Stephanie G. Mathis Airbrushing and filtering selfies may seem like a modern idea, but a new conservation project on a 17th-century painting shows that it’s a long-standing tradition to enhance one’s appearance.
Constance Kampfner of the London Times reports that conservators assessing a picture of Diana Cecil found that an artist later, perhaps in the 19th century, added more curls on her hairline and plumped up the lips to make the forehead appear smaller.
Think Kylie Jenner’s love for fuller lips is a sign of modern beauty? “Think again!” states English Heritage in a press release.
Cecil is the great-granddaughter of William Cecil, First Baron Burghley. He was a close adviser and friend of Tudor queen Elizabeth I. She lived between 1596 and 1654, according to a statement.
Cecil was a natural beauty, but as time passed, standards of beauty changed. Her reputation as an all-natural beauty may no longer be in line with those of the next generation. After Cornelius Johnson had painted Cecil, another artist changed her appearance.
The Portrait was badly damaged when English Heritage began conservation. The canvas had been rolled widthways by someone, which may have led to the cosmetic changes as an attempt to conceal the damage. A layer of varnish was also applied to the surface of the painting.
In a statement, English Heritage collections conservator Alice Tate Harte said, “I’m often amazed at the vibrant and rich colors I see when I remove the old, yellowing polish from portraits.” It was a shock to discover that Diana’s face had been altered so dramatically.
The conservation work revealed the exact date that Johnson painted the picture. Under the varnish of the top curtain, the artist’s signature and the year 1634 were hidden. This is four years earlier than was originally believed.
Cecil’s Portrait is not the only one that has been altered to meet more modern beauty standards. Experts changed the 16th-century Portrait of Isabella de’ Medici so much that they initially misidentified it as a painting of Eleanor de Toledo, her mother. The Carnegie Museum of Art staff suspected that the Portrait was fake and conducted a radiological test to confirm it.
Kelly Grovier, BBC Culture, writes: “There was something about the saccharine smile, flawless skin, sculpted chin and perfectly tapered nose, as depicted in this work when it first came to the museum, that just didn’t sound right.” What many thought was a fake turned out to be an authentic likeness.
Grovier continues, “What stared out from the X-rays was somebody else entirely — a far more convincing, older woman with peaky, worn-out skin, a slightly hooked circle under her eye, [a]double chin, and hammy hands. “In other words, it was a real person.”
Cecil’s picture wasn’t quite as radically changed as Medici’s, but they both show the dangers of overcorrecting a person’s likeness.
Tate-Harte says in a statement that “while the overpainting was originally done to cover the damage caused by the portrait rolling, the restorer added their preferences to sweeten’ the face.” “I hope that I have done Diana justice in removing these additions and showing her natural face.”
The recently conserved Portrait is on display at Kenwood House, London, where it is displayed next to the likeness of Cecil’s second spouse, Thomas Bruce.
