George II, Marble Bust - Sotheby's 2 July 2019 - and some notes on the soft paste porcelain busts of George II.

A Marble Bust of George II
attributed to Michael Rysbrack

in Sotheby's Sale - 2 July 2019. 

and some further soft paste porcelain busts of George II.

A few notes and images:

I have posted at some length already on the portrait busts of George II.

http://english18thcenturyportraitsculpture.blogspot.com/2016/07/bust-of-george-ii-by-michael-rysbrack.html

http://bathartandarchitecture.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-busts-in-queen-carolines-library.html

For the Rysbrack busts of George II in terracotta at Durham University and the Royal Collection and the marble busts in the Royal Collection and the Victoria and Albert Museum see my post.

http://bathartandarchitecture.blogspot.com/2017/10/marble-bust-of-george-ii-by-rysbrack-at.html


http://english18thcenturyportraitsculpture.blogspot.com/2016/07/busts-of-william-iii-george-i-and.html

_____________

For the lead statue of George II at Royal Square St Helier, Jersey by John Cheere (1709 - 87) see.

http://members.societe-jersiaise.org/geraint/statues/gii1999.html

________________________

The post here on the soft paste porcelain busts of George II is a series of photographs and notes collated from various websites - I do not pretend any expertise on the subject of soft paste porcelain but the work by Ross and Gael Ramsay is very good.(see notes below).

_______________

A Marble Bust George II (1638-1760).

Attributed by Sotheby's to the workshop of Michael Rysbrack (1694-1770)

Photographs and text below courtesy Sotheby's.

George II

 Marble

bust: 43cm., 17in.

base: 12cm., 4¾in.

Provenance

Christie's, London, 7 July 1998, lot 98.

Sotheby's Catalogue Note:

This beautifully carved bust of George II is a reduced version of Rysbrack's portrait, which he modelled from life in 1738. The original terracotta is in the Royal Collection (inv. no. RCIN 1412) and is paired with a bust of Queen Caroline (1683-1737; inv. no. RCIN 1411). 

Vertu, in his diaries from 1738, records that ‘the KING … sat to [Rysbrack] at Kensington twice. to have his picture modelled in Clay. the likeness much approvd on – and with a good Air. – also a Moddel of the Queen vastly like. Tho’ not done from the life’ (as quoted in Webb, op. cit., p. 155). 

Rysbrack executed marble versions of the pair for George II, which are almost certainly the prime marble versions and are in the Royal Collection at Kensington Palace (inv. nos. RCIN 31322 and 31317). 

The fact that Rysbrack kept the terracotta models indicates that he was given permission to execute further versions. A lifesize marble version of the George II from the collection of Howard Hodgkin was sold in these rooms on 24 October 2017, lot 193. 

The present bust is carved with a level of finesse worthy of Rysbrack himself, evidenced particularly in the very fine medusa mask. However, it is a simplified version of the original (note the absence of the lace bow at the collar) and the reduced size is unusual, which indicates that the present marble was probably produced in the workshop.

RELATED LITERATURE

M. I. Webb, Michael Rysbrack, London, 1954; J. Kenworthy-Browne, 'Portrait Busts by Rysbrack', National Trust Studies 1980 (1979), 67; R. Williams and K. Eustace. "Rysbrack." Grove Art Online. Oxford Art Online. Oxford University Press. Web. 11 May. 2014. ; Katharine Eustace, ‘Rysbrack, (John) Michael (1694–1770)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004; online edn, May 2009.

Sotheby's fail to note the bust at Durham University (see below).

see my blog post: 

http://bathartandarchitecture.blogspot.com/2017/10/marble-bust-of-george-ii-by-rysbrack-at.html

Whilst a competent work I personally would hesitate to suggest that it is from the Rysbrack workshop.

Comparisons with the bust in the Royal Collection and bust in Christchurch College, Oxford would suggest a rather less competent sculptor.


________________

Bust of George II

After Michael Rysbrack

Sold Michaans Lot1112, 8/9th December 2017.

