Lot Essay
The present bronze is described in the inventory of works deeded by Andre Le Notre to the King in 1699 "un groupe de Diane, un cerf et cupidon, de deux pied a debaut." The group is recorded as no. 169 in the inventory of Louis XIV's collection in 1729, and seems to have disappeared from the French Royal collection by the general inventory of 1775.
The present work (now missing its deer and cupid) firmly reflects the influence of the School of Fontainebleau (cf. The French Bronze, cat. no. 16), not only because of the tradition of the subject matter of Diana the Huntress, but also from the sturdy stance and intense treatment of the hair. The more modern French influence, that of Michel Anguier, can be seen in the moving drapery and the strong facial features. The facture of the work, with the legs, arms, and head cast separately and attached with rivets suggests a sculptor not familiar with casting technique.
An interesting comparison may be made with Anselme Flamen's large marble group of Diana of 1693 which was placed in the park at Marly and with the bronze statuette which is derived from it (cf. Souchal, Vol. I, p. 285, cat. no. 32), . In comparison, the present bronze was obviously created as a free standing group and is successful from any view points. (i.e. three-dimensional).
Even more interesting is the connection to a work by Antoine Coysevox from 1710, the marble of Marie-Adelaide de Savoie, Duchesse de Bourgogne as Diana (cf. Souchal, Vol. I, p. 215, cat. no. 91). The stance, the position of the arms, the downward glance and the treatment of the drapery all mirror the present bronze. The existence of this bronze statuette in the Royal Collection would have been well-known to Coysevox as Director of the Academie with an apartment at the Galerie du Louvre. Even though the authorship of Diana cannot be firmly attributed, its importance in late 17th Century French sculpture is secured. This unique work which is neither a copy from antiquity nor a reduction from an existing monument is confirmed as a significant work from its outstanding provenance.
The present work (now missing its deer and cupid) firmly reflects the influence of the School of Fontainebleau (cf. The French Bronze, cat. no. 16), not only because of the tradition of the subject matter of Diana the Huntress, but also from the sturdy stance and intense treatment of the hair. The more modern French influence, that of Michel Anguier, can be seen in the moving drapery and the strong facial features. The facture of the work, with the legs, arms, and head cast separately and attached with rivets suggests a sculptor not familiar with casting technique.
An interesting comparison may be made with Anselme Flamen's large marble group of Diana of 1693 which was placed in the park at Marly and with the bronze statuette which is derived from it (cf. Souchal, Vol. I, p. 285, cat. no. 32), . In comparison, the present bronze was obviously created as a free standing group and is successful from any view points. (i.e. three-dimensional).
Even more interesting is the connection to a work by Antoine Coysevox from 1710, the marble of Marie-Adelaide de Savoie, Duchesse de Bourgogne as Diana (cf. Souchal, Vol. I, p. 215, cat. no. 91). The stance, the position of the arms, the downward glance and the treatment of the drapery all mirror the present bronze. The existence of this bronze statuette in the Royal Collection would have been well-known to Coysevox as Director of the Academie with an apartment at the Galerie du Louvre. Even though the authorship of Diana cannot be firmly attributed, its importance in late 17th Century French sculpture is secured. This unique work which is neither a copy from antiquity nor a reduction from an existing monument is confirmed as a significant work from its outstanding provenance.