CHAPTER V.
HOGARTH'S INDUCEMENT TO PAINTING THE PICTURE OF SIGISMUNDA. HIS CORRESPONDENCE WITH LORD GROSVENOR ON THIS SUBJECT, CONTRASTED BY TWO LETTERS FROM LORD CHARLEMONT, FOR WHOM HE HAD PREVIOUSLY PAINTED AN INTERESTING SCENE. ORIGIN OF THE QUARREL WITH WILKES AND CHURCHILL, WHICH GAVE RISE TO THE PRINT OF THE BEAR, ETC.; AND THE ARTIST'S DEATH.
The particulars relative to the picture of "Sigismunda," Hogarth has himself inserted in his subscription-book, on the leaves of which he has pasted his correspondence with Lord Charlemont and Lord Grosvenor, and a proof print of MacArdell's copy from Correggio's picture. In a little blue memorandum book he resumes the subject, and concludes with a narrative of his quarrel with Wilkes and Churchill, which ends with the word Finis.
In these and some other loose papers, after having stated the professional injury which he had sustained from his opponents asserting, and the public believing, that he could not paint portraits, he continues:—
"Being thus driven out of the only profitable branch of my profession, I at first thought of attaching myself to history-painting; but in this there was no employment, for in forty years I had only two orders of any consequence for historical pictures. This was rather mortifying; and being, by the profits of my former productions and the office of serjeant painter, tolerably easy in my circumstances, and thoroughly sick of the idle quackery of criticism, I determined to quit the pencil for the graver. In this humble walk I had one advantage; the perpetual fluctuations in the manners of the times enabled me to introduce new characters, which being drawn from the passing day, had a chance of more originality and less insipidity than those which are repeated again, and again, and again from old stories. Added to this, the prints which I had previously engraved were now become a voluminous work, and circulated not only through England, but over Europe. These being secured to me by an Act which I had previously got passed, were a kind of an estate; and as they wore, I could repair and re-touch them, so that in some particulars they became better than when first engraved.[72]
"While I was making arrangements to confine myself entirely to my graver, an amiable nobleman (Lord Charlemont) requested that, before I bade a final adieu to the pencil, I would paint him one picture; the subject to be my own choice, and the reward—whatever I demanded. The story I pitched upon was a young and virtuous married lady, who, by playing at cards with an officer, loses her money, watch, and jewels; the moment when he offers them back in return for her honour, and she is wavering at his suit, was my point of time.[73]
"The picture was highly approved of, and the payment was noble; but the manner in which it was made, by a note enclosed in one of the following letters, was to me infinitely more gratifying than treble the sum:—
From Lord Charlemont to Mr. Hogarth.
"Mount Street, 19th Aug. 1759.
"Dear Sir,—I have been so excessively busied with ten thousand troublesome affairs, that I have not been able to wait upon you according to my promise, nor even to find time to sit for my picture. As I am obliged to set out for Ireland to-morrow, we must defer that till my return, which will be in the latter end of January, or in the beginning of February at furthest. I am still your debtor, more so indeed than I ever shall be able to pay; and did intend to have sent you before my departure what trifling recompense my abilities permit me to make you. But the truth is, having wrong calculated my expenses, I find myself unable for the present even to attempt paying you. However, if you be in any present need of money, let me know it, and as soon as I get to Ireland I will send you, not the price of your picture, for that is inestimable, but as much as I can afford to give for it.—Sir, I am, with the most sincere wishes for your health and happiness, your most obedient humble servant,
Charlemont.
To Mr. Hogarth.
"Dublin, 29th January 1760.
"Dear Sir,—Enclosed I send you a note upon Nesbitt for one hundred pounds; and considering the name of the author, and the surprising merit of your performance, I am really much ashamed to offer such a trifle in recompense for the pains you have taken, and the pleasure your picture has afforded me. I beg you would think that I by no means attempt to pay you according to your merit, but according to my own abilities. Were I to pay your deserts, I fear I should leave myself poor indeed. Imagine that you have made me a present of the picture, for literally as such I take it, and that I have begged your acceptance of the enclosed trifle. As this is really the case, with how much reason do I subscribe myself, Your most obliged humble servant,
Charlemont.
