Skip Navigation

Biometrika 1934 26(3):116; doi:10.1093/biomet/26.3.116
© 1934 by Biometrika Trust
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


CORRIGENDA

CORRIGENDA

At the time of writing this account of the Walker portraits we were unaware that there had originally been two portraits of Cromwell in the British Museum, namely one from the Cottonian Collection and a second presented by Sir Robert Rich in 1784, now in the National Portrait Gallery. The former picture, still in the Museum, has a wooden label below the frame stating that it is a copy from a portrait in the possession of Henry Cromwell, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. These words indicate that the inscription is recent; Henry Cromwell was ‘Deputy for Ireland’. A picture of his father by Walker, once in the possession of Henry Cromwell, is now owned by his descendant, the Rev. Paul Cromwell Bush. See our Plate XXXVIII. The Cottonian painting in the British Museum may well be a copy of this. In both cases the page is on Cromwell's left to the right of the picture. The National Portrait Gallery Walker, like Sir John Payne-Gallwey's, has the page behind Cromwell to the left of the picture. On the Payne-Gallwey picture is an inscription, not contemporary, stating ‘Copy in British Museum’. This must refer to the Rich painting now in the National Portrait Gallery, and suggests that this portrait had been copied at some time from the Thirkleby Park portrait which descended from Frances Cromwell to the Russells. We must note, however, that Sir Robert Rich, Bart., could not have had Robert Rich who married Frances Cromwell in 1657 for his great grandfather, as the latter died without issue.

In the sketch of the symbols on the back of the Chequers Court Cooper, most kindly sent to us, the wreath encircling the symbols was unfortunately omitted. The bow or knot at the foot merely ties the two branches of the wreath together, and requires no interpretation as a symbol. The borders of the sun and moon are so deeply indented that they undoubtedly stand for the letters O. C.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.