Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
2:19 pm
June 24, 2009
Offline
Gwenne,
Actually, I did think I could see six fingers on the left hand – but not on the right. Apparently, it was supposed to be the right hand where the anomaly was situated. I was going to suggest it, but thought I might get expelled!
SR
5:28 pm
June 23, 2009
Offline
Sarah,
I couldn't tell if her right hand held a pinky out which would account for five digits on that hand also. I think that she is pointing to her hand, but again these are things that only one who is standing in front of that portrait are going to be able to discern. But she defintely has five lesser digits plus a thumb on the hand facing the vewier, her left hand. In those days of yore, that was a sure sign of taking the left hand/lesser path of witchcraft, ie a practicing sorceress. Which begs the next question, would this portrait be something that was a oft copied image with added symbology for whomever could decpher it? I'm not trying to get tooo 'DaVinci Code' here guys, but there are tons of symbols embedded in this portrait. And it's a very tantalizing look into the possibllities that we've always suspected about this woman. Again, fascinating…
Diem et animus scire cupio: I desire knowledge of the soul.
5:54 pm
June 19, 2009
Offline
Hi Ladies,
If the painting shows 6 fingers, then can we can take it that it was painted after Anne's death as it was after she died that those rumors abounded?
It is not true, if what I remember reading about the Archaeological dig in the 1870's, what was believed to be Anne's remains were found and there were no references to a six fingered hand.
i think that the picture was painted or Commissioned by someone who wished to tell the story of Anne as they believed it to be.
In the link that I posted previously, there is a bit of history relating to Ludlow Castle Lodge. It states that
\”Castle Lodge is a medieval Elizabethan house near Ludlow Castle where scenes from the 1965 film version of Moll Flanders were shot. Castle Lodge has some of the largest collection of oak panelling in England and dates from the early 13th Century, rebuilt in 1580. In Tudor times it was the home of Elizabeth I's Master of Requests and was once used as a prison.\”
It is a painting full of little clues though and so interesting, so please come back to class Sarah, because we need all of our eyes open to solve this mystery!!
Paudie.
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
7:08 pm
June 23, 2009
Offline
Perhaps it was painted as you said after her death by someone wishing to impart their ideals and politics on the image. I read the link that you gave about the castle Lodge and it was interesting. It also stated that it's orgins began in the 13th Century, well before Anne's birth. So again, it could have been something political painted after her death, or it could be a portrait that accurately portrayed her perhaps she even posed for it. I think that is the question that is being posed here. We don't know exactly when the portrait was painted, and even though archaeologists dug up her purported grave in 1870 and no one reported a sixth digit, that still really doesn't prove or disprove anything. I like most here in this forum believe that any physical deformity (ies) that were reported about her during or immediately after her life were probably exagerated for political reasons. However, if this was a portrait that she posed for during her lifetime, then it would defintely lend credence to some of the physical descriptions about the Queen.
Diem et animus scire cupio: I desire knowledge of the soul.
3:05 am
June 24, 2009
Offline
But then don't forget: the ring finger of the right hand is vacant. Right hand in tudor times for the wedding ring. This is unlikely to have been painted after her death, therefore. Perhaps a piece of black propaganda during her lifetime – but more likely (this is my personal view) a very private portrait intended just for Henry. This is the 'Come-hither Portrait.'
SR
6:14 pm
June 19, 2009
Offline
Hi all,
maybe when Emma sees all our posts, as the one who has seen it up close, she might fill in some of the blanks for us all. I was planning a trip to Hever in the next weeks as it is somewhere I would really like to see. I would like to see the Ludlow portrait also, would have to be another trip though.
was it recently that Emma saw the portrait of Anne? Is it viewable any time?
the posted image is very low resolution but I have had a go in photoshop anyway, (don't know if I can post it without Emma's permission?) I have found something that I can add on the hand/finger debate. What seems an extra finger on the lower or Anne's right hand is part of her garment and is not an extra finger, I cant say for sure on the other upper or left hand whether she has an extra finger. She is wearing two rings on each hand one on each index and one on each ring fingers.
She points to her tummy with her right index finger and to her sleeve with the left index.
The figurehead on top of the chalice or what stands by the apple, seems to be a dragon.
I also think that the \”B\” is a broach rather than a necklace and the object under her right hand I think is an orb?
Had nothing better to do at \”silly O'clock\” on a Sunday morning!
But, more interesting questions my Tudor sleuths …
Paudie.
