Lot 3918. A very rare underglaze-blue and copper-red 'sanduo' stembowl, Yongzheng period (1723-1735); 6 1/2 in. (16.6 cm.) high, stand. Estimate HKD 400,000 - HKD 500,000. Price Realized HKD 680,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011   

Lot 25. Antonio Canova (1757-1822) Italian, Rome, Bust of Peace, 1814, white marble, on a white marble socle, 53cm., 20 7/8 in. including the socle. Estimate Upon Request. Courtesy Sotheby's.

 Provenance: John Campbell, 1st Baron Cawdor (1753-1821), early 1815;
John Campbell, 1st Baron Cawdor, and Lady Isabella Caroline Campbell, née Howard (1771-1848), eldest daughter of Frederick Howard, 5th Earl of Carlisle (1748-1825), Stackpole Court, Pembrokeshire, Wales;
John Frederick Campbell, 1st Earl Cawdor (1790-1860), and Elizabeth Campbell, Countess Cawdor, née Thynne (d. 1866), daughter of Thomas Thynne, 2nd Marquess of Bath (1765-1837), Stackpole Court, Pembrokeshire, Wales;
John Frederick Vaughan Campbell, 3rd Earl Cawdor (1817-1898), Stackpole Court, Pembrokeshire, Wales;
Frederick Archibald Vaughan Campbell, 2nd Earl Cawdor (1847-1911), Stackpole Court, Pembrokeshire, Wales;
Hugh Frederick Vaughan Campbell, 4th Earl Cawdor (1870-1914), Stackpole Court, Pembrokeshire, Wales;
John Duncan Vaughan Campbell, 5th Earl Cawdor (1900-1970), Stackpole Court, Pembrokeshire, Wales;
his sale, Stackpole Court and Golden Grove, Strutt & Parker, Lofts and Warner, 19-21 November 1962, lot 556 (‘A white marble bust of a lady with oak leafage bandeau, and another of a lady wearing a diadem, 21in. high’ [the present bust being the latter]);
Bonhams Knightsbridge, 20 March 2012, lot 395;
Private collection, United Kingdom

Exhibited: London, Royal Academy of Arts, Somerset House, The Forty-Ninth Exhibition, 13 June 1817, no. 1030.

John Campbell, Lord Cawdor, was Canova’s earliest British patron. He commissioned the Amorino (National Trust, Anglesey Abbey, inv. no. NT 516599) and the celebrated Cupid and Psyche (Musée du Louvre, Paris, inv. no. MR1777), both in 1787, and, in correspondence from that same year, Canova describes a bond of friendship between the two men beyond that of any other patron. 

Antonio Canova (1757-1822), Amorino Campbell, 1789, National Trust, Anglesey Abbey, inv. no. NT 516599.

Antonio Canova (1757-1822), Psyché ranimée par le baiser de l'Amour (Psyche revived by Cupid's Kiss), 61 × 66 1/10 × 39 4/5 in; 155 × 168 × 101 cm, Musée du Louvre. © Musée du Louvre, dist. RMN / Raphaël Chipault

Cawdor visited Canova in Rome in late 1814 and early 1815, at which time the sculptor is likely to have been formulating his plans to repatriate Rome’s great antiquities and paintings which had been confiscated by Napoleon’s armies and installed in the Louvre. Following Napoleon’s final defeat at Waterloo in June 1815, Canova was dispatched to Paris by Pope Pius VII with the task of negotiating the return of these artworks. He was followed by Cawdor in September 1815 and, on 9 September 1815, the two men met with Charles Long, art adviser to the Prince Regent, and Richard William Hamilton, Under-Secretary of State to Lord Castlereagh, the British Foreign Secretary. There can be little doubt that they discussed Canova’s mission for, the next day, and despite considerable resistance from Talleyrand and Vivant Denon, Director of the Musée Royale at the Louvre, Canova put his case to King Louis XVIII. Shortly afterwards, with the backing of the Duke of Wellington and the Prince Regent, an agreement was reached for the artworks to be returned to Rome.

Canova appears to have developed the concept of Ideal Heads (Teste ideali) with the specific purpose of gifting them to friends and patrons who had helped him in particular ways. He gave his first such bust, the Helen, conceived in 1811, to Countess Isabella Teotochi Albrizzi in 1812 (Palazzo Albrizzi, Venice), and another, the Clio, also executed 1811, to Luise Stolberg, Countess of Albany, who had commissioned Canova to execute the tomb of the poet Vittorio Alfieri (Musée Fabre, Montpellier). The Canova authority Hugh Honour has noted that, ‘None of them were commissioned - most unusually for Canova - and he took advantage of the opportunity to escape from the restrictions of portraiture or of mythological and historical subject-matter to realise his elusive aesthetic ideal’ (Honour, 1995, op. cit.).

As with the other Ideal Heads, the Bust of Peace must likewise have been presented as a gift by Canova to his friend. Lord Cawdor had been a steadfast patron throughout Canova's career and, despite the interval of the Napoleonic wars, had proven to be one of the sculptor's champions in Britain. He visited Canova's studio with the Duke of Bedford, at which time the Three Graces was commissioned (Victoria and Albert Museum, London, inv. no. A.4-1994; NGS, Edinburgh, inv. no. NG 2626), and later facilitated Canova's meeting with the Prince Regent. As is discussed below, Cawdor may also have been involved in securing the restitution of looted artworks to Rome. John Davies has confirmed that, 'amongst all other payments from Cawdor, there is no record at all of negotiation or payment for the Bust of Peace' (private correspondence). Moreover, the Bust of Peace was completed in 1814. Cawdor arrived in Rome only at the close of that year (he visited Canova's studio on 26 December 1814) and so could never have commissioned the bust. The fact that the sculptor apologises for a flaw in the marble in his letter of 8 July 1816 further goes to support the inevitable conclusion that the marble was presented gratis and not as a commission.

 Antonio Canova (1757-1822), The Three Graces, 1814-1817. Carved Marble. Height: 173 cm, Width: 97.2 cm base, Depth: 57 cm base, Weight: 825 kg, Weight: 585 kg sculpture, Weight: 240 kg base. Victoria and Albert Museum, London, inv. no. A.4-1994. © Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

Canova’s Ideal Heads enshrine the sculptor’s idea of facial perfection. Informed by nature, they are removed from the idiosyncrasies of portraiture and guided by Classical principles. Carved in a state of amore caldissimo, the Ideal Headstranscend the corporeal and present a vision of universal beauty inspired by Canova’s unique genius. The remarkable, almost ethereal, quality of the finished heads can be attributed to Canova’s superb surface finish. This, however, appears to have been achieved solely by virtue of the sculptor’s skill as a marble carver, since he told Cawdor in March 1817 that ‘some believe that I use a sort of encaustic paint on the marble of my finished sculpture, but of which crime I can no longer - for many years - be accused of. I challenge you to look and examine again the two statues of Hebe and Terpsichore, which were not treated with any wash, except that I passed over them a brush soaked in sandy water, which can be removed and washed off simply with a sponge’ (Canova to Cawdor 27 March 1817, published in Honour, Epistolario, op. cit., p. 219).

The Ideal Heads can be broadly divided into three main subjects: mythological (including: Helen; A Vestal; the Muses Clio, Callipe and Erato); historical or literary figures (including: Lucrezia d’Este; Laura; Beatrice; Sappho); and personifications (including: Peace; Gratitude; Philosophy). A fourth group exists of busts lacking identities.

Canova’s Bust of Peace symbolises the epoch. Presented by the artist to his friend and earliest British patron within months of Napoleon’s downfall, it represents, by virtue of its subject, the peace brought about by the Great Powers. Categorised as an Ideal Head by Missirini as early as 1824, and subsequently by Hugh Honour (private correspondence), the Bust of Peaceh as an added significance within the group, since it was the first Ideal Head to be presented to a British patron following Napoleon’s defeat. Cawdor’s meetings with Canova in Paris, alongside Hamilton and Long, further indicate that the bust may have given to his friend not merely for his loyalty as a patron but in thanks for his support in the campaign to restitute the confiscated artworks of the Papal States. In the very least the Bust of Peace, which was the first Ideal Head to arrive in Britain, is representative of Canova’s gratitude, as Pope Pius VII's Plenipotentiary Minister, to the British for their role, alongside Russia and Prussia, in defeating Napoleon.

Subsequently, in 1818, the four British dignitaries also present in Paris in the autumn of 1815, and who were instrumental in garnering support amongst the Great Powers for the restitution, were each presented with an Ideal Head by Canova. The Duke of Wellington received the Head of a Dancer (Apsley House, London) derived from the full figure Danzatrice con le mani sui franchi commissioned by Josephine Beauharnais circa 1802, completed 1811-12, later acquired by Emperor Alexander I of Russia, and now in the Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg; Viscount Castlereagh was gifted a Bust of Helen (Londonderry collection) after the aforementioned 1811 model given to Countess Isabella Teotochi Albrizzi; William Richard Hamilton was given an Ideal Head (Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, inv. no. WA1996.395) of the type alternately identified as Clio or Calliope first conceived as Clio for the Countess of Albany in 1811; and Sir Charles Long was sent an Ideal Head (Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, inv. no. AP 1981.13) probably derived from the head of the Seated Muse Polymnia, which had originally been commissioned as Concorde by Elisa Baciocchi Bonaparte (Eustace suggests that the bust may be a portrait of Caroline Murat, op. cit., p. 81).

