Hollow, indirect cast with thick walls, partly solid legs and arms. Radiography and tomography reveal an unusual disc-shaped, horizontal wax-to-wax join near the hips, suggesting that the figure was made of two separate parts which were connected by a flat piece of wax. Also visible is an iron rod running from the back to the chest, invested in bronze. The piece is covered with a black lacquer patina.
Alloy brass alloy with some lead and low impurities (Cu 84.72%; Zn 11.46%; Sn 0.52%; Pb 2.32%; Sb 0.30%; As 0.14%; Fe 0.31%; Ni 0.15%; Ag 0.10%).

R. van Langh in F. Scholten, M. Verber et al., From Vulcan’s Forge: Bronzes from the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam 1450-1800, exh. cat. London (Daniel Katz Ltd.)/Vienna (Liechtenstein Museum) 2005-06, figs. 38a-b on p. 167

The black lacquer patina has worn thin in places. Little remains of the two attributes (flute and caduceus?).

? from the artist, bequeathed to his widow, Barbara (‘Beyken’) van Wildere, Amsterdam, 1621;¹¹Possibly den Mercurius mentioned in her testament of 15 November 1621, see A.D. de Vries, ‘Biografische aantekeningen betreffende voornamelijk Amsterdamsche schilders, plaatsnijders, enz. en hunne verwanten’, Oud Holland 3 (1885), pp. 55-80, esp. p. 76. …; from John Teed, Bradford-on-Avon, to the museum, £ 367, as a gift from the Fotocommissie, 1959

Object number: BK-1959-61

Credit line: Purchased with the support of the Stichting tot Bevordering van de Belangen van het Rijksmuseum

The sculptor Hendrick de Keyser’s (1565-1621) estate, drawn up in 1621, lists den Mercurius separately as a work that was to remain in the possession of the sculptors widow, together with an Amor and Psyche, a portrait bust of Willem van Orange, five modelled children’s figures, a Laocoön, a horse, three modelled anatomical models, and the model of William I of Orange’s tomb monument. The remainder of the estate was transferred to De Keyser’s son, Pieter, himself a sculptor.²²E. Neurdenburg, Hendrick de Keyser: Beeldhouwer en bouwmeester van Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1930, pp. 95-96. Besides the terracotta model of the tomb for the Prince of Orange (BK-AM-37), the present Mercury, monogrammed and dated, is the sole work from this group properly identified as such. From the time of its discovery in 1959, this bronze statuette has served as the starting point for all other pieces of Kleinplastik attributed to the master.³³C. Avery, ‘Hendrick de Keyser as a Sculptor of Small Bronzes, his Orpheus and Cerberus Identified’, Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 21 (1973), pp. 3-24 (reprint in C. Avery, Studies in European Sculpture, vol. 1, London 1981, pp. 175-89).

