Subscribe
Bluesky
X-twitter

The Saltonstall Family

A historian’s view

 

 

 

 

Heather Edwards

 

 

 

A painting of a person and two children Description automatically generated

 

1 The Saltonstall Family [attributed to] David des Granges (c1611−c1672), c1636−7.
Oil on canvas, 214 x 276 cm. Tate Britain, London

 

 

The family

The picture called The Saltonstall Family in Tate Britain (Pl 1) was sold by auction from the collection of the North family, Earls of Guilford, at Wroxton Abbey on 22–24 May 1933, as lot 718, ‘Members of the Saltonstall Family’.[1] The Saltonstalls were among the ancestors of the Norths: the second Earl of Guilford (1732−1792), better known as Lord North, Prime Minister in the reign of George III, was the son of Francis North, first Earl of Guilford (1704−1790), and his first wife, Lucy Montagu (1709−1734);[2] Lucy was the only surviving child of the marriage of Richarda Posthuma Saltonstall (1689−1711) to the Hon George Montagu, later first Earl of Halifax (c1684−1739).[3]

Details of the picture are not easy to reconcile with the history of the Saltonstall family, but searches among other ancestors of the Norths, and of the Popes, their predecessors at Wroxton Abbey, have failed to produce any better candidates, and the family tradition that the sitters were the Saltonstalls, apparent in the title of the piece when sent to auction, should probably be relied upon. A picture as large and colourful as this could hardly be overlooked by anyone living in the house where it was hung, and successive generations of the Norths were probably told who the people were.

The branch of the family from which Richarda Posthuma was descended begins with Sir Richard Saltonstall (d 1601), originally from Yorkshire, who came to London and made a substantial fortune as a merchant, becoming, among other things, Lord Mayor of London in 1597.[4] He purchased an estate in the parish of South Ockendon, Essex, and married Susanna Pointz (d 1613) from neighbouring North Ockendon.[5] They had a large family, of whom the eldest surviving son, Sir Richard Saltonstall II, inherited the mansion house and estate at South Ockendon.[6] He married Jane Barnard[7] and they had four children: Richard was born in 1595,[8] Susanna in 1596, Barnard in 1598 and John in 1600.[9] Susanna married William Poulett of Cottles in Wiltshire in 1618.[10] Barnard and John died in 1632 and 1658 respectively, both apparently unmarried.[11]

Following the deaths of Richard II in 1618 and of Jane in 1619,[12] and in accordance with a detailed and careful will made by Sir Richard in November 1618,[13] their eldest son, Sir Richard Saltonstall III (knighted 23 November 1618),[14] inherited both the estate at South Ockendon and a further estate, purchased by his father, at Chipping Warden in Northamptonshire. Richard III married Elizabeth Base on 18 June 1617 at St Leonard’s, Shoreditch, in London.[15] She was baptised on 1 August 1597 at St Gregory by St Paul, the eldest daughter of Hugh Base and his wife, Anne Clarkson,[16] who had married on 4 October 1596 at St Giles, Cripplegate.[17] Elizabeth was therefore 19 years old at the time of her marriage while Richard was about twenty-two.

With the exception of a stillborn daughter buried at South Ockendon on 16 May 1620,[18] all of their children were baptised in London, Richard on 22 April 1622 at St James, Clerkenwell; Elizabeth on 8 May 1623 at St Gregory by St Paul; twins Peter and Samuel also at St Gregory on 17 May 1625; and Ann on 5 November 1628 at All Hallows, Barking by the Tower.[19] The twins are not heard of again and probably died in infancy so that, when Elizabeth died in 1630 and was buried at South Ockendon on 6 May,[20] she left a family of three children: Richard was 8 years old, Elizabeth just 7 and Ann 18 months. Richard and Elizabeth’s elder daughter, Elizabeth, died aged 13 and was buried at South Ockendon on 28 April 1637,[21] leaving Richard and Ann as the only surviving children of the marriage.