Antonio Canova (1757-1822), Ideal Head, 1817. Marble, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, inv. no. WA1996.395. © Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford

 Antonio Canova (1757-1822), Ideal Head of a Woman, c. 1817. Marble, 22 3/16 x 9 7/16 x 9 3/4 in. (56.3 x 24 x 24.7 cm), Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, inv. no. AP 1981.13. © 2017 Kimbell Art Museum

Three of the busts were first recorded in the Notizie del Giorno, 24 September 1818, shortly after their arrival in England: ‘tre teste di donne di squisto lavoro, una al duca di Wellington, altra a lord Castlereagh, ed altra all’onorevole Charles Longh’ (as quoted in Eustace, op. cit., p. 66). Eustace has noted that Pius VII, in a letter to the Duke of Wellington, had promised to show his thanks for Britain’s role in the return of looted artworks, and has concluded that the busts may have been intended as official or semi-official gifts (op. cit., p. 66).

Canova’s Ideal Heads caused a stir when they arrived in Britain. Charles Long was unrestrained in his enthusiasm and gratitude for the gift. In October 1818 he wrote to Canova:

Je n’attenderai plus long temps de vous remercier pour le Cade[au] que vous avez eu la bonté de m’envoyer - elle est tout a fait gracieuse et elegante - tous les Connoisseurs, (et beaucoup l’ont vu) l’amire extremement, et la trouvent parmi les plus jolies de vos ouvrages. je ne sais pas comment vous ... faire assez mes remerciments, pour avoir destiné cette ouvrage pourmoi mais je vous prie bien de croire qu’il n’y a personne qui sait mieux l’apprecier ...

(Charles Long, Whitehall, 6 October 1818, as quoted in Eustace, op. cit., p. 82).

Remarkably, the progenitor of Castlereagh’s Helen, the aforementioned bust presented to Countess Albrizzi in 1811, was the subject of a poem by Lord Byron, whose eloquent lines convey the intrinsic timelessness Canova’s Ideal Heads:

In this belovèd marble view
Above the works and thoughts of Man,
What Nature could but would not, do,
And beauty and Canova can!
Beyond Imagination’s power,
Beyond the Bard’s defeated art,
With Immortality her dower,
Behold the Helen of the heart

George Gordon, Lord Byron, On the Bust of Helen by Canova, 1816

Recently, the original final plaster version of the Bust of Peace was discovered in the Museo civico, Bassano del Grappa, by Prof. Mario Guderzo, Director of the Museo Canova and Gipsoteca canoviana in Possagno. The pointed plaster bust was donated to the museum by Canova’s half brother Abbate Giambattista Sartori-Canova (1775-1858). Two further plasters of the model were listed in Canova's studio after his death, one of which is lost, the other destroyed. A further untraced plaster bust was cast by Canova and presented to the wife of Richard Long, Amelia Hume, in 1817 (1762-1837) (see letter between Canova and Cawdor, 6 September 1817, published in Honour, Epistolario, op cit., pp. 127-128). The accounts of the plasterer Vincenzo Malpieri dating to 6 September 1817 show that the cast of the Bust of Peace cost 7,20 scudi, substantially more than casts of Hamilton’s ‘Muse’ at 4,20 scudi, Wellington’s ‘Ballerina’ at 3,60 scudi and Castlereagh’s 'Elena di parigi' at a mere 2,40 scudi; the price differential is not explained (see accounts of Vincenzo Malpieri published in Honour, Epistolario, op cit., p. 1191).

Antonio Canova, Bust of Peace, Pointed Plaster, image courtesy of the Museo Canova and Gipsoteca canoviana, Possagno.

Lot 5. Giambologna (1529-1608) Italian, The Dresden Mars, Florence, before 1587, inscribed with the 1726 inventory number: 176 in white to the proper left calf; bronze, on an ebonised wood base; bronze: 39.3cm., 15 1/8 in., the ebonised wood base: 8.5cm., 3 3/8 in. Estimate 3,000,000 — 5,000,000 GBP. Courtesy Sotheby's

Provenance: Personal gift from the artist to Christian I, Elector of Saxony (first mentioned in the inventory of the Dresden Kunstkammer, inv. Fol. 66r, in 1587);
Listed in the Dresden Kunstkammer inventory in 1726, no. 176;
Nationalized from the Royal House of Saxony in 1919;
Skulptursammlung, Staatliche Kunstsammlung, Dresden, until 1924;
Restituted by the Freistaat Sachsen to the Verein Haus Wettin Albertinische Linie e.V 1924;
Consigned on behalf of the Verein Haus Wettin to Galerie Altkunst GmbH, Berlin;
Acquired from the above August 25, 1927 for a corporate collection, presented to an outgoing board member on his retirement in 1943;
thence by inheritance until gifted to Bayer AG in 1988.

Exhibited: Edinburgh, Royal Scottish Museum; London, Victoria and Albert Museum; Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Giambologna 1529-1608: Sculptor to the Medici, 1978, no. 43;
Berlin, Altes Museum, Von allen Seiten schön. Bronzen der Renaissance und des Barock, 1995, no. 114;
Florence, Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Giambologna: gli dei, gli eroi. Genesi e fortuna di uno stile europeo nella scultura, 2006, no. 24;
Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Giambologna. Triumph des Körpers, 2006, no. 11;
Dresden, Grünes Gewölbe im Dresdner Residenzschloss, Giambologna in Dresden. Die Geschenke der Medici, 2006.

Literature: A. Desjardins, La vie et oeuvre de Jean Boulogne, Paris, 1883, pp. 172-174;
W. Holzhausen, 'Die Bronzen der Kurfürstlich-Sächsischen Kunstkammer zu Dresden', in Jahrbuch der Königlich-Preußischen Kunstsammlungen, 54, 1933, pp. 54-62; 
E. Dhanens, Jean Boulogne. Giovanni Bologna Fiammingo, Douai 1529-Florence 1608. Bijdrage tot de studie van kunstbetrekkingen tussen net het Graafschap Vlaanderen Italië, Brussels, 1956, p. 198; 
C. Avery & A. Radcliffe (eds.), Giambologna 1529-1608: Sculptor to the Medici, exh. cat., Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh; V&A, London; Kunsthistorisches Museum Vienna, 1978, p. 96, no. 43; 
M. Leithe-Jasper, 'Bronze statuettes by Giambologna in the Imperial and other early collections', in C. Avery & A. Radcliffe (eds.), Giambologna 1529-1608: Sculptor to the Medici, exh. cat., Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh; V&A, London; Kunsthistorisches Museum Vienna, 1978, pp. 51-60; 
M. Raumschüssel, 'The Collection of Bronzes', in The Splendor of Dresden: Five Centuries of Art Collecting. An Exhibition from the State Art Collections of Dresden, German Democratic Republic, exh. cat. Washington, National Gallery of Art; New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art; San Francisco, The Fine Arts Museums, 1978-1979, pp. 197-198; 
C. Avery, Giambologna. The Complete Sculpture, Oxford, 1987, pp. 137, 261, no. 69;
V. Krahn (ed.), Von allen Seiten schön. Bronzen der Renaissance und des Barock, Altes Museum, Berlin, 1995, pp. 114-115, 368-369, no. 114; 
B. Marx, ‘Künstlermigration und Kulturkonsum. Die Florentiner Kulturpolitik im 16. Jahrhundert und die Formierung Dresdens als Elbflorenz’, in Deutschland und Italien in ihren wechselseitigen Beziehungen während der Renaissance, Wiesbaden, 2000, pp. 211-297;
B. Marx, ‘Italianità und frühneuzeitliche Hofkultur: Dresden im Kontext’ in Elbflorenz. Italienische Präsenz in Dresden 16-19. Jahrhundert, Dresden, c. 2000, pp. 7-36 (mentioned on p. 21);
D. Dombrowski, ‘Dresden-Prag: Italienische Achsen in der zwischenhöfischen Kommunikation’ in Elbflorenz. Italienische Präsenz in Dresden 16-19. Jahrhundert, Dresden, c. 2000, pp. 65-99 (mentioned p. 74, pl. II); 
D. Syndram and Antje Scherner (eds.), Princely Splendor. The Dresden Court 1580-1620, exh. cat., Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe, Hamburg and The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2004, pp. 268-270; 
M. Leithe-Jasper and P. Wengraf, European Bronzes from the Quentin Collection, exh. cat., The Frick Collection, New York, 2004, pp. 120, 125, 127, 130, 131 n.4, figs. 2, 5; 
B. Paolozzi Strozzi and D. Zikos (eds.), Giambologna: gli dei, gli eroi. Genesi e fortuna di uno stile europeo nella scultura, exh. cat., Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Florence, 2006, pp. 209-213, no. 24; 
W. Seipel (ed.), Giambologna. Triumph des Körpers, exh. cat. Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, 2006, pp. 218-221, no. 11; 
D. Syndram, M. Woelk & M. Minning (eds.), Giambologna in Dresden. Die Geschenke der Medici, exh. cat. Grünes Gewölbe im Dresdner Residenzschloss, Dresden, 2006, pp. 35-41; 
D. Zikos, 'Die Dresdner Giambolognas. Apologie ihrer Eigenhändigkeit’ in D. Syndram, M. Woelk & M. Minning (eds.), Giambologna in Dresden. Die Geschenke der Medici, exh. cat., Grünes Gewölbe im Dresdner Residenzschloss, Dresden, 2006, pp. 89-94;
B. Marx, ‘Vom Künstlerhaus zur Kunstakademie. Giovanni Maria Nossenis Erbe in Dresden’, in Sammeln als Institution. Von der fürstlichen Wunderkammer zum Mäzenatentum des Staates, Munich and Berlin, 2006, pp. 61-92 (mentioned on pp. 66-67); 
P. Wengraf, Renaissance & Baroque Bronzes from the Hill collection, London, 2014, pp. 164-166; 
B. Marx, ‘Die Kunstkammer als Museum’, in Sehen und Staunen. Die Dresdner Kunstkammer von 1640, Berlin, 2014, pp. 59-116 (mentioned on p. 60 and p. 686, no. 3064).

