Today’s featured portrait is a superb example of twentieth century miniature portraiture. Personally, it is one of my favorites; and I consider it a cornerstone piece of my collection. Artistically, its quality ranks amongst the works of master miniature painters of prior generations; and it has solid and noteworthy academic value.
Portrait of a Roman Catholic Cardinal
Artist: painted in Paris by Ethel Mary Willis, ARMS (1874-1972)
Date/age: Dated 1904 (110 years ago, as of this writing)
Size: 4 inches in diameter (framed)
Medium: watercolor and gouache on thin ivory wafer
About the Artist
Ethel Willis was respected as both a miniature portrait painter and an engraver of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. She was born in London, in 1874; and from an early age, she displayed an aptitude for painting and drawing. Her interest in art was no doubt influenced by her father, Thomas Willis (1836-1909), who was both a successful London tea dealer and an avid art collector.
Miss Willis was afforded an enviable education in the arts, both at home in London and abroad in Paris. In London, she attended first the Royal College of Art, followed by post graduate studies at the Slade School of Fine Arts (associated with UCL/University College London). Both are inarguably amongst the most prestigious art and design institutions in the world, with “the Slade” (as it’s often called), consistently ranking as the top art and design school in the United Kingdom. Following her studies in London, Willis further honed her skills at the avante garde Académie Delecluse in Paris; and, while in Paris, she became a private pupil of the esteemed French miniature portrait painter Madame Debillemont-Chardon (Gabrielle Debillemont-Chardon, 1860-1957).
It is perhaps Madame Debillemont-Chardon who had the most influence on Miss Willis’ work. No doubt, her instruction came with a good degree of pressure, however, as Madame Debillemont-Chardon was, in her own right, a remarkably talented artist and she imposed high standards and expectations on her students. High standards and expectations aside, however, Madame Debillemont-Chardon’s enlightened artistic vision made her a top choice of discriminating students wishing to perfect their skills. One need not go further than Debillemont-Chardon’s own words (written in 1909) to get a sense of this vision: (*1)
“The miniaturist in portrait work must not remain content with mere external resemblance, but must endeavor to look deeper and to divine the spiritual side of the sitter, his character, his personality, for besides the face it is also the soul that the artist must try to see.”
Madame Debillemont-Chardon was known, too, to rail against conventional painting standards and the tendency of other artists to only paint subjects of dainty elegance or high social status. She encouraged her students to instead seek out “beauty” amongst the less glamorous and more common masses — the elderly, the disabled, the hard working, common artisans, field hands, nurses, sailors, immigrants, and the like. (*2)
A photo of how the miniature portrait appears when removed from its frame. When unframed and fully exposed in this manner, some damage is revealed along the edges of the portrait; but the painting’s details and vibrant color are better discerned without the distraction of the frame’s glass cover.
About the Portrait
Of all Madame Debillemont-Chardon’s students, it was perhaps Ethel Willis who most embraced her teacher’s vision. To wit, Willis’ work seems to capture moments more than than simple likenesses; and her subjects are painted in thought-provoking and vulnerable poses. Our featured portrait serves as a perfect example of this thoughtful approach to portraiture.
Unlike a typical portrait where the subject looks forward and engages the viewer, Miss Willis’ subject looks to the side, as if unaware of the viewer’s existence. He is depicted looking off, into the distance, appearing deep in thought, perhaps even concerned about something. One believes that he must be unaware that he is being watched; and yet, he is just that — watched — as Miss Willis’ depiction of the subject draws the viewer in and leaves him or her watching and wanting to know what the subject is looking at or, more importantly, what he is thinking about.
This “watched” subject is a Roman Catholic cardinal, dressed in traditional scarlet red (a color traditionally intended to symbolize how a cardinal should be willing to spill his blood for the church). He wears a red zimarra (an ecclesiastical cassock with a shoulder cape). On his head is a cardinal’s zucchetto (a simple, red skull cap made of silk); and at his neck, he wears preaching tabs, a typically element of late nineteenth century clerical fashion, made of black gauze and trimmed with a white hem, as was traditional for Roman Catholics (as opposed to the all-white preaching tabs worn by Protestant clergy). Lastly, he has a long, delicate chord or chain around his neck, which one assumes must hold a cross that is out of view.
