Nelson & His World

There are so many portraits of HN, ( and the Andras waxwork in Westminster Abbey, ) but with the new(ish!)waxwork at the Portsmouth, have we finally created an accurate likeness? I myself always feel a little cheated by waxworks - certainly they capture the physical, but the artist's hand on canvas, for me, captures far more, the spirit, so to speak. I find Beechy a bit stiff, Abbott too theatrical, and I prefer the slight rawness of Hoppner's unfinished portait.Which representation do others like best?-t

What a fascinating question you pose, Tay. Who was the real Nelson, amongst all the many images we have? Some features are constant - the arched eyebrows, the full lower lip, the rather wild hair - and yet they are all different. There are two by Beechey which could be of two different men, one rather reflective and soulful, the other a vigorous man of action. The Guzzardi portrait, I feel, is least like him, yet it captures something of the melancholic mood that pervades his letters from Naples. I know Abbott's portraits tended to 'Adonise', but I do think he lets us see something of the twinkly kindliness and good nature that made his officers and men warm to him.

Another reason that his features were difficult to capture was because they were so mobile. It was (I think) Lady Elizabeth Foster who commented that his natural expression was rather melancholy but could be transformed in an instant when he smiled. This, combined with a complex and contradictory character - humble, yet proud, affectionate yet aggressive, compassionate yet ruthless, must have made him difficult to pin down - indeed, one artist in Italy wouldn't attempt the task on these grounds. And he was a dreadful fidget - a very difficult subject to deal with.

I suppose for truth we have to look at the life mask made in Vienna. I'm not sure whether the process is purely mechanical but I suspect, unlike portraiture, it allows little room for interpretation. I like it anyway: it is an intelligent, thoughtful, strong but not brutal face. One can see why he was able to command.

When I have learned how to upload images, I will post two pictures that I think few will have seen, and I hope they will provoke lively discussion.

[/img]

I found this picture of Nelson as a midshipman in a book published in 1911 - Nelson in England by E. Hallam Moorhouse. I was excited by the Lady Llangattock connection as her Nelson memorabilia formed the basis of the Nelson Museum's collection in Monmouth. I emailed the curator who told me that they now know that the picture is not of Nelson - the uniform is of too late a date.

I wonder how it came to be painted. Was it, I wonder, an imaginative exercise painted after Nelson's death, with no intention to deceive; or was someone hoping to cash in on the lack of childhood pictures of Nelson? The features do seem to bear a strong resemblance to the adult Nelson.

I couldn't imagine that was Nelson even if it weren't captioned, and doesn't it look as if the face is rather too knowing and wise? I'm not sure even Nelson was that. I'm also reminded of that Victorian portrait of Nelson saying goodbye to his mother! I understand there is one of Wellington saying goodbye to his and, I believe I'm right in saying, another of Napolean doing the same. Therefore in Victorian eyes, could such a great man as Nelson do any less?

As to the likenesses of Nelson, surely we have the response of the two women in his life to consider? When presented with the portrait by Abbott, an early one before he went off the rails, Lady Nelson I believe commented, "I am well pleased with Abbott."

Lady Hamilton thought the 1806 Andras wax in Westminster Abbey, when she visited it, was Nelson to the life - but for the lock of hair which he wore normally over the scar on his forehead. The story goes that she went to readjust it, an action which apparently alarmed the attendant on duty, he not knowing who she was. When he had been introduced Emma was allowed to change it as she wished.

Kester

Oh! I thought this really had a look of Nelson - the fair colouring, arched eyebrows and full mouth - I could really imagine this was him as a boy. That's why I was so pleased when I found it. What about the uniform? I wonder if anyone can date it?

