DOI Artikel:
Nowacki, Dariusz: Recenzja: The Munich exhibition of Augsburg goldsmith's art
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.20544#0155
ading that after the outbreak of the Thirty Years’ War
(1618) Karl left Silesia and took refuge at the court of
Sigismund III Vasa in Warsaw17. Thus we cannot
rule out the possibility that the commission was sent
to Augsburg through the intermediaries at the service
of the Polish royal court; besides, considering the fact
that the coat of arms was added to a basin madę some
years before clearly for secular use, the ąuestion of the
circumstances in which the bishop became the owner
of this vessel gains in importance.
The fifth room, devoted to the Kunstkammer,
was among the most impressive. A ewer and basin by
Abraham I Pfleger (Cat. no. 50), a ship-shaped cup
by Johannes I Lencker (Cat. no. 52), and a tray by
Hans III Petrus (Cat. no. 53) undeniably rank among
the most magnificent products of European gol-
dsmithery. For a Polish viewer particularly interes-
ting was a dragon-shaped drinking horn (Cat. no.
49), once belonging to Ferdinand IFs famous collec-
tion in Ambras, as a 19th century copy of the vessel is
kept in the Czartoryski Museum in Cracow18.
The entrance to the room with the jewels from
the Kunstkammer was preceded by the fountain
from the Castle of Rosenberg, while on leaving the
room the visitor saw the altar from the castle chapel
at Husum (Cat. no. 69), testifying to the excellence
of its author, Albrecht von Horn, unąuestionably
one of the greatest masters of goldsmith’s art in
its history. Any doubts in this respect are dispelled
when we compare two smali household altars, hang-
ing one opposite the other, which precede the huge
case with this masterpiece. An otherwise very
interesting work by Matthaus Walbaum (Cat. no.
68) pales in comparison with von Horn’s relief The
Deposition (Cat. no. 70) for all its values resulting
from WalbaunYs proficiency in composing smali
elements on the fit-together principle. It is evident
here that without this seeming inconsistence on the
part of the authors of the exhibition, who showed
a fragment of the court foundations of religious
1929, pp. 66 — 68; P. Nitecki, Biskupi kościoła w Polsce.
Słownik biograficzny, Warszawa 1992, pp. 76, 271.
17 Ibidem.
18 Inv. no. MNK —XIII —98. The object was executed
before 1869 — the year of its acąuisition for the Museum. The
other copy of this drinking-horn which was madę in Vienna at
the end of the 18th century, published in: Kunsthaus Lempertz
— Auktion 702: Alte Kunst, Kunstgewerbe [...], Koln 1994, p.
105, no. 1397.
19 J. D. Łobżyński, Dies Natałis abo panegiryk kościel-
ny..., Kraków 1650 — see J. Golonka, Giovanni Battista
Gisleni autorem projektu jasnogórskiego ołtarza [in:] Jasnogórski
ołtarz Królowej Polski. Studium teologiczno-historyczne
oraz dokumentacja obiektów zabytkowych i prac konserwatorskich,
ed. J. Golonka, Częstochowa 1991 (Biblioteka Jasnogór-
objects, the picture of Augsburg goldsmithing
would have been reduced for the absence in it of
uniąue creations.
After the works of this class a smali annexe
containing Sigismund III Vasa’s commissions did
not make a good impression, the morę so as the
figurę of St Benoni (Cat. no. 74), unknown in Polish
relevant literaturę, does not rank among master-
pieces. The ascetic manner of arranging three fig-
ures from the altar at Jasna Góra (Cat. no. 73)
brought out, for instance, smali anatomical incon-
sistences in the angels’ arms; furthermore, there was
no photograph (which could at least have been
published in the catalogue) of the present retable or
the woodcut published in the year of its conse-
cration19, nor was there any mention of the dis-
covery, during conservation, of traces of the halo
round the head of the Virgin Mary20.
The author of the entry rightly observes that the
scalę of the intended altar which was also to include
łife-size figures, exceeded by far the size of the
existing one. Its setting up was planned in 1643 — it
was to be adapted to the interior of the chapel enlarged
between 1641 and 1644 21. In view of such a large scalę
of the altar commissioned by Sigismund III, the
original place for the figures would rather not have
been Częstochowa but Cracow or Warsaw. If after the
king’s death in 1632 the figures had at Jasna Góra, it is
simply incredible that there would not have been any
mention of them in the monastic archival materiał.
Therefore, we should take into account not only the
intended funerary chapel at the Wawel Cathedral22
but also a number of foundations in Warsaw. The
artistic initiatives of Sigismund III and his court have
been poorly investigated; the fact that this problem is
barely touched on in the discussed catalogue will
surely delay the study of the phenomenon of the
settlement on the Vistula of the artists from Aug-
sburg23 or of the connections with Poland of such
goldsmiths as, for instance, Tobias Kramer24.
skiego Instytutu Mariologicznego no. 1), pp. 263 — 265, fig. 6.
20 Ibidem, p. 283.
21 Ibidem, p. 255.
22 M. Rożek, Katedra wawelska w XVII wieku, Kraków
1980 (Biblioteka Krakowska no. 121), pp. 138 — 144.
23 A tracę of this phenomenon is a goldsmith’s signature on
the grave plaąue of 1632, removed from Sigismund IITs coffin
in the Wawel Cathedral: MICHEL FROS VON AUGSPURG
— Court Art..., p. 164, no. 105.
24 Seling 1980, III, p. 148, no. 1277 f; Se ling 1994,
p. 30, no. 1277*a*, b* (kept in the Royal Castle), c*; and a plaąue
with The Emperor Constantine’s Vision scene, in the treasury of
the Paulite monastery at Jasna Góra in Częstochowa — J.
Samek, J. Zbudniewek, Klejnoty Jasnej Góry, 2nd ed..