Photographs above and catalogue description below courtesy Michaans

Marble Bust of George II (1683-1760) Finely carved depicting the king as a Roman emperor, wearing a crown of laurel, a cuirass with lionís head on the shoulders, a mask of Medusa at his collar, the Garter Star on his left breast; the George (St. George and the Dragon), suspended from a sash around his shoulders, on a circular socle and square base.

Studio of John Rysbrach (1694-1770) 
Mid-18th Century {Dimensions 21 1/2 x 10 3/4 inches}


Provenance: Hilary Chelminski, London

Sold by Michaans Auctions

2751 Todd Street,

Alameda, CA 94501

United States

__________________

  

The Weathered and Repolished Marble Bust

of George II (1683 - 1760).

by Michael Rysbrack (1694 - 1770).

Sold at the Sotheby's Howard Hodgkin Sale.

Lot 193, Tuesday, 24 October 2017.

No established provenance.

see - http://bathartandarchitecture.blogspot.com/2017/10/marble-bust-of-george-ii-by-rysbrack-at.html

_____________________

George II

Michael Rysbrack

Christchurch College, Oxford.

_______________________

George II

Michael Rysbrack

Royal Collection Trust/ © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2014

Photographs from the Royal Collection website see -

https://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/31322/george-ii-1683-1760

_______________

George II.

Studio of Michael Rysbrack

unsigned

Marble Bust

Height81.8cms

Currently located in St Georges Hall Windsor Castle

Royal Collection

Presented in June 1817 to the Prince Regent by Mrs Lloyd

Originally located on the Grand Staircase at Carlton House

https://www.royalcollection.org.uk/copyright

_______________________

George II.

Bust, marble. 

attributed to Michael Rysbrack

Height 89 cms.

The head crowned with a laurel wreath is turned slightly to the right; the king wears fantastic armour with field marshal's scarf, the star of the garter and, on a ribbon round his neck, the jewel of the garter. The armour is ornamented with lion mask pauldrons and a medusa head. 

The bust is signed at the back with the initials M.R and dated 1760.

Purchased for £105 from Alfred Spero. 

In the sale of the property of the late W.J. Broderip Esq., held by Messrs Christie & Manson, 8 King Street, St James, London, on 13 June 1859; it is not possible to confirm if the bust is identical with the present piece.

Ambiguous notes above from the V and A website: http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O249019/george-ii-bust-rysbrack-john-michael/

Arundell Esdaile. The Art of Rysbrack in Terracotta. Spink and Son. 1932. pp.41-2. pl. VIII.

cf.Longhurst, M.H. English Ivories. 1926. pl.55.

Whinney, M. Sculpture in Britain 1530 to 1830. Second Edition. London. 1988. p.450, note. 16

Bilbey, Diane with Trusted, Marjorie. British Sculpture 1470 to 2000. A Concise Catalogue of the Collection at the Victoria and Albert Museum. London: V& A Publications, 2002. pp. 141. cat. no. 194

Review [1911-1938], Victoria & Albert Museum. Review of the Principal Acquisitions during the Year, London, 1912-1939, 1932, pp. 4-5, and pl. 4(b)

Whinney, Margaret. English Sculpture : 1720 - 1830 / Victoria and Albert Museum, London, London : Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1971, p. 52, cat. no. 12, illus. on p. 53

Kerslake, J., Early Georgian Portraits, I (text), London, 1977, p. 94

Kerslake, J., Early Georgian Portraits, II (plates), London, 1977, pl. 254

Snodin, Michael and Styles, J., Design and the Decorative Arts: Britain 1500-1900, London, 2001, fig. 8 on p. 160

____________________

George II

Michael Rysbrack

Lacking Laurel leaves on the top 

https://www.royalcollection.org.uk/copyright

_________________

George II

Michael Rysbrack

Signed and dated Mich. Rysbrack 1758.

Terracotta.

Durham University.

I think it is safe to say that this bust is the bust included in the Rysbrack sale of 20th April 1765.

"Lot 46. Ditto of his late majesty", 

given that the pair of terracotta busts of the King and Queen were probably those sold at the Rysbrack sale of 14th January 1767 - Lot 57.

