Charles Lepec and the Patronage of Alfred Morrison
2015; University of Chicago Press; Volume: 50; Linguagem: Inglês
10.1086/685681
ISSN2169-3072
Autores Tópico(s)Historical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
ResumoPrevious articleNext article FreeCharles Lepec and the Patronage of Alfred MorrisonOlivier Hurstel and Martin LevyOlivier HurstelIndependent Scholar, Paris Search for more articles by this author and Martin LevyAntiques Dealer and Scholar, London Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmailQR Code SectionsMoreSince the second half of the twentieth century, the appreciation of nineteenth-century European decorative arts has evolved by fits and starts. For British design, the revival was arguably initiated by the exhibition “Victorian and Edwardian Decorative Arts,” held at the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, in 1952.1 Interest in French and other continental European manufacture began later and did not immediately take hold. In France, this interest increased with the decision in 1978 to create the Musée d’Orsay, Paris, specifically devoted to the art of the nineteenth century.2 Writing that same year in the introductory essay to the catalogue for the seminal exhibition originating in Philadelphia “The Second Empire, 1852–1870: Art in France under Napoleon III,” Jean-Marie Moulin acknowledged that this particular period “has been ignored—one might almost say erased—by French art historians…. Those who have had the experience of working on the Second Empire in the area of the arts have felt the scorn (sometimes tinged with indulgence) that has surrounded the period, even—and perhaps especially—among the specialist and the knowledgeable layman.”3The ambivalence toward French decorative arts from the middle decades of the nineteenth century can perhaps be understood against the backdrop of a sense of loss for the dignified and aristocratic grandeur encapsulated by the culture of the ancien régime. France was dominated by the bourgeoisie by the time of the Second Empire, and the frequently backwardlooking decoration of this period tended toward the showy: the taste of the nouveaux riches. But this viewpoint has come to be seen as representing an incomplete and unfair assessment of a fertile period, in which technical and artistic invention introduced a great degree of originality, with such work now appreciated for its distinctly nineteenth-century aesthetic merit.Charles Lepec (1830–1890), who was at his most active during the Second Empire period,4 exemplifies this sophisticated strand of French creativity. He was an artist who excelled in the medium of enamels, and, as will be shown, was particularly original and technically innovative. Many of his contemporaries working in the medium depended on compositions prevalent during the Renaissance. The 1978 Second Empire exhibition drew attention to many of the period’s leading manufacturers, some of whom are now represented in the collection of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, which acquired them subsequently. These include the bronze founder and enamel manufacturer Ferdinand Barbedienne (1810–1892); the cabinetmaker Charles-Guillaume Diehl (1811–?1885); the ceramist Théodore Deck (1823–1891); and the silversmith and maker of enamels and electroplated wares Christofle et Cie (1830–present).5The leading Parisian manufacturers were major participants in the series of world’s fairs that dominated the second half of the nineteenth century, beginning with the Great Exhibition in London in 1851. These massive international expositions, attended by millions of visitors, served as shop windows, enabling French firms to attract the patronage of British royalty, the aristocracy, and the newly powerful plutocrats.6 Notable English purchasers from French manufacturers included Queen Victoria and Prince Albert;7 William Ward, 1st Earl of Dudley (1817–1885);8 and, most significant of all, Lepec’s patron, the Victorian Maecenas, Alfred Morrison (1821–1897).With France particularly hard hit by the worldwide depression that dominated the 1870s, England became an increasingly important market not only for French manufacturers, several of whom—for example, Deck and Barbedienne—had London-based outlets, but also for some craftsmen