Early Modern Rambler

Peter the Great’s portrait was advertised by White and Tonson in 1697 and John Overton in 1698 as a direct result of his tour of Western Europe. When the first adverts appeared in The London Gazette of 8th November and The Post Boy of 9th November he had been in England for just a few days. However White and Tonson would have had adequate warning of his arrival because the diarist Luttrell was able to report the Czar’s movements across Europe from as early as June. He recorded that the Czar met William III at Loo in October and in mid-October that ‘It is still said the czar of Moscovy will come over with his majestie.’

When John Overton advertised his portrait in The London Gazette of 27th January the Czar was still at the Royal court and Luttrell recorded on 22nd January that: ‘The revels in the Temple are ended, where was a masquerade last night, and the czar amongst them incognito in a butchers habit.’

On 11th November 1686 Robert White advertised a portrait of the Venetian commander Captain General Morosini and a map of Napoli di Romania in The London Gazette. The wording of the advertisement shows that this advertisement was prompted by Morosini’s capture of Nauplia in September and the Venetian success [against the Turks] in the Morea as a whole.

A true Prospect of the City of Napoli di Romania, lately taken by the Venetians (in a large Sheet) and the Effigies of Captain General Morosini. done by R.White. Sold at his house in Bloomsbury-market, and most Picture-Sellers in London and Westminster.

In 1691 a portrait of Prince Louis von Baden was advertised in The London Gazette of 24th September. The Emperor declared him viceroy of Hungary in June of that year. The advert appeared because on 19th August 1691 he ‘defeated the Turks in an almost decisive battle at Slankamen, on the Danube in northern Serbia. The grand vizir. . was killed. The battle was disastrous for the Turks and costly for the Austrians, but it secured the Hapsburg possession of Hungary and Transylvania.’ (Kenneth Setton, Venice, Austria and the Turks p 390)

In The London Gazette of 20th June 1692 Thomas Bassett advertised a portrait of Edward Russell, the Admiral of the Fleet. Russell achieved eminence through his commanding role at the battle of La Hogue between 19th and 24th May. The victory led to the reversal of French control over the Channel. At the time of advertising the Admiral was at sea. A number of texts were published in response to the same events. These included A Congratulatory ode to Admiral Russel and the other sea-commanders for their late, glorious victory printed by Edward Jones, and An Account of the late great victory, obtained at sea, against the French: by Their Majesties fleet, commanded in chief by Admiral Russell, and the Dutch commanded by Admiral Allemond, near the Cape of Barsteur in May, 1692 printed for John Rawlins.

In November 1691 Robert White advertised a portrait of another supporter of the Williamite regime, John Tillotson, the new archbishop of Canterbury. The advert appeared in The Term Catalogues of November 1691 and The London Gazette of 30th November. Tillotson, one of William’s chief propagandists, was nominated in April 1691 to replace the non-juror William Sancroft. The non-juring bishops had been deprived of their sees since February 1690 but the positions had been kept open in the hope of a compromise. William found that it was difficult to fill the vacancies and Tillotson received criticism for taking the position. The new Archbishop was consecrated on 31st May and in the month that the advert appeared he was sworn into the House of Lords alongside the new Archbishop of York on 5th November. The fact that Tillotson was a topical figure at the time of advertising is shown by public support for Sancroft. On 5th November ‘Sancroft gave the sacrament at Lambeth, where was a great crowd of all sorts of persons; but the door were kept shutt, and not above 60 admitted in to communicate.’ The appointment’s political dimensions is illustrated by the fact that in the same year the radical Whig John Tutchin wrote A congratulatory poem to the Reverend Dr. John Tillotson: upon his promotion to the arch-episcopal-see of Canterbury.

Robert White advertised his portrait of Sir Thomas Pilkington, the Whig Lord Mayor of London and former Exclusionist, in Mercurius Reformatus of 15th May 1691. The Whigs had been losing ground to the Tories and Pilkington was involved in a series of disputes as the Tories contested his and other Whigs’ victories in the elections of May 1690. Part of this dispute involved the choice of Mr Leonard Robinson over Sir Peter Rich as London chamberlain. This ended in a court case, which Pilkington lost, in June 1691. It is very likely that Pilkington’s portrait, in which he is depicted with many references to his status as Lord Mayor, was marketed towards Whig supporters.

