Karel Škréta (1610–1674): Studies and Documents

KAREL KRTA 16101674 STUDIES AND DOCUMENTSLENKA STOLROV VT VLNAS (edd.)

NATIONAL GALLERY IN PRAGUE, 2011 ISBN 978-80-7035-470-4

CONTENTSThe Second Apelles on the Emperors Parnassus of Muses Karel krtas Place in 17th-Century Central European Painting 17 Andrzej Kozie Baroque in Bohemia versus Bohemian Baroque, or Karel krta and Early Baroque Painting in the View of Art History33 tpn Vcha Vt Vlnas Karel krta in Prague or the Story of Two Beginnings53 Lenka Stolrov Radka Tibitanzlov Vt Vlnas To the continually increasing fame of our industrious artist. Karel krta between Switzerland, the Empire, and Italy, in the Light of Newly Discovered Sources73 Petr Pibyl Lenka Stolrov krta and Rome81 Johana Bronkov Facing the Public: krtas historiae sacrae from the Perspective of the Art Theory and Painting Practice of His Time101 tpn Vcha Karel krta pictor doctus129 Sylva Dobalov Lubomr Konen The Role and Perception of Drawing in the Era of Karel krta and His Contemporaries151 Alena Volrbov The X-Ray Investigation of the Paintings of Karel krta. The Painters Handwriting in the Light of the Invisible Rays157 Tom Berger Karel krta the Younger a Case of Two Paintings197 Andrea Rousov Sculpture at the Time of Karel krta207 Tom Hladk Stylistic Prole of Prague Early Baroque Architecture223 Mojmr Horyna Archival Documents on the Life and Ouevre of Karel krta265 Tom Sekyrka Radka Tibitanzlov et al. Reports on Karel krta in European Literature of 17th and 18th Centuries375 Johana Bronkov The Historical Writings of Vilm Slavata of Chlum and Koumberk A Little Employed Source on Bohemian History of the First Half of the 17th Century385 Alena Richterov Selected Bibliography399

IN MEMORIAM MOJMR HORYNA (19452011)

The book Karel krta (16101674): Studies and Documents features not only essays dedicated to the artists work, but also historical sources documenting his personality, work and times. Designed and conceived as a set of texts expanding on and complementing the contents of the research catalogue for the exhibition Karel krta (16101674): His Work and His Era published by the National Gallery in Prague in 2010, the individual essays elaborate new ndings made in the course of the vast interdisciplinary project Karel krta (16101674): His Work and His Era and the preparation of the eponymous exhibition. The authors of individual essays concentrated on themes that were so broad they could only be outlined in the catalogue or were not included at all. We must also note that from the start, the story of the krta research was also the story of how to grapple with the work of art historian Jaromr Neumann. Dedicated to krta and serving as the primary catalogue for the 1974 monographic exhibition in Prague, this work dominated for several decades, signicantly inuencing other authors. Recent research clearly shows that the topic of Karel krta can no longer rest upon the shoulders of a single author. A team of experts focusing on art historical, archival and general historical research has created a new body of work that includes the technical and technological research and restoration of dozens of works by krta and his contemporaries. It has yielded some major and often surprising information on the unparalleled character of 17th-century paintings and the personalities of those who commissioned them. Just as krta research is no longer the work of a single author, so too is it no longer about a single artist. Despite the importance of the artist and his unique artistic approach, we can no longer assess and interpret krta as a lone genius who arrived in a desert, gradually lling a cultural vacuum of alleged historical timelessness with his work. The recent research has shown it impossible to answer many questions about this Bohemian Apelles without also examining the many names that lled krtas horizon not only his artistic contemporaries, but also his family, patrons, those who commissioned and collected his art and the colourful social spectrum which the painter navigated with admirable determination and, perhaps, a well-formulated career strategy. Not coincidentally, editions of archival sources form a major part of this book. To date, archival sources have represented the principal desideratum of krta research all 20th-century art history work was based on 19th-century research. The current research most helpfully explored krtas family background and personal connections. Of key importance in this respect is the testimony provided by newly found fragments of krta family correspondence in foreign archives, which, among other things, enabled a reconstruction of the itinerary of krtas travels in Italy, apprentice years and wayfaring journeying abroad, all the more important as krtas pre1638 biography included many lacunae that called for hypothesis. The testimony of newly consulted sources of local provenance, such as meeting agendas of the Painters Brotherhood or (more importantly) official records referring to krtas property disputes, nancial transactions and commissions was also key. It is the editors sad duty on behalf of the team of authors to dedicate this book to the memory of pre-eminent art historian, colleague and unforgettable friend Prof. PhDr. Mojmr Horyna. He was one of the most active members of the krta research team; his knowledge and experience proved invaluable. He duly submitted his study on the architecture of krtas time on deadline and approached its rst proofreading with the same responsibility. None of us would have guessed he would not live to see his text published. His death in late January 2011, which aggrieved all of us so deeply, cut short a scientic career that had not yet reached its zenith. We present this work as a tribute to him. Lenka Stolrov Vt Vlnas

Studies

The Second Apelles on the Emperors Parnassus of MusesKarel krtas Place in 17th-Century Central European PaintingANDRZEJ KOZIE

1 Jaromr Neumann, krtov. Karel krta ajeho syn, Praha 2000, p.6. Both this and alater work by the same author (idem, Karel krta 16101674, Praha 1974, pp.713) offer an overview of more recent opinions on krtas role in the history of both Baroque painting and 19th-century painting in Bohemia. 2 See for example: Willy Drost, Barockmalerei in den germanischen Lndern, WildparkPotsdam 1926 (Handbuch der Kunstwissenschaft), p.280; Bruno Bushart, Deutsche Malerei des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts, Knigstein im Taunus 1967, pp.1617; Wolfgang J.Mller, Deutsche Malerei, in: Erich Hubala (ed.), Die Kunst des 17. Jahrhunderts, Berlin 1970 (Propylen Kunstgeschichte, vol. 9), pp.197, 201202. 3 See for example: Eberhard Hempel, Baroque art and Architecture in Central Europe. Germany/Austria/Switzerland/Hungary/Czechoslovakia/ Poland, London 1965, pp.8586; Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, Court, Cloister&City. The Art and Culture of Central Europe 14501800, London 1995, pp.245, 276278. 4 Wolfgang Prohaska, Gemlde, in: Hellmut Lorenz (ed.), Geschichte der bildenden Knste in sterreich, vol. 4, Barock, MnchenLondonNew York 1999, pp.383, 399.

There is no doubt as to the special place Karel krta the Elder has in the history of Baroque painting in Bohemia. The author of numerous religious and mythological paintings as well as remarkable portraits, celebrated in Joachim von Sandrarts Teutsche Academie with a biography and a graphic portrait [g. 1], krta is recognised as the rst purely Baroque Bohemian painter and the most important personality on the early Baroque art scene in Bohemia generally. In the words of the artists most recent monographer, Jaromr Neumann: krta is the most signicant artistic personality to emerge in 17th-century Bohemia. [] He is the founder of the Bohemian Baroque and the early modern painting tradition, incorporating the best that the 17th century produced. However, krtas unique place in the history of Baroque painting in Bohemia becomes somewhat less remarkable when we examine the work of the Prague master in the context of 17th-century Central European painting. Thus far, this issue has unfortunately received only occasional and supercial treatment. Although krtas work is generally mentioned in works analysing the history of painting in German-speaking countries, and less commonly also in overviews of early modern art in Central Europe or in treatises on Baroque art in Austria, these treatments have been limited to a condensed

1. Philipp Kilian after Joachim von Sandrarts drawing Portrait of Karel krta, in: Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der Bau, Bild und Mahlerey-Knste, Bd. 1, Nrnberg 1675 (reproduced after: Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der Bau, Bild und Mahlerey-Knste. Nrnberg 16751680. In ursprnglicher Form neu gedruckt mit einer Einleitung von Christian Klemm, Nrdlingen 1994, Bd. 1, g. on pp. 356/357)

STUDIES 17

presentation of the most important facts about the artists life and the most important features of his work. A more thorough comparison of krtas work with that of his contemporaries clearly demonstrates that the character of his painting as well as his fortunes in life show common features with the lives and works of a number of other painters active during the 17th century in the individual Central European countries. krta was actually one of many artists born in the years 16001630 who spent the worst years of the Thirty Years War studying abroad and who began their professional careers only after military hostilities in Central Europe had subsided and often in a completely new political, religious or cultural environment. I These artists gained their rst experience with the craft of painting in the traditional Central European artistic centres, often in the workshops of local masters. We know almost nothing about some of them as in the case of the teachers of Tobias Pock (16091683) from Konstanz [g. 2] or even those of krta himself. Michael Willmann (16301706) from Knigsberg and Johann Christoph Storer (16201671) from Konstanz learned the basics of painting in the guild workshops of their fathers, and Johann Heinrich Schnfeld (16091682/1683), born in Biberach, found his way to the workshop of Johann Sichelbein in the provincial town of Memmingen. Only a handful of young painters were more fortunate: for example, Johann von Spillenberger (16281679) went from his native Koice to the reputable workshop of Johann Ulrich Loth in Munich, and Joachim von Sandrart (16061688), a native of Frankfurt am Main who attracted by the established reputation of the artistic centre associated with Rudolf IIs Imperial Court set out to gain his rst artistic experience in the renowned workshop of Aegidius Sadeler in Prague.18 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

5 It can only be assumed that krtas rst teacher of painting was Johann Georg Hering, active in Prague from 1615. It seems that the work of this artist resonates in some of krtas late works, as Neumann suggests. See J. Neumann, krtov (see note 1), p.14. 6 Hubertus Lossow, Michael Willmann (16301706 Meister der Barockmalerei, Wrzburg 1994, p.13; Sibylle Appuhn-Radtke, Visuelle Medien im Dienst der Gesellschaft Jesu. Johann Christoph Storer (16201671) als Maler der Katholischen Reform, Regensburg 2000, pp.3941. 7 Annamria Gosztola, Schnfelds erste Jahre in Deutschland, in: Ursula ZellerMaren WaikeHans-Martin Kaulbach (edd.), Johann Heinrich Schnfeld: Welt der Gtter, Heiligen und Heldenmythen, Kln 2009, pp.2429. 8 Ruth Baljhr, Johann von Spillenberger, 16281677: ein Maler des Barock, Weienhorn 2003. 9 Christian Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart: Kunstwerke und Lebenslauf, Berlin 1986.