who joined English firms, such as Marc-Louis Solon (1835–1913), who in 1870 left Sèvres for Minton.9 Like so many nineteenth-century French designers and manufacturers admired during their lifetimes, the peintre-émailleur10 Charles Lepec almost disappeared from view in the twentieth century.In 1971 Lepec’s sumptuous enamel and gold nef (table ornament in the form of a ship) (fig. 1), exhibited at the Exposition Universelle in Paris in 1867, was sold by Lord Margadale (1906–1996),11 grandson of Alfred Morrison and in 1976 it entered the collection of the Badisches Landesmuseum, Karlsruhe.12 It was not until 1980, when Daniel Alcouffe published his magisterial “Les Emailleurs français à l’Exposition Universelle de 1867,” that Lepec was finally reappraised.13 Alcouffe presented Lepec as the most original and outstanding enamel artist of the nineteenth century, the master of an art form at which the French had excelled since the Renaissance—but who had been somewhat forgotten since then.14fig. 1. Charles Lepec (French, 1830–1890). Nef (table ornament in the form of a ship), 1866–67. Enamel, gold, and silver-gilt, with small gemstones, max. width 12¾ × 14 in. (32.5 × 35.5 cm). Signed with numbers 309–312, and with the monogram CL. Badisches Landesmuseum, Karlsruhe (76/119)Alcouffe also gave details of the enamel work of Lepec’s contemporaries who exhibited at the Paris Exposition Universelle, 1867, although not in the same category15—a notable coterie that included Alexis Falize (1811–1893), Charles Duron (1814–1872), Charles Dotin (b. 1820), Claudius Popelin (1825–1892), and Alfred Meyer (1832–1904).16 While enamels by Popelin and Meyer, for example, generally depend directly on Renaissance prototypes for their style of painting, Lepec’s Renaissance-inspired creations show a greater degree of inspired originality and a finer mastery of technique. If the forms of some of Lepec’s vessels reveal their historic sources, the decoration, as seen in his work for Morrison, is utterly creative in its composition and coloration. Duron is best known for his interpretations and copies of mounted hardstone vessels from the French royal collection, housed in the Musée du Louvre, Paris.17Alcouffe’s review of Lepec’s career was based on contemporary criticism and on records of works published and exhibited during the artist’s lifetime, but Alcouffe identified and illustrated only three surviving objects, including the nef and Clémence Isaure (fig. 2). In 1982, the Musée d’Orsay acquired Clémence Isaure, formerly in the collection of Henry Bolckow (1806–1878), a German-born iron magnate, member of Parliament, and first mayor of Middlesbrough, who lived at Marton Hall.18 More recently, both Katherine Purcell, in connection with Alexis Falize, and Charlotte Gere and Judy Rudoe, with regard to jewelry, have touched briefly, but significantly, on Lepec.19fig. 2. Charles Lepec. Clémence Isaure, 1865. Enamel on copper, 71 × 43⅞ in. (180.3 × 111.3 cm). Signed 2[?]51 and CLP (interlaced) and inscribed: POESIM PICTURA CELEBRAT and CLEMENCE ISAURE. Musée d’Orsay, Paris (OAO 712)Since the early 1980s many more examples of Lepec’s work in enamel have been identified, as well as paintings, drawings, designs, and carvings. In 2004 the Metropolitan Museum acquired the Bouteille vénitienne (Venetian flask) (fig. 21), and in 2010 the Carved Panel, with a Portrait of Mabel Morrison (fig. 28); both were formerly in the collection of Alfred Morrison. In addition to a greatly increased body of work, it is now possible to add substantially to the biographical details given by Alcouffe. As a preface here, we outline hitherto unrecognized and significant aspects of Lepec’s life.20Central to Lepec’s career, as is made clear by Alcouffe and others, was Alfred Morrison, who was the son of the fabulously rich collector James Morrison (1789–1857), a man obsessed with money, status, class, and power, but also public-spirited and passionate about his family.21 James Morrison built his fortune on the simple motto “small profits and quick returns.” Although his elder son, Charles (1817–1909), emulated James in terms of business acumen, it was Alfred who matched and exceeded his father as a collector and patron. James had been a typical collector in the tradition of the nineteenth-century