Joseph *Story*...next...Edward *Stow*... and evidence of my early confusion about who the artist could be of SAMUEL MEEKER

... Edward Stow by Gilbert Stuart 1802/3

When telling the tale of Joseph Story and his wife in the posts previous to this one, the next portrait described in Park was Edward Stow, which, although a typical Stuart portrait, has special meaning for me because it was when I first stumbled across this portrait, just by sheer luck on the internet, that I noted the striking similarities between this portrait and my own of Samuel Meeker, and I thought then: "My portrait is not by Peale, but by Stuart!"
So I have decided to show this portrait again, and the 'cheat sheet' printout I made with notes, which so clearly show my confusion of a few years ago. Because I thought my portrait was of Major Meeker (click here for more on the Major), the generational year was completely off as Major Meeker was the 1st cousin of Captain Samuel Meeker, father of the sitter (click here for more on the father of Samuel). And the family thought it was by Peale! But Peale's style, although the artist fit the right time frame for Major Meeker, was just not ....right..... So then I thought the artist was Trumbull. I knew about Stuart, but not knowing the style of his painting, I had ruled him out because at the time that Major Meeker would have been painted, Stuart was AWAY in England!

But yet I thought, look at that same arrangement, the same color schemes, the pose, the clothing, the curtain and sky, the chair, showing a hand and some papers...HOW was Major Meeker painted by Stuart? How to FIT that timeline! But in the end, I finally pieced together that my gt grandmother had made a mistake in her family tree book, that the sitter in the portrait was NOT Major Meeker (who was also a SAMUEL) but in fact an entirely different Meeker, Samuel Meeker, merchant of Philadelphia. (A major clue was finding out about the Stuart portrait of William Meeker which is listed in Park. William had been a business partner in Philadelphia of a "Samuel Meeker", hmmmm I thought.) So in the end it was not the Major, a local militia man who had to sell his farm in Sussex New Jersey because of debt, although famed for having fought in the Battle of the Minisink, but a young man stemming from the same family, who made his fortune in the shipping, banking, and insurance business in early Philadelphia! A generation later!

Even armed with my digital print out of Edward S. by Gilbert Stuart (see 2/27/09 "I knew...then..."), my confusion continued to reign on the identity of the artist who painted Samuel Meeker. After the editor of the Peale papers stated my portrait was not by CW Peale (see 3/4/09 "Misattribution"), I was still not convinced that the portrait was by Stuart, for there was the Problem of the Timeline. At left one can see on my worksheet the doodle "gone from America went to England" -that refers to Stuart. & "timing is off!"

And now that I have the Lawrence Park volumes (listing a large number of Stuart portraits), I see that the portrait was done in 1802/3... So the fit is super/unquestionable, as I have determined that the portrait of Samuel Meeker was done in 1803. (More on why/how I figured this date, later.)

~

From Lawrence Park:

~

Edward Stow 1768-1847
A son of Edward and Mary (Belcher) Stow of Boston, but was born in New York City. He married, in 1793, Anna Brewer Peck, and lived for some years in Philadelphia. It was there that he met Gilbert Stuart and his wife and a great friendship ensued. In 1804 he returned to Boston, and from 1813 until shortly before his death, he was clerk or secretary of the new England Mississippi Land Company.

~

~

A thoroughly DAZZLING art-historical mystery; was The Circus Rider John Bill Ricketts or Jean Baptist Breschard? Read on, if interested!

My last two posts have described the painting by Stuart named The Circus Rider, and current art historians are (at least officially) unanimous that the sitter is no other than John Ricketts. Yet, in an indeed surprising development, Peter Breschard objects to this designation with much indignation, and in fact his evidence that the circus rider is NOT Ricketts, if not incontrovertibly solid as of yet, is just as COMPELLING, to my mind. Keep in mind that Mason (1894), identified the portrait as "Breschard, the circus-rider".

Adding to this high level of confusion are two inscriptions on the painting, generally agreed to have been added at a later date: (lower left) "Portrait of / Mr. Rickarts / Horse Eqestraine / Friend of the Artist / Gilbert Stuart" & (lower right) "Portrait of Rickarts / Horse Eqestrian / An Intimate Friend of / Gilbert Stuart." These interpretations are taken from "American Paintings of the 18 century" by Ellen G. Miles, National Gallery of Art, Washington. However, perhaps, these inscriptions themselves can be subject to another interpretation? In fact consider the French name Breschard: with a French hard pronunciation of the first letter B as P, and the last letter d as t, the name Breschard is pronounced and could be spelled as Preschart, and Lo and Behold to my mind, that left inscription looks incredibly like "Preschart", and NOT "Rickarts". The second insription to my eye also looks as if the name of the sitter begins with a "B" and ends with one t. Lawrence Park shows the spelling to be "Portrait of / Mr. Rechart /..." Which of course also sounds like the French pronunciation of Breschard. Mason, as well as Park, listing the sitter to be Breschard?

