"The old Countess of Desmond, who had danced with Richard, declared he was the handsomest man in the room except his brother Edward, and was very well made."
This last anecdote of Walpole's is taken from an account which I certainly have seen and read, but the name of the authority I cannot now recollect, which stated that the Countess actually outlived the "trust term for securing her jointure" (a period generally of ninety-nine years from the date of marriage), "and was obliged in her old age to appear in a court of justice to establish her rights; and that it was there and then she delivered Walpole's anecdote to the judge and audience." All these different yet concurring testimonies seem satisfactorily to establish the fact that there was a Countess of Desmond "passing old."
Then, as to her celebrated picture, of which I have frequently seen the original on wood, in possession of the "Right Hon. Maurice Fitzgerald, Knight of Kerry," and have now a print before me, there are some particulars and questions which may interest your readers.
The print (same size as the original) is a mezzo-tint, ten inches by seven inches and a half, and has under it the following inscription:
"CATHERINE FITZGERALD (the long-lived) COUNTESS OF DESMOND, from an original Family Picture of the same size, painted on Board, in the possession of the Right Honorable Maurice Fitzgerald, Knight of Kerry, &c. &c. &c., to whom this plate is most respectfully dedicated by her very obedient and much obliged humble servant, HENRY PELHAM.
"This illustrious lady was born about the year 1464, and was married in the reign of Edward IV., lived during the reigns of Edward V., Richard III., Henry VII., Henry VIII., Edward VI., Mary, and Elizabeth, and died in the latter end of James I., or beginning of Charles I.'s reign, at the great age (as is generally supposed) of 162 years. Published as the Act directs, at Bear Island, June 4, 1806. By Henry Pelham, Esq."
In this print the features are large and strongly marked; the forehead and upper part of the nose deeply wrinkled, the head covered with a large full black hood, showing no hair whatever about the face; the person wrapped in a dark cloak, held by a single button over the breast. As some of your correspondents speak of portraits of this lady at Knowle (Vol. iii., p. 341.), Bedgebury, and Penshurst, it may be useful to compare them with this description, for the following reason.
Horace Walpole, whose "mission" seems to have been to raise "Historic Doubts," in a letter to Rev. Mr. Cole, dated May 28, 1774, has the following sentence:
"Mr. Pennant has given a new edition of his former Tour, with more cuts: among others is the vulgar head called the Countess of Desmond. I told him I had discovered, and proved past contradiction, that it is Rembrandt's mother. He owned it, and said he would correct it by a note: but he has not. This is a brave way of being an antiquary: as if there could be any merit in giving for genuine what one knows to be spurious."
This is a very teasing passage. I have no copy of Pennant's Tour by me; nor do I recollect ever to have seen one with the print here referred to. Probably some of your numerous correspondents will find one, and inform us, whether the print in it resembles the description I have given. It is not at all probable that Pennant's "cut" was copied from the Knight of Kerry's picture: but if it was copied from any of those mentioned by your correspondents; and if these be duplicates of the Knight of Kerry's "family portrait;" and if Horace Walpole's cruel criticism on Mr. Pennant be correct—then have we all been shamed with a sham. These are a considerable number of ifs, upon which this conclusion depends; but in one thing Walpole is correct: "there is no merit in giving for genuine what one knows to be spurious."