Early Mezzotint Publishing in England - I John Smith, 1652-1743

Author(s): Antony Griffiths

Source: Print Quarterly , SEPTEMBER 1989, Vol. 6, No. 3 (SEPTEMBER 1989), pp. 243-257
Published by: Print Quarterly Publications

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.com/stable/41824523

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Print Quarterly

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
96. Sir Godfrey Kneller, Portrait of John Smith , oil on canvas, 749 x 622 mm (London, Tate Gallery).

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Early Mezzotint Publishing in England - I
John Smith, 1652-1743

Antony Griffiths

Throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth cen- able obituary is only supported by a few anecdotes
turies, English printmaking scarcely impinged on the preserved by other contemporaries. Yet, as the
consciousness of the Continent. This changed in the central figure in early British mezzotint, Smith is of
first half of the eighteenth century with the recog- crucial importance, and if more could be discovered
nition of mezzotint, which quickly came to be known about him, it might enable us to start to piece
abroad as 'la manière anglaise'. More than anyone together the history of the beginnings of mezzotint
else, John Smith, whose working career spanned in this country. The appearance of a complete con-
nearly fifty years from 1683 to x729> raised the temporary collection of Smith's works at Sotheby's
quality of mezzotint so that even the French were in London last summer led me to think that perhaps
impressed. In the process, he became the first British more could be found out, and started the search that
printmaker of European reputation; foreigners in led to the discovery of two vital albums in the New
London commissioned1 and bought his works.2 York Public Library. This article presents the first
Vertue acknowledged this remarkable fact in his conclusions of my research, and is intended to be fol-
obituary notice : 'As his fame was universally known lowed by a sequel on the first publishers of English
to all ingenious persons of his time in England, so portrait mezzotints. Since the surviving evidence is
his work was of no less esteem abroad in foreign coun- always fragmentary, much of my argument has to
tries in France, Holland, Flanders, Germany & work by inferring the most plausible hypothesis that
Italy, all concurring in a settled opinion, for this due would explain the very curious phenomena that we
praise & the honour ... of this nation, that he find.
excelled all others in that art that had been before The starting point must be Vertue's obituary
notice, of which the second part has already been
him, nay that he first brought it to perfection here
equalled by none other since'.3 quoted. ' 1 743. In the beginning of this year in Janu-
ary dyd the most famous and ingenious artist of
Like many great achievements, Smith's has long
been taken for granted, and no article has ever beenEngland Mr John Smith mezzotinter (born near
devoted to his work. His portraits have been Northampton, aged 81/2/3) and left a very plentiful
included in the great catalogue by Chaloner Smith,4 fortune to his two children a son and a daughter,
and Wessely's curious handlist5 includes many, but which he by great industry and parcimonious way
far from all, of his other prints (bizarrely termed of
byliving had amassed together. He was carried into
English convention 'subject' plates) . Published infor-
the country to be buried near Northampton, I have
mation about his life is scarce, and Vertue's invalu-
heard, where he received his birth. For many years

This article was stimulated by David Alexander and Richard 3. Vertue Notebooks, in, pp. 1 13-14 ( Walpole Society , xxn,
Godfrey, who have both given me much help, including correct- 1934)-
ing a first draft. I also owe thanks to Lindsay Stainton for her 4. John Chaloner Smith, British Mezzotinto Portraits , London
comments on a draft, as well as to Roberta Waddell and Robert 1883, pp. 1 131-33 (biography) and pp. 1 133-241 (catalogue,
Rainwater at the New York Public Library, and to Peter Day arranged alphabetically). All later references to Chaloner
at Chatsworth. Smith (or CS) are to this work.
i . Portraits of foreigners made for distribution abroad are distin- 5. J. E. Wessely, Kritische Verzeichnisse von Werken hervorragender
guished from the rest of Smith's production by being signed Kupferstecher. Dritter Band: John Smith , Hamburg 1887. Nos.
Londini or Angltis (e.g. Corelli GS 58, or Cornaro CS 59). 1-285 of Wessely's catalogue are portraits arranged in
2. An impression betöre letters ot his 1707 mezzotint 01 John alphabetical order ; nos. 286-485 are subject prints arranged
Witt after Werner Hasseils (CS 279) in the British Museum iconographically. Most of these later prints only bear Smith's
is annotated Smith m'a vendu ce rare morceau à Londres 1723. This name as publisher, if indeed they bear his name at all. To
impression is inscribed in ink in Smith's hand. all appearances, many have nothing to do with him.

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
244 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND

97. John Smith after Sir Godfrey Kneller, John , Earl of Mulgrave , 169
Library) .

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND 245

the off
before his death he had left land adjoining'.
doing Nor was this
any newall. Smith clearly
works,
but at times when able (being much
had a large sum invested debilitated by
in government securities,
the gout) did retouch & print
of which his
¿2,000 plates
was to be paid
and
outright
ordered
to Ann, and
by his will they should the
be alldivided
residue rubbed out the
equally between ....
twoHis
heirs.
works are numerous and several It is notable that although Smith
persons oflived most of his
curiosity
has collected them in volumes. Some of the most life in London and died there, he owned no property
there
esteemed are sold (if first impressions) at great whatever. His dwelling at the Lion and Crown
prices
& before his death became very scarce. Heindied a Street was only rented.8
Russell
good age above 80 at his house in Russell Street, A few clauses in the will relate to Smith's prints.
Covent Garden. He had formerly purchased anit is my will that the work or engraving on
'Item
estate near Northampton valued near £500 myper
copper plates shall within three months next after
annum.' my decease be so defaced and rubbed out that the
same shall not be fit to print again and that then
The correctness of this account is easy to confirm.
Chaloner Smith found John Smith's memorial the said copper plates shall be sold and disposed of
plaque in St Peter's Church, Northampton, which by my said executors .... Item my will is that my
Italian Dutch and English engraved prints and
established that he was buried there in 1 743 having
died at the age of ninety ; his wife had predeceased
drawings be sold at auction and that my mezzotinto
prints of my own doing be sold in that manner
him in 1 71 7, and his son Benjamin followed in 1751
excepting
at the age of forty-five. The reference to the will led my best mezzotinto prints which I would
to the Public Record Office, and the discovery ofhave
thepreserved and disposed of at a better price.' The
original document6 which is too long to quote in only
full, other reference to prints in the will is that,
but which supplies much more information about besides all the contents of the Northampton house,
Smith's origins and wealth. He had a large group
Ann was bequeathed 'two volumes of my works
of cousins of the Smith, Shortgreave, Montgomery
bound in rough leather'.
and Cole families living mostly in Northampton.These remarkable stipulations speak volumes
Their occupations, where given, are cutler, about Smith's personality. The great pride in his
ironmonger, watchmaker and in one case civil plates and care for money led him in opposite direc-
servant (in His Majesty's Stamp Office in Lincoln) .tions. He could not bear that his best impressions be
Clearly Smith had emerged from the class of skilled sold for less than he thought they were worth, and
craftsmen, and gone to seek his fortune in London. so he specifically excluded them from auction. Yet
Having made it, he invested the proceeds in land
his plates, which were still a very valuable com-
back in his home county. His property was dividedmercial property, were to be destroyed as he did not
in his will between his son Benjamin and daughterwant his posthumous reputation, like that of so many
Ann. Benjamin got his estate in Upper and Lower
other printmakers, ruined by a flood of bad late
Boddington, Northamptonshire. The will lists eightimpressions. But here Smith was doomed to disap-
distinct parcels of land which Smith had purchasedpointment. His son, as executor, was not to blame.
from as many vendors, and which contained at least He inserted into the Daily Advertiser of 20 December
two farms and one cottage. Unfortunately it does not 1 743 the following : 'The mezzotinto and other cop-
value them, but there is no reason to doubt Vertue'sper plates of my late father, Mr John Smith of Russell
remark that they produced an income of £500Street a Covent Garden, that he left, and I have seen
year.7 Ann was equally well provided for; she was scraped out in pursuance of the direction of his will,
bequeathed an estate in Warwick as well as his house of which having given the preference to George
in Northampton opposite St Peter's Church 'with Kitchin of Bartholomew Close (printer to him many
years and to the time of his death) to be by him
the garden, orchard . . . and the two little houses in

6. PRO Prob 1 1/725 ff.32iz>-323r. Smith certainly died in Janu- owned 520 acres in the village of Boddington, making him
ary 1 743. The date of 1 742 given on his memorial in St Peter's the largest landowner in the area, even larger than Earl
arises from the fact that the new year was reckoned to begin Spencer, the lord of the manor. A Francis Montgomery was
on 25 March. one of Smith's executors, and it seems reasonable to suppose
7. George Baker, The History and Antiquities of the County of Nor- that Smith's estate was still in the family eighty years after
thampton, i, London 1822-30, p. 477, records that at that time, his death.
8. See n. 22, below
the Rev. Francis Montgomery of Milton, near Northampton,

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
246 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND
scraped, but they were never repolished. Instead
they were re-mezzotinted and found their way to
Boydell, who was already advertising Smith's plates
in his catalogue of 1767. Chaloner Smith must have
guessed this, for he notices that 'marks of having been
defaced can be detected on several of the modern
impressions'.
The auction specified in the will finally took place
after Benjamin's death, on 8 April 1 754 and the five
following evenings at Langford's in the Great Piazza,
Covent Garden.10 Presumably Mrs Watkins had sold
what she could, but what remained was still enor-
mous. Smith's own works were sold in bundles of
between twelve and fifty per lot, in nearly three hun-
dred lots. The rest of Smith's stock was much smaller
in quantity and consisted mostly of other portrait
prints, mainly French engravings, but with a sprink-
ling of Italian etchings and a few engravings after
Rubens and Van Dyck. There were no Old Masters
such as Marcantonio or Dürer, although 'a wood
print in 1 2 sheets by Titian' (obviously the Crossing
of the Red Sea) was included with twenty-nine other
items in one lot. It is also worth noticing three
albums: two of thirty-four and thirty-six prints
respectively, were 'by Mr Smith, of gentlemen and
ladies, pasted on card paper, and in a calves leather
cover, first impression'. The other was 'a compleat
set of Mr Smith's works, of the very best impressions,
in 2 volumes in folio, neatly bound.'
The two volumes in rough leather bequeathed to
98. John Smith after Sir Godfrey Kneller, Lord Hinchin-
Ann can be traced further in contemporary refer-
brooke, mezzotint, 350 x 252 mm (London, British
Museum). ences. Vertue knew about them: 'The late Mr John
Smith Mezotint having left a collection of his proof
prints from each plate he ever did great and small
amounted to 330 pieces - had this from his daughter
repolished and disposed of, which he proposes to sell - to be sold by Simpson print seller'.11 So did
by the pound : and the remainder of the prints there- Walpole: 'Smith had composed two large volumes
from will be disposed of at the usual price by Mrs with proofs of his own plates which I have seen in
Watkins, his late servant at No. 2 in Stewart's Rents his hands: he asked £50 for them: what became of
in Drury Lane, and by other the printsellers of them I know not.' 12 To this he added in a footnote
London and Westminster.' 9 The plates were indeed 'I am told that they were in the possession of Mr

9. I quote this from the manuscript volume of notes relating In

to view of what is known about the prices that Smith charged
engravers compiled by Francis Buckley, now in the British for single prints, this seems remarkably cheap. David Alex-
Museum. ander has discovered the eventual fate of these two albums.
In 1770 Walter Shropshire 'bookseller and printseller' of 120
10. A catalogue oj the genuine and curious collection oj prints and drawings
New
of that most excellent artist Mr John Smith, late of Russel-Street, Bond Street produced a catalogue whose title-page
Covent-Garden . . . which ( by order of the executors ) will be sold by
begins thus : A catalogue of a very curious collection of prints, consist-
auction by Mr Langford (Lugt 834). The only listed copy is ining of the whole works of that celebrated master, Mr John Smith,
the British Museum. mezzotinto scraper, being all choice proofs, reserved for his own private
Ii. Vertue, Notebooks, op. cit., m, p. 159 (from a collection ofuse, in the highest preservation: and the very set which that most
notes compiled in 1 75 1 ) . ingenious gentleman, Mr Walpole, makes mention of in his Anecdotes
12. Horace Walpole, A catalogue of engravers who have been born or of Engravers ... (a copy is in the British Museum, pressmark
reside in England , second edition, London 1786, pp. 203-04. SC. A i 12). Although at first glance this appears to be an

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND 247

99. John Smith after William Wissing, Elizabeth Brownlowe

. Library).

