Sunday, 23 May 2021 20:00 BST.
Timed Online Only Auction at HUMBERT & ELLIS LTD, Towcester, Northamptonshire.
“EMILY BRONTË. THE LOST ‘BONNET PORTRAIT’ REDISCOVERED.”
follow these link(s) for more information:
Professor Christopher Heywood at home with the painting in 2017.
A blog-post about the interconnectedness between a pair of ‘Bonnets’, a pair of Antlers, a pair of Yafflers, a pair of Finders, a pair of Keepers, a pair of Truth-Seekers. . .
As above, so below. Having spent many, many hours searching for what I was looking for —— this naturally cast antler or ‘Shed’ suddenly grabbed ahold of me, as an out-stretched hand reaching up from the forest floor —— calling for me to pick it up “I’m here”. . .
‘The moment of unearthing’ digitally preserved, so that I can ‘playback’ the thrill —— the electricity, the feeling over and over. . .
In April 2016, I found my first ever ‘Shed’ —— followed swiftly in July that same year, by the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ pencil drawing; the two things became indivisible because. . .
In early March 2017, I made contact with Professor Christopher Heywood —— wherein I also got to see, hold and discuss the original ‘Bonnet Portrait’ that I’d seen and read about online in 2013; it was sold at auction in 2011 to a private buyer. . .
A pair of ‘Yafflers’ at home —— joyfully and animatedly discussing the merits of their ‘Brace of Bonnets’ in May 2017. . .
And so it is, that Our six-sided ‘circle’ is complete —— as represented by the inner shape formed by this pair of interlocking Sheds, naturally cast by a wild Red Deer stag nearly five years ago but only reunited on Thursday 18th March 2021. . .
‘An Embrace of Antlers’ —— finding the left Shed after it had spent five years ‘lost’ in the wilderness, only goes to prove that nothing is ever truly lost, especially to those that don’t give up hope of finding what it is they’re looking for. . .
After nearly five years apart, I’ve finally reunited right-side with left again. The long ‘lost’ Shed was there all along —— about a half-a-mile apart from where the right-side was found. A few feet either way and a shed antler is easily overlooked; absorbed in a mass of snapped twigs and fallen branches that morph into a thousand ‘antlers’ in the expectant eyes of a Shed-Hunter. Sniffing out a cast antler in a forest environment is almost an ‘impossible’ mission —— especially if like me one doesn’t keep a dog. That said, a helpful wild Raven and a murmuration of starlings came to my assistance…
I love that the left side had lain totally undisturbed where it fell —— apart that is from some occasional gnawing by the wild creatures of the forest; foxes, badgers, mice, squirrels —— deer, all enjoy a nibble on a freshly shed ‘bone’, which in essence is what a Shed is, it’s Nature’s own calcium supplement. It’s underside has retained its natural dark-brown hue from a life spent in an arboreal habitat, out of direct sunlight —— whilst the side that was facing upwards to the elements has miraculously grown ‘velvet’ again —— only of the Moss variety. I have left the Moss be —— as I like the earthiness of it and ‘as found’ look. . .
In general terms, a Red Deer stag is genetically programmed from birth to annually regrow the same symmetrical pattern of Brow, Bez and Trez ‘points’ or ‘tines’. . .
Identical, symmetrical ‘Burrs’ . . .
The number of points on a stag’s ‘crown’ or ‘cup’ increase and become more impressive with each yearly regrowth until eventually a stag is deemed passed its prime or ‘going back’ —— which roughly occurs around seven to eight years of age. Most managed Red Deer Stags don’t get the chance to live out life to its natural limit, which is about 13 to 15 years, because they are humanely culled before old age sets in. Or sadly, they are poached and butchered for their majestic heads when still in their prime. Whereas the mature large-hearted stag that shed these big beauties for me to find and reunite, has lived its entire life running wild and largely unseen in a secretive, densely forested habitat —— which makes their reunion all the more miraculous. . .
Full ‘Circle’
I’ve always been a bit of a ‘hunter’ gatherer type —— particularly hunting down more formal wall art to ‘paper’ the walls of my home —— as in affordable drawings, paintings and engravings collected over several decades, that are mostly Victorian in origin. So it followed that when I found my first big Shed in 2016, I developed a sudden need to acquire an artist’s impression of a suitably magnificent Red Deer stag to celebrate my Shed Hunting success. . .
It’s my experience that eBay is a good hunting ground for tracking and finding ‘sleepers’. . .
“A sleeper is an object that is undervalued at the time it is offered for sale. Experts that are on the look-out for sleepers at auction are sometimes called sleeper spotters. While some sleepers pass through auctions unnoticed, others are spotted by two or more parties and may make a spectacular price over estimate.”
So I put ‘Red Deer Drawing’ into eBay’s search engine and began my search. . .
Almost immediately, I stumbled upon a suitably fitting picture of an impressive stag —— the very thing I thought I was looking for! It’s now long since sold by ‘Somerset and Wood’ —— but alas not to me!
I didn’t buy it because out the corner of my eye on screen, my attention was suddenly grabbed by an icon-sized image of a portrait ‘type’ that I was pretty certain I recognised from some place before. . .
Without hesitation, I bought the “Lady With Bonnet” —— particularly as it had two watchers! It wasn’t expensive —— so I did my research after clicking the ‘Buy It Now’ button!
Immediately the deal was done, I put “Lady With Bonnet” (as per the eBay listing header) into Google’s search engine —— and low and behold, there appeared onscreen, an image of the very same painting I’d previously read about in 2013, in an online, 2011 edition of the ‘Keighley News’. I knew I’d seen the portrait ‘type’ before in the course of some earlier 2013 research of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ —— another ‘Brontë’ acquisition whose full story can be read HERE.
The Google search result was from this newspaper article in the ‘Keighley News’ about the sale of the very painting (seen here temporarily removed from its ornate ‘Slater Bower of Sheffield’ frame) on the left of the ‘Bonnet’ drawing…
Little did I realise way back in July 2016 —— that finding a huge cast Red Deer Antler in a high-hedged wood, would take me on another Quest; a Quest that seeks to discover the Truth about ‘The ‘Lost’ Portrait of Emily Brontë’.
In March 2017, I read an online abstract from a paper by Professor Christopher Heywood about the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ painting, published in ‘Brontë Studies’ – the Brontë Society’s own academic journal; curious and wanting to know more, I wrote to its brilliant author.
‘Coincidentally‘, ‘Heywood’ means a ‘wood surrounded by a hedge’. Yes! I research all possible vibrations!
In so many ways, searching for the Truth about the ‘Bonnet(s)’ is no different to searching for a great ‘lost’ Shed —— except I haven’t been scratched to pieces and bitten by innumerable ticks in search of ‘Bonnets’! That said, I do recall meeting a rather pricklesome expert! Persistence and perseverance in the field is what pays dividends in the end —— the Truth is out there —— or in there in the case of the ‘Bonnet’ drawing; I believe it, I know it, I sixth sense it! Indeed, the Truth is in the very artworks themselves —— in the form of hundreds of ‘hidden’ numbers that the Brontes used as a technique for shading —— as can be detected in the left nostril of the ‘Bonnet’ watercolour, a portrait that I believe is by Branwell Brontë and should be secured for the National Collection —— should it come up for auction again. . .
Possibly ‘59232??2’ —— the last ‘2’ is unmistakable! There are many more numbers in the lips and the other shaded area of the nose. I know that they are there because I have seen and handled this painting in the flesh and looked at it closely with a jeweler’s eye-loupe, I only wish I’d had a better camera at the time…
Meeting Professor Christopher Heywood in the flesh for the first time in April 2017 —— I remember thinking there was something as otherworldly about him as there was worldly; an exceedingly well-travelled, old-school academic —— fluent in several languages, who also believed in Magick —— and faeries —— and read palms as well as books. . .
Professor Christopher Heywood who came a-knocking at my door. . .
On the 25th April 2017.
That first meeting only confirmed what I’d already deduced from our first month’s worth of daily e-correspondence; that there was nothing remotely stuffy about this Professor of Literature / Wizard in a flat cap! As he gently took ahold of my palm in his —— and began to read my fortune! It was like a reenactment of this famous scene in ‘Jane Eyre’ —— only I didn’t know Charlotte Brontë’s story line in those formative days of our friendship. . . 
I love this photograph of Professor Heywood greeting my Mother because it exemplifies the joy felt by the three of us on that unforgettable morning; Tuesday, 25th April 2017. . .
And because my Mother arrived unexpectedly, it meant there was a third person present to take a photograph of The Yaffles’ first meet. . .
The above photograph of us together remains my firm favourite because so many of the happenstances in the world of ‘Yaffle A’ and ‘Yaffle B’ have been serendipitous —— whilst at the ‘same time’ looking back to at least 2016, I have this funny feeling that fate has played its hand in it all. Especially in light of a new discovery made on Friday, 19th March 2021 —— that of Charlotte Brontë’s tiny signature ‘C BRONTË’ in the pupil of the right eye of the pencil portrait. . .
Even allowing for all the variables in LIFE —— it definitely feels like there’s an order to how the secrets of the ‘lost’ portrait of Emily Brontë by Charlotte have revealed themselves —— because there is no IF about my latest ‘unearthing’; the pencil version of the ‘Bonnet Portait’ is deliberately signed in typical Charlotte Brontë micro-script, ‘C BRONTË’.
Prof. Christopher Heywood and I, have tried to bring our pair of ‘Bonnet Portraits’ to the attention of the Brontë Society —— who have rejected both portraits at every given opportunity. . . However, despite the numerous put downs of our beloved pair of ‘Bonnets’ —— there’s an even more determined ‘third party’ that’s still very much attached to the pencil portrait. It’s an entity that’s given power to this Yaffle’s elbow; I call ‘It’ —— ‘Charlotte’. . .
Detail from a ‘lost’ portrait of Charlotte Brontë looking suitably determined! Dated 1842 —— an exquisite ‘Selfie’ I believe nay ‘know’, but it isn’t only a sixth sense thing with any of the ‘lost’ portraits I’ve uncovered. . .
. . .because the pencil version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ is quite deliberately signed, indeed it is very deliberately signed in uppercase; there’s only one ‘C BRONTË’ responsible for such a minuscule, deliberate signature as this is. . .