I am very grateful for the photograph above which was provided by Gemma Lewis, Deputy Curator (Castle and Archeology), University Library Durham.

Reproduced by permission of Durham University

For a more detailed essay and further photographs see -

http://bathartandarchitecture.blogspot.com/2017/10/marble-bust-of-george-ii-by-rysbrack-at.html

_____________

Ivory Bust of George II.

after Michael Rysbrack by van der Hagen.

Royal Ontario Museum. Canada.

___________________

George II

Attrib. Gaspar van der Hagen
after Rysbrack


For much more on van der Hagen see my blog post:

http://bathartandarchitecture.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-rysbrack-statuettes-of-rubens-van_55.html

and

http://english18thcenturyportraitsculpture.blogspot.com/2017/10/bust-of-grotius-by-rysbrack.html

___________________

The Mid 18th Century, Soft Paste, Porcelain Busts of George II.

Ascribed at various times to Chaffers of Liverpool, Bow and Vauxhall.

see below.

The argument rages on!

These busts have been described as after a bust by John Cheere - mostly on the very slim evidence of the style of the porcelain bracket at the V and A which is only vaguely similar to a plaster bracket known to have been cast by Cheere. 

I remain unconvinced - so far no record of a bust of George II has appeared.

To my eye the features on this bust are closer to the bust in the Royal Collection by Roubiliac (below) particularly in the eyes.

see my posts

http://bathartandarchitecture.blogspot.com/2017/10/busts-of-george-ii-and-john-first-earl.html

George II

Roubiliac
Royal Collection

_________

George II.

Porcelain (soft-paste) bust

43.3 cms

Factory of Richard Chaffers & Co

Shaw's Brow Liverpool,

1755-1760 (circa)

Bust of King George II on socle; soft-paste steatitic porcelain; press-moulded with two flanges in interior and wooden screw fitment which attaches it to waisted socle; top of head pierced by circular hole; wears ribbon and star, probably of Order of the Garter; cold-painted and gilded; cuirass black, embellished with gilding, star black, red, buff, grey-brown and gold, red-brown mantle trimmed in buff with black and grey-brown splashes; traces of red below buff areas; unmarked.

In set with 1938,0314.76 Dawson 1987

This bust, and the pedestal (reg. no. 1938,0314.76) which may have been made to support it (see B. Watney, 'A Hare, A Ram, Two Putti and Associated Figures', Transactions of the English Ceramic Circle, vol. 8, part 2 (1972), pl. 177a, and pp. 224-5) have been the subject of considerable controversy. At one time attributed to the Chelsea factory, and subsequently to Plymouth, they are now thought to have been made in Liverpool. As Mr. Synge-Hutchinson remarked in 'Some rare white English porcelain in the Dudley Delevingne Collection', Connoisseur, vol. 175, no. 700, June 1970, pp. 99-100, 'expert opinion has, at one time or another, assigned them to practically every eighteenth-century English porcelain factory.'

The bust is an unusual attempt on the part of an English porcelain factory to produce portrait sculpture. Although fourteen examples were traced by Mr. Delevingne, this appears to be the only decorated one.

Literature: D. Delevingne, 'The Bust of George II', Transactions of the English Ceramic Circle, vol. 5, part 4 (1963), pp. 236-48; B. Watney, 'The King, the Nun, and Other Figures', Transactions of the English Ceramic Circle, vol. 7, part 1 (1968), p. 51 (analysis).

Text and images above from the British Museum website:

https://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?assetId=396871001&objectId=30154&partId=1

______________________________

George II, (1727-60) 

Cheere, John, born 1709 - died 1787 (sculptor)

Richard Chaffers Factory (manufacturer)

Vauxhall porcelain factory

Soft-paste porcelain

Height: 39 cm, Width: 29.8 cm

Images and notes adapted from the V and A website see -

Purchased by Lady Charlotte Schreiber from Butti, Edinburgh, for £5 in October 1869. In her Journals (vol. I, p. 57) she recorded: 'Lady Hopetown took us into Edinburgh to the shop of one Butti in Queen Street. The first thing that met the gaze of the delighted C.S. was a Plymouth bust (with pedestal) of King George II. exactly the same as that which belonged to the late Dr. Cookworthy of Plymouth, which came to him from the manufacturers and which he has left as an heirloom in the family. Butti (knowing nothing of its extreme value) sold it to us for £5.'

