A beginner’s exercise in the Japanese Art of Kintsugi – ‘Golden Joinery’ —— also known as Kintsukuroi —— ‘Golden Repair’ – or in my case crudely painting over the cracks!!!   

On Tuesday, 21st. April 2020, I posted a somewhat sorry post on Instagram about a significant jug I’d received in the post that day – that unfortunately arrived in pieces! Perhaps by pure coincidence, it arrived on the anniversary of Charlotte Brontë’s 204th birthday at 1:03 pm precisely – how fitting in itself! I bought the jug online on the 11th —— and had been expectantly waiting for it to come as it was a present to myself to mark my official visit to the ‘Brontë Parsonage Museum’ in Haworth – on Monday, 15th. April 2019 —— almost a year to the day.

However, for me ‘Brontëland’ exists away from the Parsonage window; in a dream I had quite a few years ago —— long before the Brontës showed up on my radar so to speak. The place ‘Brontëland’ in my dream – was a graveyard – more specifically, a burial chamber that was raised and rectangular in shape with a heavy stone slab atop…

In my dream – I saw a wondrous lightshow as ‘blinding’ as the Sun rising only brighter —— emanating upwards and outwards from under the slab – then I woke up! It’s only in recent years —— due to my in depth research into the ‘lost’ portrait of Emily Brontë by Charlotte – that symbolically, I’ve put two and two together and given my dream a name, ‘Brontëland’ – as written on’t jug!

So yes! I was disappointed that my not easily replaced vintage jug that bears the name ‘Brontëland’ arrived at my door broken into a ‘thousand’ pieces’. So this is the story about the ‘Crying Jug’s’ resurrection…  

The following excerpt from my Instagram post titled ’The Crying Jug’ —— explains the sorry situation: 

“Well — today, 21st April 2020 — is Charlotte’s birthday — she was born on this day in 1816 in Thornton, Yorkshire — in ‘Brontëland’! And what better way to celebrate this special day in the Brontë calendar — than with the arrival of a ‘new’ piece of Brontëana to add to my humble collection!

Today, at precisely 1:03 pm — I was delivered of a beautiful ‘Blueware’ jug made by ‘New Devon Pottery’ Newton Abbot, Devon — yes a little piece of this company that is no longer in production returned to the county of its origin — only in a thousand pieces!!!

I have been patiently waiting for it to come since I bought it online on the 11th April 2020 — and voila! it arrived on Charlotte’s birthday!

I had envisioned a bunch of freshly picked blue-bells in it from one of my walks — but alas that dream is now broken!

I’ve given it a go — at reassembling the pieces but I think it is beyond my skills — and patience — although I may return to it once the first gluing has set…” 

These images show the state of the jug when it arrived…

Encouraged by some of my lovely Instagram followers, most namely ‘Yorkshire Cathie’ – I decided to continue with my initial half-hearted effort of sticking a few of the larger pieces together…

Oddly, the shattered jug had two triangular pieces missing – either whole or rendered as dust particles – presumably lost in transit due to the thinness of the packaging! So before I could apply golden lines to my joinery, I had to fill the gaps with ‘Milliput’…Admittedly, the finish is a bit rough round the edges and the light still shows through the gaps and it’s never going to hold water —— but that’s all part of the Crying Jug’s story.

And now to the third phase of its restoration; the Golden phase…Because of Lockdown and no non-essential shops open at the minute – I have used materials that were to hand in my trusty cupboard only…‘Ta dah’!!! Presenting the ‘Crying Jug’ —— Kintsukuroi STYLE…

And today, Friday 24th April 2020…

All’s well that ends well —— the seller made an immediate refund on’t jug too!

---

Addendum: Saturday, 25th April 2020.

To read about the history of the pottery that originally shaped the ‘Crying Jug’ —— click on their name: ‘New Devon Pottery’ Newton Abbot, Devon.

And to read about Beaver symbolism – click HERE

---

 

A Bonnet inspired post for Easter Sunday, 12th. April 2020 – that proves that the style of hat worn by Emily Brontë in a portrait by elder sister, Charlotte – was around even before the Brontës sisters came into being; the ‘Pamela Bonnet’ is 18th century.The ‘Pamela Hat’ Portrait pose also predates the Brontë sisters; a couple late 18th century ‘Pamela Hat’ style portraits can be viewed – HERE and HERE —— and here…

“The Chapeau à la Paméla, Pamela hat or Pamela bonnet described a type of straw hat or bonnet popular during the 1790s and into the first three quarters of the 19th century. It was named after the heroine of Samuel Richardson‘s 1741 novel Pamela; or, Virtue Rewarded. While Pamela hats and bonnets underwent a variety of changes in shape and form, they were always made from straw. The mid-19th-century version of the Pamela hat was a smaller version of an early 19th-century wide-brimmed style called the gipsy hat.”

Excerpt above from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 

The portrait on the left is a miniature version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ type —— of Emily Brontë, circa 1830. The Portrait on the left is Louisa Manners Tollemache, 7th Countess of Dysart, born 2 July 1745 – died 22 September 1840, aged 95. 

“The portrait of Louisa by Sir Joshua Reynolds was engraved by V. Green, and another by Hoppner, as a peasant, has also been engraved. Hoppner’s portrait was sold at Messrs. Robinson and Fisher’s rooms for 14,050 guineas on 27 June 1901. This portrait originally belonged to Louisa’s daughter, Lady Laura Tollemache, from whom it passed to Louisa’s granddaughter, Maria, Marchioness of Ailesbury, and finally came into the possession of the latter’s daughter-in-law, the Lady Charles Bruce, by whose executors it was sold.^[3] Thomas Lawrence‘s portrait of Lady Louisa was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1794.^[4] Louisa was a notable patron of John Constable, entertaining him at Helmingham, Ham House and London residences at Pall Mall and in Piccadilly. Constable’s letters make several references to Lady Dysart and he was evidently at ease with the family. Louisa employed his brother, Golding Constable, as gamekeeper at Helingham.^[1] Constable painted copies of Reynolds’ and Hoppner’s works, including a portrait of Louisa dated 1823.^[5] Others to derive works from Hoppner, Lawrence and Reynolds portraits of Louisa include Henry Bone, Charles Knight and Richard Smythe.^[6]“

Excerpt above from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The National Trust own a version of this very same ‘portrait type’ of The Right Honorable Lady Louisa Manners sporting a ‘Pamela Hat’ —— this time by John Constable RA – after John Hoppner’s original version. What is evidently clear is that this particular portrait type of Lady Louisa Manners —— was painted by several great artists of the period.

Please also see a Mezzotint of John Hoppner’s portrait of ‘The Right Honorable Lady Louisa Manners’ in the British Museum collection —— which again proves that the original portrait was reproduced as early as 1807: The term, ‘Mezzotint’ is an engraving developed in the seventeenth century which allows for the creation of prints.

In the National Portrait Gallery collection,there is a pencil drawing squared in ink for transfer, dated August 1823 – again featuring Louisa Manners 7th Countess of Dysart – by Henry Bone, after John Hoppner.

Returning to the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ of Emily Brontë – it stands to reason that Charlotte – who aspired to be a professional miniature painter from an early age, could conceivably have been drawn to the popular image of Lady Louisa Manners wearing a ‘Pamela Hat’ as a starting model for a portrait of her sister, Emily…

On the back of the miniature version of the ‘Bonnet portrait’ there is a rough pencil outline tracing; something it has in common with an authenticated artwork by Charlotte in the Brontë Parsonage Museum collection, as stated in ‘The art of the Brontës’ —— 

All three versions of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ – when turned to the light —— appear to have exactly the same finish…In light of these highlights —— I think it is highly improbable – that these three portraits of One subject – were painted by three different hands; especially as Charlotte was well versed in the use of Gum arabic – a transparent glaze applied to areas of shading to achieve greater depth and richer tone. 

The two larger versions of the ‘Bonnet’ share exactly the same proportions – only the paper size differs. The version on the right-hand side above – is actually on card.

Charlotte Brontë rarely drew from life – but what she did do was copy engravings then made them her own. I propose that the portrait of Lady Louisa Manners – was the inspiration for Charlotte’s earliest portrait of her sister, Emily. Only the cloak wrapped around Emily’s shoulders differs from the original ‘type’. For an outdoorsy person like Emily, a thick cloak was entirely appropriate attire —— and besides, it’s the job of a sensitive portraitist to not only capture a fair likeness of the person but also their essence.