Spencer, miniature painter, and are now in his the collectors for these proofs. He affected great
widow's. They have since been sold separately.' hauteur, and used to give audience to them, sitting
Strutt records a splendid story told to him by 'Mr on his close-stool. He required much entreaty, as well
Grosse' (presumably the print collector, Francis as an advanced price, to part with a print from this
Grose senior) that relates either to this or another book. The marks of blue paper, sticking to the cor-
album maintained by Smith : 'Smith the mezzotinto ners of a print, was considered as an undeniable
scraper had a blue paper book, in which he had proof of the goodness of the impression. Smith find-
pasted many proofs of his works, really taken to ing how readily and at what high prices the prints
observe the progress of the plates. Some time after went off, procured some ordinary impressions, which
he had left off scraping, he was much followed by he trimmed close, and stuck into the blue book, from

auction catalogue, it is in fact a fixed price list, the works the prints are arranged by sitter (in order of precedence) or
in which were 'to be sold for ready money, the lowest price by subject (with fairly imprecise descriptions), and no dates
marked in the catalogue' from Tuesday, 24 April 1770. The are given, but the information is an important supplement
contents of Smith's two volumes occupy 343 lots, and the best to the five surviving albums described later in this article. It
prints are in general priced between ioj. 6 d. and £ 1 . 1 ií. 6rf., is curious to note that seven Rembrandt landscape etchings
with a few extreme rarities rising as high as £3. 35. The total that appear later in the same list are priced between 7 s. 6 d.
for the entire collection was»£20i. i8¿. 6 d. Unfortunately all and £1. is. each.

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
248 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND
whence they were purchased as proofs.' each album13is headed 'An index referring to the
But even if these albums are now prints contained in
dispersed, a this
num- book done by John Smith
ber of others survive which were either assembled and collected by the Rt. Honble the Earle of Hading-
ton Anno Dom. 1714.' All the prints on these lists
by Smith himself and sold complete to clients (such
as those mentioned in the 1754 sale), or were madecan be dated before 17 14, and there is every reason
to think that Haddington, like Aldrich before him,
up by those clients from groups of impressions he had
sold them. At present I know of five suchhad ordered a complete set of Smith's plates. The
collections:14 first sheets of the albums themselves contain a dif-
ferent index, clearly compiled after 1740, when a
I. The first is in the library at Christ Church, number of prints had been added to the back of the
Oxford, from the bequest of Dean Henry Aldrich.15first album. This index is not arranged alphabeti-
It contains 224 prints, almost all very fine impres- cally, but simply in the order of the prints. This
sions but with few proofs, mounted into two albums, second index (and the albums themselves) contains
each of which has 1 o 1 folios and a manuscript index
a few additional plates published after 17 14, which
at the front. The index of the first volume and that were presumably acquired by Haddington in 1719
for the first 50 folios of the second are in the same when he commissioned from Smith his own portrait
scribal hand ; but the index for the last 5 1 folios were
after a painting by Aikman. This was a private plate,
clearly added later by a second hand, probably that as it does not bear Smith's address. No less than 59
of Aldrich himself. Inside the front covers are pastedimpressions from this plate appeared in a sale in 1987
impressions of Smith's 1699 mezzotint of Aldrich of the contents of the Earl of Haddington's seat at
(CS 3) with a note 'These prints were collected Tyninghame.16
by
the Reverend Dr Aldrich Dean of Christ Church in
III. The third collection, in the library of the
the year 1704'. Examinations of the albums makes
it abundantly clear how they were put together.National
In Portrait Gallery in London, is of a rather
1 704 Aldrich had bought from Smith one impressiondifferent kind. It was acquired in 1944 without any
of every plate he had ever made ; these Aldrich provenance,
had and is arranged in three albums. The
arranged in two albums, the portraits in the firstfirst
and has larger portraits, the second smaller ones, and
the third subject plates. The impressions are in
the subject plates on the first fifty folios of the second,
leaving space at the back for later additions. These
general mediocre, if not poor, but the number of
were sent along by Smith in two batches, covering
impressions involved is approximately 520. The col-
the years 1 705-1 707 and 1708-1709, and were
lection is complete in that it contains all Smith's
pasted by Aldrich onto the blank pages. Aldrichlatest
died portraits, but the reason it is so extensive is that
it contains a vast number of subject plates (and a
in 1 7 10, and so had no time to begin a third album.
few portraits) that were published rather than
II. The second collection was sold by the Earlmezzotinted
of by Smith. Many bear the lettering Smith
Haddington at Sotheby's in London on 27 June exc ., but a number have nothing on them, and it is
1988, lot 165, and is now in a British private collec-
only their presence in this album that allows us to
tion. It contains 284 mezzotints, again mostly in deduce
very that they had anything to do with him. It
fine impressions, arranged in two volumes by sub- is therefore important in giving us an insight into this
ject, beginning with royalty, working through the aspect of his production.
orders of precedence in a fairly rough and ready way,
and ending in the second volume with smaller por- IV. The fourth collection is in the Hunterian Gal-
traits and subject plates. A sheet inserted loosely lery,
into Glasgow, and in all probability comes from Dr

13. Joseph Strutt, A biographical dictionary ... of all the engraverspresent argument. Other two-volume Smith collections are
mentioned in newspapers of 2 1 Peto ber 1 772 and 2 1 January
from the earliest period of the art of engraving to the present time,
il, 1726, p. 325. 1 792 (references from Buckley).
14. I have excluded a sixth collection, the one at Chatsworth, 15. I owe my knowledge 01 this to David Alexander, r or Aldrich s
referred to by A. M. Hind, A History of Engraving and Etchingcollection,
, see C. Dodgson, Print Collectors' Quarterly , xxvin,
London 1923, p. 270. This is indeed a very fine collection
1941, PP. 57-83.
of his work, but was assembled and inlaid in its present 16.
formSold by Sotheby s, London on 28-29 September 1987, lot
between 181 1 and 1815. It could be based on a collection 582. 1 owe this reference to Richard Godfrey who has helped
put together by Smith himself, but cannot be used for the me greatly in the investigation of these two albums.