nouveaux riches, an autodidact who took the advice of his architect J. B. Papworth (1775–1847) and others in forming an outstanding collection of old master and contemporary English paintings. His decor included the typical rich man’s accumulation of Boulle furniture and Sèvres vases.Alfred preserved much of his father’s collection but stands out as a discerning patron of contemporary craftsmen (and, to a lesser extent, painters). The younger Morrison should be seen as a successor to great amateurs such as William Beckford (1760–1844) and Thomas Hope (1769–1831).22 Alfred Morrison patronized in depth those whose work he admired, many of whom are now considered among the outstanding manufacturers of the period. These include the innovative jeweler Alessandro Castellani (1823–1883); the reviver of enameled glass in the Islamic taste Philippe-Joseph Brocard (1831–1896); Lucien Falize (1839–1897), whose remarkable gold, silver, amethyst, diamond, and enamel clock made for Morrison is now in the Metropolitan Museum;23 and the maker of damascened ironwork Plácido Zuloaga (d. ca. 1910). Lepec’s work would have glowed in such company. Among other areas in which Morrison collected voraciously were engravings, textiles, and, famously, autographs.24 Chinese porcelain and enamels and Japanese works of art, including many cloisonné enamels, were also a passion of Morrison’s.25The taste for enamels began to revive toward the end of the reign of Louis Philippe (1773–1850).26 During the 1850s, collectors were principally interested in medieval and Renaissance enamels, but following the opening of Japan to the West in the mid-1850s and the sacking of the Summer Palace in Peking (now Beijing) in 1860, connoisseurs had a greater opportunity to study and acquire Asian enamels. Morrison’s collecting is distinguished, however, by his pursuit of contemporary European enamels, alongside older Asian creations.But Morrison’s interests extended beyond the works of art he commissioned and collected. The influential and innovative architect, designer, and design theorist Owen Jones (1809–1874) was engaged by Morrison to create the furniture and interiors at Carlton House Terrace, London, and at Fonthill, in Wiltshire; the work was carried out by the talented London cabinetmaker Jackson & Graham (active ca. 1840–85).27Charles LepecCharles Florent Joseph Lepec (fig. 3) was born in Paris on April 5, 1830, and died in Reux, France, on May 19, 1890.28 He was the son of Charles Antoine Lepec, who was born at Reux on April 19, 1791, and died in Paris on March 12, 1875. A descendant of the noble family of Costentin de Tourville,29 Lepec père was a lawyer, the author of several books on law,30 and a recipient of the Legion of Honor (as would be his son). His wife, Florence Jeanne Raimonde Demetria Rodriguez, was of Spanish origin.31 Despite the conventions of the time, the couple did not marry until May 1, 1832, two years after the birth of their only child. The family lived at 11, rue Gaillon, a former hôtel particulier by then divided into apartments. The building was fashionably located at the bottom of the chaussée d’Antin, between the Place Vendôme and the Palais-Royal. The spacious apartment also housed the office of Lepec père until his death in 1875.fig. 3. Studio of Nadar [Gaspard-Félix Tournachon] (French, 1820–1910). The Painter Lepec N° 848, n.d. Albumen print from glass negative, 3⅜ × 2¼ in. (8.5 × 5.8 cm). Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris (FT-4-NA-235 [2])The Lepec family owned property, including land and orchards, in Reux, near Pont-l’Evêque, Normandy, which suggests that they enjoyed a degree of financial stability and social standing. Thus it could be argued that Charles Lepec grew up in a privileged environment. He attended the Lycée Condorcet, the great liberal school on the Right Bank, much favored by the Parisian bourgeoisie. His father was a long-standing member of the prestigious Cercle des Arts, a meeting place for painters, sculptors, musicians, writers, and art lovers.32Proximity to this group surely influenced Charles Lepec’s choice of career. However, despite its relatively prosperous position, his family clearly wanted the young Lepec to have the advantage of a formal education. Although he did not go on to