ANDREAS SCHLÜTER AND OTTO VAN VEEN: THE SOURCE, CONTEXT, AND ADAPTATION

65

Local artists like Jerzy Eleuter Szymonowicz-Siemiginowski and Jan Re-
isner sent to the Academia di S. Luca in Rome by Sobieski distinguished
themselves among their foreign colleagues there before returning
home.* 74 *

Finally, Netherlandish architecture in Warsaw was characterized by
architect Tilman van Gameren’s Dutch baroque créations,'0 and a par-
tiality to Netherlandish classicizing sculptures by the Danzig artist Ste-
fan Schwaner and other stylistically antique-like works at Wilanôw
either done by (or at least similar to) those from the workshops of Artus
and Thomas Quellinus and/or Ludovicus Willemsens. 76

Indeed, in the last quarter of the 17th century, Warsaw’s noble pa-
trons, painters, sculptors, and stucco artists had at least a fondamental
knowledge of major ancient Roman monuments and sculptures. And
while no extensive collections of antiquities existed in Poland at that
time, except those contemporary but classically-inspired sculptures at
Jan III Sobieski’s Wilanôw Palace near Warsaw,77 the palace gâte itself

Barthel Ranisch in 1695. These contacts may prove significant. For on 3 January in the
previous year, 1694, his second wife Catharina (née Colson) had stood as witness for the
baptism of David, son of “...Andréas Slitter Sculptore et Elisabetha Spangen Bergrin...” in
Warsaw’s Holy Cross Church. See: Grundmann and Schellenberg, Warschau, p. 125; Kar-
powicz, Sztuka Warszawy, pp. 142-149, especially 145, 148 and Jerzy Eleuter Siemigi-
nowski: Malarz polskiego baroku, Wroclaw 1974, pp. 22, 47-49, 135-137, 139-142. For
Hevelius’ interest in the arts and his illustrated publications, see K. Targosz, Jan
Heweliusz: Uczony-artysta, Wroclaw 1986, pp. 66-85; and the De la Haye Danzig and War-
saw prints: Kurkowa, Grafika ilustracyjna gdanskich clrukôw, pp. 98-197; H. Widacka,
Jan III Sobieski w grafice XVII i XVIII wieku, Warszawa 1987, pp. 24-26, 111-114, (ill. 89-
90); and I. Takimowicz, Piçc wiekôwgrafikipolskiej, Warszawa 1997, pp. 31, 336, 395.

74 These two artist both received first prizes in the compétition of 1682. Siemiginowski
for painting (in Class I) and Reisner for architecture (although he was studying painting).
The former was a royal protégé and completed commissions for Sobieski’s royal palaces
like Wilanôw between 1686-1696. Reisner’s work is also found here and continues the aca-
demie classicism of later 17th century Italian and French painting. Karpowicz, Sztuka
Warszawy, pp. 108-125; and Jerzy Eleuter Siemiginowski, pp. 14-22 and “Jan Reisner:
Zapomniany malarz i architekt,” Biuletyn Historii Sztuki, 21(1959), nr. 1, pp. 70-83.

5 Karpowicz, Sztuka Warszawy, pp. 41-52; Milobçdzki, Architektura polska,
pp. 349-395; and Mossakowski, Tilman van Gameren, pp. 77-98, 99-154, 156-187, 203,
205-215, 218-228, 237-250, and 251-264.

76 Karpowicz, Sztuka Warszawy, pp. 82-97, 198-207; W. Fijalkowski, Wilanôw. Rezy-
deneja krôla zwyciçzcy, Warszawa 1983, pp. 11-15, 30-31, 38-39, 41-42, 46-46; S. Andros-
sov, ‘Werke von Thomas Quellinus in Russland und Polen,” in Studien zur barocken Garten-
skulptur, K. Kalinowski (ed.), Poznan 1999, pp. 97ff, especially 108-116; and DaCosta
Kaufmann, “Schlüter’s Fate,” p. 202. An overview of Schlüter’s rôle within this milieu and
enlightening observations on Polish art and culture during Sobieski’s reign, seen from a Europe-
an context, is discussed in: DaCosta Kaufmann, Court, Cloister and City, pp. 283-289.

77 Karpowicz, Sztuka Warszawy, pp. 82-97, 198-207; and S. Mossakowski, Tilman
van Gameren, p. 298.