KAREL KRTA 16101674 STUDIES AND DOCUMENTS

LENKA STOLROV VT VLNAS (edd.)

 NATIONAL GALLERY IN PRAGUE, 2011 ISBN 978-80-7035-470-4

CONTENTS
The Second Apelles on the Emperors Parnassus of Muses Karel krtas Place in 17th-Century Central European Painting 17 Andrzej Kozie Baroque in Bohemia versus Bohemian Baroque, or Karel krta and Early Baroque Painting in the View of Art History33 tpn Vcha Vt Vlnas Karel krta in Prague or the Story of Two Beginnings53 Lenka Stolrov Radka Tibitanzlov Vt Vlnas To the continually increasing fame of our industrious artist. Karel krta between Switzerland, the Empire, and Italy, in the Light of Newly Discovered Sources73 Petr Pibyl Lenka Stolrov krta and Rome81 Johana Bronkov Facing the Public: krtas historiae sacrae from the Perspective of the Art Theory and Painting Practice of His Time101 tpn Vcha Karel krta pictor doctus129 Sylva Dobalov Lubomr Konen The Role and Perception of Drawing in the Era of Karel krta and His Contemporaries151 Alena Volrbov The X-Ray Investigation of the Paintings of Karel krta. The Painters Handwriting in the Light of the Invisible Rays157 Tom Berger Karel krta the Younger a Case of Two Paintings197 Andrea Rousov Sculpture at the Time of Karel krta207 Tom Hladk Stylistic Prole of Prague Early Baroque Architecture223 Mojmr Horyna Archival Documents on the Life and Ouevre of Karel krta265 Tom Sekyrka Radka Tibitanzlov et al. Reports on Karel krta in European Literature of 17th and 18th Centuries375 Johana Bronkov The Historical Writings of Vilm Slavata of Chlum and Koumberk A Little Employed Source on Bohemian History of the First Half of the 17th Century385 Alena Richterov Selected Bibliography399

IN MEMORIAM MOJMR HORYNA (19452011)

The book Karel krta (16101674): Studies and Documents features not only essays dedicated to the artists work, but also historical sources documenting his personality, work and times. Designed and conceived as a set of texts expanding on and complementing the contents of the research catalogue for the exhibition Karel krta (16101674): His Work and His Era published by the National Gallery in Prague in 2010, the individual essays elaborate new ndings made in the course of the vast interdisciplinary project Karel krta (16101674): His Work and His Era and the preparation of the eponymous exhibition. The authors of individual essays concentrated on themes that were so broad they could only be outlined in the catalogue or were not included at all. We must also note that from the start, the story of the krta research was also the story of how to grapple with the work of art historian Jaromr Neumann. Dedicated to krta and serving as the primary catalogue for the 1974 monographic exhibition in Prague, this work dominated for several decades, signicantly inuencing other authors. Recent research clearly shows that the topic of Karel krta can no longer rest upon the shoulders of a single author. A team of experts focusing on art historical, archival and general historical research has created a new body of work that includes the technical and technological research and restoration of dozens of works by krta and his contemporaries. It has yielded some major and often surprising information on the unparalleled character of 17th-century paintings and the personalities of those who commissioned them. Just as krta research is no longer the work of a single author, so too is it no longer about a single artist. Despite the importance of the artist and his unique artistic approach, we can no longer assess and interpret krta as a lone genius who arrived in a desert, gradually lling a cultural vacuum of alleged historical timelessness with his work. The recent research has shown it impossible to answer many questions about this Bohemian Apelles without also examining the many names that lled krtas horizon not only his artistic contemporaries, but also his family, patrons, those who commissioned and collected his art and the colourful social spectrum which the painter navigated with admirable determination and, perhaps, a well-formulated career strategy. Not coincidentally, editions of archival sources form a major part of this book. To date, archival sources have represented the principal desideratum of krta research all 20th-century art history work was based on 19th-century research. The current research most helpfully explored krtas family background and personal connections. Of key importance in this respect is the testimony provided by newly found fragments of krta family correspondence in foreign archives, which, among other things, enabled a reconstruction of the itinerary of krtas travels in Italy, apprentice years and wayfaring journeying abroad, all the more important as krtas pre1638 biography included many lacunae that called for hypothesis. The testimony of newly consulted sources of local provenance, such as meeting agendas of the Painters Brotherhood or (more importantly) official records referring to krtas property disputes, nancial transactions and commissions was also key. It is the editors sad duty on behalf of the team of authors to dedicate this book to the memory of pre-eminent art historian, colleague and unforgettable friend Prof. PhDr. Mojmr Horyna. He was one of the most active members of the krta research team; his knowledge and experience proved invaluable. He duly submitted his study on the architecture of krtas time on deadline and approached its rst proofreading with the same responsibility. None of us would have guessed he would not live to see his text published. His death in late January 2011, which aggrieved all of us so deeply, cut short a scientic career that had not yet reached its zenith. We present this work as a tribute to him. Lenka Stolrov Vt Vlnas

Studies

The Second Apelles on the Emperors Parnassus of Muses

Karel krtas Place in 17th-Century Central European Painting
ANDRZEJ KOZIE

1 Jaromr Neumann, krtov. Karel krta ajeho syn, Praha 2000, p.6. Both this and alater work by the same author (idem, Karel krta 16101674, Praha 1974, pp.713) offer an overview of more recent opinions on krtas role in the history of both Baroque painting and 19th-century painting in Bohemia. 2 See for example: Willy Drost, Barockmalerei in den germanischen Lndern, WildparkPotsdam 1926 (Handbuch der Kunstwissenschaft), p.280; Bruno Bushart, Deutsche Malerei des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts, Knigstein im Taunus 1967, pp.1617; Wolfgang J.Mller, Deutsche Malerei, in: Erich Hubala (ed.), Die Kunst des 17. Jahrhunderts, Berlin 1970 (Propylen Kunstgeschichte, vol. 9), pp.197, 201202. 3 See for example: Eberhard Hempel, Baroque art and Architecture in Central Europe. Germany/Austria/Switzerland/Hungary/Czechoslovakia/ Poland, London 1965, pp.8586; Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, Court, Cloister&City. The Art and Culture of Central Europe 14501800, London 1995, pp.245, 276278. 4 Wolfgang Prohaska, Gemlde, in: Hellmut Lorenz (ed.), Geschichte der bildenden Knste in sterreich, vol. 4, Barock, MnchenLondonNew York 1999, pp.383, 399.

There is no doubt as to the special place Karel krta the Elder has in the history of Baroque painting in Bohemia. The author of numerous religious and mythological paintings as well as remarkable portraits, celebrated in Joachim von Sandrarts Teutsche Academie with a biography and a graphic portrait [g. 1], krta is recognised as the rst purely Baroque Bohemian painter and the most important personality on the early Baroque art scene in Bohemia generally. In the words of the artists most recent monographer, Jaromr Neumann: krta is the most signicant artistic personality to emerge in 17th-century Bohemia. [] He is the founder of the Bohemian Baroque and the early modern painting tradition, incorporating the best that the 17th century produced. However, krtas unique place in the history of Baroque painting in Bohemia becomes somewhat less remarkable when we examine the work of the Prague master in the context of 17th-century Central European painting. Thus far, this issue has unfortunately received only occasional and supercial treatment. Although krtas work is generally mentioned in works analysing the history of painting in German-speaking countries, and less commonly also in overviews of early modern art in Central Europe or in treatises on Baroque art in Austria, these treatments have been limited to a condensed

1. Philipp Kilian after Joachim von Sandrarts drawing Portrait of Karel krta, in: Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der Bau, Bild und Mahlerey-Knste, Bd. 1, Nrnberg 1675 (reproduced after: Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der Bau, Bild und Mahlerey-Knste. Nrnberg 16751680. In ursprnglicher Form neu gedruckt mit einer Einleitung von Christian Klemm, Nrdlingen 1994, Bd. 1, g. on pp. 356/357)

STUDIES 17

presentation of the most important facts about the artists life and the most important features of his work. A more thorough comparison of krtas work with that of his contemporaries clearly demonstrates that the character of his painting as well as his fortunes in life show common features with the lives and works of a number of other painters active during the 17th century in the individual Central European countries. krta was actually one of many artists born in the years 16001630 who spent the worst years of the Thirty Years War studying abroad and who began their professional careers only after military hostilities in Central Europe had subsided and often in a completely new political, religious or cultural environment. I These artists gained their rst experience with the craft of painting in the traditional Central European artistic centres, often in the workshops of local masters. We know almost nothing about some of them as in the case of the teachers of Tobias Pock (16091683) from Konstanz [g. 2] or even those of krta himself. Michael Willmann (16301706) from Knigsberg and Johann Christoph Storer (16201671) from Konstanz learned the basics of painting in the guild workshops of their fathers, and Johann Heinrich Schnfeld (16091682/1683), born in Biberach, found his way to the workshop of Johann Sichelbein in the provincial town of Memmingen. Only a handful of young painters were more fortunate: for example, Johann von Spillenberger (16281679) went from his native Koice to the reputable workshop of Johann Ulrich Loth in Munich, and Joachim von Sandrart (16061688), a native of Frankfurt am Main who attracted by the established reputation of the artistic centre associated with Rudolf IIs Imperial Court set out to gain his rst artistic experience in the renowned workshop of Aegidius Sadeler in Prague.
18 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

5 It can only be assumed that krtas rst teacher of painting was Johann Georg Hering, active in Prague from 1615. It seems that the work of this artist resonates in some of krtas late works, as Neumann suggests. See J. Neumann, krtov (see note 1), p.14. 6 Hubertus Lossow, Michael Willmann (16301706 Meister der Barockmalerei, Wrzburg 1994, p.13; Sibylle Appuhn-Radtke, Visuelle Medien im Dienst der Gesellschaft Jesu. Johann Christoph Storer (16201671) als Maler der Katholischen Reform, Regensburg 2000, pp.3941. 7 Annamria Gosztola, Schnfelds erste Jahre in Deutschland, in: Ursula ZellerMaren WaikeHans-Martin Kaulbach (edd.), Johann Heinrich Schnfeld: Welt der Gtter, Heiligen und Heldenmythen, Kln 2009, pp.2429. 8 Ruth Baljhr, Johann von Spillenberger, 16281677: ein Maler des Barock, Weienhorn 2003. 9 Christian Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart: Kunstwerke und Lebenslauf, Berlin 1986.

2. Tobias Pock, Self-P ortrait with Family, 16691670, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

10 Carel van Mander, Den grondt der edel vry schilderkonst, Uitgegeven en van vertaling en commentaar voorzien door Hessel Miedema, Utrecht 1973, 1., p.75. 11 Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der Bau, Bild und Mahlerey-Knste. Nrnberg 16751680. In ursprnglicher Form neu gedruckt mit einer Einleitung von Christian Klemm, Nrdlingen 1994, vol. 1, p.327. The full original text of Karel krtas biography as published by Sandrart is on p.11. 12 Lebenslauf und Kunst-Wercke Des WolEdlen und Gestrengen Herrn Joachim von Sandrart auf Sockau Hochfrstl. Pfalz-Neuburgischen Rahts: zu schuldigster Beehrung und Dankbarkeit beschreiben und (bergeben von Desselben Dienst-ergebenen Vettern und Discipeln, p.8, in: J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11). 13 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.327. On the questions related to Schnfelds Italian education see: Brigitte Dapr, Von dannen reiste er nach Italien (Sandrart): Johann Heinrich Schnfelds italienische Jahre, in: V.Zeller M.Waike H.Kaulbach (edd.), Johann Heinrich Schnfeld (see note 7), pp.3043. 14 W. Prohaska, Gemlde (see note 4), pp.402403; Silvia Carola Dobler, Die Freskierung der Chorkapellen im Zisterzienserstift Stams durch Egid Schor als Ausdruck knstlerischer Vielseitigkeit, in: Christina Strunck (ed.), Johann Paul Schor und die internationale Sprache des Barock: un regista del gran teatro del barocco, Mnchen 2008, pp.155170. 15 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.329. 16 Ibid., p.338. 17 S. Appuhn-Radtke, Visuelle Medien (see note 6), pp.5082. 18 Lichtenstein visited Rubenss workshop in 1636 and mentioned it proudly in his itinerary. See Romuald Kaczmarek, lski malarz odwiedza Rubensa. Itinerarium Johanna Lichtensteina, malarza zKtw, in: Andrzej KozieBeata Lejman (edd.), Willmann iinni. Malarstwo, rysunek igraki na lsku iw krajach ociennych wXVII iXVIII wieku, Wrocaw 2002, pp.136139. 19 Boena Steinborn, Malarz Daniel Schultz. Gdaszczanin w subie krlw polskich, Warszawa 2004, pp.1011.

The path to further artistic education outside Central Europe, ravaged by the Thirty Years War, was of key signicance for the later professional careers of this generation of painters. For young painters, the recommended or even essential destination for advanced studies was naturally Italy. Karel van Mander formulated a general approach to obtaining a comprehensive education as a painter by drawing on the artistic achievements of the best Italian schools of painting. His advice was as follows: From Rome bring some skill in drawing [], and the ability to paint from Venice. Unfortunately, only a handful of central European painters managed to put this golden rule into practice. krta was among the chosen few as well, however. It is a well-known fact that he spent six years in Italy (16301635) rst several years in Venice and later in Bologna and Florence where he signicantly elevated his art in the local schools, and nally from 1634 in Rome where he, thanks to his diligence and industriousness, perfected his art to such a degree that he nally deemed his knowledge and abilities sufficient to return to his native Prague. Sandrarts Italian tour of study had a similar itinerary. By studying the works of the local Venetian masters, he acquired a laudable practice, especially in his inventiveness and use of colours, but he relocated from Venice to Rome to make further progress in the art of drawing. Schnfeld embarked on a journey to Italy at the age of 24 and spent 18 years there (16331651). He stayed in Rome and Naples where, by producing drawings after ancient Roman as well as modern statues and paintings, he perfected his abilities to such a degree that these copies seem as though they had sprung from his own invention. Egidius Schor (16271701) spent ten years in Rome (16561666) and even collaborated with the workshops of Gianlorenzo Bernini and Pietro da Cortona, participating in the artistic projects of these workshops. In this respect, he followed in the footsteps of his elder brother Johann Paul (16151674) who had established himself in Rome. Johann Ulrich Mayr (16301704) from Augsburg undertook an even longer journey in Italy following his previous education in the workshop of Rembrandt van Rijn in Amsterdam and a stay in England. As Sandrart noted, he expected to achieve denitive perfection in his profession during his stay. While in Italy, the painter from Augsburg imbibed the strength of the beautiful blossoms growing in the local gardens of art, which, in the house of his reason and with the help of his unsurpassed diligence, he converted into the sweetest honey that could strengthen all the lovers of art in Germany. A number of contemporary artists from Central Europe only reached the northern parts of Italy on their study trips. Venice naturally enjoyed the greatest popularity and transalpine artists settled there for longer periods of time. Among these were Johann Liss (15971630) and Johann Carl Loth (16321698), whose workshop later became a stopover for other German-speaking artists of the younger generation including Hans Adam Weissenkircher (16461695), Daniel Seiter (16471705) and Johann Michael Rottmayr (16561730). Spillenberger stayed in Venice for a relatively short period of time (c. 16601661), but as Sandrart writes he nonetheless managed to acquaint himself with a good, fast painting technique of which he later made use after returning to his home country in numerous works. The artists also visited other northern towns, undoubtedly of lesser artistic quality, such as Milan, where Storer appeared around years end 1639/1640. Not only did he complete his artistic education in Milan, he also opened his own painting workshop there, which operated until 1655 when Storer returned to his native Konstanz. The overwhelming majority of Central European painters, however, could only dream of the blossoms of the Italian gardens of art. This concerned in particular artists from the traditional guild centres as well as those from centres on the Baltic Sea; for them, an obligatory destination on their study trips was the Low Countries. As the itinerary of Silesian painter Johann Lichtenstein (1610 after 1672) shows, for many Central European painters merely visiting the workshop of one of the great Netherlandish masters was in itself a considerable success. Nonetheless, many of them also set out for these artistic centres to study. The court painter of the Polish kings, Daniel Schultz (16151683), born in Danzig, is even mentioned among the students of Leyden University in 1643. Willmann also set out for Holland, arriving in Amsterdam around 1650, where he continued his education as an autodidact in the circle of the workshops of Rembrandt and Jacob Backer. For this painter from Knigsberg, it was above all Italian art that embodied his artistic ideal. Information obtained by Sandrart that in Amsterdam the young painter was forced to make
STUDIES 19

his living and for this reason could not travel to Italy attests to the artists resignation. Willmann was conscious of his insufficient artistic education for the rest of his life, and perhaps the best testimony of this fact is his letter of 22 May 1702 to Heinrich Snopek, abbot of the Cistercian monastery in Sedlec. In it, Willmann recommends his stepson Johann Christoph Lika (c. 16501712) to the abbot and praises the skills he acquired thanks to six years spent studying in Italy (c. 16711677) where as the teacher admits with regret his student saw and learned more than he himself had learned in Holland during his time there. II In general, these artists return to Central Europe and the beginnings of their own professional careers were closely linked to the end of the Thirty Years War, or rather to the temporary cessation of military hostilities. The rst artists made their way back to Central Europe already after the Peace of Prague (1635), as was the case for krta in Prague (1638) and Pock in Vienna (1640). The others came only after the Peace of Westphalia (1648) or even later when the political and economic situation in the region was stabilising. Although in the Teutsche Academie Sandrart created a myth of an overall decline in the art of painting in the Germanic countries engulfed in the Thirty Years War, and portrayed krta alone as an exemplary restorer who managed to elevate the local art of painting from this decline and wipe away the lth of its past after his return to Prague thanks to his excellent works of art, returning Bohemian painting to its former place and made it ourish, in reality none of the painters whose professional careers were developing at the time in Central Europe had to start from scratch. Until the 1650s krta remained in the shadow of another Prague painter, Antonn Stevens of Steinfels (c. 1610 c. 1675), who had created a number of altar paintings for churches in Prague already in the early 1640s, and it was most likely Stevens who was considered rst among Prague painters at the time. Even in a region as devastated by the war as Silesia, there existed a centre of guild artists in Wrocaw which was extremely expansive and watched its monopoly so closely that, for example, Ezechiel Paritius (Skora) (16221671), a portrait artist from Litomyl educated in Italy, had to try his luck elsewhere, nally succeeding in Brzeg as a court painter of the princes of Legnica-Brzeg (1654). Willmann was later forced to establish himself at the Cistercian monastery in the provincial town of Lubi (1660). There is no doubt that young painters educated in Italy or the Low Countries proliferated a style of painting in new, early Baroque forms in Central Europe. Whether these forms were inspired by a Dutch, Flemish or Italian source depended not only on where individual artists had been educated, but also on the preferences of their patrons. In Central Europe, however, the artistic level of the Dutch and Italian masters was achieved in an eclectic manner, whereby the heritage of these masters was treated as a store of readily applicable solutions. This was the result of a general awareness at the time of the high achievements of the new early modern art as well as of its pluralistic character with respect to the norms applied. Most artists resorted to models of Dutch origin which were most commonly spread through graphic printing. The best example of this approach is Franciszek Lekszycki (c. 16001668), a Franciscan monk and painter active in Cracow whose religious works are more or less truly rendered copper engravings, most commonly executed after the paintings of Peter Paul Rubens and his students. Willmann may also be named in this context, as his early works reference predominantly Flemish graphic prints from the circle of Rubens, Anthony van Dyck and the Rembrandt-like rough painting manner. On the other hand, krta along with artists such as Schnfeld [g. 3], Pock, Schor and Spillenberger belonged to a decidedly less numerous group of Central European artists who based their art primarily on Italian composition models and on a much more rened smooth style of painting. Already Sandrart wrote with exaltation about the natural feelings, well-composed ideas, correct painting technique, skilfully applied pigment-pastes and beautiful colouring that adorned the Venetian paintings of the Bohemian master, also mentioning the immense acclaim with which the artists work was received by local art enthusiasts. It is enough to mention that krtas paintings from his Venetian period before 1656 were acquired for the collections of local painting
20 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

20 For more on this issue see Andrzej Kozie, Michael Willmanns Way to the Heights of Art and His Early Drawings, Bulletin of The National Gallery in Prague 78, 19971998, pp.5466. 21 Andreas Tacke, Der Kunst-Feind Mars: die Auswirkungen des Krieges auf Kunst und Knstler nach Sandrarts Teutscher Academie, in: Klaus BumannHeinz Schilling (edd.), 1648. Krieg und Frieden in Europa (exh. cat.), vol. 2: Kunst und Kultur, Mnchen 1998, pp.245252. Willmanns letter to Sandrart of 12 December 1682 shows how deeply rooted this idea was. Here he expressed athousand thanks for the fact that the noble art of painting, almost ridiculed in many places in Germany or almost completely extinguished and fallen into darkness, could are up again thanks to this new light []Andrzej Kozie, Rysunki Michaela Willmanna (16301706), Wrocaw 2000 (Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis, vol. 2212, Historia Sztuki, vol. 14), p.167. 22 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.327. 23 See Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, Krieg und Frieden, Kunst und Zerstrung, Mythos und Wirklichkeit: berlegungen zur Lage der Kunst Mitteleuropas im Dreiigjhrigen Krieg, in: K.BumannH.Schilling (edd.), 1648. Krieg und Frieden (see note21), pp.163172. 24 tpn Vcha, Kran tvorb praskho male Antonna Stevense ze Steinfelsu, in: Ji KroupaMichaela eferisov LoudovLubomr Konen (edd.), Orbis Artium. Kjubileu Lubomra Slavka, Brno 2009, p.172. See also the exhibition catalogue Karel krta 16101674. Doba adlo, Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas (edd.), Praha 2010, ch.XI, Karel krta aAntonn Stevens, p.453. Only krtas painting The Assumption of the Virgin Mary for the main altar of the Church of Our Lady before Tn in Prague (1649) brought about achange in this situation: this painting was successful and marked the beginning of the great career of this painter educated in Italy. 25 Piotr Oszczanowski, Midzy Waltherem aWillmannem. Malarstwo Wrocawia 1 poowyXVII wieku, in: A. Kozie B.Lejman (edd.), Willmann iinni (see note 18), pp.123135. 26 Adam Wicek, Ezechiel Paritius zLitomyla ijego dziaalno na lsku iw Polsce / Ezechiel Paritius zLitomyle ajeho innost ve Slezsku avPolsku, asopis Slezskho zemskho muzea B 13, 1964, pp.1722. 27 Boena Steinborn, Oyciu itwrczoci Michaela Willmanna, in: Marek AdamskiPiotr ukaszewiczFranz Wagner (edd.), Michael Willmann (16301706) (exh. cat.), Salzburg 1994 (Schriften des Salzburger Barockmuseums, vol. 19), p.14. 28 Janina Dzik, Franciszek Lekszycki, malarz religijny baroku, Kalwaria Zebrzydowska 1998, pp.153161. 29 Andrzej Kozie, Barok irokoko, in: Mateusz KapustkaAndrzej KoziePiotr Oszczanowski, Op Nederlandse Manier. Inspiracje niderlandzkie w sztuce lskiejXVXVIII w. (exh. cat.) Legnica 2001, pp.9394. 30 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.327.

3. Johann Heinrich Schnfeld, Joseph Entertains His Brothers in Egypt, 16651670, Chateau astolovice, Sternberg Collection (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

31 Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674, Praha 1974, p.8; J.Neumann, krtov (see note 1), pp.22, 25; Lubomr Slavek, Sob, umn, ptelm. Kapitoly zdjin sbratelstv vechch ana Morav 16501939, Brno 2007, p.46. 32 J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note 31), passim.; also J. Neumann krtov (see note 1), passim. 33 For this painting krta undoubtedly used the composition model of the Renaissance woodcut by Hans Baldung Grien which depicts the same motif. See Ivana Kyzourov, Pozdn gotika, nebo ran baroko? Albrecht Drer ajeho souasnci jako vzory v17.stolet, in: Olga Fejtov Vclav Ledvinka Ji Peek Vt Vlnas (edd.), Barokn Prahabarokn echie 16201740. Sbornk pspvk zvdeck konference ofenomnu baroka vechch, Praha, Anesk kler aClam-Gallasv palc, 24.27.z 2001, Praha 2004, p.729, g.10,11. 34 This cycle of Karel krtas paintings was strongly inuenced by Albrecht Drers woodcuts from the Small Passions series as well as by the popular Passion copper engravings of the Wierix brothers. See Fejtov V. Ledvinka J. Peek V. Vlnas (edd.), Barokn Praha (see note 33), pp.727728. See also Sylva Dobalov, Paijov cyklus Karla krty. Mezi vtvarnou tradic ajezuitskou spiritualitou, Praha 2004, pp.1644. 35 Daniele Benati, Guido Cagnacci, in: Daniele BenatiAntonio Paolucci (edd.), Guido Cagnacci: protagonista del Seicento tra Caravaggio e Reni (exh. cat.), Milano 2008, pp.2753; Ugo Ruggeri, Pietro e Marco Liberi: pittori nella Venezia del Seicento, Rimini1996.

collector Michele Spietra and also caught the attention of noted collector and Italian art enthusiast Humprecht Johann Tschernin of Chudenitz during his stay in Venice (1660 1663). Consequently, at least ten paintings of the Bohemian Apelles were acquired for the counts collection in Prague. According to the ndings of Jaromr Neumann, krta referred to the Italian art of the late Renaissance (the Carracci brothers, Tiziano, Veronese, Tintoretto, and Bassano, among others) and early Baroque (Guercino, Guido Reni, Tiberio, Tinelli, Bernardo Strozzi, Domenico Fetti, Giulio Carpioni, Simone Cantarini, and Orazio Borgiani, among others) continually throughout the later period of his artistic work. It is signicant, however, that this formal Italian allure in the Bohemian masters painting dominated even when the author sporadically resorted to composition models of clearly transalpine origin, as in the case of the painting St Martin and in the cycle of eleven Passion paintings in the St Nicholas Church in Pragues Lesser Town. From this perspective, the Italian style of the local artists is a distinctive feature of works created in the Habsburg Monarchy, as in the third quarter of the 17th century such a style of painting was only produced by several court painters of predominantly Italian origin such as Guido Cagnacci (16011663) and Pietro Liberi (16051687), who worked for the imperial court in Vienna, and Filippo Abiatti (16401715) from Milan who was associated with the court of the Prince-Bishop of Olomouc

STUDIES 21

Karl II of Lichtenstein-Kastelkorn. Nevertheless, these Italians were only active in the Habsburg Monarchy for a limited period and their works had predominantly a cabinet character. The more italico painting style began to enjoy wider popularity only at the end of the 1670s. Only when a number of signicant patrons with clearly Italian taste such as Prince Johann Adam of Liechtenstein, Prince Eugene of Savoy and Lothar Franz Schnborn in Vienna, Archbishop of Prague Johann Friedrich of Waldstein, Bishop of Wrocaw Cardinal Friedrich of Hessen-Darmstadt active in Wrocaw and Nysa, and priest and chancellor Sebastian Piskorski in Cracow entered the scene was there increased demand for art that embraced the accomplished Roman Baroque and the painting of Pietro da Cortona and Carlo Maratta. In reaction to this, many journeying Italian painters came to Central Europe the virtuosi who had mastered not only oil painting, but also the buon fresco technique (painting on wet plaster), and were often able to supply architectural designs as well. Alongside the Jesuit Andrea Pozzo (16421709), a whole group of painters from Bologna were active in Vienna; the fresco painter Carpoforo Tencalla from Bissone (16231685) was active in Austria, Upper Hungary, Bohemia and Moravia; Giacomo Scianzi (? after 1702) was in the service of the Bishops of Wrocaw in Wrocaw and Nysa; Paolo Pagani from Ticino (16551716) settled in Olomouc; Innocenzo Monti (16531710) worked like the workshop of Baldassare Fontana in Moravia as well as in Cracow; Michaelangelo Palloni (16371712) also worked on the territory of what are today Poland and Lithuania, as did Francesco Antonio Giorgioli (16551725), also from Ticino, who was active in Switzerland, Southern Germany and Saxony as well.
22 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

36 Milan Togner, Barokn malstv vOlomouci, Olomouc 2008, p.39. 37 Hellmut Lorentz, Italien und die Anfnge des Hochbarock in Mitteleuropa, in: Max Seidel (ed.), Europa und die Kunst Italiens. Internationaler Kongress zum hundertsjrigen Jubilum des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz. Florenz, 22.27. September 1997, Venezia 2000, pp.419434. 38 Ibid., pp.423426. 39 Arkadiusz Wojtya, Cardinale langravio iConte savio dygnitarze Rzeszy w barokowym Rzymie, Quart 2 (4), 2007, pp.2739. 40 Micha Kurzej, Budowa idekoracja krakowskiego kocioa pw. w. Anny w wietle rde archiwalnych, in: Andrzej BetlejJzef Skrabski (edd.), Fides ars scientia. Studia dedykowane pamici Ksidza Kanonika Augustyna Mednisa, Tarnw 2008, pp.271301. 41 Ulrike Knall-Brskovsky, Italienische Quadraturisten in sterreich, WienKln 1984. 42 Giorgio Mollisi, Lopera afresco di Carpoforo Tencalla, in: Carpoforo Tencalla da Bissone. Pitura del Seicento fra Milano e lEuropa centrale (exh. cat.), Milano 2005, pp.5965; Martin Mdl, Distinguishingsimilaritiesstyle: Carpoforo and Giacomo Tencalla in Czech lands, Ars 40, 2007, pp.225236. 43 Gnther Grundmann, Barockfresken in Breslau, Frankfurt am Main 1967 (Bau- und Kunstdenkmler des deutschen Ostens, Reihe C, Schlesien, vol. 3), pp.2329; Ryszard Hoownia, Pod egid kardynaa Fryderyka Heskiego. Barokizacja kocioa w. Jakuba w Nysie w 4 w.XVII wieku, in: Ryszard HoowniaMateusz Kapustka (edd.), Nysa. Sztuka w dawnej stolicy ksistwa biskupiego, Wrocaw 2008, pp.145163. 44 M. Togner, Barokn malstv vOlomouci (see note 36), pp.4549. Pagani also worked for ashort time in Cracow. See Mariusz Karpowicz, Paolo Pagani w Krakowie, Biuletyn Historii Sztuki 54, 1992, pp.6780.

4. Michael Leopold Willmann, Adoration of the Shepherds, 16801681, Muzeum Narodowe we Wrocawiu (photo: Muzeum Narodowe we Wrocawiu) 5 Joachim von Sandrart, Ottavio Piccolomini with his Adjutant, Hans Christoph Ranfft, 16491650, Nchod (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 6. Johann Spillenberger, Diana and Callisto, 1676, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague) 7. Michael Leopold Willmann, Landscape with St John the Baptist, 1656, Muzeum Narodowe w Warszawie (photo: Muzeum Narodowe w Warszawie)

STUDIES 23

These artists were seconded by a new generation of local painters, most of whom received their education in Italy and were clearly focused on the Italian style. Among these artists were the following: Rottmayr, active in Austria, Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia; Lika, working in Bohemia and Silesia; Jerzy Eleuter Siemiginowski (c. 16601707/1711) in Poland; and a supposed student of krta, the Augustinian monk Anton Martin Lublinsky (16361690) in Moravia. The older generation of local artists, however, were forced to change their aesthetics. An example of this might be Willmann. who created several of his most Italian-like paintings after graphic print models from the circle of Cortona, Maratta and Pietro Testa around the end of the 1670s and the beginning of the 1680s, the style of which followed the Roman masters of the Italian Baroque [g. 4]. What is more, in response to the needs of local patrons, Willmann learned the demanding technique of painting on wet plaster, also unknown in the Low Countries. At that time, artists were primarily sought after who were acquainted with the Roman style of fresco, painting. From a letter to Lublinsky dated 29 March 1685 from the abbot of the Cistercian monastery in Lubi, Johannes Reich, we know that the abbot sought help nding a talented and resourceful painter, full of ideas, versed in oil painting as well as in fresco, and acquainted with the Roman style. On the other hand, in the case of oil painting as the Prince of Liechtenstein wrote in a letter to Marcantonio Franceschini of Bologna works were requested in buon gusto italiano con una morbidezza, well-modelled female nudes full of grace and vaghezza perfectly nished paintings with soft and smooth brushwork.

45 Jana Zapletalov, Mezi Boloou aKrakovem: ivot adlo italskho male Innocenza Montiho (16531710), Umn LIII, 2005, pp.335346. 46 Mariusz Karpowicz, Dziaalno artystyczna Michaelangela Palloniego w Polsce, Warszawa 1967; Idem, Francesco Antonio Giorgioli aVarsovia, Bolletino della Svizzera Italiana 90, 1978, pp.16. 47 Erich Hubala, Johann Michael Rottmayr, Wien 1981. 48 Jaromr Neumann, Jan Krytof Lika, UmnXV, 1967, pp.135176, 260311. 49 Mariusz Karpowicz, Jerzy Eleuter Siemiginowski, malarz polskiego baroku, WrocawWarszawaKrakwGdask 1974. 50 The view commonly accepted in the literature that Lublinsky was educated exclusively in krtas workshop as afree apprentice was recently challenged by Milan Togner, who traces the genesis of the art of this Moravian painter also in the works of Austrian and Southern German painters like Martin Theol Pollak (15701639) from Innsbruck, Matthias Kager (15751634) from Augsburg and Georg Bachmann (16131652). Togner even considers it possible that Lublinsky studied in Vienna and Augsburg before 1663. See Milan Togner, Antonn Martin Lublinsk 16361690, Olomouc 2004, pp.2728. 51 Andrzej Kozie, Woski przeom w malarstwie barokowym na lsku, czyli rzecz okopotach Michaela Willmanna, in: Ladislav DanielJi PelnPiotr SalwaOlga pilarov (edd.), Italsk renesance abaroko ve stedn Evrop. Pspvky zmezinrodn konference, Olomouc 17.18. jna 2003 / Renesans ibarok woski wEuropie rodkowej. Materiay midzynarodowej konferencji, Oomuniec 17.18. padziernika 2003, Olomouc 2005, pp.197210. 52 The letter is missing, but was published in full in M. Togner, Antonn Martin Lublinsk (see note 50), p.275. 53 W. Prohaska, Gemlde (see note 4), p.385.

24 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

8. Johann Christoph Storer, St Charles Borromeo as the Patron of Catholic Switzerland, 16551657, Jesuit Church, sacristy, Lucerne (reproduced after: Sibylle Appuhn-Radtke, Visuelle Medien im Dienst der Gesellschaft Jesu. Johann Christoph Storer (16201671) als Maler der Katholischen Reform, Regensburg 2000, g. on p. 171). 9. Joachim von Sandrart, Pilgrimage of the Holy Family from Egypt, 1665, Chrudim, Church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 10. Lubi, Cistercian Church, view of the interior before 1943 (photo: Warszawa, Instytut Sztuki PAN)

54 Ch. Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart (see note 9), passim. 55 The numerous mythological paintings for the bishop of Olomouc, Karl II of Liechtenstein-Kastelkorn, commissioned from Schnfeld for his private collection may serve as an example. See Milan Togner, in: Milan Togner (ed.), Krom Picture Gallery. Catalogue of the painting collection in the archbishops palace in Krom, Krom 1999, pp.301307, cat. no. 301305. 56 Barbara Eschenburg, Landschaft in der deutschen Malerei: vom spten Mittelalter bis heute, Mnchen 1987, p.67. 57 Based on an entry in the so-called Willmann family chronicle on 22 May 1663, the painter participated in the Catholic Holy Mass for the rst time (Strahov Library, Prague, the inner side of the cover at the end of the third part of this work: G.H.Rivius, Der furnembsten notwendigsten der gantzen Architektur angehrigen mathematischen und mechanischen Knst eygentlicher Bericht und verstendliche Unterrichtung, Nrnberg 1547, Inv. No. AYXII 15). 58 Although the question of krtas motivation for converting to Catholicism in Italy has been the subject of scholarly discussion, (see J.Neumann, krtov, see note 1, p.41), it is nonetheless beyond any doubt that under the Renewed Constitution of 1627 the painter could return from emigration only as aCatholic. He could also request the return of his family property only as such. See Lenka Stolrov Radka Tibitanzlov Vt Vlnas, Karel krta in Prague or The Story of Two Beginnings, pp. 5371 in this book. 59 See ibid. 60 S. Appuhn-Radtke, Visuelle Medien (see note 6), pp.112152.

III The works of most Central European painters who started their professional careers after the end of the Thirty Years War show great versatility and encompass almost all genres of painting. Both krta and Sandrart distinguished themselves as excellent portraitists [g. 5]. Schnfeld and Spillenberger focused on mythological paintings which were commissioned enthusiastically for private art collections [g. 6]. Willmanns works, on the other hand, entered him into the history of 17th-century German landscape painting for all time [g. 7]. The major source of income for these artists, however, was the production of religious paintings, above all altar paintings commissioned practically en masse by various patrons from the Catholic Church. For certain artists, the opportunity to benet from these commissions entailed the necessity to accommodate their customers expectations, in some cases even by converting to Catholicism. While Sandrart as an artist of the Calvinist confession established in liberal Franconia could work for Catholic customers, for artists active in the Habsburg Monarchy this was unacceptable. Both Willmann and krta submitted to this: the former had to convert from Calvinism to Catholicism after three years in Lubi (1663), while the latter had to accept the Catholic faith in order to be able to return to his native Prague. Almost all of the more signicant painters were tied through various contacts to their Catholic patrons, who became the major supporters and promoters of their work. It is a well-known fact that the cooperation with the Augustinian monastery at Zderaz in Prague played a signicant role at the beginning of Karel krtas artistic career after his return to Bohemia. Storer, after returning to Konstanz in 1655, became the main painter of the Upper German province of the Jesuit Order and devoted almost all of his artistic production to commissions from the Jesuits [g. 8]. Willmanns case was not any different;
STUDIES 25

11. Karel krta, The Descent of the Holy Ghost, 16681669, Salzburg Cathedral (photo: Grzegorz Zajczkowski) 12. Karel krta, Crucixion with the Virgin Mary, St John the Evangelist and St Mary Magdalene, 16681669, Salzburg Cathedral (photo: Grzegorz Zajczkowski)

26 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

61 Rdiger Grimkowski, Willmann icystersi, in: M.AdamskiP.ukaszewiczF.Wagner (edd.), Michael Willmann (16301706) (see note 27), pp.3142. 62 Astrid Scherp, Bemerkungen zu drei Altarblattentwurfen von Tobias Pock, Barockberichte 20/21, 1998, pp.260265. 63 Andreas Tacke, Das tote Jahrhundert. Anmerkungen zur Forschung ber die deutsche Malerei des 17. Jahrhunderts, Zeitschrift des Vereins fr Kunstwissenschaft 51, 1997, p.56. 64 Ch.Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart (see note 9), pp.2728. 65 S. Appuhn-Radtke, Visuelle Medien (see note 6), p.87, g. 30. 66 M. Togner, Barokn malstv vOlomouci (see note 36), pp.56, 6061. 67 Georg Paula, Schnfelds kirchliche Werke in situ, in: U.Zeller M.Waike H. Kaulbach (edd.), Johann Heinrich Schnfeld (see note7), pp.6273. 68 Andrzej Kozie, Michael Willmanns (16301706) Kunst im Dienst der Gegenreformation in Schlesien. Forschungsstand und Fragestellung, in: Joachim KhlerRainer Bendel (edd.), Geschichte des christlichen Lebens im schlesischen Raum, part 1, Mnster 2002 (Religions- und Kulturgeschichte in Ostmittel- und Sdosteuropa, vol. 1), pp.549556. 69 Franz DambeckJosef Krottenthaler, Pfarr- und Wallfahrtskirche Neukirchen zum Hl. Blut, MnchenZrich 1964 (Kleine Kunstfhrer, vol. 728), p.12. 70 Ivo Krsek, Barokn malstv 17.stolet na Morav, in: Ji Dvorsk (ed.), Djiny eskho vtvarnho umn II/1, Od potk renesance do zvru baroka, Praha 1989, p.357. This painting is known from agraphic reproduction by Gerhard de Gross (Strahov Library, Prague). 71 LebensLauf, pp.2022, in: J.Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11). See also Ch. Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart (see note9), pp.232251, cat. nos. 117123; Michle-Caroline Heck, Dune cole de peinture une acadmie de papier. Les retables de lglise de Lambach, in: Sybile Ebert-Schifferer Cecilia Mazzetti di Pietralata (edd.), Joachim von Sandrart. Ein europischer Knstler und Theoretiker zwischen Italien und Deutschland. Akten des Internationalen Studientages der Bibliotheca Hertziana Rom, 3.4. April 2006, Mnchen 2009 (Rmische Studien der Bibliotheca Hertziana, vol.25), pp.8595. 72 Unfortunately, this unique set of Willmanns works was scattered and partially destroyed after 1943. It has remained in this state to the present day. See Andrzej Kozie, Doskonaa szkoa malarstwa, czyli sw kilka ozespole obrazw Michaela Willmanna zdawnego kocioa klasztornego Cystersw w Lubiu, in: Andrzej Kozie (ed.), Opactwo Cystersw w Lubiu iartyci, Wrocaw 2008 (Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis, vol.3012, Historia Sztuki, vol. 26), pp.243260. 73 The last conservation of the paintings of krtas workshop at the cathedral in Litomice may change this view. See Karel krta 16101674. Doba adlo (see note 24), ch. V, Oltn obrazy Karla krty, pp.207, 262269. 74 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.327. 75 Franz WagnerBarbara von der Heiden, Wenig beachtete Meisterwercke der Barockmalerei in Salzburg, Barockberichte 8/9, 1994, pp.306311; Konstanze Laufer, Anmerkungen zu den Salzburger Altargemlden Johann Heinrich Schnfelds, Barockberichte 16/17, 1998, pp.2329; W.Prohaska, Gemlde (see note 4), pp.383384, 398400; J. Neumann, krtov (see note 1), pp.8990. The fact that krta was selected for this prestigious commission may have been inuenced by Archbishop Guidobald Thuns descent from the Bohemian branch of the family, and so he was most probably aware of this Bohemian painters standing on the art scene in Prague.

since establishing himself at the monastery in Lubi (1660), he connected all of his subsequent work with the Cistercians not only in Silesia, but also in Bohemia and Moravia. For Pock, a native of Konstanz, cooperation with Viennese Archbishop Philipp Friedrich of Breuner played a key role at the beginning of his career. Even Sandrart, an artist of different merit, created a signicant portion of his works for customers from the Catholic Church and in the years 1655/561661 worked almost exclusively for the Benedictine abbey in Lambach. Paradoxically, it was the Calvinist, Sandrart, established in Stockau by Nuremberg, who became the largest supplier of altar paintings for Catholic customers in almost all of Central Europe: from Wrzburg, Eichstatt, Regensburg, Landshut, Freising and Munich, to Lambach, Salzburg, Linz, Garsten and Waldhausen, to Chrudim [g. 9], Brno and Vienna. Other Central European artists followed his example: Storer supplied his altar paintings to commissioners from Jesuit circles in an area from Switzerland and Schwarzwald to Franconia, Bavaria and Upper Austria; Pock worked not only for customers from across Austria, but also from Moravia; Schnfeld did not restrict himself to Swabia, but sent his works to Bavaria and Austria as well; and Willmanns altar paintings spread fast on the art market in Silesia as well as in Bohemia, Moravia, and even Austria (Sankt Florian). In this context, krta appears to be an artist who managed to gain control only of the local market: aside from two paintings for the side chapels of the cathedral in Salzburg which will be addressed in greater detail below, an altar painting for the holy shrine in Neukirchen am Hl. Blut in the Bavarian borderlands, and a missing painting for the main altar of the Jesuit church in Tel, Moravia, all of krtas paintings for church commissioners were destined exclusively for locations in Bohemia. This decided predominance of altar paintings in period artistic production caused some of the churches to be conceived as picture galleries of a kind, amassing the works of the best contemporary Central European artists. The church of the Benedictine monastery in Lambach became a sort of exposition of the splendid work of Sandrart, who executed seven paintings ordered by the abbot Placidus Hieber: the monumental Assumption of the Virgin Mary for the main altar and six other canvases depicting individual saints for the side altars. Displaying these works in the church caused [] the paths not only of art-loving youth, but also of Emperors, Cardinals, Archdukes and other persons of high and low station to lead to see these works of art [] in a previously little-known place. Another example is the Cistercian monastery church in Lubi [g. 10], for the interior of which Willmann and his workshop created at least 60 canvases of various types. Until 1943 this set was undoubtedly the largest Central European collection of Baroque paintings created for one church and by one artist with the help of his workshop assistants. Although krta could not boast a similar temple decorated exclusively with his works, his greatest achievements also described as such in his biography published in the Teutsche Academie are the paintings he created for a number of Bohemian churches. These churches are: the St Nicholas, St Thomas and St Wenceslas Cathedrals in Pragues Lesser Town; the St Stephen and St Martin in the wall Churches in Pragues New Town; the Jesuit monastery in Prague; the Cistercian monasteries in Zbraslav and Plasy; the Episcopal church in Litomice and the Church of St Wenceslas in Mlnk. On the other hand, the two paintings krta produced for the cathedral in Salzburg and which are not mentioned in the Teutsche Academie attest to the fact that the Prague master was often invited to participate in prestigious projects signicant for the entire Central European region. krtas two large-format paintings with the motifs of The Descent of the Holy Ghost [g. 11] and Crucixion with the Virgin Mary, St John the Evangelist and St Mary Magdalene [g. 12] were created in the years 16681669 as part of the multi-year project to create painted decorations for the interior of the cathedral in Salzburg. As this work progressed, the paintings donors local Archbishops Guidobald Thun and Max Gandolph Kuenburg selected the individual artists approached for this project, probably based on the artists standing on the Central European art scene. Alongside krta, whose canvases were intended for the altars of two side chapels on the eastern side of the cathedral, the most renowned period painters from all of Central Europe worked for the cathedral in Salzburg. Schnfeld created the altar canvas St Sebastian and St Roch in approximately 16541655, and several years later (1669) he created another altar painting with the gures of selected saints, namely St Gregory, St Jerome, St Nicholas and St Martin [g. 13] as well as a missing canvas featuring the motif of
STUDIES 27

St Vincent with St Florian, St Oswald, St Erasmus and St Cecilia (c. 1669). In 1656 Sandrart supplied the missing painting The Baptism of Christ and also a painting for the altar of St Anne, while Frans de Neve (16061681), originally from Antwerp but educated in Rome, created the altar painting St Virgils Ordination as Bishop (currently housed at the Cathedral Museum in Salzburg) in 1672 and painted the canvas The Baptism of Christ, which replaced Sandrarts painting with the same theme two years later. IV Prestigious commissions of this type no doubt attested to the individual painters standing on the Central European art scene. What could be better than the life of a famous painter? asked Samuel van Hoogstraten who had spent ve years of his life in Vienna (16511655). Becoming famous along with wealth and satisfaction with ones own abilities was considered by all contemporary European art theoreticians to be the basic objective of a painters artistic activity. In this respect, Sandrart was an unrivalled model for all Central European artists, as this prince of German painters who, through the practice of the beaux arts, not only became a rich man and the proprietor of an estate in Stockau where he entertained the powerful men of the contemporary world, but was ultimately ennobled by the Emperor in 1653. Even then it was universally acknowledged that not wealth and noble titles, but the printed word was the guarantee of an artists immortal celebrity. For this reason, all of Sandrarts most signicant artistic achievements were eternalised in his voluminous biography, which was undoubtedly composed by his friend, Nuremberg poet Sigmund of Birken, and which was incorporated into the rst tome of the Teutsche Academie. Even today it is hard to overestimate the signicance of this work: it is the rst German-language publication with a richly illustrated and comprehensive interpretation of the contemporary theory of painting, graphic art, carving and architecture, based on the unifying idea of the arte del disegno. Sandrarts work published in a lavish format and excellent edition design, and with numerous copper engravings representing the most signicant works of classic art created by the best contemporary graphic artists clearly surpassed the usual level of this kind of publication at the time. When additionally accompanied by a translation of Ovids Metamorphoses and Cartaris treatise Imagines Deorum, the work was priceless as a source of indispensable knowledge for the artistic practice of a painter. Most importantly, the Teutsche Academie contained extensive paragraphs on the history of art in general as well as on individual important masters, and presented not only information on the painters of antiquity and old Italian and Dutch masters compiled from the works of Giorgio Vasari, Carlo Ridol and Karel van Mander, but also included biographical sketches of Sandrarts contemporaries together with signicant authors who had been active on German territory in the past, which the author compiled himself. Van Hoogstraten wrote: It is true that an artist must seek good fortune rst through his own merits, which is to say, through the merit and appeal of his own work [] for without the help of generous supporters and heralds loudly singing his praises, it will be difficult for him to become well known. There is no doubt that for many a Central European artist the Teutsche Academie became the most important of these heralds loudly singing his praises. It gave these often little-known artists working far from the artistic centres an opportunity to have their biographies and portraits published alongside the biographies and portraits of all famous artists of ancient as well as contemporary times, which was equivalent to achieving the highest recognition, celebrity and also a certain artistic ennoblement. It should not surprise us, therefore, that certain German artists earnestly solicited their inclusion in this prestigious enterprise. An example of this is Willmann, who had been neglected in the rst edition of the Teutsche Academie and who in 1682, having learned that work on its translation into Latin had commenced, congratulated Sandrart in a letter written in an uncommonly attering and humble tone, and included a skilfully executed drawing depicting the scene of Joachim von Sandrarts Apotheosis [g. 14]. The following year a biography of the Silesian painter and his graphic likeness appeared in the work Academia nobilissimae Artis Pictoriae (1683). krtas biography and his graphic portrait were included already in the rst German edition of the Teutsche Academie, immediately following the biography of the famous Rembrandt and right next to his portrait. While Sandrart devoted only brief notes to other
28 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

76 Samuel van Hoogstraten, Inleyding tot de Hooge Schoole der Schilderkunst, Rotterdam 1678, p.345. Cited from Celeste Brusati, Artice and Illusion. The Art and Writing of Samuel van Hoogstraten, ChicagoLondon 1995, p.253. 77 See most recently: Esther Meier, Joachim von Sandrarts LebensLauf : Dichtung oder Wahrheit?, Marburger Jahrbuch fr Kunstwissenschaft 31, 2004, pp.205239. 78 S. van Hoogstraten, Inleyding (see note 76), p.310, cited from: C.Brusati, Artice and Illusion (see note 76), p.253. 79 On the issue of this self-presentation act by Willmann see: A.Kozie, Rysunki Michaela Willmanna (see note 21), pp.164176; Rdiger Klessmann, Michael Willmann und Joachim von Sandrart. Bemerkungen zu einem Dialog, in: A. KozieB. Lejman (edd.), Willmann iinni (see note 18), pp.1620. 80 It should be noted, however, that this was due the alphabetical proximity of the two artists names.

13. Johann Heinrich Schnfeld, St Gregory, St Jerome, St Martin, St Nicholas and Other Saints, 1669, Salzburg Cathedral (photo: Grzegorz Zajczkowski) 14. Michael Leopold Willmann, Joachim von Sandrarts Apotheosis, 1682, pen drawing with Indian ink on paper, washed, Wien, Albertina, Graphische Sammlung (photo: Wien, Albertina)

important Central European artists such as Pock, Storer and Spillenberger, the Bohemian painters life and artistic achievements received an extensive treatment and an uncommonly attering appraisal. Sandrart explains that if he wanted to describe all of krtas beautiful works, he would have to signicantly extend the scope of his humble work; Sandrart also praises the artist himself as not only a versatile theoretician, but also an experienced practitioner who is always able to follow nature as much as possible. The author of the Teutsche Academie states that, thanks to these universally admired skills, the Bohemian painter attained great fame and fully deserved the honourable appellation the second Apelles on the Emperors Parnassus of Muses. This enthusiastic appraisal of krta was published barely one year after his death (1674), which Sandrart also mentions in the painters biography with deep grief, although he does not quote the artists age correctly. Moreover, this rst Central European history of art considered krta to be Sandrarts only contemporary from the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, if we discount the merely passing mention of Johann Georg Hering. Although some researchers are inclined to state that Sandrarts appraisal of krta is too obsequious, it does not seem that these doubts are justied. Based on our general knowledge of the Bohemian masters standing in 17th-century Central European painting, we may conclude that the excited tone of his biography published in the Teutsche Academie largely stems from the fact that krtas work and fortunes were typical of an entire generation of Central European artists. It is true that, compared to other important contemporary Central European artists, his work was of a rather local importance and that, except for the altar paintings for the cathedral in Salzburg, krta did not achieve any other greater success on the European stage. As an artist in Prague, he never attained a higher social status than that of the master of the Old Town painters guild and his most signicant patrons were local representatives of the Catholic Church, such as the abbots of Bohemian monasteries and members of the diocese clergy. In general, krtas pupils known from various sources were second-rate painters of rather minor signicance. Nonetheless, krtas overwhelming artistic and intellectual potential decidedly transcended the borders of the local artistic centre. Sandrart, who had made krtas personal acquaintance in Italy, was aware of this and thus neither hesitated to include krtas biography in the Teutsche Academie nor to use the ecstatic appellation the second Apelles. Although after returning to Prague krta worked for the rest of his life only as the master of the Old Town painters guild, no other contemporary painter active in the Habsburg Monarchy at the time could boast the excellent education he had received in Italy in his youth. Despite the fact that he was never invited to work for one of the Central European courts and never received the honourable title of court painter as did his Prague competitor, Anton Stevens, he consistently employed the sophisticated courtly painting manner of the Italian style in his painting, which was admired by art enthusiasts in Prague and beyond. Until the mid17th century the rst painter from Prague was the above-mentioned Stevens, and yet it was krta with his Italian education whom Sandrart called the restorer of painting in the capital of the Bohemian Kingdom devastated by the Thirty Years War. In comparison to other progenitors of Baroque painting in Central Europe, he clearly preferred the Prague master. The rhetoric of restoration never appeared in the short biography of Pock, nor in the extensive biography of Schnfeld, let alone in the account of Willmanns life published in the Latin edition of the Teutsche Academie. On Sandrarts view, the heroic biography of Karel krta, whose career began in 1638 in a city once known for its splendid painting tradition at Rudolf IIs Imperial Court and which had been brutally disrupted by the outbreak of the Thirty Years War, had grown into a distinctive example of a painters attempts to revive art in Germany and renew its prestige in a place where it had only recently celebrated its triumphs. krta, then, was a model representative of the new painting which recalled the classical-style Italian models and relied on the principles of true art, within which painting is considered one of the arti del disegno. ***

J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 11), p.327. Ibid., p.317. Most recently . Vcha, Kran tvorb (see note 24), p.172. On the issue of the intellectual dimension of krtas work see in this volume, pp. 129148, Sylva Dobalov Lubomr Konen, Karel krta pictor doctus. 85 krta andSandrart were on friendly terms during the Bohemian artists stay in Italy. On this topic see Jana Zapletalov, krta, Sandrart, Oretti: poznmka ke krtovu psoben vItlii, Umn LVII, 2009, pp.398402. 86 Without doubt, Stevens gained the title of court painter to Emperor Ferdinand III already in 1640, as the inscription on the preserved portrait of the artist attests (Museum of Czech LiteratureKarseks Gallery, Prague); see . Vcha, Kran tvorb (see note 24), p.167, g. 11. 81 82 83 84

30 THE SECOND APELLES ON THE EMPERORS PARNASSUS OF MUSES

87 J. Neumann, krtov (see note 1), p.6.

It is not long ago that Neumann, in an attempt to dene the signicance of the Bohemian Apelles against the backdrop of European painting, wrote quite emotionally that what Caravaggio was for Italy, Poussin for France, Rubens for Belgium and Rembrandt for the Netherlands, Karel krta was for the Bohemian lands. In view of our ndings, it seems more accurate to paraphrase the words of the renowned Czech researcher and state that what Pock was for Austria, Storer for Switzerland, Willmann for Silesia and Sandrart for southern Germany, Karel krta was for the Bohemian lands. Translated by Evan W. Mellander

STUDIES 31

Baroque in Bohemia versus Bohemian Baroque,

or Karel krta and Early Baroque Painting in the View of Art History
TPN VCHA VT VLNAS

1 Ji Kroupa, Djiny umn ahistorie, aneb: nemohou bt ani spolu, ani bez sebe?, in: Milena Bartlov (ed.), Djiny umn vesk spolenosti, otzky, problmy, vzvy. Pspvky pednesen na prvnm sjezdu eskch historik umn, Praha 2004, pp.139149. On the issues discussed below, comp.tpn Vcha, Der Herrscher auf dem Sakralbild zur Zeit der Gegenreformation und des Barock. Eine ikonologische Untersuchung zur herrscherlichen Reprsentation Kaiser FerdinandsII.in Bhmen, Praha 2009, pp.107139. 2 Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, War and Peace, Art and Destruction, Myth and Reality: Considerations on the Thirty Years War in Relation to Art in (Central) Europe, in: Klaus BumannHeinz Schilling (edd.), War and Peace in Europe, Vol. II, Art and Culture. Mnster 1998, pp.163172. 3 [] weil nun damals der Blut-begierige Mars aus seinem Vatterland die friedfartige Musen und Knste verjaget/[]; Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der edlen Bau-, Bild- und Malerei-Knste I, Nrnberg 1675 (reprint Nrdlingen 1994), p.327. Comp.tpn Vcha, Das Altarbild in der Kirche der Jungfrau Maria vom Siege auf der Kleinseite Ein Sakraldenkmal fr den Sieg Ferdinands II. auf dem Weien Berg, in: Elika FukovLadislav epika (edd.), Waldstein. Albrecht von WaldsteinInter arma silent musae?, Praha 2007, pp.191198, here p.191.

As a historical discipline, art history has primarily been concerned with explaining stylistic epochs, artists oeuvres or individual works of art in relation to their contextual circumstances. This approach raises the question as to what extent art history can take into account the effect of external factors on art production and consumption. A range of opinions has been voiced in response: from the simplistic concept of progressive stages in art (with a movement towards perfection followed by a decline), inuenced by contemporary social and economic developments and the interpretation of a work of art as the expression of a universal spirit of the given era, to viewing art history as an immanent process underlying the development of art forms, which occurs independently of other concurrent events. This methodical problem can also be tracked throughout the interpretations of Karel krtas oeuvre against the background of the phenomenon of Baroque in Bohemia or Bohemian Baroque. There is hardly any synthesis of 17th- and 18th-century Bohemian art which would fail to describe the defeat of the Estates in the 1620 Battle of White Mountain as the essential milestone between Renaissance and Baroque. This is, however, not a matter of mere periodisation of art: relating Baroque to the White Mountain seems to be perceived as a constructive point of departure in asking questions about the very origin and essence of art. Czech art history long departed from the idea that Baroque the originally heterogeneous cultural element was imported to Bohemia forcibly and concurrently with the post-White Mountain re-Catholicisation, the loss of state independence, and national oppression. And although Baroque indeed disrupted the artistic development, it soon became naturalized in the country and eventually transformed into the distinctive, unique Bohemian Baroque. This inuential concept came from the art historian Jaromn Neumann, who coincidentally was also the most signicant 20th-century interpreter of Karel krtas work. The model of interpretation outlined by Neumann ruled the official course of interpreting Bohemian Baroque for most of the 20th century. But if we today consider the increasing knowledge of the diversity of art originating on our territory and at the same time try to pass unbiased judgment on modern Czech history, this explanation seems hardly sustainable. Very inspiring in this respect is Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann analysing the false myth about the decline of Central European art during the Thirty Years War. His study points out that Prague, to the contrary and in spite of the permanent belligerency , witnessed extraordinary investments in art during that period. The picture of the ravaged Bohemia from where Mars ousted the peace-loving Muses and arts, as the German painter Joachim von Sandrart (16061688) put it in his biography of Karel krta which forms part of the Teutsche Academie (1675), was largely ctitious. The alleged penurious artistic conditions in Prague prior to krtas arrival as portrayed by Sandrart can be,
STUDIES 33

after all, well compared to his no less suggestive picture of a devastated Germany in the foreword to the book. It is at the same time rather paradoxical that the authors of the mythical artistic decline during the Thirty Years War were artists active in the latter half of the 17th century. And not only that this myth heavily burdened modern art-historical research; these artists thus developed their self-stereotype as revivers and re-enactors of the noble art of painting in Central Europe during the post-war era. As to the issue of early Baroque painting in Bohemia and dening Karel krtas place in its development, it can be said that there were two simultaneous viewpoints playing their part in the local art history. The rst one was the formalist or, stylistic approach whose main aim was to examine the Prague painting style during the Thirty Years War as highly different from the preceding court art of Rudolf II and to assess Karel krtas contribution to it. The second, speculative interpretation of the humanities traditionally linked the arrival of Baroque forms in Bohemia with the coining of a new spiritual and cultural tendency that came with the Counter-Reformation. *** The rst local author who attempted to capture the character of Prague painting of the latter third of the 17th century was Franz Lothar Ehemant (1779), professor of history at Prague University. Not surprisingly, he departed from Sandrarts interpretation of Central-European art history during the Thirty Years War. Ehemant presents the era of the Rudolne court art as the golden age which was too suddenly aborted by the emperors death and the ensuing unrests, while the Thirty Years War is nothing but a period of artistic stagnation to him. In this context, he notes the robberies of art collections during the Saxon and Swedish occupations of Prague. The author moreover opines that new developments were brought to Bohemia only as late as during the second half of the 17th century by artists arriving from abroad and even though local artists participated, too, most of them were leaving for Italy for training. As to krta, Ehemant merely utters that the painter was capable of imitating the styles of very many great masters. He in part casts the gloomy image of art during the Thirty Years War onto his present time, viewing the period under the reign of Empress Maria Theresa as an analogous case: as an era
34 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

4 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 1), I, p.3. Comp.Karl Mseneder, Deutschland nach dem Dreiigjhrigen Krieg: Kunst hat ihren Namen vom knnen, in: Mit Kalkl&Leidenschaft. Inszenierungen des Heiligen in der bayerischen Rokokomalerei, Franz Niehoff (Hrsg.), BandI, Landshut 2001 (Schriften aus den Museen der Stadt Landshut 17), pp.5983. 5 Franz Lothar Ehemant, Etwas zur Kunstgeschichte Bhmens, in: Josef Dobrovsk (ed.), Bhmische Litteratur auf das Jahr 1779, pp.205235, here pp.219228. Comp.Roman Prahl, Kpotkm apedpokladm djin umn (Frantiek Lothar Ehemant), Umn LII, 2004, pp.310. 6 See Edition of selected texts.

1. Bohemia, late 18th century, Jan Quirin Jahn, the place of deposition not found (reproduced after: Sbrka obraz ing. Richarda Jahna v Praze [The Painting Collection of Eng. Richard Jahn in Prague], Praha 1902, appendix after p. 12, not paginated) 2. Jan Quirin Jahn, Aneckdoten, biography of Karel krta, Prague, Library of the Royal Canonry of Premonstratensians at Strahov (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 3. Johann Georg Balzer after Johann Thomas Kleinhardt, Karel krta, 1773, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

7 F. L. Ehemant, Etwas zur Kunstgeschichte Bhmens (see note 5), pp.234235. 8 Gottfried Johann Dlabac, Allgemeines historisches Knstler-Lexikon fr Bhmen und zum Theil auch fr Mhren und Schlesien, I, Prag 1815, pp.1416; see edition No. 2 in the present Appendix. 9 Jan Quirin Jahn, Aneckdoten zur Lebensgeschichte berhmter Mahler und Beurtheilung ihrer Werke, manuscript, Prague, Strahov Library of the Royal Canonry of Premonstratensians, sign. DA II 7, f. 626635, here f. 626. Comp.Radka Tibitanzlov, in: Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674. His Work and His Era (exh. cat.), Praha 2010, p.618, cat. no.XVII.2. 10 Karel Vladislav Zap, [echy] Djiny vtvarnch umn, in: Frantiek Ladislav Rieger (ed.), Slovnk naun, II/1, Praha 1862, p.454; see Edition of selected texts.

marked by lengthy armed conicts and artistic decline caused by various factors, including a lack of interest on the part of the donors. Still another scholar following in Ehemants steps was Gottfried Johann Dlabac. The introductory essay to his Allgemeines historisches Knstler-Lexikon (1815) describes the dismal conditions in arts in Bohemia or, respectively, Prague, and concurrently claims that the subsequent revival was due to the artists either coming or returning from other countries. Dlabacs leading personality among them was Karel krta who had just come back from Italy. The author in fact totally neglects the activity of artists who never left Prague, and exclusively perceives the local artistic development from the viewpoint of the exiles, Karel krta, Wenceslaus Hollar and Georg Flegel. The latter half of the 19th century witnessed the arrival of art history as an autonomous discipline, and national viewpoints were naturally coming into play. The art of early Baroque as well as krta himself thus received very contradictory responses at that time. No matter the authenticity of krtas Bohemian origin and the success the artist eventually enjoyed in Prague he had simply trained in Italy and became established in Bohemia as a representative of a rather foreign style. It is worth attention that the late 18th-century Jan Quirin Jahn did not hesitate to prove the Italian character of krtas oeuvre by genetics: krta reportedly was the son of Italian parents settled in Prague (!). Would not Karel krtas return to his homeland, then, represent importing foreign art instead of resurrecting local painting tradition, as Sandrarts Teutsche Academie claims? The same objection clearly resounds in the relevant part of the entry History of Fine Arts in Bohemia [Djiny vtvarnch umn v echch], contained in Riegers Encyclopaedia [Slovnk naun; 1862] and written by Karel Vladislav Zap. The author judges the artistic production at the court of Rudolf II through the prism of the Romanticist approach of national art schools, and also opines that Rudolne art had only little chance of inuencing art in Bohemia due to its foreign origin. Its development was moreover forcibly interrupted by the Battle of White Mountain. 17th-century painting, viewed through the criterion of originality, was thus nothing but a foreign, mainly Italian import and with the rare exception of Karel krta it complied with the depraved taste of that period. But even krtas main asset in this view was merely his deftness in imitating Italian models.
STUDIES 35

The viability of Sandrarts image of a desolated early 17th-century Central Europe deprived of all art is rather eloquently proved by the interesting treatise on krta by Karel Purkyn (1864). Its introduction paraphrases Teutsche Akademie almost word for word with, however, several patriotic connotations: The silence of despair over the graves of our most thriving favourite sons reigned in Bohemia and Germany where the bloodthirsty god of war in the company of all his horrors had trampled every green corn underfoot. There was no fresh air for an artist who would only vainly search for the Muses of his art, for those had long taken refuge from the war pandemonium. There where one encountered the traces of shattered houses, splintered sculptures and destroyed paintings at every step and where the only image he faced always and everywhere, the image of destroyed properties and the misery of thousands of families, there was no motivation for an artist! Who would ever think there of creating something new of painting! Purkyn the rst and, for a long time, also the last interpreter of krta pondered on the character of the artists Italian lesson. He provides an informed, but still simplied description of the ght between the academics and the naturalists, at the same time claiming that both parts departed from
36 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

11 Karel Purkyn, Karel Skreta. ivotopisn nstin, Kritick ploha kNrodnm listm 1, 1864, p.103, quoted after: Rena Pokorn-Purkyov, ivot t generac. Vzpomnky na velk Purkyn. Listy alnky Karla Purkyn, Praha 1944, pp.342346, here p.342.

4. Jan Vilmek, Karel krta, 1889 (reproduced after: Humoristick listy [Humoristic Papers] 31, 1889, p. 9) 5. Gustav Edmund Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte des XVII: Jahrhundertes, Prag 1889, frontispiece, library of the National Gallery in Prague (reproduced after: Gustav Edmund Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte des XVII: Jahrhundertes, Prag 1889) 6. Ludk Marold, Karel krta, (1885), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

12 Quoted after: R. Pokorn-Purkyov, ivot t generac (see note11), p.344. 13 Ibid., p.345. 14 Antonn Rybika, Karel krta otnovsk ze Zvoic. Nstin rodoaivotopisn, Svtozor 3, 1869, pp.4243, pp.5051, pp.5556, p.63; see Edition of selected texts.

the principle that the supremacy of the emptied and distorted idealism in art must be overthrown and replaced by some other substance and other forms. Purkyn the painter was able to acknowledge the qualities of krtas oeuvre (which were far too often ignored by the previous authors); the eld he himself professed nevertheless made him focus on portraits: As far as his [krtas] painting style is concerned, I must point out that he is in fact the follower of Carracci, although his uniqueness has not drowned in the method of that school so as to make him unable to subsequently also establish a school; and mainly some portraits painted by him possess something genuinely authentic in concept and execution. K. V. Zap was not isolated in denouncing early Baroque painting. A nationalist tinge also resounds in the description of conditions ruling 17th-century Bohemian art as provided by Antonn Rybika Skutesk in one of the rst heuristically-based biographic treatises on Karel krta (1869). Rybika opines that the thriving local art was totally ruined during the Thirty Years War and the subsequent works, however successful, cannot be perceived as authentic and autochthonous Bohemian achievements but solely cogent imitations of the Italian,
STUDIES 37

7. Paul Bergner, inspector of the Picture Gallery of the Society of Patriotic Friends of the Arts and organizer of Karel krtas exhibition, held in the Rudolnum Gallery in 1910, Archives of the National Gallery in Prague (photo: anonymous author, c. 1911)

Flemish and French ones, accommodated in brush, chisel or compasses of the masters in Bohemia. Even Karel krta, on whose life and oeuvre Rybika strenuously collected valuable information, did not escape his criticism. We read that he, too, remained the mere imitator of Italian academics and eclecticists and nothing but his dexterous skills of imitating distinguished him from his Bohemian coevals. The author claims that krta failed to resuscitate the alleged old Bohemian national school whose last heirs either died out or roamed through foreign lands in search of a modest living and shelter. The latter quote proves how deeply enrooted the maudlin stereotype of the exiles, originally adopted from Czech literature and rhetoric in general , was in the contemporary ruminations on Czech ne arts. The Czech-German historian Gustav Edmund Pazaurek then drew yet another picture of Karel krta, departing from Sandrart as well as the earlier Czech literature (no matter how critical he was towards the latter). Pazaureks signicant monograph on krta (1889) greatly contributes studies of the artist from the point of heuristics and it scrupulously follows all methodical principles of positivist art history. It, nevertheless, does not sufficiently reect either on the myth of the overall devastation caused by the Thirty Years War, nor on the descriptions of krta as eclectic. It is worth attention that unlike the authors before him, Pazaurek interprets krtas imitative inclinations as proof of his poor talent instead of his artistic deftness. His polemical remarks also further sharpen the controversies in viewing krta as a supercial, albeit fashionable and successful artist. This standpoint was certainly the fruit of the contemporary Czech-German disputes as to the cultural contribution of the respective ethnicities. In this respect, Pazaureks characteristic is crucial: Wie einst Platon den Gttern tglich fr dreierlei dankte, htte auch Screta Ursache gehabt dem Himmel fr dreierlei zu danken: dass er ein inker Maler war, das er diesseits der Alpen arbeitete, somit die italienische Concurrenz weniger zu frchten hatte, und ferner, dass er
38 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

15 Ibid., p.43. 16 Ibid., p.51. 17 Ibid., p.43.

18 Gustav Edmund Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte desXVII.Jahrhunderts, Prag 1889, p.33. 19 Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674, Praha 1974, p.11. 20 Karel Chytil, [echy] Djiny malstv asochastv, in: Ottv slovnk naun, 6, Praha 1893, p.381. 21 Karel Boromejsk Mdl, Vtvarn umn. Karel krta, Ploha Nrodnch list, enclosure to No. 278, 1910 (9. 10.), p.9. 22 Karel Vladimr Herain, esk malstv od doby rudolnsk do smrti Reinerovy. Pspvky kdjinm jeho vnitnho vvoje vletech 15761743, Praha 1915. 23 Ibid., p.19. 24 Ibid., p.24. 25 Ibid., p.26. 26 Ibid., p.27. 27 Karel Vladimr Herain, Karel krta otnovsk ze Zvoic, Druh ploha eskho slova of 23 October 1910 (No. 242), pp.1718, here p.18.

nach Beendigung des dreissigjhrigen Krieges lebte. Jaromr Neumann voiced his opinion on Pazaureks book as follows: [it] tried to utterly downgrade both the value and the independent nature of the artists oeuvre and, at the same time, discredit him. The truth, however, was that krtas Czech-speaking interpreters deep into the late 19th century saw the artists indisputable Czech origin as his greatest asset. It seems that even the pragmatic Karel Chytil a Czech scholar who otherwise never dared to fall for nationalist stereotypes was rather puzzled in dealing with the phenomenon of krta. The excerpt from his interpretation summarizing the life and work of the artist and published in the Otto Encyclopaedia [Ottv slovnk naun; 1863] proves that he defended the painter from Pazaurek solely by enumerating the array of the long established denitions: The Thirty Years War and the radical changeover in Bohemian affairs indeed totally paralysed all local artistic developments []. Karel krta [] returned to Bohemia and launched a new stage of Bohemian painting here. krta, in his numerous altarpiece paintings, adheres to the Italian academics or eclectics and his oeuvre in this sense ranks as the best achievements created outside Italy. Similarly, Karel Boromejsk Mdl views krta as an artist of merely average talent whose main asset was introducing the advanced Italian patterns to Central-Bohemia and, moreover, diminishing the relics of Rudolne Mannerism: krtas art from both the aspect of form and mentality must be generally judged against the background of the tendencies and conditions of Italian art during the period of his youth; the art which was left behind to weaker forces by the Bologna academics and the Roman naturalists. It copes with what the artistic grandsons of the Carraccis and Caravaggios accomplished. However adapted, second- or even third-hand art displaying only minor signs of authentic artistic personality, it is still signicant to Bohemia in a certain groundbreaking sense. It eradicated Mannerism and Romanticism and introduced us to a higher sense of colourful picturesqueness and animated form. A completely different standpoint was taken by Karel Vladimr Herain (1915), the rst scholar to provide a synthesis on modern Bohemian painting. His work focuses on the period between the ascendance of Rudolf II to the throne (1573) and the death of the painter Vclav Vavinec Reiner (1743). The subtitle of the book Contributions to the History of Its Internal Development between 1576 and 1742 [Pspvky k djinm jeho vnitnho vvoje v letech 15761743] suggests that Herains main program in this instance was to show that the development of Bohemian painting in the given era was smooth, obeying nothing but the intrinsic laws of art, and was thus clearly beyond contemporary historical events. Herain was moreover the rst to acknowledge that Rudolne art was essential to the progress of local painting production. He claims that it was largely due to the Italian-oriented, protoBaroque oeuvres of Hans von Aachen and Bartholomus Spranger why Prague came to witness the very distinct and supreme artistic outcomes of this style which had hitherto only been perceived as imported to our environment by the Counter-Reformation in the early 17th century. Herain is also ahead in observing the inuence of Bolognese eclecticism and also perhaps Caravaggios naturalism in the work of the two above-mentioned Rudolne masters i.e., the stylistic aspects whose general features were otherwise linked with the much later inuence of krta. Political developments from between 1618 and 1620 thus did not represent any substantial turning point for the development of painting in Bohemia just because the changes which it succumbed to were of earlier date and inevitable and their unfortunate consequences (in no way denied by Herain) were to surface only on a long-term basis. The arriving re-Catholicisation then prompted local painting towards Baroque even more. This was not just due to the intensied inux of yet another topical Italian inspiration but also due to the new artistic tasks required by the Church and the aristocracy. And the artist exible enough and ready to meet these requirements was exactly Karel krta, who was later destined to attract so much attention and popularity that no other contemporary painter could equal him in this. Herain argued against Pazaurek even earlier, in connection with his 1910 retrospect held in the Prague Rudolnum Gallery: krta was a magnicent talent of the arts. Italy had red the great artist in him and it also naturally gave him the means of expression. We will not use an empty clich to value his signicance; let us just say that he is the rst master of Baroque in our lands. The Baroque style then became established here and bore beautiful fruit in both painting and architecture. K. V. Herain, however, remained isolated not only in his view of the beginnings of Baroque painting in Bohemia but also in the overall issue of Baroque. Czech art history during the inter-war period had only little understanding for such an ultimately formalist approach, assuming that a much more urgent imperative was to discover the social role in Baroque and nd it a higher ideological sense in the framework of Czech or, respectively,
STUDIES 39

8. Picture Gallery of the Society of Patriotic Friends of the Arts in the Rudolnum Gallery, installation of Bohemian Baroque painting, Archives of the National Gallery in Prague (photo: Jan tenc, c. 1919) 9. Installation of works by Karel krta in the Picture Gallery of the Society of Patriotic Friends of the Arts in the Municipal Library in Prague. Photograph from the ceremonial handover of the Gallerys collections to state administration on 9 February 1933, Archives of the National Gallery in Prague (photo: Czech News Agency, TK)

Czechoslovak history. The almanac Czechoslovak Art [eskoslovensk umn; 1926], co-written by Vojtch Birnbaum, Antonn Matjek, Josef Schrnil and Zdenk Wirth, reads that ne arts have been, nonetheless, the least affected by the consequences of the loss of national sovereignty because Bohemian Renaissance was nothing but a projection of Italian culture to the North and because the new political and religious tendencies supported the developments in art through the immigration of potent forces from Italy and Germany. The Rudolne court art thus merely represented an exclusive import, the Thirty Years War stood for a cultural caesura and neither was early Baroque able to produce any upswing in arts because it, too, progressed in a solely mechanical way of adopting xed stylistic forms: Early Baroque in Czechoslovakia like Renaissance nevertheless remained a provincial art in its quality, for it stemmed from the same sources and succumbed to the same deformation of exact stylistic form. Oldich Stefan then polemically followed with the historically moralizing line of the famous essay by Arne Novk, entitled Baroque Prague [Praha barokn], arguing in the treatise The Background of Prague Baroque [Pozad praskho baroku; 1932] that, As if we were somewhat incidentally beginning to realize that the art form is not the only content of our Baroque; that we are actually talking about the stylistic expression [sic!] of the entire 150 years of our, very important, national history: from the White Mountain to the 1770s. But we keep evading this, as if it was something that we are unsure of, that we perhaps almost fear. The reason is the helplessness which remains the characteristic feature of our relation to the historical role of this period in general. The helplessness is specied somewhat later in the essay. Stefan explains that the arts paradoxically developed in the very period which we can hardly call a happy and favourable era of our history due to national, religious and economic reasons. He perceives the arrival of Baroque in Bohemia as the result of the fateful clash of two different cultures, the conict between the Romance and Catholic South and the German and Protestant Western tendency; the conict which lasted in Bohemia for the entire 16th century. The Battle of White Mountain then caused that these two contradictory tendencies could not naturally equipoise. Baroque as an artistic opinion was forcibly imposed on the Czech population by the victorious party and it can be said that it made its way and became widespread among common people only during the 1690s or, perhaps, even later, and only then did it begin to express their thinking. But before that, it was solely a foreign import for the upper classes. Vclav Vilm tech then offered another pointed conception of the genesis of Baroque in Bohemia (1938). He was probably inspired by Max Dvoks theory about the contradictory worlds of ideas of Renaissance and Baroque arts, as well as by the view of Werner Weisbach from the 1920s about the Counter-Reformation essence of Baroque style. tech
40 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

28 Vojtch BirnbaumAntonn MatjekJosef SchrnilZdenk Wirth, eskoslovensk umn, Praha 1926, p.16. 29 Arne Novk, Praha barokn, Praha 1915. 30 Oldich Stefan, Pozad praskho baroku, in: Artu Rektorys (ed.), Kniha oPraze (Prask almanach) 3, 1932, pp.5469, here p.55. 31 Ibid., p.58. Stefan thus adopted the fundamental theses of historian Josef Peka; comp.Josef Peka, Bl hora. Jej piny insledky, in: idem, Postavy aproblmy eskch djin. Vbor zdla, Zdenk Kutnar (ed.), Praha 19902, pp.131231, here esp.pp.177185. 32 O. Stefan, Pozad praskho baroku (see note 30), p.60. Stefan also developed on the theory about transplanting Baroque into Bohemia in his book Prask kostely, Praha 1936, esp.pp.5152. 33 Vclav Vilm tech, eskoslovensk malstv asochastv nov doby, Praha 19381939.

10. Exhibition of Karel krta in the State Collection of Old Masters in the Prague Municipal Library in 1938, Archives of the National Gallery in Prague (photo: anonymous author, 1938/39) 11. View into installation of the State Collection of Old Masters (National Gallery) in the Municipal Library in Prague. On the right in the background: section with paintings by Karel krta and other 17th-century Central-European painters, Archives of the National Gallery in Prague (photo: anonymous author, 1938/39) 12. Installation of works by Karel krta in the Picture Gallery of the Society of Patriotic Friends of the Arts in the Prague Municipal Library. Photograph from the ceremonial handover of the Gallerys collections to state administration on 9 February 1933 (from left to right: Zdenk Wirth, Vincenc Kram, Prime Minister Jan Malypetr), Archives of the National Gallery in Prague (photo: Czech News Agency, TK)

perceives Baroque, with its aspiration towards the unity of content and form and its spirituality, as the antinomy of the highly rened and basically secular art of Rudolne Mannerism. To him, the preconditions for adopting Baroque were provided by the newly organized Catholicism which began long before the White Mountain. He once again expressed on the stylistic character of post-White Mountain Baroque painting in the exhibition catalogue Prague Baroque [Prask baroko; 1938]. The White Mountain and all its consequences brought a radical turning point; with it, the natural development of art was halted for a long time. Creativity sunk from elegant internationality to modest provinciality. Also the stylistic advantage was lost, as the local artists kept lingering on forms based on the Renaissance opinion. The active belligerence of the victorious Counter-Reformation began entering the forms only little by little. The rst one to attempt a constructive approach to the relation between early Baroque painting and Karel krta was Vincenc Kram who was ready to emphasize the painters epochal asset: We can, however, fully acknowledge krtas signicance for our art only if we realize how poor and weak our painting was when the artist rst appeared in public. Kram also considerably contributed to the wide recognition of the stylistic points of departure in krtas oeuvre. He straightforwardly interpreted the artist as timeless: A new stage of development in our painting, including the art work of our days, indeed takes krta into account. And we certainly cannot more highly appraise his exploit than by saying that this outstanding painter laid the foundations of our modern artistic tradition. He, on the other hand, helped petrify many stereotypes which stretched through art history from as early as the beginning of the 19th century. Beside other things, he revived the age-long exiles model of interpretation and agreed that the decisive stylistic turning point occurred outside Bohemia, and at the same time reduced Rudolne art to a mere episode, utterly insignicant for future developments. Kram also anticipated the later narrations of Jaromr Neumann by explaining krtas art as an intrinsically Czech phenomenon. To him, his lyricism and vigour constituted the tradition which subsequently climaxed in the art of the National Revival. He thus also reected the dispute over the character of Baroque in the Czech milieu and its signicance in shaping the modern nation. The latter issue was brought to life by the so-called dispute over the sense of Czech history whose tone was determined by as inuential personalities as Frantiek Xaver alda and Josef Peka during the 1920s and 1930s. Kram employed scientic methods derived from the works of the Viennese art-history school and combined them with instinctual intuition. This helped him construct the bygone dream of the 19th-century nationalist authors the new Czech national school of painting: The time has not yet come for us talk more widely about the specic or, eventually, Czech character of krtas works without being in danger of one-sidedly interpreting the features of the period. For the time being, we must depend on our inherent instinct which makes us experience krtas art as something essentially close to us. And the proof that our perception of it is correct can be, for example, the composition of Drahomras death. It directly evokes in us the artists whose Czech nature is undoubted: Is not the scene in the church lled with the spirituality and unaffectedness of Tkadlk, and does not the main monumental composition contain something of the vigour of Ales compositions in the foyer of the National Theatre? Antonn Matjek, another notable representative of Czech art history in the rst half of the 20th century, was considerably more critical of our artist. As he wrote in 1913, krtas transgression was his low genius. But here, he totally failed to reect the shift that had occurred from Pazaureks times, especially due to the 1910 exhibition of the painter. Matjek continues: He lost orientation; he kept lingering on the surface of the quarrelling methods and mannerisms, adopting them indiscriminately and without understanding their inward sense. He sank to the artistic impurity of confused formulas; impurity which is ill-fated to all the weak. His nal verdict on krta is unambiguous: The faithful imprint of this puzzled mind is its work. Matjeks coarse judgment nonetheless softens throughout his later synoptic explanations of the artistic developments in Bohemia: he gradually comes to acknowledge not only krtas leading role in constituting local Baroque painting but also his ability to synthesize the contradictory Italian ideological movements. The author conformed to the main tendencies of contemporary art history and he, too, put krta in contrast with the allegedly poor quality of other painters active during his era in Bohemia. As he notes, 17th-century development in painting faltered for the same reasons as the development in sculpture. The Czech lands knew almost nothing about the grandiose orescence of early Baroque Italian painting, and this or that stylistic advancement and novelty arrived to us only with delay, via the Italians professing routine eclecticism. []
42 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

34 Ibid., p.57. 35 Vclav Vilm tech, Malba asochastv, in: Vstava Umn vechchXVII.aXVIII.stolet. 16001800. Prask baroko (exh. cat.), Praha 1938, p.50. 36 Vincenc Kram, Karel krta, Salon, 1932, No. 2, pp.67, No. 3, pp.2728, here p.28. 37 Ibid., p.28. 38 See esp.Bohdan ChudobaZdenk KalistaJosef VaicaJan RacekAlbert Kutal, Baroko. Pt stat, Praha 1934; Arne Novk, Nov bdn oeskm baroku slovesnm, Nae vda 16, 1935, pp.189202; Zdenk Rotrekl, Barokn fenomn vsouasnosti, Praha 1995, pp.101157; Ji RakVt Vlnas (edd.), The Second Life of the Baroque in Bohemia, in: Vt Vlnas (ed.), The Glory of the Baroque in Bohemia: Essays on Art, Culture and Society in the 17th and 18th Centuries, Praha 2001, pp.3338, 4244. 39 Vincenc Kram, Zmladch let Karla krty. Jakubv pchod kLabanovi, Praha 1938 (Pspvky kdjinm vtvarnho umn1), p.10, note 18. On the nationalist tendencies in the 20th-century Czech art history, comp.Milena Bartlov, Nae, nrodn umn. Studie zdjepisu umn, Brno 2009. Kram, however, opined in another place that our Baroque school is not more signicant that our art from the period of high Gothic; as to this, comp.the following text: It cannot pass unnoticed that the one-sided inclination towards Catholic Italy has resulted in acertain measure of conservatism but that, on the other hand, the quality of Bohemian art raised with the appearance of krta, and that this gave birth to the diversied nature of our Baroque art. It would, alas, be indiscriminate to ignore that all this art, so magnicent on the outside, cannot equal our art of the 14th and early 15th centuries as far as its signicance and historical impact are concerned. This nevertheless in no way devalues the important fact that it was the very krta who reconnected Bohemia to the world progressive tendencies and thus at the same time also established our new artistic tradition (Vincenc Kram, in: Strun prvodce Sttn sbrkou starho umn, Praha 1938, unpaginated introduction). 40 Antonn Matjek, Galerie vRudoln, Praha 1913, pp.127128. 41 Comp.idem, Djepis umn. Dl pt. Umn Novho vkuIII., Praha 1932, pp.315316.

42 Idem, Malstv, in: Zdenk Wirth (ed. by), Djepis vtvarnch umn veskoslovensku, Praha 1935 (eskoslovensk vlastivda 8), Praha 1935, p.150. 43 Antonn MatjekZdenk Wirth, esk barok vtvarn, in: Co daly nae zem Evrop alidstvu. Od slovanskch vrozvst knrodnmu obrozen, Praha 1939, pp.200206, here p.200. 44 Ibid., p.203. 45 Comp.J. Rak V. Vlnas (edd.), Druh ivot baroka v echch (see note 38), pp.1360, here pp.4246. 46 Comp.Pavel Preiss, Antonn Matjek abarokn umn, in: Antonn Matjek (18891950). Anthology of papers from the conference held on 31 January on the occasion of the 100th birth anniversary of Professor Antonn Matjek and jointly organized by the Department of Art History of the Philosophical Faculty of the Charles University in Prague, the Institute of Art Theory and History of the Academy of Arts of the Czech Republic, Praha1994, pp.4753, here p.51.

But then, due to a happy turn of fate, there came a local and Bohemian painter who possessed more external possibilities, talents and will to become a more magnicent artist than his contemporaries. Karel krta []. Similar words can be found in the essay which Matjek co-wrote with Zdenk Wirth for the almanac What Our Lands Have Brought to Europe and Humanity [Co daly nae zem Evrop a lidstvu; 1939]. Although the two scholars linked Baroque with the post-White Mountain Counter-Reformation and the Habsburg absolutism, they did so with concern to its aesthetic qualities and cultural assets, and they moreover succeeded in avoiding any negative connotations. Matjeks passage devoted to our artist even critically, albeit in a simplied way, reects on the earlier local tradition of art history: krta, the painter highly valued by his own period and also of world renown, had long been overlooked. This was especially due to the rst historians in the eld of Czech art who grew up in the atmosphere of neo-Classicism of the 18th and 19th centuries. But today we know for certain that krtas appraisal voiced by his comrade from Rome, Sandrart, in his Teusche Akademie (of 1675) still stands in every word and that it is necessary to view krta as a painter who far exceeded the standard of Central-European art. krta painted both religious and secular subjects; and doing so, he employed all the means which had been mastered by contemporary Italian art and he indeed learned its lessons as a creative artist and not as a mere compiler. The favourable judgment on the Baroque master and the overall tone of the article can be explained by the nationally-defensive tendency of the almanac as well as the contemporary context: the work was published at the beginning of the German occupation whose cultural atmosphere moreover still echoed the 1938 groundbreaking monumental exhibition Prague Baroque [Prask baroko]. We can only conclude that unlike Vincenc Kram, Antonn Matjek actually never developed any deeper relationship to Karel krta and his work. *** The wide range of views on early Baroque painting and the role of Karel krta during the inter-war period were certainly due to the still supercial knowledge of the survived fund of paintings and also the lingering prejudice towards the cultural, religious and political conditions in 17th-century Bohemia. The opinions sorted out only in the latter half of the 20th century. The leading interpreter of Bohemian Baroque at that time became Matjeks student, Jaromr Neumann, who excelled in supporting his suggestive views on the subject with his sound knowledge of visual material. He did so for the rst time in the synthesis entitled Baroque Realism: 17th-Century Painting in Bohemia [Barokn realismus: Malstv XVII. stolet v echch; 1951]. This interpretation was, however,
STUDIES 43

13. Jaromr Neumann and Ji Man at the opening of Karel krtas exhibition in the Prague Castle Riding School in 1974, Archives of the National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague) 14. View into installation of Karel krtas exhibition in the Prague Castle Riding School in 1974, Archives of the National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

15., 16., 17. Views into installation of Karel krtas exhibition, held in the Prague Castle Riding School and in the Wallenstein Riding School in 2010 (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

rather adversely affected by the ideology of dogmatic Stalinism. Neumann, employing Sandrarts ground plan of the devastated country but also Marxist phraseology, drew the picture of Karel krta as a progressive artist whose realism expressed the objective laws of the class struggle: His art is one of deep inner conicts, symptomatic [] of the early stages of solidifying feudalism, the period of the nascent Baroque art. krta did not only become a tool of the new gentry, however he served it and was extolled by it. His greatness and signicance lie in the fact that a considerable part of his work also reected both the position and the interests of contemporary progressive social elements which were suppressed in the process of strengthening feudalism and also opposed the CounterReformation efforts of the Church. Jaromr Neumann provided his synthesizing view of 17th- and 18th-century art in the monumental work Bohemian Baroque [esk barok; 1968, 2nd edition 1974] which was simultaneously published in a German translation (1970). Neumann, too, perceives Baroque as a forcible import which allegedly helped establish foreign culture in Bohemia and departed from the ideals and principles linked with the Counter-Reformation efforts of the Church. The subsequent reversal of Baroque, however, was much more important in Neumanns opinion: The deep and brutally forged reshaping of economic, social and religious life gradually returned most of the population to the pale of the Church. But Baroque culture and art, which participated in realizing this upturn in the minds of the rebels, received a different meaning and different roles in the new environment than they initially had. The author thus arrives at the crucial point of his considerations, i.e. asking about the distinctive character of Bohemian Baroque. He discovers it in its ability to fuse earlier traditions and new inspirations and to transform them into a specic, national style. He opines that this style reects the great struggle for moral purity whose roots he tries to nd as early as in the Hussite movement. Neumanns Bohemian Baroque in contrast to the representative and ostentatious Baroque in Vienna or the decorative, playful and exalted Baroque in Bavaria is colloquially robust, intrinsically serious, contemplative and truthful in emotion. The moral ethos of Bohemian Baroque then eventually and signicantly enriched the art of the National Revival. Neumanns original contribution to the discourse on Bohemian Baroque was mainly his theory on the substitutive role of art. He departed from the idea as to the committed character of art and culture in 19th-century Revivalist society, and turned Baroque art into the bailiwick protecting the Czech nation against political and national suppression. This protection should then serve as a space where the nations yet unfullled state-forming desires would sublime and come into existence undisturbed: It can be said from a certain
44 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

47 Jaromr Neumann, MalstvXVII.stolet. Barokn realismus, Praha 1951, pp.7273. But there were others, too, who succumbed to the pressure of the period. Also Jaroslav Peina, Skupinov portrt veskm renesannm umn, Umn II, 1954, pp.269295, here p.292, identied realism in Renaissance painting in Bohemia with the ideology of the progressive, liberal middle classes who employed it as aweapon in their class resistance against the increasing pressure of the feudal and Catholic reaction. 48 Jaromr Neumann, esk barok, Praha 1974 (2nd revisited edition), p.16. 49 Ibid., p.17. Jaromr Neumann in this case apparently relied on the opinion of Vincenc Kram whoalbeit far from being equally consistenttried to give atrue picture of the national character of Karel krtas oeuvre, pointing to his pragmatic and realistic approach to religious subjects (see note 39). Comp.Sylva Dobalov, Mtus oeskm baroknm umlci: Karel krta, in: Tatiana Sedov (ed.), Socilne vedy ahumanistika oami mladch, Bratislava 2006, pp.268273. 50 Comp.J. Rak V. Vlnas (edd.), Druh ivot baroka v echch (see note 38), pp.2324, 5051.

perspective that the Baroque works of art, which employed the best creative skills of the Czech population, substituted in a different, albeit often inadequate and insufficient form that which the land was deprived of and denied after the defeat at the White Mountain. Or, as Neumann states somewhat later: As if the Czech lands, by the prompt arrivals and the hasty thrusts forward in the very eld of art which is the most autonomous expression of the view of life, wanted to compensate for what the historical circumstances precluded: the serene maturing of ideas, the uninterrupted continuity of work and the free harvesting of their own sowing. No matter how tendentious and exalted Neumann sounds here, his standpoint in the criticism of early Baroque painting style in Bohemia was rather pragmatic. Like K. V. Herain before him, Neumann, too, noted the signicance of Rudolne painters Spranger, Aachen and Heintz, whose ingenious use of the contrasts of light anticipated the principles of Baroque painting. He moreover emphasized that their work in the form of altarpiece paintings and epitaphs could also be encountered in Prague churches. But the picture gallery of Italian, German and Netherlandish masters at Prague Castle was certainly also a valuable lesson to local painters. The production mainly came from painters arriving from abroad (Hans Georg Hering, Matthias Mayer) but, into lesser extent, also from artists originating from Bohemia (Anton Stevens) who enriched their Mannerist point of departure by adopting the current stimuli of Baroque painting. Painting of the second quarter of the 17th century is summarized by Neumann as a transitional period which came to an end in the early 1640s with the arrival of Karel krta, the painter of a pronounced Baroque opinion. And it was only he, drawing on the best of his Italian training and disposing of extraordinary talents, who became the founder of Bohemian Baroque painting and the modern painting tradition in general. Jaromr Neumann developed on the aspect of krtas timeless signicance i.e. the signicance exceeding his own era repeatedly. Doing so, he did not avoid either inserting moral and ethical categories into historical events or coining the idea of an invariable national organism passing through the centuries. But both these points of departure were already anachronistic in the second half of the 20th century. As Neumann wrote in the introduction to the signicant catalogue accompanying the 1974 krta exhibition, Regardless of all the sweeping changes of artistic opinion, even Czech art in later periods remained deeply connected to his [i.e. krtas] painting legacy. [] It inherited his contemplative and serious approach to reality, stemming from the national dispositions which had been shaped by historical events for centuries; it inherited his insightful matter-of-factness which we can repeatedly encounter in the greatest achievements of Czech art. It followed his robust owing gesture as well as his subtle lyricism, and it embraced the vivid cogency and the colourful sonority of his brushwork. Neumann then tried to bridge the dilemma ensuing from the stereotype of krta the convert by the thesis which is in essence intrinsically romanticist: The deep roots of his family and the inward strength of his personality allowed him to transform the moral seriousness and meditative inwardness, linked with the earlier autochthonous religious tradition, into the new artistic morphology of Baroque Bohemia. He thus enormously contributed to the birth of the phenomenon which we, within the complex ethnic mixture of the contemporary style, call Bohemian Baroque for he laid the foundations for the future and independent artistic development of a revived nation. Sylva Dobalov in her attempt at deconstructing Neumanns interpretations correctly observed that these theses are too far beyond the scope of krtas painting oeuvre and are instead rather aimed at revealing the attributes of the Czech nation: they present it as contemplative and serious, but still creative and having a sense of drama, at the same time being austere and unostentatious and compensating for the lack of fantasy by its sincere, only seemingly heavy-handed and coarse inwardness and peasantry. According to Neumann, it is the very qualities of inwardness and authenticity that and in a positive sense distinguishes Czech art from the art of other nations: for the latter, however spectacular, is supercial, focused towards the outside, and histrionic. We can nonetheless still sense the intrinsic need to rehabilitate the Baroque era in Bohemia behind Neumanns reections and to do so through instrumentating ne arts and elevating them to the position of bearers of the national identity. Painting within this construct receives the role which the 19th-century nationalist concepts exclusively attributed to language. The reason why we so extensively quoted from Jaromr Neumann is that his interpretations very aptly translate the ideas which were inuencing the discourse on Bohemian Baroque throughout the 1960s and 1970s. Yet another scholar working with the concept that Baroque was intrinsically foreign art was the leading expert on Baroque sculpture,
46 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

51 J. Neumann, esk barok (see note 48), p.11. 52 Ibid., p.12. Comp.also p.13: In acountry deprived of all the arms of sovereign political life, the arts [] became the most effective means of social communication, connecting the widest social strata in their viewing of the world and in their ways of thinking and feeling. Jaromr Neumann even returned to this idea in his later essays, i.e. Aktulnost eskho baroku, Umn XXX, 1982, pp.385421, esp.p.388; and idem, Osobitost eskho baroku, Umn LI, 2003, pp.137146, esp.p.138. 53 J. Neumann, esk barok (see note 48), pp.7275; also idem (see note 47), pp.7092. 54 Idem, Karel krta (see note 19), esp.pp.4243; respectively, idem, krtov. Karel krta ajeho syn, Praha 2000, pp.611. 55 J. Neumann, Karel krta (see note 19), p.7. 56 Ibid., p.43. 57 S. Dobalov, Mtus oeskm baroknm umlci (see note49), p.272.

58 Oldich Jakub Blaek, Umn baroku vechch, Praha 1971, p.7. Comp.idem, Der Barock in Bhmen, in: Kunst des Barock in Bhmen (Ausstellungskatalog), Essen 1977, p.11: Der Barock tauchte dabei in Bhmen als eine fremde Kunst im Gefolge der rcksichtslosen Sieger auf, []. Blaek clearly followed Stefans formulations from the 1930s which he had already referred to in his book Rokoko akonec baroku vechch, Praha 1948, pp.89. Stefan is also quoted by Neumann, esk barok (see note 48), p.11. 59 Josef Poliensk, Umn aspolenost poblohorskch ech, in: Oldich J.Blaek et al., Barok vechch. Vbr architektury, plastiky, malby aumleckch emesel, Praha 1973, esp.pp.910. 60 Zdenk Kalista, esk barokn gotika ajej rsk ohnisko, Brno 1970, p.9. 61 Vclav ern, Generan periodizace eskho baroka, in: idem, A do pedsn nebes. trnct studi obaroku naem icizm, Praha 1996, pp.261354, here p.263. 62 Ibid., p.286. 63 Comp.the survey of bibliography in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 9), pp.642660, and, within it, esp.the recent works by Sylva Dobalov, Lubomr Konen, Ivo Kon, Michal ronk and others.

Oldich Jakub Blaek. As he claims in the introduction to the representative monograph The Art of Baroque in Bohemia [Umn baroku v echch; 1971], Baroque art [] arrived in Bohemia in the rst half of the 17th century, during the Thirty Years War, as art serving the new society of the White Mountain conquerors who mainly engaged in the widely constituted Counter-Reformation efforts. But it succeeded in adjusting to this milieu; it lost its foreign nature and took root. Distinct views on the arrival of Baroque in Bohemia were more or less isolated during the above-mentioned period, and if they could be heard at all, it was from the historians. The scholar worth noting in this respect is Josef Poliensk. His opening essay to the catalogue accompanying the National Gallerys permanent exhibition Baroque in Bohemia in Chlumec nad Cidlinou (1973) argues against the idea of linking the arrival of Baroque art in Bohemia to the post-White Mountain re-Catholicisation and the reinforcement of the Habsburg reign and claims that this perception is no longer maintainable. Zdenk Kalista then interpreted Baroque as a universal principle which affected all spheres of life and it therefore was, in its ambivalence, equally present in Catholic and Protestant countries. Vclav ern departs from the same roots, mainly postulated by F. X. alda in Czech milieu. His resolute argument against the traditional stereotype reads: The mistaken idea that Baroque was merely a consequence of the Roman-Catholic seizure of power within the Czech spiritual development vanished spontaneously as soon as it became clear in the overall European context that there is, also, Protestant Baroque. And it was ern the literary scientist who, on the margin of his ambitious periodisation of Bohemian Baroque based on individual generations, presented his distinctive portrait of Karel krta as an artist capable of fusing the Bohemian and European spiritual components: [] he achieved what hitherto only literature and, to a much lesser extent, music were able to accomplish: to be entirely Baroque in his art, and not just that he also was Baroque in an utterly unique way and on a European level, and still remained very Czech. erns interpretation, however, makes this Czech character of krta being merely something specic in form and style instead of a moral quality. *** The readers of this text who are waiting to see our patent solution on the given subject will probably be disappointed at this moment. The often very contradictory opinions selected for the purpose of this essay perhaps illustrate enough that it is simply impossible to arrive at any unambiguous interpretation here. Their variety should better help us ponder on the different ways of how the generations of art historians tried to get a hold on Karel krta. It is anyways clear that we can no longer maintain the idealistic view of krta as the one who would develop a national variant of Baroque or, respectively, as a national artist whose oeuvre would proudly loom over the surge of time. For krtas art actually was not any unwanted and foreign element which would, in its essence, defy the provincial atmosphere of the alleged culturally retired Bohemia, a country belatedly professing late Renaissance or, respectively, Mannerist forms. And it was neither a tool serving the ideology of the arriving establishment nor, even, a cunning means of supporting the suppressed social classes in their ght against the foreign nobs. It was just art which was utterly topical and, beyond doubt, fashionable. The local milieu was very ready to accept it, and its quality and means of expression perfectly complied with the expectations and needs of the society of that period. This is, now, the real core of the greatness and the artistic success of Karel krta. Research in the given eld, however, still remains wide open even in spite of the very many recent ndings. The best proof of this fact is the essays in the present monograph which rather eloquently point not only at the wide scope of the research on krta but also at the high potential of studying early Baroque in Bohemia. Translated by Lucie Vidmar

STUDIES 47

Edition of selected texts

Franz Lothar Ehemant, Etwas zur Kunstgeschichte Bhmens

in: Josef Dobrovsk (ed.), Bhmische Litteratur auf das Jahr 1779, Prag 1779, pp. 205235. [p. 218] Bisher befande ich mich ausser Stand, mehr Knstler, als den Peter Gemund, die Clussenberche, als die Maumeister Bene und Ferrabosco zu nennen. Je mehr man sich aber den Zeiten des Kaiser Rudolphs nher; desto mehrere und geschisktere Knstler wird man da antreffen. Nie wurden mehrere und kostbarere Kunstwerke in Bhmen gesammelt; nie mehr [p. 219] die Knstler geschtzt und krftiger aufgemuntert; nie hat ein Kaiser so viele Zeit in den Werkstten der Knstler zugebracht, und sich in verschiedenen Knsten selbst gebt, als Rudolph II.: wie man sich aus der Reisebschreibung Deutschlands des Daniel Eremita, die einem andern Werkchen angehngt ist, berzeugen kann. Sonach brach die goldene Zeit der Kunst in Bhmen zur Zeit Rudolphs, dieses bhmischen Salamon, wie man ihn seiner groen Schtze wegen, nannte, an. Dieser Vater der Knste lie verschiedene Gebude auffhren, wovon man noch einige in Prag sieht, von noch mehreren aber nur liet, wie z.B. von den prchtigen Sternwarte fr den berhmten Tycho Brahe. Er liess mit grsstem Eifer Kunstwerke, und vorzglich Gemlde sammeln; worunter auch die Stcke des Corregio waren, die derselbe fr den Herzog Friedrich von Mantua gearbeitet hatte, und die dieser dem Kaiser schenkte. Die berhmte Leda und ein Cupido, der an seinem Bogen arbeitet, waren die vornehmsten von besagten Stcken. Nicht minder erhielt er von Nrnberg die Kreuztragung Christi, und von Venedig den berhmten hl. Bartholomus, beydes von Drer [p. 220] gemalt u, m. dgl. Er legte eine der schnsten Galerieen von Europa an; weswegen er auch den berhmten Egidius Sadeler von Rom anch deinem Hofe berufte, und ihn zum knigl. Kupferstecher ernannte. Dieser Kunstphnix (so nannte man ihn) war einer der grten Kupferstecher seiner Zeit; er gab eine Abbildung von Peag, die Prager Brcke, den gedachten Wladislaischen Saal, und viele Werke nach Heinrich Golzius, Bartholomus Spranger, Joseph Heinz, Roland Savery, ein groes Bildnis Kaiser Rudolphs II. u. m. a. in Kupfer heuraus, und beschftige sich manchmal mit dem Pinsel. Damals fand man die geschicktesten Maler in Prag, die sich in die Wette bemheten, einander zu bertreffen. Unter den Hofmalern nenne ich erstlich den Bartholomus Spranger, der bereits von Maximilian II. nach Bhmen berufen ward, sehr viele historische Stcke malte, seiner Verdienste wegen in Adelstand, und mit einer dreyfach goldene Kette beschenkt wurde; darauf den Johann von Achen, der sich eine solchen Reichthum erworben hatte, da es kein Knstler jener Zeit mit ihm aufnehmen konnte; hernach den Joseph Heintz, der nicht nur an diesem [p. 221] Hofe eine groe Anzahl historischer Gemlde verfertigte, die durch die Sadeler, Lukas Kilian und Isaak Major in Kupfer gebracht worden; sondern auch von seinem Hofe nach Italien geschickt ward, um die schnsten antiken Statuen abzuzeichnen, und die bestem Gemlde zu Rom, Venedig, Mantua, und anderswo zu kopiren; endlich Roland Savery, der auf kaiserl. Befehl die schnsten Aussichten in Tyrol, durch zwey Jahre lang, abzeichnen musste; zuletzt den Georg Hufnagel (Hfnagel) der fr Rudolphen vier Bcher von allerley Gattungen Thiere malte, vor deren jedes er 1000 Goldkronen bekommen, und mit grosser Bestalltung in kaiserl. Dienste aufgenommen wurde. Arcimboldo und Sammtbreughel arbeiteten gleichfalls zu Prag. Unter den Bildhauern kenne ich aus diesem Zeitraume nur den Johann du Mont, einen Schler des Johann da Bologna, der bereits von Maximilian II. aus Florenz verschreieben worden; und Geirg Schwanhart, der zugleich ein trefflicher Steinschneider war. [][p. 223] Auch ward Allexander Abondio sammt seinem Sohne dahin beruffen, die allerhand Portraite und Historien nach der Natur aus gefrbtem Wachse poussierten. (Sandrart I, 344) [] [p. 225] Indessen kamen die Knste unter der Regierun des Kaiser Mathias in Bhmen zu ihrer Reife. Dieser Monachr beschloss, die Burg ganz neu zu bauenm und Vincentius Scamozzi ward ausersehen, diesen Bau zu leiten, womit auch im Jahre 1614 der Anfang gemacht wurde. Aber die Ausfhrung dieses Unternehmens unterblieb, indem bald darauf die Emporungen in Bhmen sich angesponnen, der Kaiser gestorben, und die Residenz von hier nach Wien verlegt wurde. Wie traurig ist dem Freunde der Knste zu sehen, da itzt die kaum anbrechende Morgenrthe, die den schnsten Tag versprach, sich pltzlich wieder in dunkler Nacht verliert! [] [p. 226] Zuerst kam im schwedischen Kriege A. 1631 der Kuhrfrst, Johann Georg, von Sachsen selbst nach Prag, und lie viele Kostbarkeiten der Residentz auf mehr alss funfzig Wagen nach Dresden schleppen; welchem Beyspiele seine Sachsen treulich folgten. Sodenn berennte der schwedische General, Graf von Knigsmark im Jahre 1648 den Hradschin und die Kleinseite von Prag. Nebst andern Kostbarkeiten aus der knigl. Schatzkammer, ward auch das Beste aus der kostbaren Sammlung von Gemlden weggenommen und nach Stockholm gefhrt. [] [p. 227] [Here, Ehemant quotes the letter written by Charles Patin who had the chance of visiting the chambers of Prague Castle alone, only in the company of Miseroni.] Nach dem westphlischen Friedensschlue erholte sich sehr bald wieder unser Vaterland, und die Knste engen an, sich, whrend eines langen Friedens, ihrem ehemaligen Glanze etwas zu nhren. Die groe Menge bisher noch vorhandenen [p. 228] Kunstsachen, eine groe Zahl nach Bhmen beruffener Knstler, die menge Liebhaber, die den Flei jener gromthig belohnten, die Untersttzungen und Aufmunterungen der Knstler, lockten noch mehrere fremde Artisten ins Land, und brachten selbst unter unsern Landesleuten Mnnern hervor, die sich zum Theil durch ihr eigenes Genie, zum Theil in Italien ausgebildet hatten, und davon einige sich mit groen Meistern messen konnten, und daher auch ihre Werke in die berhmtesten auswrtigen Sammlungen aufgenommen wurden. Noch whrend der grten Unruhen bildete sich Wenzel Hollar zu einem vortrefflichen Kupferstecher; Philipp van de Boche giebt im Jahre 1618 den Abri der Stadt Prag, und spter darauf der kaiserliche Kammermaler, Folpert von Alten Allen, die Abbildung eben dieser Hauptsatdt in Kupfer heraus. Etwas spter zeichneten sich folgende Maler aus, die historische Stcke, Architecturen, Portraite, Thiere, Blumen und Landschaften malten: Karl Screta, der die Manieren vieler groen Meister nachzuahmen wute, seine Schler, Bartholom. Klosse, und Franz Paling, sodenn Joh. Georg Hering, Anton Stephani, Karl Bings, Wenzel Britz, Eissler, Johann Friedr. He, Johann Georg Heintsch, Johann Ongers, Rudolph By, Peter Brandel, Laurentz Reiner, Michael Halwachs, Pompejus Augustinus Aldrovandini, Johann Adalbert Angermayer, Caspar Hirscheli, [p. 229] Johann Hiebel, Jakob Braun, Johann Jakob Hartmann, Wilhelm Neunhert, Adam Schpf. []
64 Note: Status particularis Regiminis FerdinandiII., amstelodami p.305 u.f. 65 Note: Gassendus in Vit Tychonis. 66 Note: Winckelmann ber die Nachahmung der griechischen Werke, S.53 der 2ten Au.

48 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

67 Note: Sandrarts Akademime, TheilII.BuchIII.1te Auage. 68 Note: Casp.Fsslin Verzeichniss der vornehmsten Kupferst. S.125.

69 Note: Des camps Vies des Peintres. P.I.p.184. 70 Note: Sandrart AkademieII.Th.III.B.S.285. 71 Note: Caso. Fuesslin Geschichte der Knstler in der Schweiz, B.1 S.52.

72 Note: Des camps 1. c. p.293. 73 Note: Sandrart 1. c. p.300. 74 Note: J.R.Fuesslin allgem. Knstlerlexikon S.18 und 251, unter dem Artikel Heinz.

75 Note: Sandrart ibid., S.279. 76 Note: Ibid. 1. c. p.346.

Gottfried Johann Dlabac, Allgemeines historisches Knstler-Lexikon fr Bhmen und zum Theil auch fr Mhren und Schlesien
Prag 1815. [le 14] Da also wieder die Knste gut aufgenommen wurden, so vermehrte sich auch die Zahl der Knstler merklich; deswegen legte Kaiser Rudolf II., dem die Knste ihr goldenes Zeitalter zu danken hatten, eine Knstlerakademie in Prag an, und nahm Sie in seinen mchtigen Schutz auf. Dieser groe Monarch, der sich lieber mit Wissenschaften und Knsten, als mit dem Schwerdte beschftigte, zog die grten Knstler Europens an sich, und wute ihre Verdienste zu krnen. Wie glcklich war also unser liebes Vaterland, da in seinem Schooe die Wissenschaften und Knste blheten, und von einem so mchtigen Monarchen untersttzt und fortgepanzt wurden! Aber auch die den bhmischen Knsten ergebene Zeitalter, verschwand mit dem Tode dieses berhmten Kaisers. Rudolf starb, und Kaiser Mathias, der [le 15] eine unruhige Regierung in Bhmen erlebte, und seinen Sitz nach Wien bersetzen mute, konnte aber keine Hlfe den Knsten leisten, ohne welcher doch ihr Daseyn nicht nur nicht bestehen konnte, sondern dieselben gezwungen waren, ein besseres Glck in fremden Lndern zu suchen. Der kleine berrest, der noch in Bhmen whren der Unruhen blieb, mute eben das Bhmen verlassen, und in der Welt so lange herumirren, bi sich wieder die Unruhen unter Kaiser Ferdinand II. legten, und der lngst gewnschte Frieden zurck nach Bhmen kehrte. Alles wurde von Feinden verwstet, und es verschwand alles, was zuvor die hchste Vollkommenheit erreichte. Bei allen den harten Schicksalen der Bhmen aber thaten sich doch einige Knstler hervor. (Holar, Philipp von der Bosche, Paul Aretin von Ehrenfeld). Nach dem dreiigjhrigen Kriege, aber kehrten wieder viele Knstler nach Bhmen zurck, und versuchten noch einmal die bildenden Knste emporzubringen. An diesem groen Werke hatte der berhmte Karl Skreta, der zuvor lange Jahre in Italien lebte, den grten Antheil, und suchte durch seine Kunststcke die vorige Neigung und Liebe der Bhmen zu gewinnen. [] [le 16] Aus diesem Zeitraume [i.e., from the period after the Thirty Years War] sind uns folgende Knstler bekannt; als: Skreta, Bartholom. Klosse, Franz Palling, Joh. Georg Hering [Dlabac mistakenly ranks Hering among the generation following krtas], Hess, Heintsch, Ongers, Rudolf By, Peter Brandel, Wenzel Lorenz Reiner, Halwachs, [], die sich in der Malerkunst hervorgethan haben.

Karel Vladislav Zap, (echy ) Djiny vtvarnch umn (Malstv) [(Bohemia ) History of Fine Arts (Painting)]
in: Frantiek Ladislav Rieger (ed.), Slovnk naun 2, Praha 1862. [p. 454] Umn milovn csa Rudolf II. povolal do Prahy mnoho slavnch umlc cizch, ale jejich tvory, a domcm umlcm k jich mnohostrannosti, jto potom doshli, valn pomohly, maj mlo spolenho s umnm eskm. V Praze tehd malovali Bartol. Spranger, Roland Savery, Jan z Cch, Jan Breughel, Jos. Heintz, Jan Hoffmann, Ji Hoefenagel a znamenit rytec Jilj Sadeler. [] Politickm a nboenskm pevratem, tidcetiletou vlkou v echch zpsobenm, petren jest podruh chod pirozenho rozvoje nrodnho umn, a echov se odtud novho nrodnho smru v umn vce dodlati nemohli. Akoliv v druh polovici XVII. stolet lechta a duchovenstvo mnoho pro malstv podnikali a vedle cizch umlc dost znamenit mnostv domcch tomuto umn sly sv vnovalo: pedce zmaltnlost a veobecn klesl vkus v krasoum nedaly eskmu duchu novho vzniku. Mli jsme pouze mnoho malv, ovem tak mezi nimi nkolik takovch, kte t evropsk slvy doli, ale ti neutvoili vce zvltn tet nrodn koly. Pedn zasluhuje estn zmnky Karel krta ze Zvoic, kter vynikal obratnost v npodoben zpsobu malovn italskch mistr.

Antonn Rybika, Karel krta otnovsk ze Zvoic. Nstin rodo- a ivotopisn [Karel krta otnovsk of Zvoice. An Outline of His Genealogy and Biography]
Svtozor 3, 1869, pp. 4243, 5051, 5556, 63. [p. 43] Vbec znmo jest, kterak vzdlanost a blahoby v zemch koruny esk v prodlen XVI. stolet na takov stupe se vyinuly, e ony tehd zaujmaly prvnch mst mezi zemmi stedn Evropy. Zvelebovalo se tenkrte kolstv tak, jako nikdy, kvetly STUDIES 49 obchod, emesla a hospodstv poln, vzdlvala se umn vtvarn a velik jin umn krsn; stavitelstv, sochastv, malstv [] vyzdvihly se a zdokonalily se tak, e dla v oboru umn tchto v zemch eskch asu toho zhotoven po bok stavti smme vtvarm nejvzcnjch umlc a emeslnk jin a zpadn Evropy, anobr e ona tyt i nad n vynikala. [] vbec veker spsob ivota spoleenskho i kulturnho ve vlasti na byl takov, e nestrann cizinci s podivenm pohleli na zem ke korun esk nleit, nepzniv jich soused vak zvidli jim takovto blahobyt a spsob astn. Bohuel e zvist takov spojen s domc nesnenlivost a nesvornost a jinmi nzkmi nruivostmi, rozehla nespokojenos a boue

nebezpen, z nich nedlouho na to vzela vlka krvav, dlouholet, v kter bohat a kvtouc kraje nae ohnm, meem, hladem a morem zpustoeny, ano cel zem esk a moravsk na vrub jsou obrceny. Tu kde se jindy rozkldala bohat msta a k oblakm se pnuly pevn a skvostn hrady, vidti bylo npotom jenom kouc se rmy a zceniny; kde se druhdy zelenaly rodn role, vinice a zahrady, rozprostraly se r pustiny []. Vtvary umn krsnch, jimi se druhdy stkvly chrmy a kltery, palce a hrady pansk i domy mansk, jsou jednak znieny surovou soldateskou, jednak zavleeny rukou loupeivou z vlasti na do krajin sousednch i zmoskch (Rakous, Bavor, Sas, vdska, aj.), aby tam ovem jet po stoletch vysvdovaly, jak bohat a slavn bvaly nkdy zem esk a moravsk a jak bedliv vzdlvali obyvatel jejich umn krsn a velik vdomosti uiten, a zstaly-li to pese vechno jet njak pamtky umleck u ns skvostn

kancionly, emesln ezan neb malovan archy, nhrobky a obrazy mu nkdy v ivot veejnm a crkevnm proslulch a t. p. ty maeny, kaeny a boeny jsou od domcch kazisvt a zelot, aby se zniila velik pamtka doby kacsk a buisk. Kdy se pak ponkud utiily boue politick a nboensk a krajiny esk a moravsk zaaly se zotavovati od vytrpnch neest vlench, zbudil se i tu zas jaks taks ivot veejn a spoleensk a vzdlvala se emesla obchody a umn; avak pozorovati tu bylo ve vm ji spsob jin a rz ciz, nesrovnvajc se s tm, kter u ns panoval ve vcech tch ped vlkou tidcetiletou. Nebo do krajin pustch a lidu przdnch povolni jsou obyvatel kmene, jazyka i spsobu cizho, bval slvy a vzdlanosti esk neznal ano j nepzniv, ti pak, kdo tu zstali z pedelho obyvatelstva, byli pedelmi nehodami vlenmi zbdovni a zmaltnli. Tak zniena jest osudnou bitvou

blohorskou a zhubnmi inky jejmi nrodnos i zlat vk vzdlanosti a blahobytu domcho, m zanikl o star esk rz malsk, stavitelsk a kovolijeck, jako i pohbena jest vbec star esk kola umleck. [] Kdo tud ctil k sob nklonnosti k umnm krsnm a vtvarnm, nucena se vidl obrtititi se doma k mistrm ji cizm, anebo jti do zem zahraninch, Vlach, Nizozemska nebo Francie kde umn takov asu toho byla v rozkvtu. Proe kdy v druh polovici XVII. stolet jaks taks ivot umleck v echch zase jeviti se zaal, neml ji nic spolenho s staroeskm rzem umleckm a misti tehdej sebe nadanj, vzdlni jsouce vzory cizmi, nemajce nrodnho zkladu a neznajce starch tradic historickch, nepovznesli se vce k spsobu samorostl esk koly umleck a teba nm zstavili zdail prce malsk, sochask a stavitelsk aj., nememe jich pedce pokldati za opravdov a samorostl umleck dla esk [highlighted by the

author of this essay], albr toliko za trefn napodobovn dl vlaskch, amskch, francouzskch, vzdlan ttcem, dltem a nebo kruidlem mistr eskch. [p. 51] [Karel krta] Bohuel vak e zabrav a vtudovav se pli hluboko do vzor vlaskch akademik a eklektik, nemohl se krta npotom zcela sprostiti jich nzoru a spsobu, a vyinouti se k pvodnosti, samostatnosti a rznosti takov, jak by se vyhledvalo k obnoven star aneb k zaraen nov esk koly malsk. Velik prce krtovy jsou toti bedliv a trefn provedeny, avak v dn z nich nepotkvme se s nzorem a spsobem naeho Koldy, Zbyka, Dticha, Polile, Radoue aneb jinch mistr star koly esk, alebr tm kad dlo jeho pipomn ns bezdky na njak vzor ciz. Proe nelze nm tak pokldati malby a vkresy jeho za dla opravdov esk, nobr za pouh ovem velmi zdail npodobovn dl vlaskch a mskch.

50 BAROQUE IN BOHEMIA VERSUS BOHEMIAN BAROQUE

Karel krta in Prague

or The Story of Two Beginnings
LENKA STOLROV RADKA TIBITANZLOV VT VLNAS

1 Joachim von Sandrart, Lacademia todesca della architectura, scultura&pittura oder Teutsche Academie der edlen Bau, Bild- und Mahlerey-Knste. Der teutschen Academie zweyter und letzter Haupt-Theil, Nrnberg 1679, p.326. 2 Bohuslav Balbn, Diva Montis Sancti: seu Origines&Miracula Magnae Dei Hominumque Matris Mariae, Quae In Sancto Monte Regni Bohemiae, ad Argentifodinas Przibramenses [] in Statua sua mirabili, aditur,&colitur [], Pragae 1665, p.127, see Edition of historical sources in this book, document no.102. 3 Quoted from: Vincy Schwarz (ed.), Msto vidm velik Cizinci oPraze (Ican see alarge city Foreigners about Prague), Praha 1940, p.31. 4 See, e. g. Milo Vclav Kratochvl, as hvzd amandragor. Prask lta RudolfaII.(The Time of Stars and Mandrake. The Prague Years of Rudolf II), Praha 1972, pp.4651.

Carolo Screta, Mahler von Prag. Komt nach Venedig, Bolognen, Florenz, Rom und wieder auf Prag. These were the words used by Joachim von Sandrart to dene the circle of krtas lifetime: he came from Prague and eventually returned there again. Bohuslav Balbn wrote about his friend in a more orid way: Praga unum aliquem misit, antiquibus pictoribus parem, virum apud nos genitum, sed Orbi et Urbi notum Prague gave us a brilliant man, who was equal to old master painters, born in this country, yet known in Rome and in the world. krtas name and the name of the Bohemian metropolis became inseparably linked for later authors, as well. And rightly so, for this great Baroque painter and the city upon the Vltava River had always belonged to each other and krta gloried Prague repeatedly in his works. At the time of krtas birth Prague experienced an epilogue of its golden era when for the second time in history it became the residential city of the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire for a longer period. The Italian Jesuit Giovanni Botero wrote in 1596: The capital city [of Bohemia] is Prague, divided into three parts, all of them situated in a large, charming basin; their names are Lesser Prague, Old Prague and New Prague. The Molta [i.e. the Vltava] separates the Lesser Prague from the Old one; but the two are linked by a most beautiful bridge of twenty-four arches. The Lesser Prague contains a noble castle built on a hill, and the Cathedral. Old Prague is adorned with many magnicent and imposing buildings; those include the tower of the astronomical clock, which actually shows the astronomical year, the movement of the Sun and the Moon, the number of months and days, a calendar of festive days, the eclipse of the Sun, the lengths of the day and night, the opposition of the Moon, the new moons, and the quadrature. This part of the city also includes the Jewish ghetto, which is a town in its own right. The New Town is divided from the Old Town by a moat, which used to be deep, but by now it has been levelled with the surrounding terrain, and there are orchards on it. All these parts of the city together are estimated to have no less a perimeter than that of the city of Rome. By rough estimates, Late Rudolne Prague, the city of krtas early childhood, had something between fty and sixty thousand inhabitants and slightly more than 3,300 houses. Its comparison to papal Rome, the rising metropolis of the European Baroque, must mainly have been a rhetorical gure, but not quite unfounded. In the mid16th century Prague experienced a fast increase in demography and construction, thanks to which it achieved, at least within the frame of Central Europe, a position of a real metropolis. At that time Vienna, which was permanently threatened by Turkish raids, disposed of roughly half the number of houses, compared to Prague. In its size, the Bohemian capital city surpassed the traditional regional centres in the neighbouring German states, such as Leipzig, Nuremberg or Augsburg. Both in its extension and signicance, it was neither equalled by the administrative centre of Silesia, Wroclaw, otherwise the only
STUDIES 53

other city within the countries of the Crown of Bohemia, which could aspire the title of metropolis. Prague had actually achieved its position of the regional metropolis gradually during the second half of the 16th century. The beginning of this dynamic development had paradoxically been marked by the defeat of the resistance of the Czech Estates in 1547, whose consequence was the end of a monopoly position of the Prague communities as centres of the political power of the burgher Estate. The retributional steps of the monarch towards the royal cities resulted in the end of the privileges that Prague had enjoyed since the Hussite wars, but they did not disrupt its position as a natural administrative and spiritual centre of the Kingdom of Bohemia, or, in some cases, even the political centre of all the Crown of Bohemia. The restrictive measures introduced by Ferdinand I opened up Prague for the aristocracy and the Court. In the mid16th century, Pragues estimated population numbered 25, 000 at the most a lower number than at the time of Charles IV. In the following decades however, the number increased rapidly. Even though the fortication walls and moats between the Old and New Towns of Prague in reality played a symbolical role only, as suggested by Botero, all the three Prague Towns the Old, the Lesser and the New tenaciously adhered to their autonomies and to the privileges, which had been bestowed on them by mediaeval rulers. Their surviving strong attitude to their ancient rights and freedoms showed, for example, in the jealous attacks of the three Prague town councils on Hradany, which in 1598 was formally promoted from the Chamber status to the Royal Town. This act was mainly provoked by the natural fact that the Hradany promontory, situated close to the royal residence, was inhabited by many prominent courtiers and court officials. In his narrative dated 1603, Pierre Bergeron used a charming formulation, telling us that there was also another suburb called Outer Hradany, sometimes considered another town. In his relation of Bohemia (1609), the German topographer Matthias Quaden von Kinckelbach summarised his impression in a sentence, saying that Prague Castle is a royal castle, which in its size and buildings rather resembles a town, than a castle. Apart from the west outskirts of the Castle, newcomers mostly bought properties in the Lesser Town. The Lesser Town, same as Hradany, was devastated by a horrible re of the left bank of Prague in 1541. The disaster made some building sites available and thus facilitated a new and more generous town-planning solution. The Lesser Town became a town of the aristocracy and the centre of the Italian community in Prague. The Lesser Town Italians included, apart from merchants and nanciers, particularly construction specialists stuccoers, stonecutters and masons, whose share in the construction of Renaissance Prague has remained
54 KAREL KRTA IN PRAGUE

5 Cf. Vclav LedvinkaJi Peek, Praha (Prague), Praha 2000, pp.296323 in particular. 6 Ji Peek, Djiny Prahy vletech 15501650 (AHistory of Prague in the Years 15501650), in: Elika FukovJames M.Bradburne et al. (edd.), RudolfII.aPraha. Csask dvr arezidenn msto jako kulturn aduchovn centrum stedn Evropy (exh. cat.), PrahaLondonMilan 1997, pp.252269, here, pp.252253. 7 Ibid, pp.254255. 8 Quoted from: Ti francouzt kavali vrudolfnsk Praze (Three French Cavaliers in Rudolne Prague), Elika Fukov (ed.), Praha 1989, p.78. 9 Quoted from:V.Schwarz (ed.), Msto vidm velik (see note3), p.38. 10 Pavel Vlek, Promny msta vdob renesance aza vldy RudolfaII.(Changes of the City in the Renaissance and during the Reign of Rudolf II) , in: Pavel Vlek (ed.), Umleck pamtky Prahy, Mal Strana, Praha 1999, pp.3442.

1. Johannes Wechter after Philipp van der Bossche, View of Prague (the so-called Sadelers prospect), 1606, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

11 Summary of the main bibliography on the Italian colony in Prague presented by Vclav LedvinkaJi Peek, Manstvo, mstsk ivot veejn asoukrom (Burghers, Public and Private Life in the City), in: E.FukovJ.M.Bradburne et al. (edd.), RudolfII.aPraha (see note6), pp.287301, here, p.300, note 9. 12 Cf. Dobroslav Lbal, Renesance amanrismus (Renaissance and Mannerism), in: Pavel Vlek (ed.), Umleck pamtky Prahy, Star Msto, Josefov, Praha 1996, pp.2730. 13 Ibid, pp.431434. 14 Ibid, pp.321323.

apparent until today. The inux of new inhabitants resulted in dynamic building development. New houses and streets rapidly rose from the Vltava valley up to the foot of Petn Hill, where the development quickly replaced the former gardens and vineyards in the vicinity of an ancient church of St John the Baptist. It was this church, now lost, which besides the Augustinian St Thomass Church became a fashionable burial ground of Rudolne courtiers, including many famous artists. A different picture could be seen on the right bank of the Vltava River. The Old Town, a bastion of burgher wealth and prosperity, kept its original mediaeval aspects both in its town planning, and in its architectural details. Whereas the vedutists of that time represented a lot of free spaces both in the Lesser Town and in the New Town gaps in the rows of houses, empty building sites, but also gardens and vineyards the Old Town, which was tightly enclosed by a ring of fortication walls, practically did not offer possibilities of further growth. Even though the consequences of the aborted Estates rebellion affected particularly hard the Old Town patricians in the sphere of politics (de iure this was the most important royal town in the country!), they did not damage the roots of their economic prosperity for good, and perhaps wre not meant to, in fact. At rst, the new art and life style, the Renaissance, entered the Gothic organism of the Old Town rather timidly. As early as 1560, however, prominent patricians could afford to employ even members of the court Castle workshop of Ferdinand I to have their houses reconstructed, as can be seen, for example in the Granovsky House within the Tyne courtyard. Prague burghers were able to adopt, albeit in spatially reduced form, even the most prestigious elements of the contemporaneous palatial architecture of the Italian origin. Even after the move of the imperial court to Prague, the construction development of the Old Town, native community of Karel krta and his family, kept some specific features, in comparison with the left-bank towns. Newly built Renaissnce buildings remained rather rare and the new style mainly found its use in the reconstructions of Gothic houses. The foremost investors included a surprisingly low number of aristocrats, being mainly recruited from the town patricians. Those often included entrepreneurs recently moved there, who were almost programmatically uninterested in a possible share in the town self-government and rather concentrated on accumulating property. In the early 17th century, the Old Town (in much the same way as the Lesser Town, a little earlier) saw the erection of real merchant palaces, whose architecture was already inuenced by Mannerism. The most important evidence of such a town residence is Teys House dated about 1610 and occupying the extensive site between Michalsk and Melantrichova streets.
STUDIES 55

Compared with the luxuriousness of the Old Town, the Renaissance New Town could appear as its poor relation. The wealth of the local patricians really did no match the dimensions of their Old Town or Lesser Town counterparts and in consequence of the distance from the Castle, the area was not inundated by foreigners who had decided to anchor their careers at the imperial court. However, contemporaneous vedute reveal that at least the fronts of their frequently two-storey houses were quickly adapted in accordance with the principles of Renaissance morphology. Those elements included arcaded courtyards, which, strangely enough, cannot be evidenced in the Lesser Town. Only fragments have survived from this Renaissance beauty of the New Town, focused in the areas around todays Wenceslas Square and itn Street.Yet the so-called Golden Cross around Mstek, the area in which the main commercial zones of the Old and New Towns historically met and directly crossed in the Rudolne period still forms a social and commercial centre of Prague. Even the contemporaneous observers noticed that Rudolne Prague, apart from a number of advantages and lures, did not lack all the shadows characteristic of early modern age metropolises. Life was expensive, even for foreigners, who had otherwise been accustomed to Bohemian cheapness; high prices of the basics were in fact the object of the complaints by the Emperors mathematician Kepler. The relatively cosmopolitan agglomeration involved a rather complexly branching (and possibly even ingeniously organised) criminality, which the native population, rightly or not, often linked to the clans of the hot-bloodied Italians. The unofficial vedute by Stevens or Savery reveal the Prague microworld in a rather unattering light. In a close vicinity to Renaissance palaces, delapidated hovels and slums of the poor people were situated. All around Pohoelec, just a few steps beyond the walls of
56 KAREL KRTA IN PRAGUE

15 Dobroslav Lbal, Nov Msto aVyehrad vrenesanci amanrismu (The New Town and Vyehrad in the Renaissance and Mannerism), in: Rena Bakov (ed.), Umleck pamtky Prahy, Nov Msto, Vyehrad, Vinohrady (Praha 1), Praha 1998, pp.2629. 16 J.Peek, Djiny Prahy (see note6), p.256.

2. Johannes Wechter after Philipp van der Bossche, View of Prague (the so-called Sadelers prospect), detail: the Old Town of Prague, 1606, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

17 M.V.Kratochvl, as hvzd (see note4), pp.5160. 18 Quoted from:V.Schwarz (ed.), Msto vidm velik (see note3), p.39. 19 M.V.Kratochvl, as hvzd (see note4), p.56. 20 Summarily, Ji Peek, Mansk vzdlanost akultura vpedblohorskch echch 15471620 (Vedn dny kulturnho ivota) (Burgher Education and Culture in Bohemia of the pre-White Mountain Battle Times, 15471620 [Ordinary Days of Cultural Life]), Praha 1993, containing an extensive bibliography on the subject. 21 Its activity at the time, see Michal Svato (ed.), Djiny Univerzity Karlovy, I, 1347/481622 (AHistory of Charles University, I, 1347/481622), Praha 1995, pp.219245. 22 Ivana ornejov, Jezuitsk akademie do roku 1622 (Jesuit Academy before 1622), in: ibid, pp.247268. 23 Cf. Anna Skbov, Obnoven praskho arcibiskupstv vletech 15611562 ajeho vztah kprask universit (The Renewal of the Prague Archbishopric between 1561 and 1562, and Its Relation to Prague University), Acta Universitatis CarolinaeHistoria Universitatis Carolinae PragensisVII/1, 1966, pp.211. 24 Ji Rak, Vvoj utrakvistick organizace vdob pedblohorsk (The Development of the Utraquist Church before the Battle of the White Mountain), Sbornk archivnch pracXXXI/1, 1981, pp.179204. 25 Bedich Peka, OKarlu krtovi. Dodaten zprvy (About Karel krta. Additional Reports), Svtozor 10, 1876, pp.121122, 153, here, pp.121122. Ibid, Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674, Praha 1974, p.14. 26 Gustav Edmund Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte desXVII.Jahrhunderts, Prag 1889, p.33. 27 Vt Vlnas, in: Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674. Doba adlo (Karel krta 16101674. His Work and His Time), Praha 2010, p.581, cat. no.XVI.1. When he was knighted, Jan krta had aseal made, which was still in the possession of his son Kundrat. He used it in 1595 to seal the conrmation of receipt of 16,500 Meissen groschen from his mother, Aneka of Vodoln. The image on the seal represents the coat-of-arms of the otnovsk of Zvoice family, complemented with the initials ISZZ [=Jan of Zvoice] (our thanks go to our colleague Jan Oulk for his kind help in deciphering the initials). Cf. Archives of the Capital City of Prague, Collection of Paper Documents, former sign. 16707. Related to the preparatory work for the krta exhibition in 2010, another seal with the coat-of-arms of the otnovsk of Zvoice was found in aprivate property in Switzerland. However, that one can be dated to the 19th century at the earliest and is rather reminiscent of the historical family tradition among the authentic or alleged descendants of the Prague krta family. 28 G.E.Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note26), p.13.

Hradany, a whole town of brothels and gambling houses had gradually come into being. It came then as no surprise that hygiene was a recurrent problem in the three towns of Prague. In 1610 the physician Hippolytus Guarinonimus claimed that all the city, except the area of Hradany, built on higher ground, was an unhealthy territory, unsuitable for habitation: [These towns] are placed rather low and all their streets are plagued with wet dirt, being detestable and foul, so there is no wonder that many deaths over there are caused not by nature, or due to the country itself , which is very well endowed among many others, but due to human sloth and negligence. It was not quite true, for the self-governing town councils strove to do something about it, but to keep the streets clean was evidently beyond their power. To illustrate the situation, let us quote a report of 1604, concerning the little square outside the former Psek Gate in the Lesser Town, in close vicinity to a luxurious Renaissance palace of a merchant and great usurer Herkules de Nova: The said square features a large heap of debris and dung, in which vagabonds and mischief-makers and other useless people gather and spend their time; living close by, other people then have to put up with a very unpleasant, unhealthy and unbearable smell, coming therefrom.
***

The construction development of the Prague towns in Rudolne times reects the process of social changes and development of cultural preferences. Prague had remained an authentic centre of the kingdom in the spiritual aspect, as well. Important educational activities were concentrated there apart from the only university in Bohemia, Prague was also a seat of about 15 Latin parish schools, and a Jesuit academy, which since 1565 was entitled to grant lower academic degrees. Naturally, the most important land administrative bodies of both the originally approved Christian Churches, the Catholic and the Utraquist, worked there. The spatial arrangement of their seats seems symbolical. Ferdinand I lent the renewed Roman Catholic Archbishopric the building of the former Gryspek House in Hradansk Square, in close vicinity to the Castle and the Cathedral, which as the foremost church in the country was also honoured by the more moderate Evangelicals. Tle Untraquist Consistory had its seat in the Carolinum and the main church of the Utraquists was that of Our Lady before Tn in the Old Town Square. In the years 1615 to1620 this constellation was complemented by the chapel of the Czech Brethern, built in the place of todays SS Simon and Judes Church U Milosrdnch. Supported nancially by Protestants from the Empire, luxurious Lutheran churches were erected on the two banks of the Vltava St Saviours in the Old Town and the Holy Trinity Church in the Lesser Town. The topography of Prague churches thus faithfully reected the religious variety in the Kingdom of Bohemia after Rudolf II issued his Letter of Majesty. By coincidence, the variety of confessions was greatest on the eve of the crushing victory of the re-Catholicising powers. Close to the Tyne church, just several steps away from its north portal, Karel krta was born in the corner Black Stag house, some time between 1608 and 1611. He was a member of the third generation of a patrician family settled in Prague, with its renown based on Jan krta (d. 1587). The grandfather of our famous painter, formerly a furrier and, later on, a miller and wine merchant, who also sold tapped wine, came to Prague from Moravia, from Olenice u Kunttu. He was granted the right of citizenship in the Old Town in 1559 and his career in the municipal self-government culminated in his senator post. In 1570 Emperor Maximilian II knighted Jan krta and his descendants, lending him a family coatof-arms and a predicate otnovsk of Zvoice. Jan, who gradually became owner of several houses in the Old and New Towns, had at least eleven children, out of whom ve were sons: Jindich, Kundrat, Pavel, Daniel and Ji. The eldest Jindich (d. 1595) inherited his fathers property in the New Town of Prague, where he enjoyed the right of citizenship. By 1594 he was mentioned as a revenue scribe. Pavel krta (d. after 1632) pursued his career at the mint office in Kutn Hora, where he was gradually a scribe (1604), deputy mintmaster (1608) and mintmaster
STUDIES 57

(1610). He held this high post until the Estates rebellion (with a break between 1612 and 1616, when he was temporarily suspended and had to defend himself, as he was indicted of embezzlement). Pavel krta proved innocent and in the years 1619 and 1620 held the post of the mintmaster in Prague. He must have been engaged in an important mint reform initiated by the Czech Estates, and in consequence, he was imprisoned and interrogated after the defeat of the rebellion. At the trial, in the spring of 1621, Pavel krta otnovsk of Zvoice defended himself successfully and apparently returned to Kutn Hora afterwards. In the years 1625 and 1626 he was mentioned there as a councillor. As he, like all his family, adhered to evangelical creed, he decided to go abroad after the declaration of the Renewed Constitution. By May 29, 1628 he handed his Kutn Hora possessions to an authorised representative, who was to ensure their sale. This representative was Pavels brother-in-law Oldich Byick of Byice. But soon after that, the possessions of Pavel krta were claimed as conscated property by the Chamber of Bohemia. The last known piece of evidence of the life of the former mintmaster is a brief mention in a letter, written on July 13, 1632 to Kateina of erotn, ne Wallenstein, the last wife of Karel the Elder of erotn, by the manager of her Wroclaw house: His Grace Zdenk of Roupov with Mr krta kindly came here today. The relationship of Pavel krta and erotn can suggest both the depth of the Moravian roots of the krta family, and the rmness of their anchoring in Reformation ambience. Later on, Karel krta honoured the memory of his beloved uncle with the painting Piet (1673), which still exists in St Jamess Church in Kutn Hora. Pavel krta may well have been indebted for the rise in his career, and also his fall, to the inuence of his younger brother Daniel (d. after 1623). This lawyer, a fanatical Utraquist in Pazaureks view, started his own career as a secretary of the Bohemian Chamber in 1603. In 1615 he became a defensor of the Utraquist Consistory and after the rebellion started, he was elected one of the directors, members of the supreme body of the Estates, numbering thirty people, which administered the
58 KAREL KRTA IN PRAGUE

29 On the mint reform, most recently Petr Vorel, Stbro vevropskm pennm obhu 16.17.stolet (14721717) (Silver in the European Money Circulation in the 16th17th Centuries [14721717]), Praha 2009, pp.259273, there, references to earlier literature. 30 G.E.Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note26), pp.1415; TomV.Blek, Djiny konskac vechch po r.1618, I(AHistory of Conscations in Bohemia after 1618, I), Praha 1882, p.594. 31 Michal ronk, in: L. Stolrov V. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note27), p.434, cat. no.X.5. 32 G.E.Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note26), p.15.