My latest related acquisition —— on Monday, 22nd March 2021; was a brand new, shiny, pearlised-white Android smartphone, a Samsung A51! For at least the past six months, my hand-me-down iPhone 6S (kindly given to me by my eldest son two years ago) has been seriously on the blink, then it virtually died just over two months ago! With the country in Lockdown, I saw no need to immediately replace my old device for a new one, as I wasn’t going anywhere! My main reason for owning a mobile phone is in case I breakdown on my 36 mile round journey to work and back; there’s no point in me having a ‘Gold’ membership breakdown card for the AA —— if one can’t call them in an emergency! Being placed on Furlough again meant a new phone could wait; being at home has done me good, indeed it’s been a time to refocus in more ways than one!
It’s also been a time of bereavement; Professor Christopher Heywood sadly passed away on the 18th February 2021. . .
In good hands in 2017 —— The Prof. and the ‘lost’ portrait of Emily Bronte.
So, in preparation for returning to near normal life post Lockdown on April 12th —— I’m back in the world of mobile communication again, but it’s having a new camera that’s thrilled me!
Having switched from an old, totally defunct Apple device to a shiny new Android one, I’m getting to grips with the differences; namely a macro lens being my new handset’s best additional feature! So there was no better or more fitting subject to test it on than the right-eye pupil of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ pencil drawing —— that I’ve always thought contains minuscule writing across it, only what do the ‘three lines’ actually say?
Well, I’m one-hundred percent confident that thanks to my new A51’s macro lens and a god-given slant of light —— that bottom-right it reads ‘C BRONTË’ (the artist’s —— Charlotte Brontë’s teeny-weeny signature) —— whilst what I originally identified as three lines of tiny ‘unreadable’ micro-script is actually the subject’s initials, ‘EJB’ for Emily Jane Brontë. In the image directly below —— it’s even possible to see how ‘EJB’ is scored into the paper. . .
For guidance only.
There is another version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ that I attribute to the hand of Charlotte Brontë because it has the same trait(s). . .
‘The Eyes Have It’ Clearly ‘E’ and ‘B’ with the ‘B’ doubling as a heart. This pair of of obliquely written initials have NOT been digitally enhanced; their visibility is purely due to a raking light.
This post is dedicated to the memory of Professor Christopher Heywood, who really is quite the most wizard individual that I have ever met —— and all because I found a huge shed antler in a high-hedged wood in 2016. Without finding the ‘Shed’ —— I wouldn’t have found (without looking) the ‘lost’ portrait of Emily Brontë —— drawn and signed by sister, Charlotte. And therein, I would never have got to know the person I had the privilege to call, ‘Yaffle B’/’Yaffo’/’Mr. Woodpecker’ —— but most of all, Dear Christopher,; his “haystack” of emails are treasure to me now.
Truth really is stranger than fiction; something that I think Professor of Literature, Christopher Heywood —— and Novelist, Charlotte Brontë —— indeed ALL of the Brontës, would agree with; it’s certainly been my experience.🦌
Stranded on the road after a l-o-n-g day spent busily, buzzing around in the life-affirming Spring sunshine —— this beautiful, furry Bumble Bee was feeling totally exhausted and spent, and needed a helping hand from a passer-by. Thankfully it was alive and buzzing still —— but cold and s-l-o-w moving in the low Sun. 
With just a little bit of gentle finger persuasion, it was perfectly content to crawl aboard my hand —— from where it was air-lifted to the safety of the hedge. Happily, I watched it shuffle off down a mossy hole, to hopefully fly —— and buzz —— and scurry —— and gather again tomorrow.💚🐝
‘Beeing Alive’ It’s the small things.
Up until today —— Monday, 1st March 2021 —— it’s been so easy and convenient for critics of the original versions of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ to pick holes —— especially by dismissing them outright as mere copies of the reproduction published in the ‘Woman at Home’ in 1894. . .
and again, in ‘The Bookman Vol III’ published in 1896. . .
In other words —— their words, the originals as pictured above —— are allegedly not early enough to be seriously considered as genuine portraits of Emily Brontë; I strongly disagree.
The critics give no credence to the FACT that the reproduction was reliably identified as a portrait of “EMILY BRONTË” by the Editor of the ‘Woman at Home’ Sir William Robertson Nicoll. The very same Sir William Robertson Nicoll who saw the ‘lost’ portrait of Emily by Charlotte in 1879 —— when he visited the Brontës’ long-serving housekeeper, Martha Brown. But hey, the ‘Bonnet’ critics think —— nay feel —— that they ‘know’ better than the honorable gentleman who described the ‘lost’ portrait of Emily by Charlotte thus, “…a pencil sketch of Emily Brontë by Charlotte, which was very clearly and boldly drawn, and which Martha pronounced an excellent likeness.”
I ask you! could Charlotte have made identifying the sitter in this version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ anymore clearer —— bolder —— or unerasable?
It’s just as well then, I’m a firm believer in ‘The Truth Will Out Eventually’ maxim, and so it is to that end that an early version of the same portrait ‘type’ has come to light. . .
It’s a version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ that doesn’t just pick holes in the critics’ simplistic, limited reasoning —— but blasts one great big hole right through their tedious excuse of an ‘argument’ —— that the originals are later copies of the 1894 ‘Woman at Home’ reproduction; they’re not.
For almost thirty years, this version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ signed by William Warman —— has been hidden from general sight in a private collection. The portrait’s former owner reliably informed me that the painting was bought from an auction house in Stockport at Maxwells of Wilmslow in the early 1990’s. In February 2021 —— it entered the market again, listed only as “William Warman C19th Watercolour Georgian Girl In Bonnet. Gilt and Gesso Frame. 1830.” 
There isn’t much information readily available online about listed artist, William Warman, other than, he flourished at the very time the Brontës were living —— as well as after they’d all died. Hence, the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ ‘type’ is irrefutably earlier than the 1894 reproduction by anything up to half a century!
It’s clear that William Warman was a professional copyist of engravings and portraits of historic and famous people, because luckily there are a number of portraits by William Warman for sale online at ‘Somerset & Wood’ —— available to buy, view and read about HERE. This link is essential viewing in order to fully appreciate William Warman’s distinctive style of portraiture. Three of the William Warman portraits on sale at ‘Somerset & Wood’, are meticulous copies after recognisable engravings of Henry VIII, Anne Boleyn and Lady Jane Grey, whilst the other three portrait ‘types’ have not been identified. That said, I have discovered that one of the unidentified portrait ‘types’ is in fact a portrait of King David —— simply because I have an original 19th century copy of the same portrait ‘type’ only by another artist’s hand. . .
So it’s clear that William Warman was about the business of copying portraits of historic and famous figures.
There can be no doubt at all that the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ is one-hundred percent attributable to William Warman’s hand because it distinctly —— and distinctively signed by him. . .
From carrying out several ‘William Warman’ searches over the last week or so, I have also discovered that the William Warman portraits currently for sale at ‘Somerset & Wood’ are derived from a 19th century portfolio that was originally auctioned at Bellmans auctioneers of Wisborough Green, West Sussex —— on the 18th, Thursday 19th September 2019.
To view the portfolio or ‘LOT 790’ —— it is imperative to click HERE —— although you must wait for the page to load owing to the number of exquisite drawings and watercolours that are available to view individually within the portfolio, 94 pages in all, including the six William Warman portraits now individually for sale at ‘Somerset & Wood’.
The OTHER significant ‘happenstance’ in this 19th century portfolio apart from the six William Warman’s, is an unsigned portrait on page five that features another pencil version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’; a version that is facially identical to a 1787 engraving of Samuel Woodforde’s ‘Wood-Nymph’.
Hand-coloured stipple engraving dated 1787.
As stated above, it is absolutely essential to click the link provided to view not just the six William Warman portraits but also the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ therein.
The relevance of these seven portraits all contained within one album, raises the question whether the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ in the album —— is possibly an early preparatory sketch by William Warman (derived from the 1787 Woodforde engraving) in readiness for his portrait of ‘Emily’. 
Of course, Emily Brontë wasn’t famous in her own lifetime but she was in William Warman’s. Online, William Warman is listed as having lived from 1806 to 1875, however, records show that William Thomas Warman was born in 1801, baptised in 1802, married in 1824, widowed in 1857, married again in 1864 and died in 1872.
It’s evident that graphite and watercolour were William Warman’s chosen mediums on paper. So keeping in mind the spirit of William Warman’s distinctive, semi-monochromatic style, I engaged the much needed services of a Genealogist in order to build a larger picture of William Thomas Warman —— to hopefully add some background colour and warmth to this enigmatic early-to-mid-to-late-ish 19th century portraitist who can boast a portrait of Queen Victoria in the Primary National Collection no less! Another essential link to check out: https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw06507/Queen-Victoria
Meanwhile, these are the Genealogist’s fascinating findings about William Thomas Warman —— ‘Professor of Drawing’:
“William was born 1801 Bishopsgate, London to Robert John Thomas and Ann (nee Peet) Robert is listed as an artist. William died 1872.
Unfortunately, I have not been able to discover if William received any formal art training.”
Unlike the William Warman portraits for sale at ‘Somerset & Wood’ —— the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ by him is suitably encased behind rippled glass, in a fine, oval-shaped gilt wood and gesso frame, the back of which confirms that it is original Victorian. . .
In fact, the flower-shaped mouldings spoke to me as much as the painting itself did —— which I think is their intention. . .
‘Under the Rose’ I think there is something hauntingly ‘Memento mori’ about the setting of this rather ghost-like version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’. . .
In the era of the Brontës and William Warman, flowers were widely embraced as a second language; they were used by the Victorians to convey messages in place of the spoken word. . .
In the Victorian ‘Language of Flowers’ the ‘Canterbury Bell’ symbolised ‘Acknowledgement’ (methinks very pertinent to today’s argument for the ‘Bonnet’!) but is there a subliminal message in these three bell-shaped flowers? as in Currer, Ellis and Acton! ‘Bell’ being the pseudonymous surname of the three Brontë Sisters.
I wonder whether the ‘Bonnet’ critics and skeptics will acknowledge any of these latest observations and findings? or will it be a repeat of when I pointed out ‘EMILY’ in the pencil portrait —— that they claim they can’t see and doesn’t exist. . .
“E M I L Y” secretly written in the folds of the drapery.
‘Never mind’ that I’ve already proved in a previous blog post —— that Charlotte did integrate words, names, sentiments —— as in these highlighted examples in an authenticated artwork by Charlotte Brontë in the Brontë Parsonage Museum’s own collection. . .
