Completed Portraits: British 18th C, Portraits: British 19th C 60 If not the poet Robert Bloomfield who is this sitter?

The Collection has added: 'The information Wardown Park Museum has for this painting describes it as being a portrait of Robert Bloomfield by John Hoppner, however the Bloomfield Society have queried this. Can anyone help identify the sitter for this portrait, or indeed confirm the artist?'

The sitter looks 30 or older to me, so if it were Benjamin Bloomfield, that would put the picture at 1798 or later, which seems too late for the hair/dress. Lou Taylor could be more precise, no doubt.

The other question is the Hoppner attribution. If this is by him, it is not one of his best portraits.

Not by Hoppner in my experience. But less easy to identify who it is by.

The painting of Robert Bloomfield by John Hoppner has been dated to the year 1800 by Horace Pitt Kennedy Skipton in his book John Hoppner in the year 1805.
He states 'the portrait shows an earnest face with wistful eyes and a forehead of some ability but limitations are suggested by the mouth; it is the work of a real artist.
Also William McKay and William Roberts in their Catalogue Raisonne of John Hoppner, 1909, also confirm that it is by Hoppner.
'Bust in an oval, looking upwards to the right wearing claret-coloured coat and white waistcoat.'

Could it possibly be William the younger Pitt ????

Might the provenance of the painting help with identifying or confirming the sitter and artist?
The Biggleswade Chronicle (27 Sep 1957) reported that an “[…] oil painting of Robert Bloomfield […] was bought by the Luton Museum […]. The portrait, by Hoppner, was given by the Rt. Hon. A. T. Lennox-Boyd, M.P., and his wife Patricia, and was sold for 30 guineas. Professor Sir Albert Richardson, past president of the Royal Academy, who opened the sale, urged that the portrait should not be allowed to leave the country.”

In the third National Portrait Exhibition, 1868, a portrait of Bloomfield, owned by Mr W. Percival Boxall, was shown (No. 168). It is described as “Bust to l.; claret-coloured coat, white waistcoat. Canvas 32 ½ x 26 ½ in.” https://bit.ly/3wcpIVy and in the two sources cited above by Joe Hayto (https://bit.ly/2Qwvl1I and https://bit.ly/3hzCSHX)

Intriguingly, in 1912, a woman called Sybil B. Reid enquired about the whereabouts of Mr. Boxall in “The Connoisseur” (Vol. 32). She wrote “My family has long possessed an unidentified portrait, which an expert has lately pronounced to be identical with one lent to the National Portrait exhibition at South Kensington in 1868 as Robert Bloomfield, the “Cobbler Poet” by John Hoppner, R.A., and then the property of Mr. W. Percival Boxall […]” https://bit.ly/3fvbc4z

Is there any indication on the back of the painting confirming that the one donated by Mr. Lennox-Boyd in 1957 and the one owned by Mr. Boxall in 1868 are the same?

So Andrea, is the implication that a portrait owned by Boxall in 1868 is the same picture said to have been long possessed by someone else 44 years later? Or are they supposed to be two different versions of the same portrait?

Mrs Reid was looking for information about Mr. Boxall "to compare the two portraits, and perhaps get further light frown on our (i.e. Mrs Reid's) picture and its authenticity", so it seems there were two versions of it.

The handling of the waistcoat, particularly, strikes me as poor for Hoppner.

The following is from the NPG's listing of all known likenesses of Bloomfield:

"Undated and doubtful

An oil by Hoppner called 'Bloomfield' (W. McKay & W. Roberts, John Hoppner R.A., p 26 and Christie's 11 June 1937) was lent to Third Exhibition of National Portraits, South Kensington, 1868 (168) by W. Percival Boxall, but surely this plump smooth gentleman does not represent the Farmer's Boy"

McKay & Roberts is not to be relied on. We should proceed on the basis that this portrait is not of Bloomfield, on the grounds of lack of likeness and lack of early documentation. And not by Hoppner from my experience of the artist.

