DOI Artikel:
Bryl, Mariusz: Jan Bołoz Antoniewicz (1858 - 1922)
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16827#0027
20
MARIUSZ BRY1
ABSTRACT
I lus article aims ai portraying the figure of Jan Bołoz Antoniewicz ( 1858-1922), Professor of Ail I liston al the University of
\ .\ iv, and one of the founding fathers of Polish art history. The paper focuses on two periods of his lite: Botoz's 'birth' as an art histo-
rian and the 'décline' of his career. Regarding the former, a historical and artistic 'first texf by Bolo/a was subjected to analysis ( The
médiéval sources for the sculptures found on the ivory- casket in the treasury oflhe Cathedral on Wawel Hill, 1885), as were the cir-
cumstances of his appointment to the Chair of History of Art in Lviv (1893). Regarding the second period, his 'final text' (Opatowski
I ament andits creator, 1922) and the events of his last fcw years of university work were examined. In the text, emphasis is placed on
characterizing Botoza's attitude which resulted from his generał outlook on life, and belongs to the realni of psychology of académie
scholarship, rather than methodology of research. Bołoz as a scholar-creator was fully formed, and it is from this that other separate
scholarly personalities were born, sometimes in keeping with his research interests (the Italian and Polish Renaissances, eighteenth
and nineteenth century art, contemporary art, Armenian art) and his intuitive approach to art, with direct expérience of the w ork of art
at us core, and sometimes quite the opposite - relating to other areas and research approaches. Nevertheless, Botoz's 'methodology'
сап be contained within well—known catégories: fonn-genesis-source-influence-de\elopment-originality-genius -masterpiece. Itfits
well within its time. w hen the old tradition of great scholars w ho were culturally and historically oriented w as being dismantled in
favour of the new trend, fitting for researchers of his génération, which aimed at developing one's own paradigm of an increasingly
autonomous discipline, emancipated from history, philology and aesthetics. Although Botoz's path to art history seems to mimie,
several décades later. the career of Hermann Grimm (law and philology, fascination with the Renaissance); although the thought of a
historically rooted cultural unity of ail fonns of art in an era was dear to him; although, just like Jacob Burckhardt, the concept of an
'objective' historical science was alien to him; yet he was far closer to the dominant Wôlfflinian trend of his génération, in line with
contemporary institutional interest in art history as an académie discipline, ail the while fighting for the strengthening of its autonomy
in regards to its older ,,sister" disciplines: history and philology.
(translated by Katarzyna Krzyżagórska-Pisarek)
(
MARIUSZ BRY1
ABSTRACT
I lus article aims ai portraying the figure of Jan Bołoz Antoniewicz ( 1858-1922), Professor of Ail I liston al the University of
\ .\ iv, and one of the founding fathers of Polish art history. The paper focuses on two periods of his lite: Botoz's 'birth' as an art histo-
rian and the 'décline' of his career. Regarding the former, a historical and artistic 'first texf by Bolo/a was subjected to analysis ( The
médiéval sources for the sculptures found on the ivory- casket in the treasury oflhe Cathedral on Wawel Hill, 1885), as were the cir-
cumstances of his appointment to the Chair of History of Art in Lviv (1893). Regarding the second period, his 'final text' (Opatowski
I ament andits creator, 1922) and the events of his last fcw years of university work were examined. In the text, emphasis is placed on
characterizing Botoza's attitude which resulted from his generał outlook on life, and belongs to the realni of psychology of académie
scholarship, rather than methodology of research. Bołoz as a scholar-creator was fully formed, and it is from this that other separate
scholarly personalities were born, sometimes in keeping with his research interests (the Italian and Polish Renaissances, eighteenth
and nineteenth century art, contemporary art, Armenian art) and his intuitive approach to art, with direct expérience of the w ork of art
at us core, and sometimes quite the opposite - relating to other areas and research approaches. Nevertheless, Botoz's 'methodology'
сап be contained within well—known catégories: fonn-genesis-source-influence-de\elopment-originality-genius -masterpiece. Itfits
well within its time. w hen the old tradition of great scholars w ho were culturally and historically oriented w as being dismantled in
favour of the new trend, fitting for researchers of his génération, which aimed at developing one's own paradigm of an increasingly
autonomous discipline, emancipated from history, philology and aesthetics. Although Botoz's path to art history seems to mimie,
several décades later. the career of Hermann Grimm (law and philology, fascination with the Renaissance); although the thought of a
historically rooted cultural unity of ail fonns of art in an era was dear to him; although, just like Jacob Burckhardt, the concept of an
'objective' historical science was alien to him; yet he was far closer to the dominant Wôlfflinian trend of his génération, in line with
contemporary institutional interest in art history as an académie discipline, ail the while fighting for the strengthening of its autonomy
in regards to its older ,,sister" disciplines: history and philology.
(translated by Katarzyna Krzyżagórska-Pisarek)
(