Sculpted in relief.

Until 1974, the relief was set in a grey (?) marble frame with profile; possibly original.¹¹Photo Nijstad Antiquairs Lochem (in Object File). This frame was possibly removed by or at the request of the Rijksmuseum.

Commissioned by Theodoor van Snakenburg (1695-1750), for his house on the corner of the Nieuwsteeg and the Steenschuur, Leiden, 1742;²²Cf. sale Amsterdam (Frederik Muller), 17-18 April 1894, no. 55 and L.J. van der Klooster, ‘Jan Baptist Xavery (1697-1742): Documentatie over enkele van zijn werken’, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 21 (1970), pp. 99-138, esp. pp. 111-12 (note 45). removed from the house, which was destroyed in the Leiden gunpowder disaster, 12 January 1807;³³See E. Pelinck, ‘Een verdwenen gevel aan het Steenschuur: Het huis van Mr. Theodoor Snakenburg en zijn bouwmeester Jacob van Werven’, Leids Jaarboekje 47 (1955), pp. 147-52. … ; collection Ms L. Abels, Huis Bolenstijn, Maarssen; from whom, on loan to the Haags Gemeentemuseum, The Hague, until 4 October 1893; her sale, Amsterdam (Frederik Muller), 17-18 April 1894, no. 55; …; from sale Amsterdam (Frederik Muller), 28 November 1916, no. 1593, to J.A. Völcker van Soelen, Castle ‘Soelen’, Zoelen, 1916; acquired by the dealer Nijstad Antiquairs BV, Amsterdam, 1974; from whom, fl. 83,500, to the museum, with funds of the Rijksmuseumstichting, 1974

Object number: BK-1974-109

When sold in 1894, the present overmantel relief was said to have come from a house destroyed in the great gunpowder explosion that rocked the city of Leiden in 1807.⁴⁴Sale collection Ms L. Abels (Huis Bolestijn, Maarssen), Amsterdam, 17/18 April 1894, no. 55: Ce beau travail de Xavery provient d’une maison à Leyde, tombée en ruines par la catastrophe du bateau chargé de poudre qui sauta en 1807, toutefois sans faire le moindre dommage à cette sculpture. It has since been established that this was the monumental mansion on the Steenschuur once belonging to the solicitor and dilettante poet Theodoor van Snakenburg (1695-1750), built in the years 1738-1740 and designed by the architect Jacob van Werven (1697-c. 1743/63). Indeed, the same part of town was reportedly heavily damaged by the explosion of a gunpowder ship sailing from Haarlem to Delft that occurred on 12 January 1807. Snakenburg’s former house was subsequently torn down, with the marble overmantel relief of the chimney, designed and executed by Jan Baptist Xavery (1697-1742), then sold as an autonomous sculpture.

The relief dates from the final year of Xavery’s life. The scene is relatively vacuous and airy, similar to the overdoor, today preserved at the Museum de Lakenhal, that came from another house in Leiden, 48 Rapenburg.⁵⁵Ch. Vogelaar, ‘Reliëf met twee amoretten,’ Bulletin Vereniging Rembrandt 10 (2000), no. 2, pp. 16-18. It was Xavery’s work on this latter house, under the patronage of its owner at the time, Diederik Baron van Leyden, that conceivably led to the commission for the present piece, executed only two years later. The interiors of both houses were decorated with works by the ceiling painter Jacob de Wit.⁶⁶ L.J. van der Klooster, ‘Jan Baptist Xavery (1697-1742): Documentatie over enkele van zijn werken’, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 21 (1970), pp. 99-138, esp. pp. 111-12 (note 45). Van Snakenburg was a personal friend of Justus van Effen. He also submitted poems to the latter’s publication, De Hollandsche Spectator. In 1731, he published a Proeve van dichtoefening (Sample of Poetic Practice) using the initials ‘A.L.F.’. Van Snakenburg’s name also appears in a written discourse by Van Effen in De Hollandsche Spectator 83 (1732), pp. 184-89, concerning the relationship between men and woman based on Ovid’s aphorism: Fallere credentem non est operosa puellam gloria (To deceive a trustful girl is no laborious glory). Information based on the website Biografisch Portaal (consulted 10 March 2026). Xavery and De Wit are known to have collaborated on other monumental projects of a comparable scale.⁷⁷D. Kool and S. Braam, ‘De marmeren amoretten van Herengracht 468’, Amstelodamum 2021, no. 2, pp. 89-102, esp. pp. 93-95.

