Quantcast
Channel: Alain.R.Truong
Viewing all 36084 articles
Browse latest View live

Studio of Hans Holbein the Younger (c.1497/98 - 1543), Lady Alice More (c.1474 - c.1551)

0
0

2

Studio of Hans Holbein the Younger (c.1497/98 - 1543), Lady Alice More (c.1474 - c.1551). Oil on panel: 14 ½ x 10 ½ in. (36.9 x 26.7 cm). Painted circa 1530 © The Weiss Gallery

This intimate portrait is the only surviving independent and contemporary likeness of Alice, the second wife of Sir Thomas More. Sir Thomas was one of Hans Holbein’s greatest and most famous patrons and this portrait, which was once considered to be by Holbein himself, was most likely produced under his supervision by his studio in Basel. Intriguingly, infrared examination shows it to have been painted over an unfinished portrait of the Dutch-born scholar and Humanist philosopher, Desiderius Erasmus, Sir Thomas More’s great intellectual rival and friend, and the person responsible for Holbein’s introduction to More in 1526.

To mark their friendship, as a gift for Erasmus, More commissioned from Holbein a life-size group portrait of his family. Erasmus wrote of his delight at receiving it in a letter of 1529 to More’s eldest daughter, Margaret Roper - ‘I cannot find words to express the delight I felt when Holbein’s picture showed me your whole family almost as faithfully as if I had been among you... The gifted hand of the painter has given me no small portion of my wish. I recognise you all... Convey my respectful salutations to the honoured Lady Alice...since I cannot kiss her, I kiss her portrait’. 

Holbein, as was custom, prepared for this monumental painting by making individual, ad vivumportrait studies in crayon. Of the eleven figures to be included in the composition, the drawings of seven survive today in the Royal Collection at Windsor. These drawings are all of a similar scale, varying from approximately 35 - 40 cm. in height by 26 - 30 cm. in width, dimensions that are comparable to our panel portrait of Alice. These drawings provided the source for subsequent portraits in oil by Holbein, as in the drawing of Thomas More, whose outlines were pricked for transfer, and whose head is on the same scale as his oil portrait in the Frick Collection, New York. The crayon study of Alice More no longer survives, but our portrait is likely to have derived from it, transferred by the same method. 

Although Holbein’s famous group portrait of the More family was destroyed by fire in the eighteenth century, its preparatory drawing, which is now in the Kunstmuseum in Basel, provides us with further insight into the artist’s methods and his relationship with More as patron. The drawing, executed in pen and brush with black ink over chalk, has additional inscriptions and motifs in brown ink that document the changes More wished Holbein to incorporate. They show for example that Sir Thomas preferred for Alice, on the far right of the group, to sit reading a book rather than kneeling in prayer, with her pet monkey scrabbling at her skirt. 

Given that our portrait is painted over an unfinished Erasmus, and from a pattern type that is dateable to c.1530 when Holbein was in Basel, and that it is painted on a linden panel (a distinctive European native hardwood), rather than on Baltic oak which was predominantly used in England, it seems certain that our portrait was painted in Basel. Holbein’s return to London in 1532 therefore gives us a terminus ante quem for the portrait. It is also worth noting the double layer of azurite, a highly expensive blue pigment used for the background. Often found in Holbein’s portraits and those of his contemporaries, its cost meant that it was only used for significant commissions, whereas in copies or lesser works, it invariably was replaced with cheaper, less stable alternatives. 

Alice More (née Harpur) was the wealthy widow of a prominent Mercer, John Middleton, at the time of her marriage to Sir Thomas More in the summer of 1511. Sir Thomas’s first wife, Jane Colt, had been dead and buried but three weeks. There is no explanation for the speed with which they married, but this did not compromise what proved to be a very successful union that lasted nearly twenty-five years until More’s execution in 1535. Alice became surrogate mother to More’s four children (as well as her own by her first marriage), mistress of the house, and his most faithful companion. Erasmus noted Sir Thomas’s devotion to her, describing how ‘He lives on such sweet and pleasant terms with her, as if she was as young and lovely as anyone can desire, and scarcely anyone obtains from his wife by masterfulness and severity, what More does from his blandishments and jests’. For her part, her determination to please her husband and win his respect is revealed in another observation by Erasmus, who was impressed that More convinced Alice to take up music despite her middle age, ‘It was a striking achievment... to persuade a woman, middle-aged and set in her ways, and much occupied with her home, to learn and sing to the cithern and lute, the monochord, or the recorder, and to do a daily exercise set by her husband’. 

It can be no coincidence that it was during their marriage that Sir Thomas More achieved greatness, and within a few years of it he wrote his theological masterpiece, Utopia (1516). In his own words and personal utopia - ‘I come home, and commune with my wife, chat with my children and talk with my servants. All these things I reckon and account as business, for as much as they must be done, and done must they need be, unless a man will be a stranger in his own house. And every man must do his utmost to be civil and obliging to those whom nature had provided to be companions of his life, or chance, or choice...’.

As his career advanced, More frequently left Alice alone to supervise the household; his only extant letter to her concerns their barn that burned down in 1529. Around the end of 1534, although she did not understand the reasons for his imprisonment, she petitioned the government for his release. After his execution the crown voided the trust he had belatedly established for her but granted her an annuity of £20 in 1537. She became entangled in lawsuits, one of them initiated by William Roper, her stepson-in-law, who depicted her as an interfering busybody in his account of Thomas’s life. She died on or before 25 April 1551 and was probably buried at Chelsea.

ProvenanceFrederick, 2nd Baron Methuen (1818-1891), Corsham Court, Wiltshire;
Thence by descent to Paul, 4th Baron Methuen (1886–1974).
Sold August 1958 to Dr Hans Schaeffer, Schaeffer Gallery, New York for £27,000.
Acquired (via Paul Herzogenrath) by Rudolf August Oetker (1916-2007), Bielefeld, Germany.

ExhibitionRoyal Academy, Burlington House, 1877 (no. 146). Royal Academy, Burlington House, 1910 (no. 106). Royal Academy, Burlington House 'Holbein and other masters of the 16th and 17th Centuries', 1950, no. 11. Palais des Beaux-Arts, Brussels, 'L'Europe Humaniste', 1954/5, no. 39, pl. 25.

The Weiss Gallery. 59 Jermyn Street, London SW1Y 6LX, United Kingdom


Follower of Hans Holbein the Younger (c.1497/98 - 1543), Lady Margaret Wotton, Marchioness of Dorset (1487 - 1541)

0
0

1

Follower of Hans Holbein the Younger (c.1497/98 - 1543), Lady Margaret Wotton, Marchioness of Dorset (1487 - 1541). Oil on panel: 30 ½ x 25 in. (77.5 x 64 cm). Inscribed upper right with the Lumley cartellino. Painted circa 1560s © The Weiss Gallery

The cartellino in the top right corner of this portrait establishes it as having belonged to the famous collector, John Lumley, 1st Baron Lumley (c.1533 - 1609). Lumley amassed one of the greatest art collections outside that of the Royal Court through a combination of inheritance, astute purchases and commissions. He owned paintings of almost all the notable figures of the Tudor dynasty, and his inventory of the collection, also known as the ‘red velvet book’ on account of its binding, and compiled in 1590, still survives today and stands as the single most important document for the study of art in Elizabethan England. Its significance lies not merely in the fact that it is a comprehensive list of the largest private collection of its time, but for the number of paintings to whom artists’ and sitters’ names are given.

