169. McGinn, Mary, Anne Verplanck, Noel Fahden Briceño, Amanda Rosner and Ron Fuchs. *Reverse Painting on Glass, Winterthur Primer*, www.antiquesandfinearts.com, 2007. 170. By the infrared spectroscopy method with Fourier Transform. If there is an area where the study of frames is closely linked to that of paintings, it is certainly in Chinese reverse glass painting. Their common history began with the arrival of European mirrors in China at the end of the seventeenth century.

#### **First period: European frames only**

The discovery in France, in 1688, of the method of glassmaking called *glass casting*171 made it possible to manufacture large mirrors. Their cost made them great luxury objects, worthy of kings, and gifts that were much appreciated in the royal courts of Europe, particularly after the spectacular Hall of Mirrors was created at Versailles. The mirrors were put into frames designed by top cabinet-markers, and the styles of these changed several times over the course of the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries172 (Illustrations **44** and **65**). Illustration **44** pag 86 is a Chinese-Swedish frame in two parts. A rectangular black and gold one made in Canton. Above a black and gold pediment, made in Sweden and inspired by the English George II style.

Such rarity at such prices made them highly suitable gifts for the emperor of China, as is shown by the lists of presents given at the Peking court.173 If the arrival of these huge plates of reflective glass provoked many reactions174 in China, the arrival of rigid frames must have been received with equal amazement by Chinese aristocrats who were only familiar with paintings fastened on to rollers, with flexible frames, or papers printed with popular imagery and fixed directly to the wall. It is certain that the first reverse glass paintings were done on framed mirrors and that the first to return to Europe did so in their original, and therefore European frames.

171. Cf. page 24. 172. Child, Graham, 1990. 173. Cf. page 26. 174. Cf. page 26.

# **Frames of Chinese reverse glass paintings**

167. Idem, 66.

168. Idem, 262.

#### **Second period: European frames and 'utilitarian' Chinese frames**

The Europeans commissioning these paintings quickly realised that it was more economical, and above all took up less space in company vessels, to send only the glass sheet to be painted in Canton. But for the return journey, since the painted sheet had to be provided with a black background a few millimetres behind it (Illustration **64**), it then required a frame. So the Chinese workshops put together simple, rectangular frames, without any carving, using an original system (Illustrations **66**) for fixing in place the wooden board that formed the back. This board was fastened by bolts that slid over the board and slotted into mortises hollowed out of the frame's uprights. The bolts allowed the board to be completely fastened, or else partially so that an entire side of it was secured in place by slotting it into a groove of the frame's upright. Once it had arrived in Europe, the Chinese frame was usually removed and replaced by a gilded wooden frame, of the style that was in fashion.

In Great Britain, mirrors painted in China were very sought-after during the reigns of George II (1727-1760) and George III (1760- 1820) when rococo-style frames were all the rage, made by famous cabinet-makers such as Thomas Chippendale (1718-1779) or John Linnell (1729-1796). This type of framing culminated in flamboyant overmantels with multiple mirrors.175 The rococo was sometimes given a Chinese flavour (Illustration **65**) by the addition of European carvings with Chinese motifs: pagodas, pavilions, *ho-ho*, 176 and so on.

In France, it was under the reigns of Louis XV (1723-1774), then of Louis XVI (1774-1791), that reverse glass paintings came into fashion, and their framing reflected the styles of these two periods.

In Sweden, where the European fashion for Chinese reverse glass paintings probably started, Adolf Fredrik, a great lover of Chinese objects,177 reigned from 1751 to 1771. He was followed by Gustav III (1771-1792) and Gustav IV Adolf (1792-1809). In two works of my corpus, the portraits of John Pike and his wife, seen in Illustrations **44** and **45**, the Swedish cabinet-maker was content to complete the Chinese frame with a European pediment, inspired by the English George II style. The decoration of the Chinese frame probably had to be commissioned to allow this adaptation.

110 111 From left to right and top to bottom: **66** | *Chinese fastening of wooden backboard of the frame:* sliding bolt. Ryser F. 200, p. 203, Ill. 20. *Decorative Chinese frames:* **67** | Lacquered frame with gilded foliation. The Chinese Porcelain Company, New York. Photo by Richard Goodbody. **68** | Gilded wooden frame with carved symbols. © National Museums Liverpool, Lady Lever Art Gallery. **69** | Cadre dit 'Chippendale chinois'. Private collection.

Finally, Catherine II of Russia bought a reverse glass painting for her collections which she had framed in her court style (no. 63 of the corpus). The framing of Chinese reverse glass paintings by these great European cabinet-makers whose work was very expensive testifies to the value that art-lovers assigned to this Cantonese painting and the eminent place it occupied in their homes. It should, however, be pointed out that the value of these paintings was as much due to the rich and fashionable frame as to the painted mirror.

#### **Third period: decorative Chinese frames**

Quite soon after this period of 'utilitarian' Chinese frames, designed only to accompany the painting on its journey to Europe, frames with better-crafted decoration appeared, which was more suited to the European market. This meant the frames were acceptable in European homes, and could be taken into them without further ado.

#### Black lacquered frames with gilded foliation

From the seventeenth century onwards, lacquered objects made in China were imported into Europe, where they were known as 'Japan-work' and the lacquering technique as 'japanning.' It was in fact through the Dutch East India Company, based in Japan, that these first lacquered objects were imported into Europe. The method of decorating frames with black lacquer and gilded foliation was then adopted by Chinese craftsmen, as fitting surrounds for the mirrors being sent to Europe (Illustration **67**). These frames were much appreciated in Europe as they suited the contemporary fashion for chinoiseries and fitted in with the highly sought-after lacquered furniture with its gilded motifs. Furthermore, they did not have to be removed and replaced with European frames.

Better still, this style was copied by European cabinet-makers who had succeeded in mastering the black- or aubergine-coloured lacquering technique with gilded motifs. These frames differed little from the original Chinese models, but included more geometrical motifs, with lattice- or diamond-shaped patterns, and they had considerable success in Europe until the late nineteenth century.178

175. Cf. page 83: Multiple mirrors.

176. More or less inspired by the phoenix.

177. Cf. page 84: Portraits of Westerners.

178. The French Second Empire was passionate about them.

#### Carved and gilded wood frames with Chinese motifs

Chinese frames of a different style were also held on to after their arrival in Europe: these were made of gilded wood and carved with Chinese lucky charm motifs (Illustration **68**), such as the characters for 'happiness' or 'longevity,' the attributes of Taoist Immortals, Buddhist symbols, and so on.

#### Frames known as Chinese Chippendale

In the 1820s, a frame appeared made of black-painted carved wood with gilded ornamentation (Illustration **69**) that had an abundance of swirled effects. Curiously, the English named this style 'Chinese Chippendale.'179

#### Copies of European frames

During the final decades of the eighteenth century and the early nineteenth century, when Western engravings were being directly transposed on to glass, Chinese workshops would copy frames of the style then fashionable in the West. These frames were simpler, less ornate than those of the preceding rococo period. Out of all the motifs used in the West, the Chinese singled out flat frames without any motif, whether gilded or ungilded—but most often rectangular or oval frames of gilded wood that included a row of carved 'pearls'180 along the glass, with a plant motif on the outer border (Illustration **70**). These Chinese frames were not always elegantly made, but they suited the mass public which was becomingly increasingly attracted to these transpositions of engravings. The Chinese painters, anxious to offer their Western clients a frame that was, as much as possible, in tune with current fashion, went as far as to paint plain navy blue- or black-coloured inner frames on the glass, as seen in Illustration **70**. Sometimes these were dotted with stars or even imitated a spectacular red and gold eglomised frame, in which the back of the glass sheet was gilded.

179. Cf. Crossman, Carl, 1991, 408 and 409. 180. Style known in France as *Louis XVI*.

#### **Emergence of a popular Chinese frame**

It is interesting to note that the so-called 'pearl' frame would become increasingly widespread in China when reverse glass painting became a popular Chinese art, around the mid-nineteenth century. The frame chosen to present these paintings was an ungilded 'pearled' frame, which became known by the Chinese name of 'abacus frame,' seen in Illustration **71**. For almost two centuries, the frames that held glass paintings were the only rigid frames present in Chinese houses. By introducing permanent rigid frames to China, reverse glass painting therefore changed the place occupied by paintings in Chinese interiors.

 They are classified below by date of citation, from 1749 to 1820.

#### Siou-Sin-Saang

The first mention of a Chinese reverse glass painter (and therefore of a workshop) by name is in the writing of William Chambers (1726- 1796),1 a Scottish architect who went to Canton in 1749 as supercargo of the Swedish East India Company. In the book he wrote on China when he returned,2 he mentioned the name of Siou-Sin-Saang, a famous Chinese painter who had done some reverse glass painting for him.

#### Spoilum

The second painter to be mentioned, in terms of date, is the portraitist Spoilum. Some of his works are signed3 named in two documents of the period.4

and, what is more, he is

#### Puqua, Cinqua, Punqua

The third mention is of lists of products bought in China by John Green, captain of the *Empress of China*, 5 the first United States ship to go to China in 1783, and then again in 1786. Fortunately, these lists have been preserved, and they give us valuable information about reverse glass paintings and their painters.

In 1786 **Cinqua**, described as a *limner* (illuminator?);

In 1786 **Punqua**, simply described as a *painter*. The reverse glass paintings bought from him represent '*Empress at Nobels* (?)' (perhaps *Empress and Nobles*?).

#### Tonqua, Tonqua Junior, Foeiqua, Fatqua and Lamqua.

The fourth mention involves a series of names of Cantonese painters that has reached us thanks to the list compiled by Robert Waln Junior of Philadelphia, who was in Canton from September 1819 to March 1820.6 For each painter, his list includes the name, status (according to Waln's estimation), character7 (in the sense of behaviour, measured from good to average), the main occupation and the workshop's address. The painters mentioned are Tonqua, Tonqua Junior and Foeiqua on Old China Street, and Fatqua and Lamqua on New China Street.

The 'qua' ending on these artists names was granted by the Chinese government to all Chinese merchants and artists authorised to trade with foreigners. All except one of the painters cited were therefore registered. The exception was Spoilum, and perhaps Spoilum was the name by which he was known to foreigners.

Although works on canvas are known to have been painted by Tonqua, Tonqua Junior, Foiequa, Fatqua and Lamqua, my corpus contains signed reverse glass paintings by only one of them, and that is Fatqua. In Waln's list he is classified as No. 1, the creator of *Paintings* and described as *painter and miniature*.

Relations between these artists, and especially their family ties, have been studied by Crossman8 and Patrick Conner.9 These authors appear to agree on the fact that the Chinese name Spoilum refers to Guan Zuolin and that Lamqua, the great nineteenth-century Cantonese oil painter, was one of his descendants.

Several other later lists were drawn up in the years after 1815, but they only concern painters on canvas or paper.

### **Some names of Cantonese painters between 1720 and 1820**

2. Chambers, William, 1757, 14. 3. Cf. Chap. III, page 127: The painter Spoilum's workshop.

4. Meares, J., 130, and Diary of Ralph Haskins of Roxbury, Massachusetts, cited by C. Crossman, 49.

5. Smith, Philip Chadwick Foster. 1984, Appendix B, 259-266.

6. List cited and commented on by C. Crossman, 54 to 71.

7. A surprising inclusion, perhaps added to help Waln's readers

in their negotiations with the painter.

8. Crossman, C, 54 to 105.

9. Conner, Patrick, 1986, 50 and 51.

#### **The Swedish Supercargoes' workshop**

We know of the Swedish supercargoes whose portraits were painted on glass. The dates of when they stayed in Canton make it possible to date these works fairly precisely. In fact, four other supercargoes are involved in the history of Chinese reverse glass painting in Sweden: these are Colin Campbell,10 William Chambers, Jacob Hahr and Johan Abraham Grill. The dates of their stays in Canton are summarised in the table below:

The workshop or workshops that produced these portraits were therefore definitely active between:

• 1732 and 1745 for John Pike, but taking into account the clothes he was wearing in the portrait11 (those of a high-ranking supercargo who wants his rank to be known), the period in question is likely to be the one when he was a second-rank supercargo, that is between 1736 and 1745;

• 1744 and 1760 for Gabriel Beyer;12

• 1747 and 1764 for Anders Gadd.

10. Cf. Chap. II, page 84: Portraits of Westerners. 11. Brocade jacket. 12. Cf. the remark on Beyer's rank, page 84.

# **The first Cantonese workshops, 1740-1760, and the Swedish 'network'**

The reverse glass paintings now in the Chinese pavilion at Drottningholm Palace and in a few Swedish museums possess several features that allow suggestions to be made regarding their attribution to different workshops.

> A study of the portraits of King Adolf Fredrik and his wife Lovisa Ulrika13 has resulted in the period 1748-1757 being estimated as the date when they were painted.

> As stated previously, one portrait appears to be of Colin Campbell.14 Since this supercargo was in Canton twice, in 1732 and 1738, it is possible that this portrait was painted from an engraving sent to Canton, like those of King Adolf Fredrik and his wife.

> The frames of these works are all original, and they confirm the various datings suggested.

> Taking into account the concordance of dates and the fact that the Swedish supercargoes must have told one another the address of this excellent reverse glass portraitist, I propose to attribute these portraits to a single workshop that I shall name the Swedish supercargoes' workshop. It was active between 1740 and 1760, at least. I attribute to it the paintings seen in Illustration **72**.

13. Cf. Chap. II, page 84: Portraits of Westerners.

14. Cf. idem.

**43, 44** page 48 **47**

glass paintings now in the library of the oval room were in the first pavilion or in the present one when it was inaugurated, or whether they were added later. We can, however, affirm that the overmantels with multiple mirrors over the fireplaces in the red, yellow and south drawing rooms were put there during the construction of the second pavilion; they are in fact part and parcel of the pavilion's interior architecture. These paintings were executed in Canton before 1761, taking account of the time taken for their transport and the building of the palace.