‘My Kindred’
‘étude’
This very unique trait singles out the pencil version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ as a genuine portrait of Emily Brontë by Charlotte; whilst William Warman’s version proves that the portrait ‘type’ existed well before the reproduction was published in the ‘Woman at Home’ in 1894.
Both Charlotte Brontë and William Warman were copyists of engravings. However, in the case of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ —— I think it was William Warman who copied Charlotte’s ‘lost’ portrait of her sister, Emily, and this is my hypothesis. . .
Martha Brown was keeper of the ‘lost’ portrait until she died in 1880. Sir William Robertson Nicoll saw the ‘lost’ portrait in 1879, one year before Martha passed away. The Brontë Parsonage Museum website says of Martha Brown, “Martha had featured in Elizabeth Gaskell’s bestselling biography, The Life of Charlotte Brontë (1857), and in her later years became something of a celebrity. Martha treasured a large collection of Brontë memorabilia that she was happy to display, but reluctant to sell. On her death this collection was divided between her sisters and gradually dispersed.”
William Warman died in 1872, so he could only have seen the ‘lost’ portrait whilst it was still in Martha Brown’s possession. As a commercial artist who specialised in small, delicate, watercolour and graphite portraits of mainly historic and famous people —— I think that it’s plausible that William Warman paid a visit to Martha Brown. Did he have a commission to create a portrait of Emily Brontë? —— who by that time was famous due to the success of her one and only novel ‘Wuthering Heights’ published in 1847.
Meantime, Branwell’s ‘Pillar Portrait’ and ‘Profile Portrait’ of ‘Emily’ —— remained hidden away from public knowledge —— folded-up on top of Arthur Bell Nicholls’ wardrobe in Ireland, where they remained undisturbed until 1914. After Charlotte’s death in 1855 – public interest in the Brontë sisters rocketed – so it stands to reason that there would have been great demand for a portrait of Emily —— author of ‘Wuthering Heights’. The only person that owned a genuine portrait of Emily Brontë drawn by Charlotte at that time was Martha Brown, which was the portrait seen by Sir William Robertson Nicoll in 1879, later ‘lost’. The very same, Sir William Robertson Nicoll —— who was the founding editor of the ‘Woman at Home’ and ‘The Bookman’ that later reproduced a printed version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ —— in 1894 and 1896 respectively. . .
Update.
News of another ‘Bonnet Portrait’ by William Warman; a signed drawing. It’s important to bear in mind that William Warman was essentially a copyist. He painted recognisable, famous and historical figures, copied from engravings of portraits by other artists.
William Warman evidently thought the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ an appealing subject.
If William Warman’s pair of virtually identical ‘Bonnet Portraits’ are not portraits of Emily Brontë — it begs the question, which other famous or historical figure does the portrait ‘type’ represent?
Earlier today, Monday 1st March 2021 —— was the funeral of Professor Christopher Heywood—— ‘The Number One Champion of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ of Emily Brontë’ —— never, EVER to be forgotten.
Almost four years to the day, 11th. March 2017, I read an abstract online about the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ from a paper by Professor Christopher Heywood, published in ‘Brontë Studies’ – the Brontë Society’s own academic journal. Curious and wanting to know more, I wrote to its author. Having only received negative responses up to that point —— from the curators that I had contacted about the pencil version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ —— I didn’t quite know what reception I could hope for. . .
Four years on from that tentative first contact, and a “haystack” of emails later —— ‘all’ I can say now is that I shall remember our unlikely friendship with undying affection. To my way of thinking, Christopher will always be thought of as a brilliant meteor —— whose tail I was luckily in time to catch. And ONLY because of our shared belief in this ‘pair’ of portraits. . .
The following abstract is from one of Professor Heywood’s earliest emails to me, that poetically and prophetically —— sums up our Quest for the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ of Emily Brontë, thus far. I can remember reading these words for the first time and thinking “WOW!” —— and they still do that almost four years to the day later. . .
“Apologies for being severe, or on the other hand, no apologies, as it’s my job to winnow the chaff from the grain. You hold the grain in your hand; the curators can only offer chaff.” Christopher Heywood – ‘Yaffle’ —— Monday, 13th. March 2017
Just as long as there’s one of us still here —— the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ of Emily Brontë WILL live to fight another day. . .
Professor Christopher Heywood ‘Yaffle’ —— 2nd. July 1928 —— 18th. February 2021.
🕯. . .
The ‘Bonnet Portrait’ painted by listed artist, William Warman —— who flourished at the time the Brontës were living. Sadly, this latest ‘Bonnet’ development came to light too late to share with Christopher —— but I will be sharing more about it here shortly. . .
Queen’s head meticulously copied from a stipple and line engraving published in 1840 —— after an original miniature by Sir William Charles Ross.
In 1839, soon after Queen Victoria proposed to Prince Albert —— Her Majesty commissioned Sir William Charles Ross, Royal Academician and miniaturist to the Queen —— to paint ‘his & hers’ portraits; hers to be given as a love-token to her dearly betrothed on the 10th. February 1840 —— the royal couple’s Wedding Day, whilst Prince Albert’s handsome likeness was for keeps. . .
Image courtesy of ‘S Werzler’
Meanwhile, in a remote parsonage in Haworth, a pair of pet geese were named ‘Victoria’ and ‘Adelaide’ —— ‘Adelaide’ in honour of the Queen’s much loved and trusted Aunt.
Who’d have thought that five years after Queen Victoria’s Coronation in 1838, Charlotte Brontë would be in exactly the right place at the right time —— to catch a fleeting glimpse of the very woman that would later go on to read ‘Jane Eyre’ aloud to her handsome Prince!
Their paths initially crossed on the ‘Rue Royale’, in 1843. Charlotte was in her second year at the Pensionnat Héger in Brussels – whilst the Queen was visiting her Uncle, King Leopold I of Belgium.
Keeping these happenstances in mind, it’s become empirically evident to me that no matter how fleetingly the Queen sped by in her “carriage and six” —— she left a long-lasting impression on one particular face in the crowd that day —— Monday, 18th September 1843. . .
I think Charlotte saw something of her own small, plainly dressed self in Victoria, or maybe she already had that certain self-awareness because the right-hand portrait is dated verso, 1842. . .
It reads “Charlotte Brontë drawn by M? Héger 1842″
In 1842, Charlotte was in her first year at the Pensionnat Héger in Brussels; I don’t profess to know whose writing it is on the back but I’m pretty certain that the other side is a self-portrait. . .
Placed side-by-side, their elongated necks, sloping shoulders and ‘perfectly’ round-shaped heads all but mirror one another; whilst the outline of their faces are as two sides of the same coin.
In 1837 —— the year of Queen Victoria’s accession to the throne, Charlotte, Emily and Anne were aged twenty-one, nineteen, and seventeen respectively —— Charlotte being the Queen’s senior by three years; in age —— if not by birth, they were peers. And although The Parsonage was far removed from the trappings and excesses of a royal court, the young Brontës’ super-charged imaginations were as flying carpets, transporting the three Sisters and their brother, Branwell —— faraway from the drear that was growing up in early 19th century Haworth to their own exotic kingdoms where sibling power ruled the day! They were Brannii (Branwell), Tallii (Charlotte), Emmii (Emily) and Annii (Anne) —— the four presiding ‘Genii’. As well as acting out their elaborate war games and fantastical flights of fancy, they even put ‘Angria’ and ‘Gondal’ on the map! —— and created in minutest detail the most extraordinary written journals that were made to imitate print. The Brontës’ juvenilia was something that continued into adulthood; in fact it’s true to say that in literary terms they never completely shut the lid on the twelve toy soldiers that famously served as a trigger for their imaginations. In the words of Charlotte, this is the moment in June 1826 —— when the toy soldiers came to life: “I snatched one up and exclaimed, ‘this is the Duke of Wellington! It shall be mine!’ Emily’s was a grave looking fellow. We called him Gravey. Anne’s was a queer little thing much like herself. He was called Waiting Boy. Branwell chose Bonaparte.” The toy soldiers were a gift from Rev’d Brontë to Branwell —— who duly shared them with his eager Sisters; in essence the soldiers acted as a vanguard for the invention of a whole raft of other more sophisticated, often titled characters. Some were entirely made-up —— whilst others were borrowed and re-imagined from life; from literature, from the Napoleonic Wars, even a couple of great explorers! So I think it’s perfectly plausible that Charlotte created a portrait of a figurehead Genii; in fact, it all fits as deftly as the ‘pattern’ or ‘signature’ in Queen Victoria’s lace!
Many of the portraits listed in ‘The Art of The Brontës’ —— are portraits of characters drawn from the Brontës’ juvenilia; in that sense, it doubles as a who’s who in Angria and Gondal! Jane Sellars, joint author of ‘The Art of the Brontës’ writes separately in an article in ‘Brontë Studies’:“One of the most significant features of the Brontës’ attitude to their drawing is the way in which they integrated their visual art with their writing, something that begins, as so much else did, with the juvenilia.” Excerpt from ‘THE ARTIST IN HER STUDIO: THE INFLUENCE OF THE BRONTËS ON WOMEN ARTISTS’ By Jane Sellars Brontë Studies, Vol. 30, November 2005.
So what I’m saying is —— just as the Brontës “integrated their visual art with their writing” – then why not their writing with their visual art? Just the odd word or sentiment slipped in here or there, so as not to ‘notice’; most specifically it’s a Charlotte trait that I’ve pre-explained here: http://somethingaboutdartmoor.com/2020/05/02/spelling-it-out-the-art-of-steganography-in-the-art-of-charlotte-bronte/
It’s known that Charlotte wrote home to eagerly awaiting Emily, about her brush with royalty on the Rue Royale in Brussels. . .
“You ask about Queen Victoria‘s visit to Brussels. I saw her for an instant flashing through the Rue Royale in a carriage and six, surrounded by soldiers. She was laughing and talking very gaily. She looked a little stout, vivacious lady, very plainly dressed, not much dignity or pretension about her. The Belgians liked her very well on the whole. They said she enlivened the sombre court of King Leopold, which is usually as gloomy as a conventicle. . .”
So it figures that Charlotte created a more lasting impression on thin ‘J Whatman’ card —— inspired by Ross’s original. . .