Within a few years Richard III remarried. His second wife was Mary Parker (1613–1662), the younger daughter of Sir Calthrop Parker of Erwarton in Suffolk and his wife Mercy, née Soame.[22] Mary was born on 17 March and baptised at Erwarton on 2 April 1613.[23] Neither the record of their marriage nor that of the baptism of Philip, their first child, has yet come to light, but Philip was in his 33rd year when he died in 1668,[24] and Bernard, their second son, was born in 1637,[25] and so the marriage took place not later than c1635 when Mary was about 22 and Richard about forty. They had seven further children, Elizabeth in 1641,[26] Henry not later than 1643,[27] Calthrop in 1644,[28] Charles in 1645[29] and Martha in 1647,[30] plus two other daughters, Mary and Jane, for whom no baptisms have come to light.[31] Mistaken claims that there was a son named John[32] seem to derive originally from confusion with Richard III’s brother, Sir John Saltonstall, who was buried at South Ockendon in 1658. Henry and Calthrop died in infancy and were buried at South Ockendon.[33] Martha may also have died young.

On or about 29 June 1640 a deed was drawn up to provide a jointure for Mary, that is, to make provision for her maintenance in the event of her being left a widow.[34] The parties to this deed were, on the one side Sir Richard Saltonstall III, and, on the other, Mary’s brothers, Sir Philip Parker,[35] Henry Parker Esq,[36] Nathaniel Parker[37] and Thomas Parker[38] and her maternal uncle, Sir Thomas Soame.[39] It seems to have been a rather one-sided assembly. The deed provided that the South Ockendon estate was settled on her for her lifetime after her husband’s death. So far it was a fairly normal arrangement. Richard’s father, Sir Richard Saltonstall II, had in his will settled the estate on his wife for her lifetime, and after her death to go to his eldest son, Richard. The 1640 deed was different in that it secured the estate after Mary’s death to her eldest son, Philip, and his male heirs, failing which it was to go to her second son, Bernard, with remainder to any further sons of this marriage. The effect was to disinherit Richard Saltonstall III’s eldest son, Richard IV. He was 18 years old at this point and a student at Queen’s College, Oxford.[40] Philip was about five and Bernard not yet three. Despite the deed, when Richard was admitted to Gray’s Inn on 29 January 1640/1 he claimed the status he should have had, being recorded in the register as the son and heir of Richard Saltonstall of South Ockendon, knight.[41]

The will of Richard III is dated 16 February 1649/50, just four days before he died, and is extremely short. It provided that his estate in Northamptonshire, which by this time included some further areas which he had bought to add to those inherited from his father, was to go to his eldest son, Richard, Ann was to receive the sum of £2000, to be paid when she married, and everything else was left to his widow, Mary, to be distributed as she saw fit to his other children. Mary was appointed sole executrix. The will was proved on 7 March. Richard was buried on 20 March.[42]

In January 1651/2 Richard and Ann sued their stepmother and her brother Henry Parker, who was a lawyer and apparently her chief adviser.[43] Richard requested a sight of various legal documents relating to property left to him by his father, and also of the 1640 deed so that he could discover whether there was any prospect of recovering his ancestral estate at South Ockendon. Ann requested some additional money for her maintenance, having been told by both Mary and Henry that any such costs would be deducted from her inheritance.[44] Henry and Mary initially refused to hand over any documents, and Mary also remarked that she would say nothing of Sir Richard III’s personal property because her stepson had no legal interest in it and made no claim to it.[45] The only recorded decision of the court was that Mary was obliged to hand over to Richard all documentation relating to property in Northamptonshire,[46] but it is clear that Richard did not succeed in recovering the Essex estate, and that from this time onwards the family and the estates were divided. Philip became Lord of the Manor at South Ockendon, lived, died and was buried there, following which his heirs inherited,[47] while Richard Saltonstall IV made his home at his Northamptonshire estate of Chipping Warden.[48]

In 1664 at the age of 42 Richard Saltonstall IV married a young widow, Margaret Forster née Nutt, in London.[49] They had several children, but only two, Richard V and Elizabeth, survived to adulthood. Elizabeth married William Peyto of Chesterton in Warwickshire.[50] In May 1688 Richard Saltonstall V and Silence Parkhurst, said to be aged about 19 and about 18 respectively, were married in London with the consent of their parents.[51] Silence was the daughter of John Parkhurst of Catesby, Northamptonshire, and his wife Catherine, née Dormer.[52] Richard was quite young to be married and had only matriculated at Trinity College, Oxford, in March of the year before when he was said to be aged 16.[53] His father, who described himself as ‘weak in body’ in his will dated 18 August 1688,[54] was perhaps anxious that his son should be settled within his own lifetime. Richard IV died on 29 August 1688 and was buried at Chipping Warden.[55] Exactly four months later on 29 December 1688 Richard V died of smallpox in London.[56] The following year Silence gave birth to a daughter who was named Richarda Posthuma.[57]

