DOI Artikel:
Rozprawy
DOI Artikel:Miodońska, Barbara: Korona zamknięta w przekazach ikonograficznych z czasów Zygmunta I
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.47895#0025
KORONA ZAMKNIĘTA W PRZEKAZACH IKONOGRAFICZNYCH
CORONA CLAUSA IN ICONOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTS DATING FROM TFIE REIGN OF SI-
GISMUND I. (COMMENTS ON ALEKSANDER GIEYSZTOR S WORK ”NON HABEMUS CAESAREM
NISIREGEM” THE CLOSED CROWN OF POLISH KINGS IN THE LATE 15th AND 16th CENTURIES)*
Since Gieysztor’s work is described as „an outline
hypothesis of the transformation of the corona aperta
into the corona clausa”, a symbol of the sovereign
authority of the King, equal to that of the Emperor,
the present author, an art historian, tries to supple-
ment Gieysztor’s materiał, especially in respect of
iconographical sources which may be relevant. She
wishes both to add to the number of sources and to
correct certain slips in dating, and also to consider
some of the theoretical problems which arise when
works of art are used as historical source materiał.
Iconographic representations of the closed crown
dating from the reign of Sigismund I (1506—1548),
can be divided into two groups, having different
value as sources and thus reąuiring a different me-
thod of approach. The first group consists of objects
which fulfilled some institutional function — seals,
coins, the coats of arms of the Kingdom and the dy-
nasty on the title pages of books, etc., heraldic sym-
bols, representations of royal personages on collec-
tions of Acts, illustrations in works of official hi-
storiography and the engravings on the ceremoniał
sword of Sigismund I (the sword with the inscription
„SIGISMUNDUS REX JUSTUS”, State Collections of
Art in the Wawel, Cracow). These iconographic re-
presentations betray a distinct tendency on the part
of the central power to implant the new symbol of
sovereign authority in the communal consciousness.
Works of art executed for the court, and not di-
rectly linked with any state function, constitute
a somewhat different category. In them, the political
aim is only one motif in the complicated skein of
ideological and artistic subjects, a skein which must
be considered as an integral whole. Of course, one
could hąrdly expect a strictly consistent use of na-
tional symbols within the complicated artistic struc-
tures which were emerging just at the time when
society was beginning to become familiar with these
new symbols. In this second category the author
mentions coats of arms, national insignia, represen-
tations members of the Royal family, of the coro-
nation ceremony, of the reception of homage, and
devotional images, all of which may be found in
portraits and medallions executed by artists at the
Court, in illuminated liturgical manuscripts and
prayer books belonging to the Royal household or
to men of state, on architectural sculpture and furni-
shings in the Sigismund Chapel in Wawel Cathedral.
This iconographic materiał is completed by a real
crown, the supposed burial crown of Sigismund I
(1548) from the collection of Jan Matejko (National
Museum in Cracow, House of Matejko, on permanent
loan to the State Collections of Art in the Wawel),
which as far as its symbolic meaning is concerned
is a closed crown.
A study of this iconographic materiał shows that
the closed srown was first and most consistently
* Also: A. GIEYSZTOR, Non habemus caesarem nisi
regem. La couronne fermie des rois de Pologne a la fin
du XVe et au XVle siecle. ,,Bibliotheque de 1’Ecole des
chartes” CXXVII, Paris 1969.
