.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
THE MAKER
The maker's mark that appears on the mounts of both ewer and dish was, until recently, attributed to Melchior Mair (master c. 1598-d. 1613) (H. Seling, Die Kunst der Augsburger Goldschmiede, 1529-1868, Munich, 1980, III, no. 1131). However, more recently, Seling and others have re-attributed this maker's mark, which occurs with occasional slight variations, to Hans Jakob I Bachmann (master 1598-d.1651) and his son, Jakob Bachmann (master 1641-d.1678) (H.Seling, A. Schommers and U. Weinhold, 'Hans Jakob I und Jakob Bachmann - Augsburger Goldschmiedewerke für die Höfe in Wien, Prague und München. Neue Ergebnisse der Markenforschung', Jahrbuch Des Kunsthistorischen Museums Wien, Vienna, 1999).
H. Seling et al (loc. sit.) list 15 pieces by the father and son to which can be added the present ewer and dish and another mounted Wanli ewer formerly in the Goldschmidt-Rothschild and van Slyke collections (discussed below). Among the father's work is an automaton of Diana and the Centaur, 1595-1600, a clock of 1624, a reliquary of St Joseph of 1620-1625 and a silver-mounted ivory tankard dated 1642, all now in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna. It is interesting to compare the markedly auricular base of the latter with that of the ewer in the present lot and to note that, by this date Jakob Bachmann was already a master in his own right although apparently working with his father.
Other work by the father includes a second Diana and the Centaur automaton of 1600-1605, now in the Green Vaults, Dresden, and a pair of altar candlesticks of 1608-1615 and two reliquaries of St. Korbinian and St Rupert, circa 1620 in the Munich Residenz . Father and son seem likely to have collaborated on mounting an ebony cabinet now at Corsham Court of 1640-45, while the son alone is credited with the mounts of an ivory Christ at the pillar, 1640-45, a plain chalice and paten, 1645-1649, a silver mounted ivory beaker, 1645-60 in the Kunstsgewerbemuseum, Berlin and the fine St Apollinaris casket of 1664 now in St. Lambertus, Dusseldorf.
The father seems then to have been well connected and supplied the courts of Vienna, Prague and Munich . The son appears to have retained these connections and, in addition, there is correspondence over payment for the St Apollinaris Casket mentioned above showing the son worked for the court of the Bavarian Duke, Philipp Wilhelm of Pfalz-Neuburg (1653-1679, d. 1690). It is tempting to suggest then that this rare ewer and dish were mounted by Jakob Bachmann for one of these distinguished families.
A POSSIBLE PROVENANCE
Assuming that these mounted pieces were indeed made for one of his royal patrons, and it should be said that no documentation has as yet come to light to confirm it, the family history points quite strongly to the Electors of Bavaria. The present owner inherited the ewer and basin from the daughter of Adolph Rabel, a Munich entrepreneur and his wife a baroness von Schacky auf Schönfeld. By family repute, she was a direct descendant of Countess Lobeis, who was the mistress of the Bavarian Elector, Maximilian II Emmanuel (1662-1726). He was known as the "Blue Elector" after the uniform he was wearing when he valiantly defeated the Turks at Belgrade in 1688. It appears that as part of her dowry she received the castle of Schloss Waffenbrunn in the Bavarian forest and this may well have been an additional gift to her.
THE PORCELAIN
Several identically decorated dishes, also with auspicious marks on the base and similar in size, are in the Topkapi Museum, Istanbul (J.Ayers and R Krahl, Chinese Ceramics in the Topkapi Saray Museum, Istanbul, II, London, 1986 pp. 623-4, no. 897). The decoration is also very closely related to that on another dish of the same size in the British Museum which is dated Wanli, c. 1573-1600
(J. Harrison-Hall, Ming Ceramics in the British Museum, London, 2001, p. 320, no 11:19).
The Wanli flask, altered by the goldsmith to a ewer, is of a type that found particular favour in Europe and dates from also around 1600. It is more finely potted and more delicately painted than most and the decoration round the neck of pendant jewels forming a lozenge design is very rare. A similarly lobed pear-shaped vase, with apparently the same scalloped double band above the foot, was excavated from the wreck of the San Diego which went aground on 14 December 1600 (D. Carré et al, Le San Diego Un Trésor Sous la Mer, Paris, 1994, p. 312. cat. no. 71). A second example of similarly elegant elongated form and with equally delicately painted decoration is in the Topkapi Museum, Istanbul (J.Ayers and R. Krahl, Chinese Ceramics in the Topkapi Saray Museum, Istanbul, II, London, 1988 p. 748, no. 1377). This bottle has been discussed by M. Ranaldi and dated c. 1575-90 (Kraak Porcelain London, 1989, p. 168, pl. 209).
