diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/50308-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/50308-0.txt | 1719 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 1719 deletions
diff --git a/old/50308-0.txt b/old/50308-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 7765f91..0000000 --- a/old/50308-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,1719 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Romney, by Randall Davies - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - - -Title: Romney - -Author: Randall Davies - -Release Date: October 25, 2015 [EBook #50308] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ROMNEY *** - - - - -Produced by Shaun Pinder, Chuck Greif and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive) - - - - - - - - - - - ROMNEY - - UNIFORM WITH THIS VOLUME - - REYNOLDS - - Containing sixteen examples of the master’s work - - VELASQUEZ - - Containing sixteen illustrations in colour - - A. AND C. BLACK, SOHO SQUARE, LONDON, W. - - [Illustration: LADY HAMILTON WITH A GOAT - - Tankerville Chamberlayne, Esq.] - - - - - ROMNEY - - BY - - RANDALL DAVIES - - CONTAINING SIXTEEN EXAMPLES IN COLOUR - OF THE MASTER’S WORK - - LONDON - - ADAM AND CHARLES BLACK - - 1914 - - PRINTED AT - THE BALLANTYNE PRESS - LONDON - - - - -PREFACE - - -The most obvious gap in the ranks of the portraits by British painters -in our National Collections is caused by the absence of any work of -really first-rate importance by George Romney. - -_The Parsons Daughter_, in the National Gallery, and the _Mrs. -Robinson_, at Hertford House, are of the finest quality; but they are -only heads. - -The large portrait of _Mrs. Mark Currie_ is charming, but by no means so -fine. - -In the _Louisa, Countess of Mansfield_, we are nearer to the very best; -but that is only a temporary loan, and until the public are in -possession of one or two of his superb whole-length portraits, such as -Earl Crewe’s _Lady Milnes_, the Marquis of Lansdowne’s _Lord Henry -Petty_, or the _Lady Bell Hamilton_, they will hardly be able to judge -the work of Romney as fairly as that of his more fortunate -contemporaries. - -In placing him in the first rank of English painters, however, the -present generation are only doing him as much honour as he deserves, -after a century of neglect; and there seems to be no fear of his fame -diminishing again or his popularity abating. - -R. D. - - - - -LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS - - -1. Lady Hamilton -with a Goat _Tankerville Chamberlayne, Esq._ _Frontispiece_ - - _Facing p._ - -2. The Parson’s Daughter _National Gallery_ 4 - -3. Thomas John Clavering, -afterwards eighth Baronet, -and his sister, Catherine -Mary _Col. C. W. Napier Clavering_ 8 - -4. Maria Margaret Clavering, -afterwards Lady Napier ” ” ” 12 - -5. Colonel Thomas Thornton ” ” ” 16 - -6. Miss Ramus _Viscount Hambleden_ 20 - -7. Mrs. Robinson as “Perdita” _Wallace Collection_ 22 - -8. William Pitt, the Younger _National Gallery_ 26 - -9. Portraits of Mr. and -Mrs. William Lindow (1770) ” ” 28 - -10. Lady Craven (1778) ” ” 32 - -11. Mrs. Mark Currie (1789) ” ” 36 - -12. Portrait of a Lady -and Child (1782) ” ” 40 - -13. Lady Hamilton as a -Bacchante (1786) ” ” 44 - -14. Emma, Lady Hamilton _National Portrait Gallery_ 46 - -15. Miss Benedetta Ramus _Viscount Hambleden_ 48 - -16. Portrait of Romney by -Himself (unfinished) (1782) _National Portrait Gallery_ 52 - - - - -GEORGE ROMNEY - - -That Reynolds and Gainsborough were the two greatest portrait painters -in England during the latter half of the eighteenth century is a -proposition which no one is likely to question. Both had qualities which -raised them far above the general, and considerably higher than even the -foremost of their competitors; and though preference for the work of the -one or the other of them is often as much a matter of taste as of -opinion, the pre-eminence of the two is beyond dispute. - -When we come to fill the third place, however, the question is not so -readily settled. There are many candidates who are, or ought to be, in -the running; and although the fashion of the present time may send up -the prices of now one now another beyond all that is reasonable and -sensible, it would be rash to say that the most popular has the best -right to the position. Only last year, for example, a new planet swam -into the dealers’ ken, a portrait of _Benjamin Franklin_, painted in -1762 by Mason Chamberlin, one of the original members of the Royal -Academy, realising the extraordinary figure of two thousand eight -hundred guineas; a figure which, as the _Times_ felicitously observes, -“places the artist on an auction level with Reynolds and Gainsborough.” - -Judged by the fickle standard of the auction room, Raeburn, at the -present moment, would have precedence over Hoppner, and Hoppner, unless -I am mistaken, over Romney. But who can say whether before another -season is over, the merits of Lawrence or Beechey, West or Copley, may -not come up in the market, and impress an uncritical public with ideas -of beauty and genius which have hitherto escaped their notice? - -In my own opinion, George Romney has better claim than any of the others -to be considered next to Reynolds and Gainsborough as a portrait -painter, inasmuch as he seems to me to have exhibited more consistently -the variety of qualities necessary for excellence in that particular -branch of his art. - -In its outward manipulation of charm and beauty, the work of Romney is -all that an amateur need ask of it, and considerations of mere elegance -have probably advanced his popularity in the sale room as much as others -more really important. But charm and beauty of this sort are delusive -guides and, unless backed by some more enduring test of excellence, will -lead us downwards only, through the scale of Hoppner, Lawrence, Harlow, -and Shee, till we find ourselves in the company of the simpering -beauties of the early and mid-Victorian age, with their sloping -shoulders and curling ringlets. With Romney we are perfectly safe. No -twinge of conscience warns us to withstand the allurements of _Lady -Hamilton_, or the fascination of the _Parson’s Daughter_. We may flirt -as long and as desperately as we please--in an artistic sense--with -_Mrs. Mark Currie_, without the slightest stain on our æsthetic morals. -There is nothing technically meretricious about any of these beauties, -and the virtue of our taste is only strengthened by the pleasurable -enjoyment of their society. - -And why? - -One of the first reasons that occur to me is one that may possibly be -challenged as being merely paradoxical; namely, that Romney, like -Reynolds and Gainsborough, was not primarily a portrait painter. That -all three of them became painters of portraits, and will go down to -posterity as such, was not because they wished to, but by the accident -of circumstance. Reynolds was an humble and assiduous disciple of Michel -Angelo, an earnest seeker after conquests in “the grand style.” Of -Gainsborough, it was said that music was his pleasure and painting his -profession; while in that profession, as we know, it was landscape which -chiefly occupied his mind and most delighted him. And Romney actually -writes to his friend Hayley, “This cursed portrait-painting. How I am -shackled with it!” - -To explain the paradox we must look back a little into the history of -painting in England, with a glance - -[Illustration: THE PARSON’S DAUGHTER - -National Gallery] - -at that of portrait-painting in other countries besides. Taking the -latter view first, we find that the only name, which readily occurs to -us, of an artist who painted nothing but portraits, is that of Holbein. -In all the greatest schools of painting, since the days of Cimabue, -portraiture was, as it were, a “bye-product,” and with a few exceptions -like Holbein, Velasquez, or Vandyck, there is no great painter who is as -well known for his portraits as for his other works. In England, until -the arrival of Reynolds, there was no school of painting at all, and the -only reason for any painter coming to England was the business, rather -than the art, of making likenesses of its vigorous inhabitants. In -England, consequently, when a school of painting was at last -established, it is hardly surprising to find that the painting of -portraits was the most considerable branch of it, not only in the early -days of its commencement, but throughout almost the whole of its -development; and it was not until comparatively late in its history that -landscape assumed considerable proportions and finally outgrew the other -branch. - -Had Reynolds and Romney, like Gainsborough, been landscape painters at -heart, it is probable that such a combination of great talent would have -resulted in a much earlier triumph for the landscapist, and that we -should not have had to wait for Turner and Constable to restore the -balance. For Richard Wilson, the actual founder of the English School of -landscape, only failed to establish it from want of recognition, and -there were many others who were fit to achieve great works in landscape -if it had not been that they were compelled to comply with the popular -demand for portraiture without regard to their artistic inclinations. - -But there was a third branch of the art on which, though unheeded alike -by the patron and the public, the minds of Romney and of many more of -the most accomplished artists of the time were bent, namely, the -historical; and so long as the market was closed to their achievements -in this direction, it was impossible for even the greatest among them to -exist without making portraiture their regular business. - -Reynolds was wise, or fortunate, enough to satisfy his historical or -classical aspirations by working them in, so to speak, with his -portraits; and while his purely allegorical or poetical compositions -have added little to his reputation, he is never so great, or so -attractive, as when painting portraits in terms of romance. Nor is he -less deservedly popular when realising some idyllic fancy like _The Age -of Innocence_, or _The Strawberry Girl_, _The Infant Samuel_ or -_Robinetta_--all of which are, in fact, portraits of a single model. -Benjamin West, on the other hand, though fortunate in obtaining Royal -approval, and truly royal payment, for his historical compositions, -found little encouragement from the public in taking to this branch of -the profession. “As any attempt in history was at that period an almost -unexampled effort,” wrote James Northcote, R.A., on the exhibition of -West’s _Pylades and Orestes_ at the Exhibition of 1766, “this picture -became a matter of much surprise. West’s house was soon filled with -visitors from all quarters to see it; and those amongst the highest rank -who were not able to come to his house to satisfy their curiosity, -desired to have his permission to have it sent to them; nor did they -fail, every time it was returned to him, to accompany it with -compliments of the highest commendation on its great merits. But the -most wonderful part of the story is that notwithstanding all this bustle -and commendation bestowed upon this justly admired picture, by which Mr. -West’s servant gained upwards of thirty pounds by showing it, yet no one -mortal ever asked the price of the work, or so much as offered to give -him a commission to paint any other subject. Indeed there was one -gentleman who spoke of it with such praise to his father, that he -immediately asked him the reason he did not purchase, as he so much -admired it, when he answered, ‘What could I do if I had it? You surely -would not have me hang up a modern English picture in my house unless it -was a portrait?’” - -It was in this year that John Singleton Copley exhibited his first -picture, a boy with a squirrel, in England. He, too, was obsessed with -the - -[Illustration: THOMAS JOHN CLAVERING, AFTERWARDS EIGHTH BARONET, AND HIS -SISTER, CATHERINE MARY - -Col. C. W. Napier Clavering] - -historical idea, and carried it so far that he is better known for his -grand compositions, like the _Death of Chatham_, than for the many very -excellent portraits he painted. Angelica Kauffmann is remembered only by -her well-intentioned but rather boneless classical compositions; and -Fuseli, so far as he is remembered at all, by his weird nightmare -effects in historical pieces. - -Broadly speaking, history was a thankless mistress to the painters, and -had it not been that Romney chose to paint portraits for the sake of -accumulating enough money for the pursuit of his own artistic ambitions, -his reputation as an artist would now be as totally forgotten as are -those of many whose names it is almost unfair to them to mention in the -present unappreciative days. - -But there is fortunately another aspect of the question. A great deal is -being said at the present time about the merits and demerits of a -classical education for boys. On the one hand we hear that it is -perfectly useless for the ordinary youth to spend the greater part of -his time at school in the generally hopeless effort of acquiring some -familiarity with the classical languages. On the other we are told that -a boy must learn something, and that the training to the mind afforded -by the study of Latin and Greek is more valuable in after life than the -acquisition of any practically useful knowledge. Whichever side we may -incline to in the case of the ordinary everyday boy who is to be sent -out into the world to make his living in one of a dozen or more -different walks of life, there can be no question that the whole-hearted -pursuit of a beloved study, whether of Greek or Latin or Chinese, by a -man of purpose and character, never fails to improve him in any other -study which he may wish to undertake. For the higher walks of life, such -as statesmanship, or the control of large interests, or the influence of -considerable bodies of opinion, it is generally admitted that the school -and university training is advantageous. An archbishop is not in these -days required to address Convocation in Latin, nor is a Prime Minister -expected to quote Horace in debate. But either can delegate the useful -duties of life to others, while they themselves are better fitted by -breadth of view to deal in the largest possible manner with public -questions. It is for this reason, to return to our paradox, that I -consider Romney’s excellence in portraiture was due, in a large measure, -to the fact that he was not willingly a portrait painter. When we see -that Reynolds came back from Italy filled with the ardour inspired by -Michel Angelo and Raphael for great painting; when we see Gainsborough, -torn from his beloved woods and fields to the painting room, both of -them establishing their reputation with practically nothing but -portraiture, I hope that the paradox will seem less paradoxical, and -that it will be agreed that Romney, too, struggling to the last with the -relentless Muse of his historical fancy, was in reality indebted to her -for most of his excellence in the department of portraiture where we are -ready to accord him so high a place. It is only another version of the -old fable of the treasure which the father induced his boys to dig for -in the vineyard. How many a fashionable painter would do well for -himself and for his art by exchanging his brush for a spade! - -Anybody can paint a portrait. It is really easier than taking a -photograph. One has only to look at contemporary representations of the -younger members of one’s friends’ families in oil or pastel to realise -that the ordinary person prefers a bad picture to a good photograph. -There is something gratifying to the latent vanity of the sitter in the -mere fact of sitting to a painter. In the old days, when there were no -such things as photographs, the inducement to sit must have been still -greater, and the demand for portraits enormous. Horace Walpole declares -that there were no less than two thousand portrait painters in London in -the middle of the eighteenth century: modern investigation has accounted -for over seven hundred! To be a portrait painter, clearly, then was not -to be an artist; and when we come to sift the artists from the mere -likeness-mongers, we shall almost invariably find that the only great -portraits were the work of men who excelled in other directions, as we -have found in the cases of Reynolds and Gainsborough. - -Applying this test to Romney, it is quite surprising to discover how -little is said of his portraiture - -[Illustration: MARIA MARGARET CLAVERING, AFTERWARDS LADY NAPIER - -Col. C. W. Napier Clavering] - -by his two earliest biographers, William Hayley, his life-long friend -and admirer, and the Reverend John Romney, his son. Nor is there very -much more, and certainly no