AN HOMAGE TO A PRINCE. GIAMBOLOGNA'S 1587 DRESDEN MARS

By Dimitrios Zikos

The Dresden Mars was a personal homage by Giambologna (c. 1529-1608) to the Elector of Saxony and Erzmarschall of the Holy Roman Empire Christian I (1560-1591, r. 1586) (fig. 1). This is the only small bronze the sculptor is known to have presented to a prince. First documented in 1587 in the first inventory of the Dresden Kunstkammer together with three more Giambologna bronzes that had reached Saxony in the same year as part of a larger gift by the Grand Duke of Tuscany, Francesco de' Medici (1541-1587, r. 1574) (fig. 2), to the Elector, the Mars belongs to the small group of Giambologna's earliest bronze statuettes and is the oldest documented cast of this particular model and the only one documented during the artist’s life.

fig. 1. Andreas Riehl, Kurfürst Christian I. von Sachsen, 1590, bpk | Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden | Elke Estel | Hans-Peter Klut.

fig. 2. Alessandro Allori, Francesco I de’ Medici, circa 1570-75© Museum Mayer van den Bergh inv. No. 0199.

The inventory, which was completed by the end of June 1587,[1] describes the bronze as: '1 image of Mars, cast in brass, sent by Giovanni Bologna to His Electoral Grace'('1 Mößingk gegoßen bildtnus Martis. Hat Johan Pollonia seiner churfürstlichen gnaden zugeschickt')[2].

'Zugeschickt' means 'sent' but proof that the Mars was a personal homage is provided by another document from the same year: a payment by the Elector to the goldsmith Urban Schneeweiß who, on 16 September 1587, received a little more than 164 Reichsthaler for a golden chain (fig. 3).

Hendrick Goltzius, Giambologna (wearing the gold chain gifted to him by Christian I), 1591, Teylers Museum Haarlem, The Netherlands. 

The comment to this payment reads: 'Giambologna, a sculptor in Florence, was presented with this chain because of the beautiful and artful image he had consigned to his Electoral Grace through Carlo Theti and this chain was presented by the said Theti when he travelled to Italy on another occasion.'

('Damit ist Johan Belegina [sic] ein Bilthauer zu Florentz, wegenn eines schönen Kunstreichenn Biltnus so Seine Churfürstlichen Gnaden er durch Carll Thetti vberantwortten lassen, beschencktt vnnd durch ermeltten Thetti, als er sonstenn in Italienn vorreiset Zubracht worden').[3]

The concept that no price was sufficient for a great work of art and therefore a great artist could give his works away at his discretion, was a topos based on the story of the ancient painter Zeuxis who presented two of his works because he claimed that no payment could ever match their immense value. The story was recounted by Pliny the Younger and repeated by Alberti and Vasari in the Renaissance, and was thus familiar enough that many important artists of the Cinquecento - Dürer, Holbein, Raphael, Titian - followed the example of Zeuxis. It was a way of demonstrating that art was more than a commodity and that the artist had a standing that allowed direct interaction with princes and reciprocal generosity. Many an artist's gift was, of course, made to obtain favour from a prince but this does not seem to have been the case with Giambologna's Mars. Indeed, the artist is known to have accepted what he was given for his work thus avoiding the need to set a price.[4]

This is best demonstrated by the circumstances described in a 1580 letter by Simone Fortuna, ambassador of the Duke of Urbino to the Tuscan court, to his master who was toying with the idea of commissioning sculptures from Giambologna. Fortuna says that Giambologna had been given precious fabric worth 50 scudi for a small bronze group of Nessus and Deianira, and a chain valued 60 scudi for another cast of the same model.[5] The fortunate owners of the two casts of Nessus and Deianira were not princes but two of the sculptor's very close friends, Niccolò Gaddi and Jacopo Salviati. It is also significant to note that Giambologna had opted to serve the Medici exclusively and thus would have presented his Marsto the Elector (whom he never met) expecting nothing in return beyond an appreciation for his art, and the hope that his already great international fame might spread.

The precise circumstances of this personal gift will perhaps never be known, but it was connected to a larger diplomatic gift from the Medici Grand Duke. One of the most important gestures of its kind, the Medici gift of 1587 comprised horses, Turkish weapons, and the three other Giambologna bronzes which also appear in the 1587 Kunstkammer inventory and are still in Dresden: a Nessus and Deianira (fig. 6)of the same type as the Gaddi and Salviati casts, a Mercury (fig. 4), and a Sleeping Nymph with a Satyr (fig. 5).[6] This lavish gift was in large part prompted by the Elector's wish to acquire thoroughbred horses in Italy for the new stables he began constructing in the summer of 1586.[7] A legation led by Heinrich von Hagen and Carlo Theti, both in the Elector’s service, left Dresden for Italy with this task in October 1586.[8] Instead of buying horses, the ambassadors received horses as gifts from the Duke of Savoy, the Grand Duke of Tuscany, the Duke of Mantua, and the Duke of Ferrara.[9] Arms were added by the Duke of Savoy and the Grand Duke of Tuscany, destined for the Dresden Ruestkammer.[10] Finally, besides the bronzes presented by Francesco de’ Medici, the Duke of Mantua, Guglielmo Gonzaga, also gave the ambassadors a bronze: an equestrian statuette of Marcus Aurelius by Filarete, which is still preserved in Dresden.[11]

fig. 4. Giambologna, Mercury, before 1587, bpk | Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden | Jürgen Karpinski

fig. 5. Giambologna, Sleeping Nymph with Satyr, before 1587, bpk | Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden | Jürgen Karpinski.

Leading up to the gift of 1587 were years of diplomatic exchange between the two courts, which although of different faiths, shared many interests, underpinned by a common loyalty to the Emperor. These interests centred on mining and had led Francesco de' Medici's father Cosimo I to approach Christian's father Elector August thirty years earlier.[12] In exchange for Saxon know-how in mining, Count Rocco di Linar - a Tuscan architect close to Cosimo I who had ennobled him - was appointed architect to the Saxon court in 1569. Rocco di Linar travelled to Italy in 1572 on behalf of the Elector and returned with a request from the Medici court for masters in artillery. A first Medici gift, of 12 Reitesel, or riding donkeys, took place the same year, and it is interesting that this was presented by Francesco de' Medici who was then regent. After coming to the throne two years later, Francesco (who was married to a Habsburg princess, Joanna of Austria, sister of Emperor Maximilian II) intensified relations with the Saxon Court and was rewarded with Elector August's support in a renewed appeal to the Emperor for confirmation of the Grand Ducal title that had been bestowed on Cosimo I by the pope.

Through Francesco's gentiluomo Hans Albrecht von Sprinzenstein (who had brought the twelve donkeys to Dresden in 1572), the Italian artist Giovan Francesco Nosseni (1544-1620) was hired by the Saxon court in 1575. It is thanks to Nosseni who remained in Saxony until his death, that the modern Italian style - especially Florentine - was introduced to Dresden where it flourished under the short reign of Christian I.[13] Just two years later, in 1577, Dresden was dubbed 'another Florence' (altera Florentia) and is today still known as Elbflorenz, or 'Florence on the Elbe'. In short, Tuscany offered art and artists in exchange for technical know-how and political support. The exceptional donation of bronzes by Francesco de' Medici’s court-sculptor marks the high point in these relations and contributed to the continued appreciation of Italian art by Christian I and his successors.

A key figure in the relations between Francesco de’ Medici and Christian I was the Neapolitan architect Carlo Theti (1529-1589) - the intermediary between Giambologna and Christian I.[14] Hired in 1584 to teach Prince Christian, Theti had worked both for the Emperor and the Medici. After Christian was invited by his father to help him rule the country, Theti was sent to Florence in 1585 to inform the Grand Duke.[15] Francesco's response was to write to both August and Christian asking them what gifts he could offer them.[16] This question may already have prompted a request for Giambologna bronzes from Dresden.[17] It is commonly assumed that Giambologna’s Mars was dispatched to Dresden together with the Medici gifts for the Elector, although the Mars was a personal gift from the artist. Damian Dombrowski has argued that Theti is not known to have travelled to Italy between the spring of 1587 and the spring of the following year. Since the payment document reports that he had given the golden chain to Giambologna, he would have done so towards the end of 1586. This would have allowed Giambologna enough time to make the Mars, which could, however, still have been dispatched with the Grand Duke’s gifts for Dresden.