Acquired as Chelsea porcelain.

Bust in white soft-paste porcelain of King George II on a pedestal with a bowed front with a moulded panel, sculpted by John Cheere, probably Vauxhall porcelain factory, previously attributed to Richard Chaffers factory, Liverpool, ca. 1757-1760.

Bibliographic References (Citation, Note/Abstract, NAL no)

Daniels, Pat. The Origin and Development of Bow Porcelain 1730-1747, Resurgat Publishers, Oxon, 2012. See pp 271-278 for an alternative attribution to the Bow porcelain factory for this bust and its bracket, another in the National Museum of Ireland, Dublin and a further bracket in the British Museum.

Daniels, Pat, Ramsay, Ross and Gael. The George II Busts and Historic Wall Brackets, The motivation, symbolism and technology by which the models can be dated to 1745-6 and attributed to the first Bow Factory in Middlesex. 2013, Resurgat Publishers, Oxon.

Mallet, J.V.G.. Some Baroque sources of English ornamental porcelains A paper read at the weekend seminar Fire and Form – The Baroque and its influence on English Ceramics, c. 1660-1760, 26th-27th March 2011, published English Ceramics Circle, 2013, pp123-146, illustrates the version at Leeds City Art Galleries, fig. 34, and favours an attribution to the Vauxhall porcelain factory.

For this bust, and the group to which it belongs, see also Roderick Jellicoe, 'Liverpool Porcelain: Fact or Fiction?', Northern Ceramic Society Journal, Vpl. 28 (2012), pp. 175-190.

Hillis, Maurice. Liverpool Porcelain, 1756-1804. 2011, pl. 5.185, where it is suggested that an attribution to Vauxhall seems more likely than to the Chaffers factory.

_____________________

George II

Soft Paste Porcelaine

They say probably Vauxhall!

7 1/16 × 12 5/8 × 6 7/8 in. (17.9 × 32.1 × 17.5 cm).

Provenance:

Arthur Hurst (until 1940; his sale, Sotheby's, London, November 28, 1940, lot 41); Irwin Untermyer (by 1957–64; to MMA)

Metropolitan Museum, New York.

see - https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/203305?&searchField=All&sortBy=Relevance&ft=George+II&offset=0&rpp=80&pos=8

_________________________

The Fitzwilliam Museum

Soft Paste Porcelain bust of George II

Bust of George II (ruled 1727-60)

Richard Chaffers & Co., factory, perhaps, England, Lancashire, Liverpool, Shaw's Brow, perhaps Shaw's Brow

height, whole, 44.5, cm height, bust, 34.8, cm. width, bust, 30.5, cm

Images and text below adapted from the Fitzwilliam Museum Website

see:https://webapps.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/explorer/index.php?qu=John%20Everett%20%20Millais%20The%20Twins,%20Kate%20and%20Grace%20Hoare&oid=39296

The evidence points to Chafers but other factories suggested are Bow Porcelain Manufactory, England, Middlesex and the Vauxhall Porcelain Factory.

Notes:

Nineteen examples of this bust of George II (1683-1760) have been recorded. The Fitzwilliam's bust lacks both the socle found with some examples, and the rococo style wall bracket to support it, which is more rare. Their attribution is contentious. Since the 19th century they been variously attributed to Chelsea, Plymouth. Bow, Worcester, Chaffers Liverpool, and most recently Vauxhall. 

On accession this bust was attributed to Chelsea, although its glaze is unlike Chelsea porcelain. It was reattributed to Richard Chaffers' Factory, Liverpool, by Dr Bernard Watney in 1968. This reattribution rested on spectrographic analysis of two examples respectively in the British Museum and in Dr Watney's collection. These showed that the body contained soapstone (steatite), which suggested Liverpool as a possible place of manufacture. 