3. Vclav Hollar, Great View of Prague, 1649 (drawing, 1636), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

33 Ibid, p.15; T.V.Blek, Djiny konskac (see note30), pp.593594; Antonn Rybika, Karel krta otnovsk ze Zvoic. Nstin rodoaivotopisn (Karel krta otnovsk of Zvoice. An Outline of His Family and Life), Svtozor 3, 1869, pp.4243, 5051, 5556, 63, here, p.43. 34 A.Rybika, Karel krta (see note33), p.43, G.E.Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note26), p.15. Cf. also J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note25), p.14. 35 G.E.Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note26), p.18, note 4, identied him with the town-hall servant Jan Srouben of Slan, but he had been reportedly dead by 1608. 36 Cf. Johann Heinrich Zedler (ed.), Grosses vollstndiges UniversalLexicon aller Wissenschaften und KnsteXXXVI, LeipzigHalle 1743, cols. 709712, from there, A.Rybika, Karel krta (see note33), pp.4243.

country in the period between the dethronement of the Habsburgs, and the ascension of the throne by Frederick V, Count Palatine. Daniel krta shared in all the principal decisions of the directorate, which after the Battle of the White Mountain resulted in a punishment of execution, loss of honour and possessions. However, the scaffold in Prague only bore his name nailed onto it, for the culprit had not waited and quickly left the country. On St Stephens 1620 he passed Beuthen in Upper Silesia and later settled in Danzig, where he reportedly became the city scribe. His Prague possessions, including a house in the Small Old Town Square, among others, were consctaed by the Royal Chamber. The least number of reports have survived concerning the youngest of Jan krtas sons, Ji (d. probably 1617), who was a physician and died heirless in Prague, possibly still quite young. Kundrat or Konrd krta (d. in September 1613), father of the painter Karel krta, was Jans second-born son. He worked as a scribe (1594) and later as an accountant (1605) of the Bohemian Chamber, occasionally also doing administrative jobs directly for Emperor and King Rudolf II. He successfully extended the family property, and when he wrote his testament in 1612, he could bequeathe to his descendants, among others, the Black Stag House in the Old Town, the Stonecutters House in the New Town, a mill, two vineyards situated close to the Prague towns, and moreover possessions outside Prague a vineyard with a press below Mlnk Castle, and a house on the suburbs of the same town. None of those possessions were indebted. The Black Stag House (No. 628I), in which, as fourth of the seven of Kundrats children the future painter Karel krta was born, has not survived up to the present. Featuring Renaissnace gables and Romanesque foundations, the building was pulled down in 1898, and replaced by a neo-Gothic house. It bears krtas memorial plaque, which shows a birthdate of 1604, which had long been presupposed, but is wrong. The original house was bought by Kundrat krta on January 12, 1592 for 81,000 Meissen groschen from Ludmila of Morchendorf, Erhard Wolf, and Vavinec Storka. Soon after that, a young relative of lady Ludmila, Kateina Herkulesov of
STUDIES 59

Morchendorf (d. after 1638) probably became Kundrats wife, who was to bear him seven children. As we now know for certain, krtas family adhered to the Unity of Brethern. A list compiled for the needs of the ecclesiastical administration in 1607 includes, among the brethern and sisters in the Prague towns, Kundrat and his wife Kateina, and also their sons Jan and Kundrat the Younger; the two remaining boys Jindich and Karel had not been born by then. Another document informs us that the krtas rented rooms in the Black Stag House. In 1608 they had three lodgers: the imperial guard named Melichar, the grocer Jik Helm, and Kapar, a coppersmith, which in the same source is said to have been making childrens things. The consumers of his products included the sons and daughters of the krta house. Kundrats known testament of 1612 divides the family possessions equally to his widow Kateina (under the condition that she would not marry until the youngest son was of age), and to the four sons: Jan, Kundrat, Jindich and Karel. The daughters Aneka, Ester and Kateina were to be provided each with a sum to pay for her wedding (12,000 Meissen groschen) and for a payment substituting for inheritance, also in the case of marriage (3,000 Meissen groschen), of which, however, the mother and other guardians had to approve. The testator appointed his brothers Pavel and Daniel krta, along with the burgher Jan Srouben, as guardians. In his last will, Kundrat also asked his wife to bring up the children to obey God and to study , so they could make their living easily, later on. This wish, which corresponded to the period ethical principles of the Unity of Brethern, was doubtless fullled by Kateina krtov, together with her brothers-in-law. The eldest of her sons, a humanistic man of letters and physician Jan (d. January 7, 1650), left Prague for Basel, where he found refuge with his later father-in-law, Professor of theology Ludwig Lucius. Later on he settled as a respected citizen and municipal physician in Schaffhausen, with his sons also going for medicine. Jans son Jindich (Heinrich) krta (16361689), known under a humanistic nickname Nicander, who graduated in Heidelberg in 1671, was a renowned polyglot, natural scientist and author of medicinal treatises, about plague cures, among others. In the German-speaking Protestant environment he was a much better known gure than his uncle, the painter as late as the 18th century. Another sibling of Karel, Kundrat the Younger krta, also lived abroad, but according to rather obscure data, he died in his youth. The third son, Jindich (d. after 1638), who accompanied his mother from Freiberg in Saxony, found a temporary new home with her
60 KAREL KRTA IN PRAGUE

37 J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note25), pp.1617; See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no.16. 38 Petr PibylLenka Stolrov, Kstle rostouc slv naeho pilnho umlce. Karel krta mezi vcarskem, aItli vzrcadle nov objevench pramen (The Ever-Growing Fame of Our Diligent Artist. Karel krta between Switzerland, the Empire and Italy as Reected in the Newly Discovered Sources), see in this book, pp.7379. 39 Jaroslava Mendelov, Obyvatelstvo praskch mst (The Population of the Prague Towns), in: Jaroslava MendelovPavla Sttnkov (edd.), ivot vbarokn Praze 16201784, Praha 2001, pp.3335, here, p.33. 40 Vclav Lva, Studie oPraze poblohorskIII.Zmny vdomovnm majetku akonskace (Studies of Prague after the Battle of the White MountainIII.Changes in house property and conscations), in: Sbornk pspvk kdjinm hlavnho msta PrahyIX, 1935, p.369. 41 Cf. Johann Heinrich Zedler (ed.), Grosses vollstndiges Universal-Lexicon aller Wissenschaften und KnsteXXXVI, LeipzigHalle 1743, cols. 709712, from there, A.Rybika, Karel krta (see note33), pp.4243.

4. Fabricius map of Moravia, detail with the representation of Olenice u Kunttu, from where Jan krta, the painter Karel krtas grandfather came to Prague, 1575 (reproduced after: http://www.staremapy.cz/ antos/ zoomify/fabricius.html) 5. Memorial coin of Jan krta, minted on the occasion of his knighthood, 1570 (reproduced after: Gustav Edmund Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674.) Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte des XVII. Jahrhundertes, Prag 1889, p. 10) 6. Prague, probably Dionysius Miseronis workshop, Coat of Arms of otnovsk of Zvoice, (c. 1650), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

7. Memorial plaque of Karel krta on the building erected in the place of the painters native house, Archives of the City of Prague (photo: Frantiek Rame, 1986) 8. Vclav Jansa, The Black Stag House in the Old Town of Prague (No. 628I) Karel krtas native house, 1896, Museum of the Capital City of Prague (reproduced after: Pavla Sttnkov Ondej Polk, Starou Prahou Vclava Jansy, Praha 2008, p. 28) 9. Karel krta workshop, Piet, the painting presented by Karel krta to the town of Kutn Hora to commemorate Pavel krta, 1673, Kutn Hora, St Jamess Church (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln)

62 KAREL KRTA IN PRAGUE

42 J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note25), pp.1617; See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no.16. 43 Petr PibylLenka Stolrov, Kstle rostouc slv naeho pilnho umlce. Karel krta mezi vcarskem, aItli vzrcadle nov objevench pramen, (The Ever-Growing Fame of Our Diligent Artist. Karel krta between Switzerland, the Empire and Italy as Reected in the Newly Discovered Sources), see this book, (see note38). 44 Jaroslava Mendelov, Obyvatelstvo praskch mst (see note39), pp.3335, here, p.33. 45 Vclav Lva, Studie oPraze poblohorskIII.Zmny vdomovnm majetku akonskace (see note40), p.369. 46 TomV.Blek mentions that conscations of 401 estates were carried out, out of which 275 estates were extensive, see T.V.Blek, Djiny konskac (see note30), p.CL.According to Frantiek Kavka, conscations afflicted 680 persons, with 166 of them losing all property , 45 forfeiting two thirds, 128 losing ahalf, and 215 one third of their possessions, cf. Frantiek Kavka, Bl hora aesk djiny (The Battle of the White Mountain and Czech History), Praha 1963, p.240. 47 The years 1624 and 1627 were other milestones, after which aconspicuous increase in conscations and the exodus of the population from Bohemia occurred. About the period of the conscation process in Bohemia, most recently Tom Knoz, Poblohorsk konskace. Moravsk prbh, stedoevropsk souvislosti, obecn aspekty (Conscations after the Battle of the White Mountain. Their Course in Moravia, Central European Contexts, General Aspects), Brno 2006, p.389. TomV.Blek mentions the various stages of the rst conscation wave, see T.V.Blek, Djiny konskac (see note30), p.XXV.The term wave was also used by Petr ornej in his workthe rst wave of conscations after 1620, the second after the Saxon invasion in 1631, and the third one related to the Wallenstein conscations after 1634; Petr ornej, Vliv poblohorskch konskac na skladbu feudln tdy (The Inuence of the Conscations after the Battle of the White Mountain on the Composition of the Feudal Class), in: Acta Universitatis Carolinae, Philosophica et HistoricaI.Studia historica 14, 1976, pp.178189. 48 Ascholarly edition published by Hermenegild Jireek, The Renewed Law and Constitution of the Hereditary Kingdom of Bohemia, Codex Iuris Bohemici 5/2, Praha 1888. As for the religious line, the preamble is of principal interest, as is the part entitled

in Leszno, Poland, in the service of the duke. However, Kateina krtov did not live long in the exiles colony of the Czech Brethern in Leszno, either, for in 1638 she was recorded in Neumarkt, Upper Silesia, from where she sent her youngest son a mandate to conduct restitution lawsuits in her name. The social and existential background, which the elder brothers of Karel krta were able to provide him with during his apprentice and travelling years, doubtless contributed to the painters successful artistic development. In the volume of their possessions, the krta otnovsk of Zvoice family ranked in the class of more well-to-do burghers of the Old Town of Prague, in which ownership of two or more houses, and other property in the vicinity of the towns, such as mills, vineyards, orchards or elds was taken for granted. Due to the great changes, which came about after 1620 due to the political concussions and the rst waves of emigration and property transfers, the old-new class gradually came to the forefront, slowly forming the new patriciate. It was also based on possessions, particularly real estate, and its members recruited mainly from the ranks of urban intelligentsia, and officials employed in town councils, in the imperial or land administration. Out of the former powerful and affluent patrician families, with which the krtas had been in contact, their possessions in Prague had been kept, and even extended, for example, by the Globic of Bun family or the Vokovsk of Kunratice. The families, which proted from the new situation, included, for example, the Laynhoz of Bevnov or the Miserone of Lison.
***

The tension between the mostly non-Catholic Estates opposition and the Habsburg monarchs in the Kingdom of Bohemia escalated from the early 17th century. After the Battle of the White Mountain on November 8, 1620, in which the demoralised and badly paid Bohemian army was defeated by the joint armies of the Empire and the League, most of the leaders of the opposition opted for a seemingly more advantageous capitulation. The rule was resumed by Ferdinand II, for whom the White Mountain victory facilitated a quicker achievement of his political aims.
STUDIES 63

On June 21, 1621, the leading representatives of the abominable rebellion ended on the Old Town execution scaffold. Other participants in the rebellion, whose behaviour was classied as crimen laesae majestatis, were also afflicted with exemplary punishment, conscation of property, and in consequence of the implemented re-Catholicising measures, many of them opted for leaving the country. The conscation of property by the monarch took away from the culprits their material possessions, thus the economic basis, from which, among others, their inuence on the political and social events resulted. The emperor was able to make full use of the powerful means that he acquired in the form of the conscated possessions, to an extent that had been impossible before 1620. The rulers position in relation to the Estates and land offices was substantially reinforced; the policy of centralisation and the re-Catholicising efforts gained strength, both on the part of the Emperor, and the Catholic Church. The rebel possessions expropriated by the monarch were often used to pay off his own debts through an advantageous sale of the conscated property. The severest forms of punishment were applied in the Kingdom of Bohemia, compared to other countries that joined the rebelling Bohemian Estates. The course of the conscation process after the Battle of the White Mountain can be divided into several stages . The rst and most extensive, was prepared from 1620, and more or less nished by 1622, even though it can be said that on and off it lasted until the year 1627, which was a kind of milestone. After the Renewed Constitution was declared (May 10, 1627), the phase was nished of the conscation of property related to the legal aspects of conscation as punishment for disloyalty to the Emperor, while the Counter-Reformation aims were largely concealed. The wording of the Renewed Constitution and the subsequent religious patents also affected the aristocrats and burghers of non-Catholic creed who had not been found guilty of rebelling against the Emperor, but had not so far converted to his
64 KAREL KRTA IN PRAGUE

On Religion. The part entitled The Property Conscated in Fines the Renewed Constitution codies in retrospect the conscations after the Battle of the White Mountain as aform of ne for trespassing against the ruler. 49 T.Knoz, Poblohorsk konskace (see note47), p.259.

10. List of the members of the Unity of Brethern in the Old Town of Prague, containing the entries of the parents and elder siblings of Karel krta, 1607, Mlad Boleslav, Museum of Mlad Boleslav region, archives of Matou Konen (photo: Museum of Mlad Boleslav Region) 11. Pieter II de Jode after Aegidius Sadeler, Aegidius Sadelers Self-Portrait, copper engraving, National Gallery in Prague, (before 1661, model before 1628), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague) 12. Aegidius Sadeler and workshop, Apotheosis of Emperor Ferdinand II as a Fighter for the Catholic Faith, 1629, copper engraving, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

own faith. From that moment on it was difficult to differentiate whether the exile and loss of property occurred in consequence of a crime against the law, or if it was a forced exile and subsequent sale of possessions for religious reasons, stipulated in the Renewed Constitution and the imperial patents. The events following the defeat of the rebellion of Bohemian Estates affected to a varied extent all the descendants of Jan krta the Elder including their families. The two guardians of the late Kundrat krtas children, their uncles Pavel and Daniel, were punished for their participation in the rebellion; the property of the former was conscated, the latter was sentenced to execution, albeit in his absence. Kateina krtov, ne Herkules of Morchendorf, and her children were directly concerned by the imperial patent from 1627, whose aim, among other things, was to nish the cleansing of the royal towns of the last Evangelicals, including the widows and orphans left by the non-Catholic citizens. The mother of Karel krta expressly refused to give up her Czech Brethern creed and opted for exile. As she was of the privileged class, she could make use of the ius emigrandi law of emigration, which enabled her to leave the country without the obligatory conscation of property. Within a limited time, burghers of the royal towns and aristocrats were allowed to sell their real estate property to a person of Catholic confession. There is no doubt that in practice this law resulted in a number of frauds and speculations. Moreover, in view of the high number of offers the deadline of four months in which to sell their properties was not feasible, so that Protestant exiles had to realise some of the sales when already abroad, by proxy, through authorised representatives, reliable Catholics. Due to these enforced sales, the prices of real estate were going down quickly: whereas in the 1620s the exiles share in the market of the Prague towns was about 13 per cent, in the next decade the number increased to almost 80 per cent. Before she left for Saxony, Kateina krtov was only able to sell the erlinkovsk mill in the New Town of Prague, a property recorded in the Land Rolls, which in 1607 her husband received for his loyal service from Emperor Rudolf II. She sold
66 KAREL KRTA IN PRAGUE

50 On this phase of the re-Catholisation in detail, see Ji Mikulec, 31.7.1627. Rekatolizace lechty vechch. je zem, toho je inboenstv (July 31, 1627. Re-Catholisation of the Aristocracy in Bohemia. Whose Is the Country, His Is the Religion), Praha 2005. 51 Cf. Ivana ornejovJi KaeJi MikulecVt Vlnas, Velk djiny zem Koruny eskVIII, 16181683 (AComprehensive History of the Lands of the Crown of BohemiaVIII, 16181683), PrahaLitomyl 2008, pp.103104. 52 Olga Fejtov, Mansk domy ajejich majitel (Burgher Houses and Their Owners), in: J.MendelovP.Sttnkov (edd.), ivot vbarokn Praze (see note44), pp.2833, here, p.30.

13. Anonymous, Executions of the Leaders of the Estates Revolt in the Old Town Square in Prague on June 21, 1621, (1621), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague) 14. Wenceslaus Hollar after Karel krta, Bust of a Youth, 1635 (drawing 1627), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague) 15. Frans Luycx, Emperor Ferdinand III, (1648/49), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

53 T.V.Blek, Djiny konskac (see note30), pp.594595; G.E.Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note26), pp.2021;V.Lva, Studie oPraze poblohorsk (see note45), p.26. 54 G.E.Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note26), p.21.

the Black Stag House in 1629, already through an authorised representative, to Ondej Laynhoz of Bevnov, a member of the Old Town of Prague council, who let his son Severin Laynhoz use it. The price was 150,000 Meissen groschen, out of which the seller only received an advance of 60,000. The remaining sum was later conscated?? by the Bohemian Chamber, claiming that in contradiction to imperials patents, Kateina took away from the country underage orphans and did not return them in due time. At the turn of the 1620s, out of the large family of Kundrat krta, only the daughter Aneka (d. before1638) remained in Prague, as she was married to an Italian merchant, Jan Baptista Reymundo. This daughter, along with two more authorised representatives, Catholic burghers Jakub Kozel of Peclinovec and Josef Dobensk of Nigropont, represented the family property interests after the mother and her siblings went abroad. We have hardly any information about the two remaining sisters of Karel krta, Ester and Kateina. Ester reportedly went abroad with her mother, but could not stand the hardships of the journey, and died soon. The newly discovered correspondence between the
STUDIES 67

krta brothers makes it clear, among other things, that the burden of worries over the family possessions was borne by Jindich krta, who remained close to his mother and probably in fact solved those practical matters for her. It was most possibly Jindich, who, before the familys departure, found the two representatives to support the interests of the krtas in the sale and administration of the remaining possessions. In his letters addressed to his brothers, or to Jans fatherin-law Ludwig Lucius, we can read about his everyday worries that resulted from this grievous situation. His efforts to provide not only for himself and his mother, but to mediate so as to ensure money for both the brothers, can be felt all through his correspondence. Our information concerning Prague childhood years and youth of Karel krta is considerably vague. As early as the 19th century, scholars have compiled knowledge of his education and painting beginnings practically exclusively from anthologies, hypotheses and later evidence. He doubtless received good-quality education, which included language classes. Due to this artists Czech Brethern affiliation, we can also presuppose a solid religious education. Whether krta was already trained in the then usual skills, such as fencing, horse riding, music, and so on, as his biographer Antonn Rybika claimed, is impossible to conrm. His rst artistic training remains a mystery, as well. Jaromr Neumann mentions that a painting was to be seen in krtas grandfather Jans house, of an Old Testament theme of Samson, and he presupposes abundant pictorial decoration in the homes of other members of the family. The krtas friends included several artists, such as Jacob Hoefnagel or Jan Ornys of Lindperk. It seeems obvious that the Evangelical patricians in the towns of the early 17th century had not taken principally negative attitudes towards artworks, and even members of the strict Unity of Brethern gradually changed their originally rigid aversion to paintings as worldly vanities. On the other hand, the participation of Karels uncle Daniel in the Calvinistic iconoclastic foray on the Prague Cathedral does not exactly prove a great inclination of the krta family towards visual arts. In the light of the most recent ndings, it seems increasingly probable that Karel krtas teacher in Prague may in fact have been Aegidius Sadeler (15681628), the renowned Rudolne engraver, who became a regular guild master in 1621, and since then reportedly pursued painting only. Sadeler may have made an acquaintance
68 KAREL KRTA IN PRAGUE

55 In greater detail, Lenka Stolrov, Karel krta azalp (Karel krta and the Transalpine Territories), in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note27), pp.6365; P.Pibyl L.Stolrov (see note38). 56 A.Rybika, Karel krta (see note33), p.43. 57 J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note25), p.15. 58 G.E.Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note26), p.19. 59 L.StolrovP.Pibyl (see note38);Cf. Sylva DobalovLubomr Konen, Karel krta aumlci praskho rudolnskho dvora (Karel krta and the Artists at the Rudolne Court in Prague), in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note27), pp.2729, here, p.28.

16. Anonymous engraver after Karel krta, View of Prague from the East, (published 1650), Museum of the Capital City of Prague (reproduced after: Lenka Stolrov Vt Vlnas [edd.], Karel krta 16101674. Doba a dlo [exh. cat.], Praha 2010, p. 512) 17. Fruit Market in the Old Town of Prague, the Estates Theatre in the background centre; on the left, houses Nos. 587, 573, 574, 575 (krtas), and 576, Archives of the Capital City of Prague I4409 (photo: Atelir Alexander, 1928) 18. Houses Nos. 574 and 575 (right) in the Old Town of Prague at market time, Archives of the Capital City of Prague I9468 (photo: anonymous, before 1929) 19. krtas (Hjkovsk) Red Heart House (No. 575) in the Old Town of Prague, Archives of the Capital City of Prague II511 (photo: Jan Keneck, 1910)

20. Entrance Portal of krtas (Hjkovsk) Red Heart House (No. 575) in the Old Town of Prague, Archives of the Capital City of Prague VI 16/23 (photo: Atelir Eckert [Jindich Eckert daughter], 1909)

of Karels father Kundrat at court, for the latter worked as rationum praefectus and supremus annonae magister, i. e. the head chamber accountant of emperors Rudolf II and Matthias. In his own words, Karel krta left for abroad in 1627, soon after he had nished regular training with his lehrmajstr (teacher), master of the painters guild, unfortunately not mentioned by name anywhere. In 1640, thus at least two years after his return to Prague, the painter revealed more interesting facts about the circumstances of his trip. Among other things, he said: [] I had never been an emigr or exile, but to perfect my art, which I had been trained in and taken a great liking to, according to a good attestation from my lehrmeister, I left the Kingdom of Bohemia for foreign parts in July 1627 [] He in fact completely denied any religious or political reasons for his departure from Bohemia: [] as in those times I was no orphan thrown out of his country, nor an emigr, but because of my art, earlier than the patents were published, in fact a year earlier than my mother emigrated, I left for abroad [], he explained. He alluded to the Decreta de Emigrantibus orphanis dated 1628, on whose basis a remaining sum for the sale of the Black Stag House had been suspended. However, based on this very fact, the value of krtas evidence can be questioned. The painter in fact pronounced these statements during the hearings of an official lawsuit, which he also conducted by proxy on behalf of his mother and other members of the family, for the said house, or rather underpayment for it,
70 KAREL KRTA IN PRAGUE

60 The theme of the study trip made by Karel krta between 1627 and 1638, most recently, Lenka Stolrov on the basis of the discovery in 2010 of the hitherto unknown sources, from which further research of the author will follow. In more detail, Lenka Stolrov, Karel krta azalp, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note27), pp.6365; L.StolrovP.Pibyl (see note38). 61 Archives of the Capital City of Prague, Collection of Manuscripts, Manuale dictorum 16381641, sign. 1169, f. 179v. See also Radka Tibitanzlov, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note27), p.592, cat. no.XVI.13; See Edition of historical sources in this book, documents nos. 7 and 22. 62 Archives of the Capital City of Prague, Collection of Manuscripts, Manuale dictorum (see note61), f. 182r. See also Edition of historical sources in this book, document no.22.

63 See above, note 53. Here we can mention afact that in 1657 Karel krtas wife Veronika, ne Grnbergerov, was investigated by the Lesser Town council, for related to matters of inheritance left by the burgher Tc, without any permit, she took away the orphan Augustin Neumann (one of the heirs, whose guardian she was) and brought him to krtas house in the Old Town, refusing to return him. During the interrogation, Veronika krtov did not want to yield in her obstinacy and she even had to be put in the town hall prison. Her husband intervened with the council of the Old Town to arrange for her release from the Lesser Town prison. However, even after that Veronika krtov did not hand over the orphaned Neumann (see Cyril Merhout, OMal Stran. Jej stavebn vvoj advn ivot (The Lesser Town. Its construction development and ancient life), Praha 1956, pp.101102). Veronika krtov seems to have shared with her husband the proverbial strength of opinion in property causes. 64 T.V.Blek, Djiny konskac (see note30), p.CXXXII. 65 Archives of the Capital City of Prague, Collection of Manuscripts, Manuale dictorum (see note61), f. 173r, see Edition of historical sources in this book, document no.22. 66 Johanna Bronkov, krta am (krta and Rome), see the chapter in this book, pp.8199. 67 Archives of the Capital City of Prague, Collection of Manuscripts, Manuale dictorum (see note61), f. 173r, see Edition of historical sources in this book, document no.22. 68 Radka Tibitanzlov, Karel krtaman Starho Msta praskho (Karel krtaaCitizen of the Old Town of Prague), in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta amalstv 17.stolet vechch avEvrop, Praha 2011, pp. 153160; Jan Kilin, krtovy mlnick vinice (krtas Mlnk Vineyards), in: ibid, pp. 161165. 69 J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note25), pp.2324. Problems of conversion more generally, e.g., J.Mikulec, Rekatolizace lechty (see note50), pp.146154. 70 T.V.Blek, Djiny konskac (see note30), p.595; See Edition of historical sources in this book, documents nos.24 and 26. 71 R.Tibitanzlov, Karel krtaman Starho Msta praskho (see note68); See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no.22. 72 Ji arek, Zdjin staromstskch dom (From the History of the Old Town of Prague Houses), Prask sbornk historick 19, Praha 1986, pp.1213. 73 Archives of the Capital City of Prague, Collection of Manuscripts, Liber inventariorum 16871702, sign. 1179, f. 113v. See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no.171. 74 Amid18th-century engraving presents this house provided with aBaroque faade, two small dormers and alarge gable in the middle, dating from around 1700. Approximately in the middle of the 18th century the building acquired alate Baroque front. The house was pulled down in the late 1920s, when it was necessary to free space for the construction of abank building.However, the plan was aborted. In the 1930s the provisional exhibition pavillion of the Myslbek Association of Artists was situated there, and then the site was left empty for years, until 1994, when the Myslbek Arcade Shopping Centre was built there. Cf. J.arek, Zdjin staromstskch dom (see note72), pp.1213; Historie pozemku palce Myslbek (History of the Myslbek Site), http:// www.myslbek.com/content/history_site.php?lang=cz (last entry 23.1. 2011). 75 Cf. G.E.Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note26), pp.2728. See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no.32. 76 R.Tibitanzlov, Karel krtaman Starho Msta praskho (see note68).

against the new owner of the house, Ondej Laynhoz. Restitution to the owner of the property left in the native country was made possible for those who returned, by an imperial decree of November 19,1633 (among others), along with the subsequent legal regulations. Laynhoz however claimed that Karel krta lived abroad as a non-Catholic all the time, questioning: How come that he could travel around Italy because of his art at the time as a non-Catholic, if there, particularly in Rome, no non-Catholic was allowed to stay, unless he deceived Inquisition offices. This was not quite true and krta himself must have known that Catholicism as the only true faith was required much less strictly in Rome than in Prague. Of greater interest seems Laynhozs specic denunciation, according to which the painter converted only after his return to Bohemia: [] it is also generally known that krta, who came back to Prague a year and a half ago, was a non-Catholic, and as he was to be arrested by the mayor of the Old Town of Prague, became a Catholic at Mlnk [] The mention of Mlnk the town with which Karel krta had numerous and in fact very special relations deserves particular attention. We naturally do not know, which of the two parties came closer to reality in their pragmatically formulated claims. The fact remains that despite all scholarly efforts it is not yet known whether Karel krta converted to Catholicism as early as the general pardon of 1622, or in Rome, later on. Both possibilities were acknowledged by earlier literature, albeit without factual argumentation. krtas religious turn from the Unity of Brethern to Roman Catholicism, not in fact unique under given circumstances, probably should not be seen today as a fatal drama of conict of faith and patriotism, but as a rational step taken on the basis of arguable property strategy and family consensus. It remains to be added that the lawsuit concerning the Black Stag House nished in 1641 in that the painter acquired 1,200 orins and was granted claim to another 1,166 orins. krta then agreed to give up other claims. After this foreign stay Karel krta appeared in Prague provedly at Easter of 1638 at the latest. He probably would not have started the subsequent property lawsuit if he as a Catholic had gone to confession at Easter, which was a new rule, and asked for a receipt. We do not know his domicile of the few rst years after his return; apart from Prague, it may well have been Mlnk. In the early 1640s, when he succeeded in the lawsuit for the underpayment for the Black Stag House, the painter was already fully engaged in another cause, which concerned the Hjek House (No. 575) in the Fruitmarket, in St Gauls parish. The last owner of the house, krtas aunt Johanna (sometime mentioned as Zuzana, Dorota or Anna) Strossburgrov, daughter of a well-known astronomer, mathematician and personal physician of Emperor Rudolf II, Tade Hjek of Hjek, died around 1635. The house was then taken over by the Old Town imperial Mayor as an alleged escheat. Karel krta claimed the property in January 1639, and after presenting the necessary documents, he eventually obtained it in 1644. He then lived there until the end of his life, as did his son Karel (d. January 2, 1691). Both painters had an apartment and a studio in the house, which can be proved by an entry in the inventory compiled after the death of Karel krta the Younger: in the upper storey, in which a room was used for painting. In the 19th century, the house came to be known as the Red Heart House, according to a newly installed sign.
***

The year 1644, in which Karel krta managed to obtain his Prague house, was a milestone in his social life. In January of the same year, this artists name was rst mentioned in the quarterly materials of the painters guild, at the time shared by the Old Town and the Lesser Town artists. krta soon built a rm position within the guild. Soon after he settled in the Old Town of Prague, he not only came to be acknowledged as a painter, but he was also considered a trustworthy authority, particularly in the higher social strata. His subsequent life, during which he probably never left Prague for a longer period of time, was already characterised by social and artistic success. Translated by Kateina Hilsk

STUDIES 71

To the continually increasing fame of our industrious artist

Karel krta between Switzerland, the Empire, and Italy, in the Light of Newly Discovered Sources
PETR PIBYL LENKA STOLROV

1 Antonn Rybika Skutesk, Karel kreta otnovsk ze Zvoic. Nstin rodo- aivotopisn, Svtozor III, 1869; Gustav Edmund Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte desXVII.Jahrhundertes, Prag 1889; Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674, (exh. cat.), Nrodn galerie vPraze 1974; Jaromr Neumann, krtov. Karel krta ajeho syn, Praha 2000. 2 Most recently on this subject: Jana Zapletalov, krta, Sandrart, Oretti: poznmka ke krtovu psoben vItlii, Umn LVII, 2009, pp.398402 (Bibliography), and eadem, krtov zitalskch archiv, in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta a malstv 17. stolet v echch a Evrop, Praha 2011, pp. 1320. 3 Joachim von Sandrart, Academie der Bau-, Bild- und MalereyKnste, Leben der berhmten Maler, Bildhauer und Baumeister II, B.III., Nrnberg 1675, pp.327328. 4 Mlad Boleslav, Muzeum Mladoboleslavska, Archiv Matoue Konenho, Sign. A3254 / Praha O1607, f. 3r. (Our thanks go to Radka Tibitanzlov.) 5 Most recently on this subject: Lenka Stolrov, Karel krta and the Art of the Trans-Alpine Region, in: Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674): His Work and His Era (exh. cat.), Praha 2010, pp.6465; Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas, Karel krtaArtist and Man in aTime of Transition, in: StolrovVlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674): His Work and His Era (exh. cat.), Praha 2010, pp.1723; L.Stolrov, recent ndings in archive sources in 2010 are the subject of further research; the correspondence was written mainly in Latin (for help with translating from Latin our thanks go to Marek Dospl). 6 L. StolrovV. Vlnas, Karel krtaArtist and Man in aTime of Transition (see note 5), pp.1723.

A key period in the shaping of Karel krtas creative approach and growth to maturity as an artist was the time he spent outside the Kingdom of Bohemia (16271638), about which we unfortunately have only sketchy information. Even in the monographs on krta, which are otherwise carefully put together and based on archive research, this chapter of the artists life has been limited to a series of hypotheses. The fragmentary reports about krtas early works, today mostly lost, and the absence of archive sources, have made this stage of the artists life an enigmatic one, to say the least. From the famous Teutsche Academie by his contemporary, Joachim von Sandrart, we learn that krta was in his childhood led to follow a charming, moral, and virtuous way of life / and in addition was attracted to the noble art of painting / whose intricate rules / he grasped very well / thanks to his innate diligence / already in his early youth he acquired a good reputation because of this: because at that time bloodthirsty Mars drove out of his country the peace-loving muses and arts / and he himself wished to acquire greater knowledge / he left for Italy / and stayed in Venice for several years very commendably in such a way / that he made the best possible use of everything that was worthy of note / and not only assembled a beautiful artistic treasure; but he also passed on these riches to lovers of art in the form of sundry ne pictures and various histories / and adorned them with the cultivation of natural affects / with ingenuity and superb invention / a good manner / and beautiful colouring / for which reason his works were much sought after and richly rewarded / to the continually increasing fame of our industrious artist Bloodthirsty Mars did not only drive out muses, but also many people whose religious persuasion did not allow them to remain in the Kingdom of Bohemia. krtas family were among those condemned to an unwilling departure from their homeland and the accompanying loss of their property, because they were members of the group of non-Catholic patricians in Prague. The recently discovered and so far unpublished correspondence between the krta brothers Jan, Jindich, and Karel, the youngest throws new light on a period of the artists life that has so far not been researched to any great extent. It also enables us to partially reconstruct the itinerary of krtas travels and sojourns in the lands of the Austrian Empire, Switzerland, and above all Italy. krtas decision to leave Prague was undoubtedly inuenced by the growing pressure of re-Catholicisation and the unfavourable way the political situation was evolving for the nonCatholic inhabitants of Bohemia after the Battle of the White Mountain in 1620. But it was evidently not the only reason he took this step. Because of the social status of the family, all the children of the deceased Kundrat (Konrd) krta received a very good education. In the case of Karels brothers this culminated in a peregrination, which at the time completed the education, not only of young noblemen, but also of the sons of rich burghers. It would appear to be more than likely that Karels departure abroad was planned, something which he himself testied to later in lawsuits that he pursued in an attempt to have the family property returned to him and outstanding debts paid. Among other things, he stated that he went abroad in order to acquire greater art and experience, and did so after he obtained (from an artist about whom he
STUDIES 73

1. Tiberio Tinelli, Portrait of Karel krta, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague) 2. Karel krta, Proving the Purity of the Vestal Virgin Tuccia, 1630/1637, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

gave no further details) a certicate that he had completed his apprenticeship, in July 1627. This artist may have been Aegidius Sadeler, whom krtas family in Prague knew well. This hypothesis, which has been put forward many times, is strengthened by the new nding that Karel krta was in contact with Aegidiuss nephew in Venice during his travels in Italy. And Aegidius Sadeler may have been the best source of recommendations of people to contact during his planned trip to Venice. The barrier between the old Catholics on the one hand and the Protestants (and the Protestants who converted to Catholicism after the Battle of the White Mountain) was not an impenetrable one in Bohemian society after the Battle of the White Mountain. From krtas contacts it is evident that he was able to make excellent use of the social capital that his family and its social network offered. It should also not be overlooked that dynastic and estate solidarity was often more important than confessional and political affiliation. We can assume that the preparations for Karels peregrination were made with the appropriate thoroughness, and that while he was still in Prague the young painter made arrangements to be welcomed not only by his own blood relations, but also by friends and acquaintances who were living abroad. This assumption is supported by a letter from Jindich krta, sent from Prague on 14 April 1627 to their brother Jan in Basel. Plans were already being made for Karels journey before the issuing of the Renewed Constitution on 10 May 1627 and Ferdinand IIs patent (31 July 1627)
74 KAREL KRTA BETWEEN SWITZERLAND, THE EMPIRE, AND ITALY

7 Radka Tibitanzlov, Karel krtas Testimony about His Person after His Return to Bohemia, in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674) (see note 5), p.592, cat. no.XVI.13. 8 Aegidiuss nephew Marco Sadeler is given as the address for the correspondence between the brothers to be sent to, see later in the text and notes 30, 32, 34, 35. 9 Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas, Karel krta 2010 aneb pbh umleckho spchu, Art&Antiques 12, 2010, p.14. 10 Brother Karel has made excellent progress and is already (although against our mothers wishes) preparing to go abroad. It is not at all easy to nd money for the journey, but Ihope that some help will turn up, Staatsbibliothek Schaffhausen, Sign. Msc Scaph 8. 11 From aletter addressed to Ludwig Lucius: The situation with us is that we have had to deal with so many disasters that we are scarcely able to breathe. What is more, we are hourly threatened with banishment, together with the loss of nearly all our property. Things are so bad so far as money is concerned that the disease called penury is spreading throughout our province. And in such evil times it is not possible to admire enough or praise sufficiently the favour which all of you show to my brothers. From this the conclusion can be drawn that through divine providence my brothers have found with you their lost homeland and your human goodness predestined to alleviate the difficulties of those afflicted by afateful decree, Staatsbibliothek Schaffhausen, Sign. Msc Scaph 8. 12 Jan started his studies in Basel in 1619 and achieved his masters

13

14 15 16

17

18 19

20

degree on 20 December 1621; for more on this subject: Die Matrikel der Universitt Basel, III, 1601/021665/66, Hans Georg Wackernagel (ed.), Basel 1962, p.225. In 16241625, Ludwig Lucius held the office of Rector of Basel University; for more on this subject: Die Matrikel der Universitt Basel, II, 1532/331600/01, Hans Georg Wackernagel (ed.), Basel 1962, p.383. See note 12. J. Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), p.16; J. Neumann, krtov (see note 1), p.16. Alena Volrbov, Vclav Hollar aEvropa mezi ivotem azmarem, in: Alena Volrbov (ed.), Vclav Hollar (16071677) aEvropa mezi ivotem azmarem, Praha 2007, p.8. Alena Volrbov, Bust of aYoung Man, in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674) (see note 5), p.346, cat. no.VIII.1 (Bibliography). J. Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), pp.195197; J.Neumann, krtov (see note 1), p.18, g. 9. Ingeborg Klekler, Die Handschriften der Wrttenbergischen Landesbibliothek Stuttgart, III, Stammbcher bis 1625, Wiesbaden 1999, pp.169172. Susanna Burghartz, Das ancien Rgime, Die Bevolkerungsentwicklung im Zeitalter der Pest, in: Georg KreisBeat von Wartburg (edd.), Geschichte einer stdtischen Gessellschaft, Basel 2000, p.120.

expelling the non-Catholic nobility from Bohemia. It is therefore likely that krta left Prague in 1627 intentionally and voluntarily on a journey to expand his horizons. Another letter by Jindich allows us to make the assumption that Karel krta made his way to Basel in Switzerland to visit their oldest brother Jan, who was continuing his studies of medicine there. After achieving his masters degree Jan had married the daughter of a leading professor of theology at Basel University, Ludwig Lucius (Luz; 15771642), and as a result of this marriage he had not only improved his social status, but was able to ensure that his younger brother received an appropriate welcome and temporary refuge. It is not without interest that before he could get married he had to prove that he was a member of the privileged social class by submitting a copy of his letter of nobility. In a further letter, addressed to Professor Lucius himself, Jindich wrote from Prague in March 1628: From the proceeds of selling off several vineyards I am sending my brother Jan 500 imperials, and Karel 60 imperials. I entreat you to kindly allocate these amounts to them when you receive them from the merchant. Jans father-in-law, who supported both brothers, evidently played a key role in Karels sojourn in the Empire and in Switzerland. The respected humanist scholar not only guaranteed his material security but also acceptance in a social milieu. Nevertheless, we still should not discount the possibility suggested by Jaromr Neumann, that the departure of the young Karel krta from Prague was connected with the movements of another talented artist, later to become a well-known engraver, Vclav Hollar. Hollar left
STUDIES 75

3. Proving the Purity of the Vestal Virgin Tuccia, Imagines galeriae, II., f. 5a, Prague, National Library of the Czech Republic, detail from the title page (photo: National Library of the Czech Republic) 4. Bocca della Verit, Imagines galeriae, II., f. 56b, Prague, National Library of the Czech Republic, detail from the title page (photo: National Library of the Czech Republic)

Prague in 1627 and made his way to Stuttgart, where he stayed until 1629. Whether or not the two artists left Prague together, they could have met in Stuttgart in 1628 at the latest. Proof of this is provided by krtas drawing in the Album amicorum by Johann Jacob Sparn (16021670), a German humanist and notary, dated in Stuttgart on 8 September 1628; it depicts a Flying Mercury, and is accompanied by a dedication in Latin, Italian, and Czech. It is this dedication and its wording that led Neumann to the conclusion that Karel krta found refuge with the young intellectual after he left Prague. But after a comparison with other entries in the album we can almost certainly exclude this supposition. There are a number of other messages there with very similar wordings. It is therefore probable that krta accompanied his drawing with a polite formula that was usual for the time. Incidentally, the pages of Sparns
76 KAREL KRTA BETWEEN SWITZERLAND, THE EMPIRE, AND ITALY

21 For more detail: Rgine Bonnefoit, Johann Wilhelm Baur (16071642). Ein Wegbereiter der barocken Kunst in Deutschland, BerlinTbingen 1997, pp.38, 39. 22 J. Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), p.17. 23 Another of krtas contemporaries, Tobias Pock (16101683), came from Constance. Perhaps this is the basis for certain similarities in their stylistic approaches, formed not only during the Italian journey, but directly in southern Germany. For more: L.Stolrov, Karel krta and the Art of the Trans-Alpine Region (see note 5), p.65; L. StolrovV. Vlnas, Karel krtaArtist and Man in aTime of Transition (see note 5), pp.1723. 24 Staatsbibliothek Schaffhausen, Sign. Msc Scaph 8. 25 Annamria Gosztola, Schnfelds erste Jahre in Deutschland, in: Urschula Zeller (ed.), Johann Heinrich Schnfeld: Welt der Gtter, Heiligen und Heldenmythen (exh. cat.), Kln 2009, pp.26, 27. 26 According to his rst biographer Joachim von Sandrart, Venice was the rst place in Italy that the young artist set out for (begab er sich in Italien und hielte sich in Venedig etliche Jahre); Arthur R.Peltzer, Joachim von Sandrarts Academie der Bau, Bild- und Mahlerey-Knste von 1675, Mnchen 1925, p.203. 27 In Venice the plague appeared to abate with the coming of winter in 1630, but broke out again in the spring of 1631 and continued until the autumn; Paolo Preto, Peste e demograa: Let moderna: le due pesti del 157577 e 163031, in: Orazio Pugliese (ed.), Venezia e la peste 1348/1797 (exh. cat.), Venezia 1980, pp.9798; idem, Le grandi pesti nellet moderna: 157577 e 163031, in: Orazio Pugliese (ed.), Venezia e la peste 1348/1797, pp.123126, here p.126; Petr Pibyl, Karel krta and Italy, in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674) (see note 5), pp.96103, here p.97. 28 The plague epidemic was brought to the Alpine valleys on the Italian side of the mountains that formed the border by soldiers ghting in the Thirty Years War in 1629. Within ashort time, especially in 16301631, all the major cities in central and northern Italy had to deal with attacks of the plague, among them (already in 1629) Milan and Mantua, and soon afterwards Verona, Brescia, Padua, Venice, Bologna, Modena, Parma, Livorno, and Florence. 29 A. R. Peltzer, Joachim von Sandrart Academie (see note 26), p.203; P.Pibyl, Karel krta and Italy (see note 27), pp.96103, here pp.9799; Petr Pibyl, Portrait of Karel krta, in: L.StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674) (see note 5), cat. no.III.7, pp.114115. 30 [] und nach dem ich von Venetien Verrei han ich zwey Jahr zu Rohm gewohnt. vn in der Zeit aich zu Neapoli geween. Und dan ersten dieses Jahrs mich von Rohm begeben und nach Florenz kommen von dannen ich necher Pistoia berufen und mich hierimes aufhalten der herr Schwager aber werdt unbeshwert nach Venetien schreiben und den brief dem S.Marco Sadeler aS.Giovanni Chrisostomo recomandieren der werdt mihr ihm zu schicken, Staatsbibliothek Schaffhausen, Sign. Msc Scaph 8; Ludwig Lucius (Ludwig Luz), professor of

31

32

33

34

35

36

theology in Basel, father-in-law of Karels brother Jan, acted as an intermediary for the correspondence between the brothers; L.Stolrov, Karel krta and the Art of the Trans-Alpine Region (see note 5), pp.6465. Pistoia berufenIt is not clear from the text what the writer meant by this expression and what was the nature of his stay in Pistoia. The idea that he might have been summoned as an artist is an attractive one, but we have no evidence for such an assertion. For the quotation see note 30. Marco Sadeler, apublisher and engraver mentioned in the years 16001644/60, worked in Venice and probably in Prague as well. He was most probably the nephew of Aegidius II Sadeler, who worked in Prague (being the son of his elder brother Marco [ 1593]). In his youth he was probably one of Aegidiuss assistants in Prague, and after his death he acquired most of Aegidiuss printing formes, which he later used successfully in Venice for new editions of sought-after prints. Aegidius II Sadeler (15681629) left for Italy with his cousin Jan I(ca. 15501600) in 1595. While Jan Isettled in Venice and ran aprinting work there, which was taken over after his death by his son Justus ( 1620), Aegidius II went to Prague in 1597 at the invitation of RudolfII.No doubt he would have been in good contact with his relatives in Venice; For more on Marco Sadeler see Dorothy A.Limouze, Aegidius Sadeler (c. 15701629), Drawings, Prints and Art Theory, (Diss.), Princeton 1990, p.352; eadem, Umn rytiny na csaskm dvoe vPraze, Grapheion 2, 1997, pp.1925, here p.22; Isabelle de Ramaix, Les Sadeler: De damasquineur graveur et marchand destampes. Quelques documents indits, Le livre et lestampeXXXV, 1989, no. 131, pp.746, here pp.25, 26; eadem, Aegidius II Sadeler, The Illustrated Bartsch, 72.1, John T.Spike (ed.), New York 1997, pp.VII,VIII; We are grateful to Blanka Kubkov for her valuable ideas and references to the literature. For more on this, see Monica Miato, LAccademia degli Incogniti di Giovan Francesco Loredan, Venezia (16301661), Firenze 1998, pp.58, 59; Francesca Bottacin, Tra Pittura e Poesia. Tiberio Tinelli e lAccademia degli Incogniti, Studi veneziani, NS XLI, 2001, pp.247258, here p.250; eadem, Tiberio Tinelli Pittore e Cavaliere (15871639), Mariano del Friuli 2004, pp.2733; Carlo Ridol, Le Maraviglie dellArte ovvero Le Vite degli illustri pittori veneti e dello Stato,I.II., in: Venetia 1648, ed. Detlev Freiherrn von Hadeln,I.,II., Berlin 1914, 1924, cit.II., pp.277288; P.Pibyl, Karel krta and Italy (see note 27), pp.96103, here pp.9799. Gustav Pazaurek already believed that Aegidius Sadeler may have been the artists rst teacher. Sadeler is repeatedly mentioned as probably having been the young krtas master, for example by Jaromr Neumann and Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, and recently also by Sylva Dobalov and Lubomr Konen. On his return to Prague, Karel krta himself stated that he had obtained astandard certicate of apprenticeship before he left Prague in 1627, but he did not mention the name of his teacher. Theoretically this could have been Sadeler, who had been one of the guild masters since 1621; Gustav E.Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte (see note 5), pp.1920; J.Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), p.15; Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, The School of Prague. Painting at the Court of Rudolf II, ChicagoLondon 1988., p.227; J.Neumann, krtov (see note1), p.14; L.StolrovV.Vlnas, Karel krtaArtist and Man in aTime of Transition (see note 5), p.19; Sylva DobalovLubomr Konen, Karel krta and Artists of the Prague Rudolne Court, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674) (see note5), pp.2829, here p.28. Even though Aegidius Sadelers role in the artistic training of the young Karel krta cannot be conrmed, it is very likely that members of krtas family knew Sadeler personally from court circles, in which Karels father, Kundrat krta ( 1613), moved as clerk of the chamber; Vt Vlnas in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674) (see note 5), p.583, cat. no.XVI.3. J.Neumann believed that Karel krta was evidently indirectly familiar with the Neapolitan school of painting (J.Neumann, Karel krta 16101674, see note 1, p.18), and considered this inuence to be one of the most important stylistic inspirations for the artists work. Among the many elements to be found in krtas work, this inuence is constantly present in the form of the imaginative use of richly contrasting chiaroscuro. Especially in the artists late period, atendency towards tenebrism is evident, and at the same time an inclination towards arealistic, almost naturalistic depiction of gures; the roots of this approach are to be foundin addition to the inuence of the Roman Caravaggistiin the works of Neapolitan artists, not only Jusepe de Ribera, but also, for example, Battistello Caracciolo, the Master of the Annunci-

album reveal that he met with many members of noble families from the lands of the Bohemian crown, where he also stayed from 1629 till 1630, during which time he likewise visited Vienna. A meeting with krta, who had left Bohemia less than a year previously, would presumably have been of interest to Sparn in view of his plans to travel there. There were no doubt many reasons why Karel krta left Basel and made his way to Stuttgart. One of them may have been a particularly serious attack of the plague, which struck Basel in 16281629. Around 2500 people died in this epidemic of the black death, representing nearly a quarter of the citys population. As we shall show later, the year 1628 was not the only one when krta chose to escape from the epicentre of an attack of the plague to seemingly safer places outside the city walls. Among other signicant factors leading to the decision to set out on this new journey was undoubtedly the movements of hostile armies, for it should not be forgotten that the conict which we are used to describing as the Thirty Years War was far from being over. During the time krta stayed in Stuttgart the outstanding graphic artist and miniaturist Johann Wilhelm Baur (16071642) and also Johann Heinrich Schnfeld (16091684) were both working there too. Whether they became acquainted there or did not make contact until later in Italy cannot be proved denitely. In the works of Schnfeld and krta we nd not only the same themes but also similar compositions, based on and citing the same starting-points and inspirational models (one example being the group of Our Lady with her child in the paintings The Vision of Anthony of Padua by Johann Heinrich Schnfeld, ca. 1680, in the church of St Anthony of Padua in Mileov, and Charles Borromeo Visiting the Plague Victims by Karel krta, 1647, private collection). In a further letter from Jindich addressed to Ludwig Lucius (this time sent to Constance), dated 5 October 1629, we read: Most esteemed sir, I pray your honour to kindly pass on to my brother Karel the money that I am sending him. It is a sum of 425 orins that I have only recently managed to acquire from our property. Before leaving for Italy, therefore, Karel krta travelled around the towns in what is today Baden-Wrttemberg, and it is not impossible that he was accompanied by Johann Heinrich Schnfeld, who was later to be his companion in Italy. For after Schnfeld left Stuttgart in 1629 he stayed some time in southern Germany before making for Italy via Basel. As we know from the account by krtas rst biographer Joachim von Sandrart, on arriving in the promised land for artists the young Prague painter spent the rst few years in Venice. In view of the spread of the plague epidemic and the fact that krta would evidently have attempted to avoid it, as was indicated earlier, we can assume that he arrived in Venice no earlier than the end of 1630, but most probably not until 1631. Coming to a town that was in the grip of the plague any earlier than this would have been an unnecessary risk, and in addition the sanitary measures taken, including closing down major roads during the time the epidemic of the black death was spreading, restricted freedom of travel between practically all the most important towns in northern and central Italy. Once the scourge of the plague had died away, Venice soon became once again a pulsating city with a wide range of stimuli for the eager Prague artist, and krta probably remained there until 1634. This hypothesis, so far supported by references in Sandrart and the existence of a portrait of krta by Tiberio Tinelli, has been conrmed by the recent discovery of a letter from Karel krta. In the letter, written in Pistoia in Tuscany and dated 8 June 1636, krta writes to Ludwig Lucius in Basel that after leaving Venice he lived for two years in Rome. From the rest of the letter it is clear that in 1636 he remained in Rome, from where he travelled to Florence, and, after a short stay in Pistoia, only a few kilometres from Florence, where he had been summoned, he was evidently preparing to return to Venice once more. In the letter, krta also gives the address to which post should be sent to him. The person who would receive his correspondence was Mr. Marco Sadeler in the parish of San Crisostomo. This reference, together with the contact with Tinelli and the circle of the Academy degli Incogniti, is a further important detail that helps to reveal to some extent the circumstances of krtas stay in Venice: Marco Sadeler was the nephew of the illustrious engraver Aegidius Sadeler, who was settled in Prague and with whom Karel krta most probably acquired his rst artistic training. The fact that Karel krta rst made for Venice after crossing the Alps may well be connected with the Sadeler family; it is difficult to imagine that a painter from Prague, on arriving in Venice, would not look up a close relative of the well-known Rudolne artist (especially if, in krtas case, he probably would have had a direct recommendation from Aegidius Sadeler).

STUDIES 77

From this letter we also learn a further important piece of information, namely that during his two-year stay in Rome Karel krta visited Naples. This excursion to the city which on the artistic level was saturated with the legacy of Caravaggios and Riberas tenebrist painting, ts in logically with the character of krtas art, and, in hindsight, helps explain it very well. The inuence of the dramatic naturalism to be found with many artists in the city below Vesuvius is particularly obvious in krtas later work (for example his Passion Cycle), where it is strikingly evident, in conjunction with the permanent presence of what the artist had learned from the Bologna school of painting. It is interesting that Sandrart does not mention krtas journey to Naples, although this city (just like Venice, Bologna, Florence and Rome, which he does mention) was one of the most important destinations for an artist and, in the case of someone starting off in the profession, virtually an obligatory one. Since krta himself stated that the rst time he left Rome in 1636 was when he travelled to the Tuscan metropolis, it is more than likely that he did not set out for Naples until after Sandrart had left Rome in 1635, in other words in the spring of that year at the earliest; this is evidently why krtas visit to Naples is not recorded in Sandrarts Lives. However, some sort of awareness of krtas visit to Naples may have survived in Italian circles. This would partially explain the mention of his activity in Naples, which (as we know from a recent study by Jana Zapletalov) Marcello Oresti mistakenly included in the Italian translation of Sandrarts Lives. Oresti, however, worked from the Latin edition of the Lives, where this mistake was already present. From Tuscany, as we can assume from what he said in the letter to Ludwig Lucius, Karel krta most probably made his way once again to Venice, where he spent some time probably at least until the spring of 1637. This nding enables us to raise at least two important questions: rstly, whether it was not until this occasion that Tiberio Tinelli painted the portrait of krta that is in Prague, and secondly, whether two early paintings by krta Proving the Purity of the Vestal Virgin Tuccia and its counterpart Bocca della Verit were not created as late as this time. From the point of view of its form, it is certainly possible that Tinellis Portrait of Karel Skrta originated in 1636 or 1637, and it is comparable with other portraits painted by Tinelli at this time. The Venetian origin of the two paintings by krta before they were acquired by Count Humprecht Jan ernn has been frequently cited, but it has always been surprising how artistically mature they were. The colouring and sureness of their composition indicate a good knowledge of the Roman milieu as well as the Venetian one, and also recall the canon of Vouets Roman gural paintings, inuences that until now it had been thought krta could only have been aware of indirectly. Up until now, krtas return from the Apennine peninsula to the transalpine regions had been dated 1635, when a series of portraits of the Saxon Elector Johann Georg and his four sons was engraved by Samuel Weishun. The author of the drawings on which the engravings were based had been assumed to be Karel krta, because they were signed with the monogram C. S. pict:. However, at the time the portraits are supposed to have been made, krta can be shown to have still been in Tuscany, as is proved by the letter referred to above; it therefore appears unlikely that he could have been the creator of these drawings. The idea that this not particularly well known artist could have accomplished a journey lasting more than a decade without any form of nancial support can today no longer be considered tenable. Throughout the period he received help from his brothers that was more than generous, in spite of the quite difficult situation in which the family found itself as a result of political events in the Kingdom of Bohemia. His brothers and his mother went to considerable trouble to provide the young artist the opportunity to travel freely round Italy and to experience at rst hand the major artistic centres and the output of artists at work in Italy at that time, and also to be able to present himself on an appropriate social level. After his return to Bohemia Karel krta repaid all this with interest. In Prague he developed his own career as an artist, was more than successful in recovering the family property, and, last but not least, he restored to his family its good name.
44 43 42 41 39 40 37 38

Translated by Peter Stephens

45 46

ation to the Shepherds, Mattia Preti, Artemisia Gentileschi, and others; On this, see again J.Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), pp.18, 20, 21, 144; J.Neumann, krtov (see note 1), p.34. J.Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), p.16. It is possible that Karel krtas journey to Naples may have followed the pattern set by his friend Joachim von Sandrart. The latter arrived in Rome in the summer of 1629, but in the autumn of 1631 he set off for Naples (and then continued to Messina and Malta) and returned to the Eternal City in 1632. In the year 1635, when he left Italy, he is no longer listed in the status animae of the parish of SantEustachio, and it is therefore more than likely that at Easter he was no longer in the Eternal City; Anthony Colantuono, Guido Renis Abduction of Helen. The Politics and Rhetoric of painting in seventeenth-century Europe, Cambridge University Press 1997, p.43; Sybille Ebert-Schifferer, Sandrart aRoma 16291635: un cosmospolita tedesco nel Paese delle Meraviglie, in: Michel Hochman (ed.), Roma 1630. Il trionfo del penello (exh. cat.), Villa Medici, Acadmie de France Rome, Roma 1994, pp.97114, here pp.97, 99, 101; Christian Klemm, entry Sandrart, Joachim von, in: The Dictionary of Art, 134, Jane Turner (ed.), New York 1996, 27, pp.724726. As Sandrart specically included Florence in the list of cities that krta visited, it may be supposed that when in 1636 krta visited the capital of Tuscany, situated on the main road linking northern Italy to Rome, it was the second time he had been there. J.Zapletalov, krta, Sandrart, Oretti (see note 2), pp.398402 (bibliography); eadem, krtov zitalskch archiv (see note 2). Marcello Oresti (17141787), Notizie deprofessori del disegno, cio pittori, scultori, [], Bologna, Pinacoteca comunale dellArchiginnasio, manuscript, Sign. B 123B 135/2; Orestis Italian translation is made from the Latin edition of Sandrarts Lives, published in Nrnberg in 1683, which expressly states in Neapoli instead of the In der Neustadt of the German version. Cited from J.Zapletalov, krta, Sandrart, Oretti (see note 2), pp.398402, here pp.399, 402, note 11. In view of our lack of knowledge of the exact chronology of the creation of Tinellis picture, this possibility cannot be ruled out; For the most recent examination of the circumstances in which the picture may have been painted, see P.Pibyl, Karel krta and Italy (see note 27), pp.96103, here pp.9799; Petr Pibyl, Portrait of Karel krta, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674) (see note 5), 114115, cat. no.III.7. In terms of form and style, krtas portrait is similar to Tinellis portraits of the poets Giulio Strozzi (ca. 1635) and Marcantonio Viario (signed and dated 1637) or of the painter Carlo Ridol (ca.1638), in other words paintings that Tinelli made in the mid-1630s or slightly later under the inuence of Bernardo Strozzi, who was established in Venice; On this see also Ladislav Daniel, in: Ladislav Daniel (ed.), Tesori di Praga. La pittura veneta del 600 e del 700 dalle collezioni nella Repubblica Ceca (exh. cat.), Electa 1996, p.148, cat. no. 36; F. Bottacin, Tiberio Tinelli (see note33), pp.106110, 116117, 122123. In connection with this possibility, the question once again arises of the technology used in the paintings (the grey oil base for Proving the Purity of the Vestal Virgin Tuccia), which led J.Neumann to date them to the beginning of krtas stay in Italy. However, the most recent ndings show that the painter used this method throughout the 1630s; agrey oil base has been conrmed on his Portrait of aPainter of Miniatures (before 1640) and the Nativity of the Virgin Mary (ca. 1640). The hypothesis that the pictures were painted in the years 16361637 would explain better the evident familiarity with Roman models which we assume when studying the two paintings; J.Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (see note1), pp.148151; J.Neumann, krtov, (see note 1), pp.22, 2526; recently Sylva Dobalov, The Chastity of the Vestal Virgin Tuscia, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674) (see note5), p.118, cat. no.III.10; M.Vondrkov, Mythological Wedding (Cupid and Psyche), in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674) (see note 5), p.54, cat. no.I.11 (citing the restorers report by A.Pokorn, manuscript, 2007); recently Sylva Dobalov, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674) (see note5), p.124, cat. no.III.13. More in Stolrov, Karel krta and the Art of the Trans-Alpine Region (see note 5), p.65. Staatsbiliothek Schaffhausen, Sign. Msc Scaph 8. Staatsbiliothek Schaffhausen, Sign. Msc Scaph 8; more on this in astudy being prepared by L.Stolrov.

78 KAREL KRTA BETWEEN SWITZERLAND, THE EMPIRE, AND ITALY

krta and Rome

JOHANA BRONKOV

1 Anno 1634 kam er nach Rom und perfectionirte sich daselbst durch msigkeit und Flei dergestalt, da er sich reich genug schtzte, wieder in sein Vatterland Prag zuruck zu kehren und daselbst die Frchte seines Fllhorns auszuschtten. Joachim von Sandrart, Lacademia todesca della architectura, scultura&pittura oder Teutsche Academie der edlen Bau-, Bild- und Mahlerey-Knste. Der teutschen Academie zweyter und letzter Haupt-Theil, Nrnberg: in Verlegung des Authoris, 1679,III.Buch,XXII.Capitel, p.327. 2 New archive documents discovered by L.Stolrov after delivering this study to the editors denitely prove krtas sojourn in Rome and central Italy where the Prague painter stayed between 1634 and 1636. Comp.Petr PibylLenka Stolrov: To the Continually Increasing Fame of our Industrious Artist. Karel krta between Switzerland, the Empire, and Italy, in the Light of Newly Discovered Sources, in this volume, pp.73-79, note 30. 3 Cornelis de Bie, Het gulden Cabinet vande edel vry schilder const, inhoudende den lof vande vermarste schilders, architecte, beldthowers ende plaetsnyders van dese eeuw, TAntwerpen: Ian Meyssens, 1661, p.251. 4 See Zprvy oKarlu krtovi vevropsk literatue 17. a18.stolet (Reports on Karel krta in European literature of 17th and 18th Centuries) in the present volume. 5 Jean Baptiste Descamps, La vie des peintres amands, allemands et hollandois, avec des portraits gravs en taille-douce, une indication de leurs principaux ouvrages, et des rections sur leurs diffrentes manieres, Paris: C.A.Jombert, 17531764, II, p.367. 6 Arnold Houbraken, De groote Schouburgh der Nederlantsche Konstschilders en Schilderessen, Amsterdam: vor den Auther, 17181721, II, p.144. 7 The mistake survived as long as to Hoogewerff (Godefrius Joannes Hoogewerff, De Bentvueghels, s-Gravenhage 1952, p.133). Swillens edition of Houbraken is more precise and its index correctly associates the cognomen Slagzwaard with krta: Pieter T.A.Swillens (ed.), De grotte Schouburgh der nederlantsche Konstschilders en Schilderessendoor Arnold Houbraken. Volume II, Maastricht 19431953, p.352. 8 Pellegrino Antonio Orlandi, Abecedario pittorico nel quale compendiosamente sono descritte le patrie, imaestri, ed itempi, nequali orirono circa quattromila professori di pittura, di scultura, e darchitettura diviso in tre parti, Bologna: Costantino Pisarri, 1704, p.112.

Arriving in Rome in 1634, he perfected himself there thanks to his watchfulness and diligence to such an extent that he felt enriched enough to return to Prague, back to his homeland, in order to pour out the fruit of his replenished horn. We have no more precise date of Karel krtas sojourn to Rome than this one, mentioned by Sandrart in his biography of the Bohemian painter. Can we, however, trust the author? Such a doubtful question must be asked by everyone who critically explores reports about krtas life. Sandrarts Academia todesca was written more than 40 years after he himself and the artist had left the Eternal City. But if krta did not spent any time in Rome, how could the Netherlandish notary and rhetorician Cornelis de Bie as early as in 1661 devote the following passage to the Prague painter which was undoubtedly related to the Roman milieu: Carolus Creten stayed with Willem Bouwer in Italy, and he received the cognomen slach-swaart in the Bent in Rome. Ironically enough and irony seems characteristic of our painter , this very anecdotal reference provided the name krta a place in biographic literature for the following two centuries, right amongst artists of the Netherlandish Golden Age. Yet another thoroughly literary existence of the Bohemian painter would good look in the history of misinterpretations and guileless inventions, oftentimes committed by writers who aspired to the exhaustive as well as encyclopaedic perfection. The literature published outside Central Europe displays krtas name most often as some variants of De Bies Carlo Creten, usually stated as Creten in the Roman countries during the 18th century, as it was established by Jean-Baptiste Descamps. The most signicant biographer of the 17th-century artists, Arnold Houbraken, does devote krta a brief mention, but he altogether omits his name in the index and moreover attributes krtas nickname to Johann Wilhelm Baur, which is a mistake that survived in professional literature up to the 20th century. The oddest thing, however, is that the memory of the Bohemian painter entirely vanished in Italy. None of the more signicant biographers mentions him and his brief entry among four thousand other ones, collected by Pellegrino Antonio Orlandi in the early 18th century, explicitly refers to the Latin translation of Sandrart, thus testifying to the absence of other than literary passing on of the reports about krtas Italian journey. One would almost succumb to awaking the rigorous spirit nourished by the scepticism of our age and claim that krta perhaps never visited Rome and that all his proclamations about his peregrination through Italy were just an intentional fable in a proprietary dispute. But we would thus even more so have to abandon our rigorous positions, label our painter a liar and begin inventing detective plots in order to explain the existence of that peculiar Roman nickname recorded by the Lier notary, or a similar disinformation campaign which affected Sandrart. And not just that we would repeat the mistake of the above-mentioned biographers: we would totally overlook krtas oeuvre for the sake of our love for paper. We therefore cannot but come to terms with the incompleteness
STUDIES 81

of our knowledge and try to reconstruct krtas sojourn in the Eternal City on the basis of the surviving minor reports while keeping in mind the oeuvre of the artist in which, in Sandrarts words, our noble art of painting lingering in mud was reinstalled to its former place and brought to its prime. What is linked with the year 1634 which so suddenly surfaces in the otherwise rather general Sandrarts text? Was it a ash of memory in which Sandrart recalled the gure of the Prague painter shortly before his own departure from Rome? That can certainly be assumed, but such memories do not necessarily have to be exact. Although Sandrart still dwelled in the Eternal City that year, it is for instance suspicious that the same date can be found in the biography by Johann Wilhelm Baur. The latter author claims that the Strasbourg miniaturist returned from Naples at that very time, but new research proves that he arrived from the South as early as in 1632 in order to start working on the prints for the monumental chronicle of the Spanish ght against the Netherlandish revolt, entitled De bello belgico, by the Jesuite Famiano Strada. Sandrart surprisingly does not know the work and motivates Baurs return from Naples with an entirely personal reason: to make him forget about a certain person. However wrong Sandrart is in this respect, the identical date concerning the two artists can be hypothetically ascribed to a memory of some kind of meeting where they happened to appear next to each other, which would indirectly conrm the report of Cornelis de Bie, i.e. that krta moved in Baurs company in Rome. That should not be too surprising because the painters knew each other already from Stuttgart, they shared the Protestant tradition, were of the same age and spoke the same language, and it cannot even be excluded that they set off to travel across the Alps together. Baurs name (one

9 J.Sandrart, Academia todesca (see note 1), II, p.326. 10 Comp.Christian Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart: Kunst-Werke und Lebens-Lauf, Berlin 1986, p.345; Sybille Ebert-Schifferer, Sandrart aRoma 16291635: un cosmopolita tedesco nel Paese delle Meraviglie, in: Olivier Bonfait (ed.), Roma 1630, Il trionfo del pennello (exh. cat.), Milano 1994, pp.97114, esp.p.101; Esther Meier, Joachim von Sandrarts LebensLauf. Dichtung und Wahrheit?, Marburger Jahrbuch fr Kunstwissenschaft 31, 2004, pp.205239. 11 Comp.Rgine Bonnefoit, Johann Wilhelm Baur (16071642). Ein Werbereiter der barocken Kunst in Deutschland. TbingenBerlin 1997, pp.15, 51. Here also see other bibliography on Baur. Famiano Strada, De Bello belgico, decas prima, ab axcessu Caroli VImp.usque ad initia Praefecturae Alexandri Farnesii Parmae ac Placentiae Ducis AnMDLXXVIII, I, Romae 1632. 12 J.Sandrart, Academia todesca (see note 1), II, p.306. Reports about Baur in Sandrarts biography diverge from the chronology conrmed by modern historiography. Sandrart states that Baur worked for Duke Orsini prior to his departure to Naples. The inaccuracies are surprising because the two painters probably stayed in Naples simultaneously, as is proved by their capturing of the Vesuvius eruption on 16 November 1631, reportedly executed by both Baur and krta in situ. R.Bonnefoit, Johann Wilhelm Baur (see note 11), p.45, g. 48. 13 According to Bonnefoit, Baur left for Italy in the company of krta and Schnfeld. The author does not prove this by any document, and it is thus probably his pure assumption at which he arrived on the basis of researching the relations among the individual artists. Rgine Bonnefoit, Johann Wilhelm Baur, la vie et loeuvre, in: Marie Koefoed (ed.), Johann Wilhelm Baur 16071642. Manirisme et baroque en Europe (exh. cat.), Strasbourg 1998, pp.1933, p.21.

82 KAREL KRTA AND ROME

1.3. Giovanni Maggi, Plan of Rome, 1625 streets between Piazza del Popolo and Piazza di Spagna, mainly occupied by Cisalpine artists (reproduced after: Stefano Borsi, Roma di Urbano VIII, La Pianta di Giovanni Maggi, 1625, Roma 1990)

14 Comp.ibid., pp.2526; R.Bonnefoit, Recueil de la Collection Reiber, ibid., p.74. 15 Prague City Archives (Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy; hereinafter, AHMP), Collection of Manuscripts, Manuale dictorum 16381641, sign. 1169, f. 166v186r. See also the edition of documents in this volume, document n. 22. 16 It is an etching from the series Capricci di varie bataglie. R.Bonnefoit, Johann Wilhelm Baur (see note 13), p.24. 17 Archivio storico del vicariato di Roma (hereinafter, ASVR), S.Lorenzo in Lucina, 1634, sign. s. a., n. 134, fol. 28. 18 As it can be assumed from the letter C situated next to Baurs name, Baur converted to Catholicism in Rome or, at least, approached the sacrament before Easter in 1634. Iunfortunately failed to more closely attribute the names Christoforo Skicher (Fischer?) and Filippo di Manper (Mamper, Maupem, Mauzer?). They can nevertheless be found in the inventory of Flemish painters in Archivio della Accademia di San Luca (hereinafter, AASL), vol. 69, f. 104, where they are led as Christoforo Tedesco and Mompert, just next to crossed-out Baurs name. This proves their affiliation with the group of the Northern artists.

of the very few catching points provided by the earliest biographer) was not utterly unknown in Rome at that time; it was, on the contrary, linked with numerous pre-eminent exponents of Roman nobility the families of Farnese, Colonna, Orsini and Borghese , and the rank of his admirers included the future cardinal and the already then successful diplomat, Giulio Mazzarino. Baur leaves Rome as late as in the autumn of 1637 and the itinerary of his way back to the Cisalpine can be very precisely documented thanks to his surviving drawings: he travels through via Flaminia to Narni; then, although Protestant by origin, visits Loreto, and continues along the Adriatic coast to Rimini, Ravenna, Chioggia, Padua, Venice and, passing through Graz, to Vienna. It would be rather enticing to attribute him the Prague painter as his companion, hurrying to Prague to deal with his inheritance matters and to settle in the town of his predecessors. krtas statements given at the court, which situate his return to Prague from his travels to 1638, would allow for this but, considering the lack of other documents, it is a far too ctional excursus. The surviving sources document Baur very well during the crucial 1634. His rst work for the Duke of Bracciano, Paolo Giordano II Orsini, is dated to that very year, and his name at the same time plays part in the Status animarum of the parish of San Lorenzo in Lucina. The Guglielmo Paur, pittore reportedly stayed in Via Vittoria, one of the streets connecting Via del Corso and Via del Babuino, in the company of two other men, also artists of Nordic origin. The record thus proves that krta was not staying with Baur in the early spring of 1634. This, however, does not really answer the question as to the credibility of De Bies and Sandrarts information, because the Status animarum of the following year did not survive and Baur cannot be documented at that address in 1636 any longer.

STUDIES 83

4. Johann Wilhelm Baur, Self-Portrait of Johann Wilhelm Baur, 1637, Strassbourg, Cabinet des estampes et des Dessins (photo: Muses de Strasbourg)

The so-called Status animarum or the inventory of souls was often kept in utmost detail in 17th-century Rome. Pastors did their regular rounds through their parishes in the period between the St Martin holiday (11 November) and Easter, visiting all houses one by one and recording the dwellers of the individual apartments videlicet, and also accompanying the individual entries by notes of whether the persons recorded approached the sacrament. The statements, however, are not solely limited to these data. They oftentimes include remarks about the practiced trade and the age and status of the inhabitants, and mention who lived in poverty or lead a licentious life. They usually moreover enumerate the staff of aristocratic palaces, inns and other lodging facilities. They undoubtedly represent immensely valuable evidence of demographic patterns of that period, profusely exploited both in past and present, but they are not such a reliable and exhausting source as we would wish. This is because the record-keepers were not always consistent, often writing down only rst names and recording the names of foreigners in most bizarre distortions. In addition, the papal city during krtas sojourn to Rome totalled 86 parishes, most of which were relatively vast after the late 16th-century reforms and encompassed numerous subsidiary churches. New archive research provisionally offers only hypotheses that encourage new ndings. The community of Cisalpine artists mainly occupied the newly established quarters at the heel of Monte Pincio, between Piazza di Spagna and Piazza del Popolo, which came under the parishes S. Lorenzo in Lucina, S. Andrea delle Fratte and S. Maria del Popolo. The hope of documenting Karel krta in this area comes with the inventory of Flemish painters, issued in the effort of the St Lucas Academy to map out all those obliged to pay tax of their trade and craft to its treasury. Thoroughness, however, was not the authors chief asset; he probably put together the list blindfold without even trying to specify or nail down the data, let alone verifying them. Most of the artists are solely listed by their rst names, accompanied by the approximate addresses. The bottom right column reads: Carlo con doy altry todeschy al vicolo de S. Jacobo per il Babuino. Favourable to our case is the reported company of two German painters because as is profusely testied by the confessional lists the members of the individual national communities often lived together. The state of souls in the S. Maria del Popolo parish, under which these streets came, is unfortunately silent about any German painters between 1634 and 1636.

19 Most parish archives are today deposited in the archives of the Roman vicarage (Archivio storico del Vicariato di Roma; hereinafter, ASVR). Some are in the funds Camerale and Buon Governo in Archivio di Stato Roma, while the registers related to the St Peter parish in Vatican can be found in Archivio del Capitolo di S.Pietro. 20 The funds of the Status animarum were vastly employed in mapping out the sojourns of Cisalpine artists to Rome. Let us at least mention the main writings: Friedrich Noack, Das Deutschtum in Rom seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters, Stuttgart 1927, II, p.549; Godefrius Joannes Hoogewerff, Bescheiden in Italie, Omtrent Nederlandsche Kunstenaars en Geleerden, s-Gravenhage 1913; Jacques Bousquet, Recherches sur le sjour des peintres franais aRome auXVIIe sicle, Montpellier 1980. 21 Eugenio Sonnino, Gli stati delle anime aRoma dalle origini al secoloXVII: origini, consistenza, contenuti ; con appendice sulle altre registrazioni parrocchiali, Roma 1977, p.136; Mariano Armellini, Le chiese di Roma dal secolo IV alXIX, Roma 1891, pp.8688. 22 My research in Archivio Storico del Vicariato di Roma allowed me to go through the stati delle anime from between 1634 and 1635 (and the ambiguous ones made me also verify the period between 1633 and 1636) from the following parishes: SantEustachio, S.Lorenzo in Lucina (the year 1635 did not survive), SantAndrea delle Fratte (the year 1635 did not survive), S.Stefano in Piscinula, S.Nicola in Arcione, Ss. Vincenzo e Anastasio, S.Maria del Popolo, S.Marcello, S.Lorenzo in Damaso, S.Maria sopra Minerva, and S.Maria in Via. 23 AASL, sign. 69, fol. 104. G.J.Hoogewerff, Bescheiden in Italie (see note 20), pp.9698. The author includes atranscription of the document and links it with the assembly of the Academys directorate, held on 14 November 1636. The negligence of the record, however, also allows for the possibility that someone included Sandrarts name solely through inertia, not knowing about his denite departure in the early 1635. But the lists of Italian painters, too, contain names of artists who did not dwell in Rome at that moment, but were members of the Academy. For example, the list of July 1635 (AASL, sign. 166, n. 68) reads, among others: Lanfranco aNapoli. 24 ASVR, S.Maria del Popolo, sign. s. a. , n. 65, 16331636.

84 KAREL KRTA AND ROME

25 Ibid., fol. 18 (Strada Laurina). 26 Pigionante means in lodging. 27 The foundation stone was laid on 3 April 1633 and the construction of the relatively simple small church was entrusted to ayoung Milanese architect, Carlo Buzi. The church was consecrated on 17 January 1636. Its front and reconstruction were executed by Carlo Rainaldi during the 1670s. Luigi Salerno, Ges e Maria, in: Via del Corso, Roma 1961, p.141; Alfredo Marchionne Gunter, Ges e Maria, in: Elio de Rosa (ed.), Roma Sacra, 1, Napoli 1995, pp.3843. 28 Jaroslav Vystril, Syn rebelv. Kulturn obraz ze 17.stolet, Olomouc 2005, p.148. The same book, on p.132, reads the assumption that P.Augustine could have met krta in person. On p.149, Vystril becomes inclined to the hypothesis (previously outlined by Neumann) that krta was introduced to the Zderaz monastery by Dionysius Miseroni (Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 [exh. cat.], Praha 1974, p.66). 29 Iam indebted to Adla midlauerov for her consultation. 30 Gabriele Raimondo, Gli agostiniani scalzi, Genova 1955, pp.278283. 31 Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674, Praha 1974, p.66. 32 For an overview of probable hypotheses, see the text by the present author: krta akomunita zalpskch umlc vm, in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta a malstv 17. stolet v echch aEvrop, Praha 2011. The most seductive are the following records: Carlo pittore on Vicolo di strada Margutta in 1635 (ASVR, S.Maria del Popolo, sign. s. a., n. 65, 1635, fol. 8v) and Carlo sciotto todesco (ASVR, SantAndrea delle Fratte s. a., n. 38, 1634, fol. 4v). 33 F.Noack, Das Deutschtum in Rom (see note 20), p.549. 34 Judith Verberne, The Bentvueghels in Rome (1620/211720), in: Peter Schatborn (ed.), Drawn to Warmth, 17th-century Dutch Artists in Italy (exh. cat.), Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, Zwolle 2001, pp.2232; idem, De Bentvueghels (1620/211720). Een Nederlandse kunstenaarskolonie in Rome, unpublished diss., Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.There are still, however, elementary works by the long-term director of the Netherlandish Institute in Rome: G.J.Hoogewerff: Godefrius Joannes Hoogewerff, De Bentvueghels, s-Gravenhage 1952; idem, Nederlandsche kunstennars te Rome (16001725), s-Gravenhage 1942; idem, Il conitto fra la insigne Accademia di San Luca e la banda dei pittori neerlandesi, Archivio della Societ romana di storia patria LVIII, 1935, pp.189203; idem, Intorno al sepolcro di Bacco. Le feste degli artisti olandesi e amminghi aRoma nel Seicento, in: Roma. Rivista di studi e di vita romana II, 1924, pp.119128; idem, Bescheiden in Italie, Omtrent Nederlandsche Kunstenaars en Geleerden, s-Gravenhage 1913. The more recent studies worth mentioning are, for example, the following: Didier Bodart, Les peintres des Pays-Bas mridionaux et de la principaut de Lige Rome auXVIIme sicle, BruxellesRoma, Accademia Belgica 1970; idem, Les fondations hospitalires et artistiques Belges Rome, in: Les Fondations nationales dans la Rome poticale, Torino 1981 (= Collection de lcole franaise de Rome 52), pp.6169; Thomas Kren, Chi non vuol Baccho: Roeland van Laers Burlesque Painting about Dutch Artists in Rome, Simiolus 11, 1981, pp.6380; David A.Levine, The Bentvueghels: Bande Acadmique, in: Marilyn Aronberg Lavin (ed.), Il 60, Essays Honoring Irving Lavin on His Sixtieth Birthday, New York 1990, pp.207226; idem, Pieter van Laers Artists Tavern. An Ironic Commentary on Art, in: H.BockT.W.Gaehtgens (edd.), Hollndische Genremalerei im 17. Jahrhundert: Symposium Berlin 1984, Berlin 1987, (= Jahrbuch Preussischer Kulturbesitz/Sonderband4), pp.169191; Jos de Meyere, Alle Wege fhren nach Rom, in: David. A.LevineE.Mai (edd.), IBamboccianti, Niederlndische Malerrebellen im Rom des Barock (exh. cat.), Kln 1991, pp.4664, esp.pp.5762; Liliana Barroero, Il se rendit en Italie. Artisti stranieri aRoma nel Seicento, in: Roma moderna e contemporanea, I, 1993, pp.1334; Wendy Thompson, Pigmei pizzicano di Gigante, The Encounter Between Netherlandish and Italian Artists in SeventeenthCentury Rome, diss. Johns Hopkins University, Ann Arbor, Michigan1997. 35 The Bent companions also took several men of non-artistic professions among themselves: two pharmacists, asurgeon and even General Alexander van Waekerbaart. Comp.J.Verberne, The Bentvueghels in Rome (see note 34), p.23. 36 Antonino Bertolotti, Artisti belgi ed olandesi aRoma nei secoliXVI eXVII.Notize e documenti raccolti negli achivi romani, Firenze 1880, p.13. Purtroppo anche oggid in Roma il forestiere facilmente vittima dellalbergatore, del bottegaio, e dellartigiano, ai quali si abbisogna ricorrere, ma iamminghi avevano trovato mezzo di rimediarvi alquanto con trarre seco proprii albergatori, sarti, calzolai, ecc.

If we want to look for a record which would comply with the inventory from the St Lucas Academy, we cannot but manage with the vague Pittori dui o tre two small streets further, on Via Laurina. In the same street, there then appears some Carlo pigionante in 1635 and some Clemente scarpellino pig[ionante] with him, and a year later, at the same address, again some Carlo pig[ionante], Bonifatio pig[ionante] con dui altri pig[ionanti]. But the lack of any data about nationality and profession would make us move in too muddy waters here. As concerns the attempts to more closely situate krtas sojourn in the papal city, yet another topographic circumstance is nevertheless worth noticing. Among the streets connecting Via del Corso and Via del Babuino, where we are referred to by both the scarce information about our painter and the general information about Northern painters, a new church of the Barefoot Augustinians, called Ges e Maria, was built on the garden of Cardinal Flavio Orsini, known as Viridarium magnum, between 1633 and 1636. It was perhaps due to the construction works why the inhabitants of the adjacent streets often changed addresses and moved between Vicolo di S. Giacomo, Vicolo degli Orsini and Via Laurina, as can be proved by more thorough comparing of records in the Statuta animarum. The German painters from the inventory issued for the Roman academy thus could well hide beyond the above-mentioned anonymous record. In the same period, between 1634 and 1638, P. Augustine from the blessed Clara of Monte Falco, Wenzel Rudolf Harant of Police and Bezdruice by his proper name son of the famous traveller and pre-White Mountain rebel, Christoph Harant , studied and underwent his monastic formation with the Barefoot Augustinians in Rome. The idea that krta might have lived with this compatriot in the same neighbourhood, or even in the same block of houses, is very tempting, especially if we consider that the very commission from the Barefoot Augustinians at Zderaz provided krta a springboard for his career after the return to his homeland. Moreover, the assembly of the general chapter of the Barefoot Augustinians was held in the convent associated with the church Ges e Maria in 1635, and also a representative of the Prague convent was obliged to participate. Hypotheses as to the contacts with the Augustinians, already raised by J. Neumann, thus receive more concrete outlines. The fund of the Status animarum in the Archives of the Roman vicarage, however, offers more hypotheses for krta. But none of the records is precise enough to safely document our Prague painter. While Karel krta the Younger was already found in the parish S. Andrea delle Fratte by Noack, the Roman address of his father will probably remain secret to us. Bentvueghels Membership of the group of Northern artists, called Bent, Bentvueghels, or Schilderbent, is besides Sandrarts dating and Baurs name the third and the last lead in our investigation of krtas traces in Rome. The Bent was established in the early 1620s as a free society of artists, mainly painters and engravers mostly originating from North Netherlands and Flanders. Their circle willingly accepted other artists who travelled to gain experience in the shadow of St Peters dome. Approximately 480 members passed through the Bent during the one hundred years of its existence. The society had no written statutes, no headquarters and no permanent directorate. Its members were men of art and related professions, usually between the ages of 20 and 25 who had their rst training behind them and came to the Eternal City in order to gain perfection through the studies of classical art as well as their famed contemporaries, but also because having Rome in their curricula usually opened ways to prestigious commissions. The Bent society was undoubtedly started by the solidarity of compatriots, which was necessary for their survival in a city not only far from their home but also full of competition where a foreigner can easily fall prey to a hotelkeeper, merchant or craftsman whose services he needs, as observes Bertolotti with unlimited validity and regret. No less strong motivation, however, was their vice for good wine which, in the South, even those who had to dig deep into their pockets could enjoy almost without restrain. The Bentvueghels society birds in English, as the Bent members nicknamed themselves took advantage of every suitable occasion for benders which became notorious in Rome. No wonder that we most often learn about these ventures from the period records, i.e. the les of lawsuits reecting the less pleasant side of the unbridled
STUDIES 85

revels. The disturbances occurred mainly in the bars during long winter evenings. But as Bertolotti mentions in the introduction to the extensive volume of archive documentation from criminal, notarial and nancial archives of the Roman gubernatorate, the subjects of disputes usually disappeared along with the alcohol vapour, and a night spent together in jail usually reconciled the disunited sides to such an extent that they refused to testify against each other the next morning. The attention of the Bent contemporaries both outside observers and eyewitnesses was attracted by the initiation ritual of the new members which was at the same time the only rm institution of the society. One of its earliest descriptions can be found in Sandrarts autobiography. His characteristic of the entrance ritual, which occurred soon after he arrived in Rome in 1620 with his cousin Michel Le Blon, is not void of idealization. Sandrart vividly portrays how the Bent cronies used borrowed pieces of furniture in a room adjacent to a pub, where he hosted forty people, to stage a tableau vivant representing allegorical gures of Poetry, Sculpture and Painting which, accompanied by Mercury, mounted Parnassus with Apollo. Apollo then ordered the Muses to accept the neophytes as guests and poured them nectar originating from Castelli, it is Castelli Romani, the traditional winegrowing region which has been supplying Roman trattoria until today. Meanwhile they all raised their goblets, exclaiming in the rain of reworks: Viva, viva Sandrart a le Blon! The text emphasizes the artful direction of light and recalls the laurel wreaths which they all received on their heads, but nevertheless avoids whatever mention about the wine christening by which the ritual culminated. It instead remarks that the two neophytes, crowned with laurels, received honorary places and that the company remained in enjoyment and quickwitted conversation till the morning. A somewhat different view of the Bent initiation ceremony is offered by krtas coeval and writer of famous biographies, Giambattista Passeri. As he notes in the biography of Pieter van Laer, [The Flemings] often threw ingenious pastimes [] When some of them arrived in Rome, and were therefore called neophytes, they treated the whole company of compatriots to a sumptuous repast in some of the legendary pubs [] These banquets lasted at least twenty-four hours ceaselessly, without them leaving the table. They had wine brought in entire barrels and only little respectfully called these pastimes baptismal ceremonies. They brashly used that sacred name for such jesting, because during these pastimes they gave the neophytes different names derived from their gure, physiognomy or behaviour, and thus baptised them with wine. Passeri, an admirer of Domenichino and Baroque Classicism, a representative of the ofcial St Lucas Academy, who even had himself ordained a priest towards the end of his life, probably used even more strict words in the original version of the quoted passage. His description, on the other hand, well illustrates the atmosphere in the papal city during the 17th century. The pranks of the young artists were not judged too rigorously and participation in similar events in no way hindered the engagement of the Flemish painters by the inuential prelates of the papal court. For example in 1631, Cardinal Francesco Barberini and his brother Taddeo accepted two Bentvueghels at once among the familiars Jan Borsman and Jacob Duyvelandt. Similarly, Jan Both and Jan van Caustren lived in the palace of cardinal Nepot. A sententious air and a certain indulgent reserve resound in the treatise by Samuel van Hoogstraten, Rembrandts student, who encountered the Bent during his journey to Rome during the 1650s. When taking a new candidate, the companions make an artful construction and honour the new member with a characteristic name. Sweet [beverage] from Albano is drunk to purify souls of all worries and foolish pride. Oh how happy are those to whom this seems useful [] and who survive certain follies unhurt! This rowdiness surely entertains but is full of danger, especially for an astute soul which readily falls in love and easily is seduced. The Schilderbent ceremonies took place in Roman taverns, most often in the Osteria della Fontana on Via Condotti, in the place where the cult coffeehouse of Romantic poets, Caff Greco, opened in the 18th century. It seems that the Bentvueghels gathered regularly right there. The walls were decorated with portraits of the society members and ironic comments, as we learn not only from Theodor van der Schuurs report about the dispute with French painters, provoked by the satyric poem by the painter of Christina of Sweden in 1665, but also from a surviving illustration, today kept in Berlin. And this is where our painter, too, probably received his name Bentnaam.
86 KAREL KRTA AND ROME

37 A.Bertolotti, Artisti belgi ed olandesi aRoma (see note 36), p.8. 38 J.Sandrart, Academia todesca (see note 1), p.9. In this context, Sandrart is already quoted by G.J.Hoogewerff (Intorno al sepolcro di Bacco, see note 34, p.122) as well as by all the following writers. 39 Giambattista Passeri, Vite depittori, scultori ed architetti cha anno lavorato in Roma, Morti dal 1641 no al 1673, Roma 1772, p.54. 40 Passeri wrote his Biographies probably around 1675. They rst came out in print as late as one hundred years later. The editor made sure to let clear them of all false eloquence of the 17th century and the ideas attuned to wordplays but also moderated in expressions. Comp.ibid, pp.x-xi. 41 Samuel Dirksz van Hoogstraten: Inleyding tot de Hooge Schoole der Schilderkonst, Rotterdam 1678, p.207. Quoted by G.J.Hoogewerff, Intorno al sepolcro di Bacco (see note 34), p.125. 42 G.J.Hoogewerff, Intorno al sepolcro di Bacco (see note 34), p.126. 43 A.Bertolotti, Artisti belgi ed olandesi aRoma (see note 36), pp.154165. The poem, entitled La Gazette de la Place dEspagne, was written in summer 1665. Its author ended up in jail and the poem was conscated and only kept in the judicial les. A.Houbraken (De groote Schouburgh, see note 6, p.552) quotes the description of the tavern, provided by the Dutch painter Willem Schellinks in connection with this conict: [] the walls all around bear drawn portraits of Dutch painters as well as painters of other nations. But portraits of the French were wiped off and could not be discerned at all. Quoted by G.J.Hoogewerff, Intorno al sepolcro di Bacco (see note 34), p.126; idem, De Bentvueghels (see note 7), p.118; D.A.Levine, Pieter van Laers Artists Tavern (see note 34). 44 Osteria della Fontana, however, was not the only place to host the ritualsfor instance, the 1632 initiation of the goldsmith Abraham Colin was held in the tavern La Spada (J.Verberne, The Bentvueghels in Rome, see note 34, p.26). Another favourite pub was between the Diocletians spa and Villa Montalto at Esquilin (G.J.Hoogewerff, Intorno al sepolcro di Bacco, see note 34, p.126).

5. A record documenting that J. W. Baur and two other German artists stayed on the right side of Via Vittoria (in the direction from Via del Corso) in 1634, Status animarum S. Lorenzo in Lucina 1634, Archivio Storico del Vicariato di Roma, fol. 28 (photo: author's archive) 6. The Inventory of Flemish and German artists, issued for the St Lucas Academy probably before 1635, reads bottom right: Carlo con doy altry Todeschy al vicolo de S. Jacobo per il Babuino, Archivio dellAccademia di San Luca, vol. 69, c. 104 (photo: author's archives)

45 Jean Baptist Descamps, La vie des peintres amands, allemands et hollandais, Paris 17531754, II, p.367. Descampsthe author of this form of the name repeated by later literature on krta was born in Dunkerque and lived in Rouen from 1740, i.e. in Normandy. This is why espadron instead of the French espadon became common in the Upper Normal dialect. 46 Comp.spadone, in: Salvatore Battaglia (ed.), Grande dizionario della lingua italiana, Torino 1998, pp.670671. 47 The initiation ritual is, for example, illustrated by the following: M.Pool after Dominicus van Wijnen, The Bentvueghel Initiation Ceremony, Rijksprentenkabinet, Amsterdam (RijksmuseumStichting, Amsterdam), copper engraving; Anonymous artist, Bentvueghel, Initiation Ceremony, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, no. A4672 (Dutch school, c. 1660, in: Pieter Jacobus Johannes van Thiel [ed.], All the Paintings in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1976, p.910). 48 G.J.Hoogewerff, De Bentvueghels (see note 7), pp.108111; J.Verberne, The Bentvueghels in Rome (see note 34), p.25.

Slach-sweert, as de Bie writes het slagzwaard in modern Dutch and espadron in Upper Norman dialect, as was introduced by Descamps, espadon in French and spadone in Italian is a long double-edged sword called a claymore. It is questionable why krta received such a nickname. As far as it can be assumed from the wide semantic register of the word, it is not always attering to the bearer of such name: its meaning ranges from lascivious connotations and belligerent egotist and swellhead as far as to the total opposite, used by Giovanni Battista Marino in the contemporary lexis i.e. eunuch, which is allowed by a metaphor taken from botany where it describes sterile fruit. The ritual which krta had to undergo can hardly be reconstructed in detail. The rituals changed depending on the nature and number of participants. The unwritten rules nevertheless demanded the candidate be introduced by one of the stalwart members and the initiation had to be assisted by at least nine Bent cronies. The allegorical production celebrating the majesty of the arts was followed by a Bacchic scene which climaxed with dousing the novices head with wine and giving him the nickname by which he was henceforth called by his companions. The ceremony was usually chaired by a eld pope; the title and functions of the individual popes were, however, as variable and unstable as everything else in these improvised frisks. They were sometimes called stewards or patrons and sometimes had a marshal or usher alias the Swiss with halberd and a eld priest the executor of the baptism by their side. The description of the ceremony in the book of travels by Cornelis de Bruyn, who became a member of the Bent in 1674, even mentions a diploma signed by all attendees. De Bruyn received it as a brand new member shortly before the company resorted to the set table where as he adds with cheerless
STUDIES 87

7. Pittori du o tre at Strada Laurina in the parish of S. Maria del Popolo, Status animarum S. Maria del Popolo 1634, Archivio Storico del Vicariato di Roma, fol. 18 (photo: author's archives)

laconism a celebration held at the expense of the new Bentvueghel began. It is not precisely known when but it was during the 1650s at the latest the rst stage of the ritual in a Roman pub came to be followed by a pilgrimage to the St Constantine mausoleum at daybreak, where the company used to water, as De Bruyn writes, the Bacchus grave. The 16th-century treatises on architecture repeatedly describe this small temple above a circular ground plan as from Classical Antiquity, and the porphyry sarcophagus of Emperor Constantines daughter with scenes with geniuses reaping grapes was named Tomba di Bacco by folk creativeness. A new Bent member then inscribed his name, cognomen and often also the year into one of the niches to the side of the sarcophagus. But this was not the end yet: In an osteria adjacent to the church, a new Bentvueghel is then shown the most beautiful vistas of Rome and they all spend the rest of the day there in gaiety, Le Bruyn adds. krta, however, was probably spared this trip outside the Roman bulwarks because the most frequent and readable inscriptions at St Constantine originate from as late as the 1640s. The parody character of the Bent rituals was far from being so avant-garde as it would seem at rst sight, and the company of painters did not just seek amusement at some others expense. Comical names and self-irony were widespread features of private Renaissance literary academies. As David A. Levine postulated, also the interpretation of the name Bentvueghels should keep out explicit connotations. It is because Giovanni Battista Albertis contemporary text of 1639 derives the origin of both public and private academies from the Alexandrian museum established by Ptolemy Soter, whose philosophers were derisively called birds, since they were kept in cages like exotic animals. According to Alberti, this museum does not refer to anything but uccelliera delle Muse and modern academies are therefore, as he claims, sometimes also called aviaries. Northern painters who often arrived penniless following Van Manders recommendation to travel to Rome to become familiar with the Classical Antiquity but also with new painting, more inspired by Nature than old masters (i.e., Caravaggio) suddenly found themselves at this modern Parnassus, in a city where the forms of new epochs swelled and ripened and idyllic paintings alternated for them with a tough ght for social status or even survival. Part of the Bent rituals certainly illustrated the ironic attitude of its members towards official institutions, but they also reected the contrast between the noble art of painting which the artists travelled and strived for and the difficult existence of enthusiasts lacking material security which they certainly would like to forget about. I do not dare to deduce to what extent they related the Dionysian ecstasy to the divine spark of authentic art that cannot be bound by rules and regulations. Even more so that we would look in vain for a shared artistic expression of the Schilderbent members, stretching from

49 Cornelis de Bruyn, Reizen van Cornelis de Bruyn door de vermaardste delen van Klein Azi, Delft 1698, pp.56. Quoted by G.J.Hoogewerff, Intorno al sepolcro di Bacco (see note 34), pp.123124. 50 Henk van de Schoor, Bentvueghel Signatures in Santa Costanza in Rome, Mededelingen van het Nederlands Instituut te Rome 38, 1976, pp.7786. 51 D.A.Levine, The Bentvueghels (see note 34), pp.211212. Comp.Accademia degli Addormentati, Apatisti, Insensati, Incolti, Immaturi, Rozzi, etc. 52 Ibid., p.215; Giovanni Battista Alberti, Discorso dellorigine delle accademie publiche, e private, e sopra limpresa de gli Affidati di Pavia, Genova 1639, p.9. 53 D.A.Levine, The Bentvueghels (see note 34), pp.217219. Levine opines that the Bent actually followed acertain artistic program. Contrary to the official academies coining the idea that ultimate art can be achieved via following xed and established methods, the Bent members claimed that authentic art is of divine or mystic origin and it therefore cannot be restricted by any rules.

88 KAREL KRTA AND ROME

54 On the dispute between the St Lucas Academy and the Bent, see: G.J.Hoogewerff, Il conitto fra la insigne Accademia di San Luca (see note 34); W.Thompson, Pigmei pizzicano di Gigante (see note34), esp.pp.229240. In connection with krta, see the brief summary in the essay by the present writer, entitled krta akomunita zalpskch umlc vm, in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta a malstv 17. stolet v echch a Evrop, Praha2011. 55 Luigi Salerno, Vita e opere di Giulio Mancini, in: Adriana MarucchiLuigi Salerno (edd.), Considerazioni sulla PitturaII., Roma1957. 56 Comp.ibid., p.XI; Benedetto Varchi, Due lezzioni, Firenze 1549, p.113; Giovanni Battista Marino, Dicerie sacre sulla Pittura, la Musica e il Cielo, Milano 1618, p.48. 57 Comp.L.Salerno, Vita e opere di Giulio Mancini (see note55), II, p.XII. 58 Ma se questo intelletto per indirizzar questa facult motiva amoversi e disegnare habbia bisogno della fantasia, odella memoria, non ancor da dubitare. Perch onoi formiam di nuovo, over noi ritraiamo dalloggetto presente. Nel primo modo non dubbio che bisogna che noi ricorriamo alla fantasia e memoria per poter con questa compor, separar, et cosi fermar di nuovo immagini di cose et esprimerle con il disegno et attion del disegnare. Dal presente noi andiam retrahendo vi di bisogno di memoria con la qual riserviam il fantasma, oimmagin della visione n allespressione. Onde si venga adisegnar quella cosa impressa nella memoria. Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Ms. Vat. Barb. Lat. 4315, f.149, quoted by L.Salerno, Vita e opere di Giulio Mancini (see note 55), pp.XIIXIII. 59 Vincenzo Danti, Il primo libro del trattato delle perfette proporzioni, Firenze 1567, Chapter II; Federico Zuccaro, Lidea de scultori, pittori e architetti, Torino 1607, ChapterVIII; L.Salerno, Vita e opere di Giulio Mancini (see note 55), p.XIII. 60 Mancini writes: [] onde essendo arte di necessit, che habbi in se quello che si dice recta ratio cioe regula certa da poter ben et articiosamente operare. On the Aristotelian-scholastic denition of art which Mancini adopted from Zucarro, see LIdea 1607, I, ChapterX.Comp.Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics 1.VI, c.VI.S; Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II, I, qu. 57, art. 3: [] ars nihil aliud est, quam ratio recta aliquorum operum faciendorum. L.Salerno, Vita e opere di Giulio Mancini (see note 55), p.XIII, note 27. 61 Salerno points to the dependence on Aristotle who places the skill to assess works of art and beauty right admist the knowledge of disegno, which Mancini directly quotes with reference to Politica,VIII, 3. Aristotle opines that disegno ranks among the four subjects essential to citizens education. 62 Gregorio Comanini, Il Figino, Mantova 1591, p.81; quoted by L.Salerno, Vita e opere di Giulio Mancini (see note 55), p.XIV. 63 Giulio Mancini, Considerazioni sulla PitturaI., Adriana Marucchi (ed.), Roma 1956, pp.1314. [] Pi tosto questi tali si devon dir copiatori che Pittori.

the bambocciate to Classicist works executed entirely in the style of the dominant taste and pursued not only at the St Lucas Academy. Numerous Dutch and Flemish artists testify especially in the latter half of the 17th century that affiliation to the Bent in no way hindered their membership in the official Academy. Theory and Practice How did people think about art and what atmosphere reigned in Rome in the period of krtas arrival? We must mainly say that the rst half of the 1530s was an era of a grandiose synthesis whose critical reection, as is common after all, arrived only with delay. The Rome of Pope Urban VIII saw the coexistence, confrontation and mingling of Classicist painting tendencies, following up with the Bologna school, and radical Baroque of da Cortona type. The colony of Cisalpine artists asserts itself by genre paintings, and even those who perhaps take offence at the low subjects, unworthy of the bambocciate, acknowledge the Northerners as masters of portrait painting. krta is in fact very lucky: he arrives to the situation which does not lack undoubted authorities who will be his role models for many decades, and simultaneously nds himself side by side with many artists who successfully follow their great heritage. However, if we want to correctly comprehend which way the opinions on art wended, we should pay attention to theoretical reections whose time of origin is close to krtas Italian journey. Aristotelian orientation is characteristic to the treatise Considererazioni attorno alla pittura, written by Giulio Mancini (15581630) between 1619 and 1621. Mancini was a physician by profession and, from 1623, even personal doctor to Urban VIII. Later, he was apostolic pronotary and canon at St Peters. Between 1623 and 1624, he followed his theoretical reections on painting, supplemented by a survey of painters including some foreign ones living in Rome, with the rst guidebook to the Eternal City in todays sense, entitled Viaggio a Roma. Mancini ranks among the new group of art connoisseurs dened as virtuosi, amatori or dilettanti, passionately advocating their right to express their opinion on works of art similarly as Dolce and Borghini did before him and even claiming that artists themselves are poor art critics. He actually launched the tendency which would take 17th-century criticism as far as to overrate content to the detriment of form and would nally result in Flibien labelling the execution of a work a mechanical part of art and would moreover determine invenzione, i.e. the literary contents of mute poetry, as its substance. Contrary to the Mannerist view emphasizing the natural disposition of an artist, Mancinis nesciun nasce Pittore claims that no one is born a painter; the author instead opines that the painting profession can be acquired through diligent studies, i.e. through imitation in the same way as one adopts intellectual habits. Referring to Aristotle, his most often quoted writer, Mancini explains that intellect aiming at a particular work always proceeds through fantasy and memory. No matter if the work is born of painters own invention or as a portrait of things which he has directly before him, it is always an imitation of the images in mind. Each and every painting must rst emerge in the artists mind, similarly as does the idea in the Mannerist theory or Lomazzos disegno interno which, as a programme and concept, precedes the realization of disegno, and thus also the inception of a work. The ability to conceive disegno is an abstraction, called matematica media or habitus contemplativus by Mancini, and it does not necessarily have to be realized in matter. This abstraction then results in the ability to distinguish between ne and poor executions. In spite of the above-mentioned, however, Mancini in his evaluating judgements does not hesitate to bring up the old distinction between imitation after reality, i.e. the so-called direct imitation, and imitation of images contained in ones mind. While for example Comanini views the direct imitation (imitazione icastica) as a painters virtue and advantage which he has contrary to a poet, a painter to Mancini is the more perfect the more he employs his fantasy and invention while those who just simply imitate should better be called copyists instead of painters. The metaphysical values previously attributed to idea by Lomazzo or Zuccaro are absent in Mancini; he instead expects certain empirical idealism from painting, and Nature in his opinion should be perfected through fantasy. The concept of ideal beauty which would become central to the 17th-century aesthetics, however, is not a straightforward subject in
STUDIES 89

8. Church of St Constantina (Santa Costanza) on Via Nomentana, interior view (photo: authors archives) 9. Signatures of the Bentvueghels, inscribed into one of the niches to the side of the St Constantina church (photo: authors archives)

his writing. Mancini connects it with the issue of proportions and decoro and eventually subordinates everything to the latter. He perceives decoro in two layers of meaning rst as convenienza, i.e. convenience acquired by excluding all inappropriate, and then as adequacy to the aim and character of a depicted thing. He thus reects the extensive postTridentine reection of sacral art as it was systematically developed by Gabriele Paleotti, but transfers it into general theory of art. As Luigi Salerno already pointed out, there is a certain discrepancy between identifying artistic and physical beauty on the one hand and emphasizing the content, the literary conception of painting on the other. It is because historical subjects require individual characteristics, and individuality is often and mainly characterized by a certain defect. Reconstructing reality, either the historical or the immediate one, and capturing a moment become superior to idealization due to the very theory of decoro. The ultimate artistic disciplines to Mancini are frescoes and historical subjects. He distinguishes between various kinds of painting, depending on the differences among the things imitated in other words, between genres. They also include those attributed to our painter from the very beginning, i.e. portraiture and histories. Mancini distinguishes portraits as simple and complicated ones, and while the rst only seek mere similarity, the complicated portraits, which an uneducated person always fails to appreciate, express the stirs, states and affections of mind. Mancini denes history as the depiction of events developed by a larger number of persons and applies Aristotles denition of drama to it. In his view, one must rst consider where, in what section of time and when the particular event occurs. He lays emphasis on lighting and the relations among the leading and secondary gures, but he mainly revolves around the central concept of decoro. Although he ranks it among other requirements on the painting of histories, he in fact forges a superior category which includes requests as to the presumable appearance, capturing the mentality of the persons depicted and reconstructing their mutual relations. His denition of painting as art, when one faces a work submitted to ones own judgement, also logically results in criticism of those painters of histories whose leading gures cannot be discerned at rst sight because the artists locate the main action into programmes that are secondary within the composition. From the aspect of contemporary perception, Mancinis classication of painters active in Rome into three schools, accompanied by their brief characteristics, is also interesting. The rst scuola includes Caravaggio and his followers. The typical feature in Mancinis opinion is their treatment of light: using a solid, focused ray of light falling from above without
90 KAREL KRTA AND ROME

64 As Salerno (XV) points out, Mancinis theology originates from Socrates according to Xenophontos (Memorab., III, c. 8). It can be found in Vincenzo Danti in the 16th century. Amuch more immediate source of inspiration to Mancini, however, was the treatise by Cardinal Paleotti who followed up with the Council of Trent by discussing the subjects of decoro and the adequacy of depiction in detail. 65 Comp.Gabriele Paleotti, Discorso intorno alle immagini sacre et profane, Bologna 1582, in: Paola Barocchi (ed.), Trattati darte del Cinquecento II, Bari 1961, pp.117509, esp.pp.332336. 66 L.Salerno, Vita e opere di Giulio Mancini (see note 55), II, p.XV. 67 G.Mancini, Considerazioni sulla Pittura I(see note 63), pp.115116. 68 Here, Mancini follows the tradition which ascribes the keenness for mere appearance to common folk. The concept is derived from Quintilianus, Inst. Orat,IX, 4: docti rationem artis intellegunt, indocti voluptatem. See Lionello Venturi, La critica darte in Italia durante isecoliXIV eXV, LArte XX, 1917, p.36; Ludovico Dolce in his Dialogo della pittura (Venezia 1557, p.36) writes: E questo diletto non intendo io quello che pasce gli occhi del volgo, oanco de glintendenti, ma quello che cresce, quanto piu locchio di qualunque huomo ritorna aguardare. 69 G.Mancini, Considerazioni sulla Pittura I(see note 63), I, p.117. That is, he requires la similitudine probabile, affetto e costume, il decoro e la gratia. 70 His examples are Bassano and aminghi. 71 G.Mancini, Considerazioni sulla Pittura I(see note 63), pp.108111.

72 Proprio di questa schola di lumeggiar con lume unito che venghi dalto senza reessi, come sarebbe in una stanza da una fenestra con le pariete colorite di negro, che [] vengono adar rilievo alla pittura [] con modo non naturale []. 73 Questa ha per proprio lintelligenza dellarte con gratia et espression daffetto, proprieta e composition dhistoria []. Vede il naturale, lo possiede, ne piglia il buono, lascia il cattivo, lo migliora, e con lume naturale gli d il colore e lombra con le movenze e gratie. 74 ha per proprio un spirito e proprieta di natura, con buona compositione e gratia et in particolare delle teste [] ha in se quella vaghezza che in un tratto rapisce lochio e diletta. 75 Gran sapere di disegno, di colorito, dinventione e compositione. 76 Giuliano Briganti, Pietro da Cortono odella pittura barocca, in: Olivier Bonfait (ed.), Roma 1630. Il trionfo del pennello (exh. cat.), Milano 1994, p.27. 77 The text came out much later, in 1646, under the name Giovanni Antonio Massani, i.e. Agucchis secretary. The treatise was published by Denis Mahon, Studies in Seicento Art and Theory, London 1947. As to Massanis text, see pp.230275, of which Agucchis part is on pp.240258. For the most recent edition, see Trattato della pittura dalla edizione di 1646, in: Ricardo de Mambro Santos (ed.), Arcadie del vero: arte e teoria nella Roma del Seicento, SantOreste (Roma) 2001, pp.139180. 78 Agucchis career climaxed during the short ponticate of GregoryXV (16211623) when he was active as papal secretary. UrbanVIII then appointed him to the position of apostolic nuncio and sent him to Venice where Agucchi lived until his death in 1632. 79 On the relationship between Domenichino and Agucchi, see Silvia Ginzburg Carignani, Domenichino e Giovanni Battista Agucchi, in: Domenichino (15811641), Milano 1996, pp.121137. The same author also presented awider analysis of Agucchis links to the Roman environment; see Giovan Battista Agucchi e la sua cerchia, in: Olivier Bonfait et al. (edd.), Poussin et Rome, Paris 1996, pp.273291. On the authorship of the treatise, see Carlo Cesare Malvasia, Felsina pittrice II, Bologna 1678, II, p.243. Domenichios letter to the Roman collector Francesco Angeloni includes adiscussion recorded by Agucchi: Mi adoperai nel distinguer, e far riessione alli maestri, e maniere di Roma, di Venezia, di Lombardia, et aquelli ancora di Toscana [] (Giovanni Petro Bellori, Le vite de pittori, scultori e architetti moderni, Roma 1672, p.359). Mahon dates the letter to 1632 (D.Mahon, Studies in Seicento Art, see note75, p.121).

a reection to illuminate a scene, as if everything occurred in a room with a single window and walls painted in black. Mancini is thus not critical towards the selection of subjects or the painting style, but he blames Caravaggio for his improbable environments and arrangements of gures. Mancini has nothing but praise for the second school which includes the Carraccios and their followers: Reni, Albano and Domenichino. He ascribes to them great deftness in art, accompanied by grace and ingenious skill in expressing state of mind as well as pertinence in conceiving histories: [This school] can see the natural, seizes it, gets hold of the good and disregards the bad, rening it and providing it colour and shadow by natural light, vividly and with utmost charm. The third school includes Cavalieri dArpino, appreciated for both his spirit and grace, mainly in painting heads, and Mancini adds that his style possesses the loveliness which immediately captures the eye and pleases. The last, fourth, school are artists like Cristofano Roncalli, Domenico Passignano, Ludovico Cigoli or Giovanni Baglione, for whom Mancini does not nd any particular shared features and neither sees any apparent points of departure in their oeuvres. The conclusion of the treatise, however, once again resounds with high recognition of Reni, Albano, Domenichino and others who took the Carracios path, following their great art of drawing, work with colour, invention and composition. Mancini observes that they are still waiting for their opportunity to come and foretells their dazzling careers. However this classication appeared more than ten years prior to krtas arrival in Rome, and it therefore necessarily lacks the echo of the radical Baroque of Pietro da Cortona, Mancinis insights describe one of the leading tendencies in theoretical reection which was further developed during the 1630s and climaxed in Belloris work. Even more embedded in what Briganti calls the eternal Classicism of Italian culture is the treatise on painting by Giovanni Battista Agucchi (15701632). The Bologna aristocrat, a relative of the Aldobrandini family, comes to Rome after the election of Paul V. Agucchi takes the young Domenichino under his patronage and resigns all public offices in order to indulge in studies of history and literature. The fruit of his frequent discussions with the young artist is the treatise on painting, written at the turn of the rst and second decades of the 17th century and published in 1646 under the name of his secretary Massani. Agucchis attempt at dividing painting into various schools and giving a true picture of their tendencies overcomes the age-long competition for primacy between the Venetian
STUDIES 91

10. Anonymous artist, The Bentvueghels in c. 1623, Rotterdam, Boijmans Van Beuningen Museum (photo: Boijmans Van Beuningen Museum) 11. Johann Wilhelm Baur, The Bentvueghels Group, 163435, Coburg, Kunstsammlungen der Veste Coburg (photo: Kunstsammlungen der Veste Coburg)

amboyant colours and Florentine drawing (Dolce and Aretino versus Vasari) and, in the second decade of the 17th century, lays the foundations to clear classication of individual styles. But it also develops a classication which would henceforth be very difficult to surpass. The Roman school, for example, represented by Raphael and Michelangelo in Agucchis view, followed the grandeur of sculptures and drew near to the art of the elders. The painters from Venetia and the Mark, with Titian in the lead, rather imitated the beauty of Nature as it appears to the eye, while Correggio as the rst of the Lombards, was an imitator of Nature, one of the greatest, because he followed it tenderly, with ease but grace, too, creating his own style (maniera). What comes next, however, is the decline of art, thorough knowledge fades away and new styles are born, remote from truth and the probable, based on the imaginary instead of the essential, which took painting astray. Amidst these artistic heresies, Agucchi writes, the Carracios arose in Bologna. The paragraph describing their
92 KAREL KRTA AND ROME

80 G.B.Agucchi,Trattato della pittura (see note 77), p.149 (1646, fol.89). 81 G. B.Agucchi, Trattato della pittura (see note 77), p.152 (1646, fol.11). 82 Comp.Carlo Volpe, Trattato della pittura di Giovanni Battista Agucchi, in: De Mambro Santos (ed.), Arcadie del vero (see note77), pp.115137, here p.120. Agucchi briey outlines the course of Annibales studies: after his early experience gained in Bologna and in the North and his inclination to Venice painting and Correggio, the artist arrives in Rome where his style transforms face to face Renaissance masters, mainly Raphael, and Classical masters in general. 83 Comp.Domenichinos letter to Angeloni, quoted by Bellori G.P.Bellori, Le Vite (see note 79, p.359) where he directly refers to Albertis treatise. 84 Volpe (C. Volpe, Trattato della pittura, see note 82, pp. 124125) points out that Agucchis passage is almost identical to an analogical one from the treatise by Vincenzo Danti (V.Danti, Primo libro del trattato delle perfette proporzioni, Firenze 1567, in: Paola Barocchi [ed.], Trattati darte del Cinquecento, vol.I., Bari 1960, p.239). 85 Francis HaskellNicholas Penny, Taste and the Antique: The Lure of Classical Scupture, 15001900, New HavenLondon 1982. 86 Giovanni Battista deCavalieri, Antiquarum statuarum Urbis Romae primus et secundus liber, s. l., s.d. [Roma post 1570/ante 1584]. 87 Franoise Perrier, Segmenta nobilium signorum et statuarum, Quae temporis dentem invidium evasere Urbis aeternae ruinis erepta, Typis aeneis abce commissa Perpetuae vene rationis monumentum, Roma1638. 88 Let us point out at the excellent study by Biaostocki: Jan Biaostocki, Lantico: regola della natura nel Seicento, in: Il Classicismo. Medioevo. Rinascimento. Barocco, Atti del Colloquio Cesare Gnudi, Bologna 1993, pp.259265. 89 J.Biaostocki (ibid., pp.260261) exemplies Belloris quote from Ovids Metamorphoses: G.P.Bellori, Idea (1664); Erwin Panofski (ed.), Idea contributo alla storia dellestetica, Firenze 1952, p.188. Charles Alphonse Dufresnoy, De arte Graphica, Roger de Piles (ed.), Paris 1668, p.21. 90 Paul Frart De Chantelou, Viaggio del Cavalier Bernini in Francia, Palermo 1988, p.152. 91 J.Sandrart, Academia todesca (see note 1), I, pp.3341; ibid., II, pp.114. Joachim von Sandrart, Scupturae Veteris Admiranda, sive delineatio vera perfectissimarum eminentissimarumque statuarum, una cum artis hujus nobilisimae Theoria, Norimberga 1680. An extensive bibliography to Sandrarts prints was most recently published by Brigitte Kuhn-Forte, Le statue antiche nella Teutsche Academie di Sandrart. Alcune considerazioni e identicazioni, in: Sybille Ebert-SchiffererCecilia Mazzetti di Pietralata (edd.), Joachim von Sandrart: ein europischer Knstler und Theoretiker zwischen Italien und Deutschland, Mnchen 2009, pp. 137163 (=Akten des Internationalen Studientages der Bibliotheca Hertziana, Rom, 34 April 2006). 92 J.Sandrart, Academia todesca (see note 1), I, p.33.

arrival in Rome became the catch-motto of Classicist theories in the latter half of the century: As soon as they beheld Roman sculptures and paintings by Raphael and Michelangelo, contemplating especially the Raphaels, they found themselves encountering much deeper insight and more renement of drawing than in the workshops of Lombardy, and concluded that the emergence of an utmost perfect maniera would require combining the delicacy of Roman drawing and the beauty of the Lombard colour scale. And since they soon comprehended how Raphael studied Classical things so as to be able to create the idea of the beauty not found in Nature [] they embarked on studying the most renowned Roman sculptures, and since they both already were grand masters, they beneted from this greatly in no time. If some passages of Agucchis text seem to remind one of the not-too-distant characteristics of our painters Italian journey, it is not altogether accidental. As the most recent research certainly and correctly discerned, the requirement of col disegno nissimo di Roma unire la bellezza del colorito Lombardo is not an eclectics manifest but a recommendation to young artists of how to best take advantage of their sojourn to the Eternal City. Similarly, lidea di quella bellezza, che nella natura non si trova appears here side by side with empirical studies and abandons all neo-Platonist inspirations. The idea of beauty which would become the motto of theoretical ruminations on art during the decades to come is conceived by Agucchi as a follow-up to Albertis treatise On Painting (published 1435 and 1547 in Italian) where we can, too, nd the selective method, i.e. the duty to choose from what Nature offers. On the one hand, there is the mere imitation of what appears to the sight and satises the simpletons and, on the other, the understanding of the idea of the beautiful, the perfection of what Nature itself would like to express. Agucchi moreover distinctly indicates the way to this perfection: it is based in exploring famed Classical sculptures. Studying Classical Antiquity Copying Classical sculpture was one of the main reasons why artists from all over Europe headed to Rome. Those who did not have the chance drew inspiration from their reproductions. The long array of publications on this subject was launched as early as during the 1570s with Giovanni Battista de Cavalleris Antiquae statuae urbis Romae. Afterward, antiquarian interest systemizes in an effort to offer exempla, or even human typology after the surviving Classical monuments. In 1638, Franois Perrier publishes his Segmenta nobelium signorum et statuarum which aspires to establish prototypes of beauty and human typology, equally as Sandrart does somewhat later. Perception of the antithesis of Nature and Classical Antiquity transforms during the 17th century. While Renaissance artists followed the Classical due to its ability to provide true and awless picture of Nature, Vasari already views Classical sculpture as Natures direct antithesis, while for Bellori during the latter half of the 17th century, Nature even follows the arts and Dufresnoy sees Classical sculpture as reecting the rules of Nature or its measure. This, however, was not the domain of the Classicists. Bernini, too, in his lecture given at the Paris Royal Academy (1664), views copying Classical sculptures as a signicant part of training young artists, aimed at developing their skill to correct Nature. An eloquent picture of the attention paid to Classical sculpture and mainly of the signicance attributed to copying it in the period of krtas Italian sojourn is offered by Joachim von Sandrart. The author includes the chapter devoted to Classical sculpture right in the rst volume of his Teutsche Academie of 1675 and then returns to it in more detail in the second volume which we are well familiar with thanks to krtas biography and, in 1680, he publishes a collection of graphic reproductions of Classical sculptures, accompanied by Latin annotation, under the title Sculpturae Veteris Admiranda. Everyone who desires to capture the perfect looks and the situation of the human body, according to its race, sex, disposition, craft, age or muscular structure, can nd all of this in Rome, in the white marble of Classical sculptures in Belvedere, in the papal garden and also other gardens, which I see to be the only universal source, the mother and the universal fodder to all these merited disciplines, and I myself drew from them with great benets for my own studies, copying the style in which they were formed, their disegno (zeichnen) and their proportions. Sandrart adds that similar exercise on Michelangelo and Raphael was pursued by all who wanted to learn something. He nevertheless notes with regret that the Germans are not among those who would have these grandiose models (vortreffliche Studien) in front of their eyes all the time, and offers them a helping hand with prints created after his own
STUDIES 93

drawings. He apparently wants to provide his compatriots with some exempla, doing so with remarkable consistency for example in the case of Laocoon who should be the prototype of an old man, he is ready to ignore his sons and thus nds no trouble decomposing the famous group sculpture as a whole. The other side of the coin is returning these abstracted, carefully selected models, mastered through diligent studies, to Nature. Baroque paintings and prints breathe new life into the ancient marble, no matter if it happens by reviving the sculptures expression as Biaostocki demonstrated in the case of the redivivus busts of Roman emperors, philosophers and other heroes, executed after drawings by Rubens from the last years of his life (16381639) or by situating Classical sculptures into a particular environment, landscape or architectonic frame, as Elisabeth Cropper and Sybille Ebert Schifferer documented in Sandrart. Although there is not enough space here to analyze Classical motifs in the oeuvre of our painter in more detail, it seems that he treated them in the very spirit of updated historical reconstruction. For instance, we cannot nd the exact model for the triumphal arch in the background of the scene with St Martin and the beggar. The urban context nonetheless suggests that it might be a poetic completion of the so-called Arco di Portogallo the arch that intersected Via Lata (which is, today, Via del Corso) and was torn down in 1662. Official Academies and Centres of Art No general overview of opinion on art and of animated theoretical discussions in 1630s Rome should omit the official art society associated with the St Lucas Academy. Its protector during krtas sojourn to Rome was Cardinal Francesco Barberini, nephew of Pope Urban VIII, and the principe was the popes favourite painter, Pietro da Cortona (16341637). Alongside him, the leading voice was given to the radical Baroque tendency which sharply confronted the tendencies of Classicism. The clash echoed in the famous polemic between Cortona and Andrea Sacchi a polemic simultaneous to the dispute between the Academy and Schilderbent. Moreover, some opine that the dispute occurred during the meeting summoned in order to nally smooth out the discrepancies between the Northerners and the official circle of painters. During the latter event, Sacchi blamed Cortona for inappropriately holding onto the ostentatious and insufficiently tending to the essential. The debate, situated right amidst the panel of scholars, subsequently revolved around the issue of the number of gures in a painting and the question whether as advocated by Sacchi a composition should remain lucid and focused on a single event after the example of Classical tragedies, because the beauty of all ingenious works is grounded in simplicity and unity. Cortona argued that more gures can depict more activities and the large-dimensional format of histories can withstand multiple episodes, if they are well-composed by the masters hand and interlinked by lights and shadows. He also compared the secondary scenes, sketching in the exposed central subject, to choirs which accompany the main story in the above-mentioned tragedies. The St Lucas Academy an official institution enjoying the support of the pope as well as countless privileges was certainly a prestigious place, often successfully sought by foreign artists who stayed in Rome for longer periods of time. The 1634 lists of its members include not only Poussin and Duquesnoy, but also Sandrart and Friedrich Greuter. There was thus no problem to appoint Lodewijk Cousin to its head in the latter half of the 17th century. Cousin was called Luigi Primo in Italy and was a member of the Bentvueghels with the cognomen gentile (the Academys principe between 1651 and 1653). It is, however, apparent from many indications in the biographies of the leading artists that artistic life in the shadow of St Peters dome throbbed elsewhere. Even the stalwart members of the official institution ran their own academies (which we do not know much about), but it is absolutely certain that they were places of theoretical discussions, close in content to Agucchis and Mancinis reection, and of copying Classical sculptures and reliefs. As Bellori writes, many young painters attended Domenichino to study al naturale, that is to copy Classical sculptures and Raphael. It was not a workshop practice, educating assistants of a single studio. Zampieris private academy was attended by Poussin, Pietro Testa and Bellori, and the theoretical grounds gained in this environment subsequently reected in their
94 KAREL KRTA AND ROME

93 B.Kuhn-Forte, Le statue antiche (see note 91), p.139. Comp.Johann Jakob Thurneysen after Joachim von Sandrart, Laocoon, in: J.Sandrart, Academia todesca (see note 1), ITheil,II.Buch,IV.Capitel, g. c. 94 J.Biaostocki, Lantico: regola (see note 88); Henrica M.Zijlstra-Zweens, Antieke karakterkoppen van Rubens, Hermeneus, XLIX, 1977, 3, pp.202206; Elizabeth Croppper, Vincenzo Giustinianis Galleria. The Pygmalion Effect, in: Cassiano dal Pozzos Paper Museum, vol. I, Ivrea 1992, pp.101126; Sybille Ebert Schifferer, Naturalezza e maniera antica. Joachim von Sandrart disegnatore dellAntico, in: Silvia Danesi Squarzina (ed.), Caravaggio e iGiustiniani. Toccar con mano una collezione del Seicento (exh. cat.), Milano 2001, pp.5764. 95 Ian Campbell (ed.), The Paper Museum of Cassiano dal Pozzo, Ancient Roman Topography and Architecture, I, London 2004, pp.248249. 96 That is, the Academy gathering held on 14 November 1636 which Hoogewerff views as aculmination of the ght of Cisalpine artists with the Academy (G.J.Hoogewerff, Il conitto fra la insigne Accademia di San Luca, see note 34, p.201). The records of the session, held in the big hall of the Cancellerie, are kept in the Academy archives (AASL, Liber Academiae Sancti Lucae). The list of participants proves that the Northerners formed almost half of the assembly (32Italian, 12French, 3Spanish, 2German, and 42Flemish and Dutch). 97 Melchior Missirini, Memorie per servire alla storia della romana Accademia di S.Luca no alla morte di Antonio Canova, Roma 1823, pp.111113 (Titolo LIX). Reprinted in: Olivier Bonfait (ed.), Roma 1630. Il trionfo del pennello, Milano 1994, pp.243245. 98 AASL, sign; 166, n. 68, fol. 10r. 99 For example in Poussins biography, Bellori mentiones circa il naturale frequentava lAccademia del Domenichino, che era dottissima (G.P.Bellori, Le Vite, see note 79, p.427). 100 Comp.Giovanni Pietro Bellori, Le vite depittori, scultori e architetti moderni, ed. Evelina Borea, Torino 1976, p.358; G.Passeri, Vite depittori (see note 39), pp.4647. Both writers state that Domenico Zampieri disliked witnesses while working and was in contact with only few friends.

101 Comp.Elizabeth Cropper, Bound theory and blind practice: Pietro Testas notes on painting and the Liceo della pittura, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 34, 1971, pp.262296; Richard E.Spear, Domenichino, New HavenLondon 1982; Elizabeth CropperCharles Dempsey, Nicolas Poussin: Friendship and the Love of Painting, Princeton 1995; Claudio StrinatiAlmamaria Tantillo (edd.), Domenichino 15811641 (exh. cat.), Milano 1996; here, see esp.Almamaria Mignosi Tantillo, Domenichino il pi sapiente La vita e le opere, pp.2155; S.Ginzburg Carignani, Domenichino e Giovanni Battista Agucchi (see note 79), pp.121137. 102 Comp., for example, Mancinis biographies of Pietro da Cortona and Poussin; see G.Mancini, Considerazioni sulla Pittura, I(see note63), pp.261, 262. 103 Donatella Livia Sparti, Le collezioni Dal Pozzo: storia di una famiglia e del suo museo nella Roma seicentesca, Modena 1992, p.29. Dal Pozzos Paper Museum was thoroughly explored in amodern edition: The Paper Museum of Cassiano Dal Pozzo: acatalogue raisonn: drawings and prints in the Royal Library at Windsor Castle, the British museum, the Institut de France and other collections. Francis HaskellJenifer Montagu (edd.), London 20012004. On the personality of Cassiano dal Pozzo, see Francesco Solinas (ed.), Isegreti di un collezionista: le straordinarie raccolte di Cassiano dal Pozzo, 15881657 (exh. cat.), Roma 2001; idem, Cassiano dal Pozzo, Atti del seminario internazionale di studi, Napoli, 18 e 19 dic. 1987, Roma 1989. 104 Regular visitors to Pozzos palace during the rst half of the 1630s were not only Poussin but also painters Pietro Testa and Giovanni Battista Ruggieri, engravers Giovanni Andrea Podest, Claude Mellan and Anna Maria Vaiani and sculptor Franois Duquesnoy, i.e. the same company which frequented Marquis Giustinianis palace. Comp.E.CropperCh. Dempsey, Nicolas Poussin (see note101), p.64. 105 Along with Sandrart, Palazzo Giustiniani often hosted the Italian painter and engraver Pietro Testa, the four Dutchmen Michael Natalis, Regnerus von Persin, Theodor Matham and Cornelis Bloemaert, and the French engraver Claude Mellan. Comp.Arthur R.Peltzer (ed.), Joachim von Sandrarts Academie der Bau, Bildund Mahlerey-Knste. Leben der Berhmten Maler, Bildhauer und Baumeister, Mnchen 1925, pp.247249. 106 Sandrarts autobiography, edited by Sigmund von Birken on the basis of his own notes, ascribes him the role of inspirer of the entire project; see Joachim von Sandrart, LebensLauf und KunstWerke des Woledlen und Gestrengen Herrn Joachims von Sandrart auf Stockau, Hochfrstl. Pfalz-Neuburgischen Rahts, Nrnbergh 1675, p.12. See also Sybille Ebert-Schifferer, Sandrart aRoma 16291635 (see note 10), pp.97114; Giulia Fusconi, Classicismo e realismo nei disegni di Sandrart per la Galleria Giustiniana, in: Giulia Fusconi (ed.), IGiustiniani e lAntico (exh. cat.), Roma 2001, pp.1527; ibid., pp.221 and 497, and E.Meier, Joachim von Sandrarts LebensLauf (see note 10), pp.205239. 107 Luigi Salerno, The Picture Gallery of Vincenzo Giustiniani, I: Introduction, The Burlington Magazine CII, 682, 1960, pp.2127; idem, The Picture Gallery of Vincenzo Giustiniani, II, The Inventory, Part I, The Burlington Magazine CII, 684, 1960, pp.93104; idem, The Picture Gallery of Vincenzo Giustiniani III: The Inventory, Part II, The Burlington Magazine, CII, 685, 1960, pp.135148. On collection inventories of Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani, see Silvia Danesi Squarzina, The collections of Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani. Part 1, Documents for the History of Collecting, The Burlington Magazine CXXXIX, 1136, 139, 1997, pp.766791; idem, The collections of Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani. Part II, The Burlington Magazine CXL, 1139, 1998, pp.102118; Silvia Danesi Squarzina, La collezione Giustiniani. Inventari 1, 2. Documenti 3. Torino 2003. 108 It was probably Fabio Giustiniani who arranged the commission to decorate the presbytery for Rubens. Rubens himself based his knowledge of Classical Antiquity on copying the marquis collections in Palazzo Giustiniani. Silvia Danesi Squarzina, La collezione Giustiniani. Benedetto, Vincenzo, Andrea nostri contemporanei, in: Silvia Danesi Squarzina (ed.), Caravaggio e iGiustiniani (exh. cat.), Milano 2001, pp.1745, esp.p.24 S.Danesi Squarzina, IGiustiniani e lOratorio dei Filippini, in: Storia dellArte 85, 1995, pp.369394. 109 S.Danesi Squarzina, The collections of Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani (see note 107), p.789 (the 1621 Inventory, Inv. No. 203). 110 Giovanni Bottari, Raccolta di lettere sulla pittura, scultura ed architettura, S.Ticozzi (ed.), Milano, 1822, pp.121 and 129. Reprinted in: Olivier Bonfait (ed.), Roma 1630. Il trionfo del pennello (exh. cat.), Milano 1994, pp.241243; Luigi Grassi, Teorici e storia della critica darte. Parte seconda: leta moderna il Seicento, Roma 1973, pp.3537.

own treatises on painting and procured the existence of Classicism inspired by the Bologna school in the entire next generation of painters. The practice documented in Domenichinos case was related to more general intellectual fashion which inuenced wide strata of low as well as high aristocracy, intellectuals and poets, all nourished by curiosity and desire for knowledge and grasping the sense of things, so characteristic of the 17th century. We can nd most various experts on Classical Antiquity in the ranks of librarians and writers on the fringe of the papal court and Roman nobility, who were surrounded by groups of enthusiasts, the so-called amatori or dilettanti. These circles mediated contacts between the artists and commissioners, motivated aristocrats to establish collections and participated in their development. Apart from famous personalities such as Giulio Mancini or Cassiano dal Pozzo they, for instance, included Leonardo Agostini (15931676), friend of Cardinal Francesco Barberini, who was later appointed antiquario ponticio and commissioner for Classical Antiquity in Rome and Lazio and who owned the Museo vario di statue e marmi antichi on Via della Madonna di Costantinopoli, in the place of, what is today, Piazzo Barberini. Other ones were Carlo Ferrante, friend of Lanfranco, Francesco Angeloni and many more. Direct contact with these enthusiasts and their collections of not only fragments of original Classical sculptures and other objets dart, but also their drawings and copies almost unwittingly formed the new 17th-century academies, reected as accademie dal vivo by biographers. The most renowned and today certainly the most thoroughly explored collection of this kind was built by Cassiano dal Pozzo, rst on Via della Croce and, from 1627, in the palace on Via dei Chiavari, across from the church SantAndrea della Valle. Dal Pozzo, secretary to Cardinal Francesco Barberini, member of Accademie dei Lincei and legendary patron of Poussin but also other more or less well-known artists, resolved to accumulate either originals or copies of all available Classical relics. The famed Museum Chartaceum holds a collection of drawings of Classical as well as early medieval buildings, sculptures, reliefs and other objects which Dal Pozzo often documented with the fervour and preciseness of a modern scholar. His effort nonetheless fully corresponds to his era: his aim was to help the artists, to whom he so generously opened his door, rene their style in the sense mentioned earlier. Yet another easily accessible opportunity to encounter Classical Antiquity and also works by the contemporary and previous generations of artists was offered by the collection of Marquis Giustiniani, whose graphic documentation, published under the title Galleria Giustiniana, was executed by Sandrart and a group of Northern artists during the 1630s. Although the part he played in Palazzo Giustiniani near the Pantheon, where he lived from 1632 at the latest, was properly corrected by recent critique, the reports that he personally executed countless drawings after Classical models appear reliable. The circle around Marquis Vincenzo Giustiniani was certainly no less impressive than his collection, numbering almost 600 paintings and more than 1,800 Classical sculptures according to the inventory compiled after his death in 1638. Giustiniani was in close contact with the reformatory tendency of Catholicism in the Roman environment, mainly represented by the followers of St Philip Neri, i.e. the oratorians from S. Maria in Vallicella whose ranks were even joined by several members of his originally Genoese family over the time. It seems that one of them, Fabio Giustiniani, made the community commission Rubens to decorate the local presbytery. The cornerstones of the collection were laid by the inuential Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani, Vincenzos brother, ten years older than him. He developed a remarkable collection of paintings which could serve as a pattern book of iconography of sacral art and also of stylistic attempts at combining it with naturalist detail. He, on the one hand, anticipated the popularity of the Bologna school and had the 1594 Crucixion by Annibale Carraci in his bedroom and, on the other hand, appreciated and owned paintings by Caravaggio, Ribera and Lanfranco. Generosity combined with an almost unerring intuition in nding the best contemporary painters is also reected in the theoretical treatise on painting which survived in the form of a letter addressed by Vincenzo Giustiniani to the Flemish attorney and Spanish agent settled in Rome, Dirk van Ameyden (Teodoro Amideni). Here, the writer discerns twelve various categories of painters and painting styles which he claims to
STUDIES 95

12. Jan Asselijn, The Bentvueghels, Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (photo: author's archives) 13. Pieter van Laer, The Bentvueghels in a Tavern, Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (photo: author's archives) 14. Roeland van Laer, The Bentvueghels in a Pub, Roma, Museo di Roma (photo: author's archives)

have discovered all by himself. His classication basically distinguishes between individual genres, from spolveri that is colouring a pre-printed model , copying, caricature and still-life to the ultimate art, enrooted in developing a unique style (maniera; in the sense of the ability to paint after ones own fantasy without any models) and in the skill to paint things directly observed by the painter, but not merely as a simple portrait of things but on the basis of their versant conceiving i.e. designing and proportioning (buon disegno e proporzioni) as well as the masterful treatment of colour and light. Vincenzo Giustiniani views the synthesis of these two ways as the immaculate, twelfth degree of painting achieved by the most magnicent, rst-class painters [] in our times, Caravaggio, the Carracios and Guido Reni. The notes made by Marquis Giustiniani therefore testify to the viability of discussion which yet did not have the chance to fossilize in the rigid schemes of the later Classicist theories. To him, Caravaggio and the Carraccios are equipollent artists, worth exploring and following. Roma nova et vetera We certainly will not be far from the truth to imagine krta in the company of intellectuals, antiquarians, poets, merchants and artists debating over the collections of Classical objects, from precious sculptures to the curios. He perhaps also used to tour after the art of the elders around Roman environs where people often went drawing in plein-air, as we are reminded by Sandrart in the description of his own trip to Tivoli in the company of Van Laer, Lorrain and Poussin. Or maybe he just went out in front of his house with a sketchbook or to the imperial fora with their bizarrely protruding fragments of Classical monuments, sunk several meters underground and symptomatically called Campo Vaccino at that time.

111 Giustiniani does not claim that his list of the rst-category artists is complete; he, on the contrary, notes that there are other ones besides those mentioned: [] tra iquali taluno ha premuto pi nel naturale che nella maniera, e taluno pi nella maniera che nel naturale, senza per discostarsi dalluno, n dallaltro modo di dipingere []. Comp.Vincenzo Giustiniano al signor Teodoro Amideni, in: Olivier Bonfait (ed.), Roma 1630 (see note 110), p.242. 112 Comp.Sandrarts description of his Tivoli trip, undertaken in the company of the mentioned artists. See A.R.Peltzer (ed.), Joachim von Sandrarts Academie (see note 105), p.184. 113 Plein-air drawing was the realm of the Northerners. The proof of this practice is, for example, the drawing by Jan Asselijn, The Bentvueghels Drawing and Painting in Plein-Air, Berlin-Dahlem, Kupferstichkabinett, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Inv. No. 144.

96 KAREL KRTA AND ROME

114 Pompilio Totti, Ritratto di Roma moderna, Roma: appresso Filippo de Rossi, 1645. It represents asupplemented version of the 1638 guide, published again in 1652. 115 Ibid., p.7. 116 Comp.Joachim von Sandrarts Academie, A.R.Peltzer (ed.) (see note105), p.270. 117 G.Passeri, Vite depittori (see note 39), pp.3942. 118 G.Briganti, Pietro da Cortono (see note 76), pp.3839. 119 Comp.ibid., p.45. 120 Apart from the two mentioned works, Flibien also mentions The Deposition by Daniel da Volterra; see Andr Flibien, Entretiens sur les vies et sur les ouvrages des plus excellens peintres anciens et modernes, Paris 16661688 (3rd ed., Trevoux 1725,VII, p.478). According to Bellori, Sacchi was of the same opinion; see G.Bellori, Vite depittori (see note 79), p.309. 121 Comp.the authors contribution krta akomunita zalpskch umlc vm, in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta a malstv 17.stolet v echch a Evrop, Praha 2011, p. 712. 122 Maurice Vaes, Les fondations hospitalires amandes Rome duXVe auXVIIIe sicle, Bulletin de linstitute historique belge de RomeI,1919, pp.161371. Matizia Maroni Lumbroso Antonio Martini, Le confraternite romane nelle loro chiese, Roma 1963, pp.177, 272274, 236238; Joseph Schmidlin, Geschichte der Deutschen Nationalkirche in Rom S. Maria dellAnima, Freiburg Wien 1906. On elder history of the confraternity S. Maria in Vampo Santo recently: Knut Schulz, Confraternitas Campi Sancti de Urbe: die ltesten Mitgliederverzeichnisse (1500/011536) und Statuten der Bruderschaft (= Rmische Quartalschrift fr christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte: Supplementheft, 54), Roma 2002.

