DOI issue:
Nr. 1
DOI article:Blower, Jonathan: Max Dvořák, Wilhelm von Bode and "The Monuments of German Art"
DOI Page / Citation link: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.31179#0099
6. the society is run by a committee elected by the
congress of art history;
7. members paying 200 Marks / 250 francs per
annum are made committee members;
8. administrative and financial reports are to be sent
out with the Jahresgaben.
The main aim of the proposed society, then, was
the création of a photographie collection of primary
sources —what Springer called an
It would consist of reproductions of
'TA wot/ Jť/hr/af
/yg A /I. J
op Ař yktňvTT cycAt yhotcot, /Ar<? op
ÎA/f'V Reproduction costs were to be covered by
membership fees, the incentives for joining being
the Jahresgaben, consisting of a few choice photo-
graphs and facsimiles, as well as discounted prices
on the major publications, which would reproduce,
in glorious monochrome, entire bodies of work such
as Raphael's madonnas, the Cartoons for the stanze
délia segnatura, or Holbein's English portraits.
Springer had consulted a couple of publishers on
the economic feasibility of his proposai. He found that
if a thousand paying members could be convinced
to subscribe, a substantial surplus of means could be
procured for the production of the major publications,
which would then naturally hnd a ready market and
wide readership amongst the members themselvesV
Income from membership fees 25 000 francs
Jahresgabe production costs 15 000 francs
Other expenses_1 000 francs
Surplus 9 000 francs
The apparent simplicity of Springer's calculations
convinced the congress. There were no signiheant
Ibidem, p. 500.
" This idea was by no means new to the German Publishing
industry. A recent, if completely unrelated book provides the
following helpful définition: "TA rVyíTpAw ryrtaw Mtar A/rcA/tV
to Ař Ao/è A Ař A crAr/o
Ag ywMAAw cf AoTr př Wt
tAA íztfitA or AřApnywV o AřwzL A ApAV A
tř/X T ďAo třryřt—yOr Ar^rř, A Ař (pT-Atr,
cr rAoAřp — /o ^vřtfďA %% p-
pnV ror/tT — ILLETSCHKO,
objections, the self-evident Italian bias of the project
went completely unremarked and, on the sugges-
tion of Richard Schöne (Bode's predecessor at the
Berlin muséums), the congress resolved to adopt
the program of the Gesellschaft Albertina with the
provisional exclusion of point six; the élection of a
committee by the congress itself. On this point, a
committee consisting of Schöne, Eitelberger and
Springer was proposed, but the two men who were
present both declined. In any case, von Tützow re-
marked that Springer had explicitly requested that
the committee includeyG<?Awn* — the society was to
be an AAr/M/hwA one. Eitelberger conhrmed this
intention on Springer's part, but had his own réser-
vations, ostensibly for purely practical reasons, i.e.,
the shortage of foreign colleagues at the congress
and the questionable efňcacy of a committee that
would thus inevitably be scattered across Europe. His
doubts were laid aside, however, and the congress
appointed a three-man committee to get the society
up and running: Prof. Karl von Tützow (German,
resident in Vienna), General Consul joseph Archer
Crowe (English, Düsseldorf), and Prof. Anton Hein-
rich Springer (Bohemian, Leipzig).
It seems little came of the Gesellschaft Albertina
after the congress at Vienna. Twenty years later, an
'Art Historical Society for Photographie Publica-
tions" was founded in Leipzig (1893) on the basis of
Springer's plans, but even then it lacked the numbers
and thus the funds to produce any sort of 'VApvtzA
Similarly, the congress itself was supposed to
have reconvened at Berlin in 1875, but had to be
postponed because the Prussians were busy putting
their muséums in order. The second congress even-
tually met at Nuremberg in 1893, and although its
foreign contingent was signiheantly diminished, an
M. — HIRSH, M. (eds.): MpH-KVA / HAWPp^r. BüpmAV
7707- 7773. München 2010, p. 626.
Its committee was exclusively German. See Kunsthistorische
Gesellschaft für photographische Publikationen. In:
ArcAA lHrA%jAAAAfR^^^7-RA^r^^rA, 5,22. 3.1894,
No. 19, pp. 297-300; and August Schmarsow's report to the
third congress of art history — KÖLN 1894 (see in note 25),
p. 32. An annual folio of photographie reproductions was
published under the name of this society from 1895 (with
18 héliogravures) to 1905, when it seems to have folded.
