To view all current artworks for sale visit philipmould.com

This portrait is one of only a handful of images that show Elizabeth I at the outset of her reign in 1558. She is shown in a simple black costume with an ermine trim and holds a pair of gloves in one hand and a prayer book in the other. The portrait is surprisingly un-regal and were it not for the well-established dating of this portrait type, one might find it hard to believe that this austere looking young woman had just acceded to the throne of England. After all, the best-known portraits of Elizabeth present her as the ‘Gloriana’ figure so well known to history, an ageless symbol of a nation, and fittingly immersed in jewels and elaborate costume. On her accession to the throne in 1558 Elizabeth faced a number of challenges. Under Elizabeth’s sister Mary, England had undergone a forced and violent programme of religious change designed to return the country to the Catholic fold after the Reformation introduced by Henry VIII and continued by Edward VI. Along with the issue of religious direction and tolerance, Elizabeth also had to overcome questions of her legitimacy amongst the Catholic population (she was later declared illegitimate by the Pope in 1570). There was also the question of Elizabeth’s sex to address, for to many Mary had set a distasteful precedent as England’s first queen regnant, and 1558 saw the publication of John Knox’s infamous ‘First Blast of the Trumpet Against The Monstrous Regiment of Women’. Such issues would certainly have influenced the way in which Elizabeth chose to be portrayed, together with other artistic factors discussed below. Unlike her predecessors, in the early years of her reign Elizabeth chose not to appoint an official court painter to record her likeness and to help oversee its dissemination. Portraiture had been used in England as a political tool since the early sixteenth century and was championed by Elizabeth’s father Henry VIII. Henry understood the importance of a talented portrait painter when trying to project an image of strength and power; his full-face portrait by Hans Holbein became an immediate icon of the age and remained a symbol of political loyalty throughout the sixteenth century. Elizabeth’s brother Edward VI followed his father’s lead and employed the services of William Scrots, who immortalised the boy king in a series of majestic full-length portraits dispersed at home and abroad.[1] Elizabeth’s sister Mary I likewise understood the power of portraiture and employed the skilled hand of Hans Eworth to record and share her likeness amongst her supporters.[2] Elizabeth, by contrast, was surprisingly slow to respond to the demand for her likeness and as a result her iconography of this period is sparse. It is clear that in the early years of her rule, the lack of up-to date portraits of Elizabeth caused problems, not least because it encouraged the circulation of poor-quality versions produced in the absence of an official likeness. As a result, in 1563 a draft proclamation was drawn up by William Cecil, Lord Burghley to try and prevent the sharing of unofficial images of the queen until ‘some special person that shall be by hir allowed shall have first finished a portraicture therof, after which finished, hir Majesty will be content that all other payntors, or gravors…Shall and maye at ther plesures follow the sayd patron or first portraictur’.[3] This was as much a prompt to the queen to sit for a portrait as it was a warning to those who produced inappropriate likenesses. Needless to say, the policing of portraiture was an impossible task and by this stage images of the young queen were already in circulation. The proclamation was never enacted, and the production of unofficial, debased portraits remained an issue for the duration of Elizabeth’s reign. The draft proclamation is interesting insofar as it shows that Elizabeth and her Privy Council were eager to adopt the well-established tradition of pattern-sharing, whereby an appointed artist would record an official likeness from life and then ‘all other payntors, or gravors’ would be able to replicate the portrait using a pattern or tracing. It is not known whether the present portrait-type of Elizabeth stemmed from a life-sitting, however, judging by the number of versions that survive, we can assume it was considered an ‘official’ likeness.[4] It is clear that it remained in circulation for longer than anticipated and is probably the type referred to rather disparagingly by Margaret of Parma later in 1567 as showing the queen ‘in black with a hoode and cornet’.[5] It is certainly true that by 1567 the present portrait would have appeared outdated and shockingly modest considering Elizabeth’s position on the global stage especially when compared to the work of more sophisticated European portraitists. Despite that, within the context of her early reign, it remains one of Elizabeth’s defining images. The present work is one of six known versions of this type. Of these, two show the queen half-length with both hands, and the other four show only the head and shoulders. The larger of these two types has become known as the ‘Clopton’ type, after the previous location at Clopton Hall of the largest surviving example formerly with this gallery. Examples of the smaller head and shoulders version can be found in the National Portrait Gallery, London, and in the Ancient House, Museum of Thetford Life, Norfolk. A further example, painted later in the eighteenth century and possibly copied from the present work, recently appeared on the London art market.[6] The dating of the portrait to around 1558– 1561 is supported by dendrochronological analysis (tree-ring dating) of the oak panel, which gives an earliest possible felling date as c.1535, and a most plausible creation date of c.1552 upwards. Technical analysis of both the present work and the NPG portrait confirms the artist or workshop used a face-pattern to outline the facial features before applying the paint. In the NPG portrait, infrared reflectography has shown that strong lines were applied to strengthen the outline of a transferred pattern. The pattern beneath, however, is hard to interpret due to the thick lines on top. The present work, by contrast, is easier to read and we know that the pattern was applied using a technique called ‘pouncing’. This involved pricking the outline of a pattern to create a series of tiny holes; the pattern was then laid onto a panel and ‘pounced’ by rubbing fine charcoal into the holes leaving a dotted outline of the face on the panel beneath. The outline could then be joined up using paint, ink or graphite. Curiously, X-ray analysis has revealed that the present work was painted over the top of another complete likeness of Elizabeth beneath (Fig.1). Oak panels were imported from the Baltic region and were costly, so it was not uncommon for panels to be recycled and updated with a subject’s latest likeness. The portrait beneath remains largely intact and makes a fascinating comparison with the image we see above. The costume appears to be more flamboyant, with a larger ruff and elaborate, padded sleeves. Elizabeth’s hands are positioned differently, and there is no prayer book. The portrait beneath does not correspond precisely with any earlier recorded portrait-type of Elizabeth and may instead have been an initial attempt by the artist to portray the young queen which was later revised. The reason for this may never be known, but it is possible that the initial portrait was judged improper at around the time of Elizabeth’s accession, and a desire may have been expressed for a more formal and becoming image of the new queen. This portrait of the young Elizabeth I reflects an as yet unambitious approach to her representation. In its modesty it reveals a young, cautious queen who has yet to master the use of portraiture for self-promotion. It shows restraint – something which Elizabeth would later abandon entirely in her portraiture – but also prudence, reflecting perhaps Elizabeth’s adopted motto – video et taceo – ‘I see and say nothing’.

[1] Strong, R. (1969) Tudor and Jacobean Portraits. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, Vol. I, pp. 93-94.

[2] Hearn, K. (1995) Dynasties: Painting in Tudor and Jacobean England 1530–1630. London: Tate Publishing, pp. 66-67.

[3] See Strong, R. (1987) Gloriana: The Portraits of Queen Elizabeth I. London: Thames and Hudson, pp. 13–14.

[4] For further information on this portrait-type see Strong, (1987) Gloriana, pp. 59-61.

[5] Kervyn de Lettenhove, J.M.B.C (ed.), (1882-1900) Relations Politiques des Pays-Bas et de l’Angleterre sous le régne de Philippe II. 11 Vols. Brussels, p. 470.

[6] Sotheby’s, London, 6 December 2012, lot 325.