The Althorp Portrait
 
 

Called 'Lady Jane Grey'
Attributed to Lucas de Heere,
Oil on wood panel
21 x 15 inches
Collection of The Earl Spencer, Althorp House

 
 
 
     One of the lesser known but more heavily romanticized portraits identified as Lady Jane Grey is that in the collection of the Earls Spencer at Althorp (Northampton). It was engraved and reproduced often throughout the nineteenth century, first as an illustration for Thomas F. Dibdin's lengthily titled The Bibliographical Decameron; Or, Tens Days Pleasant Discourse Upon Illuminated Manuscripts, and Subjects Connected With Early Engraving, Typography, and Bibliography of 1817.[1] The picture largely passed from view in the twentieth century, however, for unknown reasons. Because Richard Davey and many others have extolled the painting as an undoubted and true likeness of Jane Grey taken from life by the artist Lucas de Heere, I found it is necessary to consider it carefully during my research on portraiture of Jane Grey.

     The Althorp House Visitor Notes pamphlet states that the painting represents Lady Jane Grey in her 16th year before her marriage when she still lived at her father’s home Bradgate. The painting has been identified as Jane since at least the eighteenth century, when it was inherited by the first Earl Spencer from his grandmother, Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough (d.1744). It has always been attributed the Netherlandish artist Lucas de Heere (1534–1584). The Notes go on to state that the landscape visible through the two windows is the town of Leicester. The painting has apparently never before been critically assessed by an academic. The results of my own examination of the photograph and associated research follows.

OBJECT DESCRIPTION:
     The painting is oil on wood panel reportedly measuring 21 x 15 inches. It is in a pre-modern ebonized and gilt frame. The painting itself appears to be in overall good condition, though no conservator’s assessment is available.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:
     According to the 5th Earl Spencer (d.1910), the painting has been identified as a depiction of Lady Jane Grey as far back as the seventeenth century.[2] Sir George Scharf, director of the National Portrait Gallery from 1857 until 1895, disputed the traditional identification and suggested that the painting was instead a stylized depiction of Mary Magdalene. Scharf based his identification on the presence of the large covered vessel, which he reasoned denoted the ointment jar commonly associated with Mary Magdalene. The late-Victorian-era novelist/biographer Richard Davey derided Scharf’s identification as unreasonable and attributed it to Scharf’s unspecified prejudices. Davey argued that the Spencer portrait was almost identical to a portrait in the collection of the Trivulzio family of Milan that has always been known as a portrait of Lady Jane Grey. Davey also claimed that Jane had held in her possession several vessels similar to the one seen in the painting, at least according to purported inventories of her effects.[3] Davey failed to cite those inventories, however, and no inventories for Jane Grey’s personal property that include covered vessels are known today. Since family traditions are often problematic, it is necessary to set them aside and to assess the painting objectively and without reference to prior assessments.

IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
     The painting depicts a woman of young but otherwise indeterminate age. She is seated in an elaborately carved wooden armchair and turned slightly to the viewer’s left. Her head is tilted down, and her eyes are lowered as though engaged with the book that is open on the reading desk beside her. Her right hand turns a page of the book, a richly illuminated manuscript, while her left hand rests on the arm of the chair. There is a covered table in the foreground to the viewer’s right on which stands a large chased golden goblet, chalice, or vessel with a lid. Over the lady’s right shoulder we see a large glazed window with diamond shaped panes, looking onto what appears to be a pastoral scene of a hillside with two cedar trees, as well as trees of other types. Over her left shoulder is the figured frame and lintel of an open doorway that gives onto a darkened room. On the far wall of that room is a second window, through which the silhouette of a spire or tower appears in the distance.

     The woman has an oval shaped face with a short chin. Because the eyes are partially closed, it is difficult to determine their color, though they appear dark. The eyebrows are thin and positioned unusually high on the forehead. Her nose is very straight and has a high bridge of the type often referred to as ‘Grecian.’ Her lips are quite full, almost sensuous in appearance, but her mouth is narrow, resulting in a ‘bee-stung’ effect. Her hair is a reddish-brown or auburn and has numerous short, regular waves similar to modern crimping. She wears her hair parted in the center and drawn tightly down the sides of the head over the ears, then pulled back behind the head.