When Richarda married George Montague of Horton in 1706, she agreed to a settlement of the manor of Chipping Warden.[58] The estate subsequently came to the North family through the marriage of Richarda’s only surviving child, Lucy Montague, to the Hon Francis North Esq in 1728,[59] Richarda having died in 1711.[60] What the North family acquired from the Saltonstall family was therefore the estate at Chipping Warden, the home of Richard Saltonstall IV and his descendants, together with whatever contents, archives and personal property were there. There is no reason to suppose that they acquired anything from South Ockendon, the home of Sir Richard Saltonstall III and of Philip Saltonstall and his descendants. The Saltonstall correspondence surviving among the North family archives includes several letters relating to the Chipping Warden estate, but none relating to South Ockendon,[61] and, as mentioned above, Richard IV was denied any right to his father’s personal property.

 

 

The picture

If it is accepted that the Tate picture relates to the Saltonstall family, then the dead or dying woman on the bed can only be Elizabeth Saltonstall who died in 1630, as she was the only woman in this branch of the family who predeceased her husband. She was only 32 and the probability is that she died in childbirth. The picture does not, however, date from the time of Elizabeth’s death: costume experts Aileen Ribeiro and Valerie Cumming have both advised that the clothing indicates a date of c1641.[62] This is obviously a family picture, and the man is therefore her husband, Sir Richard Saltonstall of South Ockendon, while the two children who stand with their father at the bedside are presumably Richard and Ann, the only survivors c1641 of the children of Richard III’s marriage to Elizabeth.

Since the work dates from a decade after Elizabeth’s death and years after Richard’s marriage to Mary, it has sometimes been suggested, argued, or merely assumed, that the woman seated on the right is Mary.[63] Details of the picture are not, however, consistent with this view and suggest rather that the woman is Elizabeth, shown as resurrected from the dead with the baby who died with her.

 

A painting of a family Description automatically generated

 

2 The Capel Family by Cornelius Johnson (1593−1661), 1638. Oil on canvas, 160 x 259 cm. National Portrait Gallery, London

 

 

A living wife in a group portrait of this time is normally shown seated next to her husband or looking towards him, or both, as in the case of Henrietta Maria in ‘The Great Piece’[64] or Elizabeth Capel in Cornelius Johnson’s picture of the Capel family (Pl 2), but the woman in the Saltonstall portrait is placed to one side and looks straight ahead, out of the picture. Interpreted as a living member of the family, she is pointedly ignoring everyone else in the room. It seems more likely that she is dead and unaware of them, existing in some other world. Her position and attitude are similar to those of Mary Cholmondeley in Hogarth’s picture of that family, painted the year after Mary’s death (Pl 3).

 

A painting of a family in a room Description automatically generated

 

3 The Cholmondeley Family by William Hogarth (1697−1764), 1732. Oil on canvas, 71 x 90.8 cm.
The Marquess of Cholmondeley

 

 

The miserable expression of the man as he looks towards the woman and the baby would be very odd if this were his living wife and child, but makes perfect sense if they are dead, just as the sad expression of the husband in Van Eyck’s Arnolfini portrait is understandable once it is pointed out that his wife had died before the picture was painted.[65]

The faces of the two women to the right of the Saltonstall picture closely resemble each other. It has been remarked that their eye colour is different, and this has been claimed as evidence that two different women are depicted.[66] It would be more accurate to state that the entire colouring of the two faces is different, the dead/dying woman on the bed being painted very pale while the seated woman has the normal complexion of a living and healthy person. It seems more likely that the different eye colours were chosen for effect and to suit these two colour schemes, than that the artist, intending to show two distinct women, chose to paint them as so alike. The falling lace collar or neckerchief and cuffs worn by one are identical to those worn by the other and appear to be the same garments. Their strikingly similar faces and (so far as it can be seen) identical clothing suggest that they are the same person.

The picture has been likened to funeral monuments in which a man may be shown with more than one wife,[67] but no other example of a living man in a picture with both his living and dead wives has been cited, and such an arrangement seems highly unlikely. The views and remarks of the second wife on such a proposal may be imagined. There are, however, other examples of portraits of the same person both living and dead. The portrait of Sir Thomas Aston at the deathbed of his wife, Magdalene, painted by John Souch in 1635 (Pl 4), differs from the Saltonstall picture in its mourning atmosphere, with black clothes, black draperies, a skull and the dead baby indicated by a black-draped cradle, but the people are arranged just as the Saltonstalls are.