"This elevating circumstance had its contrast, and brought on a train of most dissatisfactory circumstances, which by happening at a time when I thought myself, as it were, landed, and secure from tugging any longer at the oar, were rendered doubly distressing.
"A gentleman (now a nobleman) seeing this picture, pressed me with much vehemence to paint another for him upon the same terms. To this I reluctantly assented; and as I had been frequently flattered for my power of giving expression, I thought the figure of Sigismunda weeping over the heart of her lover would enable me to display it. Impressed with this idea, I fixed upon this very difficult subject. My object was dramatic, and my aim to draw tears from the spectator,—an effect I have often witnessed at a tragedy; and it therefore struck me that it was worth trying if a painter could not produce the same effect, and touch the heart through the eye, as the player does through the ear.[74] Thus far I have been gratified: I have more than once seen the tear of sympathy trickle down the cheek of a female while she has been contemplating the picture.
"As four hundred pounds had a short time before been bid for a picture of 'Sigismunda,' painted by a French master, but falsely ascribed to Correggio, four hundred pounds was the price at which I rated this.[75]
"By any other of my pursuits I could have got twice the sum in the time I devoted to it; nor was it more than half what a fashionable face-painter would have gained in the same period. Upon these grounds I put it at this sum; see the letter, and see the answer. It ended by my keeping the picture in my painting-room, and his Lordship keeping his money in his pocket. Had it been Charlemont!"
This transaction having given rise to many ridiculous falsehoods, the following unvarnished tale will set the whole in its true light:—
"January 1764.
"The picture of 'Sigismunda' was painted at the earnest request of Sir Richard Grosvenor (now Lord Grosvenor) in the year 1759, at a time when Mr. Hogarth had fully determined to leave off painting, partly on account of ease and retirement, but more particularly because he had found by thirty years' experience that his pictures—except in an instance or two, mentioned in the note[76]—had not produced him one quarter of the profit that arose from his engravings. However, the flattering compliments, as well as generous offers, made him by the above gentleman (who was immensely rich), prevailed upon the unwary artist to undertake this difficult subject, which being seen and fully approved of by his Lordship whilst in hand, was, after much time, and the utmost efforts, finished. But how! the painter's death (as usual) can only positively determine. The price required for it was therefore not on account of its value as a picture, but proportioned to the value of the time it took in painting.
"This nobleman in the interim fell into the clutches of the dealers in old pictures; the treatment a man who painted new ones was to expect where these gentry once get a footing[77] so much alarmed the artist, that he thought it best to set his Lordship at full liberty to take or reject the picture by writing the following letter, and putting him in mind of the agreement which was made when the work was undertaken:—
Mr. Hogarth's Letter to Sir Richard Grosvenor.
"Sir,—I have done all I can to the picture of 'Sigismunda.' You may remember you was pleased to say you would give me what price I should think fit to set upon any subject I would paint for you; and at the time that you made this generous offer, I in return made it my request that you would use no ceremony in refusing the picture when done, if you should not be thoroughly satisfied with it. This you promised should be as I pleased, which I now entreat you will comply with, without the least hesitation, if you think four hundred too much money for it.[78] One more favour I have to beg, which is, that you will determine on this matter as soon as you can conveniently, that I may resolve whether I shall go about another picture for Mr. Hoare the banker, on the same conditions, or stop here.—I am, etc.
"June 13, 1757.
Sir Richard Grosvenor to Mr. Hogarth.
"Sir,—I should sooner have answered yours of the 13th instant, but have been mostly out of town. I understand by it that you have a commission from Mr. Hoare for a picture. If he should have taken a fancy to the 'Sigismunda,' I have no sort of objection to your letting him have it; for I really think the performance so striking and inimitable, that the constantly having it before one's eyes would be too often occasioning melancholy ideas to arise in one's mind, which a curtain's being drawn before it would not diminish in the least.—I am, Sir, your most obedient servant,
Richard Grosvenor.
