Talk:Portraiture of Elizabeth I

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New article[edit]

Lots still to do here.

  • More on symbols of virginity (Yates!)
  • Text on the coronation portrait (added to caption)
  • List of painters
  • Sergeant painters etc (Hilliard, Gower)

- PKM (talk) 18:40, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I have no text in prep for the Tudor Dynasty section; feel free to jump in here (or anywhere). - PKM (talk) 18:58, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I killed it for now. - PKM (talk) 23:40, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
DYK submitted - PKM (talk) 19:15, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Housekeeping:

  • Consistency in citations.
  • Consistency in italicizing portrait titles (should place-names i.e. Ditchley Portrait be italicized? Quoted?)
    • I've chosen to go with italics throughout in this format: The Ditchley Portrait. - PKM (talk) 03:26, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since the article is on portraiture, we should probably add the media and gallery info for each image. Thoughts? Necessary?

- PKM (talk) 00:23, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still needed[edit]

  • Add later portrait section, include:
    •  DoneAssessment of the Rainbow Portrait (iconography, "Queen of Love and Beauty", portraiture and poetry connection, perhaps link to Accession Day tilt
    • Later portraits (Hardwick Hall etc.)
  •  Done Expand Ditchley

- PKM (talk) 18:18, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Done Scan Elizabeth and the Three Goddesses, section on early allegorical paintings and the Flemish exiles, some day.
  •  DoneRogers engravings

- PKM (talk) 08:01, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Euro section - refs later. How many portraits does Strong record - including contemporary copies? The sheer volume of them compared to what had gone before needs to be conveyed. Also that Eliz. was the entire remaining royal family, so no dissipation of effort from the painting of spouses, children etc.
    • I really can't get my hands on a count anywhere; Gloriana isn't a complete survey and I don't have the 1963 Portraits which attempted to be (and of course some have come to light since).
  •  Done Quibbles: "The fashionable long galleries of Elizabethan country houses were filled with sets of portraits, often at full-length." - Later they were, but there were not too many at this date, especially full-length, I think.
    • I'll tweak that. Done.
  •  Done "These artists typically managed a group of assistants and apprentices in a workshop or studio, producing original works and copies across several disciplines, including portrait miniatures, large-scale portraits, and illuminated manuscripts, and designing jewellery and medals." - needs to be restricted; Zuccaro might have had perhaps one assistant on his visit, & one doubts (& I think nobody knows) that Ketel had a large set-up when in London. Do we know of even Oliver designing jewellery? Johnbod (talk) 04:15, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Good points. Feel free to edit, or I will. - PKM (talk) 05:21, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reworded the info on studios; it was getting straggly and repetitive anyway.
    • Found another Hilliard miniature in color, whoo-hoo. - PKM (talk) 05:52, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • No doubt Philip left Mary a Titian or two of himself when he went back to Spain; does anyone mention it? Or whether the Medici had sent Bronzinos to London, which I expect they did. Johnbod (talk) 18:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Will look for this later. - PKM (talk) 18:30, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Got one Titian sorted - in fact the one I saw yesterday, probably back in London for the first time since 1558. Johnbod (talk) 04:13, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it ok if I add a gallery row on the foreign comparisons - ladies only I think? Mor Mary, a Bronzino, Coello, & maybe a French one (you must know the best available). Johnbod (talk) 18:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ha ha, I added images to your section before I read the Talk page (and before breakfast, which is why I didn't think to check here first!) Does what I did work, or should we make a "comparison" gallery? - PKM (talk) 18:30, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Those are good. It would be nice to fit Image:Isabel de Valois1.jpg by Anguissola in somewhere. Johnbod (talk) 19:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. - PKM (talk) 03:12, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The flattened, patterned & linear nature of the portraits needs to be addressed; Waterhouse is quite good on this, but all your refs must have much more, so I will leave. Also tying in more to neo-platonism bla bla - impresas the one thing the Elizabethan artists were happy to take from Europe etc. Johnbod (talk) 18:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • YES, we need all that.
    • Can you tackle impresas? What I have is very scattered.
Ok, I have only a short bit from Sir Roy's pension plan, but it will make a start. Johnbod (talk) 19:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done I've added a piece on "reading" the portraits to the overview, but I am torn whether is it needed up here to set the context or would be better as a conclusion at the end. What do you think?
Maybe at the end, or it will be a long read before the pictures are reached. Johnbod (talk) 19:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, trying that, then signing off for a bit. - PKM (talk) 19:22, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Great quote from Strong. - PKM (talk) 19:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done Also expanded on the historic myths, Golden Age, Athur, Aeneas, etc. We need to mention that the Tuccia story is from Petrach's Triumph of Chastity (and the ermine is from illustrations of it even though ermines are not in the text, [contradicted elsewhere] per Yates). I just have to figure out how to write that as a transition between the Sieve portraits and the ermine portrait.
    • I actually need to get out of the house for a few hours, so taking a break from this. But it feels much less like a very long stub now, thank you. - PKM (talk) 18:30, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done Another thing; no doubt Hearn etc point out the dependence of the Coronation portrait on Image:Richard II of England.jpg - the point could be made in the caption maybe. Johnbod (talk) 19:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Added to the caption. If we ever do a paragraph on the Coronation portrait in the text, we can elaborate. -PKM (talk) 02:37, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done Also Strong is cited as saying the crown & sceptre as props in Darnley is their first use. Does the earlier prototype of the Coronation portrait contradict this? Johnbod (talk) 21:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The distinction is the crown and sceptre as props rather than worn/carried (E. wears her crown in the 3 Goddesses picture, and Juno drops a sceptre presumably for E. to pick up). I should clarify that. - PKM (talk) 02:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fixed. - PKM (talk) 19:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Henry Holiday's illustration (1876) to the front cover of Lewis Carroll's The Hunting of the Snark compared to the Ditchley Portrait (a gift from Sir Henry Lee to Queen Elizabeth I, c. 1592) by Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger. Once this isn't OR anymore, you know where to find this comparison.

