.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
Traditionally, the attribution of this energetic equestrian bronze model of Louis XIV was always given to Martin van der Bogaert, also known as Desjardins, but it was dispelled in circa 1933 when Friis made a stylistic connection between this model and an equestrian bronze model of Maximilian Emanuel, Elector of Bavaria, which is signed and dated (1714) by de Groff (Friis, loc. cit) and housed in the Bayerischesnational Museum, Munich (Martin, op. cit., fig.119).
In his exhaustive study on equestrian images of Louis XIV, Martin observes that a number of similar bronze versions of this model are identifiable with Desjardins and his workshop and others with de Groff (ibid., figs. 112-9). While there are evidently issues over the precise authorship of some of these models, there is no doubt that de Groff took inspiration from Girardon and Desjardin's earlier prototypes - such as the equestrian monument of Louis XIV (1679-83 (never executed)) by the former and the bronze equestrian model - after the equestrian monument in Aix-en-Provence (1687-94) also never executed - of the same found in the latter's studio after his death (Souchal,, op. cit., II, no. 47 and I, no. 46b).
The matter of attribution is confused by the fact that a number of these compositions have been incorrectly ascribed to Desjardins or his workshop and not to de Groff. Martin, for example, ascribes to the former the model in Waddesdon Manor (Martin, op. cit., fig. 112), which is in fact closest to the one autograph bronze by de Groff in Munich. This implies, therefore, that there have to be two distinguishable types; firstly the Desjardins model, which was the one conceived for the monument in Aix-en-Provence and depicts only the King on a rearing horse (ibid I, no. 46b), and the de Groff model, which has a number of variations with or without a combination of winged Victories and vanquished enemies underfoot related by compositional, physiognomic and stylistic similarities.
Although it appears that no other versions are completely identical to the present lot, it does seem to relate closest to the two bronzes catalogued as 'after de Groff' and dated to the first quarter of the 18th century that featured in the Knoedler & Co. exhibition (New York, nos. 52 and 53). Curiously the rider of the present lot is closest to that of no. 52, while the horse is closest to that of no. 53 - thus demonstrating that the artist was continually experimenting with the possible variations of the model.
There is no doubt that de Groff owed a debt to Desjardin's original conception, but in comparing the Munich bronze to all the other similar variations - some of which have even substituted Louis XIV with other sitters such as George I - it becomes clear that de Groff's adaptation of the model was as influential and sought after as Desjardin's.
In his exhaustive study on equestrian images of Louis XIV, Martin observes that a number of similar bronze versions of this model are identifiable with Desjardins and his workshop and others with de Groff (ibid., figs. 112-9). While there are evidently issues over the precise authorship of some of these models, there is no doubt that de Groff took inspiration from Girardon and Desjardin's earlier prototypes - such as the equestrian monument of Louis XIV (1679-83 (never executed)) by the former and the bronze equestrian model - after the equestrian monument in Aix-en-Provence (1687-94) also never executed - of the same found in the latter's studio after his death (Souchal,, op. cit., II, no. 47 and I, no. 46b).
The matter of attribution is confused by the fact that a number of these compositions have been incorrectly ascribed to Desjardins or his workshop and not to de Groff. Martin, for example, ascribes to the former the model in Waddesdon Manor (Martin, op. cit., fig. 112), which is in fact closest to the one autograph bronze by de Groff in Munich. This implies, therefore, that there have to be two distinguishable types; firstly the Desjardins model, which was the one conceived for the monument in Aix-en-Provence and depicts only the King on a rearing horse (ibid I, no. 46b), and the de Groff model, which has a number of variations with or without a combination of winged Victories and vanquished enemies underfoot related by compositional, physiognomic and stylistic similarities.
Although it appears that no other versions are completely identical to the present lot, it does seem to relate closest to the two bronzes catalogued as 'after de Groff' and dated to the first quarter of the 18th century that featured in the Knoedler & Co. exhibition (New York, nos. 52 and 53). Curiously the rider of the present lot is closest to that of no. 52, while the horse is closest to that of no. 53 - thus demonstrating that the artist was continually experimenting with the possible variations of the model.
There is no doubt that de Groff owed a debt to Desjardin's original conception, but in comparing the Munich bronze to all the other similar variations - some of which have even substituted Louis XIV with other sitters such as George I - it becomes clear that de Groff's adaptation of the model was as influential and sought after as Desjardin's.