hugh douglas hamilton's letters to canova - Irish Arts Review

IRISH ARTS REVIEW
HUGH DOUGLAS HAMILTON'S LETTERS TO CANOVA
I wish I were in Rome where I could see your
work . . . Living in Ireland is almost like
being in exile for anyone who truly loves art.
There is little evidence here of artistic talent
and that that I have has been ruined by the
endless portraits that I am forced to produce.
Accordingly my health has deteriorated, and
yet I do get some satisfaction and amusement
from producing the occasional historical
drawing. But my enthusiasm soon wains due
to the total lack in this country of an
understanding or liking for such things
In 1802 Hugh Douglas Hamilton
(1740-1808), possibly Ireland's finest
portrait painter of the late eighteenth
century, wrote these lines in a letter to
his friend the sculptor Antonio Canova
(1757-1822), who at that time was at the
height of his fame. Hamilton wrote from
Dublin, his native city, to which he had
returned after a lengthy sojourn in Italy
between 1779 and 1792. A group of four
letters by Hamilton, written in Italian,
and dating from 1794-18021 tell of the
artist's fondness for Canova as well as
revealing the importance of Italy for this,
a leading Irish artist of the period. The
letters are also interesting in that they
Having written in Apollo magazine
in 1982 of Hugh Douglas
Hamilton's long sojourn in Rome,
here Fintan Cullen an Irish Art
historian now engaged in
postgraduate research at Yale
University, uses Hamilton's letters
from Dublin to his friend the
sculptor Canova in Rome to throw
light on the painter's last years and
his frustration with the prevailing
attitude to art in the Irish capital.
nclude frequent and as with the piece
luoted above, strongly felt criticisms of
he artistic stagnation and unenlightened
ratronage to be found in Dublin at the
urn of the eighteenth century.
Hamilton's return to Italy was
lindered by the ongoing Anglo-French
OVars which had begun in the early
L790s. The artist wrote to Canova of his
*ears for the fate of Rome amidst "the
nisfortunes of seige and turbulence". He
!xpressed hopes of a return to "peace
Antonio Canova in his Studio with Henry Tresham, Hugh D Hamilton, c. 1778-89.
Private Collection, England.
-31
and tranquility for Europe" and that the
arts would be able to reestablish their
position in Rome so that he could have
the "consolation of returning, because"
as he wrote "I most certainly wish to
return to live and die there". But
Hamilton was also troubled by more
immediate disturbances in Ireland. The
outbreaks of rebellion and the
unsuccessful French invasion of 1798
greatly worried him and in September
1800 he wrote "it is known that the
French plan to reinvade, in which case
the rebellion will be renewed". The
following June he wrote to Canova say
ing that although the country was
"apparently tranquil [it is] occasionally
disturbed by rebellion"; Hamilton who
was quite probably a staunch loyalist felt
that the "hostile enemy", presumably
the French, would "create a situation of
war even more horrible than before,
because the people of Ireland are out for
revenge".
Amidst all the turmoil, however,
Hamilton seems to have maintained a
steady flow of business. The patronage of
painting in Dublin was conservative and
Irish Arts Review
is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve, and extend access to
Irish Arts Review 1984 1987 ®
www.jstor.org

IRISH ARTS REVIEW
HUGH DOUGLAS HAMILTON'S LETTERS TO CANOVA
although he longed for more intellectu
ally satisfying commissions, the artist's
income was dependent upon the endless
portraits that he was forced to execute.
Writing to Canova Hamilton bemoaned
the fact that in Ireland "the arts are given
little motivation" and complained that
there was no one with whom he could
discuss his work. On a more personal
level the letters place the artist in a
somewhat pitiable position. Hamilton
believed that the "Roman campagna"
was the only place in which a dedicated
artist should live and work. His inability
to return to Italy was thus a cause of
deep sadness to him. Furthermore,
around 1802-04 the artist's misfortunes
were greatly increased by a serious
nervous complaint induced by the
pressures of having to produce so many
portraits2. This extensive portrait
practise finally took its toll and in 1804
at the age of sixty four, the artist retired
from public commissions. All the same
he still longed to return to the continent.
The final line of his last known letter to
Canova, dated 8 November 1802,
expresses the forlorn hope of visiting
Paris and possibly even Italy the follow
ing Spring3 but Hamilton was never to
leave Ireland again. He died in his house
in Dublin in 1808.