EUROPEAN MOUNTED CHINESE PORCELAIN EWERS AND BASINS
The rarity and romance of Chinese porcelain in Europe in the 16th century lead to such pieces of exotica being highly prized and beautifully mounted in precious metals. Even though, by the mid-17th century, such porcelain was more obtainable, arriving as it did in considerable quantities, particularly in the Netherlands, pieces mounted outside the great trading nations are still very unusual at this date.
The survival of a Chinese porcelain ewer and dish both mounted in the 17th century by one maker and "cased-up" at the same time is exceptionally rare and quite possibly unique, at least in German silver. The concept of a ewer and dish for rinsing ones hands at mealtimes seems largely to have been a European one so Chinese porcelain ewers and dishes do not appear to have been made to match until the late 17th century and then for the Western market. As a result of the differences in the decoration of the porcelain it is only then in the rarest of cases that one can show that a Chinese porcelain ewer and basin were mounted in Europe as a set either for display or use or both.
One other such survival, although in English silver, is the very beautiful Wanli ewer with silver-gilt mounts with the London maker's mark of three trefoils slipped, of around 1585, which, when sold in the late 19th Century was accompanied by two two-handled mounted bowls and a dish (The Marquis of Exeter, from Burghley House, Christie's London, 7 June 1888, lots 256 - 259). The ewer, bowls and dish, with the same maker's mark, were acquired by J. P. Morgan and are now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (Y. Hackenbroch, 'Chinese Porcelain in European Silver Mounts', Connoisseur, June 1955, pp. 22-28, figs. 10, 11 and 18, D. Lunsingh Scheurlee, Chinesisches unt japanisches Porzellan in europäischen Fassungen, Braunschweig, 1980, fig. 9 and 11 and P. Glanville, Silver in Tudor and Early Stuart England, London, 1990, figs. 200 and 203). The deep bowl is painted with different scenes from those on the ewer but they both have similar caryatid dolphin bifurcated tail handles and surely both, as Glanville speculates, were intended "to be paired on the buffet".
Apart from the Elizabethan ewer and bowl illustrated separately in Lunsingh Scheurlee's exhaustive study of Chinese and Japanese porcelain mounted in Europe, he only illustrates one other 17th Century ewer with dish and this is in a painting by the Dutch artist, Willem Kalf (1619-1693) which is now in the Thyssen-Bornemisza collection (D. Lunsingh Scheurlee, op. cit., fig. 14 and P. Glanville, op. cit. fig. 204). Assuming that this apparently Dutch-mounted spouted ewer and dish are indeed painted from originals mounted by the same maker, they no longer appear to be extant.
Lunsingh Scheurlee illustrates just four Chinese porcelain flasks, as opposed to wine ewers, that were adapted in the West to form ewers. In addition to the mounted flask from Burghley house (op. cit.), he records two other unmarked, late 17th century, English-mounted examples, one in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts and the other in the Schroder collection (Lunsingh Scheurlee op. cit., cat. nos. 33 and 34 respectively. The latter is reproduced in T. Schroder, The Art of the European Goldsmith, Silver from the Schroder Collection, New York, 1983, cat. no. 35, pp. 113 and 115).
Much the most comparable Chinese flask to the present mounted ewer, though it lacks the spout, is, not surprisingly given its maker, one formerly in the collection of Baron Max Goldschmidt-Rothschild (op. cit., pl. 40 and sold as part of his collection Parke-Bernet Galleries, New York, 10-11 March 1955, lot 117). This was re-sold from the collection of Frederick and Antoinette van Slyke of Baltimore, Maryland (Sotheby's New York, 6 April 1989, lot 26). On the latter occasion it was catalogued as by Melchior Mair, circa 1610 based presumably on Seling's published work at that time. It appears from the pin hole visible at the base that the Goldschmidt-Rothschild ewer may possibly originally too had a foot mount, and there can be no doubt from the similarity with the present ewer that the mounts were by Bachmann although presumably Hans Jakob I rather than his son, Jakob. Although the Goldschmidt-Rothschild ewer is stylistically earlier it is, however, possible that the Augsburg pineapple mark was indistinct and the mounting was perhaps assumed to have to date from prior to 1613 when Mair died.
Spectrographic analysis of the silver on the two mounts by Prof. Dr. Ernst Ludwig Richter of Stuttgart confirms the dating given above.