pursue a career in law or one of the other professions for which he might have been eligible, the benefits of his academic learning would become evident in his erudite artistic output. As Auguste Luchet noted of Lepec’s early life: “Happy is he who is able to enter the Arts through the noble door of Letters and Sciences.”33Contemporary accounts, published about the time of the 1867 Exposition Universelle, suggest that Lepec’s principal artistic development occurred under the supervision of the artist Hippolyte Flandrin (1809–1864).34 After an early career as a painter, exhibiting at the Salons of 1857 and 1859,35 by 1860 Lepec had turned to the enamel work that would be his major preoccupation until the early 1870s.36 By 1861, he was living at 61, rue du Faubourg-Montmartre, Paris; in 1865 he was at 52, rue de Bourgogne; and by 1869 he had moved to 12, rue de Pré-aux-Clercs. When Lepec married his pupil Jeanne Marie Thierry in 1882, he lived at 13, rue Bonaparte. It is clear that Lepec also spent time from the 1860s onward at Reux, and seems eventually to have made it his main place of residence.37Lepec, Robert Phillips, and Alfred MorrisonLepec exhibited at the 1862 London International Exhibition,38 where he may have had his first encounter with Robert Phillips, the jeweler based at 23 Cockspur Street, London, who would shortly become the agent for his work in England.39 At this world’s fair, during a period when modern enamels appealed mainly to a small number of elite connoisseurs, Lepec made his first sales to Alfred Morrison, who would become his most significant patron (fig. 4).40 Phillips and Morrison were, in effect, to shape Lepec’s career. The considerable Morrison archive, part of the Fonthill Estate Archive, contains documents and letters with direct bearing on the relationships between Lepec and Phillips, Lepec and Morrison, and Lepec and his fellow Parisian craftsmen.41 This remarkably well-preserved source provides unique insights into the relationship between a patron and his agent, and those whose work was commissioned.fig. 4. J. Smith (English). Alfred Morrison, Photograph. Fonthill Estate ArchiveA simple six-page list on lined paper, certainly prepared by Phillips’s clerk,42 records purchases made by Morrison at the “International Exhibition 1862.” The list demonstrates the range and depth of Morrison’s approach to the work of contemporary manufacturers, even at this early stage of his collecting career. From Lepec, Morrison bought “9 Plaques of Enamel. Reduced from 12000 to 9,000. £360” and “Models of Coffrets & Enamels 2000 frs. £80.” Morrison acquired a number of paintings at the International Exhibition, generally noted by country of origin rather than by artist. He also bought from leading French manufacturers, including the cabinetmakers Fourdinois and Guillaume Grohé and the metalworkers Christofle and Barbedienne (who on this occasion first exhibited his cloisonné enamels).43 He bought an ebony and ivory étagère from Jackson & Graham (some years before the firm became responsible for supplying Morrison with large quantities of Owen Jones–designed furniture); work by the Italians Giovanni Battista Gatti,44 Angiolo Barbetti, and Pietro Giusti (all three famous for their Renaissance-revival furniture); and ceramics from Minton and Sèvres. In all, Morrison spent £7,762 14s 8d, reduced after various discounts—for example, of 5 percent from Fourdinois—to £7,557 15s 8d. In an account from Phillips to Morrison covering 1862–63, which includes items from Elkington, Royal Worcester Porcelain Company, Jackson & Graham, and Gatti, there are two payments to Barbedienne, including one dated October 9, 1863, for “2 Lepec Enamels 500 fr. [£]20.” The authors have not been able to establish the circumstances surrounding this transaction or its significance.45Almost certainly purchased in 1862 is the small rectangular plaque, probably depicting Venus (fig. 5), inscribed on the reverse, according to a 1975 Sotheby’s catalogue, “IPY [sic] 1861 no. 73.”46 Alcouffe speculates, probably correctly, that this work might be the one exhibited in 1867 and described at length in 1893 by Lucien Falize as “a study of a female nude, Venus or Psyche, softly and lightly clad.”47 When this piece was sold at Sotheby’s, the catalogue entry quoted