"Grosvenor Square,
Sunday morning, June 17.
Mr. Hogarth's Reply.
"Sir Richard,—As your obliging answer to my letter in regard to the picture of 'Sigismunda' did not seem to be quite positive, I beg leave to conclude you intend to comply with my request if I do not hear from you within a week.—I am, etc.
W. H.
"His Lordship not thinking fit to take any further notice of the affair, here it must have ended; but things having been represented in favour of his Lordship, and much to Mr. Hogarth's dishonour, the foregoing plain tale is therefore submitted to such as may at any time think it worth while to see the whole truth in what has been so publicly talked of."
To vindicate his fame, Hogarth at one time determined to have the picture engraved, and Mr. Ravenet undertaking it, "a subscription for the print was begun March 2d, 1761;[79] but, some time afterwards, finding that Mr. Ravenet was under articles not to work for any one except Mr. Boydell for three years then to come, the subscription was put a stop to, and the money returned to the subscribers, there being no other engraver at leisure capable of doing it as it should be done."
"January 2, 1764.
"All efforts to this time to get the picture finely engraved proving in vain, Mr. Hogarth humbly hopes his best endeavours to engrave it himself will be acceptable to his friends."
CORREGGIO'S SIGISMUNDA.
"Mute, solemn sorrow, free from female noise."
—Dryden's Sigismunda.
On the comparative merit of the two pictures of "Sigismunda" there have been various opinions. By the foregoing narrative it appears that Hogarth never paid so much attention to any preceding production; but in works of imagination success is not always proportionate to labour, and his performance might not be equal to his exertions. Be that as it may, this was the criterion by which he estimated its worth; and by the political disputes in which he was afterwards engaged with Wilkes and Churchill, this estimation was turned against himself. His opponents discovered his parental partiality for "Sigismunda;" and to wound the artist in his most vulnerable part, they mangled her without mercy.
Mr. Walpole's critique did not appear until after Hogarth's death; but when he gravely states Hogarth's performance to be more ridiculous than anything the artist had ever ridiculed, it ceases to be criticism. The best reply to so extravagant an assertion, is the original picture now in the possession of Messrs. Boydell, which, though not well coloured, and rather French, is marked with mind, and would probably have been better had it not been so often altered on the suggestions of different critical friends. Mr. Walpole contrasts it with that painted by Correggio (or Furino), on which, at the expense of the poor English artist, he bestows most extravagant and unqualified praise; asserting that it is impossible "to see the picture, or read Dryden's inimitable tale, and not feel that the same spirit animated both poet and painter." That the reader may form his own opinion by comparison, I have annexed a copy from MacArdell's admirable print; and as both sides ought to be heard, I have subjoined the following remarks from the Monthly Register of Literature, vol. ii., in which is a critique (possibly written by Mr. Joshua Kirby), as extravagant in the abuse of this picture as Mr. Walpole is in its praise. It is here stated that these observations were written for private use by a professional man whose name is well known as the author of a treatise on painting and perspective; it begins with some remarks on Miss Edwards' sale in 1746, and concludes with several strictures on Sir Luke Schaub's in April 1756: "Sir Luke's pictures (only 178) sold for £7784! a lucky collection for his heir, but unlucky for Sir Luke's reputation as a judge of painting." After several severe remarks on some of the preceding lots, the writer observes of "No. 59,—'Sigismunda Weeping over the Heart of Tancred,' called a Correggio,—that this picture is an undoubted copy; nothing in the character of Sigismunda but sorrow to recommend it. The painter might take it from his cook-maid, there being nothing elegant or delicate in her appearance. The virtuosi ran it up to £400; but Sir Thomas Sebright, at the desire of the proprietor, bought it in for £404, 5s. He soon discovered his mistake, for in reality it was worth no more than ten guineas."
