The queen isn’t smiling, but the owners of her portrait are

Roanoke island, N.C.

Until recently, an oil painting of Queen Elizabeth I had been hanging, unprotected and barely noticed, in the gift shop at The Elizabethan Gardens gatehouse.

It is believed that the portrait was painted in 1592, when Elizabeth would have been about 60 years old. It is one of the few portraits of the queen in her declining years.

If it is authentic, it could be worth millions.

“Certainly, paintings of Elizabeth are pretty sought-after,” said Christopher Apostle, senior vice president and director of old master paintings at Sotheby’s in New York. “It would be valuable.”

The earliest known full-length image of the monarch, who died in 1603, sold at Sotheby’s in London on Nov. 22 for more than $5.3 million, Apostle said.

But there’s no telling what the true worth is of the dignified depiction of the older Elizabeth that’s in Manteo. Although it has not been rigorously tested, no one has yet challenged that the painting is from the 16th century.

Anna Riehl, assistant professor of English at Auburn University, said that from her review of a digital photograph, the gardens’ Elizabeth painting would appear to be from the studio of Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger. The studio is responsible for the famed Ditchley Portrait, a huge painting, circa 1592, of the queen displayed at the National Portrait Gallery in London.

“The portrait in Manteo is a variance of that famous portrait,” Riehl said in a telephone interview from Alabama.

Riehl, who is writing a book, “The Face of Power: Early Modern Representations of Elizabeth I,” said that the jewelry, the “splendid ruff” and the shoulder veil are similar to the Ditchley. Variances were often made by the same studio, she said, using patterns it had available from the same subject.

“Most importantly, the facial features are very similar,” Riehl said. “The Manteo portrait, however, puts forth a much more aged countenance. The face is leaner, and wrinkles ripple from the queen’s mouth. It’s definitely an unflattering realism in this portrait.”

For that reason, Riehl said, the vain Elizabeth – who was known to destroy paintings that did not flatter her – most likely never saw the Manteo portrait.

“It may have been commissioned by one of her wealthy subjects,” she said. “It is a very little-known portrait. It was thrilling to discover it.”

The impetus for taking a closer look at the painting was a presentation Riehl is giving today at the gardens as part of an East Carolina University symposium. She has studied not only the queen’s portraits, but what others said about her appearance.

One example she cited was a German traveler to the English court, who described the queen’s face as “oblong, fair, but wrinkled; her eyes small, yet black and pleasant; her nose a little hooked; her lips narrow, and her teeth black.”

About 150 paintings of Elizabeth are known to have been done during her lifetime, Riehl said. Of those, about a dozen are in the United States. The youngest depiction was as a princess at about age 14, and the oldest was in her late 60s.

The Manteo painting’s provenance – tracing it to its original owner – is a mystery.

“Since we do not have full documentation on the provenance of the portrait, there will need to be fuller examination of the portrait, its paints, its underneath surface, and other data that can be gleaned from careful analysis,” East Carolina University history professor Larry Tise said in an e-mail.

The Elizabethan Gardens, founded and supported by the Garden Club of North Carolina, opened in 1960 as a tribute to the 1584- 87 English voyagers who came to Roanoke Island. The final voyage was the ill-fated Lost Colony – 117 men, women and children last seen in August 1587.

Horace Whitfield, the gardens’ executive director, said that the portrait, along with various antiques, was acquired at a New York auction house in the 1950s by Mrs. Charles Cannon, one of the gardens’ first benefactors. It has recently been returned by the North Carolina Museum of History, where it had been on loan for an exhibit about The Lost Colony.

Whitfield said that tight finances have hindered proper care and evaluation of the gardens’ antiquities, which also include Renaissance statuary and 16th-and 17th-century engravings and furniture. The Elizabeth I painting had been insured for $30,000, he said, but the gardens are seeking funds for an updated professional appraisal.

Meanwhile, he said, when the “remarkable” Elizabeth is put back on display in the gatehouse, there will be a new appreciation of the unsmiling visage of the Virgin Queen.

“I think that’s a struggle we all have,” Whitfield said. “We don’t see the value of what’s in front of us.”

Catherine Kozak, (252) 441-1711, cate.kozak@pilotonline.com