A PAIR OF ITALIAN BRONZES RECENTLY ATTRIBUTED TO MICHELANGELO BUONAROTTI - IAN COX's ITALIAN ART OBJECT OF THE MONTH - MARCH 2015

OBJECT IN FOCUS - MARCH 2015

A PAIR OF RENAISSANCE BRONZES OF MEN MOUNTED ON PANTHERS - ONLY RECENTLY ATTRIBUTED TO MICHELANGELO.

Recently a pair of amazing bronze sculptures have gone on display at the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge which have caused a major stir in the art world and I have been drawn to tell the story of them in my choice of Italian art object for March.

I've always been an admirer of sculpture and my earliest memories of going to museum exhibitions focused on this type of art work. I must have been about seventeen when I made my first expedition to the British Museum in London (a big thing for a young lad from Yorkshire) and it was to see the "Treasures of Tutenkhamun" where many of the objects were essentially pieces of Egyptian sculpture. I remember being amazed by what I saw and I am sure it was this exhibit that ignited my interests in the fine arts for the first time. I still have the companion book to that exhibition in my library. But what is it about sculpture that makes it so arresting compared with other types of art work? I believe it's to do with its three dimensional nature; somehow we as viewers can relate and respond to its directness in a positive way and not only can it be incredibly beautiful and moving, it can also inform and challenge almost every aspect of our beliefs and thinking. It's an art form which communicates the essence of humanity and I'm a sucker for it. Whenever I'm on my travels I try to search for places where I can see it - in public spaces, adorning buildings, inside them and in museum contexts too. In the depths of the recent British Winter it was a pleasure one day to read in the press that the Fitzwilliam Museum had put on display a pair of bronzes which had recently been attributed  to "il divino"  - the Renaissance master sculptor Michelangelo - and I just had to go and see them.

Michelangelo Buonarotti (1475-1564)

The great Renaissance artist Michelangelo (1475-1564) was involved with making sculpture throughout his long career and in many ways it was the thing that from an early age he loved doing most - despite his incredible achievements in architecture, drawing and painting. He wrote in one his many poems of how sculpture could bring, through the artist's creativity, inspiration and craftsmanship, "life" to inert materials:

"Sculpture, the first of the arts, delights a taste

Still strong and sound; each limb, each bone, 

Are given a life and, lo, man's body is raised

Breathing alive, in wax or clay or stone."

Many people are familiar with Michelangelo's monumental works in marble and especially objects such as the larger than life figural Medici Tomb sculptures in Florence, the fantastically moving "Pieta" in St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican and the iconic Carrara marble statue of David, now in Florence's Accademia Museum, which has to be one of the world's best known art objects through the many reproductions and derived tourist souvenirs which grace the shelves and mantelpieces of houses and apartments all over the planet. Writing this has just reminded me of my art historian friend who has a plastic table lamp of David's head which he bought in a shop in the Lanes in Brighton a few years ago! Fewer know that Michelangelo also worked in bronze throughout his career and this is due to the fact that until recently there were no known pieces by him in this medium that have survived through to the present day. It's known from documented and other sources for example, that he made a two thirds life size figure of the "David" sculpture in bronze for a French aristocrat which disappeared during the French Revolution and that he sculpted a twice life size figure of Pope Julius II which was melted down to make artillery just three years after it was cast. This is why the Fitzwilliam bronzes have created a storm for recently a group of distinguished academics have concluded that the pair of male figures mounted on panthers shown below were sculpted by Michelangelo in the early 16th century.

The Rothschild Bronzes of Men mounted on Panthers
currently on display at the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge until August 9th 2015

Standing almost three feet tall the sculptures are a non-matched pair of muscular, naked alpha males  mounted on ferocious looking panthers - inspired by the idea of mounted figures from a bacchic procession. The figure on the left is of an older man, the one on the right a younger, virile looking figure. Both have one arm raised above their heads in triumphant gesture.

