Tudor woman of 16th century painted with one reptilian eye

[shamanseeker]

Now, this is really interesting. A woman painted in the 16th century has one eye that is human and one eye which is very obviously reptilian. In light of my Celtic thread, I was looking for the origins of the Tudors. Where did they come from and when did they appear in Wales? I was surprised to find this portrait of a high-born lady. See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00pq8s7 Unfortunately the video is not working but you can see the woman's face when you click onto the site for a very short while. When I found it the first time, it didn't disappear so quickly. I've found the portrait now and she was called 'the mother of Wales (there is an explanation below).

"She is sometimes referred to as Katheryn Tudor, her father being Tudor ap Robert Vychan[1] and her mother Jane Velville. Her maternal grandfather Sir Roland de Velville (1474 - 25 June 1535), is said to have been a natural son of King Henry VII of England by a Breton lady.[2] Katheryn, who is said to have been a ward of queen Elizabeth, was the heiress to the Berain and Penymynydd estates in Denbighshire and Anglesey." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katheryn_of_Berain

"KATHERYN of BERAIN (‘ Catrin o'r Berain ’ , 1534/5 - 1591 ), ‘ Mam Cymru ’ (‘ The mother of Wales ’). Born in 1534/5 , Katheryn was the daughter of Tudur ap Robert Vychan of Berain, Denbs. , by his wife Jane , daughter of Sir Roland Velville (d. 1527 ), a natural son of Henry VII , whom Henry made constable of Beaumaris castle . Katheryn , who is said to have been a ward of queen Elizabeth , ultimately acquired by mortgage Penmynydd in Anglesey . She was m. four times: (1) to JOHN SALUSBURY , son and heir of Sir John Salusbury of Llewenni (the settlement deed is dated 11 Feb. 1556/7 ). They had two sons ( a ) Thomas (b. probably 1564 ) and ( b ) John (b. 1565 or 1566 ); John d. 1566 , before his father; (2) in 1567 to Sir Richard Clough (q.v.) ; she went with Clough to Antwerp , where he was concerned in business for Sir Thomas Gresham . It is said that Maurice Wynn of Gwydir proposed to her as he led her from the church after her first husband's funeral, but she refused as she had already accepted Sir Richard on the way to church, promising, however, ‘that in case she performed the same sad duty (which she was then about) to the knight , he might depend on being the third’ ( T. Pennant , Tours in Wales , 1810 ed., ii, 146-7)."
http://yba.llgc.org.uk/en/s-CATR-BER-1534.html

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQnPzKDiCHHRwbKv_IymZClumFWeQza4 ZZCNGndtc-6sBjeto9jBw

"Catrin Berain was the most powerful and wealthy woman in Tudor Wales. Rental income made her very wealthy - owning about 3,000 acres brought in a very substantial annual income.
Catrin nurtured her wealth and increased her influence through four strategic marriages. She had six children and numerous step-children, which is why she is known as Mam Cymru because those children went on to marry further into gentry families.
The record of pedigrees and rental deeds tells us little of Catrin the woman. There is a suggestion there that she is quite clever at manipulating the men around her. These kinds of traditions and legends would have really defined people’s image of Catrin."

"Welsh heiress, granddaughter of an illegitimate son of Henry VII of England, she contracted four profitable marriages and had so many children, step-children, grandchildren (32), and other descendants that she has been dubbed "The Mother of Wales"."
http://familypedia.wikia.com/wiki/Catrin_of_Berain_(1534-1591)

Here is another portrait of this sinister woman caressing a skull:

http://static1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100521102357/genealogy/images/thumb/2/29/Catrin_o_Ferain.jpg/174px-Catrin_o_Ferain.jpg

[Spiral]

I had a shufty on google images & this was the biggest one I could find, it definitely is painted like that !

