In 1911 the London based firm of H. R. Allenson Ltd published a pocket edition of The Rubaiyat illustrated by S.C. Vincent Jarvis. It used FitzGerald’s second edition and contained a frontispiece and 27 in–text illustrations in black and white. It is Potter #132. A second edition seems to have been issued in the same year, this being Potter #157, though it has been suggested that Potter mistakenly listed the same edition twice. Both editions (if there were indeed two) were issued in both cloth and leather bindings.
Jarvis seems to have passed under the radar of all the standard encyclopaedias of book illustrators, so that not even the sex of the artist is clear. As online ancestry records reveal, though, the artist was a woman: Sarah Constance Vincent Jarvis, and these records plus online newspaper archives allow us to glean a fair bit of information about her, and, incidentally, about her publisher, which reveals a somewhat curious background for the publication of an edition of The Rubaiyat.
Sarah Constance Vincent Jarvis (hereafter VJ) was born in Islington, London in 1883. The 1891 Census reveals that she was the daughter of Edward Jarvis, a bank clerk then aged 55, and his wife, Lucy Elizabeth Jarvis, aged 51. At the time of this census VJ was aged 7 and still at school. Her siblings were Laura Gertrude, aged 22, a student in training college; Florence Diana, aged 17, an author / journalist; Elizabeth Scott, aged 15, an art student; Gabrielle Charlotte, aged 13, at school; Noel Charles, age 11, at school; and Mary Bertha Victoria, aged 5, at school. In short, VJ grew up in a family in which she had four older sisters, one older brother and one younger sister. (In fact, as the 1881 Census shows she had several older siblings who had flown the family nest by 1891, but, as we shall see presently, only one of these figures in our main story: VJ’s older sister, Lucy Adelaide Jarvis.) At the time of the 1891 Census, the family were living at 10 Kingsland Green, Islington and employed one servant. (They were living at the same address in the 1881 Census.)
VJ’s father died in 1896, and her mother in 1900, as a result of which we find in the particularly interesting 1901 Census that VJ and her siblings were living with the oldest sister, Lucy Adelaide Jarvis, aged 39, who was a Head Teacher for the London School Board. Laura Gertrude, now 32, was an Assistant Teacher for the London School Board; Florence Diana, now aged 27, was an Artist in Fashion; Elizabeth Scott, now aged 25, was a Sculptor; Gabrielle Charlotte, now aged 23, was the Secretary to a Journalist; Noel Charles, now aged 21, was a Clerk to a Chartered Accountant; VJ, now aged 19, was an Art Student; and Mary Bertha Victoria, now aged 15, was still at school. All were unmarried at this stage, and were living at 1 Orlando Road, Clapham. They had a visiting niece living with them, and employed one servant.
On 24 March 1903, The Daily News (London) (p.3, col.7) tells us that VJ had been awarded a scholarship of £20 a year to study art at the Battersea Polytechnic Institute, a curious choice since the Institute tended to focus on science and technology – indeed, in the 1950s it became the Battersea College of Technology. However, it did run Art classes, and, since one of its aims, following its foundation in the 1890s, was to give greater access to further education for Londoners, including those from poorer backgrounds, VJ’s choice might have been influenced by the state of the family finances after the death of her parents.
In 1906, VJ’s sister, Lucy Adelaide, spinster, aged 45, married Leopold Bernhard Sommerfeld, widower, aged 47, a quarry owner from Portmadoc, North Wales. She was to die in London in 1916, aged 54, and he, also in London, in 1928, aged 69.
By the time of the 1911 Census VJ, now aged 27, still single, was an Art Mistress working for the London County Council. She was living at 27 Crescent Lane, Clapham Park, London SW, with her widowed older sister, Florence Diana Spratt, aged 37, who was listed as a Black & White Artist (She had married a Reginald John H. Spratt in 1901, but he died in 1907 at the age of only 37.) Their sister, Elizabeth Scott, now aged 35, still single, was at the same address, and was listed as an Artist. Another sister, Mary Bertha Victoria, now aged 25, still single, was also at the same address and was listed as a Lady Secretary. The address 27 Crescent Lane, Clapham, was to be a family base for many years, for it was the address of Florence at the time of her death in 1934, and that of Elizabeth at the time of her death in 1935. (Mary, to complete the picture, died in 1974, her address at the time being 78 Palace Road, London SW2.)