The two Romes, the old and the new, are so interlinked as if they were not two sisters of similar looks but, instead, one and the same person of different ages, reads the introduction to one of the most popular guides to the Eternal City. The Rome of Urban VIII appeared as a grandiose metropolis even to those who arrived from much closer than our young Northerner. Pomplio Totti for example, Umbrian by origin, enthuses with fascination about St Peters basilica as follows: Everyone who beholds it cannot but confess to seeing a creation of angels as to its beauty and of titans as to its vastness, and is condent that the new Vatican temple surpasses the Seven Wonders of the World and no monument of the past can bear comparison: [] after all, even the Pantheon, the supreme achievement of art, is much smaller than a mere drum of the Vatican cupola which, so to say, as if rested on air. The experience of Rome during the 1630s cannot be reduced to fashionable copying of either the Classical and Raphael or the famed Titians Bacchanalia held in the collection of Cardinal Ludovico Ludovisi or, respectively, in his villa in the Gardens of Sallust which revived the manuscript of the Roman, Classicist-oriented painters and contributed to developing of what Roberto Longhi labelled the neo-Venetian movement. It is nonetheless true that our painter might personally have encountered the doyenne of Baroque Classicism, Domenichino, who had a hard time in 1634 due to the incomprehension of Caravaggios supporters headed by Ribera, and better secretly ed from his commission in the Neapolitan cathedral of St Jannuarius (St Gennaro) back to Rome. But the papal city also offered other, somewhat mute encounters with artists who had passed through it and left behind their works, which were certainly more eloquent than any treatises for an artist. The effort to provide their complete list would be lost beforehand, and we can thus only illustrate that no artist would indifferently pass S. Luigi dei Francesi with Caravaggios paintings in the Contarelli chapel. A similar case is Chiesa Nuova where Rubens 1608 decoration of the presbytery with its perspective composition of side paintings climaxes in the vision of the open heaven where the rays of divine light radiate from a source so high and distant that they suggest innity. In 1622, Guercino bequeathed Rome his robust, pictorial style of expressive colour scale in the form of his monumental Glorication of St Crisogonus, executed on the ceiling of the basilica in Trastevere and consecrated to the same saint and, a year later, gave it the large-dimensional canvas The Burial of St Petronilla for the altarpiece by one of the pilasters in the cupola of St Peters basilica. Guido Reni then left behind The Holy Trinity, conceived as a revelation making the viewers contemplate, above the main altarpiece in S. Trinit dei Pellegrini (1625). The new approach to altarpieces that is as stages is proved in a more narrative variant by Sacchis Miracle of St Gregory the Great, created for the Vatican basilica (c. 1627). And let us nally mention Pietro da Cortona who, as soon as 1626, in his reconstruction of Classical life and institutions, breathed life into marble with his fresco cycle at St Bibiana and enforced the Baroque principles in painting in opposition to the Ciampellis frescos. In 1633 he began working on the fresco for Palazzo Barberini a work which can bear a single comparison in Rome: the famed Galleria Farnese. It seems that in painting, too, the winner in the frequently discussed dispute between the new and the old suddenly becomes the modern age through Da Cortonas Triumph of Divine Wisdom. It also seems that krta was not attracted by the accelerated rhythm of high-Baroque compositions aimed at monumental synthesis and immediate effect. He would perhaps have more willingly agreed to Poussins view reproduced by Flibien and Bellori that the best paintings in Rome are Raphaels Metamorphosis and Domenichinos Last Communion of St Jerome. It is, however, much easier to imagine krta in the company of painters and sculptors from the narrow streets between the Spanish Square and Piazza del Popolo, being close to the sombre perfectionist Duquesnoy relentlessly perfecting the type of modern putti, whose studio came to be attended by Artus Quellinus just upon krtas arrival the Quellinus who later provided reports about the Prague painter to Cornelis de Bie. He also undoubtedly became familiar with the main hubs of art around which the Northern artists gathered, i.e. the confraternity affiliated to the national churches S. Giuliano dei Fiamminghi, serving the entire Flemish community, and S. Maria in Campo Santo, situated right in the shadow of St Peters basilica and frequented by German and Flemish artisans, as well as S. Maria dellAnima with its concentration of higher middle-class Germans, Flemings and Dutchmen living in Rome. Although krtas cognomen received in the Schilderbent testies to his familiar relations
STUDIES 97

with the group of Flemish painters, at that time headed by Caravaggios supporter Jean Ducamps known as Giovanni del Campo in Italy and the bamboccio Peter van Laer, we can nd almost no signs of following the style of the bambocciate in krtas oeuvre. Criticizing them, as can be found in Pietro Testa and Andrea Sacchi, was far from sporadic and our painter certainly did not aspire to the label of a barbarian who would resign the hardly achievable recognition of the authentic beauty of Nature and the obstacle of depicting it with appropriate grandeur of the random. His opinion was undoubtedly much closer to the critics and it even seems that he indeed absorbed the views of art which prevailed in Rome during the 1630s. In any case, the proclaimed ideas did not trouble the painters in their reections as much as the theoreticians struggling to dene them. The artists were in much more intimammediate contact with their respected models and predecessors through their own sketches and drawings. In Agucchis anecdote, well illustrating the relationship between theory and practice, the words we, the painters, speak through our hands can be read from the lips of Annibale Carracci and it surely is of more general validity. We can hardly imagine to what extent krta followed these examples during his sojourn to Rome. Each and every artist lacking background in the form of a rich supporter and donor faced a rather uneasy situation. The more difficult it must have been for krta the immensely ambitious person which can be discerned in his life after the Roman experience. The demand for works of art was high. As Vincenzo Giustiniani observes in the above-mentioned letter, Italy was not the only country where it was commonplace to cover the walls of palaces with paintings instead of precious fabrics. Dealing in art nevertheless enjoyed the status of something undignied. The academics, for example, were supposed to refrain from all art deals under the threat of immediate expulsion from the Academy. As late as in 1670, the Roman St Lucas Academy laments the deplorable phenomenon of the works intended to decorate sacred temples and provide grandeur to noble dwellings but being displayed in shops and on streets as despicable merchandise. But the permissions (the so-called patente) surviving in the les of the Academy and given to those willing to sell either their own or someone elses works by the official artists association upon obligatory request prove that dealing in art during the 17th century experienced rather unprecedented prosperity. The only choice for an artist arriving in the Eternal City and owning nothing but his brushes was to get hired for a wage by one of the local art dealers. Johan van Gool writes about this in his description of the nancial conditions of the Bent members, featuring it as painters galley slavery. Young painters were either hired for a daily wage or were paid per item, producing portraits of saints in endless variations which were then exported to Spanish and Portuguese colonies to decorate newly established churches and monasteries. If we can nonetheless trust the earliest biographers of our painter, they seem to testify to his somewhat better position: if krta indeed gained fame as a painter of portraits, he was probably not condemned to any slavery like as other artists who vainly struggled for recognition, and some of his works perhaps still await discovery, resting somewhere high on the walls of Roman noble galleries. And we can only speculate whether the necessity to earn some living made him frequent the motifs of renowned Italian artists in paintings intended for South-American churches. Translated by Lucie Vidmar

123 Except perhaps the rather deducted gural canon in the StWenceslas Cycle. 124 The quote comes from the letter of 28 October 1651, written by Andrea Sacchi and addressed to Francesco Albani; see Carlo Cesare Malvasia (ed.), Felsina pittrice, II, G.Zanotti (ed.), Bologna 1841, pp.179181. On criticism of Pietro Tesca, see Elizabeth Cropper, Virtues wintry reward: Pietro Testas etchings of the Seasons, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 37, 1974, pp.249279, here p.271; idem, Ideal of painting: Pietro Testas Dsseldorf notebook, Princeton 1984, p.55, pp.104105. 125 Agucchi illustrates the rather complicated relationship between theory and practice with an anecdotic story from the life of the Carracis: Agostino, afan of discussions, talked about the Laocoon sculptural group in acircle of art-loving aristocrats and asked Annibale to contribute to his analysis. But Annibale just turned away to the wall of the room and drew Laocoon in charcoal on it so vividly as if he faced him at that instance, responding to the admiring words of the gathered as follows: Noi altri Dipintori habbiamo da parlare con le mani (If us the painters of adifferent kin have something to say, we use our hands to say it). Agucchi in no time adds that the painter then executed asketch of yet another Laocoonhis own inventionwhich nonetheless was not second to the famed Classical sculpture: it was splendidly conceived in every part, well-considered, harmonious and complete, and as soon as the cardinal saw it, he commissioned the Carracis to decorate his palace. G.B.Agucchi, Trattato della pittura (see note77), p.153 (1646, fol.12). 126 Letter written by Vincenzo Giustiniani, in: Olivier Bonfait (ed.), Roma 1630 (see note 110), p.243. 127 The concept, which was included in the 1617 statutes of the Academy as early as 1617, is conrmed by the 1667 document. See Loredana Lorizzo, Il mercato dellarte aRoma nelXVII secolo: pittori bottegari e rivenditori di quadric nei documenti dellArchivio Storico dellAccademia di San Luca, in: Marcello FantoniLouisa C.MatthewSara F.Matthews-Grieco (edd.), The Art Market in Italy (15th17th Centuries), Ferrara 2003, pp.325336, esp.p.327. 128 M.Missirini, Memorie (see note 97), p.126. Quoted by L.Lorizzo, Il mercato (see note 127), p.327. 129 Lorizzo (ibid.) describes three categories of merchants in the eld of art: painters selling their paintings (pittori bottegari), mere dealers with paintings (rivenditori di quadri), and art dealers and frame sellers (coronari). Paintings on sale were moreover on display in windows (regattieri) or sold through itinerant sellers. 130 Johan van Gool, De nieuwe schouburg der Nederlantsche kunstschilders en schilderessen, II, Haag 17501751, pp.470474. Juditz Verberne nonetheless warns against possible moralistic distorting of the situation because, to Van Gool, morality, artistic success and social prosperity are inseparable. Comp.J.Verberne, The Bentvueghels in Rome (see note 34), pp.2627.

98 KAREL KRTA AND ROME

Facing the Public

krtas historiae sacrae from the Perspective of the Art Theory and Painting Practice of His Time
TPN VCHA

* For a stimulating discussion on the topic, I am indebted to Prof.Milena Bartlov of the Academy of Fine Arts in Prague, valuable information was contributed by Dr. Martin Mdl from the Art History Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences, and I am grateful to Strahov Librarys Dr. Hedvika Kuchaov for her assistance with translations from Latin. 1 Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674). His Work and His Era (exh. cat.), Prague 2010, p.17; also Jaromr Neumann, krtov. Karel krta ajeho syn, Praha 2000, p.6. 2 Johann Quirin Jahn,VIII.Nachrichten von einigen bhmischen alten Malern und Knstlern, Neue Bibliothek der schnen Wissenschaften und der freyen Knste, Neunzehnten Bandes Zweytes Stck, Leipzig 1776, p.322: Zu verwundern ist es, da er verschiedene Rollen spielen konnte; ich will sagen, da er die Manier so vieler groen Maister vortrefflich nachahmte; denn er wute sich nicht nur an die Stelle eines Michelangelo, Merigi, und Lanfranc zu versetzen, sondern auch in dem Geiste eines Raphael von Urbin, Dominichino, insonderheit aber Guido Reni, den er besonders als seinen Liebling ansah, auszudrcken. Auch macht er von demjenigen Gebrauch, was er aus der Venetianischen Schule, nach einem Titian und einem Paul Veronese gelernet hatte. Cf. Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta (16101674), Praha 1974, pp.910. 3 Jan Quirin Jahn, Aneckdoten [] (See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 149): Ja er nun (nach Zeigungs J.Scandrart[!], der ihm gekennet hat) die samment[lichen] italinische Kunstschulen durchpassiret und mittelst seiner natr[lichen] scharfen Vernunft als eine eiige Bhne von allen besten Blumen den Sssen fast der Kunst zusammen gesamlet hatte, [] 4 Esp.Gustav Edmund Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte desXVII.Jahrhundertes, Prag 1889, esp.pp.6064. Cf. J. Neumann, Karel krta (see note 2), pp.912. 5 Esp.Vincenc Kram (ed.), Vstava obraz Karla krty, Praha 1938, pp.813.

Appreciations of Karel krta generally include an appraisal of the artists extraordinary receptiveness to varied sources of inspiration and his ability to recast these into a singular vision. Despite the multifarious nature of his stylistic and technical approaches, krta never lapsed into mere imitation of the mannerisms of any one master; nor did he resort to verbatim borrowing from the work of others. His art, characterised by thematic imaginativeness, formal richness, emotional intensity and spiritual depth, is always distinctive and original. His exceptional painting talent, fortuitously cultivated during his stay in the leading art centres of the Apennine peninsula, and his ability to continue to grow creatively after returning to Prague, are the qualities we use to measure krta against his peers in Bohemia. Whether altar canvases or portraits, religious- or secular-themed narrative paintings, an iconographically and inventively demanding thesis prints or book illustrations in each of these genres krta reveals himself to be a consummate artist far surpassing his contemporaries, capable in every instance of applying a unique approach. For these reasons, we may deem Karel krta to be the founder of the modern Czech painting tradition. It must be noted that art historians have only very gradually come to this realisation based on accruing facts about the artist, the increasing number of works attributed to krta and the gradual professionalization of the discipline. Assessments of an artist always reected current aesthetic standards. Thus it was that in the latter half of the 18th century Jan Quirin Jahn praised krta as a painter who superbly emulated the stylistic manner of the greatest masters like Michelangelo, Caravaggio, Lanfranco, Raphael, Domenichino, Reni and the Venetians Titian and Veronese. In Jahns eyes, krta embodied the contemporary ideal of the academically trained artist, as he had visited all the Italian art schools and, owing to his inborn and astute judgment, selected the best they had to offer. That which had been attributed to krta as a strength, came to be seen in the late 19th century as a weakness and sign of eclecticism. Vincenc Kram, who attributed krta with creative originality and progressiveness, fully rehabilitated the artists reputation in the period between the rst and second world wars. Indeed, Kram not only identied the specic sources of krtas Italian instruction, chiey Venetian colourism and Roman principles of composition and chiaroscuro modelling, but also underlined krtas highly evolved feeling for elaborating the tangible and his predilection towards the specic attributes of the terrestrial world. Jaromr Neumann also looked at krta, whom he introduced in a monograph-type oeuvre-catalogue of 1974 as a multifaceted painter possessing a broad range of expression and, in addition to the already mentioned synthesis of Venetian colourism and Caravaggian realism, traced inuences of Bolognese and Roman classicism in his work. The objective of the recent krta exhibition, complemented by an extensive scholarly catalogue, is
STUDIES 101

to introduce the artists work within the broader contexts of contemporary European and Bohemian painting. It is primarily be employing stylistic critique, supported by formal and iconographic analyses of individual works and heuristic research, that we gain access to krtas work, clarify its conception amid existing developmental contexts and dene a place for krta in our constructed story of the Bohemian and (central) European Baroque. Such an approach is clearly warranted, as well as being essential to the work of the art historian, but it must be stated that the research results primarily testify to our understanding of the artists work and have little to do with how he was perceived by his contemporaries. Although our overall estimation of Karel krta does not differ from the laudatory assessments of his contemporaries and, like them, we consider him to be the greatest Bohemian painter of the 17th century, it is difficult to square our idea of him with art theoretician and painter Joachim von Sandrarts (16061688) assertion that krta was not only a universal theoretician, but also a highly experienced practitioner at all times expertly taking nature as his guide. This skewed conceptual and material view is understandable: 17th-century art critique employed a different conceptual apparatus and professed other aesthetic perspectives; indeed, ne art itself held a different social status and performed another function. The fact that krtas paintings are able still to engage the lay viewer clearly demonstrates their universal and timeless value. Still, we cannot imagine these works being perceived by todays gallery visitors, art historians or restorers as they were by the 17th-century public. Here we face the essential dilemma inherent in any historical interpretation, a dilemma that may, in the case of Karel krta, be expressed in the following paradox: on one hand, we have the temporal perspective afforded by several centuries, owing to which we are able ever more objectively to come to know krtas work within its broader historical and developmental contexts; on the other hand, we have a temporal chasm of equal length, resulting in our great distancing from the psychological and spiritual world of Baroque man his visual and aesthetic sense and obviating an unmediated understanding of krtas oeuvre. This assertion seeks not to impugn the meaningfulness of the art historians work, but rather to point up a hitherto neglected aspect of the research as represented by the study of the contemporary theoretical and broader socio-cultural assumptions underlying krtas work and its reception in his time. While presenting Karel krta as man and artist, the editors of the new exhibition catalogue stressed that his illustrious success as evidenced by his social ascendance and material prosperity was based not only on his painterly abilities, but also his extraordinary adaptability to the circumstances of his time and demands of his society. Of course, krtas paintings represent not just a reection of the artist himself, but also of the requirements for status and prestige and the degree of cultivation and taste of the public krtas public, in other words. i.e. the complex social structure to which those both commissioning and consuming the artworks belonged, meaning church visitors, members of the clergy (especially preachers) and krtas professional colleagues. It is receptive aesthetics that furnishes a methodological starting point for an examination of krtas public; when applied to the history of art, it counts the viewer as a constitutive element of the creative process. It is not exclusively the artist and his intentions not the work understood as an imprint of his artistic genius and an expression of his time and country but rather the viewer, with his attendant expectations and demands, who forms the point of reference for any interpretation. If we allow that krta created through interaction with public demand and response, then several questions come to the fore: How was Prague prepared for krtas art? What innovation did the painter bring to Bohemia and how specically did he inuence local painting? Moreover: to what degree was krtas work formed by specic local conditions, namely his customers quest for representative status and the publics taste? The artists sacral-themed paintings best serve the search for an answer to these questions, though there is no doubt that an analogous set of questions could be formulated with respect to the portrait genre. Karel krta and historiae sacrae It is a generally known fact that the sacred image newly garnered the attention of Catholic theologians in the latter half of the 16th century in response to Protestant iconoclasm.
102 FACING THE PUBLIC

6 See further for details regarding Sandrarts assessment of Karel krta. 7 Cf. Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas, Karel krtaThe man and artist at atime of transformation, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), pp.1723. 8 The phenomenon of krtas public, though referring to anarrowly chosen segment of believers (viewers of holy drama) has been treated by Sylva Dobalov, Paijov cyklus Karla krty. Mezi vtvarnou tradic ajezuitskou spiritualitou, Praha 2004, pp.96102. 9 The art historical literature on this topic is extensive; generally on the issue see Wolfgang Kemps introductory study Kunstwissenschaft und Rezeptionssthetik included in an anthology of texts: Wolfgang Kemp (ed.), Der Betrachter ist im Bild. Kunstwissenschaft und Rezeptionssthetik, Berlin 1992, pp.727. 10 Recently, Marcela Vondrkov, Karel krtas Portraiture, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), pp.271275.

11 For the paradigm shift in painting in the early modern period, see Hans Belting, Bild und Kult. Eine Geschichte des Bilder vor dem Zeitalter der Kunst, Mnchen 19912. 12 [] pareria anoi che la pittura, la quale ha da servire ad uomini, donne, nobili, ignobili, ricchi, poveri, dotti, indotti, et ad ogniuno in qualche parte, essendo ella il libro popolare, dovesse ancor essere formata in modo che proporzionatamente potesse saziare il gusto di tutti.Gabriele Paleotti, Discorso intorno alle imagini sacre e profane, Bologna 1582, in: Paola Barocchi (ed.), Trattati darte del Cinquecento. Fra Manierismo e Controriforma, Volume secondo: GilioPaleottiAldrovandi, Bari 1961 (Scrittori dItalia 221), pp.117509, here p.493. Cf. W.Kemp, Der Betrachter ist im Bild (see note 9), pp.910; Christian Hecht, Katholische Bildertheologie im Zeitalter von Gegenreformation und Barock: Studien zu Traktaten von Johannes Molanus, Gabriele Paleotti und anderen Autoren, Berlin 1997, pp.193204. 13 W.Kemp, Der Betrachter ist im Bild (see note 9), p.10. 14 Regarding the last mentioned, see two of Balbns epigrams (See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 116) or the poem by Litomice Bishop Maxmilin Rudolf of lejnice on the painting The Stoning of St Stephen in Litomice Cathedral (more on this further in the text) included in the second edition of his epigram collection Memorabilium Romanorum Exornatorum [] of 1672 (See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 128). About Bishop lejnic see Vt Vlnas, Maxmilin Rudolf lejnic jako mecen Karla krty. Ke vzjemnmu vztahu barokn historiograe avtvarnho umn, in: Zuzana PokornMartin Svato (edd.), Bohuslav Balbn akultura jeho doby vechch. Sbornk zkonference Pamtnku nrodnho psemnictv, Praha 1992, pp.136145; Vt Vlnas, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), pp.604605, cat. no.XVI.25. 15 V.Kram, Vstava obraz Karla krty (see note 5), p.11. 16 Vclav Vilm tech, eskoslovensk malstv asochastv nov doby, Praha 19381939, p.59. 17 Jaromr Neumann, MalstvXVII.stolet vechch. Barokn realismus, Praha 1951 (esk djiny III). 18 Idem, esk barok, Praha 19742, p.76. 19 See the studie by tpn Vcha and Vt Vlnas in this book.

The need arose to re-dene its meaning and legitimacy, where the line of theological argumentation that the Church had started to elaborate during the iconoclastic storms of the Middle Ages was combined with the need to reect its aesthetic qualities as a work of art, one that had become a subject of broad theoretical discourse during the Renaissance. No longer just a cult and sacred object, the religious painting attained the status of artwork and became subject to critical reection. Thus, for example, did Gabriele Paleotti in his Discorso intorno alle imagini (1582) not only propound a teleological denition of religious painting derived from the relevant Trident Council decree provisions, but also delved into the relationship between art and the public. He propounds the belief that [] painting, which should serve men and women, the noble and rustic, rich and poor, educated and illiterate, everyone in its whichever of its parts, just like a favourite book, should also be rendered in a manner that reasonably satises the tastes of all. The requirement that art shall contrive to interest the broader public corresponds to the division of humankind into four classes: the painter (i pittori), the scholar (i letterati), the unschooled individual (glidioti) and the spiritual person (gli spirituali), each of them nding in an artwork something that pertains to them: the painter appreciates the artistic rendering, the scholar a satisfactory explication of its content, the simple person is captivated by the paintings beauty and the spiritually-inclined draws religious instruction from the painting. The specic position of the early modern religious painting, which served not only for religious meditation, but also as the subject of expert, intellectual and aesthetic evaluation, derives from the nature of its display location. The form and content of such a painting, whether forming part of an altarpiece or decorating a sacral interior, was shaped by the architectural space, cult function and anticipated behaviour of the viewer. Its public nature and intrinsic representative role clearly differentiate the religious picture from other painting types such as portraits and cabinet and other pieces. It served as both a universal interpreter of ethical values and a supreme work of art through which contemporary society as a whole was brought into contact with artistic expression of the highest quality and which was to be jointly experienced and critically reected upon. Thus, it is not surprising that these qualities enable us fully to appreciate the pre-eminent position of the religious painting in 17th-century central European painting. krtas religious-themed paintings, moreover, garnered the greatest of acclaim during his time and life. Many were graphically reproduced or were made in replica or employed as a subject of literary reection. In this respect, the exemplary works are his narrative paintings with their abundant gural crowds, e.g. the Zderaz cycle lunettes (g. 15 and 16), the altarpieces St Charles Borromeo Visitsing the Plague-Stricken (g. 5) or St Thomas of Villanova Distributing Alms to the Poor (g. 11), and the large canvases of Assumption of the Virgin and Easter cycle. Art historians, well aware of how truly pivotal these paintings are, use them as a starting point when examining krtas oeuvre and attempting to grasp its singular qualities. Thus did Vincenc Kram remark that such paintings are religious in theme only because an intense interest in reality leads the artist to a terrestrial, almost genre approach. Similarly, Vclav Vilm tech noted in the legendary scenes , the calm of the things naturally unfolding and freely associated with the topics storyline. [] The storyline is freely associated and interposed with varied subjects and episodes. In these ancillary points be they rkins, casks, crystal dishes or landscape vistas or needlework and lace, are manifested the richest painterly delicacy and sense of objects in space. Jaromr Neumann went furthest with this interpretation in his published dissertation on Baroque realism in Bohemian 17th-century painting when, citing Marxist aesthetics and the interpretation of early modern history as the period of the feudalist class war, he uses an historically inapposite ideological purpose to explicate the realistic expression of Karel krta and other painters. Notwithstanding this tendentious sidestep, the young researcher also put forth many valid observations appreciated in later years in their more mature form. Neumann concisely named and appropriately verbalized the observational and realistic tendencies in krtas work, that is the vivid narration and feeling for dramatic conict, meticulously observed and internally experienced events, the ability through natural gestures both psychologically penetratingly and poetically to express typical life situations, which took root in the phraseology of Czech Baroque scholarship and were subscribed to by several generations of scholars. A question we may pose here is to what degree such characteristics would be
STUDIES 103

understandable to the 17th-century viewer. Although we look at the same paintings or are captivated by observing the same visual phenomena, our manners of seeing and verbal descriptions of rendered realities derive from divergent psychological experience and serve other objectives. We, too, appreciate the colour and light composition, the precise compositional scheme, adroit use of architecture to construct the pictorial space and delineate signicant relationships between the interacting gures, the diversity of the physiognomic types and psychologically convincing expressions of the human gures, the apt characterisation of the setting and ingenious linking of material artefacts or animals in genre-like harmonious units, but in our overall interpretation, we tend toward a stylistic evaluation of krtas artistic expression, which we chiey perceive as realistic or as the outcome of myriad stylistic inuences. To gain insight into the manner in which the paintings were perceived in their time, it is of considerable use to turn to the accounts of Bohuslav Balbn (16211688), indisputably the greatest scholar in krtas Bohemia and one who, in his own words, was intimately familiar with the painter and his work. In Verisimilia humaniorum disciplinarum, a large textbook and theoretical treatise on the humanities published in 1666, Balbn advises students to examine remarkable paintings when staging theatre productions and costuming actors. He explicitly mentions portraits (imagines) and paintings (picturae) by the best European painters, amongst whom he includes Karel krta, as a designer of thesis prints: It is and I have oft repeated this something of a praiseworthy curiosity, carefully to examine the portraits and paintings of great artists such as Raphael of Urbino and other Italians, Rubens, Drer, Sadeler, Gal, Moncornet, and here at home the emblematic sheets of a Bohemian painter who never intended to remain in the background of the old masters: Karel krta. They show not only the gures attire, but also their most characteristic and original gestures in emotional situations. Still more instructive is his How to Look at Pictures found in the chapter Poetic Pictures (Imagines poticae). When referencing his personal experience and advising adepts of poetic art to gain inspiration by surveying artistic creations, mainly paintings, Balbn says: I usually advise students to ingrain deeply in their mind the artworks of great artists, painters, sculptors and architects, etc. This is absolutely necessary in poetry and of great importance for any description of things and persons. I praise ardent and scholarly curiosity (particularly in this respect), which encourages fantasy and a certain capacity for imagination for us to learn how to essay things in an appropriate, i.e. poetic form. After all, painters and artists have much in common with poetry both engage in creating something, and what poets say in poetry, artists say in colour In a painting or sculpture, it is necessary to behold a garment or clothes, attributes, colours, hair, gestures of hands, major facial expressions and any adjacent happenings, such as what is going on around the scene, be it in the sky or on the ground. Should anyone wish to do it as I do: when I encounter works of art by great artists, I rst scan everything with my eyes until I have committed the entire scene in detail to memory; then, I picture the individual things as painted with my eyes closed and store them in my mind, in case I should have need of them at a later time. Indeed, Balbns instructions for how to look at, or read, paintings, that is through concentrated and lasting observation and the joining of imagination and memory, assume a specic pictorial language based on a functional linking of painting and word. This humanistic concept, underpinned by the famous Horatian dictum ut pictura poesis (poetry is like painting) that Balbn paraphrases in the above-mentioned quotation, apprehends paintings as painted poems or tales. To describe such a type of painting, we nd in the period sources the term history (in Latin: historia; in Italian: storia). History was rst dened as a separate painting genre by Leon Battista Alberti in his 1435 tract On Painting. Starting from the principles of the ancient art of rhetoric, Alberti deemed history worthy of admiration and praise, if it succeeds in engaging the educated and unsophisticated viewer alike, evoking both sensory pleasure and emotional response. All of this is mediated by the rendered human gure, which captured in natural behaviour and motion grounded in observation of nature causes us to mourn with the mourners, laugh with the laughers and share the pain of those who suffer. When rendering hands in motion, the rest of the arms must be rendered in a manner that, in our subjective experience, naturally couples with such motion. Similarly, a group of gures engaged in some action is not composed additively, but subordinately, with each subject being connected to the unfolding scene in a different manner.
104 FACING THE PUBLIC

20 See Balbns statement about krta in the 3rd book of the 1st decade of Miscellanea of 1681, p.134: [] which Isay about him not only out of the friendship he so abundantly showed me when alive. See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 139. Cf. Lubomr Konen, Bohuslav Balbn aemblematika, in: idem, Mezi textem aobrazem. Miscellanea zhistorie emblematiky, Praha 2002, pp.4466, here p.53 (with areference to the literature); also Pavel Preiss, Patria mihi pro coelo est. Karel Maxmilin Laansk, k Bohuslava Balbna Nkolik poznmek ke kulturnmu prolu baroknho lechtice, in: idem, Koeny aletorosty vtvarn kultury baroka vechch, Praha 2008, pp.153175. 21 In the Latin original emblemata, here in translation emblematic sheets. Similarly, Joachim von Sandrart (Teutsche Academie der Bau, Bild und Mahlerey-Knste II, Nrnberg 1675, bk. 3, p.327) praises krtas die frnehmste Conclusiones und Emblemata. See Konen, Bohuslav Balbn aemblematika (see note 20), pp.5354. 22 Bohuslav Balbn, Rukov humanitnch discipln = Verisimilia humaniorum disciplinarum, ed. Olga Spevak, Praha 2006, pp.472475 (incl. the original Latin). Cf. Ji Kropek, Vtvarn umn uBohuslava Balbna, in: Z.PokornM.Svato (edd.), Bohuslav Balbn akultura (see note 14), pp.111121. 23 B.Balbn, Rukov (see note 22), pp.220223 (incl. Latin original). On the function of memory (ars memoriae) in literary, theatrical and ne art aesthetics from the Middle Ages to the 17th century, see Frances A.Yates, The Art of Memory, London 1972. 24 For abasic study on this topos in ne art, see Rensselaer W.Lee, Ut pictura poesis. The Humanistic Theory of Painting, New York 1967. 25 We also nd the term history (= historie) in Czech-language 17th-century sources. Cf. the decedents estate of Karel krtaJr. ( 1691), where it is used in the following ways: No. 65. model of ahistory; No. 98. model of an older history; No. 112. large portion of ahistory in which there are 5 persons and achild; No. 135. old painting, ahistory with many persons; No. 147. poetic history. See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 171. 26 Leon Battista Alberti, Das Standbild. Die Malkunst. Grundlagen der Malerei = De statua. De pictura. Elementa picturae, ed. Oskar BtschmannChristoph Schublin, Darmstadt 2000, pp.256264. For acomprehensive history of the historical painting genre, see Ekkehard Mai, Historia! Von der Figurenmalerei in Theorie und Praxis seit dem 16. Jahrhundert, in: Ekkehard MaiAnke Repp-Eckert (edd.), Triumph und Tod des Helden. Europische Historienmalerei von Rubens bis Manet, Milano 1987, pp.1529; see also the anthology of sources on this genre, Thomas W.GaehtgensUwe Fleckner (edd.), Historienmalerei, Berlin 1996 (Geschichte der klassischen Bildgattungen in Quellentexten und Kommentaren I). 27 Cf. L.B.Alberti, Das Standbild. Die Malkunst (see note 26), chap.40, p.264: Historia vero, quam meritis possis et laudare et admirari, eiusmodi erit quae illecebris quibusdam sese ita amenam et ornatam exhibeat, ut oculos docti atque indocti spectatoris diutius quadam cum voluptate et animi motu detineat. Similarly, Wolfgang Brassat, Das Historienbild im Zeitalter der Eloquenz. Von Raffael bis Le Brun, Berlin 2003 (Studien aus dem Warburg-Haus 6). 28 L.B.Alberti, Das Standbild. Die Malkunst (see note 26), chap.41, p.269: Fit namque natura, qua nihil sui similium rapacius inveniri potest, ut lugentibus conlugeamus, ridentibus adrideamus, dolentibus condoleamup. 29 Cf. Alois Riegel, Das Hollndische Gruppenportrt (Textband), Wien 1931, pp.722, also pp.209213. 30 Hubert Locher, Raffael und das Altarbild der Renaissance. Die Pala Baglioni als Kunstwerk im sakralen Kontext, Berlin 1994 (Acta humaniora. Schriften zur Kunstwissenschaft und Philosophie), esp.pp.104109. 31 For the most comprehensive treatment of this topic to date, see Wiebke Windorf, Sakrale Historienmalerei in St Peter in Rom. Faktizitt und Fiktionalitt in der Altarbildausstattung unter Papst UrbanVIII.(16231644), Regensburg 2006, esp.pp.5599 (the section Das Historienbild und Trient).

1. Karel krta, The Holy Family with St Anna, St Charles Borromeo and St Francis Seraphic, c. 1660, Hradec Krlov, Bishopric (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln)

The aesthetic conception of a narrative painting (history) as an ideal form for capturing dramatic events and human passions and emotions developed by Renaissance theoreticians and artists was rst applied to paintings with secular themes and, in churches, to wall paintings; after 1500, Raphael successfully translated the concept to the altarpiece. Inspired by his examples, 16th- and 17th-century artists cultivated the religious history (historia sacra) genre. For them, the multifariousness of Christian iconography combined with current developmental trends provided an ideal opportunity to advance their own creative inventiveness, compositional craft and virtuosity in gural painting. The attractiveness of this artistic task is in the high degree of such works accessibility: by displaying a painting
STUDIES 105

in a church, an artist could create a broader awareness of his work and in so doing reach new customers. Of course, benets also accrued to the Church in terms of its soul-saving efforts. If, according to Gabriel Paleotti, it was the primary objective of Christian paintings to bring people into the fold and deliver them to God, then the historiae sacrae depicting human action and spiritual affection performed this demanding task to a generous degree. The scope of this study does not provide for a detailed survey of this genres development; however, some typical examples, which were admired by generations of artists and became for them an endless source of inspiration, deserve to be mentioned. These are Raphaels monumental panel painting The Transguration of Christ (15181520, Pinacoteca Vaticana) and the canvas The Death of St Peter the Martyr, which Titian painted in 1530 for the Basilica di Santi Giovanni e Paolo in Venice, but was lost in the 19th century. In line with the requirements of this painting genre, however, the demands placed on painters grew, too. In order to accomplish the difficult task of reaching the educated and uneducated public alike, they had themselves to be possessed of sufficient education, be well read and study history. In matters of practical painterly skills, they were expected to employ artistic means ensuring the imprintability of a painting in the viewers mind. Balbns emphasis on observation of the concrete particularities, gesticulations and facial expressions of the gures depicted in paintings essentially formulates the criteria for a good painting: visual appeal, intelligibility and emotional urgency. krta applies these criteria, corresponding in principle to Neumanns characteristics of vivid narration and psychological incisiveness, with a marked intensity in his paintings. Let us begin with conventionally static devotional scenes (known as the sacra conversazione), such as the altarpiece The Holy Family with St Anna, St Charles Borromeo and St Francis Seraphic painted for the Church of Sts Peter and Paul On Po in Pragues New Town (g. 1). In his pyramidal grouping of ve gures around Jesus, the painter succeeds, through his skilfully composed hand gestures, turns of the head and directed looks, to portray relationships rich in expressive intensity. The rigorous subordination of the gures derives from the dramatic unfolding of the two saints adoration of the Divine Child. The Christ-child accepts their expressions of devotion, as evidenced in his benedictory gesture, but the rigid posture and facial expression respond with apparent misgiving and uncertainty to the odd behaviour of the two men. The Christ-childs fearfulness, the likes of which the painter had likely observed in the natural reaction of a child to an unfamiliar face, is mitigated by the comforting gestures of Maria and Anna. Josef remains off to the side, though his interest in the scene is clear from the pronounced turn of his head and rising posture, as indicated by the position of his hand resting atop the table. These are indeed episodic motifs with the strong psychological charge that runs through krtas work, drawing the viewer in. This same artistic approach to the material, contingent on an observers intellect incited during long and concentrated observation, is also evident in krtas cabinet painting The Virgin Mary Teaches the Christ-child to Read in the Presence of St Joseph and John the Baptist (g. 4), where the artist convincingly expresses the intense concentration of the child reading from the slate toward which his mother gestures with a pointer, as a curious St Joseph looks on. We see the same approach in the group Portrait of the Gem-Cutter Dionysius Miseroni and His Family (g. 2). The exceptional composition and spatial construction of this last painting are established by the diagonal leading from the upper left to the lower right corner in relation to which the gures of Dionysius youngest sons are uncompromisingly subordinated and proportionally reduced. Simply by rendering the portrait of the large family of the well-to-do burgher and successful artist/businessman, krta created a compelling scene in which the subtly ranged looks and gestures of all the portraits subjects evoke an atmosphere of familial comfort and solidarity, while, simultaneously, the material luxury stemming from the operation of the cutters factory (which we see in the upper right corner of the painting) is translated into a reciprocal communication with the use of various handicraft objects. Dionysius, as head of the family and operator of the family enterprise, naturally stands above in the complicated gural composition. Of the entire group, only the little daughter Kristina Jana Renata establishes eye contact with the viewer; her head rests in the palm of her fathers hand, her inquisitive look adding greater veracity and psychological cogency. The singular qualities of krtas treatment, which lay in how the artist constitutively connects all the family members to the scene, are thrown into even

32 G.Paleotti, Discorso intorno (see note 12), p.215: [] dicemo, che il ne di esse [= delle imagini cristiane] prencipale sar di persuadere le persone alla piet et ordinarle aDio; [] 33 Pierlugi De Vecchi, Raffael, Mnchen 2002, pp.333345; Rudolf PReimesberger, Tragische Motive in Raffaels Transguration, Zeitschrift fr Kunstgeschichte L, 1987, pp.89115. 34 Patricia Meilaman, Titian and the Altarpiece in Renaissance Venice, Cambridge 2000. 35 Evonne Levy, Ideal and Reality of the Learned Artist. The Schooling of Italian and Netherlandish Artists, in: Laurie Rubin (ed.), Children of Mercury. The Education of Artists in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, Providence 1984, pp.2027. 36 For adetailed treatment of the holy conversation (sacra conversazione) painting type, see Heidrun Stein-Kecks, Santa (sacra) Conversazione. Viele Bilder, ein Begriff und keine Denition, in: Karl MsenederGosbert Schssler (edd.), Bedeutung in den Bildern. Festschrift fr Jrg Traeger zum 60. Geburtstag, Regensburg 2002 (Regensburger Kulturleben I), pp.413442. 37 Martin Mdl, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), pp.238239, cat. no.V.19. 38 Marcela Vondrkov, in: ibid., pp.428429, cat. no.X.2. 39 Marcela Vondrkov, in: ibid., pp.290291, cat. no.VI.8.

2. Karel krta, Portrait of the Gem-Cutter Dionysius Miseroni and His Family, 1653, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague) 3. Tobias Pock, Self-Portrait with Family, 1669/1670, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

106 FACING THE PUBLIC

4. Karel krta, The Holy Family with St John the Baptist, 1650/1655, private collection (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln)

greater relief by a comparison with the typologically similar Self-Portrait of the Painter Tobias Pock with Family (g. 3). While here, too, we nd that individual gures possess attributes of professional activity and family solidarity (the painters tools are strewn across the table, Tobias himself holds a drawing in his hands, his youngest son Johann Jakob draws on a sheet of paper, the older Joseph Franz shows his masterly painting The Holy Family, Tobias wife holds a small dog and a rose as expressions of loyalty and love and some family portraits hang on the wall), there is a lack of any real contact among the gures. Despite the varied depictions of the gures and their faces, they are autonomous, additively arranged likenesses, together creating what is a minimally harmonious and visually attractive unit. St Charles Borromeo Visiting the Plague-Stricken, created for the main altar of the Church of the Virgin Mary and St Charles Borromeo at the Italian Hospital in Pragues Lesser Town (g. 5) is generally considered to be krtas most original work, and one in which the principles of narrative painting are rigorously applied. There is no question that in the artists entire body of work we will not nd a more strongly formulated demand that the viewer play a role in reading the depicted tale. The eccentric placement of the saint, rendered in prole commensurate with the direction of his entry into the hospital hall, prompts the observer not to apprehend him statically as a subject of devotion, which would be expected for an altarpiece, but rather in the context of the activities unfolding in his presence that he himself has instigated. The paintings narrative conception directly ensues from its wide format, providing a sufficient eld to vividly render the hospitals operation during the great epidemic of the plague in Milan in 15761577, when the cardinal distinguished himself through unstinting performance of his pastoral duties and Christs command to love one another. The painting, at a quick glance, captivates with its ingenious spatial construction and rigorous compositional arrangement (g. 6), all of which gains in intelligibility when we project onto the painting the orthogonal network that stems from the crossing of the two main axes (in red in the gure) and the vertical edge and corners of the room and of the architectonic retable, which intersect with the horizontals of the beds, the edge of the altar-mensa top and the framing of the altar edicule (in yellow). If the perpendiculars demarcate the space, then the horizontals serve to organise the large gural crowd into three depth elds the anterior, in which the saint meets with a group of unclothed men, the middle, comprising groups of women treating the ill and a benefactor pointing to
108 FACING THE PUBLIC

40 Anja Kerstin evk, in: ibid, pp.8283, cat. no.II.10. 41 Michal ronk, in: ibid, pp.214215, cat. no.V.5. 42 Michal ronk, Alena Volrbov, in: ibid, pp.216218, cat.no.V.6,V.7.,V.8.

5. Karel krta, St Charles Borromeo Visiting the Plague Sufferers, 1647, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

a dedication plate in the posterior eld, where a cross is placed on the altar top and below that an altarpiece depicting the saintesses in adoration of the grace-giving image of the Mother of God. The volume values of the depicted gures are fully realised owing to the stream of light that slantingly penetrates the space from the left; the genre grouping of nurses and their patients is accorded equal importance as that of the grouping of the saint and his companions. An interesting detail sure to rouse the viewers imagination is the sideways glance of the last man in the cardinals retinue. It is directed toward the poor wretch lying outside the pictorial scene, whose presence may be deduced from the unshod foot on the bed at the far right. The singularity of the design, which krta applied with a good dose of self-assurance by inserting his own likeness behind the back of his saintly namesake, is underlined by a comparison with two preparatory drawings and a smaller painting (modello), which perhaps also represents an alternative design for the same altarpiece (g. 7). The nal arrangement of the scene presenting the saint in a narrative hospital scene is entirely
STUDIES 109

6. Karel krta, A Compositional Arrangement of krtas Painting St Charles Borromeo Visiting the Plague-Stricken, 1647 (photo: National Gallery in Prague; graphic presentation by tpn Vcha) 7. Karel krta, St Charles Borromeo Treating the Plague-Stricken, 1647, private collection (photo: National Gallery in Prague) 8. Giovanni Battista Crespi, St Charles Borromeo Selling his Principality of Oria and Distributing Money to the Poor (detail), 1602, Milan, Cathedral (reproduced after: Marco Rosci, Il Cerano [Lopera completa], Milano 2000, pp. 100102, cat. no. 52)

distinct and derives from the concept of the history. What art models and literary material could krta have had at hand when he composed the painting? When the plague reached Milan in the summer of 1576, a city health commission (Tribunale della Sanit) was established. It stepped up hygienic precautions, set up a tent camp for the infected on the citys outskirts and a checkpoint for those wishing to enter the city. Although the Spanish Vice-Regent Marquis dAyamonte prohibited nobles in public service from leaving the city without special permission, the wealthiest Milanese, including magistrates, ed. The poor were left to their own fate in the collapsing city, while chaos and criminality reigned. In this most dire of situations, Charles Borromeo not only provided his own monies for the material needs of the ill and the poor, he also saw to their spiritual welfare. He emphatically challenged the ever more reluctant clergy to visit the sick and the dying and provided them with the example of his own actions. Three narrative scenes illustrating St Charles Borromeos uninching efforts during the plague epidemic became xed in the rich saints iconography, whose origins lay in a twenty-piece cycle of large canvases (the Quadroni) from a Milanese cathedral rendered by a team of painters under the stewardship of Giovanni Battista Crespi on the occasion of the saints 1602 beatication: Administering the Sacraments to the Plague Sufferers, Distributing His Clothing to the Plague-Stricken and Taking Part in the Penitential Process of the Holy Nail. The rst two charitable scenes unfold either in an open landscape dotted with tents and shelters or before the municipal hospital of St Gregory outside Milan. However, neither of these scenes corresponds to the situation that plays out in the Prague painting. In composing his hospital scene, krta apparently eschewed the established plague iconography of the Milanese archbishop with which he was familiar (compare the sketch from the National Gallery in Prague depicting the saint in a tent camp among plague victims), but formally referenced the depiction of the saint among a community of men on another of Crespis canvases from the same cycle St Charles Borromeo Selling his Principality of Oria and Distributing Money to the Poor (g. 8). However, the literary material behind krtas unique telling of the narrative likely came from the description of Charles heroic acts during the epidemic by Giovanni Pietro Giussano, the author of the saints official hagiography published in 1610, the year of his canonisation:
110 FACING THE PUBLIC

43 Fabiola Giancotti, Per ragioni di salute. San Carlo Borromeo nel quarto centenario della canonizzazione 16102010, Milano 2010, esp.pp.450460. 44 Anna Maria BrizioMarco Rosci, Iquadroni di San Carlo del Duomo di Milano: La Veneranda Fabbrica del Duomo di Milano nella ricorrenza del quarto centenario dellingresso in Milano dellArcivescovo Carlo Borromeo, Cardinale di Santa Prassede, Milano 1965. 45 Cf. Pamela M.Jones, San Carlo Borromeo and Plague Imagery in Milan and Rome, in: Gauvin Alexander BaileyPamela M.Jones (edd.), Hope and Healing.Painting in Italy in aTime of Plague (15001800), Chicago 2005, pp.6596, here pp.7479. 46 Marco Rosci, Il Cerano [Lopera completa], Milano 2000, pp.100102, cat. no. 52.

47 Giovanni Pietro Giussano, Vita di P.Carlo Borromeo prete cardinale del titolo di Santa Prassede Arcivescovo Milano, Roma 1610, (chap.Provede daiuti Spirituali a sequestrati per la quarantena, iquali visitava frequentemente), p.286: Havendo adunque questo Beato, et vigilante Pastore, ordinate tutte le cose nel modo descritto, acci che ognuno si contenesse in ufficio, e facesse la parte sua, e tutto il governo caminasse con ogni quiete, e con perfetta osservanza degli ordinati dati, egli stesso poi, come capo, e guida principale, usciva ogni giorno in visita, cosi della Citt, come delle Capanne, e Lazaretto [] La onde egli era sempre in continuo moto, non tanto il giorno, quanto ancora la notte, e ben spesso no asei, e setthore, per provedere amolte cose, che occorrenano. Le quali visite erano di massimo frutto, perche oltre che tenevano quieto tutto il Popolo [] Et era tale la sua carit, che non si guardava dentrare nelle case, e dentro le camere istesse, e Capanne infette di peste, per aiutare ipoveri infermi, e disporli amorir volentieri per amor di Dio; e f visto tal voltra entrar per le nestre, con le scale amano per visitare infermi, ove ritrovava impedito lingresso della porta; non potendo comportare, che ne anche una persona sola restasse priva daiuto, ne che unanima fosse in pericolo di perdersi. 48 M.ronk (see note 41), p.214. 49 Cf. Christine Gttler, Die Kunst des Fegefeuers nach der Reformation. Kirchliche Schenkungen, Abla und Almosen in Antwerpen und Bologna um 1600, Mainz 1996 (Berliner Schriften zur KunstVII), pp.2348. 50 Eduard Maur, Problmy demograck struktury ech vpolovin 17.stolet, esk asopis historickXIX, 1971, pp.830870, here p.859; Ludmila Fialov, Epidemie zaznamenan vmatrikch usv.Jindicha na Novm Mst Praskm vprvn polovin 17.stolet, in: Ji PeekVclav Ledvinka, Ponen aodstren. Msta versus poraen, Praha 1998 (Documenta pragensiaXVI), pp.227234, here p.228. Most recently, Karel ernJi M.Havlk, Jezuit amor, Praha 2008 (Kninice Djin asouasnostiXXXIV).

When this saint and attentive shepherd tended to all as described above, and everyone could go on about their own business and everything ran smoothly, peacefully and in accordance with the issued instructions, then he, the head and spiritual leader, visited the town, shacks and the hospitals daily He was constantly on the move, day and night, often until six or seven oclock, seeing to the many things that had occurred. His visits were very useful as they kept people at peace. Such was his love for his neighbour he never hesitated to enter houses, rooms and shacks befallen by the plague to help prepare poor sufferers for death by committing them to the love of God. He was often seen entering a house through a window by ladder, if he had found the door closed; he could not bear the idea of anyone going without aid or their soul being in danger of perdition. Consonant with Giussanos telling, we nd in krtas painting the Milanese archbishop as the organiser (spiritus rector) of charitable activities on one of his many visits to the citys hospitals, where he provides spiritual solace to the sick and the dying. As Michal ronk remarks in the new exhibition catalogue, the emphasis placed on the depiction of nursing activities and the hospital environment was undoubtedly linked to the artists intent to highlight the charitable mission of the Italian Hospital and bolster the representative role of the painting in depicting the members of the hospitals Board of Directors. In order to evaluate this thematic updating, emphasised by the presence of the man who commissioned the painting, Antonio Cassini de Bugella, we must be aware that the Italian Hospital represented one of the smaller institutions of its kind in Prague. It was established in the early 17th century, a time when Catholic reforms which, according to conciliar teachings on justication, placed a strong emphasis on charity and demanded that each person be involved in charitable actions, whether by distributing alms or personally serving the poor and the suffering were being introduced in Bohemia. The Italian Hospitals operation was funded by contributions from members of the Italian Marian congregation (founded in 1573) and alms collected from the citys inhabitants. After 1645, the expansion of the complex housing a church consecrated to the Virgin Mary and St Charles Borromeo and a three-wing hospital building enabled the hospital to provide a refuge for up to sixtythree individuals from among the poor, foundlings and orphans; however, this capacity was exceeded in times of crisis. In the rst half of the 17th century, when Prague was almost under constant assault by plague epidemics (1598, 1607, 1613, 16241625, 163335, 16391640, 16481649), the Italian Hospital also took in plague suffers (this is explicitly documented in the years 1639 and 1649) and members of the congregation brought home
STUDIES 111

orphaned children; when the Thirty Years War ended, the hospital also provided a haven for war invalids. To be able to imagine the setting for which krtas painting had been rendered, one must be familiar with the order of divine services in the hospital church. According to Tn Church Priest Johann Florian Hammerschmid, every morning at the main altar, a mass was held for the hospitals benefactors during which young inmates prayed the rosary for the imperial family; on the November 4th feast day of St Charles Borromeo, a saints handwritten brief was offered to be venerated by worshippers with the possibility of receiving indulgences; a forty-hour worship service was also held and, in addition to the private votive masses, four other masses were conducted. This continued for the entire octave that followed. These facts clearly indicate the possibilities for the public impact of krtas painting. In line with Balbns instructions, a viewer regularly taking part in church services would have been expected to engage in a close intellectual reading of the scene as a complex narrative. The illustrative rendering of charity and care for the material and spiritual welfare of the destitute not only drew the viewers attention, but also incited their engagement in the appropriate moral attitude as they sat listening to the homilies delivered in the hospital chapel. The inventive originality, multiple illusion of an image within an image, scenographicallycomposed scene ending with a backdrop in the form of an altar retable, theatrical staging of the actors of the narrative as if entering the proscenium from behind the wings at the sides; all of this attests to the deep theoretical knowledge behind the artists pictorial composition, perspective and narrative conception. Is there yet more evidence attesting to krta the educated painter? I shall attempt to answer this question in the next chapter. Universal Theoretician and Experienced Practitioner Although krta left behind no learned disquisitions on painting or other reections testifying to his theoretical foundation, there are available a number of statements made by contemporaries about him and his paintings. For our investigation, the soaring encomiums about the artist often found in church chronicles, annals and historiographic works: pictor primarius et celeberrimus Regni, pictor aetate nostra in Patria summus or insignis artifex are understandably irrelevant. Similarly inapposite are assessments of krtas paintings as picturae nobiles or imagines elegantes, even in cases where the writer used a more sophisticated phraseology such as simulacrum Apellea Scretae manu raro articio expictum. The nature of the written sources in which superlative, more or less stereotypical, pronouncements appear indicates that these are neither artistic critiques nor deeper reections on narrative depiction. Appraisals of this type offer no more than general characteristics concerning artistic appeal, while their informative value is compromised by the fact that similar sentiments were expressed about other far inferior artists. The more expert assessments of krtas art world colleagues, whose competence is cited by the painters close friend Bohuslav Balbn, undoubtedly carried much more weight. In the book Pepodiwn Matka Swato Horsk Marya (published in a Czech translation in 1666), he remarks that [] everybody praises him as an artist without reason and contend he has no equal in Bohemia who would be as capable as he of rendering any face of any man or image so well,. In connection with the Easter cycle paintings in the Lesser Town St Nicholas Church, Balbn writes in his Miscellanea (1681) that Paintings of equal beauty grace the St Nicholas Church in Prague, which is embellished with works from the rare brush and industry of Karel krta, our superb painter, which I say about him not only out of the friendship he so abundantly showed me when alive, but based also on the words of painters whom I often heard praise [him]. Even if we do not know which specic painters Balbn had in mind, one important written testimonial is extant. This is the curriculum vitae of Karel krta contained in the rst book in Sandrarts extensive three-volume compendium of ne art Teutsche Academie published in Nuremburg in 1675. Although not particularly detailed, krtas biography offers important information about the artists personal and professional life as well as providing an exceptionally erudite reection on his oeuvre. Even though Sandrart, as with other artists, probably obtained much of his information directly from the artist himself or a reliable communicant, the curriculum vitae is neither a supercial compilation skimming the surface
112 FACING THE PUBLIC

51 Peter RigettiJohann Christoph Pannisch, Historische Nachricht sowohl von der Errichtung der Wellischen Congregation unter dem Titel Mariae Himmelfahrt als auch des dazu gehrigen Hospitals B.V.Mariae Ad P.Carolum Borromaeum. Bey Gelegenheit dey feyerlichen Begngni des zweyten Jahrhunderts von Errichtung ermeldter Congregation, Prag 1773, pp.191192, also pp.201203. 52 Ibid, pp.193199. 53 Joannes Florianus Hammerschmid, Prodromus Gloriae Pragenae [], Pragae 1723, pp.495496; also Frantiek Ekert, Posvtn msta krl. hl. msta Prahy. Djiny apopsn chrm, kapl, posvtnch soch ijinch pomnk katolick vry anbonosti vhlavnm mst krlovstv eskhoI., Praha 1883, p.198. 54 See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 100. Cf. Josef Kopeek, Karel krta na Svat Hoe, Podbrdsko. Sbornk Sttnho okresnho archivu vPbramiIX, 2009, pp.164175, here p.165. 55 Bohuslaus Balbinus, Miscellanea Historica Bohemiae, DecadisI.LiberV., Pragae 1683, p.79. See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 140. 56 See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 88 [Prague, National Archives, Archive of Closed Monasteries, Annales Monasterii P.Wenceslai, f. 23i/r,v (entry for the years 16411644, recorded1659)]. 57 J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note 2), p.48. 58 See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 132 [National Library of the Czech Republic, Annuae litterae provinciae Boemiae Societatis Jesu 16711674, sign.XXIII C 105/8, f. 331r]. Also, Petra Oulkov, Poznmka kPaijovmu cyklu Karla krty, in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta a malstv 17. stolet v echch aEvrop, Praha 2011, s. 3947. 59 See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 127 [National Library of the Czech Republic, Annuae litterae provinciae Boemiae Societatis Jesu 16711674, sign.XXIII C 105/8, f. 166v]. 60 See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 103 [Bohuslav Balbn, Pepodiwn Matka Swato Horsk Marya, W Zzracch aMilostech swch na Hoe Swat nad Mstem Pjbrami Hor Stjbrnch den po dni wjc awjc se stkwgjc [], Litomyl 1666, p.26]. 61 Eadem imaginum gratia spectabilis est ecclesia S[ancti] Nicolai Domus Professae Pragensis, quae Caroli Scretae, eximii apud nos pictoris, pretioso penicillo, et laboribus illustratur; quod non amicitiae (quae mihi cum vivente intercessit maxima) tribuo, sed pictorum sententiis, quos saepius audivi laudantep;Bohuslaus Balbinus, LiberIII.DecadisI.Miscellaneorum Historicorum Regni Bohemiae, [], Pragae 1681, p.134. See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 139. 62 Cf. statement of Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der edlen Bau, Bild- und Malerei-Knste, Nrnberg 1675 (the entire work further presented as the abbreviated TA 1675 or TA 1679 [2nd volume]; the rst (Roman) numeral represents the volume and the second (Arabic) one the book within the volume), p.212: Ich bekenne zwar hierbey freywillig/ da ich/ wie gern ich mehrern und umstndigern Bericht von eines und andern Knstlers Stadt/ Geburtsund Ableibens-Zeit geben wollen/ dannoch/ nach angewandter groer Bemhung im Nachfragen und Schreiben/ ein mehrers nicht erhalten knnen.

63 Several indicia exist pointing to the fact that Sandrart and krta were personally acquainted. Ishall treat on the relationship between Sandrart and krta elsewhere. 64 Cf. Christian Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart. Kunstwerke und Lebenslauf, Berlin 1986 (Jahresgabe des Deutschen Vereines fr Kunstwissenschaft 1985/86), pp.3954. 65 TA 1675, II, bk. 3, p.327: [] zu der edlen Mahler-Kunst gezogen/ dern grndliche Regeln er/ vermg einer ihme angebornen Arbeitsamkeit/ wol ergriffen []. 66 Ibid: [] da er alles denkwrdige sich bstmglichst zu Nutzen machte/ und nicht allein einen schnen Kunst-Schatz samlete; sondern auch von diesem Reichtum den Kunstliebenden wieder allerhand schne Bilder und beliebige Historien mittheilte/ und dieselbe mit Ausbildung natrlicher Affecten/ wolgezeichneten Inventionen/ guter Manier/ knstlichen Erhebungen und herlichem Colorit/ zierte/ [] 67 Ibid: Von dannen begab er sich durch noch immeranreitzende KunstBegierde getrieben nach Bolognen und Florenz/ und mehrte auch auf diesen Kunst-Schulen merklich seine Wienschaft/ Anno 1634. kam er nach Rom/ und perfectionirte sich daselbst durch Aemsigkeit und Flei dergestalt/ da er sich reich genug schtzte/ wieder in sein Vatterland Prag zuruck zu kehren/ [] 68 [] melden wir nur/ da seine Werke meistens in groen Historien und Contraften bestanden/ so bey den hchsten Potentaten selbiger Landen in groen Ehren gehalten worden/ wie derselben sehr viele in Prag bey P.Nicolai/ auf der kleinen Seiten bey P.Thomas und P.Wenceslai: In der Neustadt bey P.Stephan/ in der Layenkirchen/ zu P.Martini/ Salvatoris, in der Jesuiten-Closter / desgleichen zu Knigssaler Closter/ in Plaer Closter/ zu Leit[m]eriz in der Bischofskirchen / zu P.Laurentii in Melnich und an andern mehr Orten zu sehen/ die alle gnugsame Zeugnus geben/ da unser Knstler nicht allein ein universaler Theoreticus, sondern auch ein wolerfahrner Practicus gewesen seye/ und der Natur in allem rhmlichst nachgefolget habe: [] 69 On Sandrarts art theory, see recently Michle-Caroline Heck, Thorie et pratique de la peinture. Sandrart et la Teutsche Academie, Paris 2006 (PassagenXV); Karl Mseneder, Ars doctaJoachim von Sandrarts Teutsche Academie, in: Hartmut Laufhtte (ed.), Knste und Natur in Diskursen der Frhen Neuzeit, Wiesbaden 2000 (Wolfenbtteler Arbeiten zur BarockforschungXXXV), pp.157213. 70 M.C. Heck, Thorie et pratique de la peinture (see note 69), pp.3646. On the ideal of an academic education in the 16th and 17th centuries, see Cynthia E.Roman, Academic Ideal of Art Education, in: L.Rubin (ed.), Children of Mercury (see note 35), pp.8195. 71 Cf. Hans Dickel, Deutsche Zeichenbcher des Barock. Eine Studie zur Geschichte der Knstlerausbildung, HildesheimZrichNew York 1987 (Studien zur Kunstgeschichte XLVIII), pp.158163; also Diane De Grazia, Drawings as Means to an End. Preparatory Methods in the Carracci School, in: Andrew Ladis (ed.), The Craft of Art. Originality and Industry in the Italian Renaissance and Baroque Workshop, Athens, Ga. 1995, pp.165186. 72 TA 1679, III, p.12; Cf. K. Mseneder, Ars doctaJoachim von Sandrarts Teutsche Academie (see note 69), pp.174175.

of the subjects biographical data nor a conventional appreciation. Sandrarts personal interest in krtas work is clear from the content and, as we will see, he coins his own terms (dened elsewhere in the book) in his evaluation of the painter. The text is clearly laudatory in spirit and, given the book came out a year after krtas death (about which the author writes in the conclusion of the curriculum vitae), it additionally serves as a ceremonial obituary. A feature of krtas artistic prole, as laid out in Teutsche Academie, that cannot be overlooked is his broad erudition and knowledge of the theoretical foundations of painting. The concept of the educated painter (pictor doctus), which Sandrart systematically constructs and illustrates using himself as an example in Teutsche Academie, is easily discerned in the description of Karel krtas early years. According to Sandrart, even when young krta was drawn to the noble art of painting, whose fundamental rules he thoroughly adopted owing to his inborn industriousness. In order to acquire greater knowledge (grere Wissenschaft), he set off for Italy, rst to Venice, where over the course of several years he developed as an artist by acquiring the experience that he later utilised when painting beautiful paintings and diverse histories, [which] he creatively adorned with natural emotions, superbly drawn creative inventions, a good stylistic manner, ingenious volume modelling and excellent colouration. The young artist, spurred on by artistic eagerness, then set out for Bologna and Florence, where he augmented his knowledge at their academies (Kunst-Schulen); his schooling culminated in Rome, whence he returned to Bohemia. The text does not enumerate specic krta works; Sandrart only mentions generally the painted histories and portraits: His work chiey comprises narrative histories and portraits, which are held in high esteem among the foremost nobles of this land and many of which may be found in Pragues St Nicholas Church, in the Lesser Town in the Churches of St Thomas and St Wenceslas; in the New Town in the Church of St Stephen, in the parish church of St Martin, in the Salvatore Church, in the Jesuit college, as well as in the Zbraslav monastery, Plasy monastery, in Litomice in the Bishops Church, in St Lawrence Church in Mlnk and many other places. All of these [works] are sufficient testimony to the fact that our painter was not only a universal theoretician, but also a highly experienced practitioner who, in everything he did, brilliantly emulated nature. This passage is signicant for several reasons. Primarily, it offers important information on the accessibility of krtas paintings, that is his narrative histories and portraits. While Sandrart glosses over their representation in the collections of Czech aristocrats by briey stating that the works are held in high esteem, there follows a long list of publicly accessible locations, i.e. churches and monasteries in Prague and elsewhere in Bohemia in which the artists paintings may be found. The latter, that is religious-themed paintings, are included in the category narrative histories (groe Historien). According to Sandrart, through these works one may gather a clear idea of krtas mastery, i.e. his theoretical knowledge and practical skills or his ability in everything brilliantly to emulate nature. What exactly do these characteristics of our painter harbour? Clearly, these are not randomly used words, but rather terms wholly specic in their content. Indeed, terms such as theory, practice and emulation of nature play a key role in Sandrarts conception of art as an activity both intellectual and noble. It must also be emphasised that in the interpretation of these terms, Sandrart in no way differs from his contemporaries; despite practical theses and illustrative instructions, his work remains, from the theoretical perspective, a compilation of the opinions of earlier authorities (primarily Giorgio Vasari, Karel van Mander, Federico Zuccari, as well as Leon Battista Alberti, Leonardo da Vinci and others) and in his summary he echoes the period ideal of the academicallyeducated artist. In this sense, the emphasis he places on the atelier method of drawing instruction and education is signicant. An understanding of the principles of ne art (theory) and their practical acquisition through diligent training (practice) may only be achieved at art academies, which Sandrart places in stark contrast to the painters workshops in which perfunctory and empirically-conducted instruction is provided unsupported by any systematic theoretical grounding. The basis of academic training is drawing the human gure, rst after good two-dimensional models (etchings and drawings), and then after paintings by the foremost artists and three-dimensional objects (ancient statues and casts) and nally after live models. Perfecting drawing technique requires especial diligence and
STUDIES 113

long years of training and practice in the copying and emulating of that which nature has produced. Only once the intellect is capable of devising imaginative concepts and the hand, after many years of effort in learning the art of drawing, ingeniously transfers them to paper, do both the painter and his art achieve discernible excellence. Although it may seem that the fundaments of the art of painting lay in atelier instruction, Sandrart recommends that the more advanced adept also go more often into society, where he may observe people of varied character. Here he follows their ways and behaviours while engaged in work, discussion or a trade, during quarrels and laughter, amid disputes and melees, and the gestures that each of these situations elicits in both those acting and those looking on. A central tenet of Sandrarts concept is the formulation of a relationship between depicted and visible fact, which as a key theme in early modern period art theory resists a simple denition owing to its marked ambiguity. Sandrart understands natrlichkeit, systematically translated in the Latin edition of Teutsche Academie of 1683 as imitatio naturae (thus an imitation of nature) in the much broader sense of the word naturalness, as may be understood from the abundant use of the evaluative adjective natrlich (naturalis) and from the overall contextualising of the term and this despite the fact that in several minor cases, indeed in the case of krtas curriculum vitae, Sandrart uses the paraphrase: der Natur in allem rhmlichst nachgefolget (Latin: naturam in omnibus secutus sit simplicissime), eliciting the notion of artistic creation in a purely mimetic role. Thus for Sandrart, the greatest quality an artwork can have is true and living naturalness. In his words: Only naturalness makes an artist great, excellent, famous and worthy of praise. A faithful imitation of nature, which in the advanced phase of the learning process represents the drawing of live models, will not suffice to achieve such mastery. This is only preparatory training, whose subsequent course should be directed toward a well developed, assured naturalness where the hand and mind become accustomed to extraordinary grace, vividness and lightness and the artist is able to create from memory, that is without a model, and naturally. His setting of the creative undertakings of an artist on a par with the fertile and ever resurgent power of nature is clearly seen in the advice that the painter not tie himself to any style or established custom, but, like nature itself, always change and give birth to something; even we ourselves should continually effect inner change and go from good to better. Of course, further requirements are the betting idealisation of artistic forms and grace (gratia) via which the artwork achieves loftiness and grandeur, as expressed in the formulation that just as nature itself rarely happens to attain the best, and only rarely achieves absolute perfection, so the artist must, when rendering beauty in all things, expend great effort, which for many remains unachievable, and who is capable of this or is possessed of such grace, let him consider it a gift from God for which he must offer thanks. Although what knowledge we have makes it difficult to draw any specic conclusions about the academic education krta may have received in Italy (no written documents exist; we know of virtually no drawing done after a model), Sandrarts professed ideal of the universally-educated artist (pictor doctus), applied to Karel krta, in no way contradicts what we know about the painter. krta came from a humanistically-oriented family and learned the basics of the art of painting presumably from the intellectuallyinclined Aegidius Sadeler; immediately after leaving Bohemia in 1627, he spent time in the scholarly circle of Basel-based theology professor Ludwig Luz and most likely sought out similar experiences during his Italian sojourn. According to the probate inventory of the painters son Karel the Younger, there was no lack of works of ancient classics, historical treatises and theoretical discourses on rhetoric (Nicolas Caussin, De eloquentia sacra et humana) and ne art (Ripas Iconologia, Vitruvius Ten Books on Architecture) in the family library. His extensive work as a thesis print inventor, which Sandrart also highly praises, further speaks to the idea of krta as artist-intellectual. The countless sketches, studies and painted modellos that krta created as precursors to his narrative pictorial compositions are key evidence of his academic foundation. Together this body of work provides eloquent testimony to his theoretical and practical mastery of the concept of the drawing (disegno), a universal means of expressing the artists imagination and creativity, likened to the creative power of God or nature. Sandrarts much emphasised naturalness, that is the ability by memory and imagination to capture any idea, gure or motif, is manifest in krtas sheet with six studies of Our Lady of the Sorrows (g. 9), in which the painter incrementally worked his way through to a nal
114 FACING THE PUBLIC

73 TA 1675, I, bk. 3, p.60: Was fr eine Hand zum Zeichnen erfordert werde. Es ist aber zu der Zeichnung vonnten/ da die Hand mit sonderbarem Flei und durch langwrige Ubung sich expedit, frtig und hurtig mache/ alles mit der Feder/ Griffel/ Kreide oder Kohle/ abzuzeichnen oder wol nachzubilden/ was die Natur hervor gebracht. Dann wann der Verstand seine wol-ausgesonnene Concepte heraus lsset/ und die Hand/ durch vieler Jahre langen Flei in zeichnen gebet/ solche nach der Vernunft zu Papier bringet/ so wird die vollkommene Vortrefflichkeit so wol des Meisters/ als der Kunst/ verspret. 74 Ibid: Nachdem man auch die Perspectiv wol begriffen/ und aller Dingen Gliedmaen und Leiber in sein Gedchtnus eingedrucket/ so kan der Mahler zum ftern unter die Leute Lustwandlen/ wo unterschiedliche Standspersonen anzutreffen und zu sehen sind. Da beobachte er dann ihre Art/ und Manier im arbeiten/ reden/ handlen/ zanken/ lachen/ streiten und schlagen/ was fr Gebrden sowol sie/ als die umstehende Zuseher/ fhren. 75 R.W.Lee, Ut pictura poesis (see note 24), pp.1127. 76 Joachim von Sandrart, Academia nobilissimae artis pictoriae, Noribergae 1683, p.323. 77 Similarly, Sandrart writes regarding the brothers van Eyck (TA1675, II, kn. 3, p.216) that the older Hubert in der Kunst den Zgen der Natur eiig nachgefolget; in the Latin translation (p.205) in arte nostra naturae sedulo secutus fuerat ductus. On Sandrarts use of the term Natrlichkeit, see Ch. Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart (see note 64), pp.4142; K.Mseneder, Ars doctaJoachim von Sandrarts Teutsche Academie (see note 69), esp.pp.172176; M.C.Heck, Thorie et pratique de la peinture (see note 69), pp.323333. 78 TA 1675, I, Foreword, p.2: Die Kstlichkeit einer Kunst-Sache/ wird nach der wahren lebhaften Natrlichkeit beurtheilet: Ich fue und grnde mich auch darauf/ da eine Sache um so viel kstlicher/ vollkommenund schner ist/ je mehr sie von der Natrlichkeit in sich hat. 79 TA 1675, I, bk. 3, p.61: Dann die Natrlichkeit/ macht den Knstler gro/ excellent, ruhmreich und gepriesen. 80 Ibid: Wann man nun/ in solchem nachzeichnen/ durch viele Ubung/ eine gute practic und Gewonheit/ auch sichere Hnde/ erworben/ mag man zur Abzeichnung der lebendigen Dinge schreiten/ und darinn mit msigem Flei und Aufsicht sich so lang ben/ bis man eine nach den Regeln wolgegrndete sichere Natrlichkeit erwerbe. [] Solche Dinge/ die der Natur zum hnlichsten/ knnen dem durch langen Flei abgematteten Knstler/ seine Mhwaltung/ mit Ehre und Gewinn wieder vergelten/ als wordurch Hand und Verstand zu einer sonderbaren gratia, Lebhaftigkeit und Leichte angewhnet wird. 81 Ibid: [] damit er solche/ auch ohne Idea und Exemplar/ natrlich zu gestalten wisse. Cf. similar requirement placed on the artist by Vasari; see C.E.Roman, Academic Ideal of Art Education, (see note 70), p.84. 82 TA 1675, I, bk. 3, p.102: Man soll sich an keine Manier/ Gewonheit oder angenommenen Gebrauch binden/ sondern wie die Natur immer alles verndert und anderst gebieret/ also sollen wir immerzu in allem uns verndern und von dem guten zum bssern wenden. Cf. K.Mseneder, Ars doctaJoachim von Sandrarts Teutsche Academie (see note69), pp.172173. 83 TA 1679, III, p.13: Also bleibet nun wahr/ und fest/ da/ gleich wie der Natur selbsten schwer fllet/ auf das Hchste zu kommen/ und sie selten die usserste Vollkommenheit gebiert/ also auch dem Knstler/ das Allerschnste in allen Dingen zu bilden/ die meiste Mhe mache/ ja bey vielen unmglich sey; und wer solches vermag/ oder diese Gnade hat/ es billig fr eine Gabe Gottes/ und Verpichtung des Danckens/ erkennen mge. 84 Rare documentation is Bust of ayouth extant in agraphic rendering by Vclav Hollar, and asheet with records of gural motifs based on paintings most likely acquired during his Italian sojourn. See Alena Volrbov, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), p.60, cat. no.I.14; resp.Pavel Preiss, Marginalia on krtas drawing oeuvre, in: Z.PokornM.Svato (edd.), Bohuslav Balbn akultura (see note 14), pp.130135, here p.131, g.1. 85 See the study by Sylva Dobalov and Lubomr Konen in this book. 86 Sylva DobalovLubomr Konen, Karel krta aumlci praskho rudolfnskho dvora, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), pp.2729, here p.28. 87 See the study by Lenka Stolrov and Petr Pibyl in this book. 88 krtas contact with the Accademie degli Incogniti association of painters and poets during his stay in Venice is assumed by Petr Pibyl, Karel krta aItlie, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), pp.95103, here p.97. 89 Cf. the sub-section The Karel krta Family Library, ibid, pp.557575. 90 Cf. the sub-section Karel krta and His Contemporaries as Designers of Prints, Ibid, pp.367419. 91 Cf. P.Preiss, Marginlie (see note 84); idem, Betrachtungen zu Karel krtas zeichnerischer Eigenart, BarockberichteXXXI, 2001

9. Karel krta, Six Sketches for Our Lady of the Sorrows, 1644, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

92

93

94 95

(Ehrenheft Franz Wagner zum 70. Geburtstag), pp.4252. See also the chapter by Alena Volrbov in this book, pp. 151155. On the term disegno, see Wolfgang Kemp, Disegno. Beitrge zur Geschichte des Begriffs zwischen 1547 und 1607, Marburger Jahrbuch fr KunstwissenschaftXIX, 1974, pp.219240; Sergio Rossi, Idea e accademia. Studio sulle teorie artistiche di Federico Zuccaro. I.Disegno interno e esterno, Storia dellarte XX, 1974, pp.3756. Sylva Dobalov, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), p.212, cat. no.V.3; P.Preiss, Marginlie (see note 84), pp.131132. Cf. J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note 2), pp.219220, cat.no.150, g. 174. D.De Grazia, Drawings as Means to an End (see note 71), pp.166167.

conception of the gure for the large altarpiece The Crucixion for the St Barbara chapel of the Church of St Nicholas in Pragues Lesser Town. krta understandably did not use a live model; all the versions were born of his imagination. The Berlin drawing with eight versions of the reaction of the Virgin Mary to the Angel of Annunciation represents another such example. These and numerous other drawings clearly point to an acquired methodological approach to painting preparation, indeed to the approach of an academically-trained artist. This approach included a clarication of the overall composition and patterns of light and shadow, and an elaboration of the poses of the individual gures in a number of separate sketches; special attention was devoted to key details, most importantly hand gestures. It must, of course, be said that even though krta, as an experienced portrait
STUDIES 115

artist, will have been no stranger to drawing from live models, no nude studies are extant. Let us return, however, to krtas paintings, specically his narrative histories, found in Prague churches and elsewhere in Bohemia, which were the reason for Sandrarts high praise for the artist. The attribute narrative (verbatim in German, gro, i.e. great or large) does not chiey pertain to the dimensions or format of the painting, but rather to the number of gures in the rendered scene. When in his general treatise on painting, Sandrart interprets invention (Erndung) and drawing as the main requirements, he also states that: From the above described exercise [in drawing] human bodies comes the invention or ingenuity that determines how to incorporate into narrative histories four, eight, ten, fteen, twenty and more gures or an entire army during skirmishes or on the battleeld. Sandrart then goes on to clarify the history genre (Geschicht-Mahlerey): A history should be lled with all manner of things, though each [of them] should serve the intended purpose. The rank, role and behaviour, senescence and youthfulness of the protagonists must be mirrored in their faces, gestures and general appearance. Thus, when capturing women or youths, it is necessary to render the face somewhat more daintily and nely than for men; older individuals must be rendered with upright and self-possessed gestures, especially if they are members of the clergy or highly-placed individuals. Care must also be taken to ensure that each thing resonates with the work as a whole and that this pictorial harmony may be felt at rst glance. A erce woman should be rendered with deance and a goddess of love with gentleness, so that all may recognize the artists intention without additional explanation. Figures who are meant to look very petulant or savage, must be rendered as looking brazen. Others depicted in the background should be rendered casually in gradually darkening and fading colours. Other criteria apply. A sign of mastery is the rendering of overlapping human gures, some of which are only partly visible in the scene or become less visible and are lost in the scumbling. Emphasis is placed on perspective: the properly painted thing must be proportionally rendered in space; all the architectonic details should be conceived ponderously and cleanly and soothe the eye, and the colour perspective should resonate with the overall spatial composition. In a special chapter, Sandrart discourses on the principles to be respected when painting histories. The rst step is to become familiar with the historys literary model; a reading of various authors who have taken different approaches to the material contributes to the proliferation of ideas (zur Mehrung der Gedanken). Once the painter has arrived at a general conception, he may commence to prepare the sketches. The nal form, including the colour schema, is presented as a painted model to be approved by the commissioner. While creating a painting, the artist should avoid empty corners, while ensuring at the same time they are not overlled; there must be a background vista. If the horizon is set low, then the artist himself (and not his assistants) must with great care paint the landscape, architecture and clouds. The scene must have a sufficient number of active gures concentrated wherever the main plot is unfolding. For greater clarity, the key actors should be emphasised with light effects. The paintings excellence should be increased by suitable concomitant devices that engage the beholder through decorativeness or unusualness (gute Beyfgungen/ und der Materie anstndige fremde Ersinnungen), tting poses and expressions of mental affect; the gures should be rendered in prole, in partial cover, standing, sitting, lying and kneeling, partially or fully clad, all mutually intermingled. And all the foregoing shall be executed in suitable proportion and degree. Although it is desirable for all available artistic means to be employed, they must ultimately serve in the telling of the rendered tale. In order to understand the signicance Sandrart attributed to the history painting genre, it behoves us to look at his description of Raphaels genius, which as Karl Mseneder noted is not a mere summary of others opinions, but the writers own assessment, reecting his personal taste and the aesthetic sentiments of the time. Sandrart writes of Raphael as a universal, accomplished, uncommon and experienced painter because he excelled in invention and histories, which he composed in a lucid and none too dull manner, in making all kinds of decorative tries embellishing his paintings considerably and pleasing the viewer. He was also a master at making his models charming he knew how to furnish women, children, the young and the old not only with enchanting accessories, clothes, hair trimmings and other things, but also how to depict natural movements betting every situation in such a wonderful way that it could be done no better stampeding horses, the
116 FACING THE PUBLIC

96 In this respect, an exception is formed by the carefully rendered drawing Portrait of ayoung man. See Marcela Vondrkov, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), p.354, cat. no.VIII.11. 97 TA 1675, I, bk. 3, p.62: Von der Invention, worinn sie bestehe: Aus besagter Ubung an natrlichen Leibern/ entspringet die invention oder Erndung/ welche anordnet/ wie man in groen Historien vier/ acht/ zehen/ fnfzehen/ zwanzig und mehr Figuren/ oder ganze Heere in Bataglien und Feldschlachten/ stellen solle. 98 Ibid: Geschicht-Mahlerey/ und was bey den Figuren zu beobachten: Eine Historie soll erfllet seyn mit vielen unterschiedlichen Dingen/ doch da jedes auf den vorgesetzten Zweck ziele. Es mus auch der Figuren Amt/ Dienst und Verrichtung/ Jugend und Alter/ aus dem Gesicht/ Gebrden und Area zu spren seyn. Dahero an einem Frauenbilde/ wie auch an einem Jngling/ das Gesicht etwas lieblicher und zrter/ als an Mnnern/ zu bilden: die Alten/ men mit sittsamen und bedachtsamen Gebrden/ absonderlich so sie geistliche oder hohe Stands-Personen praesentiren/ gestaltet werden. Man hat auch allezeit zu beobachten/ damit jedes Ding mit dem ganzen Werk einstimme/ und also/ gleich in erster anschauung des Gemhls/ eine Harmonie zu spren sey. Trotzig soll eine Furie, und freundlich eine Liebes-Gttin/ gebildet werden: damit man des Mahlers intention oder vorhaben/ ohn Beyfgung einer Erklrung/ erkennen mge. Die Bilder/ so ernsthaft/ zornig und wild erscheinen sollen/ men eine freche Gestalt bekommen. Andere/ die man in die ferne ordnet/ men als chtig/ mit allgemach-dunklen und abnehmenden Farben beygebracht werden. 99 Ibid: Verlierung der hinter einander stehenden Bilder: In diesem aber bestehet hierbey die meiste Meisterheit/ da sie die nackende Bilder lebhaft und natrlich treffen/ ingleichen hinter einander also eintheilen/ und nach und nach zu- oder abnehmen machen/ da sie zum theil herfr kommen/ die andere aber/ der Ordnung nach/ durch brechung der Farben/ nach der Kunst sich verlieren und entweichen. 100 Ibid: Die Perspectiv mus wol beobachtet werden: Es mus aber allhier/ wie in allem/ die Perspectiv knstlich beobachtet werden: da nmlich erstens das vorgenommene Stuck/ nach proportion des Orts und der Regeln/ sich entweder ordentlich verliere/ oder sich herfr thue und ergrere; Ferner da alles/ nach Ordnung des Gebues/ der Zimmer und Seulen/ klglich und sauber eingerichtet/ lieblich in die Augen falle; und endlich/da/ gleichwie das perspectivische Gebu selber/ also auch die Hhe und Helle/ Gnze oder Hrte der Farben/ wie oben gedacht/ sich gemchlich verliere. Und aus solcher guten Eintheilung/ wird des Knstlers Verstand geprfet. 101 TA 1675, I, bk. 3, pp.7980. See also, M.C.Heck, Thorie et pratique de la peinture (see note 69), pp.243255. 102 K.Mseneder, Ars doctaJoachim von Sandrarts Teutsche Academie (see note 69), pp.170171.

103 TA 1675, II, bk. 2, pp.9798: [] als nmlich in invention und Zusammenfgung der Historien/ welche er nicht allzu confus, auch nicht allzu arm ordiniret/ ferner in Ausbildung allerhand zierlicher NebenSachen/ womit er seine Gemlde sehr bereichert/ und die Anschauer belustiget hat. So war er auch der frtreichste Meister in holdseligen Gesichtern; Frauen/ Kindern/ Jungen und Alten wuste er nicht allein zierliche Ausstze/ Kleidungen/ Haar-Zierrathen und anders zuzuordnen/ sondern auch natrliche/ und jedes seiner condition gleichfrmige Bewegungen anzubilden/ da man sie unmglich schner machen konte: Das iehen der Pferde/ die Grausamkeit der Soldaten/ artliche Landschaften/ erschreckliche Gewitter/ schne prospective, zierliche Gebude/ Poetische Fabeln und anders wuste er sowol zu mahlen/ da man/ kurtz zu reden/ wol von ihme aussagen mag/ er seye ein universaler, vollkommener/ ungemeiner und erfahrner Mahler gewesen. 104 TA 1675, I, bk. 3, p.79. Cf. Christian Klemm, Pfade durch Sandrarts Teutsche Academie, in: Teutsche Academie der Bau, Bild und Mahlerey-Knste. Nrnberg 16751680. In ursprnglicher Form neu gedruckt mit einer Einleitung von Christian Klemm, Nrdlingen 1994, pp.932, here p.17. 105 TA 1675, (Sandrarts biography), p.20. See also, Michle-Caroline Heck, Dune cole de peinture une acadmie de papier. Les retables de lglise de Lambach, in: Sybille Ebert-SchiffererCecilia Mazzetti di Pietralata (edd.), Joachim von Sandrart. Ein europischer Knstler und Theoretiker zwischen Italien und Deutschland, Mnchen 2009 (Rmische Studien der Bibliotheca HertzianaXXV, Rom und der Norden III), pp.8595; also Ch.Klemm, Joachim von Sandrart (see note 64), pp.232251, cat.no.117123. 106 Cornelis De Bie, Het Gulden Cabinet vande edel vry Schilder Const, inhovdende den lof vande vermarste Schilders, Architecters [], Antwerpen 1661, p.251. Iprovide the full wording of the biography in the English translation, which Idid together with Dr. Jakobijn Kiel: [] Karel krta lived in Italy with Willem Brouwer, in Rome he aquired the surname Slach-sweert in the painters society. He is very good at painting compositions, portraits, both large and small, his art is in demand by all the domestic aristocrats and highly prized. He presently lives in Prague, where he is widely known and continues to produce his paintings. 107 Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), pp.262265, cat. no.V.33 (modello), cat.no.V.34 (painting).

cruelty of soldiers, neat landscapes, awesome storms, beautiful vistas, pleasing architecture, poetic fables and others [] These observed qualities of Raphaels compositions facilitate an understanding of Sandrarts high esteem for works of historical narrative by the great Venetian masters Titian, Veronese and the masterful Tintoretto, as does the encomium he painted seven altarpieces in the monastery church in Lambach, which he does not hesitate to designate as an excellent school in the art of painting in its entirety (eine vollkommene Schule der ganzen Mahlerey Kunst), and nally his praise of krtas altarpieces. It is worth noting as an aside the similar striking evaluation of krta in an otherwise brief biography of the artist in the book Het gulden Cabinet (1661) by the Flemish scholar Cornelis de Bie, who writes that Karel krta is a very good painter of compositions [= ordonnantien] and portraits, both great and small,[] Let us focus now on several superb examples of krtas narrative histories that afford us a sufficiently representative sample through which to treat all of Sandrarts stated criteria. One work that naturally belongs here is the aforementioned painting St Charles Borromeo Visiting the Plague Sufferers, which employs pure spatial forms and abundant gural staffage. A no less excellent example is the monumental canvas The Stoning of St Stephen ordered by the bishop Maxmilin Rudolf of lejnice for the main altar of the newly constructed St Stephen Cathedral in Litomice (in German, Leitmeritz) in the North-Western Bohemia (g. 10). In rendering the death of the martyr, krta apparently invoked the received iconographic tradition employed by leading artists of the Italian Cinquecento (namely Giulio Romano, Giorgio Vasari and Lodovico Cigoli) based on the rendering found in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 7:5560); on the other hand, it is a wholly original interpretation of the theme incorporating a number of remarkable details that bespeak a singular ability to create a narrative scene and use special means to underline the dramatic impression of the event. Even a cursory glance makes clear that the Litomice painting perfectly exemplies the history genre. The low landscape horizon affords a view to the suburban landscape. To the left, we see the silhouette of a fortication; the right edge is bordered by a superb specimen of classical architecture (clearly, the Damascus Gate, where the martyrdom occurred) and at a distance great trees are accentuated against the heavenly skies. Of particular signicance is the light coming from above, adding to the three-dimensional modellation of the gures and dramatization of the scene. The large gures of the players in the drama are placed in the pictorial foreground, hence closest to the viewer. In the richness of their forms and diversity of their movements, the men who surround the kneeling Stephen on all sides amply full the requirement of varietas in rendering the doings and dispositions of the human gures. The idea of a physically mismatched tussle is expressed in the powerless gesture of the martyrs extended arms and the stressing of the physical dimensions of his persecutors, their fury amplied by their motions and expressions. While a goon, naked from the waist up and bent double, gathers stones on the left, his nearest compeer in a tattered shirt raises his hand to cast a stone; to underline the brutality of the anticipated attack, the gure at left grasps the saints shoulders. Both have visual counterparts in two gures whose mirroring of their movements magnies the scenes dramatic effect. One of the men also bends over, but in contrast we are given to see the fury on his face, and his torso is clad in a blue tunic and cloak; to his right is a giant whose unclothed back is to the viewer, one hand holding a stone is lowered and the other is raised, so as easily to surmise the gures range of motion, which is echoed in the movement of the gure behind him and to his right, captured in prole with a white kerchief on his head. With more concentrated observation of the scene, we notice the large number of supernumeraries ranged into several distinct groups. At far right, together with the repoussoir gure of Saul, who, in Lukes telling, watched over the murderers clothing for them and approved Stephens death (Acts 7:58 and Acts 8:1), is a group of onlookers comprising both the curious, atop a rock, and the Roman Guard watching the gate, specically a soldier, his back turned, carrying a banner bearing the coat of arms of the Bishop of lejnice (who had commissioned the painting), and a second armed man, his face averted, likely as an expression of his disapproval of the lynching. The role of curious observer here further exciting the viewers curiosity by virtue of his uncommonness is played by the Moor
STUDIES 117

depicted at the far right whose presence does not constitute a purposeless and untting exoticism, as might seem to be the case at rst glance. In accordance with the text of the eighth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles that immediately follows the depiction of the Stoning of Stephen, this gure is an Ethiopian courtier baptized by the Apostle Philip en route to Gaza about whom the text says he had come to Jerusalem for to worship (Acts 8:27). The caricatured gures of the Jews in the background of the martyrdom scene play a different role. Their horrible faces and hand-covered ears eloquently express their unwillingness to listen to the words of Stephen about the history of Redemption delivered before the Jewish council (Acts 7:253), at which they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth (Acts 7:54). For one of the Jews, clad in a white robe, Stephens words are ultimately so unbearable that he stops his ears and turns away. The background grouping on the far left now difficult to make out comprises Christians. Specically, there is a girl who looks back over her shoulder as she wipes away tears, and then a mother and child, likely referencing Stephens diaconal vocation, which included the duty to care for unprovided-for women and orphans. The partially-rendered leg eeing at the far left evokes the persecution of the Christians in Jerusalem that occurred after Stephens death (Acts 8:13). Also vital to the scene is the large gure of the angel in the paintings upper half, in one hand carrying the palm of martyrdom and in the other the laurel wreath of eternal glory. It is a part of Stephens vision of the heavens opening and his seeing the Son of man standing at the right hand of God (Acts 7:5556). The pair of heavenly persons is captured in the upper lunette of the canvas. A glance at the beaming faces of the angel and the protomartyr may also evoke Stephens transgured appearance during his speech before the council: [They] saw his face as if it had been the face of an angel (Acts 6:15). krtas extraordinarily developed ability to transpose literary subject matter into a complex visual whole may also be admired in his decidedly non-dramatic religiously-themed scenes which, in their static nature, more closely approximate devotional paintings. One such example is the altarpiece St Thomas of Villanova Distributing Alms to the Poor in the Church of St Thomas at the Augustinian Hermits Monastery in Pragues Lesser Town (g. 11). We may infer from brief extant reports that the Monastery commissioned the painting sometime in the years 16701671 with the clear aim of spreading the cult of the orders saint (who was canonized in 1658). The painting was highly valued, as documented by the unsuccessful negotiations of a certain mid18th-century buyer to purchase the painting for the exorbitant sum of 5,000 guldens and replace it with a copy. The darkened parts of this otherwise richly-detailed multi-gure scene have become difficult to discern due to the base of thinly applied colour layers that now shows through. St Thomas of Villanova, born Thomas Garcia (14881555), also the Archbishop of Valencia, celebrated for his exemplary care of the poor and needy, took in unprovided-for and abandoned children and orphans. The acts of grace and of love for ones fellow man performed by this Father of the Poor or Holy Almsgiver are documented in detail in the four chapters of the hagiography compiled by the Augustinian Nicasius Baxius. His boundless municence is characterized thus: As [St Thomas of Villanova] donated so much in currency and alms to the hungry, the impecunious, the down-trodden, impoverished nobles, virtuous women, clergy, maidens and widows, orphans, foundlings, plebs, it seemed, when he summed up his income in the annual accounting, to have come from God and was greater than any human fortune. Working from Baxius or similar descriptions, and perhaps, too, in direct connection with the saints iconography, krta depicted the Almsgiver in a monks habit, an archbishops pallium on his chest, in the act of giving coins to an elderly man. The scene unfolds on the stairs leading to the archbishops residence amid a large group of supernumeraries. The saint in the centre is anked on both sides by ocks of supplicants; his retinue stands at the rear left by the palace entrance. As we have seen in earlier instances, while there is a multiplicity of character types engaged in various activities, all the actors cohere around the saint, the prime mover of all that is going on in the scene. Even the two angels in ight at the upper left toss coins onto the tray held by the man standing just in front of the saint and, in the right throughview, we nd on the balustraded balcony servants carrying dried sh on tenters and still others with bundles of clothing. In contrast to the Litomice painting, in the Lesser Town painting the viewer immediately grasps the identity of the title gure, whose silhouette is accentuated against a neutral
118 FACING THE PUBLIC

108 J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note 2), pp.130131, cat. no. 40; J.Neumann, MalstvXVII.stolet (see note 17), p.56, p.84. 109 See Edition of historical sources in this book, documents no.125 and 126. 110 Stated by Bohumil Matjka, Pestavba avzdoba chrmu sv.Tome pi kltee poustevnk du sv.Augustina na Menm Mst Praskm, Pamtky archaeologick amstopisnXVII, 1896, pp.81152, here p.122, with reference to acurrently unaccountedfor source. 111 Nicasius Baxius, Sanctus Thomas aVillanova, Cognomento Eleemosynarius, ArchiEpiscopus Ecclesiastes Imp.CaroliV.aSanctissimo Papa Nostro AlexandroVII.Anno M.DC.LVIII.in Festo Omnium Sanctorum Fastis eorundem adscriptus, Monachii 1659, pp.90120 (CaputXX.Sanctus Thomas verus pater pauperum ac egenorum, quibus admiranda subvenit charitate; CaputXXI.Magna pietate, et benevolentia recipit infantes expositios, eisdemque alimenta iubet dari; CaputXXII.Aliquot miracula, que Antistes, inter eleemosynas dandum, fecit; CaputXXIII.Nudos vestit, et pietatis administras sartrices excitat). 112 Ibid, pp.103104: Tantum enim depluebat nummorum, et munerum in famelicos, inopes, afflictos, nobiles attenuatos, matronas honestas, sacerdotes, virgines viduas, pupillos, expositios partus, vulgusque promiscuum egens, ut ineunti rationem annui eius proventus, divinum quiddam, ac ope maius humana videatur. 113 On the iconography of St Thomas of Villanova in the role of Almsgiver with amention of the works of Bartolom Esteban Murillo, Francisco de Zurbarn etc., which arose after his canonisation, see Antonio Iturbe Siz, Iconograa de Santo Toms de Villanueva, in: Conmemoracin del 450 aniversario de la muerte de Santo Toms de Villanueva, Valencia 2008, pp.213270, here pp.248249.

10. Karel krta, The Stoning of St Stephen, 1669, Litomice, Cathedral of St Stephen (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln)

114 We often nd krtas paintings exerting this effect. Arandom sampling includes St Martin Sharing his Cloak with aBeggar, The Death of Drahomra, Annunciation of the Virgin Mary from Church of Our Lady before Tn or Test of the Chastity of the Vestal Virgin Tuccia. 115 Cf. Christine Gttler, Actio in Peter Paul Rubens Hochaltarbildern fr die Jesuitenkirche in Antwerpen, in: Joseph Imorde (ed.), Barocke Inszenierung. Akten des Internationalen Forschungscolloquiums an der Technischen Universitt Berlin, 20.22.Juni 1996, Emsdetten 1999, pp.1031, here pp.1416. 116 Cf. Francesco Mozzeti, Educare per immagini. Gesti di carit e attivismo caritatevole, Venezia CinquecentoVIII, 1998, pp.5380, esp.pp.7577. 117 Cf. TA 1675, I, bk. 3, pp.6869. This gural type has its origins in one of the nude gures in Michelangelos Battle at Cascina (15041506). See Rudolf Kuhn, Der Aufbruch zur Schlacht von Cascina. Ein Grndungswerk der klassischen, monumentalen, vielgurigen Breitkomposition nach Komplexen, in: Friedrich PielJrg Traeger (edd.), Festschrift Wolfgang Braunfels, Tbingen 1977, pp.215222. 118 Recently, Petr Skalick, Vera effigies sv.Vclava znkdejho kostela sv.Vclava na Mal Stran vPraze, Umn LVI, 2008, pp.437446. 119 On the Zderaz cycle, see the section The St Wenceslas Cycle and Other Paintings for the Zderaz Monastery in the exhibition catalogue Karel krta (see note 1), pp.156203; also J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note 2), pp.6585, cat. no. 18. 120 Prague, National Archives (henceforth NA), Archive of Abolished Monasteries (henceforth AZK), Liber primus Annalium Nostri Excalceato-Augustiniani Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, [] AFratre Severino aSancta Anna Ordinis Eremit. Fratrum Discal. Sancti P.N.Augustini Sacerdote Professo (issued c. 1749), inv. no. 2451, manuscript 10 (formerly 3480 a), fol. 84 (record to 1628): Nec templum jam asqualore liberum suo congruo ornatu caruit: Vita Sancti Patris Augustini in viginti novem Tabulis eleganter conspicua, et circumquaque ad parietes pensilis non modice decus ecclesiae, et pietatem delibus conciliavit, et hucusque conciliat.

background represented by the smooth-surfaced pilaster of the palace architecture. The dominant position of St Thomas within the greater group arises from his placement on the elevated stairway landing, which also serves subtly to contrive his insertion into the centre of the composition. Typologically, the manner in which its theme is rendered ranks krtas painting as a contemplative history in which the telling (historia) is joined with a conventional depiction of the saint and his personal attributes (imago). In this sense, the genre treatment of the group of paupers in ttingly ragged clothing, with bare feet or sunken faces and toothless mouths, serves not only to illustrate the tale, but in conjunction with the young woman standing at left holding a child in her arms an allegorical rendering of love for ones fellow man (Charitas) achieves a greater moral signicance and indirectly prompts the viewer to contemplate the practice of charity as an essential expression of Christian virtue. krta used two anecdotal motifs to heighten the appeal of his scene. One is the dog in the lower right corner whose general posture expresses absorption in the goings-on. The raised head, forward-tilted body and tension in the legs together with the tautness of the leash held by its owner, not pictured in the scene, concisely express the dogs eagerness to come as close as possible to the saint. No less engaging of the viewers eye is the youth who sits on the ground just beside the dog and pulls on his stockings. This motif, much more visible in the preparatory drawing for the canvas (g. 12), suprisingly corresponds with the depiction of the naked man (Strumpfanzieher) in Teutsche Academie (g. 13). With the gure pulling on his stockings in haste and with full force, Sandrart demonstrated the artists ability to render human limbs even in a foreshortened perspective. Readers of the paintings We have thus far looked at krtas work from the perspective of the scholar and the educated artist. Our starting point was Balbns instructions for reading paintings and contemporary theoretical discourse on painting as transmitted through the writings of another contemporary painter, Joachim von Sandrart. The relevance of these accounts is underlined by the fact that both men knew krta and his paintings personally. The two men represent a narrowly-cultured tier of society, which was able duly to appreciate the artists quality and craft. However, there is nothing there to speak to the broadest part of krtas public; that is, the regular church and monastery visitors whether educated or uneducated, rich or poor who came into daily contact with his paintings. Is it at all possible to say more about their attitudes, if we lack any direct accounts? In the case of Karel krta, such a possibility is afforded by the annals of the Augustinian Zderaz Monastery in the New Town of Prague, which richly document the painters activities from his early days in Prague in the 1640s. Reformed Augustinian Eremites rst came to Prague during the post-White Mountain recatholization and settled in the originally Ultraquist St Wenceslas Church at Zderaz in 1625. In their zealous recatholization efforts advanced within Pragues New Town quarter, where the non-Catholic community was most populous in comparison with the Lesser and Old Towns, they took advantage of the exceptional genius loci. The nearby curative spring, associated in legend with the main holy patron of the land, Duke Wenceslas, and the vera effigies of this saint preserved in their monastery, became the starting point for developing the local St Wenceslas cult, and, in the early 1640s, found an artistic analogue in a thirty-two piece painting cycle from the life of St Wenceslas in the cloisters jointly created by Karel krta and other artists. As is clear from reports recounting how the church and monastery were tted out, the Zderaz Augustinians accorded great importance to the artistic embellishments and their effect on the population (referred to in sources as the deles, i.e. believers). From the perspective of their recatholization pursuits and the efforts of the new monastic community to establish itself in Prague, the fact that they were soon able to engage the inhabitants of the New Town and other Prague towns in their undertakings may be considered an unequivocal success. Whereas the Zderaz chronicles make no mention of the donors of the twenty nine beauty-laden paintings depicting scenes from the Life of St Augustine hanging on the walls of the monastery church since 1628, the situation as concerns the St Wenceslas cycle, some of whose extant paintings bear the dedicatory inscriptions
STUDIES 121

11. Karel krta, St Thomas of Villanova Distributing Alms to the Poor, 16701671, Prague, Church of St Thomas (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

12. Karel krta, St Thomas of Villanova Distributing Alms to the Poor, preparatory drawing for an altarpiece, 16701671, Weimar, Klassik Stiftung Weimar (reproduced after: Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674, Prague 1974, cat. no. 161, g. 187) 13. Joachim von Sandrart, Strumpfanzieher, Depiction of a Young Man Wearing a Sock at Teutsche Academie (photo: tpn Vcha)

and coats of arms of their donors, is very different. The lunette St Wenceslas Having Pagan Idols Razed was paid for by Doctor Isaias Haan settled in the New Town, St Wenceslas Pressing the Sacramental Wine by the Old Town City Councilman and vineyard official Felix Had of Prose, The Death of Drahomra by the wealthy patrician and later Old Town Councilman Vclav Vokovsk the Younger of Kunratice, and Priest Hostivod Impetrating for the Finger of St Wenceslas by the Appellate Court Scrivener Daniel Ferdinand Rabtejnsk of Guten- and Friedenthal. According to the monastery chronicles, another of krtas lunettes was nanced by Prague Castle Captain Jan Karel Pchovsk of Pchovice, who also contributed the considerable sum of 600 guldens for construction of a magnicent, intricatelycarved pulpit for the church. His daughter Anna oe funded krtas no-longer-extant large painting St Mary Magdalene with Christ as a Gardener (Noli me tangere), which was done for the atrium of the Holy Sepulchre Chapel. The bequest of another benefactor, Supreme Scrivener of the Kingdom of Bohemia Krytof Wratislav of Mitrovice ( 1645), interred in the same crypt, was used to purchase another painting by Karel krta for the altar of the same chapel, depicting the Lady of Sorrows with St John the Evangelist and the
122 FACING THE PUBLIC

121 Iam grateful to Jan Oulk for the identication and correction of the benefactors identities. 122 See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 93. 123 Ibid.

124 See Edition of historical sources in this book, documents no.91and 92. 125 See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 114. 126 See Tom Sekyrka, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), p.181, cat. no.IV.13. 127 Martin Svato, Sv.Vclav vliteratue 17. a18.stolet, in: Jan Royt (ed.), Svat Vclav vumn 17. a18.stolet, Praha 1994, pp.2225; recently, Petra Zelenkov, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 1), p.179, cat. no.IV.11. 128 Quae omnes, totam S[ancti] Wenceslai Bohemiae Patroni, et olim Ducis Martyris vitam, pulcherrime adumbrantes, mire exornant totum claustrum et ingredientes extraneos magna admiratione suspensos detinent. See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 88. 129 [] quae structuram claustri mire exornantes oculos spectantium animis ad pietatem non parum accensis vehementer rapiunt. See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 89. 130 The monastery chronicler explicitly mentions the visit to the monastery by both Habsburgs in 1646 (at that time, Ferdinand IV was crowned as Bohemian king on 5 August) elsewhere;Praha, NA, AZK, Liber secundus seu Continuatio Annalium ExcalceatoAugustiniani Nostri Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, inv. no. 2452, manuscript 11 (formerly 3480 b), fol. 55.

Two Marys. Some twenty years later, krta painted two canvases for the monastery refectory based on a commission from New Town bookbinder Hieronimus and Lesser Town bookseller Bartolomeo Lucerna: The Last Supper and The Washing of Feet. For the sake of completeness, it should be mentioned that krta is also the author, inter alia, of the paintings of church teachers and evangelists with the Virgin Mary that adorn the monastery library, a portrait series of fteen leaders of the Italian congregation of the reformed Augustinian order, and the paintings St Wenceslas and St Ludmila in the church sacristy. Soon after it was completed, the St Wenceslas cycle became a Prague sensation, attracting the citys residents and visitors to the monastery. Therefore, not suprisingly it was included in the list of Prague sights Descriptio Honoricentissima Nobilissimae [] Urbis Pragensis by Martin aban published in Prague in 1652. A still more eloquent documentation of its renown is the booklet by Monastery Prior Giles from St John the Baptist called Vnec blahoslavenmu a vn oslavenmu kneti [] svatmu Vclavovi (in English, A Crown for the Blessed and Eternally Gloried Duke St Wenceslas), which came out in 1643 (and 1644, respectively) in three language versions (Czech, German, Latin) in order to reach the greatest number of readers possible. The time lag between the painting of the cycle (16401641) and the booklets publication attests to the fact that it was added later, evidently based on the publics unagging interest in the paintings. The richly illustrated octavo booklet in which each canvas had its own graphic reproduction accompanied by the relevant passage from the saints legend and epigraphs was meant to serve as a pocket gallery and illustrated guide for discerning viewers visiting the monastery ambit (g. 14). According to the author of the Zderaz annals, all these [paintings] beautifully depicting the entire life of the martyr St Wenceslas, Bohemian patron and one time duke, wonderfully embellish the entire cloisters and draw newcomers from outside to gaze upon it with great wonderment. Similarly, a later version of the Zderaz annals writes of the paintings, which powerfully captivate the viewers eye and, in no small measure, set [their] souls aame with devotion. An extraordinary report is one that describes the spontaneous reaction of the art-loving Emperor Ferdinand III when he and his son Ferdinand IV stayed in Prague in the summer of 1646 and visited Zderaz Monastery. The following anecdote moreover illustrates how highly-valued krtas work was (50 guldens for one lunette as compared to the usual

STUDIES 123

fee of 32 or 30 guldens paid to other painters): The most distinguished Emperor Ferdinand III, during a tour of the monastery interior and the cloister, when examining the individual paintings, not being acquainted with this art, gave only a cursory glance at the work of other artists, but stopped at the paintings by krta and, while studying them and becoming familiar with the artists hand, made this comment in German to the prior who was accompanying him: krta is a good painter, but he makes sure to be paid well. Wherein lay the success of the St Wenceslas cycle and how were krtas paintings exceptional compared to the works of other painters? It has already been said that visual art played a key role in the Augustinians missionary work undertaken in Pragues New Town. Thus does the chronicle say of the St Augustine cycle of 1628 that the paintings were a major embellishment of the church while also stirring the devoutness of believers. The St Wenceslas cycle had the same impact, though in this case it seems that the quality of the artistic rendering evidently outshone the intended didactic purpose. This is made clear in the foreword of the aforementioned booklet by Monastery Prior Giles from St John the Baptist, in which the reader-viewer is admonished not to lose sight of the spiritual mission of the paintings in the face of their sensual beauty: Our Duke and heir St Wenceslas was so far hidden as if behind a kind of curtain, on the walls of our ambulatory, depicted and painted in 32 canvases, but now he comes out accompanied with many engraved gures and an apt historical treatise for you, faithful Bohemian, not only to feast your eyes on these material paintings but rather to nd a mirror and vivid example in them for yourself and to seek to follow it yourself and encourage others to do so. I believe this quotation not only justies the publication of the book, but also provides an answer to the above formulated question concerning the exceptionality of krtas lunettes. Reports on public reaction at the time conrm that the individual paintings of the Zderaz cycle were perceived as autonomous works that stood on their own artistically and that, in their narrative structure, surpassed their literary models such as the medieval St Wenceslas legend Ut annuncietur, and the relevant passages in Hjeks Kronika esk (Czech Chronicle), published in 1541, and in Jan Dubravius Historiae Regni Boiemiae (1552).
124 FACING THE PUBLIC

131 Unde Augustae memoriae FerdinandusIII.Imperator, dum quadam vice Caesarea Sua praesentia interiora subiret monasterii, videns claustrum, et singulas imagines contuens, uti erat non imperitus huius artis, in aliorum opera levem vibrabat palpebram, at picturis Scretae xo pede, ac lumine inhaerens manu articis cognita hoc elogium Patri Priori sese comitanti idiomate teutenico dixit: Screta est bonus pictor, sed curati sibi bene solvi. See Edition of historical sources in this book, document no. 89. 132 See note 120. 133 Aegidius aSancto Johanne Baptista, Wienec Blahoslawenmu awn Oslawenmu Knijeti Ceskmu, Muedlnijku Boijmu, druhmu Abelowi, Swatmu Wclawowi [], Praha 1643, p.A3/b. 134 Cf. M.Svato, Sv.Vclav vliteratue 17. a18.stolet (see note127).

135 Jaromr Neumann, Ke komposinm principm krtova svatovclavskho cyklu, Vtvarn umnVI, 1956, pp.162168, herep.165.

14. Double page of the 10th Chapter in the Booklet Ehren Krantzlein so dem Heyligen und Glorwrdigsten Martyrer Wenceslao [], (1643) with the Illustration St Wenceslas Pressing the Sacramental Wine (photo: tpn Vcha) 15. Karel krta, The Birth of St Wenceslas, 1640, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

Let us take as an example the lunette The Birth of St Wenceslas, which begins the cycle (g. 15). The scene is embellished with anecdotal motifs such as the overturned copper bowl with a sponge for washing the newborn, the birthing rope hanging from the bed, a pair of servant girls, their backs turned, warming diapers and a cat gazing into the hearth; the masterly rendered structure and rich colours of the various materials draw the eye. Although the painting is furnished with the appropriate title Nativitatis S. Wenceslai ex Wratislao principe Christiano et Drahomira pagana. Anno 908, also a reference to Hjeks chronicle (Hagec: fol: 65) and the verse metaphorically expressing the birth of the saint from the bosom of the pagan princess (Nascitur ex spina Rosa, purpura, nixaque, []), in none of these passages (nor in medieval legend) is the birth of the saint rendered as it is in krtas painting. A conventional birth scene is transposed into a psychologically-escalating conict between the pagan Drahomra and her mother-in-law St Ludmila, whose outcome is left to the viewers imagination. As Jaromr Neumann noted of the midwife holding the newborn, the expression in the midwifes eyes considerably enhances the confrontation between the two different female types and emphasises the hidden tension between them. Her placement at the centre of the conict and perhaps, too, the uncertainty and helplessness reected in her gaze testify to the deeper meaning of the scene, which only becomes apparent upon reection on the other circumstances of the story. This is not merely a conict between two different worlds personied by the pagan and the Christian princess, as is usually posited, but rather a mortal struggle over the fate of the child who will later be taken from Drahomra and raised in the Christian faith. We may also see the objective of rendering a history independently of its literary model by adding a series of scenic motifs that go beyond a general telling and lend it a signicantly deeper psychological dimension in other of the cycles extant works. It will suffice as just one example to mention the painting St Wenceslas Pressing the Sacramental Wine in which the saint is modestly rendered performing manual labour while a view to the vineyard with
STUDIES 125

the Chapel of St Mary Magdalene under Letna hill is skilfully incorporated into the scene. We might also mention the scene St Wenceslas Buying Pagan Children (g. 16), which is built upon the emotionally harrowing depiction of an abandoned child turning away from his benefactor Duke Wenceslas and trying in vain to make contact with the retreating mother at left who, with the empty cradle under her arm, greedily counts her money. The side episode at right, where we see a teacher, rod in hand, giving lessons, evokes the future destiny of the boy who was purchased to be given a brighter future. Conclusion It has been the aim of this study to provide a new way of looking at the oeuvre of Karel krta free from stylistic art critiques and iconographic interpretations, indeed one that places the subject within the context of period art theory and receptive aesthetics. It would be premature to answer the questions formulated in the introduction to this study given the topics complexity; rather, the results set out here represent a point of departure for further exploration. In this respect, it was benecial to work with the concept of the narrative painting (history), whose principles I essayed in various genres represented in krtas art, such as the sacra conversazione type of devotional painting (g. 1), the cabinet painting (g. 4), the group portrait (g. 2) and above all the narrative religious-themed scenes (historiae sacrae), i.e. altarpieces (Figs. 5, 10, 11) and hung paintings (Figs. 15 and 16). In each of these cases, we see the artists theoretical erudition and ability to express himself through visually appealing and modern forms, and his ability to use artistic means designed to capture the viewers attention. The focus while interpreting individual works was always on krtas viewers, their attitudes related to us by written sources of various natures. One of these was the scholar and cleric Bohuslav Balbn, the second was art theoretician and painter Joachim von Sandrart and, nally, there were the regular consumers of these paintings, that is the faithful, here represented by the socially diverse classes comprising those commissioning the works as well as those visiting Zderaz Monastery. The Baroque was a foreign concept to an artist freely creating his art out of inner impulse and without deference to public taste. The secret of success was to create not
126 FACING THE PUBLIC

16. Karel krta, St Wenceslas Buying Pagan Children, c. 1641, Castle of Mlnk, Collection of Ji Lobkowicz (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln)

136 See the exhibition review by Petr Kov, Oslava esk umleck tvoivosti, in the daily newspaper Prvo of 7 December 2010, p.16.

a provocative, but rather an appealing, comprehensible and sufficiently representative work. This enables us to understand Karel krtas transformation from a painter of secular-themed cabinet paintings and portraits during his sojourn in Italy into the creator of large-scale altarpieces after his return to Prague. This turnaround is not only testimony to the painters universality and artistic genius, but also provides important information about the key formative inuence of the environment on his artistic development. If in the highly competitive environment of the Italian cities it was very difficult for the young and socially unestablished painter to win prestigious commissions such as altarpieces, the situation in Bohemia was quite the opposite. A comparison of Karel krta and painters of the European Baroque, as presented in the recent exhibition, should not elicit speculation as to how illustrious a career krta might have had if he had chosen to settle abroad. On the contrary, the observations set out here show that the skills krta acquired in Italy would have had little application for him without the great artistic opportunities that awaited him in Bohemia. krta, who during his stay in Italy not only became highly conversant in the visual language of the Italian Renaissance and Baroque, but also gained the requisite theoretical knowledge, was the ideal artist for the task. Translated by Gita Zbavitelov

STUDIES 127

Karel krta pictor doctus

SYLVA DOBALOV LUBOMR KONEN

1 Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674. Doba adlo (exh. cat.), Praha 2010. On this portrait see also Miroslava Kacetlov, Autoportrt veskm baroknm malstv (M.A.thesis, Charles University), Praha 2006, pp.8990 and 182 (cat. no. 68). 2 On this problem see, in particular, Jan A.Emmens, Ay Rembrandt, maal cornelis stem, Nederlands Kusthistorisch Jarboek 7, 1956, pp.133165; John Shearman, Only Connect: Art and the Spectator in the Italian Renaissance, Princeton 1992, p.108148. 3 Giorgio Vasari, Le vite de piu eccellenti, pittori, scultori ed architetti, ed. Gaetano Milanesi, vol. 7, Firenze 1881, p.560. 4 Jana Zapletalov, Karel krta: Notes from Archives in Italy, Umn LVIII, 2010, pp.153158 (153 and 157, notes 12 and 13).

The Painter and the Book Most probably at the end of 1634, shortly before Karel krta left the city on the lagoons for Rome, his portrait was painted by the Venetian artist Tiberio Tinelli (g. 1). It is evident that within its category (portrait of a painter) it is a quite unusual work. If it were not for the text, which was most probably re-written on a secondary canvas during an old restoration, we would not have known who the author of this painting was, or who was portrayed on it. The inscription on the reverse reads: Il Ritratto di Carlo Screta / Io che limagi altrui / soglio eterna formar / co mei penelli / Vergil hora Imagin mia / Opera tua gran Tenelli /Viva spirar, che non so / piu sio sia, o pitor/o de pinto / Sall versimil / e lnto / chinnita nhavian / tu Glorial / lo vita / Aless. Berardelli [Portrait of Karel krta. I, who am accustomed to create the eternal portraits of others with my brush, now see my own image, your work, great Tenelli, breathe as if alive, so that I do not know whether it is I, or an illusion painted as though real, and so from this we have, you endless glory and I endless life, Alessandro Berardelli.] The painter portrayed is, then, Karel krta, who, in the words of the poet and painter Alessandro Berardelli, praises the portrait whose author was a further Venetian, Tiberio Tinelli. Berardelli used as the leitmotiv of his short text the traditional idea of the inability or untness of the work of art (as opposed to a living human being) to breathe and speak. Berardelli undoubtedly knew this ancient, but still effective clich of artistic praise, the tradition of which goes back into antiquity. Especially in Greek and Roman epigrams we nd a whole series of testimonies to the fact that the highest form of praise that could be accorded to a statue or painting was the observation that it would clearly soon begin to breathe or talk. Berardelli as a poet had doubtless read a great deal of ancient poetry, but as a painter it would have been enough to open Vasaris Lives, where he could have read, for instance, that the painting of The Holy Conversation, the author of which was Giulio Clovio, lacked only breath and speech to be alive. Jana Zapletalov recently pointed out the fact that both Tiberio Tinelli and Alessandro Berardelli were members of the Venetian Accademia degli Incogniti, the Principe of which was Giovan Francesco Loredan. Even though krtas name does not appear on the (unfortunately incompletely preserved) list of members of this academy, it may be assumed that during his stay in Venice he was in direct contact with this academy or at least with some of its members. This fact explains the somewhat unusual character of this portrait as the portrayal of a painter. krta has a slightly melancholy gaze turned away from the onlooker and (especially) in his hand he holds a book in which the ngers of his right hand are inserted. If we give rein to our fantasy, then we might imagine that he was thus marking the place of the text quoted above, which was later copied on the reverse of Tinellis canvas. Even more important, however, is the fact that the Czech artist is not
STUDIES 129

1. Tiberio Tinelli, Portrait of Karel krta (around 1634), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

equipped with any of the attributes that would have qualied him as a painter brush, palette or easel. In the history of portraits and self-portraits of painters this is a relatively rare case, as krta is holding only a book. This situation could be explained on the one hand by the fact that this portrait came into being in the context of a literary academy. On the other hand, and in combination with other biographical details, it designates Karel krta as a learned or educated painter: pictor doctus. Probably the rst fundamental opinion on this problem was contributed by Leon Battista Alberti (14041472) in the third book of his De pictura (1435) / Della pittura (1436), which is the foundation work of modern art treatise. The aim of painting, wrote this humanist artist, is to provide the artist with pleasure, friendship and fame rather than wealth []. It would be necessary for the painter, in order to remember these things well, to be a good man and educated in the free arts. [Finis pictoris laudem, gratiam et benivolentiam vel magis quam divitias ex opere adipisci. [] Sed cupio pictorem, quo haec possit omnia pulchre tenere, in primis esse virum et bonum et doctum bonarum artium.] Albertis statement, that the painter should be a good man and educated in the free arts, has its origin in Catos famous characterisation of the ideal public speaker: vir bonus dicendi peritus. Transferred to the

5 The literature on this genre is literally immense, and therefore we mention only afew of the recent titles, which contain further bibliographies: Joanna Woods-Marsden, Renaissance Self-Portraiture: The Visual Construction of Identity and the Social Status of the Artist, New HavenLondon 1998; Julian Bell, Five Hundred Self-Portraits, London 2000; Ulrich PstererValeska von Rosen (edd.), Der Knstler als Kunstwerk: Selbstportrts vom Mittelalter bis zur Gegenwart, Stuttgart 2005. For the symbolic signicances of the book itself see Justyna Guze, Ksika jako symbol treci intelektualnych w sztuce doby humanizmu:XVXVI w., in: Oikonograi wieckiej doby humanizmu: Tematysymboleproblemy, Warszawa 1977, pp.159243; Jan Biaostocki, Books of Wisdom and Books of Vanity, in: In Memoriam J.G.van Gelder 19131980, Utrecht 1982, pp.3767 (reprinted under the same title in: idem, The Message of Images: Studies in the History of Art, Vienna 1988, pp.4263, 242245). 6 On this term and the concept of painting creativity connected with it see at least some of the fundamental, but far from exhaustive titles: Rensselaer W.Lee, Ut pictura poesis: The Humanistic Theory of Painting, New YorkLondon 1967, pp.4148; J. A. Emmens, Ay Rembrandt, maal cornelis stem (see note 2), pp.188208.

130 KAREL KRTA PICTOR DOCTUS

7 Leon Battista Alberti, Das Standbild, Die Mahlkunst, Grundlagen der Malerei / De statua, de pictura, elementa picturae, Oskar BtschmannChristoph Schublin (trans.&edd.), Darmstadt 2000, p.292. Because the only existing Czech translation of Albertis treatise (Frantiek Topinka, Praha 1947) is inaccurate and in places verges on the unintelligible, we are using, apart from the already quoted Btschmann edition, the two following English translations: Leon Battista Alberti, On Painting, John R.Spencer (trans.&ed.), New HavenLondon 1966; idem, On Painting, Cecil Grayson (trans.), Martin Kemp (ed.), London 1991. 8 For this argument see Heinrich F.Plett, Rhetoric and Renaissance Culture, Berlin 2004, pp.311312. On the relationship between ancient rhetoric and Renaissance art theory see especially John R.Spencer, Ut rhetorica pictura: AStudy in Quattrocento Theory of Painting, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 20, 1957, pp.2644; Michael Baxandall, Giotto and the Orators: Humanist Observers of painting in Italy and the discovery of pictorial composition 13501450, Oxford 1971. 9 L. B. Alberti, On Painting, J. R. Spencer (ed.) (see note 7), pp.9091. On this iconography in detail: David Cast, The Calumny of Apelles: AStudy in Humanist Tradition, New HavenLondon 1981; Jean Michel Massing, Du texte alimage: La Calomnie dApelle et son iconographie, Strasbourg 1990. 10 Evonne Levy, Ideal and Reality of the Learned Artist: The Schooling of Italian and Netherlandish Artists, Children of Mercury: The Education of Artists in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (exh. cat.), Providence, R.I.1984, pp.2027; Eva Maringer, Schnfeld als pictor doctus: Bemerkungen zu einem knstlerischen Selbstverstndnis, in: Ursula ZellerMaren WaikeHans-Martin Kaulbach (edd.), Johann Heinrich Schnfeld: Welt der Gtter, Heiligen und Heldenmythen (exh. cat.), FriedrichshafenStuttgart 2009, p.8689. Unfortunately Idid not have the opportunity to becone acquainted with the work of Maurits Ameyers, Jan van Eyck Pictor Doctus, Onze Alma Mater, 1991. 11 Jan Biaostocki, The Doctus Artifex and the Library of the Artist in theXVIth andXVIIth Centuries, in: De arte et libris: Festschrift Erasmus 19341984, Amsterdam 1984, pp.1122 (reprinted under the same title in: idem, The Message of Images (see note 5), pp.150165&267270, where yet another bibliography is given). See also John Bury, El Grecos Books, The Burlington Magazine129, 1987, pp.388391; Bert van Selm, De bibliothek van Pieter Saenredam, Kunstschrift Openbaar Kunstbezit 12, 1988, pp.1419; Gerda Panofsky-Soergel, An Artists Library in Rome around 1600, in: Victoria von FlemingSebastian Schtze (edd.), Ars Natura adiuvans: Festschrift fr Matthias Winner zum 11. Mrz 1996, Mainz am Rhein 1996, pp.367380; Frans Baudouin, Rubens pictor doctus, zijn bibliothek en zijn lectuur, in: Prosper Arents (ed.), De Bibliotheek van Pieter Pauwel Rubens: een reconstructie, Antwerpen 2001, pp.4787; Amy Golahny, Rembrandts Reading: The Artists Bookshelf of Ancient Poetry and History, Amsterdam 2003; Frans Baudouin, Rubens and his Books, in: idem, Rubens in Context: Selected Studies, Antwerpen 2005, pp.125135; Lubomr Slavek, Potebn knihy? Ikonograe, knihy emblm aartifex doctus vechch na konci 18.stolet, in: Beket BukovinskLubomr Slavek (edd.), Pictura Verba Cupit: Sbornk pspvk pro Lubomra Konenho / Essays for Lubomr Konen, Praha 2006, pp.7993 (8187); Susan Anderson, The Library of Cornelis Dussart: Between Artist and Gentleman, Oud Holland 123, 2010, pp.133165. 12 See in particular the classic work: R. W. Lee, Ut pictura poesis (see note 6). 13 Ivo Kon, Knihovna architekta Bonifce Wolmuta, Umn 8, 1960, pp.522527. 14 Thea A.G.Vignau Wilberg-Schuurman, Die emblematische Elemente im Werke Joris Hoefnagels, Leiden 1969; Thea Vignau Wilberg, Pictor Doctus: Drawing and Theory of Art around 1600, in: Elika Fukov J. M. Bradburne et al. (edd.), Rudolf II and Prague: The Court and the City (exh. cat.), Prague London Milano 1997, pp.179188. (In the Czech version of this catalogue the expression Pictor Doctus was unfortunately omitted, p.179.)

ideal painter: vir bonus pingendi peritus a man who is of good character and who has received a good education in the free arts (pictor doctus, pictor poeticus or pictor literatus). Therefore continues Alberti artists should, for their pleasure, consort with poets and speakers who know many things. This might be useful in the conception of history (istoria), the greatest signicance of which lies in invention (of theme). Beautiful invention has, according to him, such value that it is pleasing in itself even without the painting that is based on it and as an example he mentions Lucians famous description (ekfrasis) On Calumny, which was created by perhaps the most famous painter of antiquity, Apelles (Calumnia, 5). The Painter and the Library It is not surprising that more than one painter active from the second half of the 15th century, rst of all in Italy and then in the Transalpine area, was given the title of pictor doctus, although it is often a matter of modern art-historical usus. Far from all painters (such as Agnolo Bronzino), however, were at the same time active as writers or had the opportunity to be more or less intensively personally acquainted with writers and scholars. There was here, however, one alternative solution, and this was the artists private library. Today we know that more than one painter, especially in the 17th century, owned a relatively rich collection of books from which he extracted varied knowledge and skills. It is to the merit of the Polish art historian Jan Biaostocki that he was the rst to systematically gather information about the libraries owned in the 16th and 17th centuries by painters in particular and to put these in context with contemporary theories about the learned painter and the connection between painting and poetry. Through books artists could be condentially acquainted with belle-lettres, especially with ancient and Renaissance poetry, and from this could draw the themes for their works all in harmony with the doctrine of the close relationship of painting and poetry (ut pictura poesis). Clearly the rst artist to own a library in Bohemia was the architect Bonifc Wolmut, as documented by the list of property made out after his death at the beginning of 1579. As opposed to what we might have expected in this case, Wolmuts library did not contain writings about architecture, but mostly works about astrology, astronomy and related subjects, knowledge of which was recommended to architects already by Vitruvius and Alberti. It is therefore necessary to agree with the opinion that the preserved ensemble of [Wolmuts] library shows the immense breadth of education of the architect, who was able to cover whole apparently distant scientic branches. A difficult case is that of Joris Hoefnagel, a Flemish painter of miniatures and humanist, who worked for Emperor Rudolf II in Prague in the nineties of the 16th century. Recent research has shown that this artistic genius conceived his depictions of natural objects not only on the basis of his own observation, but also with knowledge of their symbolic interpretation, which we know mainly from contemporary books of emblems. We know nothing, however, of Hoefnagels library. Did it exist at all? With his nomadic way of life we do not even know where, when and what he read whether at home in Flanders or later on his travels in Spain, Italy, Germany, Bohemia or elsewhere. As was shown especially in many of her studies by Thea Vignau-Wilberg, there is absolutely no doubt that Joris Hoefnagel was an outstanding expert, especially in emblems and so-called hieroglyphs (inventor hieroglyphicus et allegoricus). The Library and Books: Why and How? It is notoriously well known that books were and are read mainly in order that we may acquire instruction, pleasure and amusement. The role of learning (docere) naturally increases if the library is the instrument for cultivating the profession of its owner. The German painter Joachim von Sandrart, with whom krta was acquainted during his stay in Italy in the years 16301635, the author of the rst biography of the Czech artist in 1675, wrote, among other things, that our artist was not only a universal theorist, but also an experienced practician [da unser Knstler nicht allein ein universaler Theoreticus, sondern auch ein wohlerfahrener Practicus gewesen seye]. Shortly after this he continues: It can therefore be said that this discreet krta is the Apelles in the Imperial Parnassus of Muses and that in his wise brain there arose outstanding theses and emblems, which occur in this ancient university [scil. in Prague] more frequently than elsewhere [es seye dieser discrete Secreta der
STUDIES 131

2. Karel krta, Design of frontispiece for the manuscript of Bohuslav Balbn Epitome historica rerum Bohemicarum, 1669, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Kupferstichkabinet (photo: author's archives) 3. Karel krta, Design for the thesis of Count of Halweil, 1672, present location unknown (photo: author's archives) 4. Karel krta, Detail of the design for the thesis of Count of Halweil (photo: author's archives)

andere Apelles auf diesem Kayserlichen Musen-Parnass gewesen / aus deen klugen Hirn die frnehmste Conclusiones und Emblemata, (dern auf dieser uralten Universitt mehr / als an andern Orten herfr kommen)]. Sandrarts use of the terms Conclusiones und Emblemata does not refer in this case to standard emblems, which consist of three parts (picture / imago / pictura + inscription / lemma / motto + subscription / epigram), but to university theses, which were used at Jesuit educational institutes (and therefore also in Prague) for the visualisation of the conclusions of students work. When the Swedish philosopher Emanuel Swedenborg visited the Jesuit College in the Prague Clementinum on 25 August 1733, he wrote in his diary that he saw there paintings with emblems, which defendants used in public disputations (illorum picturas cum emblematibus quas loco publica defendentes sistunt). It is extremely probable that a number of them were the work of Karel krta (see CATALOGUE, No. IX.2, 410, 12, 1417) and this very fact proves that the painter was in contact with scholars not to speak of the important personalities of contemporary social life who had their portraits painted by him or ordered pictures from him. Nevertheless, the most fundamental proof of the artists contacts with scholars continues to be his friendship with the Jesuit polyhistorian Bohuslav Balbn, according to whom krta was Pictor aetate nostra in Patria summus. Let us mention at least two examples. At the close of a short list of artists whose work should be studied by the authors of dramatic works, Balbn recommends in this country the emblems of a Czech painter, who is determined in no way to lag behind the Old Masters: Karel krta [apud nos antiquis nos cessuri, Bohemi pictoris Caroli Scretae emblemata]. In 1669 the artist designed the frontispiece for Balbns manuscript Epitome rerum Bohemicarum, which is one of his most successful allegorical works (g. 2). On the sheet, divided into three horizontal bands, the natural scenery of the temple of the Bohemian past is cleverly combined with personications. The publication of this important historical work did indeed meet many obstacles, but the book was nevertheless published a little later (1677), with a frontispiece by the Augsburg engraver Matthus Kssel. For the personications of seventeen different virtues and vices on this frontispiece krta used the Iconologia, which was unusually popular in the 17th century and widely used by artists, the author of which was Cesare Ripa and which was also to be found in krtas library. This book represents an alphabetically arranged set of personications, compiled for the purpose of providing instructions on how to depict the greatest possible number of concepts, ideas and phenomena contained in the experience of an educated man of the rst half of the 17th century. The rst edition, unillustrated, was published in Rome in 1593; it was followed by further editions and translations into national languages. The third edition (Rome 1603) was illustrated (probably by Giovanni Guerra) and further editions were corrected, expanded and provided with various indexes. From this point of view the very best is the Venice edition of 1646, which contains almost 700 concepts and over
132 KAREL KRTA PICTOR DOCTUS

15 Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der Bau, Bild- und Mahlerey-Knste, Nrnberg 16751680, Christian Klemm (ed.), Nrdlingen 1994, vol.1, p.327. For brief basic information and bibliography see tpn Vcha, in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), p. 617, cat. no.XVII.1. 16 On emblematics and books of emblems (in domestic literature): Lubomr Konen, Mezi textem aobrazem: Miscellanea zhistorie emblematiky, Praha 2002. 17 Quoted according to Oldich J.Blaek, Prask sbrka universitnch thes: Kapitola zuit graky barokn, Hollar 16, 1940, p.33. We know alarge quantity of similar emblematic conclusiones, for instance, from Brussels: Karel Porteman, Emblematic Exhibitions at the Brussels Jesuit College (16301685): AStudy of the Commemorative Manuscripts (Royal Library, Brussels), Turnhout 1996. 18 Bohuslai Balbini Verisimilia Humaniorum Disciplinarum / Bohuslav Balbn, Rukov humanitnch discipln, Olga Spevak (transl. & ed.), Praha 2006, pp.573575. See Konen (see note 16), pp.5354 and6566.

19 Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (exh. cat.), Praha 1974, p.243, cat. no. 189, g. 216; Sibylle Appuhn-Radtke, Das Thesenblatt im Hochbarock: Studien zu einer graphischen Gattung am Beispiel der Werke Bartholomus Kilians, Weienhorn 1988, pp.101105. 20 Cesare Ripa, Iconologia, Padova 1625, pp.152 and 154. 21 Idem, pp.132133.

one thousand illustrations from Abundantia (Abundance) to Zelo (Zeal), derived from various literary and visual sources. krta, however, most probably owned and used the edition printed in Padua in 1625. The best example of how thoroughly and in what manner Karel krta used Ripas Iconologia is his drawing for the thesis of Count Frantiek Antonn Josef Leopold of Halweil, which was given graphic form in 1672 by Bartholomus Kilian (g. 3). The iconographically complex and unusually rich composition depicts the Virtues of the Emperor Leopold I chasing vices out of the Austrian House and it is peopled by a quantity of gures, mostly unidentiable at rst glance. Fortunately, however, the painter marked them all with numbers and accompanied this with inscriptions in his own hand, which determine their iconography. A detailed comparison of krtas gures with those of Ripa shows irrefutably that the painter used Ripas Iconologia in conceiving this demanding composition. This comparison, however, brings yet another nding: the Czech painter used only the iconography of Ripas gures, not their formal design. What, then, was his modus operandi the way he handled the Italians instructions and models? For a start let us say that he must have done something with them. Ripas personications are mainly depicted standing upright and facing the spectator and they are equipped with a whole range of attributes, whether these are animals or the most varied objects. krta therefore rst and foremost reduced the amount of paraphernalia, especially if they are the bearers of identical meanings. It is further evident that the personications, for the most part just standing still on the pages of the Iconologia, have changed with the Czech painter into gures of esh and bone. As acting dramatis personae they can no longer follow Ripa absolutely literally because the theme of the victorious battle of the virtues with the vices required that they should ee, fall, gesticulate wildly (and simultaneously frequently overlap one another). It is natural that krtas gures are much closer to life than their models in the book. As an example let us compare three gures in the centre of the rst plane of krtas composition with their opposite numbers in Ripas book (g. 4). Number 8 (Fidelitas Loyalty) holds a seal ring in his right hand, in his left a key and at her feet is a dog; it therefore corresponds to the appropriate depiction in the Iconologia (g. 5), which was construed on the basis of two of Ripas instructions for the depiction of Fedelt: Donna vestita di bianco, come la Fede, con due dita della destra mano, tenga unanello, over sigillo, & canto vi sia un cane bianco []. Donna, vestita di bianco, con la destra mano tiene una chiave, & alli piedi un cane. Her escort (No. 12) is Castigo (Punishment), depicted with a mighty axe and in Ripas book accompanied by a lion, which is pawing at the defeated bear (g. 6): Dipingeremo per il Castigo unhuomo in atto feroce, & severo, che tenghi con la destra mano una scura, o accetta, che dir vogliamo, in maniera che mostri di voler con essa severessimamente dare un sol colpo, & canto vi sia un Leone in atto di sbranare un orsa.
STUDIES 133

Figure No. 7, whose clothing is grasped by the jaws of Loyaltys dog, personied Rebellio and Cesare Ripa describes it in the following words (g. 7): Huomo giovane, armato, & sopra il cimiero porti un gatto, sotto all armatura haver una faldiglietta no al ginocchio [], & alato la spada, mostrera in prospettiva la schiena, & con la testa stara in atto di si mirare indietro con guardatura superba & minaccievole, terra con ambe le mani le cime vi sia il ferro, & per terr per dispregio vi sia una Corona, & sotto alli piedi terra un giogo []. It is therefore evident that in the conception of Halweils thesis krta made perfect use of Cesare Ripas Iconologia, which stood on one of the shelves of his library. In the interest of the better clarity and intelligibility of his gures, however, he thoughtfully reduced the iconographic material contained in the book, utilised the synonymity of some terms and the multiple signicance of some attributes. His use of the Italian bestseller was inventive, but at the same time adequate to the order a university thesis allegorically celebrating Emperor Leopold I. krtas intelligent and truly creative work with Ripas Iconologia thus conrms the already quoted evaluation of the Czech artist from the pen of Joachim von Sandrart: In matters concerning the art of painting he was nicht allein ein universaler Theoreticus, sondern auch ein wohlerfahrener Practicus or, in other words: pictor doctus. The Painter and the Book of Books As Sandrart also states, krta contributed to art-lovers many beautiful pictures and popular histories (schne Bilder und beliebige Historien). In the second half of the description of the career of the Czech Apello Sandrart then adds that krtas work consisted mainly of great histories and portraits (groen Historien und Contraften). The associated list of buildings in Prague and in Bohemia in which it was possible to see these histories leaves no-one in any doubt that these were paintings with a religious theme. It was the way in which religious themes were depicted that underwent fundamental reform as a result of the protestant criticism following the Trident Council, the results of which were far-reaching. Art works are intended to stimulate piety and be a means to salvation; they must be cleansed of all that is heretical and immoral (secular) and might cause those unable to read to misunderstand them. The post-Tridentine theologists of depiction criticised in particular the content side of the painting. In their opinion mistakes occurred rather due to the irresponsibility of the painters than thanks to shortcomings of Catholic doctrine. Treatises appeared which are reminiscent of iconographic handbooks. Errors and inconsistencies in the depiction of holy tales must be corrected by the painters on the basis of established precepts and approved literature, otherwise they were committing a sin or heresy. A painter might consult on a theme with a wise and educated man and then he was permitted eventually to include in a scene also probable facts or ideas. Art came under the direct control of the Church; the appropriate Bologna bishops were responsible for the decoration of a church. No artist any longer had such freedom as Michelangelo in the painting of the Sistine Chapel. One of the most inuential theorists of this period, the
134 KAREL KRTA PICTOR DOCTUS

22 Idem, p.552. 23 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 15), vol. I, p.327. 24 Of survey literature see in particular: Christian Hecht, Katholische Bildertheologie im Zeitalter von Gegenreformation und Barock. Studien zu Traktaten von Johannes Molanus, Gabrielle Paleotti und anderen Autoren, Berlin 1997; Giuseppe Scavizzi, The Controversy on Images: From Calvin to Baronius, New York 1992; Anthony Blunt, Artistic Theory in Italy 14501600, Oxford 1994 [1st ed. 1962], pp.103136; Paola Barocchi, Trattati darte del cinquecento: Fra manierismo e controriforma, II: GilioPaleottiAldovrandi, Bari 1961; Emile Mle, Lart religieux aprs le Consile de Trente: etude sur liconographie de la n duXVI sicle, duXVII, duXVIII sicle: Italie, France, Espagne, Flandres, Paris 1932.

5. Loyalty, in: Cesare Ripa, Iconologia, Padua 1625 (reproduced after: Cesare Ripa, Iconologia, Padova 1625) 6. Punishment, in: Cesare Ripa, Iconologia, Padua 1625 (reproduced after: Cesare Ripa, Iconologia, Padova 1625) 7. Rebellion, in: Cesare Ripa, Iconologia, Padua 1625 (reproduced after: Cesare Ripa, Iconologia, Padova 1625)

25 Recently about Paleotti see in particular two dissertation works: Ilaria Biancchi, La politica dlle immagini nellet della Controriforma: Gabrielle Paleotti teorico e committente, Bologna 2008; Holger Steinemann, Eine Bildtheorie zwischen Reprsentation und Wirkung: Kardinal Gabriele Paleottis Discorso intorno alle imagini sacre e profane (1582), Hildesheim 2006. The rst study concentrates on Paleottis inuence in Bologna, the second generally on the problems of Paleottis art theory. 26 R. W. Lee, Ut pictura poesis (see note 6), pp.4243. 27 Thomas W.GaehtgensUwe Fleckner (edd.), Historienmalerei, Berlin 1996 (Geschichte der klassischen Bildgattungen in Quellentexten und Kommentar, Band 1), p.23. 28 Ch. Hecht, Katholische Bildertheologie (see note 24), p.263. 29 Abasic bibliography on the St Wenceslas Cycle is given in the introductory text and individual entries of the catalogue L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), esp.pp.156179. 30 Publication of two versions of the legend see Vita sancti Wenceslai, incipiens verbis Ut annuncietur, transl.Antonn Podlaha, Praha 1917 (cf. Bohumil Ryba, Poznmky kpekladm legend, in: Antonn MatjekJaroslav mal [edd.], Legendy oeskch patronech vobrzkov knize zeXIV.stolet, Praha 1940, pp.119122). The translation of the version Ut annuncietur contained in Liber depictus by B.Ryba see ivot slavnho muenka svatho Vclava se zzraky, in: Idem, pp.4994.

Cardinal of Bologna, Gabrielle Paleotti, not only devoted attention to iconography in his manuscript Discorso intorno alle imagini sacre e profane (Bologna 1582), but also attempted to formulate a certain artistic theory. His work is also interesting to us in how strongly it appeared in the paintings of his native city, which krta visited half a century later during his Italian travels, and in the end the question arises of whether it was the paintings of Rome or rather of Bologna, which were decisive for his further orientation. Paleotti, among other things, placed the painting of holy stories (storia) in rst place in the hierarchy of genres of painting. This also meant that scenes had to be treated in such a way as to be in keeping with decorum; they could not be in any way lascivious or otherwise profane. In this connection it may be pointed out that the artists observance of decorum was always linked to his knowledge of the text, which does not concern only the painting of religious themes. According to Paleotti, however, a Christian painter must always feel what he is painting within himself. The Bolognese theologist even goes so far as to say that the most capable painter is not the one who shows invention, but the one for whom verity (verit, verisimilitudo) is the highest measure. The painter should follow the description of events according to the Bible. He must compose pictures simply and intelligibly so that even the poorly educated spectator can understand the movement of the thoughts of the actors in the tale on the basis of the action depicted. Similarly the painting of histories was already formulated by Alberti, quoted several times in this article (De pictura, 41), who had in mind in particular a story with many acting gures in which a drama is performed, which is inspired by classical authors, the Bible or mythology. According to Paleotti, but also other post-Tridentine authorities such as Gilio da Fabriano or Molanus before him, the scene must not, however, be complicated by decorative details; each and every element must be essential to the theme. If possible it should be stated in the Bible and this applies not only to the age of the protagonists or the place where the action takes place, but also to all other particulars. The inuence of the post-Tridentine reformers was such that towards the end of the 16th century the need for knowledge of religious literature is placed in the leading positions on the imaginary ladder of mandatory reading; metaphorically it may be said that it replaced the earlier knowledge of poetry. From the viewpoint of the Church, then, the knowledge of classical antiquity was to be replaced by Christian archaeology. A large part was also played, however, by tradition for instance there was consideration of the historically correct arrangement of the Last Supper, but priority was given in the end to the traditional depiction, where the apostles are sitting round a table. In spite of the fact that the Church in the 17th century did not insist any longer on some of its earlier teachings, the impact of these opinions did not end with the close of the 16th century. The Painter and Painted History The preserved paintings from the St Wenceslas Cycle for the Church of the Barefoot Augustinians at Zderaz, the rst dated work by krta in Bohemia, appear at rst glance to be exemplary painted histories (see IV.1IV.2; IV.4IV.8). It is evident that krta and the painters who participated in the production of the cycle had to know a great deal or else the signicance of the individual scenes of the cycle must have been explained to them in great detail. On the lunettes are accompanying texts of dual origin and the entire cycle is depicted in the treatise D. Wenceslao Bohemorum Duci ac Martyri inclyto Sertum [] (Pragae 1643) and its Czech and German versions. We may undoubtedly take the manuscript as the original iconographic programme of the cycle (cf. IV.11). We can easily imagine that the author of the book, the Zderaz Prior Father Aegidius a S. Joanne Baptista, selected the individual scenes from the life of St Wenceslas on the basis of the study of various resources, especially Dubravius Historiae Regni Boiemiae, the Czech Chronicle of Vclav Hjek z Liboan and one of the versions of the medieval legend Ut annuncietur. He arranged these in sequence according to Hjeks Chronicle. We would most probably then assume that krta had read Aegidius description and then created the composition of the picture to order as an illustration of this, or had enriched it with some details inspired by the text of the individual chapters. Or else, with regard to the fact the verses of Father Aegidius also appear on the pictures as well as the actual title, these verses may well have been of key importance for the selected composition, or might conceal the basis of the testimony
STUDIES 135

of the picture. Already on analysing the rst picture of the cycle, The Birth of St Wenceslas (see no. IV.1), the origin of which is dated 1640 and the composition of which we consider to be so well known that it is unnecessary to describe it here in detail, we nd that the relationship of the picture and the text will not be so straightforward (g. 8). Aegidius text in the Czech printed version states in the rst sentence that pagan Princess Drahomra bore her husband Vratislav a son, but it deals in greater detail mainly with the personality of Drahomra that she did not wish to accept baptism after the birth of her son and Wenceslas therefore could not take his rst sustenance from a heathen. Even after this Drahomra remained as rm as a rock she came from the hard people of atec. Vratislav and the Bishop of Mainz prayed that from this hard and painful thorn might spring a ower to correct what she did not wish. In no way is there a mention here of the circumstances of the birth of Wenceslas and there is no mention at all of Ludmila, mother of Vratislav. The poets turn of phrase presenting Wenceslas as a rose is the basis for the Latin quatrain, which as an epigram introduces the text commenting the appropriate scene in the Latin version of the treatise (in the Czech version the verses are not included): Nascitur ex spina Rosa, purpura, nix; decore/ Nix Rosa Virgineo, purpura Martyrio / Haec, si nosse cupis, Rosa, quo fragravit odore, / Postulat emunctis naribus illa legi. The actual text of the Latin version of the treatise differs from the Czech. It is not as narrative; on the contrary it consists of various biblical similes, designating the birth of St Wenceslas from such a mother as a miracle; it does, however, draw attention to Ludmila, martyr of Christ. In general it provides the painter with few gural guidelines, but it bears the unequivocal message to which the composition of the painting responds, emphasising the conict between the pagan Drahomra and the Christian Ludmila. The second inscription on the painting actually the rst in order, as it is the title of the scene is identical to the apt title of the chapter as given in the Latin text. It may be summed up as follows: if krta consulted a text, which might already have been prepared when the pictures originated, then it must have been the Latin version; he might, however, have known
136 KAREL KRTA PICTOR DOCTUS

31 Dating was uncovered in the restoration of the picture in 2010, see Sylva Dobalov in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), pp.160161, cat. no.IV.1. 32 The names are translation of excerpts of the text from Hjek, or manuscript notes, situated in the Zderaz manuscript of the legend Ut annunciatur; see Jaroslav mal, Barokn cykly svatovclavsk. Jejich vznam vobraze sv.Vclava, (diss., Charles University), Praha 1945, typescript, pp.2931.