There may have been a political dimension to the two portraits of Dryden that were advertised after his death on 1st May 1700. The first by Edelinck after Kneller was advertised in The Post Boy of 14th May, the day after his interment at Westminster Abbey. The second, sold by John Nutt, was advertised in The Flying Post of 16th July. These portraits appeared as part of a flurry of commemoration and comment. Poems appearing in this year included Thomas Brown’s satirical A description of Mr D-n’s funeral: a poem, and Mrs Manley’s The nine muses, or, Poems written by nine several ladies upon the death of the famous John Dryden esq. Dryden’s image could have had partisan connotations. He was not only the former poet laureate and an eminent literary figure, but also a believer in the divine right of kings and a Catholic Tory who had fallen out of favour with William’s regime.

A year after the composer Henry Purcell died on 21st November 1695 his portrait was advertised in The Term Catalogues of November 1696. ‘The Effigies of the late famous Mr. Henry Purcell, exactly engraved by Mr White. Price in a frame, 18d.; in a sheet, 6d. Sold by H.Playford in the Temple Change, Fleet street.’ Playford sold sheet music and in 1696 he also sold Purcell’s ‘A choice collection of lessons for the harpsichord or spinnet’ which were ‘Printed on copper plates for Mrs. Frances Purcell, executrix of the author, and are to be sold by Henry Playford at his shop.’ The portrait print may have been advertised both to publicise the sale and commemorate the first anniversary of Purcell’s death.

The line engraver Robert White was a prolific portrait print advertiser.

Robert White’s portrait of William’s Dutch General Godard van Ginkel was advertised in The London Gazette of 28th January 1692. The House of Commons was moved to deliver a vote of thanks to Ginkel in the January of 1692 for his command in Ireland, but due to resentment of William’s favouritism towards Dutch officers this decision was not popular with all MPs. In the same month Ginkel was showered with respect and honours. Luttrell records that on 16th January ‘general Ginkle dined with the archbishop of Canterbury at Lambeth, and after dinner his majestie honoured him with his company.’ At the end of January Ginkel was created Earl of Athlone and Baron of Ballimore. It is without a doubt that the portrait was advertised because of these events.

Robert White advertised his portrait of the Portsmouth Captains in The Orange Gazette of 19th February 1689, just days after William and Mary’s formal acceptance of the crown. The Captains were heroes for the new regime. They were members of the Duke of Berwick’s regiment at Portsmouth and had been cashiered in the autumn of 1688 for their refusal to accept Irish Catholic recruits. Their resistance reflected fears that James II planned to recruit large numbers of Catholic Irishmen into the army and is said to have been a contributory factor in much of the army’s support for William [don't quote me on that, I couldn't find many sources]. This print was probably marketed towards those who wished to celebrate the events of the revolution. In the same notice White advertised his print of the Seven Bishops. The seven bishops became symbols for protest against James II and a large number of group portrait prints were produced. The seven bishops were also discussed in texts published in 1689.

Advertisements for portraits of William and Mary appeared quickly after William formally assumed the reigns of government on 28th December 1688.

Vanderbank advertised a portrait of the Prince and Princess of Orange in The London Gazette as early as 31st December. The print is advertised again but described as a portrait of the King and Queen in The London Gazette of 21st February, just a few days after William and Mary formally accepted the Convention’s offer of the throne on 13th February.

Luttrell wrote that: ‘The 13th, the lords and commons assembled at Westminster came both houses to the banqueting house at Whitehal, and there presented the prince and princesse of Orange with the instrument agreed on for declaring them king and queen, and received their consent theretoo: then immediately the officers of arms and serjeants at arms, with the lords and commons, went and proclaimed their majesties at Whitehall gate, then between the two Temple gates, then in Cheapside and at the Royal Exchange; and the night ended with bonefires, ringing of bells, and great acclamations of joy.’

Robert White’s portrait of William and Mary was first advertised in The London Gazette on 11th April, the day of their coronation at Westminster. It was advertised again in the same newspaper on 18th November 1689, the day after Elizabeth I’s anniversary. This may have been a continuation of the practice of advertising to coincide with the November rituals.

Just a few days after the notice was placed William’s portrait at Guildhall was defaced. Luttrell wrote: ‘His present majesties picture at Guildhall was taken down the 21st, some person having defaced it by cutting out the crown and sceptre: the lord mayor and court of alderman have published an order for the discovery of the author, promising the reward of 500 l.’ The attack highlights the position of portraits as representatives of the sitter’s physical presence. This helps to explain why portrait prints were often advertised at times when the sitter was topical.