     The lady’s costume consists of a dress of a vivid red velvet-like fabric, showing no woven pattern, brocade, embroidery, or other embellishment. The bodice is shaped to follow the form of the breasts and squared across the top. There is a thin border of plain black trim along the upper edge of the bodice. The skirt is constructed of the same red fabric as the bodice. It appears to be free of supports or farthingales, since it lies in natural folds on the lady’s lap. Her waist is encircled by a girdle chain comprised of round gold links. The junction of the chain is embellished with a small buckle set with a single dark stone. Two strands of minute beads in shades of blue, red, and yellow hang from the buckle and lie supported in the folds of the skirt. The two strands appear both to connect to a single golden tassel at their ends.

     The voluminous oversleeves of the dress are constructed of the same red velvet-like fabric, but they are lined in black. Each oversleeve is attached to the bodice only along the axillary margin, so that the edges of the sleeves and bodice combine to create a wide rectangular frame for the shoulders. The oversleeves have been drawn up, inside out, and affixed to the shoulder, exposing a close-fitting undersleeve, also black. The simple white ruffles of the cuffs of a chemise are visible at each wrist, without discernible blackwork or other embellishment.

     The lady’s headgear consists of a white coif worn at the back of the head and secured under the chin. No goffering or other trim is seen on the coif. Overlying the coif is a hood in the French style. The hood has a rounded crown with a low profile and its sides descend to the angle of the jaw, completely covering the ears. It is secured under the chin like the coif. The hood is in two parts, the anterior portion being white and lying close to the head, while the posterior portion is salmon pink and upright. The hood has a nether billiment at its anterior edge consisting of simple figured goldwork. The upper billiment is also of goldsmith’s work but in a more complex pattern, and it appears to be set with stones. Additional trim of thin passamayne, or gold cording, marks the junction of the anterior and posterior portions of the hood. A black fall is visible attached to the back of the hood and enclosing the hair. Rather than being allowed to fall naturally down the back of the neck, it has been pulled up and forward over the crown of the head and secured to the upper edge of the hood in a ‘bongrace.’

     Other than the girdle chain and hood billiments, the lady’s jewels are limited to a single wide chain worn across the full width of the shoulders and lying high on the chest. It is comprised of chased or filigreed goldsmith’s work set with several round pearls and other rectangular stones. The central stone appears yellowish, consistent with citrine or topaz, while the others are dark, perhaps amethysts or rubies. No rings, brooches, or pendants are displayed.

     The table in the right foreground is covered with a geometrically–patterned woven textile, probably a carpet of the type known in the period as ‘Turkey carpet.’ Standing on the table is a large golden vessel with a pedestal–and–stem base. The lower half of the bowl of the vessel is elaborately chased in a floral pattern. The bulbous stem is similarly chased, but also displays three small human faces. The foot of the vessel is simply fluted. The lid of the vessel is also fluted, with the addition of a beaded center roundel surmounted by a finial with an acanthus leaf design. Atop the finial stands a figure of a man in the Greco–Roman heroic style.

     The lady appears to be engaged in reading a book, which is itself a colorfully illuminated and illustrated manuscript. The left-hand page is entirely covered with the finely painted figure of a bearded man wearing robes and walking outdoors. The image is framed by a wide golden border decorated with various floral motifs, none of which are definitively identifiable. The same floral-decorated bordering is repeated around the initial of the text seen on the right-hand page. The initial is a large and rather plain letter ‘O.’ The subsequent text is rendered in both black and red, but is illegible on account of having apparently been lined through entirely. The next right-hand page of the book is partially visible and is likewise richly illuminated. A single metallic closure clasp is visible at the edge of the front cover of the book. A pattern of cross-hatching is barely discernible in the gold coloring of the end-edges of the book’s pages.

