Ars: časopis Ústavu Dejín Umenia Slovenskej Akadémie Vied (38.2005)

6. It is necessary emphasize that fact that the re-
search of several monuments, e.g. (but not only) the
goldsmith art in Slovakia is dividing itself into two
lineš: The first line of research is conducted by the
domestic institutions for préservation of monuments,
and the second one independently also by German
scholars. The latter had a possibility to publish their
results of research in referred book. It can only be
stated that Slovák authors were — in their homeland
and in project financed from the Slovák state budget
- marginalised. All in all, the domestic research se-
ems now only as supernumerary and is limited to a
basic topographie recording of the héritage, i.e. to
the common routine; in a book with ambitions to
hâve, probably, a long-time influence, a specialised
opinion on the artworks and previous sight was gi-

ven by the foreign author (E. Wetter). Finally, this
situation provokes a question whether we need scho-
larly training of the future générations, whether our
schools of art-history and professional institutions hâve
really got a “raison d’etre”.
In the end we can state that the mentioned book
summarizes some of today’s knowledge on the art of
the medieval era, on the other hand it taises a lot of
new and overpowering questions. Nonetheless it may
only partly be considered as the “official” Statement
of the Slovák art history to the national héritage; it
might be also relevant to ask whether the general
expectations were fulfilled (having in mind also the
cost borne by the Slovák state), and whether we are
even able (and compétitive enough) to meet these
demands in relation with the aims put forward.12

that the synthesis on the “altar” theme by the latter author
was possible only in 1989 (Gotické křídlové oltáře na Sloven-
sku [Gothic winged altars in Slovakia}, Bratislava). Cf. also
WAGNER 1930 (Ref. 5), pp. 71ff.
11 Some of the earlier, according to my opinion not insignificant
contributions were in this book generally ignored; for exam-
ple DUBNICKÁ, E., “Neznáme gotické tabule v Trnavě” [The
Unknown Gothic Panes in Trnava], In: Pamiatky apríroda, 1,
1970, No. 2-3, pp. 10-12; RUSINA, I., “Motiv krajiny
v gotickej tabul’ovej malbě na Slovensku” [The Motif of
Landscape in the Gothic Pane-Painting in Slovakia}, In: Vlas-
tivědný časopis, 21, 1972, pp. 63-68; VACULÍK, K., “Reštau-
rovanie dvoch plastik zo 14. storočia” [Restoration of two
Sculptures of the 14th Century], Ibidem, 30, 1981, pp. 24-27 (a
contribution to the problém of moveable head of Jesus on the

wood-carvings of the Holý Virgin); CIDLINSKÁ, L., “Piety na
Slovensku” [Pietas in Slovakia], In: Ibidem, 30, 1981, pp. 184-
186; ŠIMUN, J., “Pieta z Františkánského kostola v Bratisla-
vě” [Pietà of the Franciscan Church at Bratislava], In: Pamiatky
a múzeá, 1993, No. 3, pp. 15-17 (to Cat. Item 2.1.4), etc.
12 Hitherto it has not been within the capacity of Slovák art
history to compile with an academie standard-work, as we
know it from Hungary, Níagyarországi milvészet 1300-1470
köriil, ed. E. Marosi, Budapest 1987, text and picture volu-
mes. In špite of objections of some Slovák scholars, the authors
in Budapest took an acceptable Central-European standpoint
(pp. 30-34), from which is discussed the relevance of several
territorial units for Slovakia’s art. The situation of Slovák art
history can even hardly be compared with those of the Slovák
historiography.

74