Do these paintings have common features that would allow them to be attributed to one or several workshops?

The paintings to be examined include those on the overmantel in the south drawing room, seen in Illustration **73** (largest view page 10):

• The outdoor scene at the base of the south drawing room overmantel;

• The five pairs on each side of the south drawing room overmantel;

• The two paintings of pheasants at the top of the yellow and red drawing room mirrors.

#### The Music-Poetry workshop

The outdoor scene at the base of the south drawing room overmantel symbolises poetry.15 It is one of a music-poetry pair, the painting on the theme of music being in the library of the same pavilion.16 This Drottningholm pair is identical to the pairs numbered 43-44 and 47- 48 in the corpus, even down to the frames.

The musical component in these pairs is also linked to another poetry element, with the couple sitting on a seat in the music-poetry pair numbered 101-106 in the corpus. We can deduce that these pairs, with all their symbolic elements, probably come from the same workshop, which was active at least between 1750 and 1770. It therefore seems possible to attribute to this workshop, which I am calling *the music-poetry workshop*, the related music-poetry paintings in the corpus, i.e. nos. 43, 44, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 65, 101 and 106, as well as the music-poetry pair at Drottningholm.

The corresponding photos in the corpus are grouped together in Illustration **74**.

15. Cf. Chap. II, page 40: Outdoor scenes: leisure in high society. 16. Göram Alm, Wirgin J., 290.

**48 32**

**59**

**60 61 62 64**

#### **Drottningholm Chinese pavilion workshops**

The Chinese pavilion given by King Adolf Fredrik to his wife Lovisa Ulrika for her birthday in 1753 was rebuilt as a permanent structure in 1763. We have no documentation to prove that the framed reverse

Pair 4 Right Pair 4 Left Pair 5 Right

**192 193** page 58 **194** page 58 **195**

#### Siou-Sin-Saang's workshop

The five pairs in the south drawing room overmantel are, from top to bottom and right to left:

• Pair 1: Young Manchu women on their veranda, one with a small red parrot, the other with a black and white dog, while a curtain raised to the ceiling opens up the veranda to the sky;

• Pair 2: Young girl on a veranda and young woman near a tree;

• Pair 3: Entertainment in the pavilion, game of Go and music;

• Pair 4: Mandarin wearing winter clothes with a falcon on his hand at a lakeside, young mandarin in summer clothes on his veranda.

The pairs of paintings numbered 1 and 5, depicting young women seated, are similar to several paintings in the corpus: nos. 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 and 197. However, there is one notable difference: the other pairs of young women in the corpus usually mark a contrast between the young unmarried girl and the young married woman, in that the first wears a simple chignon while the second wears her hair in Manchu style. I am therefore tempted to think that the Swedish framers who arranged the mirrors did not do it in the order that the Chinese painter may have stipulated. In my opinion, the original pairs may well have featured a young woman in Pair 1 and a young girl in Pair 5, with this arrangement adding an indoor-outdoor contrast.

Pair 2 in the overmantel observes the indoor-outdoor contrast and the young woman-young girl pairing is identical to the one in pair no. 181-182 of the corpus, which is also in a Swedish museum. In addition to the painting quality of the embroidered silk clothing, we might note the 'flat' depiction of the peonies.

Pair 3 in the overmantel, showing young girls and young women enjoying themselves in elegant pavilions, seems to be painted rather differently, and is reminiscent of nos. 176 and 177 in the corpus.

Pair 4 in the overmantel has winter-summer and old age-youth contrasts. The rendering of the folds of embroidered silk and the little black and white dog is as remarkable as it is in pairs 1 and 5. Painting no. 234 in the corpus is very close to it, given the mandarin's pose, the falcon in his hand and the little black and white dog. The similarity is all the more interesting for the fact that this painting no. 234 dates from around 1757-1760, to the knowledge of its first owner, Lord Clive,17 making it contemporaneous with Chambers' reference.

The very fine, elegant depiction of the gold-embroidered silk fabrics, the shaded folds of the draperies, the drawing of the faces, and also the very 'flat' representation of the flowers are characteristics shared by pairs 1, 2, 4 and 5 in the overmantel, as is the presence of the little black and white dog in pairs 1, 4 and 5. It therefore seems possible to attribute pairs 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the large Drottningholm overmantel to a single workshop, which was active from at least 1755 to 1760. Paintings numbered 181, 182, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197 and 234 might also have been produced in this workshop, which I am provisionally naming *the great Drottningholm overmantel workshop.*

Should we then attribute the portraits in Illustration **72**, of supercargoes and Swedish sovereigns, to the same workshop? Perhaps for the portraits of John Pike and his wife, which share some common features with the paintings previously attributed to this workshop: among these are the landscape, the skilful drawing of the clothes, and the little dogs. Nothing enables us to link the other Swedish portraits to this workshop, apart from the fact it appears quite probable that Swedish East India Company agents would have gone to the painter whose first portraits—those of the Pike couple they had had the opportunity to admire.

Should we, finally, link the great Drottningholm overmantel workshop to the workshop mentioned by Chambers under the name of the painter Siou-Sin-Saang?

Chambers' text18 reads as follows:

*Plates XIX, XX, XXI represent various Chinese garments. Some of the drawings have been done from life, and others are copies from pictures by Siou-Sin-Saang, a famous Chinese painter whom I employed during my stay in Canton to make reverse mirror paintings of all the Chinese costumes.*

A study of these plates leaves a strong impression that the figures have not been drawn by a Chinese artist but by a Westerner—very probably Chambers himself, who would have relied upon his memories, as he did for other drawings. The existence of this Chinese reverse glass painter is therefore open to doubt. However, Jan Wirgin19

19. J. Wirgin in Alm, Göran, 294.

**181 182 186 191**

17. Cf. the caption on no. 234 of the corpus.

18. Chambers, William, 1757, 14.

notes that in 1749, an auction sale of the cargo of three ships returning from China took place in Gothenburg. Among these was the *Hoppet*, the ship on which Chambers was a supercargo, and among the objects for sale were '10 painted mirrors depicting Chinese costumes.' These were very probably the reverse glass paintings that Chambers said he had commissioned: Swedish supercargoes were indeed obliged to put any objects bought in China up for auction, to comply with the regulations of the Swedish Customs authorities.

It should be noted that the paintings surrounding the south drawing room mirror feature Chinese men and women whose costumes are portrayed with the utmost care. And, finally, that two drawings on plate XX, *Summer Apparel* and *Merchants and People of Distinction in Winter*, form a winter-summer, old age-youth pairing, an opposition which, as we have seen,20 is very characteristic of Chinese painters' work. These drawings may have inspired Chambers because of his memory of the fourth pair of paintings on the south drawing room overmantel. All these factors lead me to think that the painter Siou-Sin-Saang very probably existed, and that the Drottningholm great overmantel workshop was his: I am therefore from now on calling it *the Siou-Sin-Saang workshop*. And why would some of the overmantel paintings, pairs 1, 2 and 5 for example, not be among those sold at auction by Chambers in 1749? Photos of the paintings thus attributed to the Siou-Sin-Saang workshop appear together in Illustration **75a** and **75b**.

These three workshops, the Swedish supercargoes', music-poetry and Siou-Sin-Saang's, were active during the same period and all had Swedish supercargoes as their clients. Whether they were linked together or were simply all one workshop, I do not have sufficient evidence to say.

20. Cf. Chap. II, page 40: Outdoor scenes: leisure in high society and page 52: 'Beautiful women.'

#### **Signed portraits**21

Among the works signed by Spoilum I have documented two por traits, one of which is on glass, and a sailor's farewell scene,22 also on glass. The portrait of Thomas Fry, in Illustration **76**, presented for the first time by Conner,23 shows a young man standing, turned slightly towards his left looking at the painter. He has short hair, without a wig, and is wearing a shirt with a jabot, over which is a long yellow waistcoat with pockets near the base. On top of this is a long, open, sky-blue jacket with buttons set close together. His blue culottes are gathered under the knee, he wears white silk stockings and dark shoes with buckles. His left hand is resting on his hip, while his right hand appears to be in the pocket of his culottes. Thomas Fry is posing against an austere interior: we see a simple wall, but no furniture. A terrace opens on to a few trees in the foreground of a water's-edge landscape, where we can see a white, nine-storey pagoda on top of an island and a pleasure sampan on the lake.

The sky is a mirror, while in the upper part of the picture a red curtain with a gold fringe is held open by cords with golden tassels.

The following words are written on the back of the picture: 'Drawn October the… at Canton in China/Spillem in the year 1774.'

This is considered to be the painter's first signature, Spillem being one of the many ways of writing his name. The most frequent version, and the one that would be adopted by Westerners, was Spoi lum. A considerable number of works would be attributed to this art ist, several of them reverse glass paintings. Very little is known about his life, but he may share the same identity as the Chinese painter Guan Zuolin, who was said to be a master of the portrait and was admired by Westerners.24

Another of Spoilum's portraits, in oil on canvas, is also dated and signed, with the following words on the back of the picture: *Spoi lum/Pinxt/Canton/ Decr. 1st 1786*. It is a head-and-shoulders portrait on a black background in an oval frame.25

On the basis of these two signed works, a series of reverse glass paintings and oils on canvas have been attributed to this painter, no

21. Or, to be more precise, portraits where the artist is named in an accompanying, handwritten text.

22. As it has been transposed, this picture is dealt with in Chap. II, page 102. 23. Conner, P. 1998.

24. Nanhai Xianzhin *1910*. Cited by P. Conner, 1986. 25. Crossman, Carl, 1991, 38, Ill. 5.

# **The Painter Spoilum's Workshop**

tably by Crossman26 and Conner,27 the two best connoisseurs of this artist's work.

Spoilum's celebrity stemmed from his portraits of Western na val officers and merchants painted from life. He painted on both glass and canvas. The reverse glass paintings possibly executed by Spoilum, and brought together in this corpus, are studied in the present chap ter and classified into five series.

#### Series 1, five portraits

The *Portrait of Thomas Fry*, in Illustration **76**, is the only 'signed' por trait.

The *Portrait of an English Gentleman*, in Illustration **77**, differs by virtue of the model's three-quarter pose; his clothes of rich mate rials—silk and gold embroideries; his hand that is slipped horizontal -

26. Crossman, Carl, 1991, 38. 27. Conner, Patrick, 2013, 1998, 1986.

Painted mirror. Hardwood frame. 38.1 x 33 cm. Circa 1770. Martyn Gregory Gallery. Photo Rights Reserved.

128 129 From left to right and top to bottom: **78** | *Portrait of a Western Merchant in a Red Jacket.* Painted mirror. Original Cantonese frame. 27.3cm x 21 cm. Martyn Gregory Gallery. Photo Rights Reserved. **79** | *Portrait of Captain Cranston.* Painted mirror. Varnished wooden frame. 31.7 x 26 cm. Martyn Gregory Gallery. Photo Rights Reserved. **80** | *Portrait of a Western Merchant (1).* Reverse glass painting. Lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 39.4 x 34.9 cm. Circa 1800. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio. **81** | *Portrait of a Rich Merchant.* Gilded wooden frame. 70 x 57.5 cm. 1780. Ref. Jenyns, 1965, p. 153, fig. 91. **82** | *Portrait of a Western Merchant (2).* Painted mirror. Lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 24 x 18 cm. Circa 1780. Martyn Gregory Gallery. Photo Rights Reserved. **83** | *Portrait of a Naval Officer.* Painted mirror. Red lacquered wooden frame. 45 x 33 cm. Circa 1780. © National Museums Liverpool, Lady Lever Art Gallery. **84** | *Portrait of an Englishman.* Gilded wooden frame. 38 x 28 cm. Circa 1790. Ref. Lü Ping, introduction. Photo Rights Reserved.

ly into his waistcoat. It is noticeable that the position of the hand and the cut and colour of the waistcoat are very similar to those in John Pike's portrait. As for the *Merchant in the Red Jacket*, in Illustration **78**, he is sitting on a Chinese seat near a Chinese gaming table, upon which lies a Western book that he is touching. The face is more distinct than in the case of Thomas Fry, but it shares with him the shadow of a smile that is so characteristic of Spoilum's work.

The *Portrait of Captain Cranston*, in Illustration **79**, is similar in its setting to the portrait of the merchant in the red jacket in Illustration 78; but the pose resembles that in the English gentleman's portrait. Conner28 has attributed both these pictures to Spoilum.

The *Portrait of a Western Merchant (1)*, Illustration **80**, is very like the paintings described above: there is the same veranda, the same water's-edge landscape, the same red curtain, and the portrait itself is of similar quality. However, there are two distinct differences: the sky is no longer a mirror, it is painted; and the painter has delighted in painting a picture 'within a picture' with his water's-edge landscape. Bearing in mind these factors, I would have little hesitation in also attributing this picture to Spoilum's workshop, but dating the period somewhat later than the preceding portraits in the same series.

#### Series 2, four portraits

The *Portrait of a Rich Merchant*, Illustration **81**, was described for the first time by Jenyns29 who also provides a photo, unfortunately in black and white. However, the accompanying description tells us about the colours. It shows a rather portly man of mature age, standing at the edge of a lake or river on which can be seen a pleasure junk. The sky is a mirror.

*He is wearing a green coat and breeches, and a beautifullyembroidered white waistcoat, and holding a gold-topped cane with a tassel. From his bearing one can see that he was a man of substance, whose clothes date him to about 1780 or 1785. He was probably a wealthy trader from one of the factories at Canton.*

28. Martyn Gregory Gallery, catalogues 2003 and 2016. 29. Jenyns, Soame R., 1965, 152, Ill. 91.

The portrait mentioned by Crossman,30 with the description 'the man, standing with a cane, appears beside a Chinese river with a junk' is the same one, and he attributes it to Spoilum. The presence of flowers in the foreground, together with the pheasant and the picture's considerable size (70 x 57.5 cm), link it to the early 'Swedish' productions described in Chapter II, page 84. The water's-edge setting with a mirror for the sky is not very different from the portrait of Thomas Fry. For these reasons, it could be dated to the 1770-1780 period.