Warszawa 1983, p. 101, fig. 72.
151
(1618) Karl left Silesia and took refuge at the court of
Sigismund III Vasa in Warsaw17. Thus we cannot
rule out the possibility that the commission was sent
to Augsburg through the intermediaries at the service
of the Polish royal court; besides, considering the fact
that the coat of arms was added to a basin madę some
years before clearly for secular use, the ąuestion of the
circumstances in which the bishop became the owner
of this vessel gains in importance.
The fifth room, devoted to the Kunstkammer,
was among the most impressive. A ewer and basin by
Abraham I Pfleger (Cat. no. 50), a ship-shaped cup
by Johannes I Lencker (Cat. no. 52), and a tray by
Hans III Petrus (Cat. no. 53) undeniably rank among
the most magnificent products of European gol-
dsmithery. For a Polish viewer particularly interes-
ting was a dragon-shaped drinking horn (Cat. no.
49), once belonging to Ferdinand IFs famous collec-
tion in Ambras, as a 19th century copy of the vessel is
kept in the Czartoryski Museum in Cracow18.
The entrance to the room with the jewels from
the Kunstkammer was preceded by the fountain
from the Castle of Rosenberg, while on leaving the
room the visitor saw the altar from the castle chapel
at Husum (Cat. no. 69), testifying to the excellence
of its author, Albrecht von Horn, unąuestionably
one of the greatest masters of goldsmith’s art in
its history. Any doubts in this respect are dispelled
when we compare two smali household altars, hang-
ing one opposite the other, which precede the huge
case with this masterpiece. An otherwise very
interesting work by Matthaus Walbaum (Cat. no.
68) pales in comparison with von Horn’s relief The
Deposition (Cat. no. 70) for all its values resulting
from WalbaunYs proficiency in composing smali
elements on the fit-together principle. It is evident
here that without this seeming inconsistence on the
part of the authors of the exhibition, who showed
a fragment of the court foundations of religious
1929, pp. 66 — 68; P. Nitecki, Biskupi kościoła w Polsce.
Słownik biograficzny, Warszawa 1992, pp. 76, 271.
17 Ibidem.
18 Inv. no. MNK —XIII —98. The object was executed
before 1869 — the year of its acąuisition for the Museum. The
other copy of this drinking-horn which was madę in Vienna at
the end of the 18th century, published in: Kunsthaus Lempertz
— Auktion 702: Alte Kunst, Kunstgewerbe [...], Koln 1994, p.
105, no. 1397.
19 J. D. Łobżyński, Dies Natałis abo panegiryk kościel-
ny..., Kraków 1650 — see J. Golonka, Giovanni Battista
Gisleni autorem projektu jasnogórskiego ołtarza [in:] Jasnogórski
ołtarz Królowej Polski. Studium teologiczno-historyczne
oraz dokumentacja obiektów zabytkowych i prac konserwatorskich,
ed. J. Golonka, Częstochowa 1991 (Biblioteka Jasnogór-
objects, the picture of Augsburg goldsmithing
would have been reduced for the absence in it of
uniąue creations.
After the works of this class a smali annexe
containing Sigismund III Vasa’s commissions did
not make a good impression, the morę so as the
figurę of St Benoni (Cat. no. 74), unknown in Polish
relevant literaturę, does not rank among master-
pieces. The ascetic manner of arranging three fig-
ures from the altar at Jasna Góra (Cat. no. 73)
brought out, for instance, smali anatomical incon-
sistences in the angels’ arms; furthermore, there was
no photograph (which could at least have been
published in the catalogue) of the present retable or
the woodcut published in the year of its conse-
cration19, nor was there any mention of the dis-
covery, during conservation, of traces of the halo
round the head of the Virgin Mary20.
The author of the entry rightly observes that the
scalę of the intended altar which was also to include
łife-size figures, exceeded by far the size of the
existing one. Its setting up was planned in 1643 — it
was to be adapted to the interior of the chapel enlarged
between 1641 and 1644 21. In view of such a large scalę
of the altar commissioned by Sigismund III, the
original place for the figures would rather not have
been Częstochowa but Cracow or Warsaw. If after the
king’s death in 1632 the figures had at Jasna Góra, it is
simply incredible that there would not have been any
mention of them in the monastic archival materiał.
Therefore, we should take into account not only the
intended funerary chapel at the Wawel Cathedral22
but also a number of foundations in Warsaw. The
artistic initiatives of Sigismund III and his court have
been poorly investigated; the fact that this problem is
barely touched on in the discussed catalogue will
surely delay the study of the phenomenon of the
settlement on the Vistula of the artists from Aug-
sburg23 or of the connections with Poland of such
goldsmiths as, for instance, Tobias Kramer24.
skiego Instytutu Mariologicznego no. 1), pp. 263 — 265, fig. 6.
20 Ibidem, p. 283.
21 Ibidem, p. 255.
22 M. Rożek, Katedra wawelska w XVII wieku, Kraków
1980 (Biblioteka Krakowska no. 121), pp. 138 — 144.
23 A tracę of this phenomenon is a goldsmith’s signature on
the grave plaąue of 1632, removed from Sigismund IITs coffin
in the Wawel Cathedral: MICHEL FROS VON AUGSPURG
— Court Art..., p. 164, no. 105.
24 Seling 1980, III, p. 148, no. 1277 f; Se ling 1994,
p. 30, no. 1277*a*, b* (kept in the Royal Castle), c*; and a plaąue
with The Emperor Constantine’s Vision scene, in the treasury of
the Paulite monastery at Jasna Góra in Częstochowa — J.
Samek, J. Zbudniewek, Klejnoty Jasnej Góry, 2nd ed..
Warszawa 1983, p. 101, fig. 72.
151