Jane Again?

[poliphilo]

O.K. guys, so what do we make of this?

It's a portrait of an unidentified woman by Jane Austen's friend and admirer the Rev James Stanier Clarke. 

Is it Jane? 

All the evidence in its favour is circumstantial, but there's nothing about it that rules it out of court.

Stanier Clarke was the Prince Regent's librarian and Jane visited him at Carlton House. Obviously she would have dressed up for the occasion.

Comments

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

How very strange. I thought it would go for over a million.

"The beauty within"- what a terribly modern idea.

Friends and family described Jane as pretty, round-faced, doll-like. I don't think she was beautiful- by either Regency or modern standards- but I think she was reasonably good-looking.

Which fits perfectly well with the Rice portrait- especially since you have to allow for the likelihood that the painter was flattering his subject.

[karenkay.livejournal.com]

I agree with you completely on every point. (Whew, how often do we get to say THAT!:))

I guess this debacle is testimony to the power of rumor. Also, judging from this report of the sale, it was just a bad day all round for consumer optimism: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=amolkVank3X0&refer=home

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

If the portrait isn't of Jane Austen it was hugely overpriced. As the portait of an unknown girl It's an attractive, journeyman piece- worth a few thou at the most.

A Ruysdael at under $3 million- that's a snip!