Enfilade

The eighteenth century in the May issue of The Burlington . . .

The Burlington Magazine 164 (May 2022)

E D I T O R I A L

• “The Rustat Memorial,” p. 443.

When the statue of Edward Colston was defaced and thrown into Bristol harbour on 7th June 2020 the resulting publicity was so enormous that it seemed likely that a wholesale assault on memorials to men who took part in the slave trade or were racist would inevitably follow. In fact, remarkably little has happened. . . .

Little more has been done in the case of church monuments. . . . Only one such case is outstanding, an application by St Peter’s church, Dorchester, to move a late eighteenth-century wall memorial to the slave owner John Gordon from the church to Dorchester Museum. If such an application is contested the matter is referred to the judgment of a diocesan Chancellor in a Consistory Court. This was the result of the ecclesiastical case that has attracted most attention, the application by the Master and governing body of Jesus College, Cambridge, to remove the monument to Tobias Rustat (1608–94) from the college chapel, which was opposed by a group of former members of the college. The case was heard in February by David R. Hodge, Deputy Chancellor of the Diocese of Ely, who in March dismissed the application. Last month the college announced that it would not appeal against his decision. . .

A R T I C L E S

• Antoinette Friedenthal, “Prince Eugene of Savoy’s Rembrandt Drawings: A Newly Discovered Provenance,” pp. 450–61.

• Pascal-François Bertrand and Charissa Bremer David, “Paintings in Beauvais Tapestry, 1764–67,” pp. 462–72. In 1764, at a time when the Royal Tapestry Manufactory at Beauvais was short of work, its directors, Laurent and André Charlemagne Charron, initiated the weaving of small tapestry panels based on designs by François Boucher. Intended as inexpensive, independent works of art, they were in essence a short-lived marketing venture. Records of their weaving in the firm’s payment registers allow a number of surviving examples to be identified.

• Sofya Dmitrieva, “Carle Van Loo at the 1737 Salon,” pp. 473–77. Although not pendants in the traditional sense, since they were painted for different patrons, it is argued here that Carle Van Loo’s A Pasha Having His Mistress’s Portrait Painted and The Grand Turk Giving a Concert to His Mistress, shown at the Salon of 1737, were meant to be read as a pair|—as portraits of the artist and his wife and as allegories of Painting and Music. By linking the paintings, Van Loo, may have intended them to make a statement on the changing relations between art and patronage.

R E V I E W S

• Duncan Robinson, Review of Susan Sloman, Gainsborough in London (Modern Art Press, 2021), pp. 478–85.

• Satish Padiyar, Review of the exhibition Jacques-Louis David: Radical Draftsman (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2022), pp. 492–95.

• Kee Il Choi, Jr., Review of the exhibition Inspiring Walt Disney: The Animation of French Decorative Arts (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Wallace Collection, and The Huntington, 2022–23), pp. 504–07.

• Camilla Pietrabissa, Review of the re-installation of seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Venetian paintings at the Gallerie dell’Accademia in Venice (from August 2021), pp. 507–09.

• Stefania Girometti, Review of Joachim Jacoby, Städels Erbe: Meisterzeichnungen aus der Sammlung des Stifters (Sandstein Verlag, 2020), pp. 529–30. Comprehensive analysis of “the collection of drawings assembled by Johann Friedrich S (1728–1816), the founder of the art institute and museum in Frankfurt that bears his name.”

• Christoph Martin Vogtherr, Review of the exhibition catalogue Watteau at Work: La Surprise (Getty, 2021), pp. 530–31.

• Hugo Chapman, Review of Cristiana Romalli, Cento Disegni dalla Collezione della Fondazione Marco Brunelli (Ugo Bozzi, 2020), pp. 531–32.