It would seem that the main sticking point where the Daguerreotype of the Brontë Sisters is concerned is Emily’s hat choice again! I actually think that if one compares the largest of the ‘Bonnet’ portraits with the figure alleged to be Emily in the Daguerreotype – there’s a certain likeness, save for Emily’s “tight curl and frizz” that is…

Ellen Nussey, lifelong friend of the Brontës, wrote of her first impressions of the fifteen-year-old Emily: “Emily Brontë had by this time acquired a lithesome, graceful figure. She was the tallest person in the house, except her father. Her hair, which was naturally as beautiful as Charlotte’s, was in the same unbecoming tight curl and frizz, and there was the same want of complexion. She had very beautiful eyes – kind, kindling, liquid eyes; but she did not often look at you; she was too reserved. Their colour might be said to be dark grey, at other times dark blue, they varied so.”

To round off —— a recent episode of BBC ‘Flog It!’ featured a beautiful, enamelled antique brooch in the style of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ – which goes to prove how popular this particular ‘portrait type’ was in the late 18th century and first half of the 19th…

In fact, it’s true to say a straw hat by itself is timeless – it’s only the ribbon or scarf tied under the chin —— that dates it.

---

Addendum 15th. April 2020.

Howzabout this for ‘coincidence’; Charlotte Brontë makes mention of the very novel ‘Pamela; or, Virtue Rewarded’ by Samuel Richardson in the very first chapter of ‘Jane Eyre’ – which proves beyond all doubt that the author of ‘Jane Eyre’ was familiar with the very novel whose heroine gave name to the ‘Pamela Hat’ —— as worn by Lady Louisa Manners Countess of Dysart, 1821 – and later, by her sister, Emily —— circa 1830, aged roundabout twelve.

---

To read about the influence of ‘Pamela’ in ‘Jane Eyre’ please use this link to The British Library – then see sub heading: ‘Pamela in Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre’ 

“Pamela continued to be popular and influential well into the 19th century. Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre alludes to Pamela early on, when Jane reads it as a young girl at Gateshead. This conscious reference invites the reader to compare and contrast the two plots which, as Jane Eyre unfolds, become more apparent…” 

---

Update.‘Some Bonnet and Black Hat Good Vibrations: The ‘Wood-Nymph’ by Samuel Woodforde’ —— brings ‘A Bevy of Bonnets for Easter Sunday: ‘The Pamela Hat.’ up-to-date, use this link to read on. . .

Some Bonnet and Black Hat Good Vibrations: The ‘Wood-Nymph’ by Samuel Woodforde.

The hours between day’s end of Monday, 6th. April 2020 — and predawn of Tuesday, 7th.  April 2020 – mark the beginning and end of my ‘twenty-four’ hour ‘Shedathon’ — and no I haven’t been to bed yet (other than a mid morning catnap in a chair) – nor will I (knowing me as I do!) until the early hours of tomorrow; I am a confirmed night owl — and probably obsessed —— ‘Shed Hunter’! I saw the Moon rise yesterday evening and I saw it set this morning. My ‘Shedathon’ hasn’t all been spent outdoors searching for shed antlers though – Lockdown forbid! As many hours have been spent indoors dreaming about finding one! I must confess that I’m totally addicted to antlers at the minute – shed ones only, from a small group of magnificent, beneficent Red Deer Stags that roam freely over a large area local to where I live.

I only ever ‘ask’ ‘The Great Deer God’ for one per season but I don’t expect one.  As far as my shed hunting season goes – it amounts to a week or two from the start of April; because once the weather warms up —— the only thing ones likely to pick up is a whole load of bloodthirsty ticks – or worse!  

The odds of finding a shed are like searching for a needle in a haystack; if you don’t put in the hours and miles – there’s not even a chance you’ll find one.

I’m delighted to say — my ‘twenty-four’ hour ‘Shedathon’ paid dividends just before the Sun rose this morning; I found my lucky ‘Sixer’ with blood still wet on its pedicle —— as fresh as the rime on the grass! The ‘Pedicle’ is the bit at the base of the antler…

I say, ‘Sixer’ because I have five sheds already that all share the same Magick – all are fallen from a small group of truly wild stags – or Brothers as I think of them. Today’s antler has three ‘points’ only; its battle scar is what makes it the perfect prize! Judging by its hefty weight and by the circumference of the pedicle – I should think that the stag that gifted it was a mature ‘Royal’ stag at the very least – meaning he would’ve sported twelve points (six points per antler). The main beam of the antler has been ‘clean’ broken – in what can only be imagined as a ‘Battle Royal’! One can’t even begin to imagine the force of Nature — of antlers locking let alone ‘snapping’ mid-fight – especially as an antler is solid bone! And as for the pain —— unspeakable.I give my sheds names; there’s a ‘Yod’, a ‘Son of Yod’ –— a ‘Yaffle’…

Then there’s a ‘Yay’ — because there aren’t words to describe the thrill of when your eyes first perceive a fallen antler let alone picking it up; there are only noises!

Walking home in the direction of the rising Sun, I got to thinking about a fitting name for my new, impressive —— and unique ‘crown’?

No surprise, the first name that leapt into my head like a doe deer – was ‘Brontë’; three points, representing three Sisters, I thought. However, thinking in ‘Three’ on this occasion really didn’t suit a cast antler from a full-blooded male deer! 

For a ‘crown’ —— that less than twenty-four hours ago was warm still atop the majestic head of a defender of his territory — a clear winner and leader of his party; there was only one name for it – ‘BORIS’.  

#Clap For Boris

8:00 PM this evening – Tuesday, 7th April, 2020

---

On the 4th. April 1855 – Charlotte’s Brontë’s tiny body was laid to rest in the Brontë family vault in St Michael and All Angels church in Haworth, West Yorkshire.

This is a short post to mark Charlotte’s passing from this World to the next – although she doesn’t rest quiet —— at least not as far as I’m concerned…

Every now and then, I feel her give me a tap on my shoulder – a infinitesimal nudge in the right direction – to help shed more light on her ‘lost’ portraits of her sisters.

Outside my french window, it’s a beautiful, warm Spring day but because of the Coronavirus lockdown – I’m obeying the rules and staying in my home until later, when I intend to go out for my permitted daily constitutional under a clear sky and a waxing Moon…

So this afternoon, Saturday 4th. April, 2020 – I thought with a little existential help from Charlotte, I’d share a newly discovered portrait of Charlotte here on my website…

It is an exceedingly beautiful portrait of Charlotte – as perfect and as ’round’ as a naturally grown pearl ——— it even glisters when turned to the light.

Verso, the portrait has an inscription that reads: “Charlotte Brontë drawn by. Mr Héger 1842″

Monsieur Héger was of course Charlotte’s teacher whom she fell madly in love with – albeit unrequited love on the part of M. Héger. Charlotte and her middle sister, Emily – attended the ‘Pensionnat Héger’ in Brussels from February 1842 to November 1842. Charlotte returned alone to Brussels to continue her education and deep infatuation with her teacher – after the sisters were called home in 1842 following the death of Aunt Branwell in Haworth.

The portrait has no provenance other than what is written on the back of it. The portrait is on suitably old paper; notice the ghost of where the portrait once slipped in its mount —— such a mark is evidence of some age.

I think the outstanding feature of this long, ‘lost’ self-portrait of Charlotte are her sparkling eyes; it’s plain to see that they are the eyes of someone who has fallen madly in love – the flush of first love delicately colouring her cheeks too…

Enough for today….

---

I just love this track from 1992 performed by Kirsty Hawkshaw —— it’s SO now!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_a_Fine_Day

In three parts, published on the 22nd December 2019 —— the date of this year’s Winter Solstice; Let There Be Light…

Part Ι.

The fact that actress Mia Wasikowska’s olive-green cloak —— as worn in the title role of the film version of ‘Jane Eyre’ has turned a deep shade of Red – is testament to the influence that fairy-tales played in Charlotte’s original narrative; ‘Cinderella’, ‘Blue Beard’ and ‘Beauty and the Beast’ are identifiable elements through-out Jane’s difficult progress —— and final fairy-tale wedding to her Prince Charming, ‘Mr. Rochester’. There is one short passage in ‘Jane Eyre’ though —— that doesn’t so much borrow from ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ —— it’s been lifted straight off the page…

The Other painting is a much smaller —— much older painting on ‘J Whatman’ watermarked paper, dated 1843 – that’s been metaphorically banished by ‘the powers that be’ to remain in the cupboard under the stairs —— only it possesses an independent will of its ‘own’ and has other ideas. It imparts its secrets to me little by little, all in its own good time. I believe in it – or how else could I explain the rest of all this…

‘Rekindling The ‘Lost’ Art of Charlotte Brontë: Where There’s Smoke There’s Fire.’ —— a blog-post consisting of imagery woven together with words —— of books, places and things that have helped to uncover the true identity behind a thought-provoking image of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ – painted on J Whatman watermarked paper. Even for a perceptionist like myself, it’s taken eleven years for the artist’s minuscule signature, that measures no more than a centimetre in length —— to miraculously come to the surface! Tiny as the signature ‘C Brontë’ is —— there can be no denying that it’s there; state of the art science would prove it. The clue to the whereabouts of Charlotte’s minuscule signature is in the title…

My father’s version of the fairy-tale differed from the ‘Ladybird’ book version I was familiar with at school, in that the wolf’s act was final —— there was never any ‘happy ever after’ for the poor little girl in the red cap and cloak. In my imagination, she was forever trapped in the dark – alive still —— but unable to get out. 

