Corpus from a Crucifix

While Franz Anton Bustelli (Swiss, d. 1763) is best known for the commedia dell’arte figures he produced at the Nymphenburg factory (see 1974.356.802), he modeled a very small number of religious figures that are considered his finest and most sophisticated sculptural works. These figures of the crucified Christ, the Mourning Virgin, Saint John, and the Mater Dolorosa are all the more remarkable for being among the earliest works that he made at Nymphenburg. The skill and expressiveness with which they are modeled suggest Bustelli was an experienced sculptor when he arrived at the factory in 1754, although nothing is known of his career prior to that point. It has been suggested by Peter Volk that Bustelli may have trained with the Munich sculptor Johann Baptist Straub (German, 1704–1784),[1] but no evidence has come to light that confirms this plausible hypothesis.

This figure of the crucified Christ, often referred to as a Corpus figure, was modeled by Bustelli in 1755.[2] Bustelli’s figure of the crucified Christ not only is depicted with unusual detail and realism but exhibits a pronounced and graceful attenuation that accentuates its expressiveness. The musculature is clearly delineated, the veins protrude, and the fingers and toes are closely observed. Christ’s face, with its heavy-lidded but sightless eyes and open mouth, is the emotional focus of the composition, and the prominent and realistic crown of thorns heightens the impact of the imagery. The sense of stillness conveyed by the limp, hanging body is contrasted with the animation of the drapery around Christ’s loins. The complex folds and the design of the billowing lower section suggest that Bustelli may have had experience specifically in sculpting wood before joining the Nymphenburg factory.[3]

The Corpus would have been mounted on a cross almost certainly made of wood, and the figure would have been attached through the holes that Bustelli has incorporated in Christ’s hands and feet, in keeping with traditional Crucifixion iconography.[4] It can be assumed that a porcelain plaque, with the letters INRI, would have been mounted on the top of the cross, and a porcelain skull and crossbones would have been placed at the foot of the cross.[5] Intended to accompany the Corpus figure, Bustelli’s figures of the Virgin Mary and of Saint John were modeled in 1756 with skillfully conceived poses to create a unified composition in which the three figures are visually and emotionally connected.[6] Only two of these Crucifixion groups are known today, and they are among the most accomplished porcelain sculpture produced during the eighteenth century. It is likely they were intended for private devotion rather than public veneration, and this supposition is reinforced by the remarkable survival of a cabinet made specifically to contain the Crucifixion group that remains mounted inside its upper section.[7]

In 1759 Bustelli modeled a figure of the Virgin Mary as the grieving mother (Mater Dolorosa), which was intended as an alternative to the earlier Virgin Mary figure.[8] These four figures constitute the only religious figures that Bustelli created, and it may have been the gravity of the subject matter that inspired the remarkable expressiveness of the Corpus and its accompanying figures. It appears that Bustelli reworked the model of the Corpus that he created in 1755, and the Museum’s figure reflects his minor revisions.[9] The reworked Corpus figure has a more defined musculature, and the impression of suffering is heightened by the more sharply delineated features of the face, which are made more visible due to the higher position of the crown of thorns. A smaller version of the Dead Christ was created in 1758, suggesting that the earlier Corpus figures were a commercial success.[10]

While Bustelli’s Corpus reflects the long history of depictions of the Dead Christ executed in ivory, wood, and bronze, the use of porcelain for religious sculpture was relatively uncommon. The Meissen factory had created a number of religious works during the 1730s and 1740s,[11] but they make up an extremely small percentage of the factory’s figural production, and porcelain was not widely embraced in Europe as a medium for religious sculpture, despite its obvious visual similarity to ivory. The Munich sculptor Ignaz Günther (German, 1725–1775) modeled a porcelain Corpus in 1756,[12] perhaps in response to Bustelli’s Corpus of the previous year, but these figures represent rare departures from the vast majority of porcelain sculpture that was made to decorate the dining table. Bustelli’s Corpus, and the figures of the Virgin Mary and Saint John produced to accompany it, ably demonstrated that porcelain was a suitable medium for the most serious sculptural expression.


Footnotes
(For key to shortened references see bibliography in Munger, European Porcelain in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. NY: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2018)
1 Volk 2004.
2 Katharina Hantschmann in Hantschmann and Ziffer 2004, p. 442, under no. 83.
3 Jeffrey Weaver in Sutton 1995, p. 116; Ziffer 1997, p. 35.
4 Interestingly, Bustelli has finished the back of the figure, albeit in a slightly summary fashion, even though it would not be seen once mounted on the cross.
5 Hantschmann and Ziffer 2004, p. 442, nos. 83–85, ill. p. 187 (catalogue entry by Hantschmann), p. 444, nos. 87–90, ill. p. 191 (catalogue entry by Hantschmann and Alfred Ziffer).
6 Hantschmann in ibid., p. 442, nos. 83–85, ill. p. 187.
7 Hantschmann and Ziffer in ibid., pp. 444–47, nos. 87–90, ill. p. 191.
8 Hantschmann in ibid., p. 448, no. 93, ill. p. 197.
9 The earliest model is illustrated in ibid., p. 187, and a detail appears on p. 192. The most notable changes involve the elimination of the upward-billowing drapery at Christ’s proper right side, the higher place-ment of the crown of thorns, more sharply executed facial features, and a more detailed musculature.
10 Hantschmann in ibid., pp. 447–48, no. 92, ill. p. 196. The smaller version of the Dead Christ reflects more substantial changes, seen more clearly in the repositioning of the legs, with the proper right leg in front, and in the reorientation of the drapery. In addition, it appears, based on photographs, that the musculature as well as the features of Christ’s face have been softened, resulting in a less dramatic and overtly emotional depiction.
11 See Antonin 2010.
12 Eikelmann 2000, ill. p. 83.