The present allegorical relief shows three putti: one sitting on a cloud suspended in the air, and two below sitting on a rock, frolicking together with a cat. The right putto rests his hand on the end of a standing sheaf of arrows. The putto left rests his right hand on the cat at his side; unclear is whether he once held some kind of object – perhaps an arrow or something for the cat? – in his raised left hand. The third, winged putto blows on the trumpet clasped in his right (i.e. the good) hand, while clasping a spray of flowers in the other. The three putti can be identified by their attributes as the personification of Fama (Fame), Libertas (Freedom) and Concordia (Solidarity).⁸⁸For the interpretation of this atypical iconography, see De Koomen in R. Baarsen et al., Rococo in Nederland, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 2001-02, no. 98. For elements of his allegorical scene, Xavery turned to Cesare Ripa’s Iconologia. The winged, youthful Fama is recognizable by his trumpet, symbolizing Triumph, and the spray of palm and olive branches, respectively symbolizing Victory and Good Reputation. Perhaps also to be interpreted in this same light is the hyacinth bottom left; in the words of Ripa, this flower is een beeld is van voorsichtigheyt en wijsheyt (a symbol of prudence and wisdom), which he also linked to Splendore del nome (Heerlijckheyt of glans van een goede Naeme) (Delight or splendour of a good Name).⁹⁹Cesare Ripa, Iconologia, of uytbeeldingen des verstands, Amsterdam 1644, p. 195. The cat nudging its head against the left putto’s leg represents Freedom, referring to the wilful character of this domestic animal: Hy draegt een Kat op ’t hoofd: omdat dit Dier een beeld van de Vryheyt is, niet willende in bedwangh staen, maer vry zijn (He wears a Cat on his head: because this Animal is an image of Freedom, not wishing to be restrained, but free), as Ripa describes the personification of Rebellion.¹⁰¹⁰Cesare Ripa, Iconologia, of uytbeeldingen des verstands, Amsterdam 1644, p. 393. For Concordia, he tells of how a bound sheaf of arrows symbolizes Solidarity, because one arrow easily breaks while a bundle can never be broken: ‘The resemblance to a bundle of arrows comes from Skilurus, who, in commending Solidarity to his Sons, handed each a sheaf of arrows for them to break: but when they proved unable, he unwound the sheaf and broke the arrow before their eyes. Saying, as long as solidarity prevails among you, neither hate nor violence will break you, but very light, so that you tear yourself and become discordant.’¹¹¹¹De gelijckenis van den bondel pijlen is genomen van Scilurus, die om sijne Soonen de Eendracht aan te prijsen elck een bondel pijlen in de hand gaf om die te breecken: maer als zy ‘t niet vermochten, ontwont hy den bossel en brack yder pijle voor haere oogen. Seggende, soo lange de eendracht onder u sal heerschen, sal noch haet noch gewelt u konnen verbreecken, maer seer licht, soo ghy u selve scheurt en tweedrachtigh zijt’; Cesare Ripa, Iconologia, of uytbeeldingen des verstands, Amsterdam 1644, p. 98. In summary, the relief may possibly represent an allegory on the theme of ‘freedom in unity’, a grave concept but here presented in an airy and playful form. The question therefore begs whether the scene is politically tinted, as previously argued.¹²¹²De Koomen in R. Baarsen et al., Rococo in Nederland, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 2001-02, p. 185. More tenable is that the allegory centres on the glorification of marriage, in which solidarity and unity coincide with a level of freedom. Only when in balance can good fortune be guaranteed, as visually conveyed at the heart of the scene by the putti’s intermingling hands. Exceptionally, the scale model in terracotta also survives to the present day, likewise preserved at the Rijksmuseum (BK-1983-21).

Frits Scholten, 2026

K. Sluyterman, Huisraad en binnenhuis in Nederland in vroegere eeuwen, The Hague 1918, p. 210 and fig. 317 (erroneously as dessus de porte); R.F.P. de Beaufort and H.M. van den Berg, De Betuwe: De Nederlandse Monumenten van Geschiedenis en Kunst vol. 3 (1st piece), The Hague 1968, p. 411, fig. 379; M.D. Ozinga, ‘Jan Baptist Xavery als decoratief-architectonisch ontwerper’, Miscellanea I.Q. van Regteren Altena, Amsterdam 1969, pp. 166-73, esp. fig. 15; L.J. van der Klooster, ‘Jan Baptist Xavery (1697-1742): Documentatie over enkele van zijn werken’, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 21 (1970), pp. 99-138, esp. pp. 111-12 (note 45); Jaarverslag Nederlandse Rijksmusea 1974, p. 25; ‘Keuze uit de Aanwinsten’, Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 44 (1996), pp. 130-53, esp. 135; R. Baarsen et al., Rococo in Nederland, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 2001-02, no. 98

F. Scholten, 2026, 'Jan Baptist Xavery, Overmantel Relief with Three Putti and a Cat _, The Hague, 1742', in F. Scholten and B. van der Mark (eds.), _European Sculpture in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: https://data.rijksmuseum.nl/20036363