DOI article:
Murár, Tomáš: ‘I am wrong about my qualifications, or I do not have any friends’: Archival Research on the First Professorship of Max Dvořák
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.73804#0061
60
like to show that Dvorak's early attempt to obtain a stab-
le position within the academic sphere of art history had
a profound impact not only on his personal life but on
how we actually understand the Vienna School of Art
History as a historiographic concept in early 20th-centu-
ry art history.
The first time the term 'Vienna School of Art History
was used to refer to a distinct methodological system was
in 1910, in Vincenc Kramar's extensive review of Dvorak's
'habilitation', where Kramar described Dvorak's work as
building on the art-historical thought of Riegl and Wick-
hoff.3 Realising that the Vienna School was formulated
as a concept as early as this can enrich our understand-
ing of what it actually means, or it can at least show how
unstable its roots are, because, paradoxically, Dvorak at
the time of publication of his 'habilitation' was not strict-
ly speaking a representative of the University of Vienna
(not until he was appointed a professor there in 1905).
On the basis of a study Dvorak wrote in 1903, however,
Kramar considered him the leading proponent of the Vi-
enna School's method of art history, which originated in
the art history department of the university's Institute of
Austrian Historical Research, from which other students
not considered today to be proponents of the Vienna
School graduated as well.4 Looking back at Kramar's 1910
placement of Dvorak's work within the Vienna School,
one might ask whether this would have happened if Max
Dvorak had not been appointed a professor at the Univer-
sity of Vienna.
In order to resolve this historiographic paradox, be-
fore examining what the Vienna School means in terms
of its methodological principles,5 we should reconstruct
the principles on which it was founded in order to un-
derstand its methodological origins. To do this in ref-
erence to Max Dvorak's inclusion within the Vienna
School, I work with three types of archival materials:
the German and Bohemian press around 1900; Dvorak's
personal correspondence with his friends Josef Susta
jours, ed. H. Olbrich, Strasbourg 1992, pp. pp. 53-63. M. Rampley,
The Vienna School of Art History. Empire and the Politics of Schol-
arship, 1847-1918, University Park PA 2013, p. 54.
3 M. Dvorak, 'Das Ratsel der Kunst der Bruder van Eyck', Jahr-
buch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhochsten Kaiser-
hauses, 14, 1903, pp. 161-319. V. Kramar, 'O videnske skole dejin
umeni', Volne smery, 14, 1910, pp. 41-43, 75-78, 110-112, 170-174,
209-210.
4 For more on Dvorak's colleagues from his university graduati-
on year, see A. Lhotsky, Geschichte des Instituts fur osterreichi-
sche Geschichtsforschung 1854-1954, Graz-Koln 1954, pp. 271-276.
See also T. Winkelbauer, Das Fach Geschichte an der Universitat
Wien. Von den Anfdngen um 1500 bis etwa 1975, Wien 2018.
5 For a recent example of this type of interpretation, see W. Balus,
'Max Dvorak, the (Christian) Architecture and the Limits of
Kunstgeschichte als Geistesgeschichte, Artibus et Historiae. An
Art Anthology, 87, 2023, pp. 241-257.
and Vincenc Kramar;6 and Dvorak's letters to Franz
Wickhoff.7
* * *
The history of Dvorak's effort to obtain his first posi-
tion as a university professor starts, surprisingly, not in
Vienna but in Prague, where, at the beginning of 1903,
a university committee suggested that Bohumil Matejka
be appointed to the position of associate professor for
art history in the Czech part of Charles-Ferdinand Uni-
versity.8 Dvorak was informed of this idea by one of the
members of the committee of professors convened for
the purpose of filling this position, Jaroslav Goll, who
had remained in close contact with Dvorak ever since he
had been Dvorak's history professor at the University of
Prague between 1892 and 1894.9 We know that it was Goll
who informed Dvorak about the suggestion that Matejka
become the professor at the University of Prague from
a letter dated 3 April 1903, sent by Dvorak to another of
Goll's students, Josef Śusta.10 In the letter, Dvorak com-
plained that he was surprised that his own name had not
even been mentioned in relation to this position. He add-
ed, 'I cannot see myself critically enough and I am wrong
about my qualifications, or I do not have any friends
among Prague University's professors'.11 Dvorak blamed
Goll for this oversight, and harsh criticism of Goll appears
in Dvorak's letters throughout the year 1903.12 In a letter to
Susta dated 23 April 1903, Dvorak, after again condemn-
6 Dvorak's correspondence with Susta was published in 1943 and
it was significantly redacted. Fortunately, the originals are pre-
served in the archive of the Institute of Art History of the Czech
Academy of Sciences in Prague, where they were compared with
the published letters for the purpose of this study. Dvorak's let-
ters to Kramar were published in 2004; in these letters only very
minor editorial interventions can be observed. See M. Dvorak,
Listy o zivote a umeni. Dopisy Jaroslavu Gollovi, Josefu Pekarovi
a Josefu Sustovi, ed. J. Pećirka, Praha 1943; M. Krejci, 'Dopisy
Maxe Dvofaka Vincenci Kramafovi', Umeni, 52, 2004, pp. 353-369.