As an Art Mistress, VJ may well have been involved in an exhibition of the Art Teachers’ Guild at the Alpine Club in London in October 1910. A report in The Times newspaper on 13 October 1910 (p.13, col.4) notes that:
Mr (sic) Vincent Jarvis, in his water–colour Study of Heather (149) combines an exact representation of the plant with fine design that grows naturally out of that representation.
Whether that “Mr” is an unwarranted assumption on the part of the writer, based on the usually male name Vincent, and the painting was really by VJ, is not known at present, as unfortunately I have been unable to trace a copy of the exhibition catalogue.
The year 1911, of course, was that in which VJ’s Rubayat was published, and though the books are undated, we know that this was the year of first publication from the accession date of the copy in the British Library (7 January 1911) and a review published in The Scotsman on 30 January 1911 (p.2, col.7), under the heading “New Editions”:
Mr. H.R. Allenson has published the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, FitzGerald’s version, illustrated by S.C. Vincent Jarvis, a dainty little book of a size to fit the waistcoat pocket, giving not only the text of the second edition, but also the previous variants. The drawings are of no particular merit.
I wish I could offer readers a more positive review of VJ’s work than this, but unfortunately this is the only review to have surfaced at the time of writing! We shall take a closer look at the publisher shortly, but meanwhile it is not clear how Allenson and VJ came to work together on an edition of The Rubaiyat, nor why VJ used her initials S.C. The thought occurs that, like that other Rubaiyat artist Cecil G. Trew, who used G instead of Gwendolen and thus allowed it to be thought that she was a man, thus facilitating publication of her work, VJ thought it expedient to allow a similar misconception to develop by using S.C. instead of Sarah Constance. This, however, is purely speculative, and though Trew went on to publish numerous books after her 1929 Rubaiyat, VJ seems to have illustrated nothing else besides Allenson’s editions of The Rubaiyat.
But to continue with her biographical details, on 26 April 1913, at the Parish Church of Clapham, VJ, aged 29, spinster, of no listed occupation, of 27 Crescent Lane, married André Lucien Casset, aged 24, bachelor, an engineer by profession, of 1 Macauley Road. Thanks to information supplied by her grandson, Florent Chayet, we do know how the couple met. It seems that in about 1904, when Lucien was about 15 years old and VJ about 20, VJ went to France taking a job as a family help, this being with Lucien Casset’s parents. VJ returned to England at some point, and, when Lucien had reached adulthood, he went to England to marry her.
In London in 1915 they had a daughter, Marie Elizabeth Andrée Casset (who was to become Florent’s mother). Their address at the time of her baptism was the above–mentioned 27 Crescent Lane, Clapham.
It is not clear when the couple moved to France, but their second daughter, Lucienne Florence Casset was born in Paris in 1918. Their third daughter, Françoise Odile Casset, was born in Strasbourg in 1921.
It is not known how the family fared during the Second World War, though it is known that their oldest daughter was active in the Free France movement, working inside France itself.
VJ’s husband, André, died in Dalat, Vietnam in March 1945, aged 56. The circumstances are not clear, but this was the troubled period when the Communist Vietnamese insurgence against French rule of the country (then French Indo–China) was coupled with Japanese occupation.
VJ herself died in Paris in 1967.
Though VJ’s three daughters lived on into the twenty–first century, all have been dead for some years, and though Florent himself was about 20 years old when VJ died, he is, understandably, able to recall little beyond what he called a simple family life. There is a family archive stored in Paris, it seems, though it is not clear what is in it, as it is not accessible at the time of writing.
Before moving on to VJ’s Rubaiyat illustrations, it is useful at this point to take a look at the book’s publisher.
Harry Rogers Allenson (hereafter HRA) was born in Levington, Wiltshire in 1866, the son of Thomas Henry Allenson and his wife Harriett. By the time of the 1871 census the family had moved to London, and in the 1881 census HRA was recorded as being an apprentice to a London bookseller – this was apparently Elliot Stock of Paternoster Row. By the time of the 1891 census he was a bookseller’s assistant in Bexley, Kent. Our next glimpse of him is in The Gentlewoman on 29 April 1893 (p.556) where we read:
Another new publisher, bookseller, and retail stationer in the Row is Mr H.R. Allenson, formerly with Mr Elliot Stock.
One of his earliest publications was William Newman Hall’s book Our Sovereign Father, published in October 1893, its aim being “to make the truth of the Divine Fatherhood a living reality in daily experience.” As we shall see, this was one of numerous religious works subsequently to be published by him.
