|
How did the Sunderland frame
(fig. 1) come about? To understand how the taste developed it
is worth considering in some detail three exceptional collections:
those of the Earl of Clarendon, the Duke and Duchess of York
and the Earl of Sunderland. That of Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of
Clarendon (1609-74), Charles II's Chancellor, represented in
the 'Painted Ladies' exhibition by the single example of Lely's
full-length of Clarendon's daughter, Anne Hyde, Duchess of
York (Scottish National Portrait Gallery, the frame on the
pair to this portrait is repr. in Mitchell and Roberts), which
was painted at the time of her marriage in 1660 to James, Duke
of York, the future James II. Clarendon's collection was largely
formed over the space of a few years from 1660; it extended to
include portraits of the famous men and women of his own and
preceding ages. His great mansion in Piccadilly, Clarendon House,
built between 1664 and 1667, was described by Evelyn in 1668
as 'now bravely furnished, especially with pictures'. But by
then the growth of the collection was over since Clarendon had
been obliged to leave the country in disgrace in 1667. Many of
his portraits have Sunderland or other auricular frames. They
would appear to date to the years immediately before his downfall
in 1667, rather than to some later framing campaign, say in 1683-5
when Clarendon's son had the collection put in order. If so,
the frames are early exemplars of the Sunderland pattern. Lely's
Anne Hyde, Duchess of York was one of his first
acquisitions and its very special frame, apparently made of oak,
with lion mask at top, garland of overlapping leaves running
round the frame, weaving in and out of the carved forms, and
straight sight edge, owes much to the frames of Charles I's reign
and the Commonwealth.
James, Duke of York (1633-1701) and his first wife, Anne Hyde,
Duchess of York (1637-71), owned Lely's ten 'Windsor Beauties',
of which two were shown in the exhibition, Elizabeth Hamilton,
Countess of Gramont and Frances Stuart, later Duchess
of Richmond (Royal Collection at Hampton Court). They are
thought to have been commissioned by the Duchess. In 1674, soon
after her early death, the pictures were hanging in the White
Room at Whitehall Palace, which was 'Hunge wth white sarsanett,
and over it blew Mohair with silk fringe', though one portrait,
that of Elizabeth Hamilton, Countess of Gramont was absent,
described as 'gone for fframe'. Though it is not known how they
were originally framed, the portrait of the Duchess in her father's
collection, described above, may give an idea of the richness
of effect that she will surely have wished to achieve. The portraits
are now housed in late eighteenth-century patterns.
Robert Spencer, 2nd Earl of Sunderland (1641-1702), Charles II's
ambassador to various European courts, was represented in the
exhibition by four of Lely's Althorp Beauties (Althorp). Sunderland
came of age in 1662 and over the next forty years he added many
works to the collection, by inheritance, purchase or commission,
in particular portraits by Van Dyck and Lely. Unfortunately his
collection is not well documented and there is little information
on the frames. What has now emerged is that not only was Lely
paid £20 in July 1666 for Mrs Myddelton, he also
received £22 in late 1666 or early 1667 'for my Ladyes
picture', probably the portrait of Lady Sunderland at Althorp,
a further £20 for an unspecified picture in June 1667 and
then £43 in October the same year for an unspecified number
of pictures, this payment being followed by one for four frames
at £14. It is not completely clear whether this frame payment
was made to Lely himself but at £3.10s per frame it accords
with the standard cost of a three-quarter length picture frame
in the Sunderland style.
The Althorp Beauties were painted
by Lely over a period of about ten years from the mid-1660s.
They have matching Sunderland frames, probably made as the portraits
were painted. Their standard size of about 50 x 40 inches means
that frames could on occasion have been swapped for practical
reasons; for example that on Mrs Myddelton once housed
a portrait of Arabella Churchill. That said it is reasonable
to conclude that the framing of the portraits today reflects
their original appearance. There are small differences between
the frames so that, for instance, while Mrs Myddelton
is very similar to the general run of Sunderland frames, the
other three shown in the exhibition have particularly stylised
masks at bottom centre, lacking the usual crowning foliage. All
the portraits have frames of oak, though the upper part of the
top cartouche on two frames, those of Barbara Villiers,
Countess of Castlemaine and Louise de Kéroualle,
Duchess of Portsmouth, is made of pine as an integral part
of the original construction. The back frames, made of pine as
usual, take the form of narrow battens planted onto the rear
of the gilt front frames to give sufficient depth to house the
picture.
Another collection of great interest,
not represented in the exhibition, is the Duke and Duchess of
Lauderdale's at Ham House where the Long Gallery is hung with
diverse frames in the Sunderland style. The frame maker, John
Norris, is known to have supplied picture frames to the Duchess
in the 1673 but it is not easy to link the framing bills to individual
pictures. In fact, few collections of the period are well documented,
making it difficult to trace the origins of the Sunderland style
with confidence.
The Sunderland style was not reserved for oil paintings as can
be seen by the finely carved pine frame on Edmund Ashfield's
small pastel, Mrs Howard, later Countess of Yarmouth (Henry
Bedingfield), from Oxburgh Hall in Norfolk, though here the sight
edge is straight. This is a frame type found on several of Ashfield's
pastels of the late 1660s and 1670s. He was described by one
early commentator, Bainbrigg Buckeridge, writing in 1706, as
an artist who worked in pastel in imitation of oil, and the pastel's
Sunderland frame serves to emphasise further the link with oil
painting.
This note has focused on an extraordinary frame style which went
out of fashion in the 1680s as other more architectural and more
regular patterns came to dominate. While it can be paralleled
by auricular frames in Holland and Florence, the Sunderland frame
in its ultimate manifestation is uniquely British.
Further information
This note should be read in conjunction with the exhibition
catalogue, Painted Ladies. Women at the Court of Charles II
by Catharine Macleod and Julia Marciari Alexander, 2001, especially
nos.1, 15, 17, 22, 30 (repr. with frame), 39, 46, 61 and 80.
For further information on framing in seventeenth-century Britain,
see Jacob Simon, The Art of the Picture Frame, 1996, from
which various material has been drawn including the letter of
John Michael Wright quoted above. Both books are available from
the National Portrait Gallery shop or on the internet at www.npg.org.uk/publications
.
For specific collections, see
Kenneth Garlick, 'A Catalogue of Pictures at Althorp', Walpole
Society, vol. 44, 1976, especially no. 399; Robin Gibson,
Catalogue of Portraits in the Collection of the Earl of Clarendon,
Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art, 1977; Alastair
Laing and Nino Strachey, 'The Duke and Duchess of Lauderdale's
pictures at Ham House', Apollo, vol. 139, 1994, p.9, and
Maurice Tomlin, 'Picture Frames at Ham House', International
Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship, vol. 4, 1985,
pp.129-40. See also Paul Mitchell and Lynn Roberts, Frameworks,
1996, pl. 40, 43.
Jacob Simon
e-mail: jsimon@npg.org.uk
9 March 2002
|