Monday

April 2012 - Harriet Hemings? and the Market

Harriet Hemings?
An interesting miniature portrait sold recently on eBay was this one, said to be of Harriet Hemings. It was described as;
"Important Ivory Portrait Miniature believed to be Thomas Jefferson's Daughter Harriet C. 1820. This is an incredible portrait miniature with a very unusual look. It was no doubt done by a highly skilled artist (technically) as the face is simply incredible.

One of the papers inside the piece indicates the subject as "Harriett Hemings", president Thomas Jefferson had two daughter's with his slave Sally Hemings, named Harriett, one dying shortly after birth, and the other, often known as "Harriet II", was born at Monticello in 1801 and was known to be working in the textile factory by age 14. It was well known that she was very light skinned and could "pass for white". The interesting thing here that the artist truthfully portrayed was that although she had very light skin, she still had African American features.

There is a lock of hair in the back of the miniature, backed by a piece of a silk dress of the subject's. The hair is very thick and course, dark, yet has a deep red tint. Jefferson was a blazing red head. Most historians believe her father is Jefferson, who is believed by many historians to have had a relationship with his mixed-race slave Sally Hemings, half-sister to his late wife. Harriet is one of Sally Hemings' four children who survived to adulthood.

This miniature has sustained a hairline crack along the left side, with perhaps some water damage. The miniature is a beautiful color as far as condition, probably because it has retained its original case (very rare) all these years. ".

The miniature had around 550 views and 35 bids before closing at $3178, despite it being cracked from top to bottom to the right of centre. Needless to say the vendor fielded many questions about the miniature.

Therefore, on Mar-14-12 the seller added the following information:

We have had a lot of questions-hopefully this will answer many of your questions. We acquired the miniature from an estate in Massachusetts. The family had possession of it for many generations, which is probably why we are so lucky to have the original case retained with it. There is not any genealogy behind why they might have had this piece, but the history of Harriet Hemings after she left Monticello is very barren.

We have been in contact with the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society in Virginia and they offered an opinion and story:

“The miniature of Harriet Hemings is interesting. She ran away with Mr. Jefferson's blessings in 1822 and apparently disappeared into the white world. She has not been identified as Harriet Hemings since then so it would have been made before 1822. As a slave she probably would not have had the money to have a miniature made. The hair would have to have the root element to have a chance of carrying a DNA signature. You might try the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello as they are interested in slave memorabilia. The provenance would be hard to prove because of her history but if true may give us a clue as to where she went and what she did after "running away" from Monticello. “

We had concluded also that this miniature dates prior to 1822, as she appears to be quite young in the portrait, around age 12-14, which would date this piece to approximately 1811. No doubt the subject would not have had the wealth to commission such a portrait, but someone who would want to remember her would have had to, unless there was some kind of personal relationship going on with the painter. Since Harriet was the second female child named Harriet, her sister dying in infancy at age 2, perhaps there was fear of loss due to the high mortality rate of children at that time, so the portrait was commissioned.


My Opinion - I have been asked by a collector for my opinion. I did watch the sale but did not bid as, even apart from the final price, I had several reservations. In my opinion the miniature dates from c1840, not from 1811. A useful resource in dating miniatures is Fashions in Hair by Richard Corson. The examples in that book illustrate that the hair style of the sitter dates to c1840-1845. Her style of dress dates to around 1840 and the metal case also dates to around 1840. To me the writing does not appear to be contemporary with the miniature and looks more early 20C in style. My knowledge of genetics is very limited, but I believe blue eyes are normally recessive, with brown eyes likely to dominate (that is generally, but not categoric). Here the sitter has blue eyes which therefore needs to be explained in the context of a slave parent. Thus, on balance I doubt the sitter is Harriet Hemings.

Other Sales
Auction prices achieved on eBay tend to average between $250-$500, with something special needed to exceed this range.

