Lot Essay
The tradition of figural sculpture in the Islamic world has not received the attention that it deserves. This art, using bronze, stone and stucco, was practised in the early centuries of Islam, in the desert palaces of the Ummayads and those of the Abbasids at Samarra.
The figural sculpture of this early period aspires to the naturalism inherited from the Graeco-Roman world. With the coming of the Turks in the 11th century into the central lands of the Islamic world, Seljuq figural art laid greater emphasis on stylisation. Most Seljuq animal and bird bronzes are functional and their formal treatment highly abstract, such as incense burners which are perforated with geometric and floral designs. In Egypt and Spain where the Hellenistic spirit survived to a greater degree than in the Eastern regions, this sculptural tradition was expressed in fountain heads and aquamaniles in the form of animals and birds of powerful form; and it is not surprising that the distiction between those that were made in Egypt and those of Spain has given rise to much discussion.
The attribution of certain bronzes to Spain is now widely accepted on the grounds of their having been recovered from excavations such as the bronze standing deer found at Madinat al-Zahra, the caliphal city near Cordova, and now in the archaeological museum at Cordova (Gomez-Moreno, M.: El Arte Árabe Español hasta los Almohades: Arte Mozárabe, Madrid 1951, fig. 396(b): Dodds, J.D. (ed.): Al-Andalus - the Art of Islamic Spain exhibition catalogue, New York 1992, no.10, p.210). Also the bronze lion found in an ancient castle in Monzon near Palencia in Castile and now in the Louvre (Gomez-Moreno fig.396(a): Al-Andalus no.54, p.270). The former is decorated with overall engraved decoration of intertwined roundels and should be dated to the 10th century. The crouching lion in the Louvre is also decorated overall with pattern arranged in defined registers and has been dated to the 12th-13th century.
The largest known Islamic bronze figural sculpture is the majestic griffin which once graced the east gable of Pisa Cathedral and is now in the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo (Al-Andalus, no.15, p.216: Scerrato, U.: Metalli Islamici, Milan 1966, pl.33, p.79 amongst many others). It is to this great bronze that the lion here under consideration must stand as a companion. Notwithstanding the close size, the griffin being about 4in. (10cm.) taller, careful comparison of style and technique serve to establish a close relationship that more than suggests one and the same workshop. There is the same monumental posture, the same engraved details - the treatment of the mane of the lion and the neck and wing feathers of the griffin, and a similar "saddle-cloth" with tiraz border inscribed in precisely the same style of kufic on a foliate ground. The escutcheons on the lion's haunches are treated in a similar manner though the framing borders and the creatures represented differ. Those on the griffin are a lion and a dove; on the lion are a griffin and an eagle. Inscribed on the tiraz of the lion is the following du'a:
On the left side proper: ni'ma wa baraka wa 'afiya
On the breast: wa salama wa sa'ada wa yumn
On the right side proper: wa kar[a]ma wa baqa li-sahibihi
(God's favour and divine grace and immunity and peace and bliss and
divine favour and lasting life to the owner)
If we accept this close relationship then each may have something to contribute to identifying their provenance. Both share many of the features of the crouching lion from Monzon, in particular the definition of the various decorative registers as well as the mane ornament, the shoulder and thigh escutcheons and a similar style of kufic.
The two great bronzes also relate to the Madinat al-Zahra deer and another found in Cordova and now in the Archaeological Museum in Madrid (Gomez-Moreno fig.397(a) and (b)). These too have "saddle-cloths" decorated with a similar pattern of ordered roundels which was subsequently adopted in Hispano-Arabic textiles of the 13th century (Al-Andalus, no.90, pp.322-323 circa 1200, and no.94,
pp.330-331, prior to 1247AD). Closely related to our lion is a bronze lion in the Museo del Bargello, Florence which has the same posture and proportions, and "saddle-cloth" with the same roundel design and tiraz bands with kufic inscriptions (Gomez-Moreno fig.397(d): Scerrato pl.30, p.71). It is of the same period as the griffin and the lion but lacks their quality and artistic authority.
In the sequence of the animal sculptures attributed to Spain, the griffin and its companion lion may be placed in the 11th or early 12th century, that is, between the caliphal deer and the Monzon crouching lion. While the lion has a great number of similarities with the eight lions around the fountain in the 14th century court of the lions in the Nasrid palace in Granada, particularly the proportions, the stance, and the way the mouth of each has been shaped to allow a water pipe to protrude, the precise dating of these stone lions is itself in question. Many authorities believe them to antedate the court and to have been adapted later for the fountain. The similarities with our lion strongly supports their earlier dating.
