Portrait of King Charles II (1630-1685) c.1670

Nicholas Dixon (c.1645-c.1708)

Watercolour on vellum, heightened with touches of gold, backed with card

10 ½ x 8 ½ inches; 26.7 x 21.5 cm

Provenance:

Christies, London, 28 February 1913
The Collection of the Late Henry J. Pfungst, Esq., F.S.A., Christie’s, London, 14 June 1917, lot 39
The Collection of Mrs. Guy Argles
James Thursby-Pelham

Literature:

Richard W. Goulding, The Welbeck Abbey Miniatures, Oxford 1916, p.26
Walpole Society, 1914-15, p.26
Katherine Mary Beatrice Gibson, “Best Belov’d of Kings” The Iconography of Charles II, Ph.D, 1997, catalogue no. 628 (as whereabouts unknown)

Exhibited:

Victoria and Albert Museum, 1915-17
Smith Art Gallery, Stirling, Exhibition of Old Master Paintings, 16-28 May 1960 (no.103, lent by Mrs Guy Argles)

Inscriptions:

Pencil inscription on the reverse, ‘Charles II/by Nicholas Dixon/(painted circa 1670 or a little earlier) Mr Richard G... the Librarian of the Duke of Portland at Welbeck & the noted authority /on the works of Nicholas Dixon pronounces/this to be an indisputable work./ Painted on a thick sheet of vellum/ laid down on cardboard and numbered Nº 12’

Although little is known about Nicholas Dixon it is clear that he was a talented and ambitious artist. His position at court, when appointed the King’s “Lymner in ordinary” in 1673, was rewarded with the same payment and benefits1 as his celebrated predecessor, and probable master, Samuel Cooper2.

Dixon’s artistic prowess was largely channelled into making copies for the King, largely taken from paintings by Cooper, Riley, Kneller and, as in this example, Lely. These large, technically accomplished cabinet miniatures had been fashionable from the time of James I, although Dixon took them into a new, larger scale.

This particular portrait of the King is an interpretation of the portrait by Lely of circa 1675 3. Interestingly, it is not a straightforward copy, but a largely independent portrait of the king. At this date, Dixon held the post of king’s limner and therefore had access to the unrivalled royal collection of paintings. In 1684/5, Dixon organized a lottery of his miniatures. Always keen to supplement his income (like his predecessors, Isaac and Peter Oliver, he was active in the art market) Dixon attempted to sell his miniatures to investors, describing them as ‘a collection of Pictures in limning not to be equalled anywhere’. The lottery ultimately failed and in 1700 the remainder of the limnings were mortgaged. They were subsequently transferred to John Holles, Duke of Newcastle for £430 (around £35,000 today). Thirty of these miniatures remain at Welbeck Abbey4.

The librarian mentioned in the fragmentary label on the reverse of the frame is Richard W. Goulding, Librarian at Welbeck Abbey from 1902-1929, who led a reappraisal of Dixon and his work5. Although no signature has been found on this work, the scale and style are unmistakably Dixon’s. As John Murdoch commented, Dixon ‘had the visual flair to produce an image instantly recognisable as by him’.6

• 1 Dixon’s salary was £200 per annum with an annual new year’s gift of silver
• 2 Cooper was initially succeeded by Richard Gibson in 1672, but this position was surrender to Dixon after only 15 months
• 3 Several art historians refer to Dixon’s affinity with the work of Peter Lely, in particular, in his ability to imbue his sitter’s with exaggerated sensuousness in his rendering of their mouths and eyes.
• 4 Derek Adlam at Welbeck has discovered additional information regarding the group at Welbeck: ‘The details of the acquisition from Dixon of his collection of cabinet miniatures are divided between Richard Goulding's 1916 catalogue of the 6th Duke of Portland's miniatures, and his later catalogue of the duke's paintings. It seems Dixon mortgaged 70 limnings for £527. 13s. 6d. to James Beschefer in trust for James and Stephen Pigou, then partners in trade. In 1707/8 the collection was transferred to John Holles, [3rd] Duke of Newcastle for £430, and "to prevent after-claps" Nicholas Dixon signed the deed as being a party to the sale. The collection has since passed by descent, and 30 remain in the Portland collection. A catalogue of 1861 made for the 5th Duke of Portland (the Underground Man) lists many more paintings than remain here - we have no idea how or why so many disappeared.’
• 5 Goulding was able to ascertain that the ND signature was indeed Dixon’s, where it had previously been confused with other artists, such as the monogrammist DM
• 6 John Murdoch, Seventeenth Century Portrait Miniatures in the Collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum, 1997, p.259.