Lumley had his paintings inscribed with a trompe l’oeil label as seen here, which usually bore the sitter’s name, their offices and dates, though notably not the artist’s name. This offers an insight into the importance then attached to a sitter’s identity over that of the artist’s. It suggests Lumley was more concerned with collecting a group of portraits of significant historical figures, rather than being concerned by their attribution. This is not surprising when considering how most of the painters at that time were considered no more than artisan guildsmen, and that few actually signed their works. Nor does Lumley seem to have minded if some of these portraits were later replicas, based upon earlier works. A recent dendrochronology of the panel for this portrait reveals an earliest tree-ring date of c.1556, so presumably it must have been painted after 1560. Lumley may have commissioned the painting himself, and certainly it would have been fairly new when he acquired it for his collection. 

Having left Lord Lumley’s collection, for many years this portrait was assumed to be of Mary I; however, the very closely related drawing by Hans Holbein the Younger in the Royal Collection, Windsor, inscribed as the Marchioness of Dorset clearly establishes that she is indeed Margaret Wotton. Other versions of the portrait are known to exist, and like the present work, are based on a lost original, presumably by Holbein. Three variants of our portrait, all identified as Margaret Wotton, are in the collectons at Welbeck Abbey (Duke of Portland), Durnham Massey (National Trust), and the Beecroft Art Gallery, Southend. 

Margaret Wotton was the daughter of Sir Robert Wotton of Boughton Malherbe, Kent, and the widow of William Medley. She married secondly Thomas Grey, 2nd Marquess of Dorset (1477 - 1530). In 1533 she rode in Anne Boleyn’s coronation procession, and was one of two godmothers for Elizabeth I. However, by 1534 Margaret was openly engaged in a dispute with her son, Henry Grey, 1st Duke of Suffolk, 3rd Marquess of Dorset (1517 - 1554), a rift that would ruin her reputation. She first quarrelled with her son, who had succeeded to the Marquisate in 1530, when he was forced to pay a fine of £4000 for renouncing his betrothal to Katherine Fitzalan, daughter of the Earl of Arundel. As a punishment, she tried to restrict his allowance as he was technically still a minor, only agreeing to his marriage to his preferred choice, Lady Frances Brandon, niece of the King, on the condition that the bride’s father, Charles Brandon, 1st Duke of Suffolk, supported the couple until her son came of age. In 1534 she finally offered to contribute ‘as my small power is and shall be’, but nonetheless Henry brought their dispute before the Kings’ Council, forcing her to admit that his allowance was not ‘meet or sufficient to maintain his estate’, and to offer to increase it. Embittered by the experience, she moved out of the Grey family seat at Bradgate House and died in 1541 at the age of fifty-four.

ProvenanceJohn, 1st Baron Lumley (c.1533 – 1609), Lumley Castle, Durham; 
Horace Walpole, 4th Earl of Orford (1717 – 1797), Strawberry Hill;
by descent to William 8th Earl Waldegrave (1788 – 1859), by whom sold,
‘Sale of the Valuable Contents of Strawberry Hill’, 17 May 1842, lot 78 (as a ‘portrait of Mary Tudor’);
where acquired by Lady Charlotte Elizabeth Guest (1812 – 1895);
by descent to Ivor Bertie Guest, 1st Baron Wimborne (1835 – 1914);
sold 9 March 1923 to Dr Eduard Beith;
Christie’s, London, 8 April 1938, lot 23, (as ‘The Duchess of Suffolk’, bt. Leggatt Bros., London); Ronald Nall-Cain, 2nd Baron Brocket (1904 – 1967), Bramshill Park, Hampshire;
Sotheby’s, London, 16 July 1952, lot 46 (as ‘Mary Tudor’); Private Collection, USA;
The Weiss Gallery, London, 1987;
Dr. & Mrs Bonheim, Cologne, Germany.

The Weiss Gallery. 59 Jermyn Street, London SW1Y 6LX, United Kingdom

Circle of Corneille de Lyon (1500 - 1575), An Unknown Nobleman in Armour, circa 1560-70

0
0

3

Circle of Corneille de Lyon (1500 - 1575), An Unknown Nobleman in Armour. Oil on panel: 12 3/4 9 3/4 in. (32.5 x 25 cm). Painted circa 1560-70© The Weiss Gallery.

16th century portraits of sitters depicted in armour traditionally portray royalty, a pictorial tradition whose Renaissance precedents notably include François Clouet’s Equestrian Portrait of François I (c.1540, Uffizi Gallery, Florence) and Titian’s portraits of Emperor Charles V on Horseback (1548: Prado Museum, Madrid) and Philip II in Armour (1551, Prado). From the oeuvre of Corneille de Lyon, the present painting best compares with a bust-length portrait of the young Dauphin Henri, showing the future King Henri II in armour (c.1536-7; Galleria Estense, Modena, inv.no.312).

Our young nobleman was likely therefore to have been of some distinction, and certainly of wealth, for such fine and ornate armour would have been very expensive indeed. Fashioned in steel and held together with brass rivets and joins, it is finely tooled in order to create combinations of floral ornaments and geometric patterns. This ‘fluting’, besides being decorative, reinforced the plates, is characteristic of armour from Landshut, a famous Bavarian armour-making centre, made fashionable by Philip II of Spain. Indeed, at this time, Landshut armourers almost exclusively supplied to the Spanish nobility, and it is therefore quite possible that our sitter is Spanish. 

The painter has taken great trouble to extensively render the highlights on the metal with touches of pure white. Yet for all this attention, the sitter’s face too is depicted with equal care, his confident gaze perhaps reflecting the near invincibility granted by this steel suit. Far from the noisy chaos of the battlefield, the image conveys a sense of power and order, calm and refinement, the sitter an exemplar of the Renaissance nobleman, both as courtier and as warrior. 

The unknown artist’s technique appears to reflect the direct influence of Corneille de Lyon, and it is likely that he may either have worked in that artist’s studio, or at least to have come into contact with his work. Corneille was one of the very finest portrait painters of the French Renaissance. Of Flemish origin, he was recorded in Lyon in 1533, and it was perhaps in that year, while the French court was residing in that city, that Corneille was made painter to Queen Eleanor, the second wife of François I. By 1541, he was painter to the Dauphin Henri, and when the latter succeeded to the throne in 1547, he was created Peintre du Roi. Corneille’s studio was very prosperous and his art was strongly influenced by the tradition of the portrait miniature, especially the example of Jean Perréal (1450/60 - c.1530). His work also shows an affinity with his almost exact contemporary, François Clouet (c.1516 - 1572); both painters shared the northern inclination towards naturalism, executed with great sensitivity and refinement.

