Mystery of the 'Lady Jane Grey' Portrait at Grimsthorpe Castle – Image copyright Ray Biggs 2019

The portrait is today located at Grimsthorpe, which has led to some confusion about whether or not the identification of Jane was genuinely meant, or if it were in fact a portrait of Katherine Willoughby instead: «Another three-quarter-length portrait at Grimsthorpe (not illustrated) depicts a lady who has been variously identified as Mary, Queen of Scots and Lady Jane Dudley (Jane Grey). It is clearly not of Mary, and Jane's name has been attached to a numer of paintings, none of which can be authenticated. A detailed scientific analysis of the work could help to identify the sitter, but there is no likelihood of this being undertaken in the near future. All we can say is that this lady's features very closely resemble those of Katherine in her other portraits.» Henry VIII's Last Love: The Extraordinary Life of Katherine Willoughby, Lady-in-Waiting to the Tudors by David Baldwin

«Do you think that that the sitter in the ¾ length ‘Grimsthorpe portrait’ is Katherine or Lady Jane Grey? This is difficult because we have no authenticated portrait of Jane. All we can say in that the lady in the Grimsthorpe portrait closely resembles Katherine – note especially the similarity in the bone structure of the face and the eyes, nose and mouth.» David Baldwin (Henry VIII’s Last Love: The Extraordinary Life of Katherine Willoughby, Lady-in-Waiting to the Tudors) – Lady Jane Grey Reference Guide

Mystery of the 'Lady Jane Grey' Portrait at Grimsthorpe Castle – Image copyright Ray Biggs 2019

However, J. Stephan Edwards have traced this portrait as a gift given in February 1844 to Sophia Matilda Wright Heathcote from her father, Thomas Wright of Upton Hall, Lincolnshire, as a portrait of Lady Jane Grey. Due to the death of Sophia Matilda's mother Sophia Frances Chaplin Wright shortly before, on the 9th of February 1844, J. Stephan Edwards believes that the portrait was a bequest from her. And not from the Wrights, who were avid art collectors in their own right, but who had only risen to prominence in the last generations and therefore had no link to the old families. Sophia Matilda in her turn bequeathed the painting to her sister-in-law, Clementina Drummond Willoughby Heathcote, 24th Baroness Willougby de Eresby, and that is how the painting ended up at Grimsthorpe Castle, home of the Willoughby de Eresby family since 1516.

The painting does not appear to have originated with the Willoughbys at all.

Sadly, the face of the painting has been completely overpainted, in order to 'restore' or 'improve' it. The only thing I can say about it is that its features is entirely consistent with the features of the lady in the Duckett painting, except that the lady in the Duckett painting has perhaps a higher forehead.

There is another colour photograph of the Grimsthorpe Portrait on p. 117 of J. Stephan Edwards book A Queen of a New Invention, with another close-up of the brooch on p. 119 (Fig.26).

The @grimsthorpecollection may yet post one as well.

The brooches are both similar and dissimilar at the same time. They both feature two unclothed women with a third person in the background and a man sitting. The image, however, is in reverse, and in the Grimsthorpe Portrait the sitting man is dressed in a pink robe and greeting one of the women with a raised clasp of hands.

Having looked at quite a number of the Judgement of Paris scenes since I first came across this motif in the brooches, I think, however, that the images are more similar than not.

I initially thought that the brooch the lady in the Duckett painting is wearing was a cameo, but looking at the close up I am more inclined to think that it is painted gold like the brooch the lady in the FitzWilliam Portrait is wearing or painted enamel. The brooch the lady in the Grimsthorpe painting is wearing also looks like painted gold or enamel.

While the colours of the brooch in the Duckett painting is made up of reddish-gold and white, there is some sparse use of colouring in the brooch in the Grimsthorpe Portrait. The overall impression is still darker, perhaps explaining the different artistic choices by the painter of the Duckett Portrait, where the impression of the brooch is altogether more striking.

Elizabeth I and the Three Goddesses

1569

Hans Eworth

Royal Collection | RCIN 403446

«Important figures at court were often portrayed in the flattering guise of mythological gods. Elizabeth I is Paris in this re-telling of the beauty contest ‘The Judgement of Paris’. The original myth saw Venus as victor over her rivals Juno and Minerva. Here, Elizabeth I keeps the prize (an orb instead of an apple) for herself, symbolising her triumph over the illustrious goddesses.