ANALYSIS OF THE PAINTED IMAGE:
     The costume worn by the woman depicted, especially the French hood, offers some clues as to the time–period during which the painting was created. Recent research by Louise Pass has more accurately delineated the chronology of the development of the French hood.[4] The hood seen in this portrait, with its crescent shape, low profile, rounded crown and forward-swept sides, is identified by Pass as reaching peak popularity in the 1520s and 1530s. Hoods of very similar design are seen in the copied portrait of Anne Boleyn now in the National Portrait Gallery (NPG 668, below left), as well as in the miniature portrait of Mary Tudor by Lucas Horenbout (NPG 6453, below center) from circa 1521–25 and the wedding portrait of Mary Tudor Brandon (collection of the Duke of Bedford, below right) circa 1516. French hoods of the 1540s and thereafter assumed a flat crown, the profile became more elevated, and the sides swept backward to the nape of the neck rather than forward to the jaw-line.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     The lady’s costume also offers some clues as to the regional origin of the painting. Bodices on the dresses of English women in the first half of the sixteenth century were typically heavily boned and relatively rigid, so that the entire front of the bodice was flat on the vertical line. This largely concealed the shape of the covered breasts and produced an androgynous silhouette. In contrast, feminine costumes seen in northern continental paintings of the same period often include bodices that follow the natural outline of the breasts. Hans Holbein’s Venus and Amor of ca.1524 (below, left) displays a bodice that not only follows the female form, but that is also extensively slashed in order to emphasize the shape of the breasts.[5] Similarly, the portrait of Katharina von Bora, wife of Martin Luther, painted in 1526 by Lucas Cranach the Elder (below, center) reveals an hour-glass shaped bodice that again fully reveals the natural outline of the female breasts.[6] Lastly, a bodice nearly identical to that worn by the Althorp lady is seen in the picture of Saint Catherine by the Netherlandish artist known only as ‘The Master of the Female Half Lengths’ (below, right)[7]. Indeed, much of the work of this last artist bears numerous striking similarities to the painting under consideration.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A DIGRESSION ON ‘THE MASTER OF THE FEMALE HALF LENGTHS’
     The identity of the unknown ‘Master’ has been disputed since he was first identified in the nineteenth century as a distinct artist. At present, ‘he’ is thought actually to have been a group or workshop of artists rather than one individual. Similarly, the location of that workshop is also a matter of debate, though most scholars agree that it was located in the Low Countries, perhaps Antwerp, Bruges, Ghent, or Mechelen. The artist or workshop was most active in the 1520s and 1530s. It was relatively prolific in its production of small panel paintings depicting individual women or small groups of women, usually aristocratic in appearance, and often engaged in either personal devotion or music-making.[8] Because ‘The Master’ created so many paintings of such striking similarity to each other, it is usually assumed that ‘he’ was working to meet the demands of an emerging consumer market calling for small-scale, affordable works of art for domestic decorative purposes.[9] Most of his works were therefore not commissioned portraits of actual people, but rather ‘pretty pictures’ of imaginary people intended for speculative sale and quick profit.

     The women portrayed by ‘The Master’ are all of a highly distinctive type. Each has an oval face sometimes described as ‘heart-shaped.’ Almost without exception, the women have wavy or crimped hair worn parted in the center and draped over the ears. The nose is usually straight with a high bridge. The eyebrows are characteristically thin and located high on the forehead. The ladies’ heads are frequently turned in a three-quarter view, and they are equally often tilted down. The gaze is almost always lowered. The same basic costume consisting of velvet dress with shapely bodice and a French hood with a bongrace is seen repeatedly in numerous separate works. In a few examples, individual costume elements are virtually identical to those of the Althorp lady, as will be noted shortly. Further, the majority of known works by ‘The Master’ situate the subject(s) in a paneled room, frequently with a doorway looking onto an adjoining room. There are usually windows present, most with diamond-shaped panes and some with churches and spires or towers visible in the distance. As with the Althorp painting, many of ‘The Master’s’ works include a large and prominently placed covered vessel, emblematic of Mary Magdalene’s ointment jar, leading art historians to identify that subset of ‘his’ paintings as depictions of Magdalene.

