As noted, the dynastic hopes Philip Herbert held for his son and daugh- ter-in-law quickly ended with the death of Charles in January 1636. Three portraits of Mary Villiers appear to have been completed in relatively short order during the year or so following this unhappy event. Among them is the Museum’s Lady Mary Villiers with Charles Hamilton, Lord Arran. Each tells a slightly different story. The earliest portrait in this group of 1636-1637 paintings seems to be a work recently on the art market (fig. 50c).

It shows the still young Mary in three-quarter length, holding a flower in her right hand. With the other, she touches a black ribbon identifying her as a recent widow. Another black ribbon is tied around her bodice. A later inscription at the upper left describes her as the widow of the firstborn son of Philip, Earl of Pembroke. 10

Lady Mary Villiers with Charles Hamilton, Lord Arran probably followed shortly thereafter, and certainly within twelve to eighteen months. Here, the FIG. 50B Anthony van Dyck, The Family Portrait message has changed. Instead of being identified as a widow, she now con- of the 4th Earl of Pembroke and His Family, ca. 1635, fronts her future matrimonial prospects. This message is conveyed by the oil on canvas, Wilton House, Salisbury (Reproduced by

permission of the 1 8th Earl of Pembroke and Montgomery inclusion of young Charles Hamilton in the guise of Cupid. Such an image and the Trustees of the Wilton House Trust, Wilton House, would only have been appropriate after a prescribed time of mourning for Salisbury, U.K.) her first husband, yet before her second engagement and wedding. Because of the similarities between Mary’s image here and in the large group portrait

(fig. 50B), a work that may not have been completed until late in 1635, it is likely that a date of early to mid-1637 can be attached to the execution of the

Museum’s painting. 11 Such a date would also be consistent with the age of her companion, who must be three or four years old. Born in 1634, Charles was the son of Lady Mary Fielding (1613-1638). Lady Mary’s brother was George

Villiers, the late father of Mary Villiers. By sharing the same fraternal grand- parents, Charles Hamilton and Mary Villiers were first cousins.

The intended male victim of Cupid’s arrow was, as we have seen, her sec- ond husband, James Stewart, 4th of Lennox and 1st .

The two were wed on 3 August 1637. It is probably no coincidence that the feathers on Cupid’s arrow are black, indicative of Mary’s widowed status.

Looking toward the young woman, Charles Hamilton gently touches his cousin with his left hand. His father, the 1st Duke of Hamilton, likely com- missioned the painting from Van Dyck, as a i 643(?) inventory of his pictures

12 lists “My La duchesse of Richmont.” Another inventory in the Hamilton FIG. 50C Anthony van Dyck, Lady Mary Villiers, Lady Archives, Lennoxlore, also dating to the 1640s, was more specific in detail. Herbert and Later Duchess of Lennox and Richmond, ca. Number 289 is “my lady duches of Lenox at length, with a cupid by her of 1636, oil on canvas, Timken Museum of Art, San Diego (© 2006 Putnam Foundation, Inc.) Sr. Anthony: Van Dyck.” 13

Two other portraits of Mary Villiers by Van Dyck have been identified.

Closely linked to the Raleigh picture in date, and functioning as another por- trait historie, is Lady Mary Villiers as St. Agnes (fig. 50D). Here, Villiers seems older and more physically mature than in the portraits already discussed.

It must be emphasized, however, that in all of these portraits, pinpoint- ing an exact age is a challenging task. Still, clues provided by the subject matter point to a date just before her marriage to the in

August 1637. Mary Villiers assumes the identity of St. Agnes, the patroness of those about to be married. She holds a martyr’s palm and is accompanied by a lamb, one of Agnes’s attributes. 14

ANTHONY VAN DYCK 241