His portrait, which hangs in the Dining-room, is not a contemporary work, but a copy executed by Aikman—to range with the other family pictures—from a miniature, done in Paris by an unknown painter, and still preserved in the Charter-room. This original, inscribed on its gold case “John Clerk of Pennicuik, 1644,” is a bust portrait painted in oils on a small oval slab of bloodstone, the polished green surface of which, with its red markings, serves for background. The face shows a delicate, prominently aquiline nose, a forehead broad rather than high, sharply pencilled black eyebrows above the dark blue eyes, a full, brightly red lower lip, a small moustache of darkest brown, turned up at the ends, and a tiny tuft on the chin. The bust is clad in that pseudo-Roman costume so much affected in the portraiture of the period, similar to that in which Charles II. appears in the equestrian statue in the Parliament Square, Edinburgh, and very closely resembling the dress worn by George Lauder, author of “The Scottish Souldier,” in the scarce portrait engraved by J. Hermanni after J. Reyners. The tunic is of a bright blue colour, cut square at the neck, and edged with gold lace, decorated on the breast and shoulders with gold ornaments worked into the shape of satyr and lion heads, and a bright red mantle falls in graceful folds on either side. The little picture is of excellent workmanship and is delicately finished, much of its precision of detail having been lost in Aikman’s not very refined life-sized copy. Above the fireplace in the Drawing-room is another portrait of this same John Clerk, a large, dark, gallery full-length, stated to have been executed, like the miniature, in Paris. Here the founder of the family is depicted standing, in a black dress, his right hand resting on the stone ball which surmounts and decorates the parapet of garden walk, his left hand sustaining his sword. The countenance is manifestly the same as that in the miniature. This picture is stated by family tradition to have been painted by “De Wit,” a portrait-painter we have not as yet been able to identify. It bears no resemblance in style to the portraits executed by James de Witt at Holyrood in 1684-5, and at Glamis Castle in 1686-8; and it could hardly have been the same artist who was working at Paris before the year 1647. Nor, of course, is it by Jacob de Wit, the painter of a subject in the Library to be afterwards described, who was not born till 1695.