Though I cannot consent to view this picture through the medium of Mr. Walpole's overcharged panegyric, which gives to the artist a power that is not in the art, and seems heightened for the pure purpose of sinking Hogarth by the contrast; yet I by no means meet this indiscriminate and unfounded censure. It is many years since I saw the picture in the Duke of Newcastle's collection, and I then thought it sublimely conceived and finely coloured. MacArdell's print gives a faithful representation of the character, and the annexed head is a correct copy.
Hogarth still bearing in mind this transaction, in which he thought himself very ill-used, continues his narrative, and concludes with a recital of the circumstances which occasioned his quarrel with Mr. Wilkes, etc.; this much hurt his feelings, and in the progress of it I have ever thought he was unjustly and most inhumanly treated:—
"As the most violent and virulent abuse thrown on 'Sigismunda' was from a set of miscreants, with whom I am proud of having been ever at war, I mean the expounders of the mysteries of old pictures, I have been sometimes told they were beneath my notice. This is true of them individually; but as they have access to people of rank, who seem as happy in being cheated as these merchants are in cheating them, they have a power of doing much mischief to a modern artist. However mean the vendor of poisons, the mineral is destructive; to me its operation was troublesome enough. Ill-nature spread so fast, that now was the time for every little dog in the profession to bark, and revive the old spleen which appeared at the time of the Analysis.[80] The anxiety that attends endeavouring to recollect ideas long dormant, and the misfortunes which clung to this transaction, coming at a time when nature demands quiet, and something besides exercise to cheer it, added to my long sedentary life, brought on an illness which continued twelve months. But when I got well enough to ride on horseback I soon recovered. This being at a period when war abroad and contention at home engrossed every one's mind, prints were thrown into the background; and the stagnation rendered it necessary that I should do some timed thing, to recover my lost time and stop a gap in my income. This drew forth my print of 'The Times,' a subject which tended to the restoration of peace and unanimity, and put the opposers of these humane objects in a light which gave great offence to those who were trying to foment destruction in the minds of the populace. One of the most notorious among them, till now rather my friend and flatterer, attacked me in a North Briton, in so infamous and malign a style, that he himself, when pushed even by his best friends, was driven to so poor an excuse as to say, 'he was drunk when he wrote it.' Being at that time very weak, and in a kind of slow fever, it could not but seize on a feeling mind. My philosophical friends advise me to laugh at the nonsense of party writing—who would mind it?—but I cannot rest myself:
'Who steals my gold steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;
'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands:
But he that filches from me my good name,
Robs me of that which not enriches him,
And makes me poor indeed.'
"Such being my feelings, my great object was to return the compliment, and turn it to some advantage.
"This renowned patriot's portrait drawn, like as I could as to features, and marked with some indications of his mind, fully answered my purpose. The ridiculous was apparent to every eye. A Brutus! a saviour of his country with such an aspect! was so arrant a farce, that, though it gave rise to much laughter in the lookers-on, galled both him and his adherents to the bone. This was proved by the papers being every day crammed with invectives against the artist, till the town grew absolutely sick of thus seeing me always at full length.
"Churchill, Wilkes' toad-eater, put the North Briton into verse in an epistle to Hogarth; but as the abuse was precisely the same, except a little poetical heightening, which goes for nothing, it made no impression, but perhaps in some measure effaced or weakened the black strokes of the North Briton. However, having an old plate by me, with some parts ready, such as the background and a dog, I began to consider how I could turn so much work laid aside to some account; so patched up a print of Master Churchill in the character of a Bear. The pleasure and pecuniary advantage which I derived from these two engravings, together with occasionally riding on horseback, restored me to as much health as can be expected at my time of life.
"Thus have I gone through the principal circumstances of a life which, till lately, passed pretty much to my own satisfaction, and, I hope, in no respect injurious to any other man. This I can safely assert, I have invariably endeavoured to make those about me tolerably happy, and my greatest enemy cannot say I ever did an intentional injury; though, without ostentation, I could produce many instances of men that have been essentially benefited by me. What may follow, God knows.—Finis."