2. Tobias Pock, Self-P ortrait with Family, 16691670, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

10 Carel van Mander, Den grondt der edel vry schilderkonst, Uitgegeven en van vertaling en commentaar voorzien door Hessel Miedema, Utrecht 1973, 1., p.75. 11 Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der Bau, Bild und Mahlerey-Knste. Nrnberg 16751680. In ursprnglicher Form neu gedruckt mit einer Einleitung von Christian Klemm, Nrdlingen 1994, vol. 1, p.327. The full original text of Karel krtas biography as published by Sandrart is on p.11. 12 Lebenslauf und Kunst-Wercke Des WolEdlen und Gestrengen Herrn Joachim von Sandrart auf Sockau Hochfrstl. Pfalz-Neuburgischen Rahts: zu schuldigster Beehrung und Dankbarkeit beschreiben und (bergeben von Desselben Dienst-ergebenen Vettern und Discipeln, p.8, in: J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11). 13 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.327. On the questions related to Schnfelds Italian education see: Brigitte Dapr, Von dannen reiste er nach Italien (Sandrart): Johann Heinrich Schnfelds italienische Jahre, in: V.Zeller M.Waike H.Kaulbach (edd.), Johann Heinrich Schnfeld (see note 7), pp.3043. 14 W. Prohaska, Gemlde (see note 4), pp.402403; Silvia Carola Dobler, Die Freskierung der Chorkapellen im Zisterzienserstift Stams durch Egid Schor als Ausdruck knstlerischer Vielseitigkeit, in: Christina Strunck (ed.), Johann Paul Schor und die internationale Sprache des Barock: un regista del gran teatro del barocco, Mnchen 2008, pp.155170. 15 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.329. 16 Ibid., p.338. 17 S. Appuhn-Radtke, Visuelle Medien (see note 6), pp.5082. 18 Lichtenstein visited Rubenss workshop in 1636 and mentioned it proudly in his itinerary. See Romuald Kaczmarek, lski malarz odwiedza Rubensa. Itinerarium Johanna Lichtensteina, malarza zKtw, in: Andrzej KozieBeata Lejman (edd.), Willmann iinni. Malarstwo, rysunek igraki na lsku iw krajach ociennych wXVII iXVIII wieku, Wrocaw 2002, pp.136139. 19 Boena Steinborn, Malarz Daniel Schultz. Gdaszczanin w subie krlw polskich, Warszawa 2004, pp.1011.

The path to further artistic education outside Central Europe, ravaged by the Thirty Years War, was of key signicance for the later professional careers of this generation of painters. For young painters, the recommended or even essential destination for advanced studies was naturally Italy. Karel van Mander formulated a general approach to obtaining a comprehensive education as a painter by drawing on the artistic achievements of the best Italian schools of painting. His advice was as follows: From Rome bring some skill in drawing [], and the ability to paint from Venice. Unfortunately, only a handful of central European painters managed to put this golden rule into practice. krta was among the chosen few as well, however. It is a well-known fact that he spent six years in Italy (16301635) rst several years in Venice and later in Bologna and Florence where he signicantly elevated his art in the local schools, and nally from 1634 in Rome where he, thanks to his diligence and industriousness, perfected his art to such a degree that he nally deemed his knowledge and abilities sufficient to return to his native Prague. Sandrarts Italian tour of study had a similar itinerary. By studying the works of the local Venetian masters, he acquired a laudable practice, especially in his inventiveness and use of colours, but he relocated from Venice to Rome to make further progress in the art of drawing. Schnfeld embarked on a journey to Italy at the age of 24 and spent 18 years there (16331651). He stayed in Rome and Naples where, by producing drawings after ancient Roman as well as modern statues and paintings, he perfected his abilities to such a degree that these copies seem as though they had sprung from his own invention. Egidius Schor (16271701) spent ten years in Rome (16561666) and even collaborated with the workshops of Gianlorenzo Bernini and Pietro da Cortona, participating in the artistic projects of these workshops. In this respect, he followed in the footsteps of his elder brother Johann Paul (16151674) who had established himself in Rome. Johann Ulrich Mayr (16301704) from Augsburg undertook an even longer journey in Italy following his previous education in the workshop of Rembrandt van Rijn in Amsterdam and a stay in England. As Sandrart noted, he expected to achieve denitive perfection in his profession during his stay. While in Italy, the painter from Augsburg imbibed the strength of the beautiful blossoms growing in the local gardens of art, which, in the house of his reason and with the help of his unsurpassed diligence, he converted into the sweetest honey that could strengthen all the lovers of art in Germany. A number of contemporary artists from Central Europe only reached the northern parts of Italy on their study trips. Venice naturally enjoyed the greatest popularity and transalpine artists settled there for longer periods of time. Among these were Johann Liss (15971630) and Johann Carl Loth (16321698), whose workshop later became a stopover for other German-speaking artists of the younger generation including Hans Adam Weissenkircher (16461695), Daniel Seiter (16471705) and Johann Michael Rottmayr (16561730). Spillenberger stayed in Venice for a relatively short period of time (c. 16601661), but as Sandrart writes he nonetheless managed to acquaint himself with a good, fast painting technique of which he later made use after returning to his home country in numerous works. The artists also visited other northern towns, undoubtedly of lesser artistic quality, such as Milan, where Storer appeared around years end 1639/1640. Not only did he complete his artistic education in Milan, he also opened his own painting workshop there, which operated until 1655 when Storer returned to his native Konstanz. The overwhelming majority of Central European painters, however, could only dream of the blossoms of the Italian gardens of art. This concerned in particular artists from the traditional guild centres as well as those from centres on the Baltic Sea; for them, an obligatory destination on their study trips was the Low Countries. As the itinerary of Silesian painter Johann Lichtenstein (1610 after 1672) shows, for many Central European painters merely visiting the workshop of one of the great Netherlandish masters was in itself a considerable success. Nonetheless, many of them also set out for these artistic centres to study. The court painter of the Polish kings, Daniel Schultz (16151683), born in Danzig, is even mentioned among the students of Leyden University in 1643. Willmann also set out for Holland, arriving in Amsterdam around 1650, where he continued his education as an autodidact in the circle of the workshops of Rembrandt and Jacob Backer. For this painter from Knigsberg, it was above all Italian art that embodied his artistic ideal. Information obtained by Sandrart that in Amsterdam the young painter was forced to makeSTUDIES 19

his living and for this reason could not travel to Italy attests to the artists resignation. Willmann was conscious of his insufficient artistic education for the rest of his life, and perhaps the best testimony of this fact is his letter of 22 May 1702 to Heinrich Snopek, abbot of the Cistercian monastery in Sedlec. In it, Willmann recommends his stepson Johann Christoph Lika (c. 16501712) to the abbot and praises the skills he acquired thanks to six years spent studying in Italy (c. 16711677) where as the teacher admits with regret his student saw and learned more than he himself had learned in Holland during his time there. II In general, these artists return to Central Europe and the beginnings of their own professional careers were closely linked to the end of the Thirty Years War, or rather to the temporary cessation of military hostilities. The rst artists made their way back to Central Europe already after the Peace of Prague (1635), as was the case for krta in Prague (1638) and Pock in Vienna (1640). The others came only after the Peace of Westphalia (1648) or even later when the political and economic situation in the region was stabilising. Although in the Teutsche Academie Sandrart created a myth of an overall decline in the art of painting in the Germanic countries engulfed in the Thirty Years War, and portrayed krta alone as an exemplary restorer who managed to elevate the local art of painting from this decline and wipe away the lth of its past after his return to Prague thanks to his excellent works of art, returning Bohemian painting to its former place and made it ourish, in reality none of the painters whose professional careers were developing at the time in Central Europe had to start from scratch. Until the 1650s krta remained in the shadow of another Prague painter, Antonn Stevens of Steinfels (c. 1610 c. 1675), who had created a number of altar paintings for churches in Prague already in the early 1640s, and it was most likely Stevens who was considered rst among Prague painters at the time. Even in a region as devastated by the war as Silesia, there existed a centre of guild artists in Wrocaw which was extremely expansive and watched its monopoly so closely that, for example, Ezechiel Paritius (Skora) (16221671), a portrait artist from Litomyl educated in Italy, had to try his luck elsewhere, nally succeeding in Brzeg as a court painter of the princes of Legnica-Brzeg (1654). Willmann was later forced to establish himself at the Cistercian monastery in the provincial town of Lubi (1660). There is no doubt that young painters educated in Italy or the Low Countries proliferated a style of painting in new, early Baroque forms in Central Europe. Whether these forms were inspired by a Dutch, Flemish or Italian source depended not only on where individual artists had been educated, but also on the preferences of their patrons. In Central Europe, however, the artistic level of the Dutch and Italian masters was achieved in an eclectic manner, whereby the heritage of these masters was treated as a store of readily applicable solutions. This was the result of a general awareness at the time of the high achievements of the new early modern art as well as of its pluralistic character with respect to the norms applied. Most artists resorted to models of Dutch origin which were most commonly spread through graphic printing. The best example of this approach is Franciszek Lekszycki (c. 16001668), a Franciscan monk and painter active in Cracow whose religious works are more or less truly rendered copper engravings, most commonly executed after the paintings of Peter Paul Rubens and his students. Willmann may also be named in this context, as his early works reference predominantly Flemish graphic prints from the circle of Rubens, Anthony van Dyck and the Rembrandt-like rough painting manner. On the other hand, krta along with artists such as Schnfeld [g. 3], Pock, Schor and Spillenberger belonged to a decidedly less numerous group of Central European artists who based their art primarily on Italian composition models and on a much more rened smooth style of painting. Already Sandrart wrote with exaltation about the natural feelings, well-composed ideas, correct painting technique, skilfully applied pigment-pastes and beautiful colouring that adorned the Venetian paintings of the Bohemian master, also mentioning the immense acclaim with which the artists work was received by local art enthusiasts. It is enough to mention that krtas paintings from his Venetian period before 1656 were acquired for the collections of local painting20 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