     Comparison of other specific elements contained in the works of ‘The Master’ to corresponding elements in the Althorp painting is revealing. For example, the face and head of the woman in the Althorp painting (below, left) is identical in almost every respect to the face and head (below, center) of the lady in Female Musician now at the Savoy Gallery in Turin (below, right).[10] The only readily discernible physical difference is in the neck, that of the Musician being somewhat shorter and perhaps thicker. Additionally, the headgear worn by the Musician is identical in every respect, including color and embellishment, to that worn by the Althorp lady. Further, the Musician wears a nearly identical red velvet dress with black edging at the bodice and pinned-up oversleeves, though her undersleeves are slashed while those of the Althorp lady are not.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     The same costume elements appear repeatedly in other paintings by ‘The Master,’ including another version of a lady playing a lute that sold through Christie’s auction house in December 2009 (below, far left ). Once again, the lute player’s headgear is the same as that of both the Althorp lady and the Musician in style, color, and embellishment. The dress is nearly so, the only differences being the addition in the Christie’s version of gold accent trim between the red fabric of the bodice and its black edging, and she wears only a chemise beneath her pinned-up oversleeves, without undersleeves. The face and head of the lute player are yet again remarkably similar to both the Musician and the Althorp lady, suggesting the possibility that the artist was working from a pattern.[11] Lastly, the wide necklace worn high across the shoulders of the Althorp lady is nearly identical to necklaces worn by sitters in at least three other paintings attributed to ‘The Master’: St Mary Magdalene Writing (detail, below, center-left, note as well the similarity of the dress and headgear), St Mary Magdalene Playing a Lute (below center-right), and the singer in Musicians (detail, below, far right).
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     Other elements seen in the Althorp painting likewise appear repeatedly in various paintings by ‘The Master.’ The one recurring most frequently is a large covered vessel, already mentioned, which is seen in almost a dozen of ‘his’ works, though not all of those works are currently identified as Magdalenes. The vessels vary widely in style and size, though all are lidded. Some are elaborately and entirely chased and repoussé in floral patterns while others are only partially decorated or display geometric patterns. Most are on pedestal stems, though at least one has four splayed feet (and engraved male portrait heads around the bowl).[13] They appear to range in size from a few inches to well over a foot tall. Many are placed on a table close to and/or in front of the sitter (above, center-right, and the Savoy Musician, second above, far right), while a few of the larger specimens appear on the sill of a window over the sitter’s right shoulder (above, far left). Many of the lids support finials, though the finial seen in the Althorp painting is among the tallest and one of only two that feature a natural human figure.[14] A third is surmounted by a winged cupid, or putto.[15]

ANALYSIS OF THE PAINTED IMAGE:
     A brief consideration is necessary of Richard Davey’s claim in 1909, noted above, of having seen a photograph of a painting in the possession of the Trivulzio family of Milan which was ‘always’ identified as a portrait of Lady Jane Grey. Davey reported that the Trivulzio picture was ‘almost identical’ to the Althorp painting.[16]The Trivulzio collection was sold in 1935, with a portion passing into the ownership of the city of Milan and now housed at the Castello Sforzesco. No portrait identified as Lady Jane Grey or otherwise comparable to the Althorp painting is currently in that collection. A smaller part of the collection was sold to the city of Turin and is now in the Galleria Sabauda, or Savoy Gallery, current home of ‘The Master’s’ Female Musician (above).[17] It is therefore exceedingly likely that the Trivulzio’s painting seen by Davey in a photograph was, in fact, Female Musician, the sitter in which does indeed bear an exceptionally strong resemblance to the lady in the Althorp painting, as discussed above. The Female Musician is no longer identified as Lady Jane Grey, however (if, indeed, it ever was so identified).