The *Portrait of a Western Merchant (2)*, (Illustration **82**), is very like the preceding picture. The setting is identical, with the same water's-edge landscape, the same sampan, the same golden pheasants in the sky and trees and flowers on the bank. The pose is also similar, with the merchant standing, leaning on his cane. Only the clothes are less opulent and the frame different.

The *Portrait of a Naval Officer*, Illustration **83**, belongs to the fine Lady Lever Gallery collection in Liverpool. It shows a British naval officer from a three-quarter view, wearing a long navy-blue jacket with buttons set close together, over a white waistcoat with large pockets near the base. His left hand is on his hip while his right hand is slipped horizontally into the waistcoat. This pose is very similar to those in portraits of the first series, particularly the one of Captain Cranston (Illustration **79**). The setting, too, is very like those in the two portraits of merchants previously described. These many resemblances enable me (for the first time in this book) to attribute the Lady Lever Gallery portrait to Spoilum and also to date it to 1770-1780.

The *Portrait of an Englishman*, (Illustration **84**)31 is comparable to the previous one in its general composition, the pose and the naval officer's uniform, and the fact of the sky being a mirror. It therefore also appears to be attributable to Spoilum.

#### Series 3, two portraits

*Captain John Corner*, in Illustration **85**, and *The Ship-Owner Audibert*, in Illustration **86**, both have a clear resemblance to the pictures

30. Crossman, Carl, 1991, 205.

31. Lü Ping, 2013, Introduction.

in series 1 and 2, particularly in the model's pose, clothing and the care taken over the face. The difference, however, is that they are not reverse glass paintings.

The *Portrait of Captain John Corner* (Illustration **85**). Some words on the back of the frame state that this is a portrait of John Corner, captain of the *Carnatic*. 32 This information is important for dating it, since the *Carnatic*, a vessel of the English East India Company, only went to Canton twice, in 1788 and 1791. Conner attributes this portrait to Spoilum.

*Portrait of the Ship-Owner Audibert* (Illustration **86**). This portrait has the distinctive features of being oval and of having a very simple, natural setting of foliage beyond a terrace, unlike other portraits of the period whose settings feature a water's-edge landscape. On a piece of paper on the back of the frame, we can just make out the following words: '*Mr Audibert / portrait fait à / Guadaloppe (?) / père… grand- / mère de…*' Conner attributes this portrait to Spoilum. The text, written in French, caught my attention because it indicates that the model is French. It would then be the only example I know of a Chinese reverse glass painting representing a Frenchman. I therefore conducted some research into the name Audibert.

130 131 **87** | *Portrait of a Young Englishman.* Painted mirror. Painted wooden frame. 29.4 x 23.7 cm. Courtesy Richard Milhender. Photo Rights Reserved. **88** | *Portrait of an European Merchant.* Reverse glass painting. Gilded wooden frame. 25.4 x 20.32 cm. Circa 1775. Martyn Gregory Gallery. Photo Rights Reserved.

This person was very probably one of the members of the Audibert family, who were ship-owners in Marseille, and owned ships travelling to India and Canton.33 They were among those Marseille's ship-owners who, after the French East India Company's monopoly ended in 1769, fitted out ships and created the lucrative four-way trade, adding voyages to the West Indies to those going to the Indies and China. The word *Guadaloppe* in the text just quoted is probably connected to this original maritime route. Private ship-owners could only operate in the absence of the monopoly granted to the French East India Company, which therefore means between 1769 and 1791. And it was during this period that the portrait was painted. However, I have not unearthed any evidence to determine whether a member of this family went to Canton or if the portrait was executed from a miniature, which might explain the unusual setting. Another interesting fact is that the captain of one of the Audibert ships was Jean Joseph Blancard, who brought the first chrysanthemum plants back from China. The task of describing them, and

32. Cf. no. 297 in the corpus. 33. Blancard, Pierre, 1806, 52, note 1. how to cultivate them, was given to the family's celebrated botanist, Canon d'Audibert de Ramatuelle.

#### Series 4, two portraits

This series comprises the *Portrait of a Young Englishman*, Illustration **87**, and the *Portrait of a Western Gentleman*, Illustration **88**. The men in both of these paintings can be seen standing, from a three-quarters angle and turned slightly towards their right looking at the painter. Supercargoes or captains, they are wearing identical clothes, right down to the embroidery on their waistcoats. They both have a hand on their hip, but one has his other hand in his waistcoat while the other man's is hanging down beside his body. A red curtain is suspended over the upper part of these portraits. The poses and depiction of the faces link them to the previous series.

However, there are three major differences:

• They are not painted mirrors;

• A room with plain, unadorned walls forms the background. The room is empty or furnished only with a table covered with a dark-blue cloth, on which two Western books are lying;

• The water's-edge landscape is absent: a lattice window looks out on to the sky, which is no longer a mirror.

• These portraits were attributed to Spoilum, one by Crossman and the other by Conner.

The almost abstract character of these compositions is a subject of intrigue:

• Do they signal a return to the more traditional Chinese portrait from which all setting was absent, with the model standing out against a plain background?

• Is this the décor of a room inside one of the factories? Two works cited by Conner might lead us to think so,34 and several paintings of the port of Canton confirm the look of these windows;

• Should we see in these pictures the influence of a Western painter? In his benchmark article on Spoilum, Conner35 notes the resemblance between these paintings and those of the English artist Arthur David (1712-1787), particularly with regard to the pose adopted, the austerity of the décor and the lattice window in the background. It

34. Conner, P, 2009, 117, Illustration 5.4, and on the Martyn Gregory Gallery website (August 2013), an oil painting on canvas entitled *Portrait of John Smith Crary*. 35. Conner, P, 1998.

is not impossible that some of this artist's engravings may have inspired Spoilum, but it seems more probable that this almost abstract décor simply represents one of the rustic rooms in a factory.36

#### Series 5, less certain attributions:

The *Portrait of a Western Merchant (3)*, Illustration **89**, no. 299 in the corpus, has been claimed as the work of Spoilum. The plunging view of the water's-edge setting and the model's pose, which only lacks the cane to complete the resemblance to the Series 2 portraits, both argue in favour of this attribution. On the other hand, the painting's format, the river opening (towards the sea) and the middling quality of how the face is depicted are unusual for this artist. I would tend to attribute it rather to one of the assistants in Spoilum's workshop.

36. Martyn Gregory Gallery, catalogue 2009-2010.

As is the case whenever there is the possibility of a great artist being involved, there is a strong temptation for the owner to attribute the work in his possession to Spoilum, particularly with portraits of merchants, supercargoes and naval officers painted in China at this time. The other attributions I have been able to hunt down when the literature permitted it are mainly those involving oil on canvas, which are therefore not relevant to the present study. We might simply note that the van Braam family portraits, studied in pages 91-94, were attributed to Spoilum—an attribution that does not seem to be correct, particularly due to the fact that these portraits were based exclusively on European engravings.

#### **Spoilum's art**

From studying these portraits, a few characteristics emerge that are peculiar to this painter. Conner37 summarises them as follows:

*His models, whether Western or Chinese, are seen face on but slightly turned towards the right; their faces are smooth, with light but quite visible shadows, and they often have the hint of a smile. Behind them is a plain setting that nonetheless has a paler area above one shoulder.*

Crossman38 adds to this what he calls 'Spoilum's characteristic of not painting both eyes at the same level.'

My own contribution would be to point to the shading, which we know to be one of the differences between traditional Chinese painting and Western painting. In all these portraits attributed to Spoilum, with the exception of Thomas Fry's, the figure is on the right of the picture and the light comes from the right. Spoilum therefore naturally places a shadow over the left part of the face, but mainly the area between the eye and the base of the chin. On the other hand, he does not usually put shading on the clothes and neither does he paint any shadows cast by the models themselves.

However, two portraits present an exception to this last rule: the one of Thomas Fry, where the shadow cast on the ground makes us think the light is coming from the window, whereas neither the

37. Conner, Patrick. 1986, 52.

38. Crossman, Carl. 1991, 205.

face nor body have any shadows; and the one of Mr Audibert, which has a single shadow on the ground.

Although Conner and Crossman do not say so explicitly, their analyses can only lead to the conclusion that Spoilum painted from life, at least where the faces and clothing were concerned. This hypothesis is confirmed by two passages from travel journals. One is the journal of John Meares:39 on his ship, the *Felice*, travelling from Canton towards the United States in 1788, he was returning a Polynesian prince, by the name of Tianna, to the Hawaiian island from whence he had come. In Canton, Tianna had bought many objects:

*But of all the objects among his riches, Meares tells us, the one that appealed most to his imagination was a portrait of himself painted by the famous Chinese artist, Spoilum, who was perhaps the only one of his kind in the whole of this vast empire. The painter had faithfully expressed all the features of his physiognomy, but had surpassed himself in the talent with which he rendered the grace pervading the Indian's face. . . it seemed as if the face changed its expression with each brush stroke.*

The other revealing quotation is in the journal belonging to Ralph Haskins of Roxbury, who describes his session spent sitting for Spoilum in the following terms:40

*While nothing else could be done, I went to Spoilum and sat for two hours to have my portrait taken. He was \$10 each and does a great deal of business in that line. I was surprised to see how expert he was in doing it.*

On the other hand, it is not impossible, and is even probable, that Spoilum was inspired by Western engravings in positioning his models, and that the setting was sometimes chosen by the person commissioning the painting from among a number of settings proposed by the artist.

Having reviewed all the certain and probable datings of Spoilum's portraits, both on reverse glass and on canvas, it would seem that he started with reverse glass portraits before proceeding to paint on

39. Meares, J. Paris Year 3, Volume 1, 228. 40. Diary of Ralph Haskins of Roxbury, Massachusetts, kept at Canton, 1802, private collection, cited by C. Crossman in Crossman, Carl, 1991, 49.

canvas. From among the reverse glass portraits, two periods emerge, such as have already been seen for Swedish portraits and that can in fact be found in all reverse glass painting. The first period, around 1770 to 1780, is when Spoilum was painting reverse mirror portraits, with the mirror representing the sky. It was also the time when he was painting larger portraits. Series 1 and 2 are linked to this period, containing portraits similar to those of Mr and Mrs John Pike.41 The second period, which starts around 1780, and extends until around 1790-1800, is when the painting covers the whole of the glass: this therefore includes Series 3 and 4. Within this period, I would surmise that Series 4 is older than Series 3. These distinctions are by no means exclusive, as periods of covering the glass very probably existed outside them, in accordance with the wishes of those commissioning them. If we add the analysis of the reverse glass paintings carried out here to those which Conner and Crossman have done for paintings on canvas, we see a real personality emerging, of an artist who tends, through his own style and economy of means, to depict his models' most essential traits. No other Chinese reverse glass painter in Canton was to achieve such acuity of perception in his art. It will come as no surprise that John Meares put Spoilum in top place among 'the painters of the Empire' and that his work is still sought-after today.

Only one reverse glass painting signed by Spoilum that is not a portrait is present in my corpus: no. 429, *George Harrison and the Crew of the Alliance*. The following words appear on the back of the frame: *G. Harrison's… has'd of Spoilum in Canton, AD 1788*. 42 Amongst barrels and bundles on a quayside, some sailors are talking while one of them bids a tender farewell to his girlfriend. The sailors' caps bear the name of their ship, the *Alliance*. This picture has been transposed from an engraving by the English painter Henry Bunbury (1750-1811). The sailors commissioned it as a souvenir of their stay in Canton and it proves only that Spoilum, the great master of the portrait, had no hesitation in painting innocuous souvenirs or, more probably, having them painted in his workshop.

41. Illustrations **44** and **45**, pages 86-87. 42. Lee, Jean Gordon, 1984, 192.

# **The painter Fatqua's workshop**

Since the transcription of Chinese names into Latin characters was not systematised in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Canton, a painter's name could have several Latin spellings, as we have seen in the case of Spoilum.

The corpus includes eight paintings whose signatures are quite similar: • *Mary, Joseph and the Baby Jesus*, no. 341 in the corpus: Fatqua

Canton pixit;

• *Snake in the Gras*s, no. 342 in the corpus, which, on the back of the frame, contains a veritable CV of the painter), in which he presents himself thus: '*Faiqua*, painter in oil and water colours, and on glass, China Street,43 Canton.' And he adds: 'Prepares boxes of assorted colours for drawing, on the lowest terms.' Finally, on a little box is written the word 'Fatqua.'

Around this, Fatqua has laid out a European palette, pots of colours, a box of colours and two interesting objects giving further information about the painter:

• A canvas depicting a Western ship, thus pointing out that he is a marine painter;

• Two painted vases: are these intended to show that he also paints on porcelain?

It is noticeable that on this 'business card' he himself uses two spellings for his name: *Faiqua* and *Fatqua*.

• *Hebe and Jupiter*, no. 343 in the corpus, Illustration **91**: *Fatqua Canton pinxit*;

• *Madame Récamier*, no. 365 in the corpus: *Falqua pinxit*;

• *Virginia in the Grav*e, no. 353 in the corpus: *Factua no. 2*;

• *Portrait of Humphrey Plantagenet, Duke of Gloucester*, 374b in the corpus: *Fatqua Canton pinxit*;

• *Portrait of George Augustus, Prince of Wales*, no. 375 in the corpus: *Farqua Canton*.

These signed paintings have the following features:

• They are all directly transposed from engravings. In the case of three of them—nos. 341, 342 and 365 in the corpus—we know the picture from which the engraving was made. Note that, in no. 342, Venus's breast is modestly covered by a chemisette, whereas this is not the case either in Reynolds' original painting or in the engravings known to have been made from this picture;44

43. R. Waln Junior specifies (page117) that the workshop was likely to be in New China Street.

44. Cf. caption of no. 342 in the corpus.

painted on the glass, with a red and gold floral decoration in Illustra tion **91** and nos. 341, 365 and 366, or with a gold border in nos. 353 and 375 of the corpus.