It is worth noting that the canvas is not a standard British canvas size. If it is unlined, a photo of the back could be helpful.

In style and costume I think the portrait is late 18c, rather than early 19c.

I have seen another version of this portrait somewhere in the mists of time. I seem to recall it had an India link and was credited as being by Thomas Hickey. I will endeavour to see if I can unearth more to sunstantiate this....

There must be a Hoppner expert who can address the attribution here.

There is a Hoppner expert, John Human Wilson, whose thesis from some time ago I have seen in the past. But this painting is NOT by Hoppner in my experience. Personally, I'd leave the Hoppner idea at that. Hickey is worth a thought.

The problem, Jacob, is that the picture is currently firmly listed as by Hoppner, not even "attributed to" him, which would be more reasonable. I can understand, of course, that the collection would hardly agree to alter the matter without the input of an expert, barring irrefutable evidence coming forward.

Perhaps Bendor Grosvenor would care to comment on authorship.

Jacinto, I'm not sure if you're aware that Jacob was Curator of 18th century portraits at the NPG 1983–2001, and then Chief Curator of the Gallery 2001-2011. Bendor certainly has a huge fund of knowledge and experience himself (though he wasn't even born when Jacob began his professional career!), and we are very fortunate to have both of them here. I rather doubt, though, he will argue with Jacob's assessment of the Hoppner idea.

For what it's worth, I concur with everything Jacob has said. I can see nothing even vaguely reminiscent of Hoppner in the portrait; the sitter's resemblance to Robert Bloomfield is to my eye small to non-existent (it seems limited to the short cropped hair at the front); and I also agree that the work is likely to be late C18th rather than early 19th. As for Benjamin Bloomfield, I'm afraid he looks even less like our man.

Human Wilson's Ph.D. thesis on Hoppner (for the Courtauld) was written in 1992: https://bit.ly/3vO7ytx. It seems to have been the first study since McKay & Roberts published theirs in 1909 - as Jacob says, the latter is a work that should (like much art historical wisdom from the early C20th) be taken with a large pinch of salt.

Osmund, I suggested Bendor Grosvenor because he's the relevant Group Leader and has recently commented on many other pictures of roughly the same period, so I thought he could also comment on this one for the sake of another informed opinion--meaning more informed than mine. I was not implying Bendor would "know better" than Jacob, whose opinion I certainly respect.

Also, to clarify my wording further, by "expert" I meant someone officially or formally considered an authority on a specific artist, not simply someone who may be quite knowledgeable indeed about that artist's oeuvre.

Hoppner's style and manner is fairly easily noticable if you know what to look for, which just comes from looking at many, many examples. In this instance I have and I concur with what has been previously stated - it simply isn't by Hoppner.
I'm sorry not to have moved forward with the Hickey attribution; I'm ploughing back through my old files to see if I can find anything!

Miles- there is a Hickey in the Tate.A young man-18ish - in a green Jacket. I think it might be a self portrait,but the blurb isn't clear. It has a similar style and feel to the painting here- same sort of expression on the face,- handling of the cravat. It might even be a younger version of our sitter here-perhaps.???

The following advertisement appeared in the Times in 1853.

The Times, Wednesday, May 18, 1853; pg. 3; Issue 21431; col D | TO NOBLEMEN and GENTLEMEN.—To be SOLD, a PORTRAIT of BLOOMFIELD, the Poet, by Hoppner. Apply at 1, Clarence-place, Middleton-road, Dalston. Dealers will not be treated with.

I think in 1853 people still knew what Robert Bloomfield looked like. His books often include a portrait frontispiece. My assumption is that a Hoppner portrait of the poet once existed but the Wardown Park portrait isn't it.

Has the time come to close this discussion on the basis that we do not know who is portrayed? It is not Bloomfield, on grounds of lack of likeness and lack of early documentation.