20 For more on this issue see Andrzej Kozie, Michael Willmanns Way to the Heights of Art and His Early Drawings, Bulletin of The National Gallery in Prague 78, 19971998, pp.5466. 21 Andreas Tacke, Der Kunst-Feind Mars: die Auswirkungen des Krieges auf Kunst und Knstler nach Sandrarts Teutscher Academie, in: Klaus BumannHeinz Schilling (edd.), 1648. Krieg und Frieden in Europa (exh. cat.), vol. 2: Kunst und Kultur, Mnchen 1998, pp.245252. Willmanns letter to Sandrart of 12 December 1682 shows how deeply rooted this idea was. Here he expressed athousand thanks for the fact that the noble art of painting, almost ridiculed in many places in Germany or almost completely extinguished and fallen into darkness, could are up again thanks to this new light []Andrzej Kozie, Rysunki Michaela Willmanna (16301706), Wrocaw 2000 (Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis, vol. 2212, Historia Sztuki, vol. 14), p.167. 22 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.327. 23 See Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, Krieg und Frieden, Kunst und Zerstrung, Mythos und Wirklichkeit: berlegungen zur Lage der Kunst Mitteleuropas im Dreiigjhrigen Krieg, in: K.BumannH.Schilling (edd.), 1648. Krieg und Frieden (see note21), pp.163172. 24 tpn Vcha, Kran tvorb praskho male Antonna Stevense ze Steinfelsu, in: Ji KroupaMichaela eferisov LoudovLubomr Konen (edd.), Orbis Artium. Kjubileu Lubomra Slavka, Brno 2009, p.172. See also the exhibition catalogue Karel krta 16101674. Doba adlo, Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas (edd.), Praha 2010, ch.XI, Karel krta aAntonn Stevens, p.453. Only krtas painting The Assumption of the Virgin Mary for the main altar of the Church of Our Lady before Tn in Prague (1649) brought about achange in this situation: this painting was successful and marked the beginning of the great career of this painter educated in Italy. 25 Piotr Oszczanowski, Midzy Waltherem aWillmannem. Malarstwo Wrocawia 1 poowyXVII wieku, in: A. Kozie B.Lejman (edd.), Willmann iinni (see note 18), pp.123135. 26 Adam Wicek, Ezechiel Paritius zLitomyla ijego dziaalno na lsku iw Polsce / Ezechiel Paritius zLitomyle ajeho innost ve Slezsku avPolsku, asopis Slezskho zemskho muzea B 13, 1964, pp.1722. 27 Boena Steinborn, Oyciu itwrczoci Michaela Willmanna, in: Marek AdamskiPiotr ukaszewiczFranz Wagner (edd.), Michael Willmann (16301706) (exh. cat.), Salzburg 1994 (Schriften des Salzburger Barockmuseums, vol. 19), p.14. 28 Janina Dzik, Franciszek Lekszycki, malarz religijny baroku, Kalwaria Zebrzydowska 1998, pp.153161. 29 Andrzej Kozie, Barok irokoko, in: Mateusz KapustkaAndrzej KoziePiotr Oszczanowski, Op Nederlandse Manier. Inspiracje niderlandzkie w sztuce lskiejXVXVIII w. (exh. cat.) Legnica 2001, pp.9394. 30 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.327.

3. Johann Heinrich Schnfeld, Joseph Entertains His Brothers in Egypt, 16651670, Chateau astolovice, Sternberg Collection (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

31 Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674, Praha 1974, p.8; J.Neumann, krtov (see note 1), pp.22, 25; Lubomr Slavek, Sob, umn, ptelm. Kapitoly zdjin sbratelstv vechch ana Morav 16501939, Brno 2007, p.46. 32 J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note 31), passim.; also J. Neumann krtov (see note 1), passim. 33 For this painting krta undoubtedly used the composition model of the Renaissance woodcut by Hans Baldung Grien which depicts the same motif. See Ivana Kyzourov, Pozdn gotika, nebo ran baroko? Albrecht Drer ajeho souasnci jako vzory v17.stolet, in: Olga Fejtov Vclav Ledvinka Ji Peek Vt Vlnas (edd.), Barokn Prahabarokn echie 16201740. Sbornk pspvk zvdeck konference ofenomnu baroka vechch, Praha, Anesk kler aClam-Gallasv palc, 24.27.z 2001, Praha 2004, p.729, g.10,11. 34 This cycle of Karel krtas paintings was strongly inuenced by Albrecht Drers woodcuts from the Small Passions series as well as by the popular Passion copper engravings of the Wierix brothers. See Fejtov V. Ledvinka J. Peek V. Vlnas (edd.), Barokn Praha (see note 33), pp.727728. See also Sylva Dobalov, Paijov cyklus Karla krty. Mezi vtvarnou tradic ajezuitskou spiritualitou, Praha 2004, pp.1644. 35 Daniele Benati, Guido Cagnacci, in: Daniele BenatiAntonio Paolucci (edd.), Guido Cagnacci: protagonista del Seicento tra Caravaggio e Reni (exh. cat.), Milano 2008, pp.2753; Ugo Ruggeri, Pietro e Marco Liberi: pittori nella Venezia del Seicento, Rimini1996.

collector Michele Spietra and also caught the attention of noted collector and Italian art enthusiast Humprecht Johann Tschernin of Chudenitz during his stay in Venice (1660 1663). Consequently, at least ten paintings of the Bohemian Apelles were acquired for the counts collection in Prague. According to the ndings of Jaromr Neumann, krta referred to the Italian art of the late Renaissance (the Carracci brothers, Tiziano, Veronese, Tintoretto, and Bassano, among others) and early Baroque (Guercino, Guido Reni, Tiberio, Tinelli, Bernardo Strozzi, Domenico Fetti, Giulio Carpioni, Simone Cantarini, and Orazio Borgiani, among others) continually throughout the later period of his artistic work. It is signicant, however, that this formal Italian allure in the Bohemian masters painting dominated even when the author sporadically resorted to composition models of clearly transalpine origin, as in the case of the painting St Martin and in the cycle of eleven Passion paintings in the St Nicholas Church in Pragues Lesser Town. From this perspective, the Italian style of the local artists is a distinctive feature of works created in the Habsburg Monarchy, as in the third quarter of the 17th century such a style of painting was only produced by several court painters of predominantly Italian origin such as Guido Cagnacci (16011663) and Pietro Liberi (16051687), who worked for the imperial court in Vienna, and Filippo Abiatti (16401715) from Milan who was associated with the court of the Prince-Bishop of Olomouc

STUDIES 21

Karl II of Lichtenstein-Kastelkorn. Nevertheless, these Italians were only active in the Habsburg Monarchy for a limited period and their works had predominantly a cabinet character. The more italico painting style began to enjoy wider popularity only at the end of the 1670s. Only when a number of signicant patrons with clearly Italian taste such as Prince Johann Adam of Liechtenstein, Prince Eugene of Savoy and Lothar Franz Schnborn in Vienna, Archbishop of Prague Johann Friedrich of Waldstein, Bishop of Wrocaw Cardinal Friedrich of Hessen-Darmstadt active in Wrocaw and Nysa, and priest and chancellor Sebastian Piskorski in Cracow entered the scene was there increased demand for art that embraced the accomplished Roman Baroque and the painting of Pietro da Cortona and Carlo Maratta. In reaction to this, many journeying Italian painters came to Central Europe the virtuosi who had mastered not only oil painting, but also the buon fresco technique (painting on wet plaster), and were often able to supply architectural designs as well. Alongside the Jesuit Andrea Pozzo (16421709), a whole group of painters from Bologna were active in Vienna; the fresco painter Carpoforo Tencalla from Bissone (16231685) was active in Austria, Upper Hungary, Bohemia and Moravia; Giacomo Scianzi (? after 1702) was in the service of the Bishops of Wrocaw in Wrocaw and Nysa; Paolo Pagani from Ticino (16551716) settled in Olomouc; Innocenzo Monti (16531710) worked like the workshop of Baldassare Fontana in Moravia as well as in Cracow; Michaelangelo Palloni (16371712) also worked on the territory of what are today Poland and Lithuania, as did Francesco Antonio Giorgioli (16551725), also from Ticino, who was active in Switzerland, Southern Germany and Saxony as well.22 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

36 Milan Togner, Barokn malstv vOlomouci, Olomouc 2008, p.39. 37 Hellmut Lorentz, Italien und die Anfnge des Hochbarock in Mitteleuropa, in: Max Seidel (ed.), Europa und die Kunst Italiens. Internationaler Kongress zum hundertsjrigen Jubilum des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz. Florenz, 22.27. September 1997, Venezia 2000, pp.419434. 38 Ibid., pp.423426. 39 Arkadiusz Wojtya, Cardinale langravio iConte savio dygnitarze Rzeszy w barokowym Rzymie, Quart 2 (4), 2007, pp.2739. 40 Micha Kurzej, Budowa idekoracja krakowskiego kocioa pw. w. Anny w wietle rde archiwalnych, in: Andrzej BetlejJzef Skrabski (edd.), Fides ars scientia. Studia dedykowane pamici Ksidza Kanonika Augustyna Mednisa, Tarnw 2008, pp.271301. 41 Ulrike Knall-Brskovsky, Italienische Quadraturisten in sterreich, WienKln 1984. 42 Giorgio Mollisi, Lopera afresco di Carpoforo Tencalla, in: Carpoforo Tencalla da Bissone. Pitura del Seicento fra Milano e lEuropa centrale (exh. cat.), Milano 2005, pp.5965; Martin Mdl, Distinguishingsimilaritiesstyle: Carpoforo and Giacomo Tencalla in Czech lands, Ars 40, 2007, pp.225236. 43 Gnther Grundmann, Barockfresken in Breslau, Frankfurt am Main 1967 (Bau- und Kunstdenkmler des deutschen Ostens, Reihe C, Schlesien, vol. 3), pp.2329; Ryszard Hoownia, Pod egid kardynaa Fryderyka Heskiego. Barokizacja kocioa w. Jakuba w Nysie w 4 w.XVII wieku, in: Ryszard HoowniaMateusz Kapustka (edd.), Nysa. Sztuka w dawnej stolicy ksistwa biskupiego, Wrocaw 2008, pp.145163. 44 M. Togner, Barokn malstv vOlomouci (see note 36), pp.4549. Pagani also worked for ashort time in Cracow. See Mariusz Karpowicz, Paolo Pagani w Krakowie, Biuletyn Historii Sztuki 54, 1992, pp.6780.