The story in short; John Bill Ricketts in his brief flash of fortune in America (he was from England) lasting less than 10 years, achieved fame and fortune by his magical ability to peform fantastical acts of daring on his well trained horses - using outlandish tricks, and later featuring other circus performers such as tightrope walkers and clowns. "Long before circuses took on the odor of a crude and common entertainment, Ricketts ... had an air of snob appeal; embraced by all classes, his circus became an especially prestigious venue for the right people to be seen at. After all, Washington, an unabashed fan, attended from time to time through his tenure in office. And the President and Ricketts regularly accompanied each other on rides through the city out into the countryside. Ricketts became such a prominent celebrity that Gilbert Stuart, Washington's portraitist, painted Ricketts, too. Washington even allowed Ricketts to put Jack - the famed white steed he rode through the American Revolution - on display in the amphitheater. Hence, a certain patriotic panache and status boost came with every seat. ......In 1797, Ricketts marked Washington's retirement with a special performance, and later that year, he performed for his friend's presidential successor, John Adams." http://explorepahistory.com/hmarker.php?markerId=815

Thus Ricketts meets that special quality which characterizes the majority of Stuart's sitters, a man of action and accomplishment who hobnobbed with the right people, those in the elite and elegant, well-funded social circles. He was in the right place (Philadelphia), and the right time period to cross paths with Stuart. He was multi-talented; besides performing, he built his own circus structures. Just the type of man who might appeal to our artist, who knew so much about everything. And more compelling, the most powerful evidence: The Provenance lists the brother of John Ricketts, Francis Ricketts, as being the first owner (Brown 1861, 320.) The following has been speculated by Ellen Miles: "Stuart undoubtedly painted Ricketts' portrait in Philadelphia, where the circus was based. The portrait remained there, unfinished, after Ricketts left for the West Indies." ("American Paintings of the 18 century" p 210). Is it possible that Stuart didn't complete the portrait, and so whimsically painted the horses' head created from the background, due less to anger than nostalgia that a good friend was gone? Did the portrait remain unfinished because the talented John Ricketts incurred catastrophic financial loss when his circus rotunda building burned to the ground in 1799? His brother was last recorded in the United States in 1810, when he was with the Boston Circus ("American Paintings of the 18 century" p 210), and thus the portrait would have passed to him when John met his death on the oceans in 1803.

But, is it possible the painting was done at a later time, that it was stopped out of frustration with the sitter (Breschard), and that by this time Stuart had become increasingly more willful and temperamental with his sitters corresponding to the extent of his fame? “...the artist, becoming angry at the equestrian, who gave him a good deal of trouble by his want of promptitude and the delays which occurred, is said to have dashed his paintbrush into the face of the portrait, declaring that he would have nothing more to do with him.” J. Thomas Scharf and T. Westcott, History of Philadelphia, 1609-1884 (Philadelphia: L.H.Everts and Co. 1884), Vol II, p 1044

The Circus of Pépin and Breschard

Pépin and Breschard were the premiere performers in the U.S. from 1808 until 1815. At left is a playbill for this circus. Our Jean Breschard clearly is a prominent performer, if not the owner alongside Mr. Pepin.

In the Provenance for the Circus Rider shown above, a Peter Grain is listed as the next owner after Francis Ricketts, "Purchased at auction around 1853 by Peter Grain." Peter Grain was an artist, known for his "panorama paintings, landscapes, portraits, theatrical designs, as well as also being a playwright and architect; he was the author of at least one stage play. His family was involved in theatrical design in New York, Philadelphia and other major American cities for at least two generations." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Grain

"American Paintings of the 18 century", in 'Notes' on Peter Grain..."A painter, was born in France around 1786... and came to the US sometime before 1815. After living in various American cities, including New York and Charleston, he settled in Philadelphia around 1850 with his family..."
The playbill above shows that Grain could have crossed paths with Breschard in "Charlestown".