A closeup view of the subject, as seen when viewing the unframed portrait. Note the subtle use of hatching and stippling (in such small, fine strokes that they are almost undetectable) juxtaposed against the use of broad wash strokes.
No description of our featured portrait could be complete without special mention of Miss Willis’ technique. She has done a remarkable job of contrasting textures and tones. The cardinal’s skin, for example, (wrinkles and all) appears very life-like, albeit slightly faded. Similarly, his hair has a natural, wiry appearance. Unlike what one would expect of a miniature watercolor portrait, however, there are no overtly obvious brush strokes. Only on close examination does one see a hint of hatching and stippling, used in only the most subtle of ways; but one also sees broad wash strokes. Interestingly, too, there is a certain luminescence to the cardinal’s attire — so much so that one would almost believe the paint is still wet. This technique is rarely seen in miniature portraits; and its brilliant execution raises the appeal of this lovely painting.
Also worth mentioning is Miss Willis’ variation on an old French standard: the solid gray background. For generations, French painters have depicted their subjects in front of flat, gray backgrounds — out of an intentional desire to focus the art on the painted subject, rather than his or her surroundings. Far from casting a traditional, flat, gray background, however, Miss Willis has instead depicted soft, gray clouds. Interestingly, there is a gloominess to these gray clouds — a useful contrast to the vibrant, scarlet red of the cardinal’s vestments. This also lends to the possibility that the subject’s pensive thought might be of worry or gloom.
View of the miniature portrait as it appears fully framed. The round, ivory wafer upon which the portrait has been painted is protected behind a concave glass lens, which has been set within a round slip mount frame made of gilt brass (brass upon which an outer layer of gold has been applied). Visible at the top edge of the slip mount frame is a bale, which was used to hang the portrait when it was exhibited in galleries.
Handwritten notes found on the rear of the framed portrait, offering some important details about the portrait’s exhibition history.
Noteworthy Exhibition
On the rear of our framed miniature portrait are some handwritten notes, believed to have been written by the artist, Ethel Willis, herself. These notes were likely affixed to the frame when Miss Willis ultimately offered the portrait for sale, which was most likely 1905 or 1906 (the two years after the portrait was painted).
Included in the handwritten notes is a list of four notable galleries where the portrait had been exhibited:
The Salon (also known as the Salon d’Apollon of the Louvre Palace): a gallery that is part of the Louvre, located in Paris, where judged annual exhibitions of fine art are held annually to showcase the finest of contemporary French painting
The Walker Gallery: a premier English gallery, located in Liverpool, which houses one of the largest art collections in England, outside of London, and which regularly exhibits fine art by contemporary painters
The Royal Institute (also known as the “Royal Institute of Painters in Watercolours): one of the world’s oldest societies of professional watercolor painters, located in London, where the finest British watercolor paintings are exhibited annually
The Royal Society of Miniature Painters (now the Royal Society of Miniature Painters, Sculptors & Gravers): an organization, located in London, dedicated primarily to the furtherance of the art of traditional miniature painting, and which hosts the most prestigious exhibition (held annually) of contemporary miniature paintings in the United Kingdom.
Provenance and Debate over the Identity of the Cardinal
After a round of exhibition in several prominent galleries, our featured portrait was purchased by a British art collector in about the year 1906. At the time, the price paid (as noted on the back of the framed portrait) was £20. (In 1906, £20 would have been a meaningful sum, as it was the equivalent of £1,877 [$3,189] in today’s terms.)
Many decades later, the portrait ended up across the Atlantic in the United States, in Dublin, Ohio, in the hands of a large antiques dealer, who offered the portrait up for auction in 2009. This antiques dealer represented that the portrait came from the estate of a long-term art collector. He also dated the portrait to have been painted circa 1920 and identified by name the cardinal featured in the portrait — claiming him to have been Cardinal Basil Hume, a well loved and respected English cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church.
