DOI article:
Crossley, Paul: "Bohemia Sacra" and "Polonia Sacra"
DOI Page / Citation link: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.20619#0053
Folia Historiae Artium
Seria Nowa, t. 7 (2001)
ISBN 83-88857-38-X
ISSN 0071-6723
Paul Crossley
Bohemia Sacra and Polonia Sacra.
Liturgy and History in Prague and Cracow Cathedrals
For Lech Kalinowski
The choir of St Vitus’ cathedral in Prague, begun in
1344 and completed by 1385, is the most eccentric of all
Gothic great churches. Its main (Southern) entrance is
decorated with a mosaic (ill. 1). Its principal chapel, dedi-
cated to St Wenceslas, has a round-arched portal, giving
onto a dark, mural interior, decorated with chunks of
semi-precious Stones, and covered by a Muslim-looking
vault (ill. 2). The cathedraPs generał composition is just
as bizarre (ill. 3). Instead of the integrated and orthogonal
layout which characterises most Gothic great churches
(Saint-Denis), we have an irregular seąuence of ąuasi-
separate elements: the huge assymetrical south steeple,
the sąuashed south transept porch, and, most unortho-
dox of all, the outsize Wenceslas chapel, pushing its
western face into the south transept. Nothing in north-
ern cathedral architecture prepares us for these spatial
irregularities or for such a blatant intrusion of Early Chris-
tian, Romanesąue, even Muslim-looking forms into a self-
consciously modern Gothic building1.
It is now generally agreed that the prime mover be-
hind these solecisms was not the cathedraPs architect,
Peter Parler, but his patron, the German Emperor and
1 The literaturę on Prague cathedral is vast. The best recent his-
tory, with up-to-date literaturę, is by K. BeneSovsk2, Goticka
katedrala. Architektura [in:] Katedrala sv. Vita v Praze (k 650 vyroci
założeni), ed. A. Merhautova, Prague 1994, pp. 25-65. See also B.
Baumiiller, Der Chor des Veitsdomes in Prag. Die Kónigskirche Kai-
ser Karls IV, Berlin 1994, and the sumptuously produced book on the
cathedral by K. BeneSovskź and I. H1 ob11, Peter Parler and St
Vitus's Cathedral 1356-1399, Prague 1999- Notę also the recent arti-
cles on the Prague choir by K. Beneśovska and J. Homolka,
Umśni, 47: 1999, pp. 351-363, and 364-384. D. Lfbal, P. Zahradnik,
Katedrala svateho Vita na Prażskćm Hrade, Prague 1999, pp. 58-142,
offers a close analysis of the structure of the whole choir and south
transept.
2 V. Kotrba, Kdy pfisel Petr Parler do Prahy, Umśni, 19: 1971,
pp. 109-135; Idem, Kapie svatovaclavska v praźske katedrale, Umeni,
8: 1960, 329-356. Kotrba’s attribution of these oddities to the interven-
tion of Charles IV, oddities all centred around the cathedraPs sacred
nucleus, the Wenceslaus chapel and the south transept, has not been
Bohemian king, Charles IV of Luxembourg2. St Vitus’s
cathedral was Charles’s Eigenkirche, the sacred centre
of his new Capital, the burial and coronation church of
his dynasty. He laid the foundation stone (in 1344), he
chose both its architects (Matthias of Arras and Peter
Parler), he imposed his unprepossessing likeness on the
cathedraPs fabric no less than five times, he endowed
its principle saint, his belovecl St Wenceslas, the 10th-cen-
tury patron of Bohemia, with a new shrine, a new tomb,
a new reliąuary bust, and - to be placed permanently
on the bust’s head - a new Bohemian crown. His fre-
ąuent journeys to Italy, not least to receive the imperial
crown in 1355 and 1368, łeft him with an abiding inter-
est in Early Christian mosaic, imperial imagery, and
Trecento painting. It was he who installed the mosaic
over the south porch, and incrusted the dado of the
Wenceslas chapel with chunks of precious Stones. All
this is well known3. What is less obvious is the fact that
Charles brought to the cathedral a set of fundamental
approaches to architecture and architectural decoration,
approaches which amount almost to an artistic policy:
firstly, a sense of architectural decorum, of the fitness of
seriously ąuestioned by subseąuent German or Czech scholarship. My
concentration on Charles’s contribution to Prague cathedral should not
blind us to the participation of his ‘cultural advisors’, such as Arch-
bishop ArnoSt of Pardubice and the leading officials of the cathedral
chapter.
3 For all these measures see J. Homolka, Zu den ikono-
graphischen Programmen Karls IV [in:] Die Parler und der Schóne Stil
1350-1400. Europaische Kunst unter den Luxemburgern, vol. 2, ed.
A. Legner, Cologne 1978, pp. 608-618 (henceforward abbreviated as
Die Parler)-, Idem, Ikonografie katedraly sv. Vita v Praze, Umśnf, 26:
1978, pp. 564-575. BeneSovska, op. cit., pp. 25-65. The mosaic
and the incrustations of the chapel are attributed to him by BeneS
Krabice, see Kronika Benese Krabice z Weitmile (henceforward referred
to as Benes Krabice) [in:] Fontes rerum bohemicarum (abbreviated as
FRB), IV, ed. J. Emler, Prague 1884, pp. 541 and 546 respectively.