 

A painting of a person in a black suit Description automatically generated

 

4 Sir Thomas Aston at the deathbed of his wife by John Souch (1593/4−1645), 1635.
Oil on canvas, 203 x 215 cm. Manchester Art Gallery

 

 

To the left the husband stands with the surviving child of the marriage. In the centre his dead wife lies in her bed, and a well-dressed woman sits in the bottom right-hand corner. Manchester Art Gallery ventures no opinion on the identity of the seated woman; Clare Gittings and Julian Treuherz suggest that she may be a relative or attendant.[68] Other commentators accept that she is Magdalene Aston as she was in life,[69] and it does seem that the presence of any other person would be an inappropriate intrusion into this picture of family loss and grief. There is no question in this case of the woman being Sir Thomas’s second wife: Magdalene Aston died 2 June 1635 and the picture is dated 30 September 1635.[70] When two pictures are of such strikingly similar design and painted just a few years apart, it seems logical that they should be interpreted in the same way. Hence the Aston portrait supports the identification of the seated woman as Elizabeth Saltonstall.

John Dwight’s two ceramic sculptures of his little daughter, Lydia, who died in 1674 (Pl 5, Pl 6), portray her as both dead and alive. In the first she is prepared for burial, her head wrapped and a posy of flowers in her hands. In the second she is rising from her grave and looking up to heaven while her head cloth and burial clothes fall from her body and she leaves below her a skull and flowers, presumably representing death and the world of the living.

 

A statue of a child holding flowers Description automatically generated

 

5 Lydia Dwight dead by John Dwight (c1633−1703), 1674.
Ceramic sculpture, 25.5 x 20.5 x 11 cm. Victoria and Albert Museum, London

 

 

A statue of a child Description automatically generated

 

6 Lydia Dwight resurrected by John Dwight (c1633−1703), 1674.
Ceramic sculpture, 28.7 x 10.5 cm. Victoria and Albert Museum, London

 

 

Nigel Llewellyn sees the second sculpture as Lydia’s ‘social body’ and her clothes as ‘a version of an Antique, and therefore timeless, costume’,[71] but the burial wrappings on her head are clearly shown and resemble nothing in ancient sculpture, and so it seems more likely that the title given by the Victoria and Albert Museum, ‘Lydia Dwight Resurrected’ describes the piece correctly.

Belief, not only in the continued existence of the soul after death, but also in the resurrection of the body, was common at this time, routinely appearing in the preambles to wills,[72] and it appears that in the Aston and Saltonstall pictures and in the two sculptures of Lydia Dwight we have three instances of the same individual being shown both dead and resurrected. In another and much later example Princess Charlotte of Wales (d 1817) is represented twice on her funeral monument, firstly lying dead and secondly rising up to heaven while an angel carries her baby (Pl 7).

 

A statue of a person with angels Description automatically generated

 

7 Monument to Princess Charlotte of Wales (d 1817) by Matthew Cotes Wyatt (1777−1862), 1826.
Marble sculpture. The Royal Collection, St George’s Chapel, Windsor

 

 

If the seated woman and her baby in the Saltonstall portrait are interpreted as the dead and resurrected mother and child, then clearly the purpose of the painting was not to create a realistic picture of the death of Elizabeth. Other details are consistent with this view. The costumes do not resemble what people would have been wearing in 1630. Richard IV is shown as about three years old, not the eight-year-old he actually was, and his sister, Elizabeth, who would have been present, is omitted. The lace worn by the two women at the right is far wider, and hence more expensive, than that on the clothes of the man and the children, although the former has the red soles and heels on his shoes that were worn with court dress, and is presumably wearing his best outfit.[73] It is possible that the living to the left have been portrayed in realistic clothes while the costumes of the dead are idealised. The lace round Elizabeth’s face resembles nothing that would be worn by a living woman, and is plainly the wrapping put round the head of the dead to support the jaw. Such head cloths were commonly of plain linen, but another example with wide lace can be seen in a portrait by Hans Von Aachen of a dead baby.[74] The head cloth shows that she is dead but, conversely, she is holding out her hand, so that she also appears to be alive.