The chain & skull are very sinister, all that stuff (props etc.) has a meaning & language of its own, they are never just decoration, any art historians out there ?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/Adriaen_of_Cronenburgh,_Katheryn_of_Berain.jpg

[KosmicKat]

The skull is typically a memento mori, a reminder of mortality,1 but given it's place in this picture and her pose, caressing it I would suggest that the most credible explanation is that it was included as a tribute to her first husband.2 The book: probably a book of hours, but the girdle is the most curious part, to my eye. Their is a peculiar link which looks as if it is attached to her finger, and is not properly formed, although all the other details in the picture are impeccably rendered.


Very popular with Dutch painters who liked to contrast the permanent bone with the impermanent flower, or an insect.
For anyone concerned, it is probably a 'prop' skull, added by the artist. Belief at the time was that an incomplete body could not be resurrected.

[Wolf Khan]

Unless we have all the facts about the chain & skull we can only speculate as to what is meant in this painting, until we are art historians we cant know for sure what the dark is trying to say here.

[Spiral]

The following are lost posts from google archive, to save time & effort I will only post the ones about the portrait & the Lady in it, The name in bold is the author of the post


Frances

She is a very beautiful woman, strong and knows her own mind. She has a reason to be portrayed in that strong manner.
The Matriarch.
Frances.

[Spiral]

Sooz

Absolutely fascinating!

I find her wearing a ring on her forefinger quite unusual for that age. I thought that was a modern fashion thing.

I wonder what the symbolism is? I've always thought intuitively, if a woman wears a ring on her forefinger it is attributed to a forceful and dominant personality, not wanting to be a conformist in a traditional female way. Making a statement so to speak.

Obviously so in this case to my way of thinking.

Sooz

[Spiral]

KosmicKat
The skull is typically a memento mori, a reminder of mortality,1 but given it's place in this picture and her pose, caressing it I would suggest that the most credible explanation is that it was included as a tribute to her first husband.2 The book: probably a book of hours, but the girdle is the most curious part, to my eye. Their is a peculiar link which looks as if it is attached to her finger, and is not properly formed, although all the other details in the picture are impeccably rendered.

1 Very popular with Dutch painters who liked to contrast the permanent bone with the impermanent flower, or an insect.
2 For anyone concerned, it is probably a 'prop' skull, added by the artist. Belief at the time was that an incomplete body could not be resurrected.


Originally Posted by Sooz
Absolutely fascinating!

I find her wearing a ring on her forefinger quite unusual for that age. I thought that was a modern fashion thing.

I wonder what the symbolism is? I've always thought intuitively, if a woman wears a ring on her forefinger it is attributed to a forceful and dominant personality, not wanting to be a conformist in a traditional female way. Making a statement so to speak.

Obviously so in this case to my way of thinking.

Sooz

The painting looks like one done with a lens, maybe the chain under her hand was too dark because its all messed up, not only is she not holding it but the links don't make sense.

There is another painting on google images under the same name (on the search) that has a very similar looking woman with very similar rings ????

http://img12.nnm.ru/imagez/gallery/0/2/c/2/e/02c2ed6921641665fd636ca0afdf61f4.jpg

[Spiral]

Shamanseeker


Originally Posted by Sooz
Absolutely fascinating!

I find her wearing a ring on her forefinger quite unusual for that age. I thought that was a modern fashion thing.

I wonder what the symbolism is? I've always thought intuitively, if a woman wears a ring on her forefinger it is attributed to a forceful and dominant personality, not wanting to be a conformist in a traditional female way. Making a statement so to speak.

Obviously so in this case to my way of thinking.

Sooz

Hi Sooz,
The Elizabethans did wear rings on their forefingers - it was very fashionable then. I believe she was a very strong woman, though. It was her mission I believe to produce as many heirs with strong reptilian genes as possible, especially in Wales. This was an infiltration into Celtic Wales and this was why she was called the 'Mother of Wales' imo.