4. Michael Leopold Willmann, Adoration of the Shepherds, 16801681, Muzeum Narodowe we Wrocawiu (photo: Muzeum Narodowe we Wrocawiu) 5 Joachim von Sandrart, Ottavio Piccolomini with his Adjutant, Hans Christoph Ranfft, 16491650, Nchod (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 6. Johann Spillenberger, Diana and Callisto, 1676, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague) 7. Michael Leopold Willmann, Landscape with St John the Baptist, 1656, Muzeum Narodowe w Warszawie (photo: Muzeum Narodowe w Warszawie)

STUDIES 23

These artists were seconded by a new generation of local painters, most of whom received their education in Italy and were clearly focused on the Italian style. Among these artists were the following: Rottmayr, active in Austria, Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia; Lika, working in Bohemia and Silesia; Jerzy Eleuter Siemiginowski (c. 16601707/1711) in Poland; and a supposed student of krta, the Augustinian monk Anton Martin Lublinsky (16361690) in Moravia. The older generation of local artists, however, were forced to change their aesthetics. An example of this might be Willmann. who created several of his most Italian-like paintings after graphic print models from the circle of Cortona, Maratta and Pietro Testa around the end of the 1670s and the beginning of the 1680s, the style of which followed the Roman masters of the Italian Baroque [g. 4]. What is more, in response to the needs of local patrons, Willmann learned the demanding technique of painting on wet plaster, also unknown in the Low Countries. At that time, artists were primarily sought after who were acquainted with the Roman style of fresco, painting. From a letter to Lublinsky dated 29 March 1685 from the abbot of the Cistercian monastery in Lubi, Johannes Reich, we know that the abbot sought help nding a talented and resourceful painter, full of ideas, versed in oil painting as well as in fresco, and acquainted with the Roman style. On the other hand, in the case of oil painting as the Prince of Liechtenstein wrote in a letter to Marcantonio Franceschini of Bologna works were requested in buon gusto italiano con una morbidezza, well-modelled female nudes full of grace and vaghezza perfectly nished paintings with soft and smooth brushwork.

45 Jana Zapletalov, Mezi Boloou aKrakovem: ivot adlo italskho male Innocenza Montiho (16531710), Umn LIII, 2005, pp.335346. 46 Mariusz Karpowicz, Dziaalno artystyczna Michaelangela Palloniego w Polsce, Warszawa 1967; Idem, Francesco Antonio Giorgioli aVarsovia, Bolletino della Svizzera Italiana 90, 1978, pp.16. 47 Erich Hubala, Johann Michael Rottmayr, Wien 1981. 48 Jaromr Neumann, Jan Krytof Lika, UmnXV, 1967, pp.135176, 260311. 49 Mariusz Karpowicz, Jerzy Eleuter Siemiginowski, malarz polskiego baroku, WrocawWarszawaKrakwGdask 1974. 50 The view commonly accepted in the literature that Lublinsky was educated exclusively in krtas workshop as afree apprentice was recently challenged by Milan Togner, who traces the genesis of the art of this Moravian painter also in the works of Austrian and Southern German painters like Martin Theol Pollak (15701639) from Innsbruck, Matthias Kager (15751634) from Augsburg and Georg Bachmann (16131652). Togner even considers it possible that Lublinsky studied in Vienna and Augsburg before 1663. See Milan Togner, Antonn Martin Lublinsk 16361690, Olomouc 2004, pp.2728. 51 Andrzej Kozie, Woski przeom w malarstwie barokowym na lsku, czyli rzecz okopotach Michaela Willmanna, in: Ladislav DanielJi PelnPiotr SalwaOlga pilarov (edd.), Italsk renesance abaroko ve stedn Evrop. Pspvky zmezinrodn konference, Olomouc 17.18. jna 2003 / Renesans ibarok woski wEuropie rodkowej. Materiay midzynarodowej konferencji, Oomuniec 17.18. padziernika 2003, Olomouc 2005, pp.197210. 52 The letter is missing, but was published in full in M. Togner, Antonn Martin Lublinsk (see note 50), p.275. 53 W. Prohaska, Gemlde (see note 4), p.385.

24 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

8. Johann Christoph Storer, St Charles Borromeo as the Patron of Catholic Switzerland, 16551657, Jesuit Church, sacristy, Lucerne (reproduced after: Sibylle Appuhn-Radtke, Visuelle Medien im Dienst der Gesellschaft Jesu. Johann Christoph Storer (16201671) als Maler der Katholischen Reform, Regensburg 2000, g. on p. 171). 9. Joachim von Sandrart, Pilgrimage of the Holy Family from Egypt, 1665, Chrudim, Church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 10. Lubi, Cistercian Church, view of the interior before 1943 (photo: Warszawa, Instytut Sztuki PAN)

54 Ch. Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart (see note 9), passim. 55 The numerous mythological paintings for the bishop of Olomouc, Karl II of Liechtenstein-Kastelkorn, commissioned from Schnfeld for his private collection may serve as an example. See Milan Togner, in: Milan Togner (ed.), Krom Picture Gallery. Catalogue of the painting collection in the archbishops palace in Krom, Krom 1999, pp.301307, cat. no. 301305. 56 Barbara Eschenburg, Landschaft in der deutschen Malerei: vom spten Mittelalter bis heute, Mnchen 1987, p.67. 57 Based on an entry in the so-called Willmann family chronicle on 22 May 1663, the painter participated in the Catholic Holy Mass for the rst time (Strahov Library, Prague, the inner side of the cover at the end of the third part of this work: G.H.Rivius, Der furnembsten notwendigsten der gantzen Architektur angehrigen mathematischen und mechanischen Knst eygentlicher Bericht und verstendliche Unterrichtung, Nrnberg 1547, Inv. No. AYXII 15). 58 Although the question of krtas motivation for converting to Catholicism in Italy has been the subject of scholarly discussion, (see J.Neumann, krtov, see note 1, p.41), it is nonetheless beyond any doubt that under the Renewed Constitution of 1627 the painter could return from emigration only as aCatholic. He could also request the return of his family property only as such. See Lenka Stolrov Radka Tibitanzlov Vt Vlnas, Karel krta in Prague or The Story of Two Beginnings, pp. 5371 in this book. 59 See ibid. 60 S. Appuhn-Radtke, Visuelle Medien (see note 6), pp.112152.

III The works of most Central European painters who started their professional careers after the end of the Thirty Years War show great versatility and encompass almost all genres of painting. Both krta and Sandrart distinguished themselves as excellent portraitists [g. 5]. Schnfeld and Spillenberger focused on mythological paintings which were commissioned enthusiastically for private art collections [g. 6]. Willmanns works, on the other hand, entered him into the history of 17th-century German landscape painting for all time [g. 7]. The major source of income for these artists, however, was the production of religious paintings, above all altar paintings commissioned practically en masse by various patrons from the Catholic Church. For certain artists, the opportunity to benet from these commissions entailed the necessity to accommodate their customers expectations, in some cases even by converting to Catholicism. While Sandrart as an artist of the Calvinist confession established in liberal Franconia could work for Catholic customers, for artists active in the Habsburg Monarchy this was unacceptable. Both Willmann and krta submitted to this: the former had to convert from Calvinism to Catholicism after three years in Lubi (1663), while the latter had to accept the Catholic faith in order to be able to return to his native Prague. Almost all of the more signicant painters were tied through various contacts to their Catholic patrons, who became the major supporters and promoters of their work. It is a well-known fact that the cooperation with the Augustinian monastery at Zderaz in Prague played a signicant role at the beginning of Karel krtas artistic career after his return to Bohemia. Storer, after returning to Konstanz in 1655, became the main painter of the Upper German province of the Jesuit Order and devoted almost all of his artistic production to commissions from the Jesuits [g. 8]. Willmanns case was not any different;STUDIES 25

11. Karel krta, The Descent of the Holy Ghost, 16681669, Salzburg Cathedral (photo: Grzegorz Zajczkowski) 12. Karel krta, Crucixion with the Virgin Mary, St John the Evangelist and St Mary Magdalene, 16681669, Salzburg Cathedral (photo: Grzegorz Zajczkowski)