Worcester porcelain is also steatitic, but as that factory made very few figures the bust is unlikely to have been made there. 

More recently the Vauxhall factory which also made steatitic soft-paste, has been adopted as an alternative. Accepting any of these three attributions would place the busts' date of manufacture in the late 1740s or 1750s, as it seems unlikely that they were made after the King's death. 

Analysis of early products of the Bow factory have indicated that some of them contained steatite, and that therefore this bust might equally have been made by the Bow factory before its establishment in the New Canton factory in Essex. This would place its date in the mid 1740s when the King was popular after his participation in the Battle of Dettingen in 1743 and the defeat of the Stuart Rebellion of 1745-6. 

The two most recent publications on the busts, Bimson, 2011, and Daniels and Ramsay, 2013 weigh these possibilities, and give the current locations of the recorded examples.

Chaffer's factory operated between 1745/5 and 1765. The date refers to the porcelain only.

Soft-paste porcelain bust of George II, bewigged, and wearing armour, the Garter Star, and a cloak draped about his shoulders and fastened with an oval cabochon brooch, supported on an associated black marble socle

Soft-paste porcelain bust of George II, press-moulded, and coated inside and outside with very pale greyish-blue lead-glaze. The glaze has many brown speckles. The back of the bust below the shoulders is open, and the marks of paring away of the clay to make the wall thinner are visible. The narrow base has a large circular hole to facilitate its attachment to a socle. A small shallow fragment from another object has adhered to the underside of the right shoulder. The King faces front with his head turned three-quarters to his left. He has a long curling wig, and wears a shirt and neckcloth under armour, the breastplate of which is ornamented with scrolls and foliage. Over his left shoulder plate is the Star of the Order of the Garter, partly concealed by a cloak which is drawn in folds around his shoulders, and is held together above the Order by an oval cabochon brooch. The circular black marble socle is associated.

Technique(s):

press-moulding; whole; with many tool marks on the interior

glazing (coating); whole

soft-paste porcelain; whole; probably steatitic lead-glaze; whole; presumed lead, appearing pale greyish-blue especially inside

Technique

Description:

Soft-paste porcelain (probably steatitic), press-moulded, and coated inside and outside with very pale greyish-blue lead-glaze, which has bubbled, particularly on the shoulders, and, here and there, where these have burst, small craters. The glaze also has many brown speckles. The back of the bust below the shoulders is open, and the narrow base has a large circular hole to facilitate its attachment to a socle. A small shallow glazed fragment, presumably from another object or prop has adhered to the underside of the right shoulder.

Dimension(s):

height, whole, 44.5, cm

height, bust, 34.8, cm

width, bust, 30.5, cm

Acquisition:

bequeathed; 1951; Lambe, Roger Francis

Provenance:

Uncertain before Roger Francis Lambe (1872-1951), London

Acquisition Credit:

Bequeathed by R.F. Lambe

Inscription:

factory mark; on base; incised; 8; possibly number in series made

Exhibition(s):

Plagiarism Personified? European Pottery and Porcelain Figures. 1986-07-15 - 1986-08-31

Organiser: The Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (Cambs.), UK

Venue: The Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (Cambs.)

Notes: see Documentation

Catalogue number: B6

Documentation:

Poole, Julia E.. 1986. Plagiarism Personified? European Pottery and Porcelain Figures.Cambridge (Cambs.): The Fitzwilliam Museump. 18

Publ. p. 18, B6

_________________________

George II porcelain bust and socle, height 17 3/4 ins with incised 3 on the socle.

Image courtesy of C. Daniels.

From the Bow Porcelain Website of Ross and Gael Ramsay.

see:

https://www.bowporcelain.net/apps/photos/photo?photoid=186665319

Dudley Delevingne Collection. This bust is regarded by us as part of a post-Culloden commission of 12 busts, possibly by Sir Henry Fox or the Duke of Richmond, and dates to mid 1746. Seven busts of this commission have been located suggesting an attrition rate of some 40%. The bust was initially analysed by Reginald Milton in 1962 and has been reanalysed by Daniels, Ramsay and Ramsay (2013). Our analysis demonstrates that this bust is of the Mg-Pb type comprising crushed silica, soapstone, a lead frit, and possibly a small component of lime-alkali bottle glass. Our analysis in no way conforms with that provided by Reginald Milton for Dudley Delevingne. Image courtesy of C. Daniels.