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND 249

100. John Smith after Sir Godfrey Kneller, King James II when Duke
York Public Library).

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
250 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND
be seen
William Hunter's own collection from the fact thatto
bequeathed one the
of these dates is not
University of Glasgow in 1 783. Iton the print
is in but on the
three backing sheet.
volumes,
and contains about 485 prints. I have not seen this,
but from the description that MartinThe discovery of the New has
Hopkinson York albums makes it
kindly given me, it appears to bepossible
verytosimilar
date almostin every
com-print that Smith ever
made (see Appendix).
position to the albums in the National PortraitThis Gal- in turn allows us to
lery. The existence of these two reconstruct the course
collections of his career, and much of the
suggests
remainder
that Smith at the end of his life (or MrsofWatkins
this article will be devoted to this task.18
after
his death) was producing complete sets
But it should not of all his
be a surprise to anyone that such
a dating isthem.
publications for those that wanted possible, Boydell
for many of these dates are
seems to have got hold of some already known and
of these, if mentioned
he wasin the literature. The
not producing them himself, for source of this existing
his catalogue ofinformation
1 773 is partly the anno-
tations written in what
lists 'A collection of about 400 metzotintoes byweSmith
now know to be Smith's
hand onand
etc. consisting of portraits, history other various
impressions.sub-
But more important is
the witnessbound'.
jects. Price £15. 15^. in three volumes of the Reverend James Granger in the
preface to his Biographical History of England . . . adap-
V. The fifth and last collection ted is tothe most
a methodical import-
catalogue of engraved British heads first
ant. It is in the New York Public published
Library, in 1769.andHe states T have added the dates
comes
from the library of the Earls of of Derby
engravingat to some
Knowsleyof Smith's heads, from an
Hall.17 There are 342 prints in total,
authentic almost
manuscript all in by the late Mr
communicated
extremely fine impressions, MacArdell mounted [died 1into
765], andtwocopied from a catalogue
albums both of which have manuscript of Smith's handwriting'.19
indices at Granger's
the dates have been
front. These reveal that a further quotedtenby numerous
prints later have authors,
at the most recent
some point been extracted. They being J. D. Stewart
contain 267 in ofhis thecatalogue of Kneller's
284 portraits listed by Chalonerpaintings,20 Smith, who have lamented
as well as a the disappearance
large number of subject pieces. of Butthe original.
what But a copy of
makes thethis list has in fact been
collection utterly different from the
sitting on theothers
shelves ofisthethat
library of the Department
almost every print bears a manuscript of Prints and Drawings
date of the British Museum ever
added
in brown ink, and that the prints since it was
are founded, having
arranged, bar- arrived in 1799 with
ring a few minor disturbances, in the bequest
the order of C. M.of Cracherode.21
these A letter mounted
dates. The ink annotations are of at the
twofrontkinds
makes it :clear
manythat the scribe was the
are written in a bold confident hand, well-known while dealerthe
Thomas Philipe and implies that
others
are in the trembling hand of a very he had oldgot itman.from theAsgreat
will collector Sir William
become clear, there can be no doubt Musgrave, that this
who had hand
in turn got it from MacArdell.
is Smith's own, and that he hadThere putcan this therefore be little doubt that both
collection
together at the end of his life forGranger's a rich and the British
client, possiblyMuseum's lists derive from
the Earl of Derby (although there the same issource,
no printand thatby Smith when compiling the
Smith of any member of the Stanley albums now in New York
family) . had access to his own list-
Those
with bold annotations must have come from a stock ing which enabled him to find missing dates without
having to rely on his memory. The dates given in
of impressions that he had dated at the time they
the New York albums almost invariably agree with
were made (fig. 97). The other dates he added after
the prints had been pasted into the album, as canthose in the London list, but have to be given greater

17. To the best of my knowledge these albums have only once those for other publishers are quite different. Thus it seems
been mentioned, by Leona Rostenberg, in her British that each publisher had his own writing engraver. Other
Publishers in the Graphic Arts ijgg-iyoo, New York 1963, p. 107, points raised by the albums concern the reworking by Smith
n. 106. of plates by, for instance, R. Williams, and his collaboration
18. The New York albums open many other routes for research with Bernard Lens.
that will not be pursued here. For instance, there seems to 19. Quoted here from the second edition, London 1 775, p. xiv.
be a set pattern of size and lettering for the plates published 20. J. D. Stewart, Sir Godfrey Kneller and the English Baroque Portrait ,
by Smith himself, and some seem to form small groups by Oxford 1983, p. 87.
themselves. The format and lettering on private plates or 21. Pressmark Tt 1.3.