Such is the candid and dispassionate appeal which this unequalled artist and excellent man makes to his contemporaries and to posterity.
In October 1764, he died of an aneurism at his house in Leicester Fields. His remains were removed to his family vault at Chiswick. The epitaph by Dr. Johnson, and that written by Mr. Garrick and inscribed on his monument, are in the first volume of Hogarth Illustrated.
In the Public Ledger of November 19, 1764, his friend Doctor Townley paid the following tribute to his talents and virtues:—
"TO THE MEMORY OF WILLIAM HOGARTH, WHO WAS SUCH AM ACCURATE OBSERVER OF MANKIND THAT NO CHARACTER ESCAPED HIM, AND SO HAPPY IN EXPRESSING HIS CONCEPTIONS BY THE STRENGTH OF HIS PENCIL, THAT, AS HIS OWN TIMES NEVER PRODUCED A RIVAL, POSTERITY WILL SCARCE EVER SEE AN EQUAL TO HIM. HIS THOUGHTS WERE SO CONSTANTLY EMPLOYED IN THE CAUSE OF TRUTH AND VIRTUE, THAT HE MAY BE JUSTLY RANKED AMONGST THE BEST MORAL AUTHORS. WHILST HE FAITHFULLY FOLLOWED NATURE THROUGH ALL HER VARIETIES, AND EXPOSED WITH INIMITABLE SKILL THE INFINITE FOLLIES AND VICES OF THE WORLD, HE WAS HIMSELF AN EXAMPLE OF MANY VIRTUES; AND WHEN, WITH UNIVERSAL ADMIRATION AND APPLAUSE, HE HAD REPROVED, INSTRUCTED, AND DELIGHTED THE AGE WHEREIN HE LIVED, HE RESIGNED THE UNCOMMON GIFTS WHICH HE POSSESSED, AND PAID THE GREAT DEBT HE OWED TO NATURE, OCT. 27, 1764."
DESCRIPTION OF THE PRINTS, Etc.
With talents equally honourable to himself, his country, and the age in which he lived, Hogarth did not leave his widow possessed of much more than arose from the sale of his prints. But during the twenty-five years which she survived him, she had the higher and more exalted gratification of finding that his reputation increased, and his fame acquired stability by time.
In the year 1780, the late Horace Lord Orford published his Anecdotes, in which he has introduced Hogarth's catalogue and character. The volume printed at Strawberry Hill, he (with the preceding part of the work) presented to Mrs. Hogarth. The books were accompanied with the following handsome apology for his strictures on the genius of her husband:[81]—
To Mrs. Hogarth.
"Berkeley Square, October 4, 1780.
"Mr. Walpole begs Mrs. Hogarth's acceptance of the volume that accompanies this letter, and hopes she will be content with his endeavours to do justice to the genius of Mr. Hogarth. If there are some passages less agreeable to her than the rest, Mr. Walpole will regard her disapprobation only as marks of the goodness of her heart, and proofs of her affection to her husband's memory; but she will, he is sure, be so candid as to allow for the duty an historian owes to the public and himself, which obliges him to say what he thinks, and which when he obeys, his praise is corroborated by his censure. The first page of his Preface will more fully make his apology;[82] and his just admiration of Mr. Hogarth, Mr. W. flatters himself, will, notwithstanding his impartiality, still rank him in Mrs. Hogarth's mind as one of her husband's most zealous and sincere friends."
In nine years after the receipt of this letter, Mrs. Hogarth died, bequeathing her property to her relation, Mrs. Mary Lewis of Chiswick, by whose kindness and friendship I am in possession of the manuscripts which form the basis of the foregoing sheets, the following most singular and curious print of "Enthusiasm Delineated," etc. etc. etc.
ENTHUSIASM DELINEATED,
CONTRASTED WITH THE PRINT ENTITLED
A MEDLEY;
TO WHICH HOGARTH AFTERWARDS ALTERED THE PLATE.[83]
"Idolatry is not only an accounting and worshipping that for God which is not God, but it is also a worshipping the true God in a way unsuitable to His nature, and particularly by the mediation of images and corporeal resemblances."—South.