Hamilton's friendship with Canova
had been formed while a resident in
Rome in the 1780s. He had arrived in
Italy in 1779 with a respectable reputa
tion as a master of pastel portraiture, a
position he maintained through commis
sions from distinguished emigres. While
in Rome he got to know many of the
leading foreign artists then working in
Italy, including the Irish history painter
Henry Tresham, the sculptor John
Flaxman, the gem engraver Nathaniel
Marchant, as well as Italian friends of
Canova such as the sculptor's future
biographer Antonio d'Este and the
engraver Martino de Boni. Canova had
arrived in Rome from Venice in 1779
and as Hugh Honour has pointed out he
''seems to have found the foreign
painters the most interesting... and it
was with them that he made friends"4.
As a "natural xenophile" he nurtured
friendships with the Scottish artists
Gavin Hamilton and Jacob More, the
Irish sculptor Christopher Hewetson,
and also with Henry Tresham and of
course Hugh Douglas Hamilton who was
presumably a frequent visitor to
' s~~~~~'
Cupid and Psyche in the Nuptial Bower,
Hugh D Hamilton c. 1793-94.
Dublin, National Gallery of Ireland.
Canova's home for in the letter of 1802
he asks after Signora Luigia, the
sculptor's housekeeper.
Hamilton's letters show the great
esteem in which he held his famous
contemporary (despite the fact that the
sculptor was seventeen years his junior).
In 1802 he wrote to Canova "allow me
to express my gratefulness in every way,
especially for the expressions of bene
volence and friendliness that you have
shown me," thanked Canova for writing,
and declared how proud he was to be
associated with one so famous.
Elsewhere I have discussed Hamilton's
artistic output during these Italian years
as well as his debt to Canova in the
creation of the fine Cupid and Psyche in
the Nuptial Bower which is in the
National Gallery of Ireland5. This
painting dates from ca. 1793-4 that is
after Hamilton's return to Ireland. In
terms of subject matter and attention to
form and line the Dublin painting is a
direct result of Canova's famous Cupid
and Psyche of 1788-89, which is now in
the Louvre. Hamilton's oil reflects the
refined pseudoclassicism of Canova's
embracing couple. Yet some four to five
years prior to painting the Dublin Cupid
and Psyche Hamilton's admiration for
Canova had found expression in a strik
ingly laudatory image that included the
sculptured group he so much admired.
-32
The pastel portrait of Canova in his
Studio with Henry Tresham standing by an
early model of the Louvre group is a
deliberate glorification of the sculptor.
Canova is represented mallet in hand,
while his other sculpting tools are on a
bench at the left. Henry Tresham (175 1
1814) the artist companion of Canova's
patron, John Campbell, later 1st Baron
Cawdor, stands to the right and seems to
be pondering some profound thought as
his gaze does not fall on the sculpture.
The deep red curtain in the background,
the shadowed archway and the still-life
at the left, display a new-found gravity
and feeling for linear rhythm that had
not been previously evident in
Hamilton's pastel work. Executed
towards the end of the artist's sojourn in
Italy, this truly great neoclassical
portrait, together with a small group of
equally large-sized pastels, is a summa
tion of the Irishman's expertise in this
medium6. For thirty years Hamilton had
worked almost exclusively as a pastel
artist, producing hundreds of popular
small oval portraits. After a decade in
Italy, where he had studied antique
statuary and had admired the cool,
precise line of Canova, Hamilton
created this masterpiece which tran
scends the limited confines of pure
portraiture.
During the 1780s Hamilton alternated
between pastels and oils. He greatly
enlarged the size of his pastels, as in the
Canova-Tresham portrait, but he also
produced the occasional oil such as a
1783 experiment in history painting,
Diana and Endymion which is here
illustrated after recent cleaning7. As
mentioned, the Cupid and Psyche in the
National Gallery of Ireland dates from
the first year of Hamilton's return to
Ireland. The artist's letter of 1794
informs us that he had actually con
ceived this composition prior to having
left Italy and he reminds Canova of the
early sketch he had shown the sculptor
some years before. The attractive
pastoral landscape to the right of the
couple with its tree-lined winding river
bank, was possibly part of the early
sketch. A pastel of Erato, the Muse of
lyric and love poetry, which has recently
come to light, has a similar, if not almost
identical river bank, although it is
populated with a merry group of classical
figures. Erato plays her lyre, while a
putto who seems to be rising from her

IRISH ARTS REVIEW
HUGH DOUGLAS HAMILTON'S LETTERS TO CANOVA
shoulder carries her name and a trumpet. sublime in ideal forms as his execution year. Between 1800 and 1804 Hamilton
This drawing is datable to ca. 1790 and was graceful, spirited and correct"8 was represented at the Society's annual
was thus possibly executed around the (both works date from 1804, but neither shows by approximately thirty paintings,
same time as the sketch for the Cupid has yet been traced). An unfinished oil ninety percent of which were portraits9.