8. Karel krta, Birth of St Wenceslas, 1640, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

33 Sylva Dobalov, in: L. Stolrov V. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), cat. no. IV.5 (there is listed a transcription of verses from the painting); Lubomr Konen, krta aTempesta, Drahomra aProserpina, Opuscula Historiae Artium. Studia Minora facultatis philosophicae universitatis brunensis, F 45, 2001, pp.7982. 34 L. Konen, idem, p.79; analysis of the poems of Aegidius on the linguistic side see: Martin Svato, Jilj od sv.Jana Ktitele, Fridrich Bridel ajejich tzn Co lovk?, in: Literrn archiv. Sbornk Pamtnku nrodnho psemnictv 27, 1994, pp.117157. 35 Mina GrigoriRodolfo Maffeis (edd.), Un altra belezza: Francesco Furini (exh. cat.) Firenze 2007, p.182, cat. No. 16; the picture was intended for the decoration of the villa La Petraia. 36 The drawing was ascribed to krta by G.Kyslikh, see Galina Kyslikh, Nemeckij, avstrijskij ivejcarskij risunok. Gosudarstvennyj Muzej Izobrazitelnych Iskusstv imeni A.S.Pukina, Vol. I,XVXVIII veka, Moscow 2009; for greater detail see Sylva Dobalov in: L.StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674). 37 Bettina Baumgrtel, Die Ohnmacht der Frauen: sublimer Affekt in der Historienmalerei des 18. Jahrhunderts, Kritische Berichte 18, 1990, No. 1, pp.520. As far as concerns the historical truth of midwifery, aso-called birthing stool was used. Already in 1581 amedical book was published on caesarian birth: Franois Rousset, Traitte nouveau de lhysterotomotokie ou enfantement caesarien|qui est extraction de lenfant par incision laterale du ventre [], Paris 1581. 38 Ch. Hecht, Katholische Bildertheologie (see note 24), esp.pp.298301.

only the appropriate epigrams. It is more probable than that he knew only the name of the scene, in this case: Nativitas S. Wenceslai ex Wratislao principe Christiano, & Drahomira pagana. Anno 908. Hagec: fl: 65. This is shown in particular by a further of the pictures in the cycle, depicting The Death of Drahomra (Drahomira frustra tech/nas lio struens, diris / que eum devovens, viva ter/re sorbetur. A 924; see IV.5), concretely the descent of Drahomra into Hell. Aegidius verses are then a variation of Virgils description of the descent of Aeneas into Purgatory, where the kingdom of Hell is designated in the epigram by the name of the god who reigns there (Hades Dis). krta found his visual model in the scene with the abduction of Persephone, as portrayed in the famous edition of Ovids Metamorphoses by Antonio Tempesta (1606, sheet 47). In any case it has already been pointed out that the combination of krtas painting, the inscription and the explanatory epigram recalls the structure of an emblem. Although it may be said that the history of St Wenceslas was surely well known to krta, the painter did not approach the creation of the picture by composing the scene The Birth of St Wenceslas completely anew. On the contrary, he referred in it to visual sources he had seen in Italy; particularly close to it is Furinis painting of Rachel giving birth, she who died on the way to Bethlehem during the birth of her second son Benjamin (Gen. 35, 1620). This is a painting with a rare theme, which was created in 1632 in Florence for Lorenzo de Medici, and krta might perhaps have been acquainted with it during his stay in Florence. For he did not take inspiration from the compositions with the birth of the Virgin Mary or John the Baptist, where the woman giving birth (a holy woman) is always decently concealed in the background of the picture (one of the exceptions is the painting by Vouet, quoted by Neumann, in the Roman Church of S. Francesco a Ripa). According to theologians such themes should be depicted with good taste; and krta showed this, after all, in the painting of The Birth of the Virgin Mary (from the National Gallery in Prague) and the drawing of The Birth of John the Baptist (in the Pushkin Museum in Moscow, g. 9). In the St Wenceslas Cycle he decided, on the contrary, on a composition where the heroine is displayed in the foreground of the canvas. The model for the depiction of Drahomira might have been Tempestas illustrations from the above-mentioned edition of Ovids Metamorphoses, concretely the scene of The Birth of Hercules (sheet 86, g. 10). But whereas the seated Alcmene in Tempestas illustration is actually giving birth beneath her robe, Drahomira is depicted in a swoon, being brought round by a servant girl with scented essences: the pose of her body expresses one of the few passions by which female heroines were distinguished in works of art (without exception, by the way, these were tragic heroines, although the causes of their swoons were varied). It was perhaps intentional when krta used for the depiction of the pagan Drahomira a model from a book often described as the painters Bible and in both cases passions belonging to women of antiquity, in order thus to emphasise the contrast between the two worlds; in the picture of the death of Drahomira also the Princess is falling into Hell in the close vicinity of a Catholic church. The theme of the ght against heresy is, by the way, one of the key themes of church art. In the debates of theologians of the picture the problem is also discussed of ancient art models, in the sense that a painting of Christ or the Virgin Mary should not be made according to the model of ancient deities. On the other hand, for example, Antonio Possevino SJ emphatically rejects any ancient themes in his treatise, but nevertheless praises the group statue of Laocoon as an important work, which a contemporary artist should always have before his eyes during the painting of martyrs. According to Christian Hecht, whose opinions I quote here, this problem nonetheless did not hold an important place among the other opinions of the Church. In any case it is obvious that krta, by following visual sources, did not in any way make his work as a painter easier, although it might seem so at rst glance. Also in the visual sources used by krta are, in particular, the depictions of St Wenceslas in the St Wenceslas Chapel of St Vitus Cathedral in Prague, created around the year 1500 and painted over at the beginning of the 17th century. The scenes from the Zderaz monastery and in the cathedral do not, however, overlap in their selection and although there is here, for example, the scene with the redemption of the pagan children by St Wenceslas, in this case the artist did not go according to it and compiled his own composition, as opposed to the scene St Wenceslas has the pagan idols cut down and Christian churches built (see IV.2). As an educated painter krta undoubtedly had his own opinion on how the
STUDIES 137

act of redemption might have taken place and he took particular pains in depicting the pagan world with architecture reminiscent of the Pantheon; with similar emphasis he also enriched the pagan environment in other scenes, outstanding among which is the picture of Drahomira pursuing the Christians, known only from the engraving by Frater Henricus in Wenceslao Bohemorum Duci (g. 11). In the case of the scene of St Wenceslas Working in the Vineyard, however, he only altered Wenceslass costume; he thus did not have the saint ostentatiously treading the grapes with bare legs and in the background he placed the existing chapel, which did indeed indicate the land of the donor of the picture (see IV.4), but on the other hand the vineyards within sight of Prague Castle already existed in the Middle Ages. It is evident that the intention pursued by krta in the St Wenceslas Cycle was the principle of historical truth. Related to this is not only the appropriate clothing of the gures or the considered description of the environment in which the action takes place. The requirement also concerned, for instance, the correct forming of the human gure as stimulated by passion with regard to Mannerist distortion. Jaromr Neumann saw the cycle as an example of the inuence of Carravaggio; in the active gures he saw human and unembellished types and he commented that the birth of the saint took place without angelic manifestations. It cannot be denied that it is surprising that St Wenceslas is portrayed without any glorication; after all, even the halo occurs only on the graphic prints of Frater Henricus and not on the paintings (g. 12). Undoubtedly we can see here the reection of the naturalism cultivated chiey in Bologna, Florence and Rome (in other words, in the cities visited by krta), which for the Church became a satisfactory solution to the problem of how to reconcile the heavenly and earthly kingdoms in such a way that Catholic art achieved its targets with recipients. Also connected with the requirement of historical truth is Sandrarts observation that krta followed Nature in everything it is no coincidence that the second area of painting in which the Czech Apelles excelled was the art of the portrait. The Painter, the Book and the Client In the painting of religious pictures the artist had understandably rst and foremost to follow the Bible as accurately as possible. Of course, a number of typically Baroque themes do not occur in the Bible and artists were able to form an impression of them only on the basis of the combination of the most varied sources or specialised disquisitions, which had to be approved by the Church. It is evident that an educated painter could defend the concept selected himself. A typical theme of the Catholic Baroque was, in particular, the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, which krta painted several times in his lifetime as an artist. There were many source texts among the basic ones was The Golden Legend, but especially in the Jesuit environment further writings came into being, some of which, such as the Adnotationes et Meditationes in Evangelia of Jerome Nadal (Antwerp 1593 and revised in 1595) or De Vita et Laudibus Deiparae Mariae Virginis Meditationes Quinquaginta by Francisco Costero (Ingolstadt 1588) had responses even outside the environment of the Order. The oldest painting by krta with this theme is the Assumption of the Virgin Mary from St Thomas Church in the Lesser Town of Prague (g. 13), prepared with a modello that has not been preserved, which displays an almost exhaustive range of motifs that might have been present at the Assumption. Perhaps the only item missing is the fruit mentioned in The Golden Legend, which symbolises the fertility of Marys virtues. Several cherubim are lightly raising the slim and youthful Virgin Mary upwards; others are scattering owers around them and waving garlands of owers. The event is set in the dramatic environment of a narrow ravine so that the radiance accompanying the miracle stands out. The second in order is the Assumption for the Italian Chapel in the Old Town of Prague, which we know only from the print of Samuel Weishun (1647, g. 14, see also IX.3). Two types of angels are assisting rather symbolically in the Virgins ascension; the main mover of the miracle is a mighty cloud on which Mary is enthroned. Here we nd no trace of owers, Nature or angelic music; the event takes place in an area characterised only by two high columns, representing the Gates of Heaven. This concept, reduced to only the basic event, is already coming close to krtas painting for the main altar of the Church of Our Lady before Tn (around 1649), which is concentrated exclusively on the Apostles gesticulating in a wide range of emotive passions and on a crowd of angelic

39 Recently (with regard to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary) Jan Royt, cta kPann Marii akeskm zemskm patronm vdu Tovarystva Jeova vbaroknch echch, Bohemia jesuitica 15562006, Tomus 2, Petronilla Cemus (ed.), Praha 2010, pp.12791309. 40 Neither Jaromr Neumann nor any other researchers paid much attention to the picture, see Jaromr Neumann, Malstv 17.stolet vechch: barokn realismus, Praha 1951, p.76; idem, Karel krta 16101674 (exh. cat.), Praha 1974, pp.27, 89 and 97; idem, krtov, Praha 2000, pp.4849. 41 Petra Nevmov, La Capella Italiana della Citta Vecchia / Vlask kaple, Praha 2005; Pavel Preiss, Italt umlci vPraze, Praha 1986, pp.263264; J. Neumann, Karel krta (see note 40), p.97. Cf. Petra Zelenkov in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), p.375, cat. no. IX.3.

9. Karel krta, Birth of St John the Baptist, Moskva, Pushkin Museum, Moscow (reproduced after: Galina Kislykh, Nemeckij, avstrijskij i vejcarskij risunok. Gosudarstvennyj Muzej Izobrazitel'nych Iskusstv imeni A. S. Pukina, Vol. I, XVXVIII veka, Moskva 2009, p. 294) 10. Antonio Tempesta, Birth of Hercules, in: Ovidius, Metamorphoseon, Antwerp 1606 (reproduced after: The Illustrated Bartsch XXXVI) 11. Frater Henricus after Karel krta, Drahomra Pursuing Christians, in: Aegidius a S. Joanne Baptista, D. Wenceslao Bohemorum Duci [], Prague 16431644 (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 12. Frater Henricus after Karel krta, St Wenceslas Pressing Wine for the Mass, Baking the Wafers and Digging the Vineyard, in: Aegidius a S. Joanne Baptista, D. Wenceslao Bohemorum Duci [], Prague 16431644 (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln)

138 KAREL KRTA PICTOR DOCTUS

STUDIES 139

manifestations on whose backs Mary is ascending, celebrated by several victorious laurel wreaths. A document was found recently from which it emerges that a good ve years after the completion of the painting krta was paid more money to add in a further two gures. Although the number of Apostles present at the event varied, on the canvas from the Church of Our Lady before Tn the most usual twelve are depicted so it appears that krta enriched the scene only in the part with the angels, the nal version of which differs from the draft sketch and the whole group is realised in a more compact manner. krta created the last two Assumptions for the Cistercians in Plasy (1666) and in Zbraslav (16651668). In the rst case by the grave there are three additional pious women, who were present when Marys body was laid in the grave. These are not mentioned in any texts and were only popularised by Peter Paul Rubens; in signicance they are usually linked with the three Maries by the tomb of Christ. In the canvas at Zbraslav, the composition of which we know only from the preserved modello and which is considered to be the most imaginative of the whole group (see V.26), the scenes of the Assumption and the receiving of the Virgin Mary by the Holy Trinity take place within the space of one painting. The Abbots request for one painting with the Twelve Apostles, glories with cherubs and Kindeln and the Holy Trinity was resolved by krta in that he combined the Assumption with the Coronation of Our Lady; he prepared two drawings for this, one of which relates more to the canvas from Plasy, where, however, the usual version was selected with the Holy Trinity separately on the altarpiece. The detailed discussion of the preparatory drawings for these paintings, and eventually other works with the theme of the Assumption, would, however, exceed the intentions of this article. A multitude of drawings and preparatory works is, by the way, another of the classic devices, which belong intrinsically to the educated painter; if we have quoted Alberti so many times in this text, let us just recall that according to him a historia must be prepared with a quantity of sketches and drawings, both of the whole and of parts, so that it is evident that even before the completion of the picture the artist had a complete idea in mind; otherwise it is not necessary to recall that the concepts of disegno and idea form one of the basic problems of art theory in the 16th and 17th centuries. krtas strong point was undoubtedly the creativity with which he was capable of nding more and more new solutions. In the group of paintings studied with the Assumption of the Virgin Mary this can also be demonstrated well on the appropriate scenes with the Holy Trinity, which in each of the canvases is created with a different cast or different composition. The rst of these, for instance, the St Thomas canvas situated not on the upper part of the altarpiece above the Assumption, but on the altar on the opposite side of the presbytery, adopts a veristic idea of the sending down of the Holy Spirit to earth the heavenly hierarchy is depicted as part of the Ptolemaic model of the Universe, where around the earthly sphere is depicted the band of the ecliptic in which the astrological signs are situated (g. 15). It is interesting that the signs of the planets Saturn and Jupiter are placed beneath the holy duo of Christ and God the Father the two Greek deities personifying these planets were also in a father-son relationship; the placing of the signs beneath Christ and God the Father is, of course, with their relationship the other way round. Nevertheless, apart from this exception, it cannot be said that krtas paintings with the themes of the Assumption and the Holy Trinity were in any way exceptional from the iconographic point of view; the three paintings intended for monasteries, however, are more nuanced in meaning and more spiritual than the two intended exclusively for the general public, which correspond more to the populated, solemn and dynamic type of composition made famous by Annibale Carracci in contest with Caravaggio in the Cerasi Chapel of the Santa Maria del Popolo Church in Rome. This may be summarized by saying that our knowledge of sources so far speaks more of the ideas of the clients and the visual sources pertaining to krtas paintings tell more of the breadth of krtas artistic knowledge and perhaps also the extensive nature of his collection of prints, which is something we may assume, rather than his work with concrete texts. In any case it did happen that krta prepared a solution, which was not accepted and had to be altered, as in the case of the non-traditional order for the Crucixion with Souls in Purgatory from the St Nicholas Church in the Lesser Town (see V.2). On the other hand this shows that in his clients he had partners who were in no way indifferent to the visual form of the resultant work and were capable of formulating their requirements precisely.
140 KAREL KRTA PICTOR DOCTUS

42 This information was from tpn Vcha, in: L. Stolrov V.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), cat. no.V.14., where abibliography is also given. See esp.J. Neumann, krtov (see note 40), pp.6568; J. Neumann, Karel krta (see note 40), pp.9697, cat. no. 15. 43 J. Neumann, Umn 17.stolet (see note 40), pp.8485 and 129, cat. no. 2324; idem, Karel krta (see note 40), pp.123124, cat. no.3435; idem, krtov (see note 40), p.88. 44 For iconography of the women by Marys grave see David Freedberg, ASource for Rubenss Modello of the Assumption and Coronation of the Virgin: aCase Study in the Response of Images, Burlington Magazine CXX, 1978, pp.432441 (432). 45 In his older texts Neumann speaks of the canvas in the sense that it has been devalued by over-paintings (J. Neumann, Malstv 17.stolet [see note 40], p.76), in his monograph of the year 2000 he already accepts krta as the author without reservation, see J.Neumann, krtov (see note 40), p.48. 46 Beneath the feet of Christ is found the sign for Saturn, beneath the feet of God the Father the sign for Jupiter. To the right of the sign for Jupiter is the sign of Mars and in the back part of the ecliptic we further nd apoorly decypherable symbol, which either designates the planet Mercury or the Zodiac sign of Taurus (the sign of the planet Mercury differs from the sign of Taurus only in an equal-armed cross added in the lower part of the sign; it is not, therefore, certain whether the sign was not damaged and altered by over-painting). The reason why precisely these signs were placed on the ecliptic is not clear. We thank our colleague Ivo Pur for the consultation. 47 Last mentioned by J. Royt, cta k Pann Marii (see note 39), p.1281.

13. Samuel Weishun after the painting by Karel krta, Assumption of the Virgin Mary, 1647, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague ) 14. Karel krta, Assumption of the Virgin Mary, 1644, Prague, Church of St Thomas in the Lesser Town (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln)

It is evident that krta must have use a hagiographic handbook such as the Acta Sanctorum, which was rst published in Antwerp in 1643 and to which Bohuslav Balbin also contributed. The critical approach of their creators, known as the Bollandists, is demonstrated by the title page of the edition, common to all the volumes of the manuscript it is decorated with the writing gure of Wisdom, surrounded by books, who is supported in her efforts by the allegories of Erudition (Eruditio) and Truth (Veritas). krta was, for example, well acquainted with the life and deeds of St Servatius, less well known in Bohemia, who was promoted by the Engels of Engelsus (a reliquary from the time of Charles IV was found in the St Vitus Treasure). krta prepared for the painting for the chateau chapel in Mnek pod Brdy two detailed drawings perfectly depicting the struggle of Servatius against Arianism, which he also described in the inscribed commentaries that supplement the drawings (about the relationship of the drawings see V. 32, VI.16).
STUDIES 141

15. Karel krta, The Holy Trinity, 1644, Prague, Church of St Thomas in the Lesser Town (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 16. Hieronymus Wierix, Christ before Caiphas, in: Biblia Sacra, Antwerp 1583 (reproduced after: Sylva Dobalov, Paijov cyklus Karla krty, Praha 2004, p. 19)

142 KAREL KRTA PICTOR DOCTUS

48 The appropriate part of Acta Sanctorum was published, however, only in 1680; for more detail see Jos Koldeweij, Van Maastricht naar Mnisech. Karel Scretas Servatius uit 1654, Antiek. Tijdschrift voor oude kunst en kunstnijverheid, 30:5, 1995, pp.208212. The hagiography of St Servatius is presented in detail by idem, Der gude sente Servac. De Servatiuslegende en de Servatiana: een onderzoek naar de beeldvorming rond een helige in de middeleeuven, AssenMaastricht 1985. (Maaslandse Monograen Groot Formaat 5). On interrelationship of drawings see L.StolrovV.Vlnas(edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), pp.260261, cat. no. V.32; pp.360361, cat. no. VIII.16. 49 Sylva Dobalov, Paijov cyklus Karla krty: Mezi vtvarnou tradic ajezuitskou spiritualitou, Praha 2004, pp.5860; the frontispiece was analysed by Lubomr Konen, Karel krta aFranois Le Roy, S.J.neboli: Historie tm detektivn, Bulletin of the National Gallery in Prague 10, 2001, pp.8792. 50 Petra Oulkov, Poznmka kPaijovmu cyklu Karla krty in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta a malstv 17. stolet v echch aEvrop, Praha 2011, pp. 3947; Petra Nevmov, Funkce obrazu vumn jezuitskho du, in: Djiny umn vesk spolenosti: otzky, problmy, vzvy. Pspvky pednesen na Prvnm sjezdu eskch historik umn, Milena Bartlov (ed.), Praha 2004, pp.107115. 51 For details see S. Dobalov, Paijov cyklus (see note 49), pp.1920, notes 11, 12 and14, g. 4 and p.22, note 18. 52 The development of the genres was studied from this angle by Daniel Arasse, see Daniel Arasse, Le dtail: pour une histoire rapproche de la peinture, Paris 1992 (rev. 2008). 53 This frequently quoted response is given, for instance, by Paul SmithCarolyn Wilde (edd.), ACompanion to Art Theory, Oxford 2002, p.52.

The appropriate attributes of the saint, such as his crosier, keys and chalice, were not, however, drawn after the concrete objects, which have been preserved in Maastricht. When the Book is not enough? It might well have been the Jesuits who facilitated krtas access to the necessary literature, but the library of the Monastery of the Barefoot Augustinians in Zderaz was also a rich one. In any case it would appear logical that the Passion Cycle, which krta created at the close of his life for the Jesuit Church of St Nicholas in the Lesser Town (see VII.615), would be inuenced by Jesuit texts, or that it would, as already indicated by Jaromr Neumann, be exposed to the principles of the spiritual exercises of the founder of the Jesuit Order, St Ignatius of Loyola. The hypothesis then appeared particularly promising that the painter might have been inspired by the treatise of Franois le Roy from the Jesuit Monastery in Douai, Occupatio Animae Jesu Christo Crucixo deutae (Pragae 1666), for which he created the well-known frontispiece with the depiction of souls meditating over Christs Crucixion, which is allegorically conceived in the spirit of Jesuit emblematic treatises as artistic activity the creation of the painted and sculpted portrait of Christ Crucied, and which contains meditations on the individual events of Christs Passions (see IX.11). No direct relationship between the pictures and the text has, however, been conrmed. In addition it has been refuted that the paintings were to have been intended exclusively for the Jesuits in the Profession House. On the contrary, those qualities were emphasised that made the pictures attractive for viewers from wide social strata, especially the Brotherhood of the Mortal Agonies of Christ and the noble donors who shared in payment for the paintings together with the Jesuits. The archive sources even indicate that the canvases were not ordered all at once as a cycle and that several of them were exhibited during Easter on the main altar of the church in keeping with liturgy. The actual concept of the compositions is relatively traditional and the same applies to the visual sources of the cycle, which were determined in the prints of the Wierix brothers and well-known works of Italian Masters like Tizian or Ludovico Carracci. For instance, in the depictions of the trials of Christ, the description of which differs slightly in the individual Gospels, krta used, apart from some loans from Drer, the more contemporary prints from the Wierix workshop, which were used directly to illustrate the large-format Bible from the Plantin Printing House (g. 16). From the viewpoint of the painting the Passion Cycle stands out in krtas work through its twilight concept and the concentration of the scene on the actual protagonists of the action, expressing their passions in the foreground of the painting or in an environment essential to the understanding of the sense of the scene. Extremely attractive, however, is the variety used in the creation of the individual gures, especially Christ, whose physical and mental state is recorded thoughtfully and sometimes even bleakly in the individual scenes. After all, it is in these very moments that we might seek the inuence of Jesuit imagery. The gaze of the onlooker is drawn by attractive details, of which there are not many, and the eye of the viewer is decidedly not distracted by them. Among these there are also objects, which were not the standard equipment of Baroque Passions such as the spike-block (g. 17), which the Netherlandish and German artists of the 15th and 16th centuries delighted to include in the repertory of Christs instruments of torture, or the feather cap, which Jesuit missionaries might have brought back from their travels in South America (see VII.10 and VII.7). Although krta painted the pictures with a far more economical technique and a more relaxed painting style than usual for him, he embodied in them at the close of his life the principle that permeated his work throughout the whole of his creative period that sacred art is on the top rung in the hierarchy of genres; and that one of the basic characteristics of a high genre concentrating on the painting of gures is the severity with which details are curtailed and with which their use is limited and controlled. At this time it was not yet the custom for a painter to record his opinions of art in written form and so, as is also the case with Poussin, we must read krtas theoretical standpoint straight from his work. The teachings of the Catholic authorities of the post-Tridentine period indicate that verity, as well as erudition, should be ranked above artistic creativity. Gilio da Fabriano, for instance, demanded of Italian artists that in scenes of Christs suffering they should not forget to portray clear signs of wounds and torture, but the Italian artists replied that this would be against decorum. However much krta in his paintings held to the limits appropriate
STUDIES 143

17. Karel krta, The Flagellation of Christ, 1673/1674, Prague, St Nicholas Church in the Lesser Town (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 18. Marci Tvllii Ciceronis opera [], Basel 1534, National Library in Prague, detail from the title page (photo: National Library of Czech Republic)

to sacred art in the Central European environment, when his pictures seem to be from the iconographic point of view not very surprising, especially in comparison with his proposals for university theses, in any case we cannot accuse him of insufficient decorum and invention. Karel krta was well-read and educated, but when standing in front of the canvas, he was rst and foremost an essential painter. Translated by Joanne P. C. Domin

54 The problem of krtas university theses has been dealt with recently in particular by Petra Zelenkov; for the most recent see in particular: eadem, Karel krta and His Contemporaries as Designers of Prints, in: L. Stolrov V. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), pp.369371 and the following catalogue entries on pages 372374, 376387, 392399 and 414416, containing further bibliographical data.

144 KAREL KRTA PICTOR DOCTUS

List of Books in krtas Library

The list given below is an attempt to identify books from the estate of Karel krta the Younger, which was written up in brief after his death in 1691. This is a working version which was used to compile a representative selection of books for the exhibition Karel krta: Time and Work, 2010, Section XV: krtas Library, pp. 558575 (introductory text and cat. nos. XV.1XV.16; for the inventory see pp. 610611, cat. no. XVI.30). The inventory lists 62 items (de facto, however, there are 63, see item no. 48 below), but in the last sentence of the list of books it is stated that Of the bound books in octavo 12 et 16 in Latin, French, Italian and German, there were counted 248 items. Written out in greater detail, then, is a mere fraction of the family library and evidently it is rather the items of larger dimension that are recorded; but this does not always apply. The original records, as newly transcribed in 2009 by Radka Tibitanzlov, are written in italics in the list presented; the numbering was carried out secondarily. An identied publication is listed under the rst or one of the oldest editions, which corresponds as precisely as possible to the name from the inventory; it is nevertheless not possible to determine a concrete edition from the original records and the data is purely

orientational. The determination of some items is disputable because the brief name of the publication corresponds to several possibilities. It is evident that the official generally wrote down the rst words of the name of a book and tried at the same time to add its author; sometimes he gave the names in Czech transliteration. As far as concerns the Iconologia of Cesare Ripa (item no. 44), it was concluded that krta most probably owned the Padua edition of 1625 (see p. 571, cat. no. XV.12). So far only two books have been found, which truly came from krtas library. The manuscript listed under item no. 17 is in the National Library in Prague; for details see p. 575, cat. no. XV.16. In the National Library there is also to be found a copy of a book signed by Karel krta the elder, this being: Marci Tvllii Ciceronis opera qvae aedita svnt hactenvs omnia, in tomos distincta quatuor, Basle 1534 (Klem 6 A 000014/T.2). On the title page of the book is the manuscript address: Velle Dei velle meum est. KScreta Prague 1627. and further Collegij Nouodomensis Societatis JeSu Catalogi incriprus. (g. 18.) This book is not expressly listed in the inventory.

Sylva Dobalov

STUDIES 145

1 Bible esk in folio Bible esk Praha 1549 (so-called Bible Melantrichova) Bible esk Kralice 15791593/94 (so-called Bible Kralick) 2 Beschreibung der Contrafactur der vornehmbsten Sttt der Weldt, in magno folio, 2 Theile Beschreibung und Contrafactur der vornembster Stt der Welt Kln 15741618 Authors: Braun, Georg; Hogenberg, Franz 3 Prvo mstsk Prva mstsk Krlovstv eskho v krtkau summu vveden Praha 1579 Author: z Koldna, Pavel Krystyn 4 Zzen zemsk Obnowen Prwo a Zjzenj Zemsk Ddjnho Krlowstwj Ceskho Praha 1627 5 Herb Matthiola in folio Herb, jinak Bylin velmi uiten Praha 1562 Author: Mattioli, Pietro Andrea 6 Historie crkevn in folio Historia crkewnj Eusebia pigmjm Pamlla biskupa Cesarienskho w Palestn, na knihy desatery rozdlen. Tho Eusebia Pamlla, o iwotu neyswtgssjho csae Konstantna welikho, knihy twery [], Praha 1594 Author: Eusebius Pamphili Historia Cyrkewnj Kassiodora Rjmskho Sentora, nazwan Tripartita: Zetj Historykw Reckch, Sozomena, Sokratesa a Theodoryka sebran, a na Dwanctery Knihy rozdlen. Nazad pidni dw Trakttow: Geden o Snmu Effezskm proti Kacstwj Nestorya Biskupa Konstantynopolitskho: Druh o Snmu Chalcedonskm proti Kaci Eutychesowi a nsledownjkm geho [], Praha 1594 Author: Cassiodorus, Flavius Magnus Aurelius

7 Policie historick Politia Historica. O Wrchnostech a Sprwcch Swtskch. Knihy patery. Praha 1584 Author: Lauterbeck, Georg 8 Flavius Josephus nmeck. Historien vnd Bcher: Von alten Jdischen Geschichten, zwentzig, sambt eynem von seinem Leben: Vom Jdischen Krieg, vnd der Statt Jerusalem, vnd des gantzen Lands verstrung siben [] Strassburg 1574 Author: Josephus, Flavius 9 Titi Livii rmische Historien. Titi Livii Rmische historien mit etlichen newen translation au dem Latein [] Meyntz 1530 Author: Livius, Titus 10 Knha nmeckch carminv in fol. Not specied book of German poems 11 Posloupnost knat Paprockho Diadochos id est Svcessio, jink: Poslaupnost knat a krlv eskch, biskupv a arcibiskupv praskch a vech tech stavv slavnho Krlovstv eskho, to jest panskho, rytskho a mstskho, krtce sebran a vydan Praha 1602 Author: Paprock z Hlohol a Paprock Vle, Bartolomj 12 Beschreibung der Schiffart und Reiss in die Trkei Niclas Kamling Beschreibung Dero Rei vnd Schifffahrt in die Trckey, so beschehen durch Weylandt Herrn N. Nicolai [] Kln 1593 Author: de Nicolay, Nicolas 13 Lexicon philosophicum Rudolphi Goclenii in par. fol. Lexicon philosophicum, quo tantam clave philosophiae fores aperiuntur Francofurti 1613 Author: Goclenius, Rudolph (the Elder) 14 Historie del mondo in par. fol. La historia del Mondo Nuovo di m. Girolamo Benzoni []. La qual tratta dellisole, et

mari nuovamente ritrovati, et delle nuove citt da lui proprio vedute, per acqua et per terra in quattordeci anni. Venetia 1565 Author: Benzoni, Girolamo 15 Philippi Theophrasti Bombast von Hohenheimb in par. fol. Title of the book undetected Author: Paracelsus 16 Dl pt a est bible esk novho zkona. Bible Kralick. 5th volume: Kralice 1588 6th volume: Kralice 15931594 17 Privilegia krlovstv eskho psan Privilegia regum et regni Bohemiae, rukopis Praha, Nrodn knihovna esk republiky, sign. XIX.A.44 18 Kniha z reglnho papru, v n nco recept napsanch, ostatek przdn Manuscript with recipes (not specied) 19 Frmahlung und Beschreibung der Horologien alten truckhs Frmalung vnd knstlich beschreibung der Horologien: nemlich wie man der sonnen vren mit mancherley weys vnd form, vnd auff allerley gattung entwerffen soll [] Gemacht allen kunstliehabern zu gefalle[n], durch autor Basel 1537 Author: Mnster, Sebastian 20 Comentarien und Beschreibung von dem Leben und Heerzug Cyri des ersten, alten Truckhs Des Hochgelrtesten philosophen, warhafftigsten Geschichtsschreibers, vnd allerchersten Hauptmans Xenophontis Commentarien und beschreibungen von dem leben und heerzug Cyri des ersten Knigs in Persien [] Augspurg 1540 Author: Xenophon 21 Marci Velseri Libri octo Marci Velseri Matthaei. f. ant. n patricii. Aug. Vind. Rerum. Augustanar [um]. Vindelicar: libri. octo. Venetiis 1594 Author: Welser, Marcus

22 Francisci Petrarchae Trostbcher Von Hlff und Rath in allem anligen. Des hochweisen frtreichen Francisci Petrarche zwei Trostbcher von Artznei beydes des gten und widerwertigen Glcks. Franckfurt am Meyn 1551 Author: Petrarca, Francesco 23 Miscellanea Bohuslai Balbini Miscellanea historica Regni Bohemiae [] Pragae 16791688 Author: Balbn, Bohuslav 24 Accuratae Effigies Ponticum maximorum Accurate effigies Ponticum maximorum, numero XXVIII, ab Anno Christi [] ad vivum ex Romano prototypo expressae iisque singulorum ponticum elogia, eorum res gestas summatim comprehendentia, ab Onuphrio Panvinio Veronense Strassburg 1573 Author: Panvinio, Onofrio 25 Architectura Militaris in fol. Architectura militaris nova et aucta, oder Newe vermehrte Fortication, Von Regular Vestungen, Von Irregular Vestungen und Aussenwercken, Von Praxi offensiva et Defensiva Leyden 1631 Author: Freitag, Adam Architectura militaris oder grndliche Underweisung [] Amstelodami 1645 Author: Cellarius, Andreas Architectura militaris oder Anleitung wie auff unterschidliche arten starcke Vestungen zubawen [] Mnchen 1664 Author: Heidemann, Christoph 26 De serponte prvn kniha in quarto Promptuarium s. i. leichter Einfund in die K. verneuerte Bhmische und Mhrische LandsOrdnung, wie auch St Wentzls Vertrag, mit angeheffter BergwergVergleichung, dann knigl. Novellen [] Prag 1678 Author: Serponte et Bregaziis, Franciscus Ferdinandus de

146 KAREL KRTA PICTOR DOCTUS

27 Nicolai Caussini Trecensis e Soc[ietas] Jesu Nicolai Caussini Trecensis, Societate Jesu, De eloquentia sacra et humana libri XVI Coloniae Agrippinae 1626 (2nd edition) Author: Nicolas Caussin 28 Dikcion latinsk a esk Dictionarium linguae latinae ex magno Basilii Fabri thesauro collectum [] interpretatio bohemica addita est Pragae (1579) Author: Faber, Basilius; z Veleslavna Daniel Adam 29 Lectiones Joannis Christophori Schambogen Lectiones publica, seu tractatus juridicus [] In quo quaestiones ad duas rubricas Qui testam: facere possunt, et quemadmodum testamenta ant [] Pragae 1683 Author: Schambogen, Johann Christoph 30 Revelationes Nicolai Drabicio Revelationum Divinarum, in usum Seculi nostri quibusdam nuper factarum [] 1663 Authors: Drabk, Mikul; Kotter, Krytof; Poniatowsk, Kristna; Komensk, Jan Amos 31 Historie del mondo Gio. Tarchagnota vlask, parte 1 et 4 Delle historie del mondo di m. Gio. Tarchagnota, le quali contengono quanto dal principio del mondo no a tempi nostri successo. Cauato da pi degni, e pi graui auttori, che habbiano o nella lingua Greca, o nella Latina scritto. Con la giunta del quinto volume, nuouamente posto in luce Venetia 1562 Author: Tarcagnota, Giovanni 32 Il Decameron di Messer Il Decameron di Messer Giovanni Boccacci Cittadino Fiorentino Fiorenza 1573 Author: Boccaccio, Giovanni 33 I dieci libri dell architetura I Dieci Libri Dell Architettura Di M. Vitruvio Venezia 1567 Author: Vitruvius STUDIES 147

I dieci libri di architettura di Leon Battista de gli Alberti Vinegia 1546 Author: Alberti, Leon Battista 34 Daniel Schwentzers Geometriae practicae Geometriae Practicae Novae et Avctae Tractatus [] Nrnberg 16231627 Author: Schwenter Daniel 35 Cento novelle scelte Cento novelle scelte da piu nobili scrittori Venetia 1561 Author: Sansovino, Francesco 36 Akta Krlovstv eskho lta 1547 Akta tch vech vc, kter sau se mezi nejjasnjm knetem a pnem, pnem Ferdinandem, mskm, uherskm, eskm rc. krlem rc. a nktermi osobami z stavuov panskho, rytskho a mstskho Krlovstv eskho ltha tohoto etc. XLVII zbhly tuto vytitn Praha 1547 37 Theatrum poeticum Theatrum poeticum atque historicum: sive Officina Io. Ravisii Textoris, post Conr. Lycosthenis vigilias correcta [] Basileae 1592 Author: Tixier, Jean (Ravisius) 38 Considerationi civili di M. Remigio Fiorentino Considerationi civili sopra lhistorie di M. Francesco Guicciardini e daltri historici, trattate per modo di discorso da M. Remigio Fiorentino [] Venetia 1582 Author: Nannini (Fiorentino), Remigio 39 Philosophia naturale di M. Alesandro Piccolomini Della Filosoa Naturale Di M. Alessandro Piccolomini [] Vinetia 1565 Author: Piccolomini, Alessandro 40 Bible svat drobnho tisku

41 Scripta philosophica Abraham Calovi D. Theol. Antehac Regiomontani [] Scripta Philosophica [] Lubecae 1651 Author: Calov, Abraham 42 Glinnalidi Cornelio Tacito Gli Annali Di Cornelio Tacito Venetia 1582 Author: Tacitus, Cornelius 43 Lhistoria di Milano M. Bernardino Corio Lhistoria di Milano volgarmente scritta, dall eccelent. oratore M. Bernardino Corio gentilhuomo Milan [] Vinegia 1554 Author: Corio, Bernardino 44 Iconologia del Ripa Novissima iconologia di Cesare Ripa Padova 1625 Author: Ripa, Cesare 45 Vokabul sedmi e Dictionarium septem diversarum linguarum Pragae 1605 Author: Vrani, Faustus
The determination of the book would not be possible without the help of Tom Havelka and Vladimr Urbnek.

49 Frantz Renner Artzney Buch Ein kstlich und bewrtes Artzney Bchlein aller-u. eusserlicher Artzney, wieder die abschewliche kranckheit der Frantzosen, u. Lhmung [] Amberg 1609 Author: Renner, Franz 50 Theses hrabte z Altanu Imago Principum Bohemiae LXI. Elogiis ducum, regum, interregum adumbrata. In novum patriae splendorem, & publicum Regni decus, spectatum proposita [] Pragae 1673 Author: z Althanu, Frantiek Ferdinand 51 Janua linguarum reserata aurea Janua linguarum reserata aurea [] Amstelodamum 1638 Author: Komensk, Jan mos 52 Leimagini delle Done Auguste Le imagini delle Done Auguste intagliate in istampa di rame / con le vite, et ispositioni di Enea Vico, sopra i reuersi delle loro medaglie antice. Libro primo. Vinegia 1557 Author: Vico, Aenea 53 Del Governo di M. Francesco Sansovino Del governo de i regni e delle republice cosi antiche come moderne libri XVIII. [] Venetia 1561 Author: Sansovino, Francesco 54 Relationi universali di Giovanni Botero Benese Le relationi vniversali di Giovanni Botero Benese Rome 1591 Author: Botero, Giovanni 55 Historia d Italia di M. Francesco Guicciardini La historia di Italia divisa in venti libri. Riscontrata con tutti gli altri historici & auttori, che dell istesse cose habbiano scritto, per Tomaso Porcacchi [] Fiorenza 1561 Author: Guicciardini, Francesco

46 Le ministre destat Le Ministre dEstat, avec le vritable usage de la politique moderne Paris 1631 Author: de Silhon, Jean 47 Colerus teutsch Cristophori Coleri Ehrerbitliche Einladung zu einer Abgebildeten Teutsch-Poetischen Mayen-Lust Welche den 22. Maymonats-Tag de itzlauffenden 42sten Jahres in der Schule zu S. Elisabet [] Breszlaw 1642 Author: Colerus, Christophorus 48 Discorsi del S. don Antonio Agostini geschriebenes altes Artzney Buch a. Discorsi del S. don Antonio Agostini sopra le medaglie et altre anticaglie divisi in XI dialoghi Roma 1592 Author: Agustn, Antonio b. unspecied medical manuscript

56 Kriegsmanual Johann Jacobi von Wallhaussen Manuale militare, oder KriegManual : Darinnen I. Die Frnembste heutiges Tages Edle HauptKriegKnste zu Landt. II. Der Griechen Lacedaemonieren, und Romanern Krieg Disciplinen III. Ein KriegsNomenclatur / krzest aus dem Frantzoischen, mit schnen Kupfferstcken [] Franckfurt 1616 Author: Jacobi von Wallhausen, Johann 57 Descriptiones Ptolemaicae Corneli Wytie Descriptionis Prolemaicae Augmentum, Sive Occidentis Notitia.

Lovanii 1597 Author: Wytiet, Cornelius 58 Nov kratochvle Bartolomje Paprockho Now Kratochvilje. Skterau tj Bohyn toti, Iuno, Pallas a Venus na Swt pissly [] Praha 15791600 Author: Paprock z Hlohol a z Paprock Vle, Bartolomj 59 Weiblicher Lustgarten Weiblicher Lustgarten Begreifft vier Theil. Der Erst handlet von aufferziehung der Junckfrawen: Im andern wird geredt von dem ampt un[d] schuldiger picht der Eheweiber: Im Dritten vom Standt der Wittiben: Im

Vierdten von guten und bsen eygenschafften [] Mnchen 1605 Author: de la Cerda, Juan Luis 60 Il primo volume delle cagioni delle guerre antiche Il Primo Volume Delle Cagioni Delle Guerre Antiche Di Thomaso Porcacchi Vinegia 1564 Author: Porcacchi, Tomasso 61 Le vite de Glihvomini Le vite de gli uomini illustri Vineggia 1527 Author: Petrarca, Francesco

62 Apologiae der bohmischen Stnde Die Andere Apologia der Stnde de Knigreichs Bhaimb, so den Leib und Blut unsers Herrn und Heylands Jesu Christi unter beider Gestalt empfahen: Au der Bhmischen Sprach in die Deutsche versetzt, und erheischender Notturfft nach, vermehret und verbessert [] Prag 1619

148 KAREL KRTA PICTOR DOCTUS

The Role and Perception of Drawing in the Era of Karel krta and His Contemporaries
ALENA VOLRBOV

1 The subject was discussed in detail from the viewpoint of Baroque art by Pavel Preiss in the introduction to the book: Pavel Preiss, esk barokn kresba, Praha 2006, pp.1028. 2 Giorgio Vasari, ivoty nejvznamnjch mal, socha aarchitekt (Lives of the Most Eminent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects), Praha 1983, Vol. 1, Chapter 1, p.12.

An anonymous drawing (g. 1) takes us to a large auditorium full of students absorbed in drawing a male nude who poses in front of them. The room is almost void of sunlight; the space is instead lit by a large chandelier and many lamps hanging above the sheets of paper on which the students work. The impressive scene probably originates from the early 18th century, but it can be perceived as an insight into the academic practice of both the previous and following periods because art education did not change dramatically over the years, as is proved by surviving drawings. The Academia del Disegno a Norimberga, as the inscription along the upper edge of the reproduced drawing proudly reads, clearly fostered drawing after live models in order to perfectly prepare students for their artistic practice. The founder of the Nuremberg academy, Joachim von Sandrart, viewed drawing as a signicant part of art work, equally as did his predecessors and contemporaries as well as those who came after him. The approaches to drawing nonetheless saw long and, in the beginning, rather rapid development. When Giorgio Vasari dened drawing disegno as the father of all other artistic disciplines in the introduction to the second, 1568 edition of his Lives of the Most Eminent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects, he actually gave a true picture of its signicance to his contemporaries in the framework of the ideological tendencies of that period. The 15th century also perceived drawing as important, but nevertheless only an instrumental and preparatory

1. Anonymous artist, Drawing a Nude in the Nuremberg Academy, pen and black ink drawing and brush and grey colour, Wien, Albertina (photo: Albertina)

STUDIES 151

tool. However, Vasaris (and not just his) interpretation of drawing from the point of its immediacy and thus also its ability to express the initial thought i.e., idea raised the discipline above other types of art work. For that matter, the establishment of the Academia del Disegno in Florence in 1563 conrmed the signicance of drawing. The humanist environment of the Florentine court favoured intellectual speculations which, in this case, also arose from the famed animated disputes as to the hierarchy of the individual arts, called Paragone. Although the new standpoint resulted in the expansion of various literary discourses on the subject of disegno as well as in the development of the factual art of drawing, tangible written documents are solely available for the theoretical part. The authors of the rather vast literature on this subject addressed drawing disegno as a reection of the Divine idea, but the particular formulas on how to draw must have been somewhat too earthbound to be preserved. We know almost no directly surviving published advice and instructions how to draw except Cenino Cenninis vade-mecum Il Libro dell Arte from the 15th century whose printed version, however, came out only in 1821 and was mainly devoted to instructions on painting and book illustration instead of drawing. But this practical aspect of the issue also underwent a development as swift as the theory of disegno itself. We can observe striking differences between drawings from the early and the late 16th century. Italian drawing which called the tune and direction equally as other Italian disciplines, certainly did not lack esprit in the previous periods; but its expressions from the 16th century on are in very broad generalizations much more relaxed. This trend is even more apparent in Central-European art. No matter their brilliance and ease, Drers phenomenal drawings are somewhat more disciplined than those by the late 16th-century foreign artists active in Germany whose style intentionally loosened. The inventories of signicant collections moreover prove that drawings became sought-after collectors items during that period. Leaving aside certain aspects of Northern Mannerism, notably the Kunstfederstuck, Transalpine approaches not only to drawing but also to art work in general seems to be far more pragmatic. This is for example evident in the oeuvre of Karel van Mander who (contrary to the Italians) touched upon artistic methods in his famous poem in the introduction to his Het Schilder-boeck of 1604. Van Mander was closely familiar with Vasari and developed on his ideas, but his standpoint on drawing was already utterly practical. To him, it was an important stage albeit merely a stage of artistic process which climaxes in painting. Van Manders comparison between drawing and painting on one hand and the human body on the other hand shows this. Drawing is seen as a body having all its parts, but it is only painting with its colour that gives it life and soul. This approach was later adopted by Joachim von Sandrart who included it in his works in a similar way and, as we will see, took it even further. The Northern artists who journeyed through Italy as actually many of them did absorbed Italian style and mode of drawing readily. Central-European drawings from around 1600 are characterised by deliberate ease employing such techniques as combinations of brush and pen, or black and red chalk, i.e. methods characteristic of another great disegno theoretician and founder of the Roman Academia di san Lucca, Federico Zuccari. Florentine style arrived in South Germany with Vasaris colleague Friedrich Sustris (15401599), who inuenced an entire new generation of South-German draughtsmen. The circle of local drawing masters included, for instance, yet another Florentine disciple Peter de Witte, called Candid (15481628). Other artists active in leading Central-European cultural centres could also pride themselves on their brilliant drawing style: Hans von Aachen (15521615), Bartholomus Spranger (15461611) and many others. Drawings characteristic of Munich, Augsburg, Prague and other pre-eminent artistic circles around 1600 are part of a style which was pursued by young artists born in the early 17th century Karel krta (1610?1674), Wenceslaus Hollar (16071677), Johann Heinrich Schnfeld (16091684) and many others. The early stages of their oeuvres were inuenced by the strong stimuli of fading Mannerism which, however, remained the foundation of their work. Works from the beginning of their careers clearly employ the main principles of Mannerist art especially its construction of gures, schemes of composition and techniques which the artists gradually abandoned to benet from the new experiences
152 THE ROLE AND PERCEPTION OF DRAWING IN THE ERA OF KAREL KRTA

3 The concept idea, used by Vasari, somewhat confused many scholars including Erwin Panofski who saw the reection of spreading neo-Platonism in the theories of disegno. More recent studies, however, became inclined towards the inuence of Aristotelianism, because Vasari works with the concept universal judgement while idea in his interpretation has aslightly different meaning.The disegno theories, after all, perhaps cannot be directly compared to any tendency in philosophy; they are rather amixture of contemporary intellectual stimuli which were commonly combined at random during the 16th century. Literature on this subject: David Summers, The Judgement of Sense: Renaissance Naturalism and the Rise of Aesthetics, Cambridge 1990, pp.114116; Robert Williams, Art, Theory, and Culture in SixteenthCentury Italy: From Techne to Metatechne, Cambridge 1997, p.41; Thomas Puttfarken, The Dispute about Disegno and Colorito in Venice: Paolo Pino, Lodovice Dolce and Titian, in: Peter Ganz Martin Gosebruch Nikolaus Meier Martin Warnke (edd.), Kunst und Kunsttheorie 14001900, Wiesbaden 1991, pp.7595, esp.p.78. 4 The theories of disegno chronologically: Dialogo di pittura by Paolo Pino was published in 1548, followed by Della nobilissima pittura by Michelangelo Biondo ayear later, in 1549; Giorgio Vasari published his Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors and Architects in 1550 at the earliest, while Lodovico Dolces Dialogo della pittura intitolato l Aretino came out in 1557. Ten years laterin 1567Vincenzo Danti published his Il primo libro del trattato delle perfette proportioni. Vasari then published the second edition of the Lives in which he, in 1568, dened the concept disegno. The next workIi riposo by Raffaello Borghiniis from 1584 and the same year saw the publication of Trattato dell arte Idella pittura, scoltura at architettura by Gian Paolo Lomazzo whose Idea del tempio della pittura came out in 1590. In the meantime, in 1587, Giova Battista Armenini came with De Veri precetti della pittura and the treatise Il Figimo by Gregorio Comanini was published in 1591. Federico Zuccari published his LIdea de pittori, scultori e architetti as late as in 1607 in Turin where he also developed his hierarchic system of disegno. 5 Cennino dAndrea Cennini: The Craftmans Handbook Il Libro Dell Arte, translated by DanielV.Thompson Jr., New York 1960, p.8. Cennini advises how to proceed in drawingrst comes the outline and then the colour, but his method is essentially identical with that of book illustration. 6 Rudolne collections contained countless drawings which the emperor purchased through his agents or which were executed by the artists active at his court; the drawings were not only collectors items but also means of enlightenment and lessons on art. Elika Fukov, Rudolfnsk kresba, Praha 1986, p.33. 7 Karel van Mander, Het schilder-boeck (facsimile van de eerste uitgave, Haarlem 1604), Utrecht 1969, Nos. 7072. http://www. dbnl.org/tekst/mand001schi01_01/mand001schi01_01_0003.php, accessed on 27 January 2010. 8 Wolfgang Stechow, Northern Renaissance Art 14001600: Sources and Documents, Northwestern University Press 1989, p.65. 9 Michle-Caroline Heck, La Teutsche Academie de Joachim von Sandrarts: une compilation ou une relecture de Vasari et de van Mander?, in: Michele-Caroline Heck Frdrique Lemerle Yves Pauwels (edd.), Torie des arts et cration artistique dans lEurope du Nord du XVIe au dbut du XVIIIe siecle. Akten des internationalen Kolloquiums Lille 2000, Lille 2002, pp.241253.

10 From the hitherto published works on Schnfelds drawings, exclusively focused on his drawings is the article by Rolf Biedermann: Rolf Biedermann, Die Zeichnungen des Johann Heinrich Schnfeld, in: Jahrbuch der Staatlichen Kunstsammlungen in Baden-Wrtemberg, Band 8, 1971, pp.119194. More recently: Hans Martin Kaulbach, Zeichnungen im Werk Johann Heinrich Schnfelds, in: Ursula Zeller Maren Waike Hans-Martin Kaulbach (edd.), Johann Heinrich Schnfeld: Welt der Gtter, Heiligen und Heldenmythen, Kln 2009, pp.212265. 11 Vladimr Denkstein, Vclav Hollar: Kresby, Praha 1977, esp.pp.2131; Gabriela KesnerovAnthony Griffiths, Vclav Hollar: Kresby agrack listy ze sbrek Britskho muzea vLondn aNrodn galerie vPraze (exh. cat.), Praha 1983, passim; Alena Volrbov (ed.), Vclav Hollar (16071677) aEvropa mezi ivotem azmarem (exh. cat.), Praha 2007, passim. 12 On krtas drawing skills, see esp.P. Preiss, esk barokn kresba (see note 1), pp.3061; Alena Volrbov, Karel krtakresl, in: Lenka Stolrov Vt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (16101674): His Work and His Era, (exh. cat.), Praha 2010, pp.343366. 13 Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der Bau- , Bild- und Mahlerey Knste, Nrnberg 1675, 1679, 1680. 14 This interpretation was later developed by Zuccari. G. Vasari, ivoty (see note 2), p.12; Cristina Acidini Lucinat, Tadeo e Federico Zuccari: fratelli pittori del Cinquecento, Milan 1998, pp.274291. 15 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie (see note 13), Part 1, Book 3, Chapter1, p.60. 16 Ibid.

gained on their journeying. The combination of brush and pen became especially rooted, lingering deep into the 17th century. It is rather typical of Karel krta, along with his embracing of the painting approach to drawing via anticipating shadow surfaces by brush instead of outlining them by pen. krta, who assimilated many aspects of Italian art, was an exceptionally brilliant draughtsman, similar to his contemporary and once perhaps also his companion, Johann Heinrich Schnfeld. The latter artist stayed in Italy, mainly Naples, for much longer than krta but he fostered a somewhat different and, needless to say, rather distinctive drawing style. He often expressed himself in brush and pen, but came to favour chalk. His specic canon of human gures of robust torsos and prolongated arms is almost unmistakable. And, after all, a Transalpine artist not visiting Italy during this period would actually be difficult to nd. If we wanted to underline how signicant Italian training was for these artists no matter that they later returned to their Central-European roots it would suffice to compare their oeuvres and the drawings of their contemporary, Wenceslaus Hollar. He never travelled to Italy, was indifferent to Italian art, and thus probably never desired to journey there. A paramount draughtsman, he was rmly rooted in the tradition of the 16th-century miniaturists with all their descriptiveness and thoroughness of detail, even though his hand was subtle and his expression often brisk. His rst known drawings lack krtas pursuit of elegance and easiness of line, but they are in principle comparable in quality. krta later came to profess Baroque exaltation which must have been utterly foreign to Hollar, and the subsequent paths of the two artists diverged to such an extent as to turn them into antitheses: the humble Hollar, patiently and ceaselessly working on miniature formats and the construction of space, detail and articulation of forms, surfaces and materials within them, and his opposite the unleashed temperamental krta, presenting gures of often sweeping gestures and deliberately unnished forms, situated in only slightly suggested space and light. Did Italy so strongly impress yet another outstanding representative of 17th-century German art and krtas coeval, Joachim von Sandrart (16061688)? The two painters were in close relationship perhaps as early as from Sandrarts studies with Sadeler in Prague during the 1620s. There is no need to emphasize Sandrarts signicance. But it we dare to overstate a little, it was he who allowed us to glance into the auditorium attended by the diligent students drawing the nude in the illustration, and it was also he who established the rst German academy of arts (Deutsche Akademie) in Nuremberg in 1662. Sandrart was well-educated and excelled in organizational skills and was probably the most pragmatic of all the above-mentioned artists. His own drawings are, however, less important at this point than his theories voiced in the memorable Teutsche Academie, gradually published in 1675, 1679 and 1680. His treatise directly follows his great predecessors, Giorgio Vasari and Karel van Mander, and approximately adopts the structure of their writings, consisting of two parts: the rst is theoretical while the second contains descriptions of the lives of artists from Classical Antiquity up to the authors contemporaries. The comparison of these three works well illustrates the development of theoretical writings on art, from the intellectual Vasari and the didactic but poetic Van Mander to the more or less practical Sandrart. The two Northern artists were closely familiar with Vasaris oeuvre and thus certainly knew how highly he valued drawing, but they reserved much less space to acknowledge it in their books. I have already mentioned Van Mander as he compared drawing and painting to the human body, which totally omitted the drawing as an expression of an inner concept contained in ones mind or as a touch of a Divine idea. Both Van Mander and Sandrart view painting as the ultimate art and attribute to it the high status which Vasari gives to drawing. Sandrart does not deprive drawing of the gift of idea, but he in the entirely rationalist tone of his period incorporates it into the intellectual process of a particular oeuvre. He opines that a drawing is nothing but a visible sketch, a depiction or an outline of a concept which we have let sprout in our soul and then submitted it as a form or an idea. He also gives much signicance to reason, opining that it releases its well-elaborated ideas and if a hand, well-trained by long years of great diligence, transfers them to paper, we experience the awless excellence of both an artist and art. Emphasizing the well-trained hand not only reects Sandrarts own practice and rationality but also is an expression of his didactic inclinations. The latter can moreover be observed in his opinion, which is absent from Van Manders writing (let alone Vasaris):
STUDIES 153

that one of the roles of drawing is to rationally reveal ones own mistakes. Sandrart nevertheless immensely favours natural talent, but thinks that it spontaneously appears only in painting alla prima instead of in drawing. We can see that drawing was deprived of its deication over time and on its way north from the Alps. Although it had to abandon its sovereign status, it retained its honorary position close to the most valued painting, and especially the above-mentioned painting alla prima. It is, however, questionable whether these theories were widely accepted by the artists themselves whether Vasaris (and later Zuccaris) apprentices indeed could feel the touch of the Divine idea while drawing and whether the students captured in our illustration a century later indeed sufficiently employed their reason in order to reveal their own mistakes. We can assume that they discussed these issues heatedly but the only certain thing is that they drew a lot from live models as well as from other works of art like workshop drawings, prints and so on. Thus let us ask one more question: How did the artists themselves perceive the role of their own drawings? Were they more or less merely a single stage on the scale of the entire artistic process to them, or did they value them as highly as their predecessors did a century ago? We can judge on the basis of the rather vast number of surviving drawings which never ceased to be favourite collectors items. Our viewpoint, however, should focus on their role in artistic practice and on the resulting condition and form in which they survived. Preparatory drawings can be, with reservation, somewhat mechanically divided into free sketches or, eventually, preliminary designs, and nal designs models. If a sketch displays apparent signs of swift record, just outlining the initial idea, if it is vivid and unnished, the nal design is its direct opposite. The denite and then repeatedly used models are often worn and devalued to a certain extent, for example by the grid that served to enlarge the original design or by outlines cut through it in order to transfer the model onto the graphic plate in the case of prints. However, many fewer such examples survive than we would expect. Many drawings which are evidently linked with a certain painting, print or a realization in another medium bear no traces of use in a workshop. It is possible in those cases that there was also an drawing which the workshop members used for their realizations and destroyed by that use. The surviving clean cognate drawing might stay in the workshop, or nd its way to the commissioner or, for example, a collector. The role of the commissioner in this case is especially interesting. The relationship between a drawing and a donor was recently well outlined by Martin Mdl in his article on the design of the fresco The Stigmatization of St Francis by Karel krta the Younger for which, very unusually, the text addressed to the commissioner also survived. The artist submitted the drawing for approval so that his customer knew in advance the future work in which he planned to invest. Yet another role of drawing was, so to say, to preserve the successful model. Several examples of this kind can be found in the oeuvre of Karel krta the Elder: it is obvious that krta often used some of his models repeatedly during his relatively long artistic career, and sometimes even after an interval of many years. This is, for example, evident in the case of his design for the representation of St Servatius which waited years to see its realization as both a painting and a print, or in the case of his compositions with The Assumption, realized with slight modications rst for the Zbraslav monastery and years later in Plasy. Many drawings remained in workshops in order to be at hand for every new possible commission. This pragmatic attitude is in no way surprising for krta and other artists competent in business; and it did not degrade the artistic qualities of the drawings, but it undoubtedly represented a commonplace and widespread practice. Every workshop had to keep the models which could eventually be used again. Eloquent proof of this bank of drawings is the surviving sketchbook of Wenceslaus Hollar. The volume discovered relatively late, in 1963, in the John Rylands Library in Manchester contains dozens of drawings from various places of his journeying, which the artist saved over many years. It opens with sketches of views of Prague executed during his stay in the city, followed by numerous depictions from Germany and later the Netherlands. Hollar pasted the drawings into the book and did not sort them too systematically just so that they could t but he basically maintained a certain chronology. The
154 THE ROLE AND PERCEPTION OF DRAWING IN THE ERA OF KAREL KRTA

17 M.-C. Heck, La Teutsche Academie (see note 9). 18 Martin Mdl, Kresba Stigmatizace sv.Frantika zAssisi aternbersk kaple vkostele praskch hybern, in: Ars linearis, II, 2010, in print. 19 A. Volrbov, Karel krta kresl (see note 12), p.363, cat. no.VIII.18. 20 Wenceslaus Hollar: 16071677, Drawings, Paintings and Etchings (exh. cat.), Manchester City Art Gallery 1963; Richard Pennington, ADescriptive Catalogue of the Etched Work of Wenceslaus Hollar 16071677, Cambridge 1982, Appendix F, lxii; Gabriela Kesnerov, Nov Pragensia Vclava Hollara, Umn XXXVIII, 1990, pp.341347; A.Volrbov (ed.), Vclav Hollar (see note 11), cat. nos. II/6, II/7,II/33.

21 These drawings could frequently be found in signicant court collections, e.g. at the court of RudolfII.E. Fukov, Rudolfnsk kresba (see note6). 22 Alena Volrbov, Nmeck kresba 15401650: Umn kresby vnmecky mluvcch zemch mezi renesanc abarokem (exh. cat.), Praha 2008, pp.80119. 23 A. Volrbov (ed.), Vclav Hollar (see note 11), cat. nos. II/10.II/34, II/55. 24 Consultant: Andrew Robison.

drawings are also often dated in his characteristic way and variously described. These models later, sometimes even after many years, served Hollar to create his etchings. Considering the span and diversity of his graphic oeuvre, Hollar very probably owned more reservoirs of this kind. It is therefore apparent that he very carefully protected his sketches and thus followed regular workshop practice. There is one more type of drawing: drawing as an independent work of art. Many scholars have not yet been able to resist the unthinking presumption that a drawing equals a design for realization in a different medium. It is a well-known fact that countless drawings did not represent preparatory steps at all, but were created directly as realizations in their own right. Works on paper and parchment drawings which artists surely intended as nal achievements originate from as early as the 15th century. Among diverse types, obvious examples are many nished portraits and topographical drawings. During the 16th century, drawing as nished work was naturally supported by the above-mentioned approach to drawing as the most valuable artistic expression inspired with the Divine idea, and this is one of the reasons why it became part of the collectors range of vision. Drawing production in the Mannerist centres bore many of these works, perceived as valuable collectors items. We moreover know drawings which are variants or multiples, even executed on commission, like the intimate, minute cabinet paintings which satised a similar role as collectibles. Some draughtsmen worked as followers of a great master. Their illustrious example is the renowned Hans Hofmann (15501591) who drew in the spirit of Albrecht Drer. Drawings also remained favourite items for early 17th-century collectors. That period saw many intimate works which did not fulll the role of designs but represented a nal form by themselves. Some less accessible sheets were replaced by copies (as was, for example, commonplace at the court of Rudolf II) or their as we would say today pastiches. The latter was the case of the Augsburg artist from a somewhat later period, Hans Friedrich Schorer, active in the rst half of the 17th century, who specialized in landscapes executed in the spirit of the Netherlandish masters Hans Bol and Paul Bril. Let us therefore focus on the phenomenon of drawing as a nished work during the 17th century. It is without doubt that many drawings by Wenceslaus Hollar were conceived in this way from their inception, whether it was the cycle of small-sized views from the artists cruise on European rivers with Count Thomas Howard of Arundel on the way to Emperor Ferdinand II or, for example, Hollars late large-dimensional panoramas from the African fortress of Tangier. Karel krta did not leave us such apparent examples because he was primarily a painter. We can, nevertheless, believe that some of his drawings which remained unrealized as paintings were executed as nished works. Many of krtas contemporaries sometimes drew with the aim of keeping the result in this medium. Drawing may have lost its leading position among the arts, but it only slightly descended in the notional hierarchy in order to stand rmly on earth from where it can be perceived as an equivalent artistic discipline. Translated by Lucie Vidmar

STUDIES 155

The X-Ray Investigation of the Paintings of Karel krta

The Painters Handwriting in the Light of the Invisible Rays
TOM BERGER

1 Alena BergerovVlastimil Berger, Rentgenologick przkum krtovy malby, in: Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (exh. cat.), Praha 1974, pp.265269; Vra Frmlov, Malsk technika Karla krty, in: ibid., pp.270276. 2 The article came into being with the strong support ofMgr.Marcela Vondrkov, Ph. D., whom Ihereby thank sincerely.

The idea of investigating the paintings of Karel krta with the invisible rays is not a new one. Roughly since the fties of last century, when x-ray machines were introduced to the eld of restoration, important works have commonly been x-rayed during repairs. In connection with the collective krta exhibition in 1974 many key works by the Master came together for the rst time in a single installation and were restored, compared and investigated by scientic methods. In the exhibition catalogue there was an article by my parents, Alena and Vlastimil Berger, which dealt directly with x-ray investigation. In the same place there was also a text by Vra Frmlov concerning the colour structure of krtas paintings. The present project continued the programme of these studies and supplemented them with further ndings arising from new research possibilities. In the course of the investigations of these pictures I found that the results of the consideration of individual paintings are the more convincing the wider the basis for comparison and the more similar paintings I can compare. In the restoring of a picture two to four photographs are usually taken and for the actual work it is mainly the damage to the concrete work that is evaluated. X-ray investigation serves as an instrument for the better knowledge of the painting, its history, damage and also the quality of the interventions of restorers. As opposed to the usual restoration practice the present project is concentrating on consideration of the painting technique of the author. The aim is to nd the common traits of his individual style and, if at all possible, also to evaluate the development (or eventually changes) in the artists hand over time. For this it was necessary to investigate the largest possible number of krtas works. The starting-point for the present investigation were x-ray photographs on the one hand from the family archive (around 90) and on the other hand from the archive of the restoration studio of the National Gallery in Prague (roughly 85), which were digitalised. From this large set it was necessary to remove a not inconsiderable number of x-rays of works by the followers and imitators of Karel krta. In the course of the present project a number of further works were x-rayed over the past year, which underwent treatment and investigation in connection with the preparation of the exhibition entitled Karel krta 16101674. Time and Work. In all a further 83 photos of 31 paintings were added. These were mainly the works of Karel krta, but they were also supplemented by the paintings of Jan Ji Hering, Antonn Stevens of Steinfels and Jan Ji Heinsch. If we compare the authentic (archive-substantiated) paintings of Karel krta with the painting of his contemporaries, followers and imitators, his hand is seen to be more original and unequivocal, with sharper contours. Through the combining and digitalisation of old x-ray photos and the making of new
STUDIES 157

 The Assumption of the Virgin Mary, Prague, Church of Our Lady before Tn, sample of the painting of the yellow robe of the angel lead-tin yellow, lead white, ochres, verdigris; under-painting lead white, ochres, carbon black, red ground of the bolus type (photo: National Gallery in Prague) Sample of the painting of the blue robe of the Apostle on the right natural ultramarine, lead white; under-painting lead white in two layers (photo: National Gallery in Prague) Sample of the painting of the blue robe of the Apostle on the right natural ultramarine, lead white; under-painting lead white in two layers (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

ones a database came into being with designation of the title and date of the work and also appropriate detail in the visible spectrum. This newly enabled the full-value comparison of individual details under equal conditions. It is thus possible to compare a concrete x-ay photograph with a colour photo of the painting or with the x-ray photo of a thematically related work, but also with x-ray photos of the paintings of krtas contemporaries or imitators. Apart from the analysis of individual x-ray photographs (individual concept, concrete damage and also technological elements) it is possible, by comparison of a larger number of photos, to reach more general conclusions concerning the painting hand of krta, habits in the handling of colour or principles in the building of the composition. By extending the heuristic base the information is not only added together in my opinion its value is multiplied. In the x-ray process a portable source of ionised radiation was used. Because these were mainly paintings on canvas bases from the 17th century, the investigation of which brings good results, new revelations were anticipated. The analysis of the painters hand by means of optical and scientic methods brings multi-layered information on the preparation and creation of the work. Thanks to their greater penetration the x-rays capture the structure of the painted work in all its complexity; materials are depicted depending on the amount of heavy metals contained in them. Usually the materials of the base, the ground layers and the actual painting are shown, and sometimes also of the varnish layer. Depicted are the exact form and all damage to all the layers of painting, and also repairs from past periods. I will not, however, deal with damage to the paintings in this article, although I may mention it in passing. Almost all painters pigments contain metals, which absorb the x-ray radiation and according to this they appear on the radiogram. With regard to its composition and the high proportion of lead in it, Krems white is of quite fundamental importance for the x-ray picture. Some researchers even declare that 70% of the x-ray photo of a painting is a record of the presence of lead white, but personally I feel that in the present case there is even more. The popularity and wide usage of lead white among artists appears to be of key importance for the investigation of painting technique using x-rays. White is traditionally the carrier of light in a painting; it has an exclusive role in the lightening of colours on a dark background and it plays the main part in the construction of the broad palette of bright tones of the painting. It also creates space in the picture format.
158 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

3 For the x-rays of the paintings an instrument originally intended for the health service was used. The ionised radiation rays were emitted at 55 kV, 10mA with exposure times in units of seconds. The distance of the instrument from the painting is such that the cone of emitted rays covers the area of the sensitive foil. The foil of dimensions 42 35 cm is applied directly to the painting so that the rays pass through the entire structure of the work of art. Today x-raying using portable sources of ionised radiation is strictly controlled. Permission for handling these machines is awarded by the Institute for Nuclear Security after annually repeated professional training. 4 The physical and chemical properties of the elements are given by the number of their relative atomic weight. This number indicates, among other things, the strength of the absorption of Roentgen radiation. The number of the relative atomic weight of lead white is 207 and further high absorption values are those of vermilion (it contains mercury 200), minium, lead-tin and Naples yellow (lead 207, tin 118, antimony 121). These other colours, however, usually play only afringe role in the space of the picture. Both blue and green contain copper (63) and cobalt (59), reds contain other metals (iron 56, manganese 55, silicium 28, aluminium 27), which show up on x-ray photos to aconsiderably lesser extent. Lead white was known from ancient times and thanks to its propertiesgreat covering ability, easily mixable with oil, quick drying and insolubility after it is dryit became exceptionally popular with the development of oil painting. 5 For the function of whites in paintings there is more in Christian Wolters, Die Bedeutung der Gemldedurchleuchtung mit Rntgenstrahlen fr die Kunstgeschichte: dargestellt an Beispielen aus der niederlndischen und deutschen Malerei des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts, Frankfurt am Main 1938, pp.1935.

1. The Holy Trinity (probably 1649), Prague, Church of Our Lady before Tn (x-ray: Tom Berger) Drawn painting with fresh brush-strokes, expressive lighting and the body of the angel recorded in unusual movement.

It must be reiterated here that the light parts on a black-and-white x-ray photograph do not always correspond to the lightness of the actual painting, but tell of the amount of metals in the paints and their ability to absorb the x-rays. This also depends on the thickness of the paint layer, its application, the handling of the brush, etc. Often, however, the physical properties of the colours are similar to their brightness. The correct interpretation of the photograph therefore always corresponds directly to the experience of the interpreter. The canvas base and the ground layers usually do not contain metals. The picture of a canvas base on the x-ray photo is a shot of the ground between the rows of thread. The imprint of the ground may show whether the ground layer was applied with brush strokes of smaller or greater width or with a spatula with a smooth surface. The manner of application and the material of the ground are of fundamental importance in the creation of the painting. Its fundamental role is determining the time of the origin of a work, or in judging its originality, was already described by Vra Frmlov in the catalogue for the krta exhibition in 1974. The blurriness or intensity of the pattern of the canvas base tells of the composition of the ground layers. For instance, the red ground in krtas paintings of the Passion Cycle contains ferrous clay with aluminosilicate parts and an admixture of lead white. On the basis of optical observation of a sample under the microscope and also with regard to the pattern on the x-ray photograph the presence of lead white is more probably marginal. The clarity of the structure of the canvas stands out most through the height of the ground coat between the knots of the canvas. As emerged from further research, the construction of the ground of krtas paintings varies in different cases. The x-ray photo of the painting of St Charles Borromeo Visiting the Plague-Stricken does not show any imprint of the canvas, which indicates the presence of
160 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

6 V. Frmlov, Malsk technika (see note1), p.273 refers to the many years of observation by Mojmr Hamsk and his experience in the study of grounds in the restoration studio of the National Gallery in Prague. 7 According to the investigations carried out in the technological laboratory of the National Gallery in Prague.

2. The Crucixion with Our Lady of Sorrows and Souls in Purgatory, 1644, Prague, St Nicholas Church in the Lesser Town (x-ray: Tom Berger) The painters expressive use of the brush created plasticity of monumental style. 3. Birth of St Wenceslas, 1640, National Gallery in Prague (x-ray: Tom Berger) The plastic modelling in the lower layers is relatively high in krtas painting.

8 J. Neumann, Karel krta (see note1), p.228. 9 Among these are three Busts of St Wenceslas (Horovsk Tn, Rychnov nad Knnou and the Museum of the City of Prague), also St Wenceslas among the Angels from the Church of St Stephen and St Wenceslas as Defender of the New Town of Prague in the Church of St Procopius in ikov. See the latest Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674. Doba adlo (exh. cat.), Praha 2010, pp.198199, cat. no.IV.26, p.234, cat. no.V.17, p.470, cat. no.XI.7 (authors of entries Marcela Vondrkov, Sylva Dobalov and Vt Vlnas).

only immaterial substances in the ground (chalk, plaster, clay). On the other hand, in the painting Portrait of the Mathematician and his Wife the ground layers portrayed the pattern of the canvas more intensively, which exactly documents the presence of heavy metals. A composition of the ground highly untypical for krta appeared in the paintings of the Birth of the Virgin and Portrait of the Painter of Miniatures, where the pattern of the ground completely blanks out the actual painting with its regular grid. The structure of the canvas and the cracking dominates to such an extent that the painted forms cannot be evaluated from the point of view of the painting. Within the framework of the x-ray investigation works from all stages of krtas work were studied. It was demonstrated, however, that the painters handwriting did not alter markedly in the course of time and that its more evident changes were connected chiey with the nature of the work ordered and are therefore dependent on the size of the work and its function and purpose. Paintings of smaller format, intended for picture rooms, or the lunettes from the St Wenceslas Cycle are characterised by more intensive and more expressive modelling. In contrast to this, in the case of portraits their gradually layered modelling reects the slow searching for the nal form. The large altar canvases are characterised by monumentality, virtuosity and simplicity of execution. The author utilised a quantity of alternating gures, gestures, stances and colour schemes. In places the drawing strokes in the lowest layers come very close to the artists drawings, which were useful material in the actual interpretation of the x-ray investigation. In Italy krta evidently learnt to approach orders responsibly and therefore he prepared the composition thoroughly with drawn sketches. The excellent drawings are often a record of the painters deliberations about the attitudes and movements of the gures for more complex groupings. The preparatory drawings were sufficient to such an extent that in the actual painting there were hardly any changes in the attitudes of the gures the authors changes, known as pentimenti, scarcely occur in the compositional plan or else have not been discovered. In the study of the authors drawings it is fascinating that even in them there are no great changes; the sketched gures appear in various poses as if they were turning and posing in front of the artist himself. The whole picture is technologically constructed gradually: rst of all the delicate under-drawing in lead, then the consolidation of the drawing in pen and nally the wash in a half-tone, applied by brush. The drawings are all the more admirable when we realise that krta later hardly altered these sketches and that in them, apart from the composition and the movement of the gures, he also resolved the light values when, using the washing of the drawing, he dened the volume of the gures and the direction of the lighting of the scene. The readiness with which krta drew variations of compositions and also partial motifs is proof of his exceptional invention and certainty as a draughtsman. It is my opinion that all the more attention should be devoted to krtas drawings because the elements of drawing also appear in his painting, in the lower layers. The transition from paper and wash colour to the canvas and a wider brush is here effortless and extremely natural. The following text presents those of krtas works that are of more fundamental signicance from the viewpoint of x-ray investigation as the full the role of representatives of basic groups of paintings. An important theme, elaborated several times by krta, was the gure of St Wenceslas. The investigation was carried out on six variants of this theme, within the framework of which the painter arrived at a stable portrait of the Czech Prince imbued with a high degree of spiritual gravity and strength. The saint is captured in compositional variants in whole gures and half-gures, on his own or accompanied by angels. Even though the size of the gure was altered, the face of the saint was repeated in an unaltered form. In three almost identical canvases with the half-gure of St Wenceslas we can trace on the x-rays how the artist constructed the form of the noble youth in delicate values, where the subtle modelling stands out from the dark background like sfumato. The stable likeness, no elements of searching or wasted strokes, all this goes to show that krta had soon created the prototype of the saint whose face he knew well. In their delicacy the x-ray photographs document that neither here nor in the rst version did he use the portrait traits of a concrete person. The concentrated serious expression of the large dark eyes, staring urgently out of the picture at the onlooker, the

STUDIES 161

slightly hooked nose over full lips with the noble expressive line where they close. The placing of the narrow moustache is already left in the bottom layer without any more substantial under-painting, as the author from the start considered this to be one of the basic characterising lines of the expression. With the gravity of a statesman, concentrated gaze and severe colouring krta created a kind of modern vera effigies of St Wenceslas. Other faces, which we might place in the category of type-cast, well-known gures, would be the paintings of St Thomas Aquinas from the property of the Prague Archbishopric, St Augustine from the National Gallery in Prague or St Ludmila from Horovsk Tn. The portrait painting of the medieval Dominican scholar was painted on a wooden base and slightly less than life-size. The concentrated gaze while writing and the slightly bent head give the impression of peace and concentration. The x-rays reveal the calm but skilful modelling, lacking in expressive elements, modelling, which mingles tonally on the photograph with the application of the ground. The skilled application of the paint in semi-liquid state is admirable and the stable image is already visible in the lower layers. A different type of person, but executed with similar lightness, is St Ludmila the counterpart of the gure of St Wenceslas. The long face of the female saint emerges from the darkness, delicately modelled with a small round brush. The face with the hollow temples remains in the shadow, half covered by the wimple; only a quarter of the face is illuminated. On the x-ray photo we can see for ourselves the careful preparation of the shapes even in the bottom layers. krta returned to a very similar face this time in the case of Our Lady of Sorrows in his Passion Cycle for the Lesser Town Jesuits. There he built up the face with clearly dened strokes in colour and further enriched the more strongly closed face with an expression of human suffering. If the artist painted the faces of the above-mentioned saints with a clear vision and simple conviction, the half-gure of St Augustine required greater effort. The author caught the saint with a movement of the hand towards his forehead. Thus from the uniform matter of the background the shapes of the uttering ngers could emerge in expressive lighting. Even though the artist partly suppressed the expressivity in the further painting with glazing, the x-ray photograph clearly conrmed the authors outstanding skill, almost virtuosity in drawing. The face of the saint is again constructed with thin lead white and because the legibility of the spatial feeling is restricted here the photograph is not unequivocal in the sense of a single painting. Some kind of searching is evident, the building up of the ideal lighting effect. In keeping with this is the twofold placing of the ear, the situation of which in the proportions of the oval head always indicate the measure to which it is bent forward or thrown back. The gradual development of the composition is also shown by the mouth, which was closed in the original version. On closer, macroscopic inspection of the highlights of the painting tiny granular bits of damage stand out clearly. With the increasing quantity of white in the work tiny grains of paint can be seen to have dropped off. This is most probably due to the authors technological imperfection as the damage is unequivocally linked with the actual painting. Similar defects were also observed on the whites of the pictures of the Relations of Christ from the chateau picture gallery in Vizovice and in some paintings of the Passion Cycle. The altar painting of St Martin was conrmed as exceptionally important in the work as a whole also from the x-ray point of view. It contains some elements of early work and at the same time there already appear here painting procedures characteristic of krtas mature individual style. In the painting we can admire the parts of the unequivocally constructed faces (the saint, the boy in the foreground), but also further positions of krtas relatively quick, vigorous painting, using long strokes with covering paint and strokes of liquid paint in medium-light tonality. The bishop with the young girl brought back to life bears all the signs of krtas outstanding drawing. On studying the x-ray photograph, which reduces the colour to values of grey, the brilliant paint drawing stands out. The brush strokes strongly recall the authors washed drawings, in which the wash is only partly dependent on the linear plan, but of course the gures do not lack basic details. Everything is painted at once, without interruption, similarly to how the drawing was made a line with the pen, then washing with the brush. Even in a large-format painting the artist began with a drawing and continued with strokes of liquid paint, modelling the gures with light. krta constructed the head of the rider,
162 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

10 Alena BergerovVlastimil Berger, Pspvek ksvatovclavsk tematice vdle Karla krty. Rentgenologick przkum, UmnXXXVIII, 1990, pp.228230. 11 Cf. L. Stolrov V. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note9), pp.184193, cat. no.IV.16,IV.20, pp.198199, cat. no.IV.27 (authors of entries Sylva Dobalov and Marcela Vondrkov). 12 Tom HladkVt Vlnas, in: L. Stolrov V. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note9), pp.219220, cat. no.V.9. 13 Michal ronk, in: ibid., p.214, cat. no.V.5.

4. St Thomas Aquinas, (after 1640), Prague Archbishopric (x-ray: National Gallery in Prague) By repeated layering of the mass of the lead white painting with the interest of a portrait was achieved. 5. Christs Relations, (probably around 1650), Vizovice State Chateau (x-ray: Tom Berger) Drawn painting with slight modelling, which is emphasised only on the highlights of the scene. The unpleasant cracking on the highlights is caused by the lead white used.

on the contrary, with the greatest care and executed the curves of the face at least twice. On the x-ray diagram this created a precise form, reminiscent of a theatrical mask with the eyes missing. If we compare the x-ray photo with the resultant painting, on which the soldiers face is modelled by sharp light, it is evident that whereas the nal shape was clearly laid down already in the base layer, the painter dealt with the lighting only in the nal phase. The riders hands are drawn and modelled with light without a single correction, almost as though they were to be part of the instruction folios in a painting manual. krta painted the horses head easily, with lightness and many tiny corrections in the drawn form, done in the still wet white paint. The red cloak is most probably created with vermilion with intensive colour. The pigment, containing mercury, was depicted on the photograph in the clear drawing of a very restrained hand. In the form of technological construction the picture of St Charles Borromeo Visiting the Plague-Stricken comes close to the altar canvas with St Martin. Here, too, we nd the naked bodies of the unfortunate painted only with dark glazes, strikingly similar to the washing in the drawing. The parts mentioned are executed with the use of pigments, which do not absorb x-ray radiation and their picture on the x-ray photos is therefore unclear. A strong light falling on the picture from the left and lighting up the scene in the second plane, where the treatment of the patients is being carried out, allowed krta to use light half-tones for the lively drawn painting. The basis for the light colour modications is again Lead white. Later, when completing the work, the artist suppressed the expressive modelling with brown glazes. The main gure of the Saint, emphasised in both light and colour, stands out effectively from the background where the narratively conceived scene linked with the hospital environment is taking place. The appearance of the Milanese Archbishop Charles was known and it is therefore no surprise that in the x-ray photograph the repeated layering of light applications of esh colour can be seen in
STUDIES 163

164 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

14 tpn Vcha, in: ibid., p.226, cat. no.V.13. 15 Natural ultramarine was dearer weight for weight than gold and was imported from what is now Afghanistan. 16 The analysis of pigments and binding agents was carried out by the technological laboratory of the National Gallery in Prague.

the tonal application. krta managed to capture the likeness of the saint convincingly, although he improved the contour of the nose several times. The same may perhaps be said of the gure of the curly-haired cavalier in the Cardinals entourage, who allegedly represents the author himself. For the expression of his own image here krta sufficed with less painters application and simple modelling with glazes. In the orders for large altar canvases krta obviously felt more secure. According to the testimony of the x-ray his handwork here is excellent. The painter allowed a multitude of angels of all sizes to y across numerous paintings; their gestures consistently ll the necessary space and convincingly impart the appropriate messages. A characteristic trait of the modelling of the angels limbs is the application of toned white in cross hatches, repeatedly turned over the volume. We nd this method of modelling, for instance, in the little angel gures on the paintings of the Jin Annunciation to the Virgin Mary, The Stoning of St Stephen from Litomice, the Assumption from the Church of Our Lady before Tn or in the painting of Silvio and Dorinda from the National Gallery in Prague. In the last work mentioned with its theatrical theme we nd a unique example of a change in composition in the shifting of the hand of the injured heroine by one half of its width. Pentimenti appear in the paintings of Karel krta only in rare cases, basically involving tiny shifts of the ngers of various gures, their lengthening or shortening. I have recorded a large intervention of the author linked with the painting of a gure, or rather the covering of a gure, only in the Assumption painting from the Church of Our Lady before Tn. In the course of restoration a total of eighteen x-ray photographs were taken of variously conceived details of the painting, which is considered fundamental from the technological viewpoint. The canvas is of key importance for understanding of krtas painting technique, whether this concerns the striking and bright colouring, enabling the study of the layering of the paints, or the variety of the gural types. The painters hand shows virtuosity in the gure of Mary; in the lowest preparatory layers we see only insignicant changes. The photo which captures the blue and pink robe of the Virgin Mary provides an excellent opportunity to consider the modelling possibilities of lead white. Whereas the pink is almost pure white, supplemented by red ochres and today relatively faded organic dyes, the blue robe is thickly under-painted with white and then for the greatest brilliance glazed with natural ultramarine. This gave the blue robe, created with crushed semi-precious stone, the most brilliant tone. On the x-ray photograph the different method of modelling can clearly be seen, the aim of it not being to differentiate various types of material, but to create a base for a rare pigment with differently demanding workability. The layout of the picture enabled krta on the earthly level to create the gures of the Apostles both in the drawing form of painting (the gures on the horizon) and in the form of monumental gures painted in brown, immaterial colours. The painting was executed on the rst plane alla prima, with a well-thought-out tonal concept, when only one of the gures of the Apostles is lit and painted with thick layers of paint. The light-accented gure of John is legible at rst glance and its intensive, material rendering relates to the modelling of Caravaggio. In the whole of the work a painting process appears, which is not common among krtas contemporaries: these are the emphatically separated colours the contours of hands, feet and head. Here it was not a case of the painting through of mutually neighbouring colours transitions, but of the omission of contours, not painting the ground, optical strengthening of the depicted gures, fabrics, hands and clouds. The outlines have the colour of the red bole ground. This cannot be a case of later damage because the contours are also in the x-ray photographs. The real reason for the use of these contour lines is not so far completely obvious; perhaps it was to increase the legibility of the work on a distant altar. Experience and virtuosity might be the main characteristics of the painting, made visible by the x-ray investigation of the masterly work for the main altar of the Church of Our Lady before Tn. We can admire the brilliant handwork in the tiny, apparently insignicant angelic beings, dressed in different-coloured robes and surrounding the Virgin Mary. The different colours provided different opportunities for expansion of the handwork the application of expressive paint strokes. The angel on the left could have similar handwriting to that on Marys cloak, because the colour of its robe was created by a composition of lead-tin yellow glazed with verdigris. The colours of the draperies
STUDIES 165

6. St Martin, (after 1650?), National Gallery in Prague (x-ray: Tom Berger) The painting of the horses head is shifted repeatedly by the painter; the saints robe is painted immediately with far clearer intent.

and esh tones of further actors in the scene are applied in thick pastes and their mutual contingency creates the anticipated harmony. Each pigment was, however, mixed in a different ratio, with a different amount of oil and had a different consistency and neness of grain. In accordance with this it was necessary to select also a different manner for the painters elaboration of the colouring material in restricted parts of the surface of the painting. According to the x-ray, however, it is evident that lead white always played an important role. All that is yet to be mentioned is the important change in composition. It is evident that krta approached the creation of an altar painting with great care the drawing of the upper half of the composition tells a great deal about the preparations and about the ideas for the arrangement of the individual gures. The x-ray photograph revealed that the large angel ying in the central part with his back to the viewer was painted additionally onto an already nished group of other heavenly beings. Although it can be found on the preparatory drawing, the author decided on a change in composition. The lling of the space around Marys body with additively arranged angels, however, clearly oversimplied the composition of the picture and suppressed it, and therefore the painter dynamised the composition subsequently with the gure of an angel with a oating robe. Also admissible is the variant that the drawing came into being ex post, as a document or record of the already completed work. The importance of the order for the Church of Our Lady before Tn is obvious not only from the nancial demands of the pigments, but also from the canvas, woven to the full width of the painting in twill weave. We do not know the precise costs of painting materials from the period around the middle of the 17th century, but Karel krta never painted on canvas of such quality, and especially of such width, at any time before or after this. This also applies to his contemporaries and the painting production of the entire region generally. In the investigation of this painting no completely satisfactory
166 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

7. The Assumption of the Virgin Mary, (probably 1649/1654), Prague, Church of Our Lady before Tn (x-ray: Tom Berger) The gure of St John is painted in a thick application and the lighting of the scene is reminiscent of Caravaggio. 8. The Assumption of the Virgin Mary, 1666, Plasy (x-ray: Vlastimil Berger) Very uent drawn painting of the angels in the heavenly sphere demonstrates the great potency and ability of the painters expression.

17 V. Frmlov, Malsk technika (see note1), p.273. 18 tpn Vcha, in: L. Stolrov V. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note9), p.136, cat. no.III.21.

explanation was found for the origin of the long crack running down almost the whole of the picture by its left edge. The crack, caused by force, Is very old and might even come from the end of the 17th century when the roof of the church caught re and the vaulting collapsed in part. Smooth painting with thin paint and the exibility of the execution of the individual gures can also be admired in other altar paintings where krtas skill and feeling for the arrangement of a gure in the space or in a certain gesture could appear and develop. The x-ray photographs of the altar paintings are similar to the artists wash drawings, but in reverse tonality. Through the evaluation of the x-ray photograph we reach a different conclusion to that aired in the article by Vra Frmlov, who states that the painter worked with a technique of grey under-paintings, or more precisely grey preparatory modelling. On the x-rays no preparatory modelling is present. The black-and-white x-ray photos of the paintings of numerous gures on extensive and common formats clearly show that krta had a clear vision already before the beginning of the actual painting and that he did not lack the skill to transfer this idea to the canvas. An outstanding x-ray photograph captures the heads of Christ and an angel from the painting of The Baptism of Christ, which belongs to the Order of the Knight of the Cross with Red Star. In the light strokes we can judge the simplicity of execution, where the dark parts of the face eyes, the shadows beneath the eyebrows, the hair or the dark opening of the mouth are left unpainted by white. In the course of one time phase, on the contrary, the light values of the rounded parts of the face developed. It must be assumed that the basic colour tone of the esh colour was carried out already in the initial painting and that in the course of the nal glazing there occurred simultaneously the combination with the darker parts of the area of the painting. The work took place in a similar way to the washed drawing, when the drawing with a pen was simultaneously supplemented by drawing with a brush
STUDIES 167

and diluted paint. The head of Christ is constructed in a similar way to the head of the angel and its tonality is lighter as opposed to the nal painting only because krta worked on it for a longer time as it was of greater signicance with regard to the theme. Similar simplicity and virtuosity in the application of the paint is demonstrated by the x-ray photographs of the heads from the paintings of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary and the Holy Trinity from the main altar of the monastery church in Plasy. This is also similar in the case of the Annunciation to the Virgin in Jin, the Relatives of Christ from Vizovice or the Holy Family with Ss Catherine and Barbara from the National Gallery in Prague. A supreme example of drawn painting with the use of thin lead white paint is represented by the paintings of The Stoning of St Stephen from Litomice and the Crucixion with the Virgin Mary and St John the Evangelist from Chotkov. Perhaps the larger scale of the gures in the space of the picture or perhaps the importance of the order made krtas monumental string throb. On the large canvases with a mainly dark tone the eye of the beholder is drawn by the light-accentuated gures. In the case of the Chotkov Crucixion the faces of the Virgin Mary and St John in particular represent the masterly use of thick applications of white in the clear light conditions. The painters handwriting of long strokes of the brush, which model Johns golden curls or form Marys wimple in uid modelling, gives the impression of ease and simplicity. With the application of highlights to the ends of the ngers and the noses of gures immersed in an uncertain, dark area, krta accentuated urgency of expression and personal experience. The face of Our Lady has, in addition, the traits of a concrete human being. This is
168 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

9. The Crucixion with the Virgin Mary and St John the Evangelist, (around 1670?), Chotkov (x-ray: Tom Berger) Example of painting with a high degree of elaboration of the gures beneath the cross.

19 Cf. tpn Vcha, in: ibid., pp.256257, cat. no.V.30; Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas, in: ibid., pp.262264, cat. no.V.34. 20 Andrea RousovVt Vlnas, in: ibid., pp.150152, cat. no.III.30. 21 The very different manner of the painting of Helen and Paris in the double portrait described might be explained according to the interpretation of Marcela Vondrkov, this being that krta portrayed the lady according to reality (and perhaps also with regard to the special requirements of the person ordering the work, who was Berka zDub), whereas in the case of the bridegroom he did not have this opportunity and therefore used the manner of painting used in the case of altar pictures. 22 Marcela Vondrkov, in: StolrovVlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note9), p.306, cat. no.VI.16. 23 A. Bergerov V. Berger, Pspvek ksvatovclavsk tematice (see note10), p.267, characterised the painting as follows: the painting [] shows great mastery of painting and also the human enthusiasm and understanding of man and the ability to express the artists relationship to the person portrayed through the means of painting.From the painting there radiates apurposeful effort at the characterisation of agreat personality. 24 Marcela Vondrkov, in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note9), pp.290291, cat. no.VI.8.

perhaps the most considered and most deeply felt of krtas gures. The stoned Stephen in his powerless, questioning gesture is also painted with similar graciousness. The works arose after careful preparative drawing and therefore we only rarely nd any shifting of shapes, contours or insignicant details of the composition. A further example of krtas unique execution is the allegorical double portrait of Paris and Helen (Frantiek Antonn Berka, Count Hovora z Dub a Lipho, and Aloisie Ludovica Anna de Montecuccoli). Although in literature several variants appear of the identication of the persons depicted, the x-ray investigation clearly shifted the question of interpretation in a different direction. The young man in the antique helmet is painted in a similar relaxed hand to the one krta used for typical or idealised gures on the altar canvases. His face is in the background and captured in the half-light with light strokes and a round brush only very generally. krta executed the beaten relief design on the golden helmet in the same manner, but with more accurate strokes. If the lady (Helen) is sharply lit in the nal painting, on the x-ray plate this trait stands out even more emphatically. The investigation showed clearly and exactly what exceptional attention the painter devoted to capturing a precise likeness of the person portrayed, how long he sought the nal image, with what effort and repetition. Although the eyes sit rmly in place from the beginning, the modelling was layered to such an extent that in the x-ray photo the head loses its roundedness. The painter nally completed the rounded shape with the help of a darker glaze. We do not nd such a precise manner of painting, reecting the effort exerted, in the rest of krtas work. The differences in the depiction of the two main gures are also evident in the resulting painting, in which a certain disproportion in the size of the gures appears through the different lighting. The investigation conrmed that the different approach of the painter to the two gures and perhaps also the painters unequal interest in the persons portrayed was present in the picture from the start. In my opinion this may be the portrait of a particular girl, whose wish it was to be portrayed with her dream. This could have been a hero, idol, warrior or a suitor. We can see a similar approach, in which the painting is built up more lengthily with layering, also in the Portrait of Ignc Jetich Vitanovsk of Vlkovice. The likeness is perfect even in the bottom layers, where the incident light and the drawing of lips, nose and dark eyes are evident. The x-ray almost recalls a photograph in which the nobleman emerges from the darkness of an undened space. As opposed to the painting of altar canvases, on which krta could implement his visions of dreamy female saints in richly owing robes, his portrait work shows a calmer hand; the painter uses a smaller brush of rounded shape and the work is more concentrated, focusing on details. Among the outstanding works, which underwent investigation at present, one might include Portrait of a Painter (once identied with Nicholas Poussin), Portrait of a Young Huntsman from astolovice, Portrait of Hesselius of Cetvinberk (formerly Bramberger of Bramberg), Portrait of a Man Writing, thought to be J. Schwanhart, and also Portrait of the Gem-Cutter Dionysius Miseroni and His Family. We might interpret Portrait of a Painter as homage to the painters guild, and although today it has not been fully claried who was portrayed, from the drawing on the x-ray it is evident that it was a close person and that the work went forward rapidly under the impression of comradely assistance. The relaxed handwork, uid even on the white collar, indicates quick painting without the officiality of orders for the nobility. The portraits of Bernard de Witte and Ji Schwanhart have in common a feeling for the seeking of a likeness. In them we nd a concentrated and careful hand, short touches of the brush and the gradual construction of the lighted accents. Both paintings are signicantly damaged in sensitive areas. krta carried out precise portrait work in the case of the Portrait of a Young Huntsman. He used liquid whites for certain and lively painting, applying the paint only with clear intent; no stroke was excessive. The hair on the x-ray photograph, shaded with a light background, completes the modelling of the regular oval shape of the crown of the head. The relaxed handwriting and the likeness captured already in the lowest layers may lead us to suspect that the painter and his model were close to one another. The group portrait of the family of Dionysius Miseroni is, on the contrary, a work on which krta spent many hours. The x-rays captured seven details, which showed that capturing the likenesses of all those portrayed called for great effort from the artist. The rounded shapes of the facial parts are emphatically arched, the eye sockets and shadows
STUDIES 169

170 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

25 Marcela Vondrkov, in: ibid., p.276, cat. no.VI.1.

10. Portrait of a Young Hunter, (after 1660), astolovice Chateau (x-ray: Vlastimil Berger) Excellent portrait painting where the resemblance is captures already in the under-layers. 11. Portrait of the Gem-Cutter Dionysius Miseroni and His Family, 1653, National Gallery in Prague (x-ray: Tom Berger) In the original draft the hand of Dionysius was loosely posed, later his daughters little head was laid in it.

beneath the eyebrows constantly omitted. The careful, lengthy work and the effort to capture the strong individual characters of the individual gures are witnessed by numerous details the consistent outlining of the shape of the head and the protracted highlights on the shaded temples or the dened drawing of the eyes and the half-circles beneath the eyes. The dark lines, often dening rounded shapes, mean that the painting of the gures and the background took place separately in different periods of time. That the work came into being over a longer period of time is also demonstrated by the originally thinner face of Dionysius with projecting cheekbones and also the gesture of his right hand, which at rst rested lightly on the arm of the chair. Only later, perhaps in order to enliven the whole scene, was the gure added of a small daughter, placing her head in her fathers hand. Her likeness was created in the liveliest way of all. Perhaps the painter wanted to portray the fathers fondness for his daughter or he wanted to indicate the versatility of the man, who is talking to his son and at the same time fondling a further child, a man who is presenting his workshop to the onlooker and is at the same time a support to his wife. All in a single moment in time, which the painter recorded and in addition enhanced with a valuable shot of the spacious and prospering workshop. The painting Portrait of a Man with Long Fair Hair does not t into the overall picture of the handwork customs of the artist. Although this work was traditionally included in the golden treasury of krtas work, I nd some characteristics of the authors hand missing in it. During portrait painting krta laid a base for the shape of the whole head and the dimensions of the face in the lowest layers at least with a drawn stroke. He usually
STUDIES 171

smoothed the uid strokes in a rounded form with great respect for the details of the painting delivered later. The painting in question, however, leaves out the preparatory layout of the face with expressive handwriting. The short strokes with a pointed brush indicate an impulsive artist who builds up the anatomy of the important persons gure very skilfully, with great erudition and a sense of effect in painting. The highlight edges of white indicate very thick painting. The locks of golden hair are also painted with half-dry brush-strokes and create a showy effect, which I nd myself unable to relate to krtas painting. The difference in handwriting is also shown in the painting of the hand with highlight effects, contrasting with the linear drawing of the shadows. There is also an expressive charge in the painting of the curtain in the background, and here too the painting is not quite in accordance with the work of Karel krta. The kind of painting for effect that we nd in Portrait of a Man with Long Fair Hair is something I would seek in the work of Bernardo Strozzi or Frans Hals. The portraits ordered from Karel krta differ from his work for religious premises. The paintings are slower, with a degree of increased attention and carefulness. We nd parallels with the relaxed hand painting the altar pictures in the drawings on paper. The alternation of gures, attitudes and light values were common both in the painting and the drawing. The drawings for portraits, however, are unique and were clearly created in a manner other than that described above. The series of canvases of the great Passion Cycle might close the technological look into the painters workshop of Karel krta. In dimensions this is an exceptional series (ten canvases measuring roughly 236 176 cm), which in addition forms the main part of the artists surviving work. The technological construction of the Passion paintings, however, surpasses to a certain extent the framework of krtas other work. A look at the work, which has gradually been restored over the course of 10 years, is opened by a rich photographic documentation, including 34 x-ray photographs. Their comparison conrmed the highly mature and economical technique of the painters execution. Dark tonality prevails in the paintings, only the gure of Christ often stands out from the area of the picture. In the majority of the dark parts the main part of the ground layer consists of red bole. The proportion of iron in these layers precisely depicted the structure of the canvas base whereas the black and brown glazes of the background and the dark parts of the painting were not recorded at all on the x-ray photos. In the areas of the esh of the gures and their drapery, which the x-ray investigation was aimed at, the main role was played by lead white. The gure of Christ from the paintings Christ before Herod, Christ before Pilate, Ecce homo and the Flagellation stands out in a strongly built structure. In the scenes of Christs trials the dark tonality of the work enhances the dignied gure of the captive Jesus in his solitude and exclusion. Also the thick paint construction of the gure indicates the strength of Christs views and convictions. Although we can observe some partial corrections in the lower layers, the exalted faces of Jesus are proof of krtas gift for capturing the most varied states of human thought and ability to present human emotions. Again we can witness the swift and simple manner of constructing human physiognomy, which we nd in the case of the large altar paintings. Here this is not a matter of effective performance as a painter, but the perfect service of the painter to ideas. As masterly details I would emphasise the elaboration of the gure of Christ in the scene of The Crown of Thorns and of the soldier looking closely into the face of Christ. In the Ecce homo scene the head of Christ is strongly constructed, desolate and deserted, and also the head of Pilate, standing apart, at a distance, as though he did not know what to do with himself. Some researchers state that the original order concerned only two paintings, the Crucixion and Our Lady of Sorrows. In both cases the gures on the surface of the painting are indeed captured on a smaller scale. The format of the painting of the Crucixion is the only one in the cycle where additional canvas has been added (by the upper edge, about 8 cm). The other canvases are always in one piece and it appears that they are all the same with normal density and regular weave. krta used similar canvases for the altar paintings; in the case of portraits the weave of the canvases was usually, strangely enough, coarser and less regular, as if it were cheaper material. From the results of the x-ray analysis, combined with the laboratory analysis of pigments,
172 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

26 Ibid., pp.311341. 27 According to aprivate consultation with Sylva Dobalov.

12. The Passion Cycle, Our Lady of Sorrows, 1670, Prague, St Nicholas Church in the Lesser Town (x-ray: Tom Berger) The gure of the Virgin Mary, a type that appears repeatedly in krtas work, is constructed with a sharp-cut hand.

it emerged that the author of the Passion Cycle signicantly accentuated the painted depiction of Christs physical suffering. During the removal of varnishes it was observed that the layering of the esh colour on the body of Christ Crucied was in several colour tones. The suspicion aroused of possible later over-paintings was dispersed by the laboratory report. The original tone of Christs body was deserted by krta himself. From colder grey tones the colour of the crucied body moved in the direction of orange, The colouring, whether it was the emphasis on the red tone of Christs body after the agellation and of the swollen bound hands, or Christs suffering orange body on the cross (still before death), was very well thought-out. It will not escape the attentive onlooker that in the severely coloured compositions the colour of the body of the martyred Christ brings a further level of understanding. For instance the corpse state of the body in the Lamentation is an example of masterly painting concept and represents the maximum that it is possible to achieve in painting. The darkened head of Christ Crucied already irrevocably recalls a skull in its shape and the conspicuous spots on the body make it known that the body is already in an advanced stage of decomposition. From the x-ray photograph it shines out that the spots are painted as under-painting and at the end the painter only amended them with a brown-green semi-transparent layer. The construction of the anatomy of the naked body beneath the cross with mere interrupted touches of thick colour seems to me to be a great innovation in their time, which was certainly supported by brilliant preparatory drawing. The painter achieved the rounded shape of the dead head with the usual openings of the eye sockets in a similar manner with the aid of nal glazes. The opinions that the whole thing might have been based on graphic prints seem unfounded to me with regard to the painting performances just described. The emphasis on experience is present on all the canvases of the cycle and plays an important iconographic role. Pentimenti do not appear on these works. The direct, and in its way simple painting technique of the Passion Cycle led Jaromr Neumann to the opinion that the pictures were painted at a time when krta no longer needed to win further orders through virtuosity and when he was rather recapitulating his life. Later, however, Petra Nevmov found in the Vienna archive proof that the paintings of Christs trials were already hanging again in the Easter period on the altars of St Wenceslas Church. The opinion may rather be closer to the truth that the Passion Cycle was painted as a temporary decoration of the Jesuit cathedral for liturgical needs during the Easter period. This is also why a simple form of painting was selected, sometimes reminiscent of backdrops in its darkness. In any case this unique painted work became krtas unrepeatable personal testimony. The x-ray investigation, carried out conceptually within the framework of the krta research, contributed the rst database in the Czech Republic devoted to a single author. It is thanks to this that we can discover today which painting procedures were most natural to Karel krta, how he dealt with orders for portraits and where he felt most free as a painter. Thanks to this work krtas art is known today in all its details. Translated by Joanne P. C. Domin

28 More from Sylva Dobalov, Paijov cyklus Karla krty, Praha 2004, pp.6774; idem, in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note9), pp.312314. 29 J. Neumann, Karel krta (see note1), esp.pp.140142. 30 Petra Nevmov, Funkce obrazu vumn jezuitskho du, in: Milena Bartlov (ed.), Djiny umn vesk spolenosti: otzky, problmy, vzvy. Pspvky pednesen na Prvnm sjezdu eskch historik umn, Praha 2004, pp.112113.

174 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

X-ray Photographs of Selected Works

STUDIES 175

176 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

 Portrait of Gem-Cutter Dionysius Miseroni and His Family, 1653, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague, x-ray photo: Tom Berger) The portrait of the wife and one of the daughters is built with a solid structure of lead white, the likeness is already captured in the ground layers in anatomical forms; the action in the background is done with long brush-strokes in thin paint containing white. Dionysius Miseroni in his portrait is painted in the bottom layers in the form of a slender man with prominent cheekbones. St Wenceslas, 1671, Horovsk Tn, state castle and chateau (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln, x-ray photo: Tom Berger) krta constructed the representative face of the Count during the first orders and repeated it in many alternatives throughout his life. The fluid hand and delicate values show that the work was created quickly without unnecessary preparations.

STUDIES 177

178 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

Paris and Helen, (around 1672), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague, x-ray photo: Tom Berger) In the lower layers this double portrait is relatively unbalanced. The girl is painted with great effort at portraiture, whereas the young man is captured at a fast tempo where the main role was played by the correct capturing of the gure on the beaten metal helmet. The lack of balance in the size of the heads and the perspective creates a certain disharmony.

STUDIES 179

 Portrait of a Man with Long Fair Hair, (1650/1660), National Gallery in Prague (photo and x-ray: Tom Berger) The expressive painting is not typical of krta. The high tonal contrast building up the rounding of the face leaves the dark part without under-painting. The shine on the hair is applied with untypically pompous effect. The likeness is certainly highly authentic. Portrait of a Miniature Painter, (before 1640), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague, x-ray: Tom Berger) The light x-ray photo with the regular structure of the canvas base is due to the presence of a quantity of lead white in the ground. The actual painting is not expressively thick and is not distinct in the photo. Portrait of a Man Writing, so-called Georg Schwanhart, (after 1650), National Gallery in Prague (photo and x-ray: Tom Berger) An excellent portrait, constructed with delicate treatment of small brushes, where the likeness is captured with great astuteness. White in liquid form handles the white collar and also the lock of hair. Delicate modelling with the aid of long strokes is typical of krta.

180 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

STUDIES 181

 St Augustine, (after 1640), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague, x-ray photo: Tom Berger) As opposed to the brilliantly drawn and modelled hand of the saint, the author did not manage the placing of the head at first. By moving the ear upwards he calmed the atmosphere of the saints vision. Crucifixion with Our Lady of Sorrows and Souls in Purgatory, (1644), Prague, St Nicholas Church in the Lesser Town of Prague (photo and x-ray: Tom Berger) The thrown-back head with the thick application of modelling is lit by strong incident light. The alternation of light and shadow is carried out practically in a single layer. The corrections of the silhouette of the Virgin Mary were carried out in wet paint only in insignificant areas.

182 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

184 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

 St Martin, (after 1650?), National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague, x-ray photo: Oto Paln) A very precisely painted and evidently also perfectly prepared scene with the saint on horseback. Whereas the main figure is constructed with firm contours and the light arched deeply over the area, the figures in the background are formed with long strokes in thin paint. In these the delicately coloured lead white does not give an effective light charge. The long strokes are reminiscent of the colour washes on preparatory drawings. St Charles Borromeo Visiting the Plague-Stricken, 1647, National Gallery in Prague (photo and x-ray: Tom Berger) The figures in the background of the scene are not built up in the strong impinging light, but also are more reminiscent of preparatory drawing in their brush treatment. The painting does not contain layering or returns to details and it also does not contain any corrections.

STUDIES 185

Assumption of the Virgin Mary, (1649/54), Prague, Church of Our Lady before Tn in the Old Town (photo and x-ray: Tom Berger) The Angel on the left represents the supreme art of modelling in wet oil paints. The application of the sharp folds of the drapery merges into more delicate brush treatment of the esh parts. A long perpendicular crack goes through almost the whole picture. The gure of the Virgin Mary is painted in one moment with the appropriate physiognomy and a clear lighting plan. For the expressive painting of the pink robe stronger brushes were needed. On the further photo different ways of processing the paint appeared alongside one another. The difference is due on the one hand to the theme depicted the head of a small angel and on the other to the possibilities of the individual colours. The modelling of the pink and the blue differs fundamentally.

186 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

STUDIES 187

188 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

 Assumption of the Virgin Mary, (1649/54), Prague, Church of Our Lady before Tn in the Old Town (photo and x-ray: Tom Berger) The painting of the Apostle in the background is executed more in the manner of a drawing; on the right there is a strong modelling of the base for the painting in natural ultramarine. The little angel was painted in full in the original composition plan; later it was overlapped by the figure of the larger angel with richly floating drapery. Portrait of Bernard de Witte, (after 1650), National Gallery in Prague (photo and x-ray: Tom Berger) An example of careful and moderate portrait work where the likeness is achieved gradually with short, repeated brush-strokes. Thanks to their sensitivity the x-rays also captured the details drawn on the black robe. The damage to the painting of the mouth and the right cheek is substantial.

STUDIES 189

Passion Cycle, Crowning with Thorns, (1673/1674), Prague, PragueArchbishopric, St Nicholas Church (photo and x-ray: Tom Berger) Both heads on the opposite side are painted at a fast tempo with a clear idea formed in advance. Apart from the strongly applied light effects it can easily be seen that the paint is applied with a free hand in the manner of drawing or writing.

190 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

 Archangel Raphael with Infant Tobias, (around 1665), Kostelec u Kk, St Martins Church (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln, x-ray photo: Tom Berger) The likeness of Tobiass head is based on classicist form. The multitude of different draperies and their colours offers a glimpse of the authors creation in the black-and-white version. It is not typical of krta that the position of the ngers was altered several times. Passion Cycle, The Lamentation, (1673/1674), Prague, Prague Archbishopric, St Nicholas church in the Lesser Town (photo and x-ray: Tom Berger) The coloured mass of Christs dead body was built up in the rst layer with lead white. Whereas the shape of the head in the lower layers is whole, the body itself is lacerated and in a state of decomposition. With suitable glazes, which are not recorded by the x-ray photograph, krta created more dramatic sadness the arching of the shape of the skull in Christs face and strengthened his body with a layer of brownish-green.

192 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

STUDIES 193

194 THE X-RAY INVESTIGATION OF THE PAINTINGS OF KAREL KRTA

 Crucifixion with the Virgin Mary and St John the Evangelist, (1670?), Chotkov, Church of the Raising of the Holy Cross (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln, x-ray photo: Tom Berger) Both figures beneath the cross are painted with profound experience. The painting of the head of the Virgin Mary is constructed rather with short strokes with unusually great attention and care. Due to the interest in the individual likeness the figure belongs more to portrait painting than to krtas usual depiction of the Virgin Mary. The Stoning of St Stephen, (1669), Litomice, St Stephens Cathedral (photo: Tom Berger, x-ray photo: Ji Bare and Ji Brodsk) This dramatic moment of the saint is captured in liquid paint on a base of lead white. Although the dynamic position of the head was adjusted several times, the layered paint shows great erudition in the modelling. By comparison of the x-ray with reality we can see that the position of the dark shadows on the facial parts also shifted during the creative process. The Annunciation, (early 1660s), Jin, St Ignatius Church (photo: Tom Berger, x-ray photo: Ji Bare and Ji Brodsk) A unique example of krtas hand, presenting the integral nature of the application of colours on the surfaces of the esh areas and the robe. The long uid strokes merge mutually with neighbouring colours. We can observe a slight harmonising of shapes only in places of the positioning of ngers.

STUDIES 195

Karel krta the Younger

A Case of Two Paintings
ANDREA ROUSOV

1 Andrea Rousov, Karel krta the Younger, in: Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674. His Work and His Era (exh. cat.), Praha 2010, pp.422425, and on, eadem, cat. no.X.6X.11. 2 Gustav Edmund Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte desXVII.Jahrhunderts, Prag 1889, pp.4249. 3 Andla Horov (ed.), Nov encyklopedie eskho vtvarnho umn, I, Praha 1995. 4 Johann Gottfried Dlabac, Allgemeines historisches Knstlerlexikon fr Bhmen und zum Theil auch fr Mhren, IIII, Prag 1815, II, p.83. 5 Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (exh. cat.), Praha 1974, p.258. 6 Ibid., pp.259264, cat. no. 206215. 7 Jaromr Neumann, krtov. Karel krta ajeho syn, Praha 2000, pp.130151. 8 Joannes Florianus Hammerschmid, Prodromus Gloriae Pragenae. Continens Urbium Pragenarum Fundationes [], Pragae 1723, p.69. 9 See note 7. 10 See G. E. Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note 2), p.44 with references to sources. There were more lawyers in krtas familyVeronika, sister of Karel the Younger married Aegidius Jelen, doctor of law and appellation counsel. 11 It is known about his trip that he stayed in the parishes of Lorenzo in Lucina and S.Andrea delle Fratteresee J. Neumann, Karel krta (see note5), p.258 and idem, krtov (see note 7), p.133. 12 Johana Bronkov, krta akomunita zalpskch umlc vm, in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta amalstv 17.stolet vechch avEvrop, pp. 712; Jana Zapletalov, Karel krta: Notes from the archives from Italy, Umn LVIII, 2010, pp.152158.

At the beginning of this study, it should be emphasised that Karel krtas rstborn son has always been a rather indecipherable gure in the Bohemian art scene of the second half of the 17th century. Although we have sufficient information about his life, we are limited to undocumented hypothesizing when it comes to his painting oeuvre. This study seeks to follow up a recently published paper that attempted more comprehensively to evaluate the state of the research about the artist and briey characterised the nature of his work. It was Gustav Pazaurek who rst took notice of krtas son as an artist in the late 19th century, assembling what is to date the most extensive archival data about his life. Earlier lexicographical literature paid only cursory attention to krta the Younger or failed to mention him altogether, one example being the most recent encyclopaedia of Czech art. The earliest mention is in Dlabacs Dictionary, which does not accord him a separate entry, but presents him as an apprentice to his father whose image was constructed with the help of the elder krtas oeuvre. To date, Jaromr Neumann has paid the greatest attention to him, albeit rst insisting that none of his paintings has been reliably identied, though we do not lack certain, though thus far unveried, hypotheses. The catalogue for the 1974 Karel krta exhibition presents krta the Younger solely as a draughtsman and graphic artist. Later, however, Neumann published several paintings attributed to krta the Younger, which were believed to be easily veriable. Neumann tended to attribute any lower-quality artworks produced within the (smaller or greater) circle of krta the father to his workshop or his son. An evaluation of krta the Youngers painting oeuvre is also made somewhat more difficult by the fact that father and son shared the same name and were not mutually distinguished in the past for example, Hammerschmid does so only once Senioris Scretae in reference to the painting with St Thomas in the St Nicholas Church in Pragues Old Town attached to the now defunct Benedictine monastery. As there is no need to repeat all krta the Youngers available biographical data, which have already been compiled by Neumann, we can concentrate on several major facts. Karel krta was krtas rstborn son and the only child to pursue his fathers profession. His artistic persona was undoubtedly formed under the supervision of his experienced father. However, the son did not choose a painting career alone he began to study law at Charles-Ferdinand University in 1664, later obtaining the post of Royal Burgrave Court Counsel. He was thus able to balance the career of an official with his painting. He improved his painting skills during a sojourn in Rome, where he is documented to have been in 1673 and registered as a painter, according to Neumann. Johana Bronkov and Jana Zapletalov most recently dealt with the sojourn of the two krtas in Rome. The archival evidence tells us that krta the Younger was active in Rome in 16741675,
STUDIES 197

1. Karel krta the Younger, Stigmatisation of St Francis, drawing, National Gallery in Prague Collection of Prints and Drawings (photo: National Gallery in Prague) 2. Karel krta the Younger, Drawing for K. M. Laansks University Thesis, c. 1679 (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

but this information was not published until 1927. As Zapletalov also learned, krta stayed with other artists in Romes Isola Toscanella quarter. Based on a newly found archival source, she gave the year of his birth as 1650, instead of the heretofore used 1646. Nothing more specic, however, was found about krtas sojourn in Rome, though it is certain that the son availed himself of his fathers contacts while in Italy. In 1679, krta was engaged to Albta Rosina, the daughter of a lawyer and appellate counsel, and the marriage brought him the house U Korand in Pragues Old Town, which was authorised to brew beer. He and Albta had ve children: Anna Kateina (b. 1680), Karel Rafael (b. 1681), Mikul Frantiek (b. 1682), Albta Dominika (b. 1685) and Vclav Jan z Boha (b. 1688), this youngest becoming the only one to outlive his mother, becoming her universal heir. krta the Youngers nancial position was solid his entire life, owing not only to income from two sources, but also his fathers inheritance. Extant documents testify to his relations with the Prague Jews (such as Kalman Brendeys, Israel Brendeis, Lbl Wiener etc.). His dealing in paintings, revealed by surviving correspondence with Count Karel Eusebio of Liechtenstein, to whom krta offered to sell paintings predominantly by his father, has thus far gone unnoticed. An inheritance inventory giving a list of paintings, furnishings in his household and money left behind is another valuable source of information about his property. krta the Younger died at the relatively young age of 45 (or 41). He was buried next to his father in the St Gallus Church in Pragues Old Town, whose register of deaths lists him as a pictor painter. Despite his relatively short art career (contemporaneous with his civil service), Neumann attributed a considerable number of paintings to the younger krta in his last study. As already mentioned above, we cannot be absolutely certain
198 KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

13 Friedrich Noack, Das Deutschtum in Rom, III, Leipzig 1927, II, p.549. Let me thank Johana Bronkov for information. 14 J. Zapletalov, Karel krta: Notes (see note 12), p.158, source quoted in note 35. 15 J. Neumann, krtov (see note 7), pp.130131. 16 Herbert Haupt, Von der Leidenschaft zum Schnen. Frst Karl Eusebius von Liechtenstein 16111684, WienMnchenWeimar 1998 (Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte des Frstenhauses Liechtenstein Band, II/2), pp.255, 281284. 17 For details about the inventory, see Radka Tibitanzlov in: L.StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), pp.610611, cat. no.XVI.30. 18 The noble and brave gentleman Karel krta of Zvoice JMC, Counsel of the High Court of the Supreme Burgrave Court and burgher of the Old Town, left the realm of the living on January 2, 1691.., AMP, SR, Liber obligationum caeruleus 5, 16911696 /1709/, sign. 3601, f. 110v113v. 19 Die 3 Januari 1691 Gen.D.Carolus Screta Pictor 45 annor. sep.in cryptam apud altari B.M.V.Neapoli, quoted from: Pavel BergnerJan Herain, Karel krta (16101674). Contribution to evaluation of his oeuvre, SPSXVIII, 1910, p.8. 20 J. Neumann, krtov (see note 7), pp.130151.

21 Drawing in pen and bistre, on graphite underpainting, washed and lightened in white, 293 204 mm, The National Gallery in PragueCollection of Prints and Drawings, inv. No. K357, recently about the drawing: Pavel Preiss, esk barokn kresba / Baroque drawing in Bohemia, Praha 2006, pp.6869 and Martin Mdl, Stigmatizace sv.Frantika: kresba Karla krty mladho, Ars linearis, II, colloquium of the Collection of Prints and Drawings, the National Gallery in Prague dedicated to the art of parchment and paper, the National Gallery in Prague April 12, 2010; in print. 22 For its full text, see P. Preiss, esk barokn kresba (see note 21). 23 See note 21. 24 Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, more in: J. Neumann, Karel krta (see note 5), p.259, cat. no. 208; idem, krtov (see note 7), p.149.

of his authorship of any of them. Where should we look for guidance? There are only two drawings that testify with certainty to krta the Youngers hand. The rst captures St Francis of Assisis reception of stigmata (g. 1). The preparatory drawing made on a square grid is signed on the bottom right obverse as C. Screta, while the reverse bears a contract for the delivery of a painting to the ternberk family Chapel of Immaculate Conception, which belonged to the Irish Franciscan Order in Pragues New Town; the contract, xed by means of four ternberk seals, was signed on April 12, 1679. Unfortunately, the painting has been missing since the monasterys closure in 1786. Pavel Preiss believes that the altarpiece canvas was commissioned by Jan Norbert of ternberk, but as Martin Mdl rightly remarked, Jan Norbert of ternberk died in late September 1678 in Vienna, so the artwork must have been commissioned by either Jan Ignc or Vclav Vojtch. The contract also mentions a painting for the altarpiece extension with the theme of Sending of the Holy Spirit, which is also missing. The mentioned drawing from the collections of the National Gallery in Prague was preceded by another without a quadratic grid, which is most probably older than its Prague version. The drawings are virtually identical in terms of their composition. The modellation of volume is more schematic than in the work of krta the Older, but his sons drawings do not lack kineticism. Ultimately, it is obvious that the sons drawing style was not much different than his fathers, though it failed to attain his temperamental air and technical mastery. It is indeed unfortunate that the realised artwork has not survived, as it would provide us with conclusive evidence of krta the Youngers painting activity to compare with material whose authorship has only hypothetically been attributed to him. The next two drawings were designed for a graphic publication of Norbert of Hochs
STUDIES 199

university thesis celebrating Count Karel Maxmilin Laansk and his family (g. 2). The drawings were made just before, or during, 1679 when Melchior Ksel produced a copper engraving after them. We will not elaborate the thesis content as it is dealt with in detail in the literature; instead, let us focus on the style. The rst drawing the older of the two from the Berlin collection is done in a loose style, while the Prague version was produced as a binding model for an engraver and its lines clearly dene the forms. At rst glance, it is obvious that the artist depended on the style of krta the Older who had a wealth of experience designing university theses. We can still trace certain deviations from his fathers style, e.g. a generally more schematic treatment in the rst line or larger form volumes. Some of the gures are almost unnaturally elongated; it is interesting to see how Ksel suppressed this style in the graphic form. The fathers rm drawing hand with a temperamental charge grew somewhat rigid in the sons conception Pavel Preiss describes this phenomenon as a classicist accent and general academisation. We may see a style similar in nature in a painting of the theme Annunciation to the Virgin Mary in the SS Henry and Kunegunde Church in Pragues New Town (g. 3). Earlier literature attributed the painting on the southern side aisle altarpiece to krta the Older Hammerschmid described it as an artwork by the most famous painter krta. Neumann noticed a different painting style and was the rst to ascribe it to the son. The painting is embedded in the altarpieces secondary architecture, which like the sculptures was done in 1755 when the altarpiece was installed by New Town Councillor Jan Antonn Kozk. It was preceded by an altarpiece set up by Kapar Vojtch Macarius, the churchs parish priest in 16641681; its corner stone was consecrated on March 20, 1684 by Pragues Suffragan Bishop Jan Ignc Dlouhovesk from Dlouh Ves. The painting was certainly completed and installed by then (1684). Chapels were gradually added to the church between 1672 and 1696 and most of the altarpiece paintings, such as those by Jan Ji Heinsch or Matj Zimprecht, were also done in this period. The fact that the church served for the New Towns painters guild, which erected an altarpiece dedicated to their patron St Lucas, is also worthy of mention. The gure types and physiognomies in the Annunciation painting are closely related to gures in a painting with the same theme, which could be ascribed to krta the Olders last period (g. 4). It is evident that the composition which is the property of the National Gallery in Prague preceded the one in the Prague church. The pentimenti testifying to the artists search for an ideal form, especially in the gure of the hovering archangel, are discernible. The looks of the archangel and Mary correspond with those traditionally employed by krta the Older in his work. An identical composition, but one that is wider and embellished with more motifs, can be found in the St Gallus Church in Pragues Old Town as part of the Marian cycle hanging above the side aisle arcades (g. 5). However, this artwork is certainly newer and its as yet unidentied artist employed even more distinctly elongated gures. Unlike the Annunciation in the St Henry Church, this painting lacks the sensitive modellation of forms and the gures motion is less natural. If we are to decide who painted the artwork in the St Henry Church and attribute it to either krta the Older or Younger, we must agree that the different style as Neumann aptly writes in the areas around the draperies, as well as the distinctly elongated gures, indeed point to krta the Younger. The gures conception their proportions and rendering corresponds, for example, with the drawings for Count Hochs university thesis mentioned above. The painting clearly reects a perfect grasp of the older krtas style, which logically could be best emulated by his son. The artwork can be seen as a purposefully close follow-up of the fathers painting model, as the commission might have explicitly demanded. Another possibility is that it was krta the Older who was commissioned to do the painting, but having no time to do so, passed the task on to his son. Another example of difficulties with krta the Youngers oeuvre is the painting St Lawrence Heals the Blind Roman Soldier in the St Lawrence Church in Mlnk-Povka (formerly opka), which originally belonged to the Order of Calced Augustinians (g. 6). Before its restoration, the artwork went virtually unnoticed and was listed in the topographical literature as a painting by Josef Kramoln (17301801). The monastery and church were in bad shape after the Thirty Years War and had to be renovated. A painting with the above mentioned theme was done by Karel krta the Older for a newly installed altarpiece in
200 KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

25 Drawing in pen on agraphite underdrawing, 206 322 mm, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Kupferstichkabinett, inv. No. KdZ 26396; and drawing in graphite, washed, 485 682 mm, the National Gallery in PrgaueCollection of Prints and Drawings, inv. No. K4566. Recently about the two drawings: Petra Zelenkov in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), p., cat. no.IX.23 A.B. 26 Copper engraving, 476 650 mm, signed on the bottom: Carlo Screta delin.: Melchior Kussel scul. 1679, the National Library of the Czech Republic, Collection of University Theses, recently with abibliography: Petra Zelenkov in: Vt Vlnas (ed.), The Glory of the baroque in Bohemia. Art, Culture and Society in the 17th and 18th centuries (exh. cat.), Prague 2001, p.361, cat. no. II/3.38B; Pavel Preiss, Koeny aletorosty vtvarn kultury baroka vechch, Praha 2008, pp.153175; and Petra Zelenkov in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), pp.pp.414415, cat. no.IX.23 C. 27 Ibid. 28 On this subject recently: Petra Zelenkov, Karel krta and His Contemporaries as Designers of Prints, in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), pp.369371. Another thesis by krta the Younger, made as acopper engraving by Melchior Ksel, is extant: ATribute to Emperor Archduke Josefthesis of Balthasar Trchner of Mllenau, CharlesFerdinand University in Prague, 1682for more with bibliography, see: Vt Vlnas in: The Glory of the baroque in Bohemia (see note 26), p.131, cat. no. I/3.43. 29 P. Preiss, esk barokn kresba (see note 21), pp.70 and 17. 30 J. F. Hammerschmid (see note 8), p.239, topically composed bibliography in: Jana MareovMartin Mdl, Jan Quirin Jahn na umnovdn vychzce: Poznmky zosmi praskch kostel, in. Ji Kroupa Michaela eferisov Loudov Lubomr Konen (edd.), Orbis Artium. K jubileu Lubomra Slavka, Brno 2009 (Opera Universitatis Masarykianae Brunensis, Facultas Philosophica. Spisy Masarykovy univerzity vBrn, Filozock fakulta 382), p.97, note 41; Emanuel Poche, Prahou krok za krokem, Praha 1985, p.211; Umleck pamtky Prahy. Nov Msto, Vyehrad, Vinohrady (Praha1), Rena Bakov (ed.), Praha 1998, p.110; Andrea Rousov in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), p. 31 J. Neumann, krtov (see note 5), p.133. 32 Karel Navrtil, Pamti hlavnho kostela farnho, fary akoly sv.Jindicha asv.Kunhuty vNovm Mst praskm, Praha 1869, pp.3031. Navrtil also writes that the painting was restored as an artwork of krta in 1824 by painter Kotrba,p.41. It was also restored by J.Toro in 1974. 33 Recently on the work: Andrea Rousov in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note. 1). 34 Recently on the cycle: ibid., pp.443447, cat. no. X10,X.11. 35 Oil on canvas, 338 215 cm, Roman-Catholic Parish MlnkPovka. 36 Jaroslaus Schaller, Topographie des Knigreichs Bhmen, Fnfter Theil, Leutmeritzer Kreis, PragWien 1787, V, p.191; Johann Gottred Sommer, Das Knigreich Bhmen, II, Bunzlauer Kreis, Prag 1838, p.117 (as Kramoln); Ottv slovnk naun, Praha 1906, p.655; Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta, Praha 1956, p.19; idem, Karel krta (see note 5), p.202, cat. no. 118; Umleck pamtky ech 2 (K/O), ed. Emanuel Poche, Praha 1978, p.371 (as Kramoln); J. Neumann, krtov (see note 7), pp.143144; Petr BareJi Brodsk, Restoration of two paintings on the main altarpiece in the StLawrence Church in Mlnk-Povka, in: Renata pakov (ed.), Mlnk-Povka. Sbornk vydan pi pleitosti znovuvysvcen kostela sv.Vavince v Mlnku-Povce obnovenho po povodni roku 2002, Mlnk 2004, pp.8891; Sylva Dobalov, Poznmka kobrazu Karla krty zkostela sv.Vavince vPovce, Obasnk mlnick, 2005, May, pp.1618.

3. Karel krta the Younger, Annunciation to the Virgin Mary, 1680s, SS Henry and Kunegunde Church, Prague New Town (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 4. Karel krta the Older, Annunciation to the Virgin Mary, c. 1670, National Gallery in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

1661 or earlier. The painting made its way quite damaged back to krtas studio at an unknown date as the inheritance assets inventory of the property of krtas son species: A large painting of St Stephen painted by the late Mr. krta, which is however damaged and belonged to the monastery in opka pod Mlnkem (No. 153) and under number 154: The same painting of the same size newly copied to replace the older painting in opka Another record comes from a opka monastery commemorative book (1712), which provides information about the churchs reconstruction in the early 1660s: Also installed was the main altarpiece with the inscription: D. LaVrentIo saCrVm, item two side altarpieces, namely with Jesus Christ in the Desert and St Stephen, with the inscription: item the altarpiece with the Holy Trinity in the vestry and with the Virgin Mary Visiting Elisabeth in the Berkovsk Chapel, item tabernacle and screen near the main altarpiece; everything amounting to 1,000 guldens []. The churchs current property does not include any altarpiece canvas with the theme of St Stephen and the entry in the inheritance assets mentioned above seems to refer to the main altarpiece with the painting of St Lawrence as the main patron saint of the opka church. The iconography was therefore incorrectly dened. In the literature, the artwork was indirectly introduced by Joachim von Sandrart: zu S. Laurentii in Melnich..; as his general list of krtas artworks outside Prague was limited in number, it is surprising that he mentions the painting of St Lawrence at all. Dlabac mentions it as a painting by krta the Older. Jaroslav Schaller does not give the name of the artist, but points to the painting: Das hohe Altarblatt in der hiesigen Klosterkirche, so den h. Laurentius vorstellet, verdient der hier angebrachten Kunst wegen unsere Aufmerksamheit. Pazaurek logically based his opinion on the 1691 entry in the inheritance assets, which listed the painting of St Stephen as a copy made by krta the Younger after an older model by his father. He rejects Kramoln as its author and understands Sandrarts note as referring to a non-existent (or lost) original. Valuable information was acquired during the artworks restoration, which was completed in 2004. The main altarpiece extension with St Augustine was also restored, but this painting dates from a later period, likely the 1740s when the church was repaired under Abbott Augustin Maffay. The St Lawrence canvas was in very bad condition before its restoration the original painting suffered under layers of non-original overpaintings and its upper part was completely altered with the addition of an angel carrying a gridiron as St Lawrences attribute. These interventions were noticed by Pazaurek, who mentions the canvas restoration by Jan (Johann) Zapletal in the 1870s.
202 KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

37 For more on this inventory, see R.Tibitanzlov (see note 17). 38 Quoted after: Petr MacekPavel ZahradnkJan Bernek, Bval klter bosch augustinin vPovce uMlnka, Przkumy pamtekVIII, 2001, Volume 2, p.26. 39 The painting with St Stephen was probably not part of the property after Emperor Josephs reforms, as the 1789 inventory no longer records itibid., p.33. 40 Joachim von Sandrart, LAcademia Todesca della Architettura, Scultura&Pittura: Oder Teutsche Academie der edlen Bau, Bild- und Malerei-Knste, Teil I, Nrnberg 1675, II, Buch 3, p.327. 41 G. J. Dlabac, Allgemeines historisches Knstlerlexikon (see note4), II, p., 93, No. 26. 42 J. Schaller, Topographie (see note 36), V, p.191. 43 G. E. Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note 2), pp.44, 79 and 84. 44 Restored by Petr Bare and Ji Brodsk; for more about the restoration, see P. Bare J. Brodsk, Restaurovn dvou obraz (see note 36). 45 For more, see Pavel Zahradnk, Djiny kltera obutch augustininn, in: Mlnk-Povka. Sbornk vydan pi pleitosti znovuvysvcen kostela sv.Vavince vMlnku-Povce obnovenho po povodni roku 2002, Renata pakov (ed.), Mlnk 2004, p.24. 46 G. E. Pazaurek, Carl Screta (see note 2), p.79.

5. Anonymous painter, Annunciation to the Virgin Mary, 1720s/1730s, St Gallus Church, Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 6. Karel krta the Younger after Karel krta the Older, St Lawrence Heals the Blind Roman Soldier, before 1691, St Lawrence Church in Mlnk-Povka (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln)

47 J. Neumann, Karel krta (see note 5), p.204, cat. no. 118; idem (see note 7), pp.143144; S. Dobalov, Poznmka k obrazu (see note36).

We now come to a sensitive point the paintings authorship. Two art historians Neumann and Dobalov attributed the artwork to krta the Younger with reference to the inventory assets entry, even though it does not specify krtas son as the painter. The entry suggests that the original by krta the Older was in his sons house and was damaged. That is why a copy was made, though this was still in krta the Youngers studio in 1691, the year of his death. The copy is of very good quality and in line with krta the Olders style. It is somewhat misleading to look for a specic artists brushwork in it as its main aim and purpose was the faithful emulation of the original painting. If we assume that the original artwork was done (or installed on the altarpiece) in 1661, we would place it in the classicist period according to Neumanns period breakdown of krtas oeuvre. Unfortunately, we still do not know any specic reason for the original canvas damage; though the reason had to be serious given the decision to replace it with a copy. The copy, of course, could also have been produced by an assistant painter
STUDIES 203

in krtas studio, which was headed by his son after the fathers death. It is very likely, though, that the canvas was painted by krta the Younger himself. The painting is executed by a rm hand without marked hesitation. The crowd scene is well rendered in terms of composition with krta the Olders Blind Saul Before Ananias (private collection) offering a closer analogy. The artist chose a scene in the life of St Lawrence, a deacon and third-century martyr, which was less frequently depicted in art the miraculous healing of a blind soldier (judging by his military garment). The Golden Legend (Legenda Aurea) mentions the Roman soldier Romanus asking St Lawrence to baptise him. It also describes a story about Lawrence who, while in gaol, miraculously cured a pagan named Lucillus who had lost his eyesight from too much weeping and had Lawrence baptise him. In the darkened background is an unidentiable architectural structure whose hanging ropes and chains might identify it as the gaol. The healing of the blind and baptism relate to Christs deed in Christian iconography Lawrences Christ-like face may be intentional here. krta only employed as many different human types as in this composition in his painting St Thomas of Villanova Distributing the Alms (The St Thomas Church in Pragues Lesser Town). Dressed in a white robe and red stole, Lawrence touches the face of the soldier whose clothes, though of different colours, correspond with the garment of the blind Saul kneeling before Ananias. The soldiers feet are chained. A woman wearing a scarf and a bearded man react with excited gestures behind the soldier. A crowd of beggars and poor people is concentrated at the compositions single level, rather blended in monochrome colours. Unfortunately, the background, even after restoration, is very difficult to make out only the architecture on the far right can be distinguished. Also discernible are silhouettes of gures, such as one resembling a child (maybe an angel) or a standing gure of man with a sword. We cannot certainly rule out that the scene in the background presages Lawrences martyrdom on a hot gridiron. We can appreciate many things about the painting, e.g. the relatively demanding compositional arrangement of the crowd scene and the related distribution of light, skilfully mastered by the artist. Besides, the painting interestingly shows that the son assumed his fathers responsibilities after his death, which increases the probability that krta the Younger was involved in the painting. As the presented paper shows, Karel krtas son is still a little-known artistic gure, though extensive archival research was done and certain artworks underwent technological analysis on the occasion of the exhibition Karel krta 16101674: His Work and His Era (the National Gallery in Prague, 2010/2011). Nevertheless, the analysis makes attribution difficult, as the technology used is basically identical. The paintings under study in this paper can be attributed to krta the Younger on the basis of the presented arguments. In the case of other works of art, however, it will be necessary to continue on with art history and archival research to either conrm or refute the authorship of artworks ascribed to krta. Translated by Gita Zbavitelov

48 Tom Hladk in: L. StolrovV. Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674 (see note 1), p.132, cat. no.III.19. 49 Jakub de Voragine, Legenda Aurea, Praha 1998, p.218. 50 Ibid.

