DOI article:
Adamski, Jakub: Between form and meaning: research on Gothic architecture as a bearer of ideological content in Polish historiography of the last five decades
DOI Page / Citation link: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.54670#0007
6
father and key figure of this movement, who was also the
founder of the concept of regional schools of Roman-
esque architecture, was Arcisse de Caumont, a citizen of
Bayeux, who in 1824 founded the Société des Antiquaires
de Normandie in Caen, and ten years later a nationwide
organization - the Société française d’archéologie pour la
conservation et la description des monuments historiques.* * 3
Since their inception, both of these associations - which,
incidentally, are still in existence - have represented the
“dogmatic” current in the archeology of architecture, that
is, research of an almost exclusively organising and clas-
sifying character which only to a limited extent corre-
sponded to the investigations of the “classical” art histo-
ry The greatest merit of the Société française d’archéologie
lies in the fact that it has been continuously publishing
two scholarly series of fundamental importance to the re-
search on medieval architecture in France, namely, Bul-
letin monumental since 1834 and Congrès archéologique
de France since 1847. Both these periodicals are published
annually and both have been presenting materials from
sessions dedicated to particular regions and cities; these
materials do not, however, constitute a catalogue raisonné,
since these sessions have not been organised according to
a consistent topographic key Influenced by de Caumont s
endeavours, an identical modus operandi was adopted by
the British, who in the year 1843 founded the British Ar-
chaeological Association, which also publishes conference
transactions from annual sessions dedicated to particular
cities and counties.
In Germany, in turn, the history of architecture had
been included in an academic curriculum for the first
time as early as 1813 - at the university of Göttingen,
where the first university professorship of art history was
established.4 In the latter half of the 19th century, efforts
were undertaken to prepare systematically planned topo-
graphical inventories of all the provinces of the Reich as
divided into districts {Kreise). Until the outbreak of the
Second World War these volumes - initially prepared by
various authors working individually - had covered all
Die Taxonomien der Architekturgeschichte und ihre naturwis-
senschaftlichen Parallelen in der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts’, in
Stil-Linien diagrammatischer Kunstgeschichte, ed. by W. Cort-
jaens, K. Heck, Berlin and Munich, 2014, pp. 34-51.
3 See: C. Freigang, Arcisse de Caumont (1802-1873) und Eugène-
-Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc (1814-1879)’, in Klassiker der Kunstge-
schichte, vol. 1, Von Winckelmann bis Warburg, ed. by U. Pfisterer,
Munich, 2007, pp. 76-91; Arcisse de Caumont, 1801-1873. Erudit
normand et fondateur de l’archéologie française. Actes du colloque
international organisé à Caen du 14 au 16 juin 2001, par la Société
des antiquaires de Normandie, ed. by V. Juhel, Caen, 2004.
4 See: Johann Dominicus Fiorillo. Kunstgeschichte und die romanti-
sche Bewegung um 1800. Akten des Kolloquiums “Johann Domini-
cus Fiorillo und die Anfänge der Kunstgeschichte in Göttingen” am
Kunstgeschichtlichen Seminar und der Kunstsammlung der Uni-
versität Göttingen vom 11.-13. November 1994, ed. by A. Middel-
dorf Kosegarten, Göttingen, 1997.
the area of the country.5 This manner of cataloguing ar-
chitectural monuments was adopted as a model in most
of the states of central and northern Europe, including the
newly independent Poland. In every country, this abso-
lutely fundamental research effort was accompanied by
the publication of more detailed, monographic works that
focused on various issues related to the chronology and
artistic origins of particular buildings or their regional
groupings, often viewed in terms of their typology.
