Author Topic: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs  (Read 37119 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ashdean

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #30 on: November 30, 2009, 12:15:14 PM »
.. To help a bit more, ... The three Latin letters are  S, Y and M. 

Thus it can be concluded that the new owner could not have been an émigré of Russian descent and was associated by the letters "S", "Y" and "M" in some manner.

Since this egg came from the Yusupov Family, it is suggested that the letter "Y" acknowledges the original owner. That intention provides a form of provenance.

Therefore the letters "S" and "M" probably designated the inscription of the new owner.

I conclude that the new owner was identified by the letters "S. M." or "M. S."

Margarita

Y MS stands for Yves Maurice Sandoz...the subsuquent owner...TOne of the removed minatures that of the younger Prince Nicholas...might be the minature adorning a Faberge frame at the hillwood museum in washington DC

Offline ashanti01

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1570
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #31 on: November 30, 2009, 12:48:25 PM »
It does appear to the same miniature except for the frame. Either way, its a beautiful frame.




toscany

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #32 on: November 30, 2009, 01:48:08 PM »
ashanti01:   I presume that you are a student with English as your native language and familiar with how to research via the Internet.  Why not research your question and then you will find these answers, including why the egg has  "S"  in the ovals. 

Indeed the "S" is indeed something of a mystery.

Margarita


The Yusupov Egg is made as a Louis XVI Table-Clock. The revolving Opaque white enamel dial, set with diamond-set Roman numerals, stand on three pillasters and Lion paw feet.  Suspended Laurel swags, contain three oval medallions that originally held miniatures of Prince Felix Yusupov, and these sons Felix and Nicholas.  The medallions now have the gold letters M, Y, and S, within rose cut diamond borders, the initials of the last owner, Maurice Sandoz.

This can be researched, under:  Youssoupov Egg with Google...

HMB

novarrofan

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #33 on: April 24, 2010, 08:36:49 PM »
Hi there,
I'm new to this forum but have been avidly reading all the posts for months now.

The question I have is that I've always been fascinated by the amazing photo of the Soviet Officials examining the Yusupov treasures in 1924 after their discovery in the Moscow House and I was curious to know if anyone has any information on the two amazing silver swans and the gargoyle/dragon creature that are also in the shot? I know someone here mentioned they were by faberge but I can't find a mention of them anywhere. I wonder what they were used for ? Perhaps  they were  just ornaments or containers for flowers at receptions perhaps? I wonder what happened to them? They are masterpieces and I'm stunned if the Soviets simply melted them down which I guess shouldn't surprise me .
Cheers
Simon

aleksandr pavlovich

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #34 on: April 24, 2010, 10:05:52 PM »
Hello, Simon!  I know of the photo of which you speak, but I do not have a copy in front of me now as I write.  An earlier item on this topic, alleges not two, but THREE swans are in the photo. (Perhaps one was misinterpreted to be a "gargoyle/dragon"?)  I would refer you to the earlier topic on this Forum:  "Youssupov Jewelry," initial entry by "Miamia," June 25, 2004, the paragraph following the second quote. She cites Geoffrey Munn's book, "Tiaras, a History of Splendour," 2001.  I PRESUME that this reference is her source for the photograph, not any description of the usage of the "swans."  I certainly have no idea in what fashion they were used, but were obviously containers of some sort.  (Tounge-in-cheek, swans were a somewhat popular motif in porcelain in the 18th and 19th centuries, as tureens, but they were generally of covered porcelain, though there WERE silver tureens as well.) Likewise, I have never seen reference to these silver swans again, after the inventory photo.  I would suspect that they WERE melted down for their silver content.  Regards,  AP
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 10:13:31 PM by aleksandr pavlovich »

novarrofan

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #35 on: April 25, 2010, 12:21:00 AM »
Hello Aleksandr!