With regard to the three other Giambologna bronzes presented by the Grand Duke, these could have not been made in the three weeks the Saxon legation stayed in Florence.[18] In a letter addressed to Christian I, which accompanied the gifts, Francesco de’ Medici says on 26 January 1587 that he was confronted suddenly - 'all'improviso' - with the Elector's desire for horses and that he thought fit to add ‘other things’.[19]  These were the Turkish weapons, which the Grand Duke had been expecting in a shipment from Constantinople. In order that they could be included in the gift, the Saxon legation prolonged its stay in Florence – so it originally planned to stay even less than three weeks.[20]

All this points to an improvised addition of the Giambologna bronzes to the Medici gift. In 1612, Grand Duke Cosimo II sent a group of Giambologna bronzes to Henry Prince of Wales, some of which were taken from the Medici collections.[21]Francesco would have done likewise, that is, taken bronzes from his own collections for an important diplomatic gift. As he had promoted Giambologna’s career and avidly collected his works, Francesco had a number of small bronzes by him in his possession (some of them are today in the Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Florence). He was, in fact, the first systematic collector of silver and bronze sculpture by Giambologna.

The addition of bronzes to the 1587 Medici gift appears, however, not to have been done spontaneously as a personal decision but as a response to an interest for works of this type. Indeed, Nosseni had urged Christian I to ask the Medici for sculpture in a letter written on 28 September 1586, shortly before the departure of the legation for Italy.[22] As a patron of the arts comparable to the Italian princes, the Emperor, and the Duke of Bavaria – so Nosseni’s argument runs – the Elector was entitled to request works from the Grand Duke made by the best artists after the arts 'came back to light' ('die Künste widerumb ans Licht kommen'). Among the Italian princes the Medici are singled out by Nosseni as the greatest art collectors. Moreover, Giambologna was the only living artist among the best artists mentioned by Nosseni. Therefore, works by him would have been an obvious choice to request in Tuscany - an idea reinforced by the fact that the Emperor and the Duke of Bavaria could boast owning works by Giambologna.

Christian did not send a written request for bronzes to the Italian princes who would be visited by his ambassadors.[23] But what was not said in a formal letter could be transmitted more subtly, since the Elector also received a bronze from Mantua, which suggests that he followed Nosseni’s advice. A small bronze by Giambologna, moreover, had the advantage of representing high art in a form that was portable and materially precious.

In a treatise on the formation of a Kunstkammer written by Gabriel Kaltemarckt in 1587 shortly after the arrival of the Giambologna bronzes in Dresden, Christian I is urged to create a veritable Kunstkammer, one that included art in the manner of the Medici and the other art-loving princes of Europe. Here Giambologna is described as the most esteemed sculptor in Europe.[24] The arrival and inclusion of his statuettes in the Dresden Kunstkammer where they are first documented in the Elector’s Reißgemach contributed to the transformation of this space according to Kaltemarckt’s instructions and provided the foundations for its further development as one of the most important and impressive Kunstkammern (fig. 7) in Europe.

fig. 7. Residenzschloss: View of the historic Bronzenzimmer in the Grünes Gewölbe, bpk | Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden | David Brandt. 

At any rate, the 1587 donation of Giambologna bronzes to Christian I remains a highly exceptional gesture. Before then, the Medici had only once presented bronzes to a sovereign when, in 1565, works by Giambologna were given to Emperor Maximilian II. And only one other important bronze had left Italy as a gift, the lost bronze David by Michelangelo, which had been given by the Republic of Florence to Marshall Giè. Theti may have been aware of the 1565 gift of Giambologna bronzes to the Emperor, since he had been employed at the Imperial court. Theti may also have informed the Elector of this precedent as support for Nosseni's recommendations, and once he arrived in Florence, Theti could have conveyed to the Grand Duke how pleased the Elector would be to receive a gift comparable to the Emperor's. Cosimo's 1565 gift of Giambologna bronzes to Maximilian II had been dictated by the practical concern to satisfy the Emperor's love for bronzes.[25] In 1565 Giambologna adapted the model of a Mercury, that had been commissioned for the Archiginnasio in Bologna, and invented a relief and a ‘figurina’, or small figure.

A year (or, in exceptional cases, six months) was needed to make a model and have it cast and finished by one of the goldsmiths in the Grand Duke's service.[26] If the three Giambologna bronzes were not chosen from the Medici collections but were made expressly to send to Dresden, then they must have been commissioned from Giambologna some time before. If the latter was the case, it is interesting that he resorted to older inventions. The Nessus and Deianira (fig. 6) was first modelled in the mid-1570s and the signed cast made for Niccolò Gaddi has survived in the Huntington Art Collections. The model for the Mercury (fig. 4) sent to Dresden had been created by 1579 when a cast was sent to Ottavio Farnese, Duke of Parma (a city also visited by the Saxon legation); this bronze is in the Museo Nazionale di Capodimonte, Naples. The oldest mention of a bronze Sleeping Nymph (fig. 5) by Giambologna dates from 1584, when a bronze of the subject was sent to the Roman household of Cardinal Ferdinando de' Medici, Grand Duke Francesco's younger brother and heir. And we shall make the case that the model of the Mars existed already by 1565.

 fig. 6. Giambologna, Nessus and Deianira, before 1587, bpk | Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden | Arrigo Coppitz

For the reasons stated above it is likely that Francesco de' Medici deprived himself of some of his Giambologna bronzes in order to send them to Dresden but the sculptor’s personal gift of the Mars would have been made intentionally some time before the arrival of the Saxon legation in Dresden.[27]

From the reconstruction we have presented, it is evident that not all four Giambologna bronzes in Dresden could have been made at the same time and this accounts for the notable differences in their facture. These differences were last studied in detail when these statuettes were displayed together during the Giambologna exhibition in the Museo Nazionale del Bargello curated by the author and by Beatrice Paolozzi Strozzi,[28] in the Vienna venue of the same show [29], and in an exhibition dedicated to only these four bronzes, which opened in Dresden in the same year. I have tried to account for these differences in an essay written for the catalogue of the Dresden exhibition.[30]

Before 1587 the making of small bronzes by Giambologna was exceptional. His priority - understandably in a Florentine artistic milieu that still revered Michelangelo - was large marble sculpture. Models for sculpture in a smaller size were more often designed for the small silver statues very much loved by Grand Duke Francesco I. Small bronzes were destined to a handful of commissions that came from outside of Florence while in Florence itself the only small bronzes Giambologna made for someone other than the Grand Duke are the two groups of the Nessus and Deianira mentioned above. Casting and finishing were delegated and on one occasion Giambologna expressed his hope that the chiseller would not change too much of the model through his finish.

It is not until around 1600 that the idea gains ground within the workshop of Giambologna to make the production of bronze statuettes a more common practice - especially that of small crucifixes. Two names of assistants are linked to this production: Felice Trabellesi and Antonio Susini.[31] The latter was not an inventive artist and Giambologna directed him towards making bronzes after his own models and after the Antique. These bronzes were cast for Susini in a foundry used by Giambologna himself, that of Domenico Portigiani, before establishing his own workshop, directly after Giambologna’s death, where he continued casting and chiselling small bronzes after the models of his master. The most characteristic example of this type of production are the bronzes first documented in the collection of Markus Zäch in 1611 – a series made up of older Giambologna models with a uniform design, cast, finish, and colour.[32] The hallmark of these technically excellent bronzes and of most bronzes made in Florence after Giambologna's death is a definition of detail so precise that it can eventually degenerate into a mechanical design. Because this precision has often been perceived as alien to the idiosyncrasy of Giambologna, such bronzes have commonly been ascribed to Susini and have therefore been considered workshop. As I have argued elsewhere, there is no historical basis for this opinion and it should be borne in mind that Giambologna himself wrote in 1605 that casts by Susini after his models are among the best things that can be acquired from his own hands -proof that we should appreciate them as autograph. Although Susini was active since the mid-1570s - for a while independent and then in Giambologna's workshop - his activity for his master before 1600 appears to have been limited to preparing the casts, patinating the Apollo in the Studiolo (1586) and he is even known to have made small wax models a year after the departure of the Saxon legation from Florence.

Any goldsmith in the Grand Duke’s service could have been involved in the making of the Dresden Mars, but it is impossible and historically wrong to ascribe it to Susini and not to consider it as an autograph work by Giambologna. And we should never forget that it was the artist himself who chose the Mars as his own personal gift to a ruler. He would not have presented so important a prince as the Erzmarschall of the Holy Roman Empire with something not made by himself. The Dresden Mars is not chiselled with the regular patterns that became standard around 1600, but rather is finished with great liveliness and intensity. It is an early autograph bronze belonging to that small group of bronzes made before 1587. With the death of Francesco de’ Medici in that year, Giambologna embarked on the making of large bronze statuary and completely delegated the production of bronzetti which from then on assumed the more uniform appearance referred to above. Among the Dresden casts only the Sleeping Nymph and Satyr (fig. 5) in the Grünes Gewölbe is so precisely defined and includes carefully engraved ornamental patterns, such as the decoration of the pillow as to appear to belong to that later type of Giambologna bronzes.