Hi Spiral,
Thanks for enlarging the second portrait of Catrin. I hadn't noticed that she had a reptilian eye in that one, too. I thought they were throwing it in our face that she was a reptilian though I imagine that in the 16th century only the rich with the 'right' bloodlines would have seen this portrait. I'm wondering now if it's that, i.e. a message that she was half human and half reptilian or whether she really did have so much reptilian blood that she actually had one eye that was always reptilian without shapeshifting. When I was researching to see if Kate Middleton was royal or not (she is by the way) I discovered that both Sarah Ferguson and Sophie Rhys-Jones (Prince Edward's wife) are Tudors. Interestingly, I read on David Icke's site that Prince Edward and Sophie Rhyss-Jones have a daughter whose eyes often look sideways instead of ahead and she is rarely seen in public. Is this because Sophie Rhyss-Jones has such a high percentage of Reptilian blood?

[Spiral]

Malc

Check out Elizabeth 1 below,She could definitely pass as a bloke lol

Interesting story though i am only posting this due to some similarities to reptilian with the serpent

As many a courtier fatally found out, it was never a good idea to displease the Virgin Queen.Which may explain why an artist carried out some serious alterations to his first draft portrait of Elizabeth I back in the 16th century.Where he had drawn the Queen clutching a serpent, the painter had second thoughts and substituted a much more feminine bunch of roses.

If looks could kill lol

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/04/article-1255466-08907257000005DC-724_638x872.jpg


Revealed once more: The image of a snake has appeared in a 16th century portrait of Queen Elizabeth I. A faint outline of the coils can be seen superimposed on her hand, while the serpent's body, - seen as dark shading - follows the line of the flowers she is holding and also passes beneath her fingers

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/04/article-1255466-08911BDD000005DC-295_308x419.jpg

What lay beneath: An artist's impression of what the snake may have looked like, left, and an infra-red image of the altered design. A serpent was sometimes used to reflect wisdom but they are also linked to notions of Satan and original sin



The revisions would have remained a mystery had it not been for the ravages of time.For yesterday, the National Portrait Gallery revealed how the image of the coiled snake had re-appeared.
Deterioration over the centuries has meant the serpent depicted in the Tudor monarch's fingers in the original version has revealed itself once more, with its outline now visible on the surface. The portrait was created by an unknown artist in the 1580s or early 1590s. The image has not been on display at the London gallery since 1921 but it will form part of an exhibition titled Concealed and Revealed: The Changing Faces of Elizabeth I, from March 13 to September 26.A serpent was sometimes used to reflect wisdom, prudence and reasoned judgment, but the scaly creatures are also linked to notions of Satan and original sin. The gallery suggested the snake's removal may have been due to the ambiguity of the emblem. An artist's impression has been created of what the snake could have looked like, with infra-red technology revealing the changes in the initial design. A statement from the gallery said: 'The snake is mainly black but has greenish blue scales and was almost certainly painted from imagination.' The image of the monarch covers a portrait of another woman, whose identity is unknown. The gallery believes the unfinished portrait was by a different painter, showing how 16th century panels were sometimes recycled by artists.

I think they were all practicing in the dark side of things

[Spiral]

I think they were all practicing in the dark side of things
That is definitely not a snake, its a serpent all right, look at the head, it also has no pattern or changes in colouration unlike Adders etc, in fact it hasn't even got scales !

[Spiral]

KosmicKat


Originally Posted by Malc
Check out Elizabeth 1 below,She could definitely pass as a bloke lol
There is a conspiracy theory, not given much credit in professional circles of course, that princess Elizabeth died, possibly as a plague victim, during the reign of her merciless sister "Bloody" Mary, and a substitute had to be found in haste to secure the lives of the luckless minor nobles charged with her care and containment.

There is, also, something, heard long ago while I was dozing through a lecture, about the tradition of calling her not only Gloriana, but Oriana, which was related to her "inability to receive a man".

On the subject of fingers and rings, this site (http://jewelry.lovetoknow.com/What_Is_the_Meaning_of_Each_Finger_for_Rings) has a section on palmistry, which might, or might not be relevant. I believe the serious study of palmistry began in the Victorian period, but may have been built on older traditions.

