McClure's Magazine, Vol 31, No 2, June 1908Various
History
McClure's Magazine, Vol 31, No 2, June 1908
Various
American literature -- Periodicals; Literature -- Periodicals
At this point this article might well end, but there may be some who
recall that last summer for a week or so there appeared in the papers
articles headed "Fakes at the Museum" or "The Metropolitan Gets Lemons,"
which assailed the genuineness of these portraits. The discussion did
not get far beyond the daily press, which, after its habit, registered
the charges as picturesquely and vehemently as it could, but attempted
no serious investigation of them. They were brought by a critic whose
position as a special student of Stuart entitled them to respectful
consideration, but after giving them that they do not seem conclusive or
even important. They were based on the fact that the pictures were
signed G. Stuart, R. A., and bore coats of arms and long Spanish
inscriptions. It was claimed that this made the genuineness of the
canvases doubtful, for Stuart signed few of his paintings--possibly none
except the standing Washington in the Philadelphia Academy; he was not
an R. A. (Royal Academician); nor was he a heraldic illuminator.
Furthermore, the painting of the male portrait and the dress and
accessories in the companion piece did not seem to the critic to agree
with Stuart's handling. To make his impressions fit with the pictures,
the critic supposed that Stuart painted a smaller portrait of Jaudenes
and started one of his wife, which through some freak of temper he left
(as he frequently did) with only the head and part of the background
finished. These being brought to Spain, some artist there finished the
lady's portrait, painted from Stuart's original a companion piece of her
husband, and added to both the coats of arms, the inscriptions, and
Stuart's name.
Now, frankly, this is not possible. As for the portrait of Dona Matilde
being left unfinished, there exists in Stuart's handwriting a list of
gentlemen who are to have copies of his portrait of Washington,
consisting of thirty-two names. A few take two copies, no one takes more
save Jaudenes, who subscribes for five. The list is dated April 20th,
1795, which is seven months after the date on the pictures, and is the
strongest possible evidence that Jaudenes was greatly pleased with
Stuart--presumably on account of these portraits--and is entirely
irreconcilable with the idea that the painter had quarreled with the
diplomat's wife or left her portrait unfinished.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account