     Despite the Spencer family tradition and Davey’s argument that both identify the painting as Lady Jane Grey (or alternatively as a ‘representation’ of her), the evidence suggests otherwise. The details in the construction of the lady’s costume indicate that the painting was created in the second or third decade of the sixteenth century, as noted above, and therefore before Jane Grey was born.[18] Further, the red color of her dress was typically used by early modern artists to denote Mary Magdalene, just as light blue was used to denote the Virgin Mary. (Most of the other depictions of Mary Magdalene by ‘The Master of the Female Half Lengths’ likewise utilize red gowns to symbolize Magdalene.) The presence here, however, of the large vessel in the right foreground, symbolic of Magdalene’s ointment jar, is the strongest single indicator that the painting was explicitly intended by the artist to portray Mary Magdalene, albeit in a contemporary context. Such imaginary portrayals of ancient Biblical figures in sixteenth-century costumes and settings were actually quite common. Further, comparison to other works that appear to depict the same woman in the same or very similar costume and setting indicate that Magdalene was a popular subject with ‘The Master’.

     The illustration visible on the left-hand page of the manuscript again supports the conclusion that the woman depicted in the painting is Mary Magdalene. She was an exceptionally popular inspirational figure throughout northern Europe, both before and immediately after the Reformation. Her popularity in England was such that her feast day continued to be observed in the reformist English First Book of Common Prayer of 1549, even as all other saints’ feast days were eliminated.[19] She was most often, however, a conflation of at least three separate and distinct Marys: the penitent harlot who washed Christ’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment[20]; Mary of Bethany, the contemplative sister of Martha and Lazarus[21]; and the woman from whom Christ exorcized seven demons.[22] The last of these three was also present at the Garden Tomb when Christ rose from the dead. We can therefore surmise that while the inclusion in the painting of the large covered vessel was intended by the artist to represent the first of the three conflated Marys, the illustration in the manuscript represents the second and third of the three Marys. That is, Mary Magdalene is portrayed by the artist as reading a devotional text, itself an act of religious contemplation consistent with Mary of Bethany, and simultaneously gazing upon an iconographic representation of her spiritual lord and master, Jesus Christ, at the moment of his resurrection, to which the third Mary was a witness.

     The text of the manuscript depicted in the painting, to the extent that it is visible in the photograph provided, appears to have been deliberately and carefully lined through by someone other than the original artist and at some point after the creation of the painting. If it has indeed been struck out, the reasons for that action are not immediately clear. It may represent an effort by some early owner to minimize the association with Magdalene and to render the painting less religiously-themed in overall tone and character. Alternatively, an early owner may have objected to the actual content of the text, which was almost certainly originally rendered legible by the artist and therefore readable by any literate viewer.[23] The text may be a Roman Catholic Book of Hours, for example, which a post-Reformation Protestant English owner would have found objectionable.

     It is exceedingly unlikely that the person portrayed in the painting was intended by the artist even to represent Lady Jane Grey. In the first instance, the painting was almost certainly created in the 1520s or 1530s, and thus before Jane Grey was born or out of infancy. Additionally, Jane was idealized beginning immediately after her death in February 1554 as a specifically Protestant martyr, one of the first of the Catholic regime of ‘Bloody Mary’. It would have been inconsistent with early Protestant martyrology to correlate Jane with Mary Magdalene since the latter was herself closely associated with Roman Catholic belief in saints and, in her conflated form, with harlotry and penitence. In contrast, Jane was considered virtually innocent, both spiritually and politically, and extolled as a model of Protestant feminine piety, such that she was not needful of specific penitence. And while the red of the sitter’s gown is often considered the color of martyrdom, the religious symbolism of colors is a traditionally Catholic motif, as exemplified in the use of prescribed seasonal liturgical colors for Roman Catholic priests saying the Mass. Protestants largely eschewed such symbolism, making it less likely that an artist would portray a martyred Jane Grey in symbolically red clothing.