On the above interpretation, the picture relates solely to Richard III and his first wife and family, ignoring the existence of his second wife and her children. The usual assumption that it was commissioned by Sir Richard himself makes no sense on this basis, nor does it suit the provenance. A Saltonstall picture inherited by the Norths could only come from Chipping Warden, and the first of the Saltonstalls to live there was Richard IV, and so there was never any such person as ‘Sir Richard Saltonstall of Chipping Warden’.[75] Richard III was Sir Richard Saltonstall of South Ockendon, and Richard IV, never knighted, was Richard Saltonstall Esq. of Chipping Warden. He was also the person who had every reason to resent his father’s second wife and children for whose sake he had been disinherited. A possible explanation for this picture is that it was commissioned by Richard IV to be hung at Chipping Warden, and that it was intended to show himself and his sister at the tragic turning point of their lives, and to inspire in the viewer sympathy for them, particularly for Richard who had lost his ancestral home and much of the wealth and status that should have accrued to him as the eldest son, these disasters being the indirect results of his mother’s early death.

This suggestion might also account for some of the oddities of the work. At this date all men wore facial hair like that of the king, the only exceptions being the very young, like the teenage Stuart brothers painted by Van Dyck in about 1638.[76] Richard was only 18 or 19 at this time and the portrait is possibly of him, standing in for his father, while Ann may have posed as her mother. Richard was probably too young and inexperienced to be aware that men never wore hats in portraits in domestic, indoor settings at this time, and that pictures half this size were more normal and appropriate for private houses.[77] On this basis the picture may preserve the memory of Richard III and his wife Elizabeth but the faces of Richard IV and his sister Ann.[78]

 

 

The artist

The Tate Gallery catalogues the Saltonstall picture as by the miniaturist David Des Granges, although its size alone, 214 x 276 cm (7 feet tall by 9 feet wide), tends to render this attribution doubtful. It has been claimed that other full-size portraits by Des Granges exist and that these are comparable in style,[79] but no-one has ever specified any such actual work of which the whereabouts are known and with which the portrait could be compared. An advertisement in the London periodical Mercurius Politicus in 1658, evidently written by someone who was familiar with Des Granges’s life and work, refers to him solely as a miniaturist.[80] This is far more convincing than the inclusion by William Sanderson in his Graphice , the use of the Pen and Pencil, or the Most Excellent Art of Painting (1658), of Des Granges in his list of panel painters ‘in the life’.[81] Sanderson’s work has been described as ‘mostly plagiarised’ and as coming within the category of ‘compilation-abridgements’,[82] and he appears to have known little of miniaturists, since his list consists solely of Hoskins and son, ‘the next modern since’ Hilliard and son.

The people in the picture are painted in the style of the mid-17th century, but they are set incongruously against a background which is reminiscent of medieval painting. In a 14th-century miniature (Pl 8), the author, Christine de Pizan, offers her new book to her patron in a small room dominated by a large, scarlet-hung tester bed.

 

A group of women sitting on a bed Description automatically generated

 

8 Christine de Pizan presenting her book to Isabel of Bavaria by the Master of the Cité des Dames, c1410.
Frontispiece to Christine de Pizan, The Book of the Queen, British Library, BL Harley 4431, fol 3

 

 

There are cloth wall hangings whose tops are angled upwards to indicate side walls, but the patterns have no foreshortening and are painted on the same plane as on the back wall.[83] The Saltonstall picture shows a similar room, and the exact same effect can be seen on the walls where trees probably indicate tapestry hangings. The right-hand wall is indicated by the angle of the border at the top but not by any foreshortening of the design on the wall, while in the two borders at the left, only the darker tones of the border on the side wall suggest the corner. It is also noticeable that the woman to the right appears to have only a tenuous connection with the chair she purports to be sitting on, and that the horizontal lines of the chair are inconsistent with one another. John Murdoch described the Saltonstall picture as ‘a composition that defies the Renaissance science of perspective’[84] and pointed out that by the time the picture was painted, ‘des Granges had been for ten years, as we know from his engraving of St George and the Dragon after Raphael, a practised exponent of rational renaissance composition’.[85]

A recent scientific examination of the Saltonstall picture has revealed not only the colours used but something of the methods of the artist.[86] This information could perhaps be used to achieve more certainty about the identity of the artist.[87]

 

 

 

