I have made the usual requests for further information on all three paintings.

This certainly does not look like autograph Lely; it is not good enough.

Last May, I made a still-pending submission to AD to the effect that another portrait in this collection https://tinyurl.com/czpmpjws looked like a Mary Beale and noted her posthumous portrait of the sitter's mother (also in this collection). "My" portrait has what I consider very much a Mary Beale face.

Jacinto, that submission, asking the collection to consider listing https://tinyurl.com/czpmpjws as 'attributed to', 'possibly by' or 'style of' Mary Beale, was forwarded to them last May, along with a separate email. Unfortunately there was no response, but they now have a link to this discussion and will see that you had also suggested Beale. Our contact there appears to have been given access to Art UK's Collections Portal in July 2023 and appears to be still with the Council, so let's hope for a reply to my latest email.

Thank you, Marion, but of course I knew you had tried to contact the collection last May. By pending I meant unresolved.

The portrait of the Countess of Carbery was formerly attributed to Lely and is rather more Lelyesque than the three male portraits under discussion. Beale, of course, was strongly influenced by Lely's work .

Dear Jacinto, as you mention, the style of this portrait cannot be Lely, but surely it must be at least stylistically linked to Beale (although without high-res images it is hard to be definitive). The other portrait you brought to discussion last May I believe also to be by Beale although perhaps slightly later in date.

As I said in my original comment, it would seem, if these works are indeed by Beale, the Earl of Carberry commissioned multiple portraits from Beale that are not mentioned in Charles Beale’s handbooks and therefore important additions to the artist’s oeuvre. From my research (although I might stand corrected) Beale didn’t have a large studio as we understand Lely and Kneller did so if these works can be considered related to Beale they would surely be autograph.

I look forward to seeing what others might think of this.

Peter, is the portrait of the Countess of Carbery mentioned in Charles Beale's records? The Countess (d. 1650) would not have sat to Beale, who did not become a professional portraitist till the 1670s.

The portrait of Francis, Lord Vaughan (d. 1667), if it is by Beale, is likely to be posthumous, like the portrait of his mother.

The sitter's vital dates (1639-1713) should be given in the Art UK entry (the birth year given for https://tinyurl.com/czpmpjws is incorrect, assuming the sitter is the same person). The picture illustrating this discussion would not be earlier than 1670s and could well be later.

A portrait of the 3rd earl by Kneller, c. 1708, is at the NPG:

https://tinyurl.com/45d4jhp6

Note how much more generic the face is here, compared to the Kneller (where the very fine face is probably by Kneller's hand). One wonders if the earl actually sat for her (though the lack of extant record of such a sitting need not mean one never existed).

I am not sure what is the latest thinking on this, but the portrait of Frances, Countess of Carbery https://tinyurl.com/3warsh8f may be a copy by Beale after a now lost original by Lely, which would explain how Lelyesque it is (Beale certainly copied other portraits by Lely, which was an important part of her training).

The portrait attributed to John Greenhill (1644-1676) that was in a Bonham's auction in 2008 reminds me of the portrait of John Vaughan.

https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/15741/lot/19/

There is a period resemblance, Marcie, though I expect your portrait, dated 1675, is earlier than ours based on the wigs. Ours is more likely to be 1680s (the sitter became 3rd Earl of Carbery in 1686).