Preceded in the estate document by the Dutch article den (the) – as opposed to een (a), as with most of the other cited works – the bronze Mercury is certain to have enjoyed a certain notoriety. The various – unsigned – replicas of the bronze statuette suggest a fairly wide dissemination in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The documented estate inventory of the Delft silversmith Thomas Cruse (1624) mentions Noch ein form van den Marcuryus van de Keyser (Another mould of the Mercury by De Keyser). It also lists other works by the sculptor, either autograph pieces or casts made after his models: an Apollo, an Orpheus and Cerberus, several horses and an écorché.⁴⁴A. Bredius, Künstler-inventare, Urkunden zur geschichte der holländischen Kunst des XVIten, XVIIten und XVIIIten Jahrhunderts, vol. 4, The Hague 1917, pp. 1457-58. Thomas Cornelis Cruse was born in Lübeck in 1586 and married in Amsterdam in December 1612. He is documented in the circle of the Amsterdam sculptor Hendrick de Keyser in 1616, when buying tools from the latter’s friend, the goldsmith Andries Frerixsz or Frederiks Valckenaer (1566-1627), whose daughter Machtelt married Hendrick de Keyser’s son, Thomas, in 1626. See Amsterdam City Archives, DTB, archive no. 5001, inv. no. 416, fol. 162, Notarial Archives (archive no. 5075), inv. no. 433, fols. 148v-149r (dated 28 March 1616) and inv. no. 440, fols. 94v-95v (dated 1 June 1626). Additionally, three different pen-and-ink drawings of the Mercury – from different sides – were made by Jan de Bisschop (1628-1671),⁵⁵London, Victoria and Albert Museum, inv. nos. D1212:20-1889, D1212:21-1889 and D1212:22-1889. who similarly recorded other works by De Keyser and Willem van Tetrode in pen-and-ink drawings with wash, perhaps meant as illustrations for a publication on contemporary sculpture.⁶⁶H. Leeflang and G. Luijten et al., Hendrick Goltzius (1558-1617): Drawings, Prints and Paintings, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum)/New York (The Metropolitan Museum of Art)/Toledo (The Toledo Museum of Art) 2003-04, pp. 71-72. The composition’s popularity in the Netherlands is additionally supported by the existence of yet another sheet showing six different views of the Mercury – attributed to Cornelis van Poelenburgh (1594/95-1667) – all rendered in red chalk.⁷⁷Staatsgalerie Stuttgart, https://www.staatsgalerie.de/de/sammlung-digital/merkur-statuette-sechs-ansichten">inv. no. C 2017/5756,249 (29). My thanks to the late Erik Löffler. Furthermore, around 1655-60 the Antwerp painter Jacques Jordaens (1593-1676) made a series of three study drawings closely resembling De Keyser’s Mercury from different directions.⁸⁸Antwerp Museum Plantin-Moretus, inv. nos. PK.OT.00156, PK.OT.02269. PK.OT.02270; A. Mackelaite in V. D’haene (ed.), From Scribble to Cartoon: Drawings from Bruegel to Rubens, exh. cat. Antwerp (Museum Platin-Moretus) 2023, no. 9. Jordaens reused the same figure in his drawing Allegory of Victory, c. 1655-60, New York, The Morgan Library & Museum, inv. no. III, 171, see ibid., fig. 98. He however added a voluminous drapery onto the figure’s body, which is the main focus of these drawings. It is unclear whether Jordaens covered a version of statuette with a piece of cloth or if he asked a live model to pose in exactly the same position as De Keyser’s Mercury.

The bronze’s renown also extended beyond the Netherlands, as the recent sale of a life-size marble Mercury from northern Italy confirms. Given the numerous parallels in facial type and pose when comparing this work to De Keyser’s design – albeit mirrored – one can only conclude that the model served as its main source of inspiration, most likely via a plaster cast.⁹⁹Sale Florence (Sotheby’s), 12-15 October 2009, no. 163, together with a life-size statue of Venus.

Two bronze replicas of the Mercury are known: one in the Musée des Arts Décoratifs in Paris,¹⁰¹⁰Paris, Musée des Arts Décoratifs, inv. no. Gr. 62. the other at the Herzog Anton Ulrich Museum in Braunschweig.¹¹¹¹U. Berger and V. Krahn, Bronzen der Renaissance und des Barock: Katalog der Sammlung, coll. cat. Braunschweig (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum) 1994, no. 133. Both are later casts lacking the sculptor’s monogram. In both cases, the original model has been reworked with chasing and other alterations. The maker of the Paris cast transformed the model into Perseus wielding a sword, with the head of Argus lying at his feet. The Braunschweig figure is less spontaneous in character and poorly cast: the execution of the pubic hair is somewhat crude, while Mercury’s helmet has a peened surface. This bronze appears be a Netherlandish cast from the seventeenth century. Recently a lead cast measuring 3 centimetres higher was discovered. Given the style of the integrally cast socle, it can be placed in the first half of the eighteenth century, most likely also in the Netherlands.¹²¹²K. Zock, G. Balderston and D. Katz, European Sculpture 2003, sale cat. London (Daniel Katz Ltd.) 2003, no. 9; F. Scholten, ‘The Larson Family of Statuary Founders: Seventeenth-Century Reproductive Sculpture for Gardens and Painters’ Studios’, Simiolus 31 (2004-05), pp. 54-89, esp. fig. 41. A smaller version carved in palm wood, originating from the Bloch collection in Vienna and sold in Luzern and Berlin, also exists.¹³¹³Sale Luzern (Gilhofer & Ranschburg), 30 November 1934, no. 100 (h. 25 cm); Sale Berlin (H.W. Lange), 18-19 November 1938, no. 241; present whereabouts unknown. Theoretically, this sculpture could have been made by De Keyser himself, as he is known to have worked with this wood type on more than one occasion. Judging by the coarse and schematic modelling, however, in this case such an attribution appears unfounded.