136 137 • Six out of seven of them are surrounded by an inner frame • The draperies are of two kinds: those made of quite heavy silk or satin fabrics, which Fatqua treats in a sculptural fashion, using bril liant colours such as an electric blue. This is the case with Hebe's robe, in Illustration **91**, Venus's robe in no. 342 of the corpus, Virginia's robe in no. 353 and the Virgin Mary's in no. 341 –the painter creates a con trast between the strong draperies and the soft skin of the women por trayed; those made of light voile, all soft and transparent, that are used to cover the young women in paintings numbered 365 and 366.

• The women's smiles come from mouths that are pinched at the edges but whose lips are full and fleshy in the centre. The chins are round with their upper part marked by a shadow under the lip.

• Fatqua's 'business card,' in Illustration **90**, is illustrated by the engraving of a Western ship. He wished to show by this that he was able to paint maritime scenes. We also have a gouache on paper of a landscape signed by Fatqua.45

From this information, it seems possible to attribute the following paintings to Fatqua's workshop:

• *Young Woman*, no. 366 in the corpus for its resemblance to no. 365, with which it makes a pair;

• *Venus and Cupid*, no. 345 in the corpus, for the drapery and the inner frame;

• *The Apotheosis of Washington*, nos. 411 and 412, for the drapery;

• *Liberty*, no. 414 in the corpus, for the face and the robe.

All the paintings signed by Fatqua or attributed to him here are grouped together in Illustration **92**, entitled *Fatqua's workshop*

.

Analysis of some of these works has enabled some dates to be sug

gested:• The portrait of George Augustus, Prince of Wales and the fu ture George IV, shows him in the regalia of Grand Master of the An cient Honourable Society of Freemasons. His Royal Highness

remained Grand Master from 1790 to 1813. • As Reynolds' *Snake in the Grass* was painted in 1785, the re verse glass painting could have been executed after 1788.46

45. Crossman, Carl, 1991, 189.

46. Taking into account the length of journeys to China.

• Since the novel *Paul et Virginie* was published in 1789, Au gustin Legrand's engraving could not have been produced until 1790, nor the reverse glass painting until 1791.

• Finally, Cosway's portrait of Madame Récamier was painted in 1802, and could not have reached Canton until 1803. We are there fore able to establish that Fatqua's workshop was active at least during the period 1785-1803.

**92** | *Fatqua's workshop.* Photos with corpus numbers

**338 339 341**

**353**

**342**

**366 374a**

**374b 374c**

A study of the overmantel in Illustration **93** contributes some interesting information for determining workshops. The frame was made in England and specialists47 attribute it to the Lindell Brothers' workshop, dating it to 1765. It contains twenty-three mirrors, of which nine are painted, from top to bottom and from left to right: • Still life with vase and bowl of lychees;

47. J. Cummings in *Chinese Glass Paintings & Export Porcelain*, 1996, 26, who cites Child, G, 1990, fig. 186, *Furniture*. London: 1968, 68, fig. 128 and 129.

• Pair 1: Birds and flowers, pheasants and peonies, water's-edge landscape on the left; and, on the right, red parrot, peonies and water's-edge landscape;

• Pair 2: Still life, white and coral vase on the left; and, on the right, a vase of peonies and periwinkles;

• Pair 3: A shepherdess with her sheep in a water's-edge landscape on the left and, on the right, a young woman in an identical landscape watching a pair of ducks on the water.

**93** | *Overmantel Mirror.* English gilded wooden frame, Georges III, 1765. 147 x185 cm. Circa 1765. The Chinese Porcelain Company, New York. Photo by Richard Goodbody. **94** | *Shepherdess* (left) and *Young Woman and Flute player* (right). Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frame. 46 x 36 cm. Circa 1780. Formerly Horlick's collection. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

# **The Shepherdess workshop**

**120a 120b 167**

The Pair 3 workshop:

• The motif in the first painting of this pair, on the left of the overmantel, belongs to the series of *Beautiful Women in Straw Hats*, a series that has received detailed study in Chap. II, page 55. The painting in this overmantel is composed of the following elements, which are shared with nos. 114, 115, 118, 120a and 120b (Illustration **94**) in the corpus:

• The shepherdess, her clothing, her hair and her pose, sitting on a rock with one hand on a basket of flowers with a tall handle, and the other holding a stick;

• The sheep, a pair and a single one, identical but with their positions reversed from left to right;

• The tranquil landscape with a river bordered by trees and beautiful villas.

However, it is different in that it is narrower, and includes neither the parts depicting a falconer watching a shepherdess, nor the one with a child playing the flute at the feet of the shepherdess.

These four shepherdesses were painted in the same workshop; no. 118 is in its original Chinese frame, while the other three have been put into English frames.

The motif in the second picture of Pair 3 in the overmantel, on the right, shows a young woman seated, with her hands on a basket of flowers. It is identical to the one in no. 119 of the corpus (which forms a pair with no. 118) and also to no. 167, but narrower, and includes neither the second young woman shown in nos. 119 and 167, nor the child playing the flute, who we see in no. 167. This scene of the child playing the flute at the feet of the young woman is identical in nos. 110 and 113 of the corpus.

Proceeding on the principle that pairs of paintings were the work of a single person, it is possible to attribute the following paintings to the same workshop: nos. 109 (paired with no. 110), 116 (paired with no. 115), 109 (paired with no. 110) and 111 and 112 (close to no. 109).

It is interesting to note, in these shepherdess scenes, that the composition is based on the same elements—the shepherdess herself, the landscape, the flute player, the falconer and the little black and white dog—but put together differently. It therefore seems possible to attribute the Pair 3 paintings in this overmantel, and nos. 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 118, 119, 120 and 167 in the corpus, to a single workshop, which I am naming the shepherdess workshop. Their photos are shown in Illustration **95**, *The Shepherdess workshop*. The method of composition in these paintings is not dissimilar to certain traditional eighteenth-century Chinese paintings, combining elements sometimes copied from handbooks of painting motifs such as the *Garden as large as a grain of mustard*. 48

This examination and attribution raise the question of the shepherdess workshop's relationship to Siou-Sin-Saang's workshop. They share some common features, such as:

• The presence of similar rococo-style frames, like the one on the Drottningholm red drawing room overmantel;

• The little black and white dogs.

However, these features do not appear sufficient to suggest that these two workshops are one and the same.

48. Petrucci, R. Paris, 1910.

**109 110 111 112**

**115 116**

**118 119**

142

The very fine series of nineteen outdoor scenes in the Leiden Ethnographic Museum in the Netherlands are all of the same size and have been fully analysed and dated49 by van Dongen.50 There is no doubt that they belong to a single workshop, which was active in the 17851790 period. Its artist's (or artists') talents were expressed in a wide variety of themes: ceremonies, landscapes, occupations and feasts. The number of scenes portraying the emperor's regal activities, seen particularly in Illustrations **96** and **97**, might lead us to think that this workshop had an official standing.

N° 81, 82, 94, 95,240, 242, 256 à 267 of the corpus make up this workshop.

# **The 'Leiden' workshop**

**96** | *The Emperor's Audience.* Reverse glass painting. Without frame. 81 x 52.5 cm. Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen. Coll.no.360-1122 XIX. Photo Rights Reserved. **97** | *The Emperor Ploughing.* Reverse glass painting. Without frame. 81 x 52.5 cm. Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen. Coll.no.360-1113 XIX. Photo Rights Reserved.

49. Thanks, in particular, to a view of the Canton quaysides. 50. Van Dongen, Paul L.F, 1995.

Over and above the evidence provided by the workshops, it is possible to group paintings by making a comparative analysis of the works themselves, taking account, also, of the people commissioning them and those the works were intended for—if, indeed, these are known. Each group of works can be attributed to a particular workshop. They are listed under different series in this chapter.

#### Series 1 and 2: Pair 1 of the overmantel in Illustration **93**

This birds and flowers pairing includes, on the left, a golden pheasant on a rock near a river. It is watching a butterfly and sitting underneath some large peonies and a flowering magnolia, a set of motifs that are all traditional Chinese symbols.51 The pheasant's pose, the shape of the peonies and magnolia and the frame itself mean that this painting is very similar to nos. 6, 7, 38 and 39 in the corpus. The second of the pair shows a red parrot (a lory bird?) with blue wings perched on a camellia with a vine climbing up it.  This scene is very close to no. 20 in the corpus (dated 1765, like the overmantel), while the parrot itself appears in the same pose and the same colours in nos. 21 and 23 of the corpus. It is a lory bird, and more precisely a lory with a collar. Buffon describes it thus:52

*The whole body, including the tail, is a dark blood red, which is precisely the livery of lories; the wing is green, the top of the head is black ending in purple on the back of the neck; the legs and the fold of the groin are a beautiful blue; the base of the neck is covered (in males) with a yellow collar, and it is by this latter characteristic that we thought we should designate this species.*

He adds that these lories are 'confined to New Guinea and the Molucca Islands': Sonnerat,53 who was much travelled in this region of the Indonesian Islands, confirms in his turn that 'birds of this species (lories) are only to be found in the Molucca Islands and New Guinea, those seen elsewhere have all been transported.' The Chinese painter (or painters) who produced these mirrors had therefore seen a lory with a collar and, even more surprising, had decided to paint it in a remarkable setting, in the midst of birds that were traditional to Chinese painting, or else found on perches in elegant houses. In addition to the paintings already referred to, it is also present in nos. 24, 51, 96, 97, 136 and 150. It is possible that this beautiful exotic bird is a 'signature' corresponding to a workshop's name or sign. One factor supporting this hypothesis is the gouache on paper (Illustration **98**) depicting the studio of the painter Tingqua, who was active between 1820 and 1860. On the left of the entrance to the workshop, a bird on its perch can be seen, which could well be a lory. The styles of these 'lory' paintings, like their dates of origin, are, however, very different, and could only be from the same workshop if it comprised several painters and it was kept running over time.

There are very few common features that would allow me to judge that these two workshops in the overmantel's Pair 2 were in fact one. I have therefore distinguished the following series:

**Series 1**: Pheasants and flowers, first element of Pair 1 of the overmantel in Illustration **93** and paintings in figures 6, 7 and no. 38 and 39 of the corpus.

**Series 2**: Red parrot and camellia, second element of Pair 1 of the overmantel in Illustration **93** and nos. 20, 21 and 23 of the corpus.

**Series 3**: The young women of Saltram House, nos. 148, 149 161, 162, 163 and 189, to which it seems possible to add nos. 160 and 216.

**Series 4**: The Saltram House couples, nos. 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 212 and 213 of the corpus.

**Series 5**: The Lady Lever Gallery courtesans, nos. 206, 207, 208 and 209 in the corpus.

**Series 6**: The concubine on her sampan, nos. 154, 155, 156, 157, 158 and 159 in the corpus, to which no. 214 might be added.

**Series 7**: The musicians of Drottingholm Chinese pavilion: twelve paintings of young women, each playing a different musical instrument, among them no. 218, to which nos. 269 and 270 in the corpus might be added.

My analysis of the works described here, in an attempt to determine their workshops of origin, provides only a thumbnail sketch of the avenues that might be followed up in order to arrive at a convincing result. More in-depth, systematic research is necessary on this topic.

This workshop is known to have existed because of the descriptions provided by court Jesuits. The Chinese texts I have been able to access in the imperial archives mention imperial commissions for reverse glass painting, but did not allow me to add anything to the Jesuits' descriptions. And, unfortunately, the few paintings now in the Palace Museum, and of which I have knowledge, are more recent than the period being studied here, besides being of Cantonese origin.

In compliance with Emperor Qianlong's order to paint on glass, Brother Attiret went to this workshop to learn the technique. During this period, 1740, mirrors given to the court by Westerners were being painted in the palace. It is probable that Emperor Qianlong was responsible for setting up this workshop, between 1735, the date of his enthronement, and 1740, when Brother Attiret mentions it for the first time.

A more thorough investigation of the palace archives and collections would be required to establish the dates when the workshop opened and closed—a workshop that was unique in the history of reverse glass painting throughout the world.

# **Some other series classified by workshop The imperial reverse glass painting workshop**

51. Cf. Chap. II , page 35: Paintings with Chinese motifs.

52. Leclerc de Buffon, G.L., 1779, 130.

53. Sonnerat, M., 1776, 173.

#### Location

The locations of Chinese painting workshops in Canton (not only for reverse glass painting) are given in the list drawn up by Waln54 in 1819: they were split among Old China Street and New China Street, two shopping streets that ran at right angles to the quay. According to Waln, the reverse glass painter Fatqua worked in New China Street, which is confirmed by his 'business card' in Illustration **90**. Fifty-six years later, in 1875, J.H. Gray,55 walking through the streets of Can ton, said:

*Set back from this watercourse, we entered the street named Ngaan Keng Kai, or the street of spectacle glasses. In this narrow bazaar, Chinese reverse glass paintings and glass lanterns of all shapes and sizes are set out for sale in great numbers. In the small building of the reverse glass painters' guild, situated in the same street, we saw artists who were very busy painting on glass. They seemed highly amused by the interest we showed in carefully examining the results of their work.*

It would seem, then, that these workshops scattered across the two main commercial streets subsequently grouped into guilds and mo ved to one street, in accordance with the Chinese tradition of streets dedicated to a corporate body such as a guild.

