Chats on Old Miniatures

LIO

Y WORTLE

R JOSHUA

UCHESS OF

f Charl

PTE

EL C

s later, did Samuel Cooper, that "admirable workman and good company" as Pepys describes him, draw for us on a few inches of cardb

.... And here he do work finely, though I fear it will not be so like as I expected; but now I understand his great skill in music, his playing and setting to the French lute most excellently, and he speaks French, and indeed is an excellent man." This visit is explained by a previous entry, on March 29th: "Harris ... hath persuaded me to have Cooper draw my wife's portrait, which, though it cost ￡30, yet will I have done." Thirty pounds in those days was, of course, a considerable sum of money, but it seems to have been Cooper's usual price for a miniature, as we learn from the record of another visit to the painter in the pages of the immortal diary: "To Cooper's, where I spent all the afternoon with my wife and girl, seeing him make

KN

LA

Tweedm

R NET

S, DUCHESS OF

s Butle

Mann: "But our glaring extravagance is in the constant high price given for pictures.... I know but one dear picture not sold (th

e in 1723 by Bernard Lens," Dallaway says it is related in the family that Cromwell surprised Cooper while he was copying the portrait and indignantly took it away with him. The original was shown at Burlington House in 1879, being then in the possessio

ongs to the Duke of Devonshire, who also possesses a very fine portrait of the Protector, of which a French critic, M. de Conches, has remarked that Cooper was a man who knew how to enlarge the style of a miniature, and that this particular specimen was as vigorous as oil, perfectly modelled and firm in touch. In the same collection is the profile drawing on paper in pen and brown ink from which Houbraken engraved his portrait. At Stafford House is another portrait of Oliver, and also a very interesting example of the pencil studies from which the artist used to paint his miniatures.

DER

S OF H

of D

S NI

KITTY

Raffles

, and, it must be contended, unjust remark that "Cooper, with so much merit, had two defects: his skill was confined to a mere head; his drawing of the neck and shoulders so incorrect and untoward that it seems to account for the number

h an amazing power of seizing character, and such breadth of delineation, we can afford to dispense with mere superficial prettiness. And, to return to Walpole's first contention, it is surely unlikely that

ter and simplicity, although the two last are unfinished. There is, however, no want of finish in the elaborate picture of Charles II., wearing the Robes of the Garter, which belongs to the Duke of R

omen are inferior to his portraits of men, an

rteen more or less unfinished miniatures attributed to Samuel Cooper, and shown with a

Samuel Cooper's work. Some, it has been suggested, recall Flatman[3] rather, or, as I think more likely, Dixon. They are in various stages of comp

Sir John King, a highly successful lawyer of his day, a favourite of King Charles II., who intended to make him Attorney-General; but he died when only thirty-eight, and lies buried in the Temple Church. Granger says of him: "Such was his reputation and so extensive his practice that i

A. S. SHELLEY

ARCHIONESS

ollection.) PORTR

.) LADY FRANC

of Car

ortrait of this staunch Royalist. Technically, however,

DER

ZABETH H

of D