© The Trustees of the British Museum
1840 stipple engraving by Henry Thomas Ryall published by Colnaghi and Puckle. Thank you kindly to ‘S. Werzler’ for the use of this image, for comparison. . .
. . .with this original watercolour copy on ‘J Whatman’ card, that I believe is by the amateur hand of wannabe miniaturist, Charlotte Brontë, circa 1843!
“WHATMAN TURKEY MILL” Charlotte’s favoured make of paper again.
The only obvious deviation from Sir William Ross’s original miniature, is that Victoria’s dress has been changed from regal red to ‘Anne’ blue —— as in Charlotte usually reserved this particular shade for portrait’s of her beloved youngest sister, Anne. Otherwise, it’s a faithful copy —— right down to the detail of Queen Victoria’s glass locket that contained a lock of Prince Albert’s hair. . .
The change of dress colour can easily be explained —— as in the ‘blue version’ is copied from a monochrome steel engraving published in 1840. In 1843, Charlotte wouldn’t have been privy to the fact that Queen Victoria’s dress in Ross’s original miniature is red; that was for Prince Albert’s eye’s only! See also, lithograph in the National Portrait Gallery collection published in 1840, here.
1840’s engraving in my collection —— of Queen Victoria looking sublime in her Bridal Dress, from a drawing by W. Drummond. Notice how facially this engraving follows the exact same lines only reversed as the engraving after Sir William Ross’s original portrait of Queen Victoria.
It’s evident over four pages in ‘The Art of The Brontës’ by Christine Alexander and Jane Sellars —— that the intricacies or workings of lace and embroidery patterns held a particular fascination for Charlotte Brontē; she produced several fine ink and pencil studies on paper of cuffs and collars. 
When comparing Charlotte’s meticulous lace and embroidery studies in ‘The Art of the Brontës’ (above) —— with the execution of the shoulder lace in the watercolour of Queen Victoria (below), one immediately notices a significant but deliberate difference in ‘meticulousness’. . .
Instead the pattern —— or arrangement of ‘dots, dashes and spaces’ —— have been simplified, re-ordered and significantly emboldened when compared to the original lace detail in the engraving. . .
Whether interpreted as a small ‘g’ —— as in ‘gENII’. . .
or this way round —— with ‘G’ and first letter ‘I’ rotated left, spell-out two things ONLY; ‘GENII‘ —— and the hand responsible.
As shown, this emboldened yet seemingly oblique group of ‘dots, dashes and spaces’ are another example of Charlotte Brontë’s stegonagraphic style; ‘concealed’ words and sentiments —— even monograms —— ingeniously embedded as patterns in lace, folds in drapery, initials in curls of hair —— even in pupils. . .
‘E B’ (Image(s) can be opened and enlarged in a new window by simply clicking on it.)
‘EMILY’ (Image(s) can be opened and enlarged in a new window by simply clicking on it.)
‘MY ALL’ (Image(s) can be opened and enlarged in a new window by simply clicking on it.)
And if dear Reader you’re not yet won over by Charlotte’s artistic sleight of hand —— or think that it’s a trait only peculiar to unauthenticated portraits in private collections —— then you’re jolly well mistaken!
Firstly, there’s an earlier post dedicated to explaining the not so plain facts about these previously undetected nuances in Charlotte’s art —— and is essential reading HERE. And secondly —— or should I say, double firstly, there’s a prime, triple exposé contained in an illustrated letter from Charlotte to her best friend or best ‘kindred’, Ellen Nussey. . .
As illustrated in ‘The Art of the Brontës’.
The original letter is in the Brontë Parsonage Museum’s own collection in Haworth —— and confirms that my theory about Charlotte Brontë’s use of 19th century ‘WordArt’ is correct. . .
“étude” —— thinly veiled as a plume of steam to signify Charlotte broadening her horizons in 1843 —— with a second term at the Pensionnat Héger in Brussels.
“HIS” —— Charlotte adding a ‘hidden’ dimension to the puff in Ellen’s Gigot Sleeve —— by wearing her own heart on it!
“MY Kindred” ‘secretly’ embroidered along the hem of Ellen’s skirt, is Charlotte’s way of expressing that Ellen was all but her blood-sister; it’s a heart-felt sentiment Charlotte borrowed in advance from ‘Jane Eyre’!
So it’s in exactly the same deliberately oblique style as Ellen’s hemline, that Charlotte saw fit to customize her blue-blooded kindred’s lace with an honorary title; ‘GENII’.
Another giveaway trait are these grey-coloured ‘lines’ on either side of the portrait. . .
They are very difficult to capture but Charlotte’s ‘lines’ are in fact columns of grey-coloured numbers. They are rather like shadowy watermarks but if you look carefully and accustom your eyes first —— you may be able to figure some out??? My experience is that it’s actually better to keep an image on the small side and use a magnifying glass for ‘easier’ detection, as the bigger the image the more diffused these tiny details become! 
Another common denominator between ‘Queen Victoria Re-imagined’ —— and above left, a watercolour version of the pencil ‘Bonnet Portrait’ that I attribute to Charlotte’s hand also —— is that both portraits have neatly pencil ruled edges; to see —— simply click on the image to enlarge in a new window. It’s almost like they have been cut from the same sheet of ‘J Whatman’ thin card!
My next ‘planned’ post will introduce a ‘new’ ‘Bonnet Portrait’ (below centre) —— that isn’t a version that I attribute to Charlotte’s hand. It clearly bears the recognisable signature of a listed artist who flourished at the very time the Brontës were alive and publishing their novels. My posts aren’t ‘planned’ only guided by the ‘lost’ artworks themselves —— as and when they come to light; I believe that they possess their own agenda —— order.
Left: ‘Emily’ from Branwell’s ‘Pillar Portrait’ in the National Portrait Gallery Collection —— for comparison purposes.
Meantime. . .
‘Not for turning.’ Captain ‘Bill’ (far right) and his appropriately behatted army of ‘Bonneteers’! In the spirit of the Brontës, I’ve recently invested in a box of pre-loved toy soldiers to help fight the good ‘Bonnet’ fight til the truth WILL out eventually.
Thanks to Gaz! —— and to my e-penpal ‘Dear John’! —— for their permanent loan; I love old things —— just imagine the stories they could tell if only they could talk. . .
In the Brontë Parsonage Museum collection in Haworth there’s a ‘mysterious’ watercolour painted by Charlotte Brontë —— called, ‘The Woman In Leopard Fur’; ‘Mysterious’ as in —— I’ve often wondered about Charlotte’s original source for her ‘Woman in Leopard Fur’ watercolour? 🐆 However, that source is a mystery no more!
For reference, Charlotte’s painting is reproduced in full colour in ‘The Art of The Brontës’ —— as well as in B/W. It’s a page(s) that invariably stops me in my tracks —— as I thumb through my very well-thumbed copy that’s stuffed with my own notes and page markers… 
‘The Art of The Brontës’ by Christine Alexander and Jane Sellars published in 1995 —— is regarded as the first full-scale study of the paintings and drawings of the Brontës — yet it offers no clues as to where Charlotte copied her painting of “The Woman in Leopard Fur” from?🙄 
Some Brontëites like to imagine that it’s a portrait of Emily???🙄
Somewhat miraculously, whilst continuing my research into a true ‘lost’ portrait of Emily Brontë (drawn by Charlotte) formally known as the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ —— I stumbled upon an engraving of the original source for Charlotte’s ‘Woman in Leopard Fur’. Charlotte’s painting is definitively copied from an engraving by Edward Smith after an original painting by James Northcote RA — a pupil of Sir Joshua Reynolds no less. Northcote was born in Plymouth in 1746 — and died in July 1831. Many of James Northcote’s paintings include big cats 🐅 — and one of his specialisms was painting Leopard fur.🐆 In that sense, the origin of Charlotte’s painting should really have been a complete no brainer — yet its taken almost as long as the truth about the ‘Bonnet’ to come to light! Diligent research usually pays dividends sooner or later, even if one finds something that one didn’t purposefully set out to find. . .
Comparing Charlotte’s painting of ‘The Lady In Leopard Fur’ to Smith’s early 19th century engraving of Northcote’s original, I think it is accurate and fair to say that Charlotte’s copy is just that; a meticulous copy. The only difference between the two are the shapes of the trees on the horizons but the sitter is clearly One and the Same. Northcote’s original must be in a private collection as there is seemingly no trace online. I imagine that the subject is derived from Greek mythology? —— because Northcote also painted a beautiful painting of ‘Adonis’ wearing Leopard fur which can be easily viewed online here.🐆
Northcote’s original of Charlotte’s ‘Woman in Leopard Fur’ could well be a representation of a ‘Maenad’; The Maenads were female followers of Dionysus and often portrayed in Leopard skin robes.🐆
Anyhoo, a previously unsolved Brontë mystery has been solved by yours truly!
As an invaluable resource as ‘The Art of The Brontës’ undoubtedly is to those that love and study the art of the Brontës —— its authors simply couldn’t, can’t and don’t know everything! I hope the ‘Library Angels’ continue to guide my hand so that I can crack the much harder nut that is the ‘Bonnet Portrait’.
(I’m most grateful to ‘Udderdishbeeleaf’ on Instagram for the angelic link above; another happy ‘happenstance’ methinks!)
A reproduction of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ in ‘The Bookman’ 1896. . .
And again two years earlier in the ‘Woman at Home’ 1894. . .
The common denominator of both hefty volumes above —— besides the obvious double publication of the ‘Bonnet’ reproduction —— IS Scottish Free Church minister, journalist, editor, and man of letters —— the honorable and “very truly”, Sir William Robertson Nicoll. . .
He was also the very person that saw the original ‘lost’ portrait of Emily Brontë by Charlotte in 1879, when he visited the Brontë’s faithful servant, Martha Brown in Haworth. He made three separate statements about the portrait that he ‘alone’ witnessed. In two separate statements, he described Charlotte’s portrait of her sister as a “drawing” – then in his later third and final statement —— he described it as a “painting”. The one thing he was consistently clear about was that it was most definitely a portrait by Charlotte, not a painting by Branwell as the National Portrait Gallery would have us continually believe! Hence, the inconsistency in Robertson Nicoll’s statements about the ‘lost’ portrait of Emily by Charlotte —— may explain why an original painting and an original drawing has since come to light a hundred years on; both are circa 1840. They are definitely NO copies of the much later reproduction above. Instead they are clearly derived from an engraving published in 1787 after a an original painting by Samuel Woodforde RA. . .