ProvenancePrivate collection, New York, USA

The Weiss Gallery. 59 Jermyn Street, London SW1Y 6LX, United Kingdom

Attributed to Nicolas de Neufchâtel (fl. 1539 - 1573?), Portrait of an Unknown Gentleman, circa 1565 - 1570

0
0

4

Attributed to Nicolas de Neufchâtel (fl. 1539 - 1573?), Portrait of an Unknown Gentleman. Oil on panel: 36 1/4 x 30 3/8 in. (92 x 77.2 cm). Painted circa 1565 - 1570 © The Weiss Gallery.

This very attractive Renaissance portrait can be attributed with some confidence to Nicolas Neufchâtel, one of the leading portrait painters working in Germany in the 1560s and early 1570s. The use of a simple yet dignified pose, the sober but rich display of material wealth, and the clear plasticity of form heightened by a strong lighting effect against a monochrome background – all visible in our painting – are usual features of the artist’s manner. In addition, the quality of the drawing and the level of detail are admirable: the sitter’s impressive full beard and short moustache were achieved by long, fine strokes of pigment – practically painted hair by hair. The likeness also shows a certain psychological insight. While the sitter’s gaze seems to softly connect with the viewer, it conveys a sense of patrician confidence. Indeed, given the lavishness of his costume − he is wearing an elegant black, fur-lined gown − he must have come from the upper echelon of society. The sophisticated arrangement of his hands and gloves in the lower right foreground serves to confirm his social standing. The great majority of the fifty or so extant portraits by Neufchâtel represent sitters from Nuremberg. Our gentleman may have resided in that city, but certainly in Southern Germany. 

Nicolas de Neufchâtel, also known as Colyn van Nieucastel, Nicolas de Novocastello or Lucidel, was born in Mons, Belgium, possibly in 1527. He was active in Germany. In 1539, he was recorded at the Antwerp Guild as a student of Pieter Coecke van Aelst. From 1561, he is recorded in Nuremberg and seems to have remained there at least until 1573, the date of his portrait of Johann Gregor van der Schardt (Trieste) after which there is no further trace of him, although his influence on Nuremberg painters was to last for two generations thereafter − his main follower, Nicolas Juvenel, closely imitated his style. Neufchâtel is known to have been a Calvinist with militant fervour. All of the painter’s known works, including a few attributed drawings, were produced between 1561 and 1573. He was one of the most successful portraitists of his time, owing to his ability to combine the warm, atmospheric quality of Flemish portraiture with the clarity and physical presence typical of German portraitists like Christoph Amberger. His sophisticated portraits appealed to Netherlandish émigrés and the local Nuremberg elite alike. Many of his likenesses depict couples, the finest being that of Hendrik and Margaretha Pilgram (Museum of Fine Arts, Budapest). Occasionally, Neufchâtel personalised portraits by inserting references to the sitter’s occupation or interests.  

We are grateful to Prof. Jeffrey C. Smith (University of Texas at Austin) for confirming that there is ground to support an attribution to Nicolas de Neufchâtel. The painting compares well with the autograph half-length portraits in the Museum of Fine Arts, Budapest, and the Alte Pinakothek, Munich. Neufchâtel’s work is featured in other important public collections, such as the Royal Museum of Fine Arts, Brussels, the Statens Museum, Copenhagen and the Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg. 

ProvenancePresumably Freifrau Roeder von Diersburg, née Freiin von Seherr-Thoss
Sold at Rudolf Bangel, Frankfurt, 22th-25th February 1921, lot no.146 (as Frans Pourbus the Younger)

The Weiss Gallery. 59 Jermyn Street, London SW1Y 6LX, United Kingdom

English School, Henry VII (1457 - 1509), circa 1590

0
0

5

English School, Henry VII (1457 - 1509). Oil on panel: 22 3/4 x 17 1/4 in. (57.7 x 37.2 cm). Inscribed upper left 'HENRY. 7'. Painted circa 1590© The Weiss Gallery.

Henry VII, the first Tudor monarch, took over the English Crown after defeating Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485, despite a relatively weak claim to the throne through his mother, Lady Margaret Beaufort. His marriage in 1486 to Elizabeth of York, daughter and heir of Edward IV, unified the Houses of York and Lancaster and is visually represented in the red and white petals of the Tudor rose.

Our portrait type is derived from a mural in the Privy Chamber at Whitehall Palace by Hans Holbein (1460? - 1534), which was finished in 1537, but later destroyed by the fire of 1698. Holbein’s original is known through two seventeenth century copies by Remigius van Leemput (Royal Collection and Petworth House) as well as Holbein’s preparatory cartoon. Henry VII is depicted standing behind his son, leaning on a plinth which is inscribed with the relative achievements of the first two Tudor kings, thus emphasising their dynastic linkage and validating their claim to the throne.

Similarly to the original mural, in our portrait Henry is shown wearing a gold gown with vertical slits in the sleeves, which is trimmed with ermine and fastened at the front with a large gold clasp set with table cut diamonds, rubies and pearls. The gown has a dark fur lining turned back to form the revers and is worn over a bright red doublet. Our sitter wears a blocked felt cap trimmed with a ruby set brooch encircled by more diamonds.

This image is a typical ‘corridor portrait’ - a posthumous image of a monarch usually created as part of a set designed to furnish the long gallery of a late Elizabethan or seventeenth century country house. Such portraits emphasised the occupant’s dynastic lineage with important historical figures, offering a useful lesson in British history as well as tasteful interior decoration. Corridor portraits were made to a standard size and format, depicting the sitter at head and shoulder length against a dark background. Some sets of portraits stretched as far back as William the Conqueror, although images of the Norman and earlier Plantagenet kings were inevitably fictitious. Similar sets can be seen in the collections at Boughton (Duke of Buccleuch), Longleat (Marquess of Bath), Helmingham Hall (Lord Tollemache) and Ingatestone (Lord Petre).

ProvenanceAlfred Morrison, M. P. (1821-1897), Fronthill House, Tisbury, Wiltshire, and thence by descent to the present owner.

The Weiss Gallery. 59 Jermyn Street, London SW1Y 6LX, United Kingdom

Sofonisba Anguissola (c. 1532 – 1625), An Unknown Noblewoman, circa 1560 - 1565

0
0

1

Sofonisba Anguissola (c. 1532 – 1625), An Unknown Noblewoman. Oil on canvas: 71 ½ x 38 ¾ in. (181.5 x 98.5 cm). Painted circa 1560 - 1565© The Weiss Gallery.