In the inter-war period, the international milieu of ex-
perts on medieval art was fully entitled to their evident
satisfaction in having completed this first, fundamental,
well-nigh positivistic phase of research. Yet this satisfac-
tion was increasingly often accompanied by a deep-root-
ed disappointment with the purely factual nature of the
investigations conducted thus far, with the research ques-
tionnaire being restricted to issues of form and construc-
tion, and with the dogmatic character of the archaeologi-
cal approach.6 The sense of cognitive dissatisfaction and
weariness, and a desire to refresh the tired aspect of art
history - and the history of architecture - were felt partic-
ularly strongly by those scholars who preferred to perceive
a work of art as a signal and an effect of the complex uni-
verse of ideas current in a given era; that is, those schol-
ars who embraced the concept of “art history as a history
of ideas” as presented by Max Dvorak in his studies, col-
lected posthumously under this title {Kunstgeschichte als
Geistesgeschichte) in a volume published in 1924.7 Signifi-
cantly, the same year saw the publication of the second
edition of Joseph Sauers fundamental compendium of the
symbolism of a medieval church - both the edifice and
its furnishings - in the light of medieval sources.8 It was
a work which certainly contributed to the scholars’ taking
note of the meanings, especially those of an allegorical na-
ture, encoded in the works of medieval architecture.
The true breakthrough, however, came in the 1940s
and 1950s, when the development of research on iconog-
raphy in visual arts resulted in the publication of pioneer-
ing studies in which architecture, too, began to be per-
ceived as a visual, or rather a communicating art.9 This
5 A complete list of all volumes is accessible online: <https://
de.wikisource.org/wiki/Kunstdenkm%C3%A4ler> [accessed on
6 August 2019].
6 T. Rodzińska-Chorąży, Zespoły rezydencjonalne, pp. 241-258
(as in note 2).
7 M. Dvorak, Kunstgeschichte als Geistesgeschichte. Studien zur
abendländischen Kunstentwicklung, Munich, 1924. See also:
L. Kalinowski, Max Dvorak i jego metoda badań nad sztukq
(w stulecie urodzin), Warsaw, 1974.
8 J. Sauer, Symbolik des Kirchengebäudes und seiner Ausstattung in
der Auffassung des Mittelalters mit Berücksichtigung von Honorius
Augustodunensis Sicardus und Durandus, Freiburg im Breisgau,
1924 (first edition: 1902).
9 P. Crossley, Tn Search of an Iconography of Medieval Archi-
tecture,’ in Symbolae Historiae Artium. Studia z historii sztuki
Lechowi Kalinowskiemu dedykowane, ed. by J. Gadomski et al.,
father and key figure of this movement, who was also the
founder of the concept of regional schools of Roman-
esque architecture, was Arcisse de Caumont, a citizen of
Bayeux, who in 1824 founded the Société des Antiquaires
de Normandie in Caen, and ten years later a nationwide
organization - the Société française d’archéologie pour la
conservation et la description des monuments historiques.* * 3
Since their inception, both of these associations - which,
incidentally, are still in existence - have represented the
“dogmatic” current in the archeology of architecture, that
is, research of an almost exclusively organising and clas-
sifying character which only to a limited extent corre-
sponded to the investigations of the “classical” art histo-
ry The greatest merit of the Société française d’archéologie
lies in the fact that it has been continuously publishing
two scholarly series of fundamental importance to the re-
search on medieval architecture in France, namely, Bul-
letin monumental since 1834 and Congrès archéologique
de France since 1847. Both these periodicals are published
annually and both have been presenting materials from
sessions dedicated to particular regions and cities; these
materials do not, however, constitute a catalogue raisonné,
since these sessions have not been organised according to
a consistent topographic key Influenced by de Caumont s
endeavours, an identical modus operandi was adopted by
the British, who in the year 1843 founded the British Ar-
chaeological Association, which also publishes conference
transactions from annual sessions dedicated to particular
cities and counties.
In Germany, in turn, the history of architecture had
been included in an academic curriculum for the first
time as early as 1813 - at the university of Göttingen,
where the first university professorship of art history was
established.4 In the latter half of the 19th century, efforts
were undertaken to prepare systematically planned topo-
graphical inventories of all the provinces of the Reich as
divided into districts {Kreise). Until the outbreak of the
Second World War these volumes - initially prepared by
various authors working individually - had covered all
Die Taxonomien der Architekturgeschichte und ihre naturwis-
senschaftlichen Parallelen in der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts’, in
Stil-Linien diagrammatischer Kunstgeschichte, ed. by W. Cort-
jaens, K. Heck, Berlin and Munich, 2014, pp. 34-51.
