Lot Essay
When the picture was exhibited at the R.A. in 1870, the subject was explained by the following quotation in the catalogue: 'Indeed, all this time there is no doubt but good Queen Katharine both heard by report, and perceived with her eyes, how the matter was framed against her, although she showed neither to Mistress Anne nor to the King any spark or kind of grudge or displeasure, but took and accepted all things in good part, and with wisdom and patience dissembled the same.' As the Art Journal further informed its readers, 'the king is about forty, fair and fat: his portrait hangs on the wall; the picture of Queen Katharine is seen above the mantelpiece, and the monogram H.K. upon the chair further indicates that Katharine still remains the lawful mistress of the monarch's heart. She has been reading in the corridor; passing the open door, she observes anxiously the king's flirtation with Anne Boleyn ... Courtiers and others look on curiously, among them may be observed Wolsey, Wyat the poet, and Somers the king's jester ... certainly the delineation and execution of the figures can scarcely be surpassed for point, brilliance and precision.'
Though six years later than lot 101, this is still an early work, painted when the artist was thirty. He had not yet developed the line in Regency couples engaged in amorous dalliance that bought him fame and fortune, focusing rather on historical subjects rich in psychological nuances. The most dramatic of these was Edward II and Piers Gaveston (repr. Baldry. op.cit., facing p.16), exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1872, but two others had Tudor themes: The Princess Elizbeth obliged to attend Mass by her Sister Mary (R.A. 1869) and The Royal Nursery, 1538 (R.A. 1871), in which Henry VIII was shown 'lavishing attention on his sickly son to the neglect of his more promising daughter, Elizabeth' (a study is repr. in Baldry, p.14). The comparatively serious nature of these paintings was undoubtedly due to Stone's friendship with Dickens, who had known his father, the painter Frank Stone, and came to regard him 'almost as a son' when Frank died in 1859, promoting his career and commissioning him to illustrate Our Mutual Friend and Great Expectations in the 1860s. The Royal Nursery seems to have been inspired by the parallel situation in another novel, Dombey and Son, and it is interesting that Dickens gave young Marcus a copy of his Child's History of England in 1858 (see Baldry, pp.11-12). However, the quotation explaining our picture in the R.A. catalogue of 1870 was not taken from this book.
Though six years later than lot 101, this is still an early work, painted when the artist was thirty. He had not yet developed the line in Regency couples engaged in amorous dalliance that bought him fame and fortune, focusing rather on historical subjects rich in psychological nuances. The most dramatic of these was Edward II and Piers Gaveston (repr. Baldry. op.cit., facing p.16), exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1872, but two others had Tudor themes: The Princess Elizbeth obliged to attend Mass by her Sister Mary (R.A. 1869) and The Royal Nursery, 1538 (R.A. 1871), in which Henry VIII was shown 'lavishing attention on his sickly son to the neglect of his more promising daughter, Elizabeth' (a study is repr. in Baldry, p.14). The comparatively serious nature of these paintings was undoubtedly due to Stone's friendship with Dickens, who had known his father, the painter Frank Stone, and came to regard him 'almost as a son' when Frank died in 1859, promoting his career and commissioning him to illustrate Our Mutual Friend and Great Expectations in the 1860s. The Royal Nursery seems to have been inspired by the parallel situation in another novel, Dombey and Son, and it is interesting that Dickens gave young Marcus a copy of his Child's History of England in 1858 (see Baldry, pp.11-12). However, the quotation explaining our picture in the R.A. catalogue of 1870 was not taken from this book.