DOI Heft:
Nr. 3-4
DOI Artikel:Klípa, Jan: The Madonna of Vys̆s̆í Brod and the Madonna of Wrocław and their donors: =
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.35032#0303
THE MADONNA OF VYŚŚI BROD AND THE MADONNA OF WROCŁAW AND THEIR DONORS
293
after the canon's return from Zittau in 1436 are the sporadic activities of the Prague Chap-
ter as donors or erectors in the interim until another exodus in 1448 In addition, the mere
fact that, following the occupation of Prague by George of Podëbrady, the Chapter was
once more active in exile, only this time in Pilsen, does not speak in favour of the picture
having been created shortly after Simon's death.What was originally an altar painting
was thus probably transported following the events of 1420, together with other valuables
of the Chapter's estate, to a secure place,which means it could well have appeared in
South Bohemia at this time; down to the occupation of Prague in 1448 by George
of Podëbrady at the latest. In favour of the hypothesis of the picture being kept in South
Bohemia as early as the middle of the 15th century is the provenance here of the only two
Madonnas of the Roudnice type which adopt the inexplicable motif of the Virgin's bare
right hand directly from the picture of Vyssi Brod.^ At the time, the panel could have
been, under the pressure of the circumstances, adapted as a portable altarpiece; a fact
attested by subsequently carved openings in the bottom lath, as well as the presence of a
consecration cross painted on the back of the picture. At the present level of scholarship
concerning the surviving written sources, the exact path of the work to the Vyssi Brod
Monastery cannot be reconstructed. Most probably Ćesky Krumlov played a mediating
role, since at one point the community of the Vyssi Brod Cistercian monks and the mem-
bers of the Prague Chapters and nobility both found refuge there, under a single roof, as it
were, from the Hussites.^
The identification of the donor depicted on the frame of the Madonna of Wroclaw also
raises questions. Since the synthesis proposed by Ernst Günther Troche^ the said figure
has been identified with the bishop of Wroclaw, Wenceslas II of Liegnitz (Pol.: Legnica).^
Troche's argument in support of the hypothesis that the origins of the altarpiece in the
retable of which the panel painting of the Wroclaw Madonna was placed is related to the
commission and the hypothesis of the picture being a gift to the Wroclaw Church from Czech envoys in the middte of the
15th century (cf: BARTLOVA, focZ/vé okrąży, op. cit., pp. 244-6.). Based on a different line of argument, I nonetheless
further tend to believe both of these assumptions to be problematic.
During this period, the records of the Prague administrators cite a single instance, an altarpiece in a Prague Cathedral,
and this in 1444. Zdeńka HLED1KOVÂ, Zf/umi.sfvice /waz,s'/V af/ecéze .si/0/7/or ///iC po/ovmy /J. Vo/., "Acta Uni-
versitatis Carolinae - Historia Universitatis Carolinae Pragensis" 31 (1991), p. 126.
Jaroslav ERS1L, Casié Vamovstv/a/po/urs/My Gzo//cA/77n^, "Folia Historica Bohemica" 6 (1984), p. 102.
^ The canons of Saint Vitus ' ....scZZ/or/ c/i/<?//y //? Cfpar Eu.sal/'a, //?aZ///y /'// Z/ZZatu, Z/7 l/rc vZcZ/r/Zy of w/n'c/?, Z/7 Z/ra fortZ/?<?<7
wouaVery of fJy/u'u z/roy &yo.sZZo<7 z/zeZr nacrer/ r-'as,se/.s, re/ias of ya/uA, t/?cm /Z/va/y aaJ Z/re/r arc/ave'. KADLEC,
freA/er/, op. cit., p. 288. Apart from Oybin, however, the valuables from the Prague Cathedral were also kept in other
safe places - in Plzen (Pilsen), Horsovskÿ Tÿn (Horssov-Teyn), Ćesky Krumlov (Krumau), as well as in Regensburg.
These localities are mentioned by Tomas Pesina of Ćechorod; no detailed records, however, survive (in contrast to those
concerning Oybin or Karlstein). Antonin PODLAHA, Eduard Ś1TTLER, C/md777oiy po/r/ar/ a 5V LiZo v frazo. Jo/io
ć/ę/Zay a yoyA, Praha 1903, p. 86.
^ These are Madonnas of the fog/aa type (see: Ivo KORAN, Z/voZ aai/c/i goZ/o/yc/7 77?ar/oa, "Umeni" 37 [1989], p.
203) with a bare right hand - the Madonna of Jindrichuv Hradec (Neuhaus) (Collections of the State Castle and Château
Jindrichuv Hradec) and the Madonna of Ćesky Krumlov (Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, inv. No. Nr. 1783). The last
example, slightly different from the canonic type of Vyssi Brod, is the Brussels Madonna (Musées royaux des Beaux-
Arts de Belgique), whose origins remain unknown.
^ Jan MÜLLER, K cAaraÆtorM iyZvar/7Ü Au/Zu/y Ćasić/70 fn/w/owr v /aZec/7 / 420-/470, "Umeni" 33 (1985), p. 528.
^ Ernst Günther TROCHE, Das? ors'Zo Ja/ir/iuu&rZ ^o/i/e^Ac/ior 7q/b/w<2/ero/, "Die Hohe Strasse: Schlesische
Jahrbücher für deutsche Art und Kunst im Ostraum" 1 (1938), p. 120.