The same differences between the casts of the Dresden set of Giambologna bronzes can be also noted in the comparative analysis of other Giambologna bronzes made before 1587. The 1575 Apollo for the Studiolo of Prince Francesco has passages like the curls of the hair, which are reminiscent of carved wood.[33] The Gaddi Nessus and Deianira in the Huntington Art Collections made before 1580 is a translation of the fluid modelling in wax into the permanent medium of metal. We could go on describing the qualities of these earliest Giambologna bronzes, but we will not be able to define a common denominator in their facture other than technical prowess. This can only mean that Giambologna had no objection to such variations provided that bronzes would remain faithful to his models and to his technical standards. More and more, however, finish became an essential part of their appearance. This must have occurred in the 1580s. The increasing importance of finish was facilited by the employment of expert goldsmiths as it is implied in the 1580 Fortuna letter and as was made possible by the physical vicinity of Giambologna’s workshop in the Palazzo Vecchio to the workshops of the goldsmiths in the service of the Grand Duke, which were located in the same building. Notwithstanding this new importance of chiselling, every bronze dated before 1587 retains a unique character and remains an autograph, unique sculpture.

The Dresden Giambologna bronzes are expertly cast (with the exception of the Nessus and Deianira), finely polished, and bear the red varnish with a golden shimmer that became the hallmark of the Florentine bronzes around the end of the 1580s. However, the precise and regular outline of every detail according to a standard pattern is not a priority.

In particular, the Dresden Mars is chiselled with great skill throughout, especially in the hair and the beard. We can perceive, when handling it, how important finish had become for Giambologna in the definition of detail. This is no longer the cast of a bozzetto left untouched after the metal has cooled but almost the work of a goldsmith who has conveyed a lively surface, best appreciated when studied closely as the Elector would have done in his study.

There are many casts of the Mars and several of high quality but only three are documented as autograph. Aside from the Dresden Mars, these are a version formerly in the Ernö Wittmann collection in Budapest which bears the initials I.B. and a cast formerly in the collection of Markus Zäch.[34] The Mars in the Quentin Foundation collection, London, has been perceived as very similar to the Huntington Nessus and Deianira and would therefore date from around that time, as does the Mars in the Stockholm Nationalmuseum, which appears to share many characteristics with it.[35] The most up to date and convincing analysis of the various casts has been provided by Manfred Leithe-Jasper, in the 2006 Giambologna exhibition catalogue.[36]

As Leithe-Jasper has put it, the Mars is Giambologna's most dynamic male nude figure and a development of two of his earliest monumental sculptures, the large bronze Neptune (fig. 8) on the fountain in Bologna and the slightly later Neptunefrom the Oceanus Fountain in the Boboli Gardens, today in the Bargello.[37] The magnificent gesture of the left arm is similar to the large bronze in Bologna (to which Heiner Protzmann has dedicated an inspiring essay[38]), as is the turning of the head in such a way as to permit the god to look over his left shoulder. But neither statue has the peculiar design of the hair of the Mars that has been linked - not without reason - to the anastole of the hair in the portraits of Alexander the Great. Whether this was a deliberate reference is impossible to prove but the locks of hair are undoubtedly one of the most striking parts of the model. Leithe-Jasper’s observation that not all of the better casts show the same pattern of hair is proof that in preparing the wax-casting model Giambologna took the liberty to make slight variations, which is a leitmotif of his art.

fig. 8. Giambologna, Fountain of Neptune, Piazza Maggiore, Bologna, 1567, Raffaello Bencini | Alinari Archives, Florence

Another important element of the model is the stride of the figure. The length of the stride is essential in determining the extent of the energy that emanates from the pose. This was ascertained after careful measurements were taken from the many versions in the Vienna venue of the 1978-1979 Giambologna exhibition. Nevertheless, as these measurements have also shown, length alone does not guarantee the appearance of such vitality. In some of the best models the left heel is not raised but a raised left heel, which adds momentum to the action, becomes an integral part of the composition in later casts and is present in the Dresden Mars. This slight raising of the heel and the torsion of the body, the gestures of the arms, and the turning of the head all make the model a veritable figura serpentinata, as can be best perceived when handling the bronze or looking at it from above (see p. 48).

In his entry on the Mars, in the catalogue of the 2006 exhibition Giambologna in Dresden. Die Geschenke der Medici, Moritz Woelk described the sculptor's present to the Elector as an image fit for a ruler: 'The pose of the heroic figure combines power, attention, and self-control - all virtues proper to a ruler'.[39] This makes the Mars an ideal choice for a present to a monarch - especially one who held the highest military office in the Holy Roman Empire, that of the Erzmarschall, and accounts for Giambologna's decision to choose the Mars among all his available models for his homage to Christian I.

The sculptor’s decision cannot have been accidental and I believe that an additional reason is because Cosimo I had sent another bronze statuette of Mars by Giambologna to Emperor Maximilian II in 1565 (along with a large scale Mercury and a bronze relief also by Giambologna).

Indeed, as has been often noted, the model of the Mars was known to Pietro da Barga who made a copy (fig. 9), today in the Museo Nazionale del Bargello. The first scholar to refer to Pietro da Barga's Mars copy was Anthony Radcliffe, but he doubted the identity between the bronze in the Bargello and the Gladiator (as the Mars was described) that was consigned to the Guardaroba of Cardinal Ferdinando I in 1575.[40] There is, however, no reason for so much caution: the Bargello Pietro da Barga Mars is the bronze documented in 1575 because its history in the Medici household can be traced together with the other copies made by the same sculptor for the cardinal – copies that belong to the uniform group today in the Bargello.

fig. 9. Pietro da Barga, Mars, before 1575, Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Florence. Reproduced with the permission of Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali / Finsiel/Alinari Archives

This copy alone is enough solid proof that Giambologna's model of the Mars had been invented before 1575. Additional evidence for such a dating is provided by another observation. As has been convincingly argued by Eike D. Schmidt the pose is reflected in Domenico Poggini's bronze Pluto (fig. 10) for the Studiolo of Prince Francesco, which can be dated around 1571-1572.[41]

fig. 10. Domenico Poggini, Pluto, circa 1571-72. Archivi Alinari, Firenze. 

Before that date, however, Giambologna is known to have made only one small bronze, the ‘figurina’ presented to Emperor Maximilian II in 1565. This bronze has been traditionally identified with the signed Standing Venus in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, which has long been believed to be a unique cast. The Venus was suggested also because it was assumed that Giambologna's 1565 bronze statuette would have represented a female figure. However, it is now clear today that the Vienna Venus is not a unique version (another very similar cast was displayed in the 2006 Vienna exhibition) but also of a later date.[42] A figurina - in Italian a feminine noun - is merely a small figure not necessarily a small female figure as is also proven by an archival registration discovered by Herbert Keutner of a ‘figurina con uno sgudo in Mano et uno bastone, innuda’ ('a small naked figure holding a shield and a baton'), which was clearly a statuette of a small male warrior, which the great Giambologna scholar had assumed was a silver version of the Mars.[43]

For all these reasons it is evident that a Mars was the figurina given by Cosimo I to the Emperor in 1565. This is corroborated not only because this was an image fit for a monarch, but also by the obvious proximity of its model to the Bologna Neptune, which was begun shortly before, in 1563.

Rarely has a bronze by Giambologna more eloquently demonstrated the sculptor's status as Europe's most important representative of his art after the death of Michelangelo. He was famous and respected enough as to take the liberty to make a personal gift to a prince - a gift that was part of one of the most important diplomatic exchanges of the Renaissance. The sculptor chose an older model, made for an Emperor, Maximilian II, and this explains why Giambologna invested so much of his creativity in this model: it is not a mere study of the male nude, but an entirely convincing and very personal rendering of a human body and a revolutionary excercise in movement - dynamic but controlled - that can only be appreciated in its historical importance if seen in the context of Giambologna's great achievements of the mid 1560s, that is, the large scale statues of Neptune and the Mercury sent to Emperor Maximilian II. For the history of bronze Kleinplastikin particular, the Dresden Mars is, together with the other three Dresden Giambolognas and the bronzes commissioned by Francesco de' Medici today in the Bargello, the epitome of the new importance that the casting of bronze statuettes had achieved for the sculptor in the 1580s - in the wake of Grand Duke Francesco's commissions of small silver statues and exquisitely wrought small bronzes finished by some of the most refined goldsmiths in the service of the Medici. Made long before this branch of his production became standardised as the result of the popularity of his models, the Dresden Marsmarks the end of the sculptor’s most inventive years. More important than any historical consideration, however,  is the fact that this bronze is undoubtedly a great work of art.

