This ground-breaking portrait by Alfred Wolmark is the first of two oil portraits of Henri Gaudier-Brzeska by Wolmark, and the only one in private hands.[1] It was given by the artist to Gaudier-Brzeska as a gift in return for a larger than life-size bust of Wolmark by Gaudier-Brzeska, depicted in the background of this work [figs. 1 and 2]. This portrait offers a complex examination of the relationship between artist and sitter. Although portraying Gaudier-Brzeska and Wolmark, it simultaneously represents the process of dual artistic creation, pushing it beyond a double portrait into the realm of subject painting or allegory. Wolmark presents Gaudier-Brzeska in the act of sculpting, holding his tools, as a craftsman deeply engaged in the physical act of creation. In his left hand he holds what appears to be a painted figural sculpture. He also incorporates a self-referential element through Gaudier-Brzeska’s sculpture of Wolmark. Modelled in clay and cast as a unique plaster, it was larger than life-size and exhibited by Gaudier Brzeska with the Allied Artists Association Exhibition in 1913. [2],[3] Wolmark may have painted the present portrait as a return gesture and it was exhibited in the same year at the International Society Exhibition at the Grosvenor Gallery, London. At this date, Wolmark was already an established painter. Gaudier himself, having only arrived in London in 1911, was still an aspiring artist struggling to garner commissions. Afflicted by abject poverty, his frayed shirts and bohemian appearance alarmed the upper echelons of society, whose commissions he coveted.[4] To financially facilitate his artistic ambitions, he worked as a clerk in the City of London and frequented local public houses, offering to draw customers for a penny each. Wolmark was fundamental in establishing Gaudier-Brzeska’s career and supported his entry into modernist circles by introducing him to potential clients.[5] Gaudier’s partner, Sophie Brzeska, kept a journal which has become a crucial primary source documenting the friendship between Wolmark and Gaudier. It details conversations and debates between the artists, particularly regarding their views on portraiture and the purpose of art, as well as recording a firsthand impression of the present painting.[6] Although this may appear unlikely given the monumental scale, the extract suggests that the painting was completed in one day in the summer of 1913. Gaudier-Brzeska reported; ‘it is a completely different style from anything Wolmark has done till now.’[7] Many popular portrait artists at this time, such as John Singer Sargent, continued to celebrate upper-class men in ways that emphasised traditional masculine virtues - dignity, control, and status. However, the present work celebrates a newly emerging notion of popular masculinity. Art historian Evelyn Silber states: ‘Almost everything about this portrait is aggrandising: Gaudier’s torso, the scale of the sculpture – embodying the modern sculptor in an image that pays homage to the classical tradition of depicting artists with the tools of their trade, while undermining the gentlemanly pretensions and decorum such portraits usually conveyed.’[8] This aggrandising and semi-erotic depiction breaks from traditional, genteel depictions of artists emphasising instead the raw, intense nature of the sculpting process. [1] The later full-length portrait is in the collection of the Musée des Beaux-Arts d'Orléans [fig 3]. [2] Patrick Elliot, (2004) Burlington Magazine. CXLVI, 1221, December, p.819. [3] The bronze casts are now in public collections including The National Galleries of Scotland, Edinburgh and The Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool. [4] H. E. Ede, Savage Messiah. Cambridge: Kettle’s Yard and Henry Moore Institute, 2011, p.42 [5] Evelyn Silber, (2004) ‘Three Portraits and a friendship: Wolmark and Gaudier-Brzeska’, in Rediscovering Wolmark: A Pioneer of British Modernism, 2004-05. London: Ben Uri Gallery. [6] ‘Sophie Brzeska: short stories and diary’, Cambridge University Library, Add. Ms 8554; Evelyn Silber, (2004) ‘Three Portraits and a friendship: Wolmark and Gaudier-Brzeska’, in Rediscovering Wolmark: A Pioneer of British Modernism, 2004-05. London: Ben Uri Gallery. [7] Ibid. [8] Evelyn Silber, (2004) ‘Three Portraits and a friendship: Wolmark and Gaudier-Brzeska’, in Rediscovering Wolmark: A Pioneer of British Modernism, 2004-05. London: Ben Uri Gallery, p.26.

