DAMAGED PICTURES

Evening Post, Volume CXXIII, Issue 142, 17 June 1937, Page 17

DAMAGED PICTURES

CURIOUS ANECDOTES

CUTS AND RESTORATIONS

(By U D. Austin.)

The recent wanton damage inflicted by some unknown miscreant upon a picture in the National Art Gallery calls to mind several parallel instances that have occurred elsewhere, also the vicissitudes which many famous paintings have undergone.

For example, there is the story concerning one of Sir Joshua Eeynolds's portraits, depicting the son and daughter of a well-known contemporary nobleman—the son posing as a figure of Cupid.

When this son grew up he quarrelled violently with his noble sire; and the latter, to mark his extreme displeasure, ordered the Cupid to be cut out of the picture; and in this injured state the family heirloom continued to hang on the wall for the next hundred years.

The little piece of painted canvas: thus arbitrarily removed was, however, not lost; and one day, by some unexplained means, it found its way into the hands of a shrewd dealer, who recognised it at once because he was familiar with an engraving of the original picture before its mutilation. | He immediately communicated with i the modern owner of the painting, who. lost no time in refitting the lost Cupid to its rightful position—another example of a cut being restored. A similar adventure befell Holbein's famous picture, "The Field of the Cloth of Gold," which now hangs in Hampton Court Palace. After the execution of Charles I, the Protector, Cromwell proposed to sell many of the late monarch's pictures to dealers and other reputable purchasers, and the list drawn up included this work by Holbein. But when the moment arrived for the preliminary examination the prospective buyer discovered that one of the principal faces in the picture, that of Henry VIII, had been cut right out, leaving a neat, round hole in its place. Naturally, the dealer declined to conclude the bargain; consequently, the defaced Holbein masterpiece was stowed away in a cellar for several years. After the accession of ..Charles 11,. a nobleman visited the Court one day arid entreated the King to honour him by the acceptance of a most valuable gift—which proved to be nothing less than the long-missing countenance of Henry VIII. The donor explained that he himself had sliced the Eoyal lineaments from their environment in order to frustrate the sale and prevent the loss to England of a great national treasure. Charles was delighted with the gift, which experts replaced so carefully that only very keen eyes can now detect any mark of removal—a I good deed well in keeping with the One of Sir Joshua Eeynolds's paintings, now valued at many thousands of pounds, has experienced some extraordinary misfortunes—including submersion in sea water and participation in a railway accident The picture is a portrait of Miss Gale, who married Admiral Gardner, and who was so beloved by her husband that he took her picture with him on all his voyages, hanging it conspicuously in his cabin. Eventually the vessel was wrecked off the West Indies! and though no lives were, lost, everythng else went to the bottom'of the ocean,: where "Miss Gale" remained for over two years. After, several unsuccessful attempts, 'at: salvage, the picture was'at last raised from its watery bed, considerably the worse for wear; and it sustained further "severe"'damage. wHeh, in 1864, it was involved in a railway collision which necessitated some amputation and reduction in size. ; Mention of railway accidents recalls another.once-famous picture which met with disaster in strange circumstances. Many years ago a fine animal study by Landseer," entitled "There's Life, in the Old Dog Yet," the property of a London merchant for whom it had been specially painted, was very much coveted by the trustees of an art exhibition which they intended to open in Manchester. They asked the owner if he would lend the picture for the occasion, and he agreed—on one condition: that as he had a rooted objection to railway travel in any shape or form, this precious art treasure must be conveyed to its destination by road; he declined to expose it to the alleged risks of train transport. So by road it went, in a horse-drawn van.

When about halfway to Manchester the vehicle had to negotiate a level crossing, and, as Fate would have it, an express train reached the sajhe spot simultaneously—smashing the van and killing the horse, though the driver miraculously escaped. But the unfortunate picture suffered irreparable •damage, and "There's. Life in the Old Dog Yet" turned out to be a sadly unprophetic title.

Another picture by Eeynolds has a rather amusing history. It is.called "Bacchus"; and the artist originally depicted the god of wine surrounded by lionesses, whereas, according to mythological legend, the animals should have been leopards. When the picture came into the hands of an engraver he instantly perceived the error, but, instead of informing the artist, he took it upon himself to correct the painter's mistake by putting spots oi». the lionesses, thus converting them into leopards, not only in the engraving, but on the original canvas as well

A-.century passed by, during which nobody ever questioned the,leopards' bona fides. Then, unexpectedly, came revelation. The picture changed owners, and its new proprietors decided to have it cleaned and renovated. Imagine the surprise and • dismay of the cleaner when, as he worked, he noticed the spots on the animals gradually disappearing!

Careful. scrutiny soon: showed the reason, and under expert-treatment the lionesses once more emerged into their pristine splendour, and today they still continue to defy mythological legend, as Sir Joshua intended.

After this, who will aver that leopards cannot change their spots? The authenticity of a portrait •by Reynolds was once disputed on/ very strange grounds. The subject of this portrait, an eccentric and wealthy individual, left instructions in his will that the picture should be put up for sale thirty years after his death. But an astute dealer questioned its genuineness because, as he pointed out, the figure in the painting wore up-to-date clothing, whereas it ought to have been depicted in the garb of at least a generation earlier, seeing that the subject rjad been thirty years in his grave!; As those were the days when men's fashions fluctuated even more capriciously than those of the fair sex, it seemed as though the objection would have to be upheld. But again a visit to the cleaners brought about a complete transformation; under manipulation all the modern dress disappeared, and beneath it was discovered the erst.while costume as worn by the subject when he sat to Reynolds.

It transpired that the eccentric merchant, whose name was Muster, had been so ardent a devotee to the decrees of fashion as to have commissioned a relay of other artists to superimpose the latest styles of clothing upon the original figure. When a fashion changed, it was painted out and another substituted. Only thus would it pass Muster.