26 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

61 Rdiger Grimkowski, Willmann icystersi, in: M.AdamskiP.ukaszewiczF.Wagner (edd.), Michael Willmann (16301706) (see note 27), pp.3142. 62 Astrid Scherp, Bemerkungen zu drei Altarblattentwurfen von Tobias Pock, Barockberichte 20/21, 1998, pp.260265. 63 Andreas Tacke, Das tote Jahrhundert. Anmerkungen zur Forschung ber die deutsche Malerei des 17. Jahrhunderts, Zeitschrift des Vereins fr Kunstwissenschaft 51, 1997, p.56. 64 Ch.Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart (see note 9), pp.2728. 65 S. Appuhn-Radtke, Visuelle Medien (see note 6), p.87, g. 30. 66 M. Togner, Barokn malstv vOlomouci (see note 36), pp.56, 6061. 67 Georg Paula, Schnfelds kirchliche Werke in situ, in: U.Zeller M.Waike H. Kaulbach (edd.), Johann Heinrich Schnfeld (see note7), pp.6273. 68 Andrzej Kozie, Michael Willmanns (16301706) Kunst im Dienst der Gegenreformation in Schlesien. Forschungsstand und Fragestellung, in: Joachim KhlerRainer Bendel (edd.), Geschichte des christlichen Lebens im schlesischen Raum, part 1, Mnster 2002 (Religions- und Kulturgeschichte in Ostmittel- und Sdosteuropa, vol. 1), pp.549556. 69 Franz DambeckJosef Krottenthaler, Pfarr- und Wallfahrtskirche Neukirchen zum Hl. Blut, MnchenZrich 1964 (Kleine Kunstfhrer, vol. 728), p.12. 70 Ivo Krsek, Barokn malstv 17.stolet na Morav, in: Ji Dvorsk (ed.), Djiny eskho vtvarnho umn II/1, Od potk renesance do zvru baroka, Praha 1989, p.357. This painting is known from agraphic reproduction by Gerhard de Gross (Strahov Library, Prague). 71 LebensLauf, pp.2022, in: J.Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11). See also Ch. Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart (see note9), pp.232251, cat. nos. 117123; Michle-Caroline Heck, Dune cole de peinture une acadmie de papier. Les retables de lglise de Lambach, in: Sybile Ebert-Schifferer Cecilia Mazzetti di Pietralata (edd.), Joachim von Sandrart. Ein europischer Knstler und Theoretiker zwischen Italien und Deutschland. Akten des Internationalen Studientages der Bibliotheca Hertziana Rom, 3.4. April 2006, Mnchen 2009 (Rmische Studien der Bibliotheca Hertziana, vol.25), pp.8595. 72 Unfortunately, this unique set of Willmanns works was scattered and partially destroyed after 1943. It has remained in this state to the present day. See Andrzej Kozie, Doskonaa szkoa malarstwa, czyli sw kilka ozespole obrazw Michaela Willmanna zdawnego kocioa klasztornego Cystersw w Lubiu, in: Andrzej Kozie (ed.), Opactwo Cystersw w Lubiu iartyci, Wrocaw 2008 (Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis, vol.3012, Historia Sztuki, vol. 26), pp.243260. 73 The last conservation of the paintings of krtas workshop at the cathedral in Litomice may change this view. See Karel krta 16101674. Doba adlo (see note 24), ch. V, Oltn obrazy Karla krty, pp.207, 262269. 74 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.327. 75 Franz WagnerBarbara von der Heiden, Wenig beachtete Meisterwercke der Barockmalerei in Salzburg, Barockberichte 8/9, 1994, pp.306311; Konstanze Laufer, Anmerkungen zu den Salzburger Altargemlden Johann Heinrich Schnfelds, Barockberichte 16/17, 1998, pp.2329; W.Prohaska, Gemlde (see note 4), pp.383384, 398400; J. Neumann, krtov (see note 1), pp.8990. The fact that krta was selected for this prestigious commission may have been inuenced by Archbishop Guidobald Thuns descent from the Bohemian branch of the family, and so he was most probably aware of this Bohemian painters standing on the art scene in Prague.

since establishing himself at the monastery in Lubi (1660), he connected all of his subsequent work with the Cistercians not only in Silesia, but also in Bohemia and Moravia. For Pock, a native of Konstanz, cooperation with Viennese Archbishop Philipp Friedrich of Breuner played a key role at the beginning of his career. Even Sandrart, an artist of different merit, created a signicant portion of his works for customers from the Catholic Church and in the years 1655/561661 worked almost exclusively for the Benedictine abbey in Lambach. Paradoxically, it was the Calvinist, Sandrart, established in Stockau by Nuremberg, who became the largest supplier of altar paintings for Catholic customers in almost all of Central Europe: from Wrzburg, Eichstatt, Regensburg, Landshut, Freising and Munich, to Lambach, Salzburg, Linz, Garsten and Waldhausen, to Chrudim [g. 9], Brno and Vienna. Other Central European artists followed his example: Storer supplied his altar paintings to commissioners from Jesuit circles in an area from Switzerland and Schwarzwald to Franconia, Bavaria and Upper Austria; Pock worked not only for customers from across Austria, but also from Moravia; Schnfeld did not restrict himself to Swabia, but sent his works to Bavaria and Austria as well; and Willmanns altar paintings spread fast on the art market in Silesia as well as in Bohemia, Moravia, and even Austria (Sankt Florian). In this context, krta appears to be an artist who managed to gain control only of the local market: aside from two paintings for the side chapels of the cathedral in Salzburg which will be addressed in greater detail below, an altar painting for the holy shrine in Neukirchen am Hl. Blut in the Bavarian borderlands, and a missing painting for the main altar of the Jesuit church in Tel, Moravia, all of krtas paintings for church commissioners were destined exclusively for locations in Bohemia. This decided predominance of altar paintings in period artistic production caused some of the churches to be conceived as picture galleries of a kind, amassing the works of the best contemporary Central European artists. The church of the Benedictine monastery in Lambach became a sort of exposition of the splendid work of Sandrart, who executed seven paintings ordered by the abbot Placidus Hieber: the monumental Assumption of the Virgin Mary for the main altar and six other canvases depicting individual saints for the side altars. Displaying these works in the church caused [] the paths not only of art-loving youth, but also of Emperors, Cardinals, Archdukes and other persons of high and low station to lead to see these works of art [] in a previously little-known place. Another example is the Cistercian monastery church in Lubi [g. 10], for the interior of which Willmann and his workshop created at least 60 canvases of various types. Until 1943 this set was undoubtedly the largest Central European collection of Baroque paintings created for one church and by one artist with the help of his workshop assistants. Although krta could not boast a similar temple decorated exclusively with his works, his greatest achievements also described as such in his biography published in the Teutsche Academie are the paintings he created for a number of Bohemian churches. These churches are: the St Nicholas, St Thomas and St Wenceslas Cathedrals in Pragues Lesser Town; the St Stephen and St Martin in the wall Churches in Pragues New Town; the Jesuit monastery in Prague; the Cistercian monasteries in Zbraslav and Plasy; the Episcopal church in Litomice and the Church of St Wenceslas in Mlnk. On the other hand, the two paintings krta produced for the cathedral in Salzburg and which are not mentioned in the Teutsche Academie attest to the fact that the Prague master was often invited to participate in prestigious projects signicant for the entire Central European region. krtas two large-format paintings with the motifs of The Descent of the Holy Ghost [g. 11] and Crucixion with the Virgin Mary, St John the Evangelist and St Mary Magdalene [g. 12] were created in the years 16681669 as part of the multi-year project to create painted decorations for the interior of the cathedral in Salzburg. As this work progressed, the paintings donors local Archbishops Guidobald Thun and Max Gandolph Kuenburg selected the individual artists approached for this project, probably based on the artists standing on the Central European art scene. Alongside krta, whose canvases were intended for the altars of two side chapels on the eastern side of the cathedral, the most renowned period painters from all of Central Europe worked for the cathedral in Salzburg. Schnfeld created the altar canvas St Sebastian and St Roch in approximately 16541655, and several years later (1669) he created another altar painting with the gures of selected saints, namely St Gregory, St Jerome, St Nicholas and St Martin [g. 13] as well as a missing canvas featuring the motif ofSTUDIES 27

St Vincent with St Florian, St Oswald, St Erasmus and St Cecilia (c. 1669). In 1656 Sandrart supplied the missing painting The Baptism of Christ and also a painting for the altar of St Anne, while Frans de Neve (16061681), originally from Antwerp but educated in Rome, created the altar painting St Virgils Ordination as Bishop (currently housed at the Cathedral Museum in Salzburg) in 1672 and painted the canvas The Baptism of Christ, which replaced Sandrarts painting with the same theme two years later. IV Prestigious commissions of this type no doubt attested to the individual painters standing on the Central European art scene. What could be better than the life of a famous painter? asked Samuel van Hoogstraten who had spent ve years of his life in Vienna (16511655). Becoming famous along with wealth and satisfaction with ones own abilities was considered by all contemporary European art theoreticians to be the basic objective of a painters artistic activity. In this respect, Sandrart was an unrivalled model for all Central European artists, as this prince of German painters who, through the practice of the beaux arts, not only became a rich man and the proprietor of an estate in Stockau where he entertained the powerful men of the contemporary world, but was ultimately ennobled by the Emperor in 1653. Even then it was universally acknowledged that not wealth and noble titles, but the printed word was the guarantee of an artists immortal celebrity. For this reason, all of Sandrarts most signicant artistic achievements were eternalised in his voluminous biography, which was undoubtedly composed by his friend, Nuremberg poet Sigmund of Birken, and which was incorporated into the rst tome of the Teutsche Academie. Even today it is hard to overestimate the signicance of this work: it is the rst German-language publication with a richly illustrated and comprehensive interpretation of the contemporary theory of painting, graphic art, carving and architecture, based on the unifying idea of the arte del disegno. Sandrarts work published in a lavish format and excellent edition design, and with numerous copper engravings representing the most signicant works of classic art created by the best contemporary graphic artists clearly surpassed the usual level of this kind of publication at the time. When additionally accompanied by a translation of Ovids Metamorphoses and Cartaris treatise Imagines Deorum, the work was priceless as a source of indispensable knowledge for the artistic practice of a painter. Most importantly, the Teutsche Academie contained extensive paragraphs on the history of art in general as well as on individual important masters, and presented not only information on the painters of antiquity and old Italian and Dutch masters compiled from the works of Giorgio Vasari, Carlo Ridol and Karel van Mander, but also included biographical sketches of Sandrarts contemporaries together with signicant authors who had been active on German territory in the past, which the author compiled himself. Van Hoogstraten wrote: It is true that an artist must seek good fortune rst through his own merits, which is to say, through the merit and appeal of his own work [] for without the help of generous supporters and heralds loudly singing his praises, it will be difficult for him to become well known. There is no doubt that for many a Central European artist the Teutsche Academie became the most important of these heralds loudly singing his praises. It gave these often little-known artists working far from the artistic centres an opportunity to have their biographies and portraits published alongside the biographies and portraits of all famous artists of ancient as well as contemporary times, which was equivalent to achieving the highest recognition, celebrity and also a certain artistic ennoblement. It should not surprise us, therefore, that certain German artists earnestly solicited their inclusion in this prestigious enterprise. An example of this is Willmann, who had been neglected in the rst edition of the Teutsche Academie and who in 1682, having learned that work on its translation into Latin had commenced, congratulated Sandrart in a letter written in an uncommonly attering and humble tone, and included a skilfully executed drawing depicting the scene of Joachim von Sandrarts Apotheosis [g. 14]. The following year a biography of the Silesian painter and his graphic likeness appeared in the work Academia nobilissimae Artis Pictoriae (1683). krtas biography and his graphic portrait were included already in the rst German edition of the Teutsche Academie, immediately following the biography of the famous Rembrandt and right next to his portrait. While Sandrart devoted only brief notes to other28 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

76 Samuel van Hoogstraten, Inleyding tot de Hooge Schoole der Schilderkunst, Rotterdam 1678, p.345. Cited from Celeste Brusati, Artice and Illusion. The Art and Writing of Samuel van Hoogstraten, ChicagoLondon 1995, p.253. 77 See most recently: Esther Meier, Joachim von Sandrarts LebensLauf : Dichtung oder Wahrheit?, Marburger Jahrbuch fr Kunstwissenschaft 31, 2004, pp.205239. 78 S. van Hoogstraten, Inleyding (see note 76), p.310, cited from: C.Brusati, Artice and Illusion (see note 76), p.253. 79 On the issue of this self-presentation act by Willmann see: A.Kozie, Rysunki Michaela Willmanna (see note 21), pp.164176; Rdiger Klessmann, Michael Willmann und Joachim von Sandrart. Bemerkungen zu einem Dialog, in: A. KozieB. Lejman (edd.), Willmann iinni (see note 18), pp.1620. 80 It should be noted, however, that this was due the alphabetical proximity of the two artists names.

