the National Archive Office in Northampton were very helpful and provided access to all of Dance’s personal records at their disposal; the Royal Academy of Art which opened its records and endless collection of newspaper reviews; the National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, for permission to view its works not on display in its storage facilities; and Britain’s National Trust which was always willing to provide access to its collections and images. Many of Dance’s works are now among a score of collections in the United States of America and I would like to extend my thanks and appreciation to two institutions in particular, the Philadelphia Museum of Art and the Yale Center for British Art. Both were generous in providing access to their collections and the time of their staff. I thank all these institutions for their time and access to their collections — your service has been outstanding. I would especially like to thank Lord Seafield in Cullen, Scotland, and his personal assistant, who generously invited me into his home to view the Grant conversation piece that is part of his collection and allowed me to photograph the painting. This unique opportunity enabled the critical analysis of all four of the Page iii duplicated conversation pieces. Lord Seafield’s generosity is an example of the richness to be found in family history collections. The only stumbling block in Britain was in gaining access to Dance’s personal records from his time in Rome, which are held in a private collection. Many hours were spent to no avail in attempting to arrange access. Though the access was granted, the books could not be located, so this avenue is still open for future exploration. In the closing stages of this enterprise I need to extend my greatest appreciation to my niece-in-law Dr Rebecca Vaughan, who provided me with the first serious revision of my grammar, and whose advise along the way convinced me there was a worthy goal at the end of the journey. Finally, I would like to extend my appreciation to my friends and family who all provided support, food, drink on occasion, and many words of wisdom. My last thought is for my mother, Bonnie Price, who was thrilled when I began this journey, in her view continuing on from her mother who studied English and History at the turn of the twentieth century. Unfortunately she was not here for the end, but I know she would be delighted. Thanks to everyone for joining me on this adventure. Page iv Abstract Nathaniel Dance (1735-1811) was a leading portraitist in London who worked alongside luminaries such as Reynolds, Romney and Gainsborough in the Golden Age of British portraiture. Dance’s contemporaries have been subject to considerable research, however, analysis of Dance has been limited with only one major study of his work undertaken in the 1970s. Unlike many of his contemporaries, Dance’s upper-middle class family were already established in London’s sociable society. His career and his works afford a different perspective from which to examine portraiture as part of Britain’s sociable society. In more recent years eighteenth-century art history research has diversified to include the complex cultural mores and behaviours of Britain’s sociable society. From stockings, buttons, books and swords to ideas of sociability, masculinity and the public sphere, a wide range of topics have become the purview of the art historian. These approaches provide the framework for rethinking Dance’s portraiture, establishing the foundation for assessing his work in a dynamic and complex way. Dance’s practices reveal the multifaceted connections between portraiture, the artist, the sitter, and the audience. This thesis argues that Dance’s portraits operated as instruments of influence in the networks and affiliations of sociable society and that a range of factors are critical to fully understand Dance’s work, including, the complex nature of sociability, changing concepts of masculinity and the rise of celebrity. This research expands our knowledge of the importance of business and social networks and the role of the portrait for communicating connections and social position of the sitters. Duplicated portraits, which are a prominent feature in Dance’s portraiture business, reveal the extent that this medium connected sitters Page v within Dance’s social sphere and in turn facilitated the expansion of Dance’s own networks. Page vi Table of Contents Contents Statement of Originality _________________________________________________ i Acknowledgements ____________________________________________________ ii Abstract _____________________________________________________________ v Table of Contents ____________________________________________________ vii List of Figures ________________________________________________________ ix Introduction __________________________________________________________ 1 Summary of Chapters ______________________________________________________ 6 Literature Review ________________________________________________________ 10 Chapter One – The Artist in Society _____________________________________ 27 The Social Standing of the Portraitist __________________________________________ 28 Portraits of Artists _________________________________________________ 35 Competition ______________________________________________________________ 41 Studios __________________________________________________________________ 47 Pricing __________________________________________________________________ 52 Business and Marketing _____________________________________________________ 57 Chapter Two – The Practice of Duplication: Authenticity and Originality _____ 67 Concepts of Authenticity and Originality _______________________________________ 69 Eighteenth-century Practices of Duplicating, Borrowing and Repetition _______________ 81 Sociable Networks and Duplicate Portraits _____________________________________ 102 Chapter Three – Sociability ___________________________________________ 116 Gender and Politeness _____________________________________________________