This thoughtful depiction of a young woman is Dod Procter’s earliest known painted portrait. During her career, Procter became renowned for her evocative portraits, particularly of women, which reflected a blend of traditional realism and modern sensibilities. The sitter, depicted in a red beret against a decorative backdrop, embodies a newly emerging modern style for women. This work remained in the artist’s studio until 1945, after which it was widely exhibited across the United Kingdom and sold to a private collection. Begun in 1914, the present work is Procter’s earliest known painted portrait and remained in her studio for over thirty years. Stylistically, the sculptural quality of the face, shoulders and upper right quadrant of the background are consistent with Procter’s early practice. In contrast, the painting's lower quadrant is reminiscent of her later technique, painted with thin layers of paint in softer tones. It is possible that this painting was interrupted by the outbreak of the First World War, and later reworked by Procter in the 1940s once her style had matured. Between 1945 to 1961, the painting toured numerous exhibitions – including the Royal Academy in 1956 – each one listed in Procter’s ledger. In 1914, Procter was at an early stage in her career. Born in London in 1890, she trained at the Forbes School of Painting in Newlyn, Cornwall, which was known for its focus on naturalistic techniques and plein air painting, strongly influenced by French Impressionism. Procter and her husband Ernest Procter became part of the Newlyn School, a significant artists' colony in the region. The outbreak of the First World War, however, had a considerable impact on their lives, and while specific records of Dod's activities during this exact year are limited, the war's onset inevitably affected the artistic community; materials became scarce, and many artists faced financial and personal hardships. A later 1923 portrait of a young woman, identified as Lilian in Procter’s ledger, depicts a young girl in a similar, if not the same, red hat [fig. 1]. Procter became renown for her single figure portraits, particularly of women; her most celebrated work Morning depicted a young reclining woman, and was presented to Tate after being voted ‘Picture of the Year’ at the Royal Academy exhibition of 1927. Procter has since been praised for her ability to capture quiet strength and introspection in her subjects and this early portrait offers a glimpse into her evolving artistic journey, showcasing the foundations of her renowned ability to capture the quiet strength and inner life of her subjects.

This elegant portrait of Cassandra Willoughby was painted by Maria Verelst, the most celebrated woman artist active in early eighteenth-century England. Having only recently come to light, the present work allows us to further explore the lives of two pioneering women who individually overcame gender biases to achieve remarkable success in their personal and professional lives. Cassandra was the daughter of the notable ornithologist Sir Francis Willoughby (1619-1672) and his wife Emma Barnard (1644-1725) and enjoyed a privileged upbringing. Her father was descended from two old established families, both named Willoughby, with estates in Lincolnshire, Warwickshire, and Nottinghamshire. By the time Cassandra was born, however, the family’s wealth and influence had been greatly diminished, and their grand family seat, Wollaton Hall, lay unoccupied since a fire ravaged part of the building in 1641. Instead of occupying the palatial Wollaton Hall, built by her great-great-grandfather Sir Francis Willoughby, the family lived in the more modest Middleton Hall nearby. The family was dealt a further blow in 1672 when Cassandra’s father, to whom the family was devoted, died. In recognition of Sir Francis Willoughby’s significant scientific contributions and status, a baronetcy was created for Cassandra's eldest brother. Their mother remarried Sir Josiah Child (1630-1699) – far sooner than the children would have preferred – and there were immediate frictions. Cassandra's new stepfather significantly strained family relations when he took control of the Willoughby estate and began extracting substantial funds for personal gain. His actions sparked heated accusations from Cassandra’s brothers, who claimed that Child was exploiting their inheritance. This perceived injustice caused lasting familial discord. In 1687, deeply dissatisfied with their stepfather’s handling of their financial affairs, Cassandra (aged seventeenth) moved with her brother Francis (aged nineteen) to Willoughby Hall. Sadly, Francis died the following year, in September 1688. After his death, Cassandra took on his significant responsibilities, alongside her younger brother Thomas, who inherited the baronetcy.[1] Cassandra’s extensive responsibilities at Wollaton Hall included overseeing repairs and renovations to the house and gardens, managing household affairs, and organizing the family’s extensive collections. Perhaps most remarkably, Cassandra documented her efforts in immense detail, revealing her deep involvement in decision-making processes typically reserved for men: “There were also fine collections of valuable meddals, and other rarities which my father collected together of dryed birds, fish, insects, shells, seeds, minerals and plants and other rarities … All these were removed, and when we had them at Wollaton it was a vast business for us to clean, label and put them in order…”[2] Cassandra’s willingness to join her brothers at Wollaton Hall, alongside her seeming indifference to marriage, opened up a world of intellectual pursuits that were otherwise closed to women. Amongst Cassandra’s greatest scholarly feats is her comprehensive two-volume family history, which she constructed – having taught herself to read medieval and Tudor script – from documents she found in the family archives. Alice Friedman writes ‘Cassandra’s peculiar status as the young mistress of her brother’s household at Wollaton gave her the opportunity to furnish and decorate a major country house at a very young age and left her the time not only for needlework and ordinary household duties but also to read, to write letters, to catalogue her father’s collection, to entertain friends, and to visit other country houses throughout England.’