Featured Period and construction thoughts on this curved chest?

This is a curved (bombé) chest of drawers with veneered exterior and an oval inlaid medallion set into the top. The carcass, drawer sides and bottoms, and the back are solid softwood (pine), with veneer limited to the visible surfaces. Dimensions are approximately 72 cm wide, 73 cm high, and 37 cm deep.

From a construction standpoint, the back is made from wide, horizontally laid, hand-sawn boards with irregular thickness, and the drawer bottoms are set into grooves rather than nailed on. I don’t see plywood, obvious machine planing, or modern fasteners. Locks and wear patterns appear broadly period-consistent.

Stylistically it reads as transitional rather than Empire or Biedermeier to me, perhaps late Louis XV moving toward early Louis XVI, continental in character, but I’m very open to other interpretations.

One point I’d be interested in hearing opinions on is the contrast between the rear feet and the back boards. The feet are darker and more oxidised, while the back appears lighter. I’m aware this can often be explained by different exposure and use over time, but I’d value thoughts on whether the back panel construction itself looks right for the period, or if there’s anything that would raise questions about later replacement.

 

Are there dust boards? First clue it could be English. Love the swan inlaid medallion.

 

I’ll check for dust boards when I have access to the piece and can pull the drawers, and will take some photos then!

 

Interesting! Are there particular construction cues that made your friend move away from Edwardian toward Regency?

 

Strictly Empire to me. And Scandinavian.
I saw the original listing, you did well. It is a nice piece, of the period.

 

I can see why Scandinavian Empire is a very reasonable reading, especially given the restraint, material choices, and overall neoclassical discipline. Where I’ve hesitated to read it as strictly Empire is the softer bow-front curvature, the reliance on inlay rather than applied bronze, and the overall lightness of the piece, which to me feels a bit removed from fully developed Empire — even in a Scandinavian context.

At the same time, I don’t think it’s classically Gustavian either, as the volume and curvature feel later than that. For me it sits most comfortably as Scandinavian late neoclassical, transitional between Gustavian and early Empire, rather than cleanly in one category. Very interested to hear what specific cues make it read as firmly Empire to you.

 

That is also seen on some Empire chests, and it is not as curvy as bombé chests.

A lot of Empire pieces have marquetry, and not all have bronze appliqués.

That is certainly possible. Late Gustavian is the same period as Empire, only specific to Scandinavia.

 

Can't help with any insights, just wanted to say it's a beauty

 

I have no problem in ascribing an early 19th century date to this.

 

Great points — and thanks for explaining. I’m still learning, so this kind of discussion is really helpful.

I don’t have strong technical arguments beyond general proportions and overall feel, and I agree that late Gustavian and early Empire overlap a lot.

 

Appreciate the input. I’m steadily working on sharpening my ability to distinguish period pieces from later reproductions.