the critic and curator Alfred Darcel (1818–1893) as saying that Lepec’s nudes had a gentillesse banale (ordinariness) and that such works had an unfortunate resemblance to colored lithographs.48 This criticism should, in fact, be seen as an interesting observation when looked at in light of Lepec’s (and others’) use of another relatively modern invention, photography.49fig. 5. Charles Lepec. Venus, 1861. Enamel with silver-gilt mount in ebonized and glazed frame, excluding frame 4¾ × 1¾ in. (12 × 4.5 cm). Reportedly inscribed on the reverse IPY [probably V rather than Y] 1861 no. 73. Private collectionFrom his position as Morrison’s agent at the 1862 London International Exhibition, it is clear that Phillips was already acting as an intermediary between manufacturers and Morrison.50 Other retailers and manufacturers that appear in Morrison’s address-notebook in the early 1860s include Thomas Goode (retailers of ceramics), Hatfield (“Brass Cleaner”), and Fannière Frères (silversmiths). Over the next five years, Phillips’s role as an intermediary helped Morrison become Lepec’s most important patron. Lepec would later highlight many of the creations from this period when he participated in the 1867 Paris Exposition Universelle.51In 1864, Phillips himself first exhibited Lepec’s work in London. The Morning Post (January 7) reported: An enamelled tazza of remarkable beauty, designed and executed by Signor Charles Lepec. It is as perfect a work in its particular style of art as can well be imagined … In the cavity of the cup is a picture—classic in conception, … representing Venus gliding swiftly over the surface of the sea in a car drawn by mermaids, while overhead hovers in mid-air Cupid with a torch in one hand, and in the other the silken reins wherewith he gently guides the water-nymphs…. In the rim of the cup, which is concave, are medallion miniatures, exquisitely painted, of some of the most celebrated women who, whether in the records of historic or of imaginative literature, have exercised the most potent influence…. The outside of the tazza is elaborately ornamented with flowers and foliage, painted in a manner to resemble the lack[sic]-work of the Japanese.52 This passage is quoted at length because this tazza (unlike La Fantaisie, dated 1864 and also exhibited by Phillips; see figs. 6, 7) has disappeared from sight since it was sold at auction in 1994 and thus cannot be illustrated.53 Identified here as La Volupté, this piece, formerly in Morrison’s collection, was also exhibited at the 1867 Exposition Universelle (see Appendix and fig. 8, top).fig. 6. Charles Lepec. La Fantaisie, 1864. Enamel on metal, with a gold coin on the base, as a washer, 6⅝ × 8½ in. (16.8 × 21.5 cm). Signed and dated CHARLES LEPEC 1864, and inscribed LA FANTAISIE. Saint Louis Art Museum, Lopata Endowment Fund (129:1994)fig. 7. Charles Lepec. Detail of the top of La Fantaisie shown in fig. 6fig. 8. A page from the catalogue of the 1867 Paris Exposition Universelle with an illustration (top) of a stemmed bowl, or coupe, identified here as La Volupté. Art-Journal1867b, p. 304The earliest surviving letter from Lepec to Phillips in the Fonthill Estate Archive is dated July 26, 1863. Its tone establishes the cordial bond and professional relationship that had developed between the two since their encounter, probably at the London International Exhibition, the previous year. In it, Lepec discusses a piece he had been working on since about April: after three months of constant work, he had now finished the foot.54 He continues by asking if Phillips will be coming to Paris with his client (clearly Morrison) and asks for a few days’ notice so that he can return from the country (presumably Reux). Lepec had made alterations to the design and would require at least four more uninterrupted months to finish the work.55 The artist also asks to be remembered to Phillips’s family.On December 21, 1863, Lepec announced to Phillips that he had finished the coupe (a shallow, dish-shaped bowl on a stem) and that a work of such importance would bring credit to them both.56 In what will be shown to be one of many instances of artistic collaboration with contemporary craftsmen, Lepec notes that Charles Duron has made the mount for the coupe.57 Lepec will leave for London