The provenance, as has been said above, is still open, and the attribution of the griffin together with the lion to Fatimid Egypt in the 11th century is not without foundation. The most striking Fatimid bronze animals (and there are indeed few) are the antlered stag in the National Museum, Munich (Sarre, F. and Martin, F.R.: Die Ausstellung von Meisterwerken muhammedanischer Kunst in München 1910, vol.II, Munich 1910), and another in the Museo di Capodimonte, Naples, both admirable examples of the Fatimid taste for naturalism and monumentality which are also features of the griffin and the lion. The griffin may have been among the booty taken in a raid by the Pisans on a town of Mahdiyya in Tunisia in 1087 according to a report by a chronicler of the 12th century (Jenkins, M. 'New evidence for the history and provenance of the so-called Pisa Griffin', Islamic Archaeological Studies, I, 1978, Cairo 1982, pp.79-81). If that report is well founded, then the griffin must have been made either in Ifriqiyya or imported from Fatimid Egypt to Ifriqiyya. Moreover the griffin is frequent theme in Fatimid art. Originating in the ancient Near East it seems to have had a solar significance and like the winged horse was adopted as a throne support perhaps to symbolise the king's ascent to heaven. What the precise meaning in the Islamic world was is still unknown. It is worth noting that the griffin appears along with the lion in the rock crystal head of the sceptre of St. Stephen, now in Budapest, which is of sure Fatimid origin.
The exact method of casting the lion is unclear. However with a bronze of this size and importance it seems likely that it would have been made using the indirect lost-wax method where the original wax model is not destroyed and can be reused should the first casting be unsuccessful. The legs have been cast separately then joined to the body using a solder of very similar composition, at which point they are solid. There is also the remains of a chaplet inside one of the legs.
It seems likely that the head and body were cast in more than one piece since otherwise an unmanageably large amount of hot metal would have been required. The exact sections the body was cast in and whether pieces were cast on or joined later is unclear. Drips inside the body run from eye to neck inside the head and from front to back along the length of the body. However these appear to be too fine to represent the molten brass and are more probably a casting of the wax original, thus providing no further illumination as to the final casting process.
Also confusing are the small square holes evenly spaced around the lion's body. Identical holes can be found on the Pisa Griffin. They appear to be the location of the original chaplets but are confusing since they have not been filled as one would expect. The metal has a relatively high tin content, about 14 on one sample. This would imply a relatively low melting temperature which would very possibly not have fused copper chaplets to the body, making them easy to remove after casting. Alternatively the same result could have been obtained using either stone or wooden chaplets. On the inside of the scupture the metal has been pushed up around the holes seeming to indicate that they were made, or at least neatened, after casting. However it is possible that the "push-up" was made on the wax model when the original chaplets were pushed through, and has thus simply been mirrored by the metal. In the legs there are clearly some filled chaplet holes and there is even the remains of a chaplet rod inside the proper right leg. This is a square rod exactly the size of the holes on the body and leads one to the conclusion that the holes on the body and head could very well have had the dual purpose of chaplets and, on their removal, as attachments for some form of decoration. The holes run in lines along the sides of the body and down the face and would be well placed to support a decorative harness or some kind of textile covering.
Another feature that raises questions is the panels made to receive inlay on the face. These are absent in the Pisa Griffin. They appear to be too deep to have been made solely for metal plaques, even if these had been enamelled, which has been suggested. It seems more probable that they were for some form of glass, ceramic or hardstone. A convex upper surface on any of these areas would enhance the sculptural effect, enabling a thickness appropriate for hardstone or glass to be possible. They would also have made the eyes considerably more powerful. It has furthermore been suggested that the sides of the mouth could have had inlaid teeth, possibly of ivory.
The original purpose of the lion is unclear. Its scale was undoubtedly designed to impress, but the central circular aperture in the mouth suggests a further more practical purpose. Similar to the known stone lions in Granada, it could have had a pipe there for a fountain. However, the tops of the legs are solid, so any water would have had to come up through the hole in its belly. While this is possible, it does not explain the use of the Pisa Griffin. That animal has a shape of mouth totally unsuited for a fountain, a mouth furthermore which is blocked from the rest of the head.
A most unusual feature which both have in common is the inverted vase shaped 'bladder' attached to the interior of the high rump of the animal above the tail. This has a rounded body and flaring mouth; it is made of the same metal and cast integrally with the body. It does not make sense as a fountain accessory. While it has been suggested that it could have held incense while keeping the body cool, this idea again fails on the lack of a passage to the mouth of the Pisa Griffin, and also on the lack of air which would have reached the burning embers, despite the small square holes. There is however an entry in the chronicles (..............) which notes that the Caliph in Cordova received guests seated between carved animals which roared. Is it possible that these 'bladders' are the remains of a sound-making device?
