Reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art and Objects of Cultural Interest: Note of case hearing on 6 March 2013: Louis de Gruuthuse’s copy of the Deeds of Sir Gillion de Trazegnies in the Middle East (Case 16, 2012-13)

Application

1. The Reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art and Objects of Cultural Interest (RCEWA) met on 6 March 2013 to consider an application to export Louis de Gruuthuse’s copy of the Deeds of Sir Gillion de Trazegnies in the Middle East. The value shown on the export licence application was £3,849,250, which represented a hammer price of £3,400,000, plus buyer’s premium of £449,250. The expert adviser had objected to the export of the manuscript under the second, third, and possibly first Waverley criteria, i.e. on the grounds that it was of outstanding aesthetic importance, that it was of outstanding significance for the study of French chivalric texts and of Netherlandish art of the period, and possibly that it was so closely connected with our history and national life that its departure would be a misfortune.

2. The eight regular RCEWA members present were joined by three independent assessors, acting as temporary members of the Reviewing Committee.

3. The applicant confirmed that the value did not include VAT and that VAT would not be payable in the event of a UK sale. The applicant also confirmed that the owner understood the circumstances under which an export licence might be refused and that, if the decision on the licence was deferred, the owner would allow the manuscript to be displayed for fundraising subject to appropriate climate control, security, and insurance arrangements being in place.

Expert’s submission

4. The expert had provided a written submission stating that the illuminated manuscript on parchment contains the rare anonymous French romance Gillion de Trazegnies. It was dated 1464 and was transcribed by the Burgundian court scribe David Aubert. It included eight half-page miniatures with painted borders and forty-four historiated initials, all by Lieven Van Lathem (fl. 1454-93), one of the most successful painters in the during this period. The manuscript comprised 237 leaves, each of which measured 275 x 262 mm.

5. The manuscript was made for Louis de Gruuthuse (1422-92), one of the most trusted governors of the northern territories held by the dukes of Burgundy. He was a great bibliophile and art patron in the . The manuscript included a dedication to Louis as well as his heraldic arms, emblem, and motto. The expert stated that the manuscript was arguably the finest, artistically, of the nearly two hundred manuscripts that survived from his large and important library. Most of Gruuthuse’s manuscripts passed from the French Royal Library to the Bibliothèque Nationale de France, but Gillion came into possession of William George Spencer Cavendish, 6th Duke of Devonshire (1790-1858) by 1817. It remained at Chatsworth until its sale at Sotheby’s in 2012. The manuscript had therefore been an integral part of the remarkable collection of art and books at Chatsworth since the early 19th century. The Duke was the creator of one of the greatest aristocratic libraries in the country and the manuscript’s inclusion in the collection epitomised the bibliophilia and cultural tastes of both the Duke and contemporary noble collectors in Britain.

6. The expert stated that the manuscript was the finest copy of the romance Gillion de Trazegnies. Van Lathem lavishly illustrated the manuscript with an inventive interpretation of a secular text which constituted his most ambitious narrative cycle. The historiated initials were created with extraordinary delicacy. The manuscript demonstrated the developing interest of early Netherlandish painters in the depiction of the natural world – the human form, the landscape, and the effects of light. Van Lathem was also known for his distinctive treatment of space, particularly exemplified in his painting of a duel between Gillion and the Saracen nobleman Lucion (f. 134v).

7. The expert noted that this text was rare; there were no other copies of the text in the UK, either in the French prose version, or in Latin translation. This vernacular chivalric text was particularly interesting for its view of the East, at a point when a crusade to recover Constantinople from the Turks was the focus of Burgundian aristocratic fantasy.

8. When questioned about how well Lieven Van Lathem was represented in the UK, the expert replied stating that a Book of Hours in Cambridge was partly attributed to him. Additionally, there was one painting in the National Gallery that may have been initiated by him. The expert adviser was also asked about the layout of the manuscript to which he opined that manuscripts were often created in stages, sometimes over a period of many years, by a series of individuals. It was likely that the size and number of the illustrations were dictated by the available space. In particular, it was noted that the historiated initials appeared to rebel against the constraints of the page.

Applicant’s submission

9. The applicant had stated in a written submission that any work of art from Chatsworth must to some extent be associated with British life. However the manuscript was made in Flanders, for a Flemish patron, was written in French and illuminated by a Flemish artist. It became part of the French royal collection around 1500 and it is not known how or when the manuscript came to England.

10. The manuscript was a beautiful example of the art of Flemish illumination; however there are other important Flemish manuscripts in UK collections as recently exemplified in the British Library’s exhibition; Royal Manuscripts: The Genius of Illumination. In addition the UK has more Flemish Renaissance codices originally intended for Louis de Gruuthuse that any other country in the world, with the exception of France (to which Louis de Gruuthuse’s son gave the bulk of his library).

11. The manuscript’s illuminations have been well studied and published. The lengthy bibliography found in recent sales catalogues testifies to the manuscript’s significance among scholars. It is however, difficult to judge the manuscript as a whole as there are a number of leaves and miniatures missing. The retention of the manuscript would not significantly add to the resources for scholars as Flemish Renaissance illumination was already well-represented in the UK.

12. When questioned about how much of the manuscript was missing, the applicant replied that there were 33 leaves missing and suggested that at some point the manuscript may have suffered damage and that the present object was a tidied and rebound version. The applicant stated that having exhaustively researched the manuscript during the previous six months, it was extremely unlikely that any new provenance information would be forthcoming in the immediate future.

Discussion by the Committee

13. The expert adviser and applicant retired and the Committee discussed the case. It was agreed that although there were a number of Flemish manuscripts in the UK, in terms of illumination, this manuscript was exceptional. The Committee agreed that the manuscript was a great rarity. Furthermore, it appeared to be relatively little known to scholarship, providing scope for further research in relation to the School and the nature of Burgundian manuscripts under Philip the Good. It was noted that the manuscript’s link to the Chatsworth collections was significant in terms of illustrating the history of aristocratic collecting in the 19th century.

Waverley Criteria

14. The Committee voted on whether the manuscript met the Waverley criteria. One member voted that it met the first Waverley criterion. Eleven members voted that it met the second Waverley criterion. Eleven members voted that it met the third Waverley criterion. The manuscript was therefore found to meet the second and third Waverley criteria i.e. on the grounds that it was of outstanding aesthetic importance and that it was of outstanding significance for the study of illuminated manuscripts and of 15th century Netherlandish secular art.

Matching offer

15. The Committee recommended the sum of £3,849,250 (£3,400,000 representing the hammer price at auction, plus £449,250 representing the buyer’s premium) as a fair matching price.

Deferral period

16. The Committee agreed to recommend to the Secretary of State that the decision on the export licence should be deferred for an initial period of three months. If, within that period, Arts Council England received notification of a serious intention to raise funds with a view to making an offer to purchase the manuscript, the Committee recommended that there should be a further deferral period of four months.

Communication of findings

17. The expert adviser and the applicant returned. The Chairman notified them of the Committee’s decision on its recommendations to the Secretary of State. The applicant confirmed that the owner would accept a matching offer at the price recommended by the Committee if the decision on the licence was deferred by the Secretary of State.