Canon Russ inherited the contents of Sawston Hall, including a 16th century portrait. Now, in order to save Sawston, he is willing to sell the portrait that some believe is of Mary Tudor!
The painting is a full length portrait of a lady in black wearing no jewellery. When first exhibited in 1956 it was claimed to be Mary I but in a later exhibition it was downgraded to just A Lady in Black.
A 16th century curator from the National Portrait Gallery claims that the portrait cannot be of Mary Tudor as the facial features are dissimilar to other authentic portraits. However, other scholars think that it must be Mary Tudor as it is too grand a portrait to be of anyone but royalty.
To read this very interesting article and see the portrait for yourself visit Times Online.
This article gives me hope that one day we might uncover another portrait of Anne Boleyn or a first portrait of her brother, George Boleyn.
Yes! The idea that there may be Tudor treasures, including portraits, lying undiscovered in some vast manor house, in a cellar or dusty attic, is just delicious. As for this portrait, I’d like to see a larger version of it online, so that I can examine the detail in it (it is supposedly a type of “puzzle” portrait, like Holbein’s The Ambassadors, featuring hidden clues). My inexpert opinion? The lady certainly bears a resemblance to Mary I …
I have examine and compare this portrait ot to Anne of Cleves and believe that it is a later portrait of this lady. She is closed to Mary I who would handle down her woven clothes to friends.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if more tudor treasures were found. There must be more paintings, carefully hidden rather than the risk of being destroyed while she was out of favour or when Elizabeth came to the throne.