(British, 18th century)

Both titled,The Honble. John Hancock. of Boston in New-England; President of the American Congress. Done from an Original Picture Painted by Littleford, C. Shepherd (pseudonym), publisher, October 25, 1775, London; oval portrait, plate 13-7/8 x 10 in, standing, sheet 14-5/8 x 10-1/4 in.; one in a Perry Hopf reproduction frame, 17 x 13 x 1 in., the other in 18th century print frame, 17 x 13 x 1 in.

Provenance: Private New England Collection

Note: It is believed that the "Littleford" to whom the original portrait or portraits for both pieces are attributed is an invention on the part of the publisher, and that these mezzotints were done after a portrait of Hancock painted by John Singleton Copley. However, the resemblance between them and any extant portrait of Hancock by Copley is somewhat lacking, one prevailing inference being the engraver was only familiar with the original via word of mouth. Prints were made in this manner as a result of increased demand for depictions of these figures stemming from the outbreak of the Revolutionary War. The mystery of the painter of the original portrait is compounded by the fact that the name "C. Shepherd" appears on other engravings of Officers in the Revolutionary War that are believed to have not been published in London but in Augsburg, Germany, in this case most likely being another fictitious name. 

Literature: "As president of the Continental Congress in 1775, Hancock was newsworthy in both London and the colonies, and he was a tailor-made subject for the print publishers. Some entrepreneurs, like Shepherd in his anxiety to get the first prints on the street, were willing to supplement truth with a generous portion of fiction ... [On 25 October 1775 Shepherd] published this [portrait of Hancock ] ... holding a letter addressed to 'Monsieur Mons. Israel Putnam Maior General a Long-Island" (Fowble p.115). "Littleford" is evidently a fictitious artist's name, and the supposed model for this image is J.S. Copley's oil portrait of Hancock done from life in circa 1772-4. However, if Shepherd did have knowledge of Copley's portrait then it can only have been a verbal description as the resemblance between his print and the original is so loose. "In reality, Shepherd was not taking an appreciable risk that his fictitious version would be rejected by the market. Only the relatively few individuals who were personally acquainted with Hancock or who had enjoyed an opportunity to see Copley's portrait could have been any the wiser" (Fowble p. 115).

Fowble, Two Centuries of Prints in America 1680-1880, 63; Russell ENA III.6; Smith, John Chaloner, British Mezzotinto Portraits III.5.