The history of the figures is interesting so I will start with that. The figures are known as the Rothschild bronzes, named after their first recorded owner, Baron Adolphe de Rothschild, a close descendant of the Rothschild banking dynasty founder. A document dated 1878 is the first known record of ownership and at the time they were attributed to Michelangelo. There are some indications they might have been bought from one of the Bourbon Kings of Naples and they may have come from the Villa Reale at Caserta where the Bourbon collections were shown. When Baron Adolphe died in 1900 they passed in to the hands of Maurice de Rothschild who owned them until he died in 1957. They then became part of a private French collection and remained there until they appeared for sale at Sotheby's in London in 2002. The auction house tentatively associated them with the renowned mid 16th century Florentine sculptor Cellini and they were estimated to fetch between one and one and a half million pounds. In the end they sold for one million six hundred and fifty thousand pounds and were bought by an anonymous British bidder. Rumour has it they are currently on the market again, but with the new attribution who knows what the purchase price will be if they are sold. It's interesting that the reappearance of the bronzes in to the public domain since 2002 has stimulated a renewed academic interest in them and twice they have appeared in important exhibitions on different sides of the Atlantic; firstly at an exhibit on William van Tetrode at the Frick Collection in New York and later at the Royal Academy "Bronzes" show in 2012.

So - the big question is - how has the recent reattribution of the bronzes to Michelangelo occurred and where has the evidence come from to support such an important decision? Keeper of applied arts at the Fitzwilliam - Victoria Avery - has told the story to the press many times in the last couple of months and its a fascinating one worth repeating here.

Victoria Avery - Keeper of Applied Arts with the
Rothschild bronzes at the Fitzwilliam Museum

Victoria has gone to great lengths to explain that the Michelangelo attribution is not a decision that has been taken lightly and that it has involved a number of different specialists with varying expertise.

The initial piece of the complex jigsaw was discovered by Professor Joannides of Cambridge University who discovered a small drawing in Montpellier Museum, France, of a nude male on the back of a panther. The page of drawings was entitled "A Sheet of Studies with Virgin embracing Infant Jesus" dated 1508 and appear to have been made as faithful copies of Michelangelo lost original drawings by one of his studio apprentices. The important small drawing in question was in one corner of the sheet showed a younger man riding the panther and in similar pose to the bronze originals now in the Fitzwilliam.

The drawing of a nude male on the back of a panther dated 1508
Montpellier Museum, France.

A comparison of this drawing with others made by Michelangelo during the period 1500 - 1510 such as the one below, confirmed Professor Joannides's suspicions concerning the Michelangelo connection.

Drawing of male nude by Michelangelo Buonarotti - c1500 - 1510

Next a scientific investigation of the bronzes was undertaken to see if a date could be confirmed for the bronzes in Cambridge. Samples of material from the bronzes was sent to a laboratory in Switzerland for a complex neutron scanning process and this yielded results suggesting the bronzes had been cast between 1500 and 1510 - this scientific evidence refuting the Sotheby's suggestion the bronzes were associated with Cellini and the middle of the 16th century. Interestingly, in this weeks Antiques Trade Gazette, dated February 21st, a update article indicates there is more scientific evidence to come which will be presented at a special research symposium to be held in Cambridge on July 6th. At this conference results from an investigation of inner core material from the bronzes might even be able to suggest a particular Renaissance workshop the bronzes were cast in - this further affirming the Michelangelo attribution.

Thirdly a clinical anatomist from Warwick University, Professor Abrahams, was consulted to examine the anatomical detail visible in the bronzes. It's well known that Michelangelo took a great interest in anatomy during his early studies in Florence and its documented that he undertook human dissections to deepen his understanding of the internal structure of the body. He would go on to make use of this knowledge in his sculpture and painting when producing representations of the human form that not only look convincing and realistic, but also show the effects of movement on the appearance of muscles beneath the skin. Professor Abrahams concluded that the anatomical form and detail of the two bronzes is incredibly accurate. When comparisons were made between the anatomy of the bronzes and other known and firmly documented and attributed work by the master - the conclusion was that the bronzes were surely by him. Comparison of anatomical details with the David marble sculpture completed in about 1504 make the arguments proposed even more compelling. Not only are the belly buttons on the male bronzes very similar indeed to that on the David, the arrangement of the pubic hair is almost identical as well - one expert commenting that this feature of the bronzes is almost like a signature!!