Such was the opinion of Dr. South, and such the opinion of Hogarth, when he designed this very extraordinary print, the intention of which is to give "a lineal representation of the strange effects resulting from literal and low conceptions of sacred beings, as also of the idolatrous tendency of pictures in churches, and prints in religious books," etc. To exemplify this, he has parodied the productions of several eminent masters, whose works, having been generally painted under the direction of cardinals, popes, etc., are chiefly on religious subjects; and by the artists absurdly attempting to represent what are not properly objects of sight, that which they intended to be sublime is rendered in the highest degree ridiculous. To burlesque the idolatrous symbols with which they have peopled their canvas, place the popish doctrine of transubstantiation[84] in its true point of view, unmask hypocrisy, and check the progress of those enthusiastic delusions which Bishop Lavington properly terms "Religion run Mad,"[85] are the author's leading objects.
To effect these purposes, he has delineated what we may fairly denominate a powerful preacher, who from his countenance, and what is hinted at in the scale of vociferation at his left hand, seems treating his congregation with a bull roar. He may be considered as either a Methodistical Papist or a Popish Methodist, for his shaven crown intimates that he is a Jesuit; and the harlequin's jacket underneath his gown denotes the versatility of his religious professions. This Proteus of the pulpit poises a puppet in each hand; that in the left represents the devil grasping a gridiron; in his right he holds the triple figure with the triangular emblem, by which Raphael and some other painters have profanely presumed to personify the Deity.[86]
Exemplifying sacred mysteries by these absurd theorems is surely open to the severest satire; and to heighten his ridicule, the artist has, by adding three legs to the triangle, rendered it a complete trivet, and given to his jesuitical and theatrical declaimer (who, as his text intimates, "speaks as a fool") a pointed antithesis,—"If you do not believe in this trivet, you shall broil on that gridiron." Dangling on pegs around the pulpit, and to be exhibited as there shall be occasion, are six other puppets, copied from the absurd misrepresentations which some of the old masters have made of Adam and Eve, Peter and Paul, Moses and Aaron. Adam and Eve are a little caricatured, but evidently intended to hint at the dry designs of Albert Durer. Adam, though naked, has the air of a first-rate coxcomb. Eve, encircled with a zone of fig leaves, has neither grace in her step nor dignity in her gesture. Peter, displaying his ponderous key, and pulling off Paul's black periwig, is copied from Rembrandt, and to him referred in Hogarth's inscription. Paul, with a beard of Hudibrastic cut and dye, being low of stature, is elevated by high-heeled shoes, and armed with two swords: that in his hand, massy as the weapon wielded by John a Gaunt; the other, which, like the dagger of Hudibras, might serve as its page, tucked to his side.
Moses and Aaron, one bearing the tables and the other an incense pot, are retreating to the other side. The Jewish lawgiver's having made many ordinances concerning food, may be hinted at by his being crowned with a porridge pot; the two feet may serve for horns. The bells on the hem of Aaron's garments are sufficiently obvious, and, as saith Master Thomas Goodwin, in his Civil and Ecclesiastical Rites—"By the bells are typed the sound of his doctrine."
The nobleman in a pew beneath, unquestionably refers to some known character; but for whom it is meant I am unable to determine. He may either be a peer who was at that time very constant in his attendance at the Tabernacle, or a wolf who has found his way into the fold, and is prowling among the lambs of the flock. His face presents the index of a mind in which hypocrisy is united with another passion, and is in an eminent degree characteristic. The holy fervour[87] of the female, who, seduced by the tender touches of an earthly lover, lets her celestial model fall to the ground, is equally remarkable. A ragged figure[88] in the same pew, dropping his tears into a bottle, we know, by his rueful countenance, his handcuffs, and the letter T marked on his cheek, to be a repentant thief. A tattered and coal-black proselyte at the foot of the reading-desk, inspired with the epidemical enthusiasm of the place, is embracing the idolatrous image of her adoration, which in colour is similar to herself.
