RKD STUDIES

Sophisticated new Leatherwork frame patterns burgeoned up until the outbreak of the Civil War in England. An example of one such pattern, by an unknown maker, is at Lacock Abbey on a painting after a Van Dyck original (of 1636) The Three Eldest Children of Charles I [21]. Close analysis of similar examples suggests this design is typical of the early 1640s.¹ It is carved in oak to resemble cut and flattened scrolling skin with grimacing masks and an irregular outer-edge, all about a concave sight-edge moulding.

Surviving fragments of two full-length frames, stored in the attic of Lacock Abbey [22], are of the same pattern and early 1640s date as the example on The Three Eldest Children of Charles I. As these two frames had at some time been sawn through, dendrochronological analysis of the exposed end grain of the oak was possible by Ian Tyers [23].² This established they were made from Baltic oak with a date range between 1633 and 1650 – consistent with an early 1640s date for this Leatherwork pattern. Baltic oak was typically used in England and other northern European countries for fine joinery from the middle ages until 1650 when the trade was ended by war in the region.³ This is the first use of dendrochronology to confirm the date of a Leatherwork frame and confirms the appearance of auricular frames in England before other countries, notably the Netherlands, and possibly Italy. Cross-sectional analysis carried out by Dr Tracey Chaplin has established the original decorative surface of the frames at Lacock was a standard oil gilded scheme, comprising a proteinaceous chalk ground, brown coloured oil mordant, and gold leaf.⁴

21
After Anthony van Dyck
The Three Eldest Children of Charles I, after 1636
oil on canvas / gilded oak frame
Lacock Abbey, National Trust (painting 996292)
Image: Gerry Alabone, 2021

Whereas during the 1630s many English frames in an Italianate style were carved in pine [figs. 4 & 5], nearly all Leatherwork frames were carved in oak. This change is probably due to oak’s strength when areas of frame were skilfully carved down to a thickness of a couple of millimetres in imitation of undulating leather. The constructional characteristics of the Lacock frames demonstrate direct Italian influence. The corner of one of the fragments shows that, like the other two examples at Lacock, the carved oak front-frame has a butted mason’s mitre, which provides no structural support for the frame [24a-b]. Instead, the frame is joined solely by its pine back-frame, in this case using a mortice and tenon, but half-laps were just as common. The back frame is set back to provide a rebate to accommodate the painting. The front frame was nailed onto its back frame prior to gilding. This type of construction, employed in English framemaking only since the 1630s, was used subsequently for nearly all Leatherwork frames.⁵

This procedure is particularly evident in Venetian ‘Sansovino’ frames. Many carved and gilded pine Venetian Sansovino frames of the mid-16th century show the same structure and construction as the English frames of the 1630s, and these techniques continued directly into Leatherwork frames. For example, the corner of a carved and gilded pine Venetian Sansovino frame of the mid-16th century, by an unknown maker, shows the same structure as English frames, and which is common to larger Italian frames of this type [25a-b].⁶

In contrast to Italian and English frames, the 1995 exhibition catalogue Prijst de Lijst lists no kwab frames as having mason’s mitres. Instead, the majority are joined using half-laps, carved in limewood, rebated for the painting, and only two are listed as originally having a back frame.⁷ The favouring of limewood for Dutch kwab frames, it being soft to carve and conducive to creating complex flowing forms, suggests the framemakers may have had different priorities than their English counterparts. For example, choosing lime to create sinuous ornament instead of the more slender and durable carving achievable when using oak.

Interestingly, Huub Baija, formerly Senior Frames Conservator at the Rijksmuseum, identified an unusual gilding system which seems to have been commonly used on kwab frames up to the 1670s.⁸ This used a thick protein-glue layer instead of a chalk ground. This gilding system has not been identified on any English frames, providing further evidence of distinct techniques being used by English and Dutch framemakers at this time, indicating a relatively small transfer of craftsmen and skills between England and the Netherlands. Craftsmen, carving and gilding frames listed in the royal accounts from the 1630s to 1670s, appear generally to have been English – and Baarsen states there are no records of Dutch framemakers or woodcarvers working in London in the 1630s.⁹

Oil gilding was used seemingly invariably on Leatherwork frames.¹⁰ The oil mordant, or its thin underlying proteinaceous chalk ground layer filling the oak grain, was buff coloured creating a solid gilded appearance. There may well have been a very thin coating originally applied overall onto the gold leaf, unifying and slightly matting the gilding. The effect would have been a harmonious surface of relatively matte gilding allowing the carving to shine without being too dazzling when appreciating the painting. In the unusual gilding technique used on kwab frames, discussed just now, Baija describes the gold leaf being adhered onto a pale salmon coloured proteinaceous-oleaginous emulsion paint. This gilding, and the possible use of a coating on the gold, may have produced an effect similar to the Leatherwork frames. In contrast, the deep mouldings and bold undercut carving of Italian Medici frames were largely water gilded on a proteinaceous gypsum ground layer, ochred and with strong coloured highlights that when gilded were burnished to contrast with matted recessed areas. The Italian frames’ brilliant sculptural effect would have been strikingly different from the uniform and subtle gilding of kwab and Leatherwork frames with their low relief carving, particularly to Leatherwork.

As the beginnings of Leatherwork and kwab coincided with when high status frames commonly became wholly gilded in England and the Netherlands – this expensive development may be shared with the appreciation of low relief auricular silver and gilded embossed leather wall hangings in both countries, and of cast brass church fittings in the Netherlands.

In contrast to the framemakers, there was a relatively large transfer of painters between the Netherlands and England. As some Netherlandish painters left England others arrived, including Peter Lely during the early 1640s.¹¹ High quality Leatherwork frames continued to be developed during the interregnum. A rare English frame, by an unknown maker, original to a portrait of The Perryer Family by Peter Lely painted in 1655, has an oak front-frame with mason’s mitres, nailed onto a half-lapped pine back-frame [26].¹² This pattern, which owes much to contemporary Florentine frames, is nevertheless highly unusual in that pierced ornament at its centres extends over the painting [27].¹³

This new evidence shows the continued influence of Italian design and construction on English frames throughout the 1630s, but also highlights differences such as the choice of wood and gilding. The same period also saw increasing numbers of Netherlandish kwab designs in print and on other objects. Together, these Italian and Netherlandish influences contributed towards the creation of new Leatherwork frame patterns in England. This article argues that Leatherwork frames imitated Italian forms and used Italian methods of construction but also incorporated influences from Netherlandish kwab ornament to form an entirely new type of European frame. Dendrochronology confirms these new Leatherwork frames were being made a decade before kwab frames appear in the Netherlands.

25a/b
Top right corner of a Venetian ‘Sansovino’ frame, front and back, mid-16th century
gilded pine, collection of Enrico Cecci
Images: Gerry Alabone, 2022

26
Peter Lely
Portrait of the Perryer Family, dated 1655
Aylesbury, Chequers Trust, inv./cat.nr. 120

27
Detail of left centre of original frame toThe Perryer Family, 1655, gilded oak, Chequers Court (painting 120). Image: Gerry Alabone, 2022