indication of his present pre-eminence among -the British portrait painters, in Allan Cunningham’s lengthy Memoir of -him published in 1832. It is true that his popularity, amounting to -serious rivalry of Reynolds at one period, is mentioned incidentally; as -is also the devotion of his art to Lady Hamilton. But these are only -considered as diversions, as it were, of his main purpose into a side -channel. The dream of his life, we are to understand, was the -achievement of historical compositions. - -Certainly he has been unfortunate in his biographers. A more tedious and -pretentious compilation than the quarto of over four hundred pages -published by William Hayley in 1809 as “The Life of George Romney, -Esq.,” I hope it may never be anybody’s fate to peruse. Hayley was a -second-rate poet--his most considerable work being “The Triumphs of -Temper”--with a third-rate intellect. “The influence which the -friendship of Hayley exercised over the life of Romney,” the son of the -artist writes, “was in many respects injurious. His friendship was -grounded on selfishness, and the means by which he obtained it was -flattery. He was able also by a canting kind of hypocrisy to confound -the distinctions between vice and virtue, and to give a colouring to -conduct that might and probably did mislead Romney on some occasions. He -drew him too much from general society, and almost monopolised him to -himself, and thus narrowed the circle of his acquaintance and friends. -By having intimated an intention of writing Romney’s Life he made him -extremely afraid of doing anything that might give offence. He was -always interfering in his affairs--volunteering his advice; and I have -much reason to believe that whatever errors the latter may have -committed, they were simply owing to the counsel or instigation of -Hayley.” - -From Hayley, then, we need not expect very much that is likely to be of -value in the way of criticism. But for one thing he is to be thanked, -namely the inclusion in his volume of a short sketch of Romney’s -professional career by John Flaxman, R.A. From this I shall have -occasion to borrow more than a few illuminating passages, a couple of -which I now adduce as evidence of how little Romney’s portraiture was -considered in an estimate of his art specially written at the time of -his death by one whom Hayley calls “an approved artist”: - -“As Romney was gifted with peculiar powers for historical and ideal -painting, so his heart and soul were engaged in the pursuit of it, -whenever he could extricate himself from the importunate business of -portrait painting. It was his delight by day and study by night, and for -this his food and rest were often neglected.” And again, by way of -summing up, “A peculiar shyness of disposition kept him from all -association with public bodies, and led to the pursuit of his studies in -retirement and solitude which ... allowed him more leisure for -observation, reflection, and trying his skill in other arts connected -with his own. And indeed few artists, since the fifteenth century, have -been able to do so much in so many different branches; for besides his -beautiful compositions and pictures, which have added to the knowledge -and celebrity of the English school, he modelled like a sculptor, carved -ornaments in wood with great delicacy, and could make an architectural -design in a fine taste, as well as construct every part of the -building.” - -The word “portraits” it will be observed occurs but once in these -passages; nor does it appear elsewhere in the sketch. If then it be -admitted that neither Reynolds nor Gainsborough nor Romney were -primarily portrait painters, and that their pre-eminence arises in a -high degree from this cause, we shall have arrived at a standpoint from -which to observe how each of the three was influenced by that cause in a -different manner, and so obtain a better idea of their several -excellences than we are likely to obtain from their “auction values.” - -In the first place, it is to be remembered that neither Reynolds nor -Gainsborough was actually averse to painting portraits, whereas we -have - -[Illustration: COLONEL THOMAS THORNTON - -Col. C. W. Napier Clavering] - -Romney’s written word that he hated it. Sir Joshua, to be sure, speaks -of his charming little _Strawberry Girl_ as “One of the half-dozen -original things that no man ever exceeds in his lifetime.” But he was -quite content to receive as many as a hundred-and-fifty sitters in the -course of a single year. Gainsborough, too, could go off into raptures -at the beauties of the young princes and princesses when he was painting -them at Winsdor, and write a flaming letter to the Royal Academy when -the royal portraits were not hung as he desired. Both found their -highest expression in portraiture, as did Romney; but whereas they were -not slow to realise that their respective gifts, widely different as -they were, fitted them pre-eminently for this sort of work, it would -seem that Romney never realised it at all; and while the other two -brought all their forces, consciously, to the beautification of this -particular branch of their art, Romney appears to have done no more than -acquiesce coldly but, be it observed, conscientiously, in the necessity -for it. - -I would therefore submit that the chief characteristics which -distinguish Romney’s portraits from those of his two greater -contemporaries are coldness--or rather simplicity--and conscientiousness. -These are conscious qualities, to which I would add a third, which I -believe to be unconscious, that is to say, the influence of the -classical art of the Greeks, which for the sake of brevity I will call -classicism. - -The distinction it seems to me is this. That whereas Reynolds was aiming -at the grand style, and spared no occasion for employing it in practice -and expatiating on it in precept, it is impossible to say that he did -not consciously apply its principles--I say consciously--to every -portrait he ever undertook. In Gainsborough’s portraits again we -recognise the hand and the heart of the landscape painter consciously -employing the terms of his favourite craft, when we find in them the -same charm, the same natural and easy grace which is the great -characteristic of his landscape drawings and sketches. While Reynolds -was painting men and women in terms of art, Gainsborough was painting -them in terms of nature. Both were applying all the principles which -they had imbibed from their earliest youth to the particular object on -which they were engaged. - -With Romney, on the other hand, this was clearly not the case. He -detested having to paint portraits. His mind was wholly attracted to -allegorical and poetical subjects. Allan Cunningham, writing in 1832, -almost apologises for mentioning his portraits at all. “A list of all -the works which Romney executed in those busy days,” he writes, “would -occupy several pages; it would, however, be absurd to specify many of -them, since they can possess little interest except for particular -families.” He then gives a list of eighteen portraits which are -“remarkable for containing more than one figure, or for their superior -merit, or on account of the character and station of the individual -represented,” adding that “in one of these lucky and prosperous years he -earned by portraiture alone some three thousand six hundred pounds.” - -Now if Romney had called upon his Muse to assist him in his portraiture, -as did Reynolds and Gainsborough, there can be little doubt that his -popularity would have extended enormously, and that his reputation would -have been increased in hardly a less degree. But whether it was the -influence of Hayley, or whether, as is more probable, it was the effect -of his character and his deep feeling for his art, Romney rarely, if -ever, permitted his Muse to descend into his painting-room when he was -executing a commission for a portrait. An honest presentment of his -sitters was apparently his only concern; he took their money, and he -conscientiously painted their portraits, in their habits as they lived, -without any conscious attempt at achieving more. - -But in keeping his Muse thus apart, it must not be supposed that he -succeeded in banishing her from his inmost self. Her influence is to be -seen and felt in almost every portrait he painted. Rarely as she was -allowed on the stage--as in the famous group of _Lady