________________

George II

Soft Paste Porcelain

No size given.

Imager and extract below from

From the Bow Porcelain Website of Ross and Gael Ramsay.

https://www.bowporcelain.net/apps/photos/photo?photoid=186665321

George II resurrected waster bust with a bespoke cast-iron stand, c. early 1745. Compositionally this bust is of the unusual Mg-P-Pb type comprising soapstone, crushed silica, bone ash, lead frit, and a small addition of lime-alkali bottle glass. This waster bust is regarded by us as the first to have emerged from the kiln largely intact and consequently belongs to the pre-Culloden group of busts that we recognise. Daniels, Ramsay, and Ramsay (2013) propose that this bust was 'rescued' by John Brittain at the Bow site in early 1745 and by descent through his daughter, Miss Brittain, was acquired by William Edkins and in turn on being auction by Sotheby's on 21st-23rd April, 1874 (Lot 470) was bought by Henry Willett and now resides in the Brighton Museum and Art Gallery. Image courtesy of C. Daniels

___________

I have taken the liberty to also copy this extract below from the very excellent Bow Porcelain Website

of Ross and Gael Ramsay - please visit if you are interested in the subject

https://www.bowporcelain.net/apps/blog/show/33516267-the-ceramic-busts-of-george-ii

From the time of their manufacture these splendid porcelain busts of King George II have been a source of continual controversy. One of the most significant achievements of early English porcelain, they have been the subject of discussions as to the ceramic recipe of the paste and glaze; the motivation behind their manufacture; the age of the King as depicted and also the time, origin and place of production.

In order to decipher the original intention behind their manufacture it has been necessary to correct both the discrepancies that exist within primary sources and the inconsistencies and prejudices that have been perpetrated through the literature since William Burt’s first mention of the busts in 1816. What we have discerned from this information is the presence of substantial bias within the research. As a result of this confusion, over time the busts have been attributed to almost every early English porcelain factory regardless of whether it produced a hard paste, glassy, steatitic or phosphatic body.

    Initially these busts were thought to be hard paste and made at Plymouth, then following Rackham they, for many years, were assigned to Chelsea. With a publication by Watney (1968) they then were attributed to Chaffers Liverpool and there they remained till Daniels (2007) questioned this attribution. Subsequently these busts have been reassigned yet again, this time to Vauxhall, yet the reasons for Vauxhall are even more threadbare than those published to support a Liverpool connection.

    Until recently the most scholarly contribution to these busts was by Dudley Delevingne in 1963. More recently Daniels has extended our understanding of these George II busts and associated brackets by arguing that one cannot hope to date and attribute this ceramic group unless one understands the symbolism to be found associated with both. Although of late, a host of writers have argued for a Vauxhall attribution, based presumably on the notion that the bracket refers to the Seven Year's War, these contributors have pointedly refused to recognise that the iconography of the busts refers to Dettingen (1743) and that of the associated brackets reflects both the preservation of the Protestant succession and the trampling underfoot of rebellion as argued by Daniels (2007). That rebellion of course was the Jacobite rebellion of 1745-1746 with its associated Roman Catholic overtones.

    A new contribution to this ceramic debate by Pat Daniels and Ross and Gael Ramsay is to be published in early October, 2013. This monograph runs to some 85 pages, 70+ figures, and 6 tables of chemical analyses. The inescapable conclusion that these three authors have reached is that there is an urgent need for a major reconsideration of the previous understanding of the early development of the English porcelain industry. Copies of this monograph may be had from:-

Reference Works (P&D) Ltd,

9 Commercial Road,

Swanage, Dorset, England, BH19 1DF

Phone: + 44 (0)1929 424423

Email: Sales@referenceworks.co.uk

_____________

'