Thank you for the direction to the earlier discussion on these amazing figures. I pulled out my copy of "Masterpieces from the House of Faberge" to look at the photo again and discovered there were actually three swans with one of them only visible showing only its neck behind one of the soviet workers on the extreme right of the photo. The figure to the left of the photo is the dragon/gargoyle like figure which is standing on webbed feet and while different to the three swans is probably by the same maker. What a tragedy to loose these great works of art!! The Soviets really have a lot to answer for. Imagine that Yusupov haul if the communist had of displayed one onc eof common sense and kept it all together and put on display, what a sight that would have been! I do believe these figures would have adorned a sideboard during grand receptions and been filled with flowers or fruit for decoration. What a sightt hat would have been. Such a disappointment so much of the Yusupov collection was destroyed by the Soviets

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #36 on: April 25, 2010, 02:19:11 AM »
Probably the swans were either melted down or sold abroad.   While a lot was saved, a lot was destroyed by the communists.  Interesting how they thought they had the right to destroy Russia's heritage in the name of an unworkable ideopogy.

aleksandr pavlovich

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #37 on: April 25, 2010, 01:37:31 PM »
As hard-strapped as the new government seemed for cash, the immediate domestic solution to the swans would have been to bypass the intrinsic value of them as Faberge "masterpieces" in favor of the material value in metal content.  Also, Faberge was not particularly highly valued by those newly in power in Russia, as the firm and clientele represented the past "decadent" regime.  Likewise, Faberge products were regarded by many as too "modern" (age-wise), which at that time, they were.  AP
« Last Edit: April 25, 2010, 01:54:07 PM by aleksandr pavlovich »

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #38 on: April 25, 2010, 02:06:26 PM »
Intrinsic value is the value of the metal.  The value of the craftsmanship is added value.

aleksandr pavlovich

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #39 on: April 25, 2010, 02:34:50 PM »
Indeed! Read "artistic/craftsmanship" versus "intrinsic."  Thanks!   AP
« Last Edit: April 25, 2010, 02:40:01 PM by aleksandr pavlovich »

novarrofan

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #40 on: April 25, 2010, 08:08:24 PM »
Either way they were the wrong people to be handling all these treasures, look at the disaster of them dispersing and breaking up alot of the  Crown Jewels, what a terrible loss for Russia that was

aleksandr pavlovich

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #41 on: April 25, 2010, 08:29:31 PM »
Referencing your passing mention of the Imperial Crown Jewels in Reply #7:  At least, Simon, an apparent combination of circumstances, DID allow a number of the greatest Crown Jewels to be retained.  If you ever get the opportunity, DO visit the separate display (as part of the so-named "Diamond Fund") at the Moscow Kremlin.  I have done so on several occasions, and always the effect is "blindingly brilliant" !   Regards,  AP
« Last Edit: April 25, 2010, 08:49:19 PM by aleksandr pavlovich »

novarrofan

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #42 on: April 25, 2010, 10:07:59 PM »
Hi Aleksandr,
Yes to visit the Diamond Fund is a still unfulfilled dream of mine but I will do it!!! :-)) Yes some of the more important gems were retained but I can't help looking at the photos of the Crown Jewels spread out in the photographs from the 1920's and to see the famous photo of the Yusupov hoard to keep thinking how much was broken up and sold off, such a tragedy. I bought the magnificent book on "Tiaras" recently which shows all the brilliant tiaras that were once in the Russian collection, almost all gone now except for the Duchess of Marlbourgh one which I think is in the Phillipines now.

novarrofan

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #43 on: April 26, 2010, 02:55:29 AM »
I've read about many of the objects that Felix managed to smuggle out of St. Petersburg during his secret trips back there during the revolution and it was exciting to see the Sapphire Venus Statue come up for auction recently but one that is always mentioned but I've never even seen a photo of was the small Ruby Buddha that was ikept n the rooms of Felix's father in the Moika Palace. It had originally been part of the plunder taken from the Summer Palace in Beijjing. Does anyone know what it actually looked like or have you seen a photo of it at all? I wonder who owns it now?
Thanks
Simon

novarrofan

  • Guest
Re: Objects of Arts from the collections of the Yusupovs
« Reply #44 on: April 26, 2010, 07:38:02 AM »
the original miniatures of Felix and Nicholas which were removed from the egg.



image from http://www.mieks.com/forum/indiv-eggs.html.

I must say I agree with those who believe the original miniatures should be restored to the egg.
[
Yes I agree totally as well. The Egg needs to be restored and the original miniatures returned and put back on the egg if they can all be found. It should never have been tampered with in the first place. Who could care less who Maurice Sandoz is anyway?. This is the Yusupov Egg an needs to display the family miniatures.