on December 27 and asks if he might stay at the British Hotel, located at 26–27 Cockspur Street, virtually next door to Phillips (both premises now demolished).58 Despite the absence of a distinctive foot rim or “mount,” logic and timing would suggest that La Fantaisie is the coupe to which Lepec refers, and that Duron simply put together the top and stem.Both La Volupté and La Fantaisie (see figs. 6–8), lent by Phillips, were shown at the Paris Salon in 1864.59 In a letter to Phillips dated May 11, 1864, Lepec notes the excellent reception of the two coupes, that he has received more requests for work, and he attributes the success to La Fantaisie.60 To the same letter Lepec attached an English-language news clipping received that day: “We beg, however, to direct attention towards two of the finest enamel paintings we have ever met with. They are by Lepec (No. 2,305) ‘La Volupté’ and ‘La Fantaisie.’ They belong to Mr. Phillips, says the catalogue.”61La Fantaisie was described in the Gazette des Beaux-Arts as depicting a wild female “Redskin” riding a chimera. The writer continued, however, by noting that he preferred the portraits shown the year before.62 Thus, by 1864, Lepec’s work in enamel was already receiving critical attention on both sides of the English Channel.In the chronology of enamels discussed by Lepec in correspondence with Phillips, the next items are three untraced bottles or flasks (trois flacons) referred to in a letter dated March 16, 1864.63 Another work completed in 1864 was a coffret (box), which Lepec planned to take to London in early July 1864; this resembled goldsmith’s work.64 Although undocumented and unsigned, the small coffret at the Musée des Beaux-Arts de Limoges, Palais de l’Evêché, might be of similar appearance.65 Lepec’s three-quarter profile portrait on the front of the coffret (fig. 9) resembles Clémence Isaure (see fig. 2)—but on a diminutive scale.66fig. 9. Charles Lepec. Coffret, ca. 1870. Painted and plique-à-jour enamel on gold and gilt-bronze, 5⅞ × 5⅜ × 3⅜ in. (15 × 13.5 × 8.5 cm). Musée des Beaux-Arts de Limoges, Palais de l’Evêché (94.522)Not all the works listed by Pierre Sanchez as exhibited by Lepec at the Paris Salons of 1863–65 have been traced.67 One such is Roger et Angélique (1865 Salon, no. 2615), which was lent by M. H. Durand, who has not been positively identified.68 Although Morrison was fast becoming Lepec’s greatest patron, it did not follow that Morrison acquired everything he was offered The drawing from the Fonthill Estate Archive, Roger et Angélique (fig. 10), is clearly for a major work and surely illustrates the (untraced) object lent by Durand to the 1865 Salon. It is signed and dated Paris 14 août 1864 Charles Lepec and is informative about the effect Lepec wished to achieve with translucent colored enamels in an enameled silver bouclier (shield) three feet in diameter.69fig. 10. Charles Lepec. Roger et Angélique, 1864. Pencil on paper, 16 × 14¼ in. (40.6 × 36.2 cm). Signed and dated Paris 14 août 1864 Charles Lepec. Fonthill Estate ArchiveThe degree to which Lepec and Phillips’s friendship deepened is emphasized in a letter dated August 23, 1864. Lepec expresses concern that Mrs. Phillips has undergone a serious operation. He also comments that his own health has improved. With regard to the bouclier, he says that he is happy that the design is to Phillips’s taste and that he will not sell it before giving him the right of first refusal.70 The bouclier is not referred to again, so we must assume that Morrison, through Phillips, rejected the piece.The subject of Lepec’s shield, characteristically erudite, is based on a section of the romantic epic Orlando Furioso by Ludovico Ariosto (1474–1533) and depicts Ruggerio (Roger) rescuing Angelica (Angélique) from a rock where she is about to be attacked by a sea monster.71 It may not be a coincidence that in 1819 Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres painted the same subject to great effect.72 Paul Mantz, describing the work as Angélique et Médor, admires its exquisite technical composition but dislikes its purple hue and overall decorative effect.73 Meanwhile, Félix Jahyer admires the colors and grace of the dazzling work.74Two smaller-scale works from 1865, formerly in Morrison’s collection and shown