Signed and dated lower right: 1569 / HE

The painting is in its original frame which has the contemporary inscription: `IVNO POTENS SCEPTRIS ET MENTIS ACVMINE PALLAS / ET ROSEO VENERIS FVLGET IN ORE DECVS / ADFVIT ELIZABETH IVNO PERCVLSA REFVGIT OBSVPVIT PALLAS ERVBVITQ VENVS'. Translated as: 'Pallas was keen of brain, Juno was queen of might, / The rosy face of Venus was in beauty shining bright, / Elizabeth then came, And, overwhelmed, Queen Juno took flight: / Pallas was silenced: Venus blushed for shame'.

We know that this remarkable painting belonged to Elizabeth herself because a visitor, Baron Waldstein, saw it at Whitehall Palace in 1600. The artist divided the painting into the real, contemporary world on the left and the allegorical world of goddesses on the right. On the left, the Queen stands on the steps and is emerging through a classical arch from a royally decorated interior containing a frieze with the Tudor arms and a canopy embroidered with her own arms. On the far right is the chariot of Venus drawn by swans. The building in the background is thought to be the earliest painted representation of Windsor castle.

This is the only known portrait of Elizabeth I wearing gloves. She is known to have been particularly proud of her elegant hands and used gloves as a sign of favour, removing them to allow a courtier to kiss the royal hand or presenting them as gifts. The goddess Venus on the right has discarded her linen smock, the layer of clothing worn closest to the skin. Unlike the goddess, this garment is not an invention of the artist, demonstrating many of the features seen on surviving smocks of the period, such as bands of embroidery in coloured silk thread.

Hans Eworth was listed as ‘Jan Euworts' in 1540 as a freeman of the Guild of St Luke (St Luke was the patron saint of painters) in Antwerp, but by 1545 he had moved to England where he remained until his death in 1574. As well as working for the Office of Revels, designing sets and costumes for Elizabeth I’s court entertainments, Eworth also produced complex allegorical and religious works.

Provenance

Presumably painted for Elizabeth I or presented to her as a gift from a courtier»

Queen Elizabeth I ('Elizabeth I and the Three Goddesses')

c. 1590

Attributed to Isaac Oliver

National Portrait Gallery | NPG 6947

«This previously unknown small-scale painting reinterprets the theme of Elizabeth and the three goddesses, also depicted in an oil painting of this title in the Royal Collection. The subject is a reworking of the classical legend known as the 'Judgement of Paris', in which a golden apple is awarded by Paris to the fairest of the three goddesses, the outcome of which led to the Trojan War. Here, rather than repeat Paris's folly, Elizabeth retains the golden orb for herself as she alone combines their separate virtues. The subject was designed to flatter the Queen, implying that the outcome of her reign would be peace and not war. The exceptionally high quality of this painting suggests that it may have been painted for the Elizabeth herself, or for someone close to her.»

The Family of Henry VIII: an Allegory of the Tudor Succession

Lucas de Heere

National Museum Wales | NMW A 564

«This picture celebrates the harmony established by Queen Elizabeth I. Elizabeth is on the right, holding the hand of Peace and followed by Plenty. Her father Henry VIII, the founder of the Church of England, sits on his throne, and passes the sword of justice to his Protestant son Edward VI. On the left are Elizabeth’s Catholic half-sister and predecessor Mary I and her husband Philip II of Spain, with Mars, the God of War. The picture, a gift from Queen Elizabeth to Sir Francis Walsingham, exemplifies the 16th century's fascination with allegory, the Queen's vision of herself as the culmination of the Tudor dynasty and her concern with the legitimacy of her regime.

Lucas de Heere came to London from Ghent in the late 1560s, one of many Flemish Protestant artists and craftspeople to flee religious persecution. This painting was accepted under the 'in lieu in situ scheme'. It was purchased by J.C.Dent at the sale of the collection of Horace Walpole at Strawberry Hill, in 1842.»

This painting was a gift from Elizabeth I herself to Sir Francis Walsingham. 

The first two we either know were owned by her, or it is strongly suspected that it was owned by her or someone close to her.

There is yet one more important dynastic portrait playing on the theme of the Judgement of Paris and the three goddesses dating from Elizabeth's reign.

Clearly it was an imagery of some importance to her.