Lot 10. Galatea and the Sea Monster. A Dutch silver salt, Adam van Vianen, Utrecht, 1624; 19.5cm., 7 3/4in. high, 589gr., 18oz. 19dwt. Estimate 3,000,000 — 5,000,000 GBP. Courtesy Sotheby's

Embossed and chased with Galatea, her hair encrusted with shells, supporting the salt container moulded with lobate folds and sinuous masks, seated on a sea monster with molten ornament flowing from his knobbly shell body, signed A.o 24. A.DE. VIANA. FE.

Provenance: Baron Lionel Rothschild of 148 Piccadilly (1808-1879)
Sir Nathan Mayer Rothschild (1840-1915)
Lionel Walter Rothschild (1868-1937) 
Sold Sotheby’s & Co. The Celebrated collection of German, Dutch and other Continental silver and silver-gilt… Removed from 148 Piccadilly W.I, April 26, 1937, lot 257
Dr. F.H. Fentener van Vlissingen
Dutch private collection.

Exhibited: Central Museum Utrecht, Tentoonstelling van oude Kunst uit particulier bezit, 2 July-15 September, 1938, no. 147
Central Museum Utrecht, Catalogus van de tentoonstelling Utrecht's kunst, opkomst en bloei, 650-1650 , Utrecht, 1948, no. 185
Central Museum Utrecht, Utrechts zilver, 10 October-23 November 1952, no. 145

Literature: C.H de Jonge, Adam van Vianen, Zilversmid te Utrecht, omstreeks 1565-1627, Oud Holland 54 (1937) p.107
A.L. den Blaauwen,  Adam, Paulus en Christaen van Vianen: leven en work, doctoral thesis, Leiden, 1957
Antje Von Graevenitz, Das Niederlandische Ohrmuschel-ornament; Phanomen und entwicklung dargestellt an den werken und entwurfen der goldschmiedefamilien van Vianen und Lutma, diss. Munich, 1973, pp. 159-160
J R ter Molen, Van Vianen, een Utrechtse familie van zilversmeden met een internationale faam, Doctoral thesis, Leiden 1984, vol. II no. 437.

Note: This salt is recorded in the division of Lionel Rothschild’s property (1808-1879), drawn up in March 1882, three years after his death. The property was divided between his three sons, Sir Nathan Mayer, Alfred and Leopold. The salt is recorded again with the same description A Salt-Cellar. Female on a Monster, as part of Sir Nathan’s portion of the inheritance, `No 1 lot’. It was kept in the Library, of 148 Piccadilly, the London home (now destroyed) which Sir Nathan’s father had bought in 1838, and left to him1. It descended in the family until Lionel Walter’s death in 1937 when it was sold to A. Vecht for £500.2 A print of the salt was published circa 1650, by Adam van Vianen’s son Christiaen, goldsmith to Charles I and Charles II (Fig.3). One of 48 plates, with which `he presented the ingenuity and breadth of his father’s designs to the world’, it is a mirror image due to the normal printing process.3

Fig.3. An etching for a salt, no. 39, from a series of 48 designs by Adam van Vianen, published by his son Christian, in ‘Constige Modellen…’, Dutch, 1646-1652.

A detail from an engraving, no. 13, from a series of 48 designs by Adam van Vianen, published by his son Christian, in ‘Constige Modellen…’, Dutch, 1646-1652.

An unpublished drawing of the salt also exists and provides exciting material for further research into the salt’s location in the early 18th century. This drawing was recently sold at auction4, part of an album of watercolours dated 1726 and attributed to Johannes Claudius de Cock, (1667-1736). In addition to the salt, the album included a number of other items by Adam van Vianen, his son Christiaen (1598-1671) and a follower from Utrecht, Michiel de Bruyn van Berendrecht (1608-1660), which have appeared at auction or are now in public collections. This album which includes the salt was recently purchased by the Rijksmuseum and will be featured in the catalogue of the exhibition 'Kwab, Dutch design in the age of Rembrandt', to be held there from 30 June until 16 September. It will also be the subject of a lecture at the symposium for the exhibition, on 14 September, also at the Rijksmuseum, and will subsequently be published in Tijdschrift voor Interieurgeschiedenis en design.

The subject of Galatea, the most beautiful of the sea nymphs, is most appropriate for a salt. Her story from Ovid’s Metamorphoses, of love for Acis son of a river god who was murdered by his rival, Cyclops Polyphemus was a popular theme in the 16th and 17th century, particularly in the Netherlands, where the sea was so important. In pictures and prints, Galatea is often shown in the presence of wild and exotic sea creatures which accompany her and do her bidding. An example by the Haarlem-born engraver and influential publisher Philips Galle of 1587, shows her reclining uncomfortably on such a creature. She holds a trident as prefigurement of Polythemus Cyclops, Neptune's son (Fig.1.). Adrian Collaert (1560-1618), Galle’s son-in-law produced prints of Galatea (also Acis) and designs for Galatea riding in a shell with sea monster, for use on the bowls of silver tazzas. Galle’s pupil Hendrick Goltzius, another Haarlem artist copied Raphael’s Fresco of the Triumph of Galatea in Rome and turned it into prints which were published in 1592. He also produced a wood cut of the nymph (1588) crowned with shells and surrounded by fleshy shapes in an early but developed example of lobate forms.5

Fig.1. Galatea, engraving, Philips Galle, Antwerp, 1587 (Courtesy Rijksmuseum)

Adam van Vianen has chosen to portray Galatea at the beginning of the story, before the events with Acis and Cyclops have taken place, yet the sculpture alludes successfully to the coming drama of love, death and transformation. The monster’s adoring backward look gives a sense of movement and progression in time. 'Her eyes are a marvel, for they have a kind of distant look that travels as far as the seas extend’.6 Galatea’s love for Acis, about to be revealed, is evoked by the billing doves, but the monster’s tail which she innocently holds for balance, acts as a warning of Cyclop’s physical strength and passion. This tail also prefigures the tall green reed that grew from a crack in Cyclops boulder after he had crushed Acis. It divides the liquid ornament, that flows from the monsters rock-like body, in the way that Acis was transformed into a river.

The Genius of the Van Vianen

The emergence of Mannerism in the last years of the Italian High Renaissance around 1520 gave artists a new freedom to experiment and conceive. Less than a century later, aspects of the style had been appropriated by inventive minds and skilful hands to create what became known as auricular ornament. The goldsmiths obsessed with this style determined to astonish and confuse, increasingly imparting a deceptive, dreamy malleability to inflexible metal objects.

Early examples of the auricular may be found in Italian craftsmanship dating from before 1550. But fifty years later a group of artists associated with the court of Emperor Rudolph II in Prague and by others in the Netherlands, gave a power to the style which allowed the viewer to roam free with his imagination. It was the genius of the van Vianens (Adam, his brother Paulus, and Adam’s son Christiaen) which proved crucial in the development and consolidation of this style. Four hundred years later, artists, craftsmen and connoisseurs continue to be fascinated by the astonishing achievements of these remarkable goldsmiths: because of them auricular silver with its specific Dutch characteristics, as surely as the work of Rembrandt, has become permanently linked with the Golden Age of Netherlandish prosperity and artistic achievement.7This is the van Vianens’ fundamental importance in the history of Dutch art.

The Earliest Auricular silver

Although the earliest piece of auricular silver to have survived dates from 1607 (a tazza by Paulus van Vianen), the evidence of an engraving by Hendrik Goltzius dated 1595 seems to indicate that the style was by then, if not already fashionable, at least igniting artists’ imaginations. The main subject of this engraving is a youthful Bacchus holding aloft a cup or two-handled bowl. This curiously formed vessel appears to be decorated with two nose-to-nose monsters with tails, but at second glance their heads merge to form a single weird aquatic face, similar to the cartilage of a human ear. This was the essence of the auricular.

Goltzius’s engraving of Bacchus (Fig.2) raises the question as to how many items of goldsmiths’ work in the auricular style were made. Although the answer will never be known, it is probably safe to say that what still exists represents just a fraction of the original whole. Even J.W. Frederiks acknowledged that, ‘Many of Adam’s works are lost [and] we only know them from descriptions in old catalogues.8 Fluctuating prices and popularity over the years must account for some lost masterpieces.9

 Fig.2. Bacchus, engraving, Hendrick Goltzius, Haarlem, 1558-1617. 

The first surviving hint of the auricular in Adam van Vianen’s work are details from a tazza bowl of 1610, the centre of which is decorated with a scene of Ulysses and his companions feasting with Circe (Rijksmuseum). These include two monsters/masks which are reminiscent of that on Bacchus’s bowl in Hendrik Goltzius’s 1595 engraving. Like that of Paulus van Vianen, Goltzius’s work was much admired by Emperor Rudolf II Habsburg (1552-1612), who was described by a contemporary as ‘the greatest art patron in the world,’ and at whose court both men were employed. Another feature, of more significance, is the rendering of the vessel which cools the hero’s wine on the tazza. This item shows that Adam had already conceived a piece of silver where the auricular would determine not only the decoration but the entire form.