Gower and her -Children_--she was ever present, though behind the scenes; how else can -one account for the almost classical severity of tone that keeps every -portrait of Romney’s, however simple, from being merely trivial, pretty, -or banal? - -[Illustration: MISS RAMUS - -Viscount Hambleden] - -An alternative explanation of the reticence and simplicity of Romney’s -portraits, his seeming unwillingness to expand into allegorical -portraiture, is his supposed sensitiveness of temperament. Hayley -expatiates on this quality to such an extent as to shake our belief in -its existence; but that it did exist in some degree is unfortunately too -evident to deny. How much or how little it had to do with the limitation -of his fancy in portraiture must only be a matter of opinion, but since -as good evidence of it as any is to be found in the story of three of -his earliest pictures, we may as well consider it before proceeding -further. - -Almost the first of Romney’s “popular successes” was a family piece -containing portraits of Sir George Warren, his lady, and their little -daughter, which was exhibited in 1769. “This picture was highly extolled -by the public,” says John Romney, “and brought him still more into -notice. According to a design in one of his sketch-books, Lady Warren is -represented as seated in a graceful and easy posture, with a fronting -attitude, but with her face slightly turned to her right, having her -left elbow leaning upon a pedestal, and the hand extended over her -daughter’s shoulder, a girl about six or seven years old, who is -standing by her. The young lady has her hands gently crossed over her -bosom, and is caressing a little bird which she holds in one hand. Sir -George, habited in a picturesque style, is standing rather to the left, -and somewhat more backward in the picture than his lady. He has his -right arm moderately extended and is directing her attention to a -distant object. The composition is beautiful, correct, and natural, and -the simplicity, grace, and feeling expressed in the figure and character -of Miss Warren are admirable.” - -This description, it is to be observed, is not from the picture itself, -which the writer had never seen, but from the artist’s drawing for it; -and it is evident that the drawing must have been executed with much -greater care and particularity than is to be found in most of Romney’s -sketches. The picture itself is now in the possession of Lord Vernon, at -Sudbury Hall, Derbyshire, the little daughter having married the - -[Illustration: MRS. ROBINSON AS “PERDITA” - -Wallace Collection] - -first Lord Vernon. Its present owner informed Mr. Humphry Ward that it -was always supposed to be by Reynolds, and that a professional valuer -valued it as such for probate in 1883. - -That so successful an attempt should be repeated was only natural. -Hogarth and Highmore had painted some of these “conversation pieces,” as -they were called, but with indifferent, or at any rate no great amount -of popular, success, and one might have supposed that a young artist -would have been ready enough to respond to the encouragement accorded to -him in this particular class of picture. But no others of the sort are -known to have been attempted, with one exception. At about the same time -Romney was engaged in a portrait group of Mr. Leigh and his family. -Unfortunately, his well-wishing friend Cumberland, the dramatist, in his -efforts to push Romney to the front, was ill-advised enough to drag -Garrick to see his pictures. Now Garrick hated Cumberland, and had a -very poor opinion of him--which is all there is to excuse him for an -unpardonable exhibition of bad taste. “I brought him to see Romney’s -pictures,” writes Cumberland, “hoping to interest him in his favour. A -large family piece unluckily arrested his attention; a gentleman in a -close-buckled bob-wig, and a scarlet waistcoat laced with gold, with his -wife and children (some sitting, some standing), had taken possession of -some yards of canvas, very much, as it appeared, to their own -satisfaction--for they were perfectly amused in a contented abstinence -from all thought or action. Upon this unfortunate group, when Garrick -had fixed his lynx’s eyes, he began to put himself into the attitude of -the gentleman, and turning to Mr. Romney, ‘Upon my word, Sir,’ he said, -‘this is a very regular well-ordered family; and that is a very -bright-rubbed mahogany table at which that motherly good lady is -sitting; and this worthy gentleman in the scarlet-waistcoat is doubtless -a very excellent subject (to the State, I mean, if these are all his -children), but not for your art, Mr. Romney, if you mean to pursue it -with that success which I hope will attend you.’ The modest artist took -the hint, as it was meant, in good part, and turned his family with -their faces to the wall.” - -If Romney had been only moderately sensitive we can easily understand -that an impertinence of this sort (for Cumberland was as dense as he was -well-meaning in thinking it was intended in good part) would have been -intolerable from anybody; but when we remember that Garrick was an -intimate friend of Reynolds, we may readily admit that it had in fact a -certain influence on Romney’s choice of subject and treatment. We have -seen that in the other group his success was the result of careful and -prepared study; but I know of no other sketches of his for family -groups--except those for the Gower picture--though there are plenty of -studies of single figures. - -A couple of years later, again, he painted the actress Mrs. Yates in the -character of the Tragic Muse, at whole length. This was twelve years or -more before Sir Joshua painted his famous picture of Mrs. Siddons, so -that it is hardly possible to compare the two. But Romney’s picture -cannot have proved more than a _succès d’estime_. “I have often wished,” -says Hayley, “that it had been the lot of Romney to paint this great -actress, one of the most gracefully majestic of our tragic queens, at a -maturer season of her life, and in the full meridian of his power; for -in that case I am persuaded the Tragic Muse of Romney would not have -appeared what at present I must allow her to be, very far inferior, as a -work of the pencil, to the Tragic Muse of Sir Joshua.” For once we may -take Hayley’s opinion as more or less correct, for although I am unable -to pronounce on the merits of the picture, not having seen it, its -history records what was the popular estimate of it. It was purchased by -Alderman Boydell, and put up to auction at Christie’s after his death in -1810, when it was bought in for nine and a half guineas. In 1812 it was -put up again and there was no bid, and the same in 1817 and 1822. In -1824 it at last found a purchaser at £10. - -As this was, according to John Romney, his first whole length portrait -of a lady, it would seem probable that he did not receive sufficient -encouragement to pursue the allegorical treatment of portrait subjects. - -But whether we incline to the one view or the other, or perhaps accept a -commixture of the two in - -[Illustration: WILLIAM PITT, THE YOUNGER - -National Gallery] - -such proportions as may seem to each of us most suitable to the facts, -we find it to be true that from henceforth Romney’s sitters were treated -as ordinary everyday human beings, and not as gods, goddesses, heroes, -nymphs, muses, or what not. What he gave them was of his best, so far as -it went, and, as I have suggested, his best went farther than he was -conscious of in giving it. Let us now see how his portraiture responds -to the three tests I ventured to suggest, namely, simplicity, -conscientiousness, and classicism. - -First, then, as to simplicity, by which I mean in this connection -simplicity of presentment--the plain prosaic record on canvas of the -likeness of the sitter. When we come to consider the third point, -classicism, we shall see that this simplicity extends to every -particular; but for the moment I am only considering the first question -that arises when a commission for a portrait is given--“How would you -like to be painted?” In Romney’s studio there seems to have been but one -answer, namely, “Exactly as I am.” Of accessories there were -practically none. The portrait was painted and that was all. A portrait -by Romney is first and foremost a portrait. - -Secondly, his conscientiousness. Who would believe, on a view of