324 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 127. 



eight and a half inches in length ; the face about 

 two and three quarter inches. It is admitted by 

 the best judges to be a painting of great merit. 

 It represents, as well as it is possible, extreme old 

 age, with an extraordinary degree of still remain- 

 ing vigour, and in this respect certainly fits exactly 

 the character of its subject. The dress is cor- 

 rectly described by your correspondent A. B. R. 

 The forehead is not very high, but square and in- 

 tellectual — deeply wrinkled ; the nose is rather 

 long, and very well formed ; the eyes dark ; the 

 mouth compressed, and denoting quiet firmness; 

 the expression altogether pleasing and placid, and 

 the face one that must have been handsome in 

 youth. Should any of your correspondents wish 

 to see this picture, I shall leave it for a short 

 time in the hands of my bookseller, Mr. Newman, 

 3. Bruton Street, Bond Street, who has kindly con- 

 sented to take charge of it, and to show it to those 

 who feel an interest in such matters. 



It must, at first sight, appear strange that such 

 men as G. Douw, the painter of the picture in 

 question, or Rembrandt, to whom are attributed 

 other portraits of this old lady, should have con- 

 descended to copy from other artists, (for the re- 

 spective dates render it quite impossible they could 

 have painted from life in this instance) : however, 

 it is natural to suppose that this extraordinary in- 

 stance of longevity made great noise at the time 

 of, and for some time after, her death, and that a 

 correct representation of such a physical pheno- 

 menon, although the work of an inferior artist, 

 may well have afforded a fitting study for even 

 such eminent painters as Rembrandt and G.Douw. 



As I am on this subject, I shall further trouble 

 you with a circumstance in connexion therewith, 

 which has recently come to my knowledge. My 

 friend, Mr. Herbert, M.P., of Muckross Abbey, 

 Killarney, has also an old family picture of the 

 same lady, with a very curious inscription, which, 

 ■while it would appear to go far towards establish- 

 ing several of her characteristic attributes, has also 

 its peculiar difficulties, which I shall presently 

 point out, in the hope that some of your corre- 

 spondents who are learned in such matters may 

 explain them. The inscription, which is on the 

 canvass itself, is as follows : 



*' Catharine, Countesse of Desmonde, as she appeared 

 at y'^ court of our Sovraigne Lord King James,in thys 

 preasant a.d. 1614, and in y" 140"" yeare of her age. 

 Thither she came from Bristol to seek relief, y' house 

 of Desmonde having been ruined by Attainder. She 

 was married in y" Reigne of King Edward IV., and in 

 y" course of her long Pilgrimage renewed her teeth 

 twice: her Principal residence is at Inchiquin, in 

 Munster, whither she undoubtedlye proposeth (her 

 Purpose accomplished) incontinentlie to return. Laus 

 Deo." 



Now, as to the authenticity of this picture, there 

 can, I should think, be no question. It has not 



been got vp for the present antiquarian contro- 

 versy ; for it is known to have been in existence 

 in the family of Mr. Herbert for a great many 

 years. It could not well be a mystification of the 

 intervening " middle age," for in that case it 

 would doubtless have been brought forward at the 

 time, to establish a particular theory as to this lady. 

 I think, therefore, it is only reasonable to suppose 

 that it was painted at the time it professes. It 

 may also be mentioned, in corroboration, that a 

 connoisseur who examined this picture for Mr. 

 Herbert attributed it to the hand of Jamieson, the 

 Scotch painter, who lived at a time that would 

 render it quite possible for him to have painted it 

 from life. So far so good. The main difficulty is 

 that of the dates given in the inscription. If the 

 Countess was 140 in 1614, and therefore born in 

 1474, she could have been but eight or nine years 

 old at the death of Edward IV., and therefore 

 could not have been marrie<I in his reign. It is 

 difficult to account for this discrepancy, except by 

 supposing that the old lady sank ten years of her 

 age (and there are statements in existence of 1464 

 being the year of her birth) ; or else by supposing 

 that the story of her marriage in the reign of 

 Edward IV. was not her own, but communicated, 

 at second-hand and erroneously, to the artist. 



On this point I hope some of your more learned 

 correspondents will favour us with their opinion. 

 There has also been recently sent me by a friend 

 an extract from the " Bii-ch Collection," British 

 Museum (Add. MSS. 4161.), being transcripts of 

 a Table Book of Robert Sidney, secoiul Earl of 

 Leicester, which contradicts the inscription in 

 some particulars : but Lord Leicester writes in u 

 loose and apparently not very authentic style. He 

 states, on the authority of a " Mr. Harnet," that 

 the Countess of Desmond came to petition " the 

 Queen" (Elizabeth), and not King James; and 

 quotes Sir W. Raleigh (on memory) as saying 

 that he (Sir W. R.) saw her in England in 1589. 

 He also talks of her death as occurring at the end 

 of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and as being 

 caused by a fall from a " nutt-tree." I do not 

 think, indeed, that much weight should attach to 

 these notes of Lord Leicester ; but it is fair to- 

 give all that comes to light, whether it makes 

 against or for the authenticity of what one wishes 

 to establish. P. Fitzgerald, 



Knight of Kbrry. 



Union Club, London. 



shakspeabe's sickle or shekel. 



( Falue of SoUdus Gallicus ?) 



(Vol. v., p. 277.) 



I undertake to answer C. W. B.'s Query with 

 the greater readiness, because it affords me an 

 opportunity of upholding that which has ever been 