An Allegory of the Tudor Succession: The Family of Henry VIII

c. 1590

After Lucas de Heere

Yale Center for British Art | B1974.3.7

Who tells us the stories that we love? Family, teachers ...

Elizabeth I Tudor and Lady Jane Grey were partially raised by the same woman, Katherine Parr. Katherine Parr was Elizabeth I Tudor's step-mother from the time she was 9 until she was 15. Important, formative years for sure. Katherine Parr also raised Lady Jane Grey for 18 happy months until her own tragic, untimely death in childbed on the 5th of september 1548.

As it so happens, Elizabeth I Tudor and Lady Jane Grey even had the same tutors. When Elizabeth I Tudor lived with her step-mother, Katherine Parr, after her father's death, so did Lady Jane Grey, as the ward of Katherine Parr's husband, Thomas Seymour, Baron Seymour of Sudeley. With Jane, when she left home to live with the Seymours, went her beloved tutor, John Aylmer.

John Aylmer has achieved his own fame as a part of Lady Jane Grey's legend, through Roger Ascham's anecdote of Jane remarking to him of Mr. Aylmer «who teacheth me so gently, so pleasantly, with such fair allurements to learning, that I think all the time nothing, whilst I am with him» in contrast to her cruel parents.

On his journey south to Billingsgate to embark, Ascham visited Lady Jane Grey at her father's house at Bradgate, Leicestershire, and in a memorable passage in The Scholemaster he has described how he found her reading Plato's 'Phaedo' in her chamber while all the household was out hunting.

At the Window (The Terrier Anxious to Join the Hunt in the Distance)

1877

John Callcott Horsley

Oil on canvas | 24.25" x 21" — 61.6 x 53.3 cm.

Roger Ascham wrote this of this encounter in his book The Schoolmaster:

«Before I went into Germany, I came to Broadgate in Leicestershire, to take my leave of that noble lady Lady Jane Grey, to whom I was exceeding much beholding. Her parents, the duke and duchess, with all the household, gentlemen and gentlewomen, were hunting in the park. I found her in her chamber, reading Phaedo Platonis in Greek, and that with as much delight as some gentlemen would read a merry tale in Boccace. After salutation, and duty done, with some other talk, I asked her, why she would leese such pastime in the park? Smiling, she answered me; “I wist, all their sport in the park is but a shadow to that pleasure that I find in Plato. Alas! good folk, they never felt what true pleasure meant.” “And how came you, madam,” quoth I, “to this deep knowledge of pleasure and what did chiefly allure you unto it, seeing not many women, but very few men, have attained thereunto?” “I will tell you,” quoth she, “and tell you a truth, which perchance ye will marvel at. One of the greatest benefits that ever God gave me, is, that he sent me so sharp and severe parents, and so gentle a schoolmaster. For when I am in presence either of father or mother; whether I speak, keep silence, sit, stand, or go, eat, drink, be merry, or sad, be sewing, playing, dancing, or doing any thing else; I must do it, as it were, in such weight, measure, and number, even so perfectly, as God made the world; or else I am so sharply taunted, so cruelly threatened, yea presently sometimes with pinches, nips, and bobs, and other ways (which I will not name for the honour I bear them) so without measure misordered, that I think myself in hell, till time come that I must go to Mr Elmer; who teacheth me so gently, so pleasantly, with such fair allurements to learning, that I think all the time nothing whiles I am with him. And when I am called from him, I fall on weeping, because whatsoever I do else but learning, is full of grief, trouble, fear, and whole misliking unto me. And thus my book hath been so much my pleasure, and bringeth daily to me more pleasure and more, that in respect of it, all other pleasures, in very deed, be but trifles and troubles unto me.”

I remember this talk gladly, both because it is so worthy of memory, and because also it was the last talk that ever I had, and the last time that ever I saw that noble and worthy lady.

