In 1823 the young, Mechelen-born sculptor Louis Royer (1793-1868) won the Grand Prize for Sculpture instituted by the Royal Academy of Fine Arts in Amsterdam.¹¹E. Langendijk, ‘Louis Royer en de eerste Groote Prijs voor de Beeldhouwkunst in Nederland’, Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 39 (1991), pp. 120-31. The prize, a grant for a four-year stay in Rome, enabled him to study an array of classical sculptures and become familiar with the neoclassicism of Antonio Canova and Berthel Thorvaldsen. Royer was highly productive in Rome, the highlights being his portrait of pope Leo XII BK-B-45), a life-size plaster of Mercury and Bacchus (Museum Hof van Busleyden, Mechelen) and the half-length marble discussed here – Ecce Homo. It depicts Christ, manacled and beaten, as Pontius Pilate presented him to the crowd shortly before he was to hear his death sentence (John 19:5). Roman soldiers had dressed him as ‘King of the Jews’, by draping him in pseudo ‘royal’ robes, placing a crown of thorns on his head and giving him a reed as a sceptre.

Christ is portrayed in keeping with the neoclassical idiom current at the time, as a virile young man with noble features. However, in the subdued pain reflected in his face one can discern a romantic sentiment which betrays the influence of the art and theories of the Nazarenes. Royer, like Thorvaldsen, was a great admirer of that German art society.²²For Thorvaldsen and the Nazarenes, see L. Balslev Jörgensen, ‘Thorvaldsen and the Nazarenes’, Apollo 96 (1972), pp. 220-27. The idea of an introvert emotional life is further reinforced by the fact that Christ is not looking at the spectator, but has averted his somewhat despondent gaze to the lower left. In that respect, comparison with the colossal sculpture of the Resurrected Christ, on which Thorvaldsen was working between 1821 and 1833, is compelling. Royer knew the work well and during his stay in Rome even made a drawing of it.³³G. van den Hout and E. Langendijk (eds.), Louis Royer 1793-1868: Een Vlaamse beeldhouwer in Amsterdam, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Museum Amstelkring) 1994, fig. 12. So with his own Christ figure, Royer deliberately departed from this strict neoclassical example of the prominent Danish master, possibly because he did not consider this elevated visual imagery in keeping with the tragic Ecce Homo theme. Thorvaldsen greatly admired his younger colleague’s creation.⁴⁴G. van den Hout and E. Langendijk (eds.), Louis Royer 1793-1868: Een Vlaamse beeldhouwer in Amsterdam, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Museum Amstelkring) 1994, p. 15, note 27. Clearly Royer himself was also satisfied with the result, since it is one of the works among which he had Charles van Beveren paint his portrait in 1830 (SK-A-1523).