  1. Karen Hearn, catalogue entry for The Saltonstall Family, 2008, Tate Britain, www.tate.org.uk ↑
  2. Peter DG Thomas, ‘North, Frederick, second earl of Guilford’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford 2015. ↑
  3. Baptism 27 November 1709, Parish Registers of St Margaret, Westminster, Westminster City Archives; ‘Lady Lucy Montagu’, http://www.thepeerage.com/p2577.htm#i25768 ; ‘Montagu, George (c.1684−1739)’, www.historyofparliament.org ↑
  4. Ian W Archer, ‘Sir Richard Saltonstall (1521?−1601)’. ODNB, Oxford 2008. ↑
  5. Ibid. Parish registers of St Nicholas, South Ockendon, 7 April 1601 and 12 February 1612/3, Ref D/P 259/1/1, Essex Record Office. ↑
  6. Will of Richard Saltonstall [II], proved 6 May 1619, PROB 11/133/489. All wills are in the National Archives, Kew, unless otherwise stated. ↑
  7. Mrs Napier Higgins [Sophia Elizabeth Higgins], The Bernards of Abington and Nether Winchendon, A Family History, vol 1, London 1903, p39. ↑
  8. No baptism found; he was 15 when he matriculated at The Queen’s College on 16 June 1610: Joseph Foster, Alumni Oxonienses: Members of the University of Oxford 1500−1714, vol IV, Oxford, 1892, p1304. ↑
  9. Baptisms of Susanna 2 October 1596, Barnard 1 January 1597/8 and John 10 August 1600, registers of South Ockendon. ↑
  10. Marriage settlement 1 May 1618, Ref DR/18/1/511, Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, Stratford on Avon. ↑
  11. Barnard’s burial 22 February 1631/2, parish registers of Somerleyton, Ref PD/577/1, Norfolk Record Office; will proved 31 March 1632, PROB 11/161/395. John’s burial 11 December 1658, registers of South Ockendon; letter to his niece, Anne Daniel, née Poulett, MS North e. 17, fols55−6, Bodleian Library, Oxford. ↑
  12. Burials 22 December 1618 and 29 May 1619, registers of South Ockendon. ↑
  13. Will proved 6 May 1619, PROB 11/133/489. ↑
  14. William A Shaw, The Knights of England, vol II, London 1906, p170. ↑
  15. Registers of St Leonard’s, Ref P91/LEN, London Metropolitan Archives. ↑
  16. Registers of St Gregory by St Paul, Ref P69/GRE, LMA. ↑
  17. Registers of St Giles Cripplegate, Ref P69/GIS, LMA. ↑
  18. Registers of South Ockendon. ↑
  19. Registers of St James Clerkenwell, Ref P76/JS1, St Gregory by St Paul, Ref P69/GRE, All Hallows, Barking by the Tower, Ref P69/ALH1, all LMA. ↑
  20. Registers of South Ockendon. ↑
  21. Ibid. ↑
  22. Marriage of Calthrop Parker Esq of Suffolk to Mercy Soame, 27 February 1598, parish registers of St Pancras, Soper Lane, Ref P69/PAN, LMA. ↑
  23. 2 April 1613, parish registers of Erwarton, Ref FB185, Suffolk Archives, Ipswich. ↑
  24. Burial 20 August 1668, registers of South Ockendon; memorial in St Nicholas, South Ockendon. ↑
  25. Baptism 12 August 1637, parish registers of St Dunstan in the East, Ref P69/DUN1, LMA. ↑
  26. Baptism 8 October 1641, registers of South Ockendon. ↑
  27. Burial 8 April 1643, registers of South Ockendon. ↑
  28. Baptism 31 May 1644, parish registers of St Clement Danes, Ref STC/PR, Westminster City Archives. ↑
  29. Baptism 29 September 1645, registers of St Clement Danes. ↑
  30. Baptism 15 July 1647, registers of All Hallows, Barking by the Tower. ↑
  31. Mary: endorsement 5 March 1661 to her father’s will, PROB 11/211/618; SJ Guscott, ‘Brideoake, Ralph, 1613–1678, ODNB, Oxford 2008; pleadings in Brideoake v Parker, Ref C 10/487/39, National Archives. Jane: petition of William and Jane Serjeant 9 February 1678, Ref HL/PO/JO/10/1/373, Main Papers 489, UK Parliamentary Archives; Serjeant v Mayne 1683, Ref C 4/553/10, National Archives. ↑