The portraits were produced at the same time as texts about the new monarchs. Poems were produced such as A Poem on the coronation of King William and Queen Mary and Francis Crake’s A congratulatory poem upon the coronation of William and Mary, King and Queen of England &c, both published by Randal Taylor. There were also ballads like The Protestants Joy; or, an excellent new song on the glorious coronation of King William and Queen Mary, etc. and other texts including The form of prayers and services used in Westminster-Abby at the coronation of the kings and queens of England: with an account of the procession from the palace to the abby, also published by Randal Taylor. [In an example of bad writing I didn't explain why I said this in the original thesis. My point was that texts and images were released in response to the same news event, which leads one to thoughts about the visual public sphere.]

The pattern of November advertising first observed under Charles II continued under William and Mary. Catherine of Braganza’s birthday on 15th November and Elizabeth I’s accession on 17th November were still marked and the days of celebration were added to by William’s birthday on the 4th, and the anniversary of his landing at Torbay on Gunpowder day. Claydon writes: ‘An occasion which sometimes embarrassed Charles and James could be useful to William. His reformation propaganda presented him as the saviour of the same cause which had been rescued in 1605, and the coincidence of the prince’s landing at Torbay on 5 November 1688 added to the anniversary’s Orange resonance. The ceremonies of the day could thus be used to establish the providential link between England’s two salvations from popery, and to legitimate the later event with reference to the earlier.’

In November 1690 John Overton advertised a portrait of the King and Queen in The Term Catalogues. That year Luttrell recorded that ‘The 4th, being his majesties birth day, was observed here very strictly, by shutting up the shops, firing the great guns at the Tower, ringing of bells, and bonefires at night; their majesties dined publickly at Whitehall, where was a great resort of nobility and gentry, and at night was a consort of musick and a play afterwards. And the next day, being the anniversary of the gunpowder plot, (being likewise the day of his majesties landing in England,) was observed with great solemnity and general rejoicing.’ The celebrations drew attention to the monarchy and on 20th November 1690 Robert White advertised a portrait of the heir to the throne Princess Anne and her husband Prince George in The London Gazette.

In 1691 Vanderbank advertised a portrait of William and Mary after Kneller in The London Gazette of 29th October. It was undoubtedly placed because of the celebrations surrounding the 4th and 5th of November. An advertisement for a print of an arch erected at Cheapside to commemorate the events of the 4th and the 5th was also advertised in The London Gazette of 9th November 1691.

November 1691 also saw an advertisement placed in The Term Catalogues for: ‘The Monarchs of England, from the Heptarchy to their present Majesties K.William and Q.Mary; curiously Engraven on Copper, taken from Medals and Original Paintings: with a Compendious History of their several Reigns by Guy Miege, Gent. Printed for T.Basset at the George in Fleet street.’

In the next reign a number of portraits of Queen Anne were advertised to coincide with the days of national thanksgiving held for the War of the Spanish Succession. Under William and Mary days of thanksgiving and fasting were also organised for the War of the Grand Alliance and in 1693 a fast was held every month between May and October. On 17th August 1693 the Calligraphic engraver John Sturt advertised an unusual portrait of William and Mary in The London Gazette: ‘The Effigies of King William and Queen Mary, with the Lords Prayer, the Creed, and Ten Commandments; the Magnificat, the Prayer for the King and Queen; the Prayer for the Royal Family; the Prayer for Clergy and People; the Prayer of St Chrysostom; and the Blessing, Engraven within a Circle, two Inches and Quarter Diameter. Engraven and Sold by John Sturt in Crane Court in the Old Change near St Paul. Price 2s.’ The inclusion of prayers suggests that this was marketed towards consumers who wanted a print to mark the days of national thanksgiving and fasting.

When William’s absences abroad left him unable to govern, his administration was left under the control of the Lord Justices. On 13th July 1695 Robert White advertised a group portrait of the Lord Justices of England in The Post Boy. Then on 15th October 1698 a portrait of ‘the Effigies of their Excellencies, the nine Lord Justices of England, for the Administration of the Government in his Majestys absence’ was advertised in The Post Man by Hall, Green and Savage.

I had 44 visitors yesterday and I have no idea where they came from. They weren’t looking for this post on waxworks, which has been the most popular up to now. They also didn’t come from Rhine River, despite the link (hello Nathanael).

I posted a lot of information on portrait print advertising under James II yesterday, so today I will simply give this link to “British Images to 1700.” If this Web site had been around in a finished state when I was doing my PhD, my thesis would have been very different. Thanks to the work of Michael Hunter and his colleagues, being stuck out in the provinces or indeed outside Britain, will in the future no longer be a problem for people wishing to study the British print.