I have not been able to procure any image, painting or engraving of a reverse glass painter's workshop. There are, however, several descrip tions and engravings of Cantonese workshops belonging to painters on canvas, silk or paper, including the most well-known of them, the painter Lamqua. His workshop has been described several times56 and its frontage was drawn by Auguste Borget.57 These descriptions date from 1830 at the earliest, which means the one that these Wes tern visitors mentioned had been rebuilt about ten years earlier be cause, in 1822, a huge fire had destroyed this whole area of the city. It

56. Forgues, Emile Daurand (Old Nick), 1845, Vol. II, 36 to 38;

# **Workshop location and premises**

was situated in New China Street, occupying a three-storey wooden building with, on its façade, a wooden sign in English, reading: 'Lam qua, handsome face painter'—a little flattery to attract the Western customer. The shop was on the ground floor, and this was where tran sactions with clients were conducted: commissions and purchases of works painted by the workshop, but also the purchase of artists' pain ting materials like paper, brushes, colours, ink and inkstones. On the first floor, several of Lamqua's assistant painters were busy. The visi tors describing these scenes did not say whether each painter created a complete work from start to finish or whether, as for porcelain,58 painters specialised in particular motifs, like figures, flowers, birds or landscapes. On the second floor, Lamqua, the master himself, would be painting the portraits of Westerners and, at the same time, conver sing with them. On the first and second floors were the engravings sent from the West, ready to be transposed in colour on to another medium. This, together with portraits, was an important activity for Lamqua's workshop.

The painter Tingqua's workshop was also painted in gouache on paper, probably by the artist himself (Illustration **98**).

Although the Chinese reverse glass workshops, which preced ed the workshops for painting on canvas, were more rustic and prob ably had fewer employees than Lamqua's workshop, their organisation and arrangement of space must have been quite similar.

58. D'Entrecolles. Paris, 1819, Vol. 10, 149.

54. List referred to and commented upon in Crossman, C., 1991, 54 to 71.

55. Gray, John Henry, 1875, 284.

Downing, C. Toogood, 1838, Vol. II, 90 to 108.

57. Forgues, Emile Daurand (Old Nick), 1845, Vol. II, 36.

Reverse glass paintings were not among the products that the East India Companies commissioned their supercargoes with buying in Canton. Purchasing these paintings and shipping them to Europe or the United States was a personal affair for supercargoes and seamen, from officers down to simple sailors. They bought them out of their own pockets in order to embellish their houses when they returned, or else to present them as gifts or resell them in the West at a substantial profit. The paintings were therefore part of their personal possessions, the *pacotille* that they were allowed to carry in the section of the ship's hold reserved for them. For this reason, the buyers needed neither to officially register these works on the inventory of the ship's cargo, nor produce any bill for them. This procedure explains why we have been able to find very few documents noting the quantities and prices of reverse glass paintings bought in Canton. Besides which, the time available to develop my thesis, and the number of themes to be dealt with, have not allowed me to research this subject as thoroughly as it deserves by looking for additional information, notably in the company archives. I have relied only on already-published documents.

Unlike European supercargoes, the captains and supercargoes of the *Empress of China*, the first American ship to go to China in 1783 and 1786, kept quite a precise tally of their purchases, particularly in the form of receipts from their Chinese suppliers.59 The following receipts have been found:

October 1784, from Molyneux,60 12 dollars for a reverse glass painting for Mrs Morris;

October 1784, from Molyneux, 4 dollars tax for various objects including Mrs Morris's reverse glass painting;

July 1786, from S. Hubbart,61 48 dollars for reverse glass paintings;

18 September 1786, from J. Green, 54 dollars for 6 reverse glass paintings;

11 December 1786, from J. Green, 24 dollars for taxes on 12 reverse glass paintings and 3 oil paintings;

December 1786, on behalf of Mr de la Tombe of Boston, 18 dollars for 2 reverse glass painted *Venuses* (the pair).

Sullivan Dorr,62 who was in China in 1800, writes that he acquired two reverse glass paintings on the theme 'Temple of Fame'63 for the price of 16 dollars, a sum which is not very different from that paid by Green.

Analysis of these receipts therefore shows that in 1784-1786, a reverse glass painting was priced at 8 to 10 dollars, to which was added a tax of around one dollar.

This price is to be compared with the sum of 2.8 dollars for a large silk parasol, 1 dollar for a teapot or a blue and white porcelain bowl, or 20 to 30 dollars for a piece of embroidered silk. I would finally point out that, in the same year, Mr de la Tombe sold 156 bottles of champagne at 1.5 dollars a bottle to Chinese merchants.

Another comparison of interest is Spoilum's portrait of Ralph Haskins.64 The model paid 10 dollars in 1803 for his portrait on canvas, executed in Canton (in two hours, he says!) by the famous painter.

 60. F. Molyneux was the secretary-accountant to Captain J. Green of the *Empress of China* on its first voyage. 61. S. Hubbart was the secretary-accountant to Captain J. Green of the *Empress of China* on its second voyage.

#### The European market for reverse glass paintings involved both:

• **A closed sector,** of sales commissioned by supercargoes of the East India Companies and entrepreneurs specialising in works of art (*marchands merciers*). These latter, who received orders from the upper echelons of society, took part in the sales of cargoes or passed on orders to the supercargoes, who would carry them out. We have been able to find very few documents detailing these transactions.

• **An open sector,** of auction sales, a means of trading that was just beginning in mid-eighteenth-century Europe. Unlike sales in the closed sector, these transactions are known to us through sales catalogues listing the lots for sale and sometimes the prices for which they were sold, noted in handwriting by the auctioneer.

By consulting these French, British and Brussels catalogues65 for the 1750-1830 period, I have been able to draw up Appendix II (page 227) showing the following information about the lots containing Chinese reverse glass paintings:

• Date of the sale and description of the lot;

• Sometimes the auction house and the seller; • Rarely the price.

#### These pictures enable us to make the following observations:

**France.** From 1757 to 1787, auction sales took place in Paris. The first sale of Chinese reverse glass paintings, in 1757, for which we know the seller's name, involved the estate of a Mr Meignen, who was described as a *former East India Company Supercargo in China*, which testified to the role played by supercargoes in the spread of these paintings. The two largest sales were those of Mr Malenfant, described as a *former valet to the King's chamber*, in 1773 (21 reverse glass paintings) and the Prince of Conti in 1777 (15 reverse glass paintings). From 1787 to 1816, only one sale was organised, in 1799. The seller was the painter and collector Jean-Baptiste Pierre Lebrun. This weak market was due to a revolutionary period marked by the absence of aristocrats, who had been great collectors of reverse glass paintings before departing into exile.

#### In France

Prices appear to be very diverse: the average price of a reverse glass painting varied within a range of 10 to 30 pounds per piece (the Malenfant sale in 1773) to a range of 60 to 12 pounds per piece (the Prince of Conti's sale in 1777). It might be interesting to compare these prices with those for works by recognised painters that were sold at the same period in the same auction houses. It would appear that a Chinese reverse glass painting was sold in France at a similar price to a grisaille painting by Boucher in 1770, or a picture on canvas by Fragonard in 1777.

**Great Britain**. Between 1787 and 1836, sales took place without interruption, mainly in London. Unlike the French sales, most of the sellers were not key figures in the country. There were, however, two exceptions: Queen Charlotte Sophia, wife of George III, whose belongings were sold in 1819, the year following her death; and David Martin, painter to the Prince of Wales, whose Chinese reverse glass paintings were put up for sale in 1799.

65. Through personal visits to Christie's archives in London, Paris libraries and, on the Getty Foundation website, Getty Provenance Index Databases. 66. Lee Ward, Mildred, 1978.

As trade with China had resumed and the aristocrats had returned, sales started up again from 1816 in both France and England, although they were slow. The golden age was over in Europe, the public had changed and the fashion for Chinese reverse glass painting would fade permanently in the West with the First Opium War.

**Brussels**. In this city, which was then Austrian, part of the great art collection belonging to the Apostolic Nuncio to Belgium, Molinari, was sold in 1763. It included some reverse glass paintings.

**United States**. The taste for reverse glass paintings started here as soon as the first merchant ship arrived in Canton in 1783. It did not wane until the mid-nineteenth century, but I have no figures to show the number of sales or the prices paid. The only figure available is contained in the meticulous inventory of reverse glass paintings in American museums compiled by Mildred Lee Ward in 1978.66 It records 759 reverse glass paintings, of which 91 are Chinese.

The subject most depicted in the reverse glass paintings sold at this period is of a young Chinese woman in her home, or in a landscape, holding a pipe or a fan in her hand. Birds and flowers appear to be the second subject in terms of numbers.

Also of note is that the large majority of these paintings were sold in gilded wooden frames.

#### In Great Britain

From 1787 to 1830 the price range was wide, from 0.1 to 3 pounds per piece, with a slight increase over the period. These prices are comparable to those for drawings (0.15 pounds in 1787, or paintings (3.1 pounds in 1807) by the very fashionable painter Thomas Gainsborough (1727-1788). The curator of Shugborough Hall told me67 that the two large Chinese-painted mirrors in the house68 were probably those sold as lots 80 and 81 on 10 February 1780 to a Mr Anson,69 for the sum of 26.5 pounds. This price was apparently very high for two reverse glass paintings, but not for two mirrors of such dimensions, which were rare at the time, and for such fine gilded frames. The Chinese painting itself probably contributed little value.

67. Email conversation with the curator, Mrs Gemma Roberts.

68. Nos. 86 and 87 in the corpus.

69. The Anson family were the owners of Shugborough Hall.

# The Influence of Chinese Reverse Glass Painting outside China

#### India

The family portrait of an Indian noble, Shuja-ud-Daula (1732-1775), Nawab of Oudh and Grand Vizier of the Mughal Empire (Illustration **99**) was painted in Canton. It was transposed from an engraving, which was itself produced from a painting by the British artist Tilly Kettle (1735-1786). The style, and particularly the inner frame with stars, allows this painting to be dated to the very end of the eighteenth, or even to the early nineteenth century. It could be attributed to Fatqua.70 The technique of reverse glass painting did not exist in India at the time, and this painting reveals the link which had been established between the Indian aristocracy and Chinese reverse glass painters.

Another painting, no. 91 in the corpus, confirms this link: before it was sold, in 2013, it belonged to the Imperial Princess Durru Shehvar, wife of the Prince of Berar, and therefore to the royal collection of Hyderabad, of which he was crown prince.

This link has two main origins:

In the eighteenth century, Indian merchants, notably Parsees,71 were trading with China and therefore went to Canton. There, they were able to observe the Western taste for Chinese reverse glass paintings, especially for portraits.

By the late eighteenth century, India was gradually becoming part of the British Empire. The British East India Company ships would stop over in India on their way to and from China, to sell or barter Chinese products there. Because of this, Indian nobles discovered the craze for Chinese reverse glass paintings on the part of British aristocrats, particularly for portraits painted by transposing European engravings on to glass. So Indian nobles, in their turn, began to buy Chinese paintings, like the British sending their engraved portraits to be transposed on to glass in Canton.

But they went further than this and, perhaps imitating the Chinese emperor, had Cantonese reverse glass painters brought to their own court. Several of the Indian reverse glass paintings I have had occasion to see are so close to the Chinese manner of painting that they can only be attributed to a painter from that country, although the subject is Indian and the setting indisputably inspired by Mughal miniatures.

Finally, catalogue no. 90 of the Martyn Gregory Gallery features a seascape of the port of Calcutta, on canvas, painted by a Chi-

The present chapter merely serves to outline a few avenues for future research which would be necessary to study the vast subject of Chinese reverse glass painting's influence outside China. This subject concerns four countries or regions: India, Europe, Vietnam and Indonesia.

70. Cf. Chap. III, page 134: The painter Fatqua's workshop.

71. Persian followers of the Zoroastrian religion who migrated to India, producing many of India's important merchants and industrialists.

nese artist in 1842, thus confirming that Cantonese painters came to India.

Like Jaya Appasamy,72 it therefore appears to me reasonable to assume that the Chinese painters who migrated to India were at the origin of an art that would subsequently flourish there, in parallel with its development in China since, from being an art confined to the court, it would, in the nineteenth century, become a popular art.

Further research is necessary to confirm this hypothesis, and still more to compile a history of this art in India.

#### Vietnam

One of the largest temples in the city of Hué, in Vietnam, owns and displays on its walls a set of beautiful Chinese reverse glass paintings in Chinese gilded frames with lucky charm carvings. Is this an anomaly? Or is it an example of a close relationship?

#### Thailand

Several large Buddhist temples in Bangkok have their walls adorned with Chinese reverse glass paintings in beautiful gilded wooden frames.73

#### Indonesia

Reverse glass painting is an art that appeared in Indonesia in the twentieth century. Among the paintings I have had the opportunity to see are some Chinese reverse glass paintings that are very similar to those painted in late nineteenth-century China.74 They are owned by members of the Chinese community. The detailed research conducted by J. Samuel on Indonesian reverse glass painting75 will enable us to tell whether there is a historic link between these paintings and Chinese ones.

#### Europe

Chinese reverse glass painting was not at the origin of European reverse glass painting, which existed well before the eighteenth century.76 However, it may well have inspired European painters. In 1758, the reverse glass painter Pierre Jouffroy77 (1718-1796), for example, painted the portrait of the Princess of Conti 'in Chinese fashion'; the pose, the clothing and the princess's hairstyle are all inspired by reverse glass portraits of Chinese men and women, particularly by the shepherdess portraits. This link is confirmed by the fact that the Prince of Conti was a great collector of Chinese reverse glass paintings.78

In Sweden, where Chinese reverse glass paintings started to arrive from the 1750s, the painter Lorentz Svensson Sparrgren (1763- 1828) boarded a Swedish East India Company ship in 1788 with the intention of going to Canton to learn the art of reverse glass painting from the Chinese. On his return, he declared he 'had learnt to paint on glass in the East Indies and was the only one to know this art.'79 Although his talent as a miniaturist is well known, the only work on glass by this artist that I have been able to examine80 does not appear to have been influenced by Chinese painting.

Peabody Essex Museum. Museum Purchase, 1996 AE85329. Photo Rights Reserved.

72. Appasamy, Jaya, 1980. 73. Patterson, Jessica Lee, 2016, 153-155. 74. And therefore not included in this study. 75. Samuel, J., 2013 and 2014.