any of -Romney’s portraits, that he looked upon portraiture as a cursed -occupation by which he was shackled? Is there any trace of -unwillingness, of haste, of slovenliness? Is there any hint that he was -out of temper with his sitters, or careless in the way he posed them, or -indifferent to the perfection of his painting? We may miss the animation -of Gainsborough, or the triumphant glitter of Reynolds in many of his -sober contemplative faces, but of the perfunctory conventionalisms of -his contemporaries or the slipshod hurry and make-believe of the modern -exhibitors we find no suggestion. Whatever he did was done with all his -strength, if not with all his heart, and no one could complain that his -portrait suffered from want of painstaking devotion to the subject. His -care and conscientiousness are as easily seen, too, in his most busy and -prosperous days as they are in his earliest - -[Illustration: PORTRAITS OF MR. AND MRS. WILLIAM LINDOW - -(1770) National Gallery] - -portraits, like that of Mr. and Mrs. Lindow, which was painted in 1760 -before he left Lancaster. - -John Romney records an amusing instance of his father’s efforts in this -respect. “I remember his telling me once,” he writes, “what difficulty -he had with a sitter in order to accomplish a little expression. The -gentleman was from the country, and an attorney; and though his -profession required intelligence, yet his countenance gave no indication -of it. To remove a settled dulness that pervaded his features, Mr. -Romney made many attempts, starting every popular topic of conversation, -but all in vain; at length by some uncommon chance, he happened to -mention hunting; at the sound of which word a ray of animation -immediately sparkled in the eyes of the sitter, and imparted a certain -degree of vivacity to his countenance. Mr. Romney took his measure -accordingly, and led him into the subject; after which he was relieved -from any further attempts at conversation as the worthy gentleman -expatiated upon it with spirit until the picture was finished.” - -“Even upon persons to whom nature was less parsimonious of her -favours,” he adds, “he knew that dulness would sometimes intrude, and, -therefore, always wished that some friends should accompany his sitters, -both for the purpose already mentioned, and also to relieve himself of -the double task of painting and of keeping up a forced conversation at -the same time.” - -Lastly, for his classicism, which is the really distinguishing -characteristic of Romney’s portraits and includes in it all the others. -“On his arrival in Italy,” Flaxman tells us, “he was witness to new -scenes of art, and sources of study ... he there contemplated the purity -and perfection of ancient sculpture, the sublimity of Michel Angelo’s -Sistine chapel, and the simplicity of Cimabue’s and Giotto’s schools. He -perceived these qualities [namely, be it observed, sublimity and -simplicity] distinctly, and judiciously used them in viewing and -imitating nature; and thus his quick perception and unwearied -application enabled him by a two years’ residence abroad to acquire as -great a proficiency in art as is usually attained by foreign studies of -much longer duration.” And again, “His cartoons ... were examples of -the sublime and terrible at that time perfectly new in English art. The -Dream of Atossa, from the Persians of Æschylus, contrasted the -death-like sleep of the Queen with the Bacchanalian Fury of the Genius -of Greece. The composition was conducted with the fire and severity of a -Greek bas-relief.” - -How many of the thousands of visitors to the National Gallery would ever -imagine that this last paragraph was written of the painter of _The -Parson’s Daughter_, or _Mrs. Mark Currie_? And yet here, I cannot help -feeling, is the real strength which underlies the structure of even the -airiest of Romney’s paintings. The roots of genius must grow deep if its -branches are to grow high. The foundations of a great building must be -firm. The faintest breeze of enlightened judgment is enough to blow away -the ornamental bungalows of the Victorian portrait-painters, while -castle Romney stands as firm as the rock on which it was built. - -“In trying to attain excellence in his art,” Flaxman continues, “his -diligence was unceasing as his gratification in the employment. He -endeavoured to combine all the possible advantages of the subject -immediately before him, and to exclude whatever had a tendency to weaken -it. His compositions, like those of the ancient pictures and -basso-relievos, told their story by a single group of figures in the -front, whilst the background is made the simplest possible, rejecting -all unnecessary episode and trivial ornament, either of secondary groups -or architectural subdivision. In his compositions the beholder was -forcibly struck by the sentiment at the first glance, the gradations and -varieties of which he traced through several characters all conceived in -an elevated spirit of dignity and beauty, with a lively expression of -nature in all the parts.” - -Although written of his classical compositions, this criticism of -Flaxman, who was himself more severely classical in his art than the -Greeks, applies with almost equal truth to his portraits. It throws into -light the hidden force that gives them their strength, that keeps them -before us as live men and women instead of painted puppets and dolls. - -[Illustration: LADY CRAVEN - -(1778) National Gallery] - -“His heads were various,” says Flaxman, still on the classical -compositions, but holding the light even more closely to the portraits, -“the male were decided and grand, the female lovely. His figures -resembled the antique; the limbs were elegant, and finely formed. His -drapery was well understood, either forming the figure into a mass with -one or two deep folds only, or by its adhesion and transparency -discovering the form of the figure, the lines of which were finely -varied with the union or expansion of spiral or cascade folds, composing -with or contrasting the outline and chiaroscuro. He was so passionately -fond of Greek sculpture that he had filled his study and galleries with -fine casts from the most perfect statues, groups, basso-relievos and -busts of antiquity. He would sit and consider these in profound silence -by the hour; and besides the studies in drawing and painting he made -from them, he would examine them under all the changes of sunlight and -daylight; and with lamps prepared on purpose at night he would try their -effects lighted from above, beneath, in all directions, with rapturous -admiration.” - -Before considering the particulars in which these observations may be -said to be applicable to Romney’s portraits, it is perhaps worth -pointing out that the essential difference between the work of Reynolds -and Romney is to be traced back to the influence exerted on each of them -by his studies in Italy. Reynolds, perhaps fortunately for British art -at the time, seems to have taken Michel Angelo and Raphael as the -founders of painting, and to have confined his study of art, -accordingly, to them and their successors. Romney, on the other hand, -while also regarding them as the chiefs, went back from them to the -antique, taking Cimabue and Giotto on the way. That he particularly -admired Correggio is stated by Hayley, but that Correggio’s “tenderness -and grace he often emulated very happily in his figures of women and -children” is a piece of criticism which I must confess to be beyond me. -Certainly it cannot be applied to his portraits. - -“His drapery was well understood,” says Flaxman; I need not quote the -rest of the sentence, because it applies in particular to the drapery of -ladies in the classic period; but in principle, the drapery of Romney’s -sitters is as simple, because well understood, as that of Atossa. Of all -painters of women surely there never was one who required such extreme -simplicity of raiment. The plainest of white or black robes seem to have -been the rule, and the most common exception to absolute simplicity was -not in the garment at all, but in the addition of a somewhat elaborate -and umbrageous hat. Of any pattern on the drapery, I can only recall one -instance, namely, that of Miss Hannah Milnes, a three-quarter length -portrait, now in the possession of Earl Crewe. Here there seems to be -something of the manner of Sir Joshua in several