Page 347 of Art Prices Current (Wm. Dawson & Sons Limited, 1928) describes a Hoppner portrait of Bloomfield as "half-length oval looking to the right....". Any contributor with a full copy, could you please post the rest of the entry?

This discussion, “If not the poet Robert Bloomfield who is this sitter?”, has attracted 25 comments since it was launched in May. I am now recommending that we close the discussion on the basis that we do not know who the sitter is, subject to the collection and my fellow group leader.

Despite the apparent identification of the portrait as Bloomfield by Hoppner as early as 1853 (post by Keri, 16 June), it is clear that this portrait is no such thing.

On the sitter, the Bloomfield Society have questioned the identity for good reason. I have now had the opportunity to analyse documented portraits of Bloomfield, three of which are reproduced on the NPG website. His face was slightly longer and more muscular, less round and less flabby. His nose had a very slight wave to it. His chin was tighter. There is no evidence for the suggested alternative identification as Benjamin Bloomfield, 1st Baron Bloomfield. As such, we are left with a portrait of an unknown man.

On the artist, the portrait is clearly not by Hoppner. As Miles says (4 June), “Hoppner's style and manner is fairly easily noticable if you know what to look for, which just comes from looking at many, many examples. In this instance I have and I concur with what has been previously stated - it simply isn't by Hoppner.” I agree with this analysis. Hoppner’s handling of paint is livelier, his colours more forceful and his compositions more original. Miles has asked whether the portrait could be by Thomas Hickey, an intriguing idea. If there were a little more evidence, I think I could support the idea of an attribution to this artist.

We have however, thanks to several contributions, made progress on identifying the provenance of this picture.

Still recommending that we close this discussion on the basis that we do not know who the sitter is, subject to the collection and my fellow group leader.

Jacob, I am following up with an email to the Collection right now. David

The attached composite is based on this work, a miniature of Robert Bloomfield that was in a Bonham's auction on Nov. 23, 2005 (lot 158), and an image with no source on the "Young Family Tree" on Ancestry.

https://tinyurl.com/58cxenca

***

Miss Sybil Beatrice Reid (16 March 1873–27 Feb. 1963) still owned her family's portrait 'Robert Bloomfield "The Cobbler Poet"' in 1959, the year that she drafted two codicils to her 1954 will. She bequeathed the portrait to Arthur Hugh Savile Reid, with a request that the portrait (and others that she named) be "held by a member of the Reid family for as long as possible".

The wills of her immediate family members did not mention paintings by title. I examined the wills of her grandfather William Reid Esq. (b. 1804, m. 1835, d. 26 Dec. 1867) her grandmother Louisa Margaret Reid (née Barkly)(m. 1835, d. 3 July 1875), her father Cecil Frederick Reid (bap. 27 March 1842, m. 1869, d. 23 Aug. 1898)(extract attached) and her mother Charlotte Mary Reid (née Grimston)(b. 21 May 1843, m. 1869, d. 24 Sept. 1932).

I ordered the will (29 Dec. 1928, with codicil 8 Aug. 1930) of William Percival Gratwicke Boxall (d. 31 March 1931), the eldest son of William Percival Boxall (d. 1898) who owned a portrait (likely this one) of "Robert Bloomfield". The will indicated that his house and property, including pictures, were not to be sold without the consent of his stepdaughters Maud Evelyn Cowper and Sybil Constance Cowper.

When Maud passed away after her sister, unmarried and with no heirs other than each other, dealing with their estates was problematic and their estates initially passed to the government. In March 1956, a High Court of Justice decision shows that Maud's estate passed to Herbert Wellesley Cowper "lawful brother of the half blood". He was a retired civil servant at the time. He passed away in Devon in November 1974.

If I am interpreting the will of William Percival Gratwicke Boxall correctly, his residuary estate fell to Sir Alleyne Percival Boxall (d. 1945), and Ernest Harper Kempe (d. 1960). Sir Alleyne Percival Boxall bequeathed his residuary estate to his cousin Harry Piers Chadwick (b. 1915, d. 1952).