97
congress of art history;
7. members paying 200 Marks / 250 francs per
annum are made committee members;
8. administrative and financial reports are to be sent
out with the Jahresgaben.
The main aim of the proposed society, then, was
the création of a photographie collection of primary
sources —what Springer called an
It would consist of reproductions of
'TA wot/ Jť/hr/af
/yg A /I. J
op Ař yktňvTT cycAt yhotcot, /Ar<? op
ÎA/f'V Reproduction costs were to be covered by
membership fees, the incentives for joining being
the Jahresgaben, consisting of a few choice photo-
graphs and facsimiles, as well as discounted prices
on the major publications, which would reproduce,
in glorious monochrome, entire bodies of work such
as Raphael's madonnas, the Cartoons for the stanze
délia segnatura, or Holbein's English portraits.
Springer had consulted a couple of publishers on
the economic feasibility of his proposai. He found that
if a thousand paying members could be convinced
to subscribe, a substantial surplus of means could be
procured for the production of the major publications,
which would then naturally hnd a ready market and
wide readership amongst the members themselvesV
Income from membership fees 25 000 francs
Jahresgabe production costs 15 000 francs
Other expenses_1 000 francs
Surplus 9 000 francs
The apparent simplicity of Springer's calculations
convinced the congress. There were no signiheant
Ibidem, p. 500.
" This idea was by no means new to the German Publishing
industry. A recent, if completely unrelated book provides the
following helpful définition: "TA rVyíTpAw ryrtaw Mtar A/rcA/tV
to Ař Ao/è A Ař A crAr/o
Ag ywMAAw cf AoTr př Wt
tAA íztfitA or AřApnywV o AřwzL A ApAV A
tř/X T ďAo třryřt—yOr Ar^rř, A Ař (pT-Atr,
cr rAoAřp — /o ^vřtfďA %% p-
pnV ror/tT — ILLETSCHKO,
objections, the self-evident Italian bias of the project
went completely unremarked and, on the sugges-
tion of Richard Schöne (Bode's predecessor at the
Berlin muséums), the congress resolved to adopt
the program of the Gesellschaft Albertina with the
provisional exclusion of point six; the élection of a
committee by the congress itself. On this point, a
committee consisting of Schöne, Eitelberger and
Springer was proposed, but the two men who were
present both declined. In any case, von Tützow re-
marked that Springer had explicitly requested that
the committee includeyG<?Awn* — the society was to
be an AAr/M/hwA one. Eitelberger conhrmed this
intention on Springer's part, but had his own réser-
vations, ostensibly for purely practical reasons, i.e.,
the shortage of foreign colleagues at the congress
and the questionable efňcacy of a committee that
would thus inevitably be scattered across Europe. His
doubts were laid aside, however, and the congress
appointed a three-man committee to get the society
up and running: Prof. Karl von Tützow (German,
resident in Vienna), General Consul joseph Archer
Crowe (English, Düsseldorf), and Prof. Anton Hein-
rich Springer (Bohemian, Leipzig).
It seems little came of the Gesellschaft Albertina
after the congress at Vienna. Twenty years later, an
'Art Historical Society for Photographie Publica-
tions" was founded in Leipzig (1893) on the basis of
Springer's plans, but even then it lacked the numbers
and thus the funds to produce any sort of 'VApvtzA
Similarly, the congress itself was supposed to
have reconvened at Berlin in 1875, but had to be
postponed because the Prussians were busy putting
their muséums in order. The second congress even-
tually met at Nuremberg in 1893, and although its
foreign contingent was signiheantly diminished, an
M. — HIRSH, M. (eds.): MpH-KVA / HAWPp^r. BüpmAV
7707- 7773. München 2010, p. 626.
Its committee was exclusively German. See Kunsthistorische
Gesellschaft für photographische Publikationen. In:
ArcAA lHrA%jAAAAfR^^^7-RA^r^^rA, 5,22. 3.1894,
No. 19, pp. 297-300; and August Schmarsow's report to the
third congress of art history — KÖLN 1894 (see in note 25),
p. 32. An annual folio of photographie reproductions was
published under the name of this society from 1895 (with
18 héliogravures) to 1905, when it seems to have folded.
97