13. Johann Heinrich Schnfeld, St Gregory, St Jerome, St Martin, St Nicholas and Other Saints, 1669, Salzburg Cathedral (photo: Grzegorz Zajczkowski) 14. Michael Leopold Willmann, Joachim von Sandrarts Apotheosis, 1682, pen drawing with Indian ink on paper, washed, Wien, Albertina, Graphische Sammlung (photo: Wien, Albertina)

important Central European artists such as Pock, Storer and Spillenberger, the Bohemian painters life and artistic achievements received an extensive treatment and an uncommonly attering appraisal. Sandrart explains that if he wanted to describe all of krtas beautiful works, he would have to signicantly extend the scope of his humble work; Sandrart also praises the artist himself as not only a versatile theoretician, but also an experienced practitioner who is always able to follow nature as much as possible. The author of the Teutsche Academie states that, thanks to these universally admired skills, the Bohemian painter attained great fame and fully deserved the honourable appellation the second Apelles on the Emperors Parnassus of Muses. This enthusiastic appraisal of krta was published barely one year after his death (1674), which Sandrart also mentions in the painters biography with deep grief, although he does not quote the artists age correctly. Moreover, this rst Central European history of art considered krta to be Sandrarts only contemporary from the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, if we discount the merely passing mention of Johann Georg Hering. Although some researchers are inclined to state that Sandrarts appraisal of krta is too obsequious, it does not seem that these doubts are justied. Based on our general knowledge of the Bohemian masters standing in 17th-century Central European painting, we may conclude that the excited tone of his biography published in the Teutsche Academie largely stems from the fact that krtas work and fortunes were typical of an entire generation of Central European artists. It is true that, compared to other important contemporary Central European artists, his work was of a rather local importance and that, except for the altar paintings for the cathedral in Salzburg, krta did not achieve any other greater success on the European stage. As an artist in Prague, he never attained a higher social status than that of the master of the Old Town painters guild and his most signicant patrons were local representatives of the Catholic Church, such as the abbots of Bohemian monasteries and members of the diocese clergy. In general, krtas pupils known from various sources were second-rate painters of rather minor signicance. Nonetheless, krtas overwhelming artistic and intellectual potential decidedly transcended the borders of the local artistic centre. Sandrart, who had made krtas personal acquaintance in Italy, was aware of this and thus neither hesitated to include krtas biography in the Teutsche Academie nor to use the ecstatic appellation the second Apelles. Although after returning to Prague krta worked for the rest of his life only as the master of the Old Town painters guild, no other contemporary painter active in the Habsburg Monarchy at the time could boast the excellent education he had received in Italy in his youth. Despite the fact that he was never invited to work for one of the Central European courts and never received the honourable title of court painter as did his Prague competitor, Anton Stevens, he consistently employed the sophisticated courtly painting manner of the Italian style in his painting, which was admired by art enthusiasts in Prague and beyond. Until the mid17th century the rst painter from Prague was the above-mentioned Stevens, and yet it was krta with his Italian education whom Sandrart called the restorer of painting in the capital of the Bohemian Kingdom devastated by the Thirty Years War. In comparison to other progenitors of Baroque painting in Central Europe, he clearly preferred the Prague master. The rhetoric of restoration never appeared in the short biography of Pock, nor in the extensive biography of Schnfeld, let alone in the account of Willmanns life published in the Latin edition of the Teutsche Academie. On Sandrarts view, the heroic biography of Karel krta, whose career began in 1638 in a city once known for its splendid painting tradition at Rudolf IIs Imperial Court and which had been brutally disrupted by the outbreak of the Thirty Years War, had grown into a distinctive example of a painters attempts to revive art in Germany and renew its prestige in a place where it had only recently celebrated its triumphs. krta, then, was a model representative of the new painting which recalled the classical-style Italian models and relied on the principles of true art, within which painting is considered one of the arti del disegno. ***

J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.327. Ibid., p.317. Most recently . Vcha, Kran tvorb (see note 24), p.172. On the issue of the intellectual dimension of krtas work see in this volume, pp. 129148, Sylva Dobalov Lubomr Konen, Karel krta pictor doctus. 85 krta andSandrart were on friendly terms during the Bohemian artists stay in Italy. On this topic see Jana Zapletalov, krta, Sandrart, Oretti: poznmka ke krtovu psoben vItlii, Umn LVII, 2009, pp.398402. 86 Without doubt, Stevens gained the title of court painter to Emperor Ferdinand III already in 1640, as the inscription on the preserved portrait of the artist attests (Museum of Czech LiteratureKarseks Gallery, Prague); see . Vcha, Kran tvorb (see note 24), p.167, g. 11. 81 82 83 84

30 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

87 J. Neumann, krtov (see note 1), p.6.

It is not long ago that Neumann, in an attempt to dene the signicance of the Bohemian Apelles against the backdrop of European painting, wrote quite emotionally that what Caravaggio was for Italy, Poussin for France, Rubens for Belgium and Rembrandt for the Netherlands, Karel krta was for the Bohemian lands. In view of our ndings, it seems more accurate to paraphrase the words of the renowned Czech researcher and state that what Pock was for Austria, Storer for Switzerland, Willmann for Silesia and Sandrart for southern Germany, Karel krta was for the Bohemian lands. Translated by Evan W. Mellander

STUDIES 31

Baroque in Bohemia versus Bohemian Baroque,or Karel krta and Early Baroque Painting in the View of Art HistoryTPN VCHA VT VLNAS

1 Ji Kroupa, Djiny umn ahistorie, aneb: nemohou bt ani spolu, ani bez sebe?, in: Milena Bartlov (ed.), Djiny umn vesk spolenosti, otzky, problmy, vzvy. Pspvky pednesen na prvnm sjezdu eskch historik umn, Praha 2004, pp.139149. On the issues discussed below, comp.tpn Vcha, Der Herrscher auf dem Sakralbild zur Zeit der Gegenreformation und des Barock. Eine ikonologische Untersuchung zur herrscherlichen Reprsentation Kaiser FerdinandsII.in Bhmen, Praha 2009, pp.107139. 2 Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, War and Peace, Art and Destruction, Myth and Reality: Considerations on the Thirty Years War in Relation to Art in (Central) Europe, in: Klaus BumannHeinz Schilling (edd.), War and Peace in Europe, Vol. II, Art and Culture. Mnster 1998, pp.163172. 3 [] weil nun damals der Blut-begierige Mars aus seinem Vatterland die friedfartige Musen und Knste verjaget/[]; Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der edlen Bau-, Bild- und Malerei-Knste I, Nrnberg 1675 (reprint Nrdlingen 1994), p.327. Comp.tpn Vcha, Das Altarbild in der Kirche der Jungfrau Maria vom Siege auf der Kleinseite Ein Sakraldenkmal fr den Sieg Ferdinands II. auf dem Weien Berg, in: Elika FukovLadislav epika (edd.), Waldstein. Albrecht von WaldsteinInter arma silent musae?, Praha 2007, pp.191198, here p.191.

As a historical discipline, art history has primarily been concerned with explaining stylistic epochs, artists oeuvres or individual works of art in relation to their contextual circumstances. This approach raises the question as to what extent art history can take into account the effect of external factors on art production and consumption. A range of opinions has been voiced in response: from the simplistic concept of progressive stages in art (with a movement towards perfection followed by a decline), inuenced by contemporary social and economic developments and the interpretation of a work of art as the expression of a universal spirit of the given era, to viewing art history as an immanent process underlying the development of art forms, which occurs independently of other concurrent events. This methodical problem can also be tracked throughout the interpretations of Karel krtas oeuvre against the background of the phenomenon of Baroque in Bohemia or Bohemian Baroque. There is hardly any synthesis of 17th- and 18th-century Bohemian art which would fail to describe the defeat of the Estates in the 1620 Battle of White Mountain as the essential milestone between Renaissance and Baroque. This is, however, not a matter of mere periodisation of art: relating Baroque to the White Mountain seems to be perceived as a constructive point of departure in asking questions about the very origin and essence of art. Czech art history long departed from the idea that Baroque the originally heterogeneous cultural element was imported to Bohemia forcibly and concurrently with the post-White Mountain re-Catholicisation, the loss of state independence, and national oppression. And although Baroque indeed disrupted the artistic development, it soon became naturalized in the country and eventually transformed into the distinctive, unique Bohemian Baroque. This inuential concept came from the art historian Jaromn Neumann, who coincidentally was also the most signicant 20th-century interpreter of Karel krtas work. The model of interpretation outlined by Neumann ruled the official course of interpreting Bohemian Baroque for most of the 20th century. But if we today consider the increasing knowledge of the diversity of art originating on our territory and at the same time try to pass unbiased judgment on modern Czech history, this explanation seems hardly sustainable. Very inspiring in this respect is Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann analysing the false myth about the decline of Central European art during the Thirty Years War. His study points out that Prague, to the contrary and in spite of the permanent belligerency , witnessed extraordinary investments in art during that period. The picture of the ravaged Bohemia from where Mars ousted the peace-loving Muses and arts, as the German painter Joachim von Sandrart (16061688) put it in his biography of Karel krta which forms part of the Teutsche Academie (1675), was largely ctitious. The alleged penurious artistic conditions in Prague prior to krtas arrival as portrayed by Sandrart can be,STUDIES 33

