Talk:Hans Eworth

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Expansion[edit]

Mary I
Mary I
Mary I
Mary I

I've expanded this and submitted a DYK. It is interesting that Cooper 2008 says that NPG 4861 (left) is likely from life and is the source of Eworth's other paintings of Mary while Hearn Dynasties 1995 doesn't mention that portrait at all. The Society of Antiquaries of London portrait LDSAL 336 (right) is also signed and dated 1554. In both portraits Mary seems to be wearing the jewel with the pendant pearl La Pelegrina that was a wedding present from Philip II (and later from Richard Burton to Elizabeth Taylor but that's another story). The Society of Anitquaries website says this portrait was finished before Mary's marriage to Philip on July 1554 - the supposed spring or summer date confuses KH and TB in Dynasties who comment on the heavy brocade and "fur wrap" (really fur-lined turned up "trumpet" sleeves [sigh]), and doesn't mention the theory that Mary is wearing her coronation robes in this portrait (the ones that would be remodeled for Elizabeth a few years later). I believe there is something on the clothes in Janet Arnold, will check.

We need a summary of Yates's deciphering of the allegory in the Luttrell portrait. I have it, it's just hard to summarize in a sentence or two. - PKM (talk) 04:43, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cooper's suggestion that NPG 4861 is from life doesn't mesh well with the technique of the period, in which artists created life-drawings of faces and hands and then returned to the studio to work from these 'patterns' and their notes. It is more likely that the first portrait was the Society of Antiquaries picture and the NPG picture (which is probably a cabinet picture) was created afterward.

It is not a conclusive fact that Mary I is wearing the famous "Pelegrina" jewel in the 1554 portraits.

The reason that the SoA suggests that their picture was completed prior to the marriage is the absence of Mary I wedding ring on the portrait.

Janet Arnold does discuss the dress at length, as does Elizabeth Drey's important MA thesis on the subject (Courtauld Institute of Art).

I have edited the page to bring it up to speed, although I have failed to correct all of the errors as some of my research has not yet been published. HansEworth (talk) 17:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]