204 KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

Sculpture at the Time of Karel krta

TOM HLADK

1 Cf. Frits Scholten (ed.), Adriaen de Vries (15561626), imperial sculptor (exh. cat.), Zwolle 1998; Dorothea Diemer, Adriaen de Vries: Neue Forschungen und eine bedeutende Ausstellung (review), Kunstchronik 52, 1999, pp.242259; Sigmund Graf AdelmannDorothea Diemer (edd.), Neue Beitrge zu Adriaen de Vries. Vortrge des Adriaen de Vries Symposiums vom 16. bis 18. April 2008 in Stadthagen und Bckeburg (Kulturlandschaft Schaumburg, Bd. 14), Bielefeld 2008; Elika Fukov, Adriaen de Vries, die Prager Burg und das Waldstein-Palais, in: MnchenPrag um 1600, Praha 2009 (Studia Rudolphina 9, Sonderheft), pp.2635; Dorothea Diemer, Die Bildhauerei an den Hfen von Prag und Wien, in: B.Bukovinsk L.Konen (edd.), MnchenPrag um 1600, pp.131142. 2 Lars Olof Larsson, Adriaen de Vries, WienMnchen, 1967, pp.9495, cat. nos. 19, 20, 22; idem, Adriaen de Vries vPraze (Adriaen de Vries in Prague), UmnXVI, 1968, pp.283288, 293, notes 7991; idem, European bronzes 14501700 (Swedish National Art Museums), Stockholm 1992, p.98; idem, Ein neues Rom an der Moldau? Der Skulpturengarten Albrecht von Waldsteins in Prag, in: Klaus BussmannHeinz Schilling (edd.), 1648: Krieg und Frieden in Europa (exh. cat.), MnsterOsnabrck 1998, Bd. II, pp.201208; Frits Scholten, in: Adriaen de Vries, imperial sculptor (see note1); idem, in: Bjrn R.Kommer (ed.), Adriaen de Vries 15561626, Augsburgs GlanzEuropas Ruhm (exh. cat.), Augsburg 2000, pp.297302, cat. nos. 33, 34; Ji KropekElika Fukov, in: Mojmr HorynaZdenk HojdaPavel Zahradnk et al. (edd.), Valdtejnsk palc vPraze (Wallenstein Palace in Prague, Praha 2002, pp.204, 234, 236242, 252254; Sergiusz Michalski, Der Laokoon und die Ringer des Adriaen de Vries im Garten des Prager Waldsteinpalastes: Symbole der berwindung des bhmischen Aufstandes?, Studia Rudolphina 4, 2004, pp.2831; Lubomr Konen, Nochmals zu Laokoon des Adriaen de Vries fr Albrecht von Waldstein, Studia Rudolphina 5, 2005, pp.7779; Elika Fukov, Sochy pro Valdtejnskou zahradu (Sculptures for the Wallenstein Garden), in: Elika FukovLadislav epika (edd.), Valdtejn. Albrecht zValdtejna, pp.442443, cat. no. 3.19; eadem, Adriaen de Vries (see note 1), pp.32, 35, note 31. 3 Cf. Grel Cavalli-Bjrkman, Der Raub der Prager Skulpturen des Adriaen de Vries durch die Schweden, in: B.R.Kommer (ed.), Adriaen de Vries, Augsburgs Glanz (see note 2), pp.4651; Wurzelbauers Venus with Cupid, the top group of the smaller fountain, was brought back to Prague in the late 19th century and it is now exhibited in the collection of the National Gallery in Prague in Schwarzenberg Palace. Cf. Karel Chytil, Prask Venuina fontna od B.Wurzelbauera (Prague Venus fountain by B.Wurzelbauer), Praha 1902. 4 One of the historical methods of metal casting (cire perdue), which made it possible to cast even complicated shapes. It was necessary to prepare awax model, which was covered with heatresistent material (clay, brick dust), and amould was thus formed. When it was dry, the mould was put in the furnace, where the

In the early 17th century Prague was renowned as one of the most important centres of Mannerist sculpture, thanks to Adriaen de Vries (15561626), a native from the Hague, trained in the Florentine studio of Giovanni da Bologna. In May 1601 De Vries was appointed court sculptor to Emperor Rudolf II, but during his lifetime he also worked for many other patrons from the highest circles. Towards the end of his life he created a large series of bronze sculptures and sculptural groups for the garden of the Lesser Town palace in Prague of Albrecht of Wallenstein. It was characteristic in its soft modelling and conspicuous movement of the robust gures, in which the arrival of a new sculptural style was already heralded. The preserved correspondence between the patron and the artist makes it clear that the sculptures came into being gradually between 1623 and 1625 and they included both the decoration of the central fountain, and freestanding groups. The same source informs us that De Vries was very well paid for those works: the artists specication of July 12, 1624 reveals that the artist asked 900 thaler for the sculpture of Apollo, while the groups of the Fighters and Bacchus and a Small Satyr were to fetch him 1100, and the group of Venus and Adonis 1400 thaler, all of those sums many times higher than the usual reward for the carvers of the Late Renaissance and Early Baroque. The conscation inventory compiled immediately after Wallensteins death (1634) discloses that the groups entitled Fighters, Bacchus and a Small Satyr, Venus and Adonis, and Laocoon and His Sons (g. 1) were situated on a white marble pedestal surrouding the main fountain, crowned with the gure of the god of seas, Neptune, nished as the last one (1627), by De Vriess assistants after his death. The garden included a smaller fountain with the top group of Venus and Cupid Standing on a Dolphin (1599) by Benedict Wurzelbauer; however, both the fountains were ruined by Swedish soldiers as early as 1648, and their sculptural decoration was transferred to Stockholm. Following De Vriess demise and the subsequent departure of his assistants from Prague, the awareness of the very specic modelling principle, the spatial development and exquisite elegance of Mannerist sculpture disappeared and as quickly, the demanding lost-wax technology of casting bronze sculptures ceased to be known, and in fact due to the war events, even the necessary material for it was missing. Those were thus also the reasons why the beginnings of Early Baroque sculpture in Bohemia were not directly related to the mentioned brilliant achievements of Prague Mannerist sculpture, but to the much deeper tradition of Central European carving trade. It was particularly thanks to art centres in Upper Austria, the Tirol and Southern Germany that a new modelling practice got to be known in this country in the early decades of the 17th century: the V-shaped cuts enlivening the simple draperies of the rather stiff saint gures, albeit often provided with a lavish supercial nish. The improving quality of the local production was conditioned by many commissions from Catholic hierarchy and the ruling
STUDIES 207

1. Adriaen de Vries, Laocoon and His Sons, 1623, Stockholm, Nationalmuseum (reproduced after: Adriaen de Vries [15561626], imperial sculptor [exh. cat.], Frits Scholten, [ed.], Zwolle 1998, p. 238) 2. Archangel Michael Defeating the Devil, rst half of the 17th century, Prague, St Vitus Cathedral (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 3. Caspar Bechteler, Flight of the Winter King, Elector Palatine Frederick, after the Battle of the White Mountain on November 8, 1620, before 1630, Prague, St Vitus Cathedral (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln)

house: in their works, carpenters, cabinet makers, carvers, and sculptors were also to contribute to the efficient support of the Counter-Reformation. The representatives of the laic clergy and of old orders and newly arrived monastic denominations (in Prague itself more than ten of the latter ones settled between 1620 and 1650) were faced with an urgent challenge to restore the furnishings of churches in such a way that divine service could be carried out there. It often rst meant the construction of the altar as the main point of the Catholic church or chapel. At the initiative of Emperor Ferdinand II, a quick replacement of the furnishings of St Vitus Cathedral in Prague, practically ruined during the Calvinist purge of the church, was carried out immediately after the defeat of the Estates uprising. However, out of the sculptural decoration of the Cathedral in the rst half of the 17th century only one representative work has been preserved, a monumental and richly polychromed sculptural group Archangel Michael Defeating the Devil (g. 2), situated on a bracket outside the entrance to St Michaels Chapel, in its iconography perfectly representing the aspirations of the militant Catholicism. The artist of this luxuriously polychrome carving of full volumes and articulated outlines obviously sought inspiration in the South-German sculptures of the same theme by Hubert Gerhard in Munich (1588) and Hans Reichle in Augsburg (before 1607), whose type of compositions had survived in Central Europe deep down into the 18th century. In the rst third of the 17th century the artist to be most closely related to Prague Cathedral was Caspar Bechteler, the court cabinet maker, whose Hradany workshop saw the birth of not only new pews and doors for St Vitus Cathedral (and probably joiners work on the pulpit), but also the famous horizontal reliefs placed in the arcades of the high choir of the Cathedral (g. 3). In them, Bechteler interestingly captured the dramatic events of December 1619: The Plundering of the Cathedral by the Calvinists on December 21, 1619, The Ruin of St John of Nepomuks Tomb, and the Flight of the Winter King, Elector Palatine Frederick after the Battle of the White Mountain on November 8, 1620.
208 SCULPTURE AT THE TIME OF KAREL KRTA

wax melted and was burnt. After that procedure molten metal was poured into the hollow of the mould. When it cooled down, the mould was broken and the acquired cast was chiselled and polished. 5 Michal ronk, Prask olte vdob ticetilet vlky (Prague Altars at the Time of the Thirty Years War), Documenta PragensiaIX/II, 1991, pp.439445, here p.439. Cf. also Jaroslav Mathon, Prask olte vrannm baroku (Prague Altars in the Early Baroque), Umn (tenc)XI, 1938, pp.561571; Ivan perling, Die Prager Altararchitektur, Sbornk prac Filosock fakulty brnnsk university, F1415, 1971, pp.282284; Lubomr Sre, Sochask vzdoba hlavnho olte vkostele P.Marie Snn vPraze (Sculptural Decoration of the High Altar in Our Lady of the Snows Church in Prague), (dipl. thesis), Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Praha1973. 6 An extensive and costly replacement of interior furnishings of St Vitus Cathedral started with its re-consecration by the Archbishop of Prague, Johann Lohel on February 28, 1621. The progress of work is thoroughly recorded in the diary of the capitular dean Caspar Arsenius of Radbuza. Cf. Viktor Kotrba, Georg neb Cajetan Bendl i Caspar Bechteler (Georg or Cajetan Bendl or Caspar Bechteler), UmnXXII, 1974, pp.308323; Lubomr Konen, Esilio publicoFridrich Falck aKapar Bechteler (Esilio publicoFrederick, Count Palatine and Caspar Bechteler), UmnXXXI, 1983, pp.451456, here p.451; Ivo Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (The Art of the Baroque. Sculpture), in: Emanuel Poche (ed.), Praha na svitu novch djin (tvero knih oPraze), Praha 1988, pp.436437; Ivan Muchka, Baroko. Katedrla v17.stolet (The Baroque. The Cathedral in the 17th Century), in: Aneka Merhautov (ed.), Katedrla sv.Vta vPraze (K650. vro zaloen) Praha 1994, pp.171, 176184; Michal ronk, Sochastv amalstv vPraze 15501650 (Sculpture and Painting in Prague 15501650), in: Elika FukovJames M.BradburneBeket Bukovinsk et al. (edd.), RudolfII.aPraha, (exh. cat.), Praha LondonMilano 1997, p.357; Michal ronkJaroslava Hausenblasov, Gloria&Miseria. Praha vdob ticetilet vlky (Gloria&Miseria. Prague at the Times of the Thirty Years War),

10

Praha 1998, pp.138, 143. Vincenc Kram, Zpustoen chrmu sv.Vta (The Plundering of St Vitus Cathedral), Michal ronk (ed.), Prague 1998; Michal ronk, Jan Ji Heinsch. Mal barokn zbonosti (16471712) (Johann Georg Heinsch. The Painter of Baroque Piety [16471712] (exh. cat.), Praha 2006, pp.1112. The composition of that sculptural group was also used in the statue of the same theme at the top of the altar in Our Lady of the Snows Church, but the gure of the devil was replaced by acloud. Cf. Oldich J.Blaek, Sochastv baroku vechch. Plastika 17. a18. vku (Baroque Sculpture in Bohemia. 17th- and 18th-century Sculpture), Praha 1958, p.64; L. Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note 5), pp.9195, 99, 117, 195196, notes 140149, gs. 39,40 (before1650); I.Muchka, Baroko. Katedrla v17.stolet (see note6), p.176 (rst half of the 17th century); L. Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note 5), pp.117, 135136, considered St Michael in the Cathedral to be work of Ernst Johann Heidelberger. Unlike that, Oldich J.Blaek, Barokn sochastv 17.stolet vechch (17th-century Baroque Sculpture in Bohemia), in: Djiny eskho vtvarnho umn. Od potk renesance do zvru baroka, II/1, Praha 1989, pp.296, 312, note 19, attributed this Cathedral carving to the main artist of the Franciscan altar (in Our Lady of the Snows Church), dating it after 1660. Its anonymous master, who in his view also made the saint sculptures and the gure of the Madonna in the parish church in Jankov, seemed to him an initiator and foremost gure of Baroque carving in Prague. The monumental bronze group by Hubert Gerhard still adorns the front of the originally Jesuit church of St Michael in Munich. Cf. most recently Reinhold Baumstark (ed.), Rom in Bayern. Kunst und Spiritualitt der ersten Jesuiten (exh. cat.), , Mnchen 1997, col. g. pp.114115, plates II,III.For the iconography of the saint in the 17th century and the surviving south German monuments cf. Michaelsikonographie, ibid, pp.413429, cat. nos. 111123; On the bronze group of Archangel Michael on the front of the Augsburg Zeughaus, most recently, Dorothea Diemer, Hans Reichle: Ein Modello fr die Augsburger Zeughausgruppe und Werkstattfragen, Mnchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst, Dritte Folge, Bd. LVII, 2006, pp.3156. V.Kotrba, Georg neb Cajetan Bendl i Caspar Bechteler (see note6), pp.310, 321, note 21: In 1616 the council of the town of Hradany granted the right of burgher to the court cabinet maker Caspar Bechteler from Ober-Sonthofen. Jaroslava Lencov, Na okraj prac Kapara Bechtelera pro Prask hrad (On the Margin of Caspar Bechtelers Works for Prague Castle), UmnXXII, 1974, pp.548553; eadem, ezan dvee pozdn renesance aranho baroka vPraze (Carved Doors of the Late Renaissance and Early Baroque in Prague), UmnXXVI, 1978, pp.464472; I.Muchka, Baroko. Katedrla v17.stolet (see note6), pp.180182; M.ronkJ.Hausenblasov, Gloria&Miseria (see note 6), p.138, subtitle under g.109: The pulpit [] comes from the time before the Battle of the White Mountain, probably dating from 1618. During the Calvinist iconoclastic period [] both its gural and

The work in the Cathedral went on to the late 1630s, and apart from Caspar Bechteler mentioned earlier, other local sculptors took part in it: for example, Ernst Heidelberger decorated the lost altar of Corpus Dei, and nancially supported by Emperor Ferdinand II, a sculptural group of the Calvary by Daniel Altmann of Eydenburg (d. 1625) was made, still situated in the triumphal arch of the so-called Imperial Chapel in the chevet of the Cathedral. Likewise, in 1618, Altmann built the high altar in the monastic church at Strahov for the energetic Abbot Caspar Questenberk receiving a royal pay of 1000 imperials for it, which was then until 1633 decorated by his brother David for the same reward. Period reports provide fairly good information about other commissions for a number of new altars, provided both for the traditional, and newly established monastic centres. Apart from the Premonstratensian monastery at Strahov, and the Jesuit church at the Clementinum, new retables were commissioned for the Minorites and Cyriacs in the Old Town of Prague, at St Stephens, and for the Spanish Benedictines in the Emmaus monastery in the New Town of Prague, for the Hermits of St Augustine at St Thomass or the Discalced Carmelites at the Church of Our Lady of the Victory in the Lesser Town. In the mid17th century, two magnicent monuments of the triumphing Counter-Reformation effort were added to those: the monumental portal altars with aedicule additions, which still decorate the churches of Our Lady before Tn and Our Lady of the Snows. The elevated architecture of the former (g. 4), built before 1649 to commemorate the averted Swedish attack on the Old and New Towns in 1648, was set with the sculptures of the land patron saints Wenceslas, Vitus, Ludmila, Sigismund, Adalbert, and Procopius, which were to be accompanied by monumental canvases by Karel krta, the Assumption of the Virgin and the Holy Trinity in the extension. The carefully conceived programme of the altar logically includes the sculptures of the supports of the Church, the apostles SS. Peter and Paul, same as the gure of the main ghter against heresy, Archangel Michael situated in the highest point of the altar structure. The interior of the Franciscan church of Our Lady of the Snows (16491651) included the large altar built in Prague (g. 5), at the costs of Johann the Elder of Talmberg. It was provided with more than twenty gural carvings, in which the traditionally oriented carving reached its rst peak in this country. Within its frame, the gure of Ernst Johann Heidelberger (c. 1590 c. 1660) stands out. He came to Prague from the Mansfeld region in Upper Saxony, but was closer to Southern Germany in style. Judging by period reports, Heidelberger was very good at stucco-work, collaborating with Italian masters even before 1618, on the decoration of the New (Spanish) Hall at Prague Castle. Approved by Emperor Matthias, he took over the post after Giovanni Battista Quadri, who died 1618/19; however, he was officially appointed court artist as late as
STUDIES 209

4. High altar in the church of Our Lady before Tn, 16421649 (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 5. High altar in the Franciscan church of Our Lady of the Snows, 16491651 (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

1628. Apart from that prestigious post, he inherited from his predecessor the duty to take part in the adornment of the newly-built Empresss apartments at Prague Castle. The preserved building accounts reveal that in 1642 the decoration of the corridors and chambers with relief mascarons and large lion heads (Maskaragesichter und Lwenkpf) was shared by the sculptors Hans Georg Bendl, Ernst Heydelberger, Abraham Melber, and Elias Gutbier. The work of a kind of art supervisor was carried out by the imperial schatzmeister and owner of a renowned cutters workshop, Dionysius Miseroni, whose face is known from a beautiful portrait by krta. Whereas Bendl was paid 89 orins for a fortnights work, Heidelberger, Melber and Gutbier worked all through the autumn on the large lion heads, for each of which they received 20 orins. The name of the last-named Lesser Town burgher Elias Gutbier is linked to the origin of Early Baroque altars at St Thomass in the Lesser Town (1644), or Holy Rood the Greater Church in the Old Town (1647); whereas Abraham Melber supplied (1638) four altars for the Premonstratensian seminary (the Norbertinum) in the Old Town. An authentic proof of Heildebergers brilliant, albeit rather stiff carving, at rst still reecting Mannerism, can be seen in the altar of the chapel of Wallenstein Palace (g. 6), mentioned earlier, which he also supplied with a richly carved frame and gures of angels and the land
210 SCULPTURE AT THE TIME OF KAREL KRTA

pictorial decoration was damaged, but the structure remained. During the renovation of the Cathedral [] small gures of angels carrying the arma Christi were supplied again, as were the painted panels with the gures of the Evangelists, Fathers of the Church and Christ, executed by the painters Matthias Mayer and Ulrich Musch before 1631. 11 The relief panels were probably executed still in the 1620s, for in 1630 Bechteler asked to be paid for the pews and panels. Cf. V.Kotrba, Georg neb Cajetan Bendl i Caspar Bechteler (see note6), pp.310, 321, note 21, pp.318320, 322323, notes 5370; L.Konen, Esilio publico (see note 6), p.451; I. Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (see note6), pp.435437; I.Muchka, Baroko. Katedrla v17.stolet (see note 6), pp.176179, 184, notes4,5; Emanuel Poche, Barokn umleck emeslo 17.stolet vechch (Baroque Crafts in 17th-century Bohemia), in: Djiny eskho vtvarnho umn. Od potk renesance do zvru baroka, II/1, Praha 1989, pp.374, 388, note 18, also mentioned Bechtelers works for Strahov, dated 1625, specically the doors and windows for the library and perhaps also areceptacle for the relics of St Norbert. 12 It might be possible that it was the same altar, for whose execution for Corpus Christi holiday on June 12, 1636 Caspar Bechteler received 15 orins. Cf. J.Lencov, Na okraj prac KaparaBechtelera (see note 10), pp.550, 552, note 26. 13 The Calvary group was installed on June 15, 1621, and the monarch likewise commissioned the outside door of the Cathedral.

14

15

16

17

Cf.I.Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (see note 6), pp.436437; M.ronkJ.Hausenblasov, Gloria&Miseria (see note 6), p.143. I.Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (see note 6), p.438: Daniel had just the time to carve the altar of St Catherine and amagnicent pontical chair (for Strahov), but then he was probably called to work for the Jesuits in the Old Town []. M.ronk, Prask olte (see note 5), p.441, mentioned that in 1629 Ferdinand II had paid Abbot Caspar of Questenberk sixty thousand Meissen groschen for the construction of altars in St Rochs at Strahov. Anew altar for St Saviours Church was provided in 1640, be it that the previous one had been damaged, or for the 100th anniversary of the Jesuit order. Cf. Jan Schmidl, Historia Societatis Jesu provinciae Bohemiae, IV, Pragae 1759, p.448; in: M.ronk, Prask olte (see note 5), pp.440, 445, note 8; Frantiek Ekert, Posvtn msta krl. hl. msta Prahy (Sacred Places of the Royal City of Prague), I, Praha 1883, p.377, mentioned that apart from the existing (late Baroque) sculptures of St Wenceslas and St Adalbert, anking the chancel, and the gures of St Barhtolomew and St Clement, standing in front of them, similar sculptures of St Vitus, St Sigismund, St Procopius and St Ludmila used to stand here in Jesuit times. However, we have no precise idea of the appearance of the original altar architecture from the 17th century. Ivo Kon, Cyriack klter achrm sv.Ke Vtho vbaroku (The Cyriac monastery and the Church of the Holy Cross in the Baroque), UmnXVI, 1968, pp.173195, particularly pp.174176. In the course of four years three altars came into being in the Emmaus monastery. We have amore denite idea of the high altar dated 1640 that remained in the place until 1726. The chronicle of the monastery describes it as athree-tier architectural piece with abundant sculptural decoration. The rst level used to hold (probably in aniche) the sculpture of the Madonna of Montserrat, anked by the carved gures of St Benedict and St Scholastica, while the arch of the niche was adorned with an imperial eagle with the insignia. The second part contained the canvas Christ on His Way to Emmaus, accompanied by two lateral sculptures. The third tier was taken up by three gures: the central one represented St Jerome. The top of the altar was dominated by the carved Resurrection between two angels. The author of the entry mentions that the altar was similar to that in the church of Our Lady of the Snows (erat ad modum majoris altaris B.Mariae ad Nives Neo Pragae). Cf. L.Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note 5), pp.189190, note 98 (reprinted after Ivo Kon, esk ezbstv 16201650 ajeho spoleensk ahistorick pedpoklady (Bohemian Carving 16201650 and its Social and Historical Preconditions), diploma thesis, Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Praha 1957, note 126); also M. ronk, Prask olte (see note 5), pp.442443; Consecration of early Baroque altars is also mentioned in the liber memorabilium of St Stephens parsonage: the predecessor of the existing (High Baroque) altar of St John the Baptist, still displaying the original canvas by Karel krta, was consecrated on October 12, 1649, whereas the high altar was probably built in 1669. Cf. Joannes Florianus Hammerschmid, Prodromus Gloriae Pragenae. Continens Urbium Pragenarum Fundationes [], Pragae 1723, p.245; J.Mathon, Prask olte (see note5), pp.565, 568, g. p.567; I.perling, Die Prager Altararchitektur (see note 5), p.282; I. Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (see note 6), p.440; Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (exh. cat.), Praha 1974, pp.9496, cat. no. 14; tpn

Vcha in: Lenka StolrovVt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674. Doba adlo (exh. cat.), Praha 2010, p.134, cat.no.III.20. 18 However, most of those Early Baroque altars had in the course of the 18th century been replaced by High or Late Baroque structures: that was the case, for example, in the churches of Our Lady of the Victory, St Saviour and St Thomas in the Lesser Town. Cf. most recently, I.Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (see note 6), pp.438440; M.ronk, Prask olte (see note 5), pp.439445; M.ronkJ.Hausenblasov, Gloria&Miseria (see note 6), pp.188190, 193194. 19 Recently, Josef Petr pointed outin Kultura aspolenost vechch doby baroka (Culture and Society in Baroque Bohemia), in: Vt Vlnas (ed.), Slva barokn echie. Stati oumn, kultue aspolenosti 17. a18.stolet (exh. cat.), p.74that from the start of the Counter-Reformation effort after the Battle of the White Mountain, sacral buildings and their furnishings were mainly commissioned by monasteries, rather than aristocracy and cities and towns, but agreat part of the means invested came from donorship, which from the 1620s became avisible demonstration of Catholic confession both with the aristocrats, and burghers. 20 After are of the Tyne church in 1679, the last mentioned carving of St Michael had to be replaced by anew one, and aseriously

patron saint Wenceslas with rened supercial nish ivory-white polychromy and gilded details. The stylistic anachronism of the decoration of this altar can best be explained by the demand of the patron, who found inspiration in exclusive sculptural monuments of Prague Castle, carried out in the spirit of the waning late Mannerism. According to another period report, from 1630, Heidelberger and an anonymous painter worked for the same extraordinary patron in case of the altars for the church and castle in Jin. The altars for the castle chapel were nished in April 1631 and in the summer of the following year, they were decorated with sculptures (heraussen gefhrte Bilder). For all the work executed in Jin, the sculptor was paid 925 orins by the princes exchequer. The post of the court artist also involved the duty to share in the mourning decoration of the
STUDIES 211

6. Ernst Johann Heidelberger Baccio del Bianco, Altar of St Wenceslas, c. 1630, Prague, Lesser Town, chapel of Wallenstein Palace (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 7. Castrum doloris of King Ferdinand IV of Habsburg, 1654, Museum of the Capital City of Prague (photo: Museum of the Capital City of Prague)

212 SCULPTURE AT THE TIME OF KAREL KRTA

21

22

23

24

25

26 27 28 29

30 31

damaged gure of St Ludmila had to be repaired, as well. The obviously gravely damaged vaulting of the chancel was newly vaulted by 1682. My thanks go to P.Vladimr Kelnar for providing me with the information from the Tyne parish annals. However, as early as 1638 sources mention unpaid bills for the altar, commissioned for the Tyne church by afamous warrior Martin Huerta, one of the donors of lateral altars of the Assumption and St James in the Emmaus. We do not know, though, if that earliest retable (?) was also completed, or it was, in its unnished form, used for the construction of the altar dated 1649. Cf. I.Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (see note 6), pp.441444; M.ronk, Prask olte (see note 5), p.442; O.J.Blaek, Barokn sochastv 17.stolet vechch (see note 7), p.296; M.ronk, Sochastv amalstv vPraze (see note 6), p.359; L.Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note 5), pp.5253, gs. 79, and again I.Kon, Umn Baroka. Sochastv (see note 6), pp.441442all of them considered Abraham Melber or Stanislaus Goldschenk possible co-authors of the sculptural features of the altar, but this was refuted by O. J. Blaek, Barokn sochastv (see note 7), p.312, note 16: [] proposed adivision of this decoration among two groups, one of which is linked to Heidelberger, the other hypothetically to Abraham Melber, who seems to have trained in Prague, though, and could thus hardly have been capable of acompletely new concept. The precise time of the origin and name of the generous donor are recorded in three Latin entries in the monastic chronicle, published by L.Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note 5), pp.2728, 182183, notes 42,43. The same donor apparently had the seven saint gures and an unusual form of the Madonna of the Rose Garlands made for the parish church of St John the Baptist in Jankov in Sedlany region. Cf. O.J.Blaek, Barokn sochastv (see note7), pp.6264, gs. 12, 13, 15; L. Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note5), pp.3637, 186, notes 7375, pp.109116, 197, notes 162175; I. Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (see note6), pp.442444; The monumental gures of St John the Baptist, SS Peter and Paul, situated in the lower tier of the Franciscan high altar, were pointed out by specialist scholars as the rst oustanding Baroque gures in Prague. Cf. most recently, O.J.Blaek, Barokn sochastv (see note 7), pp.296, 312, notes 16,17; Rena Bakov (ed.), Umleck pamtky Prahy (Art Monuments of Prague). Nov Msto, Vyehrad, Vinohrady (Praha 1), Praha 1998, p.148. J. Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note 5), pp.135159; I.Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (see note 6), pp.439440; O.J.Blaek, Barokn sochastv 17.stolet vechch (see note 7), pp.295, 312, note 11; most recently, Tom Hladk, in: L. Stolrov V.Vlnas (ed.), Karel krta (see note 17), pp.538, 542545, cat. nos.XIV.1XIV.5. Oldich J.BlaekVclav Husa, Materilie kdjinm baroknho vtvarnictv vechch I(Material for the History of Baroque Art in Bohemia), Roenka Kruhu pro pstovn djin umn za rok 1935, Praha 1936, pp.6062. The court cabinet maker Vt Gbel made wooden plinths for the sculptures. Cf. O.J.BlaekV.Husa, Materilie kdjinm baroknho vtvarnictv (see note 23), pp.6065; Jan Morvek, Giuseppe Mattei aNov staven Praskho hradu 163844 (Giuseppe Mattei and the New Construction at Prague Castle 163844), Umn V, 1957, pp.346347; V.Kotrba, Georg neb Cajetan i Caspar Bechteler (see note6), pp.317, 322, note 51; J.Lencov, Na okraj prac Kapara Bechtelera (see note 10), pp.550551; L.Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note 5), pp.160169, asked aquestion whether Heidelbergers assistants might not have included (apart from his collaboration with Johann Georg Bendl on the Marian column in the Old Town Square, which has not been conrmed in the sources), in the case of the sculptural decoration of the high altar in Our Lady of the Snows church, Abraham Melber or Stanislaus Goldschneck, possibly both of them. NA Praha, SM, sign. SMS21/4, le 2093/III.Mentioned by V.Kotrba, Georg neb Cajetan i Caspar Bechteler (see note 6), pp.317, 322, note 51. J.Morvek, Giuseppe Mattei (see note 24), p.346; L.Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note 5), pp.151152, 203, note 234. V.Kotrba, Georg neb Cajetan i Caspar Bechteler (see note 6), pp.317318. I.Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (see note 6), p.439. L.Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note 5), pp.8287, 194195, notes 131135; most recently, Elika Fukov, in: E.FukovL.epika (edd.), Valdtejn (see note 2), p.438, cat. no.3.8, g. p.439. Fukov, in: E. Fukov L. epika (edd.), Valdtejn (see note 2), p.438, cat. no. 3.9. Jan MorvekZdenk Wirth, Valdtejnv Jin (Wallensteins Jin), Prague 1934, pp.454, 460, note 40. Also p.464: [] after Wallensteins death [] the group of creditors included, besides Giov.

Cathedral in case of a Habsburg death. In early spring of 1637 Heidelberger, collaborating with other Prague artists, thus created a mourning memorial (Castrum doloris) for Emperor Ferdinand II: while Caspar Bechteler made the wooden structure of the monument and put it together, Karl Kreger turned the columns on his lathe, whereas Dionisius Miseroni covered the structure with canvas and cloth, and nally, the Lesser Town court painter Matthias Mayer decorated all the monument, at which on April 8 exequies were served. A period engraving shows us the appearance of another castrum doloris, built in St Vitus choir after the sudden death of the young King Ferdinand IV (g. 7). That monumental commemorative structure was both designed and supervised by Karel krta in the brief time between July and September 1654, and it was set with the sculptures of the cardinal Virtues, angels, and the seated skeleton, which as the Mors imperator topped the whole structure. Heidelbergers workshop also produced some saint gures for Our Lady of the Snows church, and likewise, one of the most remarkable achievements of Early Baroque in Bohemia the carving of St Francis of Paola (g. 8), apparently
STUDIES 213

designed for the high altar of the Minims in the Old Town of Prague. Ivo Kon was thus right in saying that Heildeberger must have been an exceptional personality, if he was able to overcome the limitations of Mannerist carving and approach the expression of the Baroque. The summary of Early Baroque works in Bohemia would not be complete without at least a brief mention of the signicance of Italian masters who in the 17th century practically dominated the eld of stucco-work. The massive ornamental and gural dcor of the Italians can be found in a number of local sacral and profane monuments. Whereas in Wallenstein Palace stuccoing was supervised by Domenico Canevalle da Moneto (recorded c. 16291631) and Santin Galli (d. after 1670), Michna Palace in the Lesser Town and Lobkowicz Palace at Prague Castle saw the activity of Santin Gallis son Domenico (rst recorded in 1644, d. 1675). The most important stuccoer of our Early Baroque, working for over thirty years for both ecclesiastical and aristocratic patrons, was a native of Devoggio near Lugano, Giovanni Bartolomeo Cometa (16201687). Cometas application to the emperor for a post of the court stuccoer (1680) reveals a surprisingly extensive activity: not only did he work on the fronts of the Clementinum in Prague and St Saviours Church, but he also carried out work at St Galls in the Old Town, for the Hibernians in the New Town, in the church of the Assumption in Star Boleslav, same as in Svat Hora near Pbram, or at the Loreto church in Prague. The gardens of Prague Castle display Cometas decoration of the niche with a fountain and sculpture of Hercules by Johann Georg Bendl.
214 SCULPTURE AT THE TIME OF KAREL KRTA

32

33

34

35

Pieroni and the brothers Antonio and Pietro Spezza, the sculptor E.Heidelberger (underpayment 300 orins). Cf. also L.Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note5), pp.149, 202, note 226; most recently, Tom Hladk, in: E.FukovL.epika (edd.), Valdtejn (see note 2), p.439, cat. no. 3.11; idem, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 17), p.543, cat. nos.XIV.2,XIV.3. According to an entry in payment records, Bechteler was paid 80orins for the job. Cf. J.Lencov, Na okraj prac Kapara Bechtelera (see note 10), pp.550, 552, note28. Antonn Novotn, Jak ivot Prahou el (The Course of Life in Praha), Prague 1946, p.74; L.Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note5), pp.150, 202, note229. Castrum doloris of King Ferdinand IV, copper engraving, paper, 570 736 mm, signed: Frater Henricus sculpsit, Museum of the Capital City of Prague, inv. no. 24430; It was probably krta himself who invited Heidelberger to collaborate, and out of his own pay of 428 orins, the painter also paid for the carpenters work, the timber and its transport. Cf. A.Novotn, Jak ivot Prahou el (see note 33), p.74; L.Sre, Sochask vzdoba (see note 5), pp.137, 200, notes 200, 201, g. 93 (all engraving), 94 (allegory of Hope), 95 (allegory of Love); Jitka Helfertov, Castra doloris doby barokn vechch (Castra doloris of the Baroque Era in Bohemia), UmnXXII, 1974, pp.294295, 297, 306, notes 2123, g. 3, p.294. Apart from the gural decoration of the high altar, in which Heidelberger apparently shared with his sculptures of angels above the titular painting and the gure of St Wenceslas in its upper part, his workshop supplied free-standing saint gures (16251650) now on the nookshafts in the nave. These recently restored carvings repre-

8. Ernst Johann Heidelberger, St Francis of Paola, perhaps 1625, Prague, Church of Our Lady before Tn in the Old Town of Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 9. Holy Bishop (St Adalbert?), c. 1650, Hussite Museum in Tbor, collection of Blatsk Museum in Vesel nad Lunic (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 10. Johann Georg Bendl, Archangel Raphael, after 1650 or after 1673?, Museum of the Capital City of Prague (reproduced after: Lenka Stolrov Vt Vlnas [edd.], Karel krta [16101674]. Doba a dlo [exh. cat.], Praha 2010, p. 550) 11. Cristoforo Stati, St Mary Magdalene, 16091612, Rome, SantAndrea della Valle (photo: the authors archive)

36

37

38

39

40

sent SS Barbara, Adalbert, Vitus, John the Baptist, Christ the Saviour, the Dolorosa, St Bernardino of Siena, St Francis Seraphim, StDidacus and St Antony of Padua. Some time ago, the carvings of St Adalbert and St John the Baptist were attributed to the workshop of Johann Georg Bendl (165565), while the sculptures of SS Francis and Antony of Padua were thought to have been executed by the successor of the master, active in the mid17th century. Cf. R.Bakov (ed.), Umleck pamtky Prahy. Nov Msto (see note 21), p.149. Cf. F.Ekert, Posvtn msta (see note 15), p.374; I.Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (see note 6), p.440; most recently, Elika Fukov, in: E.FukovL.epika (edd.), Valdtejn (see note2), p.438, cat. no.3.9 (Ernst Heidelberger, probably 1627); Tom Hladk, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 17), p.542, cat. no.XIV.1, g. I.Kon, Umn baroka. Sochastv (see note 6), p.444; In Michal ronks view, in: M.ronkJ.Hausenblasov, Gloria&Miseria (see note 6), p.200, Heidelberger represented an important link of local sculpture on the way from the Late Mannerism to the Early Baroque. Pavel Preiss, Italt umlci vPraze. Renesance, Manrismus, Baroko (Italian Artists in Prague. Renaissance, Mannerism, Baroque), Praha 1986, pp.250262. Ibid., p.252; most recently, Ivan MuchkaKvta Kov, Valdtejnsk palc (Wallenstein Palace), Praha 1996, pp.38, 40, 70; Ji Kropek, in: M. Horyna Z. Hojda P. Zahradnk et al. (edd.), Valdtejnsk palc (see note 2), pp.208209, 241, note 18. P.Preiss, Italt umlci vPraze (see note 38), pp.255256; Vra NakovJaroslava Lencov, Barokn pestavba

Johann Georg Bendl (c. 16201680) was in fact the greatest gure of Early Baroque sculpture in Bohemia. As early as 1723 the topographer of Baroque Prague Florian Hammerschmid called him praestans statuarius and as late as the end of the 18th century, Johann Quirin Jahn mentioned Bendl as a renowned and skilful sculptor. The appreciation of the past centuries remained valid even for modern literature, in which Bendl represents a founding gure of local Baroque sculpture, comparable to the best achievements of 17th-century Central European sculptors, and fullling a similar role as Karel krta in the eld of Baroque painting. If we compare the carvings of St Francis of Assisi from the National Gallery in Prague, and St Adalbert (?) from the Blatsk Museum in Vesel nad Lunic (g. 9), both presented at the recent Prague exhibition of Karel krta, with Bendls saint gures, all the merits of his carving stand out, representing the main stream of that artists oeuvre (g. 10). The main features included careful supercial modelling, conspicuous plasticity of the volumes, extraordinary richness of forms, and a rare logic of the composition of volumes. Same as krta, Bendl also had personal experience of Italian art. But whereas krta noticed all the topical tendencies within the frame of a wide range of Italian painting, Bendl returned from the early works of Franois Duquesnoy to the Roman marble sculpture of the last Mannerist and rst Baroque generations of sculptors, represented by the names of Ambrogio Buonvicino, Cristoforo Stati (g. 11), Ippolito Buzzio, Nicolas Cordier and Stefano Maderno. Even his stucco gures of angels below the cupola of St Saviour at the Clementinum (16481649), Bendls
STUDIES 215

12. Johann Georg Bendl, St James the Greater, 16731675, Prague, Church of the Holy Saviour in the Old Town (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 13. Franois Duquesnoy, St Andrew, 16351641, Rome, St Peters Basilica in the Vatican (reproduced after: Lenka Stolrov Vt Vlnas [edd.], Karel krta [16101674]. Doba a dlo [exh. cat.], Praha 2010, p. 552)

early work, are reminiscent of the stucco decoration in the Cappella Paolina (1611) of the Roman basilica S. Maria Maggiore, and the same equally applies to the stone sculpture of St Jerome on the front of the same Jesuit church, inspired by the gure of that saint from the Roman church S. Bernardo alle Terme by Camillo Mariani (1611). Likewise, the brilliant series of the twelve apostles, set on the confessionals of the Jesuit St Saviours church between 1673 and 1675, had found a direct inspiration in Roman sculpture, whose profound knowledge was apparently also provided by Bendls trip to Loreto, which is mentioned in his testament dated 1657. Years ago Oldich Blaek noticed that the carving of St James the Greater (g. 12) at the Clementinum is based on a composition of the marble sculpture of the same saint (c.1615) by Ippolito Buzzio in S. Giacomo degli Incurabili, while the Prague sculpture of St Andrew is an interesting variation on the renowned marble sculpture by Duquesnoy from the Vatican basilica (g. 13). The knowledge of the wide range of Roman sculpture around 1600 was also the basis of the rotary movement used in the composition of most of Bendls gures, their types and folds of draperies. Moreover, Bendl was able to transfer the creative achievements of the mentioned generation to local conditions so convincingly that he attracted some masters of the subsequent generations, particularly Matthus Wenzel Jckel, and the young Ferdinand Maximilian Brokof (16881731). The other source of Bendls sculpture is in fact genetically older than the mentioned Italian inspiration. It was the traditional craft of South-German carvers workshops, which the young apprentice of sculptural art probably got to know thanks to his father, Georg
216 SCULPTURE AT THE TIME OF KAREL KRTA

Lobkovickho palce (The Baroque Reconstruction of Lobkowicz Palace), Umn XLIII, 1995, p.428. 41 Oldich J.BlaekVclav Husa, Materilie kdjinm baroknho vtvarnictv vechch, II (Material for the History of Baroque Art in Bohemia), Roenka Kruhu pro pstovn djin umn za rok 1936, Praha 1937, pp.59; Oldich J.Blaek, Italsk podnty aohlasy vbarokovm sochastv ech (Italian Impulses and Echoes in the Baroque Sculpture of Bohemia), UmnXXVIII, 1980, pp.493503, here p.495; P.Preiss, Italt umlci vPraze (see note 38), pp.256257, 260; O.J.Blaek, Barokn sochastv (see note7), pp.298299; Vra Nakov, Cometta /Cometa/ Giovanni Bartolomeo, in: Sauer Allgemeines Knstler-Lexikon. Die Bildenden Knstler aller Zeiten und Vlker, Bd. 20, MnchenLeipzig, 1998, pp.371372, p.443 (Colombo Giovanni Battista); Ji Kropek, in: M.HorynaZ.HojdaP.Zahradnk et al. (edd.), Valdtejnsk palc (see note 2), pp.208209. 42 Oldich. J.Blaek, Jan Ji Bendl, prask socha asnho baroka (Johann Georg Bendl, aPrague Sculptor of the Early Baroque), Pamtky archeologick, XL, 1937, pp.8890; Ivo Kon, Reprezentativn obraz baroka vechch (ARepresentative Picture of the Baroque in Bohemia) (review), UmnXXIX, 1981, p.466; Oldich J.Blaek, Jan Ji Bendl. Vbr ezeb praskho sochae ranho baroku (Johann Georg Bendl. Selected Carvings of aPrague Sculptor of the Early Baroque) (exh. cat.), Praha 1982, p.5; idem, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let od smrti zakladatele esk barokov plastiky (Johann Georg Bendl. Three Hundred Years Anniversary of the Death of the Founder of Bohemian Baroque Sculpture), UmnXXX, 1982, pp.97, 110; idem, Barokn sochastv (see note 7), p.299. 43 T. Hladk, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see

14., 15. Johann Georg Bendl, Head of the Immaculata and the Group of the Angel Fighting the Devil (modern-age copies after partially preserved sandstone sculptures from the Marian column in the Old Town Square in Prague), originals dating from 1650 (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 16. Melchior Kssel after Karel krta, The Old Town Marian Column as a Geographical and Spiritual Centre of Europe (University thesis by Johann Friedrich of Waldstein, defended at CharlesFerdinand University in Prague), 1661, National Library of the Czech Republic (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln)

44 45 46

47

note17), p.544, cat. no.XIV.4, g., p.546, cat. no.XIV.6, g; The carving St Adalbert (?) from the museum in Vesel nad Lunic in fact comes from the church of St Mark in Sobslav, which has recently been researched by Michaela Zronkov, Pam omst. Sobslav vmanskch pamtech 16321752 (Memory of aTown. Sobslav in Burghers Memoirs 16321752), diploma thesis, SouthBohemian University in esk Budjovice 2007, p.143 (entry of March 19, 1650): The carver, Mr. Volfkang Eckt, artist and burgher of the town of Jindichv Hradec, for making the high altar and erecting it in the church, was paid 150 orins; for two smaller altars, executed in the town of slav, paid 112 orins; for the pulpit in the church, 40 orins paid in cash. The overall sum for the carvers302orins. Jaromr Neumann, esk barok (Baroque in Bohemia), Praha 19742, p.51. O. J. Blaek, Italsk podnty (see note 41), p.494; idem, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let (see note 42), pp.103104. Vladimr Novotn, ast Jana Jiho Bendla na vzdob kostela sv.Salvtora vPraze (Johann Georg Bendls Share in the Decoration of St Saviours Church in Prague), Pamtky archeologick XL, 1937, p.44; Oldich J.Blaek, KBendlovu realismu (On Bendls Realism), in: Jaroslav Peina (ed.), Sbornk ksedmdestinm Jana Kvta, Praha 1965 (Acta Universitatis Carolinae, Philosophica et Historica 1), pp.176182, here pp.179180; idem, Italsk podnty (see note41), pp.494495; idem, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let (see note42), pp.103104, 111, no. 4, 114, note 31. [] wegen der meines in Wallischlandt zu Unsser Lieben Frawen Loreto gethanen Voti halber vorhabendes Raiss [] . Archives of the Capital City of Prague, documents IV12848 (the original document of August 2, 1657) and IV11407 (acopy, probably from 1688).

Bendel (before 1570before 1652), who was related to the widely branching sculptors families of the Bendels and Zrns, who from the 16th century at the latest lived in the wooded regions around Waldburg and Waldsee south of the upper Danube. The rst authentic work of Bendl, his son, cannot thus be traced down to stylistic precursors in Rome, but to this blessed region of carvers and cabinet makers. According to a chronicle of the Discalced Augustinians, an important sculptor Johann Georg carried out the decoration in their monastic church of St Wenceslas at Zderaz, which was admired there by Emperor Ferdinand III in 1647. The gilded architecture of the pulpit was supported by two life-size angels, while carvings of the Holy Trinity, the Virgin, the Evangelists and Fathers of the Church, the apostles SS Peter and Paul and other angels decorated the rostrum and the roof. Jahn was the rst to understand the artist in question to have been Johann Georg Bendl, who by that time must have been a mere youth of 16 to 18 years, for the work was completed in August of 1637. Even though it had come to ruin probably soon after the monastery was abolished in 1785, it resulted in a high renown for its young creator, who was to get excellent commissions in the future, in which he repeatedly worked alongside the painter Karel krta. The most important sculptural commission in early Baroque Prague, in whose execution Bendl largely shared, was the construction of the earliest Marian column in Bohemia, erected in the Old Town Square at the impulse from Emperor Ferdinand III. That sculptural monument represented a materialised expression of thanks to the Immaculata for a successful defence of Prague against the Swedes in 1648, consisting of the sculpture of the Immaculata at the top, and four groups of angels defeating the devil at its foot (gs. 14
STUDIES 217

17., 18. Johann Georg Bendl, Sts Peter and Paul, 1648, Prague, Church of Our Lady before Tn, St Adalberts Altar (photo: National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln) 19. Johann Georg Bendl, Equestrian Statue of St Wenceslas from the Horse Market in Prague, 1680, Prague, Gallery of the Capital City of Prague, exhibited in the Lapidarium of the National Museum in Prague (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

and 15). As we can learn from the artists own application for the post of the court artist (1655) and a literal conrmation of the rector of the Old Town Jesuit college at the Clementinum, the whole monument was built in 1650 (g. 16). As all its decoration was executed in the short period from May to September of that year, assistants must have shared in the work: in the 19th century, the names of the sculptors Ernst Heidelberger, Stanislaus Goldschneck (Goldschenk), and Abraham Melber appeared, but they had certainly played auxiliary roles only, for the rm art supervision of this prestigious venture was in the hands of Johann Georg Bendl (Blaek). This art historian sought for Bendls possible inspiration in the votive Marian monument in Munich, provided by Elector Palatine Maximilian I in gratitude for the rescue of the cities of Munich and Landshut from possible ruin by the Swedes in September 1635. After the Prague monument was pulled down in November 1918, some of its damaged parts were deposited in the Lapidarium of the National Museum in Prague. Johann Georg Bendl probably met krta rst after 1645, when he worked on the high altar of St Martin in the Walls Church in the Old Town of Prague Majus altare cum imagine S. Martini a famose pictore Screta et statuis a statuario Pendl pariter aestimato exornatum est (high altar with the painting of St Martin by the renowned artist krta, and with sculptures by the sculptor Bendl, equally appreciated); unfortunately, out of the whole altar, only the brilliant canvas by krta has survived. Likewise, Bendl supplied his carvings of the apostles Peter and Paul (gs. 17 and 18) to krtas titular canvas on the altar of St Adalbert in the Tyne Church, where he also later executed the sculptural decoration of the altars of St Wenceslas (1664) and of the Annunciation (c. 1665), also complementing the central paintings by Karel krta and Anton Stevens respectively. A similar situation occurred during the renovation of the furnishings in the churches of Our Lady under the Chain in the Lesser Town, and of St Stephen in the New Town of Prague. In the second half of the 18th century, Johann Quirin Jahn mentioned the collaboration of the two artists in the decoration of St Benedicts Church at the Barnabite monastery in Hradany. In his view,
218 SCULPTURE AT THE TIME OF KAREL KRTA

48

49

50

51

52

In his summary, Jan Herain, Staromstsk rynk (The Old Town Square), Praha 1908, p.244, published Bendls testament. Cf. Also O.J.Blaek, Jan Ji Bendl, prask socha (see note 42), p.64 and note37; idem, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let (see note 42), pp.104, 115, note32. V. Novotn, ast Jana Jiho Bendla (see note 46), pp.4955, gs. 3941 (all the group); O. J. Blaek, Jan Ji Bendl, prask socha (see note 42), pp.64, 8284, gs. 5860 (all the group); idem, KBendlovu realismu (see note46), pp.176182, here, pp.179180, 181, note 17; idem, Jan Ji Bendl. Vbr ezeb (see note 42), pp.2122, cat. no. 20, 21, g. 16 (St James the Greater); idem, Italsk podnty (see note 41), p.494; idem, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let (see note 42), pp.9798, 114, note 7, p.113, no. 27; idem, Barokn sochastv (see note 7), pp.300301, 312, notes 45, 46; Pavel Vlek (ed.), Umleck pamtky Prahy. Star Msto (see note20), p.113; Tom Hladk, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 17), p.552, cat. nos.XIV.15 andXIV.16, g. Karl Feuchtmayr, Der Fall Bendl, Das Mnster 9/10, Jhr.10, 1957, pp.329330; V.Kotrba, Georg neb Cajetan Bendl i Caspar Bechteler (see note 6), p.314. Vilm Lorenc, Pspvek kmstopisu starho Zderazu (AContribution on the Topography of the Old Zderaz), Prask sbornk historick, 3, 19661967, p.93; O. J. Blaek, Jan Ji Bendl. Vbr ezeb (see note 42), p.8; idem, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let (see note42), pp.100101, p.110, cat. no.1. The possible form of the lost pulpit can be conjectured on the basis of the stylistically related and as to the execution brilliant carved work by Bartholomus Steinle, Bendls South-German colleague, one generation his elder. The work in question is aBaroque pulpit in the Marian pilgrimage church in Maria Rain near Nesselwang in Allgu, whose rostrum is supported by the shoulders of an oustanding carved life-size angel. Cf. Wilhelm Zohner, Bartholomus Steinle. Um 15801628/29. Bildhauer und Director ber den Kirchen zu Weilheim, Weissenhorn 1993, pp.341343, no. 11, g. 138, col. g. 887 (detail). O. J. Blaek, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let (see note 42), p.97, p.114, note 3, p.111, cat. no. 6; Ji FajtLubomr Sre, Lapidrium

Nrodnho muzea vPraze. Prvodce stlou expozic eskho kamenosochastv 11. a 19.stolet vpavilnu Lapidria na Vstaviti vPraze (The Lapidarium of the National Museum in Prague. Guide to the collection of Bohemian stone sculpture of the 11th to 19th centuries in the pavilion of the Lapidarium at Trade Fair Area in Prague), Praha 1993, pp.7778, cat. nos. 276288; M. ronk, Sochastv amalstv (see note 6), pp.359360, 373, note 27; Lubomr Sre, Je provediteln rekonstrukce marinskho sloupu na Staromstskm nmst vPraze? (Is the Reconstruction of the Marian Column on the Old Town Square Feasible?), Zprvy pamtkov pe 59, 1999, no. 7, pp.233240; most recently, Tom Hladk, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 17), p.549, cat. no.XIV.10,XIV.11, g. 53 [] ein Memorialseilder Jungfrauen Mariae, die Statuen oder 5 Bilder, welche [] ich verfertiget. Cf. V.Novotn, ast Jana Jiho Bendla (see note 42), p.42; O.J.Blaek, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let (see note 42), pp.97, 114, note 3; idem, Barokn sochastv (see note 7), pp.299300, 312, notes38,39. 54 It was probably thanks to prints that Bendl knew the bronze sculptures Heldenputten, the four pairs of Angels Fighting the Devil on the corners of the Munich monument, whose models have recently been attributed by Alfred Schdler to Ferdinand Murmann, possibly the most important pupil of Georg Petel. The construction of the votive column in Munich started on December 14, 1637 and the monument was consecrated on November 7 of the following year. Cf. Alfred Schdler, Eine unbekannte Kleinbronze von Georg Petel, in: Lech-Isar-Land 1994, pp.182187, gs. 113. 55 The Immaculata, likewise three groups preserved in fragments of gthing angels and the head of the devil from the fourth pair, replaced after they were ruined by the Prussian gunre in 1757, all sandstone, life-size and monumental, Lapidarium of the National Museum in Prague. Cf. O. J. Blaek, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let (see note42), pp.97, 114, note 3, p.111, no. 6; J.FajtL.Sre, Lapidrium Nrodnho muzea vPraze (see note51), pp.7778, cat. nos. 276288; After the Prague monument was pulled down, the Marian Column, erected on October 31, 1661 in the pilgrimage grounds of Svat Hora near Pbram, decorated with agilded stone replica of the

the altarpiece of St Barbara must have been one of the most beautiful krta works, similar to his painting of the Family of Christ. Bendl is mentioned as the author of the sculptural works in the altars. A rather dramatic aspect can be seen in the coexistence of the two masters within a shared Old Town guild of painters, with which Bendl repeatedly and sharply disagreed, for example in the matter of the lerbrif (certicate of completed apprenticeship) or unrealised masterly work. That was to be Bendls carving share in the decoration of the guild altar of St Lukes in the Tyne Church, for whose adornment he was to collaborate with Abraham Melber (1600 after 1657), Ernst Heidelberger, and Karel krta, too: Hans Jirg Pundl, bildhauer, made peace with other bildhauers in the presence of painters, and other members, [] all of them promising Hons Girg to receive him in the guild, but he should carve a frame for St Lukes painting for the altar of St Luke, and
STUDIES 219

20. Johann Georg Bendl, Model of the Equestrian Statue of St Wenceslas for the Horse Market in Prague, 1678, France, private collection (photo: National Gallery in Prague)

two standing angels, which he promised to do in the same year. However, not even this compromising proposal, whose nal result would be immensely interesting for us, was realised in the agreed deadline. The whole course of the quickly escalating conict, during which Bendl was supported by other master carvers, testies to the increased condence of our artist, who was doubtless aware of his privileged position within his eld. It was thus only a question of time when the two dominant gures appeared on the opposite sides of the ght between painters and carvers, which culminated in 1653 at the latest, when krta was conrmed as the rst elder of the guild. The mutual animosity of the two art elds had gradually to be judged by the mayor and councillors of the Old Town, the court of appeal, and eventually the emperor himself, to whom Bendl addressed his impressive request for protection. As the sculptors continued in their unwillingness to fulll their pledges, the elders of the guild prepared a complaint addressed to the mayor and council of the Old Town. Their grievance was in that there had always been troubles with sculptors, who avoided their guild duties (Ernst Heidelberger was specied as a culprit), and their representative Bendl only supported them. Moreover, as the main inciter of disorder and misunderstandings, he, in his own home and elsewhere, in various pubs, as well, with the others against the order plotted. In the end, Bendl himself did not achieve the required freedom of the court, but the result of the obstinate ght against the painters that he waged for his fellow carvers,
220 SCULPTURE AT THE TIME OF KAREL KRTA

56

57 58 59 60

61

gracious gure of Our Lady of Svat Hora, likewise from Johann Georg Bendls workshop, became the oldest preserved monument of this type. Cf. Josef Kopeek, Jan Ji Bendl na Svat Hoe (Johann Georg Bendl in Svat Hora), PodbrdskoXI, 2004, pp.185187. J.F.Hammerschmid, Prodromus (see note 17), p.55; O. J. Blaek, Jan Ji Bendl, prask socha (see note 42), pp.6667; idem, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let (see note 42), p.99, p.114, note 8, p.111, no. 3. Cf. most recently, Tom HladkVt Vlnas, in: L.Stolrov V.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note17), pp.219220, cat. no.V.9, g. Ibid, p.548, cat. nos.XIV.8,XIV.9, g. (author of the entry, Tom Hladk) Ibid, p.472, cat. no.XI.8, g., p.146, cat. no.III.28, g. (author of the entries, tpn Vcha). Archives of the National Gallery in Prague, le J.Q.Jahn, no. AA 1222/38, Jan Jakub Quirin Jahn, Umleckohistorick popis Prahy, Mal Strany aHradan (Art Historical Description of Prague, the Lesser Town and Hradany), s. d. [between 1767/691773], p.17. My warmest thanks for this piece of information go to Lubomr Slavek. O. J. Blaek, Jan Ji Bendl, prask socha (see note 42), pp.6364 and note 31; idem, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let (see note 42), pp.104109; Martin Halata, Kniha protokol praskho malskho cechu zlet 16001656 (The Book of Proceedings of the Prague Painters Guild from 16001656), Praha 1996, pp.150, 152, 153; Pavel Preiss, Omalstv eskho baroka (Bohemian Baroque Painting), in: V.Vlnas (ed.), Slva barokn echie (see note 19), p.184; The elders of the guild also represented great troubles to Ernst

62

63

64

65 66

67

68

69

70

71

72

Heidelberger, who was repeatedly criticised for practicing carving trade, even his property was seized in distrainment. Cf. M. Halata, Kniha protokol, p.177 (entry of the proceedings of March 11, 1655). M. Halata, Kniha protokol (see note 61), pp.154155 and notes 306, 307 (entry of August 13, 1652). According to the entry of the same day (f. 138v): Dito. Hans Heidlberger promised to make two infants for the same altar in St Lukes. Dito. Abraham Melber promised to make two seated angels for St Lukes. Idem, p.155 and notes 308, 309. P.Preiss, Omalstv eskho baroka (see note 61), p.184, note 7: The construction of the guild altar was decided on as early as 1651, but in 1654 not only the carvers (J.G.Bendl, J.E.Heidelberger and A.Melber), but also krta himself, artist of the titular altarpieceall of them were reminded for works still not supplied. After all those delays the altar was consecrated in 1661. M. Halata, Kniha protokol (see note 61), p.177, and note 391, entry of the guild proceedings of March 11, 1655 (fol. 154r): The said Mr. Hons Girg Pentl, the one that last time was made to tow the line quite severely by the elder and some other carvers, and with the help of the judge, was consequently appointed elder to those carvers. He should observe good order and rules in the rst place, but he seems to oversee everything, he will not even attend the meetings and neglects his duties. It has thus been decided that he should be indicted by the councillor and be made to work more dilligently. P.Preiss, Omalstv eskho baroka (see note 61), p.184. O. J. Blaek, Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let (see note 42), p.108; P.Preiss, Omalstv eskho baroka (see note 61), p.184: No specic details are however known of their independent guild association, which the sculptors reportedly achieved in1680. Archives of the Capital City of Prague, Collection of Manuscripts, Records of Burgers Rights 2, New Town of Prague, 16571684, sign. 560, f. 119v120r: Document conrming his wedlock birth and honest livelihood, and his eviction from the Old Town of Prague is dated May 15, 1661, Elias Pistorius and Mates tefan of the New Town of Prague are mentioned as guarantors; For this piece of information, and the subsequent ones about the carvers guild, my warmest thanks go to Radka Tibitanzlov from the Archives of the National Gallery in Prague. Archives of the Capital City of Prague, Collection of Manuscripts, Records of Guarantors and Renewal, New Town of Prague, 16361678, sign. 97, f. 330r, 342v, 352r, 361r; This archival nd refutes an earlier sceptical judgement pronounced by Pavel Preiss (see note 66). Archives of the Capital City of Prague, Collection of Manuscripts, Liber conventionum I, Old Town of Prague, 16611769, sign.4596, fol. 3 (My thanks for the transcription go to Radka Tibitanzlov); Julius Max Schottky, Prag, wie es war und wie es ist, Bd. I, Prag 1831, p.396, mentioned arather different transcription of J.G.Bendls contract, from which we learn that the upper part of the fountain bore the emblem of the New Town of Prague and agable area with an inscription, and the overall costs (including the setting of Bendls equestrian statue) were to reach 1150 orins. Cf. also O. J. Blaek, KBendlovu realismu (see note 46), p.176, probably cited after Schottky: stone sculpture or portrait of St Wenceslas on horseback, lifesize, with the usual banner in his hand. The contract with the stonecutter for the execution of the fountain burned in the re of the Old Town Hall in May 1945; it had probably been included in Liber contractum ruber I, SMP, 16751684, sign. 4109, fol. 245 (Iwould also like to thank Radka Tibitanzlov for this detail). Asmall model of St Wenceslas As aRider (polychrome limewood, h. 38.5 cm, w. 11.5 cm, l. 29 cm) eventually arrived in aprivate collection in France. The large equestrian statue (sandstone, h.238 cm) was transferred to Vyehrad in 1879 (now replaced with acopy), in 1959 it was taken to the depository of the Museum of the Capital City of Prague, and later on, to the depository of the Gallery of the Capital City of Prague; since 1990 the sculptural group has been installed in the Lapidarium of the National Museum in Prague. The Baroque stone fountain was restored relatively recently and situated (1986) outside the castle in Hoovice. Cf. O. J. Blaek, KBendlovu realismu (see note 46), pp.176, 177, 181, notes 2, 3; idem, Barokn sochastv (see note 7), p.301, 312, note49; J.FajtL.Sre, Lapidrium Nrodnho muzea vPraze (see note 52), p.81, cat. no. 295, g. p.79; most recently, Anna Sochorov, Jezdeck pomnk sv.Vclava od Jana Jiho Bendla vPraze (Equestrian Monument of St Wenceslas by Johann Georg Bendl in Prague), bachelors diploma thesis, Masaryk University in Brno, 2007. Karel krta, Radslav Zlick se ko sv.Vclavovi (Prince Radslav of Zlice Surrendering to St Wenceslas), c. 1641, oil, canvas, 137.5 276.3 cm, National Gallery in Prague, inv. no. O18981. Cf., most recently, Sylva Dobalov, in: L.StolrovV.Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta (see note 17), p.170, cat. no.IV.6, g.

was far-reaching: he achieved free practice and existence for his craft, no longer bound by the guild rules. The court of appeal in fact rst inclined to the side of the painters, but later supported their opponents and decided that painters had no right to force carvers into their joint organisational representation. Quite recent ndings reveal that the carvers did eventually achieve an independent guild organisation. It was not in the Old Town, which Bendl himself left for good in 1661, but in the New Town of Prague, where he was granted citizenship on February 21, 1669. The records of the renewed council of the New Town show Johann Georg Bendl as the only representative of the carvers guild: he was rst mentioned in that capacity in 1670, and then in 1671, 1674, and 1678. In this context it comes as no surprise that the last large sculptural commission of Bendls workshop is related to the New Town of Prague. It was to be a monumental Equestrian Statue of St Wenceslas, representing the very rst local sculptural equestrian monument in modern times. According to a surviving contract of November 16, 1678, the New Town council commissioned from Bendl eine steinerne Statua oder Bildnus des heyl. Venceslai in kniglichen Geschmukh auf einem Pferd Lebensgross sitzend und einen Fahn in der Handt haltend (a stone sculpture or portrait of St Wenceslas on horseback, lifesize, in royal garments and with a banner in his hand). The stone monument of the princely rider (g. 19), who the artist provided with the features of Ferdinand III, was to have been lifted on a stone base in the form of a large fountain (auf dem Postament des neen steinernen Rhrkostens), set in the Horse Market (todays Wenceslas Square). For all the executed work, at the beginning of which Bendl made a demonstration model of polychrome wood (g. 20), he was awarded 200 orins and about 95 kilos of rye our. In the case of this nal work we realise again how inspirational some of the painted compositions by Karel krta had been some of them even several decades old in the artistic milieu of Prague of the second half of the 17th century. Johann Georg Bendl in fact treated the robust horse of the duke of Bohemia in a manner that approaches, down to the details of the harness, an earlier composition of one of the lunettes of St Wenceslas cycle, in which his painter colleague and art competitor represented the Zlice prince Radslav in the moment of his unconditional surrender to Wenceslas a Prince, army leader and saint. Translated by Kateina Hilsk

STUDIES 221

Stylistic Prole of Prague Early Baroque Architecture

MOJMR HORYNA

1 Of the numerous publications of Jarmila Krlov the most signicant studies concerning Mannerist Rudolne architecture are the following: Il Palladianesimo in Cecoslovacchia e linuenza del Veneto sullarchitettura ceca, Bolletino del Centro internazionale di studi di architektura A.Palladio 62, 1964, pp.89110; eadem, Pietro Ferabosco und sein Schaffen im Knigreich Bhmen, Ostbairische Grenzmarken 11, 1969, pp.183196; eadem,Byl vnaich zemch vbec manrismus, Vtvarn umn 19, 1969, pp.6879; eadem,Italt misti Mal Strany na potku 17.stolet, Umn XVIII, 1970, pp.545581; eadem, Das Oval in der Architektur des bhmischen Manierismus, Umn XXI, 1973, pp.303331; eadem,Centrln stavby esk renesance, Praha 1974; idem,Poznmky krudolfnsk architektue, Umn XXIII, 1975, pp.499526; eadem,Die rudolnische Architektur, Leids Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 1, 1982, pp.271302; eadem,Die Garten RudolfII., Leids Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 1, 1982, pp.149160; eadem,La Toscana e larchitettura die Rodolfo II: iovanni Gargiolli aPraga, in: Firenze e la Toscana dei Medici nellEuropa del 500.Atti del Convegno Internazionala di StudiIII., Firenze 1983, pp.10291051; idem, Architektura doby RudolfaII., in: Djiny eskho vtvarnho umnII, 1, Praha 1989, pp.160181; eadem,Of the work of Pavel Vlek let us mention at least: Prask architektura 15501650, in: Elika Fukov (ed.), RudolfII.aPraha, PrahaLondonMilano 1997, pp. 345352; idem,Praha 16101700. Kapitoly oarchitektue ranho baroka, Praha 1998, for Rudolne architecture see in particular pp.1439. 2 Lars Olof Larsson, Zur Einfhrung: Die Kunst am Hofe RudolfsII.eine rudolnische Kunst? in: Prag um 1600. Kunst und Kultur am Hofe RudolfsII., Kulturstiftung Ruhr Essen, Luca Verlag Freren 1988, p.42. 3 Alois Kroess P. J., Geschichte der bhmischen Provinz der Gesellschaft Jesu, in: Geschichte der ersten Kollegien in Bhmen, Mhren und Blaty, Wien 1910, p.565; Klaus Merten, St Salvator in Clementinumehemals bhmischen Jesuitenkircheund Wlsche Kapelle in Altstadt in Prag, Jahrbuch des Collegiunm Karolinum 8, MnchenLerche 1967 p.150; J.Krlov, Centrln stavby (see note1), pp.6977; J.Krlov, Das Oval in der Architektur (see note1), pp.330333; Pavel Preiss, Italt umlci vPraze, Praha 1986, pp.8891; J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), pp.169171; Petra Oulkov, Klementinum, Praha 2006, pp.6566; Mojmr Horyna, Die rmischen Inspirationen der Barockarchitektur in Prag im 17. Jahrhundert, in: Barbora Balov (ed.), GenerationenInterpretationenKonfrontationen, Bratislava 2007, pp.141142; Ivan P.Muchka, HlavaIV.15261620, Sakrln architektura, in: Petr Kratochvl (ed.), Velk djiny zem Koruny eskArchitektura, Praha 2009, pp.380385. 4 P.Oulkov, Klementinum (see note3), p.65. 5 Some literature mistakenly places the construction in the period following 1594 (e.g.I.P.Muchka, Sakrln architektura, see note3, p.380), but the sources are quite unequivocal (A.Kroess

At the time of krtas birth and early childhood, which means at the very end of the Rudolne era, Prague architecture displayed an amazing variety of form. The main contribution to knowledge of this work came from the work of Jarmila Krlov and more lately from some contributions by Pavel Vlek. In this eld of art, too, the truth can be seen of Larssons characterisation of the Rudolne epoch as a period of stylistic promiscuity and vacillation between late Mannerism and the beginnings of Baroque. In der stilistischen Vielfalt der rudolnischen Kunst kommen die Hauptrichtungen der europischen Kunst um 1600 [] Es wre allerdings verkehrt der Grund dafr in der Herkunft der Knstler zu suchen. Der Stilpluralismus, oder besser gesagt Stildualismus, entspricht viel mehr eine damals allgemein verbreiteten Auffassung, da die verschiedene Themen verschiedene Stile verlangten. In architecture the origin and place of education of the creators played a far more fundamental role and the relationship between the building task and the style character of the realisation was, on the contrary, far looser. In the last decade of the 16th century the rst signicant and stylistically contemporary inuence from Rome made its appearance, surprisingly not in connection with court circles. Its result is the noteworthy building of the Chapel of the Assumption of Virgin Mary, constructed behind the presbytery of the Jesuit Church of St Salvator in the Old Town of Prague. The Marian congregation of Italian artists and artisans working in Prague naturally inclined towards the Jesuit Order. The Prague Jesuits began preaching f or them in Italian in 1560 and only nine years later the rst Marian Chapel of the Italian company came into being. Homage to the Virgin Mary was an exclusively Catholic form of worship. By cultivating this, the Italians of Prague wished to emphasise their orthodoxy in a mainly Protestant environment. The rst chapel of this congregation was no longer sufficient already in 1589 and it was therefore pulled down and immediately replaced by a new building the following year, the rough construction of which was completed in a single building season. The fact that the foundation stone laid in the building during construction according to the usual custom of the period was laid by the Papal Nuncio Alfonsus Visconti on 23 July 1590 was certainly an openly religious manifestation. The completed shell of the chapel was soon admired and sources state that it was so charming that it would be difficult to nd its equal even in Italy. Alongside the religious manifestation it was thus also the representation of Italian architecture, the exclusivity and superiority of which was openly advocated by the Italian artists. The decoration and furnishing of the chapel lasted many more years, seeing that the altar was acquired in 1594, the vaulting was decorated with stucco and frescoes in 1597 and the chapel was nally consecrated, again by the Papal Nuncio this time Filipo Spinelli on 9 August 1600. In 1607 the arches of the ambit were further decorated with frescoes and stucco. The exceptional architecture of the Italian Chapel was rightly declared in literature when it underlined in particular the fact that this was the rst structure built on an oval
STUDIES 223

ground-plan to the north of the Alps. The derivation of this ground-plan design from the constructions of an oval in the treatises of Sebastino Serlio is quite understandable. The Italian Chapel is, then, one of the few church buildings with foundations in the form so highly valued by the Mannerists; and it is even one of the earliest constructions realised. [] In addition the Italian Chapel is the only elliptical structure of the 16th century, as far as we know, and furthermore it has an ambit gallery running round it at rst-oor level. By studying the genesis of the oval ground-plan form in Italian work, in Peruzzi, Vignola, Francesco da Voltera and Carlo Maderna, and also the design of the ambit compositions in the 16th century where the closest to the Prague example was evidently Peruzzis unrealised design for an unknown church, archived in Uffizi (arch. no. 4131) Jarmila Krlov arrives at the well-founded ascription of the project for Prague to Ottavio Mascarino. This Papal architect dealt repeatedly with oval compositions around the year 1590, as shown by the unrealised projects for the Spirito Santo dei Napolitani church in Rome, where the central oval area is surrounded by a regularly designed ambit with an external wreath in an alternating rhythm of larger and smaller chapels (1584), and also a design for a courtyard, a sunken oval, in front of the facade of St Peters Cathedral from the period after 1598. In literature the Italian Chapel is usually described as a work of Early Baroque, the rst and very early example of this in Bohemia. The concept of the construction and its details and also, last but not least, its dynamic and dramatic lighting, however, belong entirely to Italian Mannerism, in particular that of Rome. Typical of Peruzzi and Mascarino is the disposition of a dynamic central area with an ambit on a ground-plan which, according to the classical measures, is irregular and asymmetrical, the capricious shape so beloved of Mannerism with tendencies towards escape and puzzlement, a ground-plan which, despite all its centrality, does not rotate around a single centre. Vignola can be seen both in the basic form of the oval and also in the almost crystalline simplication, and this is despite the fact that the interior is divided up both vertically and horizontally into a number of components, but all the parts are, as opposed to the sometimes overcomplicated and spatially dispersed designs of Peruzzi and other Roman architects of the cinquecento, erected on the most simple ground-plan, mutually fully open to and connected with one another and therefore clear. This chapel also has similar designs of the arcades and chapels coordinating with the manner of Vignolas designs [] and the at structuring, especially that of the exterior with smooth lisena frames, owes a lot to Mascarino. From the viewpoint of the architectural forms used the chapel was also the rst to use typically Roman windows of the thermal type in Czech architecture and technologically there is also the characteristic absence of roof beams and the placing of the covering of the copula roof on a thick layer of mortar directly on the reverse side of the vaulting. The acquisition of the project from an important Roman architect and the creation of a construction unparalleled in contemporary Prague, or even in the whole of Central Europe, was undoubtedly the work of the religious and artistic representatives of the colony of Italian artists and artisans settled in Prague. The deliberate nature of this act is all the more striking when we consider that of the Italian builders working in Prague at that time not one was of Roman origin or education. Only in 1594 did the nephew of Ulrico Aostalli, Rocco Soldata, arrive from Rome, but he did not enter the history of Czech architecture in any signicant way. Giovanni Maria Filippi, on the other hand, active in Prague from 1602, was a person of fundamental importance. A native of the little town of Dassindo, not far from Tridento, he allegedly trained in Innsbruck, which in the second half of the 16th century was an important centre of the arts. Filippis artistic character was fundamentally determined, however, by his subsequent lengthy stay in Rome, whence he was summoned in 1601 to the service of Emperor Rudolf II in Prague. His main task here was to be in charge of building work and the preparation of projects for Prague Castle. The conglomeration of buildings in the southern and western parts of the castle district, brought about by the gradual increase in individual buildings and fortications in the course of the Middle Ages, was already being rebuilt from the end of the eighth decade of the 16th century with the aim of connecting things up and creating, as far as possible, a regular whole in the spirit of the aesthetic ideas of the time and the representational demands of an imperial seat. Filippi continued here in the activity of several architects in the service of Rudolf II. These were exclusively Italian artists fully in the spirit of the enthusiasm of the period for Italian architecture and the conviction of the supremacy of its creators. Alongside Ulrico Aostalli (up to 1597) these were, in particular, Giovanni Gargiolli (in the years 15851594), with whom Antonio Valenti also cooperated, and at the turn of the century the famous Vincenzo Scamozzi was
224 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

S.J., Geschichte der bhmischen Provinz, see note3, p.565, and further pages). Cit. P.Oulkov, Klementinum (see note3), p.65. J.Krlov, Centrln stavby (see note1), p.69 (with reference to older literature). Ibidem, p.70. Ibidem, p.70. Renate Wagner-Rieger, Die Baukunst des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts in sterreich, Wiener Jahrbuch fr Kunstgeschichte 20, 1965, p.218. Wolfgang Lotz, Die ovalen Kirchenrume des Cinquecento, Rmisches Jahrbuch fr Kunstgeschichte 7, 1955, p.11. J.Krlov, Centrln stavby (see note1), pp.7071. W.Lotz, Die ovalen Kirchenrume (see note11), pp.2027, 4248, 5052, 5864. Ibidem, p.29 J.Krlov, Centrln stavby (see note1), p.76. W.Lotz, Die ovalen Kirchenrume (see note11), pp.6974. J.Krlov, Centrln stavby (see note1), pp.7374. M.Horyna, Die rmischen Inspirationen (see note 3), p.142. Ivan Muchka, RudolfII.als Bauherr, in: Ji Dvorsk (ed.), Die Kunst am Hofe RudolfsII., Dausien-Hanau 1988, p.181.

20 J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), p.160. 21 Petra Sophia Zimmermann, Die Architektur von Hans Vredemann de Vriep.Entwicklung der Renaissancearchitektur in Mitteleuropa, Deutsche Kunstverlag MnchenBerlin 2002, pp.4850. 22 Ibidem, p.51 23 For atribution to Gargiolli see J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), p.162, to the contrary Ivan Muchka, Architektur unter RudolfII., gezeigt am Beispiel der Prager Burg, in: Prag um 1600, Kunst und Kultur am Hofe RudolfsII., Essen 1988, p.87; alsoI.Muchka, RudolfII.als Bauherr (see note19) assumes the inuence of the models of Vredeman de Vries, which is strikingly less probable. 24 Hypothetically the wings of the stables and of the New Building east and west of the north gate were originally planned as aground oor with terraced gardens on the at roofs (Milada VilmkovFrantiek Kaika, Kdlo panlskho slu ve stavebnm vvoji Praskho hradu, Pamtky aproda 1976, pp.385391) and the building of the large halls was perhaps the work of aproject change already with the participation of Filippi. 25 J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), p.164. 26 I.Muchka, RudolfII.als Bauherr (see note19), pp.197199;I.Muchka, Architektur unter RudolfII.(see note23), pp.9192.

1. Prague, Old Town, Italian Chapel, facade, oblique view (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 2. Prague, Castle, Matthias Gate (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

also in Prague for some time. Orazio Fontana, Martino Gambarino and Rocco Soldata then evidently worked as executive building forces. In this Italian architectural concert there was one single northerner, the important theorist and decorator Jan Vredemann de Vries, who worked here with his son Paul only in the years 15961599. Preserved accounts from the year 1598 show that Vries prepared the projects for two buildings within the framework of Prague Castle, including the designs for their stucco decoration, and he also designed several fountains for the castle garden. Whether the buildings mentioned were ever executed is not clear, and the lack of further orders evidently led him to leave Prague the very next year. The summoning of Filippi can then be interpreted as an evident inclination towards Roman architecture, which was already then developing fully in the spirit of Early Baroque. He was to have realised the extensive reconstruction of the imperial seat, conceived and started already in earlier decades. Filippis rst big task was the construction of the socalled New Building, lying to the west of the North Gate of the Castle, the expressively strong architecture of which, utilising mighty bossage, was evidently designed by Giovanni Gargiolli, who probably conceived the original intention of resolving the entire north wing of the Castle. The New Building was designed as a cross-wise double wing, on the ground oor of which were the beautiful areas of the stables and on the rst oor the tremendous double-naved New Hall, the largest temporal area in the Castle. The large hall was framed by two entrance areas: the antechamber of the picture gallery on the east and the double staircase on the west side. The at ceiling of the hall was raised above the wing wall of the ground oor by monumental full pillars and its walls were composed of a complex relief formed by half-pillars, pilasters, recessed surfaces, niches and portals. The interior was decorated with copies of classical statues and bronze statues. Great attention was paid to the reconstruction of the original form of the rooms of the New Hall and of the picture gallery by Ivan Muchka, who described both areas as the peak of the interior art of the Rudolne era. The lacunar vaulting of the entrance area of the ground oor
STUDIES 225

3. Prague, Bubene, Imperial Mill, gate (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 4. Prague, Lesser Town, Church of Our Lady Victorious, interior, view from the presbytery towards the choir (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 5. Prague, Lesser Town, Church of Our Lady Victorious, north side facade (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 6. Rome, Church of S. Maria ai Monti, exterior, oblique view across the corner of the main and side facades (repro after: http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/File:Eglise_Santa_Maria_ai_ Monti2.JPG)

stables and the monumental form of the portals, constructed by Giovanni Antonio Brocco, demonstrate Roman inspirations. Evidently in 1604 Filippi further added, even before the courtyard facade of the New Building, an arcade wing with nine axes on a conical ground plan, which was apparently intended also to serve as a communication link with the planned frontal wing of the Castle facing onto Hradany Square. The design of the arcades here again combines pillars and semi-pillars and is strongly structured. The arcades were removed during the Terezian reconstruction of the Castle. In parallel with the construction of the New Building Filippi also intervened in the appearance of the recently rebuilt central wing when in 1602 he proposed a new composition of the facades of the originally Romanesque Bishops Tower, the at roof of which was provided with a terrace and balustrade. The interior of the tower was lled with a staircase above an oval ground plan, leading round a central light well and combining the popular Vignola theme with an attractive ground plan design.
226 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

27 J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), pp.163. 28 Milada VilmkovFrantiek Kaika, Stavebn promny Stednho kdla Praskho hradu, Pamtky aproda 1977, pp.385 391; J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), p.169.

29 Pablo Jimenez, Vztahy panlska aech, jejich doklady vrudolnsk kultue aumn (dissertation thesis FFUK), Praha 1996, p.132.

The alterations to the facades of the north and centre wings of the Second Castle Courtyard were intended to establish a monumentally composed space with strong connections in design to the main axes of communication, these being the North Gate and the passage through the centre wing, to which there was further to be added a main entrance gate on the west side in the wing opposite Hradany Square, which was, however, only realised in part. The inuence of a childhood spent in the Spanish Court of his uncle, Philip II, was formative in many respects for Rudolf II. This also applied to his ideas of a rulers representative seat. In connection with his building activities in Prague Castle one can also understand his repeated request in the years 1588 and 1589 that the Imperial Ambassador in Madrid, Johann Khevenhller von Aichelberg, should send to Prague the plans of the Spanish royal castles of the Escorial and in Aranjuez, Segovia and some further summer palaces. The theme of the monumental backdrop of the gate, cutting through the full height of the
STUDIES 227

entrance wing of the Castle, does not originate from Italian architecture, but from the Spanish realisations mentioned above. Both the facade of the Escorial and also that of the castle in Aranjuez are characterised by a monumental multi-axial portal coulisse cutting through the full height of the facade and looking almost like an original facade of the church type. The obvious inuence of Spanish realisations on the basic idea of the composition of the Maty Gate of Prague Castle has already been stated. The characteristic differences between the two compositions have also been recorded, the Prague one being more dynamic and strikingly verticalised. In spite of this strong height dimension and some morphological mannerisms the overall composition of a two-storey coulisse, based on the superposing of a rustic Doric order and an Ionic order in the extension, is nevertheless basically a Classical and monumental concept already in the spirit of Early Baroque anti-Mannerism. Also a fragment of the design of the west wing was the construction of an entrance staircase to the Imperial South Wing on the site of the existing representative area of the Terezian staircase of the hall. Although even after three decades of building during the reign of Rudolf II the composition of the royal castle was still actually unnished, nevertheless it was at this time that the greatest continuous non-religious building activity took place in Prague Castle from the beginning of its existence up to the present. In the nal phase of this Rudolne construction it was Filippi who strongly updated the whole work in style and applied the formal apparatus of Roman Early Baroque. Its manifestation is characterised by a certain simplication compared with the Mannerist structuring and formal complexity the tectonisation of compositional relationships, plasticisation of form and the inclination towards monumentality. Apart from the constant work for the royal castle itself Filippi was employed also on other imperial constructions, whether the alterations to the Lion Courtyard on the north forefront of the Castle or small completions in the Imperial Mill in Bubene and others. For the Emperors beloved Bubene hunting ground he proposed a large chateau building with eighty rooms and two large halls, but the realisation of this did not even begin. Numerous orders also took Filippi to the imperial chateaux, especially the large estates along the Elbe (Labe). Perhaps even more important than his activity in the imperial services was Filippis activity in the eld of church architecture. The Lutheran Church in the Lesser Town, consecrated to the Holy Trinity, was one of the protestant churches whose existence was enabled by Rudolfs Imperial Charter. It was built for the community of Hradany and the Lesser Town, mainly German Lutherans, among them also leading feudalists. The most important of these was perhaps Jindich Julius, Prince of Brunschwik-Luneburg, who lived permanently in Prague from 1607. Somewhat younger sources state that the author of the project was an imperial architect and Catholic, which at the time of construction pointly relatively unequivocally at Giovanni Maria Filippi, as Jrgen Zimmer was the rst to point out, and his attribution was adopted also by other literature. The foundation stone was laid clearly in the already started construction on 20 July 1611 and the still not completed, but usable building was consecrated on 26 July 1613. The furnishing of the interior took several years longer and the main altar was not installed until 1618, designed by the court architect of Saxony, Giovanni Marie Nosseni. The planned towers of the main facade were not realised at all. The intended original appearance of the church was shown in the project drawings, identied and published by Vojtch Birnbaum. With a reference to the frontage of the Roman church Sta Trinit dei Monti as the direct pattern for the project of the Prague facade Birnbaum very accurately indicated the stylistic starting-point for Filippis work and its link with the work of Giacomo della Porta. A further della Porta church also from the period around 1580 Sta Maria ai Monti was the starting-point for the composition of the nave of the Lesser Town building, including the shallow chapels between the stretched pillars and the design of the side facades. Characteristic of Roman inspiration are both the motif of the thermal windows and the mighty cylindrical vaults divided only by small sectors. Already Oldich Stefan drew attention to the supremely progressive motif in the composition of the walls of the nave, this being the restriction of the course of the complete entablature only above the Ionic pilasters of the structuring of the walls, whereas above the archivolts of the niche chapels the architrave and cresting are inset and only the sill
228 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

30 Ivan Muchka, Styl architektury za RudolfaII.Italianismy ahispanismy vechch na rozhran renesance abaroku, in: Elika Fukov (ed.), RudolfII.aPraha, PrahaLondonMilano 1997, pp.9394. 31 Ibidem, p.94. 32 On the stylistic character of the gate see: Pavel Preiss, Italt umlci (see note3), p.80. 33 I.Muchka, Architektur unter RudolfII.(see note23), p.93. 34 M.VilmkovF.Kaika, Kdlo panlskho slu (see note24), p.388. 35 Jarmila Krlov, Italt misti Mal Strany na potku 17.stolet, Umn XVIII, 1970, pp.561562; idem, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), p.160 (Idem older literature). 36 P.Preiss, Italt umlci (see note3), p.64; Pavel Vlek (ed.), Encyklopedie architekt, stavitel, kamenk azednk vechch, Praha 2004, p.174 37 Josef ForbelskMojmr HorynaJan Royt, Prask Jezultko, Praha 1992, pp.7374. 38 Jrgen Zimmer, Josephus Heinziusarchitectus cum antiquis comparandup.Contribution to knowledge of Rudolne architecture between the years 15901612, Umn XVII, 1969, p.233; Hilde Lietzmann, Die Deutsch-Lutherische Dreifaltigkeits, die sptere Ordenskirche Sta. Maria Victoria auf der Kleinen Seite zu Prag, Zeitschrift fr Kunstgeschichte 40, 1977, p.211; Jarmila Krlov, Kostely esk amoravsk renesance. Pspvek ktypologii, Umn XXIX, 1981, p.16 and 32. 39 The ceremony of the laying and consecration of the foundation stone was commonly only carried out after the construction had begun, when the foundations had been walled and the main construction had reached acertain height. With regard to the July date of the laying of the foundation stone in this case one may hypothetically assume that the beginning of the construction work was already at the beginning of the building season of 1610, in other words just under ayear after the issue of Rudolf s Imperial Charter on 9 July 1609. In this case the measuring, digging and walling of the foundations of the church and the establishing of the main constructions took place at the beginning of the building season of 1610, which means after Filippi returned from astay of several months in Italy and before he left once again for Italy on 1 October 1610, returning to Prague at the end of1611. 40 J.ForbelskM.HorynaJ.Royt, Prask Jezultko (see note37), p.74. 41 Vojtch Birnbaum, Pvodn prel kostela P.Marie Vtzn na Mal Stran, Pamtky archeologick 34, 19241925, pp.219220; Pavel VlekEster Havlov, Praha 16101700, Praha 1998, pp.1922; Mojmr Horyna, Bval luternsk kostel Nejsvtj Trojice na Mal Stran, Pdorys, pn ez, hloubkov ez, hlavn prel, bon prel, axonometrie, in: Vt Vlnas (ed.), Slva barokn echie (exh. cat.), Praha 2001, pp.505506, catalogue no. II, 6.2.

42 Oldich Stefan, Barokn princip vesk architektue 17. a18.stolet, Umn VII, 1959, p.306. 43 M.Horyna, Die rmischen Inspirationen (see note3), pp.142143; an analogical form was used after 1605 in the framing of passages between the elds of the side naves of St Peters Cathedral in Rome also by Carlo Maderno (see Howard Hibbard, Maderno and Roman Architecture 15801630, London 1971, p.155 and following) 44 J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), p.175; P.Vlek, Encyklopedie architekt (see note36), p.174. 45 This type of facade also has its origin in Italian architectural tradition. In Rome at the end of the 16th century it is represented, for example, by the facade of the Church of S.Maria in Vallicella, completed by Carlo Maderno (according to an older project of Martino Longhi the elder) in 1604. The type was then used relatively frequently in various modications right up to the 18th century. 46 This hypothesis must, however, be taken very carefully. The connection of the composition to the facade of the Il Ges Church in Rome is quite evident, but it may equally well be the result of Filippis artistic inclination towards the work of Giacomo della Porta. As far as Jesuit building practice is concerned, the latest literature quite rightly points out that the term Jesuit Styleintroduced by researchers in the 19th centuryhas no historical foundation, and that even with the strongly centralised organisation of the Jesuit order and the centrally discussed building plans and enterprises nevertheless Jesuit building practice did not lead to typological unity or stylistic uniformity (see Richard Bsel, Jesuitenarchitektur in Italia 15401772,I.Teil, Wien 1986, p.12). 47 Eric Forsmann, Dorisch, ionisch, korintisch, Stockholm 1961, pp.7476. 48 Ibidem, pp.9697. 49 Ji Kroupa, Umleck loha, objednavatel astyl na Morav doby barokn, in: Ji Kroupa (ed.), Vzrcadle stn, BrnoRennes 2003, pp.3839. 50 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.14. 51 J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), p.167. 52 Josef Mayer, Architektonick dlo Jana Domenica de Baris, in: Stalet Praha 5, 1971, pp.199209; Dobroslav LbalMilada Vilmkov, Architektura renesann, in: Emanuel Poche, Praha na svitu novch djin, Praha 1988, pp.126128. 53 Dobroslav Lbal, Dv dvno zanikl architektonick dla prask renesance, in: Stalet Praha 8, 1977, pp.267273; D.LbalM.Vilmkov, Architektura renesann (see note52), p.81.

runs through. In any case also founded on a similar principle of duality of the tectonic system and lling walling although segmented by massive rustic work is the surprisingly strong compositional effect of Filippis gate to the imperial court in Bubene, dating from 1606. The relationship of the two components of the gate still gives a manneristically unstable and fragmenting impression. The main portal of the Lesser Town Lutheran church was, then, a direct quotation of the frame of the axial window on the rst oor of the Roman Palace of the Conservatori on the Capitol, with which Giacomo del Duca supplemented Michelangelos facade in 1603. This composition, too, works with duality and the intersection of the framing aedicule and the actual opening of the portal, handled here, however, in the sense of dynamic unication. Filippis project of the Church of the Holy Trinity in the Lesser Town of Prague is an expressive missive of Roman Early Baroque and represents, both from the viewpoint of structural type and of architectural forms, a supremely contemporary style. Filippis project for the construction of the pilgrims Church of the Assumption of the Virgin in Star Boleslav clearly dates from the year 1612 0r 1613. It is a relatively close variation of the Lesser Town Lutheran church, but with several characteristic changes. The type of layout with the wide single nave with side niche chapels and a presbytery with a ground plan of one square eld and an apse above a half-oval is just like the church in the Lesser Town, as is the ratio of depth to width of the nave of 2:1, its mighty cylindrical vaulting intersected only by narrow sectors and the use of thermal windows lighting the side chapels. As opposed to the Prague building there is on the side walls of the nave area a continuous entablature, interrupted above the pilasters of the pillars separating the individual chapels. A characteristic motif is the helicoidal staircase up to the choir, based on an oval ground plan. As far as the exterior of the building is concerned, here too there is a striking resemblance to the side facades of the Church of Sta Maria ai Monti in Rome. The main facade is composed in a more complex manner than in the project of the Prague building; it does not have towers, but it is designed in two compositional storeys and a total of ve elds, of which the central three jut forwards in a shallow risalto, continuing up to the top gable level. The outer elds of the lower level are relatively narrow, on the upper level there are curtail wings above them. It is highly probable that the general design of the facade was inspired by the composition of the frontage of Il Ges in Rome and it is not impossible that this was the direct wish of the clients. The use of the Ionic order of pilasters on the main level is clearly linked with the Marian consecration of the building. In the interior the dominating compositional order corresponds to the celebratory area of the Virgin Mary taken up to Heaven. The new building of an important Marian place of pilgrimage in Star Boleslav later had great inuence in the subsequent Early Baroque period on the typology of the interiors of church buildings in Bohemia. This type does not, of course, have anything in common with the spatial design of the Il Ges Church and it would be a gross mistake to refer to it. Filippi created with the church in Star Boleslav an almost ideal realisation of the church building of Early Baroque and thus entered importantly into the history of our Early Baroque architecture. Further church buildings by Filippi the collegiate church in Arco (from 1613) and the Paulian monastery church in Vranov near Brno (from 1617) are variants of both Czech buildings. Also hypothetically linked with Filippis work is a group of non-religious buildings whose authorship is doubtful. Pavel Vlek stated accurately that [] if he really did create all the buildings ascribed to him, he would be a personality who was able to change his architectural style with every new order. Variations on the theme of the triumphal gate, morphological analogies and links to Rudolne architecture, which the builder knew from his stays in the court, led in the case of the splendidly composed forecourt of the chateau in Moravsk Tebov, built around 1610, to its being ascribed to Giovanni Mario Filippi. An echo of his work was also seen in the case of the courtyard arcades of Teufelv dm in the Old Town of Prague, the construction of which was evidently carried out by Giovanni Domenico de Baris. The beginning of the 17th century was also a period of exceptionally intensive building activity in all the towns of Prague, the house architecture of which demonstrates a wide range of different Italian inspiration. The no longer existing house of Lazar Henkel of Donnersmark was evidently the rst case of the use of a monumental scheme on the facade in the spirit of Palladianism. The project, clearly realised with a delay of several years from
STUDIES 229

230 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

7. Star Boleslav, Church of Our Lady, interior, general view into the church towards the presbytery (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 8. Prague, Old Town, house known as U pti korun (No. 465I), main facade (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 9. Prague, Strahov Church of St Roche, facade, whole (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 10. Prague, Old Town, Lutheran Church of St Salvator (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

54 Pavel Vlek, Prask architektura 15501650, in: Elika Fukov (ed.) RudolfII.aPraha, PrahaLondonMilano 1997, p.350. 55 D.LbalM.Vilmkov, Architektura renesann (see note52), p.141; J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), p.176; P.Vlek, Prask architektura (see note54), p.349. 56 Jarmila Krlov, Italt misti Mal Strany na potku 17.stolet, Umn XVIII, 1970, pp.545581. 57 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.34. 58 The phenomenon of the survival of Gothic style in Central European architecture of the 16th and 17th centuries was dealt with by Viktor Kotrba (esk barokn gotika, Praha 1976, pp.1923) who observed that the survival of Gothic style was astyle phenomenon appearing in the church architecture of the whole of Europe regardless of differences in language, culture or religion [] (p.23).

1609, was perhaps created by Vincenzo Scamozzi. Already proto-Baroque monumentality characterises several Prague houses in the second decade of the 17th century. The houses renovated at this time, U pti korun (No. 465I) in Melantrichova Street or house No. 551I on Old Town Square, have relatively austere facades, crowned by strongly tabular scrolled gables. A highly representative enterprise was the reconstruction of the Lesser Town Town-hall in the years 16171619, completed with the construction of the gables after 1628. Taking part in its realisation were Giovanni Battista Bussi de Campione and Domenico de Bossi and then Pietro Picsina in the construction of the gables. The ascribing of this project to Mario Filippi was rightly rejected by Pavel Vlek when he observed that This is a thoroughly late-Renaissance building [], which is clearly the most typical example of the slowly disappearing layer system [] As opposed to Filippis work it is also inuenced by the transalpine tradition []. In both secular and church architecture Filippis work represented the stylistically most progressive position of contemporary architecture. Its counterpart was posthumous Gothic, combined with some Renaissance compositional motifs and morphology, still controlling a signicant part of sacred creativity. The Church of the Most Holy Salvator, extended up to 1601, beside the Jesuit College of the Clementinum, is a typical example of such confusion of styles. The triple nave with a depth of ve vault elds which linked up with a smaller church, built in the years 15781582 by Marco
STUDIES 231

11. Prague, Lesser Town, Italian Hospital Church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary and St Charles Borromeo, interior (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 12. Prague, Lesser Town, Waldstein Palace, main facade (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

232 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

59 D.LbalM.Vilmkov, Architektura renesann (see note52), p.112. 60 As of 1606 the facade was captured by the very accurate Sadelers prospect of Prague, engraved by Jan Wechter on the basis of adrawing by Filip van den Bosch. 61 P.Vlek, Prask architektura (see note54), p.348. 62 Mojmr HorynaPetra Oulkov, Kostel Nejsvtjho Salvtora aVlask kaple, Kosteln Vyd 2006, p.9. 63 J.Krlov, Centrln stavby (see note1), pp.7783. 64 Ibidem, p.79. 65 J.Mayer, Architektonick dlo Jana Domenica de Baris (see note52), p.208.

Fontana di Brusata on the site of the presbytery of the Gothic Dominican Church of St Clement utilised the material of the pillars between the naves of the medieval church destroyed in 1420, on the site of which smaller houses were built in subsequent decades. These were bought up by the Jesuits after 1593 when they were planning the construction of the triple nave church. The main nave of the church is vaulted with an ogivally proled vault with strong triangular sectors. A marked Gothic element in the composition of the walls is the omission of the entablature above the heads of the pilasters and the direct seating of the supporting parts of the vault. At the intersection even then a dome without tambour was built. The facade opposite this as we are informed by contemporary depictions was conceived as a typically Italian church facade with the main level divided by monumental pilasters, a tabular gable framed by scrolling and three beautiful Renaissance portals, which were preserved in the facade even after the Early Baroque reconstruction. The actual author of the building of the church has not been determined, but necessary repairs in 1609 were designed by Giovanni Maria Filippi and stonemason Antonio Brocco. The Emperor Rudolf II undertook to build the votive church of St Roche at the gate of the Strahov Monastery as thanks for the ending of the plague in 1599. It was built in the years 16031612, still being completed in subsequent years and further repaired after damage in the third decade of the 17th century. The ground plan is conceived as a dynamic central area, the main space above the depth-extended octagon is open on the axis and on the eastern side of the nave into three side areas on the ground plan of ve sides of the octagon. The octagonal central area is thus combined with the dispositional type of the Latin cross. The external volume created by the composition of polygons is reminiscent of Gothic buildings. The facades combine Gothic forms of windows, window tracery and supporting pillars and characteristic Mannerist forms rustic pilaster frames, running architraves, recessed and prominent rectangular elds, niches and oval unpaired windows, portals not realised until 1617. In the interior the walls are divided up by slender pilasters, disproportional from the viewpoint of classical architectural principles, with Ionic reduced capitals on which the supports of the trough vaulting are set directly and divided by triangular sectors. The authorship of the building has been resolved in literature in various ways. Josef Meyer assumed this was a project of Giovanni Domenico de Baris; Jarmila Krlov argues against this and considers the possibility of a design by Giovanni Maria
STUDIES 233

Filippi or Giovanni Battista Bussi. Pavel Vlek also considers the last-named to be the most probable architect of the building. The building of the Church of St Salvator, which the Old Town Lutheran congregation built after the issue of Rudolfs Imperial Charter in the years 16111614, can be characterised in a similar manner. The facades combine Gothic forms of windows with tracery in the presbytery and main facade with forms of the classical type and characteristic Mannerist decorative forms: extended gables of smaller windows with tiny obelisks on the axis, scrolled crowns of support pillars, decoration of the frieze with rosettes, festoons and mascarons, Vredemann-type decorative frames on small oval windows. The interior of the church consists of a triple nave four elds deep, with emporas above the side naves and a presbytery two crossways rectangular elds deep with the apse on the ground-plan of ve sides of a decagon. Here, too, the barrel vaulting of the main nave, divided by three-sided sectors, sits directly on the heads of the pilasters attaching the pillars between the naves. This non-classical compositional state was preserved even after the Baroque reconstructions. The hypothesis of Filippis authorship was rightly rejected. The authorship of Giovanni Domenico de Baris is generally accepted even by the latest literature. The little church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary and St Charles Borromeus by the Italian Hospital in the Lesser Town was built almost simultaneously with the preceding buildings. An orphanage, hospital and school were built by the Prague Italians in the part of the city which was regulated in 1588 by Ulrico Aostalli and which was almost entirely inhabited by artists and craftsmen of Italian origin. The consecration to the Assumption of the Virgin Mary and to one of the most important saints of the Catholic Reformation, the Milanese Archbishop and Cardinal canonised in 1610, undoubtedly had religious representative signicance in the same way as the consecration of the Italian Chapel of the Old Town Jesuit College. On the site of the gardens and house of the builder Domenico de Bossi, purchased before 1602, the hospital was evidently built by 1608 and the little church between 1611 and 1617. The importance of the event was also underlined by the consecration carried out by Prague Archbishop Jan Loheli in July 1617. At present the building consists of a nave with a depth of four elds and a presbytery of two elds, of which the rst, square eld is covered by a cupola without vault spandrels and the second, slightly rectangular cross-wise, is the apse itself. The nave, executed along the sides with opposing rows of wide chapels between the pillars of the perimeter walls, represents the most common type of depth space of the Italian Late Renaissance and the beginning of Baroque. Quite uncommon in our country, however, is the shape of the strongly compressed barrel vaulting borne by massive corbels between which are rightangled sectors. Opinions on the history of the construction of the little church vary. Older literature assumed that by 1617 there was only the central part of the building and the nave with the chapels was not added until the fth decade of the 17th century, when the hospital was also extended. Jarmila Krlov, on the other hand, considers the building to have originated in a single stage and also with references to a possible Italian model, the chapel of the chateau of Buonconsiglio in Tridento. Her conclusions have also been accepted by younger literature. The authors of the project are assumed to be the rectors of the Italian congregation, Domenico de Bossi and Pietro della Pasquina. From the quick overview given of Prague architecture at the beginning of the 17th century it is evident that Prague, where Karel krta was born in 1610, was an important centre of the arts. Mannerist and post-Gothic tendencies were confronted with the already Baroque creative ideas inspired rst and foremost by contemporary Roman work. It was this orientation that prepared the ground for the acceptance of further Italian inspiration in subsequent decades. The defeat of the uprising of the Czech Estates and the subsequent sanctions considerably affected the composition of the Czech nobility and burgher society and thus inuenced the social composition of the builders. The intensive building activity of the rst two decades of the 17th century slowed after 1620, but soon new and demanding builders appeared, especially in the ranks of the top nobility and the Catholic Church. The progressive style orientation towards Italian proto-Baroque and Early Baroque creativity was further strengthened both thanks to the cultural orientation of those placing orders and
234 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

66 J.Krlov, Centrln stavby (see note1), p.81; J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), p.171. 67 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.24. 68 J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), p.173. 69 P.Vlek, Praha 16101700 (see note1), p.24. 70 J.Mayer, Architektonick dlo Jana Domenica de Baris (see note52), pp.202204. 71 D.LbalM.Vilmkov, Architektura renesann (see note52), p.82. 72 P.Preiss, Italt umlci (see note3), p.92 (Idem references to older literature). 73 J.Krlov, Architektura doby RudolfaII.(see note1), pp.173175. 74 P.Vlek, Praha 16101700 (see note1), pp.3839.

13. Prague, Lesser Town, garden, view across the parterre and path with alley of statues towards the loggia (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 14. Prague, Lesser Town, Waldstein Palace, view from the reception salon to the mythological corridor (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 15. Prague, Lesser Town, Waldstein Palace, chapel, interior (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

to the inuence of the ever stronger inux of Italian builders and building craftsmen, who prevailed in the Early Baroque period, especially in Prague. Immediately in the rst years following the Battle of the White Mountain undoubtedly the most important builder in Bohemia was Albrecht of Valdtejn. A heedless adventurer, an outstanding and courageous soldier and a splendid organiser and husbandman with undoubted traits of genius, he also decided to create a representative framework for his breathtaking career through architectural and artistic enterprises. His ambitions as a builder were certainly inuenced by life in the court and by direct knowledge of Italy on his chivalrous travels in the years 15991602 and again on his pilgrimage to Loreto in 1612. As a provincial commander of the army in Bohemia, guardian of the conciliation heritage and owner of many further estates acquired from conscations, he was already preparing the construction of a Prague palace from 1621, and soon after that he began to improve the town of Jin, the centre of his entailment dominions. For the realisation of his enterprises Valdtejn employed a relatively large group of Italian builders whose participation in the individual buildings has not yet been quite precisely dened. Undoubtedly the greatest personality among them was Giovanni Battista Pieroni da Cagliano, a Florentine, son of the architect Alessandro Pieroni, who after training with his father further improved his knowledge in the studio of the leading Florentine architect Bernardo Buontalenti. Pieroni was an architect intellectual who completed his studies with the study of law at the University of Pisa and also devoted his attention to a number of natural and technical elds. There is evidence of his close relations with Galileo Galilei and later also with Johann Kepler. From his youth he showed interest in mathematics and in this connection also in fortication architecture, to which he even devoted a theoretical treatise. He evidently travelled to Central Europe in the spring of 1622 as a fortications engineer in the services of the Emperor. In the autumn of this year there is evidence he was in Bohemia, where he entered into contact with Valdtejn within the framework of his engineering duties when he elaborated proposals for improving the fortications of Prague. In 1622 Valdtejn began to buy up further properties in the area of the future palace once he had acquired the large Trkovsk Palace with its extensive garden a year earlier. With the single and insignicant exception of the Feldovsk dm Valdtejn had acquired all twenty-six buildings on the site of the palace area by 1624. He had, of course, already begun the work of pulling down some of the buildings even earlier and also the preparatory work on the reconstruction of the Trkovsk dm. This work was supervised by Giovanni Battista Marini from Milan. According to old data from Balbn there was undoubtedly work going on already in 1623 and this work was led by Marini, who was evidently working, however, according to a project by Giovanni Battista Pieroni.
236 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

75 Zdenk Hojda, Albrecht Vclav Eusebius zValdtejna. Meznky ivota, in: Mojmr Horyna (ed.), Valdtejnsk palc vPraze, Praha 2002, pp.2946. In this brief, but excellently structured and comprehensive study see also the reference to the most important older literature. 76 Pavel Zahradnk, Djiny Valdtejnskho palce, in: M.Horyna (ed.), Valdtejnsk palc vPraze, Praha 2002, pp.5051; Mojmr Horyna, Stavebn vvoj Valdtejnskho palce, in: M.Horyna (ed.), ibid., 2002, p.91. 77 J.MorvekZdenk Wirth, Valdtejnv Jin, Praha 1946. 78 Jarmila Krlov, Giovanni Pieroniarchitekt ?, Umn XXXVI, 1988, p.511. 79 Ibidem, p.511. 80 Ibidem, p.511. 81 Ibidem, p.512. 82 M.Horyna, Stavebn vvoj Valdtejnskho palce (see note76), p.92. 83 P.Zahradnk, Djiny Valdtejnskho palce (see note76), p.50. 84 Ibidem, p.51.

16. Prague, Lesser Town, Michnovsk Palace, garden facade, whole (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 17. Prague, Lesser Town, Church of Our Lady Victorious, facade (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

The autographs of Pieroni found on the ground-plan of the rst level of the palace, capturing the actually executed building with only a few characteristic deviations in detail, testify to his authorship of the entire concept of the building. From 1625 we then have evidence of Andrea Spezza in Valdtejns service when he, as an outstanding practician and architect, took over the execution of the Prague palace and especially the Jin tasks: the extension of the chateau and the building of the Valdice Carthusian Monastery. Nicollo Sebregondi, who entered the service of Valdtejn only in 1630, was employed in particular on the Jin work as the Prague palace was at that time almost nished. To Sebregondi there may perhaps be ascribed the composition of some of the portals (such as the portal of the chapel on ground level), the building of the large blind portal in the centre of the main facade, which creates a strong axial and vertical accent in the extensive horizontal area, and also perhaps the supplementing of the composition of the east and west facades of the rst courtyard with half-pillars separating the individual elds. At the time of its construction the Valdtejn Palace was a quite exceptional realisation in the Prague environment, introducing us to all the particulars of the most demanding residential architecture of Italy at that time. A notable trait from the urbanistic viewpoint was the creation of a new square in front of its main facade. The immense main hall and the highly effective gradation of rooms with rich and iconographically uniformly conceived decor, celebrating the builder in a polyphony of themes, were important innovations in Prague residential architecture. The Valdtejn Palace [] became a model for other seats of the nobility. With its monumental appearance and connection with a garden [] it was absolutely predestined to do so. The palace forms a kind of intermediary stage in the transition from Late Renaissance
238 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

85 J.Krlov, Giovanni Pieroniarchitekt? (see note78), p.528 (with reference to the lecture of Luigi Zangheri). 86 These deviations are precisely calculated by J.Krlov (Giovanni Pieroniarchitekt? see note78, p.528) and she correctly observes that they show that the two drawings are not the documentation of the completed building, but were made during the course of building or rather at its beginning.It appears that the plan from the Bologna University Library is older than the drawing from the Florentine Uffizi, because on it the Feldovsk dm, which was only purchased in 1627, is not shown. The ground plan of this house is, however, already on the Florentine plan, which perhaps indicates that it originated in the given year or later. It further shows that changesthe blinding of the external window axis of the great hall on the south side in connection with the secondary establishment of the blind central portal of the main facade and the dividing of the west and east walls of the rst courtyard with half-pillarswas only carried out after 1627. J.Krlov assumes that the plans referred to demonstrate Pieronis authorship of the garden loggia of the palace, but not of the entire building, which she considers to be the work of Andrea Spezza. The design of the entire ground-plan, however, shows that the concept of the loggia undoubtedly came into being simultaneously with the resolution of the other parts of the main building of the palace. It seems, then, that the overall concept of the building is indeed the work of Pieroni, supplemented and altered during realisation evidently by Andrea Spezza and lastly also in details by Nicollo Sebregondi. The last to pay detailed attention to the drawings was Petr Fidler in the article Valdtejnsk palc vrmci evropsk architektury, in: M.Horyna (ed.), Valdtejnsk palc vPraze, Praha 2002, pp.140144.

18. Rome, Church of S. Maria Vittoria, main facade (repro from: http:// commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Santa_Maria_della_Vittoria_-_ facciata_-_Gaspa.jpg) 19. Prague, Chapel of St Mary Magdalene below Letn (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 20. Prague, Hradany, Loreta, Santa Casa (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

87 J.Krlov, Giovanni Pieroniarchitekt? (see note78, p.528), ascribes to him the motif of the row of large dormer windows, which is not of Italian origin, but Transalpine. In the original state the attics of the palace were used for the servants accommodation. 88 The Carthusian Monastery Valdice (Valdick kartouza) was built from 1627 according to the project of Andrea Spezza, who also prepared awooden model of the complex. There are not the slightest grounds here for the conjectured share of Pieroni (J.Krlov, Giovanni Pieroniarchitekt? see note78, p.523). Spezza proved his ability to conceive amonumental sacred building already with the building of the church of the Kamadul Benedictines in Bielany near Cracow (from 1617). The building, which was not completed until 1642, was conceived as amonumental single nave with side chapels of the characteristic Italian type. The overall concept of the building and also the use of thermal windows and other Roman motifs indicate perhaps the inuence of the Czech churches of Giovanni Maria Filippi, which Spezza was acquainted with when he stayed in Prague in 1616. In contemporary Polish architecture the building had strong potential for the creation of astyle. (Mariusz Karpowicz, Sztuka polskaXVII.wieku, Warszawa 1975, p.18). 89 Michaela Lenkov, loha architekta Nicola Sebregondiho ve slubch vvody Albtrechta zValdtejna, Zprvy pamtkov pe, 58, 1998, p.16 and following 90 Sebregondi is clearly the author of the project for the noteworthy central part of the St James Church. In the years 16241626 Giovanni Battista Pieroni elaborated ve proposals for the Jin church. Three of them handled the building as adeep single nave, but one of the variants clearly envisaged amain facade with two towers. The fourth designed the church as acentral area with acircular nave interwoven with aGreek cross and the fth was close to the executed state. (Petr Fidler, Valdtejnovi pomocnci. Stavitel aarchitekti, in: Elika FukovLadislav epika (edd.), Albrecht zValdtejna. Inter arma silent musae? (exh. cat.), Praha 2007, pp.9697 and 488). The central constructed over aGreek cross recalls the older Roman building of Sebregondi, the church of S.Maria del Pianto, built from 1612. The Jin church shows the characteristic Roman barrel vaults with rectangular sectors and coffered partition. The interior is also characterised by the perfect feeling of the classical order forms. Pavel Vlek expressed the hypothesis that the central of the St James Church in Jin is only part of the intended large cathedral, the nave of which with the side chapels was not executed. (See: Pavel Vlek,

architecture to the Baroque. In its size and programme of content it is already Baroque, although the individual architectural details did not exceed the framework of the Renaissance. In the complex of the Valdtejn Palace the greatest interest of historians has always been aroused by the immense garden loggia. The authorship of Pieroni is directly proved by the preserved drawing stored in the Uffizi in Florence. Oldich Stefan sought the source of inspiration of the composition in the portico of a house in Livorno, which was realised according to a project of Pieronis teacher, Bernardo Buontalenti, by his father Alessandro Pieroni in 1594. The motif had, however, a fundamentally longer tradition in Italian architecture of the 16th century. A great hall linked with a garden was already proposed by Rafael for the Villa Madama in Rome and then shortly after that, in 1525, also by Giulio Romano for the casino of the Lante villa at Laniculo in Rome and subsequently also in the Palace del T in Mantua. In the second half of the 16th century it is possible to nd in Italian architecture a whole range of similar rooms and they also appear in Transalpine building, especially in Austria and Bavaria. In spite of the evident link to older examples, however, the striking independence of the motif dominating the extensive garden of the palace gives the Prague version of the theme a palpably Baroque feeling. Just for this reason its reection in the Czech architectural work of the following decades is also evident. The second important palace construction in Prague in the second quarter of the 17th century was the only partly realised Palace of the Michnas of Vacnov at jezd. A substantial contribution to knowledge of the original project for this building was made by the work of Pavel Vlek. An older Renaissance house with a garden, ascribed to Ulrico Aostalli, was purchased in 1624 from Zuzana z Thurnu by Pavel Michna of Vacnov, shortly before this Albrecht of Valdtejn also expressed interest in this building. The reconstruction of the Renaissance house evidently did not begin until after the death of Pavel Michna and by 1644 only a smaller part of it was completed. The building work was allegedly carried out by master stonemason Zachari Campion de Bussi and builder Jakub Colombo. The author of the project is not known, but his artistic qualities are demonstrated by the perfectly balanced, effectively graduated and exceptionally pure architecture of the garden facade. Of the splendid symmetrical composition, distributed around two courtyards and with an external front courtyard separated from the street by a wall and a gate, only a small part was realised. The front courtyard, two courtyards and the garden were to have been linked by admirably rhythmic triple-naved passages, the like of
STUDIES 239

which was unparalleled in Central European architecture at this time. These passages, as well as the admirable graduation of the individual rooms and the horizontal and vertical communications, are documented by the Baroque copy of the ground-plan of the ground oor in the set of plans in the Dientzenhofer Sketchbook, kept in the library of the Bavarian National Museum in Munich. The artistic standard of the enterprise is demonstrated by the outstanding stucco decoration both of the risaltos of the garden facade and of the rooms on the ground oor of the garden wing, carried out by Domenico Galli, evidently a relation of Santino Galli, who participated two decades earlier in the decoration of the great hall of the Valdtejn Palace. In the Michna Palace there was undoubtedly the most extraordinary architecture of the 17th century in Prague. Architecture that was too real, too classical and too Italian [] and in addition standing very close to Roman architecture, which can be compared in particular with Algardis Villa Doria Pamphili. All this permits us to assume that the building arose on the basis of a plan imported direct from Italy. The economic collapse of the family unfortunately did not allow the entire building to be completed and already in the 17th century it was deformed by several unsuitable interventions. In comparison with the Valdtejn and Michna residences the imperial building enterprises in Prague Castle, carried out from 1635 by the Prague Italian builders Santino Bossi, Antonio Quadri, Antonio Robero and the stonemason Zachari Bussi de Campione, and later from 1638 under the guidance of architect Giuseppe Mattei, were relatively modest. Here, too, artistic invention was hindered by orders to save money, so that Matteis most important work in Prague was the construction of the communications ramp linking the top part of Ostruhova Street (todays Nerudova Street) with the square in front of the Castle, completed in 1643. After the striking and daring performance of the General of the Barefoot Carmelites Domenica a Jesu Maria in the drama at the White Mountain, the Emperor Ferdinand II decided to found new monasteries of the order in Prague and in Vienna. In Prague the Carmelites selected for themselves the recently completed Lutheran Church in the Lesser Town, consecrated to the Holy Trinity. By a gift from the Emperor and General Martin Huerta they also obtained the neighbouring buildings for the establishment of a monastery. General Vicar Kapar Arsenius of Radbuza introduced the Carmelites to the new church on 7 September 1624 and the church was consecrated the following day by the apostolic visitator of the Minorite Order, Jan Savonanti, to the honour of Our Lady Victorious and St Anthony of Padua. In subsequent years the buildings acquired were adapted for the purposes of the monastery and the church had to be provided with a monks chancel, which in the case of the Barefoot Carmelites was always behind the main altar. On the east side, however, the addition of the chancel would have encroached on the public area of what is today Karmelitsk Street, one of the main streets of the Lesser Town. For this reason it was decided to change the orientation of the church, to establish the sacristy to the west of the nave and build the area of the monks chancel behind it with an apse on a semi-oval ground-plan. This reconstruction was completed in 1634 as the building work was interrupted in 163132 by the occupation of Prague by Saxony. Architecturally this enterprise was quite undemanding. Only afterwards, up to 1642, was the striking main facade realised with the means from many donors, most prominent among them being don Balthasar de Marradas. Between the facade and the line of the street a terrace was raised with a broad entrance stairway. The monumental facade thus acquired a suitably composed forecourt and, like the new square in front of the main facade of the Valdtejn Palace, this area, too, is an early example of Early Baroque urbanist correction of an originally medieval situation. The triaxial facade with a large tabular gable, accompanied by scrolled gables above the side axes, is a frequently used type of Roman facade. The nearest pattern for the Prague facade was evidently the facade with which Giovanni Maria Soria decorated the church in Rome newly adapted and consecrated to Our Lady Victorious to the order of Cardinal Scipion Borghese in the years 16241626. A comparison of the Prague and Rome buildings shows striking resemblances both in design and in the general outline of the facade, in other words the very design traits that can be identied by even a normally perceptive viewer. The quotation of the Rome model has religious argumentative signicance here, indicating the equal status of the two church buildings linked to the Marian miracle at the Battle of White Mountain. Alongside the Carmelites and Jesuits great activity in re-catholicisation was also
240 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

91

92 93 94 95 96

97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107

108 109 110 111 112 113 114

115

Dientzenhoferv skic aesk architektura 16401670, Umn XXXVII, 1989, p.485) This hypothesis is not substantiated in any way and it is overturned by the known older plan of Pieroni and the overall urbanistic situation of the building, which with the attached nave and chapels would have collided with the track of the street leading from the city gate. The activity of Pieroni for other builders has already been elaborated by Jarmila Krlov (Giovanni Pieroniarchitekt, see note78, pp.511542) and more lately by Petr Fidler (Valdtejnovi pomocnci, see this note above, pp.88101). The lists of the so-called Frdlant conscation commission from 1634 document the completion of the palace with the exception of the external east wing towards the stables, which was only roughly completed and the interiors were unnished (M.Horyna, Stavebn vvoj Valdtejnskho palce, see note76, p.111). P.Fidler, Valdtejnsk palc (see note86), pp.176177. P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.53. P.Fidler, Valdtejnsk palc (see note86), pp.143, 145. Oldich Stefan, Oarchitektonickm tvaru Valdtejnsk Loggie vPraze, Umn XI, 1938, pp.319325. On the typology of the loggia see: Petr Fidler, Loggia mit Aussicht. Prolegomena zu einer Typologie, Wiener Jahrbuch fr Kunstgeschichte 40, 1987, p.88. J.Krlov, Giovanni Pieroniarchitekt? (cit vpozn. 78, p.529) ; P.Fidler, Valdtejnsk palc (see note86), pp.176177. P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.52. P.Vlek, Dientzenhoferv skic (see note90), pp.473496; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.5360. Emanuel PochePavel Preiss, Prask palce, Praha 1973, p.34. Z.Hojda, Albrecht Vclav Eusebius zValdtejna (see note75), p.33. Cyril Merhaut, OMal Stran, Praha 1956, p.40. P.Vlek, Dientzenhoferv skic (see note90), pp.492493. P.Preiss, Italt umlci (see note3), p.255. P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.58. P.Vlek, Dientzenhoferv skic (see note90), p.493; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.55. Concealed under this name is the grandfather of Jan Blaej Santini-Aichel, the mason Antonio Akel, whose name in the written form varied considerably at that timeseeV.Kotrba, esk barokn gotika (see note58), pp.126129. P.Preiss, Italt umlci (see note3), pp.159160; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.6768. P.Preiss, Italt umlci (see note3), p.160. J.ForbelskM.HorynaJ.Royt, Prask Jezultko (see note37), pp.3436. Ibidem, p.40. Ibidem, pp.8687. Ibidem, p.88. The enthusiasm over the Marian victory at White Mountain was very strong in the Catholic camp.In Rome the Carmelite Chapel of St Paul was dedicated to it and after its reconstruction it was newly consecrated to the honour of Our Lady Victorious and the Strakonice picture was permanently placed on its main altar when the afore-mentioned copy was sent to Prague. See J.ForbelskM.HorynaJ.Royt, Prask Jezultko (see note37), pp.3638. As mentioned above, the Roman church kept the original of the miraculous picture and the Prague church its afore-mentioned copy, equally authentic. These pictures were centres for Marian homage in both places. The resemblance of the facades was intended to expressin accordance with the understanding of the timethis relationship of both buildings to the highly valued shrine. See J.ForbelskM.HorynaJ.Royt, Prask Jezultko (see note37), p.88.

21. Prague, Old Town, former Jesuit Church of St Salvator, facade (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 22. Prague, Old Town, Clementinum, main facade, view from the corner of Kiovnick and Platnsk streets (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 23. Prague, Old Town, Clementinum, former refectory, general view (photo: National Library of the Czech Republic Ivan Krl)

developed by the Capuchins, summoned to Prague by Archbishop Zbynk Berka z Dub in 1599 and settled in Hradany from the following year. Within the framework of the Order of St Francis of which the Capuchins are also a reformed branch homage to the Virgin Mary was cultivated, including the cult of Our Lady of Loreto. Already in the 16th century Loreto was a frequent destination for pious pilgrims from Bohemia and the cult of Our Lady of Loreto is documented here from the eighties of the 16th century in Horovsk Tn. Its rapid blossoming occurred, of course, after the Battle of White Mountain. The Prague Loreta was one of the rst realisations of this time. The iniciator and founder was Benigna Kateina z Lobkovic, who purchased houses and land and from the start intended to entrust the place of pilgrimage built to the administration of the Capuchins from the neighbouring monastery. For the construction of the Santa Casa Giovanni Battista Orsi was summoned from Vienna, one of the architects who had participated shortly beforehand in the construction of the Santa Casa in the Viennese church of St Augustine on the basis of accurate measurements carried out in Loreto itself. The Prague Santa Casa, built in the years 16261627, is therefore a very precise copy of the house of Mary in Loreto in Italy. On 25 March 1631 the chapel was consecrated by Cardinal Harrach. The extent of the land acquired by Countess Lobkovic even before the commencement of building is proof that already the original intention was the construction of ambits with a facade tower, the ground-plan of which was measured out in 1631, although its realisation began in 1634. The construction of the ambits and the clock tower was also carried out by Giovanni Battista Orsi and after his death by Andrea Allio and lastly by Silvestro Carlone. The building of the ambits took several decades and gradually saw a series of improvements and alterations, only achieving its denitive form in the 18th century. Nevertheless, already in the form intended at the start of the enterprise in the third decade the Prague Loreta represents an early example of the type of place of pilgrimage with ambits so characteristic of Baroque architecture in Bohemia. Apart from their Hradany monastery the Capuchins acquired in 1630, with the permission of Emperor Ferdinand II, an abandoned hospital in the New Town of Prague. The construction of the monastery with the Church of St Joseph took place in the years 16361641 and listed for this is the builder Melchior Meer with supervisor Giono Decapaoli, evidently on the recommendation of the Strahov Abbot Kapar Questenberg, brother of the chief benefactor of the building, court military counsellor Gerhard Questenberg. They perhaps only carried out technical supervision, as both the church and the monastery represent typical examples of the extremely simple Capuchin architecture mandatory throughout the order. An exceptionally interesting building of which the author has not yet been determined is the Chapel of St Mary Magdalene in the vineyard below Letn, which the Provost of the Old Town Cyriac Church of the Greater Holy Cross had built in 1635. The chapel, which appears on krtas painting St Wenceslas presses wine for the mass, bakes the host and hoes the vineyard from 1641, is based on an oval ground-plan. Its circumference wall is divided into six elds both inside and outside. The internal area opens into six embrasures, separated by pillars and further divided up by niches. The low bell dome has a slender skylight turret set on top of it. The attempt to ascribe this building to Jan Dominik de Baris is based on a certain formal resemblance to the structuring of the facades of the church of the Old Town Lutherans. This is, however, a use of forms quite common at the period, which are not characteristic of individual authors. In the middle of the fourth decade of the 17th century we meet in Prague for the rst time Carlo Lurago, a master who play a directly style-forming role in the following decades not only within the framework of Prague architecture, but in the whole of Czech architecture. He appears in Prague at the age of twenty in 1635, perhaps in the course of his journeymans travels. In 1638 he is documented in his native town of Pelio in Val dIntelvi, but soon after this he again appears in Prague, where he commences his activity with the Prague Jesuits, at rst evidently as a stuccoer. The contract for the decoration of the Jesuit Church of St Salvator, dating from 1640, gives Lurago as a sculptor and architect. Right at the start of his activity Carlo Lurago came into contact with the Jesuits, who were his most important clients. This order, which played a dominant role in the renewal of
242 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

116 Acult object, documented since the 4th century, is the house of the Virgin Mary in Nazareth, where the Annunciation took place. Atemple was built over it in the 4th century, renovated several times and nally completely overthrown in 1263. The Marian Casa Santa was miraculously transferred in 1291 to Tersatto and three years later to Loreto near Ancona in Italy. This transfer was accompanied by Marian visions. The Santa Casa in the Loreto, in the form given to it by Italian Renaissance artists at the beginning of the 16th century, is still honoured today. 117 In 1621 aMinorite monastery was established in Jlov near Prague with the church consecrated to Our Lady of Loreto, and the Loreta in Hjek near Kladno began to be built in 1623. 118 She allegedly adopted this intention after visiting Cardinal Franz Dietrichstein in Mikulov, where the Loreta had just been completed. 119 On the talks of Countess Lobkovicov with P.Valerian Magni and Archbishop Arnot Vojtch, Cardinal Harrach, see Jan Divi, Prask Loreta, Praha 1972, pp.1820. 120 Franz Matsche, Gegenreformatorische Architekturpolitik. CasaSanta-Kopien und Habsburger Loreto-Kult nach 1620, Jahrbuch fr Volkskunde NF Bd. 1, 1978, pp.80118; Markta BatovTerezie Cvachov, Loreta. Prvodce poutnm mstem, Praha 2001, p.10. 121 The reason for the delay was undoubtedly the martial events during the Saxon occupation of Prague in the years 16311632. J.Divi, Prask Loreta (see note119), p.21. 122 The date 1643, when the dome of the clock tower was covered with metal sheeting, clearly represents the completion of only part of the building.(J.Divi, Prask Loreta, see note119, p.22) 123 Franz Matsche, Wallfahrtsarchitektur- die Ambitenanlagen bhmischer Wallfahrtssttten im Barock, in: Lenz KrissRettenberg (ed.), Wallfahrt kennt keine Grenzen, Mnchen 1984, pp.267352; Jana Niedermaier, Barocke Ambitenanlagen in Bhmen und Mhren, Mnchen 2009, pp.7779 and 262265. 124 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.6870. 125 Ibidem, pp.8081. 126 Jaromr Neumann, krtov, Praha 2000, p.46. 127 J.Mayer, Architektonick dlo Jana Domenica de Baris (see note52), p.206. 128 Viktor Kotrba, Pvod aivot architekta Jana Blaeje SantinihoAichela, Umn XVI, 1968, p.535;V.Kotrba, esk barokn gotika (see note58), p.126. 129 Vra Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet, in: Emanuel Poche, Praha na svitu novch djin, Praha 1988, p.295;Vra Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet vechch, in: Ji Dvorsk (ed.), Djiny eskho vtvarnho umn II, 1, Praha 1989, p.249; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.110. 130 Amalie Duras, Die Architektenfamilie Lurago, Praha s.d., p.14.

131 Mojmr Horyna, Hl. Niklas-Kirche in Prag Kleinseite und ihre Bedeutung fr die mitteleuropische Kirchenarchitektur des ersten Drittels des 18. Jahrhunderts, in: Petra emus (ed.), Bohemie Jesuitica 15562006, Praha 2010, p.1311. 132 An example here might be the history of the establishment and gradual construction of the Jesuit college and church in Hradec Krlov, see Ivo Kon, Umn aumlci baroka vHradci krlov, Umn XIX, 1971, pp.3940. 133 Vra Nakov, Ktypologii esk sakrln architektury 17.stolet, Umn XXXIV, 1986, p.138. 134 A.Duras, Die Architektenfamilie Lurago (see note130), pp.2123. 135 Richard Bsel, Jesuitenarchitektur in Italien 15401773, TeilI.Die Baudenkmler der Rmischen und Neapolitanischen OrdensprovinzTextband, Wien 1986, p.166. 136 P.Vlek, Dientzenhoferv skic (see note90), p.486. 137 The facade was realised with acertain degree of delay. Whether it was lack of nances that caused its formally conservative and austere appearance or perhaps its execution by local building workers, there is no proof either way. Nevertheless the difference between style of the interior and the facade is disturbingly evident. 138 Miroslav Zka, Soldattiov atukatrsk druina Carlo Luraga, (MA thesis, Philosophical Faculty of Charles University), Praha 2002; P.Vlek, Encyklopedie architekt (see note36), p.381. 139 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.112. 140 The existing domed vaulting in this eld is the work of later building reconstruction of the church after it was damaged by agreat re in 1762. The repairs were carried out by architect Frantiek Kermer. SeeI.Kon, Umn aumlci (see note132), p.144. 141 Heinrich Gerhard Franz, Barocke Architektur sehenbarocke Architektur verstehen, in: Die Dientzenhofer. Barocke Baukunst in Bayern und Bhmen, Rosenheim 1991, pp.3436; Werner Mller, Von Guarini bis Balthasar Neumann, Petersberg 2002, p.43 and following.; Mojmr Horyna, Krytof Dientzenhofer (16551722), Praha 2005, pp.4853. 142 The present appearance of the facade is inuenced by the extensive reconstruction, which was carried out after the re in 1762 by architect Frantiek Kermer. SeeI.Kon, Umn aumlci (see note132), p.40 and 144. 143 Konstanty Kalinowski, Architektura doby baroku na Slasku, Warszawa 1977, pp.3638. 144 Idem, p.57. 145 Marcela Mrzov-Schusterov, Kotzce projektanta jezuitskho kostela vKlatovech, Umn XII, 1964, p.81 and following.; Pavel Vlek, Giovanni Domenico Orsi abval kostel sv.Norberta vPraze, Umn XXXIV, 1986, pp.423424. 146 Vra Nakov, Kostel sv.Ignce vChomutov, Pamtky, proda aivot 3, 1971, p.26.

Catholic orthodoxy in Bohemia, developed mightily after the Battle of White Mountain. Whereas in 1618 there were only ve Jesuit colleges in Bohemia and two in Moravia, after 1620 and up to the middle of the 17th century 17 new colleges and residences of the order were established in Bohemia. The older buildings that the Jesuits acquired for their use were, however, merely provisional and were replaced in subsequent decades by new buildings. If we also count the partial reconstruction of the Church of the Most Holy Salvator in the Old Town Clementinum in Prague, then Carlo Lurago worked for the Jesuits on nine religious buildings, six of which were completely new buildings. In the new buildings he elaborated in particular the dispositional theme of a single-nave church with side chapels and emporas, which became, also thanks to him, a very frequent type of our Early Baroque. The oldest of these was the Church of St Ignatius and St Francis Xavier in Beznice, constructed from 1642 beside the college already constructed earlier, from 1638. The rough building of the church, completed around 1650 and completely furnished only in 1673, represents the usual type of single nave, four elds in depth, with side chapels and coretti above them, which had a concrete purpose for the Jesuits. There was rightly observed to be a certain proportional uncertainty of the ground-plan design, which does not, of course, relate either to the Star Boleslav Jesuit church or to the Il Ges type of disposition. A single nave with relatively deep and unconnected chapels is the most common type of middle-sized Italian church, which had already become at home also in Central Europe in the middle of the 17th century. The division of the nave into four elds with the same number of pairs of facing chapels and a relatively deep chancel with a polygonal apse give the impression of more marked intention of depth than would correspond to the actual dimensions of the ground-plan. Whereas the interior is characterised by the highquality stucco decoration with classical decorative shapes, the twin-towered facade is reduced by more than a bearable amount with regard to formal design. Further buildings for the Jesuits in subsequent decades show that the Jesuits were satised already with the rst work of Carlo Lurago and clearly also appreciated the fact that he soon headed an efficient building rm in which artisans of a number of building professions worked. For this reason he was already employed around 1650 in further building enterprises of the order and his activity in the sixth decade of the 17th century reached its quantitative peak. At latest in 1653 Lurago completed the plans for the Jesuit church in Hradec Krlov, which was highly valued by the Provincial. In the plan of a single nave, three extensive elds deep and with side chapels and emporas above them, opening into the presbytery where the square eld vaulted with an eight-part vault with a skylight turret was linked with a rectangular apse eld, Lurago elaborated a dispositional scheme, which was applied still at the beginning of the 18th century in Dientzenhofers project for the St Nicholas Church in the Lesser Town. The composition of the two-towered facade was designed with far greater balance than in Beznice. Already in 1654 Carlo Lurago concluded a contract for the construction of a Jesuit college and seminar in Kladsko. The ground-plan has a simple rectangular arrangement with clear and generous dimensioning of rooms. The facades are a simplied version of the composition of the facades of the Prague Clementinum. After 1660 the originally Gothic Jesuit church was reconstructed according to Luragos project; emporas were installed in the interior and the walls covered with rich stucco decoration. The construction of the college and church of the Jesuits in Klatovy was delayed for a long time by the slow acquisition of buildings and land. The contract was concluded with Carlo Lurago only in 1654. Working on the construction as a building supervisor was the young Giovanni Domenico Orsi. The construction of the church, begun in 1656, soon ground to a halt due to lack of means and was only realised ten years later according to the altered project of Giovanni Domenico Orsi. The Church of St Ignatius and St Francis Xavier in Chomutov, built from 1663, is one of the supreme works of Carlo Lurago. The single nave with side chapels and emporas and a shallow rectangular chancel is conceived with perfect proportional balance, almost identical to the ground-plan of the Prague Church of St Ignatius. Worthy of notice is the striking relief of the structuring of the walls of the main nave, where the individual chapels are separated by linked semi-pillars, building up the sections of the complete architrave, when only the platband runs above the archivolts of the emporas. The plasticity of the composition of the wall of the main nave recalls the design of the nave of the Roman church of S. Salvatore in
STUDIES 243

Lauro and thus supports the suspicion that Luragos development in the sixth decade and later was evidently linked with the knowledge of some Italian pattern sheets. The barrel vaults with three-sided sectors have the original stucco decoration. The main facade has ve axes with a central triaxial risalto set with a large gable and with side towers with octagonal upper levels. Set in front of the risalto is a triaxial portico, with a striking segmented fronton arching over it. Especially with his sacred buildings Carlo Lurago had a strong impact on the appearance of the towns of Prague in the period of krtas lifetime. After the stucco work from the period around 1640 he returned twice more to the Church of the Most Holy Salvator in the Clementinum. In the reconstruction in the years 164849, nanced by Count Karel Alexander Michna of Vacnov, an octagonal tambour with a false dome was built above the crossing, the side naves were raised and emporas built in. Lastly, from 1654, Lurago realised the new main facade of the church, facing Charles Bridge and the Bridge tower, according to his own design. Compared with its older appearance from the period after 1601 the oors of the front facade were fundamentally changed when the lower oor was lowered and a striking triaxial portico set in front of it and the upper tabular gable, set with a three-sided fronton, was higher and executed on each side by wings cut away in segments. Its super-elevation calculated precisely with the moving of the portico forward in front of the basic plane of the facade. This solution fundamentally activated the relationship of the church facade and the space in front of it so that the
244 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

147 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.114. 148 Vclav Richter, Stavebn vvoj kostela sv.Salvatora vKlementinu, Pamtky archeologick 34, 1925, p.345; Milada Vilmkov, Kostel sv.Salvatora vKlementinu. Stavebn-historick przkum Prahy, Praha SRPMO 1979, manuscr., pages not numbered. 149 V.Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet (see note129), pp.296298.

24. Prague, New Town, Church of St Ignatius, facade (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 25. Prague, New Town, Church of St Ignatius, interior, general view from the choir (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

150 Ivo Kon, Sochastv, in: Emanuel Poche (ed.), Praha na svitu novch djin, Praha 1988, p.448. 151 Petra Nevmov, Vstavba avzdoba Klementina vletech 15561773. (Diss, Philosophical Faculty of Charles University), Praha 2001, p.35. 152 Ibidem, pp.3741. 153 Ibidem, p.36. 154 Miroslav Zka, Soldattiov atukatrsk druina Carlo Luraga, (see note138), p.23. 155 Ibidem, pp.14, 2021. 156 P.Nevmov, Vstavba avzdoba Klementina (see note151), p.37; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.128. 157 Milada Vilmkov, Ke stavebnmu vvoji komplexu jezuitskch budov na Malostranskm nmst, Umn XIX, 1971, p.317 and following 158 Mojmr Horyna, Barokizace pasovskho dmuLuragovo dlo na rozhran ranho avrcholnho baroka aesk architektura kolem roku 1700, Umn LII, 2004, p.227.

portico applying the composition of a triumphal arch opens up the facade to the space of the small square and towards the viewer coming from the direction of the bridge. At that time the bridge was a main highway of the city and the new composition of the facade thus directly represented the important position of the Jesuits in its life. An important compositional component of the facade is the sculptural decoration of Jan Ji Bendl, which through the selection of saintly gures and their positioning on the facade expresses the celebration of Salvator, the Virgin Mary as the personication of the church, the testimonies of the evangelists and the teaching status of the church and nally local Christian tradition and the Jesuit Order as the continuer of this. Simultaneously with the construction of the church facade the north-west part of the Clementinum College was also built according to Luragos projects. A total of 36 agreements were concluded with him and with further builders and craftsmen between 1654 and 1682, only eight of which have been preserved; we know about the others only from the Old Inventories of the archive of the Society of Jesus. Up to 1668 the contracts are concluded with Carlo Lurago, in 1669 the contract was concluded with Carlo and Francesco Lurago and later only with Francesco. Agreements are also preserved with the stonemasons Francesco della Torre and Giovanni Battista Passerino and with sculptor Jan Ji Bendl. The stucco work was carried out by Luragos stucco team; contracts were signed by the architect himself. Leading personalities here were Giovanni Domenico Galli, Giovanni Battista Cometa and later also Antonio Soldati. The wording of the contracts shows that although the overall idea of the area was obviously formulated right at the beginning of the building work the executive projects were elaborated progressively and sometimes even with considerable changes, always before the start of each separate stage of building. The contract of 1656 shows changes in the design of the west wing, precisely the raising of the construction by one ell, a different solution to the ceilings on the third oor and in the attics and the use of rustic work on the shafts of the monumental pilasters of the main facade. After the completion of the west wing and the north wing up to the Chapel of St Eligio, up to 1668 the internal wing was constructed with a clock tower and to this was linked to the east by a cross wing with a large refectory. After Carlo Lurago moved to Passau the construction of the Clementinum was led by Francesco Lurago and after him in 1679 by Giovanni Domenico Orsi. Soon after that the building work was interrupted for a lengthy period. On the not quite regular building site Carlo Lurago managed to propose a very clear ground-plan with well dimensioned and arranged communications and spaces. The large corridors and the refectory and its vestibule are decorated with valuable stucco, frescoes and quality stonework. The refectory itself is a highly effective room, vaulted with a at barrel vault supported by mighty curtail corbels. The external facade of the west wing composed as the main facade of the college is divided by a high row of rustic-work pilasters with the heads decorated with festoons and rich decorations in the sections of frieze above them. The facade with a total of 21 axes is rhythmised by the insertion of risaltos with gemel windows and the placement of striking dormers above every second axis of the facade in the roof part. This complex design weakened, although it did not completely exclude, the danger of monotony in the exceptionally long frontage. Nevertheless, the formally rich composition of the facade was the subject of criticism in subsequent years directly from the General of the Jesuit Order, Giano Paolo Oliva. The north facade, with the exception of the four-axis risalto for the extent of the St Eligio Chapel, and the courtyard facades are merely horizontally layered and very simply executed. In the design of the Clementinum Lurago demonstrated his ability to produce a generous, logically combined and balanced composition for a monumental whole. The supreme architectural activity of Carlo Lurago for the Jesuits was then the building of the Church of St Ignatius by the Orders college in the New Town of Prague. The type of layout with an extensive single nave with a monumental main area, opposing chapels with emporas above them and a broad, shallow chancel is formulated here perfectly as regards dimensions and highly effectively. The areas of the side chapels are vaulted with at vaults, a very progressive form in their time. An interesting motif, anti-classical in its effect and dynamising the height composition of the space, is the interruption of the architrave strip and the raised sections of frieze at the level of the emporas. The composition of the side walls of the nave inspired two decades later the design of the side walls of the nave of a church in Waldsassen. A fundamental component of the effect of the interior
STUDIES 245

is also the rich stucco decoration, again carried out by the Lurago team. The exterior of the church is characterised by the monumental and calm composition of the facade with the emphasising of the central axis projecting in the risalto, the corners of which are convexly rounded. The triaxial portico in front of this risalto was added later according to the plan of Pavel Ignc Bayer. The construction of the church, begun in 1665, was roughly nished in 1670; the vaulting carried out the following year and completely nished in 1678. From 1671, however, the construction was supervised by Martin Reiner, as by this time Carlo Lurago was already living in Passau. Even before the building of the church the construction started of the neighbouring building of the New Town Jesuit College, which was carried out by Martin Reiner it is not clear whether according to his own project or that of Lurago. The construction of the college dragged on for decades and it was not completed until the middle of the 18th century. An original part of it was the very interesting Chapel of St Francis Xavier, belonging to the novitiate of the Order, composed as a small longitudinal, originally with alcove chapels and an empora ambit. Also of exceptional importance for the religious life of Bohemia was a further building by Lurago, the place of pilgrimage at Svat Hora near Pbram. The Jesuits, who had religious administration here from 1647, decided to extend and reconstruct the little chapel, visited by pilgrimages from the thirties of the 17th century, in accordance with a plan provided by Carlo Lurago in 1659. The original little chapel was extended to include what was formerly an arcaded open space for believers and supplemented by a row of external chapels consecrated to persons related to Mary and the chief saints of the Jesuit Order. The strongly atypical religious building, set on a terraced base and opened up by arcades, counted on the considerable participation of pilgrims who took part in the mass in the open air. Ambits with large corner chapels and smaller alcove chapels were also planned at the same time as the central chapel. This building, started in 1660, was completed after several interruptions in 1673 and further furnished and decorated in the following decades. Of the buildings for other church clients in Prague the most signicant was undoubtedly the Church of the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady beside the monastery of the Irish Franciscans in the New Town. This order came to Prague on the basis of a decision of Emperor Ferdinand II and Archbishop Arnot Vojtch Cardinal Harrach in 1629 and was introduced to the former Franciscan monastery by the Church of St Ambrose. After the Hybernians built their own monastery in 1637 they realised in 16521669 the building of a new church, undoubtedly according to the project of Carlo Lurago. The layout of the church also documented by a copy of the plans in the Dientzenhofer Sketchbook was also a very precise formulation of the single-nave type with side chapels and emporas. To the nave, three vaulting elds deep, was connected a deeper eld, forming the indication of some kind of intersection, which was not carried out, of the transept. The shallow chancel with rectilinear apse has a depth of two crosswise rectangular elds. At the beginning of the 19th century the church was adapted for use as a customs house. The new reconstruction last decade for the purposes of a theatre considerably damaged this monument. In the eld of profane architecture Luragos work was not so well dened. His buildings are generally characterised by high-quality technical execution, a clear and welldimensioned layout and a tendency towards block-enclosed formation of the exterior of the building. This applies both to the building of the Generalate of the Bohemian Order of the Knights of the Cross by Charles Bridge (from 1661), where the structuring of the facade is enriched by monumental rustic-work pilasters, and also to the convent of the Carmelite Nuns in the Lesser Town (from 1662) and the Old Town monastery of the Dominicans by the Church of St Giles (from 1663). Lurago entered palace architecture in Prague chiey with the demanding construction of the New Town Palace of the Losy of Losinthal family in the years 16511657. The Early Baroque form was altered by considerable younger reconstructions. The Lobkovic Palace in Prague Castle came into being in the years 16511668 through the reconstruction of the beautiful Perntejn Palace. Lurago changed the relatively structured architecture of the Renaissance building into a balanced block and raised it by one oor. In the interiors of the palace he constructed a generous three-armed staircase running round a central light well, to which was connected on the rst oor a series of richly decorated reception rooms, the main
246 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

159 M.Zka, Luragova tukatrsk dlna (see note138), pp.2528. 160 V.Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet (see note129), p.301. 161 Vra Nakov, Architekt astavitel Pavel Ignc Bayerpedstavy vliteratue askutenost, Umn XXII, 1974, p.224. 162 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.124125; Mojmr HorynaPetra Oulkov, Kostel sv.Ignce zLoyoly. PrahaNov Msto, Kosteln Vyd 2006, pp.78. 163 V.Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet (see note129), p.301; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.144. 164 At present the space has an additional oor. The original stucco decoration is preserved in the vaulting.The documentation of the original situation is preserved in the Dientzenhofer sketchbook, see P.Vlek, Dientzenhoferv skic (see note90), pp.488489. 165 At Svat Hora the Marian homage also begins with amiracle connected with the slightly rustic medieval statue of Our Lady, according to legend the actual work of the rst Archbishop of Prague, Arnot of Pardubice. The place of pilgrimage was visited in 1634 by Emperor Ferdinand II with his son and soon became popular with neighbouring nobility and people. After afurther visit from the Emperor it was entrusted to the spiritual care of the Jesuits from Beznice. (Josef Kopeek, Svat Hora, Kosteln Vyd 2003, pp.1213) 166 V.Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet vechch (see note129), p.257; J.Kopeek, Svat Hora (see note165), pp.1314. 167 J.Kopeek, Svat Hora (see note165), pp.1516 168 The order played asignicant part in the education of adepts to the priesthood in the Archbishops Seminary in Prague and also acquired great popularity among the Czech nobility. Stanislav Sousedk, Filosoe veskch zemch mezi stedovkem aosvcenstvm, Praha 1997, pp.216218. 169 P.Preiss, Italt umlci (see note3), p.184; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.122123. 170 P.Vlek, Dientzenhoferv skic (see note90), p.486 171 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.123124. 172 Ibidem, pp.137139. 173 Ibidem, pp.139141. 174 Ibidem, pp.141143. 175 Ibidem, pp.146148. 176 Ibidem, pp.139140.