Hand-coloured stipple engraving dated 1787 —— engraved by John Raphael Smith after Samuel Woodforde’s ‘Wood-Nymph’.
Meticulously copying engravings is how Charlotte Brontë honed her artistic skills, although it’s evident that not all her copies religiously followed the engraver’s exact lines. Sometimes she took inspiration from an engraving but then made it her own —— as in the case for the ‘lost’ portrait of Emily Brontë. . .
I love the magick that comes with transferred touch; a treasured letter from the great ‘Man of Letters’ himself —— in my collection.
And today’s listening —— Monday, 11th January 2021. I love every single track!💕💕💕
I’ve felt strangely drawn towards this Infra-red photo-fit of Branwell Brontë’s “obliterated figure” —— since it arrived through my door in November. . .
My latest ‘cloud-shaped’ train of thought happened because of an Instagram post —— posted by fellow ‘Bonneteer’, ‘EmilyInGondal’ —— on Wednesday, 11th November, 2020. Her Instagram post showcased an original artwork created by ‘EmilyInGondal’ titled, ‘NorthSea’ —— that featured at its core a ‘drawing’ by Emily Brontë called, ‘The North Wind’…
My initial reaction to the familiar face rising from the frothy “boundless main” – was the same as usual, that it’s the spitting image of ‘Velvet Brown’ played by Elizabeth Taylor!!!
I also had a fixed idea that it was in fact a self-portrait of Emily Brontë; I don’t know what gave me that impression? Other than, I think of Emily Brontë —— and I automatically think of Wuthering Wind!💨
Needless to admit, Charlotte’s section in ‘The art of the Brontës’ is my primary research resource; Branwell’s, Emily’s and Anne’s are secondary. That said, Emily’s ‘North Wind’ was strangely familiar but for the wrong reasons! However, through a series of Instagram exchanges ‘EmilyInGondal’ kindly ënlightened me thus…
“Although she has copied an engraving, I always thought she was channeling AGA queen of Gondal, later Catherine Earnshaw” ‘EmilyInGondal’.
Suddenly, the magic word “engraving” set me off on a new line of ‘cloud-shaped thinking’ —— a feeling akin to having a storm-force wind in my sails!!!
Emily’s ‘North Wind’ is copied from an engraving by William Finden (1787-1852) —— after an original Portrait of Lady Charlotte Harley (1801-1880) as Ianthe —— drawn by Richard Westall R.A.(1765 – 1836).
My obvious first port of call, was my go-to copy of ‘The art of the Brontës’ —— which immediately upheld the view shared by ‘EmilyInGondal’…
“Emily’s version, which was apparently named ‘The North Wind’, has a more mature, challenging expression than the original. Her eyes are piercing and have none of the wide-eyed innocence of Westall’s original. She has all the features of the first Catherine in Wuthering Heights, though she could equally well have suggested one of the heroines from the Gondal saga.”
‘The North Wind’ by Emily Brontë —— detail from ‘The art of the Brontës’ by Christine Alexander and Jane Sellars.
My second port of call was a flurry of Internet searches for Finden’s engraving —— and to see whether I could source a suitable copy for my research; this is my beautiful result!!!
It was at this point, I suddenly received a gusty blast from William Wordsworth —— that as I recall, came from a Westerly direction. It goes…
“I wandered lonely as a cloud that floats on high o’er vales and hills. . .”
Yes——I thought! In essence, Wordsworth’s epiphanic lyricism could have been penned for Emily Brontë! It’s what Emily did; she “wandered lonely as a cloud”. It was a eureka moment for me! —— especially in light of the fact that I already knew that Wordsworth’s poetry was held in high esteem by all the Brontës.
Finden’s original engraving copied by Emily is ‘Ianthe’. And the thing about ‘Ianthe’ that instantly and metaphorically blew me away —— is the cloud-shape aspect! It’s not a white floaty ‘Wordsworthy’ type of cloud —— rather it’s a storm-grey nebulous that puts me in mind of the miniature-sized ‘Bonnet portrait’. If Emily Brontë were a cloud —— she’d be no fluffy white ‘cotton-top’; Emily would be a ‘Nimbus’!
‘Nimbus’ —— from the Latin for ‘dark cloud’. And not forgetting that ‘Brontë’ means ‘Thunder’!
It’s true to say, Finden’s ‘Ianthe’ combined with Emily’s ‘The North Wind’ —— got me charged again —— cloud-shape thinking about the significance(s) of the ‘Nimbus’ in the miniature ‘Bonnet Portrait’!
Did Wordsworth’s verse intermingle with Finden’s engraving of ‘Ianthe’ —— to serve as Charlotte’s inspiration for the inclusion of a ‘Nimbus’ around her first attempt at capturing mercurial Emily on paper? Particularly in light of the fact, that there are several authenticated artworks by Charlotte Brontë, as listed in ‘The art of the Brontës’ —— that confirm Charlotte used cloud-shapes as a way of embellishing some of her ‘head-and-shoulders’ subjects. . .
A postcard from bygone days of a ‘cloud-shaped’ “Portrait of a Young Lady” by Charlotte Brontë —— on display in “Charlotte Bronte’s Room, Haworth”. (circled in white)
Owing to its naivety in style, I believe that the miniature ‘Bonnet Portrait’ is the earliest version, circa 1830’s. A substantially larger —— later version – also sits atop a cloud, circa 1840’s. . .
‘The Baby Bonnet’ —— as I endearingly call it because of its diminutive size —— just 5 cms² —— came to my attention (by ‘chance’) from an art dealer who specialises in fine 18th and early 19th century antiques ONLY. ‘The Baby Bonnet’ is certainly no copy of the much later 1894 ‘Bonnet Portrait’ photogravure that appeared in the ‘Woman at Home’ —— titled; “EMILY BRONTË From a painting by Charlotte Brontë hitherto unpublished.”. . .
Again, one must return to Emily’s ‘The North Wind’ for clues. I note, it is in fact a watercolour —— and not a drawing as I first thought, owing to the small black and white image of ‘The North Wind’ in ‘The art of the Brontës’. Emily’s copy of ‘Ianthe’ is catalogued in ‘The art of the Brontës’ on p.386 —— where its joint-authors consider Emily’s source of inspiration for her copy, beginning “Emily probably made this painting. . .”
Extract from page 386 in ‘The art of the Brontes’ by Christine Alexander and Jane Sellars.
After reading the above —— and in the absence of Emily and Charlotte, it transpires that there is no certain answer as to the exact source of Emily’s ‘The North Wind’ —— other than it’s definitively copied from Finden’s engraving of ‘Ianthe’ after Westall’s original drawing.
However, where the source of Emily’s copy of ‘Ianthe’ is concerned in the context of today’s ‘cloud-shaped thinking’ exercise(s) —— I’d say that Emily and Charlotte were singing from the same hymn sheet —— because Charlotte copied three engravings that all appeared alongside Finden’s ‘Ianthe’ in the first volume of “The Poetical Works of Lord Byron, 8 vols (London: John Murray, 1839).” —— It makes sense, that the sisters had access to one and the same volume. Even if they didn’t, one can be certain that Charlotte intimately studied every line, every stipple of Finden’s engraving of ‘Ianthe’ —— because like Emily, she too lived and breathed the works of Lord Byron. Indeed, it was Lord Byron who personally commissioned Westall’s original portrait of ‘Lady Charlotte Harley’ —— so I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Charlotte created a copy too that’s been ‘lost’; methinks I must keep my eyes peeled!
“IANTHE. (FROM THE ORIGINAL PICTURE PAINTED AT THE REQUEST OF LORD BYRON.”
As already established in an earlier post —— John Raphael Smith’s 18th century engraving of Samuel Woodforde’s ‘Wood-Nymph’ provides the main body of Charlotte’s portrait series of Emily; formally and collectively known as ‘The Bonnet Portrait’.
Hand-coloured stipple engraving of the ‘Wood-Nymph’ —— dated 1787. After the original painting by Samuel Woodforde R.A.
However, in Charlotte’s ‘head-and shoulders’ only portrait(s) —— the scenery is left out —— save for a hint of the original gathering storm… 
The storm-grey mass is condensed —— scaled down into a single, symbolical ‘Nimbus’!
‘Nimbus’ —— apart from ‘dark cloud’ in meteorological terms, also means ‘halo’ —— as in religious iconography.
Where as Emily’s rendering of ‘Ianthe’ has been scaled up into a tempest —— wannabe miniaturist, Charlotte has scaled down.
I think Charlotte’s gut response to the ‘Wood-Nymph’ as a suitable template for her miniature of Emily —— could be summed up in Charlotte own words:
“Ellis Bell did not describe as one whose eye and taste alone found pleasure in the prospect; her native hills were far more to her than a spectacle; they were what she lived in, and by, as much as the wild birds, their tenants, or as the Heather, their produce.”
The Wood-Nymph’s down-to-earth persona —— as in fetching a large bundle of sticks for the hearth —— belies that she is in fact a Fairy —— an Elemental no less. Emily’s wings were her thoughts —— and in that sense, she wasn’t chained to the Parsonage sink —— or range; Emily was no earthbound mortal either, she was a Mystic.
Perhaps Charlotte’s inclusion of ‘grey matter’ as opposed to a bundle of sticks —— is a visual representation of Emily’s infinite mind? It’s like a cushion —— a ‘seat of learning’ that holds Emily aloft. Charlotte undoubtedly idolised her “Genii” kid sister by putting her on a cloud; although evidently within the limitations of a small piece of artist’s card!!!
Just 5 cms² —— the diminutive ‘Bonnet Portrait’ beside a regular fifty pence piece for instant comparison.
Charlotte’s brushstrokes have metaphorically condensed Emily’s undying words into an art form —— before Emily had even penned them! “Thy spirit animates eternal years —— pervades and broods above, changes, sustains, dissolves, creates and rears.” ‘No Coward Soul Is Mine’ was written in 1846 towards the end of Emily’s life —— where as the ‘Baby Bonnet’ is circa 1830’s.
A slight personal digression now —— that’s pertinent in the greater scheme of this ëvaluation of the ‘Bonnet Portrait(s). . .
In my lifetime, I’ve only been airborne ‘once’ —— to Milan and back. I guess compared to some my carbon footprint is relatively low but that’s only because I’m easily adsorbed —— either in my own space or in the Great Outdoors —— and more often than not on foot. I’m a country-bred, home-bird for certain. In my not so worldly experience there are few things that come closer to pure reverential awe than watching a gathering storm —— and then getting ‘caught out’ in it! Another jaw-dropping, eye-popping, heart-stopping stimuli of ‘mine’ —— is night-walking under a cloudless, moonless sky and letting the Milky Way lead the way. In that way, Emily’s poetry is a calling; not to head in and bow my head and shut my eyes —— but to head out and gaze up —— and feel blessed; there’s no G—R—E—A—T—E—R benediction —— or affirmation that your ‘cloud’ will go on shape-shifting on the other side of Death’s door. . .
This farmhouse exposed on a windy ridge —— is my local setting for Emily’s ‘Wuthering Heights’! I always lean on the gate opposite and imagine…
In accordance with Emily’s faith —— the sky’s the limit; I believe it! And with no less conviction —— I believe that ‘The ‘lost’ portrait of Emily Brontë drawn by Charlotte —— as seen by Sir William Robertson Nicoll in Haworth in 1879.’ —— is found. I’m quite certain that if I wasn’t living a quiet, outwardly unexciting existence —— I’d never have stumbled on the ‘Bonnet’. To use an analogy – I also get my thrills from going ‘Shed Hunting’; if I don’t put in some serious groundwork I can’t hope to find an ‘eight-pointer’! And it’s the same with the ‘Bonnet Portrait(s)’. Although, I always get the strangest feeling when I’ve picked up a ‘Shed’ —— that it’s somehow been put there; as in some things are meant to be found.
In order that I might better understand Charlotte’s ‘Gipsy-Straw Portrait’ of Emily —— it’s essential I don’t get bogged down or sidetracked by a ‘small’ army of ‘Non-Conscientious Rejectors’ (NCR’s) —— who are utterly entrenched against the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ but without reason; simply not liking it isn’t a reason! And as for lack of provenance – I don’t think it’s acceptable to go on conveniently spouting the words of a long dead literary critic who guessed where the 1894 ‘Bonnet Portrait’ PHOTOGRAVURE is concerned. I utterly refuse to unquestioningly follow the Brontë Society’s same old, same old, party line that can’t (or won’t!) see passed or round a spurious ‘one-hundred-year-old’ black hole that’s decidedly Clement Shorter shaped! It’s completely incredulous to me how one man’s worthless opinion of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ COPY is valid or applicable to the original(s) now on’t table! ‘No matter’!!! —— with determination and fair winds on my side – I don’t see Shorter’s obstacle as something that can’t be got over or got round because I know that Truth will out eventually; this ‘Bonneteer’ isn’t for turning!. . .
Once upon a time, there must have been at least one ënlightened individual who worked in the Brontë Parsonage Museum in Haworth —— who believed enough in the Society’s own ‘Sanguine’ version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait. . .
In days of yore! The Parsonage Museum first opened its door to the public on the 5th. August 1928
See ‘Emily’ on the back wall (left) —— proudly on display beside millionaire philanthropist, Henry Houston Bonnell (centre) —— who amassed a substantial collection of Brontë manuscripts, books, relics, letters —— and portraits. Following his death in 1926 he bequeathed his collection to the Brontë Society on the proviso that a Library could be formed that would meet international standards for security and conservation of these fragile documents. . .
Included in ‘The Bonnell Collection’, there are three individual, sanguine portraits of the sisters. Charlotte’s is after the famous ‘George Richmond’ portrait in the National Portrait Gallery —— and Anne’s after Charlotte’s own portrait miniature of Anne —— in the Bronte Parsonage Museum Collection. Neither appear to be on display in my ‘gift of a postcard’; just the ‘bloody’ Bonnet that will not be silenced for good reason!!!
The word ‘sanguine’ derives from ‘sanguineus’ —— Latin for “blood” or “bloody”!. . .
There’s such a look of admirable defiance about the Sanguine version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’!
It remains a conveniently unanswered question as to why Emily’s sanguine portrait out of the ‘Set of Three’ —— remains the ‘Black Sheep’? The Truth exists —— enfolded in this drawing. . . 
From left to right the folds in the drapery spell-out: E.M.I.L.Y. —— could the artist have made identifying the sitter in this portrait anymore irrefutable! It’s ‘EMILY’ alright. And only Charlotte could have ‘signed’ this portrait in this unique steganographic style. For more clarity on this ‘hidden’ clue and others in Charlotte Brontës oeuvre —— please read my post “Spelling It Out; The Art of Steganography In The Art of Charlotte Brontë.”
And then there are ‘The Initials In The Eyes’ —— ‘E. B.’ for the sitter. Or are they ‘C. B.’ for the artist?
I’ve heard it said that I’m Brontë obsessed; I say not Brontë obsessed but Brontë possessed —— there is a subtle difference! I’m one-hundred percent certain that Charlotte Brontë is behind these portraits of Emily – so I appeal to those against ‘The Bonnet(s)’ —— not to shoot this messenger down in flames! “Vive le Chapeau de Paille!”; Bonneteering will continue unabated and undeterred!
Very few of Charlotte’s portraits include a background save for a pale wash —— which I note in several authenticated paintings and drawings —— take on a distinctly cloud-like shape. . . 
129. ‘Lycidas’ 111.‘Portrait of a young lady’ 138. ‘Welsh Peasants’ respectively —— from ‘The art of the Brontës’ Christine Alexander and Jane Sellars.
It’s no wonder then ——— Finden’s ‘Ianthe’ triggered my ‘cloud-shaped thinking’ again. . .
Emily’s tempestuous cloud-mass in ‘The North Wind’ is diffused at the edge —— whereas Charlotte’s ‘Baby Bonnet’ sits on a cloud that follows a more classical outline —— reminiscent of Finden’s engraving…
Another point that I note about Charlotte’s ‘Bonnet’ drawing and Emily’s ‘The North Wind’ —— is that they share the very same nose! Not like Ianthe’s nose (left) which is distinctly aquiline or ‘hooked’ —— but are identical as in they mirror one another. ‘The North Wind’s’ nose and the ‘Bonnet’s’ nose are One and the Same Nose! —— judge for yourself. . .
And the eyes of ‘Ianthe’ are much rounder than the other two pairs of faraway-looking eyes —— which are almond-shaped and wider apart between the brows and across the bridge of their noses. It’s no surprise then that after looking at the ‘Bonnet’ drawing in the unique and privileged way that I do —— that I’ve come to believe ‘The North Wind’ is Emily’s self-portrait; I stand by it! I even commented to @EmilyInGondal on Instagram – that I thought my view of ‘The North Wind’ was the general view —— see comments! And so I’ve come full circle —— back to where I started this cloud inspired post; ‘Portrait(s) of Emily Brontë; She Wandered Lonely as a Cloud.’ 💨
This post is dedicated to EmilyInGondal —— not just because her artwork titled, ‘NorthSea’ —— got me ‘cloud-shape thinking again’ about the ‘Baby Bonnet’; Or that she has gifted me a precious copy of ‘NorthSea’ to help with my research; It’s also because —— if my ‘Bonnet Portrait’ research can alter the colour of the mind of One exceptionally well-read Brontëite —— then that gives me hope that others too will one day see the sense in it all!🤞🏻
Meantime. . .
“We’ll Keep Calm and Carry On Bonneteering” —— another ‘cloud-shaped’ idea of mine! Inspired by this original early 19th century drawing, ‘The Ballad Seller’ circa 1840’s —— that’s also quite possibly a drawing by Charlotte. Click this LINK for more on this portrait. . .
Charlotte Brontë’s eponymous heroine ‘Shirley Keeldar’ perhaps? Complete with Shirley’s —— or is it Emily’s “gipsy-straw”¹? (1. Chapter XXII ‘Shirley’.)
Finally, my third and final faith —— ‘times by three’! I truly don’t believe these nine original drawings and paintings have been gathered together by pure chance alone. They are chronologically ordered in the sequence that they came to light, one at a time. From ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ (left) in 2008 —— through to another version of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ in 2020 (right).
Where the ‘Bonnet Portraits’ are most particularly concerned —— I think it is utterly nonsensical for the NCR’s to suggest that they’re copies of a copy; they’re all much earlier than the figure in the 1894 photogravure. The drawing and paintings that I have researched were created in a time l——o——n——g before ‘Google Images’ was invented!!!
One thing that can’t be disputed —— is that after twelve years they have created an Ë-normous ‘Cumulonimbus’ body of research that can be accessed under the menu header —— ‘Emily_Bronte_In_The_Frame’ at the top of this page. . .
As per usual, I like to finish with a YouTube video – of a song that’s provided a soundtrack to my writing and blogpost compilation. Only this particular song ‘To Be A Pilgrim’ has been a favourite soundtrack for much longer than that; I’ve always loved this hymn since my earliest memories of school assemblies – and this particular performance is ‘top of my pops’. . .
Since my ‘Brontë Awakening’ in 2013 —— and my ‘Bonnet Awakening’ in 2016. . .
‘BronteLand’ by EmilyInGondal
I often get the strangest feeling that I’m in a sort of modern-day spin-off of the ‘The Pilgrims Progress’ —— only this isn’t John Bunyan whose dictating the pace here —— it’s Charlotte Brontë!!! She wants her ‘lost’ portraits returned to the ‘Celestial City’. . .
Only in this Pilgrim’s ‘progress’, this Bonneteer and fellow ‘Bonnet’ protagonist, Professor Christopher Heywood – have been repeatedly turned back at the ‘Hill of Difficulty’!!! Of course —— there’s no discouragement, that shall make us relent, our first avowed intent is to ‘Keep Calm and Carry On Bonneteering’. . .
Be sure to play ichingiching to the very end; ‘To Be A Pilgrim’ is not over til it’s over. . .
Let’s hear it for the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ of Emily Brontë in the spirit of Charlotte Brontë —— who so passionately loved speaking French; “Vive le Chapeau de Paille!”. . .
Or to call the type of hat worn by Emily Brontë in the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ by another name —— let us hear it for ‘The Gipsy-Straw’.
First things first though. I begin by drawing attention to what’s under the wide brim of this ‘newest’ version of the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait. Surely, only Charlotte Brontë —— could have ‘secretly’ worked these initials, ‘E. B.’ —— into the sitter’s hair. . .
Initials In The Hair; E.B. for Emily Brontë. . .
‘E’ ‘B’ with the ‘B’ doubling as a heart.
‘The Initials In The Hair’ —— (and eyes) —— in the watercolour —— are also evident in the drawing. . .
And not only the sitter’s initials, ‘E.B.’ —— but also the artist’s too, ‘C.B.’. . .
Cryptic monogram ‘C.B.’ disguised in a curl of hair. Neither strand of hair can possibly end in a ‘B’ shape – if one follows the arrows around to each separate strand’s natural end. Try it! Think about it!
Be certain to click on the direct link below —— to read an earlier post that proves beyond doubt that Charlotte Brontë really did integrate initials —— whole words —— names —— sentiments —— into her Art; ‘Spelling It Out: The Art of Steganography In The Art Of Charlotte Bronte.’
Undoubtedly ‘The Gipsy-Straw Portrait of Emily Brontë’ by Charlotte…
I think this red-cloaked version is a stunning depiction of Emily suitably attired for the great outdoors; so much so —— I question what it is about the ‘Bonnet’ type portrait —— that originally appeared as a photogravure in the ‘Woman at Home’ in 1894 – that the ‘Bonnet Haters’ really dislike? What is it about Emily’s love of the Gipsy aesthetic that they fail to get? —— but seemingly only when it comes to the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait! What is it that feeds their deep-seated aversion to this portrait ‘type’?
And why go on idolising —— nay idealising the ‘Profile Portrait’ as ‘Emily’ —— when it’s evidently Anne Brontë?
All the while ignoring a truth —— that Emily in her day-to-day existence craved liberty. Striding over the wiley, windy moors —— almost certainly with a ‘bonnet’ tied down against the wuthering wind and a thick cloak around her shoulders —— was where Emily communed with her Higher Self. Would self-effacing Emily really have been comfortable with an image of ‘herself’ enshrined behind glass for posterity —— that exposes her in an off-the-shoulder dress in a formal setting? I think not. Surely, portraiture is the art of capturing an aspect of the sitter’s inner essence? Emily’s inner essence was her oneness with the great outdoors —— so why wouldn’t the originator of ‘Heathcliff’ —— be seen in a ‘Gipsy-Straw’ and heavy cloak? Especially as Emily’s one and only novel, ‘Wuthering Heights’ is entirely set during the Romantic Movement —— when the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ hat was in it’s heyday.
The ‘rationale’ against the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait ——can’t solely be down to lack of provenance because everything else points to the fact(s) that Charlotte is the artist responsible – and Emily is undoubtedly the sitter.
The ‘expert’ that took a shufti at the drawing —— and as quickly cast it aside —— after its long journey up North last year, concluded that the drawing of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ was “grotesque”. Talk about unnecessary ‘language’ for a small drawing created by an amateur hand —— especially when one looks at many of the drawings and paintings listed under ‘Charlotte’ in ‘The art of the Brontës’; Charlotte was after all an amateur! The expert’s disyllabic argument against the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ literally didn’t make a word of sense then —— or now! The intrinsics of the drawing were overlooked —— as in they weren’t looked at; not even when I offered to lend MY magnifying glass!
Then a beautiful, timeworn —— autobiographical book by Evangelist, Gipsy Smith —— fell into my hands just a couple of months ago —— and literally opened at this page; a light-bulb moment. . .
Why has the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait of Emily Brontë —— been anathematized in Brontë circles for in excess of a hundred years?
On the surface, the answer lies with literary critic and self-appointed art ‘expert’, Clement Shorter —— who seemingly cursed the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait when he dismissed it thus —— “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.”
Shorter’s ‘findings’ —— quoted in their entirety in the above paragraph —— nay sentence, is ALL that exists on paper against the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ reproduction that appeared in the ‘Woman at Home’ in 1894; a damning ‘sentence’ in more ways than one for the ‘lost’ original(s). There’s no proof whatsoever against the genuine nature of the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait —— only Shorter’s enduring, monotonous, amateur guesswork. ‘Never mind’ either the question mark that still hangs over Shorter’s dealings with his fraudulent business associate, T.J Wise. Shorter really should have stuck to his own discipline which was the business of critiquing Literature; he was definitely no art expert. Or put another way —— if ‘Lady Justice’ put Clement Shorter’s ‘findings’ about the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait and my findings in the balance —— Shorter’s would be left high and dry up in the air!
Although the pencil drawing and the ‘Red’ version of the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait admittedly lack provenance – my research points to the fact(s) that the portraits are by Charlotte Brontë’s hand and that the sitter is undoubtedly, Emily.
Ever since the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait of Emily Brontë was outed in 1894 —— it has been historically ostracised, despised and rejected —— if not downright marginalised in Brontë literary circles; so why the antipathy towards it?
The photogravure didn’t even get a mention in the dubious section of ‘The art of the Brontës’ catalogue raisonné! Why?
Believe me —— ‘Bonnet Haters’ isn’t name-calling for those that unquestioningly reject the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait on the ‘strength’ of Shorter’s sentence; like the ‘expert’ whose reaction to the pencil drawing was visceral —— not intellectual. It would seem that it’s not acceptable for Emily Brontë, author of ‘Wuthering Heights’ —— to be tarred with the same brush (or pencil in the case of the drawing) that said writer applied to her antihero – that “dark-skinned gipsy” and “little Lascar” ——— ‘Heathcliff’!
When Professor Christopher Heywood’s second academic paper championing the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ was published in 2018 in ‘Brontë Studies’ —— three big Brontë Society guns felt the need to deprecate the article —— and the pencil portrait therein. Why?
Although, reverse thinking-wise —— I’d say it was actually a bit of a hat-trick for the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ camp – because as a Brontë Society member —— I’m afforded online access to all the wealth of back issues of ‘Brontë Studies’ formerly ‘Brontë Transactions’ —— dating back to 1895 no less —— where I’ve yet to find another article that caused a three-pronged barrage —— like the discovery of the lil ole pencil portrait! I think ‘Free-access’ to ‘Brontë Studies’ online —— is one of the best reasons for becoming a member of the Brontë Society —— particularly when one lives as faraway from the Parsonage as I do. I believe in the Brontë Society! —— no thanks though —— to the representatives who unreasoningly dismissed the pencil drawing on Monday, 15th. April 2019 —— without so much as looking at it!
I mean, the fact that Charlotte based her fictional character ‘Shirley’ on her sister, Emily —— had Emily been born into wealthier——healthier circumstances. And that Shirley’s hat of choice was a ‘Gipsy-Straw’; facts I’ve discovered and underscored for myself post-meeting. . .
And that ‘Jane Eyre’ was influenced by Samuel Richardson —— that ‘Jane Eyre’ occasionally follows ‘Pamela’ —— the very novel that gave rise to the other name for a ‘Gipsy-Straw’ type hat ‘The Pamela Hat’. . .
Charlotte even gave ‘Pamela’ by Samuel Richardson —— a shout-out in Chapter One no less. . .
If that’s not paying homage to the significance of a ‘Gipsy-Straw’ —— I’ll eat my hat!!! The ‘Bonnet portrait’ of Emily Brontë certainly has it’s own story to tell too; it’s a portrait that continues to be conveniently ‘mysterious’ to “undeveloped understanding and imperfect feelings” —— yet to those like myself that are in the know —— it’s a “profoundly interesting” true story that needs telling over and over. . .Charlotte Brontë is an inspiration to me!
In hindsight, I question why the supposedly better-read Brontë experts in the room that day ——— Monday, 15th. April 2019 —— never thought to bring up Charlotte’s “gipsy-straw” pointers? —— all the while the pencil portrait lay rejected on the research library table!
Of course, there’s an outside chance they hadn’t made these connections for themselves at that point —— in which case I think the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait is due a review! Bear in mind also, that my own ‘Gipsy-Straw’ awakening happened through my ‘reading’ the art of the Brontës —— not their novels. Pity really, that I came too late to ‘Jane Eyre’ and ‘Shirley’ to bring said pointers up at the meeting —— as I should have liked to have heard their responses.
The fortune-teller scene in ‘Jane Eyre’ also mentions a “gipsy hat” by name —— such is its significance in Charlotte’s story-line. . .
In chapter XIX —— Mr. Rochester resorts to cross-dressing as an old mystic woman in order to breakthrough the gender and social barriers that frustrate him and Jane from gettin’ their truth on! In Charlotte’s book —— chapter XIX marks a turning point —— a declaration of Jane’s and Mr. Rochester’s true feelings for one another —— that starts with none other than the propitious appearance of “a broad-brimmed gipsy hat, tied down with a striped handkerchief”. . .
It’s obvious that the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait of Emily Brontë has it’s roots in the ‘Wood-Nymph’ by Samuel Woodforde RA. This original engraving dated 1787 proves that the ‘Wood-Nymph’ went to print twenty-nine years before Charlotte was born —— let alone when Charlotte was active painting miniatures and small portraits —— makes it about fifty!
What I most essentially note about the 1787 engraving —— is the Wood-Nymph’s headscarf or “handkerchief”; that it is latticed as opposed to striped. . .
. . . as in Charlotte’s description of the Gipsy’s headscarf in ‘Jane Eyre’ —— where Charlotte exactly describes it as a “striped handkerchief” that’s identifiable also in several versions of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ —— including the 1894 photogravure. . .
In the miniature version the handkerchief is plain ‘Forget-Me-Not’ blue…
The publication of the 1894 photogravure came much too late to serve as Charlotte’s inspiration for the fortune-teller scene in ‘Jane Eyre’ – so where did her description “a broad-brimmed gipsy hat, tied down with a striped handkerchief” come from? It’s as if Charlotte knew that “gipsy hat” personally——as if she’d seen it before. Having painted and drawn more than one version of the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait —— with either a plain or a striped handkerchief —— I think the stripes are telling. Especially as it was Charlotte’s wont to ‘meticulously’ copy engravings then personalise them by making changes of her own.
The ‘expert’ that ‘looked’ at the drawing and rejected it —— judged it to be a copy of the 1894 reproduction in the ‘Woman at Home’; a much repeated statement that is nothing short of nonsensical and deployed as a simple diversionary tactic for deflecting away from the obvious. That these portraits are so obviously created long before the photogravure in the ‘Woman at Home’ was published. They’re definitely circa 1840 —— or earlier —— as in the case of the miniature which looks like it was drafted by a younger hand than the other three —— circa 1830. The ‘Blue Version’ bottom right —— has a miniscule date for 1837.