[3] Travel became an essential aspect of Cassandra’s lifestyle. In March 1695 Cassandra and her brother Thomas began a series of journeys across England and Wales, which she meticulously recorded in her Account of the journeys I have taken & where I have been since March 1695. Her notebooks reflect a wide-ranging curiosity and analytical mind, with detailed descriptions of country houses, industrial processes, and natural curiosities. Cassandra’s travels were not just recreational; they were intellectual expeditions that allowed her to engage with the latest developments in architecture and landscape design. Written from the perspective of an early-modern woman, the rarity of Cassandra’s travel writings cannot be overstated; very few travel records by women survive from this date, likely due to the societal constraints that prevented women from journeying much further than their own, or husband’s, birthplace. In 1713, at the age of 43, Cassandra married James Brydges, who later became the Duke of Chandos. The marriage marked a significant shift in her life, as she moved to Cannons, an estate in Edgware, Middlesex, which Brydges had acquired. This estate soon became the couple's primary residence, and they embarked on extensive renovations and expansions. In addition to her new roles as a wife and stepmother to Brydges two children – John and Henry - Cassandra’s previous experience in estate management saw her active involvement in the renovation of Canonns, aided by her knowledge of country houses and gardens gleaned during her earlier travels. Numerous paintings by Cassandra are also recorded in the inventory of Cannons, and Brydges’ House in St James Square, London. [4] Her painterly skills were commended by the likes of Horace Walpole, who, after a visit to Cannons almost ten years after Cassandra’s death, stated: ‘His [the duke’s] late lady was a great painter’.[5] A number of portraits by Verelst are listed in the 1725 inventory of Cannons and 9-11 St James’ Square and the Chandos collection contained at least thirteen paintings by her.[6] At Cannons, ‘Duke of Chandos ½ length by Mrs Verlest £20’ and ‘Duke and Duchess of Chandos by Mrs Verlest £30’ were listed, and at 9-11 St James’ Square, ‘The Duchess of Chandos whole length by Mrs Verelst £35’, ‘Lady Chandos Do by Mrs Verelst £35’.[7] Verelst and Cassandra had much in common; both polymaths, both inspired by intellectual pursuits, and both painters, albeit of differing degrees of professional notoriety. Verelst’s depiction of Cassandra exemplifies the artist’s distinctive working method and compositional preferences; Cassandra’s pose is typical of Verelst’s portraits of women, as is her blue dress with a sinched in belt and plunging neckline. Cassandra holds an assortment of fruit in her right hand, whilst her left is elegantly placed to her left, connecting her with the verdant surroundings. In bringing this remarkable portrait to light, we are reminded not only of Maria Verelst's artistic legacy but also of Cassandra Willoughby’s enduring intellectual and personal achievements. This painting stands as a testament to the resilience and pioneering spirit of two exceptional women who defied societal limitations to leave their indelible marks on history. [1] Elizabeth Hagglund, (2001) ‘Cassandra Willoughby’s visits to country houses’, The Georgian Group Journal. vol. XI, pp. 185-202. [2] Cassandra Willougby, (1702) The Account of the Willughby’s of Wollaton taken out of the Pedigree, old Letters, and old Books of Accounts in my Brother Sir Thomas Willoughby’s study. [University of Nottingham, Hallward Library, Department of Manuscripts and Special Collections, Middleton MSS]. [3] Alice T. Friedman, (1989) House and Household in Elizabethan England: Wollaton Hall and the Willoughby Family. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, p. 163. [4] HEH, ST 83, Inventory of Cannons, 19 June 1725; HEH, ST 83, Inventory of St. James’s Square, 1725. [5] Horace Walpole, Walpole’s Correspondence, vol. 30 (Oxford, 1961), 61. [6] Tabitha Barber, (ed.) Now You See Us: Women Artists in Britian 1520-1920. London: Tate Publishing, 2024, p.44. [7] Susan Jenkins, (2005) ‘‘An Inventory of his Grace the Duke of Chandos’s Seat att Cannons Taken June 19th 1725’ by John Gilbert’, in The Walpole Society. No. LXVII, pp. 93-192.

Vanessa Bell was a master of the still life genre and her fascination with colour and design is magnified in this modern interpretation of a traditional still-life subject. As a key figure in the Bloomsbury Group, Bell produced some of the most avant-garde art in early twentieth-century Britain. This still life was painted at Charleston Farmhouse in the early 1930s when Bell and her partner Duncan Grant shared a studio. Arranged with theatrical flourish, this still life is set against a larger painting by Grant, abstractly depicting a mandolin partially covered by a sweep of pink drapery. Arranged in the foreground is a string beaded necklace, white rose, fan, and a green vase, bought when Bell and Grant were in Spain in spring 1923, which still remains in the collection at Charleston and is included in other works by both Bell and Grant [fig. 1].[1] During the interwar years, Bell primarily focused on still-life painting. The year that this work was painted, she was commissioned to paint the backdrop for the ballet High Yellow, performed at the Savoy Theatre, which may have influenced the highly theatrical composition depicted here. In her biography on the artist, Frances Spalding notes how Bell often returned to her painting with a refreshed mindset after decorative work, which is undoubtedly relevant to this vibrant still life. This work was originally owned by George Bergen, the artist and close friend of the Bloomsbury Group. Given the frosty relationship between him and Bell, it is curious that Bergen should have owned it. Bergen met Grant in late 1929, from which point they embarked on an intense relationship, spending much time together at Charleston. [1] We are grateful to Richard Shone for his assistance in the cataloguing of this artwork.