The mystery of Jane Austen's true likeness
Do you know what Jane Austen looked like?
There is lots of controversy surrounding the true likeness of Jane Austen. As a girl growing up in Chawton, the heart of my fifth great aunt Jane Austen’s legacy, I have my own image of Jane in my mind, like so many of us do.
There has since been a lot of claims and speculation. This is the truth.
Since its creation, this portrait has been the most widely recognized image of Jane Austen, despite being painted 53 years after her death.
Jane’s nephew, James Edward Austen-Leigh, commissioned the painting by James Andrews based on a drawing by Jane’s sister, Cassandra, for his biography A Memoir of Jane Austen, published in 1869.
This image captured the imagination of Jane’s readers and inspired her depiction on the Bank of England ten-pound note.
Cassandra’s sketch, now housed at The National Portrait Gallery, is the only undisputed portrait of Jane Austen’s face. Cassandra herself said it was not a good likeness of Jane, but was she just being modest? Although Cassandra was a talented artist, she wasn’t practiced in portraits.
James Andrew’s portrait is a much-prettified version of Cassandra’s sketch and, given Cassandra's doubts about her own drawing, it cannot be considered a true likeness.
There are various portraits claimed to be of Jane, but none have been authenticated by the National Portrait Gallery. The most well-known and polarizing is The Rice Portrait.
Having listened to the compelling arguments and evidence that it is Jane, I think it could very well be her. However, rumors suggest that despite their own (failed) attempts to purchase The Rice Portrait in the 1930s, the NPG won’t authenticate The Rice Portrait to preserve the uniqueness of Cassandra’s sketch, which they subsequently purchased and display as the only undisputed portrait of Jane Austen.
I know nothing about authenticating portraits or the inner workings of the National Portrait Gallery, so I am in no position to dispute their declaration that The Rice Portrait cannot be authenticated as Jane Austen, nor to believe allegations that the NPG , a world respected authority on portraits, has deliberately stood in its way.
What I do know is that so much doubt has been cast in both directions, it seems hard to imagine we will ever know the truth about The Rice Portrait beyond any doubt. If it is Jane Austen, then this is a tragedy.
In 2016, Melissa Dring combined her skills as a professional portrait painter and police forensic artist to create a new portrait of Jane Austen.
Trained at the Royal Academy Schools, London, and by the FBI in Washington, USA, Melissa’s portrait of Jane Austen is the only 'forensic' attempt to recreate an accurate picture of Jane Austen as an adult during the Regency period.
A full-size waxwork, subsequently made and displayed at the Jane Austen Centre in Bath, was a collaboration between sculptor Mark Richards and Melissa Dring.
In 2021, celebrity silhouettist Charles Burns created a new silhouette of Jane Austen from the waxwork, exclusively for the Jane Austen Literacy Foundation, to raise money for literacy projects. The silhouette is available as a personalized bookplate with your (or a friend’s) name in Jane Austen’s handwriting, click HERE for more information.
There are a few statues of Jane in the UK, each reflecting the sculptor’s impression of her face. This statue of Jane Austen stands on a plinth in the churchyard just in front of Chawton House. Unveiled on 9th June 2018, it is a half-size replica of the statue in Basingstoke, cast by the same sculptor, Adam Roud.
The statue commissioned by Winchester Cathedral, Jane’s final resting place, to commemorate her 250th birthday in 2025, has fueled another round of discussion and debate about how Jane’s face is depicted.
So, what do we know? Based on descriptions by those who knew Jane, we know she had:
Height and stature: Described as having a "stature of true elegance," meaning she was of a graceful height, not too tall but perfectly proportioned.
Complexion: Described as "of the finest texture," suggesting she had smooth, clear skin.
Rosy cheeks: Descriptions mention her cheeks were "a little too full," indicating a healthy, rosy complexion.
Cheerful expression: Her features were "separately good," but together they produced an "unrivalled expression of cheerfulness, sensibility, and benevolence."
Warm brown eyes and hair: Long brown hair and hazel eyes, noted for their expressiveness and warmth.
But, in the absence of a reliable portrait and with photography not yet invented, the truth is that we don’t know, beyond a general description, exactly what Jane Austen looked like.
We can’t gaze into her eyes and know we are looking at a true likeness. Every artist is free to use their imagination, as we all are.
And I think there’s something beautifully poetic about that.
Jane gave only the briefest description of Mr. Darcy, the most popular literary romantic hero of all time, leaving readers to imagine the man they wanted him to be. This is part of his universal and enduring appeal.
History has done the same with Jane. We are all left to imagine our own version of Jane Austen, the Jane we want her to be.
Jane left so much of herself in her letters and novels, but in the absence of her face, voice, or diaries, we don’t quite know her. She feels so close and yet so far.
And I think that’s part of the magic that maintains people’s interest in Jane Austen over a lifetime: a desire to know Jane, who is just out of reach.
Do you think any of these images is close to a true likeness of Jane? I’d love to know your thoughts, please share with me in the comments.
© Caroline Jane Knight
I like Cassandra's version. I think of it as really her but we may never know. I hope to see Chawton in person someday!
I like the Adam Roud sculpture, every time I go past it in Basingstoke I stop to say hello.