This is an abridged version of the section on James II in chapter 4 of my Ph.D thesis. 

Portrait print advertising under James is characterised by a restricted range of domestic sitters in comparison to the preceding and following reigns. With the exception of the image of Titus Oates in 1685, all domestic [i.e. not related to events abroad] portraits advertised under James II depicted members of the English royal family. This can partly be explained by the length of the reign, which was so brief that it reduced the opportunity for a diverse range of sitters. No portraits were found advertised in 1688 until after William’s seizure of power, so the period under study is just three years long.

From the late 1670s up until 1714 portrait print advertising was dominated by portraits of members of the British royal family. It would therefore be more surprising if they did not dominate James’ short reign. The restricted range of sitters is also a reflection of the differences between events in the reigns of the four later Stuarts. England was not at war during James II’s reign. This meant that there could be no portrait prints of military leaders of the type advertised between 1688 and 1713.

In May 1685 the portrait of Titus Oates in the pillory was advertised in The Term Catalogues because of his trial for perjury by a London jury at the King’s Bar. The trial began on 8th May and Oates received his sentence, which included several annual appearances in the pillory, on 16th May.

In 1685 and 1686 advertisements were placed for portrait prints of James II, Mary of Modena, Charles II, Charles I and Catherine of Braganza. In 1687 two notices were placed for pictures of Charles II. After that no more advertisements appeared until the regime change of 1688. This pattern of advertising probably reflects changes in James’ popularity as his reign progressed. The last advertisement for his portrait was placed in 1686. In early 1687 he turned away from his Anglican advisors and began pursuing his pro-Catholic policies with greater force. It is very probable that his portrait was not advertised in 1687 or 1688 because his lack of popularity meant that there was no longer a demand for it.

In the May 1685 issue of The Term Catalogues Robert Walton advertised two portraits of James II. The advertisement appeared shortly after James’ coronation at Westminster Abbey on 23rd April. It is likely that the advert was placed to meet demands for portraits of the new king.

On 16th July 1685 Vanderbank’s portrait of James II was advertised in The London Gazette. It is possible that Vanderbank placed the advertisement in response to consumer demand for images of the new monarch. However the fact that this advertisement appeared quite some time after James’ accession and coronation suggests an alternative explanation. (In comparison the advertisements for portraits of William and Mary that Vanderbank placed after their arrival appeared just days after the establishment of the new regime.) In July Luttrell recorded that on ‘The 12th came out his majesties proclamation for a solemn and publick thanksgiving throughout the kingdome the 26th instant, for his majesties late victories over the rebels.’ The portrait was marketed just days after the thanksgiving for the Duke of Monmouth’s defeat was announced and it was undoubtedly for this reason that the advertisement appeared. Portraits were regularly marketed near days of thanksgiving under Queen Anne.

Robert White advertised his portrait of James’ consort Mary of Modena in The Term Catalogues of November 1685 and The London Gazette of 26th November. Griffiths identifies this as part of White’s open ended series of royal portraits. These portraits included Charles I, Charles II and James II and they were also promoted in the same notice. It is possible that this notice was placed in response to demand for images of the new Queen. The precedence of previous November advertising suggests that the portraits could have been advertised together because the celebrations of this month had made the royal family topical. Luttrell’s diary shows that the celebrations were reduced during James II’s reign but still widely marked. In 1685 he wrote that: ‘The 5th, being gunpowder treason day, there were sermons at the churches in London, but little or no ringing of bells, nor hardly any bonefires at night, except two or three in some places, as formerly was usuall.’ Another possibility is that the portrait was advertised because Mary had aroused interest by suffering some minor injuries in a riding accident in October.

Advertisements for Vanderbank’s print of Grinling Gibbons’ Royal Exchange statue of Charles II were placed for different reasons. After the statue was erected in the spring of 1684 Gibbons obtained a rare patent to protect his rights over its reproduction in prints.

In 1685 Vanderbank’s engraving of the statue was advertised by Dorman Newman in the Observator of 12th January and The Term Catalogues of February. It was later marketed in The Term Catalogues of June and November 1687. In the notice of January 1685 the print cost 2s. 6d. but by November 1687 it had dropped to 1s. 6d. This is because it was a later impression and of a lower quality due to the repeated use of the plate. The successive number of impressions supports the view that there was a demand for this image. The first advertisement of January 1685 was placed because of interest in the new statue but the second in February could have been a response to Charles II’s death on 6th February. In the same issue of The Term Catalogues an advertisement was placed for: ‘Miscellaneous Poems: with some Remarks on the Death of Charles II., and the happy Succession of King James II., in a Poem to the Magistracy of England. John Whitehall. Quarto. Printed for T.Salusbury at the Black Lyon, Post Office in Fleet street.’ There is no clear evidence to suggest why the print was advertised again in June and November 1687. It may have been in response to the continuing popularity of this print. The precedence of earlier November advertising suggests that the final notice were placed to coincide with the ritual days of that month.