This ravishing portrait of an unknown noblewoman can be dated on the basis of costume and hairstyle to circa 1560 – 1565, when the Cremonese artist Anguissola was based as a lady-in-waiting to Elisabeth of Valois (1545 – 1568) at the Spanish court in Madrid from 1559, where she stayed until 1578. The portrait was traditionally and incorrectly identified as ‘Mary’ of Austria, meaning Anna, fourth wife of Philip II of Spain (1549 – 1580) – but the costume of our sitter dates to before the death of Elisabeth of Valois, third Queen Consort, and nor does she bear a resemblance to known portraits of Anna of Austria, Philip’s fourth Queen Consort. 
The richness of our noblewoman’s costume and the wealth of her jewellery nonetheless identify her as a lady from the highest echelons of the nobility, possibly a fellow lady-in-waiting with Anguissola. On her left hand she wears an engagement ‘fede’ ring, or ‘faith’ ring, of two clasped hands, representing the unity of love, as well as an elaborately mounted diamond ring. As early as the fifteenth century, the diamond ring was a feature of royal and noble weddings. It is undoubtedly an engagement portrait, for in her right hand she holds a man’s glove, presumably her betrothed’s, and in her left she clasps a long golden chain at her waist. Such chains were traditional marriage gifts, chatelaines on which as the lady of the house she would hang a bejewelled pomander or indeed her keys.
We are grateful to Mina Gregori and Amparo Serrano de Haro for confirming the attribution to Sofonisba Anguissola. Little is known of the few works attributed to Sofonisba, since historical sources and documents do not help to reconstruct the artist’s body of work with any certainty. Many paintings have been lost or cannot be traced, creating problems in reconstructing the Sofonisba catalogue. Nevertheless, this portrait reveals convincing analogies of style, execution and construction with the work of Anguissola. The sitter’s eyes, carefully delineated, and her gentle smile are typical of the artist, as is the extraordinary attention to the detailing in the costume and jewels. The heavy folds in her white satin dress, the three-dimensional impasto of the gold and red embroidery, and the finesse of the jewels, are comparable in treatment to the artist’s portrait of Elisabeth of Valois of 1565, now in the Prado. 

The great early art historian Giorgio Vasari wrote of Anguissola that she ‘has shown greater application and better grace than any other woman of our age in her endeavors at drawing; she has thus succeeded not only in drawing, colouring and painting from nature, and copying excellently from others, but by herself has created rare and very beautiful paintings.’ Born in Cremona, Lombardy, around 1532, the oldest of seven children, six of whom were girls, her father, Amilcare Anguissola, was a member of the Genoese minor nobility and her mother, Bianca Ponzone, was also of a noble background. Her apprenticeship with local painters set a precedent for women at the time to be accepted as students of art. Anguissola traveled to Milan in 1558, where she painted the Duke of Alba, who in turn recommended her to the Spanish king, Philip II. The following year, Anguissola was invited to join the Spanish court, which was a turning point in her career. Elisabeth of Valois was a keen amateur painter, and Anguissola was informally recruited as her tutor, with the rank of lady-in-waiting. During this period she adapted her style to the more formal requirements of official portraits for the Spanish court but it is notable that as a lady-in-waiting, she did not paint in an official capacity, nor indeed did she sign her work during her time at court. After the queen's death, Philip helped arrange an aristocratic marriage for Anguissola and she eventually moved to Palermo, then Genoa, where she continued to practise as a leading portrait painter.

Our painting has an illustrious early provenance, forming part of the extraordinary collection of Cardinal Joseph Fesch, half-brother of Letizia Ramolino Bonaparte (1750 – 1836), mother of the future Emperor Napoleon I, to whom Fesch was close in age. From the mid-1790s to his death in 1839 he collected one of the largest private collections of paintings of the 19th century. His love of art seems to have developed during Napoleon's campaigns in Italy (1796 - 1798), when Fesch became, through his nephew's offices, a supplier to the French army: indeed, his first acquisitions were given to him by a terrified Grand Duke Ferdinand III of Tuscany. It was after his return to Paris in 1800, however, that he began to acquire paintings at an extraordinary rate. In 1802 he was made Archbishop of Lyons and then Cardinal of San Lorenzo-in- Lucina; from 1803 to 1806 he was French Ambassador in Rome, and on his return to Paris in 1806 was appointed Grand Almoner of France. He used his considerable income to augment his collection, taking advantage of the dispersal of a number of other collections to acquire French, Dutch and Flemish paintings, as well as Italian works from some of the great Roman patrician families. In 1812, however, he quarrelled with the Emperor about his loyalty to Pius VII and lost his position, retiring to his diocese in Lyons before settling in August 1815 in Rome, where he led the life of an exile of limited resources, dividing his time between pious activities and the search for new paintings.

According to the inventory drawn up at his death, Fesch's collection comprised nearly 16,000 works. His residence in Rome was the Palazzo Falconieri in the Via Giulia, where he displayed his finest pieces.
These included such masterpieces as Giorgione's Allendale Nativity (Washington, D.C., National Gallery of Art), Giotto's Dormition of the Virgin, Fra Angelico's Last Judgement, Rembrandt's Predication of the Baptist (all Berlin, Gemäldegalerie), Poussin's Dance to the Music of Time, Metsu's Sleeping Hunter, Hobbema's Stormy Landscape, Adriaen van de Velde's Departure of Jacob, Watteau's Fête in a Park and Halt during the Chase (all London, Wallace Collection), Mantegna's Agony in the Garden, a Raphael Crucifixion, Foppa's Adoration of the Magi and Ercole de' Roberti's Israelites Gathering Manna (all London, National Gallery), Carpaccio's Hunting on the Lagoon and Pontormo's Portrait of a Halberdier (both Los Angeles, J. Paul Getty Museum). The Cardinal's own portrait was sculpted by Antonio Canova in 1807 – 1808 (Ajaccio, Musée Fesch).

ProvenanceJoseph, Cardinal Fesch (1763 – 1839), Palazzo Falconieri, Rome; 
Possibly his sale, Galerie de Feu, S.E. Le Cardinal Fesch, Ancien Archevêque de Lyon, Primat des Gaules, George, Rome, 17-18 & 24 March 1844;
Sir William Bromley-Davenport, K.C.B.;
his sale; Christie’s, London, 28 July 1926, lot 146 (as ‘Sir Antonio Moro’, ‘Portrait of Mary of Austria, fourth wife of Philip II, in white satin dress embroidered with gold braid and red flowers’, as ‘from the collection of Cardinal Fesch’), 
bought for £25.2s by
Tyndale;
Francis Howard; his deceased sale; Christie’s, 25 November 1955, lot 75 (as ‘Fontana’, ‘Portrait of Mary of Austria, fourth wife of Philip II, in white satin dress, gloves in her right hand’), bought for £115.10s by
Leggatt Bros., London;
Private European collection;
Private collection, France, until 2012.

The Weiss Gallery. 59 Jermyn Street, London SW1Y 6LX, United Kingdom

Gervasio Gatti (?) (circa 1550 - Cremona – 1630), Giuliano II Cesarini at the Age of Fourteen, with a Page

0
0

2

Gervasio Gatti (?) (circa 1550 - Cremona – 1630), Giuliano II Cesarini at the Age of Fourteen, with a Page. Oil on canvas: 73.2 x 45.3 in. (186 x 115 cm). Inscribed lower centre: ‘IVLIANUS CESARINUS/AN.AGENSXIV’ and lower left: ‘G. 46’.© The Weiss Gallery.