     The artist of this painting has traditionally been identified as Lucas de Heere, who was born in Ghent in about 1534. De Heere’s own date of birth makes it impossible for him to have created this work, however, since it dates to no later than 1540. Like his near-contemporaries Hans Holbein and Antonio Mor, de Heere worked extensively in England in the sixteenth century. He did not arrive in London until 1567, however, more than a decade after Jane Grey’s death. Again like Holbein and Mor, de Heere went on to enjoy a period of revived popularity in the nineteenth century, when he was for a time the ‘artist du jour’ among Victorian-era art historians. Innumerable paintings were incorrectly attributed to him in the nineteenth century on no stronger grounds than that he was thought (often incorrectly) to have been in England at the time a particular work was believed to have been painted. Almost all of those misattributions have since been reassigned by modern art historians, so that de Heere’s confirmed corpus of work is now relatively small. De Heere can be eliminated, with confidence, as the artist of this work.

CONCLUSION:
      The evidence contained within the painted image instead suggests very strongly that the woman depicted is an imaginary version of Mary Magdalene portrayed in sixteenth-century garb and setting. Contrary to Spencer family tradition and the assessment in 1909 made by the novelist/biographer Richard Davey, the Althorp lady cannot reasonably be identified as Lady Jane Grey, whether as a life portrait or a posthumous representation. She is almost certainly an imaginary representation of Mary Magdalene.

          The Althorp painting is undoubtedly attributable to the Flemish artist or group of artists known as ‘The Master of the Female Half Lengths.’ It completely corresponds, in terms of artistic style and overall composition, general subject matter, and specific individual elements of content, to a majority of the known works by that artist or studio.
 
 
 

 

J. Stephan Edwards, Ph.D.
Palm Springs, California
26 May 2010

 
 
  NOTES :      
 
[1]
 
Thomas Frognall Dibdin, The Bibliographical Decameron; Or, Tens Days Pleasant Discourse Upon Illuminated Manuscripts, and Subjects Connected With Early Engraving, Typography, and Bibliography, Vol. III (London: W. Bulmer and Company, 1817), 249.
 
 
     
 
[2]
 
The 5th Earl Spencer as quoted in Richard Davey, The Nine Day’s Queen: Lady Jane Grey and Her Times (New York: G.P. Putnams, 1909), 360.
 
 
     
 
[3]
 
Richard Davey, The Nine Day’s Queen: Lady Jane Grey and Her Times (New York: G.P. Putnams, 1909), 360–361.
 
 
     
 
[4]
 
Louise Pass, The French Hood: The Evolution and Construction of the French Hood, 1500–1600, accessed 20 February 2010.
 
 
     
 
[5]
  Hans Holbein the Younger, Venus and Amor, Inventory No. 323, Kunstmuseum, Basle, Switzerland. The painting was created in Basle prior to Holbein’s first move to England in 1526.  
 
     
 
[6]
 
Lucas Cranach the Elder, Katharina von Bora, Museum of Wartburg, Germany.
 
 
     
 
[7]
 
Master of the Female Half Lengths, Saint Catherine, Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan, Italy.
 
 
     
 
[8]
 
Circle of the Master of the Female Half Lengths, The Collectors: Old Master Paintings [Exhibition Catalogue], edited by Roy Bolton (London: Sphinx Books, 2009), 124–125; Grove Dictionary of Art, s.v., ‘Master of the Female Half Lengths’.
 
 
     
 
[9]
 
On the emergence in the Low Countries of a consumer-driven market in decorative art for the domestic setting, see Filip Vermeylen, ‘Exporting Art Across the Globe: The Antwerp Art Market in the Sixteenth Century’, Nederlands kunsthistorisch jaarboek Vol. 50 (1999),12–29; Neil De Marchi, ‘The Antwerp-Mechelen Production and Export Complex’, In His Milieu: Essays on Netherlandish Art in Memory of John Michael Montias, edited by Amy Golhany, Mia Mochizuki, and Kisa Vergara (Amsterdam University Press, 2007).
 