and Psyche. Together with the double sketch of Prometheus snatching Fire from An anonymous diarist of 1801 reviewing
portrait of Canova and Tresham, the the Chariot of Apollo also dates from this the exhibition of that year began his
Erato can be considered as among one of period. Hamilton's "frequent attacks of account by saying: "As usual in an infant
Hamilton's last pastels, the latter being nerves"l combined with the abundance exhibition, that of this year, consists in
also one of the few historical subjects of portraits that he was forced to the figure line almost entirely of
executed by the artist in that medium. produce presumably prevented him portraits; in fact had the artists practising
In the letter of 1794 Hamilton wrote from completing this particular painting in Ireland inclination, ability and sale for
to Canova saying that he had finally and in succeeding years from "executing composition, portraiture is at present so
given up making pastel portraits and that [even] the occasional historical piece". much the rage, that they have not leisure
he was painting "everything in oils, life The artist's intellectual frustration for any other branch of study"10. The
size as in nature". Yet his later letters tell combined with his nervous condition predominance of portraiture over
us of his depression and frustration at was a direct result of the constraints history painting in Ireland at this time
not been able to create challenging placed on artistic activity in Dublin at was also criticised in the national press.
historical pictures. The Cupid and Psyche the time. After all those years in Italy A correspondent for the Hibernian
was exhibited in Dublin in 1800 and
only two other history subjects are
Hamilton returned to a city where no
public exhibition had been held since
Journal11, in discussing the first
exhibition of 1800, lamented the
known to have been seen by the Dublin 1780 and where few artists could make a shortage of historical work and particul
public during these years: a Head of living from their profession. It was not arly the absence in England of the
Medusa and a Head of Tisiphone, until early 1800, at a general meeting of history painter Henry Tresham.
described by the Hibemian Magazine as the Society of Artists of Ireland that it Hamilton with his fellow portraitists
''two excellent heads" which "would was decided to reestablish annual William Cuming (1769-1852) and John
alone stamp Hamilton an artist, as exhibitions, the first being in May of that Comerford (ca. 1770-1832) seem to
Earl Bishop of Bristol before the janiculum, Hugh D Hamilton,
Marquess of Bristol Collection.
-33

IRISH ARTS REVIEW
HUGH DOUGLAS HAMILTON'S LETTERS TO CANOVA
have been the leading Irish artists to
show at these important exhibitions.
Among the other contributors were
Vincent Waldre, George Chinnery,
Gilbert Stuart, John Hopper and
William Ashford, all foreigners, whose
presence displeased the critic of the
Dublin Evening Post, who gave the
highest praise to Hamilton12. By 1804
the dearth of native talent and the diffi
culty in finding Government support for
their endeavours resulted in the Society
of Artists having to cancel subsequent
exhibitions and it was not till 1809 (a
year after Hamilton's death) that
another show was held.
The limited artistic possibilities
offered in Dublin were due to unenlight
ened patronage and intellectual isolation
caused by the French Wars and the pre
vailing unrest in Ireland. After 1800
those few patrons that did exist were
greatly reduced in number in the wake
of the passing of the Act of Union of the
Parliaments of Great Britain and Ireland.
From 1800 onwards Dublin saw a
Portrait of Francis Rawdon, Earl of Moira,
Hugh D Hamilton, c. 1802-1803.
Private Collection, Ireland.
"the most gracious, and in all, the most
considerate man in England". Canova
was told that Moira was sure to be a
lucrative patron. Unfortunately no
dramatic depletion in the number of
commissions seem to have resulted from
the Earl's tour, though three years later
in 1804 Hamilton exhibited a full length
resident peers and parliamentarians who portrait of Lord Moira seated in a study
either returned to their country estates with a sleeping dog by his feet.
or took seats at Westminster.