Of course, this Ohio antiques dealer was incorrect on at least two counts. First, the portrait is clearly dated 1904 (abbreviated simply as “04” beside the painter’s signature, in typical artist fashion). This would be obvious to anyone who removed the portrait from its frame and fully inspected it. Second, regardless of whether the portrait,was painted in 1904 or 1920, Cardinal Hume himself was not even born until 1923, making it impossible that he could have, as an elderly man, been the subject of the painting!
Closeup view of the lower left portion of the portrait, where the artist’s signature appears, along with the date “04” (referring to the year 1904) and the location where the portrait was painted (Paris). When framed, this signature block (the date, in particular) is partially obscured by the gold rim of the portrait’s frame. It is easy to see, therefore, how one could have misidentified the date of the piece, had he not removed the portrait from its frame.
Five years later, in early 2014, our miniature portrait resurfaced again, this time in the hands of an antiques dealer located in Ottawa, Canada. (It was from this dealer that I myself purchased the portrait.) Interestingly, this Canadian dealer had yet a different take on the portrait, claiming it to have been painted in the late nineteenth century and boldly claiming it to be a depiction of the “Blessed Cardinal Newman” (referring to the important English religious figure, Cardinal John Henry Newman, born in 1801 and died in 1890). He elaborated, too, on the beatification and pending canonization of Cardinal Newman, presumably to underscore how the cardinal’s importance added to the value of the painting. Such claims aside, however, this Canadian antiques dealer was as wrong as his Ohio counterpart was about the date of the portrait and the identity of its subject.
So how is it that two well-established antiques dealers made such erroneous and different claims about the same painting? Personally, I do not think they were trying to deceive potential buyers. Rather, I think they were simply misguided. In fact, the subject of Miss Willis’ portrait does bear slight resemblance to the nineteenth century Cardinal Newman. It is easy to see, therefore, how the Canadian antiques dealer might have assumed the portrait was of him. One must not overlook the fact, however, that the artist herself, Miss Willis, identified the portrait by the simple title of “A Cardinal”. Had she indeed painted a specific cardinal, even posthumously, one must believe that she would have chosen to identify him — if for no other reason than to enhance the value of her artwork upon its eventual sale after exhibition.
I offer this information up to the reader not simply for entertainment purposes (who doesn’t like to pick on a misguided antiques dealer, right?), but rather as a note of caution or instruction to those looking to begin collecting miniature portraits. When seeking out pieces for his or her portfolio, a collector must use deductive reasoning to determine how true the information is that is being represented by a seller. Of course, there are plenty of cases where a seller is unaware of the true significance of a portrait and offers it for an undervalued price; but there are also many cases where the opposite is true and a seller offers a piece with a puffed up or false description at an overvalued price. Thus, as is often the case in life, the buying and collecting of art requires one to adhere to an age-old principle: “buyer beware”.
Thoughts on Valuing Art
Given the information I outlined above and, in particular, the mistaken claims made regarding the identity of the portrait’s subject, what was an appropriate price to have paid for our featured portrait? The answer to this question, of course, depends on subjective evaluation that will differ from collector to collector.
When I personally evaluate a miniature portrait for potential purchase, I consider eight important criteria in trying to estimate its value:
Likability: Cardinal Rule #1 when purchasing any piece of art is that you must actually like the painted image and be able to get enjoyment out of owning it.
Identity of the Artist: I have purchased plenty of unsigned portraits simply because I find them to be beautiful. Generally speaking, however, if a portrait has been painted by a known artist, it should carry a greater value. Of course, the more well known and well regarded a particular artist is will only further enhance value.
Identity of the Subject: Most portraits you will encounter will be of unidentified subjects. Generally speaking, however, if a portrait is of a known individual, its value should reflect this. Furthermore, if the painted subject happens to be a famous or otherwise important person, it will typically be worth more.
Story Revealed: If there is a unique story behind a portrait (whether or not the subject and/or artist are known), this can also enhance the value of the artwork.