The present portrait was painted in 1586 when the sitter was fourteen, almost certainly to celebrate his recently acquired title of Duke. In 1585, he was conferred with the Dukedom of Civitanova nelle Marche by Pope Sixtus V, and thus he became the first duke of those lands. Born in Rome in 1572, he was a scion of the Roman noble family; his parents were Giovangiorgio (1550 – 1585), 2nd Marquess of Civitanova, Montecosaro, Ardea, Genzano, Civita Lavinia, and Clelia Farnese (c. 1556 – 1613), the illegitimate and much-loved daughter of Cardinal Alessandro Farnese (1520 – 1589). After she was widowed in 1585, Giuliano’s mother acceded to her father’s request and married Marco Pio of Sassuolo on 2 August 1587. Clelia moved to Emilia, leaving her adolescent son in his grandfather’s care. It is possible that it was Cardinal Alessandro Farnese – a refined man and great patron of the arts – who commissioned and paid for this celebratory portrait of his grandson and ward. In fact, Alessandro Farnese played an important role in establishing a position for Giuliano. 

In the decades straddling the 16th and 17th centuries, the Cremonese portrait school had several notable artists including Giovan Battista Trotti called Malosso, Bernardino Gatti called Sojaro and Gervasio Gatti - Bernardino’s nephew - who all worked on prestigious commissions in Cremona and for the Farnese court in Parma. Gervasio Gatti was already renowned as a portraitist in 1585; in his Cremona Fedelissima, Antonio Campi mentioned his ‘grace in portraying from life’, as the author of infinite portraits of ‘Lords, Princes and gentlemen.’ His work as court portraitist for the Farnese is confirmed by several period inventories and by the 1774 biography of the artist written by Giovanni Zaist. 

Stylistically, Gatti’s portraits are indebted to the influence of his uncle Bernardino who was strongly tied to the Correggesque movement dominant in nearby Parma, and which the young Gatti reinterpreted in cold, glazed colours and polished shapes. The lack of psychological characterization in this portrait – the stately pose, the attention to the fine details in the armour and clothing – make it possible to include this painting in the category of ‘State Portraits’. It falls among the Hapsburg-Farnese court portraits that are modelled on Titian’s paintings for Charles V and for his son, Philip II (both in the Museo del Prado, Madrid) and the works of the Dutch painter Anthonis Mor, who is documented as having worked for the Farnese court. Mor’s influence on Gatti’s portraits is evident from his early copy (now in Berlin) of the Utrecht painter’s portrait of Margaret of Austria (Palazzo Comunale, Parma). 

In our portrait, the boy’s regal features are skilfully portrayed, conveying his newly exalted position in a suitable pose contrasting with the lively and colluding expression of his midget page, who is rendered with a natural spontaneity more common in northern, particularly Lombard painting. Gatti opens the curtain on a scene where the midget is caught in the act of taking his master’s sword, cheekily smiling at the viewer. Gatti gracefully depicts the soft, colourful feathers on the left, which are part of a heraldic crest partially concealed by the helmet on the table. The shining armour - in the style of Milanese armourer Pompeo della Cesa, and therefore made between Milan and Brescia in the years from 1570 – 1580 – is finely decorated with floral motifs and figures of harpies along the edges, and the clothes of the young duke and his page are faithful to the fashions of the day. Both historically and and stylistically, it is comparable to Gatti’s Portrait of Ranuccio I Farnese in the Palazzo Comunale, Parma.

The Ranuccio portrait has ‘blood ties’ with the sitter of the portrait presented here. Giuliano was the grandson of Pier Luigi Farnese (1503 – 1574), who was also Ranuccio Farnese’s great-grandfather. Even if the painting in Parma is not a portrait of Ranuccio as some scholars suggest, a document in the Archivio di Stato di Parma confirms that Gatti painted a portrait of Ranuccio – Giuliano’s cousin of the same age – the same year that he painted Giuliano’s. However, we have yet to understand how Giuliano – who spent most of his life in Rome or on the Lazio fiefs owned by his father’s family – decided to have Gatti paint his portrait in Parma. It is plausible that the fatherless boy entrusted to his maternal grandfather was sent to Parma in Emilia – the Farnese family’s main fief – specifically to have Gervasio Gatti paint his portrait.

ProvenanceGenzano di Roma, Palazzo Cesarini; Sforza-Cesarini Collection; 
and by descent. 

LiteratureArchivio Sforza Cesarini, Rome, typewritten inventory, probably late nineteenth century, drawn up by Mario Malcangi no. 98: “Ritratto di Giuliano Cesarini a 14 anni - olio su tela di cm 187 x 115.2”.

The Weiss Gallery. 59 Jermyn Street, London SW1Y 6LX, United Kingdom

Attributed to François Quesnel, Jeanne de Bourdeille (d.1596), circa 1593

0
0

6

Attributed to François Quesnel (c.1543 - 1619), Jeanne de Bourdeille (d.1596), with one of her daughters holding a miniature of her late husband Antoine de Beaupoil de Sainte-Aulaire, Sénéchal de Perigord (c.1560 - 1593). Oil on canvas: 50 ½ x 38 in. (128.5 x 96.5 cm). Painted circa 1593© The Weiss Gallery.

This remarkable painting is compositionally unique within the context of late sixteenth century French portraiture. Though simply executed, with a chic monochromatic palette, the painting nonetheless has a complexity that belies its ostensible minimalism, for the viewer is presented with a fascinating interplay of identities and relationships between the sitters.

Jeanne de Bourdeille was born near Brantôme in Perigord, the youngest of three children of Jean de Bourdeille, lord of the manor of Bourdeille, and his wife Claude de Gontaut-Badefol. Jeanne’s older brother Pierre de Bourdeille was to become the Lord of Brantôme, as well as governor and Sénéchal de Perigord. She was married first on 12 July 1575 to Charles d’Aydie, Vicomte de Riberac and Lord of Monbazillac (1527 - 1584), with whom she had two children, both boys. After the Vicomte’s death in 1584, intriguingly she was remarried in haste the very same year with a special dispensation from Rome to Antoine de Beaupoil de Sainte-Aulaire, Sénéchal de Perigord (c.1560 - 1593). With her second husband she had four children, two boys (Marc Antoine and Maranthon, who died at birth) and two girls, Jeanne and Claude, one of whom is depicted here in this portrait which is almost certainly painted shortly after her second husband’s death in 1593.

In this portrait Jeanne is dressed in a rich black silk damask dress - her widow’s weeds. The portrait that hangs behind her to the left portrays her as a younger woman, also in widow’s weeds, in reference to her first deceased husband, Charles d’Aydie. In her second, later incarnation as widow, instead of the simple black mourning chord shown around her neck in the framed portrait, she is adorned in costly jewels. She is dressed less demurely, and thus the earlier portrait may also be interpreted as a ricordo of her former life before she became elevated to court through her relationship with her second husband. Renowned as a ‘grande dame’, Jeanne famously had the most exquisite clothes and jewelry in Perigord, an inventory of which still exists in the Bibliothéque Nationale. From her ear hangs an indistinct cameo, presumably classical, from which drops a large pearl, while her necklace is made of a gold chain with enamelled flowers, also suspended with pearls. The flowers in the necklace include white marguerites (symbols of purity), perhaps to represent the young daughter, a single white rose, and most significantly black enamelled pansies - 'pensées' (thoughts) - to symbolise remembrance - ‘pensez à moi’.