It's a pity that nothing is known of the history of the figures prior to 1878 - either in relation to who commissioned them from Michelangelo, why and what their original setting was - never mind what happened to them in the intervening centuries. What is exciting however is that the experts have estimated that they were probably made between 1506 and 1508 between the period when Michelangelo had completed the David sculpture in Florence and before he started work on the Sistine Chapel ceiling in Rome.

LOOKING AT THE BRONZES AT THE FITZWILLIAM MUSEUM ON FEBRUARY 28TH 2015

I looked at a variety of articles when preparing this posting including those in the Antiques Trade Gazette, The Times, The Telegraph and the Guardian. All were helpful, but by far the best source for anyone wishing to pursue this subject further is the book written by two of the experts, museum curator Victoria Avery and art historian from Cambridge, Professor Paul Joannides. All of the detail is there as well as more detailed coverage of how the final opinion was reached. It's available for £8.99 from the Fitzwilliam Museum shop and via the shop website.

THE BOOK ON THE ROTHSCHILDS BRONZES
PUBLISHED BY THE FITZWILLIAM MUSEUM IN 2015

I have loved doing the background reading for this story and having the opportunity to see the bronzes - first at the Royal Academy show in 2012 when they were labelled as "circle of Michelangelo" and today in Gallery 7 upstairs at the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge. There they are in the centre of the Italian gallery with no glass case or ropes separating the viewer from the objects - "fantastico"! What I woud like to say finally is that the story is a wonderful example supporting the old fashioned concept of connoisseurship - the art of "knowing" about an art object and a concept which has been a bit old fashioned in recent years in undergraduate art history programmes . Here, in a modern context, a group of experts have been brought together, each with different fields of expertise and involving both art and science, to work on a pair of objects from 16th century Italy which has led them collectively to a stunning set of conclusions. Bravo!

The bronzes are on display at the Fitzwilliam Museum until August 9th. Check their website for details.

KBO - IAN

CARAVAGGIO 'S "THE CARD SHARPS" - CHEATING AT CARDS IS NOTHING NEW

"THE CARD SHARPS" - by Caravaggio?
A PAINTING ALLEGED BY SOME TO BE BY ITALIAN BAROQUE ARTIST CARAVAGGIO

I've chosen another painting for a new series of postings focussing on a different Italian object each month, but this time its an oil on canvas. I've selected it for three reasons. Firstly it's been alleged by some art experts to have been painted by one of my favourite Italian artists - Caravaggio  and secondly, since 2013, it's been the subject of an important court case involving issues of attribution and of course that being the case, money. Thirdly, on Christmas Day 2014 we visited an exhibition at the Palazzo Barberini in Rome which focussed on Sir Dennis Mahon's collection and interests in Baroque painting which included works by Caravaggio - though the picture I have chosen to write about was not on view there. There's been an interesting judge's ruling about the case in January this year which I will come back to, but where to begin with this complex story? - well it's probably best to start by describing the picture  itself.

Below is an illustration of the oil on canvas picture which was sold by Sotheby's at their secondary salerooms at Olympia (now closed) in 2006. It measures approximately 4' 6" x 3'. The composition shows three men engaged in a game of cards round a table, all of the action taking place close to the picture plane. The young man expensively dressed in black with a plumed hat carefully scrutinises his hand of cards and sits opposite his opponent who is of similar age. The latter young man is a "cardsharp" or cheat engaged in duping his victim and we can see he has his right hand behind his back containing cards. Additional cards are also visible tucked into the belt of his doublet and he has a knife in a leather holder attached to his belt. An older man, slightly behind the young man in black, looks over the player's shoulder and is making a signal with his hand to his younger accomplice.

The painting is executed in a very detailed manner making it interesting for the viewer to observe minute aspects of such things as the men's clothing; even slits in the older man's gloves are visible. The three men themselves have a naturalism about them which suggests the artist has used models when painting the picture; this emphasises the realism of the event. The way the composition is lit adds a dramatic note to the action and the psychological nature of the interaction between the figures is further enhanced by the nervous glance the cardsharp is giving his master. The subject of cheating at cards is an old one, but here not only do we have one young man trying to dupe another, but also the impression the cheat himself is being corrupted by his master. The tense atmosphere evident in the picture ensures the viewer is prompted to think about the possible outcomes of the event!