That there were several large ‘savage’ pigs roaming free at the bottom of the steep hill into the wooded valley – only enhanced the real —— and imagined threat of ambush – that at any second a large, slavering, yellow-toothed beast —— half pig, half wolf – would gobble me up whole for afters! Despite my Father’s best parental efforts to warn me about the possible perils of straying from the path, I grew up to be the type of headstrong individual that often wanders off the beaten track – especially when I know I’m on the scent of a great ‘Red Shed’ or something Other…Wind the clock on nearly half-a-century to 2008 —— and you’ll appreciate my initial reaction to a depiction of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ – that I’d not seen before in any fairy-tale books. In an instant, the diminutive figure behind glass revivified the nervous excitement of those far-off walks to fetch a Sunday newspaper. It was love at first sight —— ever the best incentive for purchasing an artwork big or small – ‘Little Red Riding hood’ measures 16 cms by 13.5 cms.

Figuratively speaking, it felt like a resurrection of the girl who’d been trapped in the dark for many a long year —— “Little Red Riding Hood liveth!” I rejoiced, as I took hold of the painting; although in hindsight I realise it was the other way round —— the painting took hold of me!

Little Red Riding Hood’s epiphany came five years later on – whilst I was watching a late-night programme on the television called, ‘Perspectives: The Brilliant Brontë Sister’s’ – brilliantly presented by actress, Sheila Hancock. 

Suddenly, I had intuited a similarity between the artworks on show in the Parsonage on the telly, and ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ encased behind glass downstairs; I’d simply describe the moment of realisation as a ghost walking over my grave. Inspired by my late-night televisual, telepathic experience I determined to free the painting from its small, rather plain frame the very next morning —— the frame was no great loss as it was ill-fitting and although suitably old probably not original. With due care, I removed the back from the frame – and lifted ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ from her slumber. As I did so, I huffed and I puffed —— and blew away the sleeping dust of a ‘hundred years’ in a go! I then carried the painting over to the light and held it up at the window for the first time ever —— lo and behold, the daylight revealed a watermark ‘Whatman 1843’ – a make of paper that I later learned Charlotte favoured. The date of the watermark falls well within Charlotte’s lifetime – 21 April 1816 to 31 March 1855. 

I was gripped.

The airing of ‘The Brilliant Brontë Sisters’ on the 31st March, 2013 – marked the year ‘The Brontës’ first appeared on my radar so to speak —— ‘coincidentally’ it was also the 158th anniversary of Charlotte Brontë’s passing from this world to the next. To this day, I swear there is an entity attached to ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ – and the other ‘lost’ artworks I’ve researched —— several entities in fact, that are apparently just as determined as I am! 

Charlotte’s narrative imagery of ‘Mr. Brocklehurst’ in ‘Jane Eyre’ – published in 1847 – clearly alludes to the big bad wolf in ‘Little Red Riding Hood’; as does ‘Lucy Snowe’s’ visit to ‘Madame Walravens’ in Charlotte’s last novel, ‘Villette’ – published in 1853.

Given the original year of publication of both novels 1847 and 1853 respectively – coupled with the painting’s watermark for 1843, it doesn’t take much of a stretch of one’s imagination – to picture Charlotte Brontë with her head immersed in a volume of Perrault’s or Grimms’ fairy-tales – especially as Charlotte’s facial description of Mr. Brocklehurst is lifted straight from the pages of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’: “What a face he had … what a great nose! And what a mouth! And what large prominent teeth.” 

Mr. Brocklehurst was the authoritarian proprietor of ‘Lowood’ – who mistreated the poor and orphaned girls in his ‘care’.

Perrault’s version of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ is the version that my father retold with relish – as in the wolf’s act was final – but I always did half-doubt ‘his’ version of events!

Speaking of books that Charlotte may have owned——or had access to, I wonder, did the folks at the Parsonage own a copy of ‘The New Year’s Gift – Juvenile Souvenir 1832’? My timeworn copy came over from an Antiquarian in Lübeck in Germany —— a fairy-tale city (architecturally speaking) if every there was one!

It’s well documented in ‘The art of the Brontës’ – that Charlotte Brontë copied many of the drawings and paintings now in the Brontë Parsonage Museum collection – from Annuals and Periodicals of the time. Mrs Gaskell – described Charlotte’s technique in ‘Mrs Gaskell’s Life of Charlotte Brontë’…

    “When she was sixteen or seventeen, she wanted much to draw; and she copied nimini-pimini copper-plate engravings out of annuals (‘stippling’ don’t the artists call it?), every little point put in, till at the end of six months she had produced an exquisitely faithful copy of the engraving. She wanted to learn to express her ideas by drawing.”

‘The New Year’s Gift – Juvenile Souvenir 1832’ – featured a nimini-pimini copper-plate engraving of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ as its frontispiece – after Sir Thomas Lawrence’s original painting of Emily Anderson…

Again, in Lawrence one finds a link —— a vibration to the Brontës. Aspiring portrait painter, Branwell Brontë – was under the tutelage of William Robinson who himself was a pupil of the great Sir Thomas Lawrence! I think would-be miniaturist, Charlotte – would have been hugely impressed by T.S Engleheart’s special engraving of Lawrence’s ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ – especially as Charlotte held Lawrence’s portraiture in high esteem. Charlotte would have been coming up sixteen years of age in April, 1832 – an age when an image of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ may well have left a lasting impression.  

Sir Thomas Lawrence’s painting of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ is in fact a portrait of Emily Anderson – who like Charlotte, Emily and Anne – was a clergyman’s daughter also. Again, another plausible reason why Charlotte may have been drawn to the frontispiece engraving in ‘The New Year’s Gift – Juvenile Souvenir 1832’. I think Charlotte would have perceived an element of her indomitable self, stepping out from between the green, leather-bound boards of the pocket-sized Annual.

If it wasn’t for the fact, that ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ has violet-blue eyes more akin to Charlotte’s sister, Anne Brontë – I’d be one-hundred percent certain —— instead of ninety-nine-point-nine percent, that the subject IS in disguise; the painting is a figurative selfie! I’d conjecture too that ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ embodies something of Charlotte Brontë’s literary, semi-autobiographical protagonist ‘Lucy Snowe’ ——— and what’s in a name? Charlotte Brontë originally intended to call her fictional alter ego, ‘Lucy Frost’.

The stouthearted figure on ‘J Whatman’ watermarked paper is child-sized in stature only; Charlotte Brontë, Lucy Snowe —— ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ —— are one and the same I’d say. Because Charlotte was presumably a thirty-eight year old virgin when she accepted Arthur Bell Nicholl’s marriage proposal —— I interpret Charlotte’s fairy-tale self-portrayal as representing a rite of passage; the idea of consummating her marriage with her rather whiskery suitor evidently gave the bride-to-be pause for thought that took form in creative self-expression! The pigments used in ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ are a good match with the watercolour cakes inside Charlotte’s ‘George Blackman’ paintbox —— and those seen in authenticated artworks in the Parsonage Museum including a miniature portrait of her sister, Anne. The father-of-the bride wished that his only remaining daughter had postponed marriage until after her child-bearing years had passed —— such was his fear of losing her. 

Charlotte’s wont to ‘meticulously’ copy engravings means that her fairy-tale alter ego is set within a recognisable landscape that follows Engleheart’s exacting lines. However, an obvious deviation is the change of season that’s not evident in Sir Thomas Lawrence’s original brushwork either; no sooner has ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ left home and crossed over the bridge ——’Jack Frost’ has come nipping at her heels! ‘On the surface’ —— the tall leafy ‘green’ tree on the left of the painting appears to be at odds with ‘the white stuff’ visible underfoot, yet when one looks at it more closely – one notices that ‘Jack Frost’ aka Charlotte Brontë —— has been there with a paintbrush too. A hint perhaps at the Natural World reflecting the thin line between Life —— and Death.

The Grimms’ version of the fairy-tale ends miraculously and ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ lives happily ever after – but I think Perrault’s earlier —— red in tooth and claw version, would have hit home; it’s realism and finality would have resonated with Charlotte’s acute awareness of mortality —— and the brevity of life. Charlotte’s version of ‘Little Red Ridng Hood’ is an open-ended metaphor that gives its reader a clue as to how the person behind the face was thinking ahead of herself.  The central message of the painting is one of optimism —— there is something undeniably affirming about ‘Little Red Riding Hood’s’ tentative steps towards the ‘unknown’. When the painting was sat on my sideboard —— long before I associated it with Charlotte’s hand —— the following line from the 23rd Psalm always sprang to mind “Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death…” —— in fact, suddenly I’d be back in the valley again holding my father’s hand —— on my way to fetch a Sunday newspaper…

For the portraitist’s real self, there was no ambiguity come the end – other than the cause of her early death; Charlotte died on the 31st of March 1855, three weeks before her 39th birthday and after only nine months of marriage. Charlotte followed the eternal footsteps of her Mother and all five siblings —— Maria, Elizabeth, Branwell, Emily and Anne – in that order —— to an early grave. Charlotte’s death certificate states that she died from tuberculosis – although the unofficial cause of her death is cited as an extreme form of morning sickness —— Charlotte was seemingly with child. 