In the playbill below, found and kindly provided to me by Peter Breschard, is incontrovertible evidence that in fact Peter Grain knew Breschard in c 1809! Grain was an actor in the play "Billy" performed on this summer eve. Is it not likely that Peter Grain was the one who identified, or at a minimum WOULD BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY the sitter as Jean Breschard, as he knew and even worked with this circus artist? Thus we have reasonable, logical evidence as to HOW the portrait was identified as Breschard. On the basis of this knowledge,...which possibly may not be known by the (current) experts?... might a new look at the identifcation of THE CIRCUS RIDER be in order? Afterall, Someone identified the portrait, because there are the inscriptions, which to my eye look like a French pronunciation of Breschard. How solid, in fact, IS the Brown attribution that Francis Ricketts was the first owner? How credible is this source? Is he known for accuracy? (Thomas Allston Brown, "A Complete History of the Amphitheatre and Circus, from its earliest date, with sketches of some of the principal performers," New York Clipper 8 (19 January 1861).

For more information on Peter Breschard, who has used original sources in his in-depth investigation on the identification of the sitter in this portrait, he can be found at http://brasseriebreschard.blogspot.com/. He plans on writing a book on this topic and hopes to interest a publisher. He would enjoy any input on the subject!

And thus, I have exhausted all effort here, and leave it to the experts & other researchers to thrash this out, and perhaps take a second look at this re-identification from Breschard to Ricketts.
And in the meantime I have the following suggestion. Perhaps there are more descendents out there, from both the Ricketts and Breschard families. In my own case, I was suddenly astonished to notice that there were remarkable similarities between Meeker and some members of my family; below is an example and more will follow. Check the nose! the chin! can you look at younger pictures of your ancestors and find remarkable/notable similarites to the portrait of Ricketts/Breschard? Send them to me! Lets fly with this mystery, and not be stuck with one mind-set.....

Never forget Stuart's ability to nail an almost photographic image to the canvas.................

Below Benjamin Hyde Cory (1896-1983) my grandfather, gg-grandson of Phebe Meeker (twin sister of Samuel Meeker.)

the dimple in the bottom lip... the slightly upraised peak of the right side of the upper lip...rounded chin

~

~

~

~

John Bill Ricketts or Jean Breschard? Has John Bill Ricketts had his 15 min.....er....40 years ... of fame by being associated with a Stuart portrait?

There clearly exists some question as to the identity of this particular John, or Jean, as the case may be. John Bill Ricketts? or Jean Baptist Breschard? also a circus owner and equestrian performer, in the Circus of Pepin and Breschard....

This information has been provided to me; "Peter Grain, cited in the “Circus Rider” NGA provenance as owning the painting in the mid-1800s, and as selling the portrait to George W. Riggs, was a member of the Circus of Pépin and Breschard, and would have been capable of identifying the sitter in Stuart’s portrait as Breschard."

and this information has been provided:"....but I had done the provenance research and discussion of the inscriptions, and especially cited an important 1861 source that listed Ricketts' brother Francis as the first owner of the painting. Once you have read that entry, which I think explains more about the inscriptions and the provenance of the painting and thus the ID.... Ellen Miles"

So sooner hopefully rather than later I will read up on the inscriptions (found on the bottom of portrait), and check out the 1861 source. But one must question why Mason, in 1894, listed the painting as "Breschard, the Circus-Rider". And Park claims the inscription on the portrait says "Portrait of Mr. Rechart..." and one could think that the R could actually be a "B", and is the French pronunciation of Breschard.

So.... and, well, Ricketts would have had to have his portrait done by Stuart in the mid to later 1790s (before 1799 when his circus burned to the ground) right about when Stuart would have been obsessively busy with the portraits of George Washington... Ricketts would have been more well known (in this day and age), since Washington sold him his white horse Jack, nice story!

So the Jury is still out...I will work on this, for a misidentification Should be Corrected, should it not? If there is a Peter Grain in the provenance, then I would think that this portrait is not of Ricketts, but is of Jean Breschard. But was Ricketts' brother the first owner of the painting?

I have accidentally fallen into a BOILERPLATE MYSTERY!

*

Major Samuel Meeker, Joseph Brant (Thayendanegea)

detail

family tree book "Pedigree of Major Samuel Meeker"click for bigger view

As I have previously mentioned, the family tree book which traversed the generations alongside the portrait, erroneously bestowed the name of Major Samuel Meeker to the sitter in the portrait. This family tree book I now believe was compiled by Emma Martin, sister of Carrie Martin my gt grandmother. (In the image on the lefthand side, one can see that the tree begins with the three Martin sisters of Rahway New Jersey, Jane, Emma and my gt grandmother Carrie.)