Ascham’s recollection, however, was not the first time he referred to his Bradgate visit. In a letter to John Sturm on December 14, 1550, in which he discussed various learned English ladies, he wrote, “This last summer . . . I turned out of my road to Leicester, where Jane Grey was living with her father. I was immediately admitted into her chamber, and found the noble damsel—Oh, ye gods!—reading Plato’s Phaedro in Greek, and so thoroughly understanding it that she caused me the greatest astonishment.”» History Refreshed by Susan Higginbotham

On 18 January 1551 Ascham wrote to Jane:

«In this long travel of mine, I have passed over wide tracts of country, and seen the largest cities, I have studied the customs, institutes, laws, and religion of many men and diverse nations, with as much diligence as I was able: but in all this variety of subjects, nothing has caused in me so much wonder as my having fallen upon you last summer, a maiden of noble birth, and that too in the absence of your tutor, in the hall of your most noble family, and at a time when others, both men and women, give themselves up to hunting and pleasures, you, a divine maiden, reading carefully in Greek the Phaedo of the divine Plato; and happier in being so occupied than because you derive your birth, both on your father’s side, and on your mother’s, from kings and queens! Go on then, most accomplished maiden, to bring honour on your country, happiness on your parents, glory to yourself, credit to your tutor, congratulation to all your friends, and the greatest admiration to all strangers!» History Refreshed by Susan Higginbotham

Lady Jane Grey and Roger Ascham

1853

John Callcott Horsley

Oil on Canvas | 76.2 x 63.5 cm. (30 x 25 in.)

Roger Ascham was in fact Elizabeth's tutor, and the fact that Jane was on such terms with him as to feel comfortable to confide in him, says something about the relationship the girls had with their tutors.

The fact that Roger Ascham sought Jane out especially, even when the rest of her family was out hunting, shows an old, warm acquaintance.

As Nicola Tallis rightly points out, Elizabeth's later treatment of Jane's sisters indicate that the two were never close. But it is nevertheless possible to have fond memories of times you have spent with people you do not particularly care for.

And the fact that Elizabeth was fond of John Aylmer, if not her cousin, is demonstrated through the fact that she later, when Queen, made him her Bishop of London. And she refused to remove him even though people literally were begging her to. He proved to be a truly atrocious one.

Elizabeth was a loyal woman. A loyal friend, and a loyal enemy. And she showed a particularly strong loyalty towards those who had shown kindness towards the child Elizabeth.

«The Judgement of Paris perhaps had particular associations for Elizabeth, since it formed part of the six pageants performed at the coronotation of her mother, Anne Boleyn. In Anne's procession to Westminster Abbey for her crowning, she paused at the Great Conduit, where the Judgement was acted out. Conventionally, the prize of the golden apple in the myth was given to Venus; in Anne's pageant the actor playing Paris paused at the last moment and gave the prize to Anne herself, announcing:

yet, to be plain,

Here is the fourth lady now in our presence,

Most worthy to have it of due congruence.

Anne's acceptance of the apple casts her in a conventional feminine role, as a woman to be judged and rewarded by a man, but in the Three Goddesses picture, it is, as we have noted, Elizabeth herself who is Paris, who has the taken the authority of choice upon herself.» Elizabeth: Renaissance Prince by Lisa Hilton

In fact, John Aylmer (and perhaps Jane) had probably heard first hand accounts of Anne Boleyn's coronation.

While still a boy, his precocity was noticed by Henry Grey, 3rd Marquess of Dorset, later 1st Duke of Suffolk. A knight of the Bath, Jane's father was the king's sword bearer at Anne Boleyn's coronation in 1533. John Aylmer was born in 1521, and because of his longstanding relationship with the family, it is entirely possible that he heard about the events as they were going on.

Of course, John Aylmer is not the only one Elizabeth could have (or indeed would have) heard the story of her mother's coronation from. It is, however, worth noting that the time Lady Elizabeth Tudor and Lady Jane Grey spent with Katherine Parr is the first time it would have been 'safe' to talk of Anne Boleyn. This period, from 1547 when Henry VIII died, and until 1554, when Mary I came to the throne, was a period where the people in charge had nothing against Anne Boleyn.

King Edward VI clearly bore her no ill will, his tutor John Cheke thought nothing of identifying the Anna Bollein Queen sketch by Holbein as – well, Anne Boleyn – to the young King.

Neither Seymour brother had anything against her, apart from wishing for their sister to replace her. Nor did John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland.

If anything, with the focus on the new religion during Edward's reign, Anne was in vogue.

Anne do somehow always seem to end up as fashionable.

Anne had been a reformer, as were the Seymour brothers, the Duke of Northumberland, and, not to mention, King Edward VI himself.

And as was John Aylmer. He was indeed extremely zealous, as would become clear when he became a bishop.