In Marcie's composite in her first post today, the bottom image represents Augustus Henry FitzRoy, 3rd Duke of Grafton, by Pompeo Batoni, 1762, in the NPG. Are we being side tracked? And should my recommendation of 17/1/2022 to close the discussion still stand (tho' I am no longer group leader)?

Thanks for the information, Jacob.

***

A possible link to Dalston (Keri Davies 16/06/2021 16:48) might be George William Burrow of the Poor Law Board who lived in Dalston (1851, 1861, 1866). In 1866 he wrote about the need to assist Bloomfield's daughters.

***

Kieran, please see the attached snippets (your comment 10/09/2021 02:30). The portrait was in a July 31, 1929, Sotheby's auction. The missing text reads: "... wearing claret-coloured coat, cream waistcoat and white cravat, landscape background. Canvas – 32½ x 26½ (Price), £230".

An online search shows that the 1944 publication 'Apollo' mentioned a portrait of Bloomfield by Hoppner but I could not see the surrounding text.

***

For the record, as shown in the attached articles, the portrait of Bloomfield owned by the Boxall family was exhibited in Brighton in 1867 and in Horsham (West Sussex) in 1874.

The title of that Sotheby's catalogue from July 1929 (discovered by Kieran) is shown at the following link:
https://www.worldcat.org/title/1348652132

***

Robert Bloomfield’s eldest son Charles Bloomfield passed away on April 26, 1853. He was buried on May 4, 1853, and the address on his burial certificate is 16 Mintern Street, Hoxton, which is just south of Dalston.

The portrait of Robert Bloomfield that was offered for sale on May 18, 1853, more than likely belonged to Charles – his mother Mary Ann Bloomfield (née Church) having passed away in 1834. It was likely sold by his widow Hannah Bloomfield (née Bloomfield)(d. 1880), who was the daughter of Robert's brother Nathaniel Bloomfield. Hopefully, this helps to clarify the timing of the sale of the 1853 portrait of Robert Bloomfield.

This discussion is headed:

If not the poet Robert Bloomfield who is this sitter?

Is this actually a portrait of John Fergusson by Thomas Hickey? See the attachment for what appears to be a version sold at auction some years ago.

It was Miles Barton who first suggested the artist.

Ah, that's a great deal more convincing. Well done, Jacob (and Miles, whose remarkable memory got him at least three-quarters of the way there).

Do you know where and when that auction was?

I'll post the auction details in the New Year.

That is a remarkable find, Jacob.

A portrait of Fergusson is on this Geni page (select “full size” on the top left):

https://www.geni.com/people/John-Fergusson/6000000000208671738

This painting must be created in the window-1785 to 1789 in Calcutta.Hickey arrived in Calcutta in 1785 .Fergusson came back to London in 1789 and died in 1793. So here he must be about 40 years old.

That's very interesting, Louis.

I've been wondering why some websites show that Fergusson passed away in 1790. His will is available on both Ancestry and the National Archives website (free). The document indicates that he passed away between 4 October 1790 (the date when he drafted his will) and 5 December 1791 (the date of probate).

"Will of John Fergusson or Ferguson of Doonholm, Strathclyde". Will dated 4 October 1790. PROB 11/1212/55 – 5 December 1791.

He was possibly the "John Ferguson Esqr". who was buried at St. Marylebone, Westminster, on November 24, 1791.

***

I've also been trying to determine who would likely have inherited Fergusson's pictures. Here is a possible sequence:

Margaret Fergusson (d. 28 June 1845), his widow.
"Will of Margaret Fergusson, Widow of Marylebone, Middlesex". Last codicil dated 18 August 1843. PROB 11/2022/285 – 1 August 1845. A notice of her death is attached.

