18 museomag 04 ‘ 2022
as well as professional triumph, and must have been
at the height of her success in 1745, the year we
can date Latham’s portrait to on stylistic grounds.
Unlike many of his contemporaries who made their
living from portraiture, Latham was evidently not in the
habit of excessively flattering his models. This is well
illustrated by the following anecdote recounted by
his biographer Pasquin: “When Latham was in his pros-
perity, a lady of distinction, with coarse lineaments,
sat to him for her portrait, which he drew faithfully;
but she was so disgusted with the performance, that
she abused the painter; who immediately tore it from
the frame, and had it nailed on the floor of his hall, as
a piece of oil-cloth. The consequence was, that every
person who came in, knew the likeness; and the anec-
dote became so general, that the mortified nymph
repented her vain indiscretion, and offered to buy the
picture at any terms; which the artist peremptorily
refused; and was so ungallant as to have her effigy
trodden under the feet even of his domestics.”
(A. Pasquin, Memoirs of the Royal Academicians and
an Authentic History of the Artists in Ireland, London
1796, p. 29). Indeed, the model in Latham’s painting
now at the MNHA doesn’t have the very long, straight
nose that fashionable women usually are seen with
in British portraiture at the time – including several
existing portraits of Peg Woffington. Her oval face,
Pieter van Bleeck (1697-1764), Portrait of the actress Margaret
‘Peg’ Woffington, as Phebe, 1747. Mezzotint and engraving on
paper, 351 x 250 mm. Rijksprentenkabinet, Amsterdam.
high forehead and prominent nose, however, generally
match up with the features displayed in these portraits.
The portrayal of Peg Woffington as Phebe of 1747 by
Pieter van Bleeck is a good example of this.
DRESSED AS AN ACTRESS
When I consulted our colleagues from the Department
of Textiles and Fashion at the Victoria & Albert Museum
in London, they concluded that Latham’s portrait
should be dated to about 1745-50, based on the sitter’s
hairstyle and lace necklace. Peg Woffington’s outfit
doesn’t reflect the fashionable dress of the time but
instead is a form of classical/artistic dress seen only in
portraiture. It isn’t something that would have been
worn in everyday life and is typified by the front clasp
closures and the scalloped sleeve, neither of which
featured in the fashion of the day. The heyday of this
style was the late 17th century, as shown in portraits by
other British painters like Sir Peter Lely (1618-1680), but
it carried over into the early 18th century in paintings
by Godfrey Kneller (1646-1723) and are still present
later on in the work of the aforementioned Joseph
Highmore. Although there is no direct link to the
theatre, the sitter’s dress in the MNHA’s portrait does
indeed look theatrical to the specialists of the V&A
and appears to confirm her presumed identity as an
actress.
In conclusion, Latham’s striking portrait of Peg
Woffington seems to be an exciting art historical disco-
very and brings a remarkable woman back to the fore.
Its acquisition not only adds a beautiful work of art to
the MNHA’s collection of international portraits, but
also a multitude of fascinating stories to tell museum
visitors. The portrait’s aesthetic qualities and narrative
power make it an attractive work to loan out interna-
tionally too, which, in turn, increases public familiarity
with our collection. And that’s exactly the direction in
which the MNHA wants to go: towards you, the visitor!
Ruud Priem
REDISCOVERED PORTRAIT OF AN
IRISH ACTRESS AND SOCIALITE (2/2)