^ A single voice in contemporary discourse maintains a high degree of reserve as to this identification. See: BAR-
TLOVA, focZ/va o/wazy, op. cit., pp. 244, 246.
293
after the canon's return from Zittau in 1436 are the sporadic activities of the Prague Chap-
ter as donors or erectors in the interim until another exodus in 1448 In addition, the mere
fact that, following the occupation of Prague by George of Podëbrady, the Chapter was
once more active in exile, only this time in Pilsen, does not speak in favour of the picture
having been created shortly after Simon's death.What was originally an altar painting
was thus probably transported following the events of 1420, together with other valuables
of the Chapter's estate, to a secure place,which means it could well have appeared in
South Bohemia at this time; down to the occupation of Prague in 1448 by George
of Podëbrady at the latest. In favour of the hypothesis of the picture being kept in South
Bohemia as early as the middle of the 15th century is the provenance here of the only two
Madonnas of the Roudnice type which adopt the inexplicable motif of the Virgin's bare
right hand directly from the picture of Vyssi Brod.^ At the time, the panel could have
been, under the pressure of the circumstances, adapted as a portable altarpiece; a fact
attested by subsequently carved openings in the bottom lath, as well as the presence of a
consecration cross painted on the back of the picture. At the present level of scholarship
concerning the surviving written sources, the exact path of the work to the Vyssi Brod
Monastery cannot be reconstructed. Most probably Ćesky Krumlov played a mediating
role, since at one point the community of the Vyssi Brod Cistercian monks and the mem-
bers of the Prague Chapters and nobility both found refuge there, under a single roof, as it
were, from the Hussites.^
The identification of the donor depicted on the frame of the Madonna of Wroclaw also
raises questions. Since the synthesis proposed by Ernst Günther Troche^ the said figure
has been identified with the bishop of Wroclaw, Wenceslas II of Liegnitz (Pol.: Legnica).^
Troche's argument in support of the hypothesis that the origins of the altarpiece in the
retable of which the panel painting of the Wroclaw Madonna was placed is related to the
commission and the hypothesis of the picture being a gift to the Wroclaw Church from Czech envoys in the middte of the
15th century (cf: BARTLOVA, focZ/vé okrąży, op. cit., pp. 244-6.). Based on a different line of argument, I nonetheless
further tend to believe both of these assumptions to be problematic.
During this period, the records of the Prague administrators cite a single instance, an altarpiece in a Prague Cathedral,
and this in 1444. Zdeńka HLED1KOVÂ, Zf/umi.sfvice /waz,s'/V af/ecéze .si/0/7/or ///iC po/ovmy /J. Vo/., "Acta Uni-
versitatis Carolinae - Historia Universitatis Carolinae Pragensis" 31 (1991), p. 126.
Jaroslav ERS1L, Casié Vamovstv/a/po/urs/My Gzo//cA/77n^, "Folia Historica Bohemica" 6 (1984), p. 102.
^ The canons of Saint Vitus ' ....scZZ/or/ c/i/<?//y //? Cfpar Eu.sal/'a, //?aZ///y /'// Z/ZZatu, Z/7 l/rc vZcZ/r/Zy of w/n'c/?, Z/7 Z/ra fortZ/?<?<7
wouaVery of fJy/u'u z/roy &yo.sZZo<7 z/zeZr nacrer/ r-'as,se/.s, re/ias of ya/uA, t/?cm /Z/va/y aaJ Z/re/r arc/ave'. KADLEC,
freA/er/, op. cit., p. 288. Apart from Oybin, however, the valuables from the Prague Cathedral were also kept in other
safe places - in Plzen (Pilsen), Horsovskÿ Tÿn (Horssov-Teyn), Ćesky Krumlov (Krumau), as well as in Regensburg.
These localities are mentioned by Tomas Pesina of Ćechorod; no detailed records, however, survive (in contrast to those
concerning Oybin or Karlstein). Antonin PODLAHA, Eduard Ś1TTLER, C/md777oiy po/r/ar/ a 5V LiZo v frazo. Jo/io
ć/ę/Zay a yoyA, Praha 1903, p. 86.
^ These are Madonnas of the fog/aa type (see: Ivo KORAN, Z/voZ aai/c/i goZ/o/yc/7 77?ar/oa, "Umeni" 37 [1989], p.
203) with a bare right hand - the Madonna of Jindrichuv Hradec (Neuhaus) (Collections of the State Castle and Château
Jindrichuv Hradec) and the Madonna of Ćesky Krumlov (Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, inv. No. Nr. 1783). The last
example, slightly different from the canonic type of Vyssi Brod, is the Brussels Madonna (Musées royaux des Beaux-
Arts de Belgique), whose origins remain unknown.
^ Jan MÜLLER, K cAaraÆtorM iyZvar/7Ü Au/Zu/y Ćasić/70 fn/w/owr v /aZec/7 / 420-/470, "Umeni" 33 (1985), p. 528.
^ Ernst Günther TROCHE, Das? ors'Zo Ja/ir/iuu&rZ ^o/i/e^Ac/ior 7q/b/w<2/ero/, "Die Hohe Strasse: Schlesische
Jahrbücher für deutsche Art und Kunst im Ostraum" 1 (1938), p. 120.
^ A single voice in contemporary discourse maintains a high degree of reserve as to this identification. See: BAR-
TLOVA, focZ/va o/wazy, op. cit., pp. 244, 246.