  32. WR Powell, ed, A History of the County of Essex, vol 7, Victoria County History, London 1978, pp117−26; Hearn, Tate Britain, 2008. ↑
  33. Burials 8 April 1643 and 1 June 1644, registers of South Ockendon. ↑
  34. Described in the reply of Henry Parker, 12 February 1651/2, Ref C 9/9/130, National Archives. ↑
  35. Baptism 9 April 1601, parish registers of St Pancras, Soper Lane, Ref P69/PAN, LMA; will of Mary Saltonstall, dated 11 November 1651, proved 21 May 1662, PROB 11/308/208. ↑
  36. Baptism 15 November 1608, registers of Erwarton; will of Mary Saltonstall 1662. ↑
  37. Will proved 19 August 1684, PROB 11/377/119; will of Mary Saltonstall 1662. ↑
  38. Baptism 10 January 1615/6, registers of Erwarton. ↑
  39. Baptism 4 February 1584/5, parish registers of St Mary Colechurch, Ref P69/MRY8, LMA. ↑
  40. Foster, Alumni Oxonienses Vol IV, Oxford 1892, p1304. ↑
  41. Joseph Foster, The Register of Admissions to Gray’s Inn, 1521−1889, London 1889, p229. ↑
  42. Will PROB 11/211/618. Death 20 February, burial 20 March 1649/50, registers of South Ockendon. ↑
  43. Pleadings of Richard and Ann Saltonstall, 30 January 1651/2, MS C9/9/130, National Archives. ↑
  44. Letter from Henry Parker to Ann Saltonstall, 14 November 1650, MS. North c. 7, fo. 92, Bodleian Library. ↑
  45. Replies of Henry Parker, 12 February 1651/2, and Mary Saltonstall, 17 June 1652, C9/9/130, National Archives. ↑
  46. Reports and Certificates 1655, C38/127, National Archives. ↑
  47. Memorial of 1670 at St Nicholas, South Ockendon; burial 20 August 1668, registers of South Ockendon. ↑
  48. Probate of will of Edward Bathurst, Rector of Chipping Warden, Ref Y(O)/1089, Northamptonshire Archives Service; will of Richard Saltonstall IV, PROB/11/393/65. ↑
  49. Marriage 11 August 1664, parish registers of St Christopher le Stocks, City of London, Ref P69/CRI, LMA. ↑
  50. Marriage 18 June 1689, registers of Chipping Warden, Ref 066P/1, Northamptonshire Archives Service. ↑
  51. Marriage 31 May 1688, parish registers of St Anne, Soho, Ref STA/PR, Westminster Archives; George J Armytage, ed, Marriage Allegations in the Registry of the Vicar-General of the Archbishop of Canterbury, July 1687 to June 1694, The Publications of the Harleian Society, vol XXXI (London, 1890) p64. ↑
  52. Mortgage relating to Silence’s dowry, Ref R(D)/073, Northamptonshire Archives; Parkhurst, John (1643−1731), of Catesby, Northamptonshire, www.historyofparliamentonline.org ↑
  53. Foster, Alumni Oxonienses, p1304. ↑
  54. PROB 11/393/65. ↑
  55. Burial 31 August 1688, registers of Chipping Warden. ↑
  56. Burial 2 January 1688/9, registers of Chipping Warden. ↑
  57. Indenture, marriage settlement, Ref G(H)/334, Northamptonshire Archives Service. ↑
  58. Ibid. ↑
  59. George Baker, The History and Antiquities of the County of Northampton, Vol 1, London 1822, pp526−7. ↑
  60. Burial 5 April 1711, registers of Chipping Warden. ↑
  61. MS. North c. 7, Bodleian Library. ↑
  62. Hearn 2008, n3. ↑
  63. Ibid; Maurice Howard, The Tudor Image, London 1995, p52; Rosemary Isbel Keep, Facing the Family: Group Portraits and the Construction of Identity within Early Modern Families, PhD Thesis, University of Birmingham (2017), pp252−3, at p257; Catherine Hunt, ‘The Saltonstall Family, A Study of Time, Space and Memory’, Artibus et Historiae, no. 75 (xxxviii) (2017), pp181–193 at p181. ↑
  64. Anthony Van Dyck, Charles I and Henrietta Maria with their two eldest children, Prince Charles and Princess Mary, 1632, Royal Collection Trust. ↑