In London, in 1898, he married Lilian Blunt, and in the 1901 census the couple were recorded as living in Hornsey, north London, with a one year old son. HRA was listed as a publisher & bookseller, and the family were well enough off to employ a servant. In a Post Office Directory for 1902, HRA was listed simply as a bookseller having premises at 2 Ivy Lane, London EC.
In 1906 the firm of H.R. Allenson became H.R. Allenson Ltd.
In the census of 1911 – the year his edition of The Rubaiyat was published – the family were living in Palmer’s Green, north London, the couple’s son by now having been joined by four sisters. They employed one servant and a live–in nurse for the youngest daughter, who was still a baby. HRA was now listed simply as a publisher, and we know from his Rubaiyat that his business address at that time was Racquet Court, Fleet Street, London EC. He seems to have continued in the publishing business up until his death in 1929, though the company continue to publish under the name of H.R. Allenson & Co. Ltd, finally closing in 1966.
As indicated above, a large part (though by no means all) of HRA’s publishing output was religious in nature, with books on preaching, sermons, hymns, parables, and mysticism, as well as biographies of missionaries, preachers, saints, and characters in the Bible. Thus, for example, William Brock’s A Young Congo Missionary appeared in 1897, Mary W. Tileston’s Great Souls at Prayer in 1904, and Thomas Child’s Root Principles in Rational and Spiritual Things in 1905. There were also some morally uplifting poems, stories, and talks for children – Rev. H.G. Tunnicliffe’s Wet Paint and Other Sermons in Signs to Girls and Boys (1913) is a good example: wet paint stains your clothes and ruins them, and just so do sins of thought, word and deed stain your life and ruin it. How delighted the child of 1913 was to receive a copy of this as a birthday gift or as a present from Santa, appears not be recorded, alas.
A good cross section of HRA’s religious titles is provided by “The Heart and Life Booklets”, a series of pocket books which seems to have started in about 1905 and continued with added titles up until about 1927. A listing taken from a 1926 catalogue is shown in Fig.1a. Running in parallel with this series was another, also of pocket books, “The Sanctuary Booklets”, which seems to have begun in about 1908 and continued, again with added titles, until about 1915. A listing given in a copy of no.7 of the series, The Private Devotions of Bishop Andrewes, which contemporary newspaper reviews show to have been published in 1913, is shown in Fig.1b. As can be seen, the two series share several titles, notably The Dream of Gerontius, though it is not clear whether “The Sanctuary Booklets” were actually absorbed into “The Heart and Life Booklets” or not.
Looking specifically at the period in which HRA’s edition of The Rubaiyat appeared, HRA published Jasper B. Hunt’s Existence after Death implied by Science in 1910; R.C. Gillie’s Little Talks on Temperance, also in 1910; Mrs G. S. Reaney’s Temperance Sketches from Life in 1911; and J. Werschauer’s The Atheist’s Dilemma, also in 1911 – this last being Dr Werschauer’s report of his triumph (as he saw it) in a debate, “Theism or Atheism”, with G.W. Foote, noted secularist and founder–editor of The Freethinker. So, given all this, why was The Rubaiyat published in the midst of it, verses written by a wine swigging Omar, with his doubts about the after–life, and with religious views which were at best agnostic ? The book was very popular, of course, and sold well, always a temptation for a publisher, plus there have always been those who see spiritual (Sufic) symbolism in Omar’s verses, in which intoxication is symbolic of the religious ecstasy achieved in true communion with God.
Potter #132 lists the HRA edition of The Rubaiyat as the “Sanctuary Booklets Edition”, but in actual fact it wasn't – it was merely a pocket–sized book “uniform in size with our ‘Sanctuary’ booklets,” as an advertisement in a 1911 catalogue of HRA’s publications shows (Fig.1c.) Note, however, that there is here no indication of a Sufic or spiritual slant in interpreting the poem – it is just “Fitzgerald’s inimitable work.” Note, too, the entry beneath that of The Rubaiyat: Theobald A. Palm’s The Faith of an Evolutionist – an antidote to the threat posed by Darwin to orthodox Christian faith. In 1903, with a reprint in 1904 (bringing sales to 16,000 copies), HRA had also published R.E. Welsh’s The Relief of Doubt – a defence of Christianity against “the sceptical criticism of modern times.” If anything, the popularity of The Rubaiyat added to the threat to the Christian faith posed by Biblical Criticism and Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, yet HRA published it.
The images used here are photographs of the copy in the British Library. Because this book is so rare, all 28 of the illustrations are shown here, mostly with their associated quatrains in FitzGerald’s second edition, to show how they are interwoven with the text. Though many are fairly literal and uninspiring, there are some interesting details here and there. [The illustrations can be browsed here.]