[Spiral]

Shamanseeker

Thanks Spiral! In response to 'she certainly had a lot of husbands' I was thinking earlier today that she could have killed all the other husbands Another thing that I was thinking was that maybe she had a lot of husbands so she could produce children of different reptilian lines.

I read that Prince Harry's possible future wife, Cressida Bonas' mother was married four times and had a daughter from each marriage. Apparently, during the period when he'd finished with Kate, William had gone out with Richard Branson's daughter who must be Cressida's half-sister because it was reported in an Italian magazine that Kate was very annoyed that Cressida might marry Harry as her half-sister had gone out with William and she didn't want her in the 'family circle'.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/10/16/article-2463162-1875137900000578-756_634x483.jpg

The couple were snapped together on a string of dates earlier this month when they attended a James Blunt concert and a performance of musical The Book Of Mormon.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2lI6K96sa

[Spiral]

Is it me, or has she ^ got exactly the same nose as Catrin Berain ????

Noses are one of the best signs of "bloodlines" & shared DNA.

[Spiral]

Shamanseeker

It's similar though I think Cressida's is prettier. She is younger, though! It would be interesting to see if she comes from a Tudor bloodline. I shall have a look!



've just had time today to have a quick look at Cressida's mother's line which is very 'important' indeed although I didn't find any mention of the Tudor line.

I found the following from the Daily Mirror. I've also seen this on more important geneological threads. I'm posting this because The Daily Mail an Mirror are receiving a lot of criticism lately. OK, they aren't the most serious of papers and do stir people up inappropriately. However, they are letting people know lately about a lot of things that the 'more serious' papers will not print. I wouldn't be surprised if the journalists of these papers eventually let people know what's really going on. This journalist is talking about David Icke and what he claims about bloodlines and then showing that he's right. He's also suggesting that professional geneologists take a look because it isn't healthy for all these people to be inter-marrying! He's right to ask them to do this because it's all very confusing and it is a case of Royal Incest as is stated in one of the links.

"‘Bloodline’ is one of the themes I have discussed on*‘Merovee’*and it maybe, we are seeing another inter-linked relationship .*The mother of Cressida Bonas is Lady Mary Gaye Curzon, who has had an eventful love life – five children from four divorced husbands . Lady Mary Gaye is a member of an aristocratic British family, Curzon – Howe .

Lady Mary-Gaye Georgiana Lorna Curzon was born on 21 February 1947. She is the daughter of Edward Richard Assheton Penn Curzon, 6th Earl Howe and Grace Lilian Barker Wakeling. She married, firstly, Kevin Esmond Peter Cooper-Key, son of Major Sir Edmund McNeill Cooper-Key and Hon. Lorna Peggy Vyvyan Harmsworth, on 18 December 1971. She and Kevin Esmond Peter Cooper-Key were divorced in 1976.2 She married, secondly, John Austen Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe, son of Sir Richard Hamilton Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe, 2nd Bt. and Nancy Moireach Malcolmson, on 27 May 1977 at Kensington Registry Office, Kensington, London, England. She and John Austen Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe were divorced in 1986. She married, thirdly, Jeffrey Bonas, son of Harry Bonas, in 1988. She and Jeffrey Bonas were divorced in 1994. She married, fourthly, Christopher Shaw on 17 December 1996. She and Christopher Shaw were divorced.

And surprise, surprise Prince Harry is also a member of the Curzon–Howe family through his mother, Princess Diana.
Leicester Charles Assheton St John Curzon-Howe (1894–1941) was a Captain in the Royal Navy. Lady Mary Anna Curzon, only daughter of the second marriage of the first Earl, married James Hamilton, 2nd Duke of Abercorn.*Their granddaughter Lady Cynthia Hamilton married Albert Spencer, 7th Earl Spencer, and was the grandmother of Diana, Princess of Wales.*