3 See: C. Freigang, Arcisse de Caumont (1802-1873) und Eugène-
-Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc (1814-1879)’, in Klassiker der Kunstge-
schichte, vol. 1, Von Winckelmann bis Warburg, ed. by U. Pfisterer,
Munich, 2007, pp. 76-91; Arcisse de Caumont, 1801-1873. Erudit
normand et fondateur de l’archéologie française. Actes du colloque
international organisé à Caen du 14 au 16 juin 2001, par la Société
des antiquaires de Normandie, ed. by V. Juhel, Caen, 2004.
4 See: Johann Dominicus Fiorillo. Kunstgeschichte und die romanti-
sche Bewegung um 1800. Akten des Kolloquiums “Johann Domini-
cus Fiorillo und die Anfänge der Kunstgeschichte in Göttingen” am
Kunstgeschichtlichen Seminar und der Kunstsammlung der Uni-
versität Göttingen vom 11.-13. November 1994, ed. by A. Middel-
dorf Kosegarten, Göttingen, 1997.
the area of the country.5 This manner of cataloguing ar-
chitectural monuments was adopted as a model in most
of the states of central and northern Europe, including the
newly independent Poland. In every country, this abso-
lutely fundamental research effort was accompanied by
the publication of more detailed, monographic works that
focused on various issues related to the chronology and
artistic origins of particular buildings or their regional
groupings, often viewed in terms of their typology.
In the inter-war period, the international milieu of ex-
perts on medieval art was fully entitled to their evident
satisfaction in having completed this first, fundamental,
well-nigh positivistic phase of research. Yet this satisfac-
tion was increasingly often accompanied by a deep-root-
ed disappointment with the purely factual nature of the
investigations conducted thus far, with the research ques-
tionnaire being restricted to issues of form and construc-
tion, and with the dogmatic character of the archaeologi-
cal approach.6 The sense of cognitive dissatisfaction and
weariness, and a desire to refresh the tired aspect of art
history - and the history of architecture - were felt partic-
ularly strongly by those scholars who preferred to perceive
a work of art as a signal and an effect of the complex uni-
verse of ideas current in a given era; that is, those schol-
ars who embraced the concept of “art history as a history
of ideas” as presented by Max Dvorak in his studies, col-
lected posthumously under this title {Kunstgeschichte als
Geistesgeschichte) in a volume published in 1924.7 Signifi-
cantly, the same year saw the publication of the second
edition of Joseph Sauers fundamental compendium of the
symbolism of a medieval church - both the edifice and
its furnishings - in the light of medieval sources.8 It was
a work which certainly contributed to the scholars’ taking
note of the meanings, especially those of an allegorical na-
ture, encoded in the works of medieval architecture.
The true breakthrough, however, came in the 1940s
and 1950s, when the development of research on iconog-
raphy in visual arts resulted in the publication of pioneer-
ing studies in which architecture, too, began to be per-
ceived as a visual, or rather a communicating art.9 This
5 A complete list of all volumes is accessible online: <https://
de.wikisource.org/wiki/Kunstdenkm%C3%A4ler> [accessed on
6 August 2019].
6 T. Rodzińska-Chorąży, Zespoły rezydencjonalne, pp. 241-258
(as in note 2).
7 M. Dvorak, Kunstgeschichte als Geistesgeschichte. Studien zur
abendländischen Kunstentwicklung, Munich, 1924. See also:
L. Kalinowski, Max Dvorak i jego metoda badań nad sztukq
(w stulecie urodzin), Warsaw, 1974.
8 J. Sauer, Symbolik des Kirchengebäudes und seiner Ausstattung in
der Auffassung des Mittelalters mit Berücksichtigung von Honorius
Augustodunensis Sicardus und Durandus, Freiburg im Breisgau,
1924 (first edition: 1902).
9 P. Crossley, Tn Search of an Iconography of Medieval Archi-
tecture,’ in Symbolae Historiae Artium. Studia z historii sztuki
Lechowi Kalinowskiemu dedykowane, ed. by J. Gadomski et al.,