The maker's mark that appears on the mounts of both ewer and dish was, until recently, attributed to Melchior Mair (master c. 1598-d. 1613) (H. Seling, Die Kunst der Augsburger Goldschmiede, 1529-1868, Munich, 1980, III, no. 1131). However, more recently, Seling and others have re-attributed this maker's mark, which occurs with occasional slight variations, to Hans Jakob I Bachmann (master 1598-d.1651) and his son, Jakob Bachmann (master 1641-d.1678) (H.Seling, A. Schommers and U. Weinhold, 'Hans Jakob I und Jakob Bachmann - Augsburger Goldschmiedewerke für die Höfe in Wien, Prague und München. Neue Ergebnisse der Markenforschung', Jahrbuch Des Kunsthistorischen Museums Wien, Vienna, 1999).
H. Seling et al (loc. sit.) list 15 pieces by the father and son to which can be added the present ewer and dish and another mounted Wanli ewer formerly in the Goldschmidt-Rothschild and van Slyke collections (discussed below). Among the father's work is an automaton of Diana and the Centaur, 1595-1600, a clock of 1624, a reliquary of St Joseph of 1620-1625 and a silver-mounted ivory tankard dated 1642, all now in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna. It is interesting to compare the markedly auricular base of the latter with that of the ewer in the present lot and to note that, by this date Jakob Bachmann was already a master in his own right although apparently working with his father.
Other work by the father includes a second Diana and the Centaur automaton of 1600-1605, now in the Green Vaults, Dresden, and a pair of altar candlesticks of 1608-1615 and two reliquaries of St. Korbinian and St Rupert, circa 1620 in the Munich Residenz . Father and son seem likely to have collaborated on mounting an ebony cabinet now at Corsham Court of 1640-45, while the son alone is credited with the mounts of an ivory Christ at the pillar, 1640-45, a plain chalice and paten, 1645-1649, a silver mounted ivory beaker, 1645-60 in the Kunstsgewerbemuseum, Berlin and the fine St Apollinaris casket of 1664 now in St. Lambertus, Dusseldorf.
The father seems then to have been well connected and supplied the courts of Vienna, Prague and Munich . The son appears to have retained these connections and, in addition, there is correspondence over payment for the St Apollinaris Casket mentioned above showing the son worked for the court of the Bavarian Duke, Philipp Wilhelm of Pfalz-Neuburg (1653-1679, d. 1690). It is tempting to suggest then that this rare ewer and dish were mounted by Jakob Bachmann for one of these distinguished families.
A POSSIBLE PROVENANCE
Assuming that these mounted pieces were indeed made for one of his royal patrons, and it should be said that no documentation has as yet come to light to confirm it, the family history points quite strongly to the Electors of Bavaria. The present owner inherited the ewer and basin from the daughter of Adolph Rabel, a Munich entrepreneur and his wife a baroness von Schacky auf Schönfeld. By family repute, she was a direct descendant of Countess Lobeis, who was the mistress of the Bavarian Elector, Maximilian II Emmanuel (1662-1726). He was known as the "Blue Elector" after the uniform he was wearing when he valiantly defeated the Turks at Belgrade in 1688. It appears that as part of her dowry she received the castle of Schloss Waffenbrunn in the Bavarian forest and this may well have been an additional gift to her.
THE PORCELAIN
Several identically decorated dishes, also with auspicious marks on the base and similar in size, are in the Topkapi Museum, Istanbul (J.Ayers and R Krahl, Chinese Ceramics in the Topkapi Saray Museum, Istanbul, II, London, 1986 pp. 623-4, no. 897). The decoration is also very closely related to that on another dish of the same size in the British Museum which is dated Wanli, c. 1573-1600
(J. Harrison-Hall, Ming Ceramics in the British Museum, London, 2001, p. 320, no 11:19).
The Wanli flask, altered by the goldsmith to a ewer, is of a type that found particular favour in Europe and dates from also around 1600. It is more finely potted and more delicately painted than most and the decoration round the neck of pendant jewels forming a lozenge design is very rare. A similarly lobed pear-shaped vase, with apparently the same scalloped double band above the foot, was excavated from the wreck of the San Diego which went aground on 14 December 1600 (D. Carré et al, Le San Diego Un Trésor Sous la Mer, Paris, 1994, p. 312. cat. no. 71). A second example of similarly elegant elongated form and with equally delicately painted decoration is in the Topkapi Museum, Istanbul (J.Ayers and R. Krahl, Chinese Ceramics in the Topkapi Saray Museum, Istanbul, II, London, 1988 p. 748, no. 1377). This bottle has been discussed by M. Ranaldi and dated c. 1575-90 (Kraak Porcelain London, 1989, p. 168, pl. 209).