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
1:20 am
February 16, 2009
Offline
Emma emailed me to say that she rescued the image off a website that was about to close so that is the only image she has – just a low res one I'm afraid – and she's never seen it in real life. Emma has been digging to try and find out more about this portrait but hasn't been able to find out anything. The Castle Lodge was a hotel I think so perhaps that's how the person who posted it on the other site saw it and photographed it. Emma did try and contact the person who had posted it but got no reply.
I'm going to try and get hold of the lodge or estate agent to see if I can find out any more. The orb is I think a jewelled pomander which fits well with descriptions of what ladies wore at the time. It would be attached to a girdle.
Paudie, I'm sure that you can post your photoshop version on here. It would be good to see your version of it and see if we can pick out more details.
I was hoping to make a gallery of Anne Boleyn portraits and add this one but it's so tricky with copyright issues. Although, the paintings themselves are old and have no copyright, photos of them do have copyright and if I can't trace the owner of this photo I may not be able to use it – not sure!
I do love mysteries!!
Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn
4:22 am
June 24, 2009
Offline
Paudie, I can see what you mean about the right ring finger – but in my poor res' example it does not seem to be a ring, but just a blob, like a little shadow of the joint of the finger which does not seem to extend all the way around the finger itself. But I'll accept that you have a better view. Perhaps, Claire, we could get some 'big guns' in on this and actually e-mail Roy Strong (the expert on Tudor portraits). ?? Especially if it is going to go under the hammer at any future time.
SR
5:06 am
June 19, 2009
Offline
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
5:12 am
June 19, 2009
Offline
The images did not post, so I have mailed them on to Claire to post.
Paudie.
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
7:09 am
February 16, 2009
Offline
Thanks, Paudie. I've uploaded it onto /resources/anne-boleyn-pictures/ – it's the first picture. Click on it to see a close up.
Gotta dash, am jam making!!
Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn
6:42 pm
June 19, 2009
Offline
thanks Claire,
I use Mac's and they dont always want to do PC things!
I watched with interest tonight the program “Henry VIII: Patron or Plunderer” with architectural historian, Jonathan Foyle.
There was much about Hans Holbein the younger, the artist who was court painter to Henry VIII and painted the \”Rose Portrait\” that hangs in the NPG in London. You have made comparisons to the \”Rose Portrait\” and the Ludlow one in earlier posts. Holbein, as many artists at the time, would have made sketches of their subjects, much like modern artists taking photographs as a reference aid to painting later. Jonathan Foyle confirmed that Holbein used this practice when asked to go on a \”shopping expedition\” for a new wife for Henry. Without getting too long winded…
There exists in the British Museum such a sketch of Anne, it is believed to be the truest image of Anne as it would have to be a true image showing the features in detail, like a photograph for Holbein. I know it is because I went to see it last March and as I have told Claire, it was an experience! The sketch is not on display but I managed to see it, thanks to the wonderful and kind people in the Portrait gallery there. It can be seen on their web site, you will have to dig though to find it. It is believed to be the basis for the \”Rose Portrait\”.
I am a photographer by trade and do a lot of restoration of old photographs. Detail in an image means everything to me and what I saw on the internet did not do the sketch justice, so I just had to go and see it. It is as close to a photograph as one could get of Anne in my estimation and she is a very pretty lady!
I have a picture of it on my wall here as I write and see it a hundred times a day. I'm sure that we all have our Favorite image of Anne, or have a picture of her in our minds eye, this is my image of Anne as I see her, so glad to have had the experience of having seen it up close.
Paudie.
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
3:27 am
June 24, 2009
Offline
Paudie,
How wonderful! I absolutely adore Holbein's sketches – far, far more than the finished paintings, which seem dull and wooden by comparison. The drawings and wash sketches have an incredible vitality and spontaneity to them. They are some of the greatest works of portraiture ever made, in my view. And of course, you know what we are all going to be asking you next, don't you. How can we see this one? Can you let us have a look without infringing copyright?
SR
7:35 am
June 19, 2009
Offline
Hi Sarah,
copyright is a tricky thing, Claire and I have had many conversations by mail about this one, the picture itself is past copyright, but if I had a picture (and reckoned that was much more important than I really am…) I could claim copyright on my image of the sketch.
Happily for everyone, and mostly for myself I am not important at all and should have an image of mine somewhere here that I took myself.
I will have a look and if I find something, I will send it on to Claire for you!
Paudie.
