Beetham, Isabella, Mrs (SCC Newsletter July 2000)

Mrs. BEETHAM-her works painted on paper and the part played by Mrs.BULL in these.

I have spent some time trying to identify works that definately can be attributed to Mrs. Beetham and others that look like Beethams (with or without a Beetham label) but are possibly painted by Mrs.Bull. Are there certain 'clues' that would make attribution to one or the other artist fairly certain? Concurrently with this 'exercise' I wanted to draw Members' attention to Mrs. Beethams' silhouettes painted on paper as opposed to her better known work on the back of convex glass. I have read the exsisting literature on both artists. As usual I have relied very heavily on the entries in Mrs. McKechnie's book. I have not attempted to go into the backgrounds or the working lives of the two artists except where it is relevent in attempting to solve the

task I have set myself! Maybe it is not solvable and we just accept what we like. However, I hope that this article will make you look more closely at what you have on your walls or in your drawers!

The first part contains some general comments on the work of both artists - this is followed by a number of photographs & illustrations, which hopefully illustrate the range of their painted work on paper and the problem I have posed. There are silhouettes that are obviously by Mrs. Beetham and others that are clearly by Mrs. Bull - but there are others where the jury is out as far as attribution is concerned. At the end of the article I have done a small note on the labels used for these works by the Beetham Studio. Finally I have added a photograph of the painted copy of a silhouette by Mrs. Beetham that was originally painted on glass - which I think makes some useful points!

Mrs. Beetham was clearly a silhouette artist in the top rank. She had taken lessons from John Smart snr. the famous miniaturist, who would have been unlikely to take on a pupil without artistic gifts. Desmond Coke in his "The Art of Silhouette" has many entries on her and was clearly a great admirer. He considered her the top of the giants of eighteenth century silhouette artists - even above the great John Miers! To quote from him (p.137) "Mrs. Beetham was the very essence of superiority". Mrs. N. Jackson had heard her called "the Holbein of Silhouettists" - praise indeed! Mrs. McKechnie considered Mrs. Beetham's silhouettes painted on paper to be amongst the best ever produced. John Woodiwiss also shared this view and placed her high amongst the finest artists of her age. You must judge for yourselves.

Whilst we know a lot about Mrs. Beetham's background and also something of her descendents we know virtually nothing about Mrs. Bull - not even her initial. There is only one authenticated work attributed to her as far as is known. She did not have a printed label or sign her works. However, inspite of these 'deficiencies' she was without doubt an artist of skill and ability. It is unlikely that Mrs. Beetham would have employed anyone without these abilities. She was employed by Mrs. Beetham in the period l785-88, when there seems to have been quite a demand for silhouettes painted on paper by the Studio. Also, at the sametime Mrs. Beetham was developing her work on glass together with her husband's verre eglomise skills for the frames. It is possible at this time she left a good deal of the work on paper to Mrs. Bull. It has been assumed that Mrs. Bull did not help with the work on glass, although there is 'evidence' that she may have gone on to do work on glass when she set-up her own studio for a short while. The work of both artists has been compared in style with that of Mr.Charles - especially that of Mrs. Bull. I can see similarities but I think Charles' work is quite distinctive and it is always signed under the bust-line. I will try not to confuse matters by focusing on his work for the purposes of this article. For Mr. A. Mayne the problem is simple - "You see a portrait that looks exactly like the work of Charles. You take a hard second look and think, he's taken much more care over the hair than he usually does. That one is by Mrs. Bill." (see page 68) He makes it all sound so simple! I think my article will show that it is not

Mrs. Beetham and Mrs. Bull cont’d.

CLASSIC BEETHAM.

The gent illustrated on the right is about life-size. He is smaller than most comparable works. He is illustrated in Mrs. McKechnie's Book on p.459 illus. 682. His oval is 2¾" X 2¼” the more usual size is 3½" x 3¼". He is housed in a press brass frame. On the other hand the lady on the right is somewhat larger than life-size. Her oval is 3¾" X 2¾" and she is housed in a deep pearwood frame. The gent has no label but the lady is backed with trade label No.5. Two further examples are illus-in the appendix to this article - The Rev. Drake - a well-known work. He is illustrated in Mrs. McKechnie p.460 illus.685. He is backed with trade label No.4 and is in a pearwood frame. The other is of a lady in very elaborate hat - I have no details about her label but she is illustrated in John Woodiwiss's book facing p.33.

