DOI article:
Grzegorz First: Between Two Emerging Disciplines Art History in Vienna and Classical Archaeology in Cracow on the Breakthroughs in Art
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.73804#0037
36
It is evident that the Vienna School was fundamentally
rooted in a particular interest in ancient art. The ground-
breaking Stilfragen by Alois Riegl from 1893 introduced
a systematic approach to the issue of ornamentation, pri-
marily in relation to ancient times.5 Stylistic analyses not
only allowed for the chronological understanding of orna-
mentation but also facilitated the aggregation of patterns
into stylistic groups based on predominant geometric, he-
raldic, or floral and scroll forms. As is well known, Riegl
based his study on the results of his earlier works, nota-
bly those that were dedicated to artifacts from the Orien-
tal, including Egyptian, cultures. These artifacts were, in
fact, housed in the collections of the Vienna-based Óster-
reichisches Museum fur Kunst und Industrie, where Alois
Riegl was employed.6
An essential aspect of another groundbreaking work
by Riegl, dedicated to late Roman artistic industry, was
the reorientation of researchers attitudes toward the art of
late antiquity.7 The change in style described in Die spdtro-
mische Kunstindustrie nach den Funden in Ósterreich-Un-
garn was considered an artistic achievement rather than
a sign of decline. A pivotal contribution in this regard was
Franz Wickhoffs work, Die Wiener Genesis, where he no-
tably revalued early Christian art.8 These works contribut-
ed to the rejection of the Winckelmann paradigm which
regarded late ancient art as the final, declining phase in
the development of ancient art, characterized by a sup-
posed lack of creative force. This rehabilitation of late an-
cient art would influence not only the thematic focus but
also the research methodology in other archaeological
centers. It would also, as is well known, be a catalyst for
the famous dispute with Josef Strzygowski concerning the
genesis of late ancient art.9
An essential aspect of relations between genesis of art
history and classical archaeology is also a problem that
still engages the attention of many researchers. It concerns
the relationship and demarcation line, if one exists, be-
tween both disciplines. Importantly, these relationships
5 A. Riegl, Stilfragen, Grundlegungen zu einer Geschichte der Orna-
mentik, Berlin 1893.
6 Idem, Die dgyptischen Textilfunde im K. K. Osterr. Museum,
Wien 1889; idem, Altorientalische Teppiche, Leipzig 1891. Cf. also
M. Olin, Forms of Representation in Alois Riegl's Theory of Art,
Pennsylvania 1992.
7 A. Riegl, Die spatromische Kunstindustrie nach den Funden in Os-
terreich-Ungarn, Wien 1901.
8 E Wickhoff, W. von Hartel, Die Wiener Genesis, Wien 1895.
9 J. Strzygowski, Orient oder Rome. Beitrdge zur Geschichte der
Spdtantiken und Fruhchristlichen Kunst, Leipzig 1901; A. Riegl,
'Spatromisch oder orientalisch?', Beilage zur Allgemeinen Zei-
tung, 93, 1902, pp. 152-156; cf also J. Elsner, 'The Birth of Late
Antiquity: Riegl and Strzygowski in 1901', Art History, 25, 2002,
pp. 358-379 and M. Olin, 'Art History and Ideology: Alois Riegl
and Josef Strzygowski', in: Cultural Visions: Essays in the Histo-
ry of Culture, eds P. Schine Gold, B. C. Sax, Amsterdam 2000,
pp. 151-170.
looked quite different during the period under discus-
sion than they do now, and what is even more signifi-
cant, they are conditioned by the academic traditions of
a given center or country. In the case of Cracow, the influ-
ence of Vienna and the broader German scientific circle is
significant. The close connection between both centers is
evident, for instance, in the biographies of archaeologists
and art historians in Cracow who had contacts in Vienna.
The close ties between Polish classical archaeology and art
history were significantly severed in later Polish history
when archaeology was merged with the so-called history
of material culture, following the Soviet pattern, thereby
bringing it closer to universal archaeology and disrupting
what was valuable in i9th-c. art history - the community
of research areas and the complementarity of methods.
However, this issue is an entirely separate research topic.