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND 251

weight when they differ; not only

are to retain is the of
anything London list
their original quality. Most
publishers would either not bother
corrupted by a number of mistranscriptions, it also to do this or
lacks any reference to the subject
would get itplates, not
done so badly thatnecess-
the effect was lost.
arily because they were omitted
By doing from
this work Smith's orig-
himself, Smith could ensure that
inal list, but perhaps because
the quality Musgrave
of his impressions and
was maintained at a
Cracherode, as collectors of portraits, were
level unprecedentedly highnotin the inter-
field of mezzotint.
ested in them. This in turn enabled him to raise the status of the
In the production of early mezzotints there were medium, and thereby his prices. Instead of appear-
three interested parties : the artist responsible for the ing to be a cheap variety of line-engraving (which
painting reproduced, the engraver and the is what it soon became on the Continent), mezzotint
publisher. If it was a portrait mezzotint, there was became a luxury printmaking medium in its own
a fourth: the sitter. Now that we can date Smith's right, breeding a new class of collector passionate for
prints, we can trace the development of the relations rare proofs.
between the four. Smith's first plates were made If inwe now examine Smith's early activity from
1683, and all his early work was for other publishers. 1683 to 1691, we find that he worked principally for
The first two plates that he published under his five ownpublishers. The first was Richard Palmer, who
name (and therefore at his own risk) were madeemployed in him for all five plates that he made in
1687: a portrait of Sir Richard Gipps after Closter- 1683, but none thereafter. Palmer was primarily a
man (CS 109), and one of Anne Warner after Largil- map publisher, and none of the five plates bears the
lière (CS 264). In 1688 he published nothing,name butof a painter. In their effect they are close to
being popular prints. The following year Smith
in 1 689 he began the first of the long series of portraits
that he published after Kneller (fig. 98). During began working for Edward Cooper, the publisher at
1690 and 1691, as he was establishing himself, about the Three Pigeons in Bedford Street, Covent
half his production was still made on commissionGarden. for In the ten years of their association, Smith
other publishers, but from 1692 onwards every plate made 26 portrait plates for him, 19 of which were
that he produced (with one exception in 1693)after
was paintings by Wissing (fig. 99) and/or his
assistant Vandervaart, and three subject plates after
published by himself, if it was not a private plate.
He seems to have moved to Russell Street, Covent
Loir. Of the remaining seven portrait plates, two
Garden, in 1693, which is the first year that his each
nameare after Van Dyck and Kerseboom and on two
appears in the rate books.22 He first began to usethe artist is not identified. The last, after Riley, was
the
sign of the Lion and Crown there in 1699. jointly published in 1690 with Richard Tompson,
The importance of becoming one's own publisher with whom, despite his importance in early English
was evident. As Hogarth was to discover, it mezzotint
was publishing, Smith otherwise never
impossible for an engraver to earn a proper livingworked. Tompson's major rival, or possibly partner,
by working for other publishers. The printsellers in the early days of the late 1670s and early 1680s
was Alexander Browne, and for him Smith produced
paid a flat fee for engraving a plate, and the engraver
seven plates. Two each were after portraits by Wis-
got no share in the profits from the sale. The amount
paid in 1692 to R. Williams for his mezzotint singof
and Largillière, and the remaining three were
Theophilus, Earl of Huntingdon (CS 26, a private subject plates after Old Master paintings by Titian,
plate) was £1. is. 6 dP At this rate, Smith would Parmigianino and Elsheimer. Smith also produced
have earned for the 350 or so plates he made in five
his subject plates for the idiosyncratic Pierce
Tempest, after Lernens, Heemskerk, Van Dyck,
career a total of about £375. The lesson was clear:
Titian and one anonymous artist. In 1685 he made
if you wanted to grow rich, you had to control your
own plates and become your own publisher. For a
one print after Kneller for Isaac Beckett; in 1688,
mezzotinter this offered additional advantages. four more plates after Kneller for G. Beckett, and
Because such plates wear very quickly, they need in to
1 690 he produced two portraits of the Chancellors
be constantly 'refreshed' (that is, reworked) if they
of Oxford and Cambridge Universities after Kneller

22. See Survey of London , xxxvi, 1970 (The Parish of St Paul indeed died there in 1 743.
Covent Garden), p. 193. Smith continued to use the address 23. J. D. Stewart, op. cit., cat. 377; another reference I owe to
of the Lion and Crown in Russell Street after 171 7, and David Alexander.

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
252 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND

and Riley for David Loggan who Britain.

usedIt was
themonlyfor
Wissing's
bind- early death in 1687
ing in as frontispieces to his at the age of
Oxonia thirty-one
and that left the field clear for
Cantabrigia
Illustrata .24 Kneller to dominate for the next thirty-five years.
This list may make dry reading, but its point will Wissing's paintings were engraved by a number of
now become clear. In general, of the main con- mezzotinters besides Smith, primarily Isaac Beckett
temporary portrait painters after whom Smith and R. Williams. Of the 24 plates that Williams pro-
worked before 1691, all the plates after Wissing and duced after Wissing, 23 were published by Cooper;
his assistant Vandervaart were published by Cooper, of the seven other plates that he made for Cooper,
and all those after Kneller by Isaac or G. Beckett. all are after deceased artists such as Lely and Van
The two apparent exceptions in fact confirm the rule Dyck. The situation with Isaac Beckett is more com-
rather neatly. The two Kneller's published by Log- plicated, since he was a much finer engraver than
gan were not single sheet prints, but book frontis- Williams, and published the great majority of his 102
pieces, while the two portraits by Wissing produced recorded plates himself. In fact only 20 plates are
by Alexander Browne in 1685, of Lady Brownlowe for other publishers ; of these 1 2 were for Cooper, and
and her daughter Elizabeth, only remained in his of these nine are after Wissing. Beckett does seem to
hands for a very short time. Most impressions that have made three plates after Wissing on his own
I have seen have Browne's name crossed out, and account, but two are repetitions of the plates made
that of E. Cooper written in its stead. It is possible for Cooper. Finally, Jan Vandervaart himself made
to guess what lies behind this almost unique occur- three plates after Wissing; these too were all pub-
rence. An entire album ofBrowne's publications now
lished by Cooper.
in the National Portrait Gallery comes from the col-Nearly a third of Beckett's plates are after Kneller
lection of the Brownlowe family at Belton,25 and portraits. There are 28 of these, all except two pub-
establishes the connection between them and lished by Beckett himself. Vertue records that Beck-
Browne. Presumably they asked him to ett have
was the
Smith's teacher,27 and so it is not surprising
paintings engraved; he complied, but only thattothe
runonly plate after Kneller by another engraver
into trouble with Cooper who forced him to Beckett
that hand published was Smith's Madam Loftus of
over the plates, or all the prints, or both. 1685 (CS 158). Besides these, six plates after Kneller
This could
only have happened if Cooper thought thatwere he hadpublished by Robert White in around 1683,
a monopoly on prints after Wissing's paintings, and more by R. Williams, probably in the same
and a few
period.
the only person who could have given It seems reasonable to guess that these
such an
authority was Wissing himself.26 predate the establishment of firm relations between
Let us now formulate a working hypothesis:
Kneller
the and Beckett. Beckett died early in 1688, and
on 8 July
constant central relationship in early English por- that year his widow put the following
trait mezzotint is between the painter advertisement
and the in the London Gazette : 'Mr Isaac Beck-
publisher. The painter would give all hisett,worksso eminent
to for working in mezzotinto, being
one publisher, who would then have them lately
engraved
deceased, his widow doth continue in the trade
by whomever he felt like commissioning amongat the the
Golden Head in the Old Baily ; where all per-
pool of mezzotinters seeking work. If the publisher
sons may be furnished with all the newest and best
was himself a mezzotinter, he would probablysortsmake
of mezzotinto prints, likewise all other things
the plate himself, but could equally well farm
appertaining
it out to the painting them on glass'. But to
maintain
to another. To see if this hypothesis is born out by the production of new plates the widow
had
the evidence, let us first return to Wissing, to find
who, it another mezzotinter, and one who would
satisfy Kneller's standards. Thus it is that we find
is important to remember, was the most promising
of Lely's assistants, and after the latter's death
Smith in
pressed back into service for the first time since
1685 to in
1680, perhaps the most successful portrait painter make four more plates after Kneller in 1688