Your comment about 'imagined' pictures as opposed to portraits he posed for is quite interesting. Many of these are reconstructions of notable events of his life. There were numerous ones of his death, of course, as well as the attack on the polar bear. I have Lloyd's 1806 biography which has an engraving of the polar bear scene with only Nelson and the bear, not the more familiar picture with Nelson and his companion. The Lloyd book also has the scene showing Nelson boarding the San Josef. There's also a rather gruesome one, attributed to Guy Head, of Nelson in shirtsleeves with a bandaged head and stump. My least favourite portrait. I also dislike the Fuger portrait. I have read a description of this a showing a 'ruthless' face, but I think he just looks prim and rather vacant.

And yes, I suppose we should consider the ladies' opinion when assessing at the best likeness - but the Andras and the Abbott are quite dissimilar! Who was right, I wonder.

Another reason why we might wonder which portrait is the 'true' Nelson is that he changed so much. He was frequently ill or stressed and observers (and he himself) commented on how this affected his appearance.

A 'living' likeness is Alex Naylor. He bears a spooky resemblance and when in character is totally believable. He doesn't just act as ALN - he becomes ALN.

The following link takes you to a local news article about a re-enactment of Nelson's Last Walk in Portmouth on 14 September 2005 - exactly 200 years to the day and with the timings as accurate as possible.

It took a lot of hard work to pull the whole thing together but proved to be a wonderful day all round. We (Peter & I) could have slept for a week once it was over but had no such chance.
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/people/Hundreds-see-Nelson39s-last-walk.1191800.jp

More details of the event and a stack of photos are available on the youngsters site at http://wakeup.to/nelson under the title Nelson's Last Walk (with pictures) - towards the botton of the opening page - middle column.

Yes, I agree - it's like seeing ALN reincarnated - I have a photo of him with "Lady Hamilton, " on a boat on the Thames near Greenwich, taken during Trafalgar week, and as you say, he seems to be HN, down to the unseeing eye - I asssume he's wearing a contact lens though - rather than taking history literally! If I knew how to, I would post it on the site for others to comment on - ( anyone help me with this?)
Re portraits - there is also the small sketch in profile ( done in pastels?) that HN claimed was " most like me" which does not seem to "chocolate box "his appearance . In fact,it seems almost brutally honest - especially with his bony nose, and rather thick lips, but I can't remember the artist's name! ( I also read that Fanny rather liked the Schmit portrait done in Dresden, ( but I'm sure she would have hated its companion piece, the portrait of HN's guardiam angel!-t

If you don't know it, I can recommend Richard Walker's book 'The Nelson Portraits' which originally retailed at about £60 but which I picked up at the RNM shop in Portsmouth for £4.99. It's not absolutely exhaustive but it contains nearly all the well-known portraits: ones he posed for, cartoons, imagined portraits etc. and also many lesser known ones.

The drawing you're thinking of, Tay, is by Simon de Koster which, as you say, Nelson thought most like himself.

There's also a sketch by James Caulfield, 1802, 'as seen by Mr Caulfield going up Blenheim steps', with an interesting hand-written note by the artist: 'He was very Brown in the face (Tanned greatly) His Countenance had a firm expression but was not repulsive. He held himself well - like a Man accustomed to command and who would be first everywhere. He was dressed in a cocked hat, Blue coat and gold buttons - Pantaloons and Hessian boots - not in uniform' - though he is not wearing Hessian boots in the drawing!

'who would be first everywhere' - what does this mean? That Nelson would be first into action? That he was distinctive enough to be recognised as a man of authority? That he would demand recognition and respect?

Tycho,

I take it primarily to be the first of your questions, although, being Nelson the others might have some bearing.

The NMM is home to a second Andras wax, dated 1805, and is said to be the image which impressed Emma most. Emma also mentions the De Koster portrait unfavourably in comparison, and refers to 'the carriage of his body' being just right. As James Caulfield also mentions how Nelson 'held himself well... like a man accustomed to command,' his posture, or body language, seems to have been quite distinctive.