76. Ryser, F., 1991; Geyssant, J. Paris, 2008.

77. Geyssant, J., 2013; Ryser, F., 1991, 223, Ill. 253.

78. Cf. Appendix II, Auctions in France from 1720 to 1820, page 228.

79. Quoted by J. Wirgin in Göran, Alm, 2002, 292.

80. At the Vitromusée in Romont (Switzerland).

157

157

VI A Br i e f H i s t o r y o f R e v e r s e G l a s s P a i n t i n g from 1720 to 1820

#### **Development of the Chinese market**

#### Qianlong, an imperial enthusiast

Although the first European mirrors were painted under the reign of Kangxi, and after that of Yongzheng, it was under the reign of his successor, Qianlong,1 that reverse glass painting blossomed in China. This monarch had a strong liking for the Western arts and for decorative illusion.2 He had many trompe-l'oeil paintings on the walls of his palaces and admired large mirrors, the sources of these illusions. He was so fond of the reverse glass paintings created in Canton that he had several of these Cantonese painters brought3 to his court, thus founding the first, and perhaps the only reverse glass painting workshop ever established by a monarch for the decoration of his palaces.4 It was these painters that Brother Attiret watched at work, so that he could acquire the technique and thus fulfil Emperor Qianlong's order to paint on mirrors sent from Canton. The sovereign's requests for reverse glass paintings in 1743 focused on the Chinese motifs described by Attiret:5

*…which meant that for three-quarters of the time I was occupied only with painting, either in oil on mirrors, or in water on silk, trees, fruits, birds, fish and animals, but rarely figures.*

Although, thanks to Brother Attiret, we know the motifs that were present in the early paintings of this imperial workshop, the documents I have been able to consult have not told me how long the workshop survived, nor how the motifs evolved. To my knowledge, none of the paintings produced by the workshop can be seen today, but I have not had access to the Imperial Palace's reserves.

3. Between 1735, the date of his enthronement, and 1740, the date when Brother Attiret mentions the fact.

4. Amyot, Frère, 1771.

5. Attiret, Frère, 'Lettre à M. d'Assault,' 1743, 1811, 414.

The emergence of Chinese reverse glass painting, around 1720-1730, has been described in detail in Chapter I, "The dawn of reverse glass painting in China." The way it developed, both in China and the West, will be dealt with here.

#### Chinese notables in Canton, patrons and art lovers

As we saw previously,6 Chinese notables in the Canton region, especially those trading with Westerners, were at the origin of the first Cantonese reverse glass paintings offered as gifts to the emperor. When Qianlong set up his reverse glass painting workshop, the sovereign's taste started a fashion, first at court and then in the capital. The fashion quickly reached Canton, endorsing the city dignitaries' first foray into sponsorship and creating a high level of demand for such painted mirrors among Guangdong's upper classes (Guangdong being the province of Canton). In a very beautiful Chinese interior (Illustration **100**) a young woman is playing the pipa while another one is seated on the floor listening. This villa is very probably on the bank of the Pearl River, which we can glimpse through the doorways. Two reverse glass paintings adorn the wall behind the musician. The largest, in a black lacquer frame with a gilded border, belongs to the family of outdoor scenes,7 in which figures are seen relaxing beside a river. Could the owner have taken sophistication so far as to commission a view close to his villa? The other, smaller picture, in a lacquered frame with gold foliation, appears to belong to the flower family (perhaps also with birds).

These dignitaries (Illustration **101**) did not stop at simply buying works; they also added their own mark, guiding the way this painting developed and evolved during the eighteenth century. They thus played a part in its origin, through their commissions for: water's-edge landscapes, which were those seen from their beautiful villas on the banks of the Pearl River;8 outdoor and garden scenes where they appeared in the company of their family or concubines; their portraits.

The men of this upper-class society were not averse to paintings of beautiful women9 and appreciated pairs of allegories: music-poetry, old age-youth, winter-summer, and so on. They naturally shared the emperor's taste for certain aspects of Western painting like perspective and shading, as long as they were adapted to the Chinese context. This was how several paintings produced at court by European painters, and then copied, inspired many Cantonese reverse glass paintings: the portraits of concubines, doubtless among

6. Cf. Chap. I, page 26. 7. Cf. Chap. II, page 40. 8. Cf. Chap. II, page 74. 9. Cf. Chap. II , page 52.

1. Kangxi reigned from 1661 to 1722, Yongzheng from 1722 to 1735, and Qianlong from 1736 to 1796.

2. Finlay, John R., 2007, 59-193; Kleugten, Kristina, 2015; Berliner, Nancy, 2010, 175 to 191.

them the famous Xiang Fei; pheasants and flowers; and Matteo Ripa's perspective landscapes. The dignitaries who had trading relations with Westerners, knowing their opposite numbers' taste for these paintings, were able to present them with such works, most importantly their portraits.10

It would seem that these upper-class Chinese enthusiasts of reverse glass painting became a little disengaged from it in the early nineteenth century. Very few paintings of the period intended for this social class, or depicting it, are present in the corpus. This withdrawal coincided in time with:

• the change from painted mirrors to paintings on glass without silvering;

• the predominant and almost exclusive role played by transpositions of European engravings in the domain of reverse glass painting;

• the ending of Qianlong's reign, in 1796. He was the emperor who had so appreciated this art and made such a great contribution to creating a fashion for it in his country.

But around the middle of the nineteenth century, it was a different Chinese public, the lower middle class, that would give a new impetus to reverse glass painting. This change alone, which took place outside the period studied in this book, might well be an interesting subject for research. All I will say here is that the Chinese market for reverse glass paintings became a mass market and extended to all the Chinese provinces. It often focused on small works, painted on mirrors made in China, and featuring portraits of young women, or scenes from the Taoist pantheon or from stories. Thus it was that reverse glass painting, aristocratic in origin, transformed into a popular art form.

10. Illustration **37**, page 72.

#### **Development of the Western Market**

Arrival of the first Chinese reverse glass paintings in Europe

In 1741,11 in a letter to the Marquis de Broissia, Brother Attiret had vaunted the qualities of this reverse glass painting, which was new to him:

*This type of painting is all the more beautiful because, seen from a short distance away, it seems as if the figures, animals, landscapes, or any other design is not painted on the mirror but reflected; one's face can be seen in the gaps left by the paint, which makes for very attractive variety. This type of painting would not find disfavour in Europe, especially if it were done in good taste. . .*

Did Brother Attiret simply have a premonition, or did he in fact play a part in the European craze for this Chinese painting, which started during the following years among the European aristocracy? This second possibility is not inconsequential when one thinks of the major role that passages of this same letter, describing the Chinese summer palace gardens, played in the emergence of Anglo-Chinese gardens in Europe.

The first mention of a Chinese reverse glass painting arriving in Europe was of '6 reverse glass paintings of Chinese origin,' brought back in 1739 by the captain of the ship *London*, belonging to the British East India Company.12 The second involves a meeting between a French art lover and a similar painting in 1745, in Port-Louis:

*When I was in Port-Louis*13 *in 1745, I saw a Chinese mirror… where you could see a Chinese lady performing her ablutions. Above her, in a corner, was a parrot on its perch, and behind it, a monkey. Dazzled by the mirror's beauty*

*and the craftsman's skill, I desperately tried to discover by what means I could imitate it.*14

This first known description of a mirror painted in China arriving in Europe highlights the fascination and enthusiasm that surrounded this new art, which would relaunch the fashion for chinoiseries that had been created in Europe in the late seventeenth century. It should be pointed out that this mirror was already very elaborate in comparison with those described in Chinese documents dating from 1722, 1731 and 1733, which only indicated floral motifs. It therefore shows that reverse glass portraits of women and compositions with exotic animals had already made their appearance.

The reverse glass paintings mentioned below are those sold in Gothenburg by William Chambers (1723-1796) on his return from China in 1749. For the first time, the painter is known: Chambers names him as *Siou-Sin-Saang*. 15 In my opinion, some of the paintings in the Drottningholm Chinese pavilion should be attributed to him.16 Chambers certainly played an important role in creating the fashion for reverse glass painting in Europe, as he did for two other Chinese arts, architecture and garden design. During the same period, portraits of Swedish East India Company supercargoes were arriving in Sweden.

Europeans were sending mirrors to China to be painted from 1751, as Peter Osbeck, chaplain to the Swedish navy, noted when he was staying in Canton that year:17

*Importing mirrors from Europe is forbidden. However, the Europeans bring mirrors with them and have them painted with roses or other flowers, because the Chinese are particularly skilful in doing it.*

#### The aristocratic fashion for mirrors painted with Chinese motifs, 1750-1785

The arrival of the first paintings was followed by a spectacular craze for these works among the European aristocracy. They began to commission them from China18 through the middlemen known as *marchands merciers*, who specialised in works of art. European aristocrats adorned their homes with reverse glass paintings, as well as buying and selling them on the European market.

#### In Sweden

The Swedish aristocracy was the first to become interested in this Chinese art. In 1753, King Adolf Fredrik gave his wife a Chinese pavilion, which he had rebuilt in 1763. In it, mirrors painted in China were displayed. All the principal motifs of Chinese reverse glass painting were already to be found on them: birds and flowers, outdoor scenes in pairs of allegories, and beautiful women.19 I attribute some of these works to Siou-Sin-Saang's workshop.20 But the aristocracy was not alone in commissioning these paintings with Chinese motifs. On his return to Sweden, Johan Abraham Grill, for example, a supercargo with the Swedish East India Company, sent to Canton a plate of glass to be painted 'with a pheasant and its mate, perched on a rock with some flowers around them.'21

#### In England

It was in England that the Chinese market in reverse glass painting underwent the greatest expansion. At the time, the British East India Company was by far the most active of the European companies in China, and William Chambers, a former supercargo with the Swedish East India Company who had become architect to the British crown, devoted himself to spreading the word about Chinese arts, architecture, gardens and reverse glass painting.

In 1763 he had just built a pagoda and pavilion at Kew. Describing the pavilion's interior, he said: '. . . and a gallery in which, on the wall between the windows, four large mirrors painted in China have been placed.'22

In 1764, the well-known French lawyer, Elie de Beaumont, visiting the home of the British Prime Minister, Robert Walpole, exclaimed:

*The Chinese furniture, the tiles, the hothouses, the bird menagerie and particularly the pheasants from China are*

18. Cf. Chap. III, page 150: The Western Market from 1720 to 1820. 19. Cf. Chap. III, page 119: The first Cantonese workshops, 1740-1760, and the Swedish 'network'. 20. Idem. 21. Wirgin, 1998, 284.

11. Attiret, Frère, 'Lettre au Marquis de Brossia,' 1741. 1911.

12. I have not been able to consult this report referred to by J. Wirgin in Göram, Alm, 294.

13. Port-Louis was the port to which the French East India Company's ships were attached.

14. *Dictionnaire portative de commerce*, Volume 3. Paris 1770, 175. 15. Chambers, William, 1757, 14. 16. Cf. Chap. III, page 119: The first Cantonese workshops, 1740-1760, and the Swedish 'network'. 17. Osbeck, Peter, 1771, 233.

*all very worthy of attention, but I especially admired the mirrors sent from England to China and brought back with Chinese paintings done on the reverse of the mirror, with as much precision as if they had been done on the top.*23

In 1770-1780, many British aristocratic houses were graced with furniture, porcelain, screens, wallpapers and reverse glass paintings made in Canton. Some of these 'Chinese' pieces have been preserved in their original eighteenth-century state, like those at Saltram House (Illustration **102**) and at Shugborough Hall. The motifs on these reverse glass paintings are mostly of beautiful women, but there are also some birds and flowers. The rococo-style frames were fashioned by well-known cabinet makers.

It was only from the 1780s that these paintings appeared on the British auction market,24 and it is evident that the sellers, like the buyers, were not predominantly aristocrats, proving that the market for enthusiasts had extended to the middle classes. The prices being asked for these works could be high, comparable to those for major works.

#### In France

Like its English neighbours, the French aristocracy fell in love with reverse glass painting, which started appearing in auction sales in 1757.25 Two important collections were offered for sale when their owners died: in 1774, it was the collection of Mr Malenfant, former valet to the king's bedchamber, and in 1777, the Prince of Conti's collection was put up for sale. Today, there is no Chinese reverse glass painting on display anywhere in France, as there was in the eighteenth century, but we do know that the two large paintings owned by Cardinal de Rohan (Illustrations **12** and **13**, pages 42-43) must have been in the Château of Salerne in Alsace. They are now in Strasbourg town hall.

23. Beaumont (de), Elie, 1895, 144 and 145. 24. Cf. Appendix II, page 229: Auctions market. 25. Cf. Appendix II, page 228: Auctions market.

#### The taste of supercargoes and naval officers for reverse glass portraits and views of Canton

From 1740, supercargoes and naval officers passing through Canton realised that, like their aristocratic compatriots or their company directors, whose portraits, painted in Europe, adorned their country houses and offices, they too could have their portraits painted by a painter of quality, and at a price that was more than reasonable. Thus it was that reverse glass painting entered a new stage, with Westerners having their portraits painted—a stage that was to remain very active from 1720 to 1810.

Several manners of painting appeared in succession:

• The model himself was painted from an engraving or miniature, and then placed in a Chinese setting with symbols and a water's-edge landscape. The first of these that have come down to us are the portraits of Mr and Mrs Pike (Illustrations **44** and **45**, pages 86- 87), which were painted around 1745.

• Same procedure for the model, but in a plain, mirror setting in the initial period, as in the portraits of Adolf Fredrik,26 King of Sweden (Illustration **47**, page 89) and his wife, painted around 1752, and subsequently covering the whole of the glass.

• With the arrival of the painter Spoilum,27 the model was, for the first and probably the last time, painted on glass from life. The setting was a water's-edge landscape, seen or not from the position where the model was posing, be it a room or a veranda. This painter had a 'very modern' period when the décor was minimalist—just a room with bare walls, a lattice window looking out at the sky and occasionally a piece of furniture. From 1780, Spoilum preferred to paint in oil on canvas, as did other Chinese portraitists who painted from life.