It’s a considered guess —— based on the watermark for 1843 – that ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ was created post-Brussels – between the years leading up to the publication of ‘Jane Eyre’ in 1847, and the publication of ‘Villette’ in 1853. During that period of approximately ten years, Branwell, Emily and Anne all succumbed to the ravages of Tuberculosis and died in quick succession of one another. Following Anne’s death in May 1849, Charlotte was left utterly bereft and desolate; sister-less and brother-less save for the company of her aging father. 

Charlotte’s father, the Rev’d. Patrick Brontë was vehemently opposed to his only remaining daughter marrying below herself —— and only agreed to relinquish Charlotte in 1854; though he did not attend the wedding to give Charlotte away. No doubt Rev’d Brontë was also concerned that Charlotte’s filial duty would be compromised by another man in her life as well as in’t Parsonage! By marrying Arthur Bell Nicholls – assistant curate at Haworth —— Charlotte broke an earlier pact she had made with old school friends, Ellen Nussey and Mary Taylor, never to marry. Following Charlotte’s engagement —— correspondence between Ellen and Charlotte fell silent – however, in the spirit of true friendship, Ellen soon forgave Charlotte and even stood in for the father-of-the-bride who had taken to his bed on the day of the wedding. Charlotte was said to look like a snowdrop in her wedding dress. 

Ellen Nussey and Mary Taylor remained spinsters to the end – they lived to eighty and seventy-six respectively – but Charlotte’s new found happiness was destined not to bide. One wonders whether Charlotte married Arthur Bell Nicholls as in ‘do or die’ – then died because she got married and fell pregnant; Life was not fair or kind to Charlotte Brontë. At three weeks off her 39th birthday, Charlotte would have been considered an ‘old maid’ for the purposes of child bearing.  When one considers the high maternal mortality rates at that time with Charlotte’s ‘doll-sized’ clothes on display in the Parsonage Museum as I have done – it comes as no surprise that Charlotte envisioned an allegory of herself donning the iconic blood-red cap and gown… 

The true identity of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ is summed up by four minuscule uppercase letters that shout-out, ‘SELF’!! Charlotte was rather fond of using exclamation marks to emphasize a point —— one only need refer to her miniature books for evidence!!!! 

Ice typically symbolises coldness in the absence of love —— such was the front between Charlotte and Monsieur Héger – the married schoolmaster she fell madly in love with during her time studying in Brussels——1842–43 – it was a cerebral love affair that Charlotte alone was passionate about. Charlotte expounds the devastating effects of one-sided love in this passage from ‘Jane Eyre’: “A Christmas frost had come at mid-summer: a white December storm had whirled over June; ice glazed the ripe apples, drifts crushed the blowing roses; on hay-field and corn-field lay a frozen shroud…and the woods, which twelve hours since waved leafy and fragrant as groves between the tropics, now spread, waste, wild, and white as pine-forests in wintry Norway. My hopes were all dead…” Charlotte’s description of Jane’s mental health after her engagement to Mr Rochester is cried-off because he was already married.  

Quite a few of Charlotte Brontë’s meticulous copies are not quite as “faithful” as Mrs. Gaskell would have us believe —— fact. When one compares the painting of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ against the frontispiece by T.S. Engleheart, one notices flourishes that fit with Charlotte’s wont to make the subject her own; no short capelet for Charlotte’s ‘Little Red Riding Hood’!!! 

The engraver’s sharp lines lack the sensitivity and imagination of the copyist’s brush and pencil; this ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ is no clinical carbon copy after Engleheart’s engraving – or Lawrence’s original for that matter —— instead it’s the work of a gifted story-teller in their own right.  

An edition of ‘The Tatler’ – ‘A Daily Paper of Literature, Fine Arts, & Public Amusements’ – Tuesday, November 22nd 1831, wrote of Engleheart’s newly published engraving…

“‘Little Red Riding Hood’.——Painted by Sir Thos. Lawrence, P. R. A. Engraved by T. S. Engleheart.——No Little Red riding-hood is here. All warrant for the name is a red hood and a white apron. The artificial hair, the artificial mien, and unfeeling, impudent affected face, belong to no little peasant. It is a young sprig of the selfish aristocracy. The engraving is very hard.”  A rather harsh criticism but fair point in light of Charlotte’s sensitivities to the same subject.

Despite ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ having no provenance at all – or a readily visible artist’s signature, I felt compelled to contact the Brontë Parsonage Museum in Haworth about my late-night televisual, telepathic experience! So I contacted Ann Dinsdale, the museum’s Principle Curator.

Following consultation with Jane Sellars – joint author of ‘The art of the Brontës’ – Ann Dinsdale ‘concluded’ that they couldn’t say that ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ was an artwork by Charlotte Brontë – but as telling —— they couldn’t say that it wasn’t!  

The painting’s lack of provenance and an artist’s signature – drew the matter to an inconclusive ‘end’ in 2013 – and the painting returned to a semi-dormant state. 

However, from the written responses that I received at that time – it can be reasonably taken that stylistically the painting is correct for a Charlotte Brontë attribution. 

   “Jane feels that without any provenance it would be very difficult to establish your painting as the work of Charlotte Bronte. The fact that art training for young women of that period consisted of copying such prints adds to the difficulty. It’s certainly a lovely painting and she didn’t dismiss it as being Charlotte’s work. I think you will have to enjoy your painting without knowing for sure! With many thanks for contacting us and I’m sorry we weren’t able to say for sure. I hope it will be OK for us to keep details of your painting in our confidential records in case any further information should come to light.”

(Excerpt – Monday, 3rd June 2013)

Winding the clock forward to 2019 – I recently purchased a copy of ‘The Secret of Charlotte Brontë’ by Frederika Macdonald —— complete with a library stamp for ‘The Red House Museum’ in Gomersal, West Yorkshire’. Rather extraordinarily —— the delivery of Frederika’s book to my door – magically rekindled my interest in ‘Little Red Riding Hood’. Suddenly, I was impelled to remove the painting from the dark where it had languished for six whole years – apart from a couple brief outings ‘home’ – in May 2017 – and in April this year. Sadly, both trips up North came too late for a visit to the ‘The Red House Museum’ in Gomersal – as Kirklees Council closed it down due to cuts – but lucky for me a little bit of ‘The Red House’ came down to Devon…

‘The Red House’ is featured in the very programme that kick-started my interest in the Brontës —— and more specifically, the ‘lost’ art of Charlotte Brontë —— it feels like I’ve almost come full circle!

Mary Taylor of ‘The Red House’ in Gomersal, Charlotte Brontë —— and Ellen Nussey – all attended ‘Roe Head’ school at the same time – where together they became firm, lifelong friends. Charlotte’s second published novel ‘Shirley’ – immortalised Mary Taylor’s family as ”The Yorkes’ and the house at Gomersal as ‘Briarmains’. I haven’t actually got round to reading ‘Shirley’ yet – but the Internet is a wonderful fount of knowledge! In light of all that I’ve written here about Charlotte’s ‘lost’ art – you will better understand why I view receipt of Frederika’s book as a Gift; it feels like Mary Taylor herself has played a hand in posting it through my door! 

Sandwiched between pages 118 and 119 – there is a drawing by Charlotte Brontë of ‘Ashburnham Church’ dated ‘August 45’ – that she sent to Monsieur Héger – after she returned from Brussels to Haworth. Although the drawing failed to garner a response from the remote Monsieur Héger —— 174 years later, the same can’t be said here! Suddenly, the position of Charlotte’s signature on her drawing of ‘Ashburnham Church’ – gave me the clue to locating Charlotte’s minuscule signature on ‘Little Red Riding Hood’; both are more or less in the same position, at an angle on the right-hand side——both ‘C Brontë’. It’s evident from studying ‘The art of the Brontës’ that Charlotte’s signature varies in style and length quite a lot but what must surely single out the signature on ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ as genuine – is how extraordinarily small it is – 1 cm in length ONLY! It’s true —— there really is no smoke without a fire’.

