AN IMPORTANT DUTCH SILVER ROSEWATER-BASIN
No VAT will be charged on the hammer price, but VA… 显示更多 THE PROPERTY OF A GENTLEMAN 
AN IMPORTANT DUTCH SILVER ROSEWATER-BASIN

MARK OF JACOB VAN DER HORST, AMSTERDAM, 1694

细节
AN IMPORTANT DUTCH SILVER ROSEWATER-BASIN
MARK OF JACOB VAN DER HORST, AMSTERDAM, 1694
Oval, the broad rim chased with panels depicting the four elements, separated by four pairs of putti holding festoons, the first with fruit and surmounted by an eagle, the second with fruits of the sea surmounted by a beast, the third with flowers surmounted by an eagle and the last with fruit surmounted by a dove, all on a matted ground, the plain domed central cartouche surrounded by four further panels cast and chased with depictions of the four continents, marked underneath
25 3/8 in. (64.5 cm.) wide
84 oz. (2,626 gr.)
来源
Anonymous sale; Christie's, Geneva, 16 November 1993, lot 34.
出版
J. W. Frederiks, Dutch Silver, The Hague, 1961, vol. IV, no. 157, pl. 168.
注意事项
No VAT will be charged on the hammer price, but VAT at 17.5% will be added to the buyer's premium, which is invoiced on a VAT inclusive basis.

荣誉呈献

Monica Turcich
Monica Turcich

查阅状况报告或联络我们查询更多拍品资料

登入
浏览状况报告

拍品专文

This basin or 'lampetschotel', along with a companion ewer or 'lampetkan', would have been an essential part of the 17th century dining equipment, being used during and after meals to wash the hands while seated at the table. This would have been a requirement as the use of spoons and forks was not common until the end of the 17th century when the French introduced sets of table flatware. As with much silver in the 16th and 17th century the ewer and basin would also have been a key means of communicating to guests the importance and wealth of their hosts and thus, like the present example, they were often lavish objects.

Although Frederiks attributes this basin to the monogrammist HN, and compares the present dish with two others bearing this monogram, one dated 1660, the other 1668, (J. W. Frederiks, Dutch Silver, The Hague, 1961, vol. IV, no. 157) it is now accepted that the two cited examples could not in fact be by van der Horst as he was not free of the Amsterdam guild until 1668.