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
1:58 pm
June 24, 2009
Offline
Paudi,
Many thanks for taking the trouble to send that to me. Yes, it really is a stunning portrait. I have, I realise now, seen it before in books and online – but it still takes the breath away a little to behold it.
For anyone who wants to see it online, this link will take you straight there:
http://www.jack-of-all-trades……e/ab3.html
There is some dispute about whether it is irrefutably of Anne. In some instances it is shown with the title 'unknown woman.' Having said that, there are just as many people who are happy to attribute it to AB. Like you, I tend to agree with the last assertion. There is a shrewdness and a calculating intelligence present in that face which would fit AB perfectly. And of course quite attractive I should imagine to the men-folk!
A wonderful piece of art. I do love Holbein.
SR
5:57 pm
June 19, 2009
Offline
you are most welcome Sarah,
I am glad to share it. I have worked it in photoshop and balanced it for printing, if you can, get it printed, it will look so different than on your screen, trust me!
the more I read about Holbein, the more I can appreciate his work.
If you are ever near the British Museum, try to go and see it, it is a beauty as I think Anne was.
I seem to be the only guy on the forum so far and would maybe have a mans view on the attractiveness of Anne in this Holbein portrait. Men are first attracted by the visual, I would personally go a little deeper, working in photography, still have mans eyes though!
What first got me interested in Anne, was her execution speech as a boy in school, professing her love for Henry who was ultimately the reason for her death. I visited the Tower of London and Saint Peter ad Vincula on the 19th of May last, something I have always wanted to do and this year I went and spent the day there.
I have found in my job, having photographed many of the \”beautiful people\” that anyone with a genuine personality regardless of looks are the ones that resonate. Maybe thats why I am so taken by the Hans Holbein portraits.
again, so glad to share it with someone who has an appreciation for Holbein's art.
Paudie.
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
10:55 am
February 16, 2009
Offline
Hi Guys and Gals!
I've just spoken to Steve, the jeweller who makes our gold-plated B necklaces and who lives in Ludlow, and here is what he said about the portrait:-
“I am dubious as to the painting's authenticity, as to have the famous Boleyn Cup (Cirencester Church) in the foreground is just too good to be true.”
I've been doing some digging about the Boleyn cup and found that it was made for Anne Boleyn in 1535 and then passed on to her daughter, Elizabeth I, who then gave it to her physician, Richard Master. Master eventually presented it to Cirencester Parish Church in Gloucestershire, England, where it can still be found today.
See http://www.sacred-destinations…..church.htm
for a photo of it (scroll to the bottom).
It bears Anne Boleyn's family crest on the top of it.
I think that I agree with Steve. The colours seem far too “bright” when compared to the other portraits of Anne and I do feel that it is a more modern interpretation of Anne, based on the NPG portrait.
Still, this portrait is a fantastic find and now we've found the cup too!!
Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn
11:48 am
June 19, 2009
Offline
Wow Claire,
does he have a better pic of the painting by any chance or is he aware of what text is in the letter?
Well sleuthed Claire!
Paudie.
If it was not this, then it would be something else?
1:35 pm
June 24, 2009
Offline
Great! So the cup narrows down the date for the portrait considerably. If it was painted from life, it must be 1535 or 36. That, assuming a birth date of 1501, would coincide with an age for Anne of around 34 or 35 years at the time. That blows my theory of the 'come hither' portrait out of the water, because she would have been married by then, of course. Maybe Anne was the first to change the medieval tradition of wedding ring on right hand and thus we see it on the left hand here. It is still the right hand in many catholic countries, apparently – (Claire you could confirm this from Al Andalus!)
Of course it could just be, like Steve suggests, a much later effort, done after Anne's death. But I would not be too concerned about the freshness of the colour as a question against its authenticity. The typical old master look that we are used to in our galleries is largely a result of centuries of grime and varnish (and faded colours). Any painting that is kept out of the light, and not exposed to smoke and varnishing too much, will be likely to preserve its fresh appearance longer. This is possible in this case. And yes we really do need to know what that inscription says.
Anyway … over to you fellow sleuths! (this is fun, isn't it!)
SR
2:05 pm
February 16, 2009
Offline
I grew up liking Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys so this is the kind of thing that I love!!
Yes, here in Spain, the wedding ring is worn on the ring finger of the right hand, not the left hand like the US and UK.
I'm so excited about all this that I've just blogged about it! I so love mysteries and I love looking for clues and symbols in things so, yes, this is really good fun!
Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn
1 Guest(s)