at the 1867 Paris Exposition Universelle, each described as an assiette sujet (plate depicting a particular subject),75 give some idea of how Lepec’s composition Roger et Angélique might have looked. The plates are sequential works; the earlier, number 230 (fig. 11), is now in the collection of the Musée des Beaux-Arts de Limoges.76 It depicts the blindfolded figure of Fortune beside her wheel, with falling emblems of power to her right. The representation of the crown and scepter recalls a similar treatment on the earlier Audaces Fortuna Juvat (1860).77 The subject of the decoration on the second plate, numbered 231, has not been identified (fig. 12).78 Both plates have decorative floral borders surmounted by variants of a type of dragonlike creature, which is something of a leitmotif in Lepec’s work and a familiar element of the nineteenth-century interest in medieval mythology.79 Lepec also incorporated a similar motif into the monogram he created as his own letterhead (fig. 13).fig. 11. Charles Lepec. Plate, 1865. Enamel on silver, silver-gilt edge, Diam. 8⅝ in. (22 cm). Signed N. 230. CHARLES LEPEC.I.P.V. 1865. Musée des Beaux-Arts de Limoges, Palais de l’Evêchéfig. 12. Charles Lepec. Plate, 1865. Enamel on silver, silver-gilt edge, Diam. 8 in. (20.3 cm). Signed N. 231. CHARLES LEPEC. IPV.1865. Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (BK-1995-1)fig. 13. Charles Lepec. Lepec monogrammed letterhead, ca. 1867. Pen and ink on paper. Fonthill Estate ArchiveFrom correspondence relating to these two plates, it would appear that they followed two simpler, untraced examples, one with an overall geometric design and the other with a plain center (see fig. 8, bottom center, left and right), which Morrison also lent to the 1867 Paris Exposition Universelle. In a letter dated October 13, 1865, Lepec tells Robert Phillips to let Morrison know that these new plates, despite their rich decoration, could not possibly fetch the same price as the first two.80 The following day, Phillips sent Lepec’s invoice to Morrison.81The Victoria and Albert Museum holds an important and hitherto unpublished group of designs by Lepec.82 The sixteen drawings, some of which are dated, range from 1865 to 1886; they were acquired in 1891 from Phillips Brothers of Cockspur Street for £9 12s. Alfred Phillips, in a letter to the museum, refers to the “selection of 16 drawings which you made,” tantalizingly suggesting that there were more.83 In the majority of instances where the design can be associated with an identifiable work,84 these relate to commissions for Morrison.85 Although Morrison would seem to have remained Lepec’s most significant patron throughout the period 1862–66, we have already seen that Angélique et Roger went elsewhere. Another major work not acquired by Morrison was the large-scale Clémence Isaure exhibited at the 1866 Paris Salon (see fig. 2).86 The buyer, as noted above, was Henry Bolckow, who at some point also bought a Lepec-designed gold ring with an enamel of Psyche surrounded by brilliant-cut diamonds; this is now in the collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum.87The year 1866 was to be a very busy one for Lepec, and it seems that he felt the strain. Not only was he creating work on an ambitious scale, but also, as the months went by, he would be increasingly preoccupied by the following year’s Exposition Universelle. In a letter dated February 1, 1866, Lepec tells Phillips about difficulties he is having with this 71-by-45-inch creation, on which he has worked for more than a year with the help of his two ablest students.88 Lepec is delighted by the complex panels making up the arabesque borders but distraught that the 21-inch central panel has been damaged that day in the kiln. He says that he will be devastated if it cannot be recovered in time for the 1866 Salon.89There can be no doubt that the work with which Lepec was struggling is Clémence Isaure; the dimensions 71 by 45 inches correspond sufficiently closely with the 180.3 by 113 centimeters given by the Musée d’Orsay.90 The letter continues in an increasingly despondent vein. Lepec had now failed a second time in firing the central panel, recalling a problem he had had once before with a silver shield (perhaps the Durand bouclier).
Referência(s)