• Engravings or miniatures were transposed on to glass without any changes being made.28

In the years around 1775, views of the port of Canton also appeared, seen from the bank opposite the factories. Painted from life, they are a valuable testimony to the way the port changed and developed throughout the late eighteenth century.

26. Cf. Chap. II, page 84: Portraits of Westerners; nos. 283 and 284 of the corpus.

27. Cf. Chap. III, page 127: The painter Spoilum's workshop.

28. Cf. Chap. II, page 98: Direct transpositions of Western artworks.

appeared that would rapidly take over, namely the direct transposition of engravings and miniatures. The engravings were usually in black and white and imported from Europe, and the drawing was reproduced in its entirety, either freehand, or by placing the engraving under the glass. The painters would then add colour at will.

The market was twofold: there was a market for commissions and a 'take-away' one.

#### The market for commissions

164From 1780, a way of reverse glass painting Aristocrats and bourgeois alike, whether European or American, had no hesitation in entrusting Chinese painters with engravings copied from fashionable paintings, but they also authorised them to transpose their portraits, or those of their family and friends, on to glass. Some of them saw a profit to be made, like the American captain who, in 1800, had Gilbert Stuart's famous portrait of Washington transposed onto glass29 so that he could resell the paintings in the United States at a price akin to the original. Not everybody had this aim in view, and most people simply wished to have a quality colour reproduction of an artwork either in their home or to offer as a gift something that they would not have been able to afford in Europe or the United States. Those who had the opportunity to go to Canton, or who knew somebody who was going there, could play a part in the composition of the work, as did Andreas van Braam when he had his wife's portrait painted30 (Illustration **52**, page 93). This portrait has an amazingly complex composition, based as it is on several engravings and miniatures carefully chosen by him.

The remarkable skill shown by Chinese painters in depicting female flesh made them popular for transposing mythological or pastoral scenes by François Boucher or Joshua Reynolds, or suggestive scenes known as 'racy' ones. The portrait genre was not forgotten,

29. He had bought a proof on canvas by the artist himself, who was by no means loath to make copies of his works.

whether commissioned by the model himself or by somebody wanting to give it to a person with whom he wanted to curry favour. Seascapes, which certain Cantonese painters transposed brilliantly, were also very popular.

#### The 'take-away' market

Knowing Westerners' tastes for certain types of pictures, the Chinese painters made multiple copies of some of their transposed engravings, and offered them to visitors 'in the shop.' Among these visitors were supercargoes, naval officers and travellers, who found reproductions of fashionable works here. This allowed them to stock up with presents, but also to invest in objects that would make them a handsome profit on their return to the West.

This market also offered 'souvenirs of Canton,' mainly targeted at sailors. There was a boom in *sailors' farewells*, showing a heartrending separation on a quayside, between a departing sailor and his girlfriend who would have to wait for his return. Bawdy scenes also sold well.

This book does not describe this period, as the documents available did not appear sufficient in number to make a thorough study of it. Furthermore, the information I was able to gather did not appear to show any change that had not already been perceptible before 1820. The obvious lack of interest in this art, on the part of both the Chinese and Western upper classes, was reinforced, and the great

# **The period of engravings and miniatures being transposed on to glass, 1780-1820**

# **Some remarks about the 1820-1860 period**

Cantonese painters of the time, taking their cue from European taste, now worked only on canvas or paper. Reverse glass painting was the sole preserve of workshops producing 'souvenirs of Canton.' It had lost what had been its great originality and its exceptional value to the art world, namely a successful artistic union between China and the West.

30. Cf. Chap. II, page 84: Portraits of Westerners.

# 166 167 Conclusion

Artistic unions between China and the West are rare, and rarer still are successful attempts to create an art inspired by the two pictorial traditions, which are pleasing to both Chinese and Western art lovers. The first and best known of these productive attempts is represented by Sino-European works of architecture and painting: the summer palace European pavilions, Giuseppe Castiglione's paintings and Matteo Ripa's engravings, created by Jesuits under the reign and on the order of Emperor Qianlong (1736-1796). But a second achievement was in Chinese reverse glass painting, which was more surprising because it arose spontaneously, without being ordered by the emperor, and was destined, right from its inception, for both Chinese and Western upper classes. In one of the many porcelain painting workshops in the little streets of Canton port, the first reverse glass painting was created, around 1720—heralding works of art that would beguile Chinese and Western nobility alike, and would take their place in the most elegant houses. Royalty, aristocrats and the upper middle classes from Sweden, Great Britain, France, the United Provinces and Russia bought them for high prices or received them as gifts from the East India Companies. This success was not due simply to their exoticism or decorative qualities. It was the success of a real art, which had its golden age between 1720 and 1820, the period to which this book is devoted. The Chinese painters of

Canton showed evidence of constantly renewed creativity, increasing their output of high-quality works and combining Chinese themes and techniques with Western ones. With supreme skill, they depicted nature, flower, bird and landscape motifs, along with the symbols of traditional Chinese painting, but their compositions also achieved a fine balance between the perspective and shading techniques belonging to both pictorial traditions.

Emperor Qianlong, entranced by these mirrors painted in Canton, set up a reverse glass painting workshop in his own palace and asked Brother Attiret, a Jesuit painter, to embark on this burgeoning new art as soon as he arrived in Peking in 1740. The huge mirrors sent to China returned painted with beautiful unknown birds and blossoming tree branches of exotic elegance. Among the great pairs of paintings of outdoor scenes with a mandarin and his concubine or a musician, a motif as new to China as it was to the West was seen, namely the pairs of allegories 'balanced' against one another: winter-summer, old age-youth, and music-poetry. Where landscapes were concerned, moderate but pleasing use was made of Western perspective. The third theme of choice, already appreciated in both countries, was that of beautiful women. Famous or provincial concubines, simple courtesans with smooth faces almost free of any shadow, charmed the Chinese upper classes as they did European ones. The motifs were not only Chinese, because these painters were also skilled in painting portraits inspired by European engravings or miniatures, which they placed in a symbolic Chinese setting or, more simply, in the centre of a mirror. Merchants and naval officers passing through Canton placed orders for themselves, their families and friends, and the people of influence in their world whom they wanted to please. In his Canton workshop, a great artist by the name of Spoilum painted his European models from life.

But every golden age comes to an end.

By 1820, the workshops were devoting themselves exclusively to transposing Western engravings or miniatures on to glass, without any Chinese element. Enthusiasts were no longer to be found among the European or American aristocracy or upper middle classes, but among a much wider public ranging from the European and American middle class to sailors making merry in Canton.

The opening up of China, following the Second Opium War, heralded an amazing transformation in the fortunes of reverse glass painting. From being a product destined for the Chinese aristocracy and export to the West, it became a popular Chinese art which swept through all the provinces of the Middle Empire. This period, although not dealt with here, would certainly merit thorough investigation.

I will end this conclusion with a question that has dogged me throughout this research. What was the reason for this artistic confluence and international success for a painting medium that was hardly used in the West and not at all in China? Certainly, as we saw in Chapter I, "The dawn of reverse glass painting in China," the mirror itself was perceived differently in each culture, and the painting of mirrors that had come from the West encouraged them to spread in China. Certainly, these works had an exotic feel that was fashionable at the time; they were not lacking in artistic qualities; and they exerted fascination through the evidence they showed of a successful artistic fusion of cultures. But I think that, beyond these attractions, reverse glass painting had a more specific appeal, as, to a lesser extent, did reverse glass painting without silvering. By virtue of its reflective nature, glass, and even more so, a mirror, allowed the person looking at it to be more than an observer: he became a participator, entering the landscape or rubbing shoulders with the person depicted. Emperor Qianlong could become part of a landscape with Western perspective; the European aristocrat could accompany the Chinese concubine. Brother Attiret's premonition was correct, when he wrote to the Marquis de Broissia in 1741:

*This type of painting is all the more beautiful because, when seen from a short distance away, it seems as if the figures, animals, landscapes, or any other design is not painted on the mirror but reflected; one's face can be seen in the gaps left by the paint, which makes for very attractive variety. This type of painting would not find disfavour in Europe, especially if it were done in good taste.*

It was indeed done in good taste, and I hope that the research in this book provides proof of that.

Thus it was that Chinese and Western culture reflected their images onto each other, thanks to works inspired by both cultures and created by simple Chinese artists in the narrow, bustling little streets of eighteenth-century Canton.

# Appendix I Corpus, photos and captions

#### **Chinese motifs 170**

Mirrors with birds and flowers **170** Outdoor scenes: leisure in high society **174** 'Beautiful women' **182** Portraits of Chinese dignitaries **196** Landscapes **198** Other Chinese motifs **200** Multiple mirrors **202**

#### **Western motifs 202**

Portraits of Westerners **202** Other Western motifs **208**

#### **Transpositions of Western artworks 208**

Rural and Mythological scenes **208** Novels and the theatre **212** Portraits **214** Courtesans **218** Sailors' farewells **220** Landscapes and seascapes **222** Miscellaneous **224**

**N.B.** Some chinese reverse glass paintings has been analysed in Western literature and their photos published. Because of different reasons (low resolution of the photos, conditions of copyright, etc.), these photos could not be presented here. However, it seems to me desirable to quote the books where they are presented. These references are listed, at the end of each type, under the title: 'Complementary corpus without photo.'

**3**

**4**

**5**

**6**

**7**

**8**

**9 10 11** page 111 **12**

**13 14 15 16**

**1***,*  **2** *Pheasants and Peonies.* Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frames. 80 x 60 cm. Circa 1750. Ref. Gôran Alm, pp. 286-287. Chinese pavilion in Drottingholm Palace, Stockholm. Photo: Max Plunger.

[Both paintings **3** and **4** have exactly same motif. Size, colors and number of flowers are different.]

**3** *Golden Pheasants and Camellia.* Painted Mirror. Carved gilded wooden frame with palm tree motifs. 102 x 56 cm. Circa1780. All Rights Reserved.

**4** *Golden Pheasants and Camellia.* Reverse glass painting, painted wood. Gilded wooden frame Louis XV. Circa 1790. Author's collection.

**5** *Pheasants and Peonies.* Painted mirror. Recent gilded wooden frame. 118 x 79 cm. Circa 1780. All Rights Reserved.

[Both paintings **6** and **7** have exactly same motifs]

**6** *Golden Pheasants and Camellia.* Painted Mirror. English gilded wooden frame, circa 1900. 99 x 61.5 cm. Circa 1765.

Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**7** *Golden Pheasants and Camellia.* Painted Mirror. Later gilded wooden frame. 82.6 x 52.1 cm. Circa 1770.

Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**8** *Golden Pheasants and Peonies.* Painted Mirror. Gilded wooden frame, George III. 114.3 x 59.7 cm. Circa 1760. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**9** *Golden Pheasants and Peonies.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame, George I. 83 x 49 cm. Circa 1765. Courtesy Roger Keverne.

**10** *Golden Pheasants and Peonies.* Painted bevelled mirror. Rococo gilded wooden frame, circa 1765. 131 x 67.5 cm. Circa 1765. Pair with n°**18** . Ref. Wills, p. 117, ill. 134. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**11** *Golden Pheasants, Camellia and Chrysantemum.* Painted mirror. Black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 99.6 x 36.8 cm. Circa 1760. The Chinese Porcelain Company, New York, photo by Richard Goodbody.

**12** *Golden Pheasants, Butterflies and Peonies.* Painted mirror. Black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 58.5 x 86.5 cm. Ref. Kjellberg, p. 265. Courtesy Göteborgs Stadsmuseum.

**13** *Silvered Pheasants and Peonies.* Painted mirror. Varnished wooden frame. 39 x 41 cm. Pair with n°**22** . Shugborough Hall, Straffordshire. Photo: National Trust, Sophia Farley;

**14** *Golden Pheasant and Magnolia;* Painted mirror. Enameled copper frame with floral motifs. Unknown size. Ref. Kjellberg, p. 221. Courtesy Göteborgs Stadsmuseum.

**15** *Golden Pheasants and Garlands.* Painted mirror. Later « gothic » frame. 33 x 64 cm. Circa 1780. Courtesy Roger Keverne.

**16** *Golden Pheasants and Garlands.* Painted mirror. Oval black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 102 x 74 cm. Circa 1785. Ref. Child, p. 370. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

#### **Chinese motifs** Mirrors with birds and flowers

**17 18 19** page 37 **20**

**21 22 23 24**

**25** page 38 **26 27a 27b**

**28 29** page 77 **30 31**

**17** *Golden Pheasants and Garlands.* Painted mirror. Black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 45 x 62 cm. Circa 1780. Courtesy Roger Keverne.

**18** *Bird Dispute, Chrysanthemum and Amaranth Crest of Cock.* Painted bevelled mirror. Rococo gilded wooden frame, circa 1765. 131 x 67.5 cm. Circa 1765. Pair with n°**10**. Ref. Wills, p. 117, ill. 133. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**19** *Quails, Titmice, Magnolia and Camellia.* Painted Mirror. Chippendale period gilded wooden frame. 148 x 81.5 cm. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**20** *Lory, Ducks and Pomogranate.* Painted mirror. Irish Chippendale period gilded wooden frame, with 'chinoiserie' motifs. 152.5 x 114.5 cm. Circa 1765. [The frame possibly to a design by George Semple (1700-1782)]. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**21** *Parrot or Lori and Camellia.* Painted mirror. Black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 40 x 28.6 cm. Circa 1780. All Rights Reserved.

**22** *Falcon and Flowers.* Painted mirror. Varnised wooden frame. 33 x 38 cm. Pair with n°**7**. Shugborough Hall, Straffordshire. Photo: National Trust, Sophia Farley.

**23** *Parrot or Lori, Camellia and Water's Edge Landscape.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 39 x 59.5 cm. Circa 1780. All Rights Reserved.