Hamilton's thirteen years in Italy and
Among Dublin's few art patrons at his friendship with Canova gave the
this time was the very trying and tight artist a greater confidence in his work
fisted young John La Touche, son of the and allowed him to produce more
founder of the Bank of Ireland, who in challenging paintings. His succeeding
1791 had commissioned a statue of an years in Dublin deprived him of the
Amorino, or a young Cupid, from intellectual and artistic stimulation of
Canova13. From 1794-1800 Hamilton which he had obviously grown so fond.
acted on the sculptor's behalf in The artist's resentment towards his
attempting to arrange a satisfactory pay native city is thus perfectly understand
ment for this marble, repeatedly inform able and his letters can be read as just
ing Canova of his being unable to come reflections of their time and not as the
to an agreement with La Touche. In mere exaggerations of a sick and lonely
understandable frustration Hamilton in man longing as he did for a return to
1800 referred to La Touche as "the most Rome. The information to be gained
indecisive and distracted man" he had from the letters is of interest to the
ever met. The letters to Canova tell us of historian in that it supplies us with a
another somewhat more illustrious more general understanding of Dublin's
patron who also utilised Hamilton's artistic life around 1800. The artist's
friendship with Europe's leading complaints about patronage and the
sculptor. In 1801, Francis Rawdon disinterest in historical subjects are not
Hastings, 2nd Earl of Moira (later unlike similar complaints made by artists
Marquess of Hastings) (1754-1826) and critics in contemporary London.
requested that Hamilton write him a Furthermore, the Hamilton-Canova
letter of introduction to Canova, as he correspondence is of special value in
and his younger brother William, were that it is one of the few original
planning a trip to Italy, the latter wish documents that exists to tell us of an
ing to study architecture. Hamilton Irish artist's thoughts and concerns
wrote to Canova of Moira's "great during this period of great
nobility" and of his "infinite superiority, political disruption.
social and
his most amiable spirit" and labelled him
Fintan Cullen
-34
N
NOTES
1. Reference to these letters was first made by
Hugh Honour in Irish Portraits, 1660-1860,
exhibition catalogue, Dublin, London, Belfast,
1969-70, p. 51.1 am most grateful to Mr
Honour for supplying me with further infor
mation on these letters. I am also grateful to
Sergio Benedetti of the National Gallery of
Ireland for help in the translation. The letters
are in the Biblioteca Civica in Bassano del
Grappa, near Venice: Mss Canoviani,
Epistolario V, 495, 3491 (May 1794) and
Epistolario Scelto 11, 79, 1554-6 (30
September 1800, 10 June 1801 and 8
November 1802). For a
biographical
account
of Hamilton and his work as well as a check
list of his oil paintings see my forthcoming
contribution to the Walpole Society, 1984. The
first such check-list was in W.G. Strickland's
A Dictionary of Irish Artists (2 vols.), 1913,
vol. 1. pp. 427-445.
2. It is estimated that in the decade following his
return from Italy Hamilton produced some
150-200 portraits. It is unlikely that the artist
had a studio of assistants and thus produced
his portraits single-handedly.
3. Hamilton's hope of visiting the continent
would have been made possible by the
cessation of hostilities in Europe following the
signing of the Treaty of Amiens in the Spring
of 1802.
4. Hugh Honour, "Antonio Canova and the
Anglo-Romans, Part 11, The First Years in
Rome", Connoisseur, CXL111, December
1959, p. 225.
5. Fintan Cullen, "Hugh Douglas Hamilton in
Rome, 1779-1792", Apollo, CXV, February
1982, pp. 86-91.
6. The pastel was quite appropriately included in
the vast Age ofNeoclassicism exhibition in
London in 1972, Royal Academy and Victoria
& Albert Museum, no. 133, pp. 88-9.
7. For a discussion of this painting as with the
Cupid and Psyche, see Apollo, op. cit.
8. T.B.L, "The Late Hugh Hamilton, Esq.",
Hibernian Magazine, 1810, p. 272.
9. For an account of public exhibitions in Dublin
at this time see Strickland, op. cit., vol. 11, pp.
599-600. Fora listing of the paintings
exhibited by Hamilton (information on which
comes from contemporary newspapers) see my
check-list in the Walpole Society, op. cit.
10. Anonymous Journal, Dublin, Royal Irish
Academy, ms24K14 (February-September,
1801), f. 244.
11. 18 June, 1800.
12. 27 May, 1802.
13. Hugh Honour, "Gli Amorini del Canova",
Arte lllustrata, VI, nn. 55-56, dicembre 1976,
pp. 312-320. The marble cannot now be
located.
RIGHT
Diana and Endymion,
Hugh D Hamilton, 1783.
Private Collection, England.

w
-
'4'-7