177 Augustin Wolf, Frst Wenzel Lobkowitz, Wien 1869; Max Dvok, Briefe Kaiser LeopoldI.an Wenzel Euseb Herzog in Schlesien, Archiv der sterreichischen Geschichte 80, 1893, pp.463508; Robert J.W.Evans, Vznik habsbursk monarchie 15501700, Praha 2003, p.164 and 166. 178 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.149. 179 Pavel Vlek, Kasti kamenk asocha na stavb praskho opevnn v17.stolet, Umn XXXVIII, 1985, pp.359378;P.Vlek, Praha 16101700 (see note1), pp.92109. 180 V.Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet (see note129), p.296; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.104. 181 Pavel Vlek, Ilustrovan encyklopedie eskch zmk, Praha 1999, pp.378379. 182 I.I.Kon, Umn aumlci (see note132), p.40. 183 K.Kalinowski, Architektura (see note143), pp.3841. 184 P.Vlek, Ilustrovan encyklopedie eskch zmk (see note181), pp.266267. 185 V.Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet vechch (see note129), p.257; M.Horyna, Barokizace pasovskho dmu (see note158), pp.226229 186 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.150

26. Chomutov, Church of St Ignatius, interior, view towards the choir (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 27. Rome, Church of S. Salvator in Lauro, interior, view of the main nave towards the presbytery (reproduced after: http://www. piosodaliziodeipiceni.it/galleria_ chiesa.php?page=gallerie)

room extending to two oors. The representative layout and demanding decoration were in keeping with the fact that the client was at that time the most important Bohemian nobleman, in 16651674 Hofmeister and a member of the Imperial Secret Council, Vclav Eusebius z Lobkovic. Luragos building company carried out exceptionally high-quality work here also in the sphere of the stonemasons work and stucco decoration, mainly executed by Domenico Galli. Luragos large and efficient building enterprise also won considerable recognition in the construction of the New Town fortications, begun immediately after the end of the Swedish siege in 1648. The new fortications were in front of the old Gothic battlements and were also protected by large ve-sided bastions. The event of the construction of the Prague Baroque fortications has been recently elaborated in detail. Apart from the New Town fortications Lurago also acquitted himself well in the building of the new fortications of the Vyehrad Citadel. An architecturally more signicant work in this connection is the composition of the monumental coulisse of the Leopold Gate. In Luragos work outside Prague for non-religious clients the most important were: the partial reconstruction of the chateau in Nchod with the building of the chateau chapel as a small, richly decorated central space, the reconstruction of the chateau in Nov Msto nad Metuj or the building of the hospital and St Wenceslas Chapel in astolovice. In Silesia the building of the chateau in Gorzanov is ascribed to him, where in the sixties of the 17th century Luragos building supervisor Andrea Carove is mentioned. Finally Lurago was the rst architect of the curious summer palace of Humprecht near Sobotka, based on an oval ground-plan with a considerably raised central hall, built in the years 16661670. From 1668 Lurago also worked for Bishop Vclav Thun in Passau, to which he moved permanently in 1671. His late work in Passau and in other locations on the borders of Bavaria and the Salzburg region surprises with the many new and stylistically advanced themes through which he also inuenced the work of younger masters in the following period. In 1670 he ceded his house in the Lesser Town of Prague for 4,000 guilders, although this was undoubtedly below its value to his son Francesco, who also took over the management of the Prague enterprise. The extensive house in the neighbourhood of the small Church of St Procopius is evidence of exceptional nancial security, built up, of course, by the long years of serious and at some times quite hectic building activity of the master. The outstandingly extensive activity of Carlo Lurago was an important component of
STUDIES 247

28. Humprecht, Chateau general view (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 29. Nchod, chateau chapel, interior, general view (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

Prague and Czech architecture of the second third of the 17th century. In the eld of sacred architecture he formulated a very popular type of Early Baroque church and his buildings are distinguished by the rationality of the layout and good technical execution in the case of demanding commissions also by the ability to nd inventive and progressively styled solutions. Nevertheless, soon after his death his name was almost forgotten and still in the middle of the 20th century he was considered to be chiey a building entrepreneur without greater artistic abilities. He was only rehabilitated through in-depth study in the past few decades. A contemporary of Carlo Lurago, Francesco Caratti was born in Bissone in the canton of Ticino in what is today Switzerland sometime between the years 16151620. Many signicant artists active in the 16th and 17th centuries, both in Rome and in other Italian centres and also in transalpine Europe, came from this area. In his native town he was apprenticed as a stonemason with Pietro Maderno and married his masters daughter in 1642. We have no concrete reports of his assumed travels as a journeyman. In literature
248 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

187 Oldich Stefan still repeatedly characterised Carlo Lurago as amere building entrepreneur and not an architect (see O.Stefan, Prask kostely, Praha 1930, pp.109 and 111; Idem, Architektura, in: Prask baroko 16001800, Umn vechchXVII.aXVIII.stolet, Praha 1938, p.45) and attributes his buildings either to Francesco Caratti or Giovanni Domenico Orsi. The design of the portica and dome of the Church of St Salvator in the Clementinum is still given as Carattis work by Miroslav Koreck, Praha vbarevnm relifu, Praha 1975, p.195. 188 The summary of this rehabilitation appeared in the synthetic studies of Pavel Preiss (Italt umlci, see note3, pp.169184), Vra Nakov (Architektura 17.stolet, see note129, pp.295302, Architektura 17.stolet vechch, see note129, pp.255257) and Pavel Vlek (Praha 16101700, see note1, pp.110150). 189 Vra Nakov, Caratti (Carata, Carate) Francesco, in: Dizionario biograco degli Italiani, 13, 1971, pp.661662. 190 Pavel Vlek, Francesco Caratti, Umn XXXII, 1984, p.1. 191 Natives of Bissone and neighbouring places were, for instance, the architects Domenico Fontana, Carlo Maderno or the famous Francesco Borromini, who basically determined the appearance of Early and Supreme Baroque Rome.

192 P.Vlek, Francesco Caratti (see note190), p.16. 193 Vra Nakov, Nov poznatky opvodu arodin architekta Francesca Carattiho, Kulturn msnk litomickho okresu 14, Roudnice nad Labem 1978, n. 6, pp.9293. 194 Ivo krsekZdenk KudlkaMilo StehlkJosef Vlka, Umn baroka na Morav ave Slezsku, Praha 1996, p.185. Maderno worked under Tencallos leadership even earlier for the Lichtentejns in Lednice (clearly from 1633), see ibidem, pp.330333. 195 P.Vlek, Francesco Caratti (see note190), pp.34.

it is assumed that he knew the Lombardy work of his time and also the Palladian architecture in Verona, Vicenza and elsewhere. From 1642, however, we can trace his life and work quite continuously. At the end of this year he arrived in Vienna in the team of his father-in-law. In 1645 he is, together with Pietro Maderno, documented in Valtice, where they were working for Karel Eusebius, Count of Lichtenstein, evidently according to the designs of Giovanni Giacomo Tencalla, on two fountains and a pond in the chateau park. On 15 June 1652 Caratti entered the service of Duke Vclav Eusebius Lobkovic, who was at that time one of the most important personages of the Imperial Court and Habsburg politics. For this patron he already worked exclusively as an architect. It seems that he left his original profession of stonemason for health reasons at least in later years we have numerous reports of his frequent illnesses. In December 1652 Caratti moved from Vienna to Roudnice, where he took over the preparations for the reconstruction of the old chateau from Pietro Colombo. The project for the new residence as a monumental four-wing building, sent to the count on 7 April 1653, was also highly praised by the famous Giovanni Pieroni da Cagliano. Subsequently Caratti designed the admirable urbanistic regulation
STUDIES 249

of the town of Roudnice and the buildings of the summer palace and several agricultural buildings. He then further prepared a proposal for the reconstruction of the chateau in Zahni in Silesia. Although Caratti showed readiness as a designer and undoubted invention and his proposals were evaluated favourably, their realisation was hampered by the insufficient nances of the client. This was evidently the reason for the end of Carattis work for Lobkovic after the nal accounting on 16 March 1656. In the years 16571667 Caratti was working for Vclav Count Michna of Vacnov. Whereas the work directly for the Count was only smaller matters and relatively unimportant, the main task was the design and construction of the Church of St Mary Magdalene by the Lesser Town Monastery of the Dominicans, which Karel Alexander Michna of Vacnov undertook to build for the Order in 1637 in connection with a promise made by his father. The written agreement of 1654 states the Marian church in Star Boleslav and the Carmelite church in Vienna as possible models for the future building. From the building executed it is evident that Caratti (clearly in agreement with the builder) selected the Viennese model. The church, constructed from 1656, was roughly completed by 1667, including the roong and partly also the vaulting. After the death of Vclav Count Michna there were conicts between his heirs and the Dominicans, which hindered further construction work and architect Caratti also left the Michna service at this time. Only in 1677 was the church t for religious services and it was denitively completed only in 1709 with certain partial changes compared with Carattis original project. The Lesser Town Dominican church represents a signicant achievement in 17th century Prague. The extensive and relatively short nave, only two crosswise rectangular elds deep, is accompanied by side chapels connected by passageways and opens into the monumental square space of the crossing, linked to the arms of the transept on a rectangular ground-plan. Also linked to the crossing is the rectangular area of the sacristy, one vaulting eld deep, behind which in the spirit of the customs of the Order was the monks chancel, separated by a crosswise passage opened by arcades, which in the denitive realisation was changed into a mere partition. Above the crossing is an octagonal tambour, vaulted over with eight-part composite vaulting with three-sided sectors. The original appearance is documented by a copy of the project in the Dientzenhofer Sketchbook. In comparison with the accented and unequivocal longitudinality of the majority of Luragos church buildings the spatial composition of Carattis Lesser Town building was more rened. The dominant area of the crossing and the mirroring of the neighbouring elds of the space in the depth and crosswise axis brought a strong moment of centrality to the depth layout. It is in this connection that a certain layout similarity of Carattis project was observed to the layout of the crossing and apse of the Il Ges Church in Rome. The facade of the building is also innovative in a certain respect in the Prague environment. Corresponding to the size of the building is the rhythmised ve-axis layout of the A-B-C-B-A pattern, in which the three central elds are set forwards in a shallow risalto and the tabular gable, set with a broad three-sided fronton, is also composed in their extent. Scrolled gables are attached above the corner axes. The central axis of the facade was the widest and the two axes framing it were the narrowest. If one can believe Werners drawing showing the Baroque appearance of the facade, on the main level of the facade there were pilasters of the Ionic order and on the extension they were[Richard B12][Joanne D13] of a composite order. Both oors were enclosed by a continuous complete entablature, rounded above the pilasters. Behind the side axes of the facade were built at some little distance the bell towers, which as was rightly observed represents the synthesis of the Italian and Transalpine type of facade. The facade of the convent church of the Benedictine nuns at Prague Castle was ascribed to Caratti, clearly correctly, by Heinrich Gerhard Franz and Miroslav Koreck and they dated it to around 1670. The attribution is supported by the general composition pattern of the facade with its central triaxial risalto, the signicant motif of the reduction of the architrave above the surfaces of the elds and characteristic details. In the block neighbouring the Lesser Town Dominican Monastery on the east side the monumental building of the Nostic Palace was built at roughly the same time as the Church of St Mary Magdalene. The individual buildings of the complexly historically accrued block were acquired gradually from 1622 onwards by Krytof and Otta Nostic.
250 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

196 Max Dvok st., Geschichte des Raudnitzer Schlossbaues 16521684, Roudnice nad Labem 1873, p.96 and following; For plans of the urbanistic regulation of the town see Petr Macek, Roudnice, Pln msta, in: Vt Vlnas (ed.), Slva barokn echie (exh. cat.), Praha 2001, cat. no.II, 4.16, p.414.For plan of garden pavilion and wine distillery see P.Vlek, Francesco Caratti (see note190), pp.4, 5. 197 P.Vlek, Francesco Caratti (see note190), pp.1 and 3. 198 Vra Nakov, Ke stavebn innosti Fr. Carattiho vRoudnici, Kulturn msnk litomickho okresu, 13, 1976, pp.7475. 199 P.Vlek drew attention to the building of the casino and Rotta in the garden of the Michnovsk Palace (P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700, see note41, p.155). Hypothetically he then mentions the possibility of work for Vclav Michna in Radi and his brother Vilm Bedich in Chye (ibidem, p.152). 200 Lubo LancingerMilan Pavlk, Kostel sv.Ma Magdaleny na Mal Stran vPraze aFrancesco Caratti, Umn XIV , 1966, pp.109121; This study clearly demonstrated Carattis authorship, previously assumed only on the basis of style analysis and proposed by Oldich Stefan (see Mluva prask architektury, Praha 1958, p.70). 201 L.LancingerM.Pavlk, Kostel sv.Ma Magdaleny (see note200), p.110. The Viennese Carmelite church of St Joseph is, of course, mentioned in the state after construction in the third decade of the 17th century. After 1683 it was renovated after war damage and partly altered, and then the interior was considerably renovated in the second half of the 18th century. 202 Ibidem, pp.110111Management of the construction was taken over by Gion Decapaoli and he undoubtedly carried it out according to the project of Caratti, under whose leadership he also worked in the construction of the ernn Palace. 203 P.Vlek, Dientzenhoferv skic (see note90), p.490. 204 It has already been stated that the type of vaulting used, an eightpart cloister vault with sectors, was acommon type of vaulting for polygonal church apses, which was mirror-supplemented on acomplete central pattern. Whether this was due to the inexperience of the designer, or his consideration for the abilities of the building workers carrying out the work is not known. One can fully agree with the statement that this was atruly elegant solution, whichthanks to the intensive lighting of the cupolaalso produced aspiritual effect (see P.Vlek, 1989, p.491) 205 P.Vlek, Dientzenhoferv skic (see note90), pp.490491. 206 P.Vlek (Dientzenhoferv skic, see note90, p.158) also mentioned the centralisation of the whole disposition, when towards the accented area of the intersection the nave and the presbytery should allegedly be equally deep.He also refers here to the indication of Supreme Baroque biaxial composition. Nevertheless, already in the original project the presbytery had only the extent of one vaulting eld and the separated monks chancel (evidently with asacristy on ground level) was demanded right from the beginning by the Dominicans from the point of view of the regulations of their order concerning choral church services. The fact that the area of the chancel was not intended even as an optical part of the main area of the church is documented by the clearly lesser clear width of this space. 207 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.157158. 208 This sheet is not kept in any of the Prague collections. Its photographic reproduction can be found in the archive of the central workplace of the NP (National Heritage Institute). It is published, for instance, in: Pavel Vlek (ed.), Umleck pamtky Prahy. Mal Strana, Praha 1999, p.491. 209 The same drawing indicates that there were certain changes in the facade dating from the period of the completion of the church before 1709, for instance in the execution of the side portals on the outer axes of the facade. 210 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.157. 211 Heinrich Gerhard Franz, Bauten und Baumeister der Barockzeit in Bhmen, Leipzig 1962, p.34; M.Koreck, Praha vbarevnm relifu (see note187), p.32. 212 Milada Vilmkov,Urbanistick vvoj zem maltzsk jurisdikce, in: Prask sbornk historick, 1966, p.72. 213 Frantiek Kaika, Nostick palc ve stavebnm ahistorickm vvoji, 1999, manuscr., p.2.

214 Jaroslaus Schaller, Beschreibung der knigl Haupt- und Residenzstadt Prag,II., Prag 1794, s.21. 215 F.Kaika, Nostick palc (see note213), p.2. 216 P.Vlek, Dientzenhoferv skic (see note90), p.494. 217 F.Kaika, Nostick palc (see note213), p.4. 218 Mojmr HorynaPavel ZahradnkPavel Preiss, ernnsk palc vPraze, Praha-Zblov 2001, pp.1617 and following 219 With regard to the fact that single-axis windows are used on the side facades, the gemel windows on the main facade are undoubtedly an intention. They react to the strikingly widely dimensioned elds of the facade and it cannot be ruled out that their use is conditioned by the effort to acquire sufficient light in the areas facing north. The same applies for the level of the rst oor of the internal courtyard wing, where the dimensioning of the axes corresponds to the dimensions of the axes of the main facade. 220 Friedrich Bernhard Werner del., Ignaz Ringle fecit, Martin Engelbrecht esc., Palace of Count Nostitz in Prague, etching, 405248 mm, National Gallery in Prague, Print Collection, DR4850. 221 M.HorynaP.ZahradnkP.Preiss, ernnsk palc (see note218), pp.9293, plan from the fund of ernnsk stedn sprva . III, 26 in SOA Tebo, Jindichv Hradec workplace. 222 P.Vlek, Francesco Caratti (see note190), p.15. 223 The very rened and subtly considered spatial composition of the courtyard was recently barbarically distorted by placing in asmaller courtyard. This intervention is aquite typical example of the primitive brutality of modern architecture in relation to the historical context. 224 In the inventory of 1736 there was atotal of 14 rooms in the west wing beyond the great hall on the rst oor, of which only the large refectory and the billiard room are functionally specied, others are given as closets and rooms. In the east wing the chapel is specically mentioned and also the rooms of His Excellence, in the inner courtyard wing there was apicture gallery on the rst oor. Atotal of 12 rooms are listed. On the rst oor there were thus 26 rooms including the great hall. For this information Ithank Dr. Vratislav Ryav, who carried out the archive research in RA Nostic-Rieneck, the Falknov branch in SOA Plze, workplace lutice. 225 See, for instance,V.Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet (see note129), p.303; eadem, Architektura 17.stolet vechch (see note129), pp.257258. 226 P.Vlek, Dientzenhoferv skic (see note90), pp.493494; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.161165. 227 Zdenk Kalista, Humprecht Jan ernn jako mecen apodporovatel umn vdob sv bentsk ambasdy (1660 1663), Pamtky archeologick 36, 19281930, pp.5378. 228 M.HorynaP.ZahradnkP.Preiss, ernnsk palc (see note218), p.14; in this last great monography there is an exhaustive list of all older literature, from which let us mention at least the monography by Johann Joseph Morper (Das Czernin Palais in Prag, Praha 1940), then the monography of Vilm Lorenc and Karel Tska (ernnsk palc vPraze, Praha 1980) and the study by Pavel Vlek (see P.Vlek, Francesco Caratti, see note190; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700, see note41). 229 M.HorynaP.ZahradnkP.Preiss, ernnsk palc (see note218), p.16, 78.

The heir, Jan Hartvk Nostic, was the Supreme Chancellor of the Kingdom of Bohemia from 1652. This understandably meant that he was bound to a certain degree of representation, the manifestation of which was the construction of the palace in Prague. According to an old document mentioned by Jaroslav Schaller it was to have been realised in 1660. With regard to the fact that only in 1662 did Count Nostic acquire permission to extend the location by moving forward into the square and into both side streets, the year 1660 may be considered rather as only the start of the building activity. In the course of the realisation several changes were made in the project, which is also indicated by the comparison of the ground-plan in the Dientzenhofer Sketchbook and the realised building. The palace was already completed at latest in 1675. The architecture of the exterior of the palace is conceived on the entrance and side facades as a balanced and enclosed block, opened in outline only on the south side by the lower mass of the stable wing facing onto what is now Pelcova Street. The main facade was compared with the other facades strikingly richer. The eleven-axis two-storey surface is divided up by monumental pilasters set on a rounded base reaching the height of the parapets of the ground-oor windows. The heads of the pilasters are of the Ionic type, supplemented by festoons and strangely formed mascarons. Their creator was evidently the outstanding stonemason Giovanni Battista Pozzi, who also worked with Caratti on the building of the ernn Palace. The seven central axes of the facade are drawn out in a shallow risalto framed by graduated one and a half pilasters. The conservative gemel windows used throughout the main facade are surprising. In the original state, depicted by Friedrich Bernard Werner, the gemel windows of the piano nobile were set alternately with segmented and triangular frontons and above the principal moulding above the odd axes were set a total of ve walled dormer windows, also with gemel windows and triangular gables. The axial window above the main portal at the level of the piano nobile is resolved in the same way as the portal of the balcony of the piano nobile on the unrealised proposal for the north facade of the ernn Palace, or the architraves of the window on the central axis of the piano nobile of the unrealised proposal for the facade of the Dietrichstein Palace. As is already mentioned above, the composition of the courtyard was linked with the design of the main facade. The slightly sunken rectangular space is organised along the deep axis emerging from the main portal. The facade of the inner wing of the palace is opened on the ground oor by ve broad pillared arcades, the surface of the rst oor is divided up by rectangular pilaster frames surrounding the gemel windows and on the second oor was an open arcade. In this way the composition of the courtyard was oriented towards the south, because of the light, which penetrated the slanted inner wing through the arcades of the ground oor and second oor also thanks to the lowering of the mass of the outer wing to the south. This compositional theme recalls the central idea of the composition of the courtyard facade of the north wing of the ernn Palace. In the interior of the palace a considerable stylistic innovation was the design of the main staircase in the hall, the rst of its type in our country. On the rst oor the main hall, evidently extending over two oors, was accessible from the landing of this staircase. Connected with this was the double wing of rooms in the west wing, whereas in the east wing due to the uneven location the double wing of rooms and corridor changes in the southern outer part into a single wing. Carattis authorship of the project is generally assumed in literature. In his analyses Pavel Vlek pointed out several similar traits of the main facade of the Nostic Palace and the facades of the west wing of the Clementinum. Nevertheless in the design as a whole the palace is undoubtedly closer to the architecture of Francesco Caratti. Shortly after he left Michnas service Caratti was employed by Humprecht Jan ernn z Chudenic. The Count evidently had the idea of building a large Prague palace already during his embassy in Venice. After his denitive return to the Czech Lands in 1664 he renewed negotiations with the Italian agents Marquis Durazzo and Giovanni Andrea Carpeneto with regard to the matter of nding a suitable architect. At the same time as acquiring three houses and a large garden on Pohoelec opposite the Loreta in 1666 and the extension of the land the Counts secretary Hruka also talked to Carlo Lurago and his nephew Francesco. In November 1667 Caratti announced himself to the Counts secretary and in January of the following year Gion Decapaoli announced himself as the builder. In August 1668 a contract was concluded with the builders Gion Decapaoli and
STUDIES 251

30. Prague, Hradany, ernn Palace, main facade (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 31. Prague, Hradany, ernn Palace, garden facade (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 32. Prague, Hradany, ernn Palace, entrance vestibule (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

252 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

230 Ibidem, pp.19, 139146 and following 231 Ibidem, pp.1823 (with acomplete list of the building workers taking part in the construction). 232 Ibidem, pp.23, 24, 2730, 44 and followingInteresting in this connection is the strong criticism of the palace by Nikodemus Tessin in 1688. The architect, trained in the academic environment of Rome in the last quarter of the 17th century, considered the building from the viewpoint of abstract academic principles and criticised agreat deal of what ahistorian nowadays might evaluate as proof of the authors inventiveness. 233 M.HorynaP.ZahradnkP.Preiss, ernnsk palc (see note218), p.23.

Abraham Leuthner for the construction of a palace according to the plans and instructions of Francesco Caratti. In the exemplarily kept ernn archive the building is documented in detail with the original proposals for whole parts and details, the majority of which come from the hand of Caratti. Count ernn monitored the building carefully and personally approved every denitive proposal and detail. Even the unrealised variants are kept in the archive. Building work began at the start of the building season of 1669 and took place at an almost feverish pace, for already in 1671 a contract was concluded with carpenters and roofers for the roofs and in 1673 the main construction work was complete. In September of the same year Emperor Leopold I also visited the building site when staying in Prague. The building was still being completed several decades after the death of architect Caratti (1677) and the man who ordered the building, Humprecht Jan ernn (1682); the interior furnishings were never completely nished. Even unnished the palace was the object of the curiosity and admiration of numerous visitors. From the correspondence between Count ernn and his secretary Hruka before the Prague visit of Emperor Leopold I in 1673 it emerges that the Count placed great emphasis on the monumental and representative appearance of the main facade of the palace. The immense four-storey facade with 29 axes consists of two compositional stages: the mightily bossed base on the ground oor and the main stage with three storeys, with a monumental row of three-quarter pillars, set with quasi-Ionic heads with bizarre mascarons and shawls, bearing up sectors of the complete architrave at the level of the upper half-oor. It was undoubtedly correct that it was repeatedly stated that the source of inspiration was the work of Andrea Palladio, with which Count ernn was acquainted
STUDIES 253

33. Prague, Prague Castle, St Georges Church, facade (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 34. Klatovy, Jesuit Church, exterior, general view (reproduced after: http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Soubor:Barokn%C3%AD_kostel_ na_n%C3%A1m%C4%9Bst%C3%AD_-_ Klatovy.JPG)

during his stay in Venice. Inspiration by the effective fragment of the never completed palace of Porto in Vicenza is, of course, only partial. Palladios design is a typical Mannerist composition, structurally double, full of almost disturbing tension. The Prague facade shows balance of the verticals and horizontals and its monumentality is accompanied by an expression of massive stability. The differences between Palladios and Carattis designs are the differences between the Mannerist and Baroque concept of architectural composition and it has rightly been observed that, alongside the Palladian inspiration, it is necessary to take into account the stylistically more contemporary inuences of the Lombardy and Venetian architecture of the rst half of the 17th century, such as Francesco Maria Ricchini or Baldassare Longhena. Also admirably resolved is the north facade of the palace, facing the garden, the terrain of which is roughly seven metres lower than the square faced by the main facade. Because of the contact of the two facades in the northeast corner the lower storey is considerably higher on the garden facade as it also includes two oors that are actually basement oors. The facade is divided into three parts, triaxial corner risaltos, higher by the upper half-storey, and a seven-axis centre. On the bottom level the corner towers are divided by rustic-work, the central part opened by two large serlianas of symmetrical sala terrenas, between which is the axis of the entrance staircase from the courtyard. The preserved variants of the plans show that originally Caratti proposed a more simple design for the garden facade and he evidently designed the whole rich apparatus of pilasters and half-pillars of the odd arcades at the direct wish of the Count. The courtyard facades are composed in horizontal strips of oors with rhythmisation of the surface by variation of the dividing gures. The disposition of the palace is determined by the placing of an axial cross in a slightly irregular building site. The building is distributed around two courtyards, separated by a sunken inner wing. The smaller dimensions of the south courtyard are given by the irregularity of the border on the south side of the plot of land. The depth axis of the disposition east-west emerges from the main portal, passes through the triple-naved vestibule and is then connected with the three-armed royal staircase. The transverse axis passes through the vestibule in front of the foot of the royal staircase, then through both courtyards and culminates on the south side in a passageway to a small work yard, on the north side in the visual axis and a single-arm staircase into the palace garden. The enchainment of the entrance areas from the main portal up to the immense main hall
254 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

234 V.LorencK.Tska, ernnsk palc (see note228), p.76 and following;V.Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet (see note129), p.305;V.Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet vechch (see note129), p.258; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.175 and following; M.HorynaP.ZahradnkP.Preiss, ernnsk palc (see note218), p.104. 235 P.Vlek, Francesco Caratti (see note190), pp.16,21; P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.176; Aurora Scotti, Opus italicum, unpublished manuscr.2000. 236 The motif of two large serlianas on the facade was derived from the composition of the garden facade of the Medici villa in Rome. Acquaintance with this building may be assumed in the case of an educated builder and architect, nevertheless the motif of aserliana in asimilar function of accented opening-up of the surface of afacade was far more common in the architecture of the cinquecento, not only then in Bartolomeo Ammannatio, but already earlier in Giulio Romano, Vignola, Andrea Palladio and others. 237 V.LorencK.Tska, ernnsk palc (see note228), p.52. 238 In parallel with this axis exits were led from the central eld of the vestibule into the courtyard, which were dimensioned not only for horses, but also for carriages.

35. Tuchomice, St Vitus Church, facade (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

extending over seven axes of the facade and a height of three oors was already composed by Caratti with almost dramatic effect, further emphasised by Supreme Baroque alterations. The design of further reception rooms (the enlades of salons southwards of the main hall, the chapel in the northeast corner, the gallery, picture galleries in the north and west wings and the splendid stables on the ground oor of the west wing) was a unique achievement in its time, both as regards architectural composition and with regard to the expensive nature of the decoration. The proportional relationships determining the disposition of the rooms have already been analysed in literature and it has been proved that the architect worked with knowledge of the Palladian architectural theory. With all these qualities the ernn Palace represented a real event in the history of Czech and Central European architecture, even though it was in no way progressive from the viewpoint of stylistic development.

239 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.168174.

256 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

240 P.Vlek, Francesco Caratti (see note190), p.2. 241 The projects for these builders generally remained unrealised, with the exception of the adaptations to the Slavata chateau of erven Lhota. For analyses of the interesting project for the Dietrichstein Palace in Hradany see P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.177178. 242 For overall evaluation of his work see Pavel Vlek, Giovanni Domenico Orsi abval kostel sv.Norberta vPraze, Umn XXXIV, 1986, pp.416434. 243 Ibidem, p.422. 244 M.Mrzov-Schusterov, Kotzce projektanta (see note145), p.81 and following 245 Vra Nakov, Barokn architektura vzpadnch echch, Umn XXVIII, 1980, p.22 246 Eva milauerov, Ze stavebnch djin zmku Tuchomice, Stedoesk sbornk historick 5, 1970, pp.9397. 247 Jan Morvek, Stavba jezuitsk rezidence ve Star Boleslavi, UmnVI, 1958, pp.376401. 248 Vra Nakov, Kostel sv.Vorily vPraze. Kproblematice esk barokn architektury kolem roku 1700, in: Sbornk prac Filozock fakulty Brnnsk univerzity, F 3031, 198687, p.36. 249 P.Vlek, Giovanni Domenico Orsi (see note242), pp.424, 426. 250 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.187189. 251 Vra Nakov, Giovanni Domenico Orsi de Orsini aStar Boleslav, Umn XXX, 1982, p.182. 252 P.Vlek, Giovanni Domenico Orsi (see note242), pp.423424.

Caratti also completed further tasks for Count ernn when he prepared projects also for some of ernns estates. This is documented in Nejdek, Strun, Vino, Petrohrad and elsewhere. The most important was clearly the project for the Church of the Holy Rood in Kosmonosy, built in the years 16691673 by builder Domenico Augustoni. The broad and shallow single nave with intercommunicating side chapels is perfectly balanced in disposition and provided with a triaxial facade with a tabular gable tted with a large three-sided fronton with a widened base. Apart from his services to ernn Caratti is also recorded as having worked for other important builders such as Gundakar of Dietrichstein or Ferdinand Vilm Slavata. The work of Francesco Caratti represents an original manifestation in Czech Early Baroque, the starting points of which were undoubtedly Viennese architecture and good knowledge of North Italian architecture and architectural theory. In church and palace architecture he created works with a well-prepared layout and convincing appearance. The decoratively accented and formally perfect register of his architectural forms was clearly also inuenced by his original training as a stonemason. Also undoubtedly a strong creative personality of Czech architecture of the third quarter of the 17th century was Giovanni Domenico Orsi, an artist a generation younger than Lurago and Caratti. The son of an architect working in Vienna and in Prague he evidently trained, after his fathers early death, under Carlo Lurago and appears as his building supervisor and journeyman at the beginning of the sixth decade of the 17th century. We have no reports of any journeymans travels undertaken by the young artist, but it can certainly be assumed that there were some. From the middle of the sixth decade he is documented as a building supervisor, mainly working for Carlo Lurago, and from the beginning of the next decade he was already working independently. From 1665 he took over the execution of the New Town fortications from Lurago and in 1666 the construction of the Jesuit church in Klatovy, started according to Luragos plan a decade earlier, but soon halted. After taking over the construction Orsi clearly submitted his own project, according to which the building was then realised and completed in 1679. The single nave with side chapels and emporas has a basilica cross-section, a transverse nave with a large at vault over the crossing and a shallow, directly enclosed chancel. It was rightly observed that its spatial disposition is the closest to the Il Ges Church in Rome of all the Jesuit buildings in Bohemia. In connection with this building Orsi was repeatedly employed by the Jesuits, especially for their rural realisations. The new building of the St Vitus Church by the residence in Tuchomice near Prague from the years 16651672 is a simple single nave with a depth of two vaulting elds, arched over with barrel vaults with three-sided sectors set on indrawn pillars. The unrealised project of the Jesuit residence with the little Church of St Leopold in Star Boleslav, which was elaborated by Orsi in 1672, envisaged the creation of a single-nave building of the bicentral type, anticipating the layout pattern of Supreme Baroque. There is evidence here both of rhythmisation and also centralisation of the longitudinal space. This impression is further emphasised by the dividing apparatus and the different vaulting []. The strong alternating rhythm also prevails in the wide and high single nave of the Church of the Holy Trinity by the Monastery of the Paulian Order near Nov Bystice from the years 16671679. The space, which has no separate chancel, is centralised allusively by the rhythmic structuring of the walls and vaulting. The no long existing Church of Ss Norbert and Benedict by the former Archbishops Seminary in Prague had the eld of the main nave in alternating rhythm with side chapels and a connected transept with a dome above the crossing. Here too the depth construction is strongly imbued with a centralising tendency. From 1676 comes Orsis signed project for the construction of an unspecied Jesuit college with a large church, mistakenly interpreted as proposals for the reconstruction of the Marian church in Star Boleslav. The extensive single-nave church with side chapels, a transept with a dome and lantern over the crossing and a shallow chancel is a variant of the layout of the Jesuit church in Klatovy as its ground-plan was captured by a drawing in the Dientzenhofer sketchbook. The twin-tower facade was to have had a portal, framed by a marked aedicule with gemel pillars. The design of the college with two courtyards alongside the church shows Orsis capacity for generous, well-functioning ground-plan compilations and the overcoming of the irregularity of the building site in the sense of a balanced and regular-looking composition. All three variants of Orsis projects for the
STUDIES 257

36. Tuchomice, St Vitus Church, interior (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David) 37. Prague, Old Town, Kolowrat Palace, main facade (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

new church beside the Old Town Generalate of the Bohemian Order of the Knights of the Cross with Red Star remained unrealised. Two of these proposals are conceived as longitudinal buildings. The rst of them is a variant of the bi-central composition, known from the project for the Church of St Leopold in Star Boleslav. The second is a single-nave hall with richly rhythmicised side walls and revetment of the corners with trios of free pillars. Above the chancel of both these proposals there was to have been a dome. Relatively exceptional for this time is also the frequency of church centrals in Orsis work. The Church of the Fourteen Holy Helpers by the Paulian Monastery in Svtce near Tachov, built after 1668, was built on the ground-plan of a Greek cross, set in a square with an adjoining chancel of two longitudinal rectangular elds. This church, abandoned after the abolition of the monastery in 1787, was demolished by the secular authorities. In 1673 the completion of the building of St Vitus Cathedral began with the laying of the foundation stone on 3 September in the presence of Emperor Leopold I. The building work soon ground to a halt due to lack of nances. The project for completion of the building was conceived by Orsi as a slightly longitudinalised central area with a dome on a tambour in the central of the three elds of the main nave. On the basis of an anonymous engraving of the exterior of the cathedral from the 17th century and a depiction of the interior of the cathedral by Ludvk Kohl, Academy Architect Michal Brix hypothetically reconstructed the appearance of both the exterior and the interior. In the reconstruction of the Church of the Holy Trinity of the Franciscan Monastery in Slan in 16651668 Orsi altered the original longitudinal building into an allusive central by adjoining two large chapels on the transverse axis and adding a dome over the centre eld of the nave. As the last similarly formed central Orsi conceived the third version of a project for the new building of the Church of the Knights of the Cross beside the Old Town Generalate of the Order. From the above overview of the sacred buildings of Giovanni Domenico Orsi it is evident that this architect contributed a number of new motifs to Czech architecture. The alternating rhythmisation of the elds of depth naves was elaborated in the architecture of Italy and especially of Lombardy already from the beginning of the 17th century. Already in the years 16031620 the Jesuit Church of Ss Marcelino and Pietro in Cremona was built, representing the alternating rhythmisation in the same form as used sixty years later by Orsi. Before the middle of the 17th century a similar layout was used in the interior of the Jesuit Church of St James in Nice. Then just a little later it was used in the building of the Jesuit church in Pavia, which has unfortunately already been pulled down. Whereas the church in Nice has a very shallow chancel, the church in Pavia had a chancel on a square ground-plan, vaulted over with a dome without tambour. In the Rome province of the
258 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

253 Vojtch Sdlo, Kostel sv.Frantika ukiovnk na Starm Mst praskm, in: Roenka Kruhu pro pstovn djin umn za rok 1934, Praha 1935, p.44. 254 Mojmr HorynaJosef HzlerLubo Lancinger, Svtce uTachova, bval pavlnsk kostel. Stavebn-historick przkum, SRPMO Praha 1975, manuscr., not paginated; P.Vlek, Giovanni Domenico Orsi (see note242), p.426. 255 P.Preiss, Italt umlci (see note3), pp.207208. 256 Vladimr Pibyl, Baroko ve SlanmBval frantiknsk klter skostelem Nejsvtj Trojice, Slan 1988. 257 V.Sdlo, Kostel sv.Frantika (see note253), pp.4446. 258 Richard BselHerbert Karner, Jesuitenarchitektur in Italien (15401773)II., Die Baudenkmler der mailandischen Ordensprovinz, Wien 2007, pp.109111. 259 Ibidem, pp.273275. 260 Ibidem, pp.295296.

261 Richard Bsel, Jesuitenarchitektur in Italien 15401773. Die Baudeknmler der rmischen und der neapolitanischen Ordensprovinz,Wien 1986, pp.7376. 262 Ibidem, pp.9497. 263 Vittorio de FeoValentino Martinelli, Andrea Pozzo, Milano 1996, p.58 and following, 117, 246. 264 Alfredo Marchione, Gesu e Maria, in: Roma sacraI., Roma 1995, p.38. 265 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.200. 266 R.BselH.Karner, Jesuitenarchitektur in Italien (see note258), pp.208210. 267 Ibidem, pp.146150.

Jesuit Order this rhythmicised type of layout is rarer. The Church of St Ignatius in Fermo was constructed between the years 16461660. A later example of this type is the composition of the nave of the church in Frascati where the Jesuit architect Gregorio Castrichini used in the transformation a slightly older project of Carlo Fontana in the last decade of the 17th century. The concept did, however, already take into account the illusionistic completion of the church with the paintings of Andrea Pozzo. In Rome itself the earliest example of this type of rhythmicised space is the Ges e Maria Church on the Corso, which was designed by the Milanese architect Carlo Buzio in 1636, completed with alterations by Carlo Rainaldo only after 1675. The type of central space used by Orsi in the building of the church in Svtce near Tachov and clearly also in the proposal for the completion of St Vitus Cathedral is also of purely Italian origin. The link with the layout of the Church of S. Carlo ai Catinari in Rome has already been rightly pointed out. In what is referred to as the second proposal for the construction of the Church of the Knights of the Cross in Prague the area of the nave is rhythmicised by the complicated relief design of the walls. The side walls are designed in three elds, separated by pilasters, of which the central altar eld is wider than those on either side. The corners of the nave area are then panelled with trios of free-standing pillars. The above motif of the free-standing pillars dividing an interior was not usual in our architecture before this time. Here, too, one must seek models in Italian works. The oldest example may be the interior of the nave of the S. Fedele Church by the professional building in Milan, realised by Pelegrino Tibaldi in the years 15691579. The free-standing pillars in the corners of the nave and between the elds of the wall accentuate the rhythmic composition of the space. The project of Bartolomeo Bianco, elaborated in 1634 and nally not realised, for the church by the Genoan college of the order and, linked with this, a further one of the plans elaborated in 1650 by Giovanni Francesco Falcone, has a richly rhythmicised centralised nave, the central eld of which, with a dome arching over it, has side walls of three elds with the central altar eld considerably wider. Finally, the free-standing pillars and half-pillars also used in
STUDIES 259

the interior of the Church of St Francis Xavier in Mondo, which was realised by Giovanni Domenico Ricchini after 1667, have a similar function. The mentioned analogies with Italian buildings of the 17th century show that Orsi continued from the stylistically more advanced patterns of his older contemporaries. Whether he was acquainted with Italian and especially with Lombardy architecture during his supposed travels as a journeyman, which he might have undertaken sometime after 1650, or whether these inspirations came to him through builders cannot be determined without further documentation. Orsi also realised high-quality monastery buildings for religious orders. The Jesuit College in Kutn Hora was constructed from 1667 and conceived as a monumental dominant feature of the west side of the town in the vicinity of the St Barbora Church. The facade above the Vrchlice valley, with a total extent of 33 axes, was crowned with a higher centre spire and two corner spires arising from risaltos. In the accented axes there are gemel windows. The area of the facade above the socle-style ground oor level is divided up by a high row of pilasters. The generously dimensioned areas compose a well-arranged double-nave layout. The building work took place very slowly and was only completed in the fourth decade of the 18th century with certain alterations in the project. The construction of the Jesuit professional building in the Lesser Town of Prague was already prepared from the fties of the 17th century. Only in the years 16721673 did the denitive measurement of the building site and preparation of the plans take place. One of them was also prepared by Francesco Caratti, but the building was realised according to the proposal of Giovanni Domenico Orsi himself and after his death in 1679 it was completed according to the altered project of Francesco Lurago. The immense block, in scale almost crushing the surrounding buildings, has an almost unstructured facade, layered in horizontal oors. It is thus a striking example of what was termed the severe style, which prevailed in the realisation of Jesuit residential buildings in the third quarter of the 17th century. Parts of the block were two new churches, replacing older places of worship the Church of St Wenceslas on the northwest corner and the St Nicholas Church on the south side. Their facades were to frame the west front of the professional building, which was designed as the entrance. Whereas the St Wenceslas Church was conceived as a simple single nave vaulted on indrawn pillars, St Nicholas Church was intended to be the traditional type with a wide nave, opposing side chapels, emporas and a chancel on an almost square ground-plan. The Convent of the Carmelites by the Church of St Havel in Pragues Old Town was originally to have been built by Carlo Lurago, but after his departure from Prague this task was taken over by Giovanni Domenico Orsi, who realised it from 1671. The structuring of the facades varied the pattern already used for the Jesuit college in Kutn Hora. The simpler version of the same facade design is represented by the facade of the Old Town convent of the Dominican nuns by the Church of St Anne, which came into being when the humble older premises were extended after 1676. Orsi is listed also in the creation and reconstructions of important monastery interiors with characteristic Early Baroque decoration, both in the case of the Augustinian Canons in the New Town of Prague and in that of the beautiful library hall in the Strahov Premonstratensian Monte Sion Monastery, established in 1671. The architect was in contact with its Abbot and important contemporary philosopher Jeronm Hiernheim already during the construction of the church of the Archbishops Seminary. An important palace built by Giovanni Domenico Orsi is the Kolowrat Palace in the Old Town, constructed after 1673. A building of four wings, set around a regular rectangular courtyard, it is today only partly preserved. In its original state the two-storey main facade had an eleven-axis symmetrical design. The three distanced axes on the right side came into being subsequently when Count Kolowrat had a further purchased house rebuilt. The facade is horizontally designed with alternating segmented and three-sided frontons above the windows of the rst storey and an alternating row of larger and smaller dormer windows above the principal moulding. The interiors have already lost the major part of their original supercial furnishing, but the well-dimensioned two-nave design has been preserved. With regard to buildings outside Prague Orsis work in Litomice was exceptionally important. In 16631670 he carried out the construction of the Bishops Cathedral of
260 STYLISTIC PROFILE OF PRAGUE EARLY BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE

268 Idem, pp.242243. 269 Pavel Vlek, Jezuitsk kolej vKutn Hoe, in: Kutn Hora vdob baroka. Antuiqua Cuthna 1, Praha 2005, p.214. 270 Ibidem, pp.216217. 271 Milada Vilmkov, Ke stavebnmu vvoji komplexu jezuitskch budov na Malostranskm nmst, Umn XIX, 1971, pp.304313; eadem, Stavitel palc achrm, Praha 1986, pp.3031. 272 M.Vilmkov, Stavitel palc achrm (see note271), p.49 273 This ground-plan pattern was also continued by Krytof Dientzenhofer, when thirty decades later he was preparing anew project for St Nicholas Church. The scale disproportion of the mass of the professional building in the space of the lower part of Lesser Town Square was only mastered after 1737 by Kilin Ignc Dientzenhofer, who adopted this scale and dominated it with the effective vertical of the dome and bell-tower of St Nicholas Church. (See Mojmr Horyna, Novostavby K.I.Dientzenhofera vkontextu okoln zstavby, Architektura SR 48, 1989, p.36). 274 V.Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet (see note129), pp.306307. 275 Milada Vilmkov, Bval klter dominiknek pi kostele sv.Anny, p.211I, Stavebn-historick przkum Prahy, SRPMO 1962, pp.1212. 276 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), pp.195197. 277 V.Nakov, Architektura 17.stolet (see note129), p.306. 278 P.VlekE.Havlov, Praha 16101700 (see note41), p.199.

279 Jaroslav MacekPetr MacekMojmr HorynaPavel Preiss, Oktavin Broggio 16701742, Litomice 1992, p.25. 280 Petr Macek, Barokn architektura astavitelstv vsevernch echch, in: Petr HrubMichaela Hrub (edd.), Barokn umn vseverozpadnch echch, st nad Labem 2003, pp.3839. 281 Petr MacekPavel Zahradnk, Zmeck arel vZkupech, Przkumy pamtek 3, 1996, pp.334. 282 Mojmr Horyna, Die rmischen Inspirationen der Barockarchitektur in Prag im 17. Jahrhundert, in: Barbora Balov (ed.), GenerationenInterpretationenKonfrontationen, Bratislava 2007, pp.144146. 283 Oldich Stefan, Skupina mskho smruG.B.Matthaei, Pamtky archeologick 35, 19261927, p.115; idem, Barokn princip vesk architektue (see note42), pp.306, 315320. 284 In this sense the knowledge of early baroque architecture was fundamentally deepened in particular by the numerous studies of Vra Nakov, some of which are listed above in the notes, and the synthetic work of Pavel Vlek on Prague architecture of the 17th century, published 1998. 285 Also interesting for the Baroque iconography of towns and buildings is the fact that, for instance, the church of the Knights of the Cross in the vicinity of the Clementinum is depicted in the never realised form of one of Orsis projects, and the New Town Jesuit college is captured in its planned state, which at this time had not, of course, been completely realised . 286 Josef Forbelsk, panl, e aechy v16. a17.stolet, Praha 2006, p.353.

St Stephen together with building supervisor Angelo Canevallo. A further work in Litomice is St Michaels Church by the former Dominican Monastery. This building, already demolished in the 19th century, was realised by Orsi at the wish of the Dominicans according to the design of the Lesser Town Dominican church by Francesco Caratti. Orsi also began the reconstruction and completion of the chateau in Zkupy for Julius Frantiek Count Sachsen-Lauenburg in 1671. Just three years later the management of the construction work was taken over by Julius Broggio of Litomice and after him by Abraham Leuthner of Prague. When Giovanni Domenico Orsi died in 1679 his contemporary, Jean Baptiste Mathey, an artist formed by Bernini and post-Bernini Roman architecture, had been working in Prague for ve years. With his arrival the impulses of Roman Supreme Baroque, even its highly contemporary academic phase, reached our environment. Shortly after the death of krta, then, there was a signicant change of view in Prague architecture, for the inuence of Mathey was almost style-creating in the last quarter of the 17th century. The older concept of the history of Baroque architecture, based on the concept of stylistic teleology, interpreted Early Baroque architecture as a kind of prelude to the supreme style, which in its dynamic line was the actual fullment of the artistic desire of the period. The more detailed historical view, however, which is presented by some newer works, makes it possible to capture the inherent and time-specic problems of Early Baroque architecture. In this way not only do the more outstanding architects of the period Filippi, Pieroni, Sebregondi, Lurago, Caratti and Orsi appear as unique personalities with individual culminations of their own concept of architecture, but one can also see the ideologically fundamental signicance of corresponding projects and inspirational inuences, especially from the Italian environment. At the same time the personalities are also proled of the most important secular and church builders and orderers of works of art, who had a signicant inuence on artistic creativity. If we compare two of the most beautiful views of Prague, the so-called Sadeler prospect of 1606 and the prospect of Folpert van Ouden-Allen of 1685, then we realise that the overall plan of the city was preserved, but its individual spaces, streets and squares acquired new and strong dominant features, the most striking of which are: the ernn Palace on Hradany, the Church of Our Lady Victorious, St Mary Magdalene and the Professional Building of the Jesuits in the Lesser Town, the Clementinum or the Church of the Immaculate Conception by the Hibernian Monastery in the Old Town and the Church of St Ignatius with the Jesuit College in the New Town. On Ouden-Allens prospect the city of Prague gives the impression of a rich-in-form and varied organism oriented towards its dominant features. The attractive picture fully justies the catch phrase of the period, which claimed that a true cavalier and educated person with experience of the world must videre Praga et audire Arriaga. Translated by Joanne P. C. Domin

STUDIES 261

Edition of Historical Sources

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 263

264 NAZEV KAPITOLY

Archival Documents on the Life and Ouevre of Karel krta

TOM SEKYRKA RADKA TIBITANZLOV TPN VCHA ET AL.

Notes on the text

The documents made available by the present edition the regesta were selected in the framework of the archive and historical research, carried out simultaneously with the exhibition project Karel krta 16101674. His Work and His Era. Our aim was to provide the most complete view of the personality of the painter, his life story and the documents related to his oeuvre. In the selection of archive records, priority was mainly given to manuscripts and, to a lesser extent, printed documents of krtas contemporaries (B. Balbn) which, one way or another, reect the artists life and work. The materials originate from the period between the early 17th century (documents signicant for the later events related to the krta familys property) and the time shortly after the death of Karel krta the Younger, with only short overlaps into the early 18th century. The exception from this rule is one of the rst krta biographies written by Johann Quirin Jahn. We decided to include this treatise due to the high importance it has had for research on krta up to the present time. The inventories of churches or, eventually, aristocratic and bourgeois picture collections mentioning krtas works were rather irrelevant for our purposes; they were exploited in connection with the preparation of the catalogue to the exhibition and used as bases for the individual catalogue entries. Considering the given time span, the present edition thus contains inventories of inheritance which are directly linked with members of krtas family or his friends (e.g., Miseroni and Dirix of Bruk). Also, mainly due to the determined period of time of the published EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 265 material, the edition omits documents that follow the later fate of krtas works, with the exception of the essential and often quoted sale of his paintings from the Zderaz monastery library. The vast majority of the edited documents are written in German and Czech Kurrentschrift (Old German script) and they sometimes also include humanistic cursive. Most texts in Latin and Italian employ humanistic cursive and semi-cursive. The quality of the particular documents is considerably varied from the points of legibility of writing, use of seals and the like. The text of the edition employs several types of parentheses. Round brackets are the same as in the original versions. Square brackets contain editors interventions and specication and itemizing of less known or easily interchangeable abbreviations, and they also give notice of either ambiguous words or wrong spellings [!] or illegible text [?]. Angle brackets contain crossed-out texts. Illegible deletions are followed by a question mark in angle brackets. Marginal and interlinear notes (parentheses) are dened by slashes / /. If the original text was underlined, the underlined section is preserved in the edition as well. The transcription of proper names employs the principles of their emendation according to contemporary grammatical rules (e.g. Sskreta krta). These cases especially follow the phonetic form of words as is reected by the text. For the sake of better orientation in the texts, we unied the names, particularly in the heading regests, adhering to the variants most often stated in literature

(e.g. Plling Palinka). The names of less wellknown or unknown persons were unied after their most frequented form. The frequently used abbreviations (JM Jeho Milost [His Majesty], JMC Jeho Milost csask [His Imperial Majesty], VM Vae Milost [Your Majesty], VAM Vae Arciknec Milost [His Archducal Highness], datt. date, act. actum, LP Lta Pn [anno Domini], cs. csask [imperial], krl. krlovsk [royal], May. Majestt [Majesty], s., sv. svat, svatho, sancti [saint, St], p. pn, pni, pan [Mr, Messers, Mrs], H. Herr [Mr]) are itemized in the entire edition without any detailed note or square brackets. Abbreviations of frequently repeated monetary units are equally itemized (groe, zlat, krejcary, kopy mesk [groschen, guilders, kreuzers, Meissen three-scores]). The abbreviations mp manu propria, L. S. locus sigilli, NB nota bene are, on the contrary, left in the original form. Since the submitted edition does not represent a literary source and it should neither serve any linguistic purposes nor be a basis for palaeographic teaching, the editors have agreed to transcribe the texts while observing the rules stated below. The documents included are written in German, Czech, Latin and Italian, and we thus nd it necessary to point out their different transcription in the individual languages in some detail. German language Our effort to maintain the original form of the texts resulted in the unied emendation of the documents. Taking into consideration that the vast majority of the edited documents originate from the period prior to 1750, the transcription rules were unied and, with only a few exceptions, it strictly followed the regulations for the transcription of early modern German documents until 1750. This was done in such a way as to keep the extent of interventions in the text to a minimum. Capital and small letters as well as punctuation marks were used rather variously by the authors of the original texts. In order to avoid incomprehensibility of the texts and to retain their meaning, it was necessary to change the punctuation according to modern orthographic norms. The same principle was employed for separate or linked writing of the individual words, and in the case of capital letters whose use also follows modern orthography for the sake of better legibility. The non-functional gemination of consonants was simplied (for example, wirdt is transcribed as wird and unndt as und). The letter w is transcribed according to the original text with the exception of those cases where it appears in the meaning u (newen neuen, Fraw Frau). The words containing s were simplied to just while the use of s and was preserved according to the original form of the text. The frequent uctuation in writing phones t d

(Dochter Tochter), g k (gleinere kleinere), p b (Purger Burger), f v (hiefon hievon) was also preserved according to the original, as was also the use of instead of i and vice versa (btten bitten, egen eigen). Also the insertion of the letters h and b in the edition follows the original text (angenohmen, nemblich, komben, Ambt). The transcription of the letter y was maintained in the original form, too; only the redundant diaresis (especially in be) was removed. Moreover, the editors retained the uctuation of the phones i and j (ie, ieman je, jeman). Czech language The text is divided into paragraphs according to its logical context and sentential construction and, to a certain extent, is supplemented by punctuation according to contemporary orthography. Non-vocalized phones were adapted to modern orthography as well (radda rada, dattum datum). The orthotic v at the beginning of words (vosumdest, vostatn) and the orthotic j (jmt, jminul) was kept in the original form, so too the frequent oscillation in conjugating the noun bt [to be]: jsme sme, jste ste. The insertion of the letters t and l (ntco, vzctn, uedlnk) and the alternating use of and (vt vt) and d and t (oteven odeven) were also preserved. The oscillating use of the forms vzlt and zvlt was also maintained according to the original text. The writing of the prepositions s and z and the prexes s- and z- was adapted according to the meaning of the text and the contemporary orthographic norm. Latin language The transcription of documents written in Latin follows the rules for transcribing these texts from the period after 1600 whence they are transcribed in order to maintain the authentic character of the edited source. There were thus almost no interventions in the text and the form of phones. The phone y in the genitive case is transcribed as ii (juny junii, Ignaty Ignatii). Capital letters are used for names of persons, places, holidays, official titles of institutions, orders, ranks, degrees and offices (ordo Premonstratensis). The long and rounded s is not graphically differentiated in the edition. Italian language Italian texts were transcribed with regard to maintaining the authenticity of the edited source. The individual letters of the original documents are, in principle, transcribed without any changes, although accent marks and apostrophes are written and supplemented according to valid contemporary grammatical rules. The writing of capital and small letters also follows the rules of modern spelling, while words used in personied meaning (for example, la Verit) begin with capitals. Punctuation

observes contemporary grammatical rules and is added only where it helps clearly differentiate between phrases and idioms freely arranged one after another. The documents are published as follows: the heading states the place, day of week, month and year of issue. Below is the regesta abstract and, under it, the reference to the place of the documents deposition, while the latter species the particular archive or another institution and fund and gives other more detailed information. The yet unpublished documents or documents which are newly edited according to contemporary grammatical rules and now published in extenso are followed by an abbreviated abstract and then the authentic, edited document itself. In the case of documents which were edited earlier but meet the modern concept of a professional edition, a more detailed regesta is given under the heading. As to the lost and today non-existent documents (especially records from the city books which burned during the re of the Old Town Hall in 1945) as well as unfound documents, the source is quoted from relevant literature. Each document entry closes with literature where the text has been mentioned, and a note about the edition is included in the case of previously edited texts. Calendar dates in the text are, in the heading, transformed into numerical form, as dates according to the Christian Church year. The documents are divided into four sections for the sake of better lucidity the rst section contains archive documents relating to the life and personality of Karel krta; the second includes documents linked with his oeuvre and mentions of him; the third presents texts on the life and oeuvre of Karel krta the Younger, and the last, fourth section consists of documents that record the lives and oeuvres of krtas students or, eventually, his workshop collaborators, assistants and employees. The documents within the individual sections are arranged in chronological order. Authors of the individual transcriptions: Petra Oulkov (PO) Tom Sekyrka (TS) Lenka Stolrov (LS) Radka Tibitanzlov (RT) tpn Vcha (V)
1 The transcription of all texts observes the rules stated in: Ivan ovek et al., Zsady vydvn novovkch historickch pramen zobdob od potku 16. stolet do souasnosti, Praha 2002.

266 ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OUEVRE OF KAREL KRTA

I. Documents on the Life and Person of Karel krta

Prague, 10 July 1605

Emperor Rudolf II donates to Konrad krta otnovsk of Zvoice, the accountant of the Bohemian Chamber, the debenture bond of 1300 Meissen three-scores with 5% interest due until repayment as a reward for his thirteen years of service. The amount shall be paid from the rights, escheats, contrabands, nes and conscations in Bohemia and the Lands of Bohemia devolved upon the king, which krta or his heirs will request as the rst ones to pay off this claim. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), sign. S162/24, Inv.No.3280, box 2251, f. 18. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, pp. 4647. My Rudolf etc. oznamujeme tmto listem vem, jako za slun a spravedliv bejti uznvati rme, abychom tm, kte nm vrn a platn slou, zase milost na csaskou odmnu uinili. Proto z dobrm rozmyslem, nam jistm vdomm, moc krlovskou v echch a radou vrnch naich milch dali sme a tmto listem dvati rme poctivmu Kundratovi krtovi otnovskmu z Zvoic, puchhalterovi naemu komory esk, jakoto dobe, vrn a v mnohch letech zaslouilou milost, jmenovit tincte set kop meskch, nleejcch, buto npadnch, odoumrtnch, kontrabandnch pokut neb konskac, kter by se v tomto krlovstv, neb zemch k nmu nleejcch, pitrely, a on, Kundrt krta, jeho ddicov neb budouc o nich nejprv oznmili, jeto by spravedliv a podn na ns k rukm naim pily, a dnmu jet od ns povoleny a dny nebyly, ty jemu Kundratovi krtovi, jeho ddicm a budoucm, a do tch tinctiset kop meskch vydny bti maj bez odpornosti. Zatm pak, neli by jemu, ddicm neb budoucm jeho takov suma zouplna dna a zaplacena byla, chceme tomu, aby se od datum tohoto listu dotud a tak dlouho, dokud by takov sumy, tak jak naped doteno, ze velijakch pokut, npad, odoumrt, kontraband nebo konskac, aneb jinak nedoshly a nedostaly, ze sta pt tolarv nebolito kop menskch ouroily. Jako jsme pak o tom Eliovi mdgrabnerovi rad a rentmistru naemu, t budoucm rentmistrm v Krlovstv eskm, aby jemu neb jim takovej ourok vydvali poruiti rili. TS

Prague, 10 July 1607

Emperor Rudolf II donates to Konrad krta otnovsk of Zvoice, the accountant of the Bohemian Chamber, the debenture bond of 1300 Meissen three-scores with 5% interest due until repayment as a reward for his thirteen years of service. The amount shall be paid from the rights, escheats, contrabands, nes and conscations in Bohemia and the Lands of Bohemia devolved upon the king, which krta or his heirs will request as the rst ones to pay off this claim. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. S212/1, box 870. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, pp. 4647.

Wir Rudolf der Ander, von Gottes Gnaden erwehlter Rmischer Kayser, zue allen Zeiten Mehrer des Reichs, auch zue Hungarn, Bhmen, Dalmatien, Croatien Knig, Erzherzog zue sterreich, Marggraf in Mhren, Hertzog zu Lutzemburg und Schlesien und Marggraf zu Lauitz thuen kund jedermnniglichen Kraft

dieses Briefs, gleichwie wir vor billich und gerecht erkennen, dass wir dieselbe, so uns treue und erspriessliche Diensten geleistet, mit Kayserlichen Gnaden wiederumb recompensiren. Als haben wir mit unseren guten Bedacht, Wissen und Willen aus kniglichen Gewalt in Bhmen, und mit Rat unserer Getreuen gegeben,

tuen auch hiemit geben dem Ehrbaren Conrad Skreta Schottnoffsky von Zaworschitz, unserer Kniglichen Bhmischen Cammer Buchhaltern, lieben Getreuen zue Treu und auch in vielen Jahren wohlverdienten Gnaden recompens, benantlich dreizehenhundert Schock meissnisch aus allen und jeden uns als Knigen

von Bhmen zugehrigen Rechten, Caduciteten, Contrabanten, Strafen oder Conscationen, so in diesem Knigreich und demselben einverleibten Lndern vorfallen mchten, und er Conrad Skreta, seine Erben oder Nachkmling, dieselben erstens ahngebeten, denselbe gerecht und ordentlich uns zugefallen und von

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 267

uns noch niemands andern vergeben weren, die sollen ihme Conraden Skreta, seinen Erben oder Nachkmlingen bis auf die 1300 Schock meissnisch ohne Widerspruch herausgegeben werden. Entzwischen aber, ehe dass ihme, seinen Erben und Nachkmlingen solche Summa wurde bezahlet und abgefhrt, wollen und gndigist, dass von dato dieses unseren Briefs, solang bis solche <Summa> gleich wie vorgemeldet von allerhand Strafen, Caduciteten, Contrabanten, Conscationen oder sonsten anderwerts ihnen abgehrt

wurde, von 100 Reichsthaler fnf Thaller Interesse sollen erlegt werden. Wie wir dann desswegen dem ehrbaren Eliae Schmidgrabner von Lustenekh auf Bruss, unserem Rat und Rentmeistern, auch zueknftigen Rentmeistern im Knigreich Bhemb, dass die ihnen solches Interesse bezeiten abfhren sollen, durch unsern ofenen Brief besonders anbefohlen haben. Und wann er gedachter Skreta oder seinen Erben und Nachkmling besagte Summa aus bemelten zugefallenen Rechten vllig erheben teten, wie dann alles

und jedes, so sie empfangen werden, auf diesem Brief soll verzeichnet werden, als sollen sie unseren Brief wiederumb uns oder unserer Bhmischen Cammer zurckstellen. Und so, wer diesen Brief von oftgedachtes Conraden Skreta Erben oder Nachkmlingen ihme durch guten Willen abgetreten hette, wollen wir, dass ihmejeden eben solches Recht und Macht zu obbesagten Sachen gebhren solle als ihnen selbsten. Zue Urkund dessen haben wir unser kleinernes Kayserliches Insigl hierzudrucken lassen.

Geben in unseren Prager Schloss, Dienstags nach St. Procopi anno 1607 etc., unserer Reiche des Rmischen im 32., des Ungarischen im 35. und des Bhmischen auch im 32. Jahr etc. Rudolf mp., L. S., ad mandatum domini electi Imperatoris proprium Caspr Kapler Johann Peldrschimousky [attached is the nancial statement of the claim, issued by the Bohemian Chamber on 27 April 1653] TS

The Old Town in Prague, 1607

Members of the family of krta otnovsk of Zvoice are stated in the list of members of the Czech Brethren, which was held in the personal archives of the Unitys doyen, Matou Konen. Muzeum Mladoboleslavska (Museum of the Mlad Boleslav Region), Archiv Matoue Konenho (Archives of Matou Konen), sign. A3254/Praha/O1607, f. 2v, 3r. Literature: Apparently unpublished. (We thank Markta Rkov for finding and providing the text.)

V Starm Mst pan Daniel krta V rynku pan Jik krta Johanna sestra jeho

pan Kundrat krta Kateina m[anelka] Jan, Kundrat, synov RT

The Old Town in Prague, 16 February 1613

The bell was tolled for the daughter of Kundrat krta in the church of Our Lady before Tn. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), lePjem zdu t. asv.Benedikta (Receipt of church funds at Tn and St Benedict), 15061614, sign. 1645, f. 134r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

V sobotu po svatm Valentinu zvonno dcerce pana Kundrata krty z osady tto, dno 20 krejcar. RT

268 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

The Old Town in Prague, 11 September 1613

The bell was tolled for Kundrat krta in the church of Our Lady before Tn. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Pjem zdu t. asv.Benedikta (Receipt of church funds at Tn and St Benedict), 15061614, sign. 1645, f. 136r. Literature: BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 7. V stedu po Narozen Panny Marie zvonno Kundratovi krtovi z osady tto, dno 20 krejcar. RT

The Old Town in Prague, 13 September 1613

Testament of Karels father Kundrat krta, issued in 1612. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber testamentorum II, 16191658, sign. 2206, f. 34r36r. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 1819; NEUMANN 1974, pp. 15, 44; Radka Tibitanzlov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.2, p. 582.

List kaftovn a posledn vuole Kundrata krty otnovskho z Zvoic My purkmistr a rada Starho Msta praskho znmo inme tmto listem pede vemi, kde ten nebo touc slyn bude, a zvlt tu, kde nle, e pan Pavel krta otnovsk z Zvoic, obesln jsa do rady ped pana purkmistra a pny od pan Kateiny z Morchendorfu, pozstal vdovy po ne[botku] panu Kundratovi krtovi otnovskmu z Zvoic, mtnnu tohoto Starho Msta praskho, vysvdil a oznmil. Kterak jmenovan pan Kundrat krta bratr jeho rok ped svatm Duchem, jedouc do Moravy, na Horch Kutnch se zastavil a k nmu do domu jeho pijda, posledn vuoli svou a kaft v spis uveden a peet vlastn nebotka zapeetn jemu k opatrovn a schovn odevzdal, s tm pitom oznmenm, e cokoliv v nm psno, jeho jist, dokonal a posledn vuole jest, dajc dle, pokud by ho Pn Bh prostedkem smrti asn zde v echch z tohoto svta povolati ril, aby takov kaft na prvo toto ku peten sloil a podal, co tak uinil a jej na prvo sloil. Kter k dosti nadepsan pan Kateiny z Morchendorfu,

kdy vuobec otevn a ten byl v rad f[eria] sexta post Nativitatis Beatae Mariae Virginis, 13. septemb[ri] 1613, toto jest v sob drel a zavral, dr a zavr, slovo od slova jak nsleduje takto: Ve jmno Svat a Nerozdln Trojice, jedinho Pna Buoha mho, na vky vkv poehnanho amen. J Kundrat krta otnovsk z Zvoic, mtnn Starho Msta praskho, vyznvm tmto listem kaftovnm pede vemi vuobec a zvlt tu, kde nle. Znamenaje a pemejleje, kterak v tto k smrtedlnosti vecky vci promnu berou a lidem nic jistho nen jako smrt a nic nejistho jako hodina smrti. Jakkoliv z milostiv vuole Pna Boha vemohoucho pi sepsn tohoto listu kaftovnho zdravho ivota povm, avak vm, e v neit musm. Nechtce tomu, kdyby m Pn Buoh nemoc navtviti a prostedkem smrti z tohoto svta povolati ril, abych se jakejmi svtskmi a pomjejcmi vcmi zaneprazdovati ml, ale radji o dostivj s svtem tmto hnm a zlm rozlouen peujc, Pnu Bohu Stvoiteli, Vykupiteli a Posvtiteli mmu zkrouenm srdcem se pokoiti a v jeho svat bosk ruce sebe poruiti mohl, ani

tomu chtce, aby o stateek muoj, kterho mn milostiv Pn Buoh z sv pouh milosti a bosk tdrosti pro obiven m propjiti ril, po m smrti mezi Kateinu z Morchendorfu, manelku mou milou a dtkami mejmi budoucn jak nedorozumn povstati a vzniknouti mly, maje statek svuoj svobodn a nezvadn, s dobrm mm rozmyslem, bedlivm uvenm, pamti z daru boho dobr i rozumu zdravho uvaje. Pedevm a nejprve dui mou, drahou krv Pna a Spasitele mho Jee Krista vykoupenou, v ruce jeho svat, odkud jsem ji vzal, zase poroum, dokonale, siln a pevn bez omylu vc, e Buoh Otec pro nesmrn a nevypravitedln sv bosk milosrdenstv a pro jedinou ob syna svho milho, Pna a Spasitele Jee Krista, ji v poet volench svch pijti, v hodinu smrti i v den soudn k n se piznati a mezi zvolenmi svatmi k vn neskonal slv postaviti r. O mm pak stateku z milosti Pna Boha mn propjenm tuto posledn a konenou vuoli mou sepsati dave, takto dm. Kde mm duom U ernho jelena een, proti kostelu Matky Bo ped Tejnem lec, zaplacen, it[em] druh dm

s zahrdkou na dldn v Novm Mst praskm U Kamenk een, t zaplacenej, t vinice dv [v] Meziho na pitlsku lec, zaplacen, it[em] vinice s lisem pod zmkem mlnickm, na dle na gruntech zmeckch a na dle na gruntech msta Mlnka lec, t zaplacenou. Duom na pedmst mlnickm s pikoupenm kouskem zahrdky a vinic ve dvou kusch k nmu nleejc, kter slove oktovsk na Podolkovskm, mimo to milost Jeho Milosti csask mn za m vrn tehd pes dvancti lto Jeho Milosti csask inn sluby na expektanci 1300 kop meskch, pod ourok 5 kop meskch ze sta, od bern zemsk vychzejc (jako i duom a mlejn na erlinku v Novm Mst praskm lec a dskami se dc, o nm ne zpsobem kaftovnm, neli pro vdomost, e mn vlastn nle, toliko zmnku inm, ponvad ten bez mocnho listu krlovskho kaftovn listovn bti nemuoe). K tomu velijakej jinej statek, na em by ten koliv buto na jistotch, zpisch, uldprfch, klenotech, hotovch penzch a na emkoliv jinm vyhledn a uptn bti mohl, nic ovem nevymiujc, poroum Katein z Morchendorfu,

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 269

manelce m mil, Janovi, Kundratovi, Jindichovi a Karlovi, synm, t Ance, Estee a Katein, dcerm mejm vlastnm s tou manelkou mou zplozench, v iv zstvajcm, na nepsan zpsob. Pedn: aby po oteven tohoto kaftu vecko m jmn, na em by to koliv zleelo, podn skrze osoby ode m manelce m za porunky dodan a pidan, tehd v Praze ptomn, zinventovno bylo a pro vdomost mejm dtem do zrostu jich t invent se dochoval. Nad m nade vm i nad dtkami mmi manelku mou milou za otcovskou mocnou porunici s vejminkou dl poloenou naizuji: a synov moji maj ped manelkou mou a dcerami mejmi naped jmti privilegia, spisy, pamti, veckny knihy (krom kter manelce m ode m dan jsou), aty m chodic, zbran a zbroje truhlsk, stroje a jin hospodsk svrky. Manelce m obzvltn odkazuji ernej rejbti, etz zlatej, armpanty a dva nejpknj prsteny, t nejvt stbrnou konviku, jej pak ensk okrasa bez pekky j zuostati m. A z toho ze veho statku, kdy by kter z dcer mch v dosplch letech poctiv a pobon se chovajc k vdn poctivmu s radou a vuol matky sv a pnv porunkv pila, tehdy aby na vejpravu jedn kad 200 kop meskch vynaloeno a dleji za otcovsk podl 500 kop meskch, polovici po vdnm jejm, v esti nedlch 200 kop meskch a ostatek v roce pod zbhlm vydno bylo. A tm aby jedna kad z tch dcer mch z mho ze veho statku vybyta a na nic dle se nepotahujc vypravena byla a pod tm vak dve vdan vychovn sv i s nleitm opatenm odvem vedle jinejch mejch dt z tho stateku jmti maj a jinej vecken statek mimo oznmen podlen dcer mch, ten m manelce m (pokudby do zrostu a let nejmladho syna na vdovsk stolici zuostala) a synm mejm v jmenovanm na rovn dl jti a pslueti, npad aby z umrlho na ivho el. Jestli by pak kterej z dt mejch matky sv a dodanch pnv porunkv ne jmenovanch poslouchati a nimi se diti a spravovati nechtli, tehdy aby mu jen deset kop grouov eskch ze veho statku mho dan byly. Vak [aby] pi tom tato vlastn matka dti m a sv k bzni bo a liternmu umn piln vedla tak, aby nauc se

znmosti buo, umn a vcem chvalitebnm, v dosplch letech svejch sami sob bez obtnosti chlb dobvati a se iviti mohli. Piel-li by kter syn mj k letm dosplm a e by s radou a vuol matky sv a pnv porunkv poctiv a dn v stav manelsk vstoupiti a se iviti chtl, tehdy jemu do ivnosti podle uznn dno a postoupeno bejti m, tak aby t statek pospolu a do let nejmladho mho syna, kterej tak do let svch dosplch opaten potebovati bude, zstval. Ku pomoci pak manelce m, ano i pro lep opaten jak j, tak dt mejch i stateku mho, dodal sem se za porunky urozen pana Pavla a Daniele, brat krty otnovsk z Zvoic, brat m vlastn a pana Jana Sroubenho, spolumtnna Starho Msta praskho, jim toho jakoto poctivm lidem se duovujc, e oni manelky m a dt mch radou a pomoc ani v nitem jinm slunm neopust a lege skuten fedrovati a zastvati budou. A jestlie by kter z dodanch a vej poloench porunkv z tohoto svta seel, bude moci manelka m s radou pozstvajcch jinho sob zvoliti a se dodati. To pak znamenit dokldm, kde Kateinu manelku mou nade vm a velijakm statkem mm, ano i nad dtkami mejmi za mocnou otcovskou porunici ustanovuji, e ona bez vdom a povolen oznmench dodanch porunkv jak strany synv a dcer mch, tak z strany statku mho pozstalho dren a spravovn nic initi a ped sebe brti moci mti nem, nbr uinila-li by co toho sama o sv jm, to dn platnosti a moci aby nemlo. Nebo takov poruenstv jej moc a platnost potud a dotud tak dlouho ponese, nsti a jmti m, pokud by ona stavu svho nezmnila a na vdovsk stolici sedc, tak a do let v iv zstvajccho nejmladho syna mho v tom trvala. Pakli by stav svj dve let nejmladho syna, jak ji doteno, promnc, jinho manela pojala, ji poruenstv toto k n sjti m a sato aby bylo a ona svm vdnm, jak poruenstv podle tohoto mho nazen, tak i mho stateku przdn uinna, zbaven bejti a veho pnm porunkm bez mekn ihned zouplna vykzati, jeho postoupiti, v moc jich vnsti a jim jej odvsti povinna bude. A nahoepsan pni pni porunci k tomu se ode m zavazuj, aby z takovho statku jim

odvedenho, pokud by ho sama svvoln neztenila, 1500 kop meskch bu na gruntech, bez nich by sirotci bejti mohli, nebo na jistejch dluzch vykzali. A pakli by toho nieho j piinnm nebylo, tehdy pi odstoupen od n pnm porunkm statku mho na hotov 500 kop meskch, v roce pod zbhlm 500 kop meskch a ostatnch 500 kop ve dvou letech od datum tho postoupen odvedli a vydali a pnm porunkm m z mho stateku jednomu kadmu kadoron, kdy by mrn ouroda byla, po jednom vdru vna z vinic mejch praskejch za prci jich vydvno bylo. Naposledy vysoce sob vymiuji a v moci sv pozuostavuji, abych tento kaft a posledn vuoli mou zouplna vecken, neb na dle promniti, v nic obrtiti, jin uiniti, tolikrt kolikrt by se mn vidlo a zdlo, mohl. Neuinil-li bych pak mimo tento kaft dnho jinho pozen a toho abych namnoze ani namle nepromnil, tehdy tento a v sv moci a celosti zstane. Slovutn a mnohovzctn poctivosti pnv, purkmistra a radu Starho Msta praskho nynjch i budoucch, jakoto mn vdyckny laskavch pnv prosebn a snan dm, e prohldajce k mnohejm pracem mejm v as pokoje i nepokoje pro dobro t obce upmn vedle monosti m vynaloenm, nad touto posledn vuol a kaftem mejm, nicmn i nad manelkou, tak i dtkami mejmi, v em by se s pny porunky, jakoto po Jeho Milosti krlovsk k vrchnm a pednm sirotkv a vdov povinnm ochrncm utekli, pro hojnj bo odplatu ochrannou ruku dreti a pomoc fedrovati a opatrovati laskav r. Tomu na svdom a dokonalou bezpenost j zpotku psan Kundrat krta tuto mou posledn vuoli sem sepsati dal, v nm se svou vlastn rukou podepsal a jej peet mou zabezpeil. eho jest datum v Praze, v dom mm U ernho jelena vosmnctho dne msce mje, lta Pn tischo estistho dvanctho. Kterto kaft my svrchupsan z bedlivho sneen radnho k dosti pan Kateiny krtov z Morchendorfu, po dobr pamti panu Kundratovi krtovi otnovskmu z Zvoic pozuostal vdovy, ponvad jest as svj prvn bez nakn vyleel, ve vech punktch, klauzulch, artykulch zcela a zouplna jsme stvrdili

a k tomu aby do knh mstskch mohl vloen bti, povolili. F[eria] kvinta postridie sancti Martini, 12. novembris 1615. Consule domino Andrea Blowsky Palatino, vices ejus gerente, domino Joanne Kyrchmajero a Reychwicz, urbis primate. RT

270 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

The Old Town in Prague, 1627

Karel krta acquires the certicate of apprenticeship and goes abroad for training from the testimony of Karel krta during the lawsuit with Ondej Leynhoz from Bevnov, held in 1640. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Manuale dictorum, 16381641, sign. 1169, f. 166v186r. Literature: TIBITANZLOV 2011, pp. 153160.

j dnm emigrantem a exulantem nikdy nebyl, nbr se v svm umn, ktermu sem se vyuil a je sob oblbil, z Krlovstv eskho podle pleit atestac od lehrmajstra mho mn dan, v ltu 1627 in

julio do cizch zem se odebral jeto sem j se pro dosaen vtho umn a experienc ven z zem, nejsouce od dnho puzen, odebral RT

The Old Town in Prague, 8 August 1628

Kateina krtov appoints plenipotentiaries for her and her familys property before emigrating. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Protocollum consilii, 1628, sign. 1296, f. 188r. Literature: BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 8; NEUMANN 1974, p. 45.

Co[n]s[ule] domino Casparo Loselio 1628 Kateina krtov odbraje se z Krl[ovstv] [eskho] pro nboenstv, zplnomocnila jest nad statkem o spravedlnosti v jak j, tak i dtem

jejm nleejc, pana Jakuba Kozla, Jakuba Dobanskho a pan Anku, dceru svou vdanou, kder vak z toho statku ji, mate svou, vykvitovala. RT

The Old Town in Prague, 8 August 1628

Aneka Reymundov, born krtov, assumes her part of her inheritance from her father via her mother Kateina of Morchendorf. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber quietantiarum 2, 15791650, sign. 2179, f. 224v. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 21; BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 8.

Anka Reymundov stoje osobn v rad piznala se, e jest pijala od pan Kateiny krtov, matky sv, vedle kaftu Kundrata krty, otce svho, vecku spravedlnost otcovskou a ddickou, z t spravedlnosti otcovsk zcela a zouplna pijala. Pan Kateinu krtovou, matku svou, kvituje, svobodn a przdn in na asy EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 271

budouc a vn. Actum in cons[ilio] f[eria] tertia post Transgurationis Christi, 8. aug[usti] anno 1628. RT

10

The Old Town in Prague, 30 July 1629

The plenipotentiaries of Kateina krtov and Aneka Reymundov, born krtov, sold the house At the Black Deer for 2500 Meissen three-scores to Ondej Leynhoz from Bevnov. They received 1000 three-scores in ready money while the rest was supposed to be paid in instalments of 500 three-scores annually. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber contractuum caeruleus III, sign. 2114, f. 413v (the volume burned in 1945). Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 21; BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 8; NEUMANN 1974, p. 23.

RT

11

Leszno (Poland), 10 August 1629

Kateina krtov of Morchendorf, widow of Kundrat krta of Zvoice, declares that she, as the guardian of her own children, awards the power of attorney to the burgher of the Old Town in Prague, Judyta Bylinov, to leave the vineyard in Oujezd near Litomice, recorded in the Litomice books, for the use of her daughter Aneka Reymundov. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), Inv. No. 1986, sign. L32/33, box 1291. Literature: BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 8; NEUMANN 1974, p. 44.

J Kateina krtov z Morchendorfu, manelka nkdy urozenho pana Kundrata krty z Zvoic, Jeho Milosti csask puchaltera v Krlovstv eskm a mtnna Starho Msta praskho, jakoto mocn otcovsk porunice kaftem od tho pana manela mho uinnm nad dtmi s nm zplozenmi a statkem vm a velijakm jemu nleejcm nazen, piznvm se k tomu tmto listem mm mocnm vbec pede vemi a zvlt tu, kde nle, e jsem dala a tmto listem mocnm dvm plnou moc slovutn pan Judit Bylinov, mtnnce Starho

Msta praskho, aby ona, dadouce se k knihm purkmistrskm msta Litomic najti vinici tu pi mst Litomicch v Oujezd slove lec, kterou jest t nkdy pan manel mj od nkdy pana Jana Wagnera koupil, se tvrt lisem a jinm k t vinici psluenstvm, tmi knihami mohla a moc mla slovutn pan Ance Reymundov z Zvoic, dcei m mil, s tm nkdy panem Kundratem krtou zplozen, ddicm a budoucm jejm, k sammu toliko uvn na mst mm postoupiti a odevzdati. Na ten zpsob: aby ona, ddicov a budouc jej t

vinici nikdy dnmu prodvati, zapisovati, postupovati, ani na ni dluiti se nemohli, nidnm vymylenm zpsobem a prvem, nyn i na asy budouc a vn. Jestlie by pak t pan Anka Reymundov z Zvoic tak, jak jsem ji v tom se dvila a dvuji, sama bezelstn k postoupen t vinice ku prvu msta Litomic se vypraviti a toho osobn vykonati nemohla, tehdy k tomu povoluji a ji tmto listem mocnm plnou moc a prvo dvm, aby ona mohla na mst mm a svm jinho plnomocnka, kter by takov postoupen na vepsan

zpsob a vejminku vykonati mohl, zditi a jej k tomu listem mocnm zmocniti, nejina ne jako bych j to sama vecko initi a vykonati mohla. Na potvrzen toho pee svou vlastn k tomuto listu mocnmu jsem pitiskla a v nm se svou vlastn rukou podepsala. Jeho jest datum v Len 10. dne msce srpna lta Pn tischo estistho dvadctho devtho. L. S. Kateina krtov z Morchendorfu RT, TS

12

The Old Town in Prague, 6 October 1629

Kateina krtov sells the vineyard from abroad through plenipotentiaries for 4000 Meissen three-scores. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), Kniha trhov (The Book of Markets) 20, 16241648, sign. 2021, f. 221v222r. Literature: BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 8; NEUMANN 1974, pp. 17, 44, 45.

Pan Judit Blynov, mka Starho Msta praskho, koupila sob, ddicm a budoucm svm vinici

5 str[ych] mry drc [v] Mezihom pitlskm, jdouc k Hlouptnu, vedle vinice Vojtcha

z Prosee z jedn a Daniele Ditrycha, mtnna Novho Msta praskho, z strany druh lec,

se vm a velijakm k t vinici od starodvna psluenstvm od Hendrycha krty z Zvoic, jakoto dle

272 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

jinch od Kateiny krtov z Morchendorfu k prodaji gruntv jejch plnomocnkv pidanho plnomocnka dle plnomocenstv do knih ouadu Jeho Milosti csask perkmistrskho vloenho, jeho jest actum v mst Leni 21. julii lta 1629, za sumu 400 kop meskch penz hotovch, zcela a zouplna zaplacench a jemu Hendrychovi krtovi z Zvoic na mst a k ruce svrchupsan Katein krtov, Janovi, Kundrtovi, Karlovi, Ance, Estee a Katein, synm a dcerm

odtad z Zvoic danch a odvedench, z kterchto tak pijatch 400 kop meskch on Hendrych krta od sebe, pan matee, bratrv i sester pan Judit Blynovou, ddice a budouc jej tmto zpisem kvituje, przdn a svobodn in nyn i na asy budouc a vn, dnho dalho prva a spravedlnosti na tm gruntu vininm sob, pan matei, bratrm a sestrm, ani dnmu jinmu pod jakmkoli vymylenm zpsobem nepozstavujc, nbr to ve na pan Judit Blynovou,

ddice a budouc jej penejc k jmn, dren, ddinmu povn a vldnut tm vm prvem, jak jest tu vinici Kateina krtov po smrti manela svho Kundrata krty z Zvoic spolu s dtmi svejmi jakoto nazen mocn otcovsk porunice jmla, drela, uvala a vldla a jak Kundratovi krtovi zpis v knihch perkmistrskch lib[er] cont[ractuum] 18, fol. 252 svdil, zpraviti m prodvajc kupujc pede vemi zvadami, kter by se nyn neb budoucn

vynajti mohly prvem msta a hor vininch praskch. Z kterto vinice Jeho Milosti csask perkrecht obyejn z pti strychv a k svatmu Havlu 58 gro kadoron meskch vychzeti m. K tomuto zpisu mimo Hendrycha krty pan Jakub Kozel z Peclinovce a pan Jakub Dobansk z Nigropontu, nazen plnomocnci od Kateiny krtov piznali se, jeho actum 6. octobris anno 1629. RT

13

s. l., (c. 1629)

Aneka Reymundov of Zvoice informs the Bohemian Governors Office that her mother Kateina krtov bequeathed her, among other property, a vineyard near Litomice and thus pleads for support in acquiring this inheritance. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), sign. L 32/33, Inv. No.1981, box 1291, f. 3. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Milostiv pni pni, k Vaim Milostem se utkaje, ponen oznamuji, e urozen pan Kateina krtov z Morchendorfu, pan mate m mil, jesti mn vinici pi mst Litomic v Oujezd een listem mocnm, aby mn takov, kdy se v tom ohlaovati a toho pi pnv vyhledati budu, do knh mstskch tu, kde nle, vepsna a uloena byla, jakoto dcei sv postoupila, jak Va Milosti z pilecho vejpisu obrnji milostiv vyrozumti r. Ale vak na uctiv a etrn vyhledvn m nic toho uti nemohu. A ponvad nadjmenovan pan mate m, jsouce mkou v Starm Mst praskm, netoliko tu vinici, ale i jin statek v mst Mlnce a jinde koliv ode 24 let beze v pekky jako sv vlastn voln uvala a v dren toho byla, z jakch pak pin bych i j toho t mimo jin uti nemohla. Proto k Vaim Milostem se utkaje, ve v ponenosti prosm, e se tou milost ke mn nakloniti a pnm pnm msta Litomic, aby mn takovou vinici listem mocnm podn odevzdanou a postoupenou do knh tu, kde nle, beze v odpornosti vepsati a vtliti dali, dostaten poruiti rte. V em se

Vaim Milostem k milostiv ochran a dopomoen ponen poruena inm. Vaim Milostem na modlitbch trvajc Anka Reymundov z Zvoic TS

DOCUMENT No. 13 Aneka Reymundov of Zvoice informs the Bohemian Governors Office that her mother Kateina krtov bequeathed her, among other property, a vineyard near Litomice and thus pleads for support in acquiring this inheritance. Prague, National Archives, file Old Manipulation (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 273

14

Litomice, 16 September 1630

The burgomaster and the city councillors of Litomice inform the Bohemian Office about the plea of Aneka Reymundov who seeks the rendition of the vineyard donated to her as a gift by her mother Kateina krtov. The Litomice authorities, referring to the fact that Kateina krtov emigrated and also to the privilege awarded to the city by the ruler, dismiss the plea of Aneka Reymundov. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), sign. L 32/33, Inv. No. 1981, box 1291, f. 1216. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 46.

Vae Milostch vysoce urozen Svat msk e hrabata, urozen pni pni, urozen a staten pni z rytstva, pni milostiv, milostiv Vaich Milost poruen v pin Anky Rejmundov z Zvoic a vinice nkter pi prv naem v Aujezd poloen, j od Kateiny krtov z Morchendorfu, matee jej, listem mocnm otevenm postoupen, t suplikaci doten Anky Rejmundov s plecm tho listu mocnho vejpisem, poslun pijave, po peten na by se ve vztahovalo, etrn jsme vyrozumli: kde Vaim Milostem tuto pravdivou zprvu svou o t vci ince, neme nm ne do t Anky Rejmundov, kter v t pin sama proti sob jest, podivn bti. Nebo ona ped nkterm thodnem, byvi ped nmi v rad, a dle tho pan matee jej z Krlovstv tohoto pro nboenstv emigrovan, pednesenho jalovho nadepsan vinice postoupen, kter jsme sob v ptomnosti jej pro vyrozumn

v rad pesti dali. Takov vinice za vepsn do knih naich mstskch ns dajce, to j od ns oznmeno bylo: e podle znn tho listu pan matee jej mocnho, kter tyto dv klausule proti naemu od Jeho Milosti csask nm v nov danm privilegium v sob obsahuje. K sammu toliko uvn a ne mocnmu a dokonalmu odevzdn a jak dle nsleduje, na ten zpsob aby ona Anka Rejmundov, ddicov a budouc jej t vinici nikdy dnmu prodvati, zapisovati, postupovati ani na ni dluiti se nemohli, nidnm vymylenm zpsobem a prvem nyn i na asy budouc a vn. Tto sv dosti pod tmi vejminkami, jako tak osoba s mstem netrpc, uti neme. Nbr kdy pan mate jej mimo nadepsan klausule, jakoto osoba pro nboenstv z Krlovstv tohoto emigrovan, j Ance Rejmundov t vinici bez nadepsanch vejminek mocn postoup a odevzd. Ona pak jakoto pespoln a s mstem netrpc

ji domc osob zaprod, toho e j rdi pijti chceme. Jinak i to j navrhujce, pokud by pan matei jej tak vinice v asu od Jeho Milosti csask k prodn statkv vem emigrantm do ty mscv ji vychzejcch udlenm bu lovku katolickmu domcmu prodati, anebo tto Ance Rejmundov, dcei sv, jak se nadpisuje, mocn bez vejminky postoupiti zamekala, e by za odbnou poloen a snad i propaden a marn svvolnm obmeknm zmrhan byla. Z kterto piny Va Milosti milostiv pni pni milostiv uznvati rte, e dosti spedjmenovan Anky Rejmundov ne tak jsme docela odepeli, jako z nedokonalho j t vinice od astopsan pan matee jej, dn j vyvsti a k dokonal possessi t vinice pivsti chtli. V em Vaich Milost ponen dme, e nm to na dobrou strnku milostiv obrtiti. A abychom proti novmu od Jeho Milosti csask nm milostiv danmu privilegium

osobm s mstem netrpcm, eho kdyby se jednomu zl pklad dostati mlo, mnoz jin na kodu obce na a protren privilegium toho by astji dostivi byli, gruntv naich mstskch knihami nezapisovali, nad nmi a Jeho Milosti csask milostivm nadjmenovanm privilegium ochrannou ruku milostiv zdrovati rte. S tm se Pnu Bohu a Naim Milostem k milostiv ochran ponen poruen inme. Datum v mst Litomicch v pondl den pamtn svat Lidmily 16. septembris lta 1630. Vaim Milostem ponen poslun purkmistr a konel msta Litomic nad Labem [on the tergo:] Communicat Anyce Reymundov, aby se podle tchto podstatnch obran zachovala a sob sama k dobrmu v cest nebyla TS

15

Pistoia (Italy), 8 June 1636

Karel krta writes Ludwig Lucius from the Tuscan city of Pistoia, informing him about his previous letters. He asks about the addressees family and also begs to speed up the correspondence between his mother and brother. He reports the death of his sister Aneka and the possibility of getting a passport and arranging all necessary things in this matter. He summarizes his sojourn to Italy and his activities in that country. Staatsbiliothek Schaffhausen, sign. Msc Scaph 8. Literature: Lenka Stolrov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, pp. 1723, 6465; Petr Pibyl Lenka Stolrov, see the relevant chapter in this volume, pp. 7379; the most recent, 2010 discovery of archive sources remains the matter of further research of author; for more on the subject, see the forthcoming study by L. Stolrov.

Edler Ehrenkoster Grogstiger Herr Schwager deme seyen neben Winschung von Gott dem Allmchtigen

meine willige Dienste ber Zeit bevor. Wie wohl ich auch zu forn dem Herrn Schwager so auch meinem

Herren Bruder Doctori au Rohm geschrieben gewaldig begirig von ihren Zustand zu wien (die weil der Zeiten sich aldorsten gewaltig

verendert hat), darauf ich kein Antwort nie nicht gehabt. Allein von einem mihr gesagt (der den Zeit beim Herren Schwager in der Kost

274 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

gewesen), nemlich da meiner Herr Bruder Doctor sich in Krieg begeben und von dem Feind gefangen worden, von ihm sich aber wie derumb lo gemacht hat, wie es aber weiters mit ihm forfahren kein Wort mehr hab ich verstehen knnen und mihr von Herzen lieb wers, da dem Herren Schwager und meinem Herrn Bruder Doctori sampt seiner Frauen und Kindern wohl gngs und ich gegen ihnen der Affection nach mich wrklich erzeigen knte. Mit diesem aber thue ich dem Herren Schwager zu wien, da ich den ersten dieses Monats Schreiben von meiner Frauen Mutter und auch dem Herren Bruder Henrichen gehabt, sich gewaltig uber dem Doctor lamentierende, da er ihnen nicht antwortet auf ihre lseltige gethame Briefe, darumb sie nicht wien, ob er lebendig oder todt ist, bittende, da ich mglichsten Flei anwenden soll von seinem

Zustand etwas zu erfahren. Als bitte ich dem Herrn Schwager aufs hhste, wo er beim leben, oder irgents sich aufhaltet, ihm ermahnen umb nicht so nachlich zu werden, und die weil ich nach Polen verweien will auf ihre begeren, so sol mihr der Herr Brud[er] Doctor befehlen, wie und mit unser Manier ich seine Sachen aufrichten soll. Ius fr main Person anderst nichts suche allein einmahl der Sachen ledig und lo zuwerden, darvon sie mihr auch schreiben und der Herrn Bruder Henrich zu Gott hofft, da wier mit ihm zu frieden worden, Gott gebe. Weiter berichten auch wie da unsere Schwester Agnes Todts abgangen und ohne Erben und ihr Wesonder Mann sich anerbieten thuet, ein Pa Zettel von Ihr Keyserlichen Mayestt zu erlangen, umb da unser einen sich in Bhmen begeben kan, die hinderlaene Sachen

und Schulden, die dernach verbotten worden, danen zu geben denens zugehren, sollicitieren zu haben. Und die weil ich ohne da die Strafe thuen mu, so will ich Sachen aufs mglchste etwas nutzlichs auzurichten, dar zu der Herr Bruder Doctor auch seinen Rath thuen soll. Anbelangt aber meines Zustands, Gott lobe, ich bende mich wohl und nach dem ich von Venetien verrei hab ich zwey Jahr zu Rohm gewohnt <un> in der Zeit auch zu Neapoli geween. Und dan ersten dieses Jahrs mich von Rohm begeben und nach Florenz kommen von dannen ich necher Pistoia berufen und mich hierimes aufhalten der Herr Schwager aber werdt unbeshwert nach Venetien schreiben und den Brief dem S. Marco Sadeler a S. Giovanni Chrisostomo recomandieren, der werdt mihr ihm zu shicken. Neues nichts, al da die Statt

Ravenna von groe Ungestimmes des Meers mit Sand bedeckt und uberlofen und wie wohl es 40 Stund gewart, doch bei 1200 Persohnen ertruncken und umbkommen. Mit diesem sich dem Herren Schwager sampt seinem ganzen Haue in Gottes Allmchtige Hnde befehlen thue. Datum in Pistoia 8. Junii anno 1636. D[em] Herrn Schwagers willig allezeit Carl Screta mp. [address] Edlen Ehrenkosten und Hochgelehrten Herrn Ludovico Lucio zu Handen, Basel in des Herren Lucii Abwesen dem Herren Teodoro Zuingero und dem Herren Bueksdorfen umb auf zu thuen und dem Herr Samueli Grner LS

16

Srzoda (today roda, Poland), 11 February 1638

Kateina krtov and Jindich krta appoint their son or, respectively, brother Karel, the plenipotentiary to withdraw their shares of the family property left behind in Bohemia and to all further dealings with them. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber quietantiarum 2, 15791650, sign. 2179, f. 251v252v. Literature: BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 9; NEUMANN 1974, pp. 17, 23, 46.

Actum in civitate Srzoda, feria quinta ante festum sancti Valentini confessoris proxima anno Domini millesimo sexcentesimo trigesimo octavo. Coram officio et archivis, praesentibus spectabilis consulatus civitatis Sacrae Serenissimae Majestatis Regiae Srzodae personalitae comparverunt nobilis Catharina de Morchendorf Scretova, nobilis olim Conradi Screta Ssotnowski de Zavorzicz conjunx legitima vidua relicta, nec non nobilis Henricus Screta Ssotnowski de Zavorzicz, praenominati Conradi lius, mater cum lio, Henricus lius per se ac suo nomine Catharina vero mater cum personali eiusdem Henrici lii sui assistentia

et consensu, habens quoque penes se famatum Stanislaum Piekawsky, civem et consulem Srzodensem, tutorem ad actum praesentem de consensu praefati Henrici recognoscentis sibi assumptum et authoritate officii conrmatum et aprobatum ad omnia infrascripta per eam facienda et recognoscenda libere consentientem, mentibus corporibusq[ue] sani existentes ultro manifeste pure verbisq[ue] expressis recognoverunt actuq[ue] praesenti recognoscant, se omni incliori modo, via forma ac stilo, quibus de jure convenit, ac prout melius potuerunt ac debuerunt, constituisse ac solemniter ordinasse, in suum verum indubitatumq[ue] legitimum plenipotentem

ac mandatarium nobilem Carolum Screta Ssotnowskii, lium ac fratrem germanum, ad omnia et singula ad se bona quocumq[ue] iuris titulo in Regno Boemiae pertinentia et sibi servientia cuicumq[ue] personarum vendenda, archivis inscribenda et debito iuris ordine resignanda cum sufficienti mandato plenariae omni modq[ue] facultate summas pecuniarias pro bonis venditis levare ius percipiendas de legatis et perceptis quietandi debita quaevis a quibuscumq[ue] personis exigenda et alia omnia de iure ac consuetudine in omnibus negotiis eri solitae, etiam hic inexpressa (quaenim et robur expressorum habere debent) peragendi et debito iuris ordine iuxta

causae huius exigentiam determinandi et exequendi in forma mandati plenissima ac perfectissima promittentes ac se praesentibus inscribentes ac obligantes, quidquid per praedictum mandatarium suum actum, gestum conclusumq[ue] fuerit, pro rato et grato se suscepturos ac perpetuo habituros. Ob rmius robur actio praesentibus inscripta, super quo memoriale officio solutum. L. S. Stanislaus Kamenicky, proconsul S[acrae] R[egiae] M[ajestatis] civitatis Srzodae mp. Ex actis officii spectabilis consula[ti] civitatis Srzodae extraxit Petrus Ricklicky, notarius. RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 275

17

Schaffhaussen (Switzerland), 10 April 1638

Jan krta authorizes his brother Karel to withdraw his share of the family property in Prague. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber quietantiarum 2, 15791650, sign. 2179, f. 252v253r. Literature: BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 9; NEUMANN 1974, pp. 23, 46; NEUMANN 2000, p. 40.

Ich Joannes Screta Schotnowsky von Zaworzitz, der Artzney Doctor Landgraf Reichmarschal Poppenheimischer der lb[lichen] Stadt Schaffhausen, wie auch der umbliegenden Gotteshaer al Rhegnow, Paradi und St. Catharinenthal bey dieer Hofen bestalter Medicus, gebe mit diesen meinen Brief dem Edlen und Vesten Herrn Carolo Scretae Schnotnowsky von Zavorzitz, meinen hertzlieben Herrn Bruder, volligen Macht und Gewalt, da hinterlassene

Patrimonium in Knigreich Bheimb mir von meinem hertzliebsten Herrn Vater seelig[en] den Edlen und Westen Herrn Conrado Screta Schotnowsky von Zavorzitz, der Rmischen Kayserlichen Mayestt gewesenen Buchhalter bey der lblichen Kammer der Kron Bheimb, auch Frst Lichtensteinisch Rath gehrig, gtlich und rechtlig einzuziehen zu Geld zu machen, die Debitores zu quitiren, auch wieder alle unbilliche actus, welche vorgangen oder vorgehen

mchten, da specie unter andern, wa die culpam negligentiae, da Heinrichs Anlangen thuet zu protestiren und da in optima et solemni forma in suma alle dasjenige, wa er zu meinem Nutzen ersprielich zu sein wrde, erkennen zu verrichten. Zur besserer Urkund und da ich da brderliche Vertrauen zu ihme trage, hab ich dieser mit meiner eigener Hand geschrieben und unterschrieben, auch mit meinen angebornen Petschier besiegelt. Welches

geschehen zu Schaffhauen den 10. Aprilis stilo Gregoriano anno 1638. Joh[annes] Screta D[octor] mp. Povoleno k vloen do knh mstskch tohoto dvojho plnomocenstv od pana purkmistra a pnv v rad f[eria] kvinta post Nativit[atis] B[eatae] Mariae Virginis, 2. Septemb[ri] anno 1642. Co[n]s[ule] domino Adalberto Wenceslao Seniore Had Prosecze. RT

18

Prague, 9 July 1638

The Bohemian Court Office orders the burgomaster and the city council of Litomice to satisfy the plea of Karel krta in the matter of possessing the vineyard, now in the hands of Batista Reymund, the husband of krtas sister Aneka, if the authorities do not nd any substantial circumstances which would make the decision invalid. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), sign. L 32/33, Inv. No.1981, box 1291, f. 6. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 46; Tom Sekyrka, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.12, p. 591.

O Karla krtu Litomickm Poctiv a opatrn nm mil. Co na ns Karel krta z Zvoic v pin <vinice> dosaen vinice /sv ddick/, kter e by nyn Batista Reymund, nkdy Anky Reymundov sestry jeho manel v dren a uvn zstvati ml, stn vzn, a jakho v tom opaten svho pi ns snan vyhledv, tomu z plecch spisv vyrozumte. I pokud tomu tak, jak t suplikujc zpravuje a nejine jest, proto jmnem a na mst Jeho Milosti csask krlovsk a pna ns vech nejmilostivjho vm poroume, abyste jemu t dosti a pratensi jeho bez odpornosti, v jednom i druhm punktu uti dali. <Proto> Paklie co jinho podstatnho a prvnho proti tomu se nachz, nm o tom neprodlen gruntovn zprvu s navrcenm zase

tch spisv na kancel Jeho Milosti csask eskou uiniti hledli. Dn 9. julii 1638 [illegible signature] [The le does not contain any more documents. The Litomice authorities thus probably complied with the order.] TS
2 Note in the margin.

DOCUMENT No. 18 The Bohemian Court Office orders the burgomaster and the city council of Litomice to satisfy the plea of Karel krta in the matter of possessing the family vineyard, if the authorities do not find any substantial circumstances which would make the decision invalid; dated 9 July 1638, Prague. Prague, National Archives, file Old Manipulation (Photo:National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

276 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

19

The Old Town in Prague, 16381639

Dispute over the house At the Hjeks in the Fruit Market in Prague Karel krta requests the municipal officials to provide him the testament of Dorota (sometimes also stated as Anna, Johana or Zuzana) Strossburgerov to read. The officials ask for legal deferral. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Manuale dictorum, 16381641, sign. 1169, f. 27r, f. 52v55r, f. 62r. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 3536; NEUMANN 1974, p. 46; NEUMANN 2000, pp. 4041.

Karel krta otnovsk z Zvoic s Jeho Milosti csask panem rychtem, t pny ouednky estipanskmi. Karel krta pedn dal za peten ppovdi na pozstalost po nebo[ce] Dorot Strasburgerov, dcery vlastn nebo[tka] dokto[ra] Thadee Hjka z Hjku. Po peten pednsti dal: pokud by Jeho Milosti csask pan rycht, t pni ednci estipant, kte prvem odoumrtnm domu po t Dorot Strasburgerov zstalho v tomto Starm Mst praskho /lecho/ se ujali, ppovdi tto msta dti nechtli, tehdy e d, aby k provozovn praetensi sv piputn a jemu termn k prvodm jmenovn byl. Jeho Milosti csask pan rycht tohoto Starho Msta na mst a k ruce Jeho Milosti csask, t pni ednci adu estipanskho na mst a k ruce obce tho msta dali hojemstv prvnho, k emu od pana p[urkmistra] a pnv povoleno a termn k hojemstv ad primam sessionem jmenovn. Vide odpov infra fol[io] 52, 62. [f. 52v55r] Karel krta s Jeho Milosti csask panem rychtem na mst a k ruce Jeho Milosti csask, t ednky adu estipanskho na mst a k ruce obce tohoto Starho Msta praskho hojemstv Od Jeho Milosti csask pana rycht[e], t ednkv estipan[skch] Vae Milosti proti domnl ppovdi pana Karla krty z Zvoic na dm po nkdy Thadeovi Hjkovi z Hjku v lkastv doktoru njakm prvem npadnm uinn dvji, neli by Jeho Milosti csask pan rycht tohoto Starho Msta praskho na mst a k ruce Jeho Milosti EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 277

csask, t pni ouednci na mst a k ruce obce tto, jakoto k peslyen t domnl ppovdi obeslan strany, co od sebe pedneti dali, tohoto milostivho dekretu z komory Jeho Milosti csask v pin tohoto domu polho, jako i druhho instrumentu zvodu do nho vykonanho, za peten daj. Dekret z komory Jeho Milosti csask esk It[em] zvod do domu Hjkovskho. A pokud jak vedle tohoto milostivho dekretu, tak i vedle jist klausule ten a takov dm na zpsob v tm dekretu doloen pnm ouednkm estipanskm na mst a k ruce obce tto v moc uved[en] jest. Za to tehdy pni obeslan, nemnce se v dn spor proti tmu milostivmu dekretu a resoluci Jeho Milosti csask s pny pipovdajcmi <se> vydvati, za to daj, e je pi tomto opaten a vymen zstaviti, ppov pak tuto od prva zdvihnouti a v nic obrtiti rte podle prva. Od Karla krty Pan Karel krta na em podstatu odpovdi sv Jeho Milosti csask pan rycht na mst a k ruce Jeho Milosti csask a pni ednci adu estipanskho na mst a k ruce obce tto zakldati r, tomu jest vyrozumli. Pedn z zvodu to patrn rte vynachzeti, e do tho domu takov zvod jest vykonn prvem odoumrtnm, tak jakoby pan Zuzana traburgerov bez krevnch ptel, tak jak strom krevn ukazuje, prostedkem smrti asn z toho svta vykroila, take takovm prvem rili jste skrze pana rychte takov zvod poruiti vykonati. Ale pan Karel krta v tu nadji pichz, e jste o osob jeho, aby on jakm krevnm ptelem doten Anny [!] Strasburgkov

bti ml, vdomosti jmti nerili, jako pak kdybyte rili bti v tom zpraveni, t zvod vykonn nebyl. Doten pak pan Karel krta, e jest se po ty vecky asy neohlaoval, tu jedin pina jest, e jest zde v tomto Krlov[stv] eskm ptomen nebyl, anbr v cizch zemch po umn svm se zdroval. A navrtive se sem, jest podnou ppov podle pr[va] mst[skho] G 24 jakoto nejbli ptel doten Zuzany Straspurgkerov uinil, o uinnm poruen z komory Jeho Milosti csask esk odeslanm dn vdomosti nemaje a kdyby Jeho Milosti csask komora o tom vdomost toho asu mla, e on tak blzkm ptelem doten Zuzany Straspurgkerov zstv, oveme by tak takov dekret ku prvu tomuto obesln nebyl, jsa k Va Milosti t nadje nepochybn, e kdy d-li Pn Bh, tuto ppov nleit provede, e jemu tak jakoto patriciusovi pti, aby on v tm dom podle vymen prva Krlovstv tohoto eskho takovho npadu doshnouti a uti mohl, nebo kdyby on krevnm ptelem Zuzany Straspurgkerov nebyl, nechtl by tohoto prva daremn zaneprazdovati, proe jest k Va Milosti t nadje, e rte jemu termn k provozovn t jeho ppovdi jmenovati a pokud se jin statek nachz, co by obzvltn na komoru a na obec tuto pipadlo, e Jeho Milosti csask jinm prostedkem to jm vynahraditi milostiv motci r. V em sebe Va Milosti k spravedlivmu opaten porou. Od Jeho Milosti csask pana rychte pnm ednkm Zbyten a daremn tmto reprobrovnm rte bti zaneni nebo pro pni obeslan v dn spor se vzdvati povinni nejsou, i tak pro t ppov od prva Va Milosti

zdviena bti m, toho z podstatn piny, toti milostivou resoluc Jeho Milosti csask, t milostiv dekret Jeho Milosti csask, spolu i s zvodem do tho domu vykonanm, pedneeni jsou. Piem tak e pni obeslan zstaveni budou, v tu nadji pichzej a e pvodn strana k provozovn ppovdi piputna bti nem, toho e z uven svho e vynajti nerte, na to od Va Milosti jistho vymen oekvati budou. Od Karla krty Pan Karel krta potahuje se na p[rvo] m[stsk] F 15, kter vymuje, kterak a jak daleko ptel in linea collaterati stojc pod kter stupe dditi maj, on pak ten se v tom prvn zachoval a podle prva m[stskho] G 26, 27 Jeho Milosti csask pana rychte, t pny ednky obeslati dal, a tak dleji e vedle p[rva] m[stskho] G 28 k provozovn ppovdi sv piputn bude, v tu nadji k Jeho Milosti csask pichz, na e tak od Va Milosti jistho oznmen oekvati bude. Od Jeho Milosti csask pana rychte, t pn ednkv estipanskch e Jeho Milosti csask, t Jich Milost milostivch resoluc pesuzovati prvu tomuto nepinle. A p[oku]d ji pedele svou obranu jsou pedloili, na to tak od Va Milosti jistho vymen oekvati budou. Nae z bedlivho poven pana purkmistra a pnv takto oznmeno. Vide infra fol/i/o 62. [f. 62r] 1638 Bhmer Weymar Oznmen mezi Karlem krtou z jedn a Jeho Milosti csask

panem rychtem na mst a k ruce Jeho Milosti csask, t ouednky estipanskmi na mst a k ruce obce oznmen. Ponvad dm po nkdy doktorovi Thadeovi Hjkovi z Hjku pozstal, pod prvem tmto lec, vedle ohlen a zvodu na onen as jak k ruce Jeho Milosti csask, tak i obce tto uinnho (k nmu se dn od mnoha let, zvlt pak v ty tk

militrsk asy, v kterto na t dm pro zachovn jeho nemlo od obce tto vynaloeno, i tak kontribuc a bern drahn zadrno jest /aby tu jak prvo npadn jmti ml, neohlaoval/), prvem odoumrtnm pipadl vedle milostiv Jeho Milosti csask resoluc, jako i z komory Jeho Milosti csask esk prolho dekretu, jeho act[um] in cons[ilio] Camerae Boh[emiae] Pragae 31. augusti lta

te pominulho 1638, zcela a zouplna na jist zpsob v tm dekretu doloen k ruce obce odevzdn a postoupen jest. Jeho Milosti csask pak milostivch nazen a resoluc dnmu mniti nenle, z t tehdy piny ppov Karla krty otnovskho, jakoto proti t milostiv Jeho Milosti csask resoluci a dekretu Jich Milost elc, od prva tohoto se zdvh, naproti tomu pak

ednci estipant na mst a k ruce obce tto pi takovm domu zcela a zouplna se zstavuj a zanechvaj podle prva. Actum in cons[ilio] f[eria] sexta, die sancti Faelicii 14. januarii anno 1639, co[n]s[ulo] domino Jacobo Bhmer Weymar. RT

20

Mlnk, (c. 1638)

Karel krta, as the heir of his mother Kateina krtov of Morchendorf, assumes the claim on the city of Mlnk in the amount of 1000 Meissen three-scores which his mother had lent to the city. Sttn okresn archiv Mlnk (State Regional Archives of the City of Mlnk), Archiv msta Mlnk (Archives of the City of Mlnk), Book 19, le Kopi (The Book of Copies) 16371654, f. 42. Literature: KILIN 2011, pp. 161165.

TS

21

The Old Town in Prague, 28 February 1639

Dispute between Karel krta and Ondej Leynhoz from Bevnov for the paternal house At the Black Deer in the Old Town in Prague. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber appelationum 2, 15941654, sign. 1029, f. 310r. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 46; NEUMANN 2000, pp. 4041.

Reformac v pin Karla krty z Zvoic s Ondejem Lainhozem z Bevnova, t Ondej Laynhoz s Jakubem Dobenskm z Nygropontu My Ferdinand Tet z Bo milosti volen msk csa oznamujem tmto listem, e president a rady nae k apelacm na Hrad naem praskm zzen a usazen na ta od prva Starho naeho Msta praskho odeslan a odevzdan zapeetn dvoj akta v tom dvojm sporu, v jednom mezi Karlem krtou z Zvoic z jedn a Ondejem Laynhozem z Bevnova z strany druh a v druhm mezi tm Ondejem Laynhozem z jedn a Jakubem Dobanskm z Nygropontu, obma many tho Starho naeho Msta

praskho z strany druh. Co se neodpovdn na vyneen dote, jak dvoj akta jednoho i druhho sporu to ve v sob eji obsahuj a zavraj, povive toho veho s pilnost podle prva takto ta oboje oznmen na tm prv jedno feria sexta post sancti Petri et Pauli apostolorum domini, 2. julii a druh feria sexta post s. Margarethae, 16. julii, ve lta pominulho 1638 mezi nadepsanmi stranami uinn, napravuj a z vrchnosti prva nachzej, e doten Jakub Dobensk s nm Ondejem Laynhozem Karlovi krtovi v sporu tom, kter on Karel krta s jmenovanm Ondejem Lainhozem zaal odpovdati a oznmen Karel krta jeho Jakuba Dobenskho tu proti sob trpti povinen jest podle

prva. A co k apelaci sloeno, to aby zase navrceno bylo. Tomu na svdom peet na csaskou k tomu soudu obzvltn zzenou jest zapeetno. Dn na Hrad naem praskm v pondl po pamtce svatho Matje apotola boho, 28. februarii lta Pn tischo estistho tictho devtho a krlovstv naich mskho tetho, uherskho trnctho a eskho dvanctho. Fridrich z Talmberka, president Petr Macer z Letoic ten tato reformac v ptomnosti stran, jich se dote, 16. martii anno 1639. RT

278 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

22

The Old Town in Prague, 1640

During the dispute over the house At the Black Deer, Karel krta gives evidence of the reasons which made him leave his homecountry, about his return to Bohemia in the period around Easter in 1638 and about the facts which should help him recover his family property. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Manuale dictorum, 16381641, sign. 1169, f. 166v186r. Literature: Radka Tibitanzlov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.13, p. 592; TIBITANZLOV 2011, pp. 153160.

Zpis sporu mezi Karlem krtou a Ondejem Leynhozem o dm U ernho jelena. 1640 Consule domino Henrico seniore eick Actio mezi Karlem krtou otnovskm z Zvoic z jedn a pnem Ondejem Leynhozem z strany druh, kde mezi stranami o dm U ernho jelena een initi jest. Lta Pn 1640 19. martii Jako jsou /Jich Milosti Jeho Milosti csask mskho csae, uherskho a eskho krle tejn i jin rady komornci, deputrovan nejvy pni ednci a soudcov zemt v Krlovstv eskm, ten ped/ vysoce dstojn[m] a nejjasnjm knetem a pne[m] pne[m] Leopold[em] Vilme[m] arciknet[em] rakouskm, biskup[em] trasbursk[m], halbertatsk[m], pasovsk[m] a olomck[m], Jeho Milosti mskho csae, uherskho a eskho krle nad armdou Jeho Milosti generlem a plnomocnm guberntore[m] v Krlovstv eskm, e mezi Karlem krtou otnovskm z Zvoic /jakoto pvodem/ z jedn a Ondejem Leynhozem z Bevnova, mtnnem a radnm tohoto Starho Msta praskho, / obalovanm/ z strany druh o dm U ernho jelena een a v tm mst lec usque ad replicam vzel spor milostivm dekretem svm, jeho actum in cons[ilio] Cancelariae Bohemicae Pragae 9. martii lta z svrchupsanho, ku prvu nyn oznmenho Starho Msta remitrovati a pitom to milostiv naditi rili, aby strany, jich se dote, neprodlen sroen v prvodch a odvodch jich summariter beze vech interlocutori vyslyan a spravedlivou vejpovd s vejhradou

Jeho Milosti csask prva vrchnho podlen byly, jak takov Jeho Milosti dekret sub signo [*] to v sob obsahuje a zavr. Vedle kterhoto <jeho arciknetc> Jeho Milosti milostivho nazen byve strany v doten k peslyen tho nazen, tak i k dalmu zaven t pe obeslan. Karel krta otnovsk z Zvoic dal pi vzneen svm podanm a ku prvu tomuto vedle nadjmenovanho sroen odeslanm zcela a zouplna zstaven bti, kterto vzneen toto v sob obsahuje a zavr. Na Vai Arciknec Milost pravdiv vzneti pinucen jsem, kterak ped pldruhm ltem, vrtive se z Itlie a z jinch cizch zem z peregrinac do vlasti sv mil, pi prv Starho Msta praskho jsem toho, abych do domu U ernho jelena eenho, jakoto do ddictv mho po vlastnm otci mm Kundrtovi krtovi zstalho uveden a prvn zmocnn byl, etrn vyhledval, ale Andres Laynhoz, mtnn a radn tho msta, nepodn dotenho domu nynj dritel, byv k tomu obesln, mn netoliko dobrovoln jeho odstoupiti, ale ani na m prvn pedneen dn odpovdi dti nechtl, nbr Jakubem Dobenskm, nynjm primasem msta, od kterho takov dm (pr) koupil, aby jeho v tom zastoupil, jest se jalov vymlouval, take sem od pleitho n[umero] 1 dictum proti tak patrn m spravedlivosti vyneenho s nemalm svm nkladem a velikm obmeknm umn svho malskho apelovati a po ten vecken nadepsan as rozepi trpti musel. Vak chvla Pnu Bohu od prva Jeho Milosti csask vrchnho n[umero] 2 reformac 17. martii lta ptomnho publikovanou jest to, e mi na alobu mou odpovdati maj, nalezeno bylo.

Nejmilostivj arcikne, ponvad pro ptomnou belli ferias a pomjejc rnu bo prvn pe pi prv zen nejsou a to jest ode m ji prve dostaten provedeno, e jest doten Andres Laynhoz proti alob m exceptionem pedloil a Dobansk jeho zastoupiti nechtl, nbr od obzvltnho dictum, m jemu odpovdn nalezeno bylo, tolik apeloval, nyn onen na reformaci pestal, tento pak njakho vysvtlen tho ortele prva vrchnho dal a toho sob k mstu a konci, jak nleelo, nevedl a nevede, take se k tomu patrn smuje, abych j [v] prodlouenm asu nouz pinucen jsouc, ddictv mho za nimi zanechati musil. K tomu nsledujcmi vejpisy a prvy dostaten sem provedl a prokzal, e jest nadepsan dm po otci mm vlastnm zstal, kterto kaftem svm podn utvrzenm, do knh vepsanm, tak dostaten jest opatil, aby toho domu i nynjho statku pan mate m, dokud bych j Karel nejmlad syn jeho k letm prvnm nepiel, bez vdom jinch porunkv nikterak prodvn a odcizovn nebyl, jak toho t kaft n[umer]o 3 obrnji dotvrzuje. Nadto Andres Laynhoz lta 1629, toho asu tehdej purkmistr, proti nadepsanmu kaftu patrn elc zpisem, t dm za 2500 kop koupivi a dvji, neli jej tak podle nepodnho trhu doplatil, od 1629 a do [16]30 vceji ine z nho vybral nebo byvi povinen penze gruntovn asn, toti po 500 kopch ron, vedle tak nepodnho trhu skldati, teprv 750 kop lta jminulho 1639 13. dec[embri], druhch pak 750 kop lta pedelho 1638, slyc o mm pjezdu, nadepsanmu Jakubovi Dobenskmu odvsti, take jako domu on, tak tento, penz a posavad uvali a uvaj a j nechtce ddictv svho prodati, domu a ne penz uit dm.

Naproti tomu j na to veckno netoliko se souditi, kde bydleti, ale ani na iv bti nemm, take takovmi obmysly a makavm spiknutm jich, to co sem v cizch zemch umnm svm zachoval, skrze daremn takov exceptiones hjenm proti prvu m apelac, nedbnm na nkolikero od Jich Milost rad nazench nad apelacmi poruen, t od Jeho Milosti csask zde ptomnho i z kancele v tto materii odeslan dekreta, o veckno sem piel a podle vpsanch pin v tto m tak patrn a povrchu lec spravedlnosti otcovsk dn pomoci a fedruku nedosahuji, jeto nadto nic patrnjho bti neme, e od Andresa Laynhoza ciz ddictv kupovno bti nemohlo a pan p[urkmistr] a pni proti prvu mst[skmu] G 21, 27 o utvrzenm kaftu k tomu povolovati nemli. Anbr ten dm, kdy Andres Laynhoz ouad Jeho Milosti csask purkmistrsk sm drel, vdom a zoumysla a to v neptomnosti m koupil a zdali doten Dobensk neb kdo jin k tomu ode m zplnomocnn jest, se neptal a prvo mstsk patrn vymuje, e kde se statky sirot komu prodvaj, tu v kadm zpisu obzvltn povolen, e ten prodaj k dobrmu sirotku se vztahuje, doloeno bti m a j podle vymen prva mst[skh]o L 21, 24, F 54, 57 nebyvi nikdy s pan mate mou rozdlen, bych pak se v 30 [!] letech z peregrinac navrtil, o odstoupen tho domu podle prva mstskho F 31 representrujce v tomto Krlovstv sm jedin nadepsanho otce mho syn, slun se domlouvati mohu, obzvltn abych v tto tak patrn spravedliv ddick spravedlnosti m v tyto tk asy dalch odkladv a vtho utitn od odporn strany netrpl. Proto k Va Arciknec Milosti ve v pokoe se utkm a Vai

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 279

Arciknec Milost ponen prosm aby Andresovi Laynhozovi patrnou odpov neprodlen dti nadili, zprvu svou pitom Va Arciknec Milosti na kancel odeslali, ini pak dvouletn prolou na prvo sloiti naditi dostaten poruili a tak vedle obnovenho z[zen] z[emskho] Jeho Milosti ku poven pijti a milostivou a spravedlivou resoluci pi zpotku psanm domu a ddictv mm mn milostiv zanechati r Proti tomu pan Ondej Leynhoz z Bevnova potahoval se na odpov svou proti tomuto vzneen Karla krty Maje sob plec spis Karla krty i s alegac vedle milostivho dekretu a nazen Va Arciknec Milosti od purkmistra a rady Starho Msta praskho propjen, z nho, co tak to ve v pin domu mho U ernho jelena eenho mn od plnomocnkv Kateiny krtov, matee jeho a dosavad iv, ped vyjitm jejm ven z zem pro nboenstv, prvn zzench trhem podnm prodanho v sob obsahuje, s nemalm podivenm jsem vyrozuml, e on Karel krta o to usiluje, aby ta rozepe, kter pi prv tho Starho Msta praskho vedle dvojho pstupu a vzneen jeho mezi nm pvodem innou a Jakubem Dobenskm, jakoto jednm z nadepsanch plnomocnkv na iv zstvajcm a prodvajcm, o prodaj tho domu zala, na dn odpovdi na z tho zaatho a zalho poadu prva na budouc zl a velmi nebezpen pklad, t na zmatek a poruen ordinarnho procesu prvnho vyat a podle citovanho novho z[zen] zem[skho] na kanceli Jeho Milosti csask esk milostivou resoluc Va Arciknec Milosti rozsouzena byla e se netoliko tho domu ale tak i patentv z milostivho poruen v pnu Bohu odpovajc Jeho Milosti csask pod datum 25. maii tho lta 1629 vylch a na prodaj tch vech gruntv a domv emigrantskch patrn se vztahujcch lit[era] B /B patent Jeho Milosti csask mstodrcch/ dotkati chtti bude nebo dotenmi milostivmi patenty to patrn jmnem Jeho Milosti csask formaliter vymeno jest, e kdo by koliv z tch osob ven z zem odebralch ode dne publikovn tch patentv ve 4 mscch pod zbhlch

k svm domm a gruntm i statkm bu sm osobn, vak v nboenstv katolickm se s Jeho Milost csaskou srovnajc, najti nedal, aneb jich skrze katolick plnomocnky neprodal, e ty a takov domov a gruntov a statkov, pro re derelicta, nebolito za odbn dran a pobran bti maj, a tak nemnce se, jak mt tho Karla krty, t i on a jin dva brati jeho jmnem Jan a Jindich tam a posavad pro nboenstv spolu i s sestrou jejich lta majc a od matky ven z zem proti patentu vyvedenou zstvajc a lta sv tehd vickni ti a ji dvno pedtm majc v tm termnu tch tyr mscv bu k navrcen aneb k prodaji dotench gruntv emigrantskch jmenovanm a peremptorie uloenm, sem do Prahy k svm gruntm (an porunci od nebo[tka] otce jeho kaftem zzen vykroive ped nkolika lty jet ped rebeli asnou smrt z tohoto svta, nikdy tho poruenstv se nevzali, mnji pak jin v tolika let[ech] se nedodali) navrtiti a pi nich katolickmi zstati a obvaje se ovem, aby t dm dle znn patentv po projit uloench tyr mscv pro re derelicta, aneb za dm odbn vzat nebyl, jej v tom ase a termnu jako i mlejn dskami zemskmi se dc, t dm pi nm v Novm Mst praskm lec, n[ebotkovi] Janovi Chryzostonovi Hymltejnovi a Salomen manelm za sumu 2000 kop meskch dle znn trhovho vkladu v kva[ternu] trhovm druh[m] zlatm H 2 pod datum ve tvrtek po svatm Petru v okovech 2. augusti lit[era] C /C vklad z desk zemskch/, ano i vinici dle znn zpisu, jeho actum 6. [octo]bris ve tho lta 1629 lit[era] D /D zpis trhov na vinici krtovskou; E pallet na emigraty [!] a kvta se vztahujc/ trhem prodati dali, ku ktermuto prodaji tho mlejna a domu n[ebotk] Jakub Kozel, tmi dskami zemskmi a Jindich krta vlastn bratr jeho plnomocenstvm podle novho ZZ I 12 jemu od v doten Kateiny krtov matee jeho ven z zem tehd pro nboenstv, jako i a dosavad na iv tam v mst Lin zstvajc (o em v tm vkladu patrn doloeno,) zmocnni jsou byli, anbr co vtho jest, t Kateina krtov na tm plecm plnomocenstv v mst Lin 21. julii lta 1629 datrovanm, sub signo /generln plnomocenstv na prodej vech gruntv

krtovskch dan/, dvaje tmu Hendrychovi synu svmu t list mocn pod peet tho msta vedle jej pititnou k prodaji vech gruntv zde zanechanch k zapisovn jich pi knihch, kde se kter d k pijet za n penz a k vykvitovn z nich, jet tuto pinu prodaje, tch vech gruntv krom v tch patentch doloenou dokld, toti e ona od tch tch synv svch jmnem Jana, Hendrycha a Karla za to synovsky podna jest, aby jednomu kadmu dl jemu nleit vydala, co e by sice podle sv nejvy monosti vykonati chtla, ale e a do tho asu doten gruntov ku prodaji nepily, ona pak ani namle, ani namnoze penz dnch, odkud by tm synm svm dly jejich vydati mohla, dostati a tou pinou bezelstn dosti jejich za dosti e uiniti neme. Vedle kterho listu mocnho on Hendrych syn jej pomohi ty vpsan ti grunty, toti mlejn, dm pi nm a t vinici prodati, penze za n i zvdavek za t dm mj, co tak po zapraven kvty k obci nleejc, t kontribuc zadral se nalo, k sob pijal a s nimi po svch, aneb kde se koliv jemu vidlo, se odebral. A tak tudy tm zpsobem a tou mrou dn z nich na nic takovho vceji navracovati se nem a neme. bude se jet dleji i toho chtti dotkati, e on Karel krta vyedi ped desti lety, jak sm dokld z Prahy, a nechtc se v ten as reformac Jeho Milosti csask v nboenstv katolickm, mvi ji tehd tak lta sv, srovnati, pede vemi jinmi potebami dvji neli jemu na jeho dvoje vzneen kathekorick odpov od ns prodvajcho a kupujcho dna bude, to prokzati a tak tudy zdali on Karel krta podle novho zzen zemskho B 41, 2 jest legitima persona in judicis standi, zpsobem tmto se legitimrovati povinen bude, toti kde jesti on po ten vecken as tch desti let, zdali v Itlii ili pi nepteli se zdroval nebo pedn komora Jeho Milosti csask esk v vej doten resoluci sv i tuto pinu odnmn tch penz mezi jinmi formaliter dokld, e jsou se oni brati krtov, nenavrtiv se asn dle v dotknutch napomnajcch dekretv Jich Milost krlovskch pnv mstodrcch k hospodstv a ddictv svmu proti Jeho Milosti csask a zemi tto zpsobem neptelskm

a vlenm potebovati dali a jet v tom odbojenstv e trvaj. Za druh i to jest vbec znmo, e on krta navrtiv se ped pl druhm ltem sem do Prahy nekatolick a maje proto od Jeho Milosti csask rychte Starho Msta praskho arestrovn bti, potom teprve na Mlnce katolickm zstal. I kterak jest tehdy on ve Vlach na njak peregrinaci sv po svm umn nekatolick zstvati a se zdrovati mohl, ponvad ve Vlach, vzlt pak v mst m dn nekatolick lovk le na podveden a oklamn inkvisic, se zdrovati nesm. J sice od osoby sv, jsouc ji tak vkem sel, rd z toho srdce konec t vci co nejdvji by jen mon bti mohlo, dokati bych sob pl a vinoval. V tom pak on krta tm spisem svm Vai Arciknec Milost jak vej doteno nedvodn zpravuje a to pedn, kde m za nepodnho dritele tho domu mho pokld, jeto on nikdy jet dnou nepodnost proti mn jest neprokzal, co sob taky proti t podnosti a dostatenmu opaten mmu tm neslunm pedsevzetm a lstnou a podvodnou obmyslnost svou dokud iv, nedovede. Dokld t nedvodn, e by on to sv domnl ddictv njakmi instrumenty a prvy k tomu citovanmi provedl a prokzal, i kterak jesti on kdy, kde, co, jak aneb vedle eho co takovho ped prvem pevsti a prokzati mohl dokld t dleji nedvodn z pouhho toliko dumnn [!], pohdek a domlen, e bych j z tho domu svho od lta 1629 a do lta 1639 vceji ine neli sumy trhov jest vybrati ml, v tom se vak on krta vysoce mejl, nebo to bylo-li by vak budoucn zapoteb ode m se pronsti a prokzati moci bude, e sem j netoliko lta 1631 a 1632 v as lidu kurta saskho kad tejden po 40 kopch, t potom v nsledujcch rozdlnch zimnch kvartch na lid Jeho Milosti csask vedle jinch sousedv z tho domu do mnoha set, co na tisce uin, platiti, ale tak na dn tok, kter dokonce jako i cel dm hrub sputn byl, pes dva tisce kop meskch na nov staven (v em jet emeslnky na svdom mm) vynaloiti musil. A naposledy on krta i tm sv neslun mnn a pedsevzet dotahovati a doliovati usiluje, kde sob i tyto domnl a neprvn dvody

280 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

na pomoc bere. 1. e by on njakmi obmysly a spiknutm ns stran jeho odpornch hjenm apelac, zanedbvnm dekretv a co toho daremnho vceji jest, o sv zachovn na peregrinaci nabyt piel, 2. e by od purkmistra a rady k kupovn njakho jeho ddictv proti citovanm prvm povolovno bti nemlo. 3. e mi se zpis za ouadu mho purkmistrskho na ten dm uinil, i co se prvnho vysoce naklivho dvodu doteje, ten se budoucn proti nmu bude vdti, jak k slun nprav pivsti, i tak se na to nejprv ptti, kdo obmyslu a lsti aneb podvodu, on-li ili my odporn strany jeho v tom povme aneb pedel dekreta podobn od nho na potvrzen poadu prva vydan zanedbvme, co hlavn rozsudek uke, jestlie pak on njak zachovan penze sv aneb odkudkoliv jinde vzat na to nakld, j se na to, po em mi nic nen, neptm, ne na to kad pvod m mysliti, kterak svou vc, vyzdvihnouc proti nkomu rozepi, z eho a odkud bude moci zakldati, v soud zaraen sob dovsti nebo ne kad, kdo aluje, prv zstv, nbr jak prvn regule ukazuje, in victoria consistit viitus et actore non probante reus absolvitur, etiam si nihil probaverit. Chce-li se on krta s tehdejm purkmistrem a radou z povoln k tomu trhu hdati a souditi, m toho vli. 3.[!] e se zpis za tehdejho ouadu mho na ten dm stal, tm sob mlo pioprav nebo a jet proti tomu i to dokldm, e ten dm nejprv ne mn v tom termnu k prodaji vech domv a gruntv emigrantskch v dotknutmi patenty uloenm, ale Antonnovi Trentinovi za tu sumu 2500 kop meskch od plnomocnkv Kateiny krtov trhem podn byl, ale kdy potom on z jistch pin toho trhu a domu uti nemnil a nedal, tu teprv mn se pitrelo v t sum bona de od tch plnomocnkv ho ujti a pro mladho syna mho, ji tak v ltu jminulm 1639 na morn bolesti, byve on fendrychem nad jednm praporcem manv staro[mstskch] a pedtm tak ve Vlach na peregrinaci a poctiv vysvden sv sebou na to pinesi, zpis na nj svistem dti uiniti avak ne k tomu cli, abych j se z poadu prva, ji mezi nmi zalho vytrhovati a v postrann odpovdn vykazovati ml, se dje, nbr jak vej poddan a pokorn

proeno, jet vdy Vai Arciknec Milost prositi nepestvm, e m milostiv zstaviti a nade mnou, jakoto kadho asu vrnm starm a nikdy nezpronevilm sluebnkem domu rakouskho milostivou ruku ochrannou dreti, pi tm pak vetenm suplikantu, aby se on v tm neslunm a nenleitm pedsevzet svm spokojil, zaatm poadem prva iv byl a toho, co jemu budoucn soud a ortel spravedliv na to s vymenmi pokutami podvodu, lsti a zoumyslnho prva a vrchnosti zaneprazdovn dle novho ZZ D 52, t vynahraenm kod a nklad sebou pivede, oekval, milostivou resoluci svou naditi r, v em se Va Arciknec Milosti k milostiv ochran v nejhlub a poddan pokornosti poroum. Od Karla krty otnovskho z Zvoic proti odpovdi pana Ondeje Leynhoze z Bevnova /tato/ replika sub signo * cum allegatie sub n[umero]o 6, 7 et cet[era]. Replika Jakho spisu proti suplikaci m Andres Laynhoz pod titulem pokorn a na gruntu prva a spravedlnosti zaloen poteby Va Arciknec Milosti podal, jsouce mi k replicrovn propjen, jsem vyrozuml a nachzm to, e podstatu sv odpovdi zaloil jest na dvoj vci. Jedn: aby m lovka mladho, od m mladosti vdycky ctn a lechetn chovalho, z m cti loupil, nakajce m lst, podvodem a oklamnm prva, kterto odpov tomu ve vech punktch a artikulch pln nk, hann a neuetench dtek jest. Druh: vidouce m lovka potebnho, patrimonium mho zbavenho a e na prodlouen soud proti nmu lovku mocnmu a bohatmu odkud nakldati nemm. Aby m ustl a tm zpsobem o spravedlnosti a prvo m otcovsk alostiv neslun a proti v spravedlnosti pipravil, co Pnu Bohu poalovno bu. I v pravd jest se jemu podiviti, e on Andres Laynhoz, jeden pedn a nejstar konel Starho Msta praskho sm na takov vci nastupovati a jich tak nerozvliv k njak obran sv uvati, jeto nejmilostivj arcikne, nech to vickni nejvzctnj juristov soud, sirotek dojdouce let svch aneb pijdouce z peregrinac, kdy

spravedlnosti a prva svho vyhledv, na ni nastupuje a j se ujm, jak tu lest, jak podvod aneb oklamn bti me, co kdy se v bedliv poven vede, tehdy najde se proti mn nevinnmu lovku pouh zlost Andresa Laynhoza, jeto jsouce lovk moudr, star a soudce jinch, neml by nic takovho vedle povinnosti sv na sob ani znti dti. J pak nejsouce toho oumyslu a vdouce o tom, e dnho lovka spravedlnost ani hannm a nkem druh strany se neumenuje, ani ovem doliuje, nbr tot je, e prvy Jeho Milosti csask viti a vydanm prvem a ZZ pod skutenmi pokutami zamezovati r co nejkraeji bti me tuto svou odpov dvm. Pedn se ohlauji, e veckno to, co Andres Laynhoz v poteb sv zde i onde mn k dobrmu pe a seznv, pro confesione juridica pijmm a msto prvodu toho nejpodstatnjho k uitku svmu obracm, jako pak obzvltn i to, e pi potku bez potebnho svho spisu Andres Laynhoz sm to tvrd, e jest od plnomocnkv Kateiny krtov matee m ten dm U ernho jelena trhem koupil, a tak tehdy ne ode m, neb plnomocnkv mch, ktermto vlastnm piznnm svm, nad kter dnho dalho prvodu poteba nejni, ten trh nepodn o t dm uinn vyvrac a por. Pistupujce pak dle ji k sam vci a k pin prvn Andresa Laynhoza, kterou proti sumovnmu procesu pedkld, akoliv jedna kad rozepe, kde zatek svj vzala, tu i k skonn pivedena bti m. by m ustti a o spravedlnost mou ddickou pipraviti chtla, co se ze vech spis jeho provozuje. dm tak ped Va Arciknec Milost brevitate processus rozeznn bti i z tto prvn piny, e se tu dotk netoliko nejpednjho a nejstarho jednoho radnho a druhho primtora, ale tak i rady Starho Msta praskho, kteto jsouce po Jeho Milosti csask nad sirotky nejpednj v mst porunci k tomu trhu povolovati nemohli <chtli> a podle prva mst[skho] A 29, 12 nejvt pi a starost o sirotky jmti maj, aby oni, pijdouce k letm a nemajce slunho opaten z statku rodiv svch pinou chudoby sv, na n nakati a jako Pnu Bohu alovati nemuseli.