The NMM text for the Andras miniature runs:

"This pink wax relief plaque, signed 'C. Andras 1805', depicts Nelson in profile wearing vice-admiral’s full dress uniform with the Order of the Bath and a naval gold medal. It was modelled by Catherine Andras (1775–1860), Modeller in Wax to Queen Charlotte. Andras had already received a prize for her 1801 wax model of Nelson and in 1805 he sat to her for another portrait. It was a great success and casts of this relief were produced for sale between 1805 and 1812. This is one of the early examples. She was subsequently commissioned by the Dean and Chapter of Westminster Abbey to model a full-size wax effigy of Nelson.

Lady Hamilton was particularly impressed by the accuracy of the small relief plaque:

'She shewed me the inclosed wax profile which she declares is the most striking likeness that has been taken, and much more so than our little drawing or print by Mr Da Costa. On asking Lady H in what features the model so closely resembled Lord Nelson as she had declared, she said, in the direction and form of the nose, mouth and chin, that the general carriage of the body was exactly his, and that altogether the likeness was so great it was impossible for anybody who had known him to doubt about or mistake it.'"

And the link to see an image of the portrait is here: http://www.nmm.ac.uk/collections/nelson ... ID=OBJ0575

Despite the many words written and said about Nelson by Emma, little seems to relate to how he actually looked. It might be interesting to include other contemporary descriptions of Nelson's appearance in this thread (or a new one) to compliment the portraits that members have selected.

Tay - Swiftsure added a thread on how to post images further down the list called 'Uploading images.' If you're still unsure, I'm Swiftsure would be happy to provide an additional helping hand.

Now here’s a puzzle.

This portrait appeared as the frontispiece of a book published in 1911 ‘Nelson in England’ by E. Hallam Moorhouse. The caption reads ‘Horatio Nelson when Captain of the Agamemnon’.

I had never seen this portrait before and was intrigued. The list of illustrations says: ‘From the portrait by an unknown artist in Norwich Castle Museum.’

I contacted the museum and one of the assistant curators replied that the caption is wrong as the accession register for 1865 at the museum records the painting as ‘Painted in 1781 when Capt of the Albemarle (21 guns)’.[Roger Knight says ‘Albemarle, 28 guns.] She added that ‘the general consensus over the years is that the picture is not of Nelson and that ‘the inscription’ [presumably on the picture] was added later.’

It was given to the museum by Mr E.H. St Quinton of Norwich who was the Hon. Sec. Of Norwich Castle Museum. He had been bequeathed it by his brother Captain James St Quinton.

Captain St Quinton, as we know from the biog. supplied by PhiloNauticus, had died in 1865, so Mr St Quinton must have passed it on almost immediately after inheriting it on his brother’s death. We also know that Captain St Quinton was at Trafalgar and later served in ‘Agamemnon,’ though not under Nelson. So there is a Nelsonian connection, but no conclusive evidence that Captain St Quinton ever actually saw Nelson in the flesh.

However, there is a manuscript note on the reverse of the painting: ‘Jan 19th 1848 – I this day shewed this portrait of Nelson to his fifth cousin, Mrs Tayler, at 86. She instantly said: ‘It is a likeness of My Uncle Nelson’ then immediately corrected herself ‘Why, it is my Lord himself.’ Robert Hull M.D.’

So – the ‘experts’ say this is not Nelson – the ‘experts’ being a Commander Robinson, Naval Correspondent of the Times, who, the curator told me ‘had written a few books.’ A little research revealed that he was the author of amongst other works, ‘With Roberts to the Transvaal’ but did not appear to have written anything on portraiture. Nevertheless, he declared it inauthentic because a) the subject is in civilian clothes and b) there is no reference to it in any Nelson correspondence.

The National Portrait Gallery experts, according to the Museum, also say it is unlikely to be Nelson, though no reasons were given.