Looking at the bust-line terminations all have the double-loop concavity. The men have a clear dip at the back and a point at the armhole edge - at the front it is rounded. Whereas the bust-line of both ladies is much more flamboyant - with a very exaggerated point at the front - a point at the armhole & a third point at the back. The slope of their bust-lines is very deep compared with that of the gents. Sometimes the line can be flatter but always with the three points. The gents' shirt frills are neatly executed with cross hatching feature of Mrs. Beetham's shirt frills. The hair of the Rev. Drake is very neatly painted and that of the gent on this page even neater. It is painted in little strokes all over his head - as well as outside the main body at the back - this gives it a somewhat swepted back effect. Both have striped waistcoats without any obvious button. The hair of both ladies is largely covered by their elaborate hats, but it is possible to see the 'treatment' of the curls and their long tresses. The detail of their clothing has been shown with much skill. Gum arabic has been used with much restraint on all these works - a little under the collars of the men and some lines on the buffons of the ladies. I am certain that these works are by Mrs. Beetham as far it is possible to be certain about any work!

Mrs. Beetham and Mrs. Bull cont’d.

CLASSIC BULL.

There is only one definately authenticated silhouette by Mrs. Bull. This is inscribed on the back as being by her. It is of a man and I have illustrated it in the appendix to this article. Also it is illustrated in Mrs. McKechnie on p.462 illus.696. On the same page she illustrates two further gents both without trade labels or an inscription of any sort, which she attributes to Mrs. Bull on the basis of the authenticated example. I am making the same assumptions with the two gents I have photographed above. (apologies for the defects at the base of both, but fortunately enough detail is clear). The photos are slightly larger than life-size - they have been enlarged by about a ¼” in height. Their bust-line terminations are typical of the work of Mrs. Bull. The slope is flattish and there are two rather tentative peaks - one at the armhole edge - these have none of the 'flourish' of Mrs. Beetham's bust-lines! Gum arabic has been used liberally on the clothing of both gents. Particularily on the collars, underneath the collars at the back, to show the armhole edge and the coat creases from the front of the jackets. The hair ribbons are somewhat squiggly - with a fly-away look as described by Mrs. McKechnie. The shirt frills are bold and there is no doubt that Mrs. Bull excelled at this clothing detail - with her fanned out strokes to show the ruffles. She edged the frills with a clear line and in some cases added dots to show transparency. You can see these dots on the gent on the right. A large button is also visible on this gent, which again is typical of Mrs. Bull. Hair is neatly painted giving the Mrs. Bull swept back look. There are vertical stripes on the waistcoat lapels and zig-zag hatching is used to indicate the closure of the waistcoat beneath the cut-away front of the frock.

Mrs. Beetham and Mrs. Bull cont’d.

TWO YOUNG LADIES.

These two young ladies have been photographed a little larger than life-size - their ovals are 4¾" h x 3¾" w. They are housed in very deep pearwood frames that make photography difficult! Both are backed with Mrs. Beetham's label No 5. They had been neglected over the years and one glass had been broken - so they were given a "wash" about ten years ago. I think they have lost some of their 'patina' and gum arabic in the process. I have always assumed that the ladies were painted by Mrs. Beetham, but in the absence of an authenticated silhouette of a woman by Mrs. Bull I am not so sure. Also no bust-line terminations makes the problem more difficult. There is only the painting of the hair, use of gum arabic and the 'feel' of the work to guide one. They appear to have been painted in the period 1785-89 when Mrs. Bull was working with Mrs. Beetham. Both their hair-styles (i.e. the a la conseiller & the banging chignon) were in vogue at this time. They are painted in the same 'mould' as the famous Miss East, who is frequently illustrated in the literature. (I have printed her image in the appendix). No-one has ever doubted her attribution to Mrs.Beetham! Looking at her hair, (in spite of her hat) it is painted with shorter strokes and 'is curlier than the 'treatment' of the hair on the ladies above, which has a swepted back look. However, I doubt if this is significant as much will have depended on their actual hairstyles. Gum arabic has been used with much restraint on all three works. Then the 'feel' of the silhouette becomes important and I am no longer sure about these ladies. I think the jury is out and I should be glad to have your comments after looking at your own collections.

Mrs. Beetham and Mrs. Bull cont’d.

TWO GENTLEMEN.