The timely appearance of Frederika’s book through my door via ‘The Red House’ in Gomersal – is nothing short of a deliverance from the ‘powers that be’ that have officially denied ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ twice. Their second denial on the 15th April 2019 was largely based on lack of provenance but also on stylistic grounds…“The works lack provenance, which is an important factor in all cases, but our decision was also based on stylistic grounds…”  I totally accept that the painting has no provenance whatsoever – but to dismiss it on “stylistic grounds” sticks in the craw – and contradicts what was earlier ‘concluded’ about the painting in 2013. Grrrrr, what do ‘the powers that be’ actually know about this painting – when they can’t be asked to look at it properly when i gave them the opportunity?!!!! I KNOW that the drawings and paintings that I have researched ARE what I say they ARE without a shadow of doubt – hence I’m ‘quietly’ optimistic that Charlotte’s version of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ —— nay vision of ‘herself’ – will one day return home again for the third and final time——third time lucky and all that! The Brontës believed in ghosts and the supernatural —— and so do I…And so I’m remembering again that otherworldly tap on the shoulder —— whilst watching ‘The Brilliant Brontë Sisters’ – on Easter Sunday, 31st. March 2013 – coincidentally, the 158th anniversary of Charlotte’s death. In hindsight, it felt like a scene out of Emily’s novel —— only in 2013, I knew very little about the Brontës and I certainly hadn’t read ‘Wuthering Heights’! I only switched the programme on because my mother phoned me that evening and encouraged me to tune in; she knew how much I love James Herriot’s ‘All Creatures Great and Small’ – and so thought I’d enjoy a programme about the Brontës of Haworth – the vibration that links the two being Yorkshire! Despite the lack of official interest in the handful of artworks I’ve researched I’m not complaining because they have taken me to the heart of ‘Herriot Country’ —— and my mother was dead right, I have enjoyed learning about the Brontës – although not through reading their novels but through discovering their Art…Who knows, if it wasn’t for my Mother’s advice to tune in – I might have remained in the dark about the mysterious little painting that sat ‘silently’ on my sideboard for five whole years…

    “On Sunday 31 March 2013  I was enthralled by a programme on ITV called ‘Perspectives’ presented by Sheila Hancock – all about the Bronte sisters. Near the beginning of the programme – it showed some artwork by the sisters – and I was suddenly struck by the similarity in style to Red Riding Hood – I have owned this picture for quite a few years. It was just like a ghost had walked over my grave – I watched the programme twice on the ITV repeat channel –  because it was such a wonderful programme – and so beautifully and movingly presented by Sheila Hancock – I was completely enthralled. It is probably my imagining but Red Riding Hood has a likeness to the portraits of Anne Bronte by Charlotte? The strawberry blonde ringlet curls around the forehead and the blue eyes and the slightly arched nose.  Even the blue of the dress is very alike.  Probably all coincidence?”

Six years on I don’t think any of the above can be put down to mere coincidence——there are some stories one simply can’t make-up!

Wouldn’t it be fantastical to sign off the final paragraph of my ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ story in the best Brothers Grimm tradition – with ‘happily ever after’ —— BUT unfortunately that’s for the ‘powers that be’ to determine —— it’s their prerogative apparently – and they cast their long dark shadows over all five artworks – on Monday, 15th April 2019. Undeterred, I shall end in the true spirit of Charles Perrault whose fairy-tales always end with a moral…

---

It’s a strange truth that Truth itself has it’s own way of coming to the surface eventually.

---

---

There’s an unresolved problem with the alignment of some of the images and text in this post caused by an update —— but the overall content remains unchanged; my aim was to write down my findings and interpretations and send it all off out into the ether at precisely 4:19 am —— job done.  

---

---

On my return from Yorkshire earlier this year, I was surprised to find something strangely fascinating clinging to my cat’s coat, it was an Inchworm——no less; it measured about two inches tip-to-toe! In the moment, I didn’t recognise the creature’s caterpillar-ish form, but after a little on-line research I discovered its identity.

‘The Inchworm’ gets its name from its loop-like movement——it literally moves along an inch at a time. Coming hot on the heels of a particularly unhelpful Haworth experience earlier that same week – suddenly the incomer on the cat’s back – became my unlikely hero——a spiritual animal, symbolic of the inexorable progress of the ‘Lost’ portrait of Emily Brontë – as it inches ever nearer the Light——in spite of what the ‘powers that be’ would have to the contrary. What do they actually KNOW?!!!

The Haworth visit is hardly worthy of a mention other than in relation to the timely appearance of my spiritual motivator, ‘The Inchworm’.

Imagine my absolute delight yesterday morning – Saturday, 3rd. August 2019, when I discovered another Inchworm clinging to my favourite ‘Earth’ T-shirt’… 

Yesterday’s ‘second coming’ – was doubly auspicious – with the arrival of a very special edition of ‘Wuthering Heights’ posted through my door. —— All the way from Aberdeenshire, ‘coincidentally’ William Robertson Nicoll’s birth place…

The following passage from A.C. Ward’s introduction resonates with my Haworth experience, in that my knowledge of Charlotte’s portrait of Emily is intuitive——I just KNOW that it is the ‘lost’ portrait seen by William Robertson Nicoll, in 1879.  

“Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights had nothing like the immediate success of her sister’s novels, and a Preface which Charlotte wrote in 1850 failed to show any real understanding of Emily. This is not surprising, for Emily belonged to a different order of humanity from Charlotte, and they represent two opposite classes of writers: Charlotte the class which depends mainly upon the experience and knowledge it has acquired; Emily the class, a very much smaller one, which creates out of intuitive knowledge…”

---

P.S.

Delighted to find a school library ink stamp on page 21 for ‘Harold Cartwright Girls’ Grammar School, Solihull——now Alderbrook Comprehensive School since 1974 – after Cartwright Grammar and Harold Malley Boys’ amalgamated to become one school——explains why readers’ notes in the margins of this now quite rare Longman edition of ‘Wuthering Heights’ – are in several different hands! Love a book with provenance! 

---

 

 

Part One.

Recently, a lovely old timeworn book came my way, straight off the back of a lorry so to speak – its title, ‘Wuthering Heights Etc’…

Because of it, this post is dedicated to my workmate, Paddy – who knows I have a committed interest in a certain portrait of the writer of ‘Wuthering Heights’ – and so offered me first dibs on’t book! It so often seems – that some pre-loved things possess a will of their ‘own’ – in that the item somehow magically finds its new keeper rather than t’other way round——I believe it. 

The sage-coloured volume was in very acceptable, used condition——all bar one page; the frontispiece illustration was clean gone——carefully torn out! 

For some, the missing page might have come as a disappointment but not so for me; although I was slightly curious, as to which portrait of ‘Emily Brontë’ filled the gap in 1900? I had a fair inkling it could only be one of two – both of which on evidence are nowadays thought to be Anne Brontë!!! In the case of William Scruton’s portrait of ‘Emily’ – it IS clearly a copy of the left-hand figure in Branwell’s ‘Pillar Portrait’ – which is undoubtedly, Anne Brontë. 

As Branwell’s famous ‘Pillar Portrait’ in the National Portrait Gallery wasn’t discovered until 1914 – I concluded that the missing frontispiece could only be from an engraving of the right-hand figure in Branwell’s family group portrait, formally known as the ‘Gun Group’. 

Ellen Nussey, Charlotte’s closest friend, identified the R/H figure in the ‘Gun Group’ engraving – as Anne Brontë. By 1920 – Shorter had come round to that same conclusion too, that the ‘Profile Portrait of Emily Brontë’ in the National Collection is Anne Brontë, but Shorter’s ‘authority’ seemingly only counts when t’argument suits ‘the powers that be’! I think all the confusion about the ‘Profile Portrait’ of ‘Emily’ just goes to show that if only literary critic, Clement Shorter – had stuck to his discipline – things may have turned out differently for the ‘Bonnet’! ‘No matter’, I feel certain that the ‘Bonnet’ WILL get there in’t end!

Meanwhile, The ‘Profile Portrait’ in the National Collection – continues to lay claim that it is the only individual portrait of ‘Emily Brontë’. The fragment came to light in 1914 – atop Rev. A.B. Nicholls’ wardrobe in Ireland after his death in 1906; The Rev. Arthur Bell Nicholls being Charlotte Brontë’s widow. 

And ever since 1914 – the identity of the sitter has been disputed; is it a portrait of Emily? – or a portrait of Anne? 