Charles’s Italian journeys are carefully plotted by E. W i d d e r, Itinerar
und Politik. Studien zur Reiseherrschaft Karls IV sudlich der Alpen,
Cologne-Weimar-Vienna 1993-
49
Seria Nowa, t. 7 (2001)
ISBN 83-88857-38-X
ISSN 0071-6723
Paul Crossley
Bohemia Sacra and Polonia Sacra.
Liturgy and History in Prague and Cracow Cathedrals
For Lech Kalinowski
The choir of St Vitus’ cathedral in Prague, begun in
1344 and completed by 1385, is the most eccentric of all
Gothic great churches. Its main (Southern) entrance is
decorated with a mosaic (ill. 1). Its principal chapel, dedi-
cated to St Wenceslas, has a round-arched portal, giving
onto a dark, mural interior, decorated with chunks of
semi-precious Stones, and covered by a Muslim-looking
vault (ill. 2). The cathedraPs generał composition is just
as bizarre (ill. 3). Instead of the integrated and orthogonal
layout which characterises most Gothic great churches
(Saint-Denis), we have an irregular seąuence of ąuasi-
separate elements: the huge assymetrical south steeple,
the sąuashed south transept porch, and, most unortho-
dox of all, the outsize Wenceslas chapel, pushing its
western face into the south transept. Nothing in north-
ern cathedral architecture prepares us for these spatial
irregularities or for such a blatant intrusion of Early Chris-
tian, Romanesąue, even Muslim-looking forms into a self-
consciously modern Gothic building1.
It is now generally agreed that the prime mover be-
hind these solecisms was not the cathedraPs architect,
Peter Parler, but his patron, the German Emperor and
1 The literaturę on Prague cathedral is vast. The best recent his-
tory, with up-to-date literaturę, is by K. BeneSovsk2, Goticka
katedrala. Architektura [in:] Katedrala sv. Vita v Praze (k 650 vyroci
założeni), ed. A. Merhautova, Prague 1994, pp. 25-65. See also B.
Baumiiller, Der Chor des Veitsdomes in Prag. Die Kónigskirche Kai-
ser Karls IV, Berlin 1994, and the sumptuously produced book on the
cathedral by K. BeneSovskź and I. H1 ob11, Peter Parler and St
Vitus's Cathedral 1356-1399, Prague 1999- Notę also the recent arti-
cles on the Prague choir by K. Beneśovska and J. Homolka,
Umśni, 47: 1999, pp. 351-363, and 364-384. D. Lfbal, P. Zahradnik,
Katedrala svateho Vita na Prażskćm Hrade, Prague 1999, pp. 58-142,
offers a close analysis of the structure of the whole choir and south
transept.
2 V. Kotrba, Kdy pfisel Petr Parler do Prahy, Umśni, 19: 1971,
pp. 109-135; Idem, Kapie svatovaclavska v praźske katedrale, Umeni,
8: 1960, 329-356. Kotrba’s attribution of these oddities to the interven-
tion of Charles IV, oddities all centred around the cathedraPs sacred
nucleus, the Wenceslaus chapel and the south transept, has not been
Bohemian king, Charles IV of Luxembourg2. St Vitus’s
cathedral was Charles’s Eigenkirche, the sacred centre
of his new Capital, the burial and coronation church of
his dynasty. He laid the foundation stone (in 1344), he
chose both its architects (Matthias of Arras and Peter
Parler), he imposed his unprepossessing likeness on the
cathedraPs fabric no less than five times, he endowed
its principle saint, his belovecl St Wenceslas, the 10th-cen-
tury patron of Bohemia, with a new shrine, a new tomb,
a new reliąuary bust, and - to be placed permanently
on the bust’s head - a new Bohemian crown. His fre-
ąuent journeys to Italy, not least to receive the imperial
crown in 1355 and 1368, łeft him with an abiding inter-
est in Early Christian mosaic, imperial imagery, and
Trecento painting. It was he who installed the mosaic
over the south porch, and incrusted the dado of the
Wenceslas chapel with chunks of precious Stones. All
this is well known3. What is less obvious is the fact that
Charles brought to the cathedral a set of fundamental
approaches to architecture and architectural decoration,
approaches which amount almost to an artistic policy:
firstly, a sense of architectural decorum, of the fitness of
seriously ąuestioned by subseąuent German or Czech scholarship. My
concentration on Charles’s contribution to Prague cathedral should not
blind us to the participation of his ‘cultural advisors’, such as Arch-
bishop ArnoSt of Pardubice and the leading officials of the cathedral
chapter.
3 For all these measures see J. Homolka, Zu den ikono-
graphischen Programmen Karls IV [in:] Die Parler und der Schóne Stil
1350-1400. Europaische Kunst unter den Luxemburgern, vol. 2, ed.
A. Legner, Cologne 1978, pp. 608-618 (henceforward abbreviated as
Die Parler)-, Idem, Ikonografie katedraly sv. Vita v Praze, Umśnf, 26:
1978, pp. 564-575. BeneSovska, op. cit., pp. 25-65. The mosaic
and the incrustations of the chapel are attributed to him by BeneS
Krabice, see Kronika Benese Krabice z Weitmile (henceforward referred
to as Benes Krabice) [in:] Fontes rerum bohemicarum (abbreviated as
FRB), IV, ed. J. Emler, Prague 1884, pp. 541 and 546 respectively.
Charles’s Italian journeys are carefully plotted by E. W i d d e r, Itinerar
und Politik. Studien zur Reiseherrschaft Karls IV sudlich der Alpen,
Cologne-Weimar-Vienna 1993-
49