As sculptors and painters have thought fit to denominate a child's head, with duck wings, "Cherubin;"[89] Hogarth, to one of these infantine fancies, has whimsically enough added a pair of duck's feet. The well-fed figure in the desk may perhaps be meant as an overcharged portrait of Whitfield. The fainting female in the corner of the print was intended for Mrs. Douglas of the Piazza, who, after a most licentious life, became a rigid devotee, and was Sam. Foote's original for Mother Cole. The Jew, with an insect between his nails, has a fine air of head. On the book open before him is a print of "Abraham offering up Isaac."[90]
The figures in the background it is not necessary to enumerate: they are sighing, weeping, groaning! The four most obtrusive convey a severe satire on transubstantiation. A Turk looking through the window, is evidently laughing at their absurdities, and thanking Mahomet that he has been early initiated in the Koran. A dog, with "Whitfield" on his collar, seated upon a hassock, and howling in concert with the preacher, is admirably designed.
The figure of a pigeon impressed on the Methodist's brain, is intended to intimate that if the Holy Spirit gets into the head instead of the heart, it will create that confusion of intellect described in the mental thermometer which rises out of it, and which is crowned by a dove on the point of a triangle.
Thus did this great artist express his "First Thought," but afterwards erased, or essentially altered every figure except two, and on the same piece of copper: we find his variations so multifarious as to render it nearly a new print, which he entitled
CREDULITY, SUPERSTITION, AND FANATICISM.
A MEDLEY.
The preacher and the devil, except in a few shadows added to a handkerchief, are left as in the first state, and these are the only figures that are so left; from them and the background it is positively ascertained that the first and second engravings are on the same copperplate. Raphael's strange symbol of the Deity the artist has struck out, and in the place of it inserted a witch upon a broomstick; instead of the puppets representing Adam and Eve, Peter and Paul, Moses and Aaron, we have Mrs. Veale's ghost, Julius Cæsar's apparition, and the shade of Sir George Villiers.
The nobleman, and lady dropping her deified image in the pew beneath the pulpit, are discarded, and a pair of vulgar and uninteresting characters put in their room. The handcuffed felon is obliterated, and his place supplied by two figures, one weeping, the other asleep. The ragged woman hugging a model is altered to the boy of Bilson; and on the hassock, where was the howling dog, is a shoeblack's basket, with Whitfield's Journal placed upon King James's Demonology. The characters of cherubin and seraph are changed; and though the duck's wings are left, the legs are lopped off. In the place of the corpulent and consequential clerk, the artist has inserted a meagre and moon-eyed monster, with wings that either grow out of his shoulders, or appertain to a foul fiend planted behind him and acting as his prompter. Mother Douglas is beaten out of the copper, and in her room Hogarth has introduced Mrs. Tofts and her rabbits, one of the popular impositions of his own day. The smelling-bottle applied to recover Mrs. Douglas from fainting, is with Mrs. Tofts very properly changed to a dram glass. The Jew is altered, and altered for the worse: the print of "Abraham and Isaac," in a book before him, is obliterated, and a knife inscribed "bloody," and laid upon an altar, supplies its place. In the characters of the common people of the congregation there are several variations; the models which some of them held in their arms are totally changed. The pigeon in the Methodist's brain is discarded; in the place of the inscription in the top division of the thermometer he has inserted the Cock Lane ghost; and instead of the glory, which in the "First Thought" crowned the whole, we have the Tedworth Drummer, a tale which, had it not given the subject for Addison's comedy, would have been long since forgotten. On the scale of vociferation and the chandelier, the names of W—d and Romaine are only to be found in the present state of the plate; in the scale of the thermometer there are numerous alterations. In "The Medley," the artist has made an addition, and placed Wesley's Sermons and Glanville's book On Witches as supporters to the Methodist's brain. To do this, and introduce the rabbits on the foreground, he has brought his work so near the bottom of his plate as not to leave room for a title, which, with the quotation from St. John, "Believe not every spirit," etc., is, in the present state of the plate, engraven on another piece of copper.
