The Sale of the Late Kings Goods: Charles I and His Art Collection by Jerry Brotton

The Sale of the Late Kings Goods: Charles I and His Art Collection Reviews

• 
  Kalliope

  
  Van Dyck. Charles in Three Positions. 1635. Royal Collection.
  
  
  When I heard that the Royal Academy was planning an exhibition on the art collection of king Charles I (1600-1649)
  https://www.royalacademy.org.uk/exhib..., I considered either going to London to visit it or at least ordering the catalogue
  Charles I: King and Collector. As I am becoming more and more interested in the way large collections and public museums have been formed, in the aspects of collecting throughout history, in the role and functioning of patronage, and in the provenance history of individual paintings, this exhibition seemed to fit perfectly my concerns.
  
  Charles's collection in particular interested me because I knew that he had purchased in block the considerable art collection that the House of Mantua (the Gonzaga Marquises and Dukes) had been gathering since the end of the 15thC. When I visited Mantua recently I felt as if the palaces had been stripped and, apart from the still remaining frescoes, the distressingly naked walls had were disheartening to any visitor.
  
  
  Mantua - Ducal Palace.
  
  
  Then I read a review that the catalogue and the Royal Academy exhibition were somewhat disappointing. Most of the displayed works came from the same Royal collections, even though many of the most outstanding paintings had been dispersed after Charles's execution; that it had therefore become an abridged look at the already well studied art by Anthony Van Dyck and Peter Paul Rubens; and that none of the very complex issues related to collecting, to the royal courts engaged in war and diplomacy, and to the art market at the time, had been treated. As I decided then not to get the exhibition catalogue I found this book, and for it I went.
  
  And it has not disappointed me. Brotton presents in this study a phenomenal amount of material. I have felt so overwhelmed with information that I can walk away with only a very general view on how Charles's collection was formed, was dismantled, and the repercussions that both processes had and the art scene during the 17thC. For a deeper understanding I will have to visit the book again, and dip into it repeatedly as I encounter elsewhere several of the aspects treated here by Brotton.
  
  This review is therefore an attempt to synthesize what I have understood as I swam through the web of hundreds and hundreds of paintings and art works as they moved around during Charles's time.
  
  The King's collection and his involvement in art went through various phases.
  
  
  1. ART SEEDS and proper GROUNDS
  
  The seeds were planted by his mother, Queen Anna from Denmark, and by his elder brother Henry, the heir to the crown. The Queen had become a patron of Inigo Jones (1573-1652), who when renovating Somerset House converting it into her Denmark House, introduced a new style from the continent. While Henry had become very attached to this collection of statuettes by the Florentine Giambologna, toys much coveted by the young Charles. Brotton tells us that when Henry was dying in 1612, small Charles quickly went to get one of the Giambologna pieces and took it to the bed of the ailing brother.
  
  Collecting was nevertheless in the air. Cecil, Lord Salisbury, had also been a lavish collector accumulating a considerable gallery in two of his houses, in Hatfield in Hertfordshire and in his Salisbury House on the Strand. And Lord Lumley, had already gathered close to 300 paintings in 1608. Most of these collected works, however, were still portraits in the Elizabethan rigid and hieratic style. That some of this noblemen collectors were Catholic, such as Lumley, had a later repercussion in the way art changed, for the Italian school religious works were palatable to them.
  
  
  D Mytens. Earl of Arundel. 1618. National Gallery, London.
  
  
  So we see that it was Lumley's nephew, Thomas Howard, 21st Earl of Arundel, who not only inherited his collection but who, together with Inigo Jones, traveled through Italy (mostly Bologna and Mantua) where they became acquainted with the art of the likes of Giulio Romano and became more familiar with the concept of the 'studioli'. They brought their experiences and remodeled art preferences back to England.
  
  
  Rubens. Earl of Arundel. 1629. National Gallery, London.
  
  
  2. FERTILIZING
  
  Charles taste in art received a new injection when he traveled incognito to the Madrid court in 1623, in search of a wife. His wooing the King Felipe IV's sister, Maria Anna, was unsuccessful, but he and companion, George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, had a good time and productive time in terms of their art education. At the time the Habsburg Madrid court was magnificent and the King, although still young and only two years in the throne, had already shown an interest in continuing the profligate art collections begun by his ancestors. Not for nothing was he the patron who detected the abilities of the young Velázquez, who arrived at the court around the time of Charles's visit.
  