The innovative views of the Vienna school of art found
fertile ground in the emerging and shaping environ-
ment of classical archaeologists in Cracow. At this point,
we must pay attention to the founder and, importantly,
the organizer of classical archaeology in Cracow - Piotr
Bieńkowski, who set the tone and direction of research
in the initial phase of the development of Polish studies
on ancient art in the early decades of the 20th c. [Fig. 1].
The figure of Bieńkowski is well-known and esteemed in
the community of Cracow's researchers of Antiquity, es-
pecially as he taught several students who later initiated
studies on ancient art in the academic centers of revi-
talized Poland.10 Born in 1865, a graduate of ancient his-
tory studies at the University of Lviv, where his mentor
was Prof. Ludwik Ćwikliński, Piotr Bieńkowski quickly
developed an interest in art and archaeology under the
influence of his subsequent studies in Berlin with Theo-
dor Mommsen and in Vienna with Otto Benndorf.11 Im-
mediately after his period of education, he embarked on
scientific journeys to Rome and Athens, where he famil-
iarized himself with the activities of archaeological insti-
tutes. However, the key influence on the choice of his re-
search direction came from his studies in Berlin and Vi-
enna. Theodor Mommsen (1817-1903), the author of the
multi-volume History of Rome and a historian of Antiq-
uity, instilled a methodical approach to historical sciences
10 Several publications have been dedicated to the figure of Piotr
Bieńkowski, unfortunately appearing only in Polish, which
has resulted in his achievements and contributions being less
well known outside of Poland - cf. J. Śliwa, 'Piotr Bieńkowski
(1865-1925). Badacz - nauczyciel akademicki - organizator nauki',
in: Archeologia śródziemnomorska w Krakowie 1897-1997. Mate-
riały sympozjum naukowego. Kraków, 21-23 października 1997 ed.
idem, Kraków 1998, pp. 15-34.
11 Ludwik Ćwikliński (1853-1942), a classical philologist and ancient
historian, was the rector of the University of Jan Kazimierz in
Lviv. From 1902 he resided in Vienna, where, in 1917 and 1918, he
held the position of Minister of Education and Religious Affairs -
cf. K. Królczyk, 'Ludwik Ćwikliński (1853-1942)' , Nowy Filoma-
ta, 14, 2010, no. 2, pp. 83-94.
It is evident that the Vienna School was fundamentally
rooted in a particular interest in ancient art. The ground-
breaking Stilfragen by Alois Riegl from 1893 introduced
a systematic approach to the issue of ornamentation, pri-
marily in relation to ancient times.5 Stylistic analyses not
only allowed for the chronological understanding of orna-
mentation but also facilitated the aggregation of patterns
into stylistic groups based on predominant geometric, he-
raldic, or floral and scroll forms. As is well known, Riegl
based his study on the results of his earlier works, nota-
bly those that were dedicated to artifacts from the Orien-
tal, including Egyptian, cultures. These artifacts were, in
fact, housed in the collections of the Vienna-based Óster-
reichisches Museum fur Kunst und Industrie, where Alois
Riegl was employed.6
An essential aspect of another groundbreaking work
by Riegl, dedicated to late Roman artistic industry, was
the reorientation of researchers attitudes toward the art of
late antiquity.7 The change in style described in Die spdtro-
mische Kunstindustrie nach den Funden in Ósterreich-Un-
garn was considered an artistic achievement rather than
a sign of decline. A pivotal contribution in this regard was
Franz Wickhoffs work, Die Wiener Genesis, where he no-
tably revalued early Christian art.8 These works contribut-
ed to the rejection of the Winckelmann paradigm which
regarded late ancient art as the final, declining phase in
the development of ancient art, characterized by a sup-
posed lack of creative force. This rehabilitation of late an-
cient art would influence not only the thematic focus but
also the research methodology in other archaeological
centers. It would also, as is well known, be a catalyst for
the famous dispute with Josef Strzygowski concerning the
genesis of late ancient art.9
An essential aspect of relations between genesis of art
history and classical archaeology is also a problem that
still engages the attention of many researchers. It concerns
the relationship and demarcation line, if one exists, be-
tween both disciplines. Importantly, these relationships
5 A. Riegl, Stilfragen, Grundlegungen zu einer Geschichte der Orna-
mentik, Berlin 1893.
