Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 3rd May 2024, 06:46 PM   #1
urbanspaceman
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Tyneside. North-East England
Posts: 577
Default errors and answers

We went down the wrong road:
the portrait is of 1st Earl of Strafford (a supporter of Charles 1st) who was executed at Tower Hill in 1641.
His son, the 2nd Earl (died 1695) was a good friend of James 2nd and he owned the Shotley Bridge sword which passed to his nephew Thomas Watson (1693 - 1750) who had the caskets made.
There is a better image of the 1st earl portrait which looks like the original; the portrait inserted earlier in this thread has been over-painted adding a dog and moving the helmet; see attached.
The sword now looks like a Pappenheimer to me but I am uncertain. Nice tournament armour.
Attached Images
 
urbanspaceman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd May 2024, 07:11 PM   #2
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,189
Default

Well noted Keith, now that I see the shells it does look like a Pappenheimer.
Norman speaks to the often practiced 'overpainting', not to mention later 'restorations'. It really does set the mind to wondering just how much license did come into play.
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2024, 06:07 PM   #3
Peter Hudson
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 315
Default

The association of this individual with the fortunes and subsequent downfall of Catholics and thus the eventual outcome of The Jacobites are mysterious indeed.

Popular feeling ran very high against the Earl, and the King, though he had assured Strafford that his life should be spared, abandoned him when it came to the point, and on the 10th signed the commission for giving the royal assent to the Bill. The Earl was beheaded on Tower Hill, 12th May 1641, and met his death with dignity and composure. He was 48 years of age. In private life the Earl of Strafford was a devoted husband and father, a true friend and a man of high cultivation and feeling. Many of his faults of temper arose from his shattered health, the result of agonizing accessions of inherited gout. His personal habits were naturally simple, but to sustain the honour of the King "before the eyes of a wild and rude people," he maintained almost regal magnificence, with a retinue of fifty servants and a body-guard of one hundred horse splendidly mounted and accoutred. The ruins of a princely mansion, begun by him, but never completed, may still be seen near Naas. In fact further research reveals 1633-1640
Thomas Wentworth (Black Tom) Earl of Strafford and Lord Deputy of Ireland builds his great house at Jigginstown, it would be an Irish Residence for Charles I, but alas Wentworth is recalled to London and loses his head before the roof goes on his great house.
He was long known in the traditions of the Irish peasantry as "Black Tom."
Peter Hudson.

Last edited by Peter Hudson; 28th May 2024 at 06:22 PM.
Peter Hudson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2024, 10:34 PM   #4
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,189
Default

Interesting stuff on the complexities of Great Britain in this period, and as noted Thomas Wentworth was sent to rule in Ireland in 1633 by Charles I. While he is noted as being of admirable being in this context, his sobriquet "Black Tom" was from the Irish subjects for not only his despotic rule, but his dark demeanor and insistent wearing of somber Puritan clothing.

IMO, the style of the sword in the 'pappenheimer' manner likely comes from the profound Dutch influences brought to England in these times. The German blade makers ostensibly from Solingen were actually recruited in Holland for the Hounslow enterprise. This indirectly of course set the stage for the later Shotley Bridge venture.

Again, interesting connections, the son of 'Black Tom' (2nd Earl of Strafford) had a Shotley sword passed to his nephew Thomas Watson (1693-1750)
which of course has to do with the 'casket' (s) mentioned by Keith earlier.

Every sword has its own legacy, history and dynamics which present most fascinating perspective on historic events and persons. They are literally icons of history and the most exciting way to study it!
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th May 2024, 11:32 AM   #5
Triarii
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: Bristol
Posts: 120
Default

Short version as the website ate my longer reply.
There are multiple versions of the Strafford portrait, with the Pappenheimer one owned by the NT (after Van Dyke, if I recall correctly) and the other by the NPG (school 0f Van Dyke). The NPG have another with him facing to the right, but it shows the same sword hilt in both. It also appears in Van Dykes full length portrait of Charles I in armour. I suspect that it is therefore a prop supplied by the artist, along with the cuirassier armour. That armour was rarely used in England, with only one regiment and a few troops of horse using it in the ECW, but it usefully displays the martial connections of the sitter, being used even as late as the early C18th.

To be fair to AVB Norman, there are good depictions of eg Irish Hilts in portraits of Colonels Booth, Massey and Hutchinson and a Type 91 hilt in Rembrandts 'Self portrait with Saskia', which can also be seen on contemporary tomb monuments in Bristol and Gloucester cathedrals.
Triarii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st May 2024, 06:11 PM   #6
urbanspaceman
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Tyneside. North-East England
Posts: 577
Default response

Just as a hint of a suggestion: I always type/compose my longer responses in MS Word, then copy and paste into the forum, as too many times the website eats my efforts.
On to the issue at hand:
Artist's 'Props', now there is an obvious reason that never crossed my mind... thank-you.
Of course, getting important folk to sit still for lengthy periods on an often basis was never easy was it/is it?
I have abandoned all efforts to unravel the family lineage involved in the Wentworth/Woodhouse/Watson affair: simply way too many variations on the names and titles to achieve coherence. I do think I got it right except the caskets were made post 1750 by the latest WWW incumbent.
All good fun until your brain melts.
Thank-you Folks.
Attached Images
 
urbanspaceman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2024, 08:36 PM   #7
Brian Moffatt
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 7
Default

Way off beam I know Keith,
But just for the information of anyone researching "Shotley"... for some weird reason the posting on my blog on the subject no longer appears to be accessible to search engines.... so best way in is just to go straight to the front page and scroll down.
We now have what I believe to be a Medieval Derwent valley anvil... it came from very close to Hexham Abbey... fascinating thing with a cross and other detail on the side.... must have been put in when the metal was still malleable.
I'll get it up online in due course....
We are still working on the descriptions for the Museum... a truly massive task,
So currently access is rather limited since we have personally to talk the way through all of the exhibits.... which takes well over an hour.
Hopefully by next year we will have it all on tablets..
All the Best,
Brian Moffatt
Brian Moffatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.