Cameo Signature Help Needed

Another notice from the Spectator:

https://books.google.com/books?id=O...mOAKHWjoAcoQ6AEwEXoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q&f=true



See the less than positive reception of the new crown coin right above. Art work, thumbs up; suitability as a coin, thumbs down.

 

If Stodel has it right, Nichols died very young: M.A. Nichols (1838-1851) Jivvy, don't (didn't) artists working with such tiny brushes as she must have used frequently use their mouth to keep the tip very fine? Wonder if a pigment (lead?) poisoned her. Surely she started young to be so accomplished so early. Other possibility is that dates given are for her years of activity, not life.

 

If you say so. Burros?

 

I was joking, of course, LOL.

 

I assumed it was seller's description. Odds are they're meant for goats, but really, cutter should have stuck to buildings.

 

Where the heck is the lamb-ish guy on the far left going?

And do I see a unicorn lying down in the front row? I do, I DO see a unicorn.

 

I have heard that about watchmakers (illuminated dials and whatnot). She did use a lot of white and white would have a lot of lead.

She may be an interesting project to take up.

I'm sure not getting anywhere with "Anne."

 

So far, I have found no mention of her post 1851. But I still haven't tracked her down in the census (common surname)/birth/death records. I think her first name is Mary.

 

And I think her middle name is Ann (because all the cool names were already taken) and I think she has a male relative named George.

And I think she probably did die young (or got married), but I cannot believe she was getting press at age 10 and no one mentioned she was age 10.

 

I think we're there -- just found an 1838 Royal Academy Exhibition listing for her (a miniature portrait).

And I suspect I have found her mother, but not committing to that.

I know you're all thrilled to get this story in installments.

 

Keep on the good job, Jivvy!

 

One of Jack the Ripper's victims was named Mary Ann Nichols.

Not OUR Mary Ann Nichols, but google doesn't know that.

 

@Jivvy Oh, I love revelations in installments. Have done, & continue to do, my share of it. Saw this on eBay, then within the week in person at a big show:



Seller was lovely, letting me poke & prod it all over. Promised if I ever got a handle on who the family is, would let them know. Didn't really do any deliberate hunting, just chanced on this because the word 'cameo' is in the title:

Excitedly wrote that I thought I had IDed one of the women, said I'd leave further research to them & suggested they look to the family of Leopold I, King of the Belgians. Of course, after writing, looked some more at other offerings from same seller & found this lady:



who looks a fair bit like the other woman. Of course, sent a message with my new find. Nearly sent a third to suggest they redirect attention to the Orleans family, who are pretenders to the throne of France & have their loyalists, then decided to let them come to their own conclusions. Haven't received any message of effusive gratitude; I'm obviously the only one who's excited.

Meanwhile, Miss Nichols. I was thinking Mary Ann(e) a good possibility. Unkind of her not to be Maude Anastasia. I found some notices from late in the century of the sale of the effects of the late Miss M.A. Nichols but did not follow up. Think we now see where Inez Stodel got their dates, known period of activity, starting with RA exhibition.

I am now kicking myself black & blue for not going after the portrait more aggressively. Won't be the last time I did not venture more because my knowledge didn't support my gut. Knew it was exceptional, just not precisely how. Now we would recognize it again, we can watch if it comes up elsewhere, for a whole lot more!

 

@Jivvy Did you find this already?

https://archive.org/details/royalacademyofar05grav/page/364

Mary Anne of 7, Thornhill Road**, earliest exhibition 1840, intermittently through 1850. Described as a miniature painter. Painting miniatures on ivory was unremarkable, but you'd never know what she really did from dry catalogue entries!*

*See now some are specified as being an imitation cameo, most not. Can't imagine how long it took to do one. None of the RA ones described matches the ones we have seen.

** Sometime between 1841 & 1846 she moved to 21, Upper Park Street.

 

I don't understand people. AT ALL. How can they not be thrilled and spending all of their time researching it?!!!

Of course, then we would have nothing to do.

I am absolutely SICK that I didn't start researching immediately. I wouldn't have bid on it, but would have been THRILLED to pass the info on to you. It was so easy to find the first bits.

You are not wrong. But I have put "Mary Ann Nichols" and her "painted cameos" together in one article, so we're stuck with her.

I think she is adamantly "MISS" everywhere because her mother, Mary Ann Nichols, also painted. But that's a theory not yet confirmed (I have a Mrs. Mary Ann Nichols painting reference, but I have yet to pin down Miss in the census records, so I'm not 100% on who her mother is).

The "Society of Female Artists" put together a show in 1857 and there were two cameo pieces by Miss Nichols in it. The show seems a bit tossed together and I want to assume she was alive at the time, but I cannot confirm it. https://books.google.com/books?id=HbVFAQAAMAAJ (search on "nichols")

 

I had not gotten there yet! But some article referred to her as someone who did "miniatures" and then cameos and it was "miniatures" (no cameo) that got me the 1838 exhibition.

If you search the 1838 exhibit on "nichols" -- you'll see how my "mom" theory started to form: https://books.google.com/books?id=HGQEAAAAYAAJ

 

Here's the first listing I found that put me onto Mary Ann (and George... who remains a mystery). No link available.

 

The Jenny Lind imitation cameo would look something like this:

 

At some point, I will have all of her addresses sorted.

But she has several. In a short time period.

 

Great. Now we have the mystery of whether View of Highgate was shown in 1838 or 1841. She seems to stay Miss in every other mention, so suspect Mrs. was an error, perhaps being on the safe side when there was doubt.

Would not have been unusual for a maiden lady to live with a bachelor brother & act as his housekeeper.