Many little variations besides those I have noted will appear by a comparison of the two designs; one is worthy of particular attention. In the print of "Enthusiasm Delineated," the inscriptions on the thermometer, etc., are evidently from the burin of Hogarth; in the print of "The Medley," every inscription, even those which in each impression contain the same words, are the work of a writing engraver, from which I am inclined to believe, that in the first state the artist never trusted the plate out of his own hands.
With respect to the comparative merit of the two prints, I think of the "First Thought" what Mr. Walpole in his Anecdotes asserts of the "Second," that "for useful and deep satire, it is the most sublime of all his works." It forms one great whole; and the skill with which he has appropriated the absurd symbols of painters, and combined the idolatrous emblems of Popery with the mummery of modern enthusiasts, presents a trait of his genius hitherto unknown; displays the powers of his mind on subjects new to his pencil, and shows an extent of information and depth of thought that is not to be found in any of his other works.
In "The Medley" the artist has changed his ground, attacked follies of another description, and in the place of Enthusiasm introduced Credulity, Superstition, and Fanaticism. In his management of them he has shown much genius, and by his transition from one object to another, and the many metamorphoses of his characters, displayed a power of assimilating, aptness of appropriating, and versatility of pencil hardly to be paralleled, and proved that his invention was inexhaustible. With all this, it must be acknowledged that some of the local credulities which he has there depicted were of so temporary and trifling a nature, that even now they are hardly recollected by any other circumstances than having been introduced in this print.
Ten or twelve figures engraved on the background are not in the "First Thought:" two of them, viz. a crazed convert terrified by a lay preacher, are admirably descriptive; but as to the residue of this half-price audience, met together to be miserable, they add to the number without much increasing the force, destroy the pyramid, and hurt the general effect;—if they are intended to stand on the floor, they are too high; if on benches, too low. The effect of this print is further injured by the alteration of the clerk. In the first state, his ample breadth of face and black periwig render him a leading character, and give him the rank of principal figure. The thin-visaged, hungry harpy in "The Medley" has no importance, neither is there any principal figure in that print. A little cherub Mercury, crowned with a postilion's cap, and bearing in his mouth a letter directed to St. Moneytrap, is an afterthought, and only to be found in the second impression.
If I am asked what were the artist's inducements for making so many alterations, I can account for it in no other way than by supposing some friend suggested that the satire would be mistaken, and that there might be those who would suppose his arrows were aimed at religion, though every shaft is pointed at the preposterous masquerade habit in which it has been frequently disguised.
Considering the time that must have been employed in beating out the old figures, the trouble of polishing the copper, etc., it seems rather extraordinary that he should not have wholly discarded his plate of the "First Thought," and taken another piece of copper for the second. It is probable that the alterations were made by degrees, and before the author was fully satisfied with his design, became much more numerous than he had at first intended.[91]
TASTE IN HIGH LIFE
IN THE YEAR 1742.
The picture from which this print was copied, Hogarth painted by the order of Miss Edwards, a woman of large fortune, who, having been laughed at for some singularities in her manners, requested the artist to recriminate on her opponents, and paid him sixty guineas for his production.
It is professedly intended to ridicule the reigning fashions of high life in the year 1742. To do this the painter has brought into one group an old beau and an old lady of the Chesterfield school, a fashionable young lady, a little black boy, and a full-dressed monkey. The old lady, with a most affected air, poises between her finger and thumb a small tea-cup, with the beauties of which she appears to be highly enamoured.
The gentleman, gazing with vacant wonder at that and the companion saucer which he holds in his hand, joins in admiration of its astonishing beauties!
"Each varied colour of the brightest hue,
The green, the red, the yellow, and the blue,
In every part their dazzled eyes behold,
Here streak'd with silver—there enrich'd with gold."
This gentleman is said to be intended for Lord Portmore, in the habit he first appeared at Court on his return from France. The cane dangling from his wrist, large muff, long queue, black stock, feathered chapeau, and shoes, give him the air of