The amusing thing is that Elizabeth Tudor would not have been the only young girl in that schoolroom whose recent ancestress had been crowned. Lady Jane Grey's grandmother (and Elizabeth's aunt) Mary 'Rose' Tudor had also had a coronation, and that in Paris, no less. 6 November 1514 – The Entry of Mary Tudor, Queen of France, into Paris – The Tudor Society

Paris was bedecked to welcome the new queen. Tapestries hung along the streets and the entire town was decorated with lilies and roses. On her journey there Mary was greeted by a number of tableaux. The first was at St Denis. Here an enormous ship had been built, complete with real sailors who climbed the rigging. There was even wind blowing into the sails. The ship held images of Ceres, Bacchus and at the helm the Greek hero, Paris. Queen Mary Tudor's Entrance into Paris – On the Tudor Trail

It is perhaps worth noting the Tudor era's love of word plays.

It would have been a bad tutor who had failed to point out all of these, and whatever else John Aylmer may have been, a bad tutor was not one of them.

EDITED TO ADD 21.02.2021

A visitor to this site, Mary Richards, noticed a striking resemblance between the Grimsthorpe Portrait and the Streatham Portrait:

The observation made by Mary Richards prompts me to share something I noticed a while ago about the Grimsthorpe Portrait: The girdle chain hanging down from the lady's waist is the same kind as those worn by the ladies in the Fitzwilliam Portrait and the Rotherwas Portrait.

Both of those ladies are holding a girdle prayer book, seemingly attached to the girdle chain.

Whoever the lady in the Grimsthorpe Portrait is, she was probably in possession of a girdle prayer book.

Just like Lady Jane Grey.

Lately, I have also been looking at the patterns of collars for hints to help identity the sitter.

Which means that lately I have been devoting special attention to the pattern of the standing open collar of the lady in the Grimsthorpe Portrait.

I knew that pinks were a badge of the Grey family, but I have not been able to find a stylized version of pinks that matched the pattern of the collar of the lady in the Grimsthorpe Portrait.

Until I actually looked up stylized pinks version used by the Greys of Dorset, on page 98 in T.E. Scott-Ellis, Baron Howard de Walden, Banners, Standards, and Badges from a Tudor Manuscript in the College of Arms [London: De Walden Library, 1904]:

The Grey Badge and Standard

– Harry Suffolk, always at the Kings side. attended the monarch with twenty-five personal cavalrymen, riding under the Grey standard of a silver unicorn in a sunbeam of gold. The Sisters Who Would Be Queen by Leanda de Lisle

Other sources describe the badge of the Dorsets of Grey as bunches of daisies, tufted proper. “His square banner, as enrolled at the College of Arms, contains the same quarterings. The supporter is a unicorn ermine. On his long standard, per fess white and murrey, are bunches of daisies, tufted proper, for badges, and the motto, A ma puissance.” The Collegiate Church of Ottery St. Mary (1917) and An account of the restorations of the collegiate chapel of St. George, Windsor: with some particulars of the heraldic ornaments of that edifice (1844) by Thomas Willement

That, too, as we can see, is perfectly in keeping with the image before us.

My first guess as to the flowers on the girl’s collar were daisies.

The badge was to be noticed.

“In later Plantagenet days, badges were of considerable importance, and certain characteristics are plainly marked. [...] At all times badges had very extensive decorative use. [...] So great and extensive at one period was the use of these badges, that they were far more generally employed than either arms or crest, and whilst the knowledge of a man's badge or badges would be everyday knowledge and common repute throughout the kingdom, few people would know that man's crest, fewer still would ever have seen it worn.” (A Complete Guide to Heraldry by Arthur Charles Fox-Davies)

Notes

[1] A Queen of a New Invention, by J. Stephan Edwards, p. 45

[2] A Queen of a New Invention, by J. Stephan Edwards, p. 56-57

[3] A Queen of a New Invention, by J. Stephan Edwards, p. 81

[4] A Queen of a New Invention, by J. Stephan Edwards, p. 117

[5] A Queen of a New Invention, by J. Stephan Edwards, p. 168-176

[6] The first known owner of the Audley End copy of the Syon Portrait was Charles Howard, 9th Earl of Suffolk (1685 – 28 September 1733). He was a direct descendant of Lady Jane Grey's first cousin and sister-in-law, Margaret Audley.

https://artintheblood.typepad.com/art_history_today/hans-holbein/

http://www.gogmsite.net/new-content/elizabeth-tudor-the-future.html

At some point Diane de Poitiers got mixed up with Jane Shore, and Jane Shore got mixed up with Jane Grey.