Fig.2 shows the front cover decorated with a peacock. Peacocks and peacock feathers were used in designs and drawings by Aubrey Beardsley, for example, and have been used by at least three Rubaiyat artists – Mera K. Sett, W.G. Stirling and Ronald Balfour. The peacock can be used for purely decorative purposes, most notably in Whistler’s famous Peacock Room, but it can carry symbolism. On account of the periodic renewal of its plumage, it was a pagan symbol of immortality, from which it was adapted by the early Christians as a symbol of both immortality and the resurrection – hence its appearance in wall–paintings in the catacombs. It also, for more obvious reasons, became a symbol of pride, as in Aesop’s fable “The Peacock and the Crane.” I leave readers to make up their own minds about the significance of the peacock in Fig.2, but before we jump to any conclusions it might be as well to bear in mind that a peacock also adorned the cover of the 1910 Sangorski and Sutcliffe Edition (Potter #81), where there is no evidence that that was anything other than decorative. We know nothing about the nature of VJ’s Christian beliefs beyond the fact that she was married in an Anglican church, and that in itself may signify convention rather than faith, But given her association with HRA, and his publication of numerous devotional books, some Christian bias is at least possible.
Fig.2a shows the frontispiece and title–page of the VJ Rubaiyat, the former illustrating quatrain 47 (“The Eternal Saki from that Bowl has pour’d / Millions of Bubbles like us, and will pour.”) The representation is fairly literal, but there seems to be a ‘mainstream’ pouring of new–born babies, with five falling away from and below it, the one to the left seemingly about to re–join the mainstream. Flying away from and above the ‘mainstream’ is a single infant. Why ? Could it be that the ‘mainstream’ represents the mainstream of (Christian ?) life, with those falling below representing sinners, and the one above representing a saint ? It is interesting that Vedder’s illustration of this verse (his re–numbered quatrain 52) has a single stream of adult humanity, with at least three haloed saints in with the rest of us. In the bottom right hand corner of Fig.2a is what seems to be VJ’s monogram – at least, I assume it to be such in what follows.
Fig.2b seems to show the Herald of the Day implicit in the opening quatrain which it accompanies. VJ’s monogram can just be seen between his feet.
Fig.2c accompanies quatrains 4 and 5, as can be seen. It can be interpreted as showing both “the White Hand of Moses on the Bough” in quatrain 4 and “a Garden by the Water” in quatrain 5.
Fig.2d shows VJ’s illustrations to both quatrain 6 (“the Nightingale cries to the Rose”) and quatrain 7 (“the Bird of Time”), both fairly literal representations, though the shaded ‘crescent’ of rose bush forming a sort of halo round the nightingale is rather puzzling. Note, though, that decorative ‘circular’ wreaths / frames are a common feature of the illustrations – cf Figs.2f, 2i, 2j & 2q below; also Fig.2m. [The illustrations can be browsed here.]
Fig.2e clearly shows “a Flask of Wine, a Book of Verse” from quatrain 12, with “a little Bread” presumably represented by the stone–like loaf behind the jug, albeit an English cob loaf, rather than the flat loaf of Omar’s day. But there is no sign of Omar’s Beloved “singing in the Wilderness” and making it “Paradise enow”! Again, fairly if partially literal, and not very adventurous.
Fig.2f clearly illustrates the words “Look to the blowing Rose about us” from quatrain 15, with a rose shedding its petals (“At once the silken tassel of my Purse / Tear, and its Treasure on the Garden throw.”) VJ’s monogram can again be seen at the bottom of the circular frame.
Fig.2g is literal interpretation of quatrain 18, with a Lion and a (tiny) Lizard.
Fig.2h is located beneath quatrain 22 and thus quite possibly represents one of “the loveliest and the best” who has “crept silently to rest.” It could also, perhaps, relate to the “Summer dresses in new bloom” in quatrain 23 on the facing page. The bird above could be purely decorative, or it could hark back to the Bird of Time in quatrain 7, or it could represent the soul of the dead young woman. It is a common belief in folklore that at death the soul leaves the body in the form of a bird, and the notion naturally filters through into art and literature. Thus St. Benedict is said to have seen the soul of his sister St. Scholastica ascend to heaven in the form of a white dove, and in the Islamic world a bird symbolises the soul in the poetry of Sufism, as in Rumi’s “bird of my soul.” Again, in modern times, Yeats used bird–soul symbolism in his play The Death of Cuchulain, in which the hero says of the bird, “And is not that a strange shape for the soul / Of a great fighting man ?”