24. This is made clear by the dedication on CS 235. lished a third plate of a member of the Brownlowe family.
25. Sold at Christie's, London, 27 June 1984, lot 438. This was by Isaac Beckett (CS 9) after Soest, and never passed
26. The questions raised by Browne, Cooper and their into Cooper's hands.
Royal
27. Vertue,
Licences for publishing mezzotints will be discussed in the op. cit., 1, p. 43.
second part of this article. It is worth noting that Browne pub-

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND 253

i o i.. John Smith after Gottfried Schalken, The Penitent Magdalene

Museum).

for 'G. Beckett', who must have been Isaac's Smith went further in trying to protect his monopoly
widow.28 The following year the business was taken
of Kneller portraits by acquiring as many as possible
over by the line-engraver John Savage, which of Beckett's Kneller plates from Savage (as well as
explains why one plate by Smith after Knellera of few other items).29 In this he was more or less suc-
cessful, and would have been entirely so if Cooper
1689 (CS 155, Anthony Leigh) was jointly published
by Smith and Savage. But this arrangement must had not got hold of five of them first.
There
have been unworkable, for Savage was swiftly is abundant later evidence of how close the
relations grew between Kneller and Smith. In 1696
pushed aside, and every later plate that Smith made
Kneller painted Smith's portrait, and dedicated it
after Kneller was published under his own name.

28. The closeness of the relations between Smith and the Beckett advertisement in the London Gazette of 10 January 1 704 (Buck-
family may also be surmised from the portrait mezzotint ofley papers).
Isaac Beckett made (or possibly reworked) by Smith in 1689
29. This can be deduced from the later addresses on many of these
(CS 17), which was published by a W. Beckett 'at the back plates.
side of the Royal Exchange', This shop is mentioned in an

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 254 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND

to him (Tate Gallery 243, fig. 96;that

proofs the dedication
it is isforbad him his
said Sir Godfrey
on a label on the back).30 Inhouse'.33
Kneller's will Smith
is one of the few bequeathed a mourning
The pressure onring. Smith
the painter was not dissimilar. It
in return dedicated his translation of Le Brun's The was to his advantage to have his latest canvases
Conference upon Expression to Kneller in 1701 withbroadcast
a in print form, for otherwise (unless they
fulsome preface: 'Having nothing of my own suf- were state portraits) they would be known to very
few. This was much the most effective method to
ficient to return the least of your favours, I therefore
beg your acceptance and protection of this offering establish or confirm his reputation and bring him
which I make you at the expence of another; to
more commissions. The better the quality of the
whom I am obliged for this opportunity of making print, the more attention it would attract. There is
a publick acknowledgement to the world of the greatno reason or evidence to suggest that the painter at
sense I have of the many favours you have heaped this period had any financial interest in the plate;
upon me, and of the honour I enjoy in being enroledhe benefited enough without needing this as well.
in the number of your friends'.31 And what of the sitter? He could have his vanity flat-
The evidence in the cases of Wissing and Kneller,tered by seeing his portrait or that of members of
then, supports the hypothesis about the relations
his family admired by many who would never see
between painter and publisher. Clearly much more the original painting. This would be at no cost to
investigation is needed before it can be stated to behimself, although doubtless the engraver hoped to
a universal truth of the early English portraitsell a number of impressions to him for distribution
mezzotint, but this task belongs to a different article.
among his family or dependants, much in the way
Enough has been said to demonstrate that the rôle that portrait photographs are used today. All he suf-
of the painter was crucial from the very beginning. fered was a short delay in the delivery of the painting,
And, if we stand back from the evidence, it becomes a delay that was greatly lessened by the speed of
apparent that this really had to be the case. A por-mezzotint as compared with line engraving.
trait mezzotinter was dependent on a constant One rather important implication of the process
supply of paintings to engrave. He might get a fewoutlined here is that in general it can be assumed
from sitters, but if he was to be on top of fashion hethat paintings were engraved immediately after
had to get the latest paintings off the easels of thebeing painted: the need for access to the original
* most successful painters before they had disappeared derived from the fact that once it was sent out of
London it was in effect unavailable. If a portrait
to their destinations in houses in distant parts of the
country. Only the painter could intercede with theremained in London of course this was not the case,
sitter to beg the short delay needed to run offbut a we must remember that it was in the painter's
mezzotint. If the engraver could not get hold of these
interest that his newest style, not his old one, should
canvases, he was condemned to work down-market,be broadcast. Although there will be enough special
cases to make it essential to review each painting
after the paintings of third-rate painters, after draw-
independently, we can claim that in general it can
ings, after historical portraits or after prints imported
from abroad. Moreover, the mezzotinter could thenbe presumed that a new portrait painting of some
rely on the painter's assistance in correcting his
contemporary worthy was engraved within a few
proofs. I know of no direct evidence of this happen-
months of its being finished. A minor confirmation
ing in the case of Kneller and Smith, besides the
to this proposition is Smith's occasional custom of
implication in Vertue's footnote that Smith 'went to putting the date of Kneller's painting on the plate
work at Sir G. Kneller's house'.32 But Gilpin records
when it differs from the date of the engraving. It can
a story that Robert White (who, as we have seen, be argued that in cases where he did not do so, the
published six plates after Kneller around 1683) fell two dates did not diverge. The ability to date the
out with Kneller 'whom he teased so much with his prints is thus of great significance for the dating of

30. It is curious that this was engraved only in 1716 (CS 232).Library (pressmark 1043 d.48) has numerous manuscript
Presumably by then Smith felt himself to be a sufficientlyalterations which give every appearance of being in Smith's
great man to join his own portrait series. In 1696 this wouldown hand.
have seemed presumptuous. 32. Vertue, op. cit., 1, p. 43.
31. Much of this evidence will be found in Stewart, op. cit.,33.p. William Gilpin, An Essay upon prints , 3rd edition, London
34. The copy of The Conference upon Expression in the British 1781, p. 122.