  
  Velázquez. Maria de Austria. 1630. Prado.
  
  
  Charles managed to convince Felipe to donate him a few of his precious art works. In particular he clutched at Titian's portrait of the Emperor Charles V and a Dog. After all Charles was going to marry the Emperor's great granddaughter. He also purchased other works in the Madrid art market, something that did not quite exist in the England of the time (but which would develop, alas, with his death), and was well received where he visited. On his way back to London he stopped at the Palacio de la Ribera in Valladolid (now partly demolished), the former large home of the Duke of Lerma in Valladolid where the court had moved for a few years, with its 600 paintings amongst which there were several by Rubens brought there by the artist himself when he was acting as the Mantuan Ambassador to Spain.
  
  
  Titian. Charles V and Dog. 1533. Prado.
  
  
  In this section there was a point in which I strongly disagreed with Brotton. He claims that the Spanish court was not used to the practice of using artworks for diplomatic gifts. This is nonsense. It had been already been practiced for over a century and the lecture given by the current Director of the Prado Museum, Miguel Falomir, on precisely this issue is the best counterargument I can offer.
  
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7M0y...
  
  
  3. GRAFTING
  
  Soon after his return to London, in 1824, Charles became king and, again soon after, he married the French Henrietta Maria - sister to Felipe IV's wife Elizabeth.
  
  With more power and funds at his disposal Charles now engaged in his first major art coup. He purchased the art collection that the House of the Gonzagas had been accumulating for more than a century. That house was meeting its clear dynastic ends, but even before this Chronicle of a Death Foretold came to an end, the fat Vincenzo II (1594-1627) showed interest in cashing in the family's art collection before he could no longer enjoy the monies. Brotton gives a very meticulous account of the complex and twisted negotiations that this purchase, that had to be kept as quiet and secret as possible, entailed. It was finalized in 1630 and it made many people angry, including Rubens, who had helped its growth. Some of the outstanding artworks were: Mantegna's nine canvases with the Triumph of Caesar ; Raphael's Holy Family - La Perla; Caravaggio's Death of the Virgin; Titian's Roman Emperors series.
  
  
  Mantegan. Triumph of Caesar. 1484-92. Royal Collection, Hampton Court.
  
  
  
  Raphael. The Holy Family, "La Perla". 1518. Prado.
  
  
  
  4 . BLOSSOMING
  
  As King, and interested in art, and appreciative of the rhetorical style that was born in the 16C but was developing in early 117C, Charles now engaged in direct patronage. That marked the real shift in art style: from passive collector, to promoter of the grandiloquent pictorial language that could be used, so very effectively, for extoling the monarchy and his figure.
  
  Here the accounts of Anthony Van Dyck, whose refashioning of the Royal image was so successful that he displaced the earlier court painter. Van Dyck left no other path for Daniel Mytens than to leave the country and move back to the Netherlands. As his court was gaining a greater splendor, Rubens finally finalized his Apotheosis of the Stuarts, a series of nine canvases originally commissioned by Charles's father, and they were placed on the ceiling of the Banqueting House.
  
  
  
  D Mytens. Charles and Henrietta Maria. 1630-32. Royal Collection, Windsor.
  
  
  
  Van Dyck. Charles and Henrietta Maria. 1632. Kromeriz Castle.
  
  
  I guess this section in the whole story of Charles's collection is very well treated in the Royal Academy catalogue.
  
  
  
  Rubens. Ceiling Banqueting Hall. 1629-36.
  
  
  
  5. STRENGTHENING
  
  The Thirty-Year's War had significant effects in the European art market. The most famous effect is the sack of Prague whereby the Swedes took close to 600 paintings from the magnificent collection of the Emperor. But this was not the only appropriation. In 1636 the great collection of the Venetian Bartolomeo della Nave came up for sale. Charles picked some pieces but James Hamilton, Duke of Hamilton, and a star during the War purchased most of it.
  