One thing that is absolutely certain, the ‘Profile Portrait’ could never be described as a boldly drawn pencil sketch by Charlotte – which is precisely how Sir William Robertson Nicoll described the ‘lost’ portrait of Emily Brontë – that he alone witnessed in 1879…

“… In July, 1879, I paid a visit to Haworth and had an interesting interview with Martha Brown, the faithful servant who nursed all the Brontës, and saw them all die. She possessed many relics of the famous sisters which had been given her by Mr Brontë. Among them was the pencil sketch of Anne Brontë by Charlotte Brontë, which, however imperfect in drawing, is described by at least two who knew her well as an unmistakable likeness…. I purchased it on Martha Brown’s death from one of her sisters…. I deeply regret that I cannot add a portrait of the greatest genius among the sisters, Emily Brontë. Martha Brown possessed a very clearly and boldly drawn pencil sketch of Emily by Charlotte, which I in vain endeavoured to purchase. After her death, what she left was divided among four sisters, with all of whom I communicated without succeeding even in tracing the picture. …”
William Robertson Nicoll – ‘The Bookman’ Volume 1, Hodder and Stoughton, November, 1891 p. 63

https://brontesisters.co.uk/ is a great resource of well-researched information – much more detailed than anything I write here. It a website for anyone with a keen interest in Brontë portraiture and ‘The Brontë Story’ as a whole.

https://brontesisters.co.uk/Lost-Portrait-of-Emily.html

https://brontesisters.co.uk/Portraits-of-Emily-Bronte.html

https://brontesisters.co.uk/The-Profile-Portrait-Emily-or-Anne.html

https://brontesisters.co.uk/Scruton’s-Portrait-of-Emily.a.html

Returning to the missing frontispiece in the sage-coloured, paint-splattered book…

Perhaps its original keeper, ‘Dorothy Lesceline Verdou’ – decided to carefully remove the ‘only portrait ever made of Emily Brontë’ so she could frame ‘Emily’ and hang her on her wall – because in 1901, a portrait of the writer of ‘Wuthering Heights’ – was a prized possession indeed – even if it was only a print from a sage-coloured edition titled, ‘Wuthering Heights Etc’.

There’s another book – a heavy, brown, leather-bound volume, called the ‘Woman at Home’, that contains another reproduction of a portrait of Emily Bronte – only this time by sister, Charlotte…

‘As fate would have it’, by 1900 – the 1894 ‘Bonnet’ portrait photogravure reproduction in the ‘Woman at Home’ – titled “EMILY BRONTË. From a painting by Charlotte Brontë, hitherto unpublished.” had been rubbished and thrown out by Clement Shorter – yet not one scrap of evidence has ever materialised to support his damaging words…

    “The supposed portrait which appeared in The Woman at Home for July 1894 is now known to have been merely an illustration from a ‘Book of Beauty,’ and entirely spurious.”.  Clement Shorter ‘Charlotte Brontë and Her Circle’ (1896). Shorter’s use of the word ‘known’ is subjective – made up, indeed entirely SPURIOUS!

Then, in not so many words, C.W Hatfield repeated Shorter in the 1932 Bonnell Catalogue. Item 69… And so Clement Shorter’s entirely spurious opinion became dyed-in-the-wool – regarded to this day by ‘the powers that be’, as holy writ! Yet, not one shred of evidence exists against the ‘Bonnet’ – it was all hearsay back in Shorter’s time as it is to the present day——30th July 2019. 

In defiance of the ‘Shorter Supporter’s Brigade’, the B/W photogravure reproduction of the ‘Bonnet’ portrait – as featured in the ‘Woman at Home’ – continues to dominate national newspaper articles relating to the novelist and poet…

Even ‘BBC Bitesize’ – the BBC’s free online study support resource for school-age students in the U.K. – uses the ‘Bonnet’ portrait of Emily Brontë to illustrate ‘Love and Friendship by Emily Brontë’…

Where’s the rhyme or reason to this double-standard hypocrisy I wonder? 

The question mark that’s been left hanging over the ‘Profile Portrait’ for more than a century – is seemingly ‘best left’ – conveniently blowing in the wind by ‘the powers that be’. A conspiracy of silence——that way the disputed, yet undeniably much-loved pretender, stays in situ for another century! But not in this collection…

By 1906, publisher, William Heinemann – decided to omit a frontispiece altogether from a delightful volume titled, ‘Poems of Emily Brontë’. A sensible precaution in light of the confusion caused by Shorter’s self-appointed ‘authority’ on Brontë portraiture.Arthur Symon’s introduction to this small volume of Emily’s poetry – is a must-read for any Emily Brontë fan. 

Quite why Sir William Robertson Nicoll’s professionalism as editor of the 1894 ‘Woman at Home’ gets rejected in favour of Shorter’s word, never seems to cross the minds – or consciences – of the ‘Shorter Supporter’s Brigade’! 

On one side, there’s Clement Shorter who by association with convicted fraudster, T.J. Wise – has a permanent stain on his character over his involvement in Wise’s wheeling and dealing of ill-gotten Brontë manuscripts.

While on t’other side, there is Sir William Robertson Nicoll – a consummate all-round professional with a reputation that can only be described as, copy-book. He was knighted in 1909 for his literary work and long-term support of the Liberal Party. In 1921, he was awarded the ‘Order of the Companions of Honour’——motto ‘In Action Faithful and in Honour Clear’ – nuff said!  

Those that give the official thumbs down to the ‘Bonnet’ portrait – are never able to expand why Shorter’s word is favoured over Robertson Nicoll’s. Hence, one can only deduce that in agreeing with Shorter – they are broadly saying that Robertson Nicoll, as editor of the ‘Woman at Home’ went ahead and printed a complete and utter lie——FAKE NEWS to use today’s parlance. 

Do ‘the powers that be’ ever stop to consider that when they dismiss the ‘Bonnet’ print in the ‘Woman at Home’ as ‘FAKE NEWS’ – they impugn William Robertson Nicoll’s reputation as editor. They ‘can’t’ have it both ways——and all their own way – yet have for more than a century! 

Sir William Robertson Nicoll was an early president of the ‘Brontë Society’; he had a keen interest in Brontë matters. I utterly fail to see – why an honorable gentleman like Sir William Robertson Nicoll – would have been party to creating FAKE NEWS. I suspect the ‘Bonnet’ portrait in the ‘Woman at Home’ was published in a final effort to throw a light on his search for the ‘lost’ portrait that he’d seen fifteen years earlier in Haworth. —— An effort not dissimilar to when someone sticks a photograph of a much-loved pet that’s gone missing on a lamppost – in the desperate hope that someone will recognise it and know of it’s whereabouts. It’s an argument that makes sense.  

Another non-fan of the ‘Bonnet’ portrait REPRODUCTION is apparently, Ellen Nussey – who like Shorter – gets ‘quoted’ again and again…

One can read about Ellen Nussey’s portrait here, https://brontesisters.co.uk/Photo-of-Charlotte-Bronte.html

I have been told by ‘the powers that be’ that Ellen Nussey didn’t think that the ‘Bonnet’ reproduction in the ‘Woman at Home’ was a portrait of Emily Brontë——SO!

Ellen Nussey NEVER saw the clearly and boldly drawn pencil sketch that I, and Christopher Heywood, have identified as the ‘lost’ portrait – as seen by William Robertson Nicoll in 1879. Her opinion was based purely on a b/w print in the ‘Woman at Home’. I’m in no doubt at all that Ellen Nussey would have immediately recognised Charlotte’s hand had she seen the original drawing!

The ‘Bonnet’ reproduction appears to be a copy of a copy – quite possibly an artist’s impression of a copy of the clearly and boldly drawn pencil sketch of Emily by Charlotte – seen  by William Robertson Nicoll at Haworth, in 1879. A book titled, ‘The Letters of Annie Swan’ features a frontispiece by Robertson’s Nicoll’s wife, Catherine; did she have a hand in the ‘Bonnet’ portrait reproduction in the ‘Woman at Home’ I wonder? The caption beneath the frontispiece suggests that Catherine Robertson Nicoll was not averse to copying the work of other artists…

The nearest original version of the ‘Bonnet’ portrait featured in the ‘Woman at Home’ – is the red conté crayon version that is in the Brontë Parsonage Museum collection——as featured in an article by Christopher Heywood in Volume 3, Number 3, ‘Bronte Studies’ – July 2018. 

In all, there are three such portraits in the Brontë Parsonage Museum collection——numbers, 67. 68. and 69. as listed in the ‘Bonnell Catalogue’. The portraits are all executed in red conté crayon – all are unsigned but appear to be by the same hand. They came from the estate of Henry Houston Bonnell. Two feature genuine portraits of Anne and Charlotte – but it’s only Emily’s portrait that is deemed as fake without proof. All three portrait types – of Charlotte, Anne——and Emily – are widely reproduced in print to this day. 

Interestingly, a portrait of Emily Brontë by Charlotte that came up for auction in 1933 at Sotheby’s – had been reproduced, “a photogravure of the same, proof;”…

I conclude that the argument AGAINST the ‘Bonnet’ portrait – is an argument of convenience, influenced squarely by the opinions of individuals who are long dead. Neither Clement Shorter or Ellen Nussey saw the ‘lost’ portrait——so what did either of them know about the origins of the ‘Bonnet’ portrait in the ‘Woman at Home’? precisely nowt!