Her daughter is shown clasping an exquisitely bejewelled miniature portrait of her father, Antoine de Beaupoil. The elaborate gold filigree frame is decorated with scarlet and black enamel and lavishly set with fine-cut lozenge-shaped rubies and seeded with pearls. It is completed by a single large hanging pearl that echoes Jeanne’s earring and necklace. The inherent intimacy of the miniature is heightened by its juxtaposition between the mother and child. It hangs from the Jeanne’s waist on a golden chain, and is grasped by her daughter, who in turn is held at the arm by her mother - an uninterrupted sequence that mirrors their familial bonds.

Jeanne’s impressive décolletage, with a hint of her left aureole, can be interpreted as a symbolic extension of her role as a mother. It is also a sexually powerful statement which brings to mind the famous double portrait by an artist of the Fontainbleau School, c.1595, of the mistress of Henri IV of France, Gabrielle d’Estrées, depicted in a bath with her sister who pinches her nipple, a reference to her status as the King’s concubine, and indicating that she is pregnant with his child (The Louvre, Paris).

A likely painter for our portrait could be François Quesnel. He was born in Edinburgh in 1543, the son of Pierre Quesnel (d.c.1574), a French artist then in the service of James V of Scotland. François and his two brothers Nicolas and Jacques were all to follow their father’s profession. By 1572, François must have left Scotland and settled in Paris, for he is then recorded designing the medals to commemorate the entry of Charles IX and Elizabeth of Austria into Paris. In 1609 he drew a map of Paris which was engraved by Pierre Vallet in twelve plates and dedicated to Henry IV. However, it was as a portraitist in crayon that Quesnel established his reputation. In contrast to Elizabethan England, where the tradition in portraiture was dominated by three-quarter-length portraits painted in oils, the predominant fashion in France was for head-and-shoulder portraits drawn in crayon on paper. Though Quesnel rarely signed his work, some two hundred drawings have been attributed to his hand consisting of portrait figures from the courts of Henry III and Henry IV. Of the small number of portraits in oils attributable to the artist, only one is signed. It is a half-length portrait painted on panel, which reputedly depicts Mary Ann Waltham, one of the attendants of Mary Queen of Scots, monogrammed ‘FQ’ and dated 1572 (Althorp). Three other portraits are also attributed, those of Madame de Cheverny (Versailles), Madame de Laval (Le Mans Museum) and another portrait on canvas of an Unknown French Noblewoman, formerly with the Weiss Gallery in 2002. The latter work shares a similar palette and execution, as well the usual truncated, off-centre positioning of the sitter.

ProvenancePrivate Collection, France.

The Weiss Gallery. 59 Jermyn Street, London SW1Y 6LX, United Kingdom


Circle of Sir William Segar, William Fitzwilliam of Milton and Gainspark, later 1st Baron Fitzwilliam of Lifford, circa 1595

0
0

3

Circle of Sir William Segar (c.1564 - 1633), William Fitzwilliam of Milton and Gainspark, later 1st Baron Fitzwilliam of Lifford (c.1570 - 1644). Oil on panel: 72 x 49 ½ in. (183 x 125 cm). Painted circa 1595© The Weiss Gallery.

This is a rare surviving example of a late Elizabethan full-length portrait on oak panel, for by the end of the sixteenth century canvas had usurped wood as the support of choice for painters working on such a scale. The portrait can be dated on fashion to c.1595 and depicts the youthful William Fitzwilliam, the fifth in line of eldest sons all called William, dressed in the most extravagant and expensive of costumes.

His great great grand-father, Sir William Fitzwilliam (d.1534), made his fortune in London as a merchant tailor, alder-man and sheriff of London. He was also treasurer and chamberlain to Cardinal Wolseley and, with the great wealth he amassed through trade, purchased vast acreage and many manors primarily in Northamptonshire and Essex. The fortunes of the family were to be further increased by Sir William Fitzwilliam (1526 - 1599), who served Elizabeth I as Lord Deputy and Lord Justice of Ireland.

His father Sir William, who had married in 1569, spent thirty years at Elizabeth I’s court, but with the accession of James I retired to the country to manage his estates. His eldest son, our sitter, was probably born in the early 1570s not long after his father’s marriage. By 1593 he was studying in Cambridge at Emmanuel College, and in 1594 he was admitted to Gray’s Inn in London to study law. As befitted a wealthy courtier’s son, he also took lessons in singing and dancing, as well as attending a fencing school, all at his father’s expense.

William married Katherine, daughter of William Hyde of South Dunworth, Berkshire in 1603. After his father’s death in 1618, he inherited the family estates and in 1620 was subsequently given the Irish peerage of 1st Baron Fitzwilliam of Lifford. However, the loss of court grants and sinecures after his father’s retirement resulted in a substantial reduction in the family income from the State. Since Lord Fitzwilliam now lived a similarly secluded life on his country estate, and without the benefit of any official office, he gradually drifted into ever increasing debt. By 1642 he owed £20,450 with much if his estate mortgaged or sold. It was only through the judicious marriage of his eldest son to a wealthy mercantile heiress that, after his death in 1644, the fortune of the Fitzwilliam estates eventually recovered.

In our portrait, the young Fitzwilliam proudly displays his great wealth and status by the gilded finery he wears. The whole costume is an elaborate construction of interlocking gold braid which has been plaited and sewn onto an underlying layer of slashed silk, a wildly expensive and laborious technique. The long-sleeved doublet is further embellished with a row of gold buttons and complimented by cuffs made of the finest lace. His costume continues with the matching paned trunk hose and knee-length canions (or breeches), below which his stockings are fastened with tied silk sashes. The multi-layered lace ruff is worn over an additional lace collar and over his shoulders is draped a velvet-lined cloak. Whilst only the elaborately decorated hilts of his dagger and sword are visible, the artist has taken great care to capture in excellent detail the belt and sword hanger, which again is embroidered with an ornate gold design. The gold watch prominently placed on the table beside him is of comparable expense to his costume. A mechanical marvel of the time, this portable timepiece was small enough to be worn around the neck or attached to the costume, and in many ways was a precursor of the modern watch. This example was probably made in France or Germany specifically for the English market.