  Below is a record of the paintings from the Della Nave provenance:
  
  https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ca...
  
  Another collection that came up for grabs was that belonging to the Procurator Michiel Priuli. One significant work from this source is Raphael's Santa Margarita
  
  
  Raphael. Santa Margarita. 1518. KHM, Vienna.
  
  
  Once we see Charles in the apex of his art collection, Brotton who has also been following the political missteps that the King took, eventually starts narrating the dismantling of the collection.
  
  
  
  6. PRUNING - SALE OF THE CENTURY.
  
  The dispersion of Charles collection is traced through five further chapters. This section is a complicated read, since it is tangled also with the complex political developments that brought Oliver Cromwell to power. There were several stages in this sale, going from the initial iconoclastic reaction, to a more developed financial market--in which double dealings, treacheries, and nasty commercial cunning came to the fore--, to the final regulated and controlled one.
  
  And for the reader it comes as an ironic echo of more modern political situations when one reads that Cromwell put a break in the dispersion when he started emulating Charles and appropriating the same trappings of power that the king had used.
  
  Brotton devotes a good section of his book to tracking the role of foreign buyers. Amongst these the Spanish Ambassador, Don Alonso de Cárdenas, stands out. In the name of Felipe IV he managed to get hold of several of the works that had been given to the English king during his visit to Madrid. But not just those. So now the portrait of Charles V and his Dog, but also Dürer's magnificent self portrait that had been brought to England by Arundel after the city of Nüremberg offered it, are in the Prado Museum.
  
  
  Dürer. Self Portrait. 1498. Prado.
  
  
  After Cárdenas had already been doing his quiet buying Antoine de Bordeaux-Neufville, ambassador from France and particular envoyé of Mazarin, another crazy collector, arrived on the scene. He managed to get the beautiful Titian's Holy Family with the Rabbit, which had been in the Gonzaga collection.
  
  Another comer to this scene, but who had to go back almost empty handed to Brussels, from where he had come, was the painter David Teniers. He had been sent by his patron the Governor of the Southern Netherlands, the Archiduke Leopold Wilhelm of Austria (1614-1662). King Felipe IV however sent the message to his nephew to keep his hands off since he was already engaged in that market.
  
  If the King's art works within came up for grabs within England other collections formed by people around him followed a different course. Arundel and other collectors managed to bring their collections to the Netherlands where they were sold. And in that scenario Leopold got his compensation prize. Having saved his moneys he succeeded in getting hold of practically the entire Arundel collection once it had been taken out of England. He later donated it to the Austrian Empire, in compensation for what they had lost during the invasion of Prague.
  
  Leopold was so proud of his collection that he commissioned Teniers, his official painter, to depict as his visiting cards his "Galleries". And here Brotton makes a simplification as he mentions one of these galleries as a culminating work. Teniers painted at least twelve of them. All of them fascinating works for their artistry and documentary value.
  
  
  D Teniers. Archduke Leopold-Wilhelm in his Gallery. HHM, Vienna.
  
  
  Note that Raphael's painting of Santa Margarita is included in this gallery - in the centre, with a green drape over it
  
  A fascinating result of all these comings and goings is the huge impact this activity had on the formation of an art market for the public. Developing it anew in England, where for the first time art became a commodity, and establishing the Netherlands as the dominant art market for Europe.
  
  
  
  7. REPLANTING - RESTORATION
  
  
  Brotton could have stopped with the dismantling of the collection but the book has a happy ending and if there was a Restoration of the political order there was also of the art works.
  
  It was not a perfect restitution, but overall it was very successful. Most of the works are back in the Royal Collections, and those that were lost, are now in much more accessible public museums - mainly the Prado, the Louvre, and the Kunsthistorisches. We ought not to forget that even for several of those in the Prado, were originally from the local royal collection.
  
  Brotton therefore ends this tale positively telling us that by the end of Charles II's death in 1685, London had become a major art market.
  
  In his Epilogue he seals his fascinating account with a reminder of the disaster of the 1698 fire that burnt down most of Whitehall: It was fire, and not republican fury, that ignonimiously robbed the royal collection of its finest pieces.
  