A copy of a full technical analysis of this piece performed by the Oxford Research Institute for Archaeology is sold with this lot.
The figural sculpture of this early period aspires to the naturalism inherited from the Graeco-Roman world. With the coming of the Turks in the 11th century into the central lands of the Islamic world, Seljuq figural art laid greater emphasis on stylisation. Most Seljuq animal and bird bronzes are functional and their formal treatment highly abstract, such as incense burners which are perforated with geometric and floral designs. In Egypt and Spain where the Hellenistic spirit survived to a greater degree than in the Eastern regions, this sculptural tradition was expressed in fountain heads and aquamaniles in the form of animals and birds of powerful form; and it is not surprising that the distiction between those that were made in Egypt and those of Spain has given rise to much discussion.
The attribution of certain bronzes to Spain is now widely accepted on the grounds of their having been recovered from excavations such as the bronze standing deer found at Madinat al-Zahra, the caliphal city near Cordova, and now in the archaeological museum at Cordova (Gomez-Moreno, M.: El Arte Árabe Español hasta los Almohades: Arte Mozárabe, Madrid 1951, fig. 396(b): Dodds, J.D. (ed.): Al-Andalus - the Art of Islamic Spain exhibition catalogue, New York 1992, no.10, p.210). Also the bronze lion found in an ancient castle in Monzon near Palencia in Castile and now in the Louvre (Gomez-Moreno fig.396(a): Al-Andalus no.54, p.270). The former is decorated with overall engraved decoration of intertwined roundels and should be dated to the 10th century. The crouching lion in the Louvre is also decorated overall with pattern arranged in defined registers and has been dated to the 12th-13th century.
The largest known Islamic bronze figural sculpture is the majestic griffin which once graced the east gable of Pisa Cathedral and is now in the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo (Al-Andalus, no.15, p.216: Scerrato, U.: Metalli Islamici, Milan 1966, pl.33, p.79 amongst many others). It is to this great bronze that the lion here under consideration must stand as a companion. Notwithstanding the close size, the griffin being about 4in. (10cm.) taller, careful comparison of style and technique serve to establish a close relationship that more than suggests one and the same workshop. There is the same monumental posture, the same engraved details - the treatment of the mane of the lion and the neck and wing feathers of the griffin, and a similar "saddle-cloth" with tiraz border inscribed in precisely the same style of kufic on a foliate ground. The escutcheons on the lion's haunches are treated in a similar manner though the framing borders and the creatures represented differ. Those on the griffin are a lion and a dove; on the lion are a griffin and an eagle. Inscribed on the tiraz of the lion is the following du'a:
On the left side proper: ni'ma wa baraka wa 'afiya
On the breast: wa salama wa sa'ada wa yumn
On the right side proper: wa kar[a]ma wa baqa li-sahibihi
(God's favour and divine grace and immunity and peace and bliss and
divine favour and lasting life to the owner)
If we accept this close relationship then each may have something to contribute to identifying their provenance. Both share many of the features of the crouching lion from Monzon, in particular the definition of the various decorative registers as well as the mane ornament, the shoulder and thigh escutcheons and a similar style of kufic.
The two great bronzes also relate to the Madinat al-Zahra deer and another found in Cordova and now in the Archaeological Museum in Madrid (Gomez-Moreno fig.397(a) and (b)). These too have "saddle-cloths" decorated with a similar pattern of ordered roundels which was subsequently adopted in Hispano-Arabic textiles of the 13th century (Al-Andalus, no.90, pp.322-323 circa 1200, and no.94,
pp.330-331, prior to 1247AD). Closely related to our lion is a bronze lion in the Museo del Bargello, Florence which has the same posture and proportions, and "saddle-cloth" with the same roundel design and tiraz bands with kufic inscriptions (Gomez-Moreno fig.397(d): Scerrato pl.30, p.71). It is of the same period as the griffin and the lion but lacks their quality and artistic authority.
In the sequence of the animal sculptures attributed to Spain, the griffin and its companion lion may be placed in the 11th or early 12th century, that is, between the caliphal deer and the Monzon crouching lion. While the lion has a great number of similarities with the eight lions around the fountain in the 14th century court of the lions in the Nasrid palace in Granada, particularly the proportions, the stance, and the way the mouth of each has been shaped to allow a water pipe to protrude, the precise dating of these stone lions is itself in question. Many authorities believe them to antedate the court and to have been adapted later for the fountain. The similarities with our lion strongly supports their earlier dating.
