Beneath the Surface: An Exquisite Tudor Face Emerges
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- Occasionally, pictures survive in such good condition that they appear almost disarmingly fresh and modern, so attuned is our eye to looking at works damaged by dirt, abrasion and neglect. In this talk, Lawrence Hendra, Head of Research at Philip Mould and Company, will discuss an exceptional 16th century portrait, attributable to the Master of the Countess of Warwick, which represents one of the finest small panel portraits of the period.
#tudor #tudorportrait #tudorportraits #portrait #portraitpainter #masterpiece #masterpiecelondon #research
Excellent video please keep them coming !!!!
What a pleasure to watch. Thank you. It certainly deepens one s appreciation to have it explained so knowledgably.
back stories like this make sometimes make the hairs on my arms stand up -love it when it does! The painting of Mary feels even more like a portal directly back to the time she was actually sitting for this-history coming to life for me
Thank you Mr. Hendra for this wonderfully intimate art lesson.
Loved it, beautiful portrait. Mr Hendra's moustache is almost as impressive as Senor Cervantes' in his youth ;)
Fascinating video. I love it when art videos go into the relevancy of clothing and jewelry and hairstyles, there's a ton of information one may divine from a gown.
Well done. I really enjoyed hearing this artistic tale.
I thought this was a 1970's film at first, with his throwback hair and mustache. He doesn't seem to be of this time.
I expected it to be a humorous satire, like a Ron Burgundy of the art world. The reality is that it is quite informative!
Pretty cool!
I reckon his Maxi is parked outside. Definitely, he is striving for the 1972 look !
He also reminds me of one of the Kids in the Hall, whose name escapes me....
I have been to Warwick Castle...they have Queen Elizabeth's 1st side saddle, it looks like a child's. And Marie Antoinette's room is eye boggling. However the blue moder clok on the outside of the castle is a terrible eye sore. Loved the Peacocks in the grounds. Enjoyed the video.
Dont ever go to stirling castle or at least pay to get in (see clips on YT instead)........the only authentic thing there is the view of the exterior which you can see for free from any angle (quite impressive)..........all the interior is fake and freshly painted artwork on ceilings,walls,etc........it doesnt stop the tourists queuing up to see the staged setting as they think its all real......the tour guides darent tell them the truth but as no-one asks they are tight lipped LOL.
Stirling Castle has recreated what it would have looked like inside **as it was in Mary Stuart's time**. Dover Castle did a similar project. They utilised nearly long forgotten crafts by craftsmen and women (often historical re-enactors doing this work - termsed "Experimental archaeology"). The effect is close to what was in place in the time period in question. Otherwise, all we see now is the blank "skeleton" of the building. That isn't what was lived in. In a time of no electrical light, bright colours were common.
Well presented.
Who knew Ron Burgundy was into art?
Beautiful work, amazinggggggggggggg detail on the dress and necklace, hard to believe its in this condition from the 1500s.
I wish you'd utilize the closed-caption option that RUclips offers, rather than including captions that cannot be turned off. You're talking "exquisite details" and the captions are covering parts of those details. I appreciate captions as I don't hear very well myself, but I don't like when I don't have the option to turn them off. It's very distracting and a bit frustrating.
Thank you for your suggestion. We have taken it on board and posted our latest video, 'Masters in Miniature: Hilliard and Oliver' without subtitles.
Philip Mould & Co no! I am deaf and I need subtitles. All the person wanted was the ability to turn them off. Please rethink as it is so frustrating when subs are not enabled. Bloggers miss out on so many potential subscribers because of that.
Lovely portrait. For a moment there, I thought it was going to be an old film of Philip; then again, we've seen him in 1998, and so, this would obviously not be Philip.
Question: is this a period 16th century frame?
Question that on further videos up might answer, why was black cloth so expensive, I’m assuming because of the dyes required? why did this specific portrait survive so well relative to others from this period. thanks
Good Questions.
@@rosered103 In Queen Elizabeth's portraits, she is usually wearing black, red, purple or white , all of which were very expensive dyes, or in the case of white, difficult to keep pristine. Black was also considered very elegant.
