A pair of sand pictures after Philip de Loutherbourg, likely by Benjamin Zobel

Benjamin Zobel was born in Bavaria in 1762. From a family of pastry chefs, he rose through the ranks to master pastry-chef by the age of 20 and subsequently into the royal kitchen of George III in London. There, he became a “table decker”, combining culinary acuity with artistic skill to create highly complex works of art make out of grains of sugar. These would decorate the enormous tarts that would be served at Windsor Castle. His skills with powdered confectionery were then translated into a creating artworks out of dyed sand. The method for laying both sand and sugar was the same; the medium was shaken through a playing card, cut and pleated to the required dimensions and Zobel concocted a special adhesive, rendering his formerly ephemeral compositions much more permanent. 

While Zobel made many “sand paintings”, often copied from the works of his friend George Morland, these two works are copies of paintings by Phillip James de Loutherbourg (1740-1812). De Loutherbourg’s artistic career encompassed different media, but his paintings are generally known for his naval battle scenes, as well as his pastoral and industrial landscapes. De Loutherbourg was also renowned for his set designs for theatres around London. These two battle scenes copied these in sand paintings embody this talent for theatrical composition.¹ One – The Battle between Richard Coeur de Lion and Saladin at the Battle of Acre – is now in the Leicester Museum and Galleries collection. The other original work – William the Conqueror at the Battle of Hastings – is less traceable, but a line engraving by William Bromley of the work (Museum Number: 1858,1009.115) was published in Robert Bowyer’s edition of Hume’s History of England in 1804. In both, the central figure – William the Conqueror and Richard the Lionheart respectively – is shown in profile, on horseback and with sword aloft. Fighting surrounds the central figures on all sides. These works encapsulate the relentless pace and brutality of warfare in the most delicate of media.

¹ For more on de Loutherbourg’s career see: Ann Bermingham, “Technologies of Illusion: De Loutherbourg’s Eidophusikon in Eighteenth Century London,” Art History, 39:2 (April 2016): 376-399.