Quality of Workmanship: How well a painting is executed is, of course, a critical component of valuation. This can include composition, how well the artist’s vision is conveyed in the piece, the quality of paints and other medium used, how well or how accurately the subject was depicted, the method of painting and brush strokes used, etc.
Age of the Painting: As one would expect, the older a painting is, it will likely be worth more money. Of course, this depends quite heavily on all the other factors with which one evaluates the artwork. (A 200-year old portrait that was either poorly painted or poorly maintained will likely be of little value, no matter who the artist or subject may be.)
Condition of the Painting: As stated in regards to the age of a portrait, if a painting has been poorly maintained, has suffered damage of some kind or has otherwise deteriorated, its value will be diminished. Buyers need to look at all potential acquisitions with a critical eye, as some damage will be readily visible, but some will not. (As an example, the presence of mold can be very dangerous to a piece of art. For the untrained eye, however, mold may be difficult to detect, especially if it is in the beginning stages of growth.)
Provenance: If a portrait has been owned by a famous individual, this can enhance its value. A portrait can, likewise, carry a higher value when it is known to have been maintained by a long-term collector. (If a portrait has changed hands numerous times, there is an increased risk of wear and potential damage that may not be readily visible. A painting that has been held for many years by a single collector, on the other hand, is expected to have had minimal handling and, likewise, is expected to have been maintained and cared for in a way that better maintains its value.)
Photo of a three inch-tall miniature portrait (not owned by me and not related to our featured portrait) recently offered for sale on an online auction site. This damaged portrait serves as a perfect example of the pitfalls a buyer can encounter.
The above photo is provided as an example of how one must evaluate a piece of art with a skeptical eye and how one should never take a seller’s description at face value without further evaluation. This particular miniature portrait was described by its seller as “a lovely seventeenth century miniature portrait on copper in the original gilt frame, dating from circa 1680”. It was offered for $420. The viewer will notice, of course, that the portrait has clearly suffered some damage. Out of curiosity, I myself inquired of the seller about the portrait’s visible discoloration. He replied that the portrait had lost a lot of its original paint and that the visible blotches one sees are actually the now-bare copper upon which the portrait was originally painted. He further added, “this piece is not in great condition, to be honest, but it may be possible for a good restorer to improve it.” Perhaps someone will indeed want to try their hand at restoring this damage portrait; but they won’t likely pay $420 for the privilege. (Nor will they likely appreciate it being described as “lovely”.)b The moral of this story, of course, is that an old portrait is not necessarily a valuable portrait. Thus, again, buyer beware.
In the case of our featured portrait, I paid a price of $1,200 to purchase it from the Canadian antiques dealer. This price is on the high side for what I would typically pay for a miniature portrait; and there are some who would suggest that I paid too much. There is no denying the fact, however, that it is a fine specimen and is superbly well painted. The fact that it was painted by a well known, well-respected artist is, of course, a huge plus. That it was exhibited at several esteemed galleries also reinforces that important figures in the art world also deemed the portrait to have been of high quality. The only thing that might have made the portrait more valuable would have been if it were a painting of an actual cardinal who sat and modeled for Ethel Willis. In conclusion, however, I paid a price that was only 37% of the inflation-adjusted price that Miss Willis originally sold the portrait for in the early 1900s.
All things considered, I believe $1,200 to have been a fair price. More importantly, though, Miss Willis’s portrait of her unnamed cardinal is a superb addition to my personal collection and is one that I will value for many years to come.
Footnotes
(*1) Uzanne, Octave (1910). Studio Talk: Madame Debillemont-Chardon’s Miniatures, as published in The International Studio: an Illustrated Magazine of Fine and Applied Art, Volume 39, Issues 153-156, New York, New York, pages 210-216.
(*2) Debillemont-Chardon, Gabrielle (1909). La Miniature Sur Ivoire: Essai Historique et Traité Pratique, (translated: Miniatures on Ivory: a Historical Essay and Practical Treatise), Paris France.
_____________________________
Copyright © 2014 Michael Tormey. All rights reserved. All images contained herein are the property of Michael Tormey unless specifically noted otherwise.