Recent sales included a miniature portrait of an unknown lady sold on eBay for £630 ($1000). The vendor did not know the artist, but it is clearly by the Irish artist Frederick Buck.

A surprisingly high price, $4830, said to be a miniature of around 1850 of a lady and her baby from the McCagg family, was paid by a dealer for a portrait by Richard Morrell Staigg (1817-1881) a British artist who arrived in USA in 1831.

He visited Europe 1867-1869, and again in 1872-1874. The case here has an outer rectangular wooden frame and an inner ormolu mount.

From the style of the casework, the hairstyle, and her dress, it appears this miniature was painted by Staigg during his visits to England in 1867-1874. Casework like this was used in Europe, rather than USA, thus seeming to be painted during a visit to Europe.

Somewhat similar wooden outer frames were used by the American artist John Henry Brown as with the example shown here, but they lacked such an ornate ormolu inner frame. Another British miniature with a wooden outer frame and an ormolu mount is also shown for comparison.

More about photographic bases

American and British miniature portraits from the early 20C provide an interesting comparison. One being a painted miniature and the other two appearing to be on a photographic base.

The oval one of a young lady sold for $505. It was described as; An American Revival watercolor portrait miniature, of a young woman with red hair and blue eyes, wearing a pink dress and blue stone pendant, against a blue background. The painting is set in a gilt pendant frame with a solid reverse, and is signed by listed artist Sarah Eakin Cowan at the lower right. It is accompanied by a card which says: "Mrs. M. Campbell / by Sarah Eakin Cowan / New York City/ 1940 / 3 1/4 x 4 1/4." The painting is in excellent condition.

The rectangular one was sold for $478 and was described as; outstanding antique portrait miniature of a DuPont family beauty (possibly jean liseter austin / dupont 1897-1988, although we can't confirm this), superbly painted in oil / gouache on ox bone (NOT celluloid or related material), the female in magnificent jewels & clothing of the period, with original dore gold over bronze frame having hanging pendant at top, original glass (note: some chips to edges of glass inside). The painting is signed C.B. Pereira, and dates to circa 1915-20. approx 4.5" tall x 3.5" wide overall. Pereira is not recognised as a miniature painter, being more likely the name of a photographer who employed a colourist to over paint the portrait.

The miniature of the child also appears to be on a photographic base. It sold for £555 ($890) and was described as; This auction is for a truly lovely antique English portrait miniature by well listed miniaturist Beatrice Wainwright. Dating one would guess to the earlier 20thC. A sensitively painted portrait of a young girl. Measures 7.5cm wide x 15.5cm tall. Signed to the lower edge and bares the artists name and London address to the reverse.

However, the similar prices achieved show that collectors do not discriminate against miniatures painted over a photographic base, if the sitter is appealing and the artist is named.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Do you think all the bidders of the three miniatures had the experience to tell a photographic base miniature? The Cowan is a traditional portrait, while the other two are photographic in appearance. If the respective sellers had clearly said "painted on a photographic base" I wonder if bid levels would have been less? Listing descriptions can be misleading. JL

Don Shelton said...

I generally agree with your comment, but without knowing who the bidders were, cannot speculate on their individual levels of knowledge.
While I personally prefer miniatures where a photographic base is not obvious, I also recognize it was a widely used technique in the early 20C.
And when one compares these examples with the extraordinary prices that early b&w photographic prints can achieve, the prices do not seem greatly out of court when including the value of the frames and glasses themselves. Replacement cases and/or glasses are very expensive. What it does all show in my opinion, as expressed in the past, is that miniature portraits are a much under-rated art form, especially when one considers their beauty, any sitter history, and the artistic skill required.
In 2012 dollars the Cowan miniature would probably have cost around $5000 when it was painted, so has now sold for a fraction of its original "real" cost.
But I do acknowledge it remains true that "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"! - With a silver lining for collectors, as in what other art field are original works by artists featured in major museums, available so reasonably?