
Gold brooch surrounded by a rope of brown hair (ca. 1835), an example of a short-lived craze in England.
King George IV of England was a pretty wild youth, and when he clapped eyes on one commoner that he knew he would never be authorized to marry, he sent her a picture of his love-at-first-sight eye. She sent an eye picture back. They married in secret, a marriage later abandoned.
But England was left with one of those nutty crazes for which it is is well known.
“Lover’s eyes” became a thing. The fact that they were worn close to the heart on lockets and pendants makes me wonder if the antique-locket side of Suzanne’s jewelry business, Luna & Stella, might have come across any.
Lauren Moya Ford reports at Hyperallergic on a new book about a collection of the mysterious miniatures.
“From the moment the Prince of Wales (later, King George IV of England) laid eyes on Maria Firtzherbert at the London opera in 1784, he knew it was love. But Fitzherbert, a Catholic, twice-widowed commoner, knew that British law would never allow their union. She fled to France to escape the future king’s ardor, but Fitzherbert’s absence only inflamed the prince more. In his passion, he sent Fitzherbert a miniature portrait of one of his eyes. She reciprocated with her own eye miniature, and one month later, the two were married in a secret ceremony. The scandalous tale of love at first sight set off a craze for eye miniatures across England that would stretch for nearly four decades.
“A new book, Lover’s Eyes: Eye Miniatures from the Skier Collection (D Giles Limited, 2021) edited by Elle Shushan, features a richly illustrated cache of over 130 of these bejeweled, hand-painted treasures. Eye miniatures are typically made of painstakingly detailed watercolors on polished pieces of ivory, and surrounded by carved gems, enameled metals, and human hair. These exquisite, enigmatic objects are frequently unsigned, making the majority unattributable to a single artist, and because they depict only a single eye and sometimes a stray lock of hair or eyebrow, the sitter’s identity is also often obscured. …
“Most lovers’ eyes were worn as jewelry, especially on brooches, lockets, and pendants worn close to the heart. Others decorated small functional boxes and etuis used to hold toothpicks, false beauty marks, and other trinkets. Most eye miniatures were exchanged between lovers, though they were also given to close friends and family members. Others were produced as memorial tokens after a loved one’s death. In this case, the eye is often surrounded by clouds to symbolize the subject’s ascent from earth.
“But it wasn’t just the eye itself that carried meaning in these small portraits. An essay by art historian Graham C. Boettcher explains the messages conveyed by the miniatures’ accompanying diamonds, coral, and other gemstones. Pearls, for example, symbolized purity but also tears, and often framed the portraits of the deceased, while garnets represented friendship.
“Another essay by Shusan details the ways that eye miniature artists utilized the language of flowers, or floriography, in their work. For example, a miniature thought to be the eye of Mary Sarah Fox surrounded by foxgloves may be a play on the sitter’s last name, but could also connect the sitter to the energy, magic, and cunning that the flower was then considered to represent. In addition to eyes, some miniatures also featured locks of the sitter’s hair, another fragment of a beloved body to be captured and cherished by the miniature’s owner forever.
“Although the king later abandoned Fitzherbert for a more legitimate marriage, he requested to be buried with her eye miniature placed directly over his heart upon his death. In this way, he took a piece of his lover — and her watchful gaze — with him to the grave. …
“Lover’s Eyes: Eye Miniatures from the Skier Collection, edited by Elle Shushan and published by D Giles Limited, is available on Bookshop.”
Photos showing an array of these mementos may be seen at Hyperallergic, here.
I am not sure if that is cool or creepy. I am leaning towards creepy.
LOL. You’re thinking Edgar Allan Poe could do something with this concept?
Possibly Edgar Allan Poe, but I would be probably be freaked out if I opened a gift from my husband and it was one of his eyeballs staring at me. Even if it was a picture of one of his eyeballs.
I certainly learned something I didn’t know. Never heard of eye miniatures. To me, they look a little creepy, as though they should be in a fantasy story. H-m-m-m…
There are great imaginative possibilities.
Oh, yes!