Provenance: By descent to his 2nd daughter Catherine who married 
Sir John Lee of St. Edmundsbury, Suffolk, thence to
Baptist Lee (1690-1768), Livermere Park, Suffolk, thence to his nephew
Nathaniel Acton Lee (? - 1836), thence to his sister Harriet who married in 1774
Sir William Fowle Middleton, Bt, of Shrubland Hall, Suffolk, thence to
Sarah Fowle Middleton, their daughter, who married in 1802
Sir Philip Bowes Vere Broke (1818-1855) whose grand-daughter Jane Anne married in 1882, the 4th Lord de Saumarez of Guernsey
Thence by descent at Shrubland Park, Suffolk

The Weiss Gallery. 59 Jermyn Street, London SW1Y 6LX, United Kingdom

Zhangzhou Dish Made for the Islamic Market, Zhangzhou Prefecture, Fujian Province, China, Early-Mid 17th century

0
0

Zhangzhou Dish Made for the Islamic Market, Zhangzhou Prefecture, Fujian Province, China, Early-Mid 17th century, 42cm diameter

10

11

7

12

Zhangzhou Dish Made for the Islamic Market, Zhangzhou Prefecture, Fujian Province, China, Early-Mid 17th century, 42cm diameter. © Amir Mohtashemi Ltd.

The porcelain dish is of circular form and is painted in underglaze cobalt blue on white. The centre of the dish is depicted with an architectural landscape scene including numerous pagoda-like buildings, figures, large rocks together with a fish, a lobster, two figures on a boat and various plants. The deep cavetto of the dish is decorated with panels of Arabic inscriptions alternating with flowers also enclosed in cartouches. The outer rim of the dish is further decorated with smaller panels of flowers and foliage. 

Zhangzhou dishes with Arabic inscriptions were made predominantly for the Southeast Asian Islamic market. Most often these wares were exported to Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines and Japan. These dishes were initially referred to as 'Swatow' wares as they were presumed to be named after the 'Shantou' port in Guangdong Province, China, where they were later shipped out from. 

Similar Zhangzhou dishes with Arabic inscriptions can be found in The Aga Khan Collection, Topkapi Saray, The Dutch Princessehof Collection in Leeuwarden and The Asian Civilisations Museum. There is a large Chinese dish with Arabic inscriptions in The Asian Civilisations Museum, Singapore, Accession Number 2007-00870, which measures 42.3cm diameter - nearly the same size as our dish.

Amir Mohtashemi Ltd69 Kensington Church Street, London W8 4BG, United Kingdom

Circle of William Larkin (1580/5 - 1619), Christopher Cresacre More (1572 - 1649), 1611

0
0

4

Circle of William Larkin (1580/5 - 1619), Christopher Cresacre More (1572 - 1649). Oil on canvas: 44 3/8 x 31 7/8 in. (112.5 x 81 cm). Painted 1611. © The Weiss Gallery.

Christopher Cresacre More (1572 - 1649) was the great-grandson and biographer of the humanist scholar and statesman Sir Thomas More (1478 - 1535). Most commonly known by his second name, the youthful Cresacre trained in France for the priesthood at the English college in Douai. However his ambition to embrace an ecclesiastical career came to a halt in 1599 with the death of his eldest brother John (1577 - 1599). Instead he returned to England in order to assist in the continuation of the family line and, in 1603, he married Elizabeth Gage (1585 - 1610), sister of Sir John Gage, Bart, of Firle, Sussex. Upon his marriage, his father settled upon him the ancient family estate of More Hall, a manor situated in North Mimms in Hertfordshire. Like his father, Thomas II (1531 - 1606) who was repeatedly charged with recusancy at quarter sessions, at assizes, and in the archdeacon’s court, Cresacre remained true to Catholicism despite the heavy penalties and restrictions he and his family was forced to endure.

In 1630, Cresacre published The life and death of Sir Thomas Moore, Lord High Chancellour of England, with a special dedication to the Queen, Henrietta Maria, a leading supporter of the Catholic cause. Despite borrowing extensively from the earlier biographies by Thomas Stapleton (1588) and William Roper (1626), and adopting a more hagiographic tone in his introduction, the book is notable for the tender beauty of Cresacre’s account of the last days of the doomed Sir Thomas.

Our portrait, with its deliberately enigmatic inscription, depicts the sombrely attired Cresacre in mourning for his late wife Elizabeth who had passed away the year before in 1610. The painting likely hung in More Hall, where it would have been in proximity of the renowned large group portrait of Sir Thomas More and his family, which he also owned and which now hangs in the National Portrait Gallery, London. Inspired and partly copied after Hans Holbein’s (c.1497/8 - 1543) lost original, it was painted in 1593 by Rowland Lockey (fl.1593 - 1616). The painting is a composite representation of five generations of the family, covering a span of about fifty years. Sir Thomas More is instantly recognisable (third from the left), with a beardless young Cresacre (second from the right) aged about twenty-one seen flanked by his parents, Thomas II (1531 - 1607) and Maria Scrope (1534 - 1607). Interestingly, Lockey was also commissioned to paint a miniature copy of the same composition, now in the Victoria & Albert Museum. It likely was painted a few years later, for Cresacre is depicted there with the beginnings of the beard and a moustache that we find in our portrait.

ProvenanceBy direct descent to Thomas More, Barnborough Hall, Yorkshire
Sold by the executors of Thomas Peter More, October 1859, Thomas Hollis? Acquired by Colonel Charles Thomas John Moore Esq., of Frampton Hall (1827¿1900) thence by descent to 
Valerie Tunnard-Moore, St. Peter’s Port, Guernsey

The Weiss Gallery. 59 Jermyn Street, London SW1Y 6LX, United Kingdom

A Rare Blue and White Pen Box of Islamic Form, China, Late 15th century , Ming Dynasty (1368-1644)

0
0

A Rare Blue and White Pen Box of Islamic Form, China, Late 15th century , Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) © Amir Mohtashemi Ltd

A Rare Blue and White Pen Box of Islamic Form, China, Late 15th century , Ming Dynasty (1368-1644), 26.5cm long (box without mounts).© Amir Mohtashemi Ltd.

This rare and unusual blue and white porcelain pen box of slender oval form is painted with scrolling lotus motifs in underglaze blue. The sides of the box are fairly straight with rounded corners. The interior is divided into four compartments; the largest compartment is of mihrab form. One compartment contains a semi-circular metal inset. The other two compartments hold small metal containers. The metal mounts were probably added in the 19th century in France. The cover of the pen box is missing and the base of the box is unglazed. 

The shape of this pen box is based on earlier metal prototypes from the Middle East. The semi-circular metal compartment would have been used as the water pot (for mixing the ink and water). The small container with a covered lid would have functioned as an inkwell, and the other with a pierced lid may have been used to hold sand. This pen box would have been used as a part of a scholar or calligrapher’s set. 

There is a similar pen box, Hongzhi period, circa 1500, further decorated with Ottoman gold and jewelled insets and fittings in The Topkapi Saray Museum, Istanbul, illustrated in R. Krahl & Erbahar, p. 546, fig. 666 and also in John Carswell, p. 134, fig. 149a,b. The Topkapi Saray Museum’s pen box measures only one centimetre longer, 27.5cm, than our pen box and shares similar style of painting seen in the underglaze blue scrolling lotus decoration on the sides of the box. Another Chinese blue and white pen box of similar design and dating to circa 1500, is in The David Collection, Copenhagen, Accession Number 7/1991 (28cm long). 

Literature: Carswell, J. Blue & White: Chinese Porcelain Around the World, British Museum Press, London, 2000. 
Krahl R. and Erbahar. Chinese Ceramics in The Topkapi Saray Museum, Istanbul: A Complete Catalogue, II, Yuan and Ming Dynasty Porcelains, Sotheby's Publications, London, 1986.