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND 255

the paintings on which they memorial

are plates paid for by the family, for example
based.
A new market thus sprung that of
up,Joseph Martyn, a merchant
cemented by of London (CS
bonds
of mutual interest between artist, sitter and 167). A few other cases are of interest. Smith's print
publisher/engraver. As it matured, the mezzotinters after Kneller's self-portrait (CS 1 50) which is dedi-
soon forced the publishers out of the business by deal- cated to Kneller by Smith does not have an address ;
ing directly with the painters, and power then gradu- neither does Smith's own portrait after Kneller's
ally shifted from the sitter and painter to the painting (CS 232). Nor does the memorial portrait
mezzotinter. The primary cause of this was the of Wissing that Smith made in 1687 (CS 278). If,
establishment of a new collectors' market for the as it seems, this was Smith's own tribute to Wissing's
mezzotints as fine prints in their own right which memory, it seems that their relationship, like that
made the mezzotinter more independent. The most of Smith and Kneller, was on more than a mere busi-
evident symptoms of this was the new market for ness footing.
proofs, for which fragments of evidence survive, such If it is difficult to reconstruct the relationships of
as the word proofe written in a contemporary handthe painters, publishers and engravers, it is even
on a state before letters of CS 130 in the Britishharder to find out much about the collectors and the
prices they paid. The impression before letters of
Museum. Few genuine working proofs touched by
the artist survive,34 but a large number of proof statesLady Brandon (CS 22, 1687) in the New York album
exist, many before all letters, sometimes with the bears the annotation Cost 5 skill.36 Granger records
that Smith himself in later life was offering a guinea
names of artist and engraver, but before the sitter's
name or with his coat of arms alone. Unlettered for impressions of his print of the Duke of York (CS
states frequently have manuscript writing added in 142, 1697, fig. 100), of which the plate had been
the margin in Smith's own hand. lost.37 The evidence of the Christ Church and Had-
Another sign is the growth of the 'private plate' dington albums suggests that Smith's primary clients
- the plate commissioned and paid for by the sitter were the sitters themselves ; clearly he was adept at
or by a member of his family. For an engraver asthe hard sell, and a sitter found it difficult to avoid
careful about money as Smith, the absence of anending up buying more than his own portrait. Some
indication of a publisher on his plates can be nowere evidently quite happy to do so ; Gilpin records
accident (though it is necessary to remember thatthat the great collector of prints and drawings Lord
plates published as frontispieces or title-pages ofSomers (whose portrait by Richardson Smith
books did not usually carry addresses) . The earliest engraved in 1 713, CS 234) 'was so fond of the works
private plates appear to date from 1687, but it is not of this master that he seldom travelled without carry-
until the mid- 1690s that they become a significant ing them with him in the seat of his coach'.38 It is
part of Smith's output. Whenever we come acrossequally possible to suggest that it was those who were
a print by Smith after an obscure painter, the likeli-already collectors of prints (as were Aldrich and
hood is that it is a private plate : examples are printsSomers) who wished their portraits to be mezzotin-
after Weidemann (CS 78), Hassells (CS 89), Hill (CSted by Smith. Others, such as the strongly
117-18), Tilson (CS 148), Lambert (CS 154), Sale- Hanoverian Haddington,39 would perhaps have
man (CS 16), Pattin (CS 215) and others.35 Of thebeen more interested in the collection as a document
five prints after John Baptist Medina, four areof the Whig supremacy.
private plates. Presumably Smith knew Medina But it was not only portraits that concerned Smith.
when he was working in London between 1686 and The New York album originally contained a total
1688-89, and Medina had the canvases sent down of 71 subject plates that he had made, of the most
to him from Edinburgh. There are a number ofdiverse kinds. Some were low life or bawdy scenes

34. An example in the British Museum is of CS 262 (Kneller's on it : K. James ye 2nd. done by J. Smith from ye last original picture
daughter as St Agnes; inventory P6-234). he sat for to Sr Godfrey Kneller before he went out of England.
35. The lettering on CS 78 (the portrait of Mme d'Auverquerck)38. Gilpin, op. cit., p. 124. David Alexander points out to me that
gives the initials of the person who paid for the plate. Smith apparently never advertised, which rather confirms the
36. An old price of £1. is. is marked on the impression of CS thesis that his primary market was among the sitters and
informed collectors.
247 in the NPG album.
37. James Granger, A biographical history of England , 2nd edition,39. The lettering on his portrait calls him 'the Dutch skipper' ;
London 1 775, 1, p. xv. In the New York album Smith pasted this was apparently a term used for Hanoverian sympathizers.
See n. 16.
a slip of paper under the impression of this plate, with written