Adam van Vianen and His Circle

While Paulus van Vianen went on his travels and latterly lived in Prague as goldsmith to the emperor Rudolf II, Adam stayed in Utrecht, living for many years in a house on the eastern side of the Oude Gracht, which his father had acquired in 1595. He had a wide circle of friends including prominent artists and intellectuals in Utrecht and Haarlem as well as Amsterdam. In artistic terms, his home town of Utrecht was very successful and international in outlook ‘most of the leading artists had worked in Rome or in other countries’…and even with a population of 30,000 compared with Amsterdam’s 120,000, ‘it was still the most important centre for painting in the republic…in Utrecht as in Antwerp and Rome, Catholics and the Aristocracy played formative roles, whereas the reigning ethos in the Dutch Republic as a whole was essentially protestant and middle class’.10

Bizarre Folds and Undulations

Following Adam’s tentative experiment with the auricular style on the tazza of 1610, he quickly utilized his skill as a silversmith and chaser to create pieces whose entire form was lost to the ornament. By the time he made the ewer and basin of 1614, (Rijksmuseum) with its scenes from the Eighty Years’ War, the design was enclosed by the bizarre folds and undulations of cartouche-like auricular panels. These are inhabited by distinctly up-to-date masks, most probably reflecting the taste of the commissioning client: the City of Amsterdam for presentation to Prince Maurice who in 1610 had a grotto designed by Jacques de Gheyn for the Ninnenhof in the Hague, which shows many elements of the auricular. The overall shapes of the ewer and basin, however, do not deviate from traditional forms. To that extent they are compromise objects, an observation which cannot be levelled against Adam van Vianen’s silver-gilt ewer, also dated 1614, which he made for the Amsterdam Guild of Silversmiths. This piece, made in homage to his brother, Paulus, who had died in 1613, found Adam exploring to the full his genius as a goldsmith. The body of this wonderful object, entirely auricular, has been described as ‘fluid earlobe-like forms flowing into one another’ like some ‘stirred syrupy substance’ from which emerge ‘all manner of terrifying part-human and part-animal creatures’.11 Within the protectionist world of the guilds, it was an extraordinary accolade to both Paulus, who had largely lived abroad and to Adam who was a goldsmith from Utrecht, that a guild from Amsterdam should commission a work, created by one, in honour of the other.

This reference to ‘part-human and part-animal’ elements in their work reminds us that both Paulus and Adam van Vianen were inspired, not only by the Mannerist masters of the Renaissance but also by Nature at its most exposed and visceral. As a seafaring people whose country was almost as much water as it was land, the Dutch were open more than most to the vagaries of the sea. With a coast battered by the swell and tempest of North Sea storms, among the most alarming appearances from the deep were a number of beached whales: at least 40 between 1521 and 1699. Two in particular were noteworthy: a large specimen washed ashore on 3 February 1598 by the small town of Katwijk, near Leiden, and another on 19 December 1601 at Beverwyck, near Haarlem (Fig.5).12

 Fig.5. Stranded Whale at Berckhey, 1598, Gilliam van der Gouwen, Dutch, 1679-1681, after Jacob Matham and Hendrick Goltzius (Courtesy Rijksmuseum)

The eventual dismemberment of these marine colossi revealed many intriguing details, among which were the bones of the whales’ ears (Fig.6). Similarly, there was a fascination for the internal workings of the human body. This was especially so after Petrus Pauw, Professor of Anatony at the University Leiden, established in 1594 the first permanent anatomical theatre where public demonstrations took place every winter. The theatre’s steeply tiered seating ensured that all the observers had a good view of the rotating dissection table where the corpse was laid out. We are told that many artists attended these and similar dissections, in Leiden, Amsterdam and elsewhere, among whom were Aert, Pietersz (1550?-1612), Pieter van Miereveld (1596-1623) and Rembrandt van Rijn (1606-1669).

 Fig.6. Bone from a whale’s auricular system.

Given the circles in which Adam van Vianen moved, both artistic and intellectual, it is inconceivable that he was unaware of the lively attention paid by his contemporaries to such events. The beached whales were a matter of widespread gossip and wonderment and the cadavers on surgeons’ slabs, their exposed viscera in cartouche-like folds of skin, were the subject of much earnest study and discussion. While it has already been shown that the auricular motifs which Adam and his brother Paulus developed from ornament originating in Italy via Prague, sights like these gave the style in Adam’s hands its Dutch genius.

Lot 3920. A small blue and white vase, zhadou, Qianlong six-character sealmark and of the period (1736-1795); 3 1/4 in. (8.3 cm.) high. Estimate HKD 350,000 - HKD 450,000. Price Realized HKD 524,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011   

Lot 3921. A rare large yellow-ground underglaze-blue 'peach' dish, Qianlong six-character sealmark and of the period (1736-1795); 10 5/8 in. (27 cm.) diam. Estimate HKD 1,000,000 - HKD 1,500,000. Price Realized HKD 1,160,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011   

PARIS - La vente de Sculpture et d'objets d'art européens organisée le 19 juin chez Christie's à Paris a rencontré un franc succès avec 83% des lots vendus et 94% en valeur. Le top lot de la vente est une plaque en émail peint polychrome représentant l'empereur Auguste. Estimée initialement €20.000-30.000, la plaque attribuée à Colin Nouailher s'est vendue €125.000. Autre beau prix atteint lors de la vente, un couple de maures réalisé en Italie au XIXe siècle qui a trouvé preneur pour €122.500.

Lot 80. Attribuée à Colin Nouailher (Actif 1539-1567), Limoges, 1541, Empereur Auguste. Plaque en émail peint polychrome à rehauts d'or représentant l'empereur Auguste. Portant l’inscription IMP OC TAVIANUS, la lettre B et la date 1541. D.: 22 cm. (8 2/3 in.). Estimation: €20.000-30.000. Prix réalisé: €125.000. © Christie's Image Ltd 2018

Collection privée de la succession de Monsieur Eric Martin Wunsch.

Literature: S. Baratte, Les émaux peints de Limoges, Paris, musée du Louvre, 2000, pp. 66-68. 
A.-M. Bautier, "Les Neuf Preux et les Paladins dans les émaux peints de Limoges", Bulletin de la Société nationale des antiquaires de France, 1989, pp. 320-348. 
C. Briend, "Un Preux attribuéà Colin Nouailher", Nouvelles acquisitions 1990-1995, Musée des Beaux-Arts de Lyon, 1996, pp. 18-23. 

Lot 3922. A fine and rare blue and white globular jar, Qianlong six-character sealmark and of the period (1736-1795); 5 in. (12.7 cm.) diam. Estimate HKD 800,000 - HKD 1,200,000. Price Realized HKD 4,220,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011   

Lot 3924. A rare pair of blue and white 'dragon' ogee bowls, Jiaqing six-character sealmarks and of the period (1796-1820); 6 3/4 in. (17.2 cm.) diam. Estimate HKD 350,000 - HKD 450,000. Price Realized HKD 1,220,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011 

Each decorated on the exterior with two striding five-clawed dragons amidst clouds and flaming scrolls between double-lines around the foot and rim, the interior with a central medallion enclosing a further dragon.

Note: Jiaqing ogee bowls of this pattern appear to be very rare. Yongzheng and Qianlong prototypes of this form and design are known; see a pair of bowls Yongzheng bowls included in the Exhibition of Ch'ing Porcelain from the Wah Kwong Collection, Hong Kong, 1973, and illustrated in the Catalogue, no. 59.

Lot 3926. A fine pair of blue and white bowls, Daoguang six-character sealmarks and of the period (1821-1850); 3 7/8 in. (9.8 cm.) diam. Estimate HKD 40,000 - HKD 60,000. Price Realized HKD 375,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011 

Each decorated on the exterior with flower scrolls above overlapping ruyi-heads encircling the foot and a band of classic scrolls on the gently everted mouth rims, the interior with a single floral spray within double-circles.

Christie's. Important Chinese Ceramics and Works of Art, 1 June 2011, Convention Hall

Lot 3927. A blue and white 'dragon' dish, Qianlong six-character sealmark and of the period (1736-1795); 6 3/4 in. (17 cm.) diam. Estimate HKD 30,000 - HKD 50,000. Price Realized HKD 112,500. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011 

Painted to the interior well with an upright dragon rising in a sinuous curl in pursuit of a 'flaming pearl' amidst flames, the exterior similarly decorated with a pair of dragons among clouds striding in pursuit of flaming pearls.

Christie's. Important Chinese Ceramics and Works of Art, 1 June 2011, Convention Hall

Lot 3928. A fine pair of blue and white bowls, Xuantong six-character marks and of the period (1908-1911); 6 1/4 in. (15.5 cm.) diam. Estimate HKD 150,000 - HKD 200,000. Price Realized HKD 275,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011 

Each bowl is potted with flared sides, painted on the exterior with a fruiting sprays of peaches, pomegrantes, and grapes, all above a band of lappets encircling the foot, the interior with a peach spray within a double-line border on the medallion, below a band of classic scrolls on the everted mouth rim, repeated on the exterior.