  65. The Arnolfini Portrait by Jan Van Eyck, National Gallery, London. Margaret L Koster, ‘The Arnolfini Double Portrait: A Simple Solution’, Apollo, September 2003, pp3–14. ↑
  66. Keep 2017, p258; Hunt 2017, p183. ↑
  67. Hearn 2008. ↑
  68. Clare Gittings, ‘Venetia’s death and Kenelm’s mourning’, Sumner, ed, Death, Passion and Politics, pp54−68 at p54; Julian Treuherz, ‘New light on John Souch of Chester’, The Burlington Magazine, CXXXIX (1997), pp300−07 at pp305−06. ↑
  69. Roy Strong, ‘Sir Henry Unton and his Portrait: an Elizabethan memorial picture and its history’, Archaeologia, vol xcix (1965), pp53−76 at pp53−4; Judith W Hurtig, ‘Death in childbirth: seventeenth-century English tombs and their place in contemporary thought’, The Art Bulletin, vol 65, no. 4 (1983), pp603−15 at p610; Peter Earle, ‘The English at home’, Stuart England, ed Blair Worden, Oxford 1986, pp242−64 at p246; Nigel Llewellyn, The Art of Death, London 1991, p47; Keep 2017, pp247−8; Hunt 2017, pp182−3, citing Llewellyn. ↑
  70. Memorial in church and burial 4 June 1635, bishop’s transcripts, St Peter, Aston by Sutton, Cheshire Archives. Sir Thomas Aston at the Deathbed of his Wife, www.manchesterartgallery.org ↑
  71. Llewellyn 1991, p28. ↑
  72. Eg, Wills of Sir Richard Saltonstall [II], proved 6 May 1619, PROB 11/133/489; Bernard Saltonstall, proved 31 March 1632, PROB 11/161/395; Mary Saltonstall, proved 21 May 1662, PROB 11/308/208. ↑
  73. C Willett Cunnington and Phillis Cunnington, Handbook of English Costume in the Seventeenth Century, 3rd edn, London 1972, p54. ↑
  74. Sumner, ed, Death Passion and Politics, fig 18, p119 (picture’s present location unknown). ↑
  75. Hearn 2008. ↑
  76. Lord John Stuart and his brother Lord Bernard Stuart by Anthony Van Dyck, c1638, National Gallery, London. ↑
  77. Oliver Millar, ‘Sir Kenelm Digby and Van Dyck’, Ann Sumner, ed, Death, Passion and Politics, Van Dyck’s Portraits of Venetia Stanley and George Digby, London 1995, pp 32−36 at p33. ↑
  78. I should like to thank my daughter, Cecily Pearson, and staff at the Bodleian Libraries, the Essex Record Office, the National Archives and Suffolk Archives for their assistance. ↑
  79. Eg. anon, The Tate Gallery an illustrated companion to the National Collections of British and Modern Art, London 1979, p11. ↑
  80. Mercurius Politicus, no. 426, July 22−9 1658, p701 (online at www.hathitrust.org ). First noticed by Christopher Lennox-Boyd: www.britishmuseum.org under David des Granges. ↑
  81. William Sanderson, Graphice, the use of the Pen and Pensil, or the Most Excellent Art of Painting, London, 1658, p20, https://archive.org/details/graphiceuseofpen00sand/page/20/mode/2up ↑
  82. M Kirby Talley, Portrait Painting in England: Studies in the Technical Literature before 1700, London 1981, p229. ↑
  83. Master of the Cité des Dames, frontispiece, Christine de Pizan, The Book of the Queen, c.1410-14, Harley MS 3341, f. 3r, British Library, London. ↑
  84. John Murdoch, ‘The Seventeenth-Century Enlightenment’, The English Miniature, 1981, pp85–162 at 135–6. ↑
  85. Ibid. ↑
  86. Rica Jones and Joyce H Townsend, ‘The Saltonstall Family c1640 by David Des Granges’, https://www.tate.org.uk/about-us/projects/tudor-stuart-technical-research/entries/the-saltonstall-family-c1640-by-david-des-granges ↑
  87. I should like to thank my daughter, Cecily Pearson, and staff at the Bodleian Libraries, the Essex Record Office, the National Archives and Suffolk Archives for their assistance.↑

 

Download as PDF
Subscribe