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
256 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND
luck in London for a short period, sometime between
May 1692 and mid- 1698. Besides a self-portrait (CS
226, 1694) and one of Anne Kynnesman (CS 153,
1698), Smith engraved two of his subject paintings:
a Mary Magdalene in 1693 (W 332, fig. 101), and a
Sleeping Girl , which cannot be dated, since it does not
appear in the New York album. Finally we must
remember that the albums in the National Portrait
Gallery and the Hunterian reveal how many plates
by other engravers Smith bought second-hand, and
republished possibly after some rework, with or
without a new address. On the other hand, there is
very little if any evidence that Smith ever published
new plates that he had commissioned from other
mezzotinters.
In conclusion, it is worth stressing Smith's most
surprising procedure, one which is difficult to paral-
lel in the work of any other engraver. This is his habit
of putting together complete collections of his own
work. This cannot have been easy. He would have
had no stock of the early plates that he had made
for other publishers, and he therefore had to buy
them back piece by piece. The signs of this are very
evident in the albums described above, for the
impressions of these early prints are often worn and
damaged. Likewise, he would have had to keep for
himself supplies of all the private plates that he had
made - with or without the knowledge of the person
102. John Smith after Werner Hassells,
who had Jan Witt
paid for ,
the engraving. This must often
mezzotint, 284 x 200 mm (London, British
have been difficult. The most curious case is the plate
Museum).
of 1 707 of the Frankfurt merchant Johann Witt after
Werner Hassells (CS 279, fig. 102). This private
plate was presumably made as a memorial to the
after painters such as Egbert van Heemskerk and man, who had died in 1 704, by a colleague who had
Laroon, some were small-scale genre scenes after van come to London. The lettering is in the most accom-
Lernens or landscapes after van Wyck. Others, from plished gothic fraktur , and I cannot believe that there
1700 onwards, were from Old Master paintings in was any London letter engraver capable of such
collections in London, most prominently that work. If so, the plate must have been sent to Ger-
belonging to the painter-dealer Simon du Bois. A many, and Smith must have ensured that adequate
special case is the set of nine plates of the Loves of supplies were sent back to him from there.
the Gods after paintings thought to be by Titian, then I do not think that Smith went to this trouble
at Blenheim. These were made in 1 708-09, just when simply for the sake of bringing in some extra income.
Smith seems to have briefly fallen out with Kneller, Rather, it seems to be a sign of his remarkable self-
and were doubtless intended to fill the gap.40 They consciousness. He was fully aware of his own value
were dedicated to the Duke of Marlborough and and historical importance, and was determined to
equipped with an engraved title plate by George assemble the evidence that would not merely dem-
Vertue, but, to judge from the number of sets left onstrate how good he was, but also the route that
in the auction of 1 754, the project was not a success. led him from his rude beginnings to the great accom-
Another interesting group is of paintings by Gott- plishments that won him a European reputation. It
fried Schalken, who came from Holland to try his can only be this that led him to assemble such an
extraordinary document as the album in the New
40. See Vertue, op. cit., ra, p. 14 (on John Simon) : 'and for some
York Public Library. Such astonishing self-
time when Smith differed with Sir G. Kneller the other was confidence makes him Hogarth's precursor, and was
caressed by him & did many good works'. possibly his greatest legacy to British printmaking.

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 EARLY MEZZOTINTS IN ENGLAND 257

Appendix
The Chronology of the Plates made by John Smith
These dates have been taken from the album in the New
1694 CS 14, 56, 57, 81, 108, 125, 126, 150, 220, 226
York Public Library. Chaloner Smith's numbers are1695 CS 27, 66, 84, 117, 118, 148, 172,257,271
used
for portraits; Wessely's numbers for subject plates. This Undescribed, after Kneller: Putto by Queen Mary's
list omits all those prints in the albums which do not have Tomb

dates specifically written on them, even though these 1696are

CS 87, 188, 201, 221, 222 + 3
implied by the context in which they were placed. 1697ExtraCS 37, 55, 71, 115, 136, 142, 151, 154, 186,252
dates for portrait prints which are not in the New1698 YorkCS 16,64, 75, 153, 161,215, 217
album but which are given by the London list are added1699 CS 3, 68, 113, 123, 124, 160, 191, 229, 247
1700 CS 2, 70, 107, 114, 189, 209, 250, 259 + 48
after a plus sign ; the same has been done for a few subject
prints that are dated in their lettering. + W 316
1701 CS 20, 50, 53, 78, 130, 193, 210, 216, 233
1683 0835,141,168+39,46 + W 380
w 369, 405, 470 1702 CS 5, 6, 23, 69, 96, 134, 194, 195, 212, 249, 255,
Undescribed: John , 3rd King of Poland (pub. 273 + 7.95
Beckett) W395
after Laroon: Shoemaker ; Woman 1703 CS 13, 19, 72, 128, 143, 159, 162, 169, 242,
Feeding Child 284+24I
w 357 + 327
after Annibale Carracci : Virgin and
Child with Angels in a 1 704 CS 58, 228, 240, 241
Landscape W 318 + 414
1684 0836,265 1705 CS 32, 49, 67, 163, 164, 165, 166, 184,225,261
W328, 349, 351,385 W365
Undescribed: after N. Loir: Mary Magdalene; 1706 CS 7, 59, 61, 62, 77, 85, 97, 99, 102, 137, 206, 237,
Virgin and Child 270 + 98, 238
after Parmigianino : Virgin and Child + W415
with two Saints 1707 CS 33, 52, 65, 82, 94, 1 16, 258, 279
1685 CS 25, 26, 138, 158 W 321,415
w 304, 323a, 443, 452, 484 1708 CS 18, 198, 200, 266
Undescribed: after Van Dyck: Ecce Homo; w 334 to 342 ( 1 708-09) ,412
Lucretia's Suicide 1709 CS 199,239
1686 CS 28, 38, 145, 149, 171, 183 1710 CS 54, 80, 133, 219
W 384 171 1 CS 1 10
Undescribed : Child Running to its Mother in a Garden W 302
1687 CS i, 10, 22, 109, 120, 179, 231, 264, 278 + 41, 47, 1712 CS 24, 60, 152, 190, 243
CS (Lens) 15 1 713 CS 234, 244, 283
W 298a, 450 W449
Undescribed : Two Fencers (etching), possibly after 1714 CS 63, 73, 197
Lauron 1 7 15 CS 100, 131, 204, 207
1688 CS 51, 182, 187, 211, 236, 246, 274, 277 1716 CS 232, 262
w 398, 453 1717 CS 91, 103, 203, 268
1689 CS 17, 21, 76, 79, 86, 132, 155, 177, 178, 218, 227, 1718 CS 42, 263 (as 1717-18), 280
275, 276 1719 CS 90, 122, 167
W 485 (etching of dogs and monkey in kitchen) 1720 CS 11,31,253, 254
Undescribed : after Wissing : Princess Anne ( = W 5) 1721 CS 139, 157, 248
after Kneller : Princess Anne 1723 CS 88, 213
1690 CS 29, 105, 121, 174, 176, 235, 256, 275, 281, 1724 CS 92
282+ 129, 192 1729 CS 74
W287
Undescribed: Queen Mary (with Lens, pub.
Cooper) NOTE : From 1 7 15 to 1 724 Smith was in the habit of mak-
1691 CS 106, hi, 147 ing new royal portraits in pairs : the larger one he made
w 333, 442 himself, the smaller replica he had made for him and bears
1 692 CS 4, 1 5, 95, 1 1 9, 1 80, 230, 25 1 , 260 his name only as publisher. None of these small replicas
W388 is to be found in the New York album, but they are all
1 693 CS 34, 89, 1 1 2, 1 35, 1 56, 1 85, 1 96, 245 entered in the London list under the same year as the larger
W 332 versions.

This content downloaded from

193.0.108.43 on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:14:25 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms