Beth - I have a book about Sully and there are so many versions of Victoria by Sully himself, and those have been copied by other artists many times. All that of course stretches "artistic licence" to the limits really. Our task is not an easy one.
--Previous Message-- : Sully's portrait of the young Queen Victoria : has drawn my attention to how artistic : licence can make it difficult for those : interested in royal jewels to identify : specific jewels with certainty from : paintings, or questions might be posed as to : whether the jewel had been reset. : See : : http://wallacelive.wallacecollection.org/eMuseumPlus;jsessionid=6D4E1DCE187BAB140E98650CC9C801B1.node1?service=direct/1/ResultDetailView/result.t1.collection_detail.$TspImage.link&sp=10&sp=Scollection&sp=SelementList&sp=0&sp=0&sp=999&sp=SdetailView&sp=0&sp=Sdetail&sp=0&sp=F : While Queen Victoria is wearing what is : obviously the diamond diadem, the artist's : rendition is different from the actual jewel : and might cause confusion to those who were : unfamiliar with it. : Do others know of portraits where artistic : licence might cause confusion or make : identification problematic? For example in : the recent post I did about Annigoni's study : of the Queen Mother wearing her Greville : emerald necklace and earrings, those : unfamiliar with the set might ponder if she : was wearing that demi-parure. :