The soft modelling of the Mercury and its elegant, mannerist pose demonstrate that the roots of De Keyser’s style partly lay in works by contemporaneous painters such as Abraham Bloemaert, Cornelis van Haarlem and Joachim Wtewael. Comparable figures, sharing the pose and facial type, can be observed in Bloemaert’s Joseph and his Brothers in Egypt and Wtewael’s Banquet of the Gods.¹⁴¹⁴Utrecht, Centraal Museum, inv. nos. 8292 and 34950. The latter’s design for a salt cellar from 1603 is adorned with figures rendered with a similar sense of flowing line and supple modelling encountered on the Mercury.¹⁵¹⁵G. Luijten et al., Dawn of the Golden Age: Northern Netherlandish Art 1580-1620, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 1993-94, no. 100. De Keyser knew both painters well: Wtewael – who also worked with sculpture – commissioned him to make his terracotta portrait bust in 1606 (BK-NM-4191);¹⁶¹⁶G. Luijten et al., Dawn of the Golden Age: Northern Netherlandish Art 1580-1620, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 1993-94, no. 58, F. Scholten, ‘A Beheaded Bust and a Fountain-Statue by Hendrick de Keyser’, The Burlington Magazine 137 (1995), pp. 838-41. Bloemaert was the son of his first teacher. Yet Bartholomeus Spranger’s drawing of Hermes (Mercury), Athena and the Industrious Artist, was perhaps a more immediate model for the present figure. Made no later than 1611, this drawing was engraved by Jan Muller in Amsterdam in 1628 (RP-P-OB-32.192). The standing pose of the Mercury in this print bears a striking resemblance to that of De Keyer’s statuette.

Frits Scholten, 2024
An earlier version of this entry was published in F. Scholten, M. Verber et al., From Vulcan’s Forge: Bronzes from the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam 1450-1800, exh. cat. London (Daniel Katz Ltd.)/Vienna (Liechtenstein Museum) 2005-06, no. 38

J. Leeuwenberg with the assistance of W. Halsema-Kubes, Beeldhouwkunst in het Rijksmuseum, coll. cat. Amsterdam 1973, no. 225, with earlier literature; C. Brown et al., Art in Seventeenth Century Holland, exh. cat. London (The National Gallery) 1976, no.155; S. Heiberg, Christian IV and Europe, exh. cat. Copenhagen (Statens Museum for Kunst) 1988, no. 1048; W. Halsema-Kubes, ‘De Noordnederlandse beeldhouwkunst in de 17de eeuw’, Kunstschrift 35 (1991) 3, pp. 16-25, esp. p. 18; G. Luijten et al., Dawn of the Golden Age: Northern Netherlandish Art 1580-1620, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 1993-94, no. 55; Scholten in F. Scholten, M. Verber et al., From Vulcan’s Forge: Bronzes from the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam 1450-1800, exh. cat. London (Daniel Katz Ltd.)/Vienna (Liechtenstein Museum) 2005-06, no. 38; Mackelaite in V. D’haene (ed.), From Scribble to Cartoon: Drawings from Bruegel to Rubens, exh. cat. Antwerp (Museum Platin-Moretus) 2023, p. 54 and fig. 9a

F. Scholten, 2024, 'Hendrick de (I) Keyser, Mercury, Amsterdam, 1611', in F. Scholten and B. van der Mark (eds.), European Sculpture in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: https://data.rijksmuseum.nl/200115892