Recently, one rather high-handed art expert I’ve met – commented that she thought the style of the ‘Bonnet’ drawing, “grotesque”. She couldn’t even be asked to look at the drawing——as in hold it – or look at it under any form of magnification – or bright light——so assured is she of HER authority; an authority that she perceptibly didn’t like challenged. ‘Luckily’, I’d thought to take along my own trusty magnifying glass to our meeting – but alas my offer to lend it – was declined.  I say to that expert – go reference ‘The art of the Brontës’ – to see a large collection of artworks in the “grotesque” style by Charlotte Brontë – if that’s what YOU so wish to call it! No names, no pack drill!!!

In light of the fact that it was Sir William Robertson Nicoll who witnessed the ‘lost’ portrait when he visited Martha Brown, in 1879 – I know without a shadow of doubt who’s word I hold true.

Sir William Robertson Nicoll described the ‘lost’ portrait of Emily Brontë – as a “clearly and boldly drawn pencil sketch” by Charlotte; NEVER, EVER——as a fragment of a group portrait by Branwell, as in the oil on canvas that hangs in the National Portrait Gallery and purports to be the ‘Lost’ Portrait. ‘Never mind’ either, that on evidence it’s most likely a portrait of Anne!

So you see, I really don’t care about the empty space left by the missing frontispiece…

 

---

Part Two.

A copy of a portrait by George Romney of Emma Hamilton?

Another reason cited by Brontë HQ in Haworth – to reject the ‘Bonnet’ portrait ‘type’ in general – is that the ‘Bonnet’ is apparently a copy of a George Romney painting of Emma Hamilton. It isn’t.

It was a pleasure to meet Principal Curator, Ann Dinsdale – but alas she too looked upon the ‘Bonnet’ drawing in an unfavourable light…

On my return from Haworth, I determined to dispel any Romney/Hamilton association with the drawing once and for all. So I contacted Alex Kidson, author of the George Romney catalogue raisonné, for his expertise and advice on the matter. With absolutely no ado he was most agreeable and helpful, “…to me you are justified in discounting the idea that it has anything to do with Romney.”  I ask, could it be put any plainer – or more authoritatively – than that? 

Alex Kidson also brought to my attention another ‘Bonnet’ portrait by an artist called, Thomas Stewardson. Stewardson’s portrait is of Mrs Jane Romney – George Romney’s future daughter-in-law. The portrait was commissioned by Romney’s son and emerged from Romney family ownership at auction, in 1894! Whereupon it proceeded to become mis-attributed in the years that followed as a painting by Romney of his wife Mary.

Mr. Kidson advised that Stewardson’s portrait of Mrs. Jane Romney …“could provide some element of an explanation for a Romney connection.” 

What flagged up for me – is the auction date ‘1894’. Stewardson’s portrait remained in a private collection until 1894 – so it simply wouldn’t have been feasible for the ‘Bonnet’ portrait photogravure reproduction in the 1894 ‘Woman at Home’ to have been ‘copied’ from Stewardson’s portrait of ‘Mrs. Jane Romney. Please click on the link to see Stewardson’s portrait. The auction took place – 24-25 May 1894 – and the ‘Woman at Home’ was published that July.  Besides, the clearly and boldly drawn pencil sketch of the ‘Bonnet’ portrait has its own date – for the year, 1844.

I rest my case for the time being – and trust that something WILL turn up——because Truth has a way of coming out eventually. 

   “It is proposed to establish a Bronte Society… The chief desideratum is the excellent pencil sketch of Emily Brontë, drawn by Charlotte, which was in the possession of Martha Brown, the old servant of the family, and is now lost.” I saw it thirteen years ago, and vainly endeavoured to purchase it. I have vainly endeavoured to trace it since.” 
William Robertson Nicoll, 1893   

I have a gut feeling, that Sir William Robertson Nicoll once touched the drawing that I now champion… A big gun from ‘Brontë HQ’ recently advised me, “…I am afraid that this is one of those cases which must be allowed to rest.”

I don’t agree. 

---

---

A tale without an ending – about a feral cat I once knew named, ‘Dobby’.

Yesterday, Friday 24th May 2019 – will be forever etched on my conscience – as the day I gave my cat Dobby away; only time will tell whether I did the right thing by Dobby. 

Dobby and I have lived together in the same house for fifteen years – ever since I found her as a feral kitten mewing in distress – trapped between towering stacks of old railway sleepers at a timber reclamation yard; Dobby was five weeks old then, a scrap of a thing with sticky eyes——and the rest is history as they say…

One of a litter of feral kittens – I was later to discover Dobby was the sole survivor – the others all perished from disease, malnourishment – and rat attack.

Run over by a motorbike – and hit by a car in separate incidents – Dobby is definitely a cat that has used up several of her nine lives to date – she’s a born survivor though. Only recently she came back from the dead – after she lost the use of her back legs – and smelled like a dead cat for several days. We thought she had gone off to die like cats sometimes mysteriously do – but she miraculously made it home covered in tiny slugs after missing for thirty-six hours – preferring to spend her dying hours in her favourite room…By night she slept by the wood-burner and by day she lay in her basket in the garden – warmed by the Winter Sun——as February this year was unseasonably warm. Kept going with regular teaspoonfuls of water by mouth, Dobby miraculously lapped her way back to life – regaining the use of her back legs and her appetite! Seemingly she returned with a stronger constitution than she’d had before the ‘deep sleep’ that lasted about a week had done her good. 

Yesterday, I came downstairs to several pools of blood on the floor – pools relative to Dobby’s size that is——little bright red puddles here and there on the flagstones and tiles – but never the carpet; Dobby was always an exceptionally clean, house-trained cat! As one who witnessed their own father hemorrhage on two occasions——and then cleaned up the aftermath – Dobby’s blood loss was nothing too shocking – but it was definitely a reality check to seek professional advice; as Dobby’s very life-blood was now on the floor.

And so Dobby journeyed back to within half-a-mile from where she was born – with a visit to our local veterinary surgery. Seemingly none the worse after her car journey——or blood loss – Dobby was surprisingly active on the consultation table – and that was my dilemma – what to do? The vet was pretty certain she was suffering from a condition called ‘Hyperthyroidism’ which is treatable but ongoing for life and therein prohibitively costly——in my circumstances that is. My monthly outgoings are just about stretched to their limit just now – so the alternative was a one-off payment to have her humanely put to sleep – which after nursing her back from the brink of Death only a couple months earlier seemed particularly unfair – to a cat that wasn’t ready to give up on herself.

As one who has been at the head-end of two old horses riddled with arthritis – as they ‘crashed out of this world’ after lethal injection – I’m not a person that normally balks at the idea of euthanasia. To say nothing of the day when I held my beloved old dog ‘Ebbie’ as he too was put humanely to sleep… 

And so to the third, surprise alternative…to sign her over to the vet for ‘re-homing’ – as in the vet offered Dobby a life-line——by offering to give her a new home herself – Dobby had suddenly, unexpectedly landed on her feet again! I’ve always thought of Dobby as a lucky cat – just hope I didn’t give my luck away yesterday – certainly feels a bit like it today. I went to the vets prepared that it was possibly time to let Dobby go – but when it came to it – I couldn’t deny Dobby a chance to live.

Before the start of Dobby’s new life – Dobby had asked to go out – so I opened the door and let her out. She poddled over the road to the gap in the wall opposite – and was gone for a couple hours before she returned home. She was sprawled out on the sun-warmed concrete in the back yard when I caught up with her – whiskers twitching——listening to the sparrows chattering and chirping away in the garden – the very sparrows she once would of pounced on – but they’ve grown used to her feeble ways now and showed no fear.

The agreement of signing her over to the vet – is that I won’t know how Dobby responds to treatment unless she dies – which won’t be for several years I hope – not months, weeks, days, hours…it’s the only update I need to know for myself and the vet agreed to let me know. Dobby is Marcella’s now and I respect that – and besides, having a vet for an owner has got to be a dream come true for any cat!Marcella told me that she loves cats especially – and I could see that; she certainly had a way with ‘my’ Dobby. She told me that she had a whole family of re-homed cats – and that was the thing…

I’d been unexpectedly given a choice – of sending Dobby to ‘Cat Heaven’ – which I can’t be sure even exists – or sending her to a ‘Cat Heaven’ which DOES exist where an administering cat angel called, ‘Marcella’ will give her the very best shot at a new lease of life IF the treatment works. 

I said my quick ‘goodbye’ – voluntarily settled-up for Dobby’s blood to be tested for ‘Hypothyroidism’ plus consultation – then exited the surgery——and Dobby’s life; like the vet said there was no going back. 

In the ‘cold’ light of a new day – I can’t help have my doubts about the decision I made yesterday. Dobby’s mental well-being barely crossed my mind when I signed her over – it was a decision made in the moment, weighed up by Dobby’s physical decline and the ongoing cost of treating it. When I got back home – I couldn’t help think about what I had done – was I right to uproot her from all that was familiar and from the people she trusted – most namely me? 