When this picture was painted it represented a shift in taste towards a new style of painting which would eventually be described as "baroque" by art historians and Italian artist Caravaggio was one of its leading propoents in the late 16th century. He would go on to use many of the techniques illustrated in this painting in his major works with religous subject matter for important clients many of whom came from the catholic church, but that's not the issue here.

Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio
Self portrait

As mentioned earlier, the painting was consigned for sale at Sotheby's Olympia saleroom by Lancelot William Thwaytes. The work had been in his family since 1962, but at the time of its appraisal by experts at the saleroom it was considered a copy of an original by the artist and catalogued as such. It was described by Sotheby's in the following terms according to Bendor Grosvenor in Art History News back in 2013 - The Cardsharps - "a 17th century copy after Caravaggio's original now in the Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas" At the time the painting had been appraised by Sotheby's in-house experts and Caravaggio experts including Professor Richard Spear of the University of Maryland - all of whom thought it was an anonymous copy of an original work by the artist and probably carried out in the 17th century. When auctioned the painting was sold for a hammer price of £42,000 plus buyer's premium, producing a total of £50,400.

The picture was acquired by Denis Mahon, the well known art historian, though I'm not sure if he was the original purchaser at the Sotheby's sale. What matters is that Mahon argued the picture was a work by Caravaggio himself, suggesting that the artist may have painted more than one version of the subject. There is evidence to suggest he did this on more than one occasion, for example in the case of the painting known as "Boy with a Lizard". Sir Denis himself died in 2011 and the picture had been loaned to the London Museum of the Order of St John and insured for 10 million pounds!!

Art Historian Sir Denis Mahon

In January 2013 the person who had consigned the picture to Sotheby's in 2006, Lancelot William Thwaytes, lodged a claim with the courts against Sothebys seeking unspecified damages, interests and costs relating to the price difference between the £42,000 realised in 2006 and what its true market value was at that time had it been deemed to be a work by Caravaggio as determined by expert opinion. In other words the claimant was suing Sotheby's for negligence for not undertaking the appropriate research on the work prior to the sale and advising him accordingly.

Sotheby's went on to issue a statement saying that "its view that the painting is a copy and not an autograph work by Caravaggio is supported by the eminent Caravaggio scholar Professor Richard Spear as well as by several leading experts in the field". These included Helen Langdon, author of the 1998 biography on Caravaggio and Sebastian Schutze, a professor of art history from Vienna.

So where did it all go from here? Well, on January 16th 2015 High Court Judge Mrs Justice Rose ruled on the case which had hinged on whether Sotheby's had indeed carried out enough research and advised the client properly about the work. The court had received testimonials from a variety of experts including Professor Richard Spear and others. The auction house had also undertaken ordinary and ultra-violet inspection of the work which had revealed no 'non-copy features' indicating no conflict of opinion with the other evidence. It may thus come as no surprise that, taking all of the detail into account, Mrs Justice Rose dismissed the claim outright. Her judgement stated that although both parties had admitted there was "no single ultimate authoritative voice on the attribution of Caravaggio as there is with some artists", she was firmly of the view that Sotheby's were entitled to come up with the opinion that the quality of the painting was not sufficiently high to merit further investigation".

It doesn't end there though. Having won the case Sotheby's are now claiming 3.75 million pounds full costs from Mr Thwaytes and on January 16th the judge ordered an intermim payment of 1.8 million pounds should be made to Sotheby's. Given that Mr Thwaytes had also employed a high profile firm to represent him, his own bill must also be huge, though according to the Antiques Trade Gazette it has emerged that the claimant may have insurance cover and 3rd party litigation funding. And will he appeal against the judgement? Well it would appear that hasn't been decided yet.

Articles consulted for this blog item include:

The Antiques Trade Gazette, p2, Issue 2176, 31st January 2015

Bendor Grosvenor, "Sotheby's sued over Caravaggio attribution" Art History News, February 15th 2013.

THIS BLOG ITEM IS NUMBER 26 OF A SERIES OF POSTINGS WHICH BEGAN IN JANUARY 2015.
Subjects range from the purchase of a holiday home in the little town of Citta dell Pieve, Umbria to geographical, architectural and art history topics connected to Umbria, Tuscany and Italy in general. Please register if you would like to be alerted to future postings, Thanks - Ian.