introduced in heraldry. Thus, in representations of
Sigismund I madę during his lifetime, several types
of crown of different shapes appear. The open crown
is an exception among them. There was a transitional
form, an open crown worn on the cap with an orb
(mundus) attached to it, and also sometimes with
quite distinct arches. The closed crown, however, is
morę usual, and appears in two forms: 1. closed by
a single, Iow arch and worn on a pileolus; 2. closed
by two rather high arches with an orb at the inter-
section, worn on a pileolus, a cap, or directly on the
head. Nonę of these crowns shows close similarity to
the formal coronation crown of Polish kings, called
the crown of Boleslav I (the Brave), but in fact morę
probably that of Vladislav I (the Short). This may be
explained in two ways: 1. It was not the State Crown
but the personal crown which was usually shown,
sińce its shape, though unknown to us, must have
been morę familiar to contemporaries who would see
it fairly frequently; 2. The actual crown was not
represented exactly, but shown by means of contem-
porary stylistic forms with a freedom limited only
by the symbolic meaning of the insignia. The first
hypothesiis is practically unprovable. The second,
though, seems to correspond with the generał con-
clusions of Percy Ernst Schramm on the repro-
duction of insignia in art around 1500.
This question is linked with the theoretical con-
ception of the copy, arrived at in the Middle Ages,
with the question of the relationship between the
real object and its „imaging” in art (iconographic
rendition), and with the multiple reproduction of an
accepted iconographic formula. It seems that we
cannot speak of the faithful, detailed reproduction
of Polish insignia earlier than in royal portraits of
the second half of the 16th century (portraits of Ste-
phen Bathory, the portrait of Anna Jagiellon in
Wilanów). Before this, although artists handled the
stylistic forms available with some freedom, they
did no morę than stress one new feature, which was
important for the symbolic meaning of the chief
insignium of royal authority, the closure of the crown
with arches, and the orb at their intersection. Icono-
graphic materiał shows that this was originally done
on the instructions of persons at the Court itself,
who would be fully aware of the ideological mean-
ing of this innovation. This awareness must have
existed at the Court as early as the 1520s and '30s.
The closed crown was earliest and most consistently
shown in the first of these two iconographic groups.
The change in the second group is not noticeable
until about 1530, the year of the coronation „vivente
rege” of Sigismund II Augustus.
Although iconographic sources of the first half of
the 16th century tell as about the progressive accep-
tance of the new emblem of sovereignty by the
community in morę detail than do written sources,
they can play only an ancillary role in determining
the datę when „the form of the royal insignia coin-
cedes with the conception of a closed crown as
a symbol of supreme authority”. The solution to this
problem must be sought first of all in historical facts
and written documentation. The opinion of Gieysztor,
17
CORONA CLAUSA IN ICONOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTS DATING FROM TFIE REIGN OF SI-
GISMUND I. (COMMENTS ON ALEKSANDER GIEYSZTOR S WORK ”NON HABEMUS CAESAREM
NISIREGEM” THE CLOSED CROWN OF POLISH KINGS IN THE LATE 15th AND 16th CENTURIES)*
Since Gieysztor’s work is described as „an outline
hypothesis of the transformation of the corona aperta
into the corona clausa”, a symbol of the sovereign
authority of the King, equal to that of the Emperor,
the present author, an art historian, tries to supple-
ment Gieysztor’s materiał, especially in respect of
iconographical sources which may be relevant. She
wishes both to add to the number of sources and to
correct certain slips in dating, and also to consider
some of the theoretical problems which arise when
works of art are used as historical source materiał.
Iconographic representations of the closed crown
dating from the reign of Sigismund I (1506—1548),
can be divided into two groups, having different
value as sources and thus reąuiring a different me-
thod of approach. The first group consists of objects
which fulfilled some institutional function — seals,
coins, the coats of arms of the Kingdom and the dy-
nasty on the title pages of books, etc., heraldic sym-
bols, representations of royal personages on collec-
tions of Acts, illustrations in works of official hi-
storiography and the engravings on the ceremoniał
sword of Sigismund I (the sword with the inscription
„SIGISMUNDUS REX JUSTUS”, State Collections of
Art in the Wawel, Cracow). These iconographic re-
presentations betray a distinct tendency on the part
of the central power to implant the new symbol of
sovereign authority in the communal consciousness.