The provenance, as has been said above, is still open, and the attribution of the griffin together with the lion to Fatimid Egypt in the 11th century is not without foundation. The most striking Fatimid bronze animals (and there are indeed few) are the antlered stag in the National Museum, Munich (Sarre, F. and Martin, F.R.: Die Ausstellung von Meisterwerken muhammedanischer Kunst in München 1910, vol.II, Munich 1910), and another in the Museo di Capodimonte, Naples, both admirable examples of the Fatimid taste for naturalism and monumentality which are also features of the griffin and the lion. The griffin may have been among the booty taken in a raid by the Pisans on a town of Mahdiyya in Tunisia in 1087 according to a report by a chronicler of the 12th century (Jenkins, M. 'New evidence for the history and provenance of the so-called Pisa Griffin', Islamic Archaeological Studies, I, 1978, Cairo 1982, pp.79-81). If that report is well founded, then the griffin must have been made either in Ifriqiyya or imported from Fatimid Egypt to Ifriqiyya. Moreover the griffin is frequent theme in Fatimid art. Originating in the ancient Near East it seems to have had a solar significance and like the winged horse was adopted as a throne support perhaps to symbolise the king's ascent to heaven. What the precise meaning in the Islamic world was is still unknown. It is worth noting that the griffin appears along with the lion in the rock crystal head of the sceptre of St. Stephen, now in Budapest, which is of sure Fatimid origin.
The exact method of casting the lion is unclear. However with a bronze of this size and importance it seems likely that it would have been made using the indirect lost-wax method where the original wax model is not destroyed and can be reused should the first casting be unsuccessful. The legs have been cast separately then joined to the body using a solder of very similar composition, at which point they are solid. There is also the remains of a chaplet inside one of the legs.
It seems likely that the head and body were cast in more than one piece since otherwise an unmanageably large amount of hot metal would have been required. The exact sections the body was cast in and whether pieces were cast on or joined later is unclear. Drips inside the body run from eye to neck inside the head and from front to back along the length of the body. However these appear to be too fine to represent the molten brass and are more probably a casting of the wax original, thus providing no further illumination as to the final casting process.
Also confusing are the small square holes evenly spaced around the lion's body. Identical holes can be found on the Pisa Griffin. They appear to be the location of the original chaplets but are confusing since they have not been filled as one would expect. The metal has a relatively high tin content, about 14 on one sample. This would imply a relatively low melting temperature which would very possibly not have fused copper chaplets to the body, making them easy to remove after casting. Alternatively the same result could have been obtained using either stone or wooden chaplets. On the inside of the scupture the metal has been pushed up around the holes seeming to indicate that they were made, or at least neatened, after casting. However it is possible that the "push-up" was made on the wax model when the original chaplets were pushed through, and has thus simply been mirrored by the metal. In the legs there are clearly some filled chaplet holes and there is even the remains of a chaplet rod inside the proper right leg. This is a square rod exactly the size of the holes on the body and leads one to the conclusion that the holes on the body and head could very well have had the dual purpose of chaplets and, on their removal, as attachments for some form of decoration. The holes run in lines along the sides of the body and down the face and would be well placed to support a decorative harness or some kind of textile covering.
Another feature that raises questions is the panels made to receive inlay on the face. These are absent in the Pisa Griffin. They appear to be too deep to have been made solely for metal plaques, even if these had been enamelled, which has been suggested. It seems more probable that they were for some form of glass, ceramic or hardstone. A convex upper surface on any of these areas would enhance the sculptural effect, enabling a thickness appropriate for hardstone or glass to be possible. They would also have made the eyes considerably more powerful. It has furthermore been suggested that the sides of the mouth could have had inlaid teeth, possibly of ivory.
The original purpose of the lion is unclear. Its scale was undoubtedly designed to impress, but the central circular aperture in the mouth suggests a further more practical purpose. Similar to the known stone lions in Granada, it could have had a pipe there for a fountain. However, the tops of the legs are solid, so any water would have had to come up through the hole in its belly. While this is possible, it does not explain the use of the Pisa Griffin. That animal has a shape of mouth totally unsuited for a fountain, a mouth furthermore which is blocked from the rest of the head.
A most unusual feature which both have in common is the inverted vase shaped 'bladder' attached to the interior of the high rump of the animal above the tail. This has a rounded body and flaring mouth; it is made of the same metal and cast integrally with the body. It does not make sense as a fountain accessory. While it has been suggested that it could have held incense while keeping the body cool, this idea again fails on the lack of a passage to the mouth of the Pisa Griffin, and also on the lack of air which would have reached the burning embers, despite the small square holes. There is however an entry in the chronicles (..............) which notes that the Caliph in Cordova received guests seated between carved animals which roared. Is it possible that these 'bladders' are the remains of a sound-making device?
A copy of a full technical analysis of this piece performed by the Oxford Research Institute for Archaeology is sold with this lot.