A Trained Eye for Textiles
Van Dyck was born in Antwerp to a father who was a wealthy silk merchant and a mother who was well-known for her embroidery skills. An understanding of and exposure to textiles was thus fostered from an early age.
Van Dyck was a child prodigy, and he is now considered the most important 17th-century Flemish artist after his teacher, Peter Paul Rubens. Van Dyck was greatly influenced by Rubens, along with the Venetian Renaissance artist Titian. In addition to achieving success in his hometown, Van Dyck lived and worked throughout Italy, creating especially renowned portraiture of Genoese aristocrats. He also painted religious and mythological subjects.
Having journeyed to England earlier in his career, Van Dyck returned in 1632. He was soon knighted and became court painter to King Charles I. His commanding, complimentary portraits of the king and his family set the tone for English portraiture. Many courtiers were eager to engage Van Dyck to paint their portrait, too.
One such patron was James Stuart, Duke of Richmond and Lennox. Stuart was cousin to Charles I and loyal to his kin and king. He was rewarded with prominent positions at court, which included Gentleman of the Bedchamber, Lord Steward of the Household, and Privy Councillor. In 1633, he was installed as Knight of the Garter, England’s highest order of chivalry.
Painting the Duke’s Likeness
In this painting, the duke wears the insignia of the Order of the Garter, which was created in 1348 by King Edward III. Recipients are appointed personally by the monarch. The elements Stuart wears are: the silver star on his mantle (which is always worn on the left); a red and gold jeweled pendant on a green sash showing St. George (the patron saint of the Order and England); and a golden garter below the bow on his left knee (always worn on the left, too).
Contemporary costume designer Paul Tazewell, in a program at The Met called “The Artist Project,” comments that this painting, with its deliberate and swaggering staging, is a highly theatrical composition. He speaks to how Van Dyck’s depiction of light reflecting off of the metallic star as well as swaths of fabric gives the work a sculptural quality.
Stuart’s clothes are of the height of fashion, and he wears them with a nonchalant elegance; this was a hallmark of the artist’s style. The duke’s stockings and turn of leg show off shapely calves, which were considered to be an excellent attribute in men. In fact, padded stockings were sometimes worn to accentuate these features.
The French style shoes are flamboyantly adorned with large rosettes with high heels. In this period, soles were made identical with the left and right indistinguishable; with wear, each sole would eventually conform to the foot. Stuart’s wrinkled hosiery mirrored by carefully tousled blond hair with a stylish lovelock—hair from the nape of the neck that drapes over the chest that was particularly fashionable during the reign of Charles I—produces a romantic image of aristocratic affectation.
Of Lace and Loyalty
Van Dyck’s rendering of Stuart’s lace collar is exquisite. This luxurious material was a key feature in most portraits of wealthy men and women during the period. In Tudor England, it was usually depicted in an exacting manner. By the Baroque era, artists such as Van Dyck took a more painterly approach with dense brushmarks.The collar in “James Stuart (1612–1655), Duke of Richmond and Lennox” is made of bobbin lace, which is produced by hand and made by intertwisting threads wound on cylinders called bobbins. In Kassia St. Clair’s book “The Golden Thread: How Fabric Changed History,” she writes that “anonymous lacemakers created baroque designs of dizzying complexity, each one requiring exacting, mathematical planning to ensure the correct numbers of bobbins were in play.”
This type of lace, either produced in Britain or the Low Countries, was an ideal material for creating wide, flat collars such as the one worn by the duke. Art historian Sophie Ploeg writes that as bobbin lace is dense and lacks open work, artistically it is “impractical to depict every individual thread in paint. The viewer’s comprehension of the lace no longer relies on an entirely precise and detailed rendering of its structure and pattern.” The innovative Van Dyck captures the lace’s texture and pattern through light and shade.
The duke is accompanied in this painting by his dog, a greyhound, who reputedly saved his life during a boar hunt. This breed symbolizes nobility and loyalty. In general, depictions of dogs in art are used to signify fidelity. Van Dyck elevates the animal to new heights of grace and poise with the dog’s front legs posed elegantly. This alludes to Titian’s “Charles V With a Hound” from a hundred years earlier, which is now in the Prado Museum, but in Van Dyck’s time, it was part of Charles I’s storied art collection. In both works, each dog rests their muzzles on their owner’s hip while gazing loyally at them.
In Van Dyck’s painting, the dog represents his own loyalty to the duke, but also likely denotes the duke’s devotion to the king. Van Dyck’s compositions are characterized by rhythmic movement, evident here. The artist’s use of long, curving lines allows the separate elements of the work—from the dog to the clothes to the background’s curtain—to flow into one another.
In the 1640s, tumultuous times came to England: Tensions between Royalists and Parliamentarians amplified, and the loyal duke made substantial financial contributions to assist the king. In the midst of this conflict, Van Dyck died in 1641. The royalist cause was subsequently defeated in the English Civil War. James Stuart lost three of his brothers, King Charles I was executed, and his court was dispersed. Van Dyck’s portrait “James Stuart (1612–1655), Duke of Richmond and Lennox” immortalizes pre-Civil War England with great artistic panache.
