Italian, Florence, late 17th / early 18th century, after the Antique

Private collection, Cologne;

Tomasso Brothers Fine Art, Leeds, TEFAF, Maastricht, March 2019;

Where acquired.

From the time of its discovery on 14 January 1506 in the garden of Felice de’ Fredis on the Oppian Hill in Rome, the Laocoön has been lauded as one of the greatest sculptures to have survived from the ancient world. Consequently, no antique sculpture has been more discussed, coveted, interpreted and re-invented by scholars, collectors and artists since the 16th century. The critical fortunes of the Laocoön and its sculptural legacy in the form of copies in marble, bronze, terracotta, porcelain and other materials have been recently examined in depth by Aymonino and Dodero, Settis and Aguissola, and Cuzin, Gaborit and Pasquier (op. cit.), so it is superfluous to repeat these learned accounts here.

The present bronze of the Laocoön is an impressive example of the insatiable appetite of 17^th and 18^th century collectors to own a version of the group as both a reminder of their visit to Rome and / or as a symbol of their erudition and good taste. These bronzes may have been acquired in Rome or Florence as souvenirs on the Grand Tour, or bought from sculptors back in their native cities. Parisian foundries excelled in producing refined bronzes that throughout the 18th century rivalled Italian casts and were exported across Europe. Distinguishing the differences between French and Italian bronzes can often be difficult and reflects the shared traditions, movement of craftsmen and demands of the clients. An example of this attributional question is the superb bronze Laocoön in the J. Paul Getty Museum (inv. 85.SB.413) catalogued by the museum as the work of Giovanni Battista Foggini, active in Florence around 1700, but which has recently been published, in a dedicated study on a bronze Laocoön by Filippo Della Valle, as a French cast from the late 17^th / early 18^th century (D. Zikos op. cit., p. 140, figs. 7, 36).

The attribution of the present Laocoön presents similar questions as the Getty Laocoön. In order to determine the date of the cast consideration should be given to the details of the original marble’s restoration history during which the position of the right arms of both Laocoön and his younger son were changed and changed back again, and ultimately removed (A. Aymomino, E. Dodero op. cit., pp. 378-9). Close comparison needs to be made in the chasing and patination, and technical examination of the alloy can help in suggesting a place and date of production. Whether cast in Italy or France, the final analysis of any bronze is in the skill of the casting and beauty of the patina. The warm, dark chestnut colour of the patina in the present bronze, with fine brushing that enhances the anatomy, combined with strong chasing and finishing in the skin of the snake and the hair of the three human protagonists have resulted in the identification of this bronze as a Florentine cast of the late 17^th or early 18^th century. As observed above in the case of the Getty Laocoön, and the Della Valle Laocoön that was itself formerly considered French, many of these attributional observations could apply equally to French bronzes of a similar date. Whether cast in Paris, Florence or Rome, the present bronze would have been collected for its wonderful evocation of one of the seminal masterpieces of Antiquity and its superb craftsmanship. 

RELATED LITERATURE

J.P. Cuzin, J.R. Gaborit, A. Pasquier, D’après l’antique, exh. cat., Musée du Louvre, Paris, 2000, pp. 228-273;

C. P. Presicce, ‘Mimicking Restoration. Small bronzes as a medium for experimentation, in S Settis, A. Anguissola, Serial Classic. Multiplying Art in Greece and Rome, exh. cat., Fondazione Prada, Milan, 2015, pp. 181-186;

D. Zikos, A Laocoön by Filippo Della Valle, Florence, 2023;

F. Haskell, N. Penny, Taste and the Antique. The Lure of Classical Sculpture 1500-1900, revised and expanded edition by A. Aymonino and E. Dodero, vol. 1, Turnhout, 2024, no. 52, pp. 372-384.