after all, well compared to his no less suggestive picture of a devastated Germany in the foreword to the book. It is at the same time rather paradoxical that the authors of the mythical artistic decline during the Thirty Years War were artists active in the latter half of the 17th century. And not only that this myth heavily burdened modern art-historical research; these artists thus developed their self-stereotype as revivers and re-enactors of the noble art of painting in Central Europe during the post-war era. As to the issue of early Baroque painting in Bohemia and dening Karel krtas place in its development, it can be said that there were two simultaneous viewpoints playing their part in the local art history. The rst one was the formalist or, stylistic approach whose main aim was to examine the Prague painting style during the Thirty Years War as highly different from the preceding court art of Rudolf II and to assess Karel krtas contribution to it. The second, speculative interpretation of the humanities traditionally linked the arrival of Baroque forms in Bohemia with the coining of a new spiritual and cultural tendency that came with the Counter-Reformation. *** The rst local author who attempted to capture the character of Prague painting of the latter third of the 17th century was Franz Lothar Ehemant (1779), professor of history at Prague University. Not surprisingly, he departed from Sandrarts interpretation of Central-European art history during the Thirty Years War. Ehemant presents the era of the Rudolne court art as the golden age which was too suddenly aborted by the emperors death and the ensuing unrests, while the Thirty Years War is nothing but a period of artistic stagnation to him. In this context, he notes the robberies of art collections during the Saxon and Swedish occupations of Prague. The author moreover opines that new developments were brought to Bohemia only as late as during the second half of the 17th century by artists arriving from abroad and even though local artists participated, too, most of them were leaving for Italy for training. As to krta, Ehemant merely utters that the painter was capable of imitating the styles of very many great masters. He in part casts the gloomy image of art during the Thirty Years War onto his present time, viewing the period under the reign of Empress Maria Theresa as an analogous case: as an era34 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

4 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 1), I, p.3. Comp.Karl Mseneder, Deutschland nach dem Dreiigjhrigen Krieg: Kunst hat ihren Namen vom knnen, in: Mit Kalkl&Leidenschaft. Inszenierungen des Heiligen in der bayerischen Rokokomalerei, Franz Niehoff (Hrsg.), BandI, Landshut 2001 (Schriften aus den Museen der Stadt Landshut 17), pp.5983. 5 Franz Lothar Ehemant, Etwas zur Kunstgeschichte Bhmens, in: Josef Dobrovsk (ed.), Bhmische Litteratur auf das Jahr 1779, pp.205235, here pp.219228. Comp.Roman Prahl, Kpotkm apedpokladm djin umn (Frantiek Lothar Ehemant), Umn LII, 2004, pp.310. 6 See Edition of selected texts.

1. Bohemia, late 18th century, Jan Quirin Jahn, the place of deposition not found (reproduced after: Sbrka obraz ing. Richarda Jahna v Praze [The Painting Collection of Eng. Richard Jahn in Prague], Praha 1902, appendix after p. 12, not paginated) 2. Jan Quirin Jahn, Aneckdoten, biography of Karel krta, Prague, Library of the Royal Canonry of Premonstratensians at Strahov (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 3. Johann Georg Balzer after Johann Thomas Kleinhardt, Karel krta, 1773, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

7 F. L. Ehemant, Etwas zur Kunstgeschichte Bhmens (see note 5), pp.234235. 8 Gottfried Johann Dlabac, Allgemeines historisches Knstler-Lexikon fr Bhmen und zum Theil auch fr Mhren und Schlesien, I, Prag 1815, pp.1416; see edition No. 2 in the present Appendix. 9 Jan Quirin Jahn, Aneckdoten zur Lebensgeschichte berhmter Mahler und Beurtheilung ihrer Werke, manuscript, Prague, Strahov Library of the Royal Canonry of Premonstratensians, sign. DA II 7, f. 626635, here f. 626. Comp.Radka Tibitanzlov, in: Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674. His Work and His Era (exh. cat.), Praha 2010, p.618, cat. no.XVII.2. 10 Karel Vladislav Zap, [echy] Djiny vtvarnch umn, in: Frantiek Ladislav Rieger (ed.), Slovnk naun, II/1, Praha 1862, p.454; see Edition of selected texts.

marked by lengthy armed conicts and artistic decline caused by various factors, including a lack of interest on the part of the donors. Still another scholar following in Ehemants steps was Gottfried Johann Dlabac. The introductory essay to his Allgemeines historisches Knstler-Lexikon (1815) describes the dismal conditions in arts in Bohemia or, respectively, Prague, and concurrently claims that the subsequent revival was due to the artists either coming or returning from other countries. Dlabacs leading personality among them was Karel krta who had just come back from Italy. The author in fact totally neglects the activity of artists who never left Prague, and exclusively perceives the local artistic development from the viewpoint of the exiles, Karel krta, Wenceslaus Hollar and Georg Flegel. The latter half of the 19th century witnessed the arrival of art history as an autonomous discipline, and national viewpoints were naturally coming into play. The art of early Baroque as well as krta himself thus received very contradictory responses at that time. No matter the authenticity of krtas Bohemian origin and the success the artist eventually enjoyed in Prague he had simply trained in Italy and became established in Bohemia as a representative of a rather foreign style. It is worth attention that the late 18th-century Jan Quirin Jahn did not hesitate to prove the Italian character of krtas oeuvre by genetics: krta reportedly was the son of Italian parents settled in Prague (!). Would not Karel krtas return to his homeland, then, represent importing foreign art instead of resurrecting local painting tradition, as Sandrarts Teutsche Academie claims? The same objection clearly resounds in the relevant part of the entry History of Fine Arts in Bohemia [Djiny vtvarnch umn v echch], contained in Riegers Encyclopaedia [Slovnk naun; 1862] and written by Karel Vladislav Zap. The author judges the artistic production at the court of Rudolf II through the prism of the Romanticist approach of national art schools, and also opines that Rudolne art had only little chance of inuencing art in Bohemia due to its foreign origin. Its development was moreover forcibly interrupted by the Battle of White Mountain. 17th-century painting, viewed through the criterion of originality, was thus nothing but a foreign, mainly Italian import and with the rare exception of Karel krta it complied with the depraved taste of that period. But even krtas main asset in this view was merely his deftness in imitating Italian models.STUDIES 35

The viability of Sandrarts image of a desolated early 17th-century Central Europe deprived of all art is rather eloquently proved by the interesting treatise on krta by Karel Purkyn (1864). Its introduction paraphrases Teutsche Akademie almost word for word with, however, several patriotic connotations: The silence of despair over the graves of our most thriving favourite sons reigned in Bohemia and Germany where the bloodthirsty god of war in the company of all his horrors had trampled every green corn underfoot. There was no fresh air for an artist who would only vainly search for the Muses of his art, for those had long taken refuge from the war pandemonium. There where one encountered the traces of shattered houses, splintered sculptures and destroyed paintings at every step and where the only image he faced always and everywhere, the image of destroyed properties and the misery of thousands of families, there was no motivation for an artist! Who would ever think there of creating something new of painting! Purkyn the rst and, for a long time, also the last interpreter of krta pondered on the character of the artists Italian lesson. He provides an informed, but still simplied description of the ght between the academics and the naturalists, at the same time claiming that both parts departed from36 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

11 Karel Purkyn, Karel Skreta. ivotopisn nstin, Kritick ploha kNrodnm listm 1, 1864, p.103, quoted after: Rena Pokorn-Purkyov, ivot t generac. Vzpomnky na velk Purkyn. Listy alnky Karla Purkyn, Praha 1944, pp.342346, here p.342.

4. Jan Vilmek, Karel krta, 1889 (reproduced after: Humoristick listy [Humoristic Papers] 31, 1889, p. 9) 5. Gustav Edmund Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte des XVII: Jahrhundertes, Prag 1889, frontispiece, library of the National Gallery in Prague (reproduced after: Gustav Edmund Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte des XVII: Jahrhundertes, Prag 1889) 6. Ludk Marold, Karel krta, (1885), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

12 Quoted after: R. Pokorn-Purkyov, ivot t generac (see note11), p.344. 13 Ibid., p.345. 14 Antonn Rybika, Karel krta otnovsk ze Zvoic. Nstin rodoaivotopisn, Svtozor 3, 1869, pp.4243, pp.5051, pp.5556, p.63; see Edition of selected texts.

the principle that the supremacy of the emptied and distorted idealism in art must be overthrown and replaced by some other substance and other forms. Purkyn the painter was able to acknowledge the qualities of krtas oeuvre (which were far too often ignored by the previous authors); the eld he himself professed nevertheless made him focus on portraits: As far as his [krtas] painting style is concerned, I must point out that he is in fact the follower of Carracci, although his uniqueness has not drowned in the method of that school so as to make him unable to subsequently also establish a school; and mainly some portraits painted by him possess something genuinely authentic in concept and execution. K. V. Zap was not isolated in denouncing early Baroque painting. A nationalist tinge also resounds in the description of conditions ruling 17th-century Bohemian art as provided by Antonn Rybika Skutesk in one of the rst heuristically-based biographic treatises on Karel krta (1869). Rybika opines that the thriving local art was totally ruined during the Thirty Years War and the subsequent works, however successful, cannot be perceived as authentic and autochthonous Bohemian achievements but solely cogent imitations of the Italian,STUDIES 37

7. Paul Bergner, inspector of the Picture Gallery of the Society of Patriotic Friends of the Arts and organizer of Karel krtas exhibition, held in the Rudolnum Gallery in 1910, Archives of the National Gallery in Prague (photo: anonymous author, c. 1911)

Flemish and French ones, accommodated in brush, chisel or compasses of the masters in Bohemia. Even Karel krta, on whose life and oeuvre Rybika strenuously collected valuable information, did not escape his criticism. We read that he, too, remained the mere imitator of Italian academics and eclecticists and nothing but his dexterous skills of imitating distinguished him from his Bohemian coevals. The author claims that krta failed to resuscitate the alleged old Bohemian national school whose last heirs either died out or roamed through foreign lands in search of a modest living and shelter. The latter quote proves how deeply enrooted the maudlin stereotype of the exiles, originally adopted from Czech literature and rhetoric in general , was in the contemporary ruminations on Czech ne arts. The Czech-German historian Gustav Edmund Pazaurek then drew yet another picture of Karel krta, departing from Sandrart as well as the earlier Czech literature (no matter how critical he was towards the latter). Pazaureks signicant monograph on krta (1889) greatly contributes studies of the artist from the point of heuristics and it scrupulously follows all methodical principles of positivist art history. It, nevertheless, does not sufficiently reect either on the myth of the overall devastation caused by the Thirty Years War, nor on the descriptions of krta as eclectic. It is worth attention that unlike the authors before him, Pazaurek interprets krtas imitative inclinations as proof of his poor talent instead of his artistic deftness. His polemical remarks also further sharpen the controversies in viewing krta as a supercial, albeit fashionable and successful artist. This standpoint was certainly the fruit of the contemporary Czech-German disputes as to the cultural contribution of the respective ethnicities. In this respect, Pazaureks characteristic is crucial: Wie einst Platon den Gttern tglich fr dreierlei dankte, htte auch Screta Ursache gehabt dem Himmel fr dreierlei zu danken: dass er ein inker Maler war, das er diesseits der Alpen arbeitete, somit die italienische Concurrenz weniger zu frchten hatte, und ferner, dass er38 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