Obzvltn vdouce o kaftu prve alegrovanm otce mho, kterm jest to matei m zapovdl, aby ona toho domu i jinho statku prodvati a roztrhovati nemohla. On pak Andres Laynhoz ne podle njakho veejnho Jeho Milosti csask mandtu, neb obzvltnho dekretu, ale vedle (pr) a radji proti tmu kaftu takov dm jest koupil, a tak tm a nejinm titulem ke jmnu Vclava syna svho ji mrtvho zapsati dal, v ktermto kaftu o mn Karlovi nejmladm a tehd nezletilm synu svm na nkolika mstech dosti v patrnch slovch se zmnka obrn in, k emu kdyby byl Andres Laynhoz vdom nepospchal a tho domu mti nechtl, nbr t kaft, nezletilost i neptomnost mou sm u sebe i s panem purkmistrem pny v mst radnm dobe uvil, nebyl by on ani dn tho domu koupil mimo to prvo mstsk. Vedle kterhoto prva a z[zen] z[emskho] sem j tu vc na Vai Arciknec Milost jakoto plnomocnho guberntora zem tto vznesl a jako lovk v chudob postaven, ddictv otce mho zbaven a na dlouh proces prvn, z eho nakldati nemajc, za sumrn t vci vyslyen a rozeznn dal, i a posavad dm, co sem vedle toho vymen prvnho a z pin naped pipomenutch dobe uiniti mohl. ta patenta vechno jsou dobr a na svm mst ne to toliko pravm, e se na m v niem nevztahuj, protoe sem j dnm emigrantem, a jak strana odporn v jednom mst dokld, exulantem nikdy nebyl, nbr se v svm umn, ktermu sem se vyuil a je sob oblbil, z Krlovstv eskho podle pleit atestac od lehrmajstra mho mn dan v ltu 1627 in julio do cizch zem se odebral, a tak v t pin doten Laynhoz in signem errorem causae ut non causa komitruje, vztahujce pinu peregrinac m na religiji, jeto sem j se pro dosaen vtho umn a experienc ven z zem, nejsouce od dnho puzen, odebral. To i v kolch dti, nerci-li rozumn lid, vdti maj, a tak tehdy neuedi j, o ddictv otce mho, nbr jsa tm ubezpeen, e se mn dle znn kaftu otce mho, z podlu mho nic neztrat a ztratiti neme, pro nabyt umn na peregrinaci se oddavi, ddictv otce mho nikoliv sem tudy neztratil a dnm zpsobem ztratiti

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 281

nemohu, ani se proto za odbn pokldati me, a on Laynhoz ciz spravedlnosti proti prvu a sv vlastn povdomosti, byvi toho asu purkmistrem, ovem pak proti patrnmu kaftu otce mho (formalia) aby t statek [!] mj pospolu a do let nejmladho syna mho, kter tak do let svch dosplch opaten svho jako jin potebovati bude, zstval, na sebe pevozovati neml. Nad to veje nachz se ex actis jak zpisu, tak patentu vydanho, e jest Laynhoz dm mj U ernho jelena een o jeden rok pece neli patenty vyly, to jest 30. julii anno 1629 koupil, z eho se patrn vid, e jest tho domu dvno dostiv byl, o spravedlnost mou ddickou stl, dve neli jak pina jemu k tomu od koho dan byla, co jak proti boskmu pikzn nepod domu blinho tvho, tak i lidskmu prvu elc jest, jeto Antonn Trentin, kupujce tak ten dm, za nj penze hotov dval, vak pro pekku Laynhoza za hotov penze, to jest Laynhoz na termny uil, obdreti nemohl. e pak pi t druh pin t Andres Laynhoz sob nkter jin grunty od bratra mho prodan k obran a ku pomoci be, to jeho v niem [?], protoe se tu sbhaj jin ppadnosti a pkladov, i nemohou za dnou reguli vyzdvihovni bti, nebo Judita Bylinov podle ptelskho jednn a mezi nmi vagrovskho zpznn jest se mnou o t vinici a penze za ni povinn, poznavi to, e by proti mn obstti nemohla, dobrovoln smluvila, dobrovoln za jist smlouvy a sneen vecka prva lom, z strany mlejna od pjezdu mho z peregrinac jest jet ti lta a 18 nedl neprolo, k dobvn toho mm jet dosti asu a nadji mm, e i ten nepodn dritel mlejn po napomenut sob usmysl a vodstoupen mho ddickho odporen nebude, nad to, e Jan Baptista Reymund, kdy sem j o odstoupen jedn vinice na onen as od matee m v mst Litomicch Ance, manelce jeho a seste m vlastn, postoupen skrze suplikovn k Jeho Milosti pnm mstodrcm a Jeho Milosti csask nastupoval v odpovdi sv podobnm zpsobem podobnm plnomocenstvm Judit Bylinov dan, zpisy j k j seste m, tak i jemu uinnmi jako i tento vklad mlejna a prodaj domu a e to ve platnosti nemlo, dostaten plnomocenstv sem

provedl a prokzal, take vedle milostivho poruen a nejposlednj resoluc Jeho Milosti csask purkmistr a rada msta Litomic jsou m do t vinice prvn uvedli Co se pak tkne plnomocenstv od matee m, nkdy Jakubovi Kozlovi a Jakubovi Dobenskmu, t vedle nich Jindichovi bratru mmu, v ltu 1629 danho, akoliv v nm se zmnka in, jako bych j dlu svho otcovskho od pan matee m dati ml, vak to ani s rozumem srovnno bti neme, nebo jak ji doteno sem rok pod na perekrinaci zstval, k dosti toho dlu plnomocenstv k prodaji dnmu nedval a to artikule mimo sama slova v tm plnomocenstv obsaen bu oustnm psanm na to pi prv uinnm aneb domnlou niakou dost z podstaty prva se neukazuje. nbr to t plnomocenstv od matee m v t form dno, jak jest odsud od plnomocnkv svch sneena byla, e neohldajce se (jak prokzno) na velikou diferenci mezi emigranty a mnou, i vzdlen m velik pede vemi patenty a dekrety obvinnm zase vecko brno bti mlo co se pedn patentv Praan Starho Msta dote, ten se na m nikoliv nevztahuje, protoe jsem za tehdejho asu dnm sirotkem z zem ven vyvrenm ani emigrantem nebyl, nbr jak ji naped toho doloeno jest, po umn svm jet dve ne ty patenta vyly, anbr o rok dve neli mate m emigraci ped sebe vzala, do ciz zem e sem se odebral, kterto pina jest v prvch c[saskch] e proto nidn na ddictv a spravedlnosti sv dn kody nsti neme, nbr aby se po 30 letech [!] zase z studium a peregrinac sv vrtil svch vc uti a do nich zveden bti m. takov patentov, kdyby se v em na osobu mou vztahovaly (jako e jsou se nevztahovaly, to ode m naped ukzno jest), byly by se vedle nich na mou vlastn spesu neli vdouce, e toliko na emigranty a ven z zem vyvezen a vyveden, slun pominuli, a tak nevztahujce se na m a jich sob v znmost uveden nemve, vedle nich sem se chovati nemohl kdyby scus kdy proti nm co takovho prva byl vyhledval, byli bychom to dostaten provedli, e dn z ns brat nikdy ani emigrantem nebyl, o ve proti Jeho

Milosti csask nic neptelskho se nedotinil, jak to Andres Laynhoz v nkolika spisch svch jako obzvltn v jednom, e nejstar dvno ped rebeli v cizch zemch oenil a jeden (pr) v Polt v umn malskm se cvi a e v brzkm ase sem do tchto zem se navrtiti chce, a tak e nic proti Jeho Milosti csask neproheili, na by se scus potahovati mohl, sm to vyznv a v tom artikuli nam svdkem jest. e pak t Andres Laynhoz ode m prvodu dostatenho, kde sem po vecken as [v] peregrinaci sv zdroval, mti d, a m za pinou nboenstv nenleit do svdom sah, to jemu k dn reputaci neslou, nbr on chce-li m bu v peregrinaci neb v ve m tupiti, vak dve toho mus mn domu mho odstoupiti a potom vedle prva partes actoris defendrovati a e jsem se bu na mstech podezelch zdroval, bu e katolickm lovkem nejsem, provsti povinen bude. J jsouce svdomm svm jist a majce Vae Arciknec Milost dostatenou povdomost osoby m, ped duchovnmi a svtskmi lidmi v t pin sebe dobe jak legitimrovati vm a na ten as nechtce nkoho k hanb pivsti, o tom, co se v t pin zbhlo, mlm. Pt pina na to se vztahuje, e bych j se njakho patrnho podveden prva a na oklamn osoby jeho Andresa Laynhoze sloen lsti a zformovan praktiky dopustil, i odpovdajce na to negative a potahujce se prvnj prvody m, pravm, e jak brati moji, tak i j s nimi pro nullis personis civiliter mortuis jmni bt nememe, protoe jsme vedle milostiv resoluti Jeho Milosti csask jura post liminii et restitutionis in integrum ani pro nboenstv ven z zem nevyjeve, ani proti Jeho Milosti csask nidnho odbojenstv se nedoinive, nikd neztratili, mnohem pak mn (jak odporn strana toho nedvodn dokld) od dnho prva kondemnrovni aneb odsouzeni nebyli. on Andres Laynhoz mn od datum toho nepodnho zpisu jeho a do asu ptomnho z uvn slun a nleit prv bti povinen bude. Piem vak toho bedliv dleji poviti slu, co by tm trhem a koup proti mn, lovku mladmu, do m patriae z perekrinac zase se navrtilmu a o takovm trhu vdomost

nemajcmu, dovozovati chtl. To jest aby m nejen o spravedlnost a prvo m otcovsk a ddick pealostiv, abych po mm otci nic nedostal a nedoshl, pipravil, ale i z m poctivosti, e se o spravedlnost mou a prvo m domlouvm, obloupil, co Pnu Bohu, Jeho Milosti csask a Va Arciknec Milosti alovno bu, e se s tm od jednoho z nejpednjch a nejstarch konelv tak nerozvliv proti vemu svdom potkvm. A po[ku] d tato vc, jak ji naped doloeno notoria jest a v prvnch resolucch c[saskch] dosti vysvtlena, nepotebuje dnho obrnho procesu prvnho a jsouce j tolik i lovk chud, na prodlouen soud nemm odkud nakldati, take kdybych od Va Arciknec Milosti jakoto vrchnosti kesansk retovn a chrnn nebyl, skrze to nejsnzeji bych o m tak patrn prvo pijt, o to ku Pnu Bohu pti musil. Proe Vai Arciknec Milost ve v ponenosti za to dm, jakoby mi se velik proti v spravedlnosti a prvu ublen a zkrcen dti chtlo, k srdci svmu milostiv pipustiti, m v tom politovati, tu vc z prodlouenho procesu prvnho (zvlt e i on sm v poteb sv jsouce lovk vkem sel) rte. Po dn tto repliky pan Ondej Leynhoz dal, aby jemu ad duplicam propjena byla. K jehoto dosti slun pan p[urkmistr] a pni povoliti a tu repliku Karla krty ad duplicam comunicrovati naditi rili. Po prolm termnu od pana Ondeje Leynhoze tato duplika sub sig. * et allegatie sub ku prvu pedloena jest. RT

282 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

23

The Old Town in Prague, 15 August 1640

Karel krta requests Jan Baptist Reymund to convey to him the paintings of his predecessors. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Manuale dictorum, 16381641, sign. 1169, f. 140v141r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

1640 Consule domino Joanne Khobr Khobrspergka Pan Karel krta otnovsk z Zvoic vedle tohoto na Jana Baptistu Reymunda vydanho obesln toto na Vae Milosti jakoto po Jeho Milosti csask pedn pny ochrnce sirotkv vzneen in, kterak doten pan Jan Baptista Reymund, jsouce od nho pana Karla krty otnov[skho] z Zvoic ptelsky skrze dobr lidi dn, aby on pan Jan Baptista obrazy anebo kontrfekty po nkdy panu ddu, pan bby, t

panu otci, jako i pan matei, tud i sester a brat pozstal, kter jemu panu Karlovi krtovi nleej, navrtil, tch a takovch obrazv a kontrfekt nidnm zpsobem odevzdati a jich postoupiti nechce, jeto aby obrazy ty a kontrfekty kdy tomuto Baptistovi anebo manelce jeho a ji dotenho pana Karla krty seste sviti a nleeti mly, toho od nho nikdy prokzno a provedeno bti moci nebude. Nbr to se vyhled a najde, e vedle artykule kaftu od nkdy dobr pamti panu Kundratovi otnov[skmu] odtud

z Zvoic, pana otce jeho nejmilejho, uinnho a ktermu ve vem vudy a posavad msto dno jest, takov obrazy a kontrafekty nleej a pokud vedle pr[va] mst[skho] B 42, E 44 poslednch vl kaftujcch netoliko vysoce se etiti, ale i nad tm ruka ochrann drna bti m. Proe nadepsan pan Karel krta Va Milosti za to etrn d, e vedle vej dotenho artykule kaft, kter netoliko na obrazy a kontrfekty, ale i na velijak knky se vztahuje, dotenho pana Baptisty Reymunda k tomu, aby se takov

obrazy a kontrafekty odevzdal a ty od sebe odvedl, pidreti rte podle prva. Baptista Reymund po tomto vzneen dal hojemstv prvn s tou protestac, zdali povinen bude na t vzneen odpovdati aneb ne? K emu od pana p[urkmistra] a pnv povoleno ad [?] 2 proximam. RT

24

The Old Town in Prague, 27 August 1640

Judgment of the city councillor in the dispute between Karel krta and Ondej Leynhoz over the house At the Black Deer which shall remain the property of the new owner. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Manuale dictorum, 16381641, sign. 1169, f. 146r147r. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 46; NEUMANN 2000, pp. 4041.

Feria secunda post sancti Bartholomaei Ap[osto]l[i] Domini 27. augusti anno 1640 Vejpov mezi Karlem krtou otnovskm z Zvoic z jedn a panem Ondejem Leynhozem z strany druh NB actio se nachz na spisch vide infra tato actio srovnan a ingrosso fol. 166 Akoliv z prvodu od Karla krty otnovskho z Zvoic v tom mezi nm z jedn a panem Ondejem Leynhozem z Bevnova z strany druh o dm U ernho jelena proti Tejnu v tomto Starm Mst praskm lec vzelm sporu to se vynachz, e nebo[tk] Kundrat krta otnovsk z Zvoic, in o gruntech a jinm statku svm pozen kaftovn, Kateinu manelku svou a mate vlastn dotenho Karla

krty nad tm statkem a dtmi po nm zstalmi a tehd nezletilmi s tou vejminkou, aby ona bez vdom a povolen j k rad a pomoci dodanch porunkv jak z strany oznmench dt, tak i statku, nic initi a ped sebe brti nemohla, nbr uinila-li by co toho o sv jm, to dn platnosti a moci nemlo, za mocnou otcovskou porunici zdil. e vak takov vejminka patrn a vlastn toliko a do let dosplch jmenovanch dt, obzvltn pak v dotenho Karla krty, jakoto nejmladho syna, se vztahovala, a tak dojitm let jich prvnch minula. Ji tehdy prv oznmen Kateina krtov (majc se vedle nazen Jeho Milosti csask pnv komisav nad reformac v religii jmnem a na mst Jeho Milosti csask uinnho za

pinou nepijet nboenstv samospasitedlnho katolickho v ltu jminulm 1628 z Krlovstv eskho odebrati) v neptomnosti dt svch ji pedtm let prvnch dolch, netoliko k prodaji z svrchudotknutho domu plnomocnky zditi, ale i byvi od tch dt toti Jana, Hendrycha a tohoto praetendrujcho Karla o vydn dl jich ddickch tam vn vyhledvan, tent dm (kterto sice pro neprodn jeho ped projitm asu v patentch Jeho Milosti csask vbec publikovanch a vloenm pro re derelicta polon a k ruce Jeho Milosti csask, o nyn pipomenutch synch pro a za jakmi pinami z zem tto, kdy pi dnm prv od nich ohlen uinno nebylo, se odebrali, konscrovn by byl) svobodn jakoto t dle kaftu nebo[tka] Kundrata

krty na nm dl svj majc, prodvati mohla. Z tch tehdy pin pitom mezi panem Ondejem Leynhozem z Bevnova z jedn a prvn zzenmi plnomocnky Kateiny krtov z strany druh o pipomenut dm podn beze vech obmyslv zavenm zpisem knih mstskch utvrzenm trhu (nad nm jako i jinmi podnmi trhy a zpisy dle vymen prv krlovstv tohoto eskho ruka ochrann drna bti m). Z toho veho zcela a zouplna se zanechv a on pan Ondej Leynhoz pi pokojn possessi uvn takovho domu ji zcela a zouplna zaplacenho zstavuje, s tm pitom doloenm, chce-li asto doten Karel krta otnovsk z Zvoic (ponvad se tu dle ohlen Jeho Milosti csask pana rychte a Jeho Vysoce Arciknec

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 283

Milosti rady na mst a k ruce Jeho Milosti csask pi zaven tto acti uinnho dnho podvodu a odtud pochzejcho interesse nenachz) v pin penz gruntovnch od pana Ondeje Leynhoza dle kvitanc knh mstskch odvedench, k komu

nleeti bude, hledti, prvo se mu v tom nezavr. kody pak z jistch slunch a prvnch pin mezi nadepsanmi stranami se zdvhaj, ve podle prva. Actum feria secunda post sancti Bartholomaei Ap[ostoli] Domini, 27. augusti anno

1640 con[sule] domino Joanne Khobr a Khobrspergka. Suscepit consulatum dominus Nicolaus Turek a Rosenthal feria secunda post Nativitatis B[eatae] Mariae Virginis, 10. septembri anno 1640. RT

25

Prague, 18 October 1640

Karel krta is one of the witnesses to the signing of the transfer of the obligation to the claim of 4000 guilders of Antonius Brucius and 1296 guilders of Vilm Slavata among the Italian families settled in Prague. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Sbrka opis (Collection of Duplicates), Sttn oblastn archiv Tebo (poboka Jindichv Hradec) (State Regional Archives of the City of Tebo [branch Jindichv Hradec]), 18 October 1640. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 11, 26.

Jan Giacomo Carollini zapisuje zplnomocnnci Caspara Delnetti, panu Josefovi Maggiolimu a jeho manelce Albt na jim postoupenou obligaci pana Antonia Brucia Dieses mehrer Sicherheit wegen zu bezeugen, hab ich erbeten die

Ehrenvesten Herrn Carl Skreta, Burger und Mahlern in der Alten Stadt Prag und Jo[hann] Lorenz Jerab von Kirchhaimb, Buerger und deutschen Schulhalter in der Kleinen Stadt alda, welche sich neben mir mit aigner Hand und gewhnlicher ihrer Petschaft unterzeichnet.

So geschehen zu Prag, den 18. Octobris anno 1640. L. S. Jo[hann] Giacomo Carollini mp. L. S. Carl Sskreta von Zaworzicz mp. L. S. Jo[hann] Lorenz Jerab mp. RT

26

The Old Town in Prague, 21 February 1641

Dispute over the house At the Black Deer the court of appeal conrms the judgment of the city council from 27 August 1640. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber appelationum 2, 15941654, sign. 1029, f. 323r. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 46; NEUMANN 2000, pp. 4041.

Konrmac mezi Karlem krtou otnovskm z Zvoic z jedn a Ondejem Leynhozem z Bevnova z strany druh My Ferdinand III. z Bo milosti volen msk csa, po vecky asy rozmnoitel e a uhersk, esk, dalmtsk, charvtsk etc. krl, arcikne rakousk, markrab moravsk, lucembursk a slezsk kne a luick markrab etc. Oznamujem tmto listem, e president a rady nae k apelacm na Hrad naem praskm zzen

a usazen na ta od prva Starho naeho Msta praskho odeslan a odevzdan zapeetn akta v tom sporu mezi Karlem krtou otnovskm z Zvoic z jedn a Ondejem Laynhozem z Bevnova z strany druh, co se ppovdi na dm U ernho jelena een v Starm naem Mst praskm lec, t i kod v pi hlavn vzelch zdvien dote, jak akta t pe to ve v sob eji obsahuj a zavraj. Povive toho s pilnost veho podle prva, zanechvaj toho ortele na tm prv feria secunda

post sancti Bartholomaei Apostoli Domini, 27. augusti lta ji pominulho 1640 mezi nadepsanmi stranami vyneenho, pi sv vze. Ponvad tu co za prvo vypovdno jest, tomu na svdom peet na csaskou k tomu soudu obzvltn zzenou jest zapeetno. Dn na Hrad naem praskm ve tvrtek po nedli prvn v post, jen slove invocavit, 21. februarii lta Pn tischo estistho tyryctho prvnho a krlovstv naich mskho ptho, uherskho estnctho a eskho trnctho.

Fridrich z Talmberka, president Publicat[um] coram partibus 7. martii 1641. Jan Graff z Graffenburgu RT

284 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

27

The Old Town in Prague, 7 February 1643

The burgomaster and the councillor of the Old Town in Prague state that the house which was once the property of Tade Hjek of Hjek (and is situated next to the King Wenceslas College) and, after him, of Zuzana Strassburgov while the latter died without issuing her last will and the house is thus iure devolutionis ab intestate devolved upon the king and the community is requested, according to the blood-related line of succession, by Karel krta otnovsk of Zvoice who claims his right to the inheritance here and who dwelled in foreign countries on travels when the above-mentioned inserting occurred. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), sign. H 199/5, Inv. No.1399, box 926. Literature: Tom Sekyrka, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.14, p. 593.

Gnedige und gebietende Herren, Euer Gnaden khnen wr hiemit wie windert nicht lassen, was massen Ihro Rmisches Kaiserliches Maestat, unser allergndigister Herr, auf unser allerunterthnigistes Ansuchen, sich gegen uns in Khayserlichen Gnaden, so weith inclinirt und zu wieder erhb und Reparirung des vershienen 1636 Jahrs, den 4. Martii durch ein unglckselig ausgangene Herres brumst ruinirten und abgebrndten Altstdter

Waerthuermbs, fnf Hundert Gulden zu Hielf auderselben extra ordinarii mietheln, aller gndigist deputiret und angeordnet haben berhmter Ihrer Kayserlichen Mayestat allergndigisten Resolution vermge Euer Gnaden Decrets sub Lit. B. un die eine Helfte des Weyland Thadeo Hagek und hernacher Susanna Straburgerin zugehrigen und nachgelassenen Hauses, in welches nach ihrem ab intestato tdtlichen Hientwirt, weilen sich von

ihrer Freundschaft damahls niemand befunden, Ihro Rmische Kayserliche Mayestat und der Gemeinde zu Handen iure devolutionis ab intestato die Immission beschehn, zu obangebteten Ende aplicirt worden. Dieweil aber Carl Screta Schotnowsky von Zawoic, der sich damahls, da gedachte Immission beschehen, in frembden Landen in peregrinatione aufgehalten, der BlutverwandnsLinien nach diesorts ius hereditatis praetendiret, und wie wr aus denen

von Ihme zum Theil producirten Documentis ersehen und verstehen, da solches ausgewiesene Mittel bey dieser Beschafenheit fallen wrt mssen Actum 7. Februarii anno 1643 Euer Gnaden dienstgehorsambe Brgermeister und Rath der Alten Stadt Prag TS

28

Mlnk, (before 19 March 1643)

Karel krta requests the city council of Mlnk to convey to him a vineyard as reimbursement for unpaid interest on a claim which he inherited from his mother. The request was considered with an affirmative result at the session of the Mlnk municipal council. Sttn okresn archiv Mlnk (State Regional Archives of the City of Mlnk), Archiv msta Mlnk (Archives of the City of Mlnk), Book 75, le Manul neb protokol radn (The City Councils Manual alias the Protocol) 16411646, f. 57. Literature: KILIN 2011, pp. 161165. TS

29

Mlnk, 19 March 1643

The Mlnk city council gives Karel krta a vineyard situated on Tomov city farmland near the Trinity church at Chloumek as reimbursement for the debt inherited from his mother. krta shall annually conscribe two three-scores of groschen from this vineyard, shall obligatorily assign a vineyard keeper there and, if he wants to sell the vineyard in the future, he must preemptively offer it to the city or the Mlnk burghers. Sttn okresn archiv Mlnk (State Regional Archives of the City of Mlnk), Archiv msta Mlnk (Archives of the City of Mlnk), Book 120, le Kniha vinin (The Book of Vineyards) 16101745, f. 139. Literature: KILIN 2011, pp. 161165. TS

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 285

30

(Prague), after 28 May 1643

The Bohemian Chamber orders Jan Petk of Vokountejn the Elder to help Karel krta acquire the house of Tade Hjek of Hjek in the Old Town in Prague. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), sign. H 199/5, Inv. No.1399, box 926, f. 1. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Jmnem a na mst Jeho Milosti mskho csae, t uherskho a eskho etc. krle etc. pna ns vech nejmilostivjho slovutnm purkmistru a rad Menho Msta praskho se porou. Akoliv ltu pominulm 1638 dm nkdy Thadee Hjka z Hjku v lkastv doktora v Starm Mst praskm vedle Koleje krle Vclava lec, jakoby Jeho Milosti csask, t obci staromstsk prvem odoumrtnm nleel <byl pipadl> k ruce sci ujat byl, avak Karel krta z Zvoic navrtive se po <takovm> tm ujet ze Vlach, na komoru Jeho Milosti csask eskou suplikovati, t na Praany staromstsk vzneti <nepestv, e zvod do tho domu od prvnjho csaskho rychte tak i obce staromstsk omylem se stal> a za kasrovn zvodu do tho domu k ruce Jeho Milosti csask, t obce staromstsk vykonanho dati nepestv, oznamujce, <e

neb> e na t dm, po <dcei> Zuzan Sstrospurgkerov dcei tho Thadee Hjka, a tak krevn tet jeho prvem npadnm piel a pipadl, avak takov npad a i posavad dle vymen prvnho dokonale neprovedl a neukzal, jak tomu vemu z piloench spisv obrnji vyrozumti mocti budou, aby oni Praan Jeho Milosti csask rychte v Starm Mst praskm (titul), aneb koho by na sv mstu [!] ku prvu malostranskmu s plnomocenstvm <k tmu prvu> vypravil, t nadepsanho krtu <neped> neprodlen ped sebe k tmu prvu sroili je netoliko v tom ale tak pokud by mimo svrchupsan spisy co vceji a dleji pedneti chtli beze vech zbytench interlocutori <do> proti sob dostaten a summariter vyslyeli <a je> strany na to vejpov spravedlivou s vhradou vrchnho prva podlili. Vdouce, e na tom jist a milostiv

vle Jeho Milosti Csask naplnna bude. Ex Consilio etc. 28. maii 1643 Komora Jeho Milosti csask esk slovutnmu Janovi starmu Petkovi z Vokountejna (titul) plec ppisy ku prvu malostranskmu prolho odslati a pi nm to nle, aby on buto sm aneb skrze plnomocnka svho skln interesse na dom nkdy Thadee Hjka proti Karlovi krtovi z Zvoic <a v> pi prv malostranskm velijak hjil a zastval, t Praany malostransk k tomu, aby oni bez odkladu t vc vyslyeli a <s tm> na to vejpov s vejhradou vrchnho prva podlili, napomenul, o em vdouce, tak se zachovati nepomine. Ex consilio 28. mai 1643 TS

31

The Old Town in Prague, March 1644

Karel krta requests the Bohemian Chamber to cover the supplementary payment of money owed to his father. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Komorn knihy (Chamber Books), Registry 16431646, Book No.445, f. 109v. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Martius 1644, N[umer]o 40 Eli Maggauer, krta Pan rentmistr Krl[ovstv] esk[ho] zprvu dv na stnost Karla krty z strany na doplacen mu vykzanch penz. RT

286 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

32

The Old Town in Prague, 16441656

Records in the guild book, related to Karel krta as a master painter, refer to his joining the Old Town Guild, him participating at the confraternitys sessions and the admission and releasing of the apprentices Frantiek Palinka, Ondej Petr, Jakub Tuc and Samuel Globic of Bun the Younger to and from their apprenticeship. A number of other records are linked with appointing krta as the superior of the guild in 1653 and with the ensuing duties, especially conscientiously keeping the guild nancial statements, summoning sessions and solving problems which preoccupied the guild at that time i.e. mainly disputes with woodcarvers and glaziers who wanted to become independent, and with the New Town painters. Many entries were written in Karel krtas own hand. His work in the eld of painting is linked with the recorded promise to execute a painting for the guild St Lucas altarpiece in the church of Our Lady before Tn and a portrait of the Empress, intended for the chancellor. Archiv Nrodn galerie vPraze (Archives of the National Gallery in Prague), fund Prask malsk bratrstva (Prague Painters Confraternities), le Kniha protokol praskho malskho cechu zlet 16001656 (The Book of Protocols of the Prague Painters Guild from between 1600 and 1656), Acquisition No. AA 1209. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 46; HALATA 1996 (edition), p. 218; RONK 1997, pp. 114116; Radka Tibitanzlov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.19, p. 598. RT

33

Mlnk, 28 April 1645

Karel krta buys a desolated and uncultivated vineyard on Tomov city farmland near Mlnk from the widowed Kateina Svobodov for 32 guilders. krta shall annually conscribe 46 groschen from this vineyard to the city of Mlnk. Sttn okresn archiv Mlnk (State Regional Archives of the City of Mlnk), Archiv msta Mlnk (Archives of the City of Mlnk), Book 120, le Kniha vinin (The Book of Vineyards) 16101745, f. 77. Literature: KILIN 2011, pp. 161165. TS

34

The Lesser Town in Prague, 9 July 1645

Karel krta marries Veronika, a daughter of Antonn Grnberger from the Lesser Town in Prague, in the local St Thomas church. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), St Thomas church, le Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16321649, sign. TO N2 O2, f. 18v. Literature: RYBIKA 1869, p. 9; PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 2829; BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 8; NEUMANN 1974, p. 46; NEUMANN 2000, p. 40.

Item copulatus est ingenuus et spectabilis dominus Carolus Screta pictor cum honesta virgine Veronica Grnbergerin, lia Antonii Grnberger, civis minoris Pragae, et Mariae,

testes nobilis et ampliss[imus] dominus Wenceslaus Gifsberofsky, scriba minor Regni Boemiae, Antonius de Bossi, officialia salis, dominus Martinus Luth, vitricus sponsae, civis et

senator Parvae Partis, Simon Dietz, lorarius et civis Minoris Pragae, Simon Luth etc. RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 287

35

Prague, 13 January 1646

Karel krta requests the emperor to pay off the claim which Emperor Rudolf II owed to his father from 1607. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), sign. S162/25, Inv. No.3280, box 2251, f. 78. Literature: Tom Sekyrka, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.14, p. 593.

Allerdurchleuchtigster grossmchtigster, unberwindlichster Rmischer Kayser, auch zue Hungarn und Bheim Knig, etc. Allergndigister Kayser Knig und Herr. Euer Kaiserliches und Knigliches Majestat kan ich hiemit untertnig ist nicht vorhalten, wie dass die Rmische Kaiserliche Majestat, auch zue Hungarn und Bheim Keiserliche Knigliche Maiestat Rudolphus der Ander, hochseligisten Angedenkens dero Kniglichen Bhmischen Cammer-Buchhaltern, weiland Cunrad Sskreta von Zavoritz, meinem lieben Vatern seeligen, wegen seiner Ihrer Majestt geleister getreue und ersprsslicher Dienste, noch in dem verstrichenen 1607 Jahr, am Montag nach sancti Procopii, aus Kaiserlichen Gnaden mit 1300 Schock meisnisch begnadet und selbige Summe Geldes mit dero Kaiserliche Assecuration versichert, dergestalt, da dieselbte aus allen Ihrer Maiestat als Knige zue Bheimb gebhren Rechten, es sei an Todflligkeiten, Contrabanden, Poenfllen oder Conscationen, welche sich etwan in deisem Knigreich Bheim und dessen incorporirten

Landen ereignen, Ihrer Maiestat rechtmessig zustendig sein, von ihme Cunraden Skreta oder dessen Erben und Nachkommen erffnet und angezeigt werden und noch niemands andern vergehen sein mchten, ihme Skreta, seinen Erben und Nachkommen, ohne Weigerung gefolget und gezahlet, inmittelst auch selbige Summa, solang sie nicht abgestattet wrde, von dato des Briefs jhrlichen mit 5 per cento verinteressirt werden solle. Inmaen solches berhrte Ihren Maiestat Assecuration, davon hiebey ein vidimirte Abschrift sambt deren glaubwrdigen transsumpt beyliegendt mit mehrern Zeigen thuet. Wann nun nach mehr berhrt meines Vatern Absterben gedachte kaiserliche Donation mir, als dessen eheleiblichen Sohn, erblicken Rechtens zuekommen, auf meine Vermg derselben bei Euer Majestt hiesigen Kniglichen Bhmischen Cammer vielfltig beschehene Anmeldung und gesuchte Bezahlung, aber mir immerzue zum Bescheid worden, daweilen ietziger Zeit keine Mittel vorhanden, ich anderst nicht befriediget werden knne, es sein dann,

dass ich selbsten etwan ein in obengezogener Assecuration begriffener Mittel erfragen und frbringen mchte. Diesemnach nehme zue Euer Kaiserliches und Knigliches Maiestat ich hiemit meine gehorsamste Zuucht und bitte alleruntertnigist Euer Kaiserliches und Knigliches Maiestat geruehen mir, als personae miserabili und der ich ausser dieser kaiserliche Gnad nach meinen Eltern, sonst kein anders Patrimonium zuegewarten, die Kaiserlichen und Kniglichen Gnad zu erzeigen und bey dero verordneten Herrn Praesident und Rten hiesiger Knigliche Cammer durch ein gemessenes Decret, die allergndigste Verordnung zutuen, damit, wan ich ins knftig etwan ein von denen in ofterserwehnten Kaiserlichen Assecuration begriffenen, Euer Maiestat rechtmessig gebhrenden Mitteln, es sei an Tdlichkeiten ab intestato, Contrabanden, Poenfllen oder Conscationen erkndigen, oder vor andern erffnen mchte, ich derselbten auch nach laut selbiger Assecuration wirklich geniessen mge und mir darinnen von niemanden, er seye wer der immer

wollte, keine Hinderung oder Vorgrif zuetuen verstattet, inmittelst auch zu meiner tglichen Unterhaltung aus langter Euer Maiestt Knigliche Cammer-Resstauchtsgefllen mir des Interesse bezahlet und gefolget werden solle. Solche Hohe Kaiserlich Gnad werde mit untertnigsten treuen gehorchsam zu bestimen ich die Zeit meines Lebens mich beeissen und tue hierber zu allergndigsten gehrigen Resolution mich untertnig ist befehlen. Actum Prag den 13. Januarii anno 1646. Euer Kaiserliche und Knigliche Maiestat alleruntertnigst gehorsambster Carl Screta mp TS
3 Also attached are other documents written in German. The rst document of 26 February 1646 informs that 184 three-scores and 32groschen were paid on the discharge of claims until 1615 and interest was thereafter paid up to the StGeorge holiday in 1617. It thus remains to pay 1115 three-scores, 27 groschen and 1 dinar, and the interest from St George 1617 to StGeorge 1646 in the amount of 1617 three-scores, 30groschen and 4 dinars, it is 2732 three-scores, 57 groschen and 5 dinars in total. The second, undated document contains the suggestion to negotiate a discount on the payment of interest with krta because the debt already exceeds the entire donated sum.

36

The New Town in Prague, summerautumn 1648

Karel krta (similarly as other Prague inhabitants) saved his property with the Zderaz Augustinians during the siege of Prague by the Swedish army. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archivy zruench klter (Archives of Abolished Monasteries), le Liber secundus seu Continuatio Annalium Excalceato-Augustiniani Nostri Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, ac Patroni Regni Bomiae, In Neo-Civitate Pragensi Supra Zderas Situati ab Anno Partae Salutis MDCXLII ad Annum usque MDCLXIII Complectens. [] AFratre Severino aSancta Anna Ordinis Eremit. Fratrum Discal. S.P.Augustini Sacerdote Professo (issued 1749), Inv. No. 2452, manuscript 11 (formerly 3480 b), f. 82 (record up to 1648). Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 47.

Porro ex numero eorum, qui rerum suarum incolumitati consulere volentes, in monasterium eas contulere, rati ibi quam optime tectas

fore (quod tamen nota Suecorum perda valde incertum reddebat) fuerunt Illustrissimus dominus Carolus comes Valtstein, Illustrissimus

dominus Baro Spulir, dominus Schebeschovsky, Don Florius, dominus Gezbenovsky, Christophorus Bek, dominus Screta praestans

pictor, dominus Visner, dominus Skrichovsky, dominus intervad. Dominus Casparus Knespelius etc. V

288 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

37

The Old Town in Prague, 27 June 1650

The beginning of the painters protest against the endangerment of the canopy above the guild St Lucas altarpiece in the church of Our Lady before Tn. Karel krta and the pre-eminent masters of guilds of both the Old and New Towns in Prague sign a lawsuit against the official Jan Pavel Dvorsk. Archiv Nrodn galerie vPraze (Archives of the National Gallery in Prague), fund Prask malsk bratrstva (Prague Painters Confraternities), le Kniha protokol praskho malskho cechu zlet 16001656 (The Book of Protocols of the Prague Painters Guild from between 1600 and 1656), Acquisition No. AA 1209, f. 127v128r. Literature: HALATA 1996, pp. 144145 (edition); PAOUT 1874, p. 814; KUCHYNKA 1915, pp. 2728; KUCHYNKA 1919, pp. 2122; NEUMANN 1974, pp. 115117; OUTRATA 1986, pp. 161162; RONK 1996, p. 105. RT

38

Prague, 28 June 1653

Karel krta informs the emperor that the interest from the debt of Emperor Rudolf II, totalling 1300 Meissen three-scores, was paid for the year of 1616 when also 184 three-scores, 32 groschen and 6 dinars were paid off on the capital, and there are thus 1111 three-scores, 27 groschen and 7 dinars left to cover. krta at the same time points out that Jan Spilka, burgher of the Old Town in Prague, was caught in the very act of violating the marriage bed and imprisoned. krta, as the creditor of the above-mentioned debt, applies for the paying of a penalty to be imposed on Spilka. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. S212/1, Inv. no. 870. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 47; Tom Sekyrka, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.23, p. 602.

Allergndigster Kayser, Knig und Herr, Herr demnach glorwrdigen Andenkens Rudolf der Ander, Rmischer Kayser, anno 1607 meinem Vater Conraden Skreta, der Kniglichen Bhmischen Cammer Buchhaltern vor seine nutzbare, treue Dienste zue Gnaden recompens benanntlich 1300 Schock meissnisch erteilt und solche Summa sub interesse vermg der Beilag A schriftlich versichert. Von Zeit aber dieser Gnadenversicherung bendet es sich, dass die Interesse bis vor das 1616. Jahr abgefhrt und zwar im selben Jahr auch auf das Capital 184 Schock, 32 Kreuzer, 6 Denarii von der Kniglichen

Bhmischen Cammer bezahlt worden, dass also noch 1111 Schock meissnisch, 27 Kreuzer, 1 Denarii mir als Erben meines Vaters schuldig verbleiben: Weilen dann gedachte Summa auf alle Euer Maiestat als Knigs in Bhmen zugehrige Rechten, Caduciteten, Contrabanten, Strafen oder Conscation, so etwa in diesem Knigreich vorgehen und sich begeben mchten und desselben Briefs ordentlicher Inhaber solche erstlich, ehe dass si von Euer Maiestat einem anderen vergeben weren, sich angebete, lauten tuet. Indem nun ietzt verwichener Tagen Johann Spilka, Burger der Alten Stadt Prag,

im Ehebruch ergriffen und von dem Gericht in Verhaft genomen, Euer Maiestat poenae pecuniariae obnoxius wird, welches vor mir kein anderer noch angebracht, auch von Euer Maiestat jemanden angeschaft worden. Als tue Euer Maiestat alleruntertnigst bitten, sie geruheten solche Geldstraf, so Euer Maiestat zu Handen von dem Recht ihme Reo mchte auferlegt werden, in Abbruch der vom 1616. Jahr verlosenen Interessen mir allergndigst Anweisen und bei der Kniglichen Bhmischen Cammer oder Euer Maiestat Richtern in der Alten Stadt Prag gegen gebrlicher Quitantz solche mir zu

erlegen, gtigst verordnen. Euer Maiestat mich in untertnigster Demut empfehlende etc. Euer Kayserlichen Mayestt gehorsambter Underthan Carl Skreta etc. Prag den 28. Junii anno 1653 etc. Der lblichen Kayserlichen Hofcamer mit freundlich dienstlicher Recomendation zuzuschicken. Ex Cancellariae Boemicae Aulicae, 3. julii anno 1653 V. Pachta mp. TS

39

The Old Town in Prague, 14 July 1653

Karel krta was appointed the superior of the Old Town and New Town joint guild of painters, glaziers and embroiderers. Archiv Nrodn galerie vPraze (Archives of the National Gallery in Prague), fund Prask malsk bratrstva (Prague Painters Confraternities), le Kniha protokol praskho malskho cechu zlet 16001656 (The Book of Protocols of the Prague Painters Guild from between 1600 and 1656), Acquisition No. AA 1209, f. 140v. Literature: HALATA 1996 (edition), p. 157. RT EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 289

40

Regensburg, 30 July 1653

Emperor Ferdinand III orders the Bohemian Chamber in Prague to provide him an advisory opinion as to Karel krtas request to the chamber to pay off the debt of 1300 Meissen three-scores of which 1119 three-scores are left to be paid while krta demands the latter amount to be covered from the money forfeited to the benet of the chamber from the penalty charged to the Old Town burgher, Jan Spilka. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le DKM (Bohemian Section of the Court Chamber) I, 1653, box 512. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Was gestalten und aus Ursachen bei der Rmischen Kaiser, auch zu Hungarn und Bhmen Kaiserliches Maiestt, unsern allergndigsten Herrn Carl Skreta gehorsamst suplicando einkomten geheten [?], das ihme in Abschlag der seinem Vatern seeligen, des gewesten Buchhaltern

bei der Bhmischen Camer-Buchalterei zur Gnaden ausgesetzten 1300 Schock meisnisch annoch ruckstendigen 1119 Schock meisnisch und dem pro rata davon verfallenen Interesse, das Johan Spilka, Burgern der Alten Stadt Prag, verwirkten Strafgelder uberlassen werden solten, das

ersehen die Herrn aus der Beilage mit mehren Ersuchen solchen noch dienstfreundlich hierbter uns ihr rtliches Gutbedenken unschwer zukomen lassen wollen [?] allerseits Gttlicher Obacht empfelend. Regensburg den 30. Julii 1653. TS

41

The Old Town in Prague, 30 September 1653

Karel krta is listed in the leading position as the superior of the painters guild in the Old Town in Prague during the restoration of the city council. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber renovationumKniha obnov (The Book of Restorations), 16301678, sign. 70, not foliated. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 33.

Star do podku malskho, sklenskho, krumplskho a ezbskho Karel krta Fabin Harovnk

Ji Lambek Nikodm ek Jan Ji Pentl inspektor pan Pavel Konstantin Fiala RT

42

The Old Town in Prague, 5 October 1653

The son of Karel krta, Vclav Bohumil, was baptized in the church of St Gallus. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of StGallus, le Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16521704, sign. HV N1, p.13. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 42 (edition); BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 10 (mistakenly stated as sons Vclav and Bohumil); NEUMANN 1974, p. 48; NEUMANN 2000, p. 130 (wrong date of baptism, 5 August).

Baptisat[us] e[st] infans nomine Wencesla[us] Deochar[us], parentu[m] Francisci [!] Skreta et

Veronicae, patrini Wencesla[us] Gesberovski, Dionysi[us] Miseron, dominus Antonius de Boosi,

Anna Miseronova, Maria Elisabetha Chinostinova. RT

290 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

43

The Old Town in Prague, November 1653

Karel krta requests payment of the amount charged to the Old Town burgher, Filip Vrba, by the Bohemian Chamber. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Komorn knihy (Chamber Books), Registry 1653, Book No. 448, f. 130v. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

November 1653, N[umer]o 56 Karel krta, Vrba pokuta Karel krta d, aby mu ta pokuta, kter na Filipovi Vrbovi pro

cizolon skutek pi prv Starho Msta praskho pisouzena bude, na porku praetens jeho vykzan byla. RT

44

s. l., 12 May 1654

Karel krta conrms to produce 5 barrels of wine per year at his vineyards near Mlnk. Sttn okresn archiv Mlnk (State Regional Archives of the City of Mlnk), Archiv msta Mlnk (Archives of the City of Mlnk), le Spisy (Records), 12 May 1654. Literature: KILIN 2011, pp. 161165. TS

45

The Old Town in Prague, 23 January 1657

Karel krtas daughter Veronika is baptized in the church of St Gallus. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16521704, sign. HV N1, p.69. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 17, 42 (edition); NEUMANN 1974, p. 48; NEUMANN 2000, p. 130.

Anno 1657 23. Januarius Baptizata est lia Veronica domini Caroli Szkreta et Veronicae, civium Veteropragensium, susceptoribus

Venceslao Jesberoski ex Monte Oliveti, vicescriba Regni Bohemiae et domina Veronica Mazankowa. RT

46

s. l., 20 June 1657

Karel krta informs the city council of Mlnk that he, after the death of his brother Jan, Doctor of Medicine, in Schaffhausen ascribes one third of the instalments of the claim which he has with the Mlnk city council, to the heirs of his brother. Sttn okresn archiv Mlnk (State Regional Archives of the City of Mlnk), Archiv msta Mlnk (Archives of the City of Mlnk), le Spisy (Records), 20 June 1657. Literature: KILIN 2011, pp. 161165. TS EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 291

47

Dresden (Germany), 1657

Karel krta, a councillor and an ironmaster were sent out to Dresden as a committee of experts in order to evaluate a metal crucix originating from the workshop of Hans Hillger which Emperor Leopold I planned to buy and donate for the Charles Bridge as it eventually occurred. Literature: Archive document was not more closely ascertained and not found; NEUMANN 1974, p. 47; SEKYRKA 2011, pp. 147152. RT

48

The Old Town in Prague, 6 July 1658

Karel krta is listed in the leading position among the representatives of the painters guild in the Old Town in Prague during the restoration of the city council. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber renovationumKniha obnov (The Book of Restorations), 16301678, sign. 70, not foliated. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 33.

Star mali, skleni, krumpli a ezbi Karel krta Fabin Harovnk

Ji Lambek Nikodm ek inspektor pan Fridrich Rap RT

49

The Old Town in Prague, 23 November 1658 3 March 1659

Karel krta bears witness in the dispute of Marie Albta Prukov against Daniel Jaromsk of Strohmberg. During the testimonies in 1658 and 1659, the painter concurrently states that he is 48 years old. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber testimoniorum albus, 16541660, sign. 1095, f. 73r89r, 94r115r. Literature: TIBITANZLOV 2011, pp. 153160.

Svdom ku poteb pan Marii Albt Prukov Pan Karel krta z Zvoic, mtnn Starho Msta praskho, v letech 48, po vykonan psaze svdil takto: ad 1. art[ikul]: pravda, e v ltu 1656 jsouce na Mlnce k sbrn vna, t i pan Jaromsk se tam vynachzel, a shledave se ped domem neb[otku] panu Davidovi Rafaelovi Prukovi Jeho Milosti csask rychti v mst Mlnce nleejcm, pan Jaromsk tu sm povdal,

e k panu Prukovi nebo[tkovi] ji jde, ponvad jemu vno sbrati zapovdl, jeho za proputn dati a abych s nm el nahoru k panu Prukovi. J pak nechtl, kouc, aby sm el a sv vci dil, neb jsem vdl, pro. e jak neb[otk] pravil, pro neplacen ouroku za nkolik let, co vinici dr, a e se strojil nkolikrte to uiniti. ad 4 co i neb[otk] pan Liduce, pedel manelce pana Pruka, jedenkrt, co jsem slyel, kdy se k n [Jaromsk] oulisn jml, ekla, nechte m pane

synku, vak slym, e se proti mn radte na dost pan vdovy [Prukov] jsme spolu li [as witnesses with Elias Pistorius] v ltu 1657 22. junii a to po poledni pan David Rafael Pruek ml pan Lidmilu, rozenou Cyrylovou z Konecchlumu, sestenici vlastn mou Pan vdova nepotebuje m, neb v, e m profes nen prvn vci diti, ne to, e pan vdova neumjc sti, mn nkter spisy po neb[otku] panu manelu jejm pozstal

k peten jich podala a kter k t pi nle, s ptelem svm se radila i v neptomnosti m v mstech praskch. jest tak, e potkajce pana Jana Wolfa na plcku u Matky Bo Snn, jemu sem pravil, e pan Jaromsk upomn vdovu a pi na ptomnosti pravil, e nic s neb[otkem] panem Prukem nem, ne vecko dobr, pravil pan Jan Wolf, e jest tomu tak, na to sem odpovdl, bojm se, e ns pan vdova k svdom poene, na to odpovdl, e tak pan von der Litten z dluhu po neb[otku]

292 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

jejm Nydrumovi pi komornm soudu upomnal, ona vak t auszug, e v ezn kupci jednomu z naen pana Jaromskho od jejho pedelho pna zaplacen jest, vynala, a on e co slyel, e svditi bude Pan Jan Wolf, mtnn Starho Msta praskho pi Jeho Milosti csask krlovsk komoe esk koncipista, v letech 40, po vykonan psaze svdil takto. o tom vm, e kdy pan Jaromsk s neb[otkem] panem Prukem v pin zpovdi sbrn vna zaal mluviti, pan krta pre do komory el a potom kdy pestali, zae vyel a ekl, srovnali jste se it[em] jednoho asu na rynku staromstskm, jak se dobe pamatuji, k panu krtovi jsem pravil, pan Jaromsk chce dditi. Herr Elias Pistorius, Burger der Knig[lichen] Neuen Stadt Prag, seiner Alters umb 40 Jahr, nach geleisteten gewhnlichen Zeugenayd, weil er der bhmischen Sprach nit kundig, hat in der Tetschen, auf die ihme in judicio transferirte articulos positionales und interrogatoria augesaget wie folget. Ist wahr, da in vergangenen 1657 Jahre Zeg mit dem Herrn Skreta von der Frau Maria Elisabeth Prusskin erbeten worden, da sie zue dem Herrn Han Bernhart mit iemander gehen und ihr befragen, ob er davon einige Wiesenschaft habe, wa Herr Daniel Jaromirzsky hin und

her, unter den Lethen redet und austreet herr Skreta hat den Herrn Han Bernhard zue dem Herrn Jaromirzsky zue schieken darumb gebeten, damit er Jaromirzsky solche Wrter und bele nachreden lieber unterwegen laen mchte. Ob aber Herr Skreta zue solche begehren von der Frau Prusskin erbeten worden sey oder nit; solchen weys Zeug nit. Wa Herr Jaromirzsky fr Reden habe sollen unterwegen laen, ist damahls von Herrn Skreta nichts speciciret [3 March 1659] Pan Karel krta, mtnn Starho Msta praskho, v letech 48: jako jest urozen pan Daniel Jaromsk z Stromberku m ze spod podepsanch, abych jemu jist svdom k t rozepi, kterou na mst a k ruce Anny manelky sv, t Daniele mda z Miltenberku, ddictv po otci jejich neb[otku] Kundratovi mdovi pozstalho se dotkajc, na jist artikule dal a ezanou ceduli ji dti 6. feb[ruarii] 1659 odslati dal, tak inm a tuto odpov a svdom dvm. Pedn to mn povdomo jest, e neb[otk] pan Kundrat md dn mrha, neb opilec neb hr nebyl, jak vak v handli svm stl, neb dluen-li byl, to mn povdomo nen a jak jest ped vyplundrovnm v svch handlch byl, po vyplundrovn vak, kter po slavnm vtzstv na Bl Hoe bylo, to sem slchal, e vecken krm od zbo vyprzdnn, jako i nahoe v komorch vydrancovno a pobrno, na fasuky naldovno

bylo, ano i etzek, kter neb[oka] Liduka mdov na krku mla a jej na kamna pro zachovn jeho vyhodila, nalezen a vzat byl, jako i jedno prostradlo, kter tehd vyvala, vzala a feldzech z nho nadlajc, ty terci vzali, in summa vecko, tak e neb[oka] nemajc se do eho oblcti, sestra m Anka jak sukn, kabtku, mantlku j pjiti musela, aby z domu vyjti mohla. mate pan Ludmily z Konecchlumu mon ena byla a svj krm oteven s materilnmi vcmi a barvami u T mezk a dm ten, v kterm nyn pn z Rozkoe bydl, mla. Pravda jest, e v ltu 1638 neb[oka] pan Lidmila Prukov jeden halsband mn ukazovala t halsband po neb[oce] pan Prukov zstal, jest tomu tak, vak zastaven a nyn v mch rukou zstv Pravda jest, e jsem panu Prukovi kval, aby pana Jaromskho obeslati dal, aby bu ukzal, co na nm mti sob pokld, anebo aby mu pokoj dal a mezi lidmi ho nepomlouval, e by mu bylo od vrchnosti porueno, odpovdal a jemu etc. sem dluen, co se mm pvodem dlati mal, co proti mn, nech toho vyhledv, jak nle, ten lh, partyt etc., e on tu mou Liduku k pli pivede, kdy chce, kval, t medle nevnate jich k sob, vak jsou falen.

Pravda, e tu knihu sem sob pjenou ml, vak nepamatuji, zdali sem ji zae vrtil, neb ji mezi svmi knihami nemm. Mohla by stti za pl tolaru, neb byla star ndrlandsk historie s kuprtyky nktermi na nic, e bych je darmo nevzal. Pipomnal pan Daniel Jaromsk o tu knihu, t odpov sv sem mu dal: a chtj-li ji mti, nech ji vynajdou takovou, zaplatm jim ji. kdy jsem se dol [do Mlnka] plavil pro nebezpenost, tehdy jsouce neb[otk] pan Pruek nemocn, jsem doktora sebou vzal, vysvditi me v pravd iv plavec Moudr jmnem, ani jsem co od vody vyneti pomhal, aneb jinho sebou vezl. [about the journey to Mlnk] Jako sm oit jsem vidl, pijedouce tam v ltu 1638 k velk noci, e tu dnho nedostatku nebylo, mn tak [Pruek] na pivtn prsten s turkusem daroval a tomu oba manel chtli, abych pi nich zstal, e ji v letech jsou a dti e nemaj, kterm by co nechati mli, mn tak k poteb m sto kop pjili, kter jsem zas toho roku, dostave od obce est sud vna, tyrmi sudy zaplatil. pravda jest, e pan mate neb[oky] pan Lidmily Prukov nuzn nebyla a a do smrti z hotovho iva byla, e z zem pro nboenstv vyla, v Torgav, potom v Lipsku iva byla, take veho neprotravila RT

50

Prague, 23 May 1659

Karel krta informs the Bohemian Chamber about a house in Mlnk being unlawfully used by the imperial magistrate, and seeks the rendition of the house from the emperor as an instalment of the 1300 Meissen three-scores, donated by Emperor Rudolf II to krtas father. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), sign. S162/24, Inv. No.3280, box 2251, f. 16 and 19. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 47.

Milostiv pni pni, jakou milostivou dekratac jste rili na m ponen 13. tohoto msce mji pednesen a ohlen

poruiti uiniti, pro pipomenut vejpis takov pikldm, ponen a poslun dkujce, tuto zprvu dvm. e v mst Mlnce nad Labem

vynachz se jeden dm, kter od dritelv vlastnch bu pro nboentv, neb jinou pinu oputn, take dritelov pedel ani jejich

ddicov, co mn toliko povdom jest, pes 20 let dn se k tmu domu neohlauje. Z toho nsleduje, e se dn vce, kter by ddin

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 293

na nm co vyhledvati ml, nevynachz, a tak prvem odoumrtnm na Jeho Milost csaskou jakoto krle eskho a pna zem, pipad. Ped 20 lety vak jsouce nynj Jeho Milosti csask pan rycht Jakub Hamacyus purkmistrovskm sluebnkem, jest t dm k obyvu od kohokoliv z ouadu jemu propjen, vak dokonale knhami mstskmi, neb njakm kontraktem, neb za kou smnu, nen postoupen, v kterm a posavad nadepsan Jeho Milosti csask pan rycht pebv

a jej zaplacen, ani prvn postoupen od dnho nem. I ponvad t dm od pravch dritelv oputn a v tolika ltech dn z nich neb ddic jich se na nj nept a nepotahuje, nsleduje, e dn vceji, kter by ddin k nmu nleel, se nevynachz, a Jeho Milosti csask pan rycht jej sob prvn od dnho postoupen nem, take vlastn prvem odoumrtnm Jeho Milosti csask pipad a slavn komora esk o takovm nic vdti nemohla, mnji komu zadala. Proe Vaich Milost

ponen dm, e to pi panu purkmistru a rad tho msta Mlnka, aby oni ten jmenovan dm skrze emeslnky shldnouti a proacovati dali a Jeho Milosti csask pana rychte aby z uvn tak vedle uznn prv byl, k tomu pidreli, milostiv nadili a takov dm, za by oznn, i v tolika letech uvn, mn vedle milostivho zakzn na porku tto piloen praetenci m, uti popti milostiv rte. V em se Vaem Milostem k skutenmu nazen poruena inm a zstvm.

Vaich Milost ponen poslun Karel krta [on the tergo:] Sernetur a zprva od ouadu mlnickho pijde. [Attached is the copy of the Emperor Rudolf IIs donation to Kundrat krta in the amount of 1300 three-scores, dated 10 July 1607.] TS

51

The Old Town in Prague, 13 June 1659

The son of Karel krta, Antonn, was baptized in the church of St Gallus. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16521704, sign. HV N1, p.95. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 42 (edition); BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 10; NEUMANN 1974, p. 48; NEUMANN 2000, p. 130.

Anno 1659 13. junii Baptizat[us] est Antoni[us] Caroli Skretae et Veronicae lius legitim[us], patrini dominus

Antoni[us] de Bossi, Antoni[us] Stephan[us] Steinschneider [!], Anna Klobizowa. RT

52

s. l., 25 June 1659

Karel krta reminds the city council of Mlnk to pay off the debt in the amount of 100 groschen which he lent to the city in 1653. Sttn okresn archiv Mlnk (State Regional Archives of the City of Mlnk), Archiv msta Mlnk (Archives of the City of Mlnk), le Spisy (Records), 25 June 1659. Literature: KILIN 2011, pp. 161165. TS

53

(Prague), (before 2 September 1659)

Karel krta repeats his previous request of 23 May 1659, addressed to the Bohemian Chamber in the matter of the house in Mlnk being unlawfully used by a local imperial magistrate. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. S162/24, Inv. No.3280, box 2251, f. 20, 21. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Milostiv pni pni, jistou zprvu mm, e pan purkmistr a konel msta Mlnka nad

Labem v pin domu, v nm Jeho Milosti csask rycht pebv a na Jeho Milost csae pipadlho, mn

vak od Vaich Milost na porku m praetens milostiv jminulho 15. mai zakzanho, jednu i druhou

294 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

zprvu Vaim Milostem jsou dali. Ponvad se jinak nenadji, ne e tak a nejina, jak jsem tu vc 23. mai lta tohoto pednesl a se vynachz. Proe Vaich Milost

ponen prosm, e tu vc sob pednsti dal a milostiv resolvrovati rte. V em se Vaem Milostem ponen a poslun poroum

a zstvm Vaich Milost ponen poslun Karel krta TS

54

The Old Town in Prague, 23 September 1659

Karel krta is a witness at the wedding of Daniel Wussin in the church of St Stephen in the New Town in Prague. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Stephen, le Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16411663, sign. T O1, f. 81v. Literature: PODLAHA 1916, p. 256.

Potvrzen svatho manelstv Poctiv mldenec Danihel Wusin, rodil z Kraczu a tajermarku s poctivou pannou Kateinou, pozstalou dcerou po nebotkovi panu Baltazarovi Putlerovi, m[anu] Novho Msta praskho. V ptomnosti

pana druby Felixa Krape, pana Karla krty, mana Starho Mana praskho, pana Matye Webnera, mtnna Menho Msta praskho, pana Jana Jiho Benera, mtnna Menho Msta praskho, urozen panny Anny Dobick,

m[anky] Novho Msta praskho, urozen panny Kateiny Wejvarovsk, m[anky] Novho Msta praskho. RT

55

s. l., 9 November 1659

Karel krta repeatedly reminds the city council of Mlnk to pay off the debt to him in the amount of 100 three-scores of groschen which he lent to the city in 1653. Sttn okresn archiv Mlnk (State Regional Archives of the City of Mlnk), Archiv msta Mlnk (Archives of the City of Mlnk), le Spisy (Records), 9 November 1659. Literature: KILIN 2011, pp. 161165. TS

56

(Prague), 16 September 1660

Karel krta warns the Bohemian Chamber that the list of creditors of the city of Mlnk, addressed to the Imperial Office in 1653, mistakenly omits the creditor Kristin Uzlar whose debts were to be passed on the ruler. The Mlnk officials thus concealed a debt in the amount of 9500 three-scores. krta requests a reinvestigation of the matter and informs the Chamber that he would seek the reimbursement of his claim. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. S212/1, box 870. Literature: Tom Sekyrka, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.23, p. 602.

Milostiv pni pni, e jste rili m pedneen milostivou resoluc dekretrovati, e pokud dotknut prostedek extraordinrn

a krlovsk komoe nepovdom a a posavad nedan jest, e odtud dnho na praetensi svou vkazu uti mm ex consilio Camerae Bohemiae

13. septembris anno 1660, zaco Vae Excelence a Milostem poslun dkuji. Prostedky pak tyto jsou a fundament, e na Jeho Milost

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 295

csaskou prvem pokutnm pichz, takov jest, e pan p[urkmistr] a pni msta Mlnka nad Labem v ltu 1653 dadouce na kancel Jeho Milosti csask na Hrad praskm poznamenn dluh svch od obce rozdlnm lidem povinnch, mezi jinmi viteli vypustili Krystiana Uslara jako podobnm zpsobem nyn pi comissi tractationis mezi msty a viteli jejich tot se stalo, ani jeho vitele svho aneb ddice jeho skrze psan jako jin vitele k t komisi necitovali, ani on Krystian Uslar neb ddicov jak pi Jeho Milosti csask kanceli, tak tak pi comissi tractationis se neohlsil a neohlsili. Oni pak pni mlnit takov dluh zamleli z t piny, e t Krystian Uslar pi vpdu kurrsta saskho, byvi na Mlnce, e domy spoliroval, za mnoho tisc jak vna, tak jinch vc z msta vyvezl, k csaskmu obrazu a erbu stlel a sob nenleit ponal a vedl, jeho pni mlnit proto kondemnruj a sumu jemu povinnou sob pivlastuj. On pak z druh strany ex diffidentia causae se ostchal

kdy ohlaovati a jich upomnati. I jestli jest on Krystian Uslar pro sv delictum zbaven sv praetensi zaslouil, to ne na debitorovi jeho, ne na Jeho Milost csaskou pipad. A e tomu tak jest (bez dn Va Excelenci a Milostem jak vymen) rate moci pkr poruen o zprvu k Jeho Milosti csask rychti Jakubovi Hamaciusovi a panu purkmistru a rad na Vai Excellenci Milosti pravdiv zpravili poruiti uiniti. Praetensi pak tho Uslara jsou tyto: Nov Msto Prask 1000 kop gro o sv. Ji 1610 Nov Msto Prask 1000 kop gro. o sv. Ji 1612 Nov Msto Prask 500 kop gro Jubilate 1618 Nov Msto Prask 1000 kop gro sv. Havla 1618 Nov Msto Prask 350 kop gro sv. Jilj 1620 Nov Msto Prask 2000 kop gro sv. Havla 1618 esk Brod 1000 kop gro 3. junii 1622

Mlnk 700 kop gro sv. Ji 1622 Mlnk 1000 kop gro Nov lto 1621 Mlnk 200 kop gro sv. Ji 1614 Mlnk 500 kop gro sv. Ji 1610 Zdu Mlnk na vyplacen dvora 300 kop gro 1613 9550 kop gro Ouroku na tu sumu se kvitancmi vitel svch likvidrovati nebudou moci. Co by pak z tchto prostedk na zaplacen praetensi sv sob vybrati ml, o tom dleji se vyjeviti nepominu. S tm se Vaim Excellencm a Milostem poroum. Va Excelenci a Milosti hotov poslun Karel krta mp. Praes[entum] 16. septem[bri] 1660 Jeho Milosti Csask etc. Jeho Excelenci panu panu presidentu a pnm pnm radm zzen komory v Krlovstv eskm, pnm pnm mn milostivm poslun ohlen

[on the tergo:] Suplikujcmu oznmiti, ponvad jest nkdy Eva Uzlarov nade vm a velijakm statkem svm mohovitm i nemohovitm t asu sv lta 1628 emigraci nkdy pana Filipa Fabriciusa z Hohenfeld za plnomocnka, tak jak se toho zprva in, zdila, tehdy e krlovsk komora esk vidti neme, vedle eho by ty od obce mlnick zapsan posty, a na osobu jej veden, prvem sklnm acrovan bti mly. Ex cons[ilio] Cam[erae] Boh[emiae] Pragae 26. augusti 1661. Vyhledati spisy strany pozstalosti Uslarovsk. TS

57

(Prague), 4 October 1660

The response of Michael Gabriel Matthaeides of Sonnenstral, an official of the Old Town in Prague, to the reproval to his work between 1653 and 1655, concerning the collection of charges of wine imported to Prague for tapping. Archiv Nrodnho muzea (National Museum Archives), Sbrka (Collection) F, Inv. No. 169, Old Town in Prague, le vci obecn isoukrom (Community and Private Matters), 16451670, box 132. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Replika proti odpovdi pan Rosiny Ludomilly Wernerov, kterou jest ona na nedostatky z potv obecnch nebotka pana Balthazara Bernarda Wernera starho z Beyerspergu pana manela svho, a to za lta 1653, 1654 a 1655 sloila

purkmistrskho vyn z pot lta 1653 u pjmu Art. 3 dle opench register ouednch proputno k enku 31. dito [jna] panu Karlovi krtovi vna mlnickho 12 [vder] 9. novembris panu Karlovi krtovi vna mlnickho 6 [vder] Z kadho <sudu> vdra po 21 krejcarech, 2 denrech potajc, vyn cla na penzch 201 zlatch, 14 krejcar, 4 denry. Z pot lta 1654

U pjmu 31. dito [decembris] od pana krty z 104 vder vna eskho k enku proputnho 36 zlatch, 58 kejcar, 4 denry. Actum v puchhalteriji Starho Msta praskho 4. octobris anno 1660. Michael Gabriel Matthaeides z Sonnenstralu TS
4 Hogshead old Bohemian measure of capacity, 1 hogshead = 56.6 litres. Twelve hogsheads is thus 679.2 litres. 5 Six hogsheads are 339.6 litres.

1653 1654 a 1655 Dal nedostatkov, kte se tak pi konfrontrovn register obecnch proti registrm vinnm ouadu Jeho Milosti csask

296 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

58

The Old Town in Prague, 14 October 1660

Karel krta gives evidence in favour of Ji Adalbert Pruina of Marpach in the dispute of the latter with Kateina Emlie eick, born Florinov of Lambtejn, for the inheritance from Silvestr Florin of Lambtejn. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber testimoniorum 27, 16581664, sign. 1076, f. 210v230v. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 111; TIBITANZLOV 2011, pp. 153160.

Svdom ku poteb pana Jika Adalberta Pruiny z Marpachu, mtnna Starho Msta pra[skho] proti pan Katein Emilii eick, rozen Florinov z Lambtejna, t mtnnce Starho Msta pra[skho], kde initi jest, v pin odporu kaftu neb[otka] pana Silvestra Florina z Lambtejna pi prv tohoto Starho Msta praskho registry veden. 14. octob[ri] a[nno] 1660 Testis 3, pan Karel krta otnovsk z Zvoic, mtnn Starho Msta praskho na artikule positio pana Jiho Adalberta Pruiny z Marpachu examinovn, svdil takto: Ad 19, 20 nen mn povdom jine, ne e neb[oka] Vorila Florinov ntco po rodich svch

a ptelch, dm pak ten na merhov een po strejci mm Jikovi krtovi, manelu jejm, spolenm zadnm zddila. 27 to od neboky sem slyel, e kdy se pro nboenstv ven strojila, tehdy e dm merhovsk Jeho Milosti csask panu hrabti z Valdtejna postoupila, dle nevm. [as concerns Silvestr Florian of Lambtejn] 31 pravil mn sm jedenkrt, e kad den na dukt pichz. 32 nevm, co zachoval a pro nezachoval, ovem kdyby spoil, byl by zachoval. 33 nkdy sem bejval a skleniku vna s nm vypil, i tak za m penze. 34 nevm, ne e rd lidi vidl a s nimi posedl. Blzkost jest takov, e neboka

manelka jeho, sestra vlastn pan Kateiny, pola od matee, kter strejce mho krevnho za manela mla ped otcem manelky jeho, pravda jest. To jest povdom, e mnoho let v slub nebotka pana nejvyho purkrab Adama z Valdtejna za sekrete byl a potom vrchnm psaem pi ouad nej[vyho] purkrab[stv] praskho, co platu ml, nevm, ne vrchnm psaem jsouce, mn jedenkrte pravil, e pijde na dukt za den ml rd lidi u sebe, jako sem sm nkdy skleniku vna s nm vypil, utratil-li svou slubu, nevm. RT

59

(Prague), 1 August 1661

The Bohemian Court Chamber reminds Countess Dorotte Ryvarov in the matter of paying off the debt to the benet of Karel krta. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. R 56/1, box 745. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

[office note:] Spokojen v dluhu Karla krty za malovn pochzejc Pan Dorot Frantice hrabnce Ryvarov V pamti sneti budete, kterak jsme <ji> jmnem a na mst Jeho Milosti csask krle a pna nm vem nejmilostivjho pi vs to, abyste Karla krtu v jistm jemu za prci jeho povinnm dluhu spokojiti, anebo, pokud byste co proti dosti jeho mli, nm odpov vai co nejdve odeslati hledli, dostaten neuinili. I ponvad, jak

z pleitho suplikujcho spisu porozumvme, tomu se od vs a posavad zadosti nestalo, proto tm jmnem a na mst Jeho Milosti csask jet jednou a ji nakonec vm poroume, abyste <?> dle pedelho nazen naeho skuten zachovati a dotenho krtu v tom od nho praetendirovanm dluhu bez velijakch dalch odkladv spokojiti a ns tm vce zbyten zaneti nedopoutli. <Aneb jestli> Pakli byste proti tomu co podstatnho za obranu mli, tehdy nm tou odpov vai s navrcenm tch vm v t pin komunicrovanch spisv na Jeho Milosti csaskou kancel

eskou co nejdve odeslati <hledieli> nepomjeli. Dn 8. augusti 1661. TS

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 297

60

The Old Town in Prague, 1661

The dispute of the painters guild, concerning the disposal of the canopy of the St Lucas altarpiece in the church of Our Lady before Tn. Archiv Nrodn galerie vPraze (Archives of the National Gallery in Prague), fund Prask malsk bratrstva (Prague Painters Confraternities), le Akta ocechovnm olti sv.Luke vTnskm chrmu (Files on the Guild Altarpiece of St Lucas in the Tn church), 16501779, Acquisition No. AA 1220. Literature: PAOUT 1874, p. 814; KUCHYNKA 1915, pp. 2728; KUCHYNKA 1919, pp. 2122; NEUMANN 1974, pp. 115117; OUTRATA 1986, pp. 161162; RONK 1996, p. 105; Radka Tibitanzlov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.22, p. 601.

Urozen a staten vladyky, slovutn a mnohovzctn poctivosti Vae Milosti pane purkmiste a pni radn, pni nm laskav nchyln, jako jste po peten od Jich Excel[enc] a Milost krlovskch pnv mstodrcch v Krlovstv tomto eskm na poruen vzneen a dost v pin neboen olte naeho v kostele Blahoslaven Panny Marie Matky Bo ped Tejnem a staroitnho staven nebolito portlu nad tm oltem se nachzejcho a nm spojenho, Jich Excel[ence] a Milosti od ns 5. aprilis lta ptomnho podanou k Va Milosti pod datum 25. tho msce prol dekretac pi ns to, abychme Va Milosti dostatenou zprvu nai a podstatu prva k tmu olti majcho pednsti hledli, naditi rili. Vedle takovho Va Milosti nazen v nleit etrn uctivosti tak inme a (vak z ohledu toho, e podek n ve vech tchto slavnch tech mstech praskch od starodvna v jedn spojen zstv, prva a interese pana p[urkmistra] a pn Novho a Menho mst praskch, jak dalece by to vzctnm ouadm tch mst tu pslueti mohlo, v nitem neumenujce) Va Milosti tuto gruntovn a pravdivou zprvu nai pednme, toti, e majce sob od slavnch a svatch pamt csav mskch a krlv eskch pedkov nai podkv umn malskho a emesel sklenskho, krumplskho a jinch k nim pivtlench na t vej pipomenut olt rozlin milostiv obdarovn a privilegia dan a potvrzen, tho olte jsou s dotenm jeho psluenstvm od starch a dvnch vkv jak t pedkov nai, tak i my po nich a dosavad vdycky a beze v pekky (jak Va Milosti samm i sice vbec to dobe znmo a vdomo jest) v takovm prv dren a uvn tho olte k slubm bom zstvali. eho pro tm lep

dotvrzen Va Milosti pleit in forma probante pedkldme sub n[umero] 1 extrakt z konrmac privilegi od slavn pamti Jeho Milosti csask a krlovsk Ferdinanda I. v ltu 1562 a tak tm ji ped 100 lety tm pedkm naim udlen, v kterto konrmaci Jeho Milosti csask patrn dokldati a vysvdovati r, e jsou ji tehd doten pedkov nai mali ze vech tech mst praskch olt u Matky Bo ped Tejnem v Starm Mst praskm mli a toho NB podle privilegium jim danho spolen uvali, pikazujce, aby pi tm olti, jakoto NB od starodvna bejvalo, na budouc asy neporuitedln zachovan byli. It[em] sub n[umero] 2 podobn extrakt listu od Jeho Milosti csask Rudolfa toho jmna druhho mskho csae, kde Jeho Milosti csask potvrzujce tolik milostiv tm pedkm naim vechna privilegia a obdarovn jich na te dotenou konrmaci Jeho Milosti csask Ferdinanda I. se potahovati a dleji pitom i to, e jsou ji open pedkov nai od slavn pamti krle Ludvka na t olt obdarovn sob udlen mli a t Jeho Milost csa Ferdinand I. jim tho listu a obdarovn krle Ludvka e jest potvrditi ril, patrn dokldati a vysvdovati r. List pak tho Jeho Milosti krle Ludvka te sub n[umero] 3 piloen de dato v stedu velikonon lta 1523, kter sice jin privilegia dotenho podku naeho potvrzuje, ukazuje zase na jin starodvn listy a obdarovn, kte nm od pedkv tho Jeho Milost krle Ludvka dan byly, vysvdujce, e jest obzvltn Jeho Milost csa Karel t podek s vlastnmi milostmi a svobodami obdarovati ril a e jsou pedkov nai takov obdarovn tehd ji NB od starodvna mli. Kterto tak starobyl prvo nae k tmu olti dleji

jet tak netoliko pleejc extrakt sub n[umero] 4 du a artikulv od Va Milosti vzctnch pekv [!] pana purkmistra a pn Starho a Menho mst praskch tmu podku naemu v ltu 1598 vydanch, v kterch opty to patrn doloeno se nachz, e jsou podobn ji tehdejho asu takovou milost a obdarovn na t olt majce tehdej pedkov nai od pedkv svejch a do tho asu z milosti bo dochovanou mli, tm vceji utvrzuje, albr tak m by tak t pedkov nai proti vykonvn pi tm olti slueb boch na den pamtky sv. Luke patrona naeho panu fari, kovstvu, varhanku a zvonkovi povinni bti mli, to zetedln vymuje. Nemn ukazuj patrn asto doten prvo k tmu olti podku naemu nleejc erbov a ttov podku naeho, toti umn malskho, t emesle sklenskho, zlatotepeckho a krumplskho na portlu nebolito klenut nad tm oltem a staven pi nm se nachzejc, kteto erbov a ttov ne teprv nynjch asv na tm portlu postaveni jsou, albr od starodvna se na nm nachzej, jako pak i npis okolo tho staven a olte pi obnoven jeho (kter podobn ne pokoutn, albr zejm a zjevn v ltu dvno jminulm 1604 uinno jest) titul tho olte a e ten ke cti a chvle Kristu Pnu a sv. Luki a pospolu 3 evangelist Pn (nikoliv vak ke cti njakho Rokycanskho a e by k statuae na tm staven bti mly, jak by k okliven naemu pi vrchnosti milostiv takov pina zboen tho portlu nedvodn pedstran bti chtla, an kdyby toho poteba ukazovala, i to by se, e t Rokycansk ne pi tm naem olti, ale kde jinde poloen byl, vynajti mohlo) tak jak se nachz, vyzdvien a poslzeji znovu ozdoben jest zlatmi literami,

napsan vyjevuje a ukazuje. Jako pak pro tm patrnj spaten toho veho abris tho staven te sub n[umero] 5 se pikld. A k tomu pistupuje dleji i to, e by ve v ltu jminulm 1621 od Jeho Milosti csask slavn a svat pamti csae Ferdinanda II. jist pni komisai k reformrovn tho kostela Matky Bo ped Tejnem a co by tak v nm proti svat a samospasitedln ve msk katolick se nachzelo, toho k zruen a vyvren nazeni, akoliv t komis tak horliv a psn konan byla a zen byla, a i nkter vci na milostiv Jeho Milosti csask poruen zase v sv msta postaven bti musely, vak nenalezeve t pni komisai pi tm olti naem a portlu jeho nic takovho, co by proti du a crkve svat katolick elilo, toho jsou v sv podstat a zpsobu zanechali, co by sice jine nikoliv pominuto nebylo. Ani tak me od koho rozumnho a antiquitatuum nebolito staroitnch vc a pamtek milovnka eeno bti, e by t olt a staven nad nm a okolo nho se nachzejc k jak ohyzd byl, neb tot staven vlastn starobyl pamtka jest a takov antiquitates bez toho v chrmch Pn piln pozorovan a pohledvan bvaj, neb tehd kdy to staven bylo, takov zpsob architektury se zachovval a uval a to se architektura gothica jmenuje, kter trvala nkolik set let a do architekt[ury] Michaelis Angeli Bonarote, kter poslzeji zase pravou a za starch man uvanou architekturu grecam vyzdvihl a t se od toho asu a posavad uv. Mnohem pak mnji me eeno bti, e by t staven v cest na pekku aneb k jakmu zastnn bylo, neb toho nieho se nenachz. e pak t olt n v zpsobu s jinmi olti v tm chrm Pn se nesrovnv a jakoto n tak by se skvti

298 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

ml, v tom nm vina pitna bti neme, neb chtjce my ped nktermi lety podek n v as tch trvajcch vojenskch asv velmi sklesl zase vyzdvihnouti a v d uvsti, kde by ve pedevm o to, co by k vtmu vzdln, cti a chvle Bo t pobonosti nleelo, jednno a kdo by co k tmu olti naemu pro okrlen jeho uiniti ml, rozvreno, ntco tak ji zhotoveno. Tu v to takov pekka pila, e jsou ezbi z dobrho du vykraujce statutis od Va Milosti nm vydanch poddan bti nechtli, Va Milosti proti nm spisy podali, z eho potom formln soud poel a ten na est let trvajce, na apelaci Jeho Milosti csask ji od 3 lta zstval. Nyn pak na publikovn konrmac neb reformac Va Milosti vejpovdi pozstv, take ty prostedky, kter na doten olt n obrcen bti mly, na dvoj soud s tmi ezbi, jak pi prv tohoto Starho, tak podobn Menho Msta praskho vynaloen bti musely a vyly. Nicmn vak sluby Bo pi tm olti naem od starodvna vystaven a nazen, jak prve za as pedelch, tak i pod tm trvajcm soudem, bez umenen se konaj, ku kterm od ns pni fari kovstvu, varhanku a zvonkovi netoliko to, co dle znn vej alegrovanch statut a artikulv od Va Milosti nm danch vymeno jest, ale mnohem vceji kadoron dvati a platiti se pichz, jak z pleejcho poznamenn toho sub n[umero] 6 to spatiti rte. A ponvad pak z toho ze

veho ten nevyvratitedln gruntovn dvod nsleduje, e prvo k asto pipomenutmu olti od slavn a svat pamti csae Karla pochzejc pi starodvnm podku naem ji takm ti sta let trv a t podek n jak tho prva, tak i dotenho olte ve vem tom zpsobu, jak se a posavad nachz, bez petren, t bez velijak pekky vdy stal, v pokojnm dren a uvn a do asu ptomnho zstv a pitom nic takovho, co by proti ve svatomsk katolick eliti, neb ku pohoren, ohyzd, aneb jak pekce tho chrmu Pn bti mlo a to k nprav pivedeno bti nemohlo, se nevynachz. V vej alegrovanch privilejch naich tak od Jich csaskch a krlovskch Milost jak pi vech vrchnostech a pnch, obyvatelch Krlovstv tohoto generaliter to, abychme pi takovch obdarovnch a asto openm olti naem nepromnitedln zachovan byli, nazeno jest, ale tak rozlin instrukc od Jeho Milosti csask a krlovsk Va Milosti dan, kter v sob obsahuj, e Va Milosti nad cechy, emesly a podky ruku dreti a v em by kter podek jakou stnost ml a na Vai Milost to vznesl, v tom je, aby Jeho Milosti csask o to zaneprazdovn bti neril, nleit opatrovati pslu, ano i prva mstsk Krlovstv tohoto cestu a outoit pi Va Milosti k pohledvn nm ukazuj a vystavuj. Proe spolhajce se my v ppadnosti tto na vej piloen posavad pevn a neporuitedln

nadn a milosti od Jich Mi[lost] csav mskch a krlv eskch podku naemu udlen a pi nich od tak dvnch let milostiv zanechan z obzvltnho uven toho, e se pi ns dn proheen, neb provinn, pro kter by takov prvo nae starodvn nm odato bti mohlo, nenachz, e vdy dle pi tom vem neporuitedln zanechni a pichrnni budeme a na koliv pi vrchnosti milostiv zvltnho snad toliko oblben a dosti s nedvodnm oklivenm ns toho pohledvn, nm to mocn a bezprvn odato nebude, v t pevn a neomyln nadji zstvme. A tak pikldajce k tomu tolik Va Milosti jakoto pedstaven vrchnosti manv k nm a spravedlnosti majc nchylnost a lsku, s tou dvrnost a ujitnm Va Milosti ve v etrn uctivosti prosme, e zprvou svou v t pin Jich Excel[encm] a Milostem krlovskm pnm mstodrcm uinnou za ns v tom, aby takov antiquitas a nkladn staven asto jmenovan olt n tak, jak od starodvna a posavad zstval, dleji vdy na budouc asy v sv celosti zanechn a my, t budouc potomci nai, pi prv a pokojnm dren jeho bez pekky jednoho kadho lovka zstaveni a zachovni byli, platn se pimlouvati, i tak dle k laskav a pevn ochran sob ns poruen mti rte. V em se Va Milosti porouejce zstvme. Va Milosti etrn poslun star podku umn malskho, emesla

sklenskho, krumplskho a jin k nmu pivtlen spolen. [on the reverse]: Prae[sentum] 28. junii a[nno] 1661 Urozenm a statenm vladykm, slovutn a mnohovzctn poctivosti panu purkmistru a pnm radnm tohoto slavnho Starho Msta praskho, pnm k nm laskav nchylnm etrn zprva. Nr. 5: Grunt portlu neb tabernaculi, pod ktermi olt jest A olt neb kmen oltn B pil, v nm olt zazdn C vrchn stupe pi olti D prostedn stupe, v nm dry E tet nejdolej stupe, v nm zadn sloupy tabernaculi zazdn jsou F tyry sloupy tabernaculi, kter klenut z kamenn raby nesou G elezo, kter skrze pil, v nm olt zazdn jest, jde H prampouch od jednoho sloupu k druhmu jdouc a vprosted na pili odpovajc, v kterm t olt vzdn jest J jin eleza, kter sloupy tabernaculi v hromad dr K mka devn L zdka zrove s vrchnm stupnm, kter t jeden sloup v sebe pojm, vak dl prkny od vrchnho stupn pikryt jest. RT

61

The Old Town in Prague, 16621663

The dispute concerning the verbal assault of Karel krta from the side of Daniel Jaromsk. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber testimoniorum 27, 16581664, sign. 1076, f. 344r352v. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 112.

Svdom ku poteb Daniela Stelce, mtnna a radnho v mst Mlnce nad Labem a Jana Motyky, v slub zstvajcho u pan Marie Albty Prukov, vdovy na Mlnce, z strany poctivosti proti

Danielovi Jaromskmu z Strombergku, radnmu Starho Msta praskho. Svd pan Daniel Jedlika, svnk a mtnn Starho Msta praskho, v letech 38:

mohu na sv dobr svdom vzti, e sem to od pana Jaromskho, aby to o panu krtovi mluviti ml, dokonce nic neslyel a nevm, nebo ode m nikdy bez dobrho sndan aneb vobdu pni mlnit neodeli, nbr vdycky s dobrm trukem, take kdyby

i co toho mluviti se mlo, nemohu se s dobrm svdomm nic o tom pamatovati, ale jednoho asu to jest pravil pan Jaromsk, vak tak nepamatuji se, zdali bylo u m doma, neb na hospod a taky nevm, zdali ten as neb pedtm bylo, e pan krta ty

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 299

mlnick dobe id a pinou toho jest, e pan Prukov s panem Jaromskm se soud a e vechno po n dditi chce j sem pana Jaromskho tam u Pseckch asi po tikrte vidl, e s pny mlnickmi mluvil, ale aby o panu krtovi co neslunho mluvil, to sem j neslyel pan Jaromsk co zlho o panu krtovi aneb o km lidu neptelskm, kter by v ltu 1659 v Krlovstv eskm bti ml, mluvil. j se s panem krtou neshledvm, tak sem nic od nho neslyel, aby co o panu Jaromskm mluviti ml, mimo asi dvakrt, za jin pinou byvi v dom jeho pana krty, od nho i od jeho manelky sem slyel, e na Mlnci vecko podvodnci a lhi jsou, ale to se pana Jaromskho nic nedotkalo [7 August 1662] Svd Vclav tang z Labtna,

mtnn Novho Msta praskho, v letech 42: potkavi m pan Jaromsk v Celetn ulici nhod, povdal sem mu, e pan krta u m byl a m se dotazoval, zdali mn hann od pana Jaromskho povdomo nen, j odpovdl, e o niem nevm. [11 August 1662] Svd Ludmila tangov, mtnnka Novho Msta praskho, v letech asi 50: [owner of the pub At the Psecks] kdy pni mlnit mli odsud do Mlnka jeti, tehdy se spolu u m v hospod zastavili a truk vna v sni sob dti dali, ani nesedli j sem tak na to piln, co sou mezi sebou mluvili, pozoru nedala, kdy sem jim vna pinesla, tehdy sem zase od nich po sv prci odela, ne to se nco pamatuji, e pan Jaromsk o niakm penzlichu a malovn tuze k tm

pnm mlnickm mluvil, tak tuze spolu mluvili, jako by se vadili, kieli, to sem zaslejchla, prv kdy sem tehd do kuchyn la, e jest pan Jaromsk mluvil ten malek, vak jednoho pro druhho nebylo slyet. Co dl bylo, aby nco toho dle mluveno bylo, tehdy toho v tom ase nepamatuji neb mnohokrte opil lovk [?] mluv a potom se za to stzliv styd a j radji odtud hned jdu, nebo toho nerada slym. ale s nm [Jaromskm] nemluvila, j sem nic jinho neslyela, ne o njakm penzlku a malovn a nkomu e nadval malk a to se dobe pamatuji jakou danou sob pinu ml, aneb od koho e o panu krtovi co zlho mluviti ml, to j nevm, ani mnil-li jest jeho, kdy o tom penzlku, malovn, neb malku mluvil, j taky toho nevm, aby jac neptel

v Krlovstv eskm v ltu 1659 se nachzeli to jest pravda, e jsou byli vichni pi dobrm raui j sem od nho pana krty, ani jeho pan manelky, ani od jinho, aby jeho pana Jaromskho v em pomlouvati ml, nic neslyela, tak sem s panem krtou nikdy nemluvila, ani s pan jeho, jen co sem jednou vidla s mm muem, kdy o toto svdom s nm mluvil a dnes podruh ped kancel. Tyto svdom strany ujaly za publikovn 15. januarii anno 1663. RT

62

(Prague), 19 April 1663

Karel krta, referring to his plea of 1660, requests the Bohemian Chamber to order the royal prosecutor to address his matter. krta himself would then provide all relevant documents to the prosecutor. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. S212/1, box 870. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Milostiv pni pni, Va Excellenci a Milostem k milostiv pamti pivozuji, kterak jsem v ltu 1660 13. septembris jist spis a dost o pedneen prostedku, skrze kter bych v praetensi m, vztahujc se na 1100 kop meskch a od lta 1616 na n vzelch pt ze sta ourokv k zaplacen pijti mohl. Na kterouto dost mou od Vaich Excelenc tuto piloen dekretac se stala, na kterouto zase v tm ltu

1660 17. septembris jsem spis, v nm prostedky a e se Krystiana Uslara a jistot jemu svdcch dote, jsem oznmil. Nyn pak na tom pozstv, abyste rili milostiv pi Jeho Milosti csask a krlovsk prokurtora adjunktu naditi, aby tu a takovou ode m Vaim Milostem pedneenou vc vedl, s tm vak takovm opatenm, kdy se takovho prostedku dosoud (jako dn pochybnost nen) a jak Vaich Milost dekretaci s sebou

pin, aby to prvo dnmu jinmu mimo m, tak jak jste se rili milostiv zakzati, zadno nebylo, an bez toho mimo mou praetensi dobr dl krlovsk komoe zstane, j jemu nepominu dokumenta k tomu nleejc do rukou dti. O em se Vaim Excelencm a Milostem poruena inm a zstvm Vaich Excelenc a Milost ponen poslun Karel krta z Zvoic mp.

[on the tergo:] P[resentum] 19. April 1663 Jeho Milosti csask etc., Jeho Excelenci panu panu presidentu a pnm pnm radm zzen komory v Krlovstv eskm, pnm pnm mn milostivm ponen dost Karla krty TS

300 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

63

(Prague), (before 14 June 1663)

A request by Karel krta, addressed to the Bohemian Court Chamber and concerning the claim of 50 thalers for the repair of one Drers and one Tintorettos paintings which suffered damage during cabinetmakers works in the Prague Castle Picture Gallery. According to the testimony of Adam Khr, however, only 2530 tollars should be paid for the repair of the two paintings. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), sign. S21/7/rok 1663, Inv. No. 3139, box 2109. Literature: NEUMANN 1964, p. 27; Pavel Preiss, in: SLAVEK 1993, p. 33; Olga Kotkov, in: KOTKOV 2006, pp. 126127, g., p. 125, notes 5355 (editions, bibliography); STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.24, p. 603; SEKYRKA 2011, pp. 147152.

Milostiv pni pni, Va Excelenci a Milostem pokorn pipomnm, kterak ped nkterm mscem skrze pana atzmistra Ferdinanda Missirona jste rili pi mn naditi, abych dva kusy malovan, jeden od vzneenho male Alberta [!] Durera a druh od Tentoreta, kter od truhl velice zhanoben byly, abych takov zase k svmu zpsobu pivedl a spravil. Co jsem na poruen Vaich Excelenc a Milost vedle m monosti vykonal a ty dva kusy malovan dobe spraven zase k rukm pana atzmistra dodal a odvedl. Za kterouto prci padeste tolar od Va Excelence a Milosti

dm, kter e mn rate poruiti vydati a zaplatiti ponen a pokorn prosm a zstvm. Vae Excelence a Milosti ponen poslun Karel krta mp. [on the tergo of the spread:] Jeho Milosti mskho csae, uherskho a eskho krle etc., Jeho Excelenci a Milostem panu panu presidentu a pnm pnm radm zzen komory v Krlovstv eskm ponen dost o zaplacen od opravovn dvouch kus malovanch Karla krty.

[on the reverse, in a different hand, statement of Adam Khr] Gndig und hochgebietende Herrn Herrn. Herr Carl Screta, Burger und Mahler der Kniglichen Alten Stadt Prag, begehrt in seinem mir umb Bericht und Guttachten, in Gnaden communicirten und hierbey wieder zuerukhkomenden Memorial wegen Ausbesserung zweyer Bilder, so eins hiervon bey Beklaid oder Austafflung der Bilder Gallerie, von den Tischlern Schaden gelitten, 50 Reichsthaler. Hierber habe ich Herrn Schazmaister und Malerey verstndige, was etwa davon verdient sein mchte, vernomen und soviel Nachricht

erhalten, da er Herr Screta bey solcher Reparirung von 25 bis in die 30 Reichthaler verdient hatte. Was nun Euer Excellenz und Gnade ihme darvor und was die Tischler, weilen durch ihre Unachtsambkeit eines darvon in etwas verderbt und hien wiederumben ausgebeserth werden mssen, bezahlen lassen wollen, stehet bey deroselben gnedigen Belieben. Mich aber zu beharlichen Gnaden gehorsamlich empfhelende Euer Excelenz und Gnaden Gehorsamber Adam Khr mp. TS

64

Prague, 9 July 1663

The Bohemian Chamber orders the Prosecutor of the Bohemian Kingdom, Krytof Norbert of Fahnenschwungk, to summon Karel krta, the painter and burgher of the Old Town in Prague, and to assure him that he has priority in the payment of his claim if scal means are acquired for the imperial treasure. He shall also take over all documents related to this matter from krta, weigh them and provide his advisory opinion report to the Bohemian Chamber. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. S212/1, box 870. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Jmnem a na mst mskho csae, t uherskho a eskho krle etc. pi Jeho Milosti csask a prokurtoru v Krlovstv eskm panu Krytofovi Norbertovi z Fahnenschwungku takov se nazen in: Jako na Jeho Milosti csask krlovskou komoru eskou Karel krta, mtnn a mal v Starm Mst praskm, se uchz a jist

skln prostedky pednsti jako i dokumenta k tomu patc vydati, na ten zpsob a s tou dost se uvoluje, aby budoucn se z tch sklnch prostedkv, kdyby k dobrmu Jeho Milosti csask majc kontentrovn a zaplacen bti mohl. Proe aby on svrchupsan Jeho Milosti csask krlovsk pan prokurtor nadjmenovanho krtu

ped sebe povolati a jeho jmnem dotknut Jeho Milosti csask krlovsk komory esk, e z nadeench sklnch prostedkv, kdy tak dotenm zpsobem k dobrmu Jeho Milosti csask piveden budou, na zaplacen praetenc sv ped jinmi vejkazu uit m, ujistiti a naproti tomu od nho vechny dokumenta k t poteb

patc in originali vyzdvihnouti, je bedliv uviti a jak by t vc dleji pedsevzata bti mohla open Jeho Milosti csask Komoe esk zprvu a zdn sv uiniti nepomjel. Ex consilio Camerae Bohemiae Pragae 9. julii 1663. TS

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 301

65

Mlnk, 1664
Karel krta along with the numerous and non-resident notables attends the wedding of Karel Elsheimer in the Mlnk house of Marie Albta Prukov. Sttn oblastn archiv Praha (State Regional Archives Prague), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), .k.f.. (Roman-Catholic Parish Office) Mlnk, Register No. 2, year 1664. Literature: KILIN 2011, pp. 161165. TS

66

(Prague), (before 6 July 1665)

Karel krta informs the Bohemian Chamber that the royal magistrate from Litomice has already consigned some Uzlar securities to the above-mentioned chamber and asks they be given to the prosecutor in order to expedite the case. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. S212/1, box 870. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Milostiv pni pni, jistou toho zprvu mm, e Jeho Milosti csask rycht v mst krlovskm Litomicch na milostiv Vae Excelence a Milost

poruen nkter jistoty uslarovsk in originali na slavnou komoru jest sloil. I aby ta vc od Jeho Milosti csask pana prokurtora fedrovna bti mohla, Vai Excelenci

a Milosti ponen dm, aby ty jistoty uslarovsk Jeho Milosti csask panu prokurtoru dodan byly, a pi tom poven t vci e milostiv nadti rte. S tm zstvm

Va Excelenci a Milosti ponen poslun Karel krta TS

67

(Prague), (before 1 October 1665)

The Bohemian Royal Prosecutor, Adam Norbert Knaut of Fahnenschwungk, gives a report to the Bohemian Royal Chamber, presented on 1 October 1665, that Karel krta has already given him various copies of claims belonging to convicted persons and also informed him that the originals are held by Mikul Nicarius in Litomice. The prosecutor moreover reports that because the latter makes excuses that he had sent the originals to their owners in Dresden, which is prosecutable, he recommends imprisoning Nicarius until he places security deposits. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. S212/1, box 870. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Milostiv, t laskav pni, k pamti Va Milosti pivozuji, kterak Karel krta, mtnn a mal Starho Msta praskho, jist prostedky, kter mu tak per decretum, jakby se dalece jeho praetens vztahovala, vykzan jsou, pednesl, a mn rozdln vejpisy jistot na mnoho tisc se vztahujcch a nkterm osobm odsouzenm nleejcch, pednesl, i tak, e originalia tch jistot jeden mtnn v mst Litomicch, jmnem Mikol Nicarius za sebou m, v znmost uvedl. I byvi od krlovsk

komory esk Jeho Milosti csask panu rychti dotenho msta Litomic psno, aby ty jistoty in originali od jmenovanho Mikule Nicariusa vyzdvihl, a tak t csask rycht, kdy v Praze byl, je za sebou ji mti pravil. Nicmn na krlovskou komoru eskou niak jin dv jistoty, o kter psno nebylo, odeslal, o druhch pak jistotch, kter odeslati ml, pe, e open Mikul Nicarius se excusruje, e ji tch jistot vce nem, a e je zase tomu, komu (prej) nleely, ven z zem, do Dran, odeslal.

I ponvad asto praven Mikul Nicarius o tom dobrou vdomost ml, e ty jistoty odsouzenm osobm, a tak vlastn krlovskmu sku nle a on netoliko jich ven z zem vyslati neml, ale i tak, e jest takov skln praetens ututlal a jich nevyjevil, v pokutu krlovskmu sku patenty vymenou upadl a z t piny ta jeho vejmluva jemu nijak postaiti neme. Proe byl bych v t ppadnosti toho poslunho nevymujcho zdn, aby poznovu Jeho Milosti csask rychti eenho msta psno

bylo, aby on ty jistoty od tho Mikule Nicariusa vyzdvihnouti, a kdyby jich vydati nechtl, aneb se tm, e je do Dran poslal, nejsouc to postaitedln vejmluva, vymlouvati chtl, s asisenc prva arestem stiti hledl, dotad a tak dlouho, dokavad by takovch jistot nesloil. Pi tom se Vaim Milostem k stl milosti poslun poroueje zstvm Vaim Milostem k slubm poslun voln A[dam] N[orbert] Knaut [z Fahnenschwungku] mp. TS

302 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

68

The Old Town in Prague, 1665

Karel krta requisitions the undercharge of the debt from the Uzlar claims. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Komorn knihy (Chamber Books), le Kniha pamtn na spisy (The Memorial Record Book), 1665, Book No. 453, f. 25r and 47v. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 37; BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 49.

N[umer]o 14 Julius a[nno] 1665 Karel krta d, aby jistoty uzlarovsk Jeho Milosti csask pana prokurtora od Jeho Milosti csask rychte msta Litomic dodan a v poven vzat byly.

O jistoty uzlarovsk; C. rycht[] litomick December anni 1665 O pipomenut k Jeho Milosti csask rychti msta Litomic, aby rozlin jistoty uzlarovsk vyzdvihnouc

je od Mikule Hylariusa, na Jeho Milosti csask Komoru eskou sloiti hledl. K, jistoty uzlarovsk, Hylarius, C. rycht[] litomick RT

69

Prague, 16651666
A convolute of documents in the matter of the dispute between Karel krta and Daniel Jaromsk of Strohmberk, the latter being the plenipotentiary of the Prague family of the mds, for the claim of Marie Albta Prukov in the amount of 150 guilders or, respectively, for the vineyard which krta was using. krta eventually lost the dispute, conducted in both Mlnk and Prague, at the court of appeal. Sttn okresn archiv Mlnk (State Regional Archives of the City of Mlnk), le Spisy (Records), Convolute of Documents on the Lawsuit krta vs Jaromsk 16651666. Literature: KILIN 2011, pp. 161165. TS

70

(Prague), (before 1 March 1666)

Karel krta informs the Bohemian Royal Chamber that the holder of the Uzlar securities, Mikul Hilarius, the burgher and councillor in Litomice, was indeed imprisoned but he, however, keeps denying that he would have sent these documents to Dresden. krta further states that the acquisition of these documents is, after all, unnecessary because the debtors are aware that they are neither allowed to pay to the creditors whose property was forfeited for conscation nor can they be reminded about the payment from abroad. He also recommends that the royal magistrates in the New Town in Prague, in Mlnk and in esk Brod examine the reports about these debts in the city books. As it follows from the note, the Bohemian Royal Chamber sent this plea to the prosecutor Krytof Norbert Knaut of Fahnenschwung, asking him for his report and advisory opinion, as early as on 1 March 1666. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. S212/1, box 870. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Milostiv pni pni, jistou zprvu toho mm, e by Jeho Milosti csask pan rycht v mst Litomicch na Vae Excelenci a Milost poruen Mikule

Hilariusa, mtnna a radnho v tm mst, za pinou nesloen rozlinch uslarovskch jistot od 21. januarii do toho asu do arestu na rathauz tho msta dti zpsobil.

T pak Mikul Hilarius svou vejmluvou, e by ty jistoty v tom kik tureck tm lidem, kterm nleeli, do Dran odeslati ml, se zastr. Jestli vak tomu tak jest neb ne,

vdti se neme, speji, e tomu tak nen, se souditi me. A by i bylo, e by je tam do Dran poslal, tehdy proto by Jeho Milosti csask interess hynouti nemohlo a dlunci by

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 303

dluhu z t piny, e by originalia ped rukami nebyly, pozbti nemohli a nemli, nebo vitelov dlunk pro jejich pedkv doinn, a e vd, e pedkov jejich kondemnrovan jsou, a e ty jistoty Jeho Milosti csask nle, dlunk svch upomnati nesmj, bezpe se na to, e vitelov jejich kondemnrovan, jich upomnati smti nebudou, takovch jistot v poznamenn mezi jin jejich dluhy pi comissi tractationis neuvedli, proto aby se nevyjevily, neb vyjeveny jsouce, e by je platiti museli.

Vae Excellence milostiv pni pni, kdyby se takovch jistot originalia doshnouti nemohly, pro nedosaen jich by interese Jeho Milosti csask hynouti nemohla. Ale ponvad jist osoby zde v mstech praskch jsou, kter ty jistoty vidli a v rukou svch jmli, nepochybn, e by Jeho Milosti csask panu Fiscalu to vysvditi mohli, ano i on sm Mikul Hilarius se piznv, e originalia tch jistot u sebe jml. Jako tak (vak nedvajce Va Excelenci a Milosti dnho

vymen) kdybyste rili sob ten zpsob oblbiti a Jeho Milosti csask pnm rychtm v tch dlunch mstech poruiti (toti v Novm Mst praskm, v mst Mlnce a eskm Brod), aby oni ppisy takovch jistot, kterch jsem na milostiv Vaich Excelenc a Milost poruen Jeho Milosti csask panu Fiscalu sloil, za nimi posavad zstvaj, konfrontrovali, kter v knihch dlunch tch mst se vynachzej, a folium a knihu vyznamenali. Take kdyby ty jistoty se naleznouti neb

oshnouti nemohly, a ta msta dlun platiti by nechtly, tehdy musely by sv knihy tu, kde nle, edirovati. eho j pi milostivm Va Excelenci a Milosti uven zanechvaje Vai Excelenci a Milosti k milostiv resoluci se poslun poroum a zstvm Va Excelenci a Milosti ponen poslun Karel krta z Zvoic m. p. TS
6 Other documents state the name Nicarius. See Document No. 67.

71

The Old Town in Prague, 16661669

Bartolomj Alexius records the debt owed to Karel krta in the amount of 300 guilders. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber obligationum No. 7, 16531674, sign. 2257, f. 413r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Bartolomj Alexius oznmil a piznal se, e jest dluen panu Karlovi krtovi otnovskmu z Zvoic, ddicm a budoucm jeho dluhu pravho ti sta zlatch v ltu 1656 na den svatho Havla jemu zapjen a jedno sto zlatch ourokv na dom svm, v nm bydl,

u ernho vorla eenm, 12. april[i] anno 1666. [in margine:] Pan Karel krta otnovsk z Zvoic stoje osobn v rad i pi knihch mstskch Starho Msta praskho pijal od ddicv neb[otka] pana

Bartolomje Alexiusa ti sta zlatch z sumy hlavn a jedno sto zlatch starch ourokv, i co jich k tomu vceji a do sloen te dotenho kapitlu dle ujitn naproti psanho pirostlo. 19. 9. a[nno] 1669. RT

72

The Old Town in Prague, 1666

Karel krta requisitions the undercharge of the debt from the Uzlar claims. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Komorn knihy (Chamber Books), le Kniha pamtn na spisy (The Memorial Record Book), 1666, 1667, Book No. 454, f. 16r, 51v and 56r. Literature: BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 49.

Aprilis anni 1666 N[umer]o 14, Jeho Milosti csask prokurtor Pipomenut na spis pana Karla krty v pin jistot uzlarovskch. Januarius anni 1667 Jeho Milosti csask prok[urtor] Zprva spolu s rozdlnmi spisy

strany jistot uzlarovskch, t vzneen mlnickch. N[umer]o 20 Martius anni 1667 Ouad msta Mlnka nad Labem Zprva strany domnlho dluhu uzlarovskho. Pi tom rozdln vidimrovan allegata. RT

304 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

73

The Old Town in Prague, 3 September 1668

Karel krta sold the cellar in the drapers stalls at the Coal Market in Prague. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber contractuum albus, 16591733, sign. 4447, f. 57r58v. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Urozen pan Linhart Kek z Lilienfelsu a z Kreutzbruku, mtnn, t psedc sprvce pi ouadu estipanskm Starho Msta praskho stoje osobn v ouad estipanskm v tm Starm Mst praskm piznal se jest, e jest sob, pan Judit Julin manelce, ddicm a budoucm svm sklep v kotcch soukenickch od Uhelnho trhu do nich jdouc po prav ruce patnct, vedle sklepu pana Jana Vclava Vokouna

z Vokountejna, mtnna Starho Msta praskho a pana Matje echlaskho zednka z strany druh lec od urozenho pana Karla krty z Zvoic, mtnna asto jmenovanho msta praskho za sumu jedno sto a padeste zlatch rnskch hotovch, zcela a zouplna zaplacench, koupil, z nich pan prodvajc pana kupujcho kvituje, przdn a svobodn in nyn, na asy budouc a vn a to k jmn,

dren, ddinmu uvn a vldnut tm vm prvem, jak jest t sklep on pan Karel krta jistm zpisem libro contractuum albo, folio 507 postoupen a zapsan ml, bez pekky jednoho kadho lovka v dren a v uvn zstval, dnho prva, ani jak zvltnosti sob a budoucm svm vce a dle na tm sklep nepozstavujce. Maje zvady spraviti prvem msta. Z kterhoto sklepu od pna Linharta

Kreka kupujcho s budoucmi svmi od ptho svatho Havla lta 1668 kadoron po 30 zlatch rnskch do dchodu obecnho tohoto ouadu estipanskho nadeenho odvozovno bti m. Piznal se k tomu osobn pi ouad estipanskm pn prodvajc. Actum 3. septembris 1668. RT

74

The Old Town in Prague, 1668 (1674)

The Old Town burgher Ondej ermk records the assumption of a debt owed to Karel krta. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber obligationum No. 8, 16681676, sign. 2258, f. 10r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Pan Ondej ermk, mtnn Starho Msta praskho piznal se, e jest dluen dluhu pravho a spravedlivho panu Karlovi krtovi otnovskmu z Zvoic, pan Veronice, manelce, ddicm a budoucm jeho jeden tisc zlatch rnskch, toti 500 zlatch, kter pan Daniel Walthauser a pan Lidmila manel, jakoto pedel dritelov domu U ern hrb eenho v Dlouh std [!] pnm

porunkm Amarellovskm knihami mstskmi 13. aug[usti] a[nn] o 1663 pojistili a t pni porunci Amarellovt tch 500 zlatch na tm dom jsou nadepsanmu panu Karlu krtovi 26. januarii lta 1665 proti jim zase na svm dom ujitn postoupili, tak jak to pojitn a vedle nho iuxtou pipsan postoupen v knihch mstskch plnji svd. 3. septembris a[nn]o 1668.

[in margine:] Veronika po Karlovi krtovi otnovskm z Zvoic zstal vdova stoje osobn v rad oznmila a piznala se, jako jest v ltu 1668 3. septembris Ondej ermk nadeenmu Karlu krtovi a j Veronice jeden tisc zlatch rejnskch pod ourok obyejn byl ujistil a takovou sumu hlavn i s ourokem dle tho pojitn na ni vzelm, jet za ivobyt openho Karla krty jim

manelm nleit odvedl a zaplatil, proe e z toho dluhu ona Veronika krtov dotenho Ondeje ermka, ddice a budouc jeho kvituje 3. septembris a[nn]o 1674. RT

75

The Old Town in Prague, 26 April 1670

Karel krta gives evidence during the sale of the house of Kateina Krsn of Lewenfeld to Vilm Dyryx of Bruk. stav djin umn Akademie vd R (Institute of Art History, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic), Oddlen dokumentace (Documentation Department), fund Rudolf Kuchynka, box RK 2. Literature: Unpublished the given Book of City Records burned in 1945 during the fire at the Old Town City Hall.

Karel krta byl 26. 4. 1670 svdkem pi prodeji domu Kateiny Krsn z Lewenfeldu Vilmu Dyryxovi

z Bruku (Liber contractuum caeruleus V, sign. 2116, f. 295). RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 305

76

The Old Town in Prague, 30 September 1670

Karel krta gives evidence during the sale of the house of Doctor Ji Frantiek Becelli to Felix Freund, a painter from the Old Town in Prague. stav djin umn Akademie vd R (Institute of Art History, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic), Oddlen dokumentace (Documentation Department), fund Rudolf Kuchynka, box RK 2. Literature: Unpublished the given Book of City Records burned in 1945 during the fire at the Old Town City Hall.

30. 9. 1670 Karel krta svd pi prodeji domu doktora Jiho Frantika Beceliho mali Felixovi Freundovi (Liber contractuum caeruleus V, sign. 2116, f. 301). RT

77

Prague, 27 November 1670

Karel krta and Jan Konstantin Kouimsk testify that Anna Skalick, burgher of the Old Town in Prague, bequeathed both her immovable and movable property for the benet of Prague University. Archiv Nrodnho muzea (National Museum Archives), Sbrka (Collection) F, Inv. No. 169, Old Town in Prague, le vci obecn isoukrom (Community and Private Matters), 16451670, box 132. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Wir Carl Screta von Zavoritz und Johan Constantin Kaurzimsky von Campo Belli, beide Brgern der Kniglichen Alten Stadt Prag, hiermit urkhunden und bekennen, demnach den 14. Maii anno 1668 in dem exempto der lblichen Carolinischen Universitt zu Prag Jurisdiction zugehrigen Collegio Sancti Wenceslai die Anna Skaliczkin als geweste Wirthin daselbst und zugleich Brgerin der Kniglichen Alten Stadt Prag mit Tode abgegangen und die dahero wegen der Sperr Ihrer Verlaenschaft und Publication Ihres Testaments entstandene Strittigkeit zwischen gemelter Universitt und einem lblichen Magistratn der Kniglichen Alten Stadt Prag von Ihro Kaiserlichen und Kniglichen Maiestt also allergndigist decidirt werden, da der Universitt angefhrte Fundamenta in denen Stadt-Rechten und Ihren Privilegiis possessione et usu stabilirt zu sein befunden, und das Testament der Universitt ad publicandum zugeschickt, und die Erben dahin verwiesen werden sollen,

welches nach dem es geschehen und nach erfolgter Publication auf des (titul) Herrn Brgermeisters und Rathes der Kniglichen Alten Stadt Prag wiederholtes geziemendes Ersuchen, so wohl auf unser selbigenes gethanes instndiges Anhalten und Bitten, wie auch mit Einwilligung des hierzu gehrigen Erbens Georg Milota von wohlgedachter lblichen Universitt (titul) Herrn Rectore Magnico und Magistratu Academico au der Academischen Sperr und Jurisdiction dieselbe vllige Verlassenschaft der obbemelten verstorbene Annae Skaliczkin, uns als verordneten Skaliczkischen Testamentarischen Executoribus ausgefolget worden, also da wir solche Verlassenschaft als wie dieselbe nach mehrmahl gemelter Anna Skaliczkin Tode in besagten Collegio Sancti Wenceslai bestanden und entweder alldorten unter der Universitt Sperr bishero verblieben, oder von dortten umb Sicherheit und besser Verwahrung willen in das Collegium Carolinum verschlosener und gesperter bertragen,

und verwahrter gehalten worden, als nemblich Geld, Silber und Gold, Getreidich, Mhl, Kleider, Bett- und Leinen- Gewand etc. und in Summa alles und jedes wie es den Nahmen haben mag und zu dieser Skaliczkischen Verlaenschaft pertinent und gehrigist, ohne einigen Mangel und Abgang sambt der Lobrief von der Unterthnigkeit der Annae Skaliczkin in originali zu unseren Hnden richtig empfangen haben. Derowegen thuen wir ber solchen Empfang und richtige Ausfolgung dieser ganzen und vlligen Verlassenschaft der Annae Skaliczkin seeligen Ihrer Magnicenz wohlernanten (titul) Herrn Rectorem und gantzen lblichen Academischen Magistratum der Kaiser- und Kniglichen Carolo-Ferdinandischen Universitt zu Prag oder wer sonsten in diesem Fall quittirens vonnthen hat hiemit und in Kraft dieses in bester Form Rechtens quittiren und liberiren, mit Verzicht, da bei oft erwehnter lblichen Universitt wie weiter nichts solcher Skaliczkischen Verlassenschaft halber zu praetendiren

noch zu suchen haben, auch, weil wegen derselben nicht Ausfolgung vorhin von unterschiedlichen Partheien protestirt worden, wir uns dahero beide vor Einen und Einer vor beyde in solidum zur Schadlohaltung erbieten und wieder jedermniglichs Anspruch wohlgedachte Universitt darumb jederzeit vertretten wollen und sollen. Inmassen wir uns in Kraft dieses hierzu verbinden mit Verpfndung aller unser Gabe und Guths, und Insonderheit unserer brgerlichen in der Alt Stadt Prag situirten Husern, auch da dieses mit Bewilligung eines lblichen Magistrats der Kniglichen Alten Stadt Prag in dero Stadt Bcher, wann es gleich ohne beisein unser geschehen solte, einverleibet werden mge, content und zu Frieden sein. Zu Urkhund dessen haben wir diese Quittung und Schadlohaltung nicht allein aigenhndig unterschreiben und mit unsern aufgedruckten Petschaften bekrftiget, sondern auch solches obbemelter Erbe George Milota wegen seines hierzu gegebenen vlligen

306 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

ja Worths und consenses, wie auch die zu diesem Actu von einem lblichen Magistratu oftbesagter Kniglichen Alten Stadt Prag alles eies deputirte Herren Commissarii, die Wohledle Gestrenge Herr Nicolaus Joannes Eymer von Waltiow und Herr Georg Johann Reiman von

Riesenberg, beide Rathsverwandte der Kniglichen Alten Stadt Prag unterschrieben und mit Ihren Petschaften ausgefertiget. So geschehen Prag den 27. Novembris anno 1670. L. S. Carl Screta Ssotnowsky von

Zawoicz, von der seeligen Anna Skaliczkin executor testamenti mp. L. S. Johan Constantinus Kauimsky von Campobelli, Executor testamenti ut supra mp. L. S. Niclas Johann Eymer von Waltershoffen in dem mp.

L. S. Georg Johan Reiman zum Zeignus mp. L. S. Ji Milota, posledn vle neboky Anny Skalick od n zzen ddic mp. TS

78

The Old Town in Prague, 24 November 1671

Record of the dispute between Karel krta and Daniel Bekovec in the matter of using the coat-of-arms and the title otnovsk of Zvoice. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Protokol vejpovd, psah arelac (Protocol of Testimonies, Oaths and Reports), 16581668, sign. 1247, f. 122r123r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Oznmen mezi urozenm panem Karlem krtou otnovskm z Zvoic z jedn a panem Danielem Bekovcem z strany druh. Ponvad urozen pan Karel krta otnovsk z Zvoic, mtnn Starho Msta praskho, obslajce ku prvu pana Daniele Bekovce, podobn mtnna nyn dotknutho Starho Msta praskho de edendis, to od nho uvajce, on mlo od nkterho asu erbu jemu a strejcm jeho, t i prediktu otnovsk z Zvoic od slavnch csav mskch a krlv eskch pedkm jeho nadanho, e by jak co v podpisch,

tak i kdy co do knih mstskch klsti a zapisovati dv, k nemalmu oznmench pana Karla krty, t strejcv a potomkv jeho praejudicium osobovati ml, by co v jistm od prva vloenm termnu, zdali z rodu a lineae Vavince Bekovce pochz a toho erbu a prediktu uvati me, dostaten prokzati, a pokud by toho provsti nemohl, pi nm takov uvn zamezen bylo, povyhledval. Kterto obesln jsouce pipomenutmu panu Danielovi Bekovcovi propjen a maje v asu prvy vymenm excepci svou sloiti, ten jest, e by

obslka jeho nezala, vychzeti, a dave se ven z rozepe o jin a k tto acti nepatc vci, exciprujce dilatorie, odpovdati povinen nebyl, vychzeti a toho obesln przdna se uiniti vynasnaoval. Prva pak Krlovstv tohoto eskho, e jak pvod povinen jest alobu svou ped prvem provsti, tak tak obvinn svou ped prvem pedloenou pinn aneb vejmluvou opodstatniti. A chtl-li by dilatorie exciprovati, m a povinen jest in [?] peremptoris odpovdati, v sob patrn zdruj a zavraj. Proe to se z prva vynachz, e tolikrte oznmen

pan Daniel Bekovec na obesln pana krty svou patrnou excepci, nechtce jeho za takovho pan krta uznati, ve dvouch nedlch pod zbhlch s prvodem sloiti m. kody pak a outraty z jistch pin mezi stranami na ten as se zdvhaj podle prva. Actum et publicatum in consilio Antiquae Urbis Pragensis feria tertia pridie sanctae Catharinae Virginis et Martyris, 24. novemb[ri] anno 1671. Consule domino Nicolao Eymer de Valtirzow. RT

79

The Old Town in Prague, 30 January 1673 6 October 1673

Dispute between krta and Jaromsk, concerning the defamation of honesty. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber appelationum 3, 16551670, sign. 1030, f. 401r, 402r, 416r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Refor[matio] mezi panem Danielem Jaromskm a panem Karlem krtou Jmnem a na mst Jeho Milosti mskho csae, uherskho a eskho krle, pna pna ns vech nejmilostivjho praesident, vicepraesident a rady Jeho Milosti nad apelacmi na Hrad praskm

zzen a usazen: na ta od prva Starho Msta praskho odeslan a odevzdan zapeetn akta v tom postrannm sporu mezi Danielem Jaromskm apelujcm z jedn a Karlem krtou apeltem z strany druh, co se na sloen spisu odvodnho v hlavn rozepi z nku poctivosti dote, jak acta toho sporu to

ve v sob eji obsahuj a zavraj. Povive s pilnost takto to oznmen na tm prv 7. dne msce z lta pominulho 1671 vyneen, napravuj a z prva nachzej, e naddotknut Daniel Jaromsk tch pohledvanch akt nebo spis podn popis ve tech dnech ku prvu pednsti, vedle kterhoto

jeho tehdej ptel prvn Jan astnej Kouimsk takov akta ve dvouch nedlch vydati. A kdyby se to uiniti spoval, tehdy skutenm vzenm k tomu pidrn bti, potom pak openej Daniel Jaromsk svj spis odvodn, t ve dvouch nedlch pod zbhlch sloiti m podle prva, kody a outraty mezi vej

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 307

dotenmi stranami, v tom sporu vzel, z jistch a hodnch pin se zvdhaj [!]. A co k apelac sloeno, to aby zase navrceno bylo. Tomu na svdom peet Jeho Milosti csaskou a krlovskou k tomu soudu obzvltn zzenou jest zapeetno. Actum na Hrad praskm po nedli septuagesima 30. dne msce ledna, lta Pn estnctistho sedumdestho tetho. Frantz Voldich z Vchynic J[an] Vclav repl O tho pana Daniele Jaromskho a Karla krtu Slovutn a vzctn poctivosti ptel nm mil, netajme vm, e

jsme sob ty mezi Danielem Jaromskm apelujcm z jedn a Karlem krtou z strany druh za pinou sloen spisu odvodnho zal akta pednsti dali a po vedlivm [!] poven pleejc prvn vymen vynesli, jeto vy nleit vyhlsiti, ano i v skutek uvsti dti vdti budete. A ponvad od openho Daniele Jaromskho prvnj ptel jeho prvn Jan astnej Kouimsk in puncto praevaricationis navren jest, proto v t ppadnosti k vyhledvn pravdy ex officio dleji postupovati nm, pak toho nemn i z strany vydn tch akt po vyjit dvounedlnm ase, v ktermto Jan astn Kouimsk ty od

naddotenho Daniele Jaromskho pohledvan spisy vydati m, ubezpelivou zprvu Vai uiniti nepominete. Dn na Hrad praskm 30. dne msce ledna lta Pn 1673. Frantz Voldich z Vchynic J[an] Vclav repl Karel krta s Danielem Jaromskm Slovutn a vzctn poctivosti ptel nm mil, v em se k nm Karel krta za pinou inrotulrovn jist mezi nm a Danielem Jaromskm z strany druh pi prv vaem zal rozepe etrn uchz, z pleejcho spisu jeho vyrozumte. Pokud tomu tak jest, jak on suplikujc

pedn, e ji tincte let doten rozepe trv a a posavad k skonen svmu nepichz, jmnem a na mst Jeho Milosti csask pna ns vech nejmilostivjho vm poroume, abyte t rozepi beze vech dalch prtahv podn inrotulrovati dadouce, ji povili a potom strany spravedlivou vejpovd s vejhradou Jeho Milosti csask prva vrchnho podlili, pakli by v tom co jinho na pekce bylo, nm zprvu toho uinili. Dn na Hrad praskm 6. dne msce jna lta Pn 1673. Jan Frantiek Vrbna vicepraesident Jan Vclav repl RT

80

The Old Town in Prague, 21 March 1673 23 November 1673

Continuation of the dispute between Karel krta of Zvoice and Daniel Bekovec in the matter of using the coat-of-arms and the ensuing title. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber appelationum 3, 16551670, sign. 1030, f. 410r, 420r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

O Daniele Bekovce Slovutn a vzctn poctivosti ptel nm mil, dave sob piny odvoln Daniele Vojtcha Bekovce od toho pi prv vaem mezi nm z jedn a Karlem krtou z strany druh 7. dne msce bezna lta te pominulho 1672 vyneenho oznmen, kde o pozd sloenou excepci initi jest, nleit pednsti, po bedlivm veho poven vynachzme, e takov odvoln msta a prchodu mti nem, v kterto pin vedle du a prva jak dleji postupovati, vdti budete. Ponvad sice astji vidti jest, kterak skrze ku prvu ji pijat praesentrovan, pak zase stranm navrcen spisy, rozdln nedorozumn a nepodnosti povstvaj, proto by z toho budoucn selo a zbyten prtahov na zkrcen toliko spravedlnosti elc uvarovni bti mohli, zapoteb bude, aby podobn po vyjit termnu v den svten nebo jinch feri k adu Jeho Milosti csask purkmistrskmu podv spisy stranm nikoliv zase zptkem navrcen, nbr pi prvnm potom na prv sedn dal v tom poteby

jednan byly, co v budoucch ppadnostech na pozoru mti nepominete. Dn na Hrad praskm 3. dne msce bezna lta Pn 1673. Frantz Voldich z Vchynic J[an] Vclav repl Publ[icatum] 21. martii 1673 Daniel Bekovec Slovutn a vzctn poctivosti ptel nm mil, jako jest jeho csask a krlovsk Milost krl a pn, pn ns vech nejmilostivj na pedchzejc poslunou zprvu a zdn nae v pin Daniele Bekovce za zdvien toho proti nmu zaraenho sclnho procesu a opaten jeho na poctivosti ponen a pokorn proscho pi tm prvnm procesu zanechati a nm pitom skrze obzvltn reskript pod datum v Laxenburku 3. dne msce ervna lta ptomnho 1673 milostiv poruiti ril, abychme dotenmu Bekovcovi na doveden oznmenho procesu ukzati, ano i co dle, kde nle a zapoteb bude, intimrovati nepomjeli, jak v tom Jeho Milosti csask nejmilostivj vle a intenc skuten naplnna byla,

proe vedle toho sebe i strany, jich se tu dote, zpraviti a dleji v tom vedle du a prva jak postupovati, vdti budete. Dn na Hrad pra[skm] 17. dne msce ervna lta Pn 1673. Frantz Voldich z Vchynic J[an] Vclav repl O Daniele Bekovce a Karla krtu Slovutn a vzctn poctivosti ptel nm mil, jako jest Jeho csask a krlovsk Milost krl a pn ns vech nejmilostivj suplikac Daniele Bekovce, mtnna Novho Msta praskho, n on za restituci in integrum contra lapsum fatalium k sloen excepc v t pi, kterou s Karlem krtou za pinou prediktu otnovsk z Zvoic, t erbu vladyckho pi prv naem trp, ponen d, nm odeslati a pitom skrze obzvltn psan sv pod datum v Vdni 28. dne msce ervna lta dochzejcho nejmilostivji poruiti ril, abychme, vyrozumjce v tom stranu odpornou, veho bedliv povili a na to na kancel Jeho Milosti krlovskou eskou dvorskou zprvu s dobrm zdnm

uiniti nepomjeli. I aby se tomuto Jeho Milosti csask nejmilostivjmu nazen povinn zadosti stalo, proe te includrovanou suplikaci tho Daniele Bekovce s jistm termnem stran jeho odporn propjiti a nm potom to ob [!] s pipojenou zprvou va, jestli by jste co v tom k pipomenut mli, odeslati nepominete. Dn na Hrad praskm 23. dne msce listopadu lta Pn 1673. Jan Frantiek hrab z Vrbna, vicepraesident J[an] Vclav repl RT

308 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

81

The Old Town in Prague, 23 April 1673

Karel krta is stated as one of the witnesses at the wedding of Konstantin Vilm Frank of Hohenberk and Konstancie Leopoldina, the daughter of Fabin Harovnk of Sferyn. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16521704, sign. HV O1, p.629. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 33.

Aprilis 23. copulati sunt matrimonio praemissis in facie ecclesiae dominus Constantinus Wilhelmus Francken de Hohenberg cum honesta Virgine

Constantia Leopoldina, domini parentis Fabiani Harovnik a Sferen, c[ivis] A[ntiquae] U[rbis] P[ragensis], testes dominus Mathias [?], dominus Joannes Severinus Dirix,

dominus Carolis Screta, domina Anna Dirixova, p[ater] Wenceslao a Sancto Alberto. RT

82

s. l., 15 February 1674

Karel krta lends 900 guilders to Count Anton Pankratz Gallas. Sttn oblastn archiv vLitomicch (poboka Dn) (State Regional Archives in Litomice [branch Dn]), fund Historick sbrka (rodinn archiv) Clam-Gallas (Historical Collection [Family Archives] of the Clam-Gallas Family), Gallas Familienakten, le Dluhy Antonna Gallase (Debts of Anton Gallas), 16611674, Inv. No. 1450, box 417. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

16611674, Schulden des Anton Grafen von Gallas Nach eissigen Nachsuchen bey der Knig[lichen] Landtafel im Knigreich Bh[eim] in denen grern Schuldverschreibungs Quatern,

allwo alle Schuldobligationes einverleibet werden, seind nach folgende specicirte von dem Hoch und Wohlgebornen Herrn Herrn Antonio Pancratio Rudolpho des Heil[igen] Rm[ischen] Reichsgrafen von Gallas aufgerichte Schuldverschreibung bi

auf heutig unten gesetztes Datum befunden worden, wie folget. Herrn Carl Screta de dat[o] oblig[ationis] 8. Aug[usti] 1671 Hypotheca Anfalles vermgen in 2 Jahren zue bezahlen 900 Florin RT

83

The Old Town in Prague, February 1674

Karel krta disburses Vclav Rosa (the father of his daughter-in-law, Albta) the amount of 1000 guilders which Rosa passed on to krta as the debt of Vojtch Had of Prose. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber obligationum No. 7, 16531674, sign. 2257, f. 332r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Vojtch z Prosee a Pelertejna dluen Vclavovi Rosovi, ddicm a budoucm jeho 1000 zlatch rnskch V[clavu] Rosovi [in margine:] Vclav Rosa piznal se, e tch tisc zlatch rejnskch, kter sob na dom nronm na Tarmarce a Koneovic ulici lecm, od

starodvna U Porybnch eenm, m postoupil jest panu Karlovi krtovi otnovskmu z Zvoic s ourokem od jminulho svatho Havla lta 1673 bcm na nho pana Karla krtu, ddice a budouc jeho vechno a cel sv prvo pln pevozuje a pen. A to proto, e jest on pan Karel krta proti takovmu postoupen jemu panu

Vclavovi Rosovi tisc zlatch rejnskch hotovch odvedl a vyetl. 24. 2. 1674 Pan Veronika po neb[otku] panu Karlovi krtovi otnovskm z Zvoic zstal vdova pijala od pana Jindicha Krytofa Klusa pi Jeho Milosti csask krlovskm ouad berninm na Hrad praskm

registrtora jeden tisc zlatch od osoby sv i na mst dt svch a ddicv po dotenm panu Karlovi krtovi zstalch kvituje a hypotku z knh mstskch propout a kasruje nyn i na asy budouc a vn 29. 10. 1674 RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 309

84

The Old Town in Prague, 1 August 1674

Karel krta was buried in the church of St Gallus in the tomb before the altarpiece of Our Lady. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika zemelch (Register of Deaths), 16451731, sign. HV Z1, p.205 (modern pagination in pencil). Literature: RYBIKA 1869, p. 10; PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 17, 4; BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 10; NEUMANN 1974, p. 48; NEUMANN 2000, pp. 116117.

1674 Augustus 1. sepultus est in crypta[m] B[eatae] M[ariae] ante altare B[eatae] M[ariae] V[irginis] dominus Carolus Screta famosissimus pictor. RT

85

s. l., 1675
The city council of Mlnk terminates the quittance of the debt which it owed to Karel krta and paid if off annually in two instalments of 35 guilders. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), sign. M 28/36, Inv. No.2209, cat. no. 1472. Literature: KILIN 2011, pp. 161165. TS

86

The New Town in Prague, 12 March 1686

Veronika krtov, born Grnbergerov, the wife of Karel krta, was buried in the Church of St Henry in the New Town in Prague. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Henry, le Matrika zemelch (Register of Deaths), 16791699, sign. JCH Z6, p.176. Literature: BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 10; NEUMANN 1974, p. 48.

Martius 1686 12. [Pohbena] urozen pan Veronika krtov, dlouh as ji vkem sel, od Modrho lva z Koskho trhu. RT

310 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND PERSON OF KAREL KRTA

II. Documents on the Oeuvre of Karel krta

87

1641
In connection with the construction of the church, consecrated to St John of Nepomuk, in Nepomuk near Plze, Bohuslav Balbn mentions the publication of the book Fama Posthuma (1641), written by the Jesuit Ji (Ferus) Plach the Elder and illustrated by Karel krta. Bohuslaus Balbinus, Miscellanea Historica Regni Bohemiae DecadisI.LiberIV.Hagiographicus, seu Bohemia Sancta, Continens Sanctos et Beatos Bohemiae, Moraviae, Silesiae, Lusatiae, [], Pragae 1682, p.106. Literature: Petra Zelenkov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. IX.1, pp. 372373.

Nostra memoria Ilustrissimus dominus Franciscus de Sternberg Nepomuci dominus, R[everendo] P[atre] Georgio Fero Soc[ietate] Jesu incitante, Sacellum hoc vetustate labascens totum dirui iussit, et novam, eamque perelegantem ecclesiam

B[eati] Joannis Nepomucensis honori magnis sumtibus exstruxit. Benedici ecclesiam illam permisit Ernestus Archiepiscopus Pragensis, et Cardinalis per alios, cum ipsemet per morbum venire, et consecrare non posset. In altari summo hujus templi B[eati]

Joannis imago imago radiata conspicitur, atque in veneratione habetur; per eam novi templi caussam an[no] 1641 R[everendus] P[ater] Georgius Ferus Soc[ietatis] Jes[u] librum edidit, quem Famam Posthumam B[eati] Joannis Nepomuceni inscripsit; in eo

libro, elegantibus imaginibus, summo pictore Carolo Screta Pragensi praebente operam, vitam et mortem B[eati] Joannnis, brevissimis titulis triplici idiomate, Latino, et Bohemico, et Germanico comprehendit. V

88

The New Town in Prague, c. 1641

Record about the execution of the St Wenceslas cycle and fteen portraits of distinguished members of the Order of Barefoot Augustinians by Karel krta for the cloister of the Zderaz monastery of the Barefoot Augustinians in the New Town in Prague; the royalty paid to Karel krta amounts to 50 guilders per painting (compared to 32 guilders paid to other painters). Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archivy zruench klter (Archives of Abolished Monasteries), le Annales Monasterii S.Wenceslai Eremit[arum] Discal[ceatorum] S[ancti] P[atris] Augustini ab Anno 1623 usque ad Annum 1659 (issued 1659), Inv. No. 2450, manuscript 9 (formerly 3479), f. 23i/r,v (record to the period 16411644). Literature: MAL 1948, p. 91; DVORSK 1966, pp. 305306; NEUMANN 1974, pp. 6566.

Quoad fabricam monasterii fuerat quidem illa ruditer quantum ad muros eo usque perfecta. Deerat tamen eidem adhuc ultima aliorum articium, ad ultimum complementum, in plurimis locis maxime in inferiori claustri ambitu, in dormitorio versus meridiem, in hortis etc. Igitur huius triennii P[ater] Prior ante omnia claustrum complevit quadrilaterum, ita ut singulis fornicis arcubus muratis, corresponderent singulae rotundae seu arcuatae fenestrae viterae [!], quarum singulis iterum e regione fuerunt oppositae, totidem EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 311

etiam arcuatae tabuluae articiosae, seu imagines pictae, 30 numero, ab insigni artice domino Carolo Screta pleraeque depictae. Pretium singularum ex his a domino Screta elaboractis pervenit ad 50 orenorum ab aliis depictae 32 orenorum singulae constabant. Quae omnes, totam Sancti Wenceslai Bohemiae Patroni, et olim Ducis Martyris vitam, pulcherrime adumbrantes, mire exornant totum claustrum et ingredientes extraneos magna admiratione suspensos detinent. Rursum inter fenestras in columnis intermediis duorum

claustri laterum, collocatae sunt 15 aliae minorem tabulae quadratae, eb eodem praefato celebri pictore domino Screta articiose depictae, veras effigies primorum nostrae Italiae Congregationis virorum illustrium repraesentantes. V[enerabilis] G[eneralis] V[enerabiles] P[atres] Andreae Dicz, Andreae a Sancto Job, fundatoris socii nostri illustres ordinis, Augustini Mariae a S[anctissim]a Trin[itate] primi Vicarii Generalis, P[atris] Joannis Pauli a Sancto Nicolao, P[atris] Juliani a Sancta Maria, P[atris] Jacobi a Sancto Felice,

P[atris] Simeonis a Sancta Cruce, P[atris] Vincentii a Jesu Maria, P[atris] Joannis Baptistae a Jesu Maria, P[atris] Joannis a Sancto Guilelmo, P[atris] Cypriani a Sancto Martino, Patris Pauli a Sancto Joanne Evang[elista], Fratrum Bernardi, bini Zachariae Conversorum (horum virtutes vide in Eremo Sacra Augustiniana nuper authore P[atre] Mauritio a Sancta Maria vulgata typis. V
7 Originally probably stated 30 orenorum, which was rewritten to 32.

89

The New Town in Prague, c. 1641

Report about the St Wenceslas cycle and the portraits of Augustinian monks in the cloister of the Zderaz Augustinian monastery in the New Town in Prague. Also mentioned is the inspection of the paintings by Emperor Ferdinand III (which occurred in 1646 in the presence of King Ferdinand IV.). Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archivy zruench klter (Archives of Abolished Monasteries), le Liber primus Annalium Nostri Excalceato-Augustiniani Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, et Patroni Regni Bomiae, In Neo-Urbe Pragena Supra Zderas Situati Ab Anno partae Salutis MDCXXIII ad Annum usque MDCXLII Complectens. [] AFratre Severino aSancta Anna Ordinis Eremit. Fratrum Discal. Sancti P.N.Augustini Sacerdote Professo (issued c. 1749), Inv. No. 2451, manuscript 10 (formerly 3480 a), f. 258259 (record to 1641). Literature: MAL 1948, DVORSK 1966, NEUMANN 1974, pp. 6566.

Igitur sub hoc Prioratu Reverendus Pater Prior [i.e. P. Aegidius a Sancto Joanne Baptista] ante omnia claustro quadrilatero complementum dedit, ita ut singulis fornicis arcubus murali opere extructis responderet singulae semirotundae, seu arcuate speculares fenestrae, quarum singulis iterum e regione intra arcus fuerunt oppositae in forma hemcycli totidem tabulae arte pictoria vitam Titularis, et Tutelaris Patroni Divi Wenceslai Ducis et Martyris Inclyti referentes ab insigni Magistro domino Carolo Screta potiori ex parte elaboratae. Sunt autem numero triginta duae, quae structuram claustri mire exornantes oculos

spectantium animis ad pietatem non parum accensis vehementer rapiunt, quarum unaquae 30 orenorum constat: Screta tamen suas eduxit ad 50 orenorum usque. Unde Augustae memoriae Ferdinandus III. Imperator, dum quadam vice Caesarea Sua praesentia interiora subiret monasterii, videns claustrum, et singulas imagines contuens, uti erat non imperitus huius artis, in aliorum opera levem vibrabat palpebram, at picturis Scretae xo pede, ac lumine inhaerens manu articis cognita hoc elogium Patri Priori sese comitanti idiomate teutenico dixit: Screta est bonus pictor, sed curati sibi bene

solvi: rursus inter fenestras in epystiliis, seu capiculis pilarum concamerationes sustentantium occupabant duo claustri latera, quindecim aliae minores tabulae quadratae penicillo itidem Scretae excellenter depictae, quae dimidias veras tamen effigies primorum nostrae Italicae Congregationis virorum illustrium exhibebant, uti sunt Patris Andreae Dicz, Patris Andreae a Sancto Job, Patris Augustini Mariae a Sanctissima Trinitate primi Vicarii Generalis, Patris Joannis Pauli a Sancto Nicolao, Patris Juliani a Sancta Maria, Patris Jacobi a Sancto Felice, Patris Simeonis a Sancta Cruce, Patris Vincentii a Jesu Maria,

Patris Joannis a Sancto Quilelmo, Patris Cypriani a Sancto Martino, Patris Pauli a Sancto Joanne Evang[elista], Fratris Bernardi, et fratris Zachariae Conversorum, qui omnes virtutibus non vulgaribus exculti haud obscuram post se opinionem sanctitatis reliquere, ut nos trahant in odorem unquentorum suorum, modo sit, qui currere velit. V
8 See the treatise by tpn Vcha in the present publication.

90

The New Town in Prague, c. 1641

Report about the crypto-portraits of the Zderaz Augustinian, Brother Jindich from St Peter and provost of the St Giles monastery from St John the Baptist (Daniel Vclav Himmelstein of Velechov), on the lunette St Wenceslas Consecrating the St Vitus Cathedral by the Regensburg bishop St Wolfgang, situated in the cloister of the Zderaz monastery. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archivy zruench klter (Archives of Abolished Monasteries), le Liber secundus seu Continuatio Annalium Excalceato-Augustiniani Nostri Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, ac Patroni Regni Bomiae, In Neo-Civitate Pragensi Supra Zderas Situati ab Anno Partae Salutis MDCXLII ad Annum usque MDCLXIII Complectens. [] AFratre Severino aSancta Anna Ordinis Eremit. Fratrum Discal. S.P.Augustini Sacerdote Professo (issued 1749), Inv. No. 2452, manuscript 11 (formerly 3480 b), f. 218 (record to 1658). Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Eius [i.e. Fratris Henrici a Sancto Petro] effigiem verissimam infra in claustro videre est inter vitam Sancti Venceslai in illa imagine, qua t dedicatio ecclesiae Sancti Viti per Sanctum Wolfgangum

Ratisbonensem Prosulem [!], in qua pariter Patris Aegidii effigies cernitur ad perennem merito eorum memoriam. V

312 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

91

The New Town in Prague, c. 1641

Karel krta painted The Lamentation, i.e. of the Mother of Sorrows with St John the Evangelist and the two Marys, for the altarpiece of the chapel of the Holy Sepulchre in the Zderaz Augustinian monastery which was built at the expense of the Supreme Scrivener of the Bohemian Kingdom, Krytof Wratislav of Mitrovice ( 1645). Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archivy zruench klter (Archives of Abolished Monasteries), le Liber primus Annalium Nostri Excalceato-Augustiniani Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, et Patroni Regni Bomiae, In Neo-Urbe Pragena Supra Zderas Situati Ab Anno partae Salutis MDCXXIII ad Annum usque MDCXLII Complectens. [] AFratre Severino aSancta Anna Ordinis Eremit. Fratrum Discal. Sancti P.N.Augustini Sacerdote Professo (issued c. 1749), Inv. No. 2451, manuscript 10 (formerly 3480 a), f. 260 (record to 1641). Literature: MAL 1948; DVORSK 1966; NEUMANN 1974, pp. 6566.

Eruebantur similiter fundamenta Sacelli Domini Sepulchri ad calcem ecclesiae hortum versus expensas potiores suppeditavit in hoc pium opus Illustrissimus dominus dominus Christophorus Wratislav Supremus Regni Scriba, qui pro foribus huius sacrae aediculae cryptam sepulchralem cadaveri suo condendo posuit, et non diu post, dum sacello

suprema manus imposita fuisset, vita functus in eam est positus. Sola imago Virginis Dolorosae cum suis assectis Joanne, et Magdalena Dilectis Domini, ac alia Maria arae sepulchri superposita domini Scretae penicillo scite efficta 60. aureos e crumena Wratislaviana eduxit. V

92

The New Town in Prague, c. 1641

Karel krta was paid 60 guilders for the painting [of the Mother of Sorrows with St John the Evangelist and the two Marys] executed for the chapel of the Holy Sepulchre in the Zderaz Augustinian monastery. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archivy zruench klter (Archives of Abolished Monasteries), le Annales Monasterii S.Wenceslai Eremit[arum] Discal[ceatorum] S[ancti] P[atris] Augustini ab Anno 1623 usque ad Annum 1659 (sepsno 1659), Inv. No. 2450, manuscript 9 (formerly 3479), f. 23i/v (record to the period 16411644). Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Screta 60 orenorum pro imagine Sancti Sepulchri soluit. V

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 313

93

The New Town in Prague, c. 1641, resp. 1645

The Prague Castle District Administrator, Jan Karel Pchovsk of Pchovice, contributed 50 guilders to the execution of one of the paintings of the St Wenceslas cycle in the cloister of the Zderaz Augustinian monastery; his daughter Anna oe commissioned a large painting with St Mary Magdalene and Christ as the Gardener (Noli me tangere) for the anteroom (atrium) of the chapel of the Holy Sepulchre in the same place. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archivy zruench klter (Archives of Abolished Monasteries), le Liber primus Annalium Nostri Excalceato-Augustiniani Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, et Patroni Regni Bomiae, In Neo-Urbe Pragena Supra Zderas Situati Ab Anno partae Salutis MDCXXIII ad Annum usque MDCXLII Complectens. [] AFratre Severino aSancta Anna Ordinis Eremit. Fratrum Discal. Sancti P.N.Augustini Sacerdote Professo (issued c. 1749), Inv. No. 2451, manuscript 10 (formerly 3480 a), f. 63 (record to 1645). Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Nec ommittendus est hic Illustrissimus, ac Generosissimus heros dominus Carolus Prichovsky Arcis Pragensis Praefectus, et postea unius legionis Croatarum Ductor, qui praeter alia etiam suggesti novi articiose sculpti, et picti author fuit, et 600 orenos in sculpturam, et picturam impendit, unamque

ex imaginibus Sancti Wenceslai in ambitu conventus pretio 50 orenorum, et alteram Sancti Patris Augustini in ecclesia posuit. Non dissimilem marito sese exhibuit eius domina consors nata Pisniciana, quae nostro monasterio domum donavit: et laudabiliter parentum vestigia legens lia Anna Sophia ornatum

sacrum pro altari Sanctae Annae haud vulgarem, et magnam imaginem Sanctae Mariae Magdalenae cum Christo hortulano in Atrio Sacri Sepulchri ab egregio, ac famoso pictore Carolo Screta coloribus expressam eri iussit. V

94

The Lesser Town in Prague, 31 December 1644

Karel krta received payment of 200 guilders for executing two altarpiece paintings with The Holy Trinity and The Assumption for the chancel of the St Thomas church of Augustinian Anchorites in the Lesser Town in Prague. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archiv esk provincie augustininskho du (Archives of the Czech Province of the Augustinian Order), le Diarium exitus Monasterii Pragensis S.Thomae Tempore R.P.SS.Theol. Doct. et Magistri fratris Angelici de Tapparellis [16371665], Inv. No. 142, sign. IIc 7, f.115r. Literature: MATJKA 1896, le 121; NEUMANN 1974, p. 46.

31. [Decembris 1644] Erecta fuere duo altaria latis magna in choro ecclesiae, unum S[anctissi]mae Trinitatis aliud B[eatae]

Virginis Assumptae: pro iis haec fuere expensae: [] Domino Carolo Scretae pictori pro imaginibus orenorum ducenti. V

314 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

95

The Lesser Town in Prague, 1644

Karel krta painted The Crucixion with the Virgin Mary and Souls in Purgatory for the altarpiece of the Confraternity of the Dead in the St Nicolas church in the Lesser Town in Prague for 200 guilders, paid from the bequest of the Land Vice-Scrivener, Knight Zdenk Jeovsk of Luby ( 1645). Nrodn archiv (National Archives), fund Nboensk bratrstva (Religious Confraternities), le Pamtnice duikovho bratrstva pi kapli sv.Barbory kostela sv.Mikule na Mal Stran (The Memorial Book of the All Souls Day Confraternity with the St Barbara Chapel of the St Nicolas church in the Lesser Town in Prague), sign,XVII/57, f. 68, box 133. Literature: tpn Vcha Sylva Dobalov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. V.2., pp. 210211.