If the book had been compiled even earlier, for example by Mary Brookfield (see image upper/center), chances for misnaming the sitter might have been reduced. However Mary was young when her mother Phebe passsed away and I believe it was at this time point that information on the portrait became vague; but the most important fact was preserved, the name “Samuel Meeker.”

Emma (mom's "gt auntie"), bless her, tried to compile the tree back to Samuel as best she could, but determined that Samuel Meeker was the father of Phebe. [As I know now, Samuel and Phebe were twins.] Emma thus placed the time of the portrait a generation back in time. Which is why she/other family members most likely thought it was by Peale (a famous portrait painter in Philadelphia but a bit earlier than Stuart.) Possibly Emma had come across the more renowned MAJOR Samuel Meeker in the history books of the region, and plausibly thought that such an ILLUSTRIOUS war hero would be interested in having his portrait done to preserve his likeness for posterity.

And in fact the Major DID have a daughter Phebe, solidifying (Emma's) identification of this person as being the sitter in the Portrait.

Major Samuel Meeker achieved his fame by skirmishing with the famous half Indian JOSEPH BRANT (a.k.a. Thayendanegea), Mohawk leader and British military officer during the American Revolution.

Stay tuned!

The "Pedigree Of Major Samuel Meeker" Chap. I

Without this book, esssentially outlining a tree to the sitter in the portrait and providing his name "Major Samuel Meeker", all would have been lost. Without this name, my interest in sleuthing a possible connection to me and my family would most likely have evaporated, since "Peale" meant nothing to me (see post "Misattribution" 3/4/2009). Until I actually was in possession of the portrait, I didn't even know this book existed...and it seemed more of an afterthought that my mom handed it to me. A musty old thing as quaint as the portrait itself, with names that meant nothing to me. There was no indication, by anyone including my mom, that this was OUR family that was depicted! The names were foreign gibberish. Then again, I had only just begun my jump into genealogy. My first revelation was recognition of the two great aunties, Emma, Jane, and their sister Carrie (my gt grandmother) Martin from New Jersey, from whence the tree was traced back to Samuel Meeker.
A HUGE step forward! How cool!

The Pedigree Of Major Samuel Meeker

So, the sitter was Major Samuel Meeker, painted by Peale.

What? Wow, a Major during the time of the American Revolution!!

The word went around in my family. However, much to my irritation, they mostly remained glassy-eyed as I excitedly related my latest discoveries, describing our connection to a Revolutionary War Hero! (It seems I am the only one bitten by the genealogy gene.)

But...hold on not so fast.... parts of the puzzle were simply not falling into place as I expected. But, I will tell a story about the Major, for I spent much time on this interesting character which included taking a trip back east on the quest to learn more.

the first page

the second page (click on photo for larger view)

Misattribution

This sticker was on the back of the portrait of Samuel Meeker, which of course lent credence to the thought that the Portrait was by Peale. Probably the most important Peale is Charles Wilson (he had 10 children, many became well-known painters as well). He was born in 1741 and moved to Philadelphia in 1776 where he painted portraits of prominant individuals, including George Washington. He was a prolific painter, and besides his art served during the Revolutionary War, engaged actively in politics and civic affairs, and opened up what is considered to be the first museum in the country, filled with a diverse collection of botanical, biological, and archaeological specimens.

So, it was natural to conclude that, indeed, my portrait was by C W Peale. Wow, I thought!

Until, I began to hit roadblocks. Portrait of John and Elizabeth Lloyd Caldwater; C W Peale 1772 @ Philadelphia Museum of Art

~

Quite confidently, I wrote David C. Ward (circa 2005), senior associate editor of the Peale Family Papers. He just as confidently dashed the thought that the Portrait was by Peale! He in fact indeed suggested that it might be by our celebrated artist Gilbert Stuart. I just as confidently dismissed this idea, for time lines did not fit. More on that later.

But look closely. How does one describe that DIFFERENCE? ...where the characters in Peale's painting above, somehow are not as dimensional as Samuel Meeker--in fact, there are no styllistic similarities.... Here was one big lesson in art history. Painters have their own "style."

~

But what about the sticker? Why does it seem even the Philadelphia Museum of Art agreed that it was by Peale? Well, I have received no satisfactory answer by the museum, for how this mistake could be made. But, to make mistakes is human. Also if one looks closely at the smaller print, it says; "Attributions of Loans are those of the Lender". Note also the mispelling of 'Princeton'-- details were not too important I suppose. And, truth be told, at this point Stuart was nowhere near as well-known, as Peale.

~