|
|
LOT 51
From a European Family Collection
A bronze fountainhead in the form of a lion
Mediterranean, probably South Italy, second half 12th century
250,000—350,000
GBP
Lot Sold. Hammer Price with Buyer's Premium: 1,546,650 GBP
|
|
|
measurements20.5cm. long; 19.5cm. high |
|
Descriptioncast as standing foursquare, with the head raised and facing upwards, the rear legs pointed backwards at the joint, the tail running from between the rear legs onto the back, the face with protruding eyes, a prominent single brow linked to a ridged nose, the cheeks each with a series of furrows, a large moustache curling around the upper edge of the mouth which incorporates a small spout, the mane depicted naturalistically with undulating grooves with a projecting incised element beneath each cheek, a pair of panels of cursive calligraphy descending from the neck and meeting at the tail, a pair of panels with kufic flanking the rump, a large ogival shaped medallion with a symmetrical arabesque across the chest, shield-shaped panels of similar arabesques at the top of each of the legs, the rump with a pair of eight-petalled rosettes flanking the tail, a large circular aperture on the underside of the body This lot contains 1 item(s). |
|
Inscriptions
In cursive:
al-'izz al-da'im wa al-i / qbal (a) wa al-sa`a[da]
'Perpetual glory and prosperity and happiness'
In kufic, possibly:
al-'izz al-da'im / al-birr al-birr al-birr
`Perpetual glory, piety, piety, piety'
This beautiful bronze fountainhead is an extremely rare, and possibly unique, representative of an important and influential period of bronze sculpture from the Kingdom of Sicily. From the time of Roger II to the celebrated reign of Frederick II Hohenstaufen, Arab, Greek and local craftsmen engaged in an artistic interaction that produced a marvellously rich artistic outpouring and that was also to provide a major influence on subsequent European medieval art. The stylisation of the eleventh and early twelfth centuries of the magnificent Pisa griffin and the Metropolitan Museum lion is gradually replaced with a more expressive and convincing physical. This quality gives our lion a sense of vitality that the earlier pieces had not attempted. Its strength and weight seem almost perceptible, the gaze imploring. The decoration, too, has taken on a different character. As with the earlier examples it is composed of calligraphy and foliate motifs, but now these forms are more complex with cursive as well as kufic inscriptions. The foliate motifs are no longer schematic, but are fleshy-leaved palmettes. The technique has also been adapted. The decoration is worked with greater depth, perhaps in imitation of stone carving. The chiselling-out of the designs, familiar, and presumably learnt, from Persian metalwork, deftly complements the physicality of the sculptural form.
Only one other work in metal of this period has been convincingly identified. It is a casket in the collection of the Museum of Islamic Art, Doha (Allan 2001, p.50, no.12). Like the lion, it has chiselled out decoration of calligraphy and arabesques. The decoration is organised in a similar manner with clearly defined panels separated by undecorated areas. The inscriptions on the casket are also in cursive and kufic script, though not so well formed as on the lion. The arabesques contain the same elaborate palmettes and are composed in a similar symmetrical manner. The arabesques on each of the rear haunches of the lion display the characteristic features clearly. Scrolling tendrils have fleshy leaves curling round the tendril; an inverted elaborate palmette forms the upper terminal; the base of the design is a simpler palmette at the centre of an elaborate palmette-shaped cartouche formed from interlacing tendrils. This form of arabeque is paralleled on the better-known group of ivory caskets from the Kingdom of Sicily and of this period. The bronze casket takes its form and decoration directly from them (Pinder-Wilson 1973 illustrates a number of examples).
The obvious precursors in metal to this lion are diffcult to identify. A lion, possibly a fountainhead, in Kassel, is thought to be Egyptian and to date from the eleventh century (Berlin 1989, p.184, no.199). It is signed along the torso with the name of the maker in incised kufic. Otherwise it is undecorated. It shares a similar stance with our lion along with a number of other comparable features such as a flattened head, curved eyebrows and a mane extending, as stylised projections, around the cheeks of the beast, all treated in an abstract manner. The rear legs are also pointed out at the joint. This feature also appears on a Spanish bronze incense burner in the Louvre, datable to the same period as our lion, the later twelfth or early thirteenth century (Paris 1989, p.154, no.127). The highly schematised form and features of the Spanish bronze illustrate that a very different style is prevailing there at this time and argues against a western Mediterranean provenance for our lion.
In terms of the greater anatomical concern and expressiveness of our lion, of far greater similarity are a large number of south Italian stone sculptures of the twelfth century, many still adorning the churches for which they were made. The majority are in Apulia and, though with a multitude of local variations, they form a recognisable group of which our lion is clearly part. What might be considered defining features of the sculptural aspects of our piece are all present with some frequency in this group: the tail taken between the legs and up over the back, the pronounced brows, small cupped ears, the wrinkled nose and the lined cheeks. The face of our lion is highly reminiscent of that on the stone lecturn at Monte Sant'Angelo (Garton 1984, fig.122a). The lion head on the lecturn in the cathedral at Canosa is also comparable (Belli d'Elia 1975, p.83). The Episcopal Throne of this cathedral has more related lions' heads (ibid., p.91). The elephants supporting this throne have ridges running horizontally down their trunks of the same manner as those on our lion's nose (ibid., p.87). The placing of the tail over the back is a commonplace illustrated on a stone lion in Manfredonia (Belli d'Elia 1980, p.80). A capital from Venosa has lions carved with a series of deep lines running down either cheek (Willemsen & Odenthal 1959, p.62).