The space under the fireside chair where her basket was til yesterday – looks empty now and fills me with pangs of guilt – but there is also strange solace in knowing that it’s just empty rather than ‘Dobby-shaped empty’ – which was my alternative option.

I hope for Dobby’s sake that she forgets me soon —–like yesterday – and the quirky house that’s been her home for fifteen years. I of course won’t ever forget ‘Dobby-Do’. Fingers crossed I don’t hear from Marcella – the patron saint of cats – for a good few years yet.

 

 To be concluded. 

 

Realise also – that the micro-script in Charlotte’s, Branwell’s and Emily’s drawings is infinitesimally small – so would need high magnification – and high-resolution images – in order to view what’s been hidden from normal sight for well-over a century. Some numbers in the art of the Brontës are obvious though——just can’t believe the experts haven’t spotted them yet after all this time——the last surviving Brontë – Patrick Brontë, died 7th June 1861. Especially too – as the National Portrait Gallery has two of Branwell’s paintings including the famous ‘Pillar Portrait’ – their lack of perception in this matter defies belief!   

Alas, unless ‘Clement Shorter’s Supporters’ – who unfairly label the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ in all its versions as ‘fake’ (without any proof) – open their eyes——and minds – to the wonders that are hidden in the art of the Brontës – hundreds and hundreds of hidden micro-script characters in the form of numbers – the ‘lost’ portrait of Emily Brontë by Charlotte will remain LOST – but in their unseeing eyes only. I’m not the only person who sees numbers in the art of the Brontës – so CLEARLY and DEFINITELY not imagination. 

Just as the tiny spider hides in the petals of a white rose in my garden – so ‘hundreds and hundreds’ – nay thousands – of numbers are THERE in the art of the Brontës.

IF only the experts could be persuaded to look beyond what only readily meets their eyes – they too would see Charlotte’s – Branwell’s – and Emily’s ‘Secret World of Numbers’ – that’s been there right under their noses the whole time——in the artworks in their own collections; in the Brontë Parsonage Museum and the National Portrait Gallery. Anne also probably joined in the ‘Art of Numbers’ but without access to high-resolution images of the Brontës artworks it is not possible to be certain – as I am with the three other Brontë siblings. 

The Brontës would definitely have perceived the tiny spider in the white rose——in a metaphorical sense that is. Indeed, Charlotte would probably have painted my white rose and then disguised a row of numbers – as veins, like in her watercolour of pink Wild Roses…

Meanwhile, like the tiny spider in the white rose – the hidden numbers in the art of the Brontës pass largely ‘unseen’.

 

Earlier today – Tuesday, 14th May 2019, ‘Tip’ an Exmoor Stag – was feelin’ the Sun on his ole bones again——because after two-and-half years mounted on a large nail on my wall indoors – he desperately needed to go outside for some gentle dusting. 

‘Tip’ was a special gift from a special friend I call the ‘Squire’ – recovered from his land on Exmoor. ‘Tip’ was resurrected from a bog – with just the tip of one of his antlers showing, hence his name ‘Tip’. 

The ‘Squire’ kindly offered to chemically bleach the head for me – but I literally screamed back at him via email “NO! – DON’T TOUCH IT!”, hence that is why ‘Tip’ has cured to a most beautiful golden hue – almost looks like old parchment.

Shed Hunting folks call these old skulls ‘Dead Heads’ but to me ‘Tip’ is metaphorically very much alive still——because he emanates a feeling of overwhelming peace into my room. Seems a strange statement I know – especially if one dwells on the desperate struggle that poor ‘Tip’ must have suffered before he surrendered to that dark, suffocating mud – but perhaps it’s because of it? Put it this way – ‘Tip’ feels very different to my collection of Sheds that literally spark every time I touch one – like electricity shooting up my veins – to my head, reminding me of where and when I found each one ——there’s nothing like finding a fresh Shed.

Stateside – Shed Hunters call ‘Sheds’ ‘White Gold’. Some look for sheds just for fun – with the promise of finding a prize, even two, may be three and counting…

Whilst for others, shed hunting ultimately leads to the stag or ‘buck’ itself. Sheds are a way of tracking an animal – through the seasons——the years – to ultimately kill it as a trophy; a big, mature stag with impressive headgear is what the serious shed hunter keeps in his – or her sight. But if Nature takes the animal first – it’s termed as a ‘Dead Head’. 

As a Shed Hunter who goes after sheds for fun only – I don’t get why anyone would want to kill the magnificent, beneficent creatures that leave these wondrous creations for us to find. Although, as one who sees beauty in the earthly remains of an animal that I know met a horrible, unnatural end – I’m self-aware that I’m a bit of a contradiction in terms!

‘Tip’ IS unique – in as much as he was a gift – and he’s my only pair – all my other Red Deer antlers are single sheds found by myself – five to date. Nothing was harmed in the pursuit of these amazing sheds – apart from a couple of blood-thirsty ticks – which are par for the course if you venture where the Wild Deer roam. 

Anyway, to the task in hand; dusting——a pleasure and a joy today——only.

In reality turned out to be more of an exercise in standing back – or zooming in – to marvel at all the amazing intricacies that the sunlight revealed. A quick flick over the antlers with a sheep’s wool duster – and an artist’s brush for the ‘Gold’ and sutures sufficed; job done.

I decided to leave the inner web be —— it does no harm.

---

Some good tips on ‘finding antlers’ from Johnny…

http://www.johnnykingdom.co.uk/blog/finding-antlers/

---

Some good dusting vibes from:

‘Gold’ by Spandau Ballet.

“Gold (gold)
Always believe in your soul
You’ve got the power to know
You’re indestructable
Always believe in
‘Cause you are gold (gold)….”

---

…especially as on Monday, 15th April 2019 – I too experienced a ‘witch trial’ of a sort – where my inquisitors outnumbered me 3:1. It was a meeting where superstitions and prejudices – not fairness and sound arguments determined the outcome; my inquisitors didn’t listen to reason either.

Then an accidental——transcendental meeting with ‘Alice Nutter’ at the roadside en route to the top of Pendle Hill the day after – reinforced my resolve to keep on metaphorically ‘running up that hill’; onwards, upwards——sometimes sideways, but never back; Truth knows only one way.

There were other routes our satnav could have taken us from North Yorkshire to Pendle Hill in Lancashire –  but it took us along the ‘Blacko Bar Road’ – where I was immediately stopped in my tracks by the quiet dignity of ‘Alice Nutter’ – a Roughlee gentlewoman immortalised in Brass and Steel…

Alice Nutter was condemned to hang on the 20th. August 1612 – as a so-called ‘Witch’ – despite her plea of not guilty.

In the early 17th century – under the rule of notorious witch-hunter King James I – if someone so much pointed the finger at you – there was little hope of escaping the noose – especially as the accused were denied legal representation and the right to call witnesses in their defense. For Alice there was no escaping her heavy chains except through torturous execution; death by hanging in 1612 was in truth – slow strangulation that could take minutes not seconds.     

I met Alice in broad daylight——but I can quite imagine that at dusk – or after dark when the Moon is risen – she would appear even more life-like. The ‘animated’ life-sized sculpture of Alice Nutter —designed and made by local sculptor David Palmer – is quite one of the most hauntingly beautiful and visually powerful memorials to a person that once freely walked this Earth – that I have ever laid eyes——or hands on; it’s true to say – Alice ‘moves’ in more ways than one. 

I love too – how Alice is immortalised just a few feet away from Roughlee’s War Memorial; says so much about how Pendle folk feel about one of their own – 400 years on. 

I don’t think it’s possible to visit Pendle and not feel affected by the atmosphere of the place; it’s a feeling that hangs in the air like a dead weight at times. That said, our walk to the top of Pendle Hill blew the cobwebs away; the views across Lancashire were breathtaking – as was the sight of the low Sun afire over Pendle Hill at our departure.

‘Pendle’ a place I won’t forget – or the name, ‘Alice Nutter’.  

---

Alice Nutter

ALICE NUTTER: Lancashire’s first social worker?

An original line drawing of a beautiful Red Deer stag quenching its thirst; it measures just a few centimetres ‘square’——now framed.

Originally, bought from an online bookseller for ‘pennies’ – it was discovered between the pages of the Holy Book – as a bookmark.

To me – this Nun’s drawing with words – simply sums up everything I know and feel about the magic of discovering one of these white-tipped beauties at my feet…

Ever since finding my first Shed – a HUGE eight-pointer in 2016 – I’ve been addicted to ‘Shed Hunting’ – the joyful, early Springtime pursuit of searching for naturally shed Red Deer antlers.

Lifting a Shed from the earth and holding it on high leads me to think that somehow it has been placed not randomly cast at all——because this April, I have been doubly blessed with a ‘pair’ of freshly shed Red Deer antlers – a five-pointer and a huge sixer——WOW!