DOI Artikel:
Kochanowska-Reiche, Małgorzata: Beautiful Madonna of Wrocław: the Question of Provenance and Original State
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.18949#0059
Similar dualism appears in style. An innovative feature is the sculpture’s
compactness, expressed in a tendency to unitę all the composition elements,
morę advanced than in the case of Bohemian Madonnas (for example from
Pilsen and Krumlov). On the other hand, one may notę reminiscences of
decorative wooden figures of Bohemian Madonnas from the third ąuarter
of the 14th century, expressed in fine but unnatural positioning of the
Virgin’s right hand’s fingers and eąually unnatural position of the Child.9 It
is commonly assumed that the Madonna of Wrocław comes from the same
sculptor’s workshop that the Madonna of Toruń. The two sculptures represent
two versions of a single compositional pattern, being as if mirror reflections
of each other. The motif differences are but slight, deeper ones may be noted
in proportions and the deepest in idea and a level of execution. In the case
of the Madonna of Toruń, the mantle’s folds (as well as her veil), very
spaciously and dynamically shaped, suggest a spinning motion. The figurę
of the Virgin is composed in several planes which is enhanced by her arm’s
and head’s tilt. The face of the Virgin represents the type of beauty analogous
to the Wrocław one, although her look is morę “statuesąue”: the cut of her
narrow, S-shaped eyes is identical with the Wrocław sculpture. There are
serious differences in both position and gestures of the Child - he is
definitely seated. The way the Child sits, the way he crosses his legs and is
held by his Mother - all give morę natural impression and interplay of
composition elements is fuller than in the Wrocław sculpture. Thus, it may
be assumed that the Madonna of Wrocław had been created earlier than the
Madonna of Toruń.
The Madonna of Sternberk’s relationship with the Toruń workshop is
proved not only by almost identical repetition of the drapery pattern and
the sculpture’s high artistic value but also the slightly S-shape cut of the
Virgin’s eyes; this detail cannot be explained by sheer borrowing. The face
itself, however, is rendered differently so one should assume that this figurę
was created by a sculptor from the workshop of the Toruń master. In recent
literaturę this sculptor is called the Follower of the Master of the Beautiful
Madonna of Toruń and the sculpture is dated for the last decade of the
14th century.111 Stylistically, also a figurę of St. Annę with the Yirgin and Child
from Nova Rasę (Neu-Reisch, ill. 7) in Moravia should be counted in the
Toruń circle. In St. Annę we encounter a different drapery pattern (having
no analogies) but a comparable effect of the vividness of folds, ease in their
shaping and contrasting of composition planes. It should be added that the
contrapposto variant is also a common element of St. Anne’s sculpture and
the Toruń group.
v For example Madonna of Zahraźan, Madonna of Bećou, Madonna of Hrddek.
1111. Hlobil, catalogue entries in Od gotiky k renesanci. Vytvarna kultura Morauy a Slezska
1400-1550, vol. III: Olomoucko, ed. by I. Hlobil, M. Perutka, exh. cat., Olomouc 1999,
pp. 267-272 and in Last Flowers ofthe Middle Ages. From Gothic to the Renaissance in Moravia
and Silesia, ed. by I. Hlobil, exh. cat., Palazzo Yenezia, Romę 2000, pp. 79-83.
57
compactness, expressed in a tendency to unitę all the composition elements,
morę advanced than in the case of Bohemian Madonnas (for example from
Pilsen and Krumlov). On the other hand, one may notę reminiscences of
decorative wooden figures of Bohemian Madonnas from the third ąuarter
of the 14th century, expressed in fine but unnatural positioning of the
Virgin’s right hand’s fingers and eąually unnatural position of the Child.9 It
is commonly assumed that the Madonna of Wrocław comes from the same
sculptor’s workshop that the Madonna of Toruń. The two sculptures represent
two versions of a single compositional pattern, being as if mirror reflections
of each other. The motif differences are but slight, deeper ones may be noted
in proportions and the deepest in idea and a level of execution. In the case
of the Madonna of Toruń, the mantle’s folds (as well as her veil), very
spaciously and dynamically shaped, suggest a spinning motion. The figurę
of the Virgin is composed in several planes which is enhanced by her arm’s
and head’s tilt. The face of the Virgin represents the type of beauty analogous
to the Wrocław one, although her look is morę “statuesąue”: the cut of her
narrow, S-shaped eyes is identical with the Wrocław sculpture. There are
serious differences in both position and gestures of the Child - he is
definitely seated. The way the Child sits, the way he crosses his legs and is
held by his Mother - all give morę natural impression and interplay of
composition elements is fuller than in the Wrocław sculpture. Thus, it may
be assumed that the Madonna of Wrocław had been created earlier than the
Madonna of Toruń.
The Madonna of Sternberk’s relationship with the Toruń workshop is
proved not only by almost identical repetition of the drapery pattern and
the sculpture’s high artistic value but also the slightly S-shape cut of the
Virgin’s eyes; this detail cannot be explained by sheer borrowing. The face
itself, however, is rendered differently so one should assume that this figurę
was created by a sculptor from the workshop of the Toruń master. In recent
literaturę this sculptor is called the Follower of the Master of the Beautiful
Madonna of Toruń and the sculpture is dated for the last decade of the
14th century.111 Stylistically, also a figurę of St. Annę with the Yirgin and Child
from Nova Rasę (Neu-Reisch, ill. 7) in Moravia should be counted in the
Toruń circle. In St. Annę we encounter a different drapery pattern (having
no analogies) but a comparable effect of the vividness of folds, ease in their
shaping and contrasting of composition planes. It should be added that the
contrapposto variant is also a common element of St. Anne’s sculpture and
the Toruń group.
v For example Madonna of Zahraźan, Madonna of Bećou, Madonna of Hrddek.
1111. Hlobil, catalogue entries in Od gotiky k renesanci. Vytvarna kultura Morauy a Slezska
1400-1550, vol. III: Olomoucko, ed. by I. Hlobil, M. Perutka, exh. cat., Olomouc 1999,
pp. 267-272 and in Last Flowers ofthe Middle Ages. From Gothic to the Renaissance in Moravia
and Silesia, ed. by I. Hlobil, exh. cat., Palazzo Yenezia, Romę 2000, pp. 79-83.
57