particulars, which is -possibly a conscious imitation. But in portrait after portrait, and -certainly in every piece which is most characteristic of Romney, whether -it is Mrs. Jordan or Lady Hamilton or Mrs. Currie, the plain robe is the -rule. The magnificent picture of Louisa Countess of Mansfield (in -profile, seated under a tree) is now on loan from Lord Cathcart at the -National Gallery, and is hanging close beside Mrs. Mark Currie’s; and -while both depart from the letter of this rule, they depend for their -magical effect upon the spirit of it. Lady Mansfield’s flowing robe is -of a pale yellowish tinge, and a voluminous scarf of grey, almost as -pale, mingles with the folds of drapery. But as contrasted with the deep -shadows of the foliage against which the brightly coloured profile is -set, the general impression is of an exquisitely posed figure in the -simplest of flowing creamy white robes. No ornament fixes the eye, no -violent contrast of colour interrupts the rhythm of the whole figure. -“The design,” says Mr. Roberts in his Catalogue Raisonné, “appears to -have been adopted from a Greek gem.” - -Mrs. Currie’s dress, which I hope I am correct in describing as a frock, -is of pure white; but it is faintly striped, not I think in colour, but -in texture; and there are some bows on the elbows, and a sash of pale -lake. - -Anything less reminiscent of a Greek statue than this radiant young -English beauty in a muslin frock, I am quite willing to admit, it would -be difficult to think of. At first sight a severely classical taste -would be more likely to condemn her for the - -[Illustration: MRS. MARK CURRIE - -(1789) National Gallery] - -unmitigated prettiness that is usually associated with the cheapest kind -of pictorial imbecility. But let her not be condemned unheard. That she -was an exceedingly pretty woman need hardly be doubted, and that she -wished to be made as pretty as possible in her portrait may fairly be -taken for granted. If she had any other qualities it is probable that -her name would be remembered for them. As it is, Romney has -conscientiously painted a portrait of her which probably pleased her -almost as much as it pleases all of us to-day. “In his composition,” we -remember, “the beholder was forcibly struck by the sentiment at the -first glance.” How true this is of Mrs. Currie and her prettiness! The -painter’s whole effort is concentrated on that one quality, and instead -of dissipating the beholder’s attention with accessories, he soothes it -with a seeming artlessness which no one but a great painter could nearly -accomplish. Mrs. Currie’s drapery is of course strictly English--in -substance at any rate and form. But here again we feel the guiding or -restraining hand of the Classic Muse, just as we should have seen it had -Romney been painting Mrs. Currie in the character of Antigone. As it -was, Romney was speaking English and not Greek; only it is the English, -as it were, of a finely educated man. - -But in placing Romney so high above the crowd of ordinary portrait -painters, and a little higher than any except Reynolds and Gainsborough, -it is only fair to consider how far short he fell of equalling those -two. And it must not be forgotten that the limitations which he imposed -upon himself were quite as likely to affect his popularity among his -patrons and their friends as with posterity. Classic simplicity is an -invaluable quality in the portraiture of everyday men and women, -especially when the latter are young and pretty; but a gallery of -portraits by Romney would afford a much narrower view of the -capabilities of the English School than a similar exhibition of the work -of Reynolds or Gainsborough. The oft-repeated assertion of Lord -Chancellor Thurlow that “Reynolds and Romney divide the town, and I am -of the Romney faction,” must be taken with a considerably larger pinch -of salt than is popularly accepted with it. In the first place, Romney -was not at all in fashion until after his return from Rome in 1785, by -which time Reynolds had been painting portraits for at least twenty -years. Gainsborough, too, who was by seven years the senior of Romney, -was quite as many years ahead of him in practice, though he had only -recently come to London from Bath. In the year 1785 we know that Romney -earned £3635 from portraits. At this time, so his pupil Robinson -records, his prices were £20 for a head, £30 for a kit-cat, £40 for a -half-length, and £80 for a whole length. Taking the average at as low a -figure as £35, this means about a hundred commissions in his busiest -year. This is certainly a large number, and Sir Joshua never had more -than a hundred-and-fifty in a year; but it must not be taken as an -average for any great length of years. - -Again, when we look at the names of his most distinguished patrons, the -list is not as long or as imposing as those of Reynolds and -Gainsborough. The latter had the patronage of Royalty, besides a good -number of the aristocracy, while Reynolds had, if I may be allowed the -expression, “mopped up” all that was most brilliant in beauty, birth, -and genius, leaving very little for anybody else. The Catalogue of the -Exhibition of National Portraits held at South Kensington in 1867, -enumerates but twenty pictures by Romney, and as many as a hundred and -fifty by Reynolds. - -That Romney’s sensitive disposition and retiring habit of life may in -some degree account for his not being more widely popular in his own -time is no doubt true. But apart from any other consideration there is -no question that a fine portrait by Reynolds is a more satisfying -possession than any but the very finest by Romney, and a characteristic -one by Gainsborough more exhilarating. Though there is at least one -instance in which he “wiped Reynolds’s eye,” namely, with his -magnificent head of _John Wesley_, which was painted in 1789, when -Wesley was eighty-six years old. “At the earnest desire of Mrs T.,” the -old man wrote, “I once more sat for my picture. Mr. Romney is a -painter - -[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A LADY AND CHILD - -(1782) National Gallery] - -indeed! He struck off an exact likeness at once, and did more in an hour -than Sir Joshua did in ten.” - -Still, there is a variety of qualities in Reynolds’s and Gainsborough’s -pictures that we do not find, or expect to find, in those of Romney--a -fact which must be taken into account in comparing the number of their -respective portraits exhibited in 1867. The stream of popular taste -steadily ebbed during the century following Sir Joshua’s death, and it -is only of late years that Romney has been “discovered” and restored to -public favour. A great deal of Romney’s present-day popularity I cannot -help thinking is attributable as much to the delectable quality of his -ladies’ faces as to the classic simplicity of treatment which makes them -what they are. - -Then, of course, there is Lady Hamilton, to whom, as we find Allan -Cunningham asserting, many have imputed the chief charm of Romney’s best -pictures. In these days it is certainly true that her name is -inseparably associated with Romney’s art in the popular mind, and the -latest addition to the bibliography of Romney is concerned with nothing -but Lady Hamilton. Unfortunately for Romney’s reputation both inside -and outside his painting-room, this lady’s fame has so filled the public -ear with matters which are altogether distinct from the art of painting, -that it is almost impossible to appreciate her influence upon Romney’s -art in anything like its proper proportions. We are as it were between -two fires--the glamour which she threw over the painter and the glamour -which he threw over her; and our view of the matter, unless we are -careful to screen our eyes, is likely to be too highly coloured for the -ordinary purposes of criticism. - -The broad fact seems to be that for nearly a decade the inspiration of -Emma Lyon poured like sunlight into Romney’s studio, and although before -it came he had for several years established his reputation and done -some of his best work in portraiture, its withdrawal, in 1791, was the -end of all that was happy or successful in his career. “His imagination -was gone,” says Mr. Humphry Ward; “his health, for many years frail, -became less robust than ever, and of his portraits and pictures painted -after 1791, many exhibit signs of decaying powers.” - -That