"Portrait Of Catherine Murray Beside A Plinth With Roses, 17th Century; Anthony Van Dyck"
Portrait of Catherine Murray, later Countess of Dysart, Beside a Plinth with Pink Roses, 17th CenturyAfter Sir Anthony Van Dyck (1599-1641)
This exquisite Grand Manner work is an evocative example of the type of portrait in vogue during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Beautifully composed, the sitter has been depicted standing in a rocky outcrop, next to stone ledge with pink roses, the symbol of love. The beautiful colour combination of the white billowing sleeves, the russet dress, and the striking azure cloak and scarlet draperies imbue the portrait with a sense of luxury; the wealth portrayed emphasise the fact that this lady was a paragon of the wealthy and privileged society that she belonged to. A remarkable care is exercised in rendering the delicate arms and hands, and the treatment of the drapery, with its delicate folds and virtuoso in the art of conveying the texture of the fabrics.
Catherine Murray (née Bruce) was a Scottish noblewoman, and the daughter of Colonel Norman Bruce and Janet Norvell. Norman Bruce was the second son of the 8th Baron of Clackmannan. The Bruce family can trace their lineage back to Robert Bruce, the King of Scotland. During the English Civil War, she played a crucial role in overseeing the management of Ham House, defending it from the advances of Parliamentary forces.
In the early 1620s, Catherine married a descendant of James II of Scotland, William Murray, the 1st Earl of Dysart, who was a childhood friend of King Charles I and remained one of his trusted favourites. In 1626, he was made Gentleman of the Bedchamber and the family moved to Ham House near Richmond, and Catherine was made a lady-in-waiting to Queen Henrietta Maria and as such, she participated in the cultural milieu of the Caroline court in the 1630s.
After the outbreak of the Civil War, William, as a close confidante of Charles I, became an active royalist messenger during the Civil Wars; a service that took him across the country and overseas to France, the Netherlands and even Rome. With William away from Ham for long periods, Catherine was often left to protect her four daughters and defend Ham House from sequestration by Parliament. Although she and her daughters were able to visit the court occasionally while it was located in Oxford, upstream from Ham House, their prominent Royalist status drew the attention of Parliament. This was a time of violent overhaul of the status quo, when King fought Parliament for governance of the Church and State; a time when political revolution entered even the quiet reposes of country houses.
In 1643, she faced accusations of secretly providing financial support to the King, which she successfully refuted, although she continued to face threats of asset seizure in the subsequent years. Despite these adversities, Catherine took her daughters to the Oxford court during the winter of 1643–44, the same year in which William was created Earl of Dysart. She petitioned Parliament several times during the 1640s, significantly in the spring of 1646, when her husband was detained in the Tower of London as a royalist spy. The loyalty to Parliament of her relative, Thomas Bruce, first Earl of Elgin, who as a Scottish Presbyterian was fighting against the King, may also have helped bolster Catherine’s case. Catherine successfully defended Ham House estate against a final attempt to seize it, after enduring months of relentless struggle.
Catherine's narrative serves as a quintessential example of the genuine struggle for political agency that women experienced during the era recognised as the English Revolution. Throughout these two decades of turmoil, women from both royalist and parliamentarian forces valiantly defended their households and shielded their children from the invading armies that traversed the nation. Catherine died on 2 August 1649 and was buried at Petersham Church.
Van Dyck set a new standard for English portraiture and his portraits gave his royal and aristocratic sitters an unprecedented glamour and elegance. Due to his immense skill, his patrons often ordered additional copies of their likeness to adorn the walls of other properties or to give to family members, but due to the renown of the sitters (celebrities in their day) other members of society also commissioned a copy for themselves too. Apart from Van Dyke and his studio to create these works, other artists were commissioned too, some of which were major artists.
Our portrait is a contemporary version of Van Dyke’s portrait of the sitter in the Egremont Collection at Petworth House, West Sussex (painted 1637). There are five known copies in extant: our portrait, Scottish National Portrait Gallery, at Chatsworth, at Knole, and Christie’s London, 16th June 1967 (lot 24). It is a very fine example - and a real tour de force - of seventeenth century portraiture and held in the most spectacular good quality and condition gilded frame.
Anthony Van Dyck, a significant Flemish painter of the 17th century, held a position of prominence following Rubens. His artistic prowess was notably shaped by the impactful works of Rubens and various Italian artists he studied under. Van Dyck's career flourished in Antwerp and Italy where he excelled as a portraitist, in addition to creating intricate religious and mythological paintings. His skills extended beyond painting to include exceptional draftsmanship and etching. He is most renowned for his sophisticated depictions of Charles I and his court.
He was born in Antwerp and began producing independent works around the age of 17, during 1615-16. By 1621, he was serving James I of England, a role he left for an extended stay in Italy, lasting until 1627. Following a second stint in the Netherlands, Van Dyck achieved even greater acclaim upon his return to the English court in 1632. His detailed and complimentary depictions of Charles I and his family established a new benchmark in English portraiture, creating a trend among court members.
Provenance Anonymous sale; Christie's, New York, 16 October 1987, lot 129
Literature E. Larsen, The Paintings of Anthony van Dyck, Freren, 1988, I, pl. 28; II, p. 396, no. 1014a, the sitter erroneously identified as the Countess of Devonshire, as 'Anthony van Dyck', (with incorrect provenance);
O. Millar in S.J. Barnes et. al., Van Dyck: A Complete Catalogue of the Paintings, New Haven and London, 2004, p. 560, under no. IV.167, as a 'copy'
Exhibited Tel Aviv, Museum of Art, Van Dyck and his Age, 29 October 1995-17 January 1996, no. 29 (catalogue entry by D.J. Lurie), the sitter erroneously identified as the Countess of Devonshire, as 'Anthony van Dyck'
Measurements: Height 151cm, Width 130cm 10cm Depth framed (Height 59.5”, Width 51.25”, Depth 4” framed)
Le Magazine de PROANTIC
TRÉSORS Magazine
Rivista Artiquariato