#### **24** *Cockatoo.*

Reverse glass painting. Gilded wooden frame. Unknown size. Circa 1780. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**25** *Pheasants in Water's Edge Landscape.* Painted mirrors. 20th century gilded wooden frame. 128.5 x 79.5 cm. Circa 1765. Ronald Phillips Ltd

**26** *Pheasants in Water's Edge Landscape.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame, circa 1880. 89 x 58 cm. Hand written note on the back: 'A.B DANIELL & SONS 42, 44, 46 WIGMORE STREET CAVENDISH SQUARE, LONDON.' Pair with n°**84**. Ref. Child, p. 350, pl. 817. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**27a** *Mandarin Ducks*  **27b** *Golden Pheasants.* Pair of painted mirrors.

Gilded wooden frame with mirrors.

127 x 73.5 cm. Circa 1775. Formerly Horlick's collection. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio. **28** *Ducks and Pigeons in Water's Edge Landscape.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame, George II. 110 x 87 cm. Circa 1750. Ref. Jourdain M., Jenyns S., p. 100. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**29** *Ducks in Water's Edge Landscape.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 54.5 x 87.5 cm. Circa 1785. Formerly Horlick's collection. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**30***,* **31** *Birds, Flowers and Fruits.* Pair of painted mirrors. Castle Ward. **30** *Dove and Currants.* Gilded wooden 'lancet' frame with mirrors. 64.1 x 53.3 cm. **31** *Parrot and Grapes.* Hexagonal gilded wooden frame with mirrors. 71,1 x 46,3 cm. Photo: National Trust, Peter Muhly.

**48**

**52, 53** pages 48-49

**49 50 51**

**32***,* **33** *Birds and flowers.* Reverse glass paintings. Gilded wooden frame. 17 x 22 cm. Photo: Wreting, Bertil/Nordiska Museet, Stockholm.

Complementary corpus without photo

**34***,* **35** *Prunus and Bamboo.* Background painted on paper behind the glass. Ref. N. Berliner, p. 220, cat. 17, plate 35.

**36** *Silver Pheasants, Mynah and Flowers.* Ref. Jenyns, 1965, p. 150, fig. 86.

**37** *Francolins and Water's Edge Landscape.* Ref. Jenyns, 1965, p. 150, fig. 87.

**38** *Golden Pheasants and Camellias.* Ref. Schiffer, 2004, fig. 275.

**39** *Golden Pheasants.* Ref. Child, p. 379, fig. 820.

**40** *Peacock and Peonies.* Ref. Child, p. 379, fig. 821. **41***,* **42** *Outdoor Scene in Southern China.* Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frame with mirrors. 175 x 105 cm. Circa 1780. Ref. Martin Etienne, 2008. Formerly Cardinal de Rohan's collection. Strasbourg City Hall. © Photo Martine Beck Coppola.

**43***,* **44** *Outdoor Scenes, Music and Poetry.* Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frame, Chippendale period. 165 x 82 cm. Circa 1770. Formerly Horlick's collection. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**45***,* **46** *Elegant accomplishment.* Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frame. 55.9 x 44.5 cm. Circa 1760. Ref. Sparks, fig. D. Photo Rights Reserved.

**47***,* **48** *Outdoor Scene, Music, Poetry.* Pair of painted mirrors. Black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 64.4 x 83.2 cm. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**49** *Outdoor Scene, Music.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 35.6 x 61 cm. Circa 1760. Dyrham Park. Photo: National Trust, Seamus Mc Kenna. **50** *Outdoor Scene, Music.* Painted mirror. English black japanned frame with gold decoration. 72 x 117 cm. Circa 1765. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**51** *Outdoor Scene, Music.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 78.7 x 51.4 cm. Circa 1760. Ref. Jourdain M., Jenyns S., p. 104, fig. 61. The Chinese Porcelain Company, New York, photo by Richard Goodbody.

**52***,* **53** *Outdoor Scene, Music, Poetry.* Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frame, Louis XV. 80 x 51.3 cm. Circa 1760. Courtesy Rijks Museum.

**54a***,* **54b** *Outdoor Scenes, Music.* Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frame, circa 1780. 148.5 x 74.5 cm. Circa 1780. All Rights Reserved.

**55***,* **56** *Outdoor Scenes, Music.* Pair of reverse glass paintings. Gilded wooden frame. 40 x 30 cm. Circa 1800. Courtesy Roger Keverne.

#### **Chinese motifs** Mirrors with birds and flowers **Chinese motifs**

# Outdoor Scenes

**43, 44** pages 44-45

**57 57** (détail) **58 58** (détail)

**67 68 69a** page 4 **69b** page 4

**57** *Outdoor Scene, Music.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame, George III. 103 x 77 cm. Circa 1800. Formerly Horlick's Collection. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**58** *Outdoor Scene, Music.* Painted mirror. Oval black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 56 x 30 cm. Circa 1810. © National Museums Liverpool, Lady Lever Art Gallery.

**59** *Outdoor Scene, Poetry.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 44.5 x 73.5 cm. Circa 1780. Formerly Horlick's collection. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**60** *Outdoor Scene, Poetry.* Painted mirror. Chinese hardwood frame. 66 x 40.6 cm. Circa 1770. The Chinese Porcelain Company, New York, photo: Richard Goodbody.

**61** *Outdoor Scene, Poetry.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame with bamboo motifs. 76.8 x 113 cm. Circa 1770. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**62** *Outdoor Scene, Poetry.* Painted bevelled mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 73.5 x 86 cm. Circa 1765. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**63** *Outdoor Scene, Poetry.* Painted mirror. Russian gilded wooden frame, middle of 18th century. 172 x 52 cm. Collection of Catherine II, Empress of Russia. The State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, photo: Vladimir Terebenin.

**64** *Outdoor Scene, Poetry.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 57.5 x 82.5 cm. Circa 1780. Formerly Horlick's collection. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**65** *Outdoor Scene, Poetry.* Painted mirror. Varnished and gilded wooden frame. 59 x 99 cm. Circa 1790. © National Museums Liverpool, Lady Lever Art Gallery. **66** *Outdoor Scene, Poetry.* Reverse glass painting. Gilded wooden frame with leaf of acanthus motifs. 45 x 35 cm. Circa 1760. All Rights Reserved. **67** *Outdoor Scene, Poetry.*

Reverse glass painting. Gilded wooden frame. 43.7 x 28.7 cm. Circa 1770. © Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

**68** *Romantic Scene.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 49.5 x 52.1 cm. Dyrham Park. Photo: National Trust, Seamus McKenna.

**69a** *The Aristocrat, the Beauty and the Falcon.* **69b** *Water's Edge Landscape.* Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frame, with bamboo motifs, George III. 67 x 66 cm. Circa 1770. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**72**

**70** page 47 **71 73**

**70** *The Aristocrat, the Beauty and the Falcon.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 43 x 54 cm. Circa 1780. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**71** *The Aristocrat, the Beauty and the Falcon.* Reverse glass painting. Gilded wooden frame. 44 x 51 cm. Circa 1800. Ref. Child G, p. 385, fig. 840. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**72** *The Aristocrat, the Beauty and the Falcon.* **73** *Outdoor Scene.* Pair of painted mirrors. Rosewood frame. 56.5 x 86.5 cm. Circa 1760. All Rights Reserved.

**74** *The Aristocrat, the Beauty and the Falcon.* Reverse glass painting. Hardwood frame. 40 x 29.5 cm. Circa 1800. Photo Bukowskis Auctions.

**75** *The Aristocrat, the Beauty and the Falcon.* Painted mirror. Black lacquered frame with gilded lineaments. 90 x 103 cm. Circa 1780. © National Museums Liverpool, Lady Lever Art Gallery.

**76** *Emperor XuanZong and Yang Guifei.* Painted mirror. Black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 29 x 20 cm. Circa 1750. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**77** *Outdoor Scene.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 82,5 x 89 cm. Circa 1770. Formerly Horlick's collection. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**78** *Outdoor Scene.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 51 x 38 cm. Circa 1750. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**79***,* **80** *Outdoor Scenes.* Pair of painted mirrors. Black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 83 x 58 cm. Circa 1770. © National Museums Liverpool, Lady Lever Art Gallery.

#### **81** *The Hunt.*

Reverse glass painting. Unframed. 52.5 x 81 cm. 1785-1790. Ref. van Dongen, fig.10. Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen, coll. n°360-1120 XIII. Photo Rights Reserved.

**82** *Kite Flying beside the River.* Reverse glass painting. Unframed. 52.5 x 81 cm. 1785-1790. Ref. van Dongen, fig. 3. Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen, coll. n°360-1123 XIII. Photo Rights Reserved.

**83** *On the Terrace.* Painted mirror. English gilded wooden frame. 84.5 x 100.5 cm. Circa 1750. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

**84** *Outdoor Scene, Poetry.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame, George II. 75 x 55 cm. Circa 1750. Pair with n°**26**. Ref. Child G., p. 350, fig. 817. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**85** *In the Garden.* Gilded wooden frame. 84.5 x 54,6 cm. Circa 1790.

Courtesy Roger Keverne.

180

Thierry Audric • **Chinese reverse glass painting** 1720-1820

**86** page 50 **87 88 89**

**90 91 92 93**

**94 95 96** page 53 **97**

**98 99** page 100 **99** (detail) **100**

#### **86***,* **87** *In the Garden.* Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frame. 115 x 83 cm. Shugborough Hall, Straffordshire. Photo: National Trust, Sophia Farley.

**88***,* **89** *In the Garden.* Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frame. [The two frames could be juxtaposed to compose a single scene]. 139.7 x 84.5 cm. Circa 1790. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**90** *In the Garden.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame, George III. 101.5 x 84.5 cm. Circa 1760. Ref. Schiffer H. R., 2004, fig. 274. Ronald Phillips Ltd.

#### **91** *In the Garden.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 91,5 x 60 cm. Formerly collection of Imperial Indian Princess Durru Shevar.

Peter Lipitch.

**92***,* **93** *In the Garden.* Pair of painted mirrors. Black lacquered and gilded wooden frame. 40.6 x 57.8 cm. Circa 1770. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**94** *Enjoying Eating Fruit* Reverse glass painting. Unframed. 52,5 x 81 cm. 1785-1790. Ref. Van Dongen, fig. 5. Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen, coll. n°360-1119 XIII. Photo Rights Reserved.

**95** *A Summer Garden Scene.* Reverse glass painting. Unframed. 52.5 x 81 cm. 1785-1790. Ref. Van Dongen, fig. 5. Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen, coll. n°360-1129 XIII. Photo Rights Reserved.

**99** *Two Women in an Interior.* Reverse glass painting. Black lacquered frame. 39 x 52.5 cm. Circa 1790. Courtesy of the Americain Museum in Britain.

**100** *In the Veranda* Reverse glass painting. Unknown frame. 36.8 x 29.2 cm. Circa 1790. Martyn Gregory Gallery.

#### Complementary corpus without photo

**101** *Outdoor Scene, Art of Verse.* Ref. Jenyns 1965, p. 150, fig. 88.

**102** *Outdoor Scene, Poetry.* Ref. Conner P., 1998, fig. III.

**103** *The Hunt.* Ref. Jenyns, 1965, p. 153, fig. 89.

**104** *In the Garden.* Ref. Granville F., 1933, p. 370.

**105** *In the Veranda.* Ref. Jourdain M., Jenyns S., p. 106, fig. 64.

**106** *In the Veranda.* Ref. Jourdain M., Jenyns S., p. 104, fig. 62.

**107** *Outdoor Scene, Music.* Ref. Göram Alm, Wirgin J., p. 290.

**108** *Outdoor Scene, Art of Music.* Ref. Jourdain M., Jenyns S., p. 104, fig. 61.

**109** page 66 **110** page 66 **111 112**

**113 114 115** page 57 **116**

**117 118 119 120a**

**120b 122** page 58 **123** page 59

**109** *The Voice of Age.* **110** *The Voice of Youth.* Pair of painted mirrors. English black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 83.8 x 50.8 cm. Circa 1780. Ref. H. Granville Fell, 1933, p. 367 ; Jourdain M., Jenyns S., 1967, p. 105, fig. 60. Formerly collection of Her Majesty Queen Mary. Photo Rights Reserved.

**111** *Young Woman and Old Fisher Man.* Painted mirror. Gilded wooden frame. 63.5 x 38.1 cm. Circa 1780. Ref. Spark, cover figure. Formerly collection of Stephen Winkworth and Dent-Brocklehurst. Photo Rights Reserved.

**112** *Young Woman and Old Fisher Man.* Reverse glass painting. Black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 41 x 27.5 cm. Photo Bukowskis Auctions.

**113** *Young Woman, Flute Player and Falconer.* Painted mirror. Black lacquered frame with gilded foliation. 54 x 87.5 cm. Circa 1760. Formerly Horlick's collection. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**114** *Shepherdess, Flute Player and Falconer.* Painted overmantel mirror. Rococo gilded wooden frame, George III. 91.5 x 146 cm. Circa 1780. All Rights Reserved.

**115** *Shepherdess and Falconer.* **116** *Young Woman and Servant.* Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frame, circa 1880. 75 x 50 cm. Circa 1770. Courtesy Roger Keverne.

**117** *Shepherdess and Falconer.* Painted mirror. Rococo gilded wooden frame, George III. 109 x 94 cm. Circa 1765. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.

**118** *Shepherdess and Falconer.* **119** *Young Woman and, Flute Player.* Pair of painted mirrors. Carved and gilded wood frame with Chinese motifs. 63 x 51 cm. Circa 1770. © National Museums Liverpool, Lady Lever Art Gallery. **120a** *Shepherdess.* **120b** *Young Woman and Flute player.* Pair of painted mirrors. Gilded wooden frame. 46 x 36 cm. Circa 1780. Formerly Horlick's collection. Courtesy Sotheby's/Art Digital Studio.