The Rigaud portrait, finished after his return from the West Indies, was altered to thin down Nelson’s rounded boyish face which had been ravaged by sickness. However, he recovered well. The fuller face of this portrait might simply confirm the good progress of his convalescence over a few weeks or months to the ‘rounded face’ described by Mahan. The portrait could well have been painted by a jobbing itinerant portrait artist of which there were many in Bath and London, both of which he visited at this time. Nelson need not necessarily have commissioned the picture – his uncle, William Suckling, with whom he stayed in Kentish Town, might have done so.

Moreover, the portrait has some resemblances to the features we know; Nelson prior to service on the Albemarle, and on half-pay, may well have worn civilian clothes. Captain St Quinton’s ownership provides a local connection and the likeness was recognised by a relative. (Tony has established that St Quinton was a Norfolk man, born in Norwich)

‘Experts’ have been known to make misattributions.

So – could this be Nelson?





































































































































Now here’s a puzzle.

This portrait appeared as the frontispiece of a book published in 1911 ‘Nelson in England’ by E. Hallam Moorhouse. The caption reads ‘Horatio Nelson when Captain of the Agamemnon’.

I had never seen this portrait before and was intrigued. The list of illustrations says: ‘From the portrait by an unknown artist in Norwich Castle Museum.’

I contacted the museum and one of the assistant curators replied that the caption is wrong as the accession register for 1865 at the museum records the painting as ‘Painted in 1781 when Capt of the Albemarle (21 guns)’.[Roger Knight says ‘Albemarle, 28 guns.] She added that ‘the general consensus over the years is that the picture is not of Nelson and that ‘the inscription’ [presumably on the picture] was added later.’

It was given to the museum by Mr E.H. St Quinton of Norwich who was the Hon. Sec. Of Norwich Castle Museum. He had been bequeathed it by his brother Captain James St Quinton.

Captain St Quinton, as we know from the biog. supplied by Philonauticus, had died in 1865, so Mr St Quinton must have passed it on almost immediately after inheriting it on his brother’s death. We also know that Captain St Quinton was at Trafalgar and served on ‘Agamemnon,’ though not under Nelson. So there is a Nelsonian connection, but no conclusive evidence that Captain St Quinton ever actually saw Nelson in the flesh.

However, there is a manuscript note on the reverse of the painting: ‘Jan 19th 1848 – I this day shewed this portrait of Nelson to his fifth cousin, Mrs Tayler, at 86. She instantly said: ‘It is a likeness of My Uncle Nelson’ then immediately corrected herself ‘Why, it is my Lord himself.’ Robert Hull M.D.’

So – the ‘experts’ say this is not Nelson – the ‘experts’ being a Commander Robinson, Naval Correspondent of the Times, who, the curator told me ‘had written a few books.’ A little research revealed that he was the author of amongst other works, ‘With Roberts to the Transvaal’ but did not appear to have written anything on portraiture. Nevertheless, he declared it inauthentic because a) the subject is in civilian clothes and b) there is no reference to it in any Nelson correspondence.

The National Portrait Gallery experts, according to the Museum, also say it is unlikely to be Nelson, though no reasons were given.

The Rigaud portrait, finished after his return from the West Indies, was altered to thin down Nelson’s rounded boyish face which had been ravaged by sickness. However, he recovered well. The fuller face of this portrait might simply confirm the good progress of his convalescence over a few weeks or months to the ‘rounded face’ described by Mahan. The portrait has all the hallmarks of a jobbing itinerant portrait artist of which there were many in Bath and London, both of which he visited at this time. Nelson need not necessarily have commissioned the picture – his uncle, William Suckling, with whom he stayed in Kentish Town, might have done so.

Moreover, the portrait has some resemblances to the features we know; Nelson prior to service on the Albemarle, and on half-pay, may well have worn civilian clothes. Captain St Quinton’s ownership provides a local connection and the likeness was recognised by a relative. (Tony has established that St Quinton was a Norfolk man, born in Norwich)

‘Experts’ have been known to make misattributions.

So – could this be Nelson?