15 Ibid., p.43. 16 Ibid., p.51. 17 Ibid., p.43.

18 Gustav Edmund Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte desXVII.Jahrhunderts, Prag 1889, p.33. 19 Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674, Praha 1974, p.11. 20 Karel Chytil, [echy] Djiny malstv asochastv, in: Ottv slovnk naun, 6, Praha 1893, p.381. 21 Karel Boromejsk Mdl, Vtvarn umn. Karel krta, Ploha Nrodnch list, enclosure to No. 278, 1910 (9. 10.), p.9. 22 Karel Vladimr Herain, esk malstv od doby rudolnsk do smrti Reinerovy. Pspvky kdjinm jeho vnitnho vvoje vletech 15761743, Praha 1915. 23 Ibid., p.19. 24 Ibid., p.24. 25 Ibid., p.26. 26 Ibid., p.27. 27 Karel Vladimr Herain, Karel krta otnovsk ze Zvoic, Druh ploha eskho slova of 23 October 1910 (No. 242), pp.1718, here p.18.

nach Beendigung des dreissigjhrigen Krieges lebte. Jaromr Neumann voiced his opinion on Pazaureks book as follows: [it] tried to utterly downgrade both the value and the independent nature of the artists oeuvre and, at the same time, discredit him. The truth, however, was that krtas Czech-speaking interpreters deep into the late 19th century saw the artists indisputable Czech origin as his greatest asset. It seems that even the pragmatic Karel Chytil a Czech scholar who otherwise never dared to fall for nationalist stereotypes was rather puzzled in dealing with the phenomenon of krta. The excerpt from his interpretation summarizing the life and work of the artist and published in the Otto Encyclopaedia [Ottv slovnk naun; 1863] proves that he defended the painter from Pazaurek solely by enumerating the array of the long established denitions: The Thirty Years War and the radical changeover in Bohemian affairs indeed totally paralysed all local artistic developments []. Karel krta [] returned to Bohemia and launched a new stage of Bohemian painting here. krta, in his numerous altarpiece paintings, adheres to the Italian academics or eclectics and his oeuvre in this sense ranks as the best achievements created outside Italy. Similarly, Karel Boromejsk Mdl views krta as an artist of merely average talent whose main asset was introducing the advanced Italian patterns to Central-Bohemia and, moreover, diminishing the relics of Rudolne Mannerism: krtas art from both the aspect of form and mentality must be generally judged against the background of the tendencies and conditions of Italian art during the period of his youth; the art which was left behind to weaker forces by the Bologna academics and the Roman naturalists. It copes with what the artistic grandsons of the Carraccis and Caravaggios accomplished. However adapted, second- or even third-hand art displaying only minor signs of authentic artistic personality, it is still signicant to Bohemia in a certain groundbreaking sense. It eradicated Mannerism and Romanticism and introduced us to a higher sense of colourful picturesqueness and animated form. A completely different standpoint was taken by Karel Vladimr Herain (1915), the rst scholar to provide a synthesis on modern Bohemian painting. His work focuses on the period between the ascendance of Rudolf II to the throne (1573) and the death of the painter Vclav Vavinec Reiner (1743). The subtitle of the book Contributions to the History of Its Internal Development between 1576 and 1742 [Pspvky k djinm jeho vnitnho vvoje v letech 15761743] suggests that Herains main program in this instance was to show that the development of Bohemian painting in the given era was smooth, obeying nothing but the intrinsic laws of art, and was thus clearly beyond contemporary historical events. Herain was moreover the rst to acknowledge that Rudolne art was essential to the progress of local painting production. He claims that it was largely due to the Italian-oriented, protoBaroque oeuvres of Hans von Aachen and Bartholomus Spranger why Prague came to witness the very distinct and supreme artistic outcomes of this style which had hitherto only been perceived as imported to our environment by the Counter-Reformation in the early 17th century. Herain is also ahead in observing the inuence of Bolognese eclecticism and also perhaps Caravaggios naturalism in the work of the two above-mentioned Rudolne masters i.e., the stylistic aspects whose general features were otherwise linked with the much later inuence of krta. Political developments from between 1618 and 1620 thus did not represent any substantial turning point for the development of painting in Bohemia just because the changes which it succumbed to were of earlier date and inevitable and their unfortunate consequences (in no way denied by Herain) were to surface only on a long-term basis. The arriving re-Catholicisation then prompted local painting towards Baroque even more. This was not just due to the intensied inux of yet another topical Italian inspiration but also due to the new artistic tasks required by the Church and the aristocracy. And the artist exible enough and ready to meet these requirements was exactly Karel krta, who was later destined to attract so much attention and popularity that no other contemporary painter could equal him in this. Herain argued against Pazaurek even earlier, in connection with his 1910 retrospect held in the Prague Rudolnum Gallery: krta was a magnicent talent of the arts. Italy had red the great artist in him and it also naturally gave him the means of expression. We will not use an empty clich to value his signicance; let us just say that he is the rst master of Baroque in our lands. The Baroque style then became established here and bore beautiful fruit in both painting and architecture. K. V. Herain, however, remained isolated not only in his view of the beginnings of Baroque painting in Bohemia but also in the overall issue of Baroque. Czech art history during the inter-war period had only little understanding for such an ultimately formalist approach, assuming that a much more urgent imperative was to discover the social role in Baroque and nd it a higher ideological sense in the framework of Czech or, respectively,STUDIES 39

8. Picture Gallery of the Society of Patriotic Friends of the Arts in the Rudolnum Gallery, installation of Bohemian Baroque painting, Archives of the National Gallery in Prague (photo: Jan tenc, c. 1919) 9. Installation of works by Karel krta in the Picture Gallery of the Society of Patriotic Friends of the Arts in the Municipal Library in Prague. Photograph from the ceremonial handover of the Gallerys collections to state administration on 9 February 1933, Archives of the National Gallery in Prague (photo: Czech News Agency, TK)

Czechoslovak history. The almanac Czechoslovak Art [eskoslovensk umn; 1926], co-written by Vojtch Birnbaum, Antonn Matjek, Josef Schrnil and Zdenk Wirth, reads that ne arts have been, nonetheless, the least affected by the consequences of the loss of national sovereignty because Bohemian Renaissance was nothing but a projection of Italian culture to the North and because the new political and religious tendencies supported the developments in art through the immigration of potent forces from Italy and Germany. The Rudolne court art thus merely represented an exclusive import, the Thirty Years War stood for a cultural caesura and neither was early Baroque able to produce any upswing in arts because it, too, progressed in a solely mechanical way of adopting xed stylistic forms: Early Baroque in Czechoslovakia like Renaissance nevertheless remained a provincial art in its quality, for it stemmed from the same sources and succumbed to the same deformation of exact stylistic form. Oldich Stefan then polemically followed with the historically moralizing line of the famous essay by Arne Novk, entitled Baroque Prague [Praha barokn], arguing in the treatise The Background of Prague Baroque [Pozad praskho baroku; 1932] that, As if we were somewhat incidentally beginning to realize that the art form is not the only content of our Baroque; that we are actually talking about the stylistic expression [sic!] of the entire 150 years of our, very important, national history: from the White Mountain to the 1770s. But we keep evading this, as if it was something that we are unsure of, that we perhaps almost fear. The reason is the helplessness which remains the characteristic feature of our relation to the historical role of this period in general. The helplessness is specied somewhat later in the essay. Stefan explains that the arts paradoxically developed in the very period which we can hardly call a happy and favourable era of our history due to national, religious and economic reasons. He perceives the arrival of Baroque in Bohemia as the result of the fateful clash of two different cultures, the conict between the Romance and Catholic South and the German and Protestant Western tendency; the conict which lasted in Bohemia for the entire 16th century. The Battle of White Mountain then caused that these two contradictory tendencies could not naturally equipoise. Baroque as an artistic opinion was forcibly imposed on the Czech population by the victorious party and it can be said that it made its way and became widespread among common people only during the 1690s or, perhaps, even later, and only then did it begin to express their thinking. But before that, it was solely a foreign import for the upper classes. Vclav Vilm tech then offered another pointed conception of the genesis of Baroque in Bohemia (1938). He was probably inspired by Max Dvoks theory about the contradictory worlds of ideas of Renaissance and Baroque arts, as well as by the view of Werner Weisbach from the 1920s about the Counter-Reformation essence of Baroque style. tech40 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

28 Vojtch BirnbaumAntonn MatjekJosef SchrnilZdenk Wirth, eskoslovensk umn, Praha 1926, p.16. 29 Arne Novk, Praha barokn, Praha 1915. 30 Oldich Stefan, Pozad praskho baroku, in: Artu Rektorys (ed.), Kniha oPraze (Prask almanach) 3, 1932, pp.5469, here p.55. 31 Ibid., p.58. Stefan thus adopted the fundamental theses of historian Josef Peka; comp.Josef Peka, Bl hora. Jej piny insledky, in: idem, Postavy aproblmy eskch djin. Vbor zdla, Zdenk Kutnar (ed.), Praha 19902, pp.131231, here esp.pp.177185. 32 O. Stefan, Pozad praskho baroku (see note 30), p.60. Stefan also developed on the theory about transplanting Baroque into Bohemia in his book Prask kostely, Praha 1936, esp.pp.5152. 33 Vclav Vilm tech, eskoslovensk malstv asochastv nov doby, Praha 19381939.

10. Exhibition of Karel krta in the State