.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Provenant de la collection du comte et de la comtesse d'Ormesson
CERCLE D'ANTOINE COYSEVOX, FRANCE, FIN DU XVIIE SIÈCLE
Vénus accroupie
Details
CERCLE D'ANTOINE COYSEVOX, FRANCE, FIN DU XVIIE SIÈCLE
Vénus accroupie
bronze, la terrasse ovale fondue avec la figure, au-dessous une étiquette ancienne "630"
H. 31,2 cm (12 ¼ in.)
Vénus accroupie
bronze, la terrasse ovale fondue avec la figure, au-dessous une étiquette ancienne "630"
H. 31,2 cm (12 ¼ in.)
Provenance
Collection comte et comtesse d'Ormesson ;
Puis par descendance aux propriétaires actuels.
Puis par descendance aux propriétaires actuels.
Further Details
A BRONZE FIGURE OF A CROUCHING VENUS, CIRCLE OF ANTOINE COYSEVOX, FRENCH, LATE 17TH CENTURY
At first glance, very few elements allow for a certain identification of the iconography of this bronze. Its nudity suggests Venus or a bather; however, the work is more enigmatic. The figure appears to grasp an object that has since disappeared, while the turned head directs the gaze toward an absent point, suggesting a historic interaction. These clues point toward a more precise interpretation: the goddess most likely faced a Cupid from whom she had just confiscated his bow.
Comparisons with ancient sculptures and their engraved reproductions help to shed light on this hypothesis and to reconstruct this iconographic scheme. Of particular pertinence are the Crouching Venus with Cupid from the Farnese collection, now in the National Archaeological Museum of Naples, as well as engravings of this same sculpture by Marcantonio Raimondi (1480-1534), probably after Francesco Francia (1447-1517), or by Giovanni Battista de Cavalieri (1525-1597), titled Venus corollaria In aedibus Farnesianis. These works attest to the wide dissemination of the antique model in the presence of a Cupid.
The motif of the Crouching Venus, admired for the anatomical complexity implied by its posture, enjoyed very wide diffusion. The most famous ancient Venus is the version held since 1787 in the Uffizi, Florence, although other versions were already known at the beginning of the 16th century. Some, presenting what Francis Haskell and Nicholas Penny describe as “significant variations,” were already in circulation. Among modern interpretations, the marble by Antoine Coysevox (1640-1720), completed in 1686, stands out as one of the most remarkable “imitations” of this antique prototype. Its success was considerable, and a bronze was cast by Joseph Vinache (1697-1764) for the Château de Marly. This is now preserved in the Musée national des châteaux de Versailles et de Trianon (inv. MR 3293).
The base of our bronze, cast as one with the figure, reproduces that of the antique model, confirming the work’s grounding in this tradition. However, in the case of the present bronze, the orientation of the figure as well as the positioning of the arms diverge from the best-known versions, suggesting an origin in processes of indirect transmission.
The process of engraving, which reverses compositions in relation to the matrix, offers a line of interpretation in this respect. This bronze, the only known sculptural example in which the left leg is placed on the ground rather than the right, may thus derive from an engraved model. It is likely the case therefore that the sculptor who created this rare variant, only knew antique models through these inverted images and transposed the composition as he perceived it.
At first glance, very few elements allow for a certain identification of the iconography of this bronze. Its nudity suggests Venus or a bather; however, the work is more enigmatic. The figure appears to grasp an object that has since disappeared, while the turned head directs the gaze toward an absent point, suggesting a historic interaction. These clues point toward a more precise interpretation: the goddess most likely faced a Cupid from whom she had just confiscated his bow.
Comparisons with ancient sculptures and their engraved reproductions help to shed light on this hypothesis and to reconstruct this iconographic scheme. Of particular pertinence are the Crouching Venus with Cupid from the Farnese collection, now in the National Archaeological Museum of Naples, as well as engravings of this same sculpture by Marcantonio Raimondi (1480-1534), probably after Francesco Francia (1447-1517), or by Giovanni Battista de Cavalieri (1525-1597), titled Venus corollaria In aedibus Farnesianis. These works attest to the wide dissemination of the antique model in the presence of a Cupid.
The motif of the Crouching Venus, admired for the anatomical complexity implied by its posture, enjoyed very wide diffusion. The most famous ancient Venus is the version held since 1787 in the Uffizi, Florence, although other versions were already known at the beginning of the 16th century. Some, presenting what Francis Haskell and Nicholas Penny describe as “significant variations,” were already in circulation. Among modern interpretations, the marble by Antoine Coysevox (1640-1720), completed in 1686, stands out as one of the most remarkable “imitations” of this antique prototype. Its success was considerable, and a bronze was cast by Joseph Vinache (1697-1764) for the Château de Marly. This is now preserved in the Musée national des châteaux de Versailles et de Trianon (inv. MR 3293).
The base of our bronze, cast as one with the figure, reproduces that of the antique model, confirming the work’s grounding in this tradition. However, in the case of the present bronze, the orientation of the figure as well as the positioning of the arms diverge from the best-known versions, suggesting an origin in processes of indirect transmission.
The process of engraving, which reverses compositions in relation to the matrix, offers a line of interpretation in this respect. This bronze, the only known sculptural example in which the left leg is placed on the ground rather than the right, may thus derive from an engraved model. It is likely the case therefore that the sculptor who created this rare variant, only knew antique models through these inverted images and transposed the composition as he perceived it.
Brought to you by
Olivia Ghosh
Specialist