  
  Van Dyck. Charles I and His Family. 1633. Royal Collection.
  
• 
  Gerry

  Jerry Brotton's extremely well researched and very well written account of the formation of, and subsequently disposal of, an art collection that eventually became that of King Charles I lifts the lid off the treachery and double-dealing that went on behind the scenes.
  
  Many of the greatest artists' works including, Rubens, Leonardo, Van Dyck and Rembrandt, were amongst those that were bought, borrowed and sold, and occasionally removed illegally, in this account of 17th century drama that eventually ended with Charles I's execution, Oliver Cromwell's Parliamentary government, Charles II retreat to exile and his subsequent return to take up the throne, succeeding his father.
  
  Prince Henry, James eldest son and heir to the throne, who died young, was perhaps the catalyst for the collection because when young he visited the continent and began buying paintings that were taken back to England. When he died his brother Charles inherited and built on the collection. Works of many of the great artists were available and Anthony Van Dyck became Charles court painter - see the magnificent cover design - and so there were plenty of his works floating about.
  
  As Prince of Wales, Charles went to Spain for the Spanish Match, as it were, but it failed but at least he was able to gather any number of paintings to take back to England. The Mantua collection later provided him with any number of old masters and Charles developed a world-class art collection with his palaces crammed full of Italian Renaissance pictures, the like of which had rarely been seen in England until this date. Artworks from Mantua were highly valued by Charles and were generally hung in the most prominent locations throughout the royal residences.
  
  Many noblemen were recruited to provide him with pictures and it seems like they looked after their own interests just as much as they tried to please Charles. And when he was beheaded in 1649 double-dealing and insider trading came very much to the fore. It is amazing to see what prices some of the great artists' works went for; and example is a Rubens for £4 and a Rembrandt for £6! But every famous artist was represented when the sale of the paintings to finance the navy and government projects began.
  
  The sales were quite convoluted with dividends being arranged for some creditors while pictures were also being sold to all and sundry. Beginning in May 1650, over 1100 transactions took place until 1658 with proceeds amounting to £134,383 5s 4d, of which £26,500 went to finance the navy. With £10,000 going on salaries and allowances claimed by the trustees, contractors and treasurers the final figure was anything between £96,000 and £118,000.
  
  When Charles II arrived for the Restoration, buying back the works of art, or handing back by those feeling inclined to court favour with the new monarch began and, almost remarkably, many of the works of art were returned to the monarchy. But once again there was skulduggery going on in the prices that were on offer!
  
  It is a most fascinating read in what is a most compelling tale and a great slice of English history.
• 
  Gemma Webb

  Engrossing account of how Charles I acquired his art collection & his motives and methods. Slightly confusing to follow all the art market machinations of dealers and diplomats but a fascinating insight into the early days of the English art market and the rise of the connoisseur.
  
  Author makes interesting point that those paintings "lost" from the royal collection in 17thC are probably more accessible to modern audiences in European galleries than those "saved" for the royal collection which remain behind closed palace doors in the UK to this day...
• 
  Debbie

  My reading of The Sale of the Late King’s Goods: Charles I & His Art Collection comes on the heels of finishing The Last Leonardo, a fabulous book about the Salvator Mundi, the painting that sold for $450 million at Christie’s last November. It’s hard to get your head around a painting that sells for such an astronomical sum which is what drew me to The Last Leonardo in the first place. In this book author Ben Lewis delves into the history of the Salvator Mundi that some scholars allege was once part of King Charles I collection.
  
  I wanted to read The Sale of the Late King’s Goods to see if in fact the Salvator Mundi is mentioned given it’s all about Charles I collection, and it was published one year prior to the discovery of the (alleged) long-lost painting of Leonardo da Vinci. I wasn’t really surprised that there was no mention of the painting; except for one reference, “…[there was] one undisputed Leonardo in the collection, St. John the Baptist (1513)”. Hmm.
  
  But still the book is phenomenal. And I suggest that though the Salvator Mundi may end up being the most stunning and controversial sale of an artwork in the 21st century, the machinations that went on with Charles I’s art collection in the 17th century are far more controversial, stunning and interesting.
  
