It may seem unlikely that there is space in the literature for another study of Tudor and Stuart painting. However, Robert Tittler’s appraisal brings clarity and new understanding to the practicalities of the artists’ trade. Rather than repeating the ‘otherness’ of the characters who were not Holbein, Rubens or Van Dyck, Tittler presents the identities of individuals, and the complexities of their age, with sensitivity. He pulls together the (considerable) scholarship to date and provides thoroughly documented definitions of the limitations and conditions within which these artists – both male and female – operated. As a study, it will doubtless prove instrumental for students as it signposts the most significant discoveries from the work of Roy Strong through to recent research by, among many others, Karen Hearn, Edward Town, Charlotte Bolland and the author himself.
The well-defined sections and unpretentious prose take the reader from a comprehensive historical introduction to the place of foreigners working in England. Tittler shines a light on the marked differences in practice across the country, from East Anglia to Dorset. Part ii presents a detailed and fresh account of the Painter-Stainers’ Company. Tittler makes clear the lack of speed engendered by the function of this guild, leading to the ‘decorative rather than figurative expertise; more with craft than with art’. The following chapter of Part ii turns to provincial artists and assesses their relationship with London. Some painters travelled around while maintaining workshops in London, some settled in the provinces and others stayed in the capital city. Ideas and methods thereby permeated the country. In Part iii, Tittler focuses on the specifics of arms and glass painters, unearthing key sources and revealing the surprising prevalence of false heraldry in the regions.
In Part iv, Tittler gives attention to the workshop personnel, and specifically the role of women. He identifies the close interplay between home life and workshop, with key examples – such as Alice Paynter – where the wife of a deceased artist was intended to complete a commission (a job which, intriguingly, she did not finish). This practice indicates an interchangeability between husband and wife, with the painters’ trade placed more equally within households than has hitherto been acknowledged. The status of women is not overplayed by Tittler. He rebalances previous attempts to over-correct the role of female artists and presents a calm progress, with leading lights such as Anguissola and Gentileschi paving the way for ‘native English women painters’ such as Mary Beale (1633–99) to ‘find their feet in courtly circles in the mid-century and beyond’. This chapter concludes with invaluable tables listing the names of apprentices, journeymen and masters based at the Chester Company of Painters, Glaziers, Embroiderers and Stationers, c 1560–1640.
The following chapter employs archaeological and archival evidence to assert the practicalities and limitations of the workshop space. Tittler highlights the difficulties of finding suitable space for making art amidst urban expansion. It is at this point in the publication that the lack of colour plates becomes most apparent. The text would benefit from colour illustrations of paintings and depictions of the relevant towns and cities to open up the topic to a broader audience.
Could these artists make a good living through their trade? Tittler’s penultimate chapter presents a sobering view of the drudgery of a craftsman’s existence in the business of painting. The artists he describes were not flamboyant stars. Instead, these ‘picture makers’ knew their trade and deployed it proficiently. In an environment where foreign painters were favoured at court, and even Holbein died in debt, there was little hope for more modest provincial painters to carve out a luxurious existence. Tittler suggests, compellingly, that the slow adoption of the continental habit of signing paintings held back the identifiability and potential fame of English artists. It was the popularity of portraiture that provided the most stable income, with Van Dyck setting up what Tittler beguilingly describes as ‘a virtual assembly line’ for their production.
Tittler’s conclusion makes the distinction between the thriving, ambitious Dutch workshop tradition and the more humble English artistic scene. The tendency for English artists to become set in their ways hindered their progression and is reflective not only of the artistic profession but also of the state of the nation. This thought-provoking study cements Tudor and early Stuart painting for a living as a product of its time: disciplined, professional and serving a purpose. With hindsight, these painters created a preparatory layer for – or a foil to – the spectacular, but still predominantly portrait-based proficiency that was to come with Reynolds, Gainsborough and Lawrence, once the English market shed its perfunctory nature and took a leading role in the artistic world.