Despite all the repetitive negativity that’s been heaped on the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait for well-over a century, the common press as in newspapers – have kept the ‘Bonnet’ from being metaphorically crushed! Often choosing it over and above the disputed alternative —— to illustrate articles about Emily, even in her bicentenary year. . .
A selection of articles from The Guardian, The Times and The Sun; proof that the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait of Emily Bronte refuses to be downcast by the ‘Bonnet Haters’. And for good reason(s)…
‘Exactly like it says on’t tin!’ “EMILY BRONTË. From a painting by Charlotte Brontë, hitherto unpublished.”
Above, the original photogravure reproduction published in the ‘Woman at Home’ in 1894. The whereabouts of the original painting as mentioned below the photogravure —— was not known in 1894; 126 years on, I think it’s true to say it’s finally come to Light…
And what’s in a name?
Ënlightenment where the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait is concerned comes from hither and thither; my timeworn copy of ‘As Jesus Passed By’ —— by the late, great evangelist, Gipsy Smith —— turned up in the recycle shop where I work on Monday, 14th September 2020. I bought it.
‘Gipsy-Straw‘, or ‘Pamela Hat’, or ‘Bonnet’ —— call it what you will. Though, when it comes to the drawing, only one name fits; ‘The ‘Lost’ Portrait of Emily Brontë’ —— drawn by Charlotte.
The following excerpt (highlighted in blue below) is from an article from The British Weekly for the 5th. November 1896 —— written by Sir William Robertson Nicoll, an early President of the Brontë Society. Nicoll was not only the founder and Chief Editor of ‘The British Weekly’ —— but also of the ‘Woman at Home’ that first published the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ photogravure in 1894. This is Nicoll’s eyewitness account of Charlotte’s pencil portrait of Emily Brontë —— as seen by Nicoll in 1879.
Needless to say, Sir William Roberston Nicoll was a consummate professional in all that he touched and energised. . .
“In the end of July, 1879, I paid a visit to Haworth and stayed the night at the Black Bull Inn, too closely associated with the memory of Patrick Branwell Brontë. . .On the second day I had an interesting interview with Martha Brown, the faithful servant who nursed all the Brontës and saw them all die. She lived for the most part in Ireland, but had a room in Haworth and paid occasional visits to her relatives there. She seemed for her station an intelligent and refined person, and was very ready to converse about the Brontës, for whom she had a warm love. . .She had all the Brontës’ works and a good many relics that Mr. Bronte had left her, but which she had sold some. One of the most interesting was one of the microscopical manuscript magazines in 32 mo. grey paper. She had once had a copy of the Poems by Currer, Ellis and Acton Bell, with an inscription by Emily Brontë, but had sold it for £5 and a new edition. There was also a good many drawings, by which Charlotte’s were much the most careful. There was only one rough sketch by Emily Brontë and Patrick’s drawing’s were unfinished. But the most precious of the whole, one of surpassing interest, was a pencil sketch of Emily Brontë by Charlotte, which was very clearly and boldly drawn, and that which Martha pronounced an excellent likeness. I endeavoured in vain to purchase it. . .
“On Martha Brown’s death, which occurred sometime after, I endeavoured to procure some of her relics, and especially the drawing of Emily Brontë. What she left was divided among four sisters, with all of whom I communicated, but was unable to procure or even trace it.”
“Any relic of the dead is precious, if they were valued living.” Emily Brontë —— ‘Wuthering Heights’.
The only trouble with the “relics” I’ve researched is that the herd have been historically turned against the ‘Gipsy-Straw’ portrait of Emily Brontë —— and now the only thing I imagine that’s turning —— are ‘the sleepers in that quiet vault’!
Image above —— The lil ‘Gipsy-Straw’ drawing of Emily Brontë —— temporarily laid to rest on the Elm seat of my Great-Granny B’s 18th Century or earlier —— ‘Séance Chair’. The chair was bought in Brixton Market in the 1930’s —— for the express purpose of the Medium to sit on; gosh! —— the stories it could tell! Apart from as you see it here —— it’s not used nowadays, and why would I use it when the pictures communicate without the need for a conduit —— or maybe that is my role writing these posts?
Is anybody there?
Posted ‘All Hallows’ Eve’ —— Saturday, 31st. October 2020. To the memory of my Great-Granny B —— and my father, and Pamela —— Great-Granny B’s youngest child (my father’s aunt in fact!) who died not long after this happy photograph was taken at Land’s End in 1937. The tragic loss of Pamela was the reason that Great-Granny B turned to ‘The Medium of The Chair’ for answers and solace.
Mei-lan and her crystal singing bowls —— found by chance whilst writing this post; some beautiful resonances to return to…
A blog-post about the unearthing of the fourth —— and hopefully finalising ‘Bonnet Portrait’!
The ayes may not have it just yet —— but the eyes certainly do; soul gazing detail from the fourth ‘Bonnet Portrait’.
A few weeks ago, I happened upon another ‘Bonnet Portrait’ —— the fourth for sale on my favourite online marketplace – or hunting ground! This particular ‘red’ version was listed for sale by a true-gentleman art dealer that I’d had previous Brontë-related dealings with in February 2020. ‘Needless to say’ —— I’m a firm believer that lightening does strike twice – or in the case of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ —— twice times twice…
…ëquals ‘The Fab Four’!
Initially, the ‘red’ version was listed with no mention of either Emily Brontë —— or Charlotte Brontë —— or the ‘Bonnet Portrait’…
The timely appearance of the above eBay listing triggered in me —— a decision to metaphorically stop chasing the ‘Bonnet’ butterfly…
19th century suspended animation in action. A de——light——ful detail from a genuine 1818 watercolour. I love the way the artist forgot to paint the handle of the basket – see the void between forearm and basket!
Thereby, I decided to share my awareness of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ with the eBay seller in the hope that any new interest generated in the ‘red’ version of the ‘Bonnet’ would be good publicity for the ‘lost’ portrait cause! Of course, my intervention —— or angelic guidance as I prefer to think of it —— meant that I’d probably placed myself out of the bidding – but my loss was outweighed by possible ‘Bonnet’ gains!
And no, the above early bid wasn’t mine!
After a series of e-communications – the seller ended his initial listing of his own volition and relisted his painting again —— only with a renewed title and some ënlightened rewording. The text in this image can be enlarged in a new window by clicking on’t image! 
Despite a full ten day auction duration – the painting failed to generate any real interest and the portrait sold somewhat ‘disappointingly’ —— or put it another way, some you win and some you ‘lose’!
Now, I don’t doubt for one second that all four ‘Bonnet Portraits’ were created by Charlotte Brontë – and as fantastical as that may sound to some – I don’t see who else could have possibly created them, especially as all four versions share certain quirks – and all predate the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ photogravure in the ‘Woman at Home’ published in 1894 by a good half-century.
It’s clear that ‘The Fab Four’ are derived from Samuel Woodforde’s ‘Wood-Nymph’ – ‘copied’ from an engraving published in 1787; it’s what Charlotte did. She ‘meticulously’ copied engravings then made them her own by adding her own details —— and even ‘re-imagining’ the face; Emily’s face in the case of the ‘Bonnet’ Fab Four!
The ‘red’ version —— like the pencil drawing —— both have the sitter’s initials worked into the hair…
Initials in the Hair. E.B. —— for sitter Emily Bronte. C.B. —— for artist, Charlotte Bronte.
Cryptic monogram ‘C.B.’ disguised in a curl of hair. Neither curl can possibly end in a ‘B’ shape if one follows both strands around to their natural ends.
Both the ‘red’ version and the pencil version —— are on J. Whatman watermarked paper; the significance only being that ‘J. Whatman’ was Charlotte’s paper of choice.
All ‘The Fab Four’ are drawn or ‘painted by numbers’ —— as in they all have teeny-weeny numbers ‘hidden’ about their person. The ‘red’ version illustrates this method of delicate shading and building up layers probably better than the other three. If one looks at the sitter’s nose one might be forgiven for thinking that her nose is covered in freckles – but if one looks closer it’s possible to discern that the ‘freckles’ are in fact numbers…
And then there are those soul gazing eyes —— enhanced here only by the slant of the light and that other magic ingredient so loved by Charlotte; Gum arabic! 
I think Charlotte tried to perfect her image of Emily through a progression of icon-like ‘Bonnet Portraits’; the first to be created was most likely the miniature —— circa 1830’s, followed by the more formal style portrait, the ‘blue’ version – which has a tiny date, 1837. The pencil version —— I believe is the ‘lost’ portrait seen by William Robertson Nicoll in Haworth, in 1879. The ‘red’ version is possibly Charlotte’s final attempt to capture something of the independent spirit, the superhuman element that was Emily —— and that’s why in the ‘red’ version Charlotte has afforded her sister amber-coloured eyes; they’re shamanic —— eagle eyes no less!
G. K. Chesterton was an English writer, philosopher, lay theologian, and literary and art critic – who wrote of Emily Brontë —— “Her imagination was sometimes superhuman——always inhuman,” and that “Wuthering Heights might have been written by an eagle.”
It would be easy to say that Chesterton’s description of Emily could have inspired any artist in Chesterton’s lifetime (1874 to 1936 ) —— to create the ‘red’ eagle-eyed version after the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ photogravure that was published in 1894 in the ‘Woman at Home’ – but that’s simply not possible because all four original ‘Bonnet Portraits’ were created in Charlotte’s lifetime —— definitely not Chesterton’s; science I know could prove this point!
We know Emily kept a pet hawk in her menagerie – a Merlin —— which in shamanic terms was clearly Emily’s spiritual animal…
And besides, it’s evidently clear that Charlotte had perfectly perceived the raptor-like flashes in Emily’s eyes long before Chesterton; one only need read the highlighted quote above and below —— Charlotte Bronte, of Shirley, Emily Bronte’s prototype…
Not being particularly well-read when it comes to Brontë books —— I have it on good authority from EmilyInGondal —— who is also a keen supporter of the ‘Bonnet Portrait’ —— that Emily Brontë herself described one of her Gondal characters as having ‘falcon eyes’.
I, for my part —— stick to ‘reading’ Brontë pictures. 