  The book also provides a glimpse into the history of art with a focus on Europe in the 17th century. It describes the creation of an art market that likely did not exist up until the point that Charles I was executed for treason; it was shortly after that his collection went on sale (publicly) to raise funds for the new ruling class—the republic of England. The proceeds were designated to Charles’ (many) ‘creditors’ via dividends, and the remaining funds to the newly formed republic led by Oliver Cromwell (there was also a select paintings kept by the republic). This marked the first time a Royal Art collection was available to ordinary, working (non-noble) people, not only to view but to purchase. Jerry Bretton, author of The Sale of the Late King’s Goods suggests this ‘democratized’ fine art for the first time ever in England. Excellent point.
  
  The book describes the background of Charles I collection—his passion for art, his quest to build a collection that he had been inspired to create after visiting the monarchy in Spain before he became King. Art to Charles was a form power. Yet it’s obvious that his collecting was not strategic, nor always logical. He didn’t have the resources to fund his art quest, often there were more pressing needs of his country, like military campaigns and support for his soldiers. Yet his quest continued. This did not bode well for his image or his performance.
  
  “Charles's first seven years in power led the crown into two disastrous Wars and singularly failed to establish him as one of the most powerful monarchs in Europe. At least he was now one of its most prominent art collectors” (pg 142).
  
  Charles I had agents dispersed throughout Europe who he tasked with finding and negotiating artworks for his collection. They often worked in ‘secret’, keeping his identity hidden. There were problems with this model; Charles would often renege on payments, delay payments, leave agents working on his behalf in dire straits. In one instance an agent threatened to expose Charles’ lack of payment publicly for a deal that involved acquiring the Gonzaga Collection. The vast collection, owned by a wealthy family from Mantau, Italy included works by Titian, Raphael, and Correggio. The deal eventually went through but ruined at least one of Charles’s dealers.
  
  But more intriguing were the events occurring after Charles I was beheaded for treason in 1649. His impressive collection of European Masters that he’d amassed, and works he’d commissioned through artists he had on staff (including his court artist Anthony van Dyck) was astonishing. The disbursement of the Royal collection, mandated by the Republic was complicated and lengthy, with clandestine deals, involvement of other countries’ vying for the best of the best, and double dealing.
  
  Then, yet another twist—Charles II, Charles I son was reinstalled on the throne after Cromwell’s death in 1660 and one of his first mandates was to order the return of all artworks previously owned by his father with no compensation. Seriously. Yet even more amazing was reading how the majority of “paintings originally carted out of the residences now found themselves back where they had started” (p 340). Unbelievable.
• 
  Susan

  I found this book while browsing on Amazon for anything that might relate to the Royal Academy exhibition Charles I King and Collector. What a wonderful book. It provided an informative and detailed account of the King as a collector of art, what happened to the collection after the Civil War and how the collection was re-established with the Restoration of the monarchy. It added so much to my enjoyment and understanding of the exhibition (which is fantastic) and highly recommend this book. I intend to read it again and will be used as a source for future reference.
• 
  Mark Turnbull

  Fabulous description of items and also the layout of Whitehall Palace, which really brings home a picture of the palace, and palace life.
• 
  Justin Neville

  Finally got round to finishing this back-burner art history book.
  
  There was a lot that was fascinating here - especially on how most of the art acquired by Charles I was obtained for self-glorification and prestige-building, rather than out of any real artistic sensibilities. Which makes it bizarre how very little of it was ever seen by the court at large, let alone the public.
  
  Not that much changes - I read the other day how many millions the British government has spent on new art since austerity ostensibly set in.......and what tiny fraction of it is ever on display to the public.
  
  One of the most fascinating aspects here is how the other European royal courts should, by rights, have been appalled by the British toppling and then beheading of their monarch. Of course, initially they spurned the Roundhead government. But it didn't take them very long before they were falling over themselves to befriend the Commonwealth in their eagerness to snap up all of Charles's hard-acquired treasures.
  
