1762 many of the artists involved in the 1760 exhibition had abandoned the Society of Arts, due to its
efforts to impose tight control over the selection and display of works and to prioritize the display of its
own premiumwinning works mainly by amateur artists (Brewer, 1997, 232; Hargraves, 2005)
This generated two opposing factions ultimately forming new societies, the first being the Free Society of
Artists associated for the Relief of Distressed Brethren, their Widows and Orphans, a charitable
organization supporting artists in need, which continued to emphasize practical support for artists,
especially those beginning their careers, and to focus on applied and amateur arts (Hargraves, 2005, 159–
160). The second was the Society of Artists of Great Britain (Myrone, 2008, 189). This saw its main
mission as the advancement of art rather than practical support for artists (Solkin, 1992, 176–177), and
wished to prioritize the liberal arts, even if this meant charging an entrance fee to its exhibitions in order
to restrict attendance to the wealthy and educated (Hargraves, 2005, 28–38). The Society of Artists of
Great Britain later acquired a royal charter and called itself the Incorporated Society of Artists of Great
Britain (Hargraves, 2005, 51–55). It saw itself as fulfilling an important function in increasing public
knowledge of art, and held strictly managed aesthetic debates that extended beyond mechanical or craft
based skills. It increased its standing as a professionalizing force. It also set up life classes (Hargraves,
2005, 44–45, 51–53; 102–103). These higher ideals often masked commercial motives; regular auctions
were held in order to help members make a living. Joseph Wright of Derby exhibited 34 paintings with
the Society of Artists between 1765 and 1773. Zoffany and the painter of horse portraits, George Stubbs,
also exhibited regularly with them before exhibiting at and becoming members of the Royal Academy.
Matthew Hargraves has recounted in detail how the Society of Artists (of Great Britain) became riven by
internal conflict, as the “old guard” there refused, in the face of considerable protest, to reform its
electoral procedures for the Directorate (Hargraves, 2005, 63–92). When George III later approved the
foundation of and monarchical support for the Royal Academy, the “old guard” of the Society abandoned
it to become the ruling oligarchy of the new institution. Those artists remaining with the Society of Artists
promoted their organization as more libertarian than the Royal Academy, which had been established
under royal protection. This strategy later caused problems, however, as “liberty” evoked in the minds of
the public the trauma of the French Revolution or the American War of Independence (Hargraves, 2005,
63–88, 113–114, 145–147, 170). Society of Artists exhibitions continued but included handicrafts and
“curiosities,” and struggled to match the higher ideals of the new Royal Academy. The Society focused on
its role as a trade association and held public lectures on craftrelated topics such as pigments and
chemistry (Brewer, 1997, 235). The last Society exhibition was held in 1791 (Hargraves, 2005, 92–163).
Another method of exhibiting works was the mounting of oneman shows, which often charged an entry
fee and provided welcome publicity for artists. Gainsborough held exhibitions in his own home,
especially after falling out with the organizers of Royal Academy exhibitions, who did not display his
works to his satisfaction. Joseph Wright of Derby also had a serious disagreement with the Academy,
which had granted him associate, but not full membership, and subsequently set up in 1785 a oneman
exhibition at Covent Garden that included his sensational The Widow of an Indian Chief Watching the
Arms of her Deceased Husband (1785), although this particular work remained unsold (Egerton, 1990,
261). John Singleton Copley (1738–1815) exhibited his The Siege of Gibraltar (1783–1791) at an
Oriental pavilion on the edge of Green Park, London, charging a oneshilling entrance fee and
capitalizing on patriotic pride in a recent military victory (Bonehill, 2005, 139–140).
In France, Greuze held private exhibitions of his works to coincide with the Salons. Works banned from
the Salons might also be exhibited privately. Oneman shows could generate generous income. In 1799,
David held a private exhibition of his The Intervention of the Sabine Women (L’Intervention des
Sabines) (1799) later joined by his Bonaparte Crossing the Alps (Napoléon franchissant le Grand