John Hutcheson Fergusson (d. 1845), her nephew by marriage.
"Will of John Hutcheson Fergusson of Trochrigg". Will dated 2 November 1837. PROB 11/2021/53 – 1 July 1845.

John Hutcheson Fergusson, his son (d. 1901). Will dated 25 January 1901. Probate 26 March 1901. An extract of the will is attached.

Margaret Harriet Anne Fergusson-Abbott, his niece (d. 1904). Probate 11 September 1904. I have ordered this will.

An article (extract attached) in the ‘Ayr Observer’ of October 14, 1887, mentions a Nasmyth portrait of the poet Robert Burns and a portrait of a man "in the same room", possibly of "a member of the Fergusson family" who went "out to India" at Auchendrane mansion owned by "Miss Cathcart".

John Fergusson of Doonholm mentioned his widowed sister Agnes (1735–1816) and her late husband Elias Cathcart (1703–1798) in his will. Their eldest son David Cathcart, Lord Alloway (1765–1829), was the father of Elias Cathcart (1794–1877).

The 1901 Census shows that Elias Cathcart's three unmarried daughters resided together at Auchendrane mansion. Jane Adelaide Cathcart passed away in 1909, reportedly ending that line of the family.

Marcie--the newspapaer cutting seems to suggest Alexander Nasmyth painted a portrait of the young John Fergusson. I was wondering if our sitter, was really a man in his mid forties,worn out by hard work in the Indian climate.Something to think about.
Have you got a copy of John Fergusson's will.One reference I find to a will says Doonholm and his estate-- bought by Fergusson in 1783--- was to be left to the children of John Fergusson's uncle William. The thing is- probate and Chancery might have taken a year or two??? Also,there may be more than one John Fergusson. ???
The records of the Clan Fergusson also make interesting reading.

Mind you Alexander Nasmyth was born in 1758-so would not be old enough to paint a young John Fergusson,who probably went to India in about 1765 ish.Unless he copied something extant.???

Fergusson’s will is here (free):
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/D364728

***

A copy made by Nasmyth is certainly a possibility, Louis. As Jacob suggested, the portrait in the auction catalogue is not identical to the portrait on Art UK. It seems to more closely match the portrait on the Geni website. Where is that portrait located? I'm not a member of Geni but perhaps someone who is a member can send a message to the owner of that family tree.

***

The Nasmyth portrait owned by Miss Cathcart was definitely of Robert Burns. There are several articles about its sale on the BNA. I have attached one of them from 1905. Another article does report that the Burns painting was on the wall beside another painting by Nasmyth, however, but there is no evidence that it was the portrait of John Fergusson.

***

I have also attached an obituary for James Fergusson (1808–1886) who was the son of the surgeon William Fergusson (1773–1846). William Fergusson was the brother of John Hutcheson Fergusson (d. 1845)(see my comment of 25/12/2022 02:10). Perhaps James Fergusson once owned the original portrait of John Fergusson. It would make sense – he worked in India for the company that John Fergusson had co-owned. I have ordered his will.

A correction to my comment of 28/12/2022 01:27 (and a mystery):
In his will John Fergusson of Doonholm mentioned: “Mrs. Margaret Fergusson my wife”, “James Fergusson of Bank, [illegible] Ayr my brother [illegible] and Margaret Hutchison alias Fergusson his wife”. That information seems to match various family trees. However, he also mentioned “Mrs. Agnes Fergusson alias Cuthbeart [? illegible] my sister widow of the deceased Elias Cuthbeart [? illegible] of Greenfield”. My concern is that family trees show that the husband of Agnes Fergusson was “Elias Cathcart” and that he passed away in 1798. If that information is correct, Agnes could not have been his widow in a will written in 1790. Perhaps Elias Cathcart was her second husband?

