Portrait of Margaret Laton probably by Marcus Gheeraerts (the Younger), Britain, ca.1620

Oil painting

Acquired with the assistance of the National Heritage Memorial Fund, The Art Fund, and contributors to the Margaret Laton Fund

By family descent to Sir John Headlam; sold Christies's 19 July 1929 lot 41, bought Knoedler presumably for Hon. Esmond Harmsworth, later Viscount Rothermere, and purchased by private treaty 1994.

Probably painted in London by Marcus Gheeraerts the younger (born in Bruges, Belgium, 1561, died in London about 1635-1636).

The painting was acquired with the jacket worn by the sitter, now in the Textiles and Dress Department (museum number T.228-1994).

When the V&A acquired the jacket and portrait of Margaret Layton in 1994, the museum used the version "Laton" following the example set in 1933 by V&A curator Albert Kendrick. However, according to documents and monuments of the Layton family in Rawdon, Yorkshire, and The Dictionary of National Biography, the name was more ususally spelled with a 'y'.

The arguments for the spelling of Margaret Layton's surname:

A member of the Aireborough and Horsforth Museum Society in Yorkshire wrote to the museum in 2002 (letter passed to the Textiles and Dress Department). The letter explained that the Society holds documents signed by Margaret Layton's husband, Francis, all of which are signed 'Layton'. Enclosed was also a copy of a document dated 17 May 1642 and an article on Rawdon, the Layton's estate in Yorkshire.

Previous references using the spelling 'Laton':

A.F. Kendrick, English Needlework, 1933, p.93. The author was clearly aware of the sale of the portrait and jacket at Christie's (spelt Layton, see below), but no explanation of the change in spelling was given.

J.L. Nevinson, "English Embroidered Costume Elizabeth and James I - Part I", Connoisseur, Jan 1936, p.23

George Wingfield Digby, Elizabethan Embroidery, 1963, p.82 (includes several errors of fact, citing her maiden name as Rawdon [it was Brown/Brawne] and that she was a Lady-in-waiting to Queen Elizabeth I [no evidence for this, and very unlikely].

Georg Garde, "Costumes and hangings from the Shakespeare period", Danish Handcraft Guild, IV, 3, 1964, p.94

Janet Arnold, "Jane Lambarde's Mantle", Costume, 14, 1980, p.66

Previous references using the spelling 'Layton':

Document dated 17th May 1642, signed by 'Fra: Layton' [copy sent to the museum by a member of the Aireborough and Horsforth Museum Society in Yorkshire].

Tombstones of Henry and Thomas Layton, sons of Francis and Margaret, in St. Peter's Church, Rawdon.

Portrait of Mrs Francis Layton, sold at Christie's, 19 July 1929, property of Major-General Sir John Headlam, descendant of the Layton family, to Viscount Rothermere.

Portrait of Margaret Layton of Rawdon (d.1641), Christie's New York, Saturday, 16 April 1994, property from the Estate of Mary, Viscountess Rothermere.

Dictionary of National Biography, entry for Henry Layton, "theological writer, eldest son of Francis Layton (d.23 Aug. 1661, aged 84) of Rawdon, West Riding of Yorkshire, was born in 1622. His father was one of the masters of the jewelhouse to Charles I and Charles II."

Online New Dictionary of National Biography, entry for Henry Layton (1622-1705), "writer on theology, was born at Rawdon, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, the eldest of the six sons of Francis Layton (1576/7-1661), master of the jewel house to Charles I and Charles II, and Margaret, daughter of the well-known benefactor Sir Hugh Brown of London. The Laytons were an ancient and well-to-do family, and in pursuance of his father's will, Henry built a chapel at Rawdon."

Conclusion

In the absence of any evidence for the use of 'Laton', it is difficult to argue against the signature of her own husband, the tombs of her sons and the DNB entries.

Historical significance: Avril Hart and Sharon Fermor, entry no. 4075 on Jacket of Margaret Laton [sic] and Portrait of Margaret Laton [sic], in National Art Collections Fund Review, 1994, p.146-147.

Citation of part of this article by Sharon Fermor referring to the portrait [spelling of 'Laton' corrected to 'Layton' throughout]:

"The portrait of Margaret Layton, purchased with the bodice, is an intriguing example of early seventeenth-century English portraiture, as well as a unique example of a sitter shown wearing an extant garment. Comparison with the bodice shows that the artist has painted its distinguishing features with great care, undoubtedly reflecting the value that it held for the sitter. He has paid particular attention to its embroidery, reproducing in detail the individual motifs of birds, insects and flowers, while exercising a degree of artistic licence in terms of their specific arrangement.

The portrait has not yet been securely attributed to a known artist, although in some respects it shows similarities with portraits by Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger (c.1561-1636), who worked for the Crown from the 1590s onwards. Female portraits ascribed to Gheeraerts at Hampton Court and at Dulwich Picture Gallery [London] show sitters wearing similarly embroidered jackets and the handling of detail is close in each case, although one cannot rule out the possibility that this reveals the hand of a specialist painter of costume. The facial type of Margaret Layton and the sketchy painting of the hair also occur in other Gheeraerts portraits. The relative informality of Margaret Layton and the lack of background detail are, however, uncharacteristic of the artist, although they may have been specified by the patron.

The date of the portrait is unknown, but the style of the bodice suggests a date of between 1610 and 1620. The sitter's age at this time is also uncertain, but X-radiographs of the painting reveal that the artist produced two versions of the face. Beneath the visible likeness is an older-looking, slightly heavier image of Margaret Layton's face. It would thus appear that the artist repainted her in a more youthful and idealised way, perhaps at her request, or that of her husband who was most likely to have commissioned and paid for the work. This alteration raises interesting questions, at present unanswerable, about the exact date of the painting and the occasion for which it was commissioned. The size and plain setting of the work and the relative informality of the sitter's costume make it unlikely that it was designed to commemorate a great public occasion, although the painting is not without its own quiet grandeur. Certainly, the sitter is shown as a model of propriety, with her eyes slightly averted from the viewer. The small open book in her hand is probably intended to suggest a missal, a device which portraitists often used to allude to the sitter's presumed piety. SF. Sharon Fermor is Head of Paintings in the Prints, Drawings and Paintings Collection at the Victoria and Albert Museum."

Object Type
Oil-painted portraits of noble or wealthy men and women became increasingly common in the 17th century. Important as it was to dress magnificently, it was also essential to be portrayed in one's finery. The portraits nearly always show the sitters splendidly dressed, in the height of expensive fashion, in order to emphasise their status.

People
Margaret Layton (formerly Laton) was the daughter of Sir Hugh Browne, a wealthy vintner and grocer. She is said to have been born in 1579, but it is more likely from her costume and appearance that she was born around 1590. She married Francis Layton (1577-1661), one of the Master Yeomen of the Jewel House at the Tower of London, and died in 1641.

The artist, Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger (1561-1635), spent his early years in Bruges (Belgium), where his father was active as a painter and printmaker. When he was about seven, the family moved to London. Marcus eventually obtained many commissions from the English court, both for portraits and for decorative work. He was popular at the courts of Elizabeth I and James I, but fell out of favour with James's wife, Anne of Denmark, after 1617. After that date, Gheeraerts's sitters came more and more from the gentry.

E.214-1994