The raised division on the front haunches is a feature of a number of works in stone, such as the elephant supports on the throne of Canosa mentioned earlier. It was present on late Roman lions from this region and may be a revival or a continuation of that practice.
The style is paralleled in other media as well. Some of the lion's features are present in a lion painted in a roundel on a vault of the Norman Stanza of the Cappella Palatina (Tronzo 1997, p.90). The painted lion has the prominent arched brows interrupted by the furrows of a frown. On our lion this frown has been abstracted to an elaborate v-shaped motif in the middle of the brow.
An ivory casket in the Metropolitan Museum, of the same date as our lion and thought to be from Amalfi, has carved panels in which is a lion of some similarity and notable for sharing the ridged nose of our lion (Carratelli 1992, p.323).
The eight-petalled rosettes on the lion's rear are present on the lions decorating the coronation mantle of Roger II, made in 1133-34, and used by subsequent Norman rulers, including Frederick, on their coronation. They also appear in abundance as a decorative motif on the ceiling of the Cappella Palatina. That magnificent interior may have been an inspiration for the arabesques on our lion for the arrangements are closely comparable in design and component elements (and therefore to those on the ivory caskets mentioned above) to those found across the decoration of the ceiling (Gabrieli and Scerrato 1979, nos.58, 59 & 64).
The style used to depict the mane is a significant break from the approach used on the Pisa griffin, the Metropolitan lion and even of many of the stone lions of Sicily and South Italy of the late eleventh and early twelfth century. The schematised coils have been rejected in favour of a more naturalistic attempt at rendering the hair. This new style seems to have gradually replaced the old, but is certainly present on significant works in the Kingdom of Sicily by the mid-twelfth century. The porphyry sarcophagus of Frederick II Hohenstaufen, dated by Deer to the 1140's, is supported on four lions (Deer 1959, p.46). Three of these have coiled hair, but one has the beginnings of the naturalistic style of our lion. This style may have its origins in Antique models that were becoming of interest to craftsmen at this time. The porphyry sarcophagus was itself a conscious reference to the Antique and seems to have been based in terms of form on specific Roman models. However, the style of some lions carved on Fatimid ivories, notably one from a group in the Bargello Museum and one in the Louvre, raises a strong possibility that this was imported from Egypt (Venice 1993, p.199, no.87, and Anglade 1988, p.63, fig.32d, respectively). The manes of the lions depicted on both of these ivories accords in style with that on our lion. They also feature panels of arabesques over the front and rear haunches. The beasts on these ivory panels are treated in a lively naturalistic manner in general and it seems probable that the introduction of the livelier and more anatomically convincing treatment on the sculpture of South Italy and Sicily owed much to the influence of Fatimid art. It may be that, rather than a revival, there is a continuation of late Roman traits reintroduced into southern Italy and Sicily from Fatimid Egypt. One reason why this may have occured is the need for models for the animal symbols of the four evangelists lacking in the orthodox Byzantine tradition (Deer 1959, p.56).
The strength with which the style of those slightly earlier ivory panels is present in this lion argues for an Arabic craftsman being responsible for its production. The quality of the calligraphy, notably the clarity of the cursive script, also argues for an Arab hand in its making. The evidence for Arab craftsmen in the Kingdom of Sicily is scant. Amongst it is a record of a 'Leonardus Saracenus' who worked on the church of S. Eustachio, Matera, 1082 (Garton 1984, p.110). In 1131 Roger II had a castle built in Bari by Muslim workers. There were also craftsmen amongst the Arabic colony established by Frederick II in Lucera in the early thirteenth century. They were still active when Charles of Anjou's army took the fortress in 1300, demonstrated by a document recording the order of Charles to transfer the 'Saracenos artistas' to Naples.
The use of lion-form fountainheads is the legacy of Roman tradition. Hence the majority, if not all, of early Islamic fountainheads come from regions formerly under Roman rule. There is some evidence for the continuation of this practice in the Kingdom of Sicily. There is a depiction of a lion-headed fountain above a waterslide in the decoration of the Capella Palatina (Monneret de Villard 1950, fig.230). Two porphyry lions' heads in the Dumbarton Oaks Museum may have been the spouts of such fountains (Deer 1959, p.59). A panegyric of Roger II by his court poet Abd ar-Rahman from Butera also mentions lion fountains, in the Palace of La Favera (ibid., p.110).
The evidence for a metalworking tradition in the Kingdom of Sicily is also hard to track down, though, recently there has been a useful clarification of what can be said (Contadini, Camber and Northover 2001). For the period after the date covered by this article, there is little more information save for oblique references. Amongst the decoration of the palace of Frederick at Foggia, there are accounts which state that, as well as carved lions, there was a 'male bronze statue and a cast of a cow in the same compound' (Radke 1994, p.183). There is also the suggestion that there were bronzes at Lucera (ibid., p.184).
The size of this bronze lion would suggest that it was intended for a personal space. The nature of the inscriptions tends to argue for a secular use, though this is not entirely certain. The patron for such a work of art as this must have been a man of some means. Whether he was an Arab or Christian is not clear. The legibility of the inscriptions might at least suggest that it was commissioned by an Arab speaker. In the second half of the twelfth century, the Arab community was in decline for a number of reasons, amongst which emigration and conversion were the dominant causes. However, even as late as the middle of the thirteenth century, there still to be found muslims occupying significant positions, such as Frederick's minister, Uberto Fallamonaca, and, therefore, in able to act as patrons to significant works such as this lion. |
|
