spent some time face to face with history today

**OC Richard** · 10th November 13, 05:07 PM

Today I had to take my daughter to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (or LACMA as we call it) and inevitably I thought of the wonderful huge portrait of Hugh Montgomery which used to hang there. I couldn't find it last time and was quite disappointed, as it's one of the finest 18th century portraits showing Highland Dress.

I talked to the guy behind the counter in the bookshop and he looked it up... yes it was still in the museum collection... and yes it was still on display! However it had been moved from the main building to a separate building housing "The Art of the Americas".

Here it is

I spent quite a bit of time studying this magnificent portrait very close-up.

Here's the thread I did a while back which will give the background

http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/f...intings-74907/

I did note that the jacket's facings appear to be blue, not green as has been supposed. They are not green in the slightest! However the central squares in the bonnet's dicing are quite clearly green... hmmm...

The sporran is quite gorgeous and painted with painstaking accuracy, its ornate silver top, the silver bullion tassels, the sealskin body.

For the first time I noticed that he's wearing a silver kilt pin. I didn't know that kilt pins existed at such an early date.

The Black Watch tartan is painted beautifully, with every detail of the sett perfect, and with gorgeous glowing colours, not as dark as we're used to military Black Watch looking, and much more intense than the image above shows.

The silver shoe buckles, the marl turnover cuffs to the diced hose, everything in amazing detail.

The man working there said that the portrait was painted from life, I think he said in Boston, which if true is interesting. The painting is signed and dated 1780. How this important painting ended up in Los Angeles, I have no idea.

What a great thing it was, to stand there and breathe it in!

By the way, the version one constantly sees in books about Highland Dress is an unsigned copy which used to hang in The National Portrait Gallery, Edinburgh, now the National Museums Scotland.

Here's the copy used as a bookcover. The copy is inferior in every way.

Here is some info about the man (happily the Wiki article uses the original Copley painting)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Mo...rl_of_Eglinton

**RockyR** · 11th November 13, 08:19 AM

About the Kilt Pin...

To me it looks like the very bottom of the scabbard for his dirk, not a kilt pin. I could be wrong.

Beautiful painting though and great attention to detail. What oft times gets distorted is the tartan pattern itself which is difficult to reproduce accurately in painting... he did a masterful job.

**MacGumerait** · 12th November 13, 12:06 AM

Richard , great pic and a beautiful painting . I am very familiar with it , as you might imagine .

Evidently , the Montgomery Clan fell out of favor in the LA County Museum and got moved from the main building .

**OC Richard** · 12th November 13, 05:04 AM

Originally Posted by RockyR

About the Kilt Pin...

To me it looks like the very bottom of the scabbard for his dirk, not a kilt pin. I could be wrong.

Wow that's interesting! I spent nearly an hour with my face a few inches from this huge painting and that thing for sure looked like a kilt pin, even the shape is clear, a shape you see in classic kilt pins from time to time (thistle shape on top) but now that you mention it, at least in the image I posted, it DOES look like the bottom of the dirk scabbard!

I suppose I'll have to go back for another look, with that in mind!

**SFCRick** · 12th November 13, 05:42 AM

post deleted

**RockyR** · 12th November 13, 06:53 AM

OCR... I think that could possibly be the epitome of "can't see the forest for the trees".

Still a beautiful work of art, worth a second look.

**creagdhubh** · 12th November 13, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by RockyR

About the Kilt Pin...

To me it looks like the very bottom of the scabbard for his dirk, not a kilt pin. I could be wrong.

Beautiful painting though and great attention to detail. What oft times gets distorted is the tartan pattern itself which is difficult to reproduce accurately in painting... he did a masterful job.

That is what I always thought. I too have always admired this painting for many reasons from an artist's point of view, but also for the reasons you point out, Richard.

**Madadh** · 12th November 13, 05:38 PM

The picture on the book is different than the painting. Look at the sword, they are pointing in different directions. I too think that the pin is actually the bottom of the dirk. Just my 2 pence.

**Connaughton** · 12th November 13, 06:44 PM

John Singleton Copley is the artist. Anyway the backgrounds are different. And I believe that the piece in Scotland is much smaller, so maybe a study for the version is LA? Or Maybe it goes the other way around. Many of you may be more familiar with JSC's portrait of Paul Revere. But we've all seen his work before.
I've no opinion on the pin or dirk puzzle.

Great piece of art thanks for sharing it with us.

Connaughton

**Tim Little** · 12th November 13, 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by OC Richard

The man working there said that the portrait was painted from life, I think he said in Boston, which if true is interesting. The painting is signed and dated 1780. How this important painting ended up in Los Angeles, I have no idea.

Interesting indeed!

Possibly Boston, England, I suppose. Copley apparently left Boston, Mass., for Europe in 1774 and did not return:

http://www.johnsingletoncopley.org/biography.html