DOI Heft:
Nr. 4
DOI Artikel:Białostocki, Jan: Esilio Privato: King Stanisław Leszczyński painted by Oudry
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.18817#0110
pictures could not be a pair. The fact that the female portrait disappeared during tłie war makes
it impossible to analyse. I sliall therefore concentrate on the first one, which happily still exists.
Does this painting actually represent Stanisław Leszczyński? There is certainly sonie simi-
larity but it is not very strong. When we compare Oudry's picture with examples of Leszczyński's
iconography dating from the time of his first election as king of Poland in 1704, we are struck
by the absence of the Polish chara eter so strongly accentuated in his engraved portraits, in
which some similarity to Sobieski — perhaps not wholly unintentional — can be observed.
In later portraits which represent him as Duke of Lorraine and Bar (which he became in 1737)
he appears with an enormous wig, his face fuli of strength and self-satisfaction. His moustache,
formerly long and 'Polish', then became smali. One also finds portraits of him with no moustache
at all. In any case, the appearance of the man represented by Oudry in this portrait can only
perhaps bear out, not prove, the traditional identification of the sitter. It is the iconography
of the picture, which has puzzled its interpreters, which gives, I believe, the best proof of the
correetness of the traditional identification.
Before turning to the iconography, it is necessary to dwell a little on the dating. I have always
thought that the date should be read as 1730 and it seems to me that historical circumstances
also contradict an earlier dating. In 1720 Stanislas Leszczyński, rccently exiled to Wissembourg,
Was in an extremely difficult position, following his captivity in Turkey and the adventures
and vicissitudes of his stay in Sweden. It hardly seems possible that he had the time and money
to order his portrait at that time. Quite a different situation obtained in 1730. Living at Cham-
bord, as father-in-law to Louis XV, he was in an excellent position to make use of the paLiter
who in the meantime had become court painter to the French king. Leszczyński displays a.i
order which may be seen as that of the Saint-Esprit, which he received about 1725. It is true
that Oudry had ceased to paint portraits by this time. But he may easily have made an excep-
tion for the father-in-law of the king, and, further, the portrait is craite an unusual one.
It is at this point that I should like to turn to its iconography, beginning with the following
words of Pierre Francastel: "t/n seul trait resteraił a elucider, cest la raison de ce costume de piilerin
de Saint Jacąues, non certes sans exemples contemporains, mais assez piąuant pour ce roi en exil."s
In the early 18th century disguised portraits representing, as they did in the past, sitters
'en pelerins'' do indeed still oceur. Two such portraits, perhaps the best known and often adduced,
were also mentioned by Francastel. They are by Grimoux, known through several copies, the
best examples being those in the Uffizi. The woman represented in pilgrim's dress is Mademoiselle
Desmares as Colette in the opera-ballet "Les Trois cousines" by Dancourt. These pictures as
well as other portraits of the same kind, which we meet among Works by Antoine Pesne, Gou-
dreaux and others, such as a portrait of Madame de Pompadour 'en pelerine'' painted by the
pastellist Louis Vigee in 1745, or a lost portrait by Santerre known from the Julienne sale of
1765, where it is described as 'une pelerine habillee galarnment,s — all these pictures introduce
us into a world of a very specific pilgrimage, that of the 'pelerinage d'amour.''
Dancourt's opera-ballet mentioned above, "Les Trois cousines" contributed more than any-
thing else to the popularity of the motif of the pilgrimage to the island of love — Cythera:
'' Venez a l'isle de Cy there
En pelerinage avec nous..."
8. Francastel, op. cit.
9. The question has been studied not only by Francastel, who touched on it, but also by Pierre du Colombicr, who devoted
two pages to it in his essay, "Antoine Pesne und die franzosische Malerei,"publishedin the monograph on Antoine Pesne
(with E. Berckcnhagen, M. Kiihn and G. Poensgen), Berlin, 1958, pp. 44 — 6. I repeat his examples.
96
it impossible to analyse. I sliall therefore concentrate on the first one, which happily still exists.
Does this painting actually represent Stanisław Leszczyński? There is certainly sonie simi-
larity but it is not very strong. When we compare Oudry's picture with examples of Leszczyński's
iconography dating from the time of his first election as king of Poland in 1704, we are struck
by the absence of the Polish chara eter so strongly accentuated in his engraved portraits, in
which some similarity to Sobieski — perhaps not wholly unintentional — can be observed.
In later portraits which represent him as Duke of Lorraine and Bar (which he became in 1737)
he appears with an enormous wig, his face fuli of strength and self-satisfaction. His moustache,
formerly long and 'Polish', then became smali. One also finds portraits of him with no moustache
at all. In any case, the appearance of the man represented by Oudry in this portrait can only
perhaps bear out, not prove, the traditional identification of the sitter. It is the iconography
of the picture, which has puzzled its interpreters, which gives, I believe, the best proof of the
correetness of the traditional identification.
Before turning to the iconography, it is necessary to dwell a little on the dating. I have always
thought that the date should be read as 1730 and it seems to me that historical circumstances
also contradict an earlier dating. In 1720 Stanislas Leszczyński, rccently exiled to Wissembourg,
Was in an extremely difficult position, following his captivity in Turkey and the adventures
and vicissitudes of his stay in Sweden. It hardly seems possible that he had the time and money
to order his portrait at that time. Quite a different situation obtained in 1730. Living at Cham-
bord, as father-in-law to Louis XV, he was in an excellent position to make use of the paLiter
who in the meantime had become court painter to the French king. Leszczyński displays a.i
order which may be seen as that of the Saint-Esprit, which he received about 1725. It is true
that Oudry had ceased to paint portraits by this time. But he may easily have made an excep-
tion for the father-in-law of the king, and, further, the portrait is craite an unusual one.
It is at this point that I should like to turn to its iconography, beginning with the following
words of Pierre Francastel: "t/n seul trait resteraił a elucider, cest la raison de ce costume de piilerin
de Saint Jacąues, non certes sans exemples contemporains, mais assez piąuant pour ce roi en exil."s
In the early 18th century disguised portraits representing, as they did in the past, sitters
'en pelerins'' do indeed still oceur. Two such portraits, perhaps the best known and often adduced,
were also mentioned by Francastel. They are by Grimoux, known through several copies, the
best examples being those in the Uffizi. The woman represented in pilgrim's dress is Mademoiselle
Desmares as Colette in the opera-ballet "Les Trois cousines" by Dancourt. These pictures as
well as other portraits of the same kind, which we meet among Works by Antoine Pesne, Gou-
dreaux and others, such as a portrait of Madame de Pompadour 'en pelerine'' painted by the
pastellist Louis Vigee in 1745, or a lost portrait by Santerre known from the Julienne sale of
1765, where it is described as 'une pelerine habillee galarnment,s — all these pictures introduce
us into a world of a very specific pilgrimage, that of the 'pelerinage d'amour.''
Dancourt's opera-ballet mentioned above, "Les Trois cousines" contributed more than any-
thing else to the popularity of the motif of the pilgrimage to the island of love — Cythera:
'' Venez a l'isle de Cy there
En pelerinage avec nous..."
8. Francastel, op. cit.
9. The question has been studied not only by Francastel, who touched on it, but also by Pierre du Colombicr, who devoted
two pages to it in his essay, "Antoine Pesne und die franzosische Malerei,"publishedin the monograph on Antoine Pesne
(with E. Berckcnhagen, M. Kiihn and G. Poensgen), Berlin, 1958, pp. 44 — 6. I repeat his examples.
96