==Images needed==

  •  Done Teerlinc portrait miniatures Got'em. - PKM (talk) 22:17, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oliver miniature
  •  DoneSoftened versions of the Ditchley portrait
Got two of them - PKM (talk) 03:55, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- PKM (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • It will be extremely difficult to obtain images of Elizabeth I's jewellery as 99% of it was sold off or melted down by Oliver Cromwell during the interregnum. I have several excellent photos of Elizabeth's locket ring however? Danny (talk) 00:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anthonis Mor[edit]

Do we know anything about this (my bold - I expect this is EB 1911):"In 1553 he was sent to England, where he painted the portrait of Queen Mary I, perhaps one of his very noblest works; and in all probability the portraits of Sir Henry Sidney, and of Ambassador Simon Renard. That of Renard's wife was not painted until three years later. To this period should be attributed the miniature of Mary Tudor in the Duke of Buccleuch's collection, two portraits of Elizabeth at the age of twenty-one, one of which once belonged to Propert, and another even more notable, of Roger Ascham, now in the collection of Pierpont Morgan." - presumably these subject attributions are no longer maintained? Johnbod (talk) 21:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neither Strong 1963 or Hearn 1995 mention any portraits of Elizabeth dating to the 1550s, nor any attributed or even formerly attributed to Mor, though Hearn does mention a collection of portraits of anonymous women of this date by Mor. It seems highly unlikely to me that Mary I would have allowed Elizabeth's portrait to be painted by anybody in this period. Sounds like EB 1911 outdated info to me. - PKM (talk) 21:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We also need to do something with Hans Eworth. - PKM (talk) 02:38, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mask of Youth[edit]

Close reading of Gloriana shows that Strong is careful to distinguish between images based on the Darnley pattern into the 1590s and the Mask of Youth which he attributes to Hilliard and the late miniatures c.1594 and forward. I have rewritten to follow Strong's distinction.

I'm continuing to track down and add images to the Commons, so at some point we might want to expand the gallery.

I'll be intermittently working on this through the week. - PKM (talk) 03:01, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are now 103 images of various sorts in the Commons. There are a few more to add, and only one I really want that I can't find in color in a form to scan (the later Hilliard). - PKM (talk) 03:57, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Media[edit]

Terrific article, I'm adding this list as an afterthought..Modernist (talk) 05:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Partial list of actresses who portrayed Elizabeth I in Theater, TV and movies:

As a matter of interest...this link also:[1] Modernist (talk) 05:08, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words on the article. The actresses are listed in Cultural depictions of Elizabeth I of England; we should verify that the women in your list are all included there. - PKM (talk) 18:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added a theater section there...thanks..Modernist (talk) 23:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prints and Coins[edit]

I can contribute something on this. I picked up the catalogue for the National Maritime Museum exhibition since I last worked on this article, and that has good material. Where should we put it so we don't lose the current flow? - PKM (talk) 18:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Started new section. - PKM (talk) 19:19, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can anyone make out more detail on this 1585 sovereign than I can? The column on the left looks like it may have the pelican in her piety on top, but I can't make any sense out of the one on the right, and I've had no luck so far finding any descriptions of the engravings on the coinage.
We need to add medals/medallions. - PKM (talk) 21:10, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, compare this coin of Mary I - columns with curlicues. - PKM (talk) 21:20, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Rainbow Portrait[edit]

Hi, I have made a small adjustment to the Rainbow Portrait section as it inaccurately states that the artist is unknown. The painting is attributed to Isaac Oliver. Danny (talk) 20:57, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By whom? I keep seeing this noted on internet sites but who actually suggested that attribution, which doesn't seem all that likely to me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.222.240.176 (talk) 03:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On your list un-ticked[edit]

original version of the above

Attrib. Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger? Danny (talk) 21:12, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Looks modern to me, especially with those fantasy lips. qp10qp (talk) 22:10, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think the original is actually hanging in the NPG. I thought it was original at first. However, upon checking, this image has been enhanced. I'm looking for the original version. Danny (talk) 00:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I am trying to track this one down. At one time, lots of portraits were attributed to Gheeraerts, and i can't find any recent commentary on this one at all. It looks like its heavily varnished and hasn't been cleaned, so who knows? Will continue to dig.
      • Either way, I should copy it to the Commons and add it to the collection. - PKM (talk) 19:21, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some more you might like for this page[edit]

The "Allegory of Queen Elizabeth" circa 17th century


Queen Elizabeth, c.18th Century


Allegory of the Succession of King James I, c. 18th Century


Elizabeth I, the Peace Portrait


Danny (talk) 00:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth I's jewelley[edit]

I thought you might like to see one of the best examples of Elizabeth's surviving jewellery. The ring was created around 1570 and the portrait miniatures are by Nicholas Hilliard. It survived because it was hidden from Oliver Cromwell by members of King Charles's court. The ring is now part of the Chequers Trust Danny (talk) 00:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Elizabeth I Locket Ring.jpg
Queen Elizabeth's locket ring.
Queen Elizabeth's locket ring open.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Newman (talk • contribs) 00:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Portrait with overpainted snake[edit]

BBC article about it here [2] - it's going to go on display at the National Portrait Gallery later this month. Lovely article, by the way. 81.156.124.198 (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Portraiture of Elizabeth I of England. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:31, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Portraiture_of_Elizabeth_I&oldid=1209833029"