This imposing, altar-shaped cabinet surmounted by a clock, has many features that are characteristic of Augsburg work of the 1670s, and is a very rare datable example from this decade being dated 1679 on a small gold-framed panel prominently set atop its upper section. With its many secrets and surprises - expressive of a complex and layered iconography - it is reminiscent of the great Augsburg Kunstschränke of the first half of the century, in particular those devised by the famous Philipp Hainhofer (1578-1647).

AUGSBURG CABINET-MAKING OF THE 1670S
The tall, stepped, tabernacle-like case is intended to be viewed front on, and has no doors to conceal its riches from a casual glance. In this, it is typical of Augsburg production of the second half of the seventeenth century; previously, almost all cabinets made there had been provided with large doors, implying that they could only be enjoyed, and their meaning grasped, by those who took the time to open them up and penetrate into the secret contents of their interior. After the devastation of the Thirty Years War which ended in 1648, many rulers in the German-speaking countries of Central Europe needed new, powerful symbols that immediately proclaimed their wealth and cultural standing. In response to this, a novel type of richly decorated cabinet without doors was developed. The variously coloured marble columns of the present example, with their giltwood capitals, are typical features of this trend; closely comparable ones occur on a large cabinet-on-stand dating from the late 1660s in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna (Dieter Alfter, Die Geschichte des Augsburger Kabinettschranks, Augsburg 1986, fig. 110). Such columns had been introduced in the previous decade, on a series of sumptuous, pietre dure-mounted, ivory- or ebony-veneered cabinets; an example sold in these rooms, 14 December 2000, Lot 30, is now in the Liechtenstein Museum in Vienna. On the present piece, they frame and articulate recessed perspectives with red-and-white tiled floors of tortoiseshell, mother-of-pearl and ivory. Just like the use of tortoiseshell which in Augsburg was only regulated in 1665, these perspectives reflect the growing influence from Antwerp, the other major centre for the production of cabinets in mid-seventeenth century Europe (see Reinier Baarsen, 17th-century Cabinets, Rijksmuseum Amsterdam 2000, pp. 23-35). Equally characteristic of Augsburg work of this period is the carved and gilded decoration of fanciful scrolls in Knorpelstil (Alfter, op. cit., figs. 102-104).

A COSMIC PROGRAMME
The new type of open cabinet developed in the 1670s often stood on a stand that was designed en suite. It was meant to be placed against the wall in a fixed position in a room, as a conspicuous element of its decoration. Exceptionally, however, the present cabinet may be turned in order to inspect the decoration of its back; clearly, it would have to stand in the centre of a room. Its sides are very shallow, and at the rear, the less elaborate decoration is openly visible. This cabinet may have been intended to stand on a side-table, just far enough from the wall to be turned. Thus, it occupies a unique position between the earlier Kunstschränke which were meant to be admired from all sides, and the later group of frontally designed cabinets.
The cabinet shares with the earlier Kunstschränke the sense of a complex, multi-layered meaning. Unusually for an Augsburg cabinet, painted panels dominate the decoration; this again reflects the inspiration from Antwerp. There, however, the paintings, often evoking the famous masterpieces of Rubens and his school, usually tell a fairly straightforward story, either mythological or biblical in character - here, their meaning is less obvious. On the front, they are devoted to Western civilization. On the top one, a painter is recording the ruins of the ancient world, whereas below, an elegantly dressed gentleman holding a basket of fruit and flowers in front of classically designed buildings with a woman milking in a courtyard, seems to celebrate the blessings of a well-regulated life. Below niches which may have contained small sculptures, classical masks are depicted; above them small elements were originally attached, possibly classical cameos, which are now missing. The vanitas-thought implicit in the large upper scene is made explicit when the panel is turned and death appears in the guise of a skeleton holding an hourglass and a scythe. And who is the bearded, pensive man depicted in the central figure in the base, amidst two panoramic views of prosperous cities? Probably representing a philosopher, he is the only figure to remain in place when the cabinet is turned and the exotic world of China appears in four well-painted, atmospheric views of pagodas and walled cities. These extraordinarily early and life-like depictions are undoubtedly based, albeit loosely, on the illustrated descriptions of China that had recently been published, such as Joan Nieuhof's Het Gezandtschap der Neerlandsche OostIndische Compagnie... of 1665 and Athansius Kircher's China Illustrat of 1667. This exceptional evocation of a mysterious, faraway country is flanked by busts on pedestals with pseudo-Chinese inscriptions, presumably depicting Chinese philosophers or rulers. The four large views adorn doors which on their inside also have painted scenes. These show figures amidst landscapes and probably symbolize the four parts of the world, i.e. the known world in its entirety.
Thus, the decoration of the cabinet seems to juxtapose ancient Europe with China, the mysterious country about which much more information had recently become available, within the context of the entire world. The concept of vanitas is again present in the mirror and the necessaire fitting kept behind the doors at the back. The sides of the cabinets have sliding panels that reveal secret drawers. The contents of these may have had further bearing on the iconography of the entire piece, and multiplied and intensified its meaning.
The far-reaching iconography of the cabinet, which is clearly intended to encompass the entire world, as well as the changing seasons, is reminiscent of those elaborated by the humanist and agent, Philipp Hainhofer in the early part of the century, and realized in some of the best-known and most elaborate cabinets ever made in Augsburg. A famous example is the so-called Stipo Tedesco which he sold in 1628 to Archduke Leopold of Tirol, who subsequently presented it to Granduke Ferdinand II of Tuscany; it is now kept in the Palazzo Pitti in Florence. Of ebony inlaid with hardstones, this can also be turned and it is equally surmounted by a clock (Alfter, op. cit., pp. 50-53, figs. 37-38). Though much more complex than the present piece, it may be seen as one of its immediate precursors.