I don’t have the inclination to work out the various permutations of the Curzon–Howe family tree and how close the ‘Bloodline’ relationship is between Prince Harry and Cressida Bonas but it may be a good idea if an expert in genealogy, did so.*The resulting children of a too close blood connection can have serious problems . At best, the children may have no chins and sticky out ears, and a penchant for racist gaffes – click*Huffington Post*and at worst, major physical or mental defects – click*‘The Queen’s Hidden Cousins’."

http://merovee.wordpress.com/2010/08...n-are-cousins/

‘Bloodline’ is one of the themes I have discussed on*‘Merovee’*and it maybe, we are seeing another inter-linked relationship .*The mother of Cressida Bonas is Lady Mary Gaye Curzon, who has had an eventful love life – five children from four divorced husbands . Lady Mary Gaye is a member of an aristocratic British family, Curzon – Howe .

Lady Mary-Gaye Georgiana Lorna Curzon was born on 21 February 1947. She is the daughter of Edward Richard Assheton Penn Curzon, 6th Earl Howe and Grace Lilian Barker Wakeling. She married, firstly, Kevin Esmond Peter Cooper-Key, son of Major Sir Edmund McNeill Cooper-Key and Hon. Lorna Peggy Vyvyan Harmsworth, on 18 December 1971. She and Kevin Esmond Peter Cooper-Key were divorced in 1976.2 She married, secondly, John Austen Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe, son of Sir Richard Hamilton Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe, 2nd Bt. and Nancy Moireach Malcolmson, on 27 May 1977 at Kensington Registry Office, Kensington, London, England. She and John Austen Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe were divorced in 1986. She married, thirdly, Jeffrey Bonas, son of Harry Bonas, in 1988. She and Jeffrey Bonas were divorced in 1994. She married, fourthly, Christopher Shaw on 17 December 1996. She and Christopher Shaw were divorced.

And surprise, surprise Prince Harry is also a member of the Curzon – Howe family through his mother, Princess Diana .
Leicester Charles Assheton St John Curzon-Howe (1894–1941) was a Captain in the Royal Navy. Lady Mary Anna Curzon, only daughter of the second marriage of the first Earl, married James Hamilton, 2nd Duke of Abercorn.*Their granddaughter Lady Cynthia Hamilton married Albert Spencer, 7th Earl Spencer, and was the grandmother of Diana, Princess of Wales.*

I don’t have the inclination to work out the various permutations of the Curzon – Howe family tree and how close the ‘Bloodline’ relationship is between Prince Harry and Cressida Bonas but it may be a good idea if an expert in genealogy, did so .*The resulting children of a too close blood connection can have serious problems . At best, the children may have no chins and sticky out ears, and a penchant for racist gaffes – click*Huffington Post*and at worst, major physical or mental defects – click*‘The Queen’s Hidden Cousins’*.

http://merovee.wordpress.com/2010/08...n-are-cousins/

http://merovee.wordpress.com/2013/02...-royal-incest/

P.S. I was looking through William's direct ancestors and came across this:

William (Sir) MAXWELL**(1715? - 1771 Edinburgh) ; *3rd Baronet of MONREITH*
**847:***Magdalen (of Blair) BLAIR**(? - 1765) ; *(Madeline)*
http://fabpedigree.com/willa1.htm


All they tell us about her father is the following: Cressy's mum (the daughter of the late Earl Howe) and her father, Jeffrey Bonas, were married for six years, but famously naughty Mary-Gaye has had three other husbands and four other children. She won't go to Ascot without her mobile kitchen. Old Harrovian and twice-married businessman Jeffrey is chairman of old-fashioned haberdashers MacCulloch & Wallis but spends his days researching local history at home in Norfolk. And playing golf. It would be interesting to know where the MacCullochs and Wallises came from (apart from Scotland, i.e. :P).

It would appear that one of her sisters married Branson's son after a relationship with William. But I'm confused because William was said to have gone out with Branson's daughter when he separated from Kate before they were engaged - so I'm confused

[Spiral]

Blimey !

I'm tempted to post Monty Pythons "Upper class twit of the year".




UPDATE;

Thats all I can find.