The Scotlandspeople website shows that Agnes Fergusson was indeed married to Elias Cathcart (in Ayr, on October 17, 1762). That site also has the record of the death of Elias Cathcart of Ayr. He passed away on February 27, 1776, at the age of 76. The word that looks like “Cuthbeart” in the will of John Fergusson of Doonholm is likely “Cathcart”.

Here is an extract from the will dated 2 May 1902 (codicils not shown) of Margaret Harriet Anne Fergusson-Abbott (see my comment of 25/12/2022 02:10). Probate was granted in 1905. She doesn't mention a portrait of John Fergusson of Doonholm.

Marcie- I have come across a painting by Henry Raeburn of Mrs John Hutcheson Fergusson.--of Trochnaige,--- So I was wondering- how many Mrs John Hutcheson Ferguson's at this time would be able to afford a portrait by Raeburn. Could this refer to our sitter??/
https://photoarchive.paul-mellon-centre.ac.uk/objects/418347/portrait-of-mrs-john-hutcheson-fergusson-of-trochraigne?ctx=bda0482ba38f9da1d960b35414f8f3891957af4b&idx=28

of Trochraigne typo :-(

Excellent find, Louis, but John Hutcheson Fergusson was our sitter's nephew – the son of his brother James Fergusson of Bank, Ayr. In the will that I just posted, Margaret mentioned that portrait you found of her “grandmother” as well as a “companion portrait in oils of my grandfather Mr. John Hutcheson Fergusson of Trochraique”. Margaret was the daughter of John Hutcheson Fergusson's daughter Margaret [or Mary] Ann Harriet Fergusson (and James Abbott).

Perhaps the first portrait in the will is the one by Romney at this link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Petrie

The pose is somewhat similar to that of John Fergusson of Doonholm.

Added interest----Here is a portrait of William Fairlie, Fergusson's partner in India.
http://www.historicalportraits.com/Gallery.asp?Page=Item&ItemID=796&Desc=Sir-William-Fairlie-and-family-|-Robert-Home

BTW. It seems Fergusson was heavily involved in shipping Opium to Canton-- so a drug dealer-- they always get rich!!!

Osmund asked (20/12/2022) where the portrait of John Fergusson by Thomas Hickey was sold. It was at Lawrence's, Crewkerne, 26 April 1990 lot 10, without further useful details beyong the catalogue entry previously posted (20/12/2022).

The matter of the sitter's identity, as well as the original artist, clearly seems to be resolved, so it would appear this is ready for closure pending the Group Leader's interaction with the collection.

Thank you all. I'll contact Luton Culture about the proposed changes.

Reviewing the thread of this argument, I think we can say the issue of the sitter is nicely resolved - the similarity with the Crewkerne catalogue entry and the image used for Fergusson on Genie - provides the conclusive supporting evidence needed for the collection to change the attritubtion of the sitter to John Fergusson of Doonholm. However the discrepancies in the background details between the Luton portrait and the one shown in the catalogue (less refined and less detailied in the Luton case) leaves the possibility open that we are dealing with a later copy (which might also account for the non-standard size of canvas noted by Jacob) after Thomas Hickey. So, I think we can only recommend changing the artist attribution to either 'attributed to' or 'after' Thomas Hickey. Following Louis's suggestion, we can even offer a c1785-1789 as a tentative date, though obviously, if it is a copy, we can only speculate as to the date of its production. In whatever case, it is clear, your combined efforts have definitively answered the original question - not John Hoppner and not Robert Bloomfield and you have provided a convincing alternative.

I would favour attributed to Thomas Hickey, rather than 'after'.

Did Luton Culture respond? See Marion's post of 04/01/2023.

Ruth, Jacob, thank you for your recent comments. Luton Culture did not respond in 2023. I have tried again today.

Can we close this discussion in the absence of a response from Luton after two approaches in 2023 and earlier this year?

Sitter: John Fergusson of Doonholm (d. 1790/91)

Artist: Attributed to Thomas Hickey (1741–1824)

Date: c1785-1789