THE CLOCK BY ELIAS WECKHERLIN
Both on the Stipo Tedesco and on the present cabinet, the clock underlines the momento mori-aspect of its decoration. When the present piece is turned around, the door of the clock may be opened and its beautifully engraved movement inspected, something that would have appealed greatly to an age obsessed with mechansims as well as virtuoso workmanship. It is signed by the well-known Elias Weckherlin who is recorded as being married in 1646 and who died in 1689. He must have collaborated with some of the most prominent Kunsttischler of Augsburg, as his movements adorn some of the outstanding productions. Examples are a jewelled table-clock featuring a camel in the Grünes Gewölbe in Dresden, and a night clock in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna, whose case is reminiscent of the present cabinet (Klaus Maurice, Die deutsche Räderuhr, Munich 1976, figs. 603 and 672). Inscribing the dial of the clock with the locations for world time, Weckherlin was obviously instructed to adapt his work to the far-reaching ideas underlying this ambitious creation.
Almost all cabinets and other costly works of art produced in Augsburg in the seventeenth century, however precious, were produced for the open market; all European rulers and their agents turned to the powerful dealers in this city when wishing to purchase splendid works for their treasuries. The present piece however, with its proudly inscribed date and revolutionary iconography, must have been made to the specifications of a particular patron. Sadly, his identity is unknown; he was clearly a remarkable figure in the world of early chinoiserie.
The movement may be compared to a 30-hour timepiece table clock by the same maker (see John A. Robey 'One-day single-handed Augsburg spring timepiece, c. 1680', Antiquarian Horology, volume XXXIV, no. 1, March 2013, pp. 95-99) which exhibits similar characteristics to the motionwork and particularly a signature to the backplate and engraved numbers to the dial probably by the same hand as the present clock.

THE EARLS OF MACCLESFIELD AT SHIRBURN CASTLE
The romantically-embattled medieval Shirburn Castle in Oxfordshire was bought by Thomas Parker (1667-1732), 1st Earl of Macclesfield in 1716 following his ennoblement by George I. As a leading lawyer, he had risen to be Lord Chancellor, and may have been drawn to the ancient castle, between Oxford and London, by a desire to enrich his medieval ancestry. The earliest part of the castle is of circa 1377 and it required much modernisation - the 1st Earl rebuilt more than three-quarters of the castle in Georgian brick. Unfortunately for him, his enemies accused him of embezzlement and in 1725 he retired from Court and spent his remaining years at Shirburn.
Whilst the 1st Earl was very much a political animal, his son George, 2nd Earl (1697-1764), was an amateur of the sciences and arts, a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries from 1752 and President of the Royal Society between 1752 and 1764. He further aggrandised the Castle's collections and embarked on his Grand Tour in 1719 in search of paintings and sculpture. Amongst his embellishment of the estate was a Classical Ionic temple built to the designs of the architect Westby Gill (d. 1746). The account of his tour, noted by E. Wright in Some Observations made in travelling through France, Italy etc. in the years 1720, 1721 and 1722, London, 1730, records his visits to the studios of Giuseppe Chiari and Sebastiano Conca.
The latter is likely to have executed the portrait which depicts the 2nd Earl in Rome (T. P. Connor, 'Edward Wright and Lord Parker in Italy, 1720-22', Apollo, July 1998, pp. 23-30). The 2nd Earl's antiquarian tastes mark the beginning of the family's interest in this area. While the 2nd Earl was probably responsible for the formation of the majority of the collection, it is unclear who the present lot. However, it is clear, that the taste for the unusual and the esoteric prevailed. The 2nd Earl's great grandson, Thomas (1811-1896), became the 6th Earl in 1850. He was Tory MP for Oxfordshire (1837-1841) and in 1842 married Mary Frances Grosvenor (d. 1912), daughter of the 2nd Marquess of Westminster, and it may well be he acquired the present clock in keeping with the revival of 'Antiquarian' taste at Shirburn.