The silhouette on the left is photograped a little larger than life-size. (apologies for the quality of this photo, but it still shows the important details fortunately). He is housed in a pearwood frame with a Mrs. Beetham label No.5 on the back. He is owned by a Member of the S.C.C. His bust-line termination is very like that of Mrs. Bull with a small peak at the armhole and a rather blunted point at the back (see Mrs. McKechnie p.461 illus.689 of a hatted man with a similar bust-line. He also is backed with label No.5. This silhouette she attributes to "Studio of Mrs. Beetham"). Unfortunately he has no frill to guide us but he does have some neat hatching on his waistcoat above and below his button - this looks like Mrs. Bull. His jacket is liberally covered with gum arabic, which would again point to Mrs. Bull. Hair on the other hand could be Mrs. Beetham with many little strokes and a slightly swepted up effect. Overall I favour Mrs. Bull. The man on the right presents more problems! He is photographed larger than life-size to hopefully bring out as much detail as possible. In actual fact his oval is 2¾” h x 2¼" w. He is housed in a pearwood frame and has no trade label. I have assumed over the years that he was by Mrs. Beetham - now I am not sure! His bust-line termination is a little more sloping than his companion with a more pronounced point at the back. This does not immediately suggest Mrs. Bull. His shirt frill is not evenly hatched and is only partially edged with a darker line - more like Mrs. Beetham's style. On the other hand he has gum arabic all over his jacket with much emphasis on the armhole demarcation. His hair has similarities to that of his companion but does not have a swept back look. He may not be by either lady!

Mrs. Beetham and Mrs. Bull cont’d.

A PIGEON PAIR!

The silhouette on the left has been photographed a little larger than life-size - it is housed in a giltwood frame and has Mrs. Beetham's trade label No.5 on the back. It is owned by a Member of the S.C.C. His bust-line termination is rather flat with the only obvious peak at the armhole edge. Immediately this would suggest Mrs. Bull, but the whole silhouette does not have the 'feel' of Mrs. Bull. His frill is more 'uneven' than Mrs. Bull's frills and has no darker line outlining the edges of it. The waistcoat button is not obvious and the hatching of the lower waistcoat suggests Mrs. Beetham. The painting of the hair is different from those we have looked at so far in this article - it is not like the little classic Beetham man described earlier but more like the 'treatment' of hair on some authenticated Beetham ladies. His gum arabic is not all over the jacket but has been used quite thickly to suggest detail. I vote for Mrs. Beetham in this case! On the right is a lady in riding habit photographed considerably larger than life to show detail. Her oval is 2¾" h X 2¼" w. She is housed in a pearwood frame with the remnants of a Beetham label No 5 on the back. It is possible she has been reframed at some point and she has certainly been cleaned. Her bust-line termination does not suggest either of the lady artists! Her frill has a 'soft' look that does not suggest Mrs. Bull. Her hair is very wispy and gives no 'guide lines' I fear! The feather on her hat suggests Mrs. Beetham. Gum arabic has been sparingly used, but there may have been some loss with cleaning. To quote from John Woodiwiss on Mrs. Beetham - "I have been offered examples from her brush that were very ordinary." He surmised that she had bad days and uncongenial sitters! The jury is out on the lady I think.

(Correction. Mrs. Beetham had 7 recorded labels and not 5 as stated on the label page of this article.)

The Beetham Labels - used on her work painted on paper

On the right is a print of label No 4. Mrs. McKechnie states that Mrs. Beetham used this label for most of her works painted on paper. In fact I have rarely seen this label as most works on paper seem to have the No 5 label. This label is photographed below. Interestingly enough with the exception of the Rev. Drake most of the silhouettes illustrated in Mrs. McKechnie have the No.5 label or no label at all! (see pages 459 & 460) Also, under "Studio of Mrs. Beetham" there are two silhouettes illustrated with label No 5. It is therefore clear that a Beetham label (either No.4 or 5) on a painted on paper work could be by Mrs. Beetham or Mrs. Bull. Attribution with certainty can only be made on stylistic grounds.

Mrs. Beetham's first label was long and very sentimental in tone. As she became more successful her labels became briefer. Label No 5 was her last label and this is very brief. The date 1785 at the bottom of this label refers to the date it was printed. As Desmond Coke states in his book "The Art of Silhouette" the most superior "put the least in their shop window".

A REPRO. Mrs. BEETHAM !!

I recently visited a neighbour and saw this silhouette across the room on the mantlepiece. I thought that it looked like a wonderful silhouette by Mrs. Beetham so I asked to be allowed to examine it! At close quarters it certainly looked like a Mrs. Beetham on card but my instinct gave me another signal! I was not happy about the frame, which is Victorian, but was informed by the owner that it had been to match another family silhouette. However, on turning to the back of the frame I found the inscription, which I have photographed below. This revealed all! The silhouette was a copy of a silhouette on glass - no artist was mentioned but the original was obviously by the great lady! The copier was clearly a skilled artist and he or she has done quite a good job! I am not sure about the white beads. Nevertheless the whole work does not have the panache or flair of Mrs. Beetham's work. There is no doubt that the original work on glass must have been very fine. This silhouette is likely to remain in the family so will not turn up at the saleroom. I just wonder if the inscription became detached how this silhouette would be described in the catalogue.