Yes, the darker, richer the dye, the more expensive due to various processes. A darker colour may require the fabric or the thread to be dyed multiple times to get the required depth of colour. Black in particular could fade over time so just having it initially shows that the purchaser is a person of means to spend money on fabric that may well need to be discarded when it has faded. It is also possible to see decorative elements in the black gown. It has borders of another fabric, still in black with embroidery in black on it. It is not easy to see what fabric the gown is but it could be a very very fine wool or wool/silk mix, with a black silk velvet borders with black silk embroidery or couching on it. Then the sleeves and partlet and ruff (I do not think the sleeves or the partlet ARE the chemise) exquisitely embroidered with more black silk and gold work. The hood is likely to be black velvet. I research and make historical costumes, particularly of the Tudor period, and this is on my "wish list". (Note: my comment the sleeves are NOT the "chemise" (which itself is an incorrect term - it should be smock) is that in the 1560s it was common for partlet and sleeve sets to be given as gifts and often embroidered "wrought with blak silke" is a common phrase. The fabric is likely a very high quality linen. They would be lightly stitched into the bodice and easily removed and replaced. The actual plainer smock (again of linen but maybe more hardwearing but still very high quality, would be worn underneath and protect this very expensive embroidered work from the body oils. Laundering such a pair of sleeves, partlet and ruffs, would require specialist skills. Though Mistress Potter was wealthy she would have made certain this gown was kept in tip top condition.
I share your wonderment about this very unusual perfect condition painting, almost 450 years old. Is there not a certain chance this is a later painting made to appear from the 16th century? 🤔 The veins on the temple and cosmetically operated lips (so popular today) raise some additional doubt. The provenance not knowing the artist is an additional uncertainty. However, I assume the usual rigorous forensic investigations have supported this painting’s correct age and authenticity, in which case it is a one of a kind masterpiece indeed 😊
I would like to know more. First glance, I have my doubts.
A bit off topic but that moustache really works for him. Great look 👍🏻
Is this from the 1970's? 🤔
It's possible that the artist used a lot of lead drier in the carbon black. Added as either a ground lead glass, or perhaps through the use of a lead painting dish the paint had been allowed to sit upon for a day or more. Any added lead would have helped to harden up the carbon black paint film more than is usual for this colour.
Does the head look so large compared to the waist?
Some painters used pitch as black I believe (?)
It's very intricate indeed, but so does some portraits featuring Henry VIII as well, I think.
the face is very roughly executed (or reworked)
I don't wish to be mean, however I don't agree with notion that this is very early for English Portraiture. Meynnart Wewyck's work-now that is very early for English portraiture. Holbein can be considered early English portraiture. Elizabethean portrait? Nope.
Why would black be an expensive pigment? Is it not generally just carbon in one type or another, charred bones or soot?
It is not the pigment that is expensive; it is the black cloth that she is wearing that is a sign of wealth.
Its the processing of creating such a deep rich dark colour. Often the fabric requires multiple dye baths to get the saturation. such a colour is also prone to fading.
NOW WE KNOW WHERE LORD LUCAN HAS BEEN HIDING OUT ALL THESE YEARS. lol
He's saying stuff that my eyes don't see.
What if it had been Alfred e Newman
Get rid of the SUBTITLES please. They are just in the way of the art.
😳
Impressive mispronunciation of the word chemise in two different ways
It’s remarkable how much intricate detail is put into the drapery but the portrait is rather crude by comparison. The planes aren’t well defined and the proportions are off.
This is screaming to be a hilarious parody video... just needs some dead pan humour.
Same I genuinely thought this was a parody before I clicked
Dodgy mustache.
Very dodgy and dodgy hair
B
get rid of that moustache!
Don't be so rude! I think it looks rather suave and it suits him - a bit of 70s vibe going on.
Yes it does make him look like a 70's porn star ! It must be a 'look'.
@@TheFiown I'll have to take your word for that. I've never needed to resort to porn, 70s or otherwise.
@@Sparrowdean Me neither although I did look once many years ago and was surprised that it was so boring, but each to hi/her own. I was making a little joke, this young man is going for a retro look and doesn't look like he takes himself too seriously. Besides when I look in a mirror I am in no position to criticise anyone ! xo
His moustache and sideburns are majestic! It's nice to see an attractive man with some style.
No way is that painting from the 1500s.
art galleries/auctioneers/valuers & appraisers are so corrupt they would knowingly sell it as an original 1500,s painting even if it was painted last week...............they are not to be trusted 1 inch any of them.....its all about ££££ commission.
@@geoffdundee Agree! I bet 96% of the time, they will take a forged painting and auction it off for big money. The art world is very corrupt. Even the buyers are!
@@KayInMaine .art auctioneers-dealers/car dealers/estate agents.............all crooks :)
Your expertise is....what? Please provide evidence as to why this is not from the 1500s? We are all curious to know.
@@myladyswardrobe Yes, evidence please. Inquiring minds want to know!
Please consider that the artist may well have been a rare FEMALE portrait artist. We already know of a number of female European artists of that very same era, so why not ask this question? Why oh why do museum curators always default to MEN?