  And then barely a decade later, the Stuart monarchy is restored and Charles II wants the royal artworks back. Egg on faces all round. #awkward
  
  Nonetheless, much of this is swamped under a sea of dry detail on every single work, when, where and for how much it was acquired and subsequently resold and resold or lost and refound etc. The author has done a great job at uncovering so much information, but could do a better job at stepping back and synthesising or interpreting the import of his research.
• 
  Stephanie Matthews

  Wonderful book. It's not just about the art (although that is the primary focus) but a very turbulent period of English history using the art collection as a point of view. It's fascinating to read, I've learned a lot (including the fact that I have no respect for Charles I whatsoever) and heartily recommended. Well spent book token, that.
• 
  Nick

  Enjoyable and informative. The Afterword is especially poignant. Why is the majority of Royal Art Collection unavailable for the public to view in the 21st century? Taxpayers funded it yet it remains the largest private art collection in the world.
• 
  Susan Bennett

  Very timely with the RA staging a show of these works.
• 
  Andrea Bowhill

  Charles I was always a sickly child not thought to live pass infancy, by some miracle he recovered but for the rest of his life he remained frail. The death of his older brother Prince Henry left the young Charles grief stricken and pressure had now mounted he was to face the limelight, to prove to his people he could be a King, Charles I reign began in 1625.
  
  Unlike his father James I of England and VI of Scotland, Charles lacked the scholarly erudition he replaced books with interest in paintings, sculptures and tapestries. As a ruler Charles was deeply insecure unsure of his own physical and personal stature he suffered from an unconscious assurance against despair and loneliness giving himself a shy, awkwardness and showing little grasp of people but what he did have was a strong rigid belief in his royal title which give him predisposed funds to invest in his art collection what he became was an obsessive collector. The risks inherent in buying art did not prevent Charles from accepting the practice of betrayal, fraud and theft his agents and dealers made sure he got what he wanted. It was also believed Charles obsession with art was to be his retreat, his escapism to have ward off any other existential doubt.
  
  This story is painted in a wonderful vivid dramatic picture told through King Charles I greatest collection, the struggles of art verses power which Charles created against the backdrop of wars and revolution. Europe was in bitter conflict over religion and imperial authority, The 30 year's war 1618 - 1648 left Charles bankrupt but during these turbulent times Charles managed to extend and capitalize on his Art. Politics in England mounted all around him for his pointless wars and overspending having dismissed Parliament several times; he slowly pushed his own country into Civil War until a final act against his people sealed death, executed for high treason 1649.
  
  The Kings relentless spending was suddenly brought to light and it was quite overwhelming, his greatest achievement was to posses such an impressive art collection. Artist works such as Raphael, Leonardo, Durer, Rembrandt and many others, portraits were commissioned from Ruben, Van Dyck, Charles also acquired a handful of exquisite Titians known to be his favourite pieces, drawings, statues and tapestries everything was careful catalogued and most were kept aligning the walls and space of his palaces and yet his own country stood in extreme debt.
  
  We then move through the book to another shift in power Oliver Cromwell's, Cromwell took charge of the countries debt by selling off Royal possessions; they were assessed, valued and given a price tag it was known that Royalty was up for Sale. Cromwell used the collection to pay off the late king's debts and to raise money for the Commonwealth military forces the art collection went to the highest bidder or as payment for a debt in lieu, simply anyone could purchase an item, merchants, drapers, glaziers, brewers, cutlers or even given to orphans across London.
  
  In 1660 the Monarchy was restored King Charles II ordered the repossession of many works of art that had been given away lost or sold to another country, Charles II was also shrewd enough to negotiate with certain pieces of Art to settle old political scores. Detectives of that time were sent forth to find, this book weaves through history looking into the heart of glamorous city's of Europe of that time for England's finest art collection.
  
  Jerry Brotton the author takes us into a vivid world of one of the most interesting and exhilarating History eras, he has done a wonderful and fascinating job in his extensive research collaborating and corresponding with curators, scholars associated with the interpretation and cataloguing of these various pieces of art. Members of the Royal household gave Mr. Brotton access to the archives at St James's Palace and with their own knowledge he has managed to entwine it all into a great piece of writing. Congratulation to Jerry Brotton, a wonderful read, full of insightfulness into the world of cut throat Art History.
  
  Highly Recommended to anyone who loves this Great history era.
  
  Andrea Bowhill