EUROPEAN MOUNTED CHINESE PORCELAIN EWERS AND BASINS
The rarity and romance of Chinese porcelain in Europe in the 16th century lead to such pieces of exotica being highly prized and beautifully mounted in precious metals. Even though, by the mid-17th century, such porcelain was more obtainable, arriving as it did in considerable quantities, particularly in the Netherlands, pieces mounted outside the great trading nations are still very unusual at this date.
The survival of a Chinese porcelain ewer and dish both mounted in the 17th century by one maker and "cased-up" at the same time is exceptionally rare and quite possibly unique, at least in German silver. The concept of a ewer and dish for rinsing ones hands at mealtimes seems largely to have been a European one so Chinese porcelain ewers and dishes do not appear to have been made to match until the late 17th century and then for the Western market. As a result of the differences in the decoration of the porcelain it is only then in the rarest of cases that one can show that a Chinese porcelain ewer and basin were mounted in Europe as a set either for display or use or both.
One other such survival, although in English silver, is the very beautiful Wanli ewer with silver-gilt mounts with the London maker's mark of three trefoils slipped, of around 1585, which, when sold in the late 19th Century was accompanied by two two-handled mounted bowls and a dish (The Marquis of Exeter, from Burghley House, Christie's London, 7 June 1888, lots 256 - 259). The ewer, bowls and dish, with the same maker's mark, were acquired by J. P. Morgan and are now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (Y. Hackenbroch, 'Chinese Porcelain in European Silver Mounts', Connoisseur, June 1955, pp. 22-28, figs. 10, 11 and 18, D. Lunsingh Scheurlee, Chinesisches unt japanisches Porzellan in europäischen Fassungen, Braunschweig, 1980, fig. 9 and 11 and P. Glanville, Silver in Tudor and Early Stuart England, London, 1990, figs. 200 and 203). The deep bowl is painted with different scenes from those on the ewer but they both have similar caryatid dolphin bifurcated tail handles and surely both, as Glanville speculates, were intended "to be paired on the buffet".
Apart from the Elizabethan ewer and bowl illustrated separately in Lunsingh Scheurlee's exhaustive study of Chinese and Japanese porcelain mounted in Europe, he only illustrates one other 17th Century ewer with dish and this is in a painting by the Dutch artist, Willem Kalf (1619-1693) which is now in the Thyssen-Bornemisza collection (D. Lunsingh Scheurlee, op. cit., fig. 14 and P. Glanville, op. cit. fig. 204). Assuming that this apparently Dutch-mounted spouted ewer and dish are indeed painted from originals mounted by the same maker, they no longer appear to be extant.
Lunsingh Scheurlee illustrates just four Chinese porcelain flasks, as opposed to wine ewers, that were adapted in the West to form ewers. In addition to the mounted flask from Burghley house (op. cit.), he records two other unmarked, late 17th century, English-mounted examples, one in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts and the other in the Schroder collection (Lunsingh Scheurlee op. cit., cat. nos. 33 and 34 respectively. The latter is reproduced in T. Schroder, The Art of the European Goldsmith, Silver from the Schroder Collection, New York, 1983, cat. no. 35, pp. 113 and 115).
Much the most comparable Chinese flask to the present mounted ewer, though it lacks the spout, is, not surprisingly given its maker, one formerly in the collection of Baron Max Goldschmidt-Rothschild (op. cit., pl. 40 and sold as part of his collection Parke-Bernet Galleries, New York, 10-11 March 1955, lot 117). This was re-sold from the collection of Frederick and Antoinette van Slyke of Baltimore, Maryland (Sotheby's New York, 6 April 1989, lot 26). On the latter occasion it was catalogued as by Melchior Mair, circa 1610 based presumably on Seling's published work at that time. It appears from the pin hole visible at the base that the Goldschmidt-Rothschild ewer may possibly originally too had a foot mount, and there can be no doubt from the similarity with the present ewer that the mounts were by Bachmann although presumably Hans Jakob I rather than his son, Jakob. Although the Goldschmidt-Rothschild ewer is stylistically earlier it is, however, possible that the Augsburg pineapple mark was indistinct and the mounting was perhaps assumed to have to date from prior to 1613 when Mair died.
Spectrographic analysis of the silver on the two mounts by Prof. Dr. Ernst Ludwig Richter of Stuttgart confirms the dating given above.