7 I would like to thank Dr Friedrich PolleroR for letting me study
Dvorak's letters to Wickhoff in the Archive of the Institute of Art
History of the Vienna University.
8 Archive of the Charles University, Personal Folders, The Person-
al Folder of B. Matejka (further as ACU BM), 'The Letter of the
Professorial Committee from 9 March 1903'. See also J. Vybiral,
'Why Max Dvorak did not Become a Professor in Prague', Journal
of Art Historiography, 17, 2017.
9 See B. J1ROUŚEK, Jaroslav Goll: role historika v ceske spolecnosti,
Ceske Budejovice 2006.
10 Archive of the Institute of Art History of the Czech Academy
of Sciences, The Estate of J. Pećirka, Box 10 Correspondence
(further as aiah jp), 'Dvorak to Susta on 3 April 1903'. See also
J. Śusta, Mlada leta uchovska a vandrovni, Praha - Videh - Rim,
Praha 1963.
11 aiah jp, 'Dvorak to Susta on 3 April 1903'.
12 See, e.g., aiah jp, 'Dvorak to Susta on 14 May 1903'. Cf. M. Dvorak,
Listy o zivote a umeni, p. 118 (as in note 6).
like to show that Dvorak's early attempt to obtain a stab-
le position within the academic sphere of art history had
a profound impact not only on his personal life but on
how we actually understand the Vienna School of Art
History as a historiographic concept in early 20th-centu-
ry art history.
The first time the term 'Vienna School of Art History
was used to refer to a distinct methodological system was
in 1910, in Vincenc Kramar's extensive review of Dvorak's
'habilitation', where Kramar described Dvorak's work as
building on the art-historical thought of Riegl and Wick-
hoff.3 Realising that the Vienna School was formulated
as a concept as early as this can enrich our understand-
ing of what it actually means, or it can at least show how
unstable its roots are, because, paradoxically, Dvorak at
the time of publication of his 'habilitation' was not strict-
ly speaking a representative of the University of Vienna
(not until he was appointed a professor there in 1905).
On the basis of a study Dvorak wrote in 1903, however,
Kramar considered him the leading proponent of the Vi-
enna School's method of art history, which originated in
the art history department of the university's Institute of
Austrian Historical Research, from which other students
not considered today to be proponents of the Vienna
School graduated as well.4 Looking back at Kramar's 1910
placement of Dvorak's work within the Vienna School,
one might ask whether this would have happened if Max
Dvorak had not been appointed a professor at the Univer-
sity of Vienna.
In order to resolve this historiographic paradox, be-
fore examining what the Vienna School means in terms
of its methodological principles,5 we should reconstruct
the principles on which it was founded in order to un-
derstand its methodological origins. To do this in ref-
erence to Max Dvorak's inclusion within the Vienna
School, I work with three types of archival materials:
the German and Bohemian press around 1900; Dvorak's
personal correspondence with his friends Josef Susta
jours, ed. H. Olbrich, Strasbourg 1992, pp. pp. 53-63. M. Rampley,
The Vienna School of Art History. Empire and the Politics of Schol-
arship, 1847-1918, University Park PA 2013, p. 54.