Christie's. Important Chinese Ceramics and Works of Art, 1 June 2011, Convention Hall

Lot 3929. A fine blue and white bowl, Xuantong six-character mark and of the period (1908-1911); 6 5/8 in. (16.8 cm.) diam. Estimate HKD 50,000 - HKD 70,000. Price Realized HKD 225,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011  

The exterior finely painted in vibrant cobalt-blue tones with stylised flowers borne on delicate vines within a band of chevrons below the mouth rim and a band of ruyi-heads above the foot, the interior densely decorated with a stylised six-petal floral bloom on the medallion, the cavetto with stylised cicada divided by ruyi-heads within a stippled ground.

Spanning 14 auctions in total, remarkable lots with extraordinary provenance will be offered across mediums, periods and price points. © Christie’s Images Limited 2018

LONDON.- Christie’s Classic Week sales in July present a vibrant array works of art dating from antiquity to the 20th century. Spanning 14 auctions in total, remarkable lots with extraordinary provenance will be offered across mediums, periods and price points. Works range from a rich offering of paintings, drawings and watercolours across Old Masters, Victorian, Pre-Raphaelite, British Impressionist, 19th Century European and Orientalist Art, to important decorative arts including sculpture, furniture, portrait miniatures and gold boxes, to inspiring books, manuscripts, illustrations, prints, science and natural history. Highlights include a poignant work by Rubens, Thomas Chippendale furniture marking the 300th anniversary year of his birth, Pre-Raphaelite works, two bronzes from ‘the Court of the Sun King’ Louis XIV of France, illustrations by Quentin Blake and Ancient Greek pottery. Works will be on public view at Christie’s King Street from 30 June to 12 July.  

Antiquities | 3 July 
Comprising 116 lots, the Antiquities sale will be led by a Faliscan red-figured calyx-krater, finely decorated with an elaborate scene set in the Underworld (estimate £70,000-90,000). The work is one of only eight known vases attributed to the Nazzano Painter who is considered one of the masters of the Faliscan school. Another highlight is a Roman marble head of the young Commodus, estimated at £50,000-80,000. This extremely powerful and rare portrait successfully captures the youthful arrogance of the Crown Prince, here depicted as a teenager. The sale also features part of the prestigious Resandro Collection of Egyptian art (lot 1-18), including a large bronze of the lion-headed goddess Wadjet-Bast (estimate £50,000-70,000) and a faience shabti for the Royal Scribe Horkebi (estimate £10,000-15,000) previously in the collection of Captain Spencer-Churchill.  

Lot 70. A Faliscan red-figured calyx-krater, attributed to the Nazzano Painter, circa 380-360 B.C.; 16 ½ in. (42.3 cm.) high. Estimate GBP 70,000 - GBP 100,000 (USD 92,820 - USD 132,600). © Christie's Images Ltd. 2018

Supplied by Thomas Chippendale to Sir Rowland Winn, 5th Bt. (1739-85) of Nostell Priory, probably for his London house 11 St. James's Square, London, circa 1767,
Following his death it was included in the sale of the contents, Christie's, London, 9 and 11 April 1785, p. 9, lot 7 but was withdrawn from the sale (deleted from the auctioneer's book),
Sir Rowland Winn, 6th Bt (d. 1805), and subsequently moved to Nostell Priory, Wakefield, Yorkshire, 1785,
Sold from Nostell Priory anonymously, presumably following his death, Mr. H. Phillips, London, 6 May 1807, lot 283 (£6.5s).
With Morton Lee, circa 1952, from whom acquired by 
Samuel Messer, 23 June 1952,
The Samuel Messer Collection of English Furniture, Clocks and Barometers, sold Christie's, London, 5 December 1991, lot 130, where acquired by the present owner.

Lot 3994. A green-enamelled 'dragon' jar and cover, Qianlong six-character sealmark and of the period (1736-1795); 8 1/4 in. (21 cm.) high. Estimate HKD 400,000 - HKD 600,000. Price Realized HKD 1,700,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011

Painted and enamelled in green with two five-clawed dragons striding in pursuit of 'flaming pearls', amidst wispy clouds and between the Eight Buddhist Emblems,bajixiang, around the shoulder and a louts petal band around the base, the cover decorated with a similarly enamelled dragon.

Provenance: Sotheby's Hong Kong, 19 November 1986, lot 277

Note: Compare with published examples such as the covered jar illustrated in Chinese Ceramics- The S.C. Ko Tianmilou Collection, Hong Kong, 1987, pl. 114; and in the National Palace Museum, illustrated in Enamelled Ware of the Ch'ing Dynasty, Book II, CAFA, Hong Kong, 1969, pl. 13. Another vase of this pattern from the Greenwald Collection sold at Christie's Hong Kong, 1 December 2010, lot 2831.

Lot 3996. A very fine green-enamelled 'dragon' saucer dish, Qianlong six-character sealmark and of the period (1736-1795); 7 in. (17.7 cm.) diam. Estimate HKD 120,000 - HKD 180,000. Price Realized HKD 475,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011

Well enamelled to the exterior with a pair of five-clawed dragons in mutual pursuit of 'flaming pearls', the interior with a sinuous dragon grasping for a pearl amidst flame scrolls below a pair of green-enamelled line borders, Japanese wood box.

Provenance: Bluett & Sons, London
A Japanese private collection

Note: A similar dish in the Victoria and Albert Museum is illustrated by R. Kerr, Chinese Ceramics, Porcelain of the Qing Dynasty, London, 1986, no. 98 and another in the National Palace Museum, Taipei, was included in the in the Special Exhibition of K'ang-Hsi, Yung-Cheng, Ch'ien-Lung Porcelain Ware from the National Palace Museum, Taibei, 1986, illustrated in the Catalogue, p. 116, no. 86. Yongzheng and Jiaqing examples can be found in the Palace Museum, Beijing, illustrated in Miscellaneous Enamelled Porcelains, Plain Tricoloured Porcelains, The Complete Collection of Treasures of the Palace Museum, Shanghai, 2009, nos. 76 and 77.

Lot 3997. A fine green-enamelled 'dragon' jar, Qianlong six-character sealmark and of the period (1736-1795); 7 7/8 in. (20 cm.) high. Estimate HKD 400,000 - HKD 600,000. Price Realized HKD 1,580,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011 

Painted and enamelled in green with two five-clawed dragons striding in pursuit of 'flaming pearls', amidst wispy clouds and between the Eight Buddhist Emblems,bajixiang, around the shoulder and a lotus petal band around the base, the cover decorated with a similarly enamelled dragon, Japanese wood box. 

Provenance: A Japanese private collection 

Note: Compare with published examples such as the covered jar illustrated in Chinese Ceramics - The S.C. Ko Tianminlou Collection, Hong Kong, 1987, pl. 114; and one in the National Palace Museum, Taipei, illustrated in Enamelled Ware of the Ch'ing Dynasty, Book II, CAFA, Hong Kong, 1969, pl. 13. Yongzheng and Jiaqing examples can be found in the Palace Museum, Beijing, illustrated in Miscellaneous Enamelled Porcelains, Plain Tricoloured Porcelains, The Complete Collection of Treasures of the Palace Museum, Shanghai, 2009, nos. 73 and 74.

Lot 3998. A rare famille verte jar, Kangxi six-character mark and of the period (1662-1722); 8 1/2 in. (21.5 cm.) high. Estimate HKD 600,000 - HKD 800,000. Price Realized HKD 2,420,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011 

Finely enamelled with a pair of pheasants perched on decorative rockwork beside a flowering magnolia tree, peonies and bamboo, amidst numerous birds and insects in flight or perched on branches, all between keyfret around the foot and a band of cartouches enclosing scholarly objects interspersed with detached floral sprays on the shoulder of the jar, the short neck encircled by colourful chilong striding amidst ruyiclouds. 

Provenance: Ralph M. Chait
Previously sold at Christie's Hong Kong, 30 May 2006, lot 1431
A private collection. 

Note: Although the present design appears on a number of famille vertedecorated vessels from the Kangxi period, it is very rare to find a jar of this type inscribed with a mark. Cf. a baluster vase similarly enamelled with pheasants and inscribed with an apocryphal Chenghua mark, illustrated in Porcelains in Polychrome and Contrasting Colours, The Complete Collection of Treasures of the Palace Museum, Hong Kong, 1999, pl. 74.

Lot 3999. A fine aubergine and green-enamelled 'dragon' bowl, Jiaqing six-character sealmark and of the period (1796-1820); 4 3/8 in. (11 cm.) diam. Estimate HKD 180,000 - HKD 220,000. Price Realized HKD 250,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011 

The exterior incised with two dragons pursuing 'flaming pearls' amidst flames and two cruciform clouds above rocks and waves, all under a dark aubergine enamel reserved on a green ground. 

Lot 4000. A fine wucai'dragon and phoenix' bowl, Daoguang six-character seal mark and of the period (1821-1850); 6 1/8 in. (15.6 cm.) diam. Estimate HKD 120,000 - HKD 180,000. Price Realized HKD 400,000. © Christie's Images Ltd. 2011 

Brightly enamelled to the exterior with two scaly five-clawed dragons in pursuit of the flaming pearl, alternating with descending long-tailed phoenix, all amidst meandering leafy scrolls and below a band containing the Eight Buddhist Emblems, bajixiang, at the rim, the interior with a central medallion enclosing a five-clawed dragon in pursuit of the 'flaming pearl' , box.