In February 1686 two sets of royal portraits were advertised in The Term Catalogues. John Overton advertised portraits of ‘King James II., Queen Mary, King Charles I., King Charles II., and Queen Dowager: made by several Masters’ and Robert Walton advertised ‘King Charles I., after Sir Anthony Vandyke, King Charles II., and King James II., by R.Robinson; all in Mizzo-tinto.’ It is likely that the notices appeared because February 1686 was the first anniversary of Charles II’s death and James II’s accession to the throne. In late January 1686 Luttrell recorded that: ‘The late kings effigies at length is done in his robes in waxwork, and is putt amongst the tombes at Westminster.’ Evelyn wrote that on the ‘6: Being his Majesties day, on which he began his Reigne; By Order of Council, it was to be solemniz’d with a particular Office, & sermon, which the Bis: of Ely preached at W:hall: on 11: Numbers: 12: a Court-Oration, upon the Regal Office & c: It was much wonder’d at; that this day which was that of his late Majesties death, should be kept as festival, & not the day of the present Kings Coronation: It is said, that it had formerly ben the costome, though not ‘til now, since the Reigne of K.James. 1.’

On 19th August 1686 Edward Cooper placed an advertisement in The London Gazette for ‘the Portraicture of their Majesties and all the Royal Family Compleated from the Originals, Painted by Mr. Wissing.’ Cooper appears to have had an arrangement with Wissing for the exclusive publication of his paintings. This portrait may have been placed because James II was touring the west of England in order to raise support for parliamentary members who would carry out his pro-Catholic policies. In August Luttrell wrote that: ‘The 23d, his majestie began his progresse into the west: that night he lay at Marlborough; the 24th at the duke of Beaufords at Badminton; the 25th at Bristoll; the 27th at Bridgewater, and saw Sedge moor in his passage; the 28th at the earl of Pembrokes at Wilton; the 29th at Southampton; the 30th at Portsmouth; and the 31st the king returned to Windsor.’ It is possible that the portrait was marketed towards consumers in the West Country.

In December 1686 Isaac Beckett and Alexander Browne advertised prints of ‘their Majesties Effigies, after the last Paintings. By Mr. Largilitere.’ Beckett’s notice was placed in The London Gazette of 9th December and Browne advertised in the same paper on 13th and 20th December. In this case the placement of two similar advertisements is not evidence for the sitters’ topicality. Griffiths suggests that Beckett and Browne both released reproductions of the painting of James II because of a confusion over who had the rights to reproduce the picture.

The Earl of Rochester died in July 1680. When Jacob Sampson advertised his portrait in The Term Catalogues in February 1681, he was responding to the considerable interest that had been aroused by the sitter’s deathbed repentance of his debauched life and his turn to Christianity.

Several tracts were published in 1680 and 1681 discussing Rochester and his conversion. Rochester’s conversion was seen as a victory against the growing atheism of the age because he had lived his life as an avowed atheist and his writings had personified the court’s debauchery.

Thomas Thynne’s portrait was advertised by Langley Curtis and Edward Cooper in the True Protestant Mercury of 21st February 1682 and later by Robert White in the same newspaper on 8th April.

Both advertisements appeared because Thynne was murdered in Pall Mall on 12th February after parting from his friend the Duke of Monmouth just fifteen minutes earlier.

Amidst the initial speculation surrounding the murder it was thought that it was ‘a design against him and the duke of Monmouth’ but it was soon discovered that his assassination had been ordered by his Swedish love rival Count Königsmark who “had some pretensions to the lady Ogle, whom Mr. Thin had since married:” [Luttrell, State Affairs, vol 1, p.164]

Königsmark and the three assassins were taken prisoner but the Count escaped to France after being released on bail. The other men were executed in early March. Thynne was buried in Westminster Abbey on 9th March.

Thynne’s murder excited a lot of attention including that of John Evelyn, who went to view the embalmed body of one of the murderers ‘it being one of the first, which was embaulmed by a particular art invented by one Will: Russell a Coffin Maker.’ [The diary and correspondence of John Evelyn, p.286.]

The portrait was part of a stream of printed response to the events.