he was exceedingly fond of her need not, of course, be doubted. How -could it be otherwise? But is it any more necessary to dwell upon his -purely personal relations with her than on those of Sir Joshua Reynolds -with Kitty Fisher or Nelly O’Brien? For Reynolds, those two -“professional beauties” were sitters, of whom the painter succeeded in -painting several beautiful and accomplished portraits. For Romney, Emma -Lyon was to some extent the embodiment of the Muse whom I have ventured -to postulate as his guardian angel, when engaged in the perilous -commerce of painting pretty and fashionable ladies. That she was also -the veritable embodiment of all that was pleasing to the mortal eye in -the shape of woman is at least equally certain; but unlike so many of -her frail sisters, she was a remarkably accomplished and intelligent -woman. “She performed both in the serious and comic to admiration,” -writes Romney, in a letter describing an evening at Sir William -Hamilton’s, “both in singing and acting. Her Nina surpasses everything I -ever saw, and I believe as a piece of acting nothing ever surpassed it. -The whole company were in an agony of sorrow. Her acting is simple, -grand, terrible, and pathetic.” - -In another letter, to Hayley in June 1791, he writes, “At present, and -the greatest part of the summer, I shall be engaged in painting pictures -from the divine lady. I cannot give her any other epithet, for I think -her superior to all womankind. I have two pictures to paint of her for -the Prince of Wales. She says she must see you.... She asked me if you -would not write my life. I told her you had begun it. Then she said she -hoped you would have much to say of her in the life, as she prided -herself in being my model.” And again in the following month “I dedicate -my time to this charming lady; there is a prospect of her leaving town -with Sir William for two or three weeks. They are very much hurried at -present, as everything is going on for their speedy marriage, and all -the world following and talking of her, so that if she had not more good -sense than vanity her brain must be turned. - -“The pictures I have begun are Joan of Arc, a Magdalen, and a Bacchante, -for the Prince of Wales, - -[Illustration: LADY HAMILTON AS A BACCHANTE - -(1786) National Gallery] - -and another I am to begin as a companion to the Bacchante. I am also to -paint a picture of Constance for the Shakespeare Gallery.” - -The extent of Romney’s obligations to her, simply as a model, may be -gathered from a glance at Mr. Roberts’s Catalogue Raisonné of his work. -Here we find forty-five different pictures of the fair Emma, a figure -which is about doubled if we count the various versions painted of one -and another--as a Bacchante, for example, no less than twelve separate -canvases are enumerated. Nor does this catalogue probably include a good -many sketches and studies which were left unfinished. Of the various -characters in which he painted her, apart from pictures which were -simply portraits, the list includes those of Alope, Ariadne, a -Bacchante, Cassandra, Circe, Comedy, the Comic Muse, Contemplation, -Euphrosyne, a Gipsy, Iphigenia, Joan of Arc, a Magdalen, Meditation, -Miranda, Nature, a Nun, a Pythian Priestess, S. Cecilia, Sensibility, a -Shepherdess, Sigismunda, the Spinstress. The Sempstress, it may be -mentioned, was not painted from her, but from Miss Vernon. - -Such a catalogue as this is, I suppose, unique in the annals of -painting. Oddly enough it is paralleled in those of literature--if it be -not thought too fanciful to quote the example of William Shakespeare. -For fanciful as at first thought it may seem, it is, nevertheless, -helpful to an understanding of the relations of the private life of each -to his particular art. - -George Romney, like Shakespeare, was born of humble parents in a remote -country town. Dalton, in Lancashire, is further from London than -Stratford, but as I do not pretend to draw the parallel too closely, I -will confine myself to a short account of Romney’s circumstances only. -He was born on December 15, 1734. His ancestors, yeomen of good repute, -lived near Appleby, in Westmorland, but took refuge during the Civil -Wars in the neighbouring county. His father was a joiner, which in those -days included the trade of carpenter and cabinet-maker, and George was -apprenticed to him. How and at what period the love of painting came -upon him has not been clearly shown. Cumberland asserts that it was -inspired by the cuts in the - -[Illustration: EMMA, LADY HAMILTON - -National Portrait Gallery] - -_Universal Magazine_. Hayley says that he consumed the time of his -fellow-workmen in sketching them in various attitudes, while John Romney -states that Lionardo’s treatise on painting, illustrated by many fine -engravings, was early in his hands. Cumberland describes him as “a child -of nature who had never seen or heard of anything that could elicit his -genius or urge him to emulation, and who became a painter without a -prototype.” At nineteen, however, he was apprenticed for four years to a -painter called Count Steele, who was practising in the neighbouring town -of Kendal. During this time he fell in love with a young lady of some -little fortune, Mary Abbot, and on October 14, 1756, he carried her -across the border to Gretna Green and married her. - -His precipitate marriage drew upon him the rebuke of his parents, but he -vindicated himself with some firmness and skill. “If you consider -everything deliberately,” he wrote, “you will find it to be the best -affair that ever happened to me; because if I have fortune I shall make -a better painter than I should otherwise have done, as it will be a -spur to my application; and my thoughts being now still, and not -obstructed by youthful follies, I can practise with more diligence and -success than ever.” - -According to Hayley, he soon perceived that his marriage was an obstacle -to his studies; that he was ruined as an artist, and that he might bid -farewell to all hopes of fame and glory, although he was devoting -himself with all his might to his work. “The terror of precluding -himself from those distant honours,” says Hayley--to whom, by-the-by, we -are under no obligation to believe more than we wish--“by appearing in -the world as a young married man, agitated the ambitious artist almost -to distraction, and made him resolve very soon after his marriage, as he -had no means of breaking the fetters which he wildly regarded as -inimical to the improvement and exertion of his genius, to hide them as -much as possible from his troubled fancy.” - -This exordium of Hayley’s is, as it were, in the nature of a -“preliminary announcement” of the separation between Romney and his -wife, when five years later he resolved to try his fortune in London. - -[Illustration: MISS BENEDETTA RAMUS - -Viscount Hambleden] - -“In working rapidly and patiently at different places in the north, for -a few years,” Hayley continues, “by painting heads as large as life at -the price of two guineas or figures at whole length on a small scale for -six guineas, he contrived to raise a sum amounting almost to a hundred -pounds; taking thirty for his own travelling expenses, and leaving the -residue to support an unoffending partner and two children, he set forth -alone, without even a letter of recommendation, to try the chances of -life in the metropolis.” - -That was in 1762; and for a much longer period than Shakespeare, and -with no occasional visits to his family, Romney worked in London and -became more and more famous, until, as we have seen, his decline set in. - -“The summer of 1799 came,” writes Allan Cunningham, “but Romney could -neither enjoy the face of nature, nor feel pleasure in his studio and -gallery. A visible mental languor sat upon his brow--not diminishing but -increasing; he had laid aside his pencils; his swarm of titled sitters, -whose smile in other days rendered passing time so agreeable, were -moved off to a Lawrence, a Shee, or a Beechey; and thus left lonely and -disconsolate among whole cartloads of paintings, which he had not the -power to complete, his gloom and his weakness gathered and grew upon -him.... In these moments his heart and his eye turned towards the -north--where his son, a man affectionate and kind, resided; and where -his wife, surviving the cold neglect and long estrangement of her -husband, lived