Fig.2i clearly relates to quatrains 30 and 31, depicting Omar listening to a Doctor or Saint, yet gleaning nothing beyond, “I came like Water, and like Wind I go.” There are some interesting ancillary details in this illustration. Note the two skulls and the hour–glass to the lower right – regular symbols of Death and Time. But more curious is the leafy surround of the illustration, which seems to bear fruit capsules of the opium poppy (Papaver Somniferum.) These are generally symbolic of sleep (hence Somniferum) – Keats, in his sonnet “To Sleep,” talks of the “lulling charities” of the opium poppy – but what they are doing here is not clear, unless the association is with the Sleep of Death, or, more speculatively, the Sleep of those, like the Mohammedan Doctor and Saint, who are unable or unwilling to recognise Christ. This is perhaps made more likely by the possibility of the Christian slant, as mentioned above in connection with Figs.2 and 2a. The poppies feature again in Figs.2r & 2s below. [The illustrations can be browsed here.]
Fig.2j is one of the most interesting of VJ’s illustrations, and by its location clearly refers to “the Master–knot of Human Fate” in the last line of quatrain 34. The skull to the lower left, the Masks of Comedy and Tragedy to the lower right, plus the vines with grapes, the vines interlinking all, are alike fairly clear in their intent, but what of the Anchor which dominates the design ? This must surely be the Christian Anchor of Hope which is grounded in Faith, derived from Hebrews 6.19, and a regular feature in the wall paintings of the catacombs. This is the strongest indication that there is some Christian slant in this interpretation of The Rubaiyat, though of course it is not dominant throughout. Note the monogram in the bottom right hand corner.
Fig.2k shows Omar drawing aside the Veil to reveal the Lamp he seeks in quatrain 37. The wording of this quatrain is not very clear, and this may have led VJ to misinterpret it. The meaning is made much clearer by quatrains 32 & 33 in FitzGerald’s first edition: there was a Veil past which Omar could not see, and, asking Destiny for a Lamp to guide him, he does not get any such guidance, and must settle for “a blind Understanding.” VJ’s illustration rather suggests he is about to get the Lamp of guidance, though I suppose his hand may be being held back by some unseen force.
Fig.2l is a fairly literal representation of quatrain 40, but what is Omar holding behind his back ? It looks like the pendulum out of a grandfather clock! One suggestion has been that it is some sort of device used in opium smoking, thus linking up with the poppies in Fig.2i above and Figs.2r & 2s below, but I could find no such implement. Another suggestion has been that it is a type of long–necked Persian wine–decanter, thus linking up with omnipresent wine of the quatrains, but though such decanters certainly existed, this doesn’t look very much like one! All in all, then, ‘the pendulum’ remains rather a mystery object. Note the monogram beneath the seated potter.
Fig.2m clearly shows two Tulips, one lifting up her chalice, the other wilting, and inverted like an empty Cup in accordance with the wording of quatrain 43.Note the monogram just below the drooping tulip.
Fig.2n is a fairly literal representation of quatrain 46, though the Angel has a curiously misty form.
Fig.2o is a fairly literal representation of quatrain 49, with a nominal Caravan in Annihilation’s Waste, and with the hint of an oasis (“Well of Life”) in the foreground.
Fig.2p is an unusual representation of quatrain 55, where the “Cypress–slender Minister of Wine” is not the usual female Saki, but a jug of wine. There appears to be a bunch of grapes on the little table.
Fig.2q seems to be a nod towards quatrains 60, 61 and 62 taken together – the Angel–delivered grapes and wine–cup which can befuddle the theologians of all sects, and scatter the leaden troubles of the Soul like the mighty Mahmud wielding his sword. The wine–cup has pseudo–Arabic characters around it, the central design on it possibly representing Sultan Mahmud “on his golden Throne” (from quatrain 11.) Note the monogram in the bottom right hand corner.
Fig.2r shows the shades of some of “the myriads who / Before us pass’d the door of Darkness through” of quatrain 67. Above the procession of the dead we have a similar procession of bats; and below, a similar procession of poppy capsules. The latter recall Fig.2i above, and surely here represent the Sleep of Death. The bat became associated with death through its fondness for living in caves, once regarded as entrances to the underworld, and in ancient tombs. In more modern times, of course, as nocturnal creatures of a sinister appearance, they have become associated with the evil vampire. Note the monogram in the bottom left hand corner.