Amir Mohtashemi Ltd69 Kensington Church Street, London W8 4BG, United Kingdom

Kendi, Jingdezhen, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398)

0
0

Kendi, Jingdezhen, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398)

1

Kendi, Jingdezhen, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398). Porcelain painted in underglaze red. Height: 15.3 cm, Width: 16 cm. Sir Percival David Gift, Museum no. C.54-1937© Victoria and Albert Museum, London 2017.

A kendi was originally a pure water container carried by travelling Buddhist monks. It later became a domestic drinking vessel.

In the Ming dynasty (1368-1644) Jingdezhen became the major ceramic-manufacturing centre. Imperial kilns were established to produce fine porcelain for the exclusive use of the emperors. The tradition of inscribing the emperor's reign title on the wares also started in the Ming. This pure water vessel (kendi) painted in underglaze red is typical of the Hongwu reign period.

Kendi with lotus design, Jingdezhen, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398)

0
0

Kendi with lotus design, Jingdezhen, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398)

1

Kendi with lotus design, Jingdezhen, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398). Porcelain painted in underglaze copper red. Height: 13.3 cm registers, Diameter: 16 cm registers. Given from the Bloxam collection, C.132-1928 © Victoria and Albert Museum, London 2017.

Porcelain pouring vessel, commonly known as a kendi, with a squat bulbous body and a short, fat spout, narrowing at the end to a small opening. Painted in underglaze copper red with a pattern of peony flowers and foliage on the main body and a border of leaves around the shoulder.

Kendi are a form pouring vessel that were produced for the domestic and export markets during the 15thcentury, becoming particularly popular in Southeast Asia. The red pigment used to create the floral design on this piece contained both arsenic and high concentrations of copper but no tin. During the firing process, this composition was particularly unstable as the lack of tin and high levels of copper could damage the sought after red pigment effect.

Ewer with floral design, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398)

0
0

Ewer with floral design, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398)

1

Ewer with floral design, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398). Porcelain painted in copper red, Jingdezhen kilns, south China. Height: 36.9 cm. Purchased with the assistance of The Art Fund, the Vallentin Bequest, Sir Percival David and the Universities China Committee, C.857-1936 © Victoria and Albert Museum, London 2017.

This ewer for wine is painted with a floral design using copper as a colourant. It has not fired successfully and in some places the colour has turned grey rather than the intended red.


Cup, China (Jingdezhen), Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-98)

0
0

Cup, China (Jingdezhen), Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-98)

 Cup, China (Jingdezhen), Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-98). Porcelain with decoration in moulded relief and incised under copper red glaze. Height: 5.1 cm, Diameter: 9.8 cm. C.138-1963 © Victoria and Albert Museum, London 2017.

Cup with rounded sides and everted rim, the footrim of "V" section with chamfered edge, the flat base showing a spiral finish and unglazed and burnt slightly orange-red in parts. The glaze is of a comparatively even, soft red of somewhat brownish tone, through which the turning marks on the outside of the bowl are visible, while the colour is very thin at the rim. The bowl is decorated round the inside with a moulded design of two running five-clawed dragons with clouds between them and in the centre with an incised cloud design.

Dish, Jingdezhen, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398)

0
0

Dish, Jingdezhen, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398)

Dish, Jingdezhen, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398). Porcelain with incised and moulded decoration in relief. Diameter: 14.6 cm. C.11-1954 © Victoria and Albert Museum, London 2017.

Dish, circular, round the rim, two dragons pursuing each other amidst cloud-scrolls, in moulded relief. On the well, incised with three cloud-scrolls.

Bowl with lotus and chrysanthemum scrolls, China, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398)

0
0

Bowl with lotus and chrysanthemum scrolls, China, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398)

1

Bowl with lotus and chrysanthemum scrolls, China, Ming dynasty, Hongwu period (1368-1398). Porcelain painted in underglaze blue. Height: 14 cm, Diameter: 33.7 cm. Given by Sotheby & Co., C.18-1957 © Victoria and Albert Museum, London 2017.

Porcelain bowl with rounded, spreading sides rising from a rather small, tapering footrim. The base is glazed, and the glaze is poorly controlled above the foot. Painted in underglaze blue on the inside with a large medallion comprising a peony spray; round the sides, a broad band of sketchy chrysanthemum-scroll design; and below the rim, a classic scroll border. Outside is a broad lotus scroll above a lotus-panel border.

China exported similar bowls to Turkey and Iran, where they are still kept in former imperial collections.

Emile Olive (1852-1902), An Impressive Belle Epoque Brooch Pendant, France, c. 1895

0
0

1

2

3

4

5

Emile Olive (1852-1902), An Impressive Belle Epoque Brooch Pendant, France, c. 1895. Gold, silver, plique-à-jour enamel, emerald, diamond & pearl. H 9.00 cm (3.54 in); W 5.20 cm (2.05 in)©Tadema Gallery.

Emile Olive succeeded Georges Le Saché as designer for Lucien Falize. He left Falize in 1885 to form a partnership with Georges Fonsèque in Paris. After Olive’s death in 1902 Fonseque continued the business for a further twenty years.  

This pendant is an exceptional example of the fusion of Japonisme and Art Nouveau in France. The background in plique-à-jour enamel represents a lily pond in the Japanese cloisonné manner on which a magnificent blister pearl set in gold appears to float. The fine diamond-studded frame surround shows the elegant and characteristic swirls of the French Art Nouveau style. 

Literature: cf. Henri Vever's La Bijouterie Française au XIXe Siècle, translated by Katherine Purcell, p. 1021. 
Dictionnaire International du Bijou, Paris 1998, p. 228. 

Wilhelm Lucas von Cranach (1861-1918), Symbolist Brooch 'The Cockerel & The Hen', Germany, c. 1900

0
0

1

2

5

3

4

 Wilhelm Lucas von Cranach (1861-1918), Symbolist Brooch 'The Cockerel & The Hen', Germany, c. 1900. Gold, enamel, demantoid garnet, ruby & pearl. H  3.40 cm (1.34 in)  |  W  5.20 cm (2.05 in)© Tadema Gallery.

Monogrammed twice 'WLC'. Original fitted case signed Lucas von Cranach.

A rare example of Cranach's humorous side in the creation of this exceptional jewel which epitomises the renaissance spirit of his artistry. 
His imagination & craftsmanship is shown in the use of these naturally shaped baroque pearls into the cockerel & hen. The plain pearl drop could be symbolising the resultant egg of the encounter. The grapevines are representing both fruitfulness & intoxication. 'The cock croweth but the hen delivereth the egg'.

Literature: The Berlin artist Wilhelm Lucas von Cranach was a painter, designer & jeweler who studied in Weimar & Paris. His illustrious ancestor was the renaissance painter Lucas Cranach the Elder. He began designing jewels in the 1890's. Pieces executed by Louis Werner to his designs were shown at the International Exhibition of 1900.

Viewing all 36084 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images