yet to prove the depth of a woman’s love, and show to the -world that she would have been more worthy of appearing at his side, -even when earls sat for their pictures, and Lady Hamilton was enabling -him to fascinate princes with his Calypsos and Cassandras. Romney -departed from Hampstead, and taking the northern coach arrived among his -friends at Kendal in the summer of 1799. The exertion of travelling and -the presence of her whom he once had warmly loved overpowered him; he -grew more languid and more weak, and finding fireside happiness he -resolved to remain where he was; he purchased a house and authorised the -sale of that on Hampstead Hill.” - -So much for the parallel as concerned the private life of either. But -what about his art? Where in Shakespeare’s literary career are we to -find anything comparable with the influence of Emma Lyon on Romney’s -painting during the crowning decade of his accomplishment? I suggest as -the answer, that during a similar period, of about the same duration, -namely from about 1593 to 1603, we may trace a similar influence on the -poet, which is embodied in a series of masterpieces numbering over a -hundred, namely, most if not all, of the first hundred and twenty-five -of “Shakespeare’s Sonnets.” They were all written to one person, and in -such terms of art as have led others besides Alexander Dyce to suppose -that they were really addressed to the poet’s muse rather than to any -corporeal being. As in the case of Romney, the author has been maligned -by the undiscerning vulgar for supposed deviations from the strict path -of virtue in his relations with his friend. But for any one who has an -understanding of the spirit of art there is nothing in either case to -support the allegation. Had Shakespeare and Romney looked no farther -than their own hearths for artistic inspiration, the world would have -been the poorer: that is all. - - * * * * * - -Of Romney’s classical or historical pictures the world knows almost as -little as it cares about them. “I have made many grand designs,” he -himself wrote in 1794, “I have formed a system of original subjects, -moral and my own, and I think one of the grandest that has been thought -of--but nobody knows it.” Cunningham, after disposing shortly of his -portraits, proceeds to state that the historical and domestic pictures, -finished and unfinished, deserve a more minute examination; that they -embrace a wide range of reading and observation and are numerous beyond -all modern example. But with the exception of _Titania and her Indian -Votaries_ and _Milton Dictating to his Daughters_, which were mentioned -by Flaxman, and various fancy portraits of Lady Hamilton, he does not -specify a single finished example. His explanation is that “for one -finely finished there are five half done, and for five half done there -are at least a dozen merely commenced on the canvas.” - -[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF ROMNEY BY HIMSELF (UNFINISHED) - -(1782) National Portrait Gallery] - -So far as these canvases are concerned, there is no doubt that the -majority of them have been destroyed; but there are still in existence a -large quantity of drawings and sketches on paper, both in pencil and in -India ink, for classical compositions. As many of these are probably -rough ideas for his lost pictures, it is perhaps worth mentioning a few -of the subjects enumerated by Cunningham among the unfinished -productions, which may help to identify the sketches, besides, as -Cunningham says, “showing the range of his mind, and also his want of -patience to render his works worthy of admission to public galleries.” -The principal are as follows: _King Lear Asleep_, _King Lear Awake_, -_Ceyx and Alcyone_, _The Death of Niobe’s Children_, _The Cumean Sibyl -Foretelling the Destiny of Aeneas_, _Electra and Orestes at the Tomb of -Agammemnon_, _Thetis Supplicating Jupiter_, _Thetis Comforting -Achilles_, _Damon and Musidora_, _Homer Reciting his Verses_, _David and -Saul_, _Macbeth and Banquo_, _The Descent of Odin_, _The Ghost of -Clytemnestra_, _Eurydice vanishing from Orpheus_, _Harpalice_, _A -Thracian Princess defending her wounded Father_, _Antigone with the -Corpse of Polynices_, _A Witch displaying her Magical Powers_, -_Resuscitation by Force of Magic_, _Doll Tearsheet_, _Cupid and Psyche_. - -Besides these there are a number of portrait sketches, which though not -so numerous, are much more charming, in spite of their being exceedingly -rough and slight. They must have been simply notes, and can seldom have -been intended for more than fixing an idea in the painter’s mind. I have -as many as a dozen in my own possession which I have picked up here and -there in the dealers’ portfolios, and there are probably a good number -of them in existence. Rough as they are, they are certainly deserving of -more attention than is usually accorded to them; for though Romney never -seems to have enjoyed the process of committing a portrait to paper as -Gainsborough did, these business-like notes of pose and chiaroscuro give -us a good insight into his methods of setting to work. Perhaps the taste -of a future generation will prefer the rough-hewn idea of a great -portrait painter to the finished achievement of Benwell or Buck in -little. - - - - -INDEX - - -Boydell, Alderman, 26 - - -Cathcart, Lord, 35 - -Chamberlin, Mason, 2 - -Cimabue, 5, 30, 34 - -Copley, John Singleton, 8 - -Copley’s _Death of Chatham_, 9 - -Correggio, 34 - -Cumberland, 23, 46 - -Cunningham, Allan, 13, 19, 41 - -Currie, Mrs. Mark, 3, 31, 35, 36 - - -Dalton, 46 - - -Exhibition of National Portraits, 40 - - -Flaxman, John, R.A., 15, 30, 31, 32, 34 - -Fuseli, Henry, R.A., 9 - - -Gainsborough, Thomas, 11, 16, 17, 28, 40 - -Garrick, David, 23, 24 - -Giotto, 30, 34 - - -Hamilton, Lady, 13, 41-43 - influence on Romney’s painting, 51 - Romney’s portraits of, 45 - -Hayley, William, 13, 25, 47 - influence over Romney, 14, 20 - -Highmore, 23 - -Hogarth, William, 23 - -Holbein, Hans, 5 - - -Kauffmann, Angelica, 9 - - -Michelangelo, 30, 34 - - -Northcote, James, R.A., 7 - - -Pictures by George Romney - _Bacchante_, 44 - _Constance_, 45 - _Joan of Arc_, 44 - _John Wesley_, 40 - _Lady Gower and her Children_, 20 - _Lady Hamilton_, 3, 35 - _Louisa, Countess of Mansfield_, 35, 36 - _Magdalen_, 44 - _Milton dictating to his Daughters_, 52 - _Miss Hannah Milnes_, 35 - _Mr. and Mrs. Lindow_, 29 - _Mr. Leigh and his Family_, 23 - _Mrs. Jordan_, 35 - _Mrs. Yates as The Tragic Muse_, 25 - _The Dream of Atossa_, 31 - _The Parson’s Daughter_, 3, 31 - “_The Triumphs of Temper_,” 13 - _The Warren Family_, 21 - _Titania and her Indian Votaries_, 52 - “_Tragic Muse_,” 26 - - -Raphael, 34 - -Reynolds, Sir Joshua, 4, 5, 7, 11, 16, 28, 34, 40 - -Roberts, Mr., Catalogue Raisonné, 36, 45 - -Romney, George, birth of, 46 - apprenticed to joinery, 46 - apprenticeship to Count Steele, 47 - classicism, 30 - conscientiousness, 28 - distaste for portrait painting, 4 - first full-length portrait of a lady, 26 - influence of Hayley upon, 14 - in London, 49 - letters to Hayley, 44 - life of, by William Hayley, 13 - marriage to Mary Abbot at Gretna Green, 47 - place among portrait painters, 38 - portraits compared with those of Reynolds and Gainsborough, 18 - prices obtained for pictures, 39 - principal pictures, list of, 53, 54 - return to Kendal, 50 - separation from his wife, 48 - simplicity of treatment, 27 - -Romney, Rev. John, 13, 21, 29, 47 - - -Shakespeare Gallery, 45 - -Shakespeare, William, 46 - - -Thurlow, Lord Chancellor, 38 - - -Vandyck, 5 - -Velasquez, 5 - -Vernon, Lord, 22 - - -Walpole, Horace, 12 - -Ward, Mr. Humphry, 23, 42 - -West, Benjamin, 7 - -West’s “_Pylades and Orestes_,” 7 - -Wilson, Richard, Founder of the English School of Landscape, 6 - - - PRINTED AT - THE BALLANTYNE PRESS - LONDON - - -Typographical errors corrected by the etext transcriber: - -trival, pretty, or banal=> trivial, pretty, or banal {pg 20} - -scarlet waistcoast=> scarlet waistcoat {pg 24} - - - - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Romney, by Randall Davies - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ROMNEY *** - -***** This file should be named 50308-0.txt or 50308-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/0/3/0/50308/ - -Produced by Shaun Pinder, Chuck Greif and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive) - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. |