‘A man in the dark in a picture frame/ So mystic and soulful’
Ultravox, Vienna
More than twenty-five years ago I complained about the state in which the historic pictures in the Museum of Methodism, London, were stored. Little could I have imagined that would eventually result in the kind of comprehensive and critical study of images of John Wesley, which has just been published. What happened was that I was asked to do something about the situation, and the first task was to list what was there. For every portrait of some past worthy there seemed to be yet another of John Wesley, and they all seemed slightly different. My inborn curiosity led me to try to get to the bottom of this; I have ended up researching the area in a way possibly no-one ever has.
The kinds of questions I wanted to ask were – what did artists painting Wesley make of him? Did he pay artists to paint him, or engravers produce prints, and what were his views on art? Did the Methodist movement use his image, and if so, how? Was he as chameleon-like a character as the number and variety of pictures suggest? It’s all in Image, Identity and John Wesley: a study in portraiture which has just been published
Tracking down images of John Wesley has not been that onerous. As he was a prominent public figure, galleries, museums and private individuals aren’t unaware if they have a picture of him, and often display them. Since many are held in British Methodist Heritage locations, getting to see those has generally been straightforward. Some I have still not seen after 25 years; some have simply disappeared. What has been a challenge is tracking the ‘provenance’, the genealogy, of some pictures. For instance, four copies are known of the first painted portrait, by J.M. Williams (c.1742/3): which dates back to then? None has a history before the mid-19th century. In 2018 it is planned to put the four alongside each other and get some expert opinions as to their age.
Another interesting avenue has been tracking down whether Wesley was painted by Joshua Reynolds, which forms the first chapter of the book (a version was published in 2015 in the British Art Journal). Wesley made two comments to suggest this, and Reynolds had several appointments in 1755 for a ‘Mr Westley’ – but no portrait has ever been known. The conclusion: that Wesley did sit to Reynolds in 1755 but there was no resulting portrait. But as for getting to that conclusion – and why there was no portrait – well, read the book!
Many questions are left unanswered, particularly about Wesley’s attitude to art, or Methodism’s use of his image. Also about the how and why – what, for instance, was behind Nathaniel Hone’s portrait which now hangs in the National Portrait Gallery, London – and what was its previous provenance? If there is a conclusion from the book it is that virtually all images of Wesley are to some extent caricature. And by the way, I should add that the Museum of Methodism store is now well equipped and organised!
Peter Forsaith
Research Fellow
Westminster Oxford Research Network 