https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/376602

https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw194314/Lady-Jane-Grey?search=ap&subj=47%3BJewellery&page=4&displayStyle=thumb&displayNo=60&wPage=109&rNo=6580

https://www.rct.uk/collection/search#/9/collection/600979/lady-jane-gray

Carcanet:

https://www.rct.uk/collection/search#/29/collection/600999/ieanne-gray

Comments

Thanks for the site and the thoughts. You may enjoy(or not!) taking a look at mine: http://lukism.wordpress.com/2021/09/15/lady-jane-grey/. I agree that Jane may have had an eye irregularity. Cheers.

It might just be me here, but does anyone note a resemblance between the Grimsthorpe and the Streatham portraits? Is it possible that the Streatham could have been based on the Grimsthorpe model?

For the rationale behind identifying the Streatham Portrait as Lady Jane Grey, I think one major factor was the inscription ‘Lady Jayne’.

Much of the paint of the inscription had deteriorated, rendering the writing less than clear,

but authorities agreed that ‘Lady Jayne’ was the likely text. Dr. Libby Sheldon of the University College of London who examined the portrait believed that the inscription was exactly contemporaneous

with the painting itself, which dendrochronological analysis has revealed to date from no earlier than the 1590's. Another was its similarity with the Houghton Portrait (shown above).

The Houghton Portrait originated with the Rodes family of Houghton Hall in Yorkshire and was part of a larger collection of portraits of Protestant heroes.The Houghton Portrait was displayed

in a national exhibition in 1866 as a portrait of Jane Grey. The existence of two identical but quite separate works under the same identification suggested that the identification was authentic.

Wikipedia has a bit more information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streatham_portrait

And J. Stephan Edwards writes of both portraits on p. 50-58 of his book A Queen of A New Invention.

It is such a shame. I too would love it if they did a complete examination of this portrait. From being a rather obscure

and inauspicious painting I have grown very fond of it. I think that this is actually Lady Jane Grey. So much more the shame that is was overpainted.

Again we are in complete agreement. It makes no sense to me either why they would "mix & match" backgrounds, jewellery etc., however, clearly there is a precedent of sorts for it.

In addition to the portrait with the head of Mary I Tudor above, but with the dress and jewellery of Katherine Parr, there is also the fact that when it cames to portrait sets you will often see

that the painters have 'borrowed' jewellery from one lady to give to another. In the portrait I have posted of Jane Seymour above, she too is wearing Mary I Tudor's famous brooch.

Out of interest, would you happen to know what the NPG's rationale was for identifying the Streatham as Jane? It could aid with the identification of the Grimsthorpe.

It is a shame that the Grimsthorpe portrait has been painted over. It would be fascinating to see what the sitter looked like under the X-ray.

It makes no sense to me why they would "mix & match" backgrounds, jewellery etc however I think there is a precedent of sorts for it.

You are definitely not the only one to notice the resemblance between the Grimsthorpe and the Streatham Portrait! I entirely agree.

I too have wondered if the Streatham Portrait is based on the Grimsthorpe Portrait.

The only problem is that all of the particular traits of the Streatham Portrait, the carcanet from the Duckett Portrait,

the jewellery from the engraving and the portraits of Mary I Tudor, and Mary I
Tudor's dress cannot be found in the Grimsthorpe Portrait.

While the brooch the lady is wearing in the Grimsthorpe Portrait (and the Duckett
Portrait) cannot be found in the Streatham Portrait.

Also, if the copyists had access to a full-length gown, we did they feel the need to superimpose the dress of Mary I Tudor onto the image?

Since then, however, I have come over a painting of Mary I Tudor, in Katherine Parr's
dress and jewellery, with the background of Elizabeth when a Princess.

I have now posted this painting above. This painting does look 'younger' than the Streatham Portrait, but even so I feel that it sets a 'precedent' of sorts. That would however mean that the creator

had access to both the engraving or the Duckett Portrait or some version thereof with the carcanet necklace and the Grimsthorpe Portrait 😊

I just want to say thank you for your generosity in creating and maintaining varying and your own points of view on these portraits and stories. As an avid reader of history/herstory I appreciate it.

Oh, thank you so much! What a lovely comment to receive! This site has given me a lot of pleasure, and it is so lovely to hear that that is the case for somebody else too :)