Thanks to documents and some of the sculptor’s letters that have survived much is known about how the sculpture came about. For example, we know that Royer began preparations in 1825, commissioned by an Amsterdam tobacco merchant, Mr Wolterbeek.⁵⁵Nijmegen, Catholic Documentation Centre, inv. no. 4971; E. Langendijk, ‘Louis Royer en de eerste Groote Prijs voor de Beeldhouwkunst in Nederland’, Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 39 (1991), pp. 120-31, esp. p. 125 (Here Langendijk mistakenly calls Wolterbeek ‘Wolterman’). The plaster model was finished on 6 October that year.⁶⁶Sale, collection Louis Royer (1793-1868), Amsterdam (Roos), 17 November 1868, no. 19. A preserved receipt shows that, for the rendering of the work in marble, he was assisted by a stonemason called Carlo Monti, who, on 20 December 1825, received 35 scudi for his help.⁷⁷Nijmegen, Catholic Documentation Centre, inv. no. 5318. On the same receipt, a payment of 43 scudi is noted for the conversion of a portrait in marble, which can be identified as the herm bust of the Ghent architect Velleman in Galerie d’Arenberg, Brussels. On 13 September 1826 Royer had the figure, which was finished by then, plus several other works, shipped to the Netherlands. The work was probably signed and dated on the pedestal, which has meanwhile been lost: L. Royer Ft. Roma 1826.⁸⁸Note RMA and P.K. van Daalen, Nederlandse beeldhouwers in de negentiende eeuw, The Hague 1957, p. 104. Wolterbeek had meanwhile moved to Germany and backed out of the purchase of the Ecce Homo.⁹⁹E. Langendijk, unpublished manuscript, 2001, p. 34, in Artist File Louis Royer, RMA, refers to: Nijmegen, Catholic Documentation Centre, inv. no. 5308. Therefore, the sculptor asked his business representative and maecenas A.B. Roothaan (1783-1847) to find a new client who was prepared to pay at least 1,400 guilders for the work. However, Roothaan opted not to send the figure to the annual exhibition in Amsterdam, as he considered it too heavy for transport, and left it in storage although there was in fact a potential buyer: a certain De Vos, who was willing to pay no less than 2,000 guilders for it.¹⁰¹⁰E. Langendijk, ‘Louis Royer en de eerste Groote Prijs voor de Beeldhouwkunst in Nederland’, Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 39 (1991), pp. 120-31, esp. p. 126. In the end, Royer’s Ecce Homo was displayed for the first time in August 1828, at the Antwerp Salon.¹¹¹¹Lyst der werken van schilder-, beeldhouw-, bouw-, graveer-, en teekenkunst, uytgevoerd door nog leevende meesters/Notice des ouvrages de peinture, sculpture, architecture, gravure et dessin exécutés par des artistes vivans, exh. cat. Antwerp 1828, no. 217. Later that year it was submitted to the exhibition of living masters in Amsterdam, the catalogue of which contained the following positive review: ‘This piece is a felicitous representation; it is only a shame that the hands and chest appear somewhat clumsy; the hands, in particular should have retained more of the nobility that is so skilfully portrayed in the head.’¹²¹²Beoordeelend overzigt der voornaamste, op de Amsterdamsche tentoonstelling van 1828, toegelaten kunstwerken, van nog in leven zijnde Nederlandsche meesters, Amsterdam 1828, p. 63, no. 6: Dit stuk is treffend voorgesteld; jammer slechts, dat handen en borst iets zwaars hebben; vooral in de handen moest het edele, dat in den kop meesterlijk is uitgedrukt, meer bewaard zijn gebleven. Ultimately, the sculpture was obtained at that exhibition by the State for the sum of 2,500 guilders.¹³¹³The Hague, Rijksarchief Zuid-Holland, Mauritshuis, inv. 13, no. 374: written communication Pierre van Gobbelschroy (Ministry of Internal Affairs) and Johan Steengracht van Oostkappele (director Museum van Levende Nederlandsche Meesters), 25 November 1828. With thanks to Jenny Reynaerts for this reference. It was placed in Paviljoen Welgelegen (Haarlem), where works of living masters were displayed, until the new Rijksmuseum building was opened in Amsterdam in 1885.

A former pupil of the sculptor, Jozef Tuerlinckx, wrote in a letter to Royer on 1 May 1848 that the (plaster?) model of the Ecce Homo ‘is still revered in the church of San Giuliano dei Fiamminghi in Rome’.¹⁴¹⁴A. Jacobs, Welgevormd: Mechelse beeldhouwers in Europa (1780-1850), exh. cat. Mechelen (Lamot/Museum Schepenhuis) 2006, p. 125; Nijmegen, Catholic Documentation Centre, inv. no. 5381: votre modèle de l’Ecce Homo est toujours tenu en honneur en l’église de St. Julien des Flamands où l’on a enterré Vesale. Inquiries as to its present whereabouts revealed that it no longer stands there, nor does the church know of any further pertinent information.¹⁵¹⁵Written information Hugo Vanermen, rector Chiesa e Fondazione Reale Belga San Giuliano dei Fiamminghi, 3 January 2012. The plaster Ecce Homo mentioned in the sale catalogue of Royer’s estate is, according to the description, a cast of the marble that was in the national gallery (housed in Paviljoen Welgelegen, Haarlem) in the day.¹⁶¹⁶Sale, collection Louis Royer (1793-1868), Amsterdam (Roos), 17-19 November 1868, no. 19, fl. 4, to S. Heukensfeld : Ce buste est moulé sur la statue mi-corps exécutée en marbre, qui se trouve dans la galerie nationale à Harlem. This is impossible however, since the height given here (66 cm) is too far removed from the marble (88 cm). On the other hand, it could be a preparatory scale model, possibly identical to the model mentioned by Tuerlinckx. In that case, Royer would have had this piece shipped to the Netherlands sometime between 1848 and his death.

Bieke van der Mark, 2026