3 M. Dvorak, 'Das Ratsel der Kunst der Bruder van Eyck', Jahr-
buch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhochsten Kaiser-
hauses, 14, 1903, pp. 161-319. V. Kramar, 'O videnske skole dejin
umeni', Volne smery, 14, 1910, pp. 41-43, 75-78, 110-112, 170-174,
209-210.
4 For more on Dvorak's colleagues from his university graduati-
on year, see A. Lhotsky, Geschichte des Instituts fur osterreichi-
sche Geschichtsforschung 1854-1954, Graz-Koln 1954, pp. 271-276.
See also T. Winkelbauer, Das Fach Geschichte an der Universitat
Wien. Von den Anfdngen um 1500 bis etwa 1975, Wien 2018.
5 For a recent example of this type of interpretation, see W. Balus,
'Max Dvorak, the (Christian) Architecture and the Limits of
Kunstgeschichte als Geistesgeschichte, Artibus et Historiae. An
Art Anthology, 87, 2023, pp. 241-257.
and Vincenc Kramar;6 and Dvorak's letters to Franz
Wickhoff.7
* * *
The history of Dvorak's effort to obtain his first posi-
tion as a university professor starts, surprisingly, not in
Vienna but in Prague, where, at the beginning of 1903,
a university committee suggested that Bohumil Matejka
be appointed to the position of associate professor for
art history in the Czech part of Charles-Ferdinand Uni-
versity.8 Dvorak was informed of this idea by one of the
members of the committee of professors convened for
the purpose of filling this position, Jaroslav Goll, who
had remained in close contact with Dvorak ever since he
had been Dvorak's history professor at the University of
Prague between 1892 and 1894.9 We know that it was Goll
who informed Dvorak about the suggestion that Matejka
become the professor at the University of Prague from
a letter dated 3 April 1903, sent by Dvorak to another of
Goll's students, Josef Śusta.10 In the letter, Dvorak com-
plained that he was surprised that his own name had not
even been mentioned in relation to this position. He add-
ed, 'I cannot see myself critically enough and I am wrong
about my qualifications, or I do not have any friends
among Prague University's professors'.11 Dvorak blamed
Goll for this oversight, and harsh criticism of Goll appears
in Dvorak's letters throughout the year 1903.12 In a letter to
Susta dated 23 April 1903, Dvorak, after again condemn-
6 Dvorak's correspondence with Susta was published in 1943 and
it was significantly redacted. Fortunately, the originals are pre-
served in the archive of the Institute of Art History of the Czech
Academy of Sciences in Prague, where they were compared with
the published letters for the purpose of this study. Dvorak's let-
ters to Kramar were published in 2004; in these letters only very
minor editorial interventions can be observed. See M. Dvorak,
Listy o zivote a umeni. Dopisy Jaroslavu Gollovi, Josefu Pekarovi
a Josefu Sustovi, ed. J. Pećirka, Praha 1943; M. Krejci, 'Dopisy
Maxe Dvofaka Vincenci Kramafovi', Umeni, 52, 2004, pp. 353-369.
7 I would like to thank Dr Friedrich PolleroR for letting me study
Dvorak's letters to Wickhoff in the Archive of the Institute of Art
History of the Vienna University.
8 Archive of the Charles University, Personal Folders, The Person-
al Folder of B. Matejka (further as ACU BM), 'The Letter of the
Professorial Committee from 9 March 1903'. See also J. Vybiral,
'Why Max Dvorak did not Become a Professor in Prague', Journal
of Art Historiography, 17, 2017.
9 See B. J1ROUŚEK, Jaroslav Goll: role historika v ceske spolecnosti,
Ceske Budejovice 2006.
10 Archive of the Institute of Art History of the Czech Academy
of Sciences, The Estate of J. Pećirka, Box 10 Correspondence
(further as aiah jp), 'Dvorak to Susta on 3 April 1903'. See also
J. Śusta, Mlada leta uchovska a vandrovni, Praha - Videh - Rim,
Praha 1963.
11 aiah jp, 'Dvorak to Susta on 3 April 1903'.
12 See, e.g., aiah jp, 'Dvorak to Susta on 14 May 1903'. Cf. M. Dvorak,
Listy o zivote a umeni, p. 118 (as in note 6).