 
     
 
[10]
 
Master of the Female Half Lengths, Female Musician, Galleria Sabauda (Savoy Gallery), Museum of Turin, Italy.
 
 
     
 
[11]
 
The use of patterns by artists of the sixteenth century is well documented, and numerous pattern books have survived.
 
 
     
 
[12]
 
Master of the Female Half Lengths, St Mary Magdalene Writing, Czartoryski Collection, National Museum, Krakow, Poland; St Mary Magdalene Playing a Lute, Private Collection; and Musicians, The State Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg, Russia.
 
 
     
 
[13]
 
Master of the Female Half Lengths, St Mary Magdalene Writing, Private Collection, accessed 5 April 2010.
 
 
     
 
[14]
 
The other being the painting sold through Christies in December 2009 (see above).
 
 
     
 
[15]
 
Master of the Female Half Lengths, St. Mary Magdalen Playing a Lute, Pinacoteca, Turin, Italy.
 
 
     
 
[16]
 
See n. 3 above.
 
 
     
 
[17]
 
Alfred Scharf, ‘Two Neglected Works by Filippino Lippi’, The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs 7:412 (July 1937), 4.
 
 
     
 
[18]
 
Jane Grey is traditionally thought to have been born at the same time as Edward VI, i.e., October 1537. Recent research has shown, however, that she was actually born somewhat earlier, probably in late 1536. See J. Stephan Edwards, ‘On the Date of Birth of Lady Jane Grey’, Notes and Queries 54 (Sept 2007) 3: 240–242; ‘A Further Note on the Date of Birth of Lady Jane Grey Dudley’, Notes and Queries 55 (June 2008) 2: 146–148.
 
 
     
 
[19]
 
The Feast of St Mary Magdalene was eventually eliminated from the English Church with the publication of the Second Book of Common Prayer of 1552, though she remained a popular religious cult figure among the English for some time thereafter. See Eamon Duffy, The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England 1400–1580 (Yale University Press, 1992).
 
 
     
 
[20]
 
Described in Luke 7: 36–50.
 
 
     
 
[21]
 
Described in Luke 10: 38–42.
 
 
     
 
[22]
 
Mark 16: 9. For a concise discussion of the conflation of the various New Testament Marys as one Mary Magdalene, see H. Colin Slim, ‘Mary Magdalene, Musician and Dancer’, Early Music 8 (October 1980) 4: 460–461.
 
 
     
 
[23]
 
Northern European artists are well known for their ability to depict objects, including manuscripts and printed texts, in exceeding detail. Indeed, entire academic studies have been conducted of the detailed sheet music depicted in musically-themed paintings by ‘The Master of the Female Half Lengths’ specifically. See, for example, H. Colin Slim, ‘Paintings of lady concerts and the transmission of Jouissance vous donneray’,Imago Musicae 1 (1984), 51–73.
 
         
         
 
    Introduction to Portraiture of Lady Jane Grey
 
    The Anglesey Abbey Portrait      The Bodleian Library Portrait  
                 
    The Chawton House–Hever Castle Portrait                 The Elliot–Gedling House Portrait  
                 
    The Fitzwilliam Museum Portrait     The Houghton Hall Portrait  
                 
    The Jersey Portrait     The King’s College Portrait  
                 
    The Madresfield Court Portrait     The Melton Constable Hall Portrait  
                 
    The Norris Portrait     The Northwick Park Portrait   
                 
    The Portland Portrait      The Rotherwas Portrait  
                 
    The Somerley Portrait     The Streatham Portrait  
                 
    The Syon House Portrait      The van de Passe Engraved Portrait  
                 
    The Wrest Park Portrait     The Yale Miniature  
                 
    Other Portraits Called
‘Lady Jane Grey’
         
                 
                 
 


Historian "at" somegreymatter "dot" com

Page created 27 May 2010, Revised 18 July 2012

Copyright © 2005 – 2014, J. Stephan Edwards
May not be reproduced in part or in whole without written permission of the author.