Works of art executed for the court, and not di-
rectly linked with any state function, constitute
a somewhat different category. In them, the political
aim is only one motif in the complicated skein of
ideological and artistic subjects, a skein which must
be considered as an integral whole. Of course, one
could hąrdly expect a strictly consistent use of na-
tional symbols within the complicated artistic struc-
tures which were emerging just at the time when
society was beginning to become familiar with these
new symbols. In this second category the author
mentions coats of arms, national insignia, represen-
tations members of the Royal family, of the coro-
nation ceremony, of the reception of homage, and
devotional images, all of which may be found in
portraits and medallions executed by artists at the
Court, in illuminated liturgical manuscripts and
prayer books belonging to the Royal household or
to men of state, on architectural sculpture and furni-
shings in the Sigismund Chapel in Wawel Cathedral.
This iconographic materiał is completed by a real
crown, the supposed burial crown of Sigismund I
(1548) from the collection of Jan Matejko (National
Museum in Cracow, House of Matejko, on permanent
loan to the State Collections of Art in the Wawel),
which as far as its symbolic meaning is concerned
is a closed crown.
A study of this iconographic materiał shows that
the closed srown was first and most consistently
* Also: A. GIEYSZTOR, Non habemus caesarem nisi
regem. La couronne fermie des rois de Pologne a la fin
du XVe et au XVle siecle. ,,Bibliotheque de 1’Ecole des
chartes” CXXVII, Paris 1969.
introduced in heraldry. Thus, in representations of
Sigismund I madę during his lifetime, several types
of crown of different shapes appear. The open crown
is an exception among them. There was a transitional
form, an open crown worn on the cap with an orb
(mundus) attached to it, and also sometimes with
quite distinct arches. The closed crown, however, is
morę usual, and appears in two forms: 1. closed by
a single, Iow arch and worn on a pileolus; 2. closed
by two rather high arches with an orb at the inter-
section, worn on a pileolus, a cap, or directly on the
head. Nonę of these crowns shows close similarity to
the formal coronation crown of Polish kings, called
the crown of Boleslav I (the Brave), but in fact morę
probably that of Vladislav I (the Short). This may be
explained in two ways: 1. It was not the State Crown
but the personal crown which was usually shown,
sińce its shape, though unknown to us, must have
been morę familiar to contemporaries who would see
it fairly frequently; 2. The actual crown was not
represented exactly, but shown by means of contem-
porary stylistic forms with a freedom limited only
by the symbolic meaning of the insignia. The first
hypothesiis is practically unprovable. The second,
though, seems to correspond with the generał con-
clusions of Percy Ernst Schramm on the repro-
duction of insignia in art around 1500.
This question is linked with the theoretical con-
ception of the copy, arrived at in the Middle Ages,
with the question of the relationship between the
real object and its „imaging” in art (iconographic
rendition), and with the multiple reproduction of an
accepted iconographic formula. It seems that we
cannot speak of the faithful, detailed reproduction
of Polish insignia earlier than in royal portraits of
the second half of the 16th century (portraits of Ste-
phen Bathory, the portrait of Anna Jagiellon in
Wilanów). Before this, although artists handled the
stylistic forms available with some freedom, they
did no morę than stress one new feature, which was
important for the symbolic meaning of the chief
insignium of royal authority, the closure of the crown
with arches, and the orb at their intersection. Icono-
graphic materiał shows that this was originally done
on the instructions of persons at the Court itself,
who would be fully aware of the ideological mean-
ing of this innovation. This awareness must have
existed at the Court as early as the 1520s and '30s.
The closed crown was earliest and most consistently
shown in the first of these two iconographic groups.
The change in the second group is not noticeable
until about 1530, the year of the coronation „vivente
rege” of Sigismund II Augustus.
Although iconographic sources of the first half of
the 16th century tell as about the progressive accep-
tance of the new emblem of sovereignty by the
community in morę detail than do written sources,
they can play only an ancillary role in determining
the datę when „the form of the royal insignia coin-
cedes with the conception of a closed crown as
a symbol of supreme authority”. The solution to this
problem must be sought first of all in historical facts
and written documentation. The opinion of Gieysztor,
17