I think royal portraits do not symbolize the actual characteristics of a ruler. Rather, they were just generic and implied majesty and power. In the Royal collection, a collection of royal portraits ranging from visual to decorative arts appear in the form of photography, prints, paintings, sculpture and ceramics. At the beginning of the sixteenth century, the royal portraits have been used to depict the image of a certain royalty. Besides, some artists create some portraits in favour of the people in power and therefore, judging the originality and the reality of these portraits become a challenge. However, Bomford said, “But with the Tudors, we begin to get the accurate portraits-actual likeness of real people”.
Royal portraits are created without the knowledge of the person in power, showing how the public sees the person. For example, on the chart of Arts and Rulers, portraits of various prominent leaders are enlisted. Among them is Marie- Antoinette and her children. The painting is designed to explain her various aspects. Surrounded by children, it is a clear symbol that she is a loving mother, and it shows the reality of how a mother is caring to her children. Also, there is a pillow on her feet that symbolizes power and majesty. However, her portrait exaggerates her appearance as compared to her real look.
Another iconic portrait on the Art and rulers chapter is Abraham Lincoln and his son Thomas. The portrait communicates a lot on first sight. As seen in the painting, Abraham Lincoln is seated while his son leaning on a table looking at him. Also, there is a book on the table. Hence, the presence of his son and a book on the portrait implies that he was a normal man despite his social status. Besides, it can be concluded that he provided support as we note on the son’s confidence. However, the sitting posture on the portrait might lure someone to conclude that Abraham Lincoln was a calm person. In real life, he was tough and strict and therefore, the posture betrays the reality.
Elizabeth I portrait is also found in the chapter on Art and rulers named as “Armada portrait”. Done by George Gower, the painting gives a lot of information and imagination about the ruler. First, she is seen placing her hand on the globe, therefore, indicating the level of power and influence on the world. Behind, is a crown placed on a table implying her majesty as a queen. However, the background on the portrait with army chariots indicates chaos and war during her era. Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth 1 was known to be a calm ruler; hence painting war chariots on her portrait would taint her image. Also, her dress code on the picture does not idealize the ruler’s appearance as a queen.
Lastly, we find the iconic portrait of George Washington on the Art and Rulers chapter. Seated on a majestic chair and holding a sword is a sign of peace. Also, the painting is a summary of his guiding ideals, justice, moderation and brave characteristics during his tenure as a ruler. It idealizes the moral character of George Washington, who tried to live by his own words and principles. The ruler’s moral character enabled him to offer a leadership role to his troops through times of war. In conclusion, royal portraits do not really tell how a ruler looked like because some are prone exaggeration and might favour the sitting rulers and their monarchs.