Fig.2s shows the shades of “the Devout and Learn’d” of quatrain 68, returning to Sleep. Their Learning is represented by a heap of books and manuscripts, and Sleep by the three poppy capsules to the lower left (cf. Figs 2i & 2r above.) Note the monogram just below the end of the left hand side of the frame of the illustration.
Fig.2t is another rather literal and uninspiring illustration, this time of quatrain 78. Note the monogram on the horizon, at the extreme left.
Fig.2u shows two illustrations, both relating to quatrain 82, with the Vine on the left and the Dervish on the right. Both are fairly literal and rather uninspiring. There is possibly a monogram just to the right of the bottom of the circular surround of the latter.
Fig.2v illustrates quatrain 89, with Omar “within the Potter’s house alone.” There is possibly a monogram between 4 and 5 o’clock on the edge of the circular surround.
Fig.2w is a rather clumsy representation of the “peevish Boy” in quatrain 92, but then this is a difficult verse to illustrate – as quatrain 62 in FitzGerald’s first edition, Edmund J. Sullivan fell back on a similarly lack–lustre illustration, and Gordon Ross’s illustration of the same was only livened up with a Cat with its own Bowl of Joy!
Fig.2x clearly depicts the Vessels of quatrain 97, though without “the little Crescent all were seeking” and with no attempt to extract the potential humour of their speaking. As quatrain 66 in FitzGerald’s first edition both Edmund J. Sullivan and Gordon Ross had some fun with this verse (and indeed with the Potter’s Shop generally.)
Fig.2y appears to depict a rose bush from which both the Rose and the Nightingale have departed! This seems not unlike drawing a picture of an empty sitting room and titling it, “Resident gone out”, though it has to be admitted that the illustration actually is a literal representation of quatrain 104 !
Fig.2z is a literal illustration of the closing words of quatrain 110, “turn down an empty Glass!” There is perhaps a monogram at about 4 o’clock near the edge of the circular surround.
Various suggestions have been made in the foregoing regarding the presence in some of the illustrations of a possible Christian reaction to Omar’s agnosticism, and perhaps even to Islam, which might well have suited HRA’s religious views, if not VJ’s. But considered overall, how much evidence is there for this ? Since some 22 or 23 of the 28 illustrations are literal interpretations of their associated quatrains, with no Christian slant at all, the answer has to be: “not a great deal.” On the other hand, it is difficult to see the Anchor in Fig.2j as anything other than a symbol of Hope through Christ. Also, it is difficult to account for the presence of opium pods in Figs.2i, 2r & 2s except via the known evils of opium addiction, the drug being manufactured from the pods grown especially in the Middle East, the Lands of Islam. Likewise, the non–mainstream infants in Fig.2a merit some explanation, in Christian terms or otherwise. So, though VJ’s Rubaiyat illustrations taken together do not constitute a rebuttal of Omar’s agnosticism and the Islamic world in which he lived, the Christian Anchor of Hope and the presence of opium pods are certainly suggestive of something in that direction.
[The illustrations can be browsed here.]
As stated earlier, VJ seems to have illustrated no other books after the 1911 Allenson edition of The Rubaiyat. She was married two years after its publication, of course, and so like many another female artist back then, her career as an artist may well have given way to her roles as wife and mother. That she continued to paint as a hobby is clear from a few surviving pictures owned by Florent and his cousins. I give here four examples: Fig.3a, a rather neat study of an owl; Fig.3b, a fish; Fig.3c, a guinea–pig (a family pet); and Fig.3d, a spray of flowers. As regards this last, perhaps, recall the Study of Heather noted in the exhibition of the Art Teachers’ Guild in 1910, mentioned above.
These paintings are, of course, totally different in style to the Rubaiyat illustrations, so much so that one could be forgiven for thinking they were done by different artists. But then this is perhaps not so surprising when one considers that the paintings were done for amusement many years later than the commissioned Rubaiyat illustrations. I am reminded of that other Rubaiyat artist Doris M. Palmer who in later life, after doing numerous cartoons for Men Only magazine, went on to produce expressionist paintings relating to the Vietnam War !
**********
My thanks are due to Fred Diba, Joe Howard, Sandra Mason & Bill Martin, and Roger Paas for proof-reading this article and making various suggestions relating to it. Also to Florent Chayet and his cousin Marc Cayla, grandsons of VJ, for some background information and the art–work featured in Fig.3.
**********
To return to the Notes and Queries Index, click here.
To return to the Index of the Rubaiyat Archive, click here
.