6 Idem, Die dgyptischen Textilfunde im K. K. Osterr. Museum,
Wien 1889; idem, Altorientalische Teppiche, Leipzig 1891. Cf. also
M. Olin, Forms of Representation in Alois Riegl's Theory of Art,
Pennsylvania 1992.
7 A. Riegl, Die spatromische Kunstindustrie nach den Funden in Os-
terreich-Ungarn, Wien 1901.
8 E Wickhoff, W. von Hartel, Die Wiener Genesis, Wien 1895.
9 J. Strzygowski, Orient oder Rome. Beitrdge zur Geschichte der
Spdtantiken und Fruhchristlichen Kunst, Leipzig 1901; A. Riegl,
'Spatromisch oder orientalisch?', Beilage zur Allgemeinen Zei-
tung, 93, 1902, pp. 152-156; cf also J. Elsner, 'The Birth of Late
Antiquity: Riegl and Strzygowski in 1901', Art History, 25, 2002,
pp. 358-379 and M. Olin, 'Art History and Ideology: Alois Riegl
and Josef Strzygowski', in: Cultural Visions: Essays in the Histo-
ry of Culture, eds P. Schine Gold, B. C. Sax, Amsterdam 2000,
pp. 151-170.
looked quite different during the period under discus-
sion than they do now, and what is even more signifi-
cant, they are conditioned by the academic traditions of
a given center or country. In the case of Cracow, the influ-
ence of Vienna and the broader German scientific circle is
significant. The close connection between both centers is
evident, for instance, in the biographies of archaeologists
and art historians in Cracow who had contacts in Vienna.
The close ties between Polish classical archaeology and art
history were significantly severed in later Polish history
when archaeology was merged with the so-called history
of material culture, following the Soviet pattern, thereby
bringing it closer to universal archaeology and disrupting
what was valuable in i9th-c. art history - the community
of research areas and the complementarity of methods.
However, this issue is an entirely separate research topic.
The innovative views of the Vienna school of art found
fertile ground in the emerging and shaping environ-
ment of classical archaeologists in Cracow. At this point,
we must pay attention to the founder and, importantly,
the organizer of classical archaeology in Cracow - Piotr
Bieńkowski, who set the tone and direction of research
in the initial phase of the development of Polish studies
on ancient art in the early decades of the 20th c. [Fig. 1].
The figure of Bieńkowski is well-known and esteemed in
the community of Cracow's researchers of Antiquity, es-
pecially as he taught several students who later initiated
studies on ancient art in the academic centers of revi-
talized Poland.10 Born in 1865, a graduate of ancient his-
tory studies at the University of Lviv, where his mentor
was Prof. Ludwik Ćwikliński, Piotr Bieńkowski quickly
developed an interest in art and archaeology under the
influence of his subsequent studies in Berlin with Theo-
dor Mommsen and in Vienna with Otto Benndorf.11 Im-
mediately after his period of education, he embarked on
scientific journeys to Rome and Athens, where he famil-
iarized himself with the activities of archaeological insti-
tutes. However, the key influence on the choice of his re-
search direction came from his studies in Berlin and Vi-
enna. Theodor Mommsen (1817-1903), the author of the
multi-volume History of Rome and a historian of Antiq-
uity, instilled a methodical approach to historical sciences
10 Several publications have been dedicated to the figure of Piotr
Bieńkowski, unfortunately appearing only in Polish, which
has resulted in his achievements and contributions being less
well known outside of Poland - cf. J. Śliwa, 'Piotr Bieńkowski
(1865-1925). Badacz - nauczyciel akademicki - organizator nauki',
in: Archeologia śródziemnomorska w Krakowie 1897-1997. Mate-
riały sympozjum naukowego. Kraków, 21-23 października 1997 ed.
idem, Kraków 1998, pp. 15-34.
11 Ludwik Ćwikliński (1853-1942), a classical philologist and ancient
historian, was the rector of the University of Jan Kazimierz in
Lviv. From 1902 he resided in Vienna, where, in 1917 and 1918, he
held the position of Minister of Education and Religious Affairs -
cf. K. Królczyk, 'Ludwik Ćwikliński (1853-1942)' , Nowy Filoma-
ta, 14, 2010, no. 2, pp. 83-94.