Perillustris dominus n[omen] n[escio] Loubsky Eques alius sepulturae haberet, in crypta Sacelli Defunctorum pro altari illius contulit 300 orenorum ex qua pecunia imago Crucixi altaris

curata est, et soluta domino pictori Carolo Screta 200 orenorum. V

9 On the identication of the donor, see OULKOV 2010, p. 1223.

96

Prague, 29 August 5 November 1646

Financial statement for the works on the castrum doloris for Anna Maria of Spain. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), Inv. No. 1580, sign. K1/33, suble Smrt csaovny Marie, manelky FerdinandaIII.(Death of Empress Maria, Wife of Ferdinand III), box 1053. Literature: NOVOTN 1946, p. 76; POPELKA 1994, pp. 43, 116.

Prag den 29. Augusti a[nno] 1646 Rentmeister und Gegenhandler Anstat und im Nahmen Hchstg[edachter] Ihrer Mayestt unsers Allerg[n]d[ig]sten Herren befehlen wir euch hiemit ihr wollet dem Carl Screta Mahlern weg[en] Mahlung des castri doloris fr Ihr Mayestt die verstorbene Kayserin Glorwrdigster Gedchtnis in Abschlag des mit ihme getrofenen Accords fr diemahl 50 Floren reinisch gegen richtiger Quittung dargeben und bezahlen. [?] Kempink mp. Hochlbliche Knigliche Bhembische Camer, gndig hochgebietende Herrn hierbey berreichen Euer Gn[a]d[en] ich nochmale in gehorsamb eine particular Verzaichnu de einigen Costens, was das castrum doloris, welches den 6. Septembris unlengst

abgelaufenen [1]646 Jahrs in der Kniglichen Prager Schlo Thumbkirchen fr Ihr Mayestt, die in Gott ingst abgeleibte Rmischen Kayserin Mariae hochster[melter] Andenkens aufgerichtet worden gestanden und belauft sich, wie hierbey zu sehen in allem auf 1172 Floren, 4 Kreuzer, 3 Denarii, dieweil dann die Parteyen (augenomben Herrn Festa so noch nit gar contentirt) von den jenig[en] Geld, welche auf Euer Gnaden gndige Verordnung gegen meinen Interimsscheinen ich au dem Kniglichen Bhmischen Rentambt empfangen durch mich cauer de Herrn Scretae bezahlt worden, worber ich dero Quittungen in Handen und nun solche alweg zu Herrn Rentmaisters Verraitung, damit es den Partayen knnen frgeschrieben und etwan doppelte Bezahlung verhtet werden, gehren. Al gelanget an Euer Gnaden mein gehorsambes Bitten, sie geruhen bemeltem Herrn Rentmaister per

decretum gndig anzubevehlen, da er sowohl diese particular Verzaichnu nach Raticirung solcher sambt Quittungen, al auch da Crnungs particular nebens aller Parteyen Quittungen und taxirten Handwerks auzgen (in maen die Buchhalterey hiebevor in ihrn Euer Gnaden eingeraichten Guetachten dahin gangen), zu seiner Verraittung von mir der Ordnung nachbernehme und meine Interimsschein hergegen auhndigen lassen wolle, wie es nun an sich selbsten billich und die unumgngliche Notturft erfordert, al thue zue dem Gnaden ich mich gehorsam empfehlen. Euer Gnaden gehorsambster Adam Gottfried Kuhr mp. Prag den 22. Octobri 1646 Rentmeister und Gegenhandler Demnach Carl Screta Mahler wegen des fur Ihrer Mayestt die verstorbene Kayserin glarwurdigster

Gedachtnus iungsthin aufgerichten castri doloris noch 50 Floren reinisch bey den Euch anvertrauten ambt zu fordern und hiervon Ihrer Kayserlichen Mayestt Bauschreiberey des Kniglichen Prager Schlo Adamen Gottfrieden Khuer von Kuhrbach 13 Floren wegen dargegebnen Holcz dem Zimmerman, wegen verrichtern Arbeith 15 Floren, dem Hoffuhrman wegen der Fuhren 10 Floren reinisch, die ubrige 12 Floren ermelten Screta gegen allerseits Quittung zu bezahlen verwilliget worden. Als befehlen anstat und im Nahmen mehr hchstermelte Kayserlichen Mayestt wir euch hiemit Ihr wollet obner standener maen ermelten Khur angeregte 13 Floren, dem Zimmerman 15 Floren, dem Hoffuhrman 10 Floren und die ubrige 12 Floren dem Screta gegen allerseits richtiger Quittung dargeben und bezahlen. So euch hier auf kunftig Beyraittung fur quit gelegter passiret werden sollen.

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 315

Prag den 5. Novemb[ri] anno 1646 Rentmeister und Gegenhandler Demnach Carolo Screta Mahlern wegen Verfertigung des in alhiesiger Kniglichen Prager Schlokirchen fr Ihre Mayestt die verstorbene Kayserin glorwrdigster Gedchtnus

jungsthin aufgerichten castri doloris von hchster[melter] Ihrer Mayestt Haubtman dero Herrschaft Podiebrad 200 Floren gegen hiebey verwahrter original Quittung bezahlt worden. Als befehlen anstat und im Nahmen mehr hchster[melter] Kayserlichen Mayestt wir euch

hiemit, ihr wollet ermelten Screta Quittung ber angeregte 200 Floren anstat baaren Gelts annehmen und dem Haubtman berhrter Herrschaft Podiebrad hierber gebhrent bescheinigen und es al eine Herrschaft Geflligkeit per Empfang und Augab, wie Ihr recht zuthuen

wisset per Empfang und Augab in Raittung einschriben. So euch kunftig fr [?] gelegter passiret werden solle. RT

97

(Prague), September 1646

The castrum doloris for Anna Maria of Spain, the wife of Emperor Ferdinand III. Sttn oblastn archiv vPlzni (poboka Nepomuk) (State Regional Archives in Plze [branch Nepomuk]), fund Rodinn archiv falknovsk vtve Nostitz-Rieneck 13641945 (Family Archives of the Falknov Branch of the Nostitz-Rieneck Family), Inv. No. 34, sign. DD 4edn spisy eskho mstodritelstv (Official Records of the Bohemian Governors Office) 16171721, box 6. Literature: NOVOTN 1946, p. 76; POPELKA 1994, pp. 43, 116; Radka Tibitanzlov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.16, p. 595.

Den 1. Septembri 1646 dem Herrn Rentmeister 4 Mntzzettel geben, so augetragen jeden 2 Mnztzettel 1376 Florin 767 Florin 175 Pfund weie Wachskerzen zue 42 Kreuzer thuet 122 Florin, 30 Kreuzer 1000 Elln Tuch zue 14 Kreuzer

Dem Hofglaser fr Trad, Schrauben, Paumbwoll, die Lampen zue hencken und dieselben zu versorgen, von jeder 6 Kreuzer thuet von 500 Florin, 50 Kreuzer Centen oder 60 Pfund Paumbhl, 4 Lot zu jeder Lampen per 14 Florin Item dem Schneider 10 Florin Summa 429 Florin, 50 Kreuzer

Der Hofglaser begehrt 20 Florin, in Abschlag Item der Schneider 10 Florin Sambt 10 Florin, ist es 429 Florin, 30 Kreuzer Vor das castrum doloris dem Mahler Screta 550 Florin RT

98

Prague, November and December 1648

Karel krta executed a drawn model for the graphic portrait of the Jesuit priest Ji Plach, defender of Prague against the Swedes in 1948, at the request of the Imperial General Christoph Buchheim. The portrait was engraved by the Zderaz Augustinian, Brother Jindich from St Peter. Literature: BREVIS RELATIO 1910, pp. 8385. 12. [Novembris 1648] Solennes exequiae in Tejnensi ecclesia pro domino colonello Czabelicky ab hoste in assultu generali vulnerato et mortuo; plurimae missae pro illo lectae. Propria effigies P[atris] Plachi a domino Screta missa ad fratrem Henricum, ut illam aere sculpat expensis domini comitis Buchaimii generalis, qui heri in Austriam discessit. Epigraphia illius Patri est talis: R[everendus] P[ater] Georgius Franciscus Plachi e Soc[ietatis] Jesu Budvicensis in obsidione Pragae defensor patriae, pater juventutis Academiae a[nno] 1648 staturae 6 pedum et 5 digitorum. 15. [Novembris 1648] Sculpitur aere a fr[atre] Henrico ad requisitionem et expensas Illustrissimi domini comitis Bucheimii generalis P[atris] Plachi cum tali epigraphe: R[everendus] P[ater] Georgius Franciscus Plachi e Soc[ietatis] Jesu Budvicensis defensor patriae, pater juventutis Academiae in obsidione Pragae a[nno] 1648, aetatis 43, staturae 6 pedum et 5 digitorum. Symbolum ejus est: dulce et decorum est pro deo et patria mori. 6. [Decembris 1648] R[everendus] P[ater] rector collegii Soc[ietatis] Jesu Sancti Clementis misit P[atrem] Hencelium, concionatorem germanicum, petendo laminam, in qua sculpta fuit effigies P[atris] Plachi a nostro fr[atre] Henrico, promittens se velle eam solvere, modo non amplius ad usum impressionis convertatur, sequi inde multa inconventia etc. Responsum eam non esse amplius prae manibus, sed missa Ilustrissimo domino comiti Buchaimio generali, qui curavit sculpi et solvit laborem. V

316 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

99

The Old Town in Prague, 1652

Karel krta received payment of 150 guilders for executing the altarpiece painting with The Crucixion for the White Friars church of the Great Cross in the Old Town in Prague (an equal amount was paid to Antonn Stevens for his painting with the The Assumption). Nrodn knihovna R (National Library of the Czech Republic), Sbrka rukopis astarch tisk (Collection of Manuscripts and Old Prints), le Johann Carl Rohn, Ianus Bifrons respectans praeteria, asens praesentia prospiciens futuris seu Liber Archivi Primus Sanctae Crucis, sign.VII A10 a, f. 85v (record to 1652). Literature: KON 1968, p. 175.

Hoc anno accesserunt ecclesiae Sanctae Crucis duo notabilia altaria, Crucixi videlicet, et Ascensionis Domini, antehac enim tantum penes majorem Aram unum, alterum non tam altaria, quam altariola (ut in ratiociniis woltariciky vocantur) exstabant. In haec dua altaria dominus Praepositus ex nervo a domina Lecanska

proveniente egregios sumptus fecit, et hoc anno integre exsolvit. Sculptori dati sunt pro utraque ara 240 orenorum domino Carolo Screta pictori praeclaro pro imagine Crucixi 150 orenorum, domino Antonio Stephano Steinfels pictori pro imagine Ascensionis Domini 150 orenorum. V

100

Svat Hora near Pbram, July 1654

Two records in the diarium of the Jesuit residence at Svat Hora, informing that Karel krta visited the place of pilgrimage in the company of Count Bernard Ignaz Borzita von Martinitz for the purpose of executing a painting of the local graceful Marian statue and designing a sanctuary (tabernaculum) for its display. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), dov archiv redemptorist (Archives of the Redemptorist Order), Diarium Residentiae in Sacro Monte a24. Augusti Anno 1647 usque ultimam Decembris 1669, Inv. No.104, sign. P 7, f. 123. Literature: KOPEEK 2002, pp. 165166 (published with inaccuracies).

18. [Julii 1654] Adduxit etiam secum Excellentissimus Comes Carolum Scretam primarium et celeberrimum pictorem regni, hunc data opera evocavit Praga, ut statuam miraculosam B[eatae] V[irginis] in Sancto Monte effigiaret et ut elegans aliquod tabernaculum pro eadem statua B[eatae] Virginis delinearet. Sumptus dabit ipsemet Excellentissimus Comes.

19. [Julii 1654] Dominica VIII. post Pent[ecostem] peregrini Excelentissimus Dominus Comes de Martinitz (titulus) ab hesternis vesperis cum tota sua aula. Haec Dominica tertio suam devotionem in honorem Sanctissimae Trinitatis et Beatissimae Matris peregit, promisit se curaturum elegans tabernaculum pro statua miraculosa Beatae Virginis Mariae. Hodie

etiam summo mane dominus Carolus Screta celeberimus pictor caepit effigiare B[eatam] Virginem nostram et ob hoc data opera evocatus est Praga ab Excellentissimo Domine Comite de Martinitz Supremo Regni Purgravio. V

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 317

101

Svat Hora near Pbram, July 1654

Report from the hand-written history of Svat Hora about Karel krta and Count Bernard Ignaz Borzita von Martinitz visiting the same place on 18 and 19 July 1654 for the purpose of executing a painting of the local graceful Marian statue and designing a sanctuary (tabernaculum) for its display. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), dov archiv redemptorist (Archives of the Redemptorist Order), Synopsis historiae Sacromontanae ordine annorum digesta (written 1679), Inv. No. 113, sign. P 131, f. 37. Literature: KOPEEK 2002, pp. 165166 (published with inaccuracies). Julii 5. [1654] Excellentissimus Dominus Burgravius Regni Bernardus Comes a Martinitz. Ejusdem 18. iterato adfuit et adduxit secum dominum Carolum Scretam illum inter celeberrimos aevi sui Apellem eo ne, ut statuam B[eatae] V[irginis] effigiaret. Sequenti mox die opus aggressus, omnem artem impendit, stando, sedendo multis continue horis ad lineas omnia revocando. Sed tamen consumpsit, non tangendo. Qui alias picturae gloria ac potissimum repraesentanda, quam proposuit cuiuslibet effigie, felicissimus habebatur. Juxta se posita utraque imagine, picta damnata est uno ore ab omnibus. Prototypon est contra ipsum pro se approbatum. Illa autem imago a domino Screta transpicta est illa ipsa, quae in valva tabernaculi lateralis B[eate] V[irginis] intra fornicem quasi situata visitur. V

102

Svat Hora near Pbram, 1654

Bohuslav Balbn describes krtas trouble in executing a painting of the graceful Marian sculpture at Svat Hora near Pbram in his book about the same sculpture. Bohuslaus Balbinus, Diva Montis Sancti seu Origines et miracula magnae Dei hominumque Matris Mariae, in Sancto Monte Regni Bohemiae, ad Argentifodinas Przibramenses, quotidiana populi frequentia, et pietate, in statua sua mirabili, aditur, et colitur:V.libris comprehenda, Pragae 1665, pp.127128. Literature: KOPEEK 2009, pp. 164165.

(Car[olus] Scr[eta]) Praga unum aliquem misit, antiquis pictoribus parem, virum apud nos genitum, sed orbi et urbi notum, ubique ab arte laudatum; (nominae opus non est, digito viator

ostendet) hic in S[acro] Monte pictorio pluteo statuto, ante oculos stante imagine, in diva nostra exprimenda omnem artem consumit, stetit, seditque multis continuis horis, ad lineas omnia revocavit, nam Principis in

Regno viri urgebat imperium. (Catull. Horat.) Ridete quidquid est domi cachinnorum! Currente rota cur urceus exit? et tamen picturae gloria, ac potissimum repraesentanda, quam

proposuerit cujuslibet effigie, foecilissimus habetur; utraque juxta se posita imagine, hanc pictam damnavimus uno ore omnes. V

103

Svat Hora near Pbram, 1654

Bohuslav Balbn describes krtas trouble in executing a painting of the graceful Marian sculpture at Svat Hora near Pbram in his book about the same sculpture (Czech translation by Matj Vclav tajer). Bohuslav Balbn, Pepodiwn Matka Swato Horsk Marya, W Zzracch aMilostech swch na Hoe Swat nad Mstem Pjbrami Hor Stjbrnch den po dni wjc awjc se stkwgjc [], Litomyl 1666, pp.2627. Literature: Vt Vlnas, in: sekyrka 1997, cat. no. 3.26, p. 9899.

Jeden vborn dobr a v svm umn velmi zkuen mal z Prahy pokusil se o to, veckno sv umn na to vynaloil, aby jej vlastn pemaloval. Hledl, sedl, maloval nkolik hodin pod, neb mu bylo porueno

od pednho pna v echch [tj. hrabte Bernarda Ignce Boity z Martinic]. Nicmn svatohorskho obrazu dobe pemalovati nemohl, jakkoli vickni ho v malskm umn bez piny chvl a za to maj, e mu

nen rovnho v echch, kter by uml tak vlastn vyobraziti jakoukoli tv kterhokoli lovka anebo obrazu jako on. Vzali jsme oba obrazy spolu, star, i ten nov od nho malovan, a cokoliv ns bylo,

kte jsme se na n dvali, vickni jednosvorn jsme pravili, e chybil daleko. V

318 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

104

(Prague), after 2 September 1654

List of payments of the Bohemian Chamber, disbursed for the work on the castrum doloris for Ferdinand IV, built in the St Vitus Cathedral. Karel krta executed works worth 428 guilders. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. K1/4, Inv. No. 1580, box 1055. Literature: Tom Sekyrka, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.21A, p. 600; SEKYRKA 2011, pp. 147152.

Particular Verzaichnus was das fr der Rmischen auch zue Hungarn und Bheimb etc. Khnigliches Maestat Ferdinandi IV. Hochwrdige Gedchtnus alhier in der Schlo Thumbkirchen sancti Viti aufgerichte castrum doloris und die dar

zur erzeugte Nottrfen, bei denen vom letzten Augustii bies 2. Septembris 1654 Jahrs per 3 Tage bergehaltenen Exequien gestauen und gekostet, als nemblich Fridrich Riezel Tischler vor deen Arbeit 300 Florin

Herrn Carln Screta, Mahlern, waruem er aber die Zimmerleuthe, item Fuhrlohn und dar zue gebrauchte Holz Materialien selbsten bezahlen men 428 Florin Dem Bildhauer Ernst Heydelbergern und deen Adhaerenten von den

4 Staduis, soviel Kindln, item unterschiedliche Todtenkpfen und denen Guldenfeluen umbher in die Bgen zue machen 200 Florin Summa 1672 Florin reinisch TS

105

(Prague), 8 October 1654

The Bohemian Chamber orders its treasurer to disburse to Karel krta the rest of the 728 guilders for the commissioned castrum doloris for Ferdinand IV. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. K1/4, box 290. Literature: Tom Sekyrka, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.21B, p. 600; SEKYRKA 2011, pp. 147152.

[office note] Herr Rentmeister sol dem Carln Screta Mahlern in der Alten Stadt Prag die per pausch veraccordierte 728 Florin wegen Aufrichtung des Knigs Ferdinandi Quardi castri doloris, annoch restierende 128 Florin gegen Quitung ausfolgen lassen. Prag den 8. Octobris anno Domini 1654.

Herrn Renthmeister und Gegenhandler, demnach dem Carl Skreta Mahlern an denen mit ihme wegen Verfertig- und Aufrichtung des Kniglichen castri doloris per pausch ausser der auf 200 Florin absonderlich veraccordirten und nunmehr bezahlten Bildhauerarbeit verglichenen und in hiebey khomender glaubewrdige

Specication [?] 728 Florin annoch 128 Florin ruckstendig verbleiben und nun wir Ihme solche aus dem Euch anvertrauten Renthambts gefhlen befehlen zulasen verwilliget. Als befehlen anstatt und im Nahmen hchstgedachter Ihrer Kayserlichen Mayestt wir euch hiemit, ihr wollet obbesagten Skreta berhete aufstendige 128 Florin gegen

gebhrende Quitung bezahlen und erfolgen lassen, <welche> und die also mit Ihme vergleiheme vllige Summa der 728 Florin ein Reitung per Ausgab einbringen, massen es Euch ausser Mngl sein und pasiert werden solle. TS

106

The Old Town in Prague, December 1654

The closing nancial statement of the church funds of Our Lady before Tn (dated 31 December 1654) states that Karel krta was disbursed the difference of 44 guilders and 8 kreuzers from the Old Town municipal government for adding two gures to the altarpiece painting with The Assumption in the same church. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), Tnsk zdu (Tn church funds), le Kniha rznch pot za lta 16541663 (The Book of Various Figures for the Period 16541663), sign. 1646, f. 23r (record to 1654). Literature: tpn Vcha, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. V.13, p. 226.

Nklad na velik olt: 31. decembris panu Karlovi krtovi mali, co se jemu od malovn dvouch

gur na pltn v olti velkm restrovalo, ostatek zouplna

doplaceno proti kvitanci jeho 44 zlatch, 8 krejcar. V

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 319

107

The New Town in Prague, (c. 1654)

Henricus a Sancto Petro, a monk of the Augustinian monastery in the New Town in Prague, requests the Bohemian Chamber to pay for his work on the engraving which depicts the castrum doloris of the Emperor and King Ferdinand IV. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. K1/4, box 290, f. 19. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Milostiv pni pni, neinm ped Vaich Milostem tejn, jako mn od Vaich Milost m k vyryt po slavn a svat pamti Jeho Milosti mskho, uherskho a eskho krle Ferdinanda IV. castrum doloris k zhotoven dna. Nyn jsouc ta vc ji ped nkolika dni k mstu a konci pivedena. Co se ryt dotenho castrum doloris prce m stal estinedln dote, Va Milosti modlitebn dm, e k vynahraen tomuto klteru naemu svatho Vclava, nen-li penitch prostedkv ped rukami, bu dva sudy vna, aneb nco npodobn od obil, laskav naditi a vykzati rte. V em se Vaim Milostem k milostiv resoluci poroum. Za Vaich Milost na modlitbch trvajc Fr[ater] Henricus Sancto Petro, du bosckho svatho Augustina u svatho Vclava v Novm Mst praskm TS
DOCUMENT No. 107 Henricus aSancto Petro, amonk from the ranks of the Barefoot Augustinians, requests the Bohemian Chamber to pay for his engraving which depicts the castrum doloris of the late FerdinandIV. (c. 1654), New Town in Prague. Prague, National Archives, file New Manipulation (photo: National Gallery in PragueAle David)

108

tk, 1656
The Memorial Book of the tk parish states that Karel krta executed the painting Our Lady with Ss Peter and Paul for the main altarpiece of the Ss Peter and Paul parish church for the amount of 300 guilders (?). Literature: PREISS 1955, pp. 158159. V 320 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

109

Venice (Italy), 1656

The inventory of inheritance of the Venice painter and collector, Michiel Pietro (Michiel Steiner), written on 5 and 6 April 1656, mentions two paintings by Karel krta with the subject of Adam and Eve (Uno Adamo, et Eva di Carlo Creta or, respectively, Un Adamo et Eva di ma[no] di Carlo Creta). Published by Jana Zapletalov from the source held in Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Giudici di Petizion, Inventari, Busta 366, Vol. 11, f. 7v. Literature: ZAPLETALOV 2010, p. 153. V

110

Verona (Italy), 1656

The 1656 inventory of inheritance of the Verona lawyer Giovanni Pietro Cortoni mentions krtas painting representing The Dance or The Exultation of Players (Carlo Screta pezzi uno n[umer]o 1 Tripudio di giocatori, largo p[iede] 5 o[nce] 4, alto p[iede] 3 o[nce] 1.). Published from the source held in Jesi, Biblioteca Comunale Planettiana, Archivio Azzolino, box 206, Vol.3, not foliated (f. 2v). Literature: ZAPLETALOV 2010, p. 155. V

111

Venice (Italy), (16601663)

krtas paintings included in the inventory of paintings offered to Count Humprecht Johann Czernin in Venice for sale (undated). Sttn oblastn archiv Tebo (poboka Jindichv Hradec) (State Regional Archives of the City of Tebo [branch Jindichv Hradec]), Rodinn archiv ernn (ernnsk stedn sprva) (Family Archives of the Czernin Family [Czernin Central Administration]), ernnsk galerie (The Czernin Gallery) 166*1799, box 761, f. 58. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, pp. 148149. [No. 18] Bersabea original del Screta [No. 19] Giosef fuggitivo dal letto original del Screta [No. 35] Virgilia Screta [No. 36] Dea Vestale, che porta aqua nel crivello con arma di monsignore al colliere di cane, NB Screta [No. 43] Diluvio, original di Screta [No. 44] Causa di diluvio, original Screta [No. 63] Venere Adone, che si bacciano, paese di Baldissera, gure di Screta [No. 124] Ritratto Veronica Franca, ven[ezian]a poetessa Screta [No. 126] Rit[ratto] Cassandra Fideli, ven[ezian]a oratora [No. 142] Ballo di satiri, original del Screta [No. 146] La Verit della bocca in Roma del leone con un matto, original del Screta V

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 321

112

Venice (Italy), (16601663)

Inventory of paintings purchased by Humprecht Jan Czernin in Venice, also mentioning krtas works from the above-mentioned collection of paintings on offer. Sttn oblastn archiv Tebo (poboka Jindichv Hradec) (State Regional Archives of the City of Tebo [branch Jindichv Hradec]), Rodinn archiv ernn (ernnsk stedn sprva) (Family Archives of the Czernin Family [Czernin Central Administration]), le Lista der eingekhaufften Bielder (Czernin Galerie 166*1799), box 761, f. 2124. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, pp. 148149.

[14] Giosef fuggitivo dal letto 24 [15] Bersabea 30 [33] Ballo di satiri 20 [36] Il Diluvio 48 [37] Crapula causa del diluvio 48 [39] Un re con un turbante, sei gure, bacuri[?] dora 48 [83] Una donna, che monta le scale con un sedazzo e altre gure 48

[87] Historia di Virgilio colla donna, che lo scherni 48 [108] Una poetessa veneta, vestita di verde 56 [109] Una compagna venetiana, oratoressa che scrive 56 [122] Donna, che baccia un giovane in un paesin 16 V

113

(Klatovy), 27 June 1661

The municipal government of Klatovy replies to Karel krtas demand note in the matter of repaying a debt, stating that two payment terms indeed expired but that reconstructing the office and accommodating the army brought expenses to the city. The body, however, promises that it would send the due amount as soon as possible in the forthcoming days. Sttn okresn archiv Klatovy (State Regional Archives Klatovy), fund Archiv msta Klatovy (Archives of the City of Klatovy) 13531945 (1956), Inv. No. 84, le Kopi list odeslanch radou apurkmistrovskm adem (Kniha copiarum) (The Duplicate Book of Letters Sent by the Council and the Burgomasters Office) 16571662, Evidence No. K68, f. 321r. Literature: BERNKOV 2004, pp. 183185.

Panu Karlovi krtovi 27. junii 1661 e pn ns ze dvouch terminv umluvench a ji prolch upomn a nm psan nae, v nm k placen jist ppov se stala, pipomn, porozumvme. emu v konenosti zadosti by se bylo stalo, kdyby obnova ouadu a nek lidu vojanskho a u ns logrovanho, nae nemal outrata vzela, v to bylo

vkroilo. Nicmn pna v konenosti ubezpeujeme a se zavazujeme, e povinnej penze bez dalho pna zdrovn a zaneprzdnn v krtkch dnech po schvlnm poslu naem odeleme, toliko dme, e krtk s nma strpen a sekn uin, v em se jistotn pn ubezpeiti moci bude. TS

DOCUMENT No. 113 Copies of two letters addressed to Karel krta by the municipal government of Klatovy and respectively dated 21 May 1673 and 14 June 1674. State Regional Archives Klatovy, file Archives of the City of Klatovy, The Book of Copies 16691681 (photo:1662, State Regional Archives Klatovy)

322 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

114

The New Town in Prague, 1661

Karel krta executed two paintings with the subjects of The Last Supper and Washing the Feet for the refectory of the Zderaz Augustinian monastery at the expense of the New Town book-binder Jeronm and the Lesser Town book-seller Bartolomj Lucerna, receiving 35 guilders for each. (Also mentioned are two canvases, The Marriage Feast in Cana of Galilee and Mary Magdalene in the House of the Pharisee, both painted by Fabin Harovnk.) Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archivy zruench klter (Archives of Abolished Monasteries), le Liber secundus seu Continuatio Annalium Excalceato-Augustiniani Nostri Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, ac Patroni Regni Bomiae, In Neo-Civitate Pragensi Supra Zderas Situati ab Anno Partae Salutis MDCXLII ad Annum usque MDCLXIII Complectens. [] AFratre Severino aSancta Anna Ordinis Eremit. Fratrum Discal. S.P.Augustini Sacerdote Professo (issued 1749), Inv. No. 2452, manuscript 11 (formerly 3480b), f.276277 (record to 1661). Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 66.

Anno abhin uno duabus imaginibus articiosis, et devotis refectorium nostrum statim ad initium illustratum est; quarum unam Coenae Domini compactor noster dominus Hieronimus civis Neo-Pragensis, alteram, quae lotionem pedum habet, dominus Bartholomaeus

Lucerna bibliopola Parvo Partensis: ille quidem quindecim orenos, hic totidem sexagenas offerendo compararunt, imagines tamen a domino Caloro [!] Screta pictore triginta quinque orenis appretiatae, et solutae fuerunt. Duae alterae Caenae Galileae, et Magdalenae

apud Pharisaeum a benefactore uno et altero nempe a domino Doctore Birka, et domino Nicolao Chyrurgo triginta pariter, et quinque orenis 12. Martii comparatae sunt. Pinxit has ultimas dominus Fabianus pictor. V

115

s. l., 8 October 1663

Prince Karl Eusebius of Liechtenstein orders Karel krta be reimbursed the amount of 450 Rheinish guilders for three paintings which he had purchased from him. HALW, HZR 1663/64, f. 57v. Literature: HAUPT 1998, p. 71.

dem Carl Screta, burger[lichen] Mahlern zue Prag vor drey von ihm erkauften Bielder, vor iedes per 100

Reichsthaler, in allem aber geben 450 Florin reinisch. RT

116

(1663)
Two epigrams by Bohuslav Balbn where portraits of Count Karl Maximilian Lazansky of Bukowa or, respectively, some Diadomilla both executed by Karel krta are equalled to the ideal appearances of an angel or, respectively, Venus. The rst epigram was published in Balbns collection of epigrams, entitled Examen Melissaeum seu Epigrammatum libri quinque [], Pragae 1663. The second epigram is part of Balbns undated manuscript Adversariorum R.P.Balbini 2da seu Litt. B, f. 319 (held in the library of the Strahov monastery, sign. DE V28). Literature: PREISS 2008, pp. 161162 (with Czech translation); Konen 2002, p. 53 (with Czech translation).

Modestia optimi adolescentis Caroli. Angelicam effigiem cupiebat pingere Screta, Effigiem pinxit Carole parve tuum. EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 323

Effigiem Veneris cum vellet pingere Screta, Effigiem pinxit o Diadomilla tuam. V

117

Prague, 9 April 1664

Karel krta enters into contract with Count Karl Caretto-Millesimo. The contract obliges the painter to execute castrum doloris after his own design for Countess Silvia of Baden, born Caretto-Millesimo. According to the receipt dated 5 June 1664, krta received the amount of 600 guilders for the work. The source, which was originally deposited in the archives of the family of Czernins of Chudenice, was not found. LITerature: OPOENSK 1910 (edition), pp. 134135. RT

118

(Prague), 17 July 1665

Karel krta enters into contract with the abbot of the Zblaslav monastery, Ji Oldich of Oberkunreut. The contract obliges krta to execute a painting with the subject of The Assumption for the main altarpiece of the Zbraslav monastery and to complete it by the time the woodcarvers and cabinetmakers have completed their works at the latest. krta will be paid 650 Rheinish guilders for the painting, receiving 200 guilders upon signing the contract and the rest upon delivering the work. Records conrmed by krta prove that 200 guilders were paid immediately, on 17 July 1665, and the remaining 450 guilders on 26 February 1668. Sttn oblastn archiv vLitomicch (State Regional Archives in Litomice), fund Cistercici Osek (Cistercians from Osek), le Miscellanea, sign. D II 68 (today missing). Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 126; SEKYRKA 2011, pp. 147152.

Im Jahre 1665 den 17. Juli ist nachfolgende Berednuss [!] zwischen hochwrdigen und hochgelehrten in Gott andchtigen Herren Herren Georg Ulrich Junkern von Oberkunrauth des heiligen Cistersienser Ordens Kniglichen Stifts Knigsaal Abten an einer, dan dem Herren Carol Screta, Brgern und Mahlern in der Alten Stadt Prag, an andern. Nemblich dass der gemeldte Herr Carol Screta, Mahler, fr Ihr Hochwrden und Gnaden zum grossen Altar in die grosse Kirche zu Knigsaal mahlen soll ein Stck acht Ellen und etliche Zoll hoch, dan vier und eine halbe Ellen breit, darauf Unser Lieben Frauen Himmelfahrt mit zwelf Aposteln, eine Gloria mit Engeln und Kindeln und die Heilige Dreifaltigkeit. Und das gemeldte Stck aufs lngste zu Aufrichtung der brigen von Bildhauen und Tischler darzu gehrige Sachen verfertigen. Dargegen versprechen Ihr Hochwrden und Gnaden obgemeldten Herrn Screta fr das gemahlte Stck sechs Hundert und fnfzig Gulden rheinisch zu geben der Gestalt dass erst bei

Unterschreibung dieses Contrakts Ihme Herrn Screta zwei Hundert Gulden rheinisch zuerlegen. Die brige vier Hundert und fnfzig Gulden bei Lieferung des gemeldten Stck. Das dieses zwischen Ihr Hochwrden und Gnaden und dem Herren Carol Screta geschlossen ist worden und fest gehalten wird, haben sich beide contrahierende mit eigenen Hnden unterschreiben und ihre Petschaften zugedruckt. So geschehen zu Knigsaal den Tag und Jahr wie oben. L. S. Carl Screta mp. L. S. Georg Ulrich Junckter von Oberkunreuth, Abt zu Knigssaahl Den 17. Juli wie geschlossen, habe von Ihr Hochwrden und Gnaden empfangen zwei Hundert Gulden reinisch bekenne mit dieser Schrift und Unterschrift Carl Screta mp. Den 26. Februar 1668 habe empfangen wegen Stckes der Unser Lieben Frauen Assumption die brige vier Hundert und fnfzig Gulden reinisch und der mit vllig bezahlt

worden, dass dem also beuzeuge mit meiner Hand Unterschrift. Carl Screta mp. TS

324 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

119

1666
Bohuslav Balbn sets krtas university theses (emblemata) as the example for stage directors of theatre performances, comparing them to portraits and pictures by the leading painters, Raphael and other Italians, and also Peter Paul Rubens, Albrecht Drer, Egidius Sadeler, Phillip Galle and Balthasar Moncornet. Bohuslaus Balbinus, Verisimilia humaniorum disciplinarum seu Juducium privatum de omni litterarum (quas humaniores appellant) articio quo in libello praecepta epistolarum [] proponitur. [], Pragae 1666, pp.216217. Literature: KROPEK 1992, p. 115; KONEN 2002, p. 53.

Est (quod saepe dixi), est quaedam laudata curiositas, imagines et picturas magnorum aticium sedulo inspicere, quales sunt Raphalis Urbinatis et ceterorum Italorum, item Rubeni, Dureri, Sadeleri, Galei, Moncorneti et apud nos antiquis non cessuri, Bohemi pictoris Caroli Scretae emblemata. Hi non tantum apparatum personarum, sed

gestus insignes et raros in affectibus ostendut. V

10 Comp.the modern edition and the Czech translation: Bohuslav Balbn, Rukov humanitnch discipln = Verisimilia humaniorum disciplinarum, prepared for publication, accompanied by commentary and notes and translated from the Latin original with the help of Bohumil Rybas translation by Olga Spevak, Praha 2006, pp.472475.

120

Tel, 16661667
Karel krta executed the painting The Adoration of the Jesus Name, representing not only the monogram IHS but also the Saviour Himself and St Ignatius of Loyola with St Francis Borgias and St Francis Xavier, on commission from Countess Francess Slawata for the main altarpiece of the Jesus Name church with the Jesuit college in Tel. He received 300 guilders for the work. The altarpiece was replaced by a new one with the canvas by Daniel Gran in 1747. Literature: ZVOLNKOV 2007, pp. 34, 4952. V

121

Litomice, 2 May 1669

The Litomice Bishop Maximilian Rudolph of lejnice writes the Metropolitan Canon, Tom Peina of echorod, informing him beside other things that krtas painting for the main altarpiece of St Stephen cathedral in Litomice is being nished. Ego interim apparo dominis canonicis meis nova hic stella et de notanda nova hac mea cathedrali ecclesia de meo jam pariter. Interim et d. Screta picturam suam pro altari majore est perfecturus LITerature: SCHLENZ 1914, p. 566, note 2; VLNAS 1992, p. 137; Lenka Stolrov Vt Vlnas, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. V.33, V.34, p. 262. V

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 325

122

(Prague), (7 February 1670)

Petr tupart of Lwenthal, councillor of the Bohemian Chamber, informs the body about the damages caused to the Prague Castle Picture Gallery which dawned both on the paintings and the building due to the fast melting of snow at night. Members of the committee judging the damage included Superintendent (Schatzmeister) Ferdinand Miseroni, construction scrivener Ondej ermk, court painter Johann Hess, court builder Santin de Bossi, and Karel krta. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Star manipulace (Old Manipulation), sign. S21/71670, Inv. No.3139, box 2109. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 48; SEKYRKA 2011, pp. 147152.

hab ich mit Zuziehung Ihro Maiestt Schatzmeister Herrn Ferdinand Miseron, dann des Bauschreibers Andreas Tschermaks und Hofmalers Johann He, wie auch des Hofmauermeisters Santin de Bossi, sowohl auch nachgehende durch Herrn Carolum Sckreta den Schaden, welcher vorkommen in der kaiserlichen

Kunstcammer an Bildern, wie auch an dem Gehu in Augenschein genomen soviel nun die Gemlde in der Kaiserlichen Kunstcammer betrifft, ist nicht ohne, dan die zwischen denen zweien Dechern ber den grossen Saal liegende, mit Schnee angeflte Rinnen, wegen des so gehlingen eingefallenen Tau- und

Regenwetters das von beiderseits Dchern haug zusammengefallene Wasser nicht hat fr dem knnen, sondern an etlich Orten bergangen, ber dass auch bei dem Abfal bel versehen ist, dannenhero auf atliche Bilder in dem Bildersaal stark getropfet, wordurch aber nach einhelliger Erkantnus des Herrn

Hofmalers und Herrn Screta ganz kein Schaden geschehen, all dieweilen dieselbe von dem Herrn Schatzmeister bald abgenomen, in einem geheitzten Zimmer getrucknet und an sicher Ort in dem Bildersaal bis dieses remedirt sein wird, gestellet bleiben. TS

123

s. l., 27 February 1670

Acquitted voucher to the full sum of 191 guilders, which were accepted by Karel krta from Count Franz Gallas. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka paprovch listin (Collection of Paper Documents), sign. AMP PPLV1008. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 3334 (edition); NEUMANN 2000, pp. 9394; Radka Tibitanzlov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.27, p. 607.

Da ich Unterschriebener au Anordnung H[och]grf[lichen] Gnaden Herrn Francisci Grafen Gallassen v[o]n (titul) Herrn Bernard Flckhe wohlbestelten

Hauptman zu Reichenberg ein hundert ein und nenzig Gulden paar empfangen habe, bezegt diee meine aigenhndige Schrift und

Unterschrift. So geschehen den 27. Febr[uarii] anno 1670. Carl Screta mp. Id est 191 Florin RT

124

The Lesser Town in Prague, 1670

(krtas) painting of The Crucixion, procured by Countess Susanna Polyxena of Dietrichstein for 100 guilders, was exhibited on the main altarpiece of the St Nicolas church with the Jesuit professional house in the Lesser Town in Prague. Wien, sterreichische National Bibliothek, le Literrae Annue provinciae Boemiae Societatis Jesu 16701674, Cod. 11963, f. 3r. Literature: Stolrov Vlnas 2010, pp. 312, 334335; Oulkov 2011, pp. 3947.

Ex acuendis vero delium affectibus, proportionata materiae Christi in cruce extremum loquentis, et agonizantis effigies, liberalitate Excell[entissi]mae et Ill[ustrissi]mae Dominae Dominae Polyxenae supremi in

regno Boemiae Burgravii coniugis, centum orenorum comparata pretio, et ab insigni saeculi nostri in Boemia Apelle depicta, in summo altari exposita est, quae etiamnum e dextro arae latere collocata, sexta

quaque feria serico velamine (quo per hebdomadam caeteram obtegitur) reducto, omnium oculis non sine tenero piarum animarum solatio proponitur. Patet eadem imago, quoties Venerabile sacramentum, e

mortuorum sacello secundis feriis ad aram primariam, peracta pro defunctis aut menstruae, aut hebdomadaria devotione refertur. PO

326 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

125

The Lesser Town in Prague, 1670

Karel krta executed the painting St Thomas Villanueva Giving Alms to the Poor for the side altarpiece in the St Thomas church of the Augustinian Hermits in the Lesser Town in Prague. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archiv esk provincie augustininskho du (Archives of the Czech Province of the Augustinian Order), le Summarium rerum memorabilium Conventus Micro-Pragensis S[anc]ti Thomae Apostoli Ordinis Fratrum Eremitarum Sancti Patris Augustini [] aP.Theobaldo Gruber (issued 1756), sign. Ia 5, manuscript 6, f. 265266. Literature: MATJKA 1896, le 122; NEUMANN 1974, p. 130.

Anno 1670. Erectum fuit in ecclesia Thomaea altare S[ancti] Thomae Villa-Novani, in quo altari imago hujus Sancti plus auro aestimata a pictore Screta hodiedum asservatur de hoc altari perhibet manuscriptum vetus in fasc[iculo] n[umero] XV. lit[erae] B notatum sequentia: Ad dexteram

capella. Altare S[ancti] Thomae de Villa-Nova O[ordinis] N[ostri] de quo: Gott dem Allmchtigen der Unbeeckten Jungfrauen Mariae und dem Wunderbahren heil[igen] Thomae de Villa-Nova zu Ehren ist dieser Altar aufgerichtet worden anno 1670. V

126

The Lesser Town in Prague, 1671

Karel krta received an advance payment of 30 guilders for executing the painting St Thomas Villanueva Giving Alms to the Poor for the side altarpiece in the St Thomas church in the Lesser Town in Prague, and another 270 guilders upon completing the work. Literature: MATJKA 1896, le 122; NEUMANN 1974, p. 130. V

127

The Lesser Town in Prague, 1672

During Lent in 1672, the worshippers in the St Nicolas church with the Jesuit professional house in the Lesser Town in Prague indulged in contemplation before the painting of Christ on the Mount of Olives, executed by Karel krta for 111 guilders. Nrodn knihovna R (National Library of the Czech Republic), le Annuae litterae provinciae Boemiae Societatis Jesu 16711674, sign.XXIII C 105/8, f. 166v. Literature: Nevmov 2004, p. 112; Stolrov Vlnas 2010, pp. 313, 320321; Oulkov 2011, pp. 3947.

Qui per magni ieiunii ferias de mysteriis horti olivarum quotidie peroravit ecclesiastes ipsum Christi orantis simulacrum Apellea Scretae manu

raro articio expictum pretio centum undecim orenorum delibus oculis spectandum exhibuit. PO

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 327

128

Litomice, 1672
The poem (epigram) by the Litomice Bishop Maximilian Rudolph of lejnice, inspired by krtas painting The Stoning of St Stephen from the main altarpiece in the Litomice cathedral. Maximilianus Rudolphus Schleinicensis, le Memorabilium Romanorum Exornatorum Potice, Ad Ethicum alicubui, aut Politicum sensum, Centuria una. Sive Curae Remissiores, Pragae 1672, p.N4/ab. Literature: MACHYTKA 1990, p. 218.

Divus Stephanus Protomartyr, dum in Icone, in terram genu tenus prostratus, a Judaeis lapidatur, in coelum suspicit. VII. Aspice, quam placido tranquilli lumine vultus, Innumero Stephanus, se videt hoste peti? Quam cupit ignosci duris lapidantibus? et dum Sternitur, ut Numen mitigat ipse prece?

Ut tollit super astra oculos? lapidumve nec imbre Territus, in coelum lumina versa tenet? Et Jesum in coelo stantem, dextramque tenentem, Cernere se, Patris, mox moriturus, ait? Quid dixi moriturus? in ipso limine mortis, Aethereae vitae redditus, astra subit. Jam Stephane, in Domino obdormi, dum te astra coronent Stellaque sit capiti, quod modo plaga fuit. V

129

(Klatovy), 21 May 1673

The municipal government of Klatovy replies to Karel krtas demand note in the matter of repaying a debt. The body appreciates that krta is willing to postpone the payment, at the same time pleading high decit and other creditors and promising to disburse at least part of the debt in the amount of 50 guilders. Sttn okresn archiv Klatovy (State Regional Archives Klatovy), fund Archiv msta Klatovy (Archives of the City of Klatovy) 13531945 (1956), Inv. No. 85, le Kopi list odeslanch radou apurkmistrovskm adem (Kniha copiarum) (The Duplicate Book of Letters Sent by the Council and the Burgomasters Office) 16691681, Evidence No. K69, f. 273r273v. Literature: BERNKOV 2004, pp. 183185.

Panu krtovi 21. mai anno 1673 Kdy toho, kterak laskav pn, s zadluilou obc na outrpnost maje v pin povinnho dluhu, nm sekn inil, povaujeme tehdy takovho ptelstv a diskreci vceji in ab usum brti se ostejchme, a proto peujce velijak, abychom laskavho pana kontentrovati mohli, 50 oren rejnskch s tou nejvt tkost v nynj obtn asy jsme shledali, a ty taky proti podn kvitanci odslme. Jistotn srden bychom rdi vceji byli shledali onen cel dluh zaplatili, ale i velik nedostatek, i jinch pnv vitelv na ns hust a tk nastupovn nm v tom pekku in, proe laskavho pna ptelsky dme a dokonalou nadji mme, e nepme ostatnho restu, jet dalho

hjemstv nm propj, my nemrn se o to starati, aby laskav pn k nleitmu povinnho dluhu zaplacen ten dvji pijti mohl. S tm laskavho pna ochran bo poroueje, zstvme k slubm vdycky voln. TS

DOCUMENT No. 129 The Duplicate Book of Letters sent by the Klatovy council and burgomasters office, 16691681, State Regional Archives Klatovy, Archives of the City of Klatovy, f. 273rv (photo: 1662, State Regional Archives Klatovy)

328 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

130

(Klatovy), 14 June 1673

The municipal government of Klatovy replies to Karel krtas demand note of 26 May in the matter of paying off the remaining debt. The city has already disbursed 50 guilders but it does not have more funds so far due to the communitys poverty, bad annuities and claims of other creditors. The body thus asks krta to avoid compelling the rest of the debt before the court and exposing the city to additional legal charges. Sttn okresn archiv Klatovy (State Regional Archives Klatovy), fund Archiv msta Klatovy (Archives of the City of Klatovy) 13531945 (1956), Inv. No. 85, le Kopi list odeslanch radou apurkmistrovskm adem (Kniha copiarum) (The Duplicate Book of Letters Sent by the Council and the Burgomasters Office) 16691681, Evidence No. K69, f. 281r. Literature: BERNKOV 2004, pp. 183185.

Panu Karlovi krtovi otnovskmu z Zvoic 14. junii 1674 Byli jsme dokonal nadje, e laskav pn po pijet 50 oren v pin ostatnho restu od ns povinnho njakou outrpnost a sekn mti bude, ale z psan de dato 26. maii lta tohoto k nm prolho vyrozumvme, e laskav pn, ns oste z restrujc sumy upomn, s tm doloenm, pokud (prej) od datum psan ve tyech nedlch ostatn sumy nezapravme, e podle prva svho postupovati bude. Vme sice, e jeden kad svmu chce a dluhv svch uti dostiv jest a my taky bychom vinovali, aby veckny pni vitelov nai nleit kontentrovati bti mohli, co vak, pravdu mluvie pro velikou schuzelost a zadluilost obce njak uiniti nememe nebo kde jak duch [!] se vyskytne, hned nkolik pnv vitelv na nj oekv, a odtud pochz, e podn a vas urit smluven termnov placen bti nemohou, akoliv nyn nejpatnj dchodov jsou. Vak nadji mme, e zase v krtkm ase nco penz shledme a dle nejvy mocnosti jist kvantum laskavmu pnu odeslati konenosti neumineme, proe vdy pedce laskavho pna ptelstv dme, e jet k zchuzel, a zadluil obci na tak dalece

se naklon a dnch outrat nm nedohazujc, za krtk as sekn uin, my v jistot velijak se k tomu piinme, aby laskav pn v zadralm restu co nejdvji zaplacen bti mohl. Co e laskav pn uin doufanlivou nadji mme a zase t prokzan nm a obci na ptelsk nchylnosti vem vm pjemnm se odmovati neumineme, jako pak dle ochrany bosk jsme a zstvme laskavmu pnu.
11 The copy of the letter issued by the Klatovy municipal government is dated 14 June 1674. The date is, however, wrong according to the ndings of Maruka Bernkov. The letter is recorded as part of the documents of 1673 and its contents, too, corresponds to this dating.

TS

DOCUMENT No. 130 The Duplicate Book of Letters sent by the Klatovy council and burgomasters office, 16691681, State Regional Archives Klatovy, Archives of the City of Klatovy, f. 273rv (photo: 1662, Archives of the City of Klatovy, f. 281r)

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 329

131

(Klatovy), 7 July 1673

The municipal government of Klatovy replies to Karel krtas demand note of 20 June in the matter of paying off the remaining debt. The body informs him it is unable to redeem the debt since it has no more funds to satisfy its creditors. It, however, promises to repay half of the remaining debt during Christmas of the given year and the rest during the Candlemas of the year to come. Sttn okresn archiv Klatovy (State Regional Archives Klatovy), fund Archiv msta Klatovy (Archives of the City of Klatovy) 13531945 (1956), Inv. No. 85, le Kopi list odeslanch radou apurkmistrovskm adem (Kniha copiarum) (The Duplicate Book of Letters Sent by the Council and the Burgomasters Office) 16691681, Evidence No. K69, f. 290r290v. Literature: BERNKOV 2004, pp. 183185.

Panu Karlovi krtovi 7. julii anno 1673 Urozen pane nm zvlt laskav pzniv, tak jako jsme laskavho pna skrze nkoliker psan i tak z prostedku naeho vyslan osoby o trpliv sekn od ns povinho dluhu snan nsledovali a na to dokonalou resoluci pod datum 20. dne ptomnho msce junii, e totito jist termn vdti a jak kvantum v tm sloen bti m, laskav pn dostiv jest, jsme vyrozumli. Pichz nm to sice velmi ltostiv, e po tolikerm ns upomnn povinnosti na zadosti uiniti nememe. Nicmn vak pokud laskav pn ty velik nedostatky a obce klatovsk nemonost v sv povaen uili a to k srdci pipustiti sob oblb, tehdy nadje nm odtud povstane, e k trpnosti pina poznan bude. Neb to v pravd cel obec vyznati, a ns jeden kad svou kodou a zhubou zakoueti mus, e nemajce ji psno obec klatovsk tm dnch, obzvltn nynjch, asv, uplacen svch pnv kreditorv, prostedkv sami soused sv ivnosti opoutti, a nyn obec zastupovati musej. Ponvad ale jineji uiniti nememe, neli e, jak jin, tak taky laskavho pna podle nejvy monosti kontentrovati musme, proe prohldajce na budouc obecn intrdy

vynachzme, e pokud vemohouc Pn Bh letonho podzimnho loven poehnati r, z ryb nco shledati a odtud polovici zstvajcho restu k ptm slavnostem vnonm shromditi, ostatn pak polovici tho k hromnicm t nejprv ptm odeslati mocti budeme se doufanliv tme, e tehdy laskav pn na schuzelost obce na se tak ltostiv ohldnouti a ji jmenovan dva termny k zaplacen dluhu svho akceptrovati odporn nebude, ve v uctivosti dme a dle ochrany bosk zstvme B. P. k slubm pjemn hotovi, Jeho Milosti csask p[urkmistr] a r[ada] krlovskho m[sta] Klatov. TS

DOCUMENT No. 131 The Duplicate Book of Letters sent by the Klatovy council and burgomasters office, 16691681, State Regional Archives Klatovy, Archives of the City of Klatovy, f. 290rv (photo: 1662, Archives of the City of Klatovy)

330 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

132

The Lesser Town in Prague, 1673

Three paintings by Karel krta, representing The Judged Christ, were displayed on the main altarpiece of the St Nicolas church with the Jesuit professional house in the Lesser Town in Prague during the Candlemas of 1673. Nrodn knihovna R (National Library of the Czech Republic), le Annuae litterae provinciae Boemiae Societatis Jesu 16711674, sign.XXIII C 105/8, f. 331r. Literature: Nevmov, 2004, p. 112; Stolrov Vlnas 2010, pp. 313, 322327; Oulkov 2011, pp. 3947.

Per magni ieiunii ferias propositus est Christus apud diversa tribunalia iudicatus, idemque mysterium in tribus elegantibus Scretiano penicillo

elaboratis imaginibus pro summa ara exhibitum est. PO

133

The Old Town in Prague, 1673

Two paintings by Karel krta St John of Patmos (1650s) and St Catherine (1658) were recorded according to the inventory in the Carolinum assembly hall. Archiv Univerzity Karlovy (Charles University Archives), sign. A12/2, f. 130136. Literature: Marcela Vondrkov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. nos. V.15 and V.16, p. 230.

in aula magna Carolinae sunt dua imagines, una S. Joannis, altera S. Catharinae, manu domini Screta picta. RT

134

Prague, 31 March 1674

Jacob Graf informs Count Czernin that The Flagellation, executed by painter Karel krta for the St Nicolas church in the Lesser Town, was completed and the only thing left is to frame it. Graf thus requires the disbursement in the amount of 81 guilders, which is the price for both the painting and its ttings. Sttn oblastn archiv Tebo (poboka Jindichv Hradec) (State Regional Archives of the City of Tebo [branch Jindichv Hradec]), ernnsk stedn sprva (Czernin Central Administration), sign.VIII Fd/20, Inv. No. 761, f. 142. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 140 (wrong date 23 March 1674); DOBALOV 2004, pp. 82, 89 (wrong date 23 March 1674); Tom Sekyrka, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. VII.16, pp. 340341; SEKYRKA 2011, pp. 147152.

Pragae 31. Martii 1674 Illustrissime et Excellentissime Domine Domine Comes, Domine Patrone colendissime Cum Illustrissima Excellentia vestra promptissima liberalitate in imaginem Christi agellati a Carolo Screta pingenda consensuit, ac illa articio sua eiusdem pictoris manu non solum pridem absoluta, verum et

publica devotioni in hac elapsa quadragesima exposita fuerit, iamque precio iusto una cum aliis more alieno ad eam pertinentibus ornamentis, inaurata scilicet lista ac cortinis solvenda sit. Rogo Illustrissimam Excellentiam vestram dignetur pro omnibus hisce octaginta et unum imperialies mihi exsolvere, cum hoc precio, aliae quoquae sint comparatae

et id ipsum pro picta cum dictis appertinentijs veniant. Pro gratia et liberalitate speciali Societas nostra primario vero Domus Professa nostra se obligatam semper agnoscet, Deus vero Optimus Maximus in carne pro nobis passus et mortuus hoc donum sanctum sancta et felici morte haud dubie se munerabitur, quae ut quam longissime differatur ego animitius

precor, maneoque uti in multis aliis ita in et ob hoc specialiter. Illustrissimae Excellentiae vestrae obligatissimus, devotissimus et humillimus servus in Christo, Jacobus Graf TS

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 331

135

The Lesser Town in Prague, 1674

The Jesuits from the Lesser Town in Prague purchased three paintings with The Suffering of Christ, executed by Karel krta some time ago, for 300 guilders. Nrodn knihovna R (National Library of the Czech Republic), le Annuae litterae provinciae Boemiae Societatis Jesu 16711674, sign.XXIII C 105/8, f. 524v. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Aevi nostri, nostraeque Patriae Apellis praestantissimi opus, patientis DEI ternae imagines, priusquam fatis concederet ab eo parate

a nostri unius cura procuratae 300 rhen[ensium]. PO

136

Prague Vyehrad, 1677

The 1677 inventory of the Ss Peter and Paul capitular church at Vyehrad in Prague lists krtas painting The Conversion of St Paul (In the St Paul chapel with gilding and also with the nice virtuoso achievement by the noble painter, Master krta) as well as The Crucixion and Ss Peter and Paul which the late artist painted. Literature: KON 1987, p. 544. V

137

s. l., 16781720
Works by Karel krta, held in the collections of the Count Gallas family between 1678 and 1720. Sttn oblastn archiv vLitomicch (poboka Dn) (State Regional Archives in Litomice [branch Dn]), fund Historick sbrka (rodinn archiv) Clam-Gallas (Historical Collection [Family Archives] of the Clam-Gallas Family), Frdlant, (1238) 15291947, Inv. No. 1963, 2192, cat. no. 549. Literature: KRUMMHOLZ 2005, pp. 273, 274, 276, 277; CLAM-GALLASV PALC 2007, pp. 8183, 91, 98; Radka Tibitanzlov Tom Sekyrka, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVII.22, p. 634.

Inventarium uber die hochgriche Gallasische Prager Hau Mobillien, welche nach der Theilung, so den 17. Junii anno 1720 geschhen, sich in selben Hau befunden und ihro hochgrichen Gnaden Herrn Herrn Grafen Frantz Carl von Gallas zu kommen seynd. Mahlereyen, so bey der Theillung bey den Hau gelassen worden N[umer]o Hoch Breith von folgenden Meisters Ehlen/Virtl/Zoll Ehlen/Virtl/Zoll 30. Herrn Stracka Contrefait 2 1 2/4 Screta Inventory of 6 September 1678, Gallery

N[umer]o 30. des Herrn v[on] Straka Conterf[ait] von Skreta 81. 1 gros St[uck] mit viel[en] Figuren von Skreta 107. kleiner Cupido vom Skretta The 1720 Inventory of the Prague palace Mahlereyen, so bey der Theilung bey den Hau gelassen worden 30. des Herrn v[on] Straka Conterf[ait] von Skreta; 2 Ehlen hoch, breit 1 Ehlen, 2/4 Virtl, Zoll 81. romanische Histori von vielen Figuren 2 x 4, Screta RT

332 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

138

(Klatovy), 30 January 1680

The municipal government of Klatovy replies to Veronika krtovs demand note in the matter of repaying a debt, pleading for more patience in receiving the instalments. Sttn okresn archiv Klatovy (State Regional Archives Klatovy), fund Archiv msta Klatovy (Archives of the City of Klatovy) 13531945 (1956), Inv. No. 85, le Kopi list odeslanch radou apurkmistrovskm adem (Kniha copiarum) (The Duplicate Book of Letters Sent by the Council and the Burgomasters Office) 16691681, Evidence No. K69, f. 613v. Literature: BERNKOV 2004, pp. 183185.

Urozen pan Veronice krtov, vdov, mtnnce krlovskho Starho Msta praskho 30. januarii 1680 Urozen pan, kterak ns pan spolu s pny ddici nebotka dobr pamti pana manela jejho strany zaplatcen od obce na restrujcho kvantum napomn, po peten za tou pinou k nm prolho psan pod datum 18. currenti, jsme vyrozumli. I akoliv povinnost nai bti uznvme, takov rest co nejspe zaplatiti, vak ale nenachzce pi obci na dnch prostedkv pan a spoluddice jej v tom etrn nsledovati a za njak dal strpen dati nuceni jsme. Proe jsouce oumyslu pokud ne vecko, aspo dobr dl na t rest odeslati, e s nmi tak laskav naloiti a ponkud sekn uiniti sob oblb, ptelsky dme. S tm vedle mocn ochrany bosk zstvajce pan k slubm hotovi. P[urkmistr] a r[ada] m[sta] Klatov. TS

DOCUMENT No. 138 The Duplicate Book of Letters sent by the Klatovy council and burgomasters office, 16691681, State Regional Archives Klatovy, Archives of the City of Klatovy, f. 613v (photo: 1662, Archives of the City of Klatovy)

139

1681
Bohuslav Balbn mentions krtas paintings [the Passion cycle], displayed in the St Nicolas church in the Lesser Town in Prague, in his enumeration of imposing Prague church architecture. Bohuslaus Balbinus, LiberIII.DecadisI.Miscellaneorum Historicorum Regni Bohemiae, Topographicus et Chorographicus, qui Fines et Terminos totius Bohemiae, tum ipsorum Districtuum guras, Arces, Oppida, et Urbes [] continet, ac complectitur; Tum Opera Publica Bohemiae, Pontes, Basilicas et Templa Celebriora, Palatia, Coenobia, Aedicationes sumtuosas [], Pragae 1681, p.134. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Norbertinorum in Strahov ecclesia inter ornatiores, quas habet Praga, computatur. Idem dici potest de nova ecclesia S[anctae] Mariae Magdalenae

Praedicatorum in minore Praga; Hibernorum Ordinis S[ancti] Francisci Minorum ita nunc adornatur, ut istis dubiam palmam relinquat.

S[ancti] Thomae Apostoli ecclesia in minore Praga tum seipsa, tum altari summo memorabilis censetur, in quo S[ancti] Thomae Apostoli obitus

cum tormentis graphice depictus ab Apelle Belgii Rubenio spectatur. Eadem imaginum gratia spectabilis est ecclesia S[ancti] Nicolai Domus

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 333

Professae Pragensis, quae Caroli Scretae, eximii apud nos pictoris, pretioso penicillo, et laboribus illustratur; quod non amicitiae (quae mihi cum vivente intercessit maxima)

tribuo, sed pictorum sententiis, quos saepius audivi laudantes. V

140

1683
Bohuslav Balbn mentions krtas painting St Luke Drawing the Virgin on the altarpiece of the Prague painters guild in the church of Our Lady before Tn in the Old Town in Prague. Bohuslaus Balbinus, Miscellanea Historica Bohemiae, DecadisI.LiberV.Parochialis et Sacerdotalis in duas divisus partes; quarum Prior Parochias omnes Veteris Bohemiae, per Decem Archidiaconatus recitat; [], Pragae 1683, p.79. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 8.

Erectio et dotatio altaris S[ancti] Lucae Evangelistae et S[ancti] Laurentii Martyris in ecclesia ante Laetam Curiam Pragae a civibus an[no] 1388.

Hoc altare S[ancti] Lucae nostra memoria exornandum sibi sumsit Carolus Screta civis Pragensis et pictor aetate nostra in patria summus. V

141

The Old Town in Prague, 1 September 1684

After the death of the court gem cutter, Ferdinand Eusebius Miseroni, the inventory of his inheritance was issued in his house at Prague Castle under the presence of Vclav Moic Salomon of Friedberg and Ferdinand of Lichtenburg. The inventory lists gold, silver, jewellery, clothes, documents, correspondence and debts as well as many crystal products executed by the deceased (found in the gem-cutting workshop) and numerous paintings. In addition, it mentions portraits of rulers and saints, hunting scenes and still-lifes alongside family portraits, while one of the latter can be reliably attributed as the Portrait of the Gem-Cutter Dionysius Miseroni and His Family. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber inventariorum, 16801688, sign. 1178, f. 227r275r. Literature: URBAN 1976, p. 11; SKIVNEK 1980, pp. 119; SKIVNEK 1982, p. 71; SKIVNEK 1983, pp. 6668.

Von Mahlereyen In der groene Stueben Ein groes Stuckh von Screta gemahlt, worauf der gottseel[ige] Herr Dionisius Misiron sambt dessen Frau und allen seinen Khindern an Contrfect, woran ein geschtickter Firhankh

Des Gottseel[igen] Herrn mit jetziger Frauen Contrfect in Rahm mit vergolter Leisten 2 Des seel[igen] Herrn Contrfect, als er noch jung war, in Rahm 1 In dem Zimmer in obern Stock ober den Thor Ein altvaterisches Contrfect 2

In dem Kinderzimmer Contrfect des seel[igen] Herrn Dionisi Misiron, wie er annoch jung war, in Rahm 1 Contrfect des seel[igen] Herrn, als er 18 Jahr alt war, in Rahm 1 Contrfect der Frau Mutter sambt dem seel[igen] Herrn, als er ein kleines Khind war 1 RT

334 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

142

The New Town in Prague, 19 February 1685

Felix Frantiek Blha Chottovsk, burgher and councillor of the New Town in Prague, issues his testament in 1685, bequeathing two paintings by Karel krta to the New Town and Old Town city halls. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber testamentorum 5, 16661708, NMP (New Town in Prague), sign. 4084, f. 312v327r. Literature: FEJTOV 1996, pp. 171172.

od Jeho Milosti csask a krle pna pna mho nejmilostivjho a ddinho tu csaskou a krlovskou milost sob uinnou, e jest Jeho csask a krlovsk milost osobu mou nejprve v krlovskm Starm, potomn pak, kdy odtud na Nov Msto prask jsem odebral a v nm se osadil, tak v tm krlovskm Novm Mst praskm za jednu osobu radn nejmilostivji zvoliti a dosaditi rila a j tak podle t csask a krlovsk milosti od obouch slavnch magistrtv jak Starho, tak tak Novho

obouch krlovskch mst praskch po vechny asy, po kter v prostedcch jich jsem zstval, velik zdvoilosti a vldnosti jsem uil, proe na dokzn m povinn vdnosti pedn obraz svatho milho Vclava, patrona tohoto Krlovstv eskho, od vzneenho male neb[otka] pana Karla krty malovan magistrtu krlovskho Starho Msta praskho na vnou pamtku do msta radnho krlovskho Starho, druh pak t od nyn pravenho male vlastn rukou malovan obraz Matky Bo Bolestn synka mrtvho na

kln majc magistrtu Novho Msta praskho do msta radnho v csaskm a krlovskm Novm Mst praskm na pamtku odkazuji a legruji. daje, e tato mal oferrovan pamtka netoliko vdn ode m pijata, anbr tak njak pamtn ppis k jednomu i druhmu obrazu, e do jednoho i druhho Boho msta in perpetuum oferrovan jsou, povolen bude. RT

143

The New Town in Prague, 23 January 1690

The testament issued by Jan Octavius, son of Dionysius Miseroni of Lison, on 5 January 1690 contains alongside many other items the list of paintings found in the testamentarys property. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Kniha sirot tvrti sv.tpna (The Book of the St Stephan Orphans Quarter), 16901767, sign. 2288, f. 1r7r. Literature: URBAN 1976, p. 11; SKIVNEK 1980, pp. 119; SKIVNEK 1982, p. 71; SKIVNEK 1983, pp. 6668.

Rubrica G Mallerey Meine Gemhlde, unter welichen Uner Lieben Frauen Bild in der Capellan fr ein groen Schatz halte, diees solle mit allen Ornamentis, welche sich anjetzo auf dem Altar benden, sambt denen Blumwerck, mit welichen bey hhern Festen das Altar orniret wird und die Lierle in ihren Verwahrung hat. Meinem Sohn Josepho Antonio al ein Praelegatum seyn und so lang jemand au meinen Descendentibus im Leben seyn, wird jedesmahl bey dem eltisten verbleiben und dafern meine Descendenslinea aufhren solte, so solle diees Bild mit allen seinen Ornamentis der Kirchen des Grern

heyligen Stephan anheimb fallen, meine Erben oder Descendentes dahin verobligire alle Sambstag eine Lampen tglichen aber ein kleines Wachlichtel, wie ich es bihero gehalten, brennen laen. Diejenige 6 Stuckh Bilder aber al nemb[lich] meines Ahndl Herrn Hieronymi Miiron und deen geweste Ehefrau Isabella, den meines Grovatern weyl[and] Herrn Octavius Miiron und deen Ehefrau, seel[ige] Laura Miironin, im gleichen meines Herrn Vatern weyl[and] Dionysius und meiner Frauen Mutter Juditha Contrafeit, welche ich unlengst mahlen laen, sollen meinen Sohn Josepho Antonio und Consequenter bey denen Descendentibus pro memoria

familiae verbleiben. Item solle das groe Bild, worauf der Bacchus mit denen Satyren nach Rubens gemahlet, in gleichen meinen Sohn Josepho Antonio verbleiben. Wie nicht weniger das Bild des heyl[igen] Dionysius, so Herr Screta seelig mit eigener Hand gemahlet, mehr gemeldeten meinem Sohn Josepho Antonio zuvor herau gebhren. Meiner Frau Liel seel[ige] zwey Contrafait, eines nach dem Zimbrecht, das andere aber nach Herrn Demuci, solle das erste meinem Sohn Wenceslao Dionysio, das andere aber meiner lieben Tochter Maria Elisabeth gebhren. Und weilen wegen der brigen Gemhlde der Zeit einige Taxa zumachen, die Zeit nicht verstattet, al solle nach

meinem Absterben in Gegenwarth der erbetenen Herren Assistenz Rthen durch vorstndige Mahler geschtzet und unter meine Erben getheilet werden. RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 335

144

The New Town in Prague, late 17th century

Description of the St Stephen parish church in the New Town in Prague, also mentioning a painting by Karel krta. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Farn ad usv.tpna na Novm Mst praskm (Parish Office at St Stephan in New Town in Prague), le Liber memorabilium I, 16411706, Book No. 1, Inv. No. 1, f. 73v74r. Literature: NEUMANN 1974, pp. 131132.

Svatho Jana Ktitele, kde prv, jak praveno, olt svatho Vclava a eskch svatch patronv stval, na nklad urozenho a statenho vladyky pana Jana Benedikta Smolka, Jich Milosti Krlovsk Kancele prask sekrete, jen lta 1689 dne 5. aug[usti] z prostedku ivch vykroil, zhotoven jest. S obrazem od dobr pamti pana Karla krty, vzneenho male, malovanm, doshna posvcen v ltu 1649 12. dne octobris skrz vysoce dstojnho pana Josefa Cortiusa sufragna, kter nynjho Jeho Milosti csask pana pana

sufragna de Longa Villa na knstvo posvtil. Relikvie v nm jsou sloen s. Celestina, Saturnina a Cyrila. /small altarpiece of St Virgin Rosalia/ Proti tmu druh tak ji posvcen s. Panny Rosalie dlem velebn knz pan Jakub Chvojn, nkdej far svatotpnsk, dlem nynj pan far knz Daniel Hubka (na nklad vak odjinud sob poskytnutch) postaviti dali. Reliquia v nm jsou s. Geneseia, Vincentia a Felixa. RT

145

The Old Town in Prague, 19 June 1704

The inventory issued after the death of Jan Karel Fridrich Fischer, the second husband of Veronika krtov, the daughter of Karel krta the Elder, does not only list commonplace items but also numerous musical instruments, a vast collection of books and books with copper engravings, mathematical instruments and large numbers of paintings among which krtas works can also be found. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber inventariorum, 17021712, sign. 1180, f. 119v147v. Literature: HOJDA 1993, pp. 60, 65, 67, 7481, 92, 97, 98; SLAVEK 2007, p. 169.

Vornehmen Mahlers Caroli Screta Conterfait mit Reyblei gezeichnet 1 oval Scretisches Manns Conterfait 12 Florin 1 ein Scretisches Cavaliers Conterfait 8 [Florin] RT

336 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

146

Sluhy, May 1708

The inventory of the St Adalbert church in the village of Sluhy lists paintings attributed to Karel krta. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archiv praskho arcibiskupstv (Archives of the Prague Archbishopry), le Recepta 1708, VVI, Inv. No. 3023, box 1001. Literature: Apparently unpublished. The painting in question was formerly attributed to krta by Schaller and Pazaurek and later recognized as the work by J. J. Heinsch (NEUMANN 1974, p. 94, RONK 2006, pp. 149, 160).

Genuina et conscientiosa relatio super praesente statu ecclesiarum ad benecium Kosteleczense pertinentium a decano Kosteleczensi Ecclesia Sluhensi patrocinio S. Adalberti protecta est satis bene instructa. Aditicio bona sed in choro et sacristia nescio a quali [?] valdest. Altare majus habet decorum cum imagine sancti Adalberti personali, admirabiliter a Carolo Screta depicta. Nunx anno 1708 die 5. junii de parata pecunia in cancellaria Steiniczensi deposita habet.

Inventarium der Krchen Altr, Ornath und andern Krchen Sachen, so sich bie den 15. May de 1708 Jahr in der Sluher Krchen St. Adalberti benden thuet. Aufm groen Altar da Bild in Lebensgre, de an in dem andern Altar rechterhand da Altarblat in Crucix, auch von solcher Hand 1 Heyligen Adalberto von Mahler Screto 1 [on the tergo:] Inventarium uber die zur St. Adalberti Kirchen in dem Dorf Sluha gehrige Paramenta RT

147

The Old Town in Prague, 8 April 1710

Some works by krta are listed in the inventory issued after the death of the Old Town burgher and pharmacist, Frantiek Dirix of Brux and Rotenberk. Although Frantiek Kleo of Roudn, the second husband of Albta krtov, the widow of Karel krta the Younger, was related to this distinguished Old Town family, it was already Karel krta the Elder before him who was in frequent contact with the members of this family (among them especially the Old Town burgomaster Jan Severin Dirix) on various occasions. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber inventariorum, 17021712, sign. 1180, f. 337r339r. Literature: HOJDA 1993, pp. 65, 69, 75, 98, 99.

An Bildern N[ume]r[o] 1. ein groes Bild Cyrus in vermetalirten Rahm per 20 Florin 2. zwey Contrafe, ein jedes zu 10 R[eichs]th[aler], machen zusamen 20 R[eichs]th[aler] 3. vier Steinfelsisches Landschaften per 24 Florin 4. eine deto Landschaft per 8 Florin 5. eine Landschaft von Leonard 10 Florin

6. drey deto Landschaft per 15 Florin 7. ein andten Stuck per 10 8. ein Kuchelstuck 10 9. ein Cupido mit der Venus 6 10. ein Scretisches Contrafe der seel[igen] Frauen Dirixin per 15 Florin 11. ein groe Landschaft 24 12. ein Neptunus mit der Venus 6 13. ein Argus per 6 14. Pignalien [!] mit der Venus 10 15. Geilung Christi sambt gantzen Altar per 7

16. ein kleines Bild Auferstehung auf einen Brettel, per 10 17. ein Paulus von Screta per 20 Florin 18. ein Joseph von Screta per 20 Florin 19. ein Hieronymus von Screta per 20 Florin 20 ein Contrafec mit einen Moor 10 21. ein Sebastianus 20 22. seel[iger] Herr Primator Dirix 10 23. seel[iger] Herr Wilhelmb Dirix 10

24. der letzt verstorbene Herr Frantz Dirix 10 25. ein Dirixisches Contrafe ohne Hnden 10 26 Contrafe Herrn primatoris Reiman 10 27. seel[iger] Herr Pochs 3 28. eine Landschaft 7 29. eine Pallas 3 RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 337

148

The New Town in Prague, September 1749

The art agent (maybe inspector of the Dresden gallery, Pietro Guareti) to August III, the Saxony Elector and King of Poland, purchased ve paintings (with Ss Gregory, Ambrose, Jerome, Paul and Moses) from the Zderaz Augustinian library for 2060 guilders and, subsequently, also four paintings of the Evangelists for 1500 guilders. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), Archivy zruench klter (Archives of Abolished Monasteries), le Liber sextus seu Continuatio Annalium Excalceato-Augustiniani Nostri Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, et Patroni Regni Bomiae Neo-Pragae Supra Zderas erecti ab anno partae Salutis M DCC XX Vad annum usque M DCC LII., Inv. No. 2456, manuscript 15 (formerly 3480 f), f. 256257 (record to 1749). Literature: NEUMANN 1974, p. 156.

Mense septembri die 2. repertus est quidam liberalis emptor, qui pro exornanda Regis Poloniae Aula (prout rumusculus ab ipsomet vulgatus est) quinque imagines Scretianas, nempe Sanctorum trium ecclesiae Gregorii, Ambrosii, Hieronimi, Sanctique Pauli Apostoli atque S[ancti] Moysis commentabatur

a conventu nostro emere, et pro ipsis pretium obtulit 2060 orenorum, insuper appromittens easdem imagines aestimato optimi pictoris penicillo propriis expensis copiatas adinstar venditarum conventui nostro procurandas, uti spectantibus in bibliotheca apparent. Quocirca R[everen]di Patres examinatis pro

et contra rationibus suum dederunt annutum, hoc tamen exceptione, ut dictarum imaginum (si consensus majorum superiorum accesserit, sicut etiam infra paucarum dierum moram accessit) una cum annuo censu in sumptus antiqui aedicii jam e proximo ruinam minitantis impenderetur. Praeterea quia

Praettactus emptor summe sibi in arte picturae Scretianae collibuit, die 18 supra dictis mensis vendicavit sibi quoque quatuor Evangelistarum imagines, pro quibus parato numeravit 1500 orenos, servandis tamen iisdem supra in prima venditione conditionibus. V

149

s. l., late 18th century

Jan Quirin Jahn: Aneckdoten zur Lebensgeschichte berhmter Mahler und Beurtheilung ihren Wercke (krtas biography) Strahovsk knihovna Krlovsk kanonie premonstrt (Library of the Royal Canonry of Premonstratensians at Strahov), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), sign. DA II 7, pp.626635. Literature: PREISS 1958, p. 145; Vt Vlnas in: HOROV 1995, pp. 308309; NEUMANN 2000, pp. 9, 10, 48, 86, 88, 105; SLAVEK 2005, pp. 2637. Carl Screta Wir haben diees groen Meisters darumben gedacht, weilen er zwar Joachim Sandrart seinetwegen gemeldet, jedoch nicht alles von ihm aufgemercket, so ich (gleich wie bey andern Lebensbeschreibungen gesehen) aber allhier aufhr[lich] mache! Er ist in Prag gebohren worden und seine Eltern waren Italner [!] von Nation. Seine Kunstruhm war bey seiner Lebenszeit allbereits berall augebreithet und der warhafte Ruf seiner groen Meisterwerke bezeichten solches tglich mehr und mehr, welche wir nun auch mit groen und gebhrenden Respect und hchster Bewunderung betrachten und darau die Kunstfhigkeit uners groen Landesmanns ersehen knnen. Ja er nun (nach Zeigungs J. Scandrart [!], der ihm gekennet hat) die samment[lichen] italinische Kunstschulen durchpassiret und mittelst seiner natr[lichen] scharfen Vernunft als eine eiige Bhne von allen besten Blumen den Sssen fast der Kunst zusammen gesamlet hatte, begab er sich nach geendigten (zu Prag aber angefangenen) 30jhrigen Krieg wieder in sein Ruhm ruhiges, wie wohl verwstetes Vaterland, allwo er sich der in Staub und Aschen liegenden Kunst eyfrigst Annahme und sie au deren Rudern hervorzogen und ihr Vermg seines herr[lich]en Kunstpinels und andern recommondablen Qualitaeten ein nees kst[liche]s ehren Kleyd anlegte und sie in den grsten splendeur also setzte, da alle hohe und niedrige Stands Persohnen diees Knigreichs darvor wieder eine nee Hochachtung bezeichnen msten. Es ist hchstens zu verwundern in Ansehung seiner Wercke, in wie vielerley Mannieren anderen groen italinischen Meistern, dieer brafe Mann seinen edlen Pinel hat zu vermetamorphosiren gewust und zwar so, da alle von frembden Lndern nach Prag kamen, die Kunstkennern dieselbe vor derer alten Meisterwercke ansehen, massen er zuweilen aus der rmischen Schul den groen Raphel dUrbin, Michael Angelo, Caravagio und Lanfranc und der bolognesischen den Hanibal Carasi, Dominiquin und sonderlich dem Quido Rheni (dem meist nach Grahmet [?] hat) und in der Venetianischen Schul den Titian und Paulo Veronesse etwas abgesehen und in seine Wercke mit sonderbahrer Adresse hat einzuverleiben gewust. Ich gebe dem kunstliebenden Leer hiemit eine kleine Notitze seiner verschiedenen un hinterlassenen different Kunststcke, woran man mit kunstgelhrten Augen alter Hand Arthen obgedachter Meister vollkommend fnden und sehen kan. In der Theynkirchen der Altstadt Prag auf dem hohen Altar siehet man ein groes Werck, vorstellend die Himmelfahrt Mariae mit dem darunterstehenden Aposteln. Diees Stck hat er als seinen Meisterstuckh der Mahlergilde allda vorgestellet und hat dar in der Manier des Dominiquins durchausgefolget. Lincker Hand diees gedachten Altars siehet man in einen Seithenaltar vorgestellet einen englischen Gru. Die Composition hieran ist halb raphaelisch und halb quidorhenisch angenehm, nobel und herrlich aufhr[lich] gemahlet. Rechter Hand ein Seithenblath mit der Heil[igen] Catharina aus dem Gusto des Dominiquins, dann eben dieen ein etwas kleineres Altarblaths in sich haltend Jesus, Maria und Joseph nach dem vortreften Gusto des Hanibal Carazi. Lincker Hand etwas weither unten ist das schne Blath des Mahleraltars zu sehen, vorstellend den Heilig[en] Evangelisten Lucam in actu, wie er die Heilige Mutter Gottes Mariam abmahlet. Man siehet hieran die Demuth und Modesti selbst in der Figur der Mutter Gottes vorgebildet

338 DOCUMENTS ON THE OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA

und der Kopf von S[ank]t Luca stellet da Pourtrait diees groen Meisters Carl Screta selbsten vor, das gantze Werck aber an sich selbst ist nach dem Gont des Quido Rheni. In der Augustiner Kirchen S[ank]t Thomas in der Kleinern Stadt Prag stehet ein wunderbahres Seithenaltarblad, gleich bey Eingang der groen Kirchthr lincker Hand, vorstellend dem Heilig[en] Nicolaum de Tolentino, wie er denen Armengeld und Almoen autheilet. Es ist vllig aus dem Gusto des unvergleichten Hanibals Carazi tractiret und sehr knst[lich] und herr[lich] ordiniret, schn gemahlet und wird von denen Kunstkennern vor sein Werck allda gehalten. In der Maltheser Kirchen zu Matka Boi genand auf der Kleinen Seithen zu Prag ist das daige groen Altar ebenmssig von seiner Hand, es stellet die Mutter Gottes in Wolcken und darunter den Patron von der Insul Maltha, nemb[lich] den Heilig[en] Joannem Babtistam, von nebst einigen zur Erd auf denen Knieen liegenden und betenden alten Malthesen Rittern, in dem Hinterwerck siehet man verschiedene Schiffe und Galleern. In dieen Stuck hat er sich theils der Arth des Titians, theils des Pauli Veronensis bedienet. Item ist allda ein Seithenaltarblad mit der Decollation der Heiligen Barbara von vermischten Gusto des H[anibal] Carazi und Guido Rheni. In dem Professhau der Jesuiten seynd nebst einen schnen Crucix Bild an denen Seithenpfeilern der Kirche verschiedene schne Passionstcke zu sehen und unter dieen absonderlich ein Abnehmung Christi von Cretz, vllig nach der besten Arth des Han[ibal] Carazi und ein Grablegung Christi nach Titians Arth gepinelt. Auf den Hratschin in der Kirche derer P. P. Barnabitten ein Seithenaltarblad vorstellend die Enthaubtung der Heil[igen] Barbara, vllig nach dem prchtigen Gusto des Pauli Verenese [!]. Auf der Nestadt Prag in der Kirche von S[ank] t Stephan der Gren eine Tauf Christi herr[lich] und knst[lich] gemahlet, fest und edl gezeichnet und wunderwrthig coloriret, auf die richtigst und preywrtigste Arth des Quido Rheni. Dann in daiger S[ank]t Heinrich Kirch ein englischer Gru nach ebenmssigen quidschen Gusto. Weithers in dem Closter derer P. P. Augustiner Barfsser zu S[ank]t Wentzl der gantze Cretzgang ad ambitus diees feilig[en] bhmischen Herzogs und

Patrons S[anc]ti Wenceslai Leben in verschiedenen Stcken und vernderten Arth von Meistern zu sehen, worin er meist Titian, Dominiquin, dem Quido aber wenig exerciret hat. In der daigen Bibliothec aber ist wrck[lich] von seinen Sachen eine gantze Schule zu nden und soll er die in dieen Closter befnd[lichen] Stcke zu Zeiten seines Assili[us], da er wegen eines Italiner, den er weg[en] angestochtener Ehre in Eyfer erstochen, verfertiget haben. Unter so vielen andern hchst preylichen Stcken aber ist eines, so mich sonder[lich] jederzeit charmiret hat, so oft ich Gelegenheit gehabt habe, solches zu besehen, solches ist in der Parochial Kirchen zu S[ank]t Martin auf der Altstadt Prag linker Hand des hohen Altars (so auch sein Werck ist und S[ank]t Martinum zu Pferd vorstellet) unter dem Bogen und stellet vor die Desponsation der Heil[igen] Catharinae mit dem Kindlein Jesu, war in dieer Groe Knstler sehen lassen, da er in der That keinen von denen grsten Meistern zu weichen Ursach habe. Mein kunstbegriger Leer gehe hin und betrachte es mit Gelhrter Attention nur wohl, ich wei gewie, du wirst mir hierum Recht sprechen und mit mir eines seyn, das obern Bladel diees Altars stellet einen S[ank]t Joanis Evangelisten Kopf vor und ist sein aigen Portrait, als er etwa 40 Jahr alt war. Da Closter Knigsaal unweith Prag hat auch nebst verschiedenen andern Wercken ein Haubtaltarstck, vorstellend eine Mariae Himmelfahrt nach der Arth des Dominiquins. In gleichen die bischf[liche] Thumkirch zu S[ank] t Stephan in Letmeritz auf dessen hohen Altar die Martyr diees Heyligen wundervoll und kunstmssig vorgestellet und theils nach Arth des Carazi, die untern Figuren belangend die Gloriae, aber nebst denen Engeln und Kindeln nach des Dominiquinus Manier tractiret ist, auch seynd 4 andern Nebenaltrblder da zu sehen als: ein Heuliger [!] Schutzengel von raphaelischer Zeichnung und quidischen colorirt, ein Heiliger Adalbertus, vollkomen nach Titians Arth, ein Heiliger Petrus und Paulus, und dann der Martyrtod des Heilig[en] Wenceslai als ein Nachtstck, von der Manier des Cheval[ier] Lanfrancs. Da er nun also in dieen seinen Vaterland sein Vermgen in der Kunst zur genge hat sehen lassen und gezeichet hat, da seine Inventiones und Pinels Krften

allen andern groen Meistern von Italien da gleich Gewicht hielten, so muste er endlich auch die Zeit erwarten, die ihm von Gott bestimmet war, der Natur den letzten Lebenszin zu bezahlen und abzustatten. Einige Zeit vor seinen Tod, da er schon bethlgerich dar niederlag und verschiedene von denen Anween den Frenden, die ihm besuchten, sein Abscheiden sollende Kunst hchst betauert wurde, sprach er also zu: ich habe so viel gethan, als ich kunte und habe euch durch meinen Pinel so viel gewieen, das ihr Zegnsse genug davon gesehen habet, als nemb[lich] in samt[lichen] 3 Prager Stdten, in dem Closter Knigsaal, zu Leutmeritz in Dohm, aber in einen kleinen Kirchel eines Dorfs unweith Letmeritz, allwo ein hltzerne Henckel an der Kirchthr ist (womit er da Dorf Krzestitz meinde und da derselbe Hnckel noch hetiges Tags zu sehen ist), allda habe ich da Vermgen meiner Kunst gelassen. Es ist diees ein kleines Altarbldlein diees Filialkirchels zu S[ank]t Mathai genant, so dem Letmeritzerischen Bisthum unterworfen ist und stellet den Heiligen Mathaeum vor, gleichsam in Begrief sein Evangelium zu schreiben, da er von der Spitz oder Seithen durch einen Engel informiret und ihm die rechte Hand mit der Feder durch des Engels Hand gefhret wird. Wahrlich man solte bey Ansicht dessen fast fragen, ob Raphael dUrbin selbsten (nach dessen Grantes gemahlet ist) etwas Besseres habe machen knnen als diees ist, ein sicherer eyfriger Kunstkenner Herr Gabriael Sensa kunte bey Erblckung dessen sich nicht baudigen, ohne die grsten Lobsprche vor groer Frede hievon zu sagen und ich mu von Hertzen lachen, da ich ihm hrete sagen: ich habe nie was Bessers von Screta gesehen, es ist warhaftig wie ein Raphael und ich nde da Alt und Neun Testament darinen, massen ich an dem Kopf des Heilig[en] Mathai ein veritablen jdischen grau Barth mit einer so christlichen Stirne und Angesicht vereiniget siehe und wie mahlen diee Expression etwas lcherlich vorkam, so ist sie doch wahr und audrckend genug gesaget, er war brigens ein Mann von Ehr liebenden Honetten, Gemthe und Stunde bey hohen und niedrigen in groer Estim und Reputation und hat durch seine Emsigkeit, Mhe und Arbeith ein ansehnliches Geld zusammengebracht, auch einen

schnen Schatz von Kunstsachen als Mahlereyen, Zeichnungen und Kupferstichen nach groer Meisterwercke hinterlassen, welche nach seinen Tod (wie wir gesagt worden) umb eine groe Summa Gelds nacher Nrnberg verkaufet worden seyn. Sein hinterlassener Sohn hat auch mit guten Success den Pinel hantiret und ist denen Fustopfen seines Vaters rhm[lich] gefolget. Letzt[lich] aber mu noch diees beyfgen, da die Italiner unern Carl Screta mitnichten haben aus ihren Land entlassen wollen, massen er schon so hochgeachtet war, da man ihm auf der Academie zu Boglonio dem Nahmen und Sitz eines Professoris Accademici zu aignete, die rm[ischen] Bent tauften ihm mit dem Beynahmen Schlacht-Schwerd. Es seynd auch viele durch von seinen Kunststcken nach der Hand von denen Italinern erkaufet und nach Italien und andern Lndern versendet und verkauft worden, wie mir dann selbsten der Chevalier Schaub, vormahlig geweener englischer Envoje an spanischen Hof, bey meinen Anween in London a[nn]o 1728 ein schnes Stck von seiner Hand zu meinen grsten Plaisir und meines Landmanns Ehren gewen hat, so den Alexantrum und Diogenem in dem Va vorbildete, welches er in Spanien erkaufet und nacher Engeland mit sich gebracht hat. Seine Pinele Handlung war schmltzend aufhr[lich] starck und wohl coloriret, man ndet keine schweichlende oder geschmnckte Farben in seinen Wercken, sondern die pure Natur. Seine Zeichnungsarth ist vest, richtig und von denen besten Antiqien entletznet und diefahls nobel, edel und fast sine errore. Man ndet auch keine extravagante Stellungen in seinen Figuren und so er doch nach Umstnden der Sachen dergleichen etwas vorstellen muste, so war es doch nicht wider die Natur, noch all zu wild, er hat brigens nach der Boulognischen Schul etwas ins Braune coloriret und wann er das damahl nach nicht so, wie hent zu Tage bekannte clair-obscur oder mittel Licht verstanden htte, wren seine Wercke fast untadelhaft und angenehmer als sie seyn. Er hat nebst den studio historico auch treff[liche] Pourtraite gemahlet, wovon man in den grsten Familien diees Knigreichs noch die preywrdigen Zeichne ndet. RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 339

III. Documents on the Life and Oeuvre of Karel krta the Younger

150

Rome, 16731675
Karel krta the Younger is recorded in Rome as a resident of the Isola Toscanella neighbourhood, staying in house No. 5 on the street of San Felice. Published by Jana Zapletalov from the source held in Rome, Archivio Storico del Vicariato di Roma, San Lorenzo in Lucina, Stati delle anime, anno 1673, f. 88, Vicolo del Bottino. Literature: ZAPLETALOV 2010, p. 157. RT

151

The Old Town in Prague, 20 February 1675

Veronika krtov marries Jilj Jelen. The witnesses present at the wedding include Vlm Dirix of Bruk and Rotenberk and Samuel Globic of Bun. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16521704, sign. HV O1, p.637. Literature: BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 10; PAZAUREK 1889, p. 43 (edition), NEUMANN 1974, p. 48.

Copulati sunt matrimonio in facie eccl[es]iae clarissimus dominus Aegidius Jelen, Utriusq[ue] Juris Doctor cum honesta Virgine Veronica, relicta lia post dominum Carolum Screta de Zavorzitz. Testes

generosus dominus Wilhelmus Dirix de Bruck et Rotenberg, questor S[acrae] C[aesarae] M[ajestatis] et generos[us] dominus Samuel Globicz de Buczina. RT

152

(Prague), (before 28 February 1678)

Request of Karel krta the Younger, addressed to the Bohemian Governors Office and asking the body to exact the amount of 75 guilders from the Appelate Councillor Baltasar Trchner, which the person in question owes for the drawings executed for the universe thesis of his oldest son by his father. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. S212/2, box 985. Literature: NEUMANN 2000, p. 133; Tom Sekyrka, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.29, p. 609; SEKYRKA 2011, pp. 147152.

Hoch und Wohlgeborne, Wohledle und Gestrange, Gndig Hochgebietende Knigliche Herrn Statthalter, Euer Excellez und Gnaden bringe hiermit gehorsamst anbei, wasmassen der Kniglichen AppellationsRat Herr Baltasar Trchner meinen

seeligen Vater Carl Skreta wegen unterschiedlicher Delineationen und Zeuchnungen, welche er vorgedachter Herr Doctor Trchner eltisten Sohn zu seinen gehabten Disputationibus schon vor etlichen Jahren mhsamb verfertiget und bersendet,

mir bis dato 75 Florin schuldig verbleibet und nur von einer Zeit zu der anderen die Zalung aufschiebet. Weil dann obgemelter Herr Doctor Trchner wegen seiner gehabten GranitzCommission bei Euer Excellenzen und Gnaden annoch einige Gelder

zu fordern hat und praetendirt, also bitte dieselbe unterthnigst und gehorsambst mir die hohe Gnade zu tuen und damit bei den Kniglichen Ober Steuer Ambt (doch ohne Massgebung) mir meine rechtmssige Schuld inbehalten und zugestellet

340 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

werden mchte, per Decretum in Gnaden anzubefehlen. Zu dero gndigen Resolution und stets beharlichen hohen Gnaden mich untertenigst empfehlend verbleibe,

Euer Excellenzen und Gnaden gehorsamer Carel Sskreta von Zaworitz mp.

[on the tergo:] Carl Screta bittet Herrn Doctor Trchner zur Bezahlung 75 Florin vor unterschiedliche gelieferte Disputations Delineationes anzuhalten. Februar 1678

Communicetur (titl.) Herrn Appelations Rat Trchner etc. Ex consilio Regiae Cancellariae Bohemiae Pragae 5. Martii 1678 TS

153

The Old Town in Prague, 22 July 1678

Karel krta the Younger records his debt owed to Jindich Achtman and Vclav rovec, the guardians of the Vodikas orphans. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber obligationum No. 11, 16781699, sign. 2261, f. 42v44r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Porunci sirotk Vodikovskch Jindich Achtman a Vclav rovec ze Starho Msta praskho vydluili pro potebu sirotk od urozenho a statenho vladyky pana Karla krty otnovskho z Zvoic 400 zlatch rejnskch pro zaplacen

jinch vitelv dluh na tch sirotcch Vodikovskch pohledvajcch, toti urozenmu a statenmu vladyce panu Danielovi Globicovi z Buna, mtnnu a radnmu SMP edeste zlatch rejnskch, item urozenmu a statenmu vladyce panu

Kaparovi Francovi a pipovdme z open sumy kadho pl lta ourok obyejn 6 per cento nleit a asn odvozovati, sumu pak hlavn v roce pod zbhlm panu viteli naemu, ddicm a budoucm jeho a tomu kadmu, kdo by sob toto

zapsn dlun nleit a podn postoupen ml, na hotovch penzch dti a zaplatiti RT

154

Prague, 14 December 1678

Karel krta the Younger informs the Prince of Liechtenstein that he is aware of the Princes interest in some of his fathers paintings. He, however, states that he has hitherto hesitated as to which paintings he would dispose of because he initially planned to keep them for his own studio. But because the Prince is still interested, he eventually decided to sell him some of these. Lichtensteinisches Hausarchiv, Vaduz, box 68. Literature: NEUMANN 2000, p. 31; HAUPT 1998, p. 255 (with minor divergencies from the present transcription; carried out by Dr. Matou within the preparatory works on the 1974 exhibition of Karel krta. The transcription is part of the inheritance of Jaromr Neumann, held in the Institute of Art History, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic).

Serenissimo Duca, Vostra Altezza compatir con la solita grandezza dAnimo il mio hardire. Gi che ho compreso del Maestro di Casa, la continuatione del affetto, que Vostra Altezza Serenissima tiene verso quelli consapevoli, gli quali stanno ancora nel suo essere. E ben vero, que io era quella volta risoluto di venderli, per amor le spese, que ho fatto (alla proportione della mia persona vile) grand nel fabricare, nulla di meno havendo mi rifatto tantino, ho proposto di conservarle per il mio proprio studio e tesoro.

Si non considerasse il carattere di Galanthomo. Data la parola a Vostra Altezza Serenissima di volerli vender, son contento ultimatamente di privarmene per tanto. Il Horatio Gentileschio 160 total Rt, Rompimento del arco per 120 Rt et quel ultimo grande niente di meno di 200 Rt. Et questa risolutione di vender Io per li obligh(?)i grandi delle gratie ricevutte dal S[erenissi]mo di Vostra Altezza signore Padre il mio defunto. Poi la speranza que tengo per certo dottener per mezzo di Vostra Altezza Serenissima la libert a copiar secundo

il mio piacere nella Galleria di Sua Majest. Finalmente il che non dubito dhaver di Vostra Altezza Serenissima alteri impiegh(?)i et commandi appartinenti alla mia professione. Accioch mi possi gloriare desser dun cossi grande Principe che oi di Vostra Altezza Serenissima. A Praga agli 14. Decembre Anno 1678 Schiavo obedientissimo Carlo Screta [on the tergo:] Con pieno Tit. a Sua Altezza

Serenissima il Duca de Lichtenstein a Feldspurg Von Screta von Prag den 14. Decembris 1678
12 The city in question is Valtice, the family residence of the Liechtenstein family in Lower Austria. Valtice was annexed in 1919 to Czechoslovakia which is, today, the Czech Republic.

TS

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 341

155

Prague, 12 April 1679

Commission of a painting intended for the family chapel of Counts Sternberbergs in the church of Our Ladys Immaculate Conception with the college of the Irish Fransciscans in the New Town in Prague. The contract is attached by four Sternberg seals of black wax on the reverse of the preparatory drawing i.e. a modeletto to the painting The Stigmatization of St Francis. Nrodn galerie vPrazeSbrka kresby agraky (The National Gallery in PragueCollection of Prints and Drawings), Inv. No. K357. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 45, note 2; BERGNER 1910, cat. no. 74; NEUMANN 1974, pp. 259261, cat. nos. 208209; KESNEROV 1976, cat. no. 50; PREISS 1979, pp. 6869; NEUMANN 2000; PREISS 2006, pp. 6869; MDL (in print). (The transcription by Martin Mdl included in the present publication slightly diverges from J. Neumanns transcription.)

Vermg dieses Abrys hat der Herr Screta sich verobligiret sancti Francisci Bild in die Sternbergerische Capellen bey den Patribus Hibernis einzumalen und auf das klainere Blat mus ein besonderer Abrys geschehen, aliquid de Trinitate, als zum Exempel etwan den Heyligen

Geist spiritum sanctum super apostolos mittentem, waylen die Allerheyligste Dreyfaltigkheit ihm in selber Kirchen in andern Capellen gemahlet ist. Fr diese beede Bilder seind dem Herrn Screta Hundert Thaler versprochen worden, mit Condition, wann er soliche zur

Satisfaction unser mahlen wird, 50 Thaler werden ihm gegeben werden, wan er anfangen wirt zue mahlen, ante festum sancti Francisci Seraphici 8. Tag zuvor soll es in Altar schon sein.

Prag den 12. April 1679 W[enzel] A[dalbert] G[raf] v[on] St[ernberg] [?] RT

156

The Old Town in Prague, 2 June 1679

Karel krta the Younger marries Albta, a daughter of Vclav Rosa. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St James, le Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16321710, sign. JAK O1, p.30. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 46 (edition); BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 10; NEUMANN 2000, p. 130.

In facie eccl[esi]ae juncti sunt vinculo matrimonii generosus dominus Carolus, lius pie defuncti g[enerosi] domini Caroli Screta Ssaknowsky [!] v Zaworzicz et ingenua virgo Anna

Elisabeth Rosina, lia generosi ac clarissimi domini Venceslai Rosa, U[triusque] J[uris] D[octore], domino Gielhelmo Dirix z Wobumbergu [!], domina Veronica Scretowa, Anna

Budinowa, copulans Rev[erendissi] mus dominus abbas Sedlecensis Ord[inis] Cister[ciensium]. RT

157

The Old Town in Prague, 16 April 1680

Karel krta the Youngers daughter Anna Kateina is baptized in the church of St Gallus. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16521704, sign. HV N1, p.288. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 47 (edition); NEUMANN 2000, p. 133.

Baptizata lia Anna Catharina domino Carolo Creta et Elisabetha conjugibus. Patrini: r[everen] diss[imus] dominus Joannes Benol,

canonicus Wissegradensis, clarissimus dominus Carolus Jaroslaus Borowansky de Borowan, J[uris] U[triusque] D[octor], domina

Maximiliana Machtin, domina Catharina Klobitzin. Cum facultate et licentia no[str]a baptizavit r[everendiss]imus dominus Joannes

Samuel Borowansky de Borowan, canonicus Budissynensis. RT

342 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

158

(Prague), (before 29 March 1681)

List of nineteen paintings by Karel krta, issued by his son of the same name who delivered it to Johann Kastner, the Liechtenstein administrator in Prague. Kastner sent the list to the Prince of Liechtenstein on 29 March 1681.The list was returned to him with notes and directions as to the purchase of three paintings, and was accompanied by a letter dated 9 April 1681 in Buovice. Vaduz, Lichtensteinsche Kunstsammlungen, HALV, box 68. Literature: NEUMANN 2000, p. 31; HAUPT 1998, pp. 282283.

Verzeychnus, was bei gleichen in der Eil hat knnen aufgemerkt werden meisten von C[arl] Screta NB. 1 Aus dene Pastor Fido ein Spiel mit viel Lebensgrss Figuren auf teutsch die Blinde Kuhne genant von Carlo Screta gemacht, aber etwas unausgemacht 330 Florin NB. 2 Aus dem Pastor Fido auch von Carlo Screta wie der den Bogen zerbrechen thuet ein Jger, weilen er seine Liebste, vermeinend ein Wild zu sein, geschossen, von 5 Elen hoch und 3 breit 150 Florin NB. 3 Ein Fuga in Egipten nach dem Horatio Gentilescho von Carlo Screta copiret, lebensgross Figuren und Joseph darbey schlafend; gross lang 5 Elen, hoch von 3 Elen, <saget als Originale > 180 Florin 4. Ein Musiqspiel von den Musen auf allerhand Instrumenten. Lebensgross Figuren, nach Tintoretto von Carlo Screta copirt, lange

auch von 5 Elen, hhe von 3 Elen 180 Florin NB. 5 Nach den Quido Reno ein Centaurus, Nessus genant, wie er eine Nimpham raubet, lebesgross von Carlo Screta copiert 100 Florin /Vor diese Copay in fahl es sich also benden wird, das es von des Carlo Screta Hand abcopirt ist, soll darvor 80 Florin geben werden. Numero 5./ 6. Ein Conterfay von Titiano, ganze Statur eines Frsten genant Rosenberg, beraus treich gemacht, originale 60 Reichstaler 7. Ein Conterfay eines Schfers gestalt von Carlo Screta originale 25 Reichstaler 8. Eine Diana gestadtlich Conterfay C[arlo] Screta 25 Reichstaler 9. Ein Romanischer Kopf von Carlo Screta Brustbild, kstlich beraus 25 Reichstaler / Vor diesen Kopf wil man geben 30 Florin. Numero 9./ 10. Eine Venus mit einem Satiro und

Kindln darbei, von 2 Elen und halb lang und anderthalb hoch, originale C[arlo] Screta 59 Reichstaler 11. Ein Crucix in Klein auf Kupfer von Carlo Screta mit einer in Amacht singender Madonna und Johanne, originale 30 Reichstaler 13. Unser Libe Frau Maria gloriosa sitzend ob den Wolken sambt den Engeln von C[arlo] Screta orig[inale] 25 Reichstaler 14 Kindln von Carlo Screta spielend und einander kampfend wegen der abrupfenden Apfelen von den Baumen, originale 56 Reichstaler /Vor diese Khiendlen solle ihme geben werden 56 Florin, Numero 14./ 15. Ein Englischer Gruess von Carlo Screta originale 60 Reichstaler 16. Eine Barbara, wie sie von dem Vater enthaubtet wird 40 Reichstaler 17. Ein Marie Himmelfahrt sambt

allen beywesenden Aposteln, origi[nal] 130 Florin 18. Eine Schkung ode Erleichtung heiligen Geistes ber die Aposteln von C[arlo] Screta, originale 40 Reichstaler 19. Ein Lucretia nach Quido Reno von Carlo Screta eigener Hand copiert, Lebensgross 60 Reichstaler 20. Eine Maria spielend und saugendes Kindl von Carlo Screta, originale 30 Reichstaler Sonsten viel andere unzehlbare Kpfe und Sachen von Carlo Screta, wie auch von anderen vornehmen Authoribus, die die Zeit nicht zulass aufzumerken und zu beschreiben zu nden sein. TS
13 Item No. 12 is missing.

159

Prague, 29 March 1681

Johann Kastner sends the Prince of Liechtenstein the list of paintings by Karel krta which was delivered to him by the painters son, Karel krta the Younger. The son reportedly also wants to wait for the Princes arrival into Bohemia and Kastner then awaits the Princes instructions as to the purchase of paintings. Vaduz, Lichtensteinsche Kunstsammlungen, HALV, box 68. Literature: NEUMANN 2000, p. 31; HAUPT 1998, p. 282.

Durchleuchtigter Hochgeborner Hertzog, Gndigster Frst und Herr Herr, Euer Hochfrstlichen Gnaden gehorsambst berichte, wie da mir der junge Screta dise hier beifolgente Verzeuchnu durch seinen Diener einhndigen lassen, so aus Unachtsambkeit wegen des so blen Wetters beschmutzet, weilen es aber

sein aygene Handschrift nicht umbfertigen wollen lassen, sondern in originali berschicke, in andern auch mit Ihme zu redkommen, welcher Gestalt von andern gewissen Leuten vernommen 4 Stck Historii Malwerk Herr Borziowski von seines seelligen Vatern hat, hette Ihme ohne Zweyfel wohl wssent sein werden, aldieweilen sie wohl

miteinander bekant, mir zur Antwort gegeben, ers zwar nicht recht betracht, ob es Originalien oder abcopirt von seines Herrn Vaters Originalien weren, dan er ebenfalst gute Leut gehalten, die wohl seiner Hand nach abcopirt haben, so wie er aber vernommen, so hette er die 4 Stuckh obemdliche von ein von Adl Girzurowskii umb leidliches Geld

und zwar meistenteils umb Gewehr, Flinten und Rhr von gedachten Gerzurowskii eingehandlet und schwerlich alle 4 Ihn 200 Florin kosten, mir aber Herr Borziowski ein Stuck, so doch nicht gross umb 150 Florin geboten, zu gehorsambster Nachricht. Ers auch so teuer mir geboten, aldie weilen mir selber gemeldet, das Herr Wijschnoberskij

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 343

Ihme wohl wolte anbringen. Her Screta aber wnschete Ihro Hochfrstlichen Gnaden Ankunft in Bhmen wehen gehorsambst aufwarten wolle und was ihm mglich zu thun were Ihro Hochfrstlichen Gnaden

seins Vatern hinterlassene Malerii zu Diensten sein solle. Wormit einem Hochfrstlichen Gnaden in Schutz des allerhchsten, mich aber zu Hochfrstlichen Gnaden empfehle. Prag den 29. Martii 1681

Euer Hochfrstlichen Gnaden ein untertnigst gehorsambster Johann Kastner TS

160

Buovice, 9 April 1681

Jan Kastner returns the list of krtas paintings to the house administrator in Prague with the instruction to him taking charge of the three indicated paintings if Karel krta the Younger would sell them for 166 guilders instead of the initially required 181 guilders. In the case of an affirmative answer, the paintings shall be transferred to Kostelec nad ernmi lesy from where they will be paid for and sent to Buovice. If krta is interested, he can also send several smaller paintings and give their lowest price. Vaduz, Lichtensteinsche Kunstsammlungen, HALV, box 68. Literature: NEUMANN 2000, p. 31; HAUPT 1998, pp. 283284 (with minor divergencies from the present transcription; carried out by Dr. Matou within the preparatory works on the 1974 exhibition of Karel krta. The transcription is part of the inheritance of Jaromr Neumann, held in the Institute of Art History, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic).

An Hausmeister uf Prag Euer Schreiben sambt den uberschikten Lista der vorhandenen Malerey haben wir zue recht erhalten und sein wir zwar der Meinung gewest, alle diejhnige P[ilder], allwo ein Notabene stehet, zu nehmben. So lasset es sich aber nicht thun, ungesehenere, weillen es ein zimb[liches] Geld antrift, zu kaufen. Doch wollen wir 3 P[ilder] nehmben in Hofnung, es wird von des Screta Haus sein; als folgt die Liste hiemit wieder zurckund diejhnige 3 P[ilder], die wir nehmben werden, bei denselben ist ein Zettl angeklept, wie viel wir darvor geben wollen. In Fal er es dan

in diesen Wert lassen wollte, wird ihn das Geld aus den Kosteletzer Renten darvor gegeben werden. Die Lista soll wieder zuruckgeschikt werden. Folget zugleich ein Befehl an den Leiter wegen das Geld, zum Fal er solche umb diesen Preiss lassen wiel, khennet alsdan dem Leiter den Befehl zuschicken, damit er Euch das Geld ubermache und sodan die 3 P[ilder] nacher Kosteletz dem Leiter wohl eingemachter zuschicken sollet, welche er uns durch eigenen Pothen uberschicken wird. Und weilen mit Fleiss dieser Poth darmit abgeschickt werden wird, kan der Screta, wan er wiel, noch sonsten

etlich kleine P[ilder] mitschicken und den negsten Preis berichten. Butschowitz, den 9. April 1681 [illegible signature] [in margine] Vor ein Khopf No. 9 30 Florin No. 5 80 Florin No. 14 56 Florin 166 TS
14 The city in question is Kostelec nad ernmi lesy, in the property of Princes of Liechtenstein from1623.

161

The Old Town in Prague, 19 August 1681

The son of Karel krta the Younger, Karel Rafael, is baptized in the church of St Gallus. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16521704, HV N1, p.298. Literature: PODLAHA 1917, p. 142; NEUMANN 2000, p. 133.

Anno 1681, Augusti 19. Baptizatus e[st] lius Carolus Raphael nobili domino Carolo Screta et Elizabetha coniugibus,

patrini nobilis dominus Wenceslaus Pawlowsky, medicinae doctor, nobilis dominus Wenceslaus Fleissmon, Dorothea Borowanska,

R[everendissi]mo domino Joanne Benol, canonico Wissehradensi. RT

344 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

162

The Old Town in Prague, 11 October 1681

The son of Karel krta the Younger, Karel Rafael, was buried in the church of St Gallus. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika zemelch (Register of Deaths), 16451731, sign. HV Z1, p.20. Literature: PODLAHA 1917, p. 142.

October 1681 11. sepultus e[st] in coemiterio Carolus Raphael Screta, infans duodecim septimanarum. RT

163

The Old Town in Prague, 7 December 1682

The son of Karel krta the Younger, Mikul Frantiek, is baptized in the church of St Gallus. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16521704, HV N1, p.312. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 47 (edition); NEUMANN 2000, p. 133.

Baptizat[us] e[st] Nicola[us] Francisc[us] domino Carolo Screta et Elisabetha conjugi[bus], patrini dominus Francisc[us] Felix Necassi, a[tque] R[everendissimus] dominus Joannes Benol, canonic[us] Wissegradi[censis], domina Veronica Scretin, a patre Procopio. RT

164

The Old Town in Prague, 5 August 1685

The daughter of Karel krta the Younger, Albta Dominika, is baptized in the church of St James in the Old Town in Prague. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Jacob, le Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16711707, sign. JAK N3, p.192 (modern pagination in pencil for the needs of microlm). Literature: PODLAHA 1917, p. 287; NEUMANN 2000, p. 133.

Anno 1685 Augusti 5. dominus Carolus Screta de Zaworzicz, civis Antiquae Urbis Pragensis et domina Elisabeht [!], uxor eius, curarunt baptisari lia suam propriam, cuis est nomen Elisabeth Dominica, patrina quae ex fonte baptismatis illa levavit honesta

virgo Anna Catharina Ablunkowa, civ[is] Antiquae Urbis Pragensis, asistantes Catharina Benolowa liola, dominus Maxmilianus Benol, civis Antiquae Urbis Pragensis, baptisans fr[ater] Didacus Novatius, concionator ordinarius. RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 345

165

The Lesser Town in Prague, 14 October 1685

Karel krta the Younger is a witness at his sister Veronikas second wedding, to Jan Fridrich Karel Fischer, a registrar with the Office of Land Registers. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of the Holy Virgin under the Chain, le Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16221745, sign. PM N2 O2, p.120. Literature: BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 10.

1685 den 14. Octobris [?] proclamatione in facie copulade Herr Johann Fridrich Carl Fischer bey der Kniglichen Bhmisch[en] Landtafel bestalten Registratori mit der Frau

Veronica Scretin Sottnofski von Zaworitz, testes 1. Herr Adalbertus von Petzendorf, Kleinseithner Rathsverwandter, 2. Herr Michael Mth, Oberhauptman von der Kayserlichen

Artilerie, 3. Herr Nicolaus Lebkesselt, Stuckgiesler, 4. Herr Carolus Screta. RT

166

(Prague), (before 9 February 1688)

Report of the Royal District Administrator in the New Town in Prague, Jindich of Guttejn, informing the royal governors about the dispute between the New Town municipal government and the painter Prosper de Mutii. The painter requires 50 guilders for the delivered painting of The Holy Trinity from the municipal government but the body wants to disburse only 36 guilders on the basis of statements received from other painters. The district administrator therefore suggests the governors office appoint a committee to consider the painting. The municipal government should be represented by painter Jan Ji Heinsch and Prosper de Mutti by Jean Baptiste Mathey while a superintendent (Schatzmeister) and Mr krta should be appointed as the unbiased. As it follows from the official note of 22 April 1688, the New Town district administrator received the decision on the basis of this advisory opinion. Nrodn archiv (National Archives), le Nov manipulace (New Manipulation), sign. G 1/M/1, box 193. Literature: NEUMANN 2000, pp. 133, 151, note 313.

Gndige Herren Herren, wie Euer Excellenzen und Gnaden gndig anbefohlen den Magistrat der Kniglichen Neuen Stadt Prag ber die Beschwerde des Prosper de Mutii, Malern, zu vernehmen und nach Befund der eingebrachten Beschafenheit solchen Diferentien gtlich abzuhelfen mich zu bemhen, wofern aber ein erhebliches gegen Bedenken sich ereignen und man hieraus in der Enge nicht gelangen knte, die eugentliche Bewandnus mit beirukenden Gutachten berichten solle, demselben bin ich gehorsamblich nachkommen, so Euer Excellenzen und Gnaden aus obgedachten Magistrats beigelegten Bericht mit mehrern gndig ersehen knnen. Weilen dann gndige Herren Herren zwischen ihme diese Strittigkeit gnzlich aufzuheben nicht hat geschehen knen, indeme beide Recht zu haben vermeinen,

der Prosper de Mutii wider die Stadtmaler als interessirte, der Magistrat aber wider die, welche der Mutii anfhrt, als seine Landsleute protestiren tuen. Die Stadtmaler setzen zwar in ihrer Attestation, dass das Bild nicht mehres als 36 Florin wert, jedoch setzen sie keine Ursach oder Mangel aus, worumb es so wenig wert sein solle, wo doch die Deputirte vom Magistrat selber 50 Florin darfr zu geben sich offeriret, der Magistrat auch dasselbe plecidiret. Wie aus ihrem Bericht zu ersehen, der de Mutii aber nit allein diesen widerspricht, vorwendend, dass ihme unmglich were, so wenig fr ein Bild, welches viel mehres laut der walischen Maler Attestat wert seye, zu nehmen, sondern praetendirt, wofern man ihme, doch wider sein Verhofen, die brige Malerei zu malen absprechen mchte, die Schaden und Unkosten, die ihm durch

den Magistrat verursacht seye worden, indeme sie ihme solang afgehalten, sein Abries bis dato auf den Rathaus haben, wodurch er nicht anders hat schlssen knnen, weilen sie seinen Abries behalten, die contrahirte Arbeit von ihm nicht abwenden wollen, derowegen er alle andere ihm vorgefallene Arbeit fahren lassen, und wann er diese contrahirste Arbeit aus verlassen mste, dadurch in das grste Verderben geraten mchte. Derowegen were meine gehorsambe, doch unmassgebliche Meinung, damit man desto besser aus der [?] kommen knte, wann Euer Excellenzen und Gnaden von den Parteyen der Attestanten Malern, als nemblich vom Magistratsseiten den Hans Georg Heinisch, Burgern und Malern der Kniglichen Alten Stadt Prag, sodann von des de Mutii den Johann Babtista Mathei sambt Zuziehung des Herrn

Schatzmeisters und Herrn Screta als unparteischen gndig anbefehlen belieben mchten, dass diese die Mangel bei den Bild der heiligen Treyfaltigkeit aussetzen und dem Wert nach schetzen sollen. Worber Euer Excellenzen und Gnaden weitern gndigen Befehlig erwarte und mich zu dero Beharrenden Gnaden gehorsambst empfehlend verbleibe Euer Excellenzen und Gnaden gehorsambster Heinrich Graf von Guttenstein TS
15 The person in question is probably the superintendent of the Prague Castle Picture Gallery. This position was held by Frans Leux of Luxenstein between 1683 and 1714.

346 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

DOCUMENT No. 166 Examination of the dispute between the painter Prosper de Mutti and the New Town municipal government. The artist requires his due royalty for the delivered painting and Karel krta the Younger is invited to expertly asses its price; dated before 9 February 1688 (Prague). Prague, National Archives, file New Manipulation (photo: National Gallery in Prague Ale David)

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 347

167

The Old Town in Prague, 9 March 1688

The son of Karel krta the Younger, Jan of God, is baptized in the church of St James. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St James, le Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16711707, sign. JAK N3, p.222 (modern pagination in pencil for the needs of microlm). Literature: PODLAHA 1917, p. 287; NEUMANN 2000, p. 133.

Anno 1688 9. Martii ex parochia Jacobi Baptisatus est infans nomine Wenceslaus Joannes Dei, parentes Carolus Screta de Zavorzicz et Elisabetha, levans Ill[ustrissi]m[u]

s dominus Comes Wenceslaus de Sternberg, Ill[ustrissi]m[u]s Baro Straka ex Libczan, Baro Jo[ann] es Spork, baptisanti Wenceslaus Antonius cantor. RT

168

The Old Town in Prague, 20 February 1690

Karel krta the Younger accuses Vclav Hrdlika of an unspecied theft. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber appelationum 6, 16891695, sign. 1006, f. 27v + 28r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Dote se Karla krty a Vclava Hrdliky Slovutn a vzctn poctivosti ptel nm mil, co tak na ns Karel krta z strany Vclava Hrdliky pi vs za pinou krdee jemu stal zjitnho vzn a aby proti tmu delikventu ex officio inkvisrovno bylo, snan d, to z pleejcho spisu jeho obrnji vyrozumte. I jsouce vc slun a prvm

srovnal, aby takov peinn pro pklad jinch kdcv bez trestn nezstalo. Proe proti v potku dotenmu Vclavovi Hrdlikovi v t tak patrn krdei, zdvihnouce nleit corp[us] delicti, summariter procedrovati a co za prvo jest, nad takovm ouinkem ortel vynsti, outraty na ten inkvisitorn proces pak vchzejc (pokud t kdce prostedkv nem) podle t od ns

v t ppadnosti stal limitaci, od nho Karla krty zavyupomnati vdti budete. Dn na Hrad praskm 20. dne msce nora lta Pn 1690. Vclav Norbert Oktavin hrab z Vchynic a Tetova Praes[entum] 9. Martii 1690. Pub[l]icat[um] 10. Martii 1690. RT

169

The Old Town in Prague, 3 January 1691

Karel krta the Younger is buried in the tomb before the altarpiece of Our Lady in the church of St Gallus. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika zemelch (Register of Deaths), 16451731, sign. HV Z1, p.44. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 17, 42 (edition), BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 10; NEUMANN 1974, p. 48; NEUMANN 2000, p. 133.

Anno 1691 Januarius 3. gen[erosus] dominus Carolus Screta pictor, 45 an[nos], sep[ultus]

in crypta[m] apud altare B[eatae] M[ariae] V[irginis] Neapolit[anae]. RT

348 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

170

The Old Town in Prague, 10 January 1691

Samuel Globic of Bun the Younger is authorized as guardian after the death of Karel krta the Younger. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Manuale dictorum, 16901693, sign. 1312, f. 33v. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Anno 1691 den 10. januarii pan mlad Samuel Globic z Buna k rad pidn pan ovdovl krtov, rozen Rozov, poruenstv po inventue j se sv. RT

171

The Old Town in Prague, 12 January 1691

Inventory of inheritance from Karel krta the Younger. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber inventariorum, 16871702, sign. 1179, f. 100v114r. Literature: ZAP ERBEN 1857 (edition); NEUMANN 1974, pp. 4850, 89, 97, 120, 257; HOJDA 1986, pp. 44, 46; HOJDA 1993, pp. 51, 5354, 60, 68, 7476, 80, 82, 92; HOJDA 1994, pp. 65, 68, 70; SLAVEK 2007, pp. 123124; SLAVEK 2008, p. 879, note 11; Radka Tibitanzlov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI. 30, pp. 610611.

Invent pozstalosti po neb[otku] panu Karlovi krtovi z Zvoic Lta Pn 1691 12. dne msce januarii v ptomnosti urozench a statench vladyk pana Jana Daniele Krocna z Drahobejle a pana Maximilina eelickho z Rozenwaldu, jakoto z msta radnho krlovskho Starho Msta praskho deputrovanch komisav, stal se popis v a velijak pozstalosti po neb[otku] urozenm pnu Karlovi krtovi z Zvoic, Jeho Milosti csask krlovsk soudu nejvyho purkrabstv rad a mtnnu te eenho Starho Msta praskho, jak nsleduje. Pan vdova Albta krtov, rozen Rozov Sirotek Vclav Jan Bo, st 2 lta Na gruntech Dm od starodvna U Hjk een v Starm Mst praskm vedle ernho Vorla, nedaleko Mince lec. Polovice domu nkladnickho U Korand od starodvna een dle zpisu knch mstskch; kdy pak t dm v ten velk ohe k shoen

piel, tehdy neb[otk] pan krta, nechtce na vystaven nklad vsti, dle jeho vlastnho upsn se prohlsil, e z tho domu i s tm, co do ivnosti vloil, vce nic praetendrovati ned ne 1800 zlatch rnskch, ku kterto sum podle piznn pan vdovy neb[otk] pn na staven j na hotov jet pipjil 300 zlatch rnskch, a tak z tho domu Korandovskho do tto pozstalosti pat 2100 [zlatch] V jedn ern hrobov truhle rozlin zklady, na kterto zapjeno, jak v knize neb[otka] pana krty vlastn rukou poznamenno. Kalmanovi Brandejsovi idu, na nm No 1 30 zlatch Na jin zklad tmu No 3 50 zlatch 4 100 zlatch 8 100 zlatch 10 100 zlatch 11 nco stbra a ostatek m bti na punochch, ku ktermuto id Kalman Brandejs se piznal a prohlsil, e co se nedostv, sm dosaditi m, jest pjeno 500 zlatch

12 150 zlatch 13 100 zlatch 15 50 zlatch 17 50 zlatch 18 50 zlatch 22 50 zlatch 23 100 zlatch 26 100 zlatch 27 100 zlatch 28 150 zlatch 29 jsou penze in natura, zklad vyzdvien 50 zlatch 31 100 zlatch 32 200 zlatch 34 100 zlatch 35 200 zlatch 36 150 zlatch Israelovi Brandejsovi idu nleejc zklad, na nj pjeno 200 zlatch Jin zklad dva prsteny, kad s jednm diamantem, na nj do jistho msta zapjeno 100 zlatch Zklad zapeetn v mal krabice, od koho zastaven jest, se nev, jsouce odpeetn, nachz se zlat etzek pancovho dla, pi nm polouportukleser. Dva zlat prsteny, v jednom 9 diamantk a v druhm jeden diamant,

t etzek hrachovho dla pozlacen, kter se za falen dr, na nj dle zaznamenn zapjeno 5. maii lta 1688 100 zlatch Suma kapitlu na zklady zapjenho 2980 zlatch Dlun zapsn N. 1 obligaci in originali pana Jana Clerixa, souseda na maltzskm prv v Menm Mst praskm a Agnes manelky jeho de dato 9. octob[ri] anno 1679 na pana Karla krtu znjc na 1200 zlatch N. 2 originln idovsk staar na 2000 zlatch od Lebla Wienera a jeho otce na pana Karla krtu znjc, na ktermto neb[otka] pna vlastn rukou napsno, e na nj 1000 zlatch zaplaceno a zstv 1000 zlatch N. 3 zapjeno jest od neb[otka] pna dle obligac in originali de dato 15. julii anno 1690 panu Petrovi Mikulovi Frantikovi Kostomlatskmu Vecovcovi [!] z Vesovic 1000 zlatch N. 4 originl idovsk staar na neb[otka] pana Karla krtu znjc

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 349

od Lble Wienera de dato 16. junii 1687 lta na 1000 zlatch N. 5 originl staar na neb[otka] pna znjc od Aarona Planty ida de anno 1686 na 500 zlatch N. 6 originl staar t /na/ neb[otka] pna znjc od Kalmana Brandejsa ida dle dato 23. januarii anno 1685 na 200 zlatch N. 7 originl obligac od Jej Milosti pan Marie Renaty ovdovl hrabnky Slavatov de dato 14. septemb[ri] anno 1688 800 zlatch Suma kapitlu na obligac zapjenho 5700 zlatch Od zlata, stbra Dva prsteny, kter neb[otk] pan krta nosval, v jednom kadm patncte routovch diamant, z jednoho vak ten prostedn, a to nejvt, se nedostv. Dva zlat prsteny, v kadm 3 esk diamanty fasovan v stbe. Koek stbrn malik okrouhl 1 Kord s stbrnmi ki, hkem a nkonm 1 V rejbtii dubovm, vnit lut pacovanm Hodinky stbrn s budkem, v stbrnm futrlku, v 28 lotu Dv slnky stbrn nzk, na zpsob tch lic v hromad, v ob 17 lotu Stbrnch stejnch lic 9 Kok nzk s poklikou na tch knokch, pozlacen, v 17 lotu Ve futrlku erb krtovsk z jaspisovch pulrovanch kamen v hromadu kunstovn sloen, pi nm dva stbrn lit groe, jeden s oukem a krtovskm erbem. V tom rejbtii majestt in originali na pargamen psan od csae Maximilina na vladyctv neb[otka] Jana krty. Od obraz N. 1 obrzek star obdln na prkn pilepen, na nm Posledn veee Pn 1 2 et 3 landafty stejn, na jednom jak voda ze skly tee, na druhm pust staven v ernch rmch 2 N. 4, 5 et 6 stejn men landafty v ernch rmch 3 N. 7 et 8 jet men stejn landafty v ernch rmch 2 N. 9 item landaft nco mlo vt, t v ernm rm 1 N. 10 et 11 landafty, na nich moe malovan, bez rmc 2

N. 12 landaft bez rmu na nm Scheferin 1 N. 13 gura, jak se poklad dobejv 1 14. malovan ebrci 1 15. hlava star eny v okrouhlm pozlacenm rm 1 16. svat Jan Ktitel 1 17. ensk osoba s hadem 1 18. obdln obraz Nanebevzet Panny Marie s rozlinmi svatmi bez rmu 1 19. gura pobonosti 1 20. Rachel, velk kus, vak nedomalovan 1 21. Nanebevzet Panny Marie 1 22. svat Lidmily usmrcen 1 23. Panna Marie s Jesultkem u prsu a svat Josef, velk kus, kter neb[otk] sm maloval 1 24. obrzek na mdi, krucix s Pannou Mari a svatm Janem 1 25. doktor a pacienti 1 26. nah ensk osoba mal 1 27. malik obrzek, jak svat Josef sp 1 28. malik konterfekt generla Picolomini 1 29. et 30, malik non landafty, vejchoz msce 2 31. sesln Ducha svatho na apotoly a Pannu Marii [1] 32. velk kus, na nm 6 enskch obnaench osob, jak musicruj 1 33. kontrfekt neb[otka] pana starho krty v rm 1 34. kontrfekt neb[otka] pna, kdy jet mlad byl, v rm 1 35. kontrfekt neb[oky] pan krtov 1 36. mal obrzek Nanebevzet Panny Marie 1 37. Ecce homo 1 38. star kontrfekt musk 1 39. kontrfekt neb[otka] pana Cortesii 1 40. mal landaft 1 41. nedohotoven 3 hlavy 1 42. kontrfekt musk 1 43. gura ensk osoby 1 44. kontrfekt jednoho biskupa 1 45. kontrfekt neb[otka] pana hrabte Bernarda z Martinic 1 46. kontrfekt csaovny Margarety 1 47. gura jednoho mue 1 48. holandsk drynk 1 49. kontrfekt musk 1 50. obraz podmalovan musk gury 1 51. kontrfekt musk osoby 1 52. nah ensk osoba s starcem 1 53. divokch lid zpsob 1 54. kontrfekt musk osoby 1

55. anjel Gabriel 1 56. zaat kontrfekt musk 1 57. jak 3 osoby v lese spj 1 58. kontrfekt csae Ferdi[nanda] III. 1 59. kontrfekt ensk osoby 1 60. bolestn Matka Bo s Kristem Pnem na kln 1 61. svat Petr a Pavel 1 62. historia na zemi [se] sedcm starcem 1 63. svat patriarcha Jakub, jak vidl anjele z nebe stupujc 1 64. konterfekt neb[otka] pana kardinla z Harrachu 1 65. model njak historie 1 66. ensk osoba a k prsm gurovan v rm 1 67. konterfekt ensk osoby 1 68. nedomalovan obraz ensk osoby 1 69. konterfekt neb[otka] pana krty mladho vku 1 70. hlava jednoho starce, ostatek nedomalovan 1 71. star obraz ensk osoby s npisy 1 72. pohansk vdova sedc 1 73. krucix 74. mal obrzek svat M Magdalny 1 75. konterfekt njakho mladho pna v kyrysu 1 76. pt hlav muskch starcv 1 77. dv musk hlavy nedodlan 1 78. Venue s mscem na hlav 1 79. ti mal osoby, jeden jak bernka na hlav nese 1 80. star obrzek Korunovn v nebi Panny Marie 1 81. Nanebevzet Panny Marie 1 82. bohyn Pallas 1 83. ti nah ensk osoby 1 84. musk hlava vzhru patc 1 85. konterfekt njakho jenerla 1 86. konterfekt jednoho kardinla 1 87. svat Hieronymus 1 88. konterfekt jednoho jenerla 1 89. ensk osoba plac 1 90. pt dtinskch hlav 1 91. mal ensk osoba cel 1 92. svat Vclav, jak ho bratr morduje 1 93. Jeek s kem 1 94. Panna Marie, jak Jeka koj 1 95. konterfekt ensk osoby starodvn 1 96. ensk osoba nah, spc s jednm starcem 1 97. model obrazu svat Panny Barbory 1 98. model njak star historie 1

99. model Nanebevzet Panny Marie 1 100. dva modely na jednom pltn 1 101. et 102. modely kvt 2 103. konterfekt ensk osoby 1 104. kvt rozlin 1 105. svat Petr, jak sp 1 106. gura jednoho mue 1 107. konterfekt neb[otka] opata zbraslavskho Jungera 1 108. konterfekt Jeho Milosti csae v mladm vku 1 109. konterfekt s intou 1 110. ensk osoba s smrt hlavou 1 111. patriarcha Isaac dvajc poehnn Jakubovi 1 112. velk kus, njak historie, na nm pt osob a jedno dt 1 113. Korunovn Krista Pna 1 114. Tobi, jak ho anjel vede 1 115. Zvstovn Panny Marie 1 116. konterfekt cel osoby pana hrabte Franze Gallase 1 117. konterfekt njakho starho duchovnho 1 118. konterfekt jenerla Colloredy 1 119. konterfekt njakho mladho duchovnho 1 120. konterfekt pana hrabte Jana Hartvka z Nostic 1 121. uhersk ensk osoba 1 122. Turek 1 123. konterfekt njakho duchovnho 1 124. svat Josef, jak Jeka na loktech chov 1 125. et 126 konterfekty njakho hrabte a pan jeho 2 127. konterfekt nedokonal musk 1 128. konterfekt jin, t nedodlan 1 129. et 130. dva obrazy stejn s satou hlavou a okolo n velik aly 2 131. et 132. dva landafty mosk 2 133. landaftek mal 1 134. na prkn malovan obrzek obdln 1 135. star obraz, njak historie s mnohmi osobami 1 136. velk obraz, na nm nah ensk osoba 1 137. velk obraz, arvtka Nmcv s Turky 1 138. tmu npodobn 1 139. zase takov 1 140. model obtovn Panny Marie v chrm 1 141. svat Jan Evangelista, velik kus, in insula Pathmos, nedohotoven 1 142. Panna Maria s Jekem,

350 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

s svatou Annou a svat Carolus Boromaeus, velk kus 1 143. velk obraz, na nm svat Michal archanjel, jak zl anjele z nebe pud 1 144. velk kus, 12 znamen msnch 1 145. velk kus, tvan divokho kance 1 146. k tmu podobn kus tvan jelena 1 147. historie poetick 1 148. velk kus, lec ensk osoba nah 1 149. Lugrecia, velk kus 1 150. velk kus, svat Vclav, jak jest od bratra zamordovn 1 151. obrzek mal Panny Marie s Jezultkem, jak sp 1 152. obrzek malik devn, na nm 5 hlav 153. velk obraz, na nm svat tpn od neb[otka] pana starho krty malovan, kter vak poruen jest a nleel do kltera na opku pod Mlnkem 1 154. v t velikosti t obraz v nov koprovan, kter na mst tho na opku pijti m 1 155. krucix s Pannou Mari a svatm Janem, velk, jet nedomalovan 1 156. velk obraz nedomalovan, Bolestn Panna Marie syna Boho na kln majc, s svatm Janem a svatou M Magdalnou 1 157, 158, 159, 160 tyry obrazy, ensk osoby rozlinch krojv 4 161. mal obrzek na mdi, krucix s Pannou Mari, s svatm Janem a svatou M Magdalenou 1 162. velk obraz svinut, Nanebevzet Panny Marie 1 163. zaat konterfekt neb[oky] pan krtov, toliko hlava 1 tyry kusu mdi, na nich obrazy vyryt it[em] velk plt mdi, asi 2 lokte dlouh a 1 loket irok 164. item druh zaat konterfekt t pan krtov, kdy ji star byla Co se pak ostatnch malskch vc, totito velikch kunstovnch gur voskovch a kipsovch, t kupfertych (kter od jednoho v tom zbhlho a povdomho pna sortrovan jsou) a rysv na pape dote, ponvad pro mnostv toho kad kus specice zaznamenn bti nemohl, majce tak ohled na to, e jedno bez druhho prodno bti

neme, nbr to ve vesms neb v sum k prodaji pijti mus, proe takov vechny pi spolenosti, a by se dobr kupec nalezl, v jednom sklep suchm nahoe a v druhm dole pi zemi zaven zstanou. Od knch Bible esk in folio 1 Beschreibung der Contrafactur der vornehmbsten Sttt der Welt in magno folio, 2 Theile 2 st. Prvo mstsk 1 zen [!] zemsk 1 Herb Mathiola in fol. 1 Historie crkevn in fol. 1 Policie historick 1 Flavius Josephus nmeck 1 Titi Livii Rmische Historien 1 Kniha nmeckch carminv in fol. 1 Posloupnost knat Paprockho 1 Beschreibung der Schiffarth und Raiss in die Trkey Niclas Nicolai Kamling 1 Lexicon Philosophicum Rodolphi Goclenii in par fol. 1 Historie del mondo in par fol. 1 Philippi Theophrasti Bombast von Hohenheimb in par fol. 1 Dl pt a est Bible esk Novho zkona in par fol. 2 kusy Privilegia Krlovstv eskho psan 1 Kniha z reglnho papru, v n nco recept napsanch, ostatek przdn 1 Frmahlung und Beschreibung der Horologien alten Truckhs 1 Comentarien und Beschreibung von dero Leben und Herzug Cyri des Ersten, alten Truckhs 1 Marci Velseri Libri octo 1 Francisci Petrarchae Trostbcher 1 Miscellanea Bohuslai Balbini 1 Accuratae Effigies Ponticum maximorum 1 Architectura Militaris in fol. 1 De serponte, prvn kniha in quarto 1 Nicolai Caussini Trecensis e Soc[ietas] Jesu 1 Dikcion latinsk a esk 1 Lectiones Joannis Christophori Schambogen 1 Revelationes Nicolai Drabicio 1 Historie del mondo Gio[vanni] Tarchagnota, vlask, parte 1 et 4 1 Il Decameron di Messer 1 I dieci libri dell architetura 1 Daniel Schwentzers Geometriae practicae 1 Cento novelle scelte 1 Akta Krlovstv eskho lta 1547 1

Theatrum poeticum 1 Considerationi civili di M. Remigio Fiorentino 1 Philosophia naturale di M. Alesandro Piccolomini 1 Bible svat drobnho tisku 1 Scripta philosophica 1 Glinnalidi Cornelio Tacito 1 Lhistoria di Milano M. Bernardino Corio 1 Iconologia del Ripa 1 Vokabul sedmi e 1 Le ministre destat 1 Colerus, teutsch 1 Discorsi del S. don Antonio Agostini geschriebenes altes Artzney Buch 1 Frantz Renner Artzney Buch 1 Theses hrabte z Altanu 1 Janua linguarum reserata aurea 1 Le imagini delle Done Auguste 1 Del Governo di M. Francesco Sansovino 1 Relationi universali di Giovanni Botero Benese 1 Historia d Italia di M. Francesco Guicciardini 1 Kriegsmanual Johann Jacobi von Wallhaussen 1 Descriptiones Ptolemaicae Corneli Wytiet 1 Nov kratochvle Bartolomje Paprockho 1 Weiblicher Lustgarten 1 Il primo volume delle cagioni delle guerre antiche 1 Le vite de Glihvomini 1 Apologiae der bohmischen Stnde 1 Svzanch knek in octavo 12 et 16 latinsky, francouzsky, vlasky a nmecky, setlo se jich 248 kus Ve sklpku proti zadn svtnici V almae ve zdi od chodcch atv Pl ern kanavacov tuplovan s krajky, k nmu kabtek a spodky t s krajky premovan Jin kabtek a spodky t z ernho kanavacu Kabtek a spodky tak ern soukenn, ji hrub ochozel Kabtek a spodky z ernho kamelhoru Kaputa z holandskho sukna mykov barvy, veskrz proktem podit, pi n knoky s stbrem protkvan. K n kamisola tak proktov s podvkou stejn, kalihoty z strakatho aksamitu. K tm atm opasovac wehrgehenk s zlatem a stbrem krumplovan Item rukavice s hedbvma [!]

franclemi a ti poutkov male pod halstuch Kaputa ern z holandskho sukna 1 K n kamizola z ernho tercenellu, s krajky premovan 1 Pl znovn z ernho panihelskho sukna 1 Sukna takovho 7 loket Pl ern kronraov 1 Kaputa a dvoje spodky tuze ochozel z ernho aretu de nirais Kabtek a spodky z aretu ernho, spodky kamelhorov 1 Kaputa a spodky z trafovanho stbrn barvy harasu, s bavlnnm strakatm pltnem podit Pi tom vesta t z takovho pltna Kamizoly z mode ahanho pltna 2 arpa jednou okolo ivota ern hedbbn [!] s ernma franclemi 1 Kaputa ji onoen z ernho holandskho sukna 1 Koich z ernho holandskho sukna s ernm bernkem, vak od molv zkaenm, podit 1 Bornowill z prostho sukna s ernm pajem podit 1 Pl deov z modrho kamelhoru kartzem podit 1 Kamizola star ern z plisu 1 chlafpelz z strakatho bavlnnho pltna a s bavlnou vycpvan 1 Deka z tureckho stbrohlavu s zelenm pltnem podit 1 Item takov deka nco sprostj s zlatm pltnem podit 1 Punochy zimn dlouh, englick, nov 2 pry Punochy harasov kropenat, ochozel 1 pr ern punochy zimn, t ochozel 1 pr Rukavice s ernma krajky 1 pr Paroky krtk 2 a dlouh 1 3 Klobouky ern 2 a ediv 1 3 Portr z modrho sukna 1 Firhak modr harasov od okna 1 It[em] od dve 1 Spodky koen barevn 1 Item souken ern 1 V almae oechov barvy Od blch atv Prostradlo tenk s krajkami 1 Cejcha star s karmaznem vyvan 1 Cejcha star barchnov 1 Ubrusy cvilinkov 2 Detto runk 1 Koile na klidmona 1 Koil neb[otka] pana tejnkch 8

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 351

Prostjch 2 Star mal cejka 1 chlafthozny 1 Bavlnnch punoch pr 1 Plena 1 Vobojek a pr tacl poynt devenis Halstuch krajkovch a s krajky 11 Tacl s krajkami pr 5 prostch pr 2 tek s krajky 1 Punty pltn s bavlnou 2 Pkn damakov ubrus a 12 servet zstvaj v zstav, na kter neb[otk] pn 5 zlatch do jistho msta pjil. Od cnu V almae velk vykldan, dole s ubldem Ms novch 14, v 37 lib. ly 4 4 lib. Ms novch 5 Men misky 3 Malch novch misek 8 Tal 21 Patika mal 1 Plpinty 2 Konvice pivn 1 Flae pinetn tyrhrann 1 kopek pod umyvadlo 1 Plt pod sklenice 1 Me pod prase 1 Dbnky na kvt 1 Pl a ejdlka 2 Svcny s poklikami 2 Serpentnovho kamene okrouhl ae s cnovm roubem 1 S. V. hrnec non 1 Mod [!] velk mosaznej s eleznou palikou 1 V tm sklep v almae ve zdi Bl majolikov dbnek s stbrnm pozlacenm vkem s erbem neb[otka] pna 1 Barevn majolikov dbnek s stbrnm blm vkem 1 Dbnky s cnovma vkami 2 Majolikovch lek s poklikami 5 Hlinnch lk s poklikami 5 Hlinnch l na konfekty 6 Serpentnov malik dbneek s cejnem obit 1 Mistika malik 1 Obrzek mal stbrn v ernm rm, Korunovn Krista Pna a na rm 6 anjelskch hlaviek 1 Vky duktov kolnsk v futrlu 1 Vky jin visc 1 Vky mosazn lotov s kolnskm gleichem, pi nich mosaznho zva na 64 dukt 1

Vhy mosazn s eleznm gleichem, pi nich libern rozbrajc zva 1 Od rozlinch mobili v velikm pokoji enktisch dubov s tyrmi dvkami, v nm nkter vinn sklenice 1 Porculnov miska 1 Prostch no pr 6 Vrcby cel kameny 1 Futrl na ae [s] vnem, toliko jedna sklenn ae 1 Sesl nzkejch [se] zbradlma s ervenm kvtovanm na lut pd tlaenm aksamitem potaenm 6 Item takov mal sesliky 2 idliek stejnch vyezvanch 12 Stoly sprost, na nich harasov ahan koberce 3 Stl s ernm kamennm pltem, na nm star koen koberec 1 Na nm instrument 1 Clavicord 1 V komoe na prav ruce vedle t svtnice Polookrouhl stoly, na nich harasov koberce 2 Stoleek s ernm schiefer kamenem 1 Almara velk bl, v n tureck koberec s harasovma franclemi 1 V pokoji vedle t komory Almara velk bl przdn 1 Malik nzk stoleky, na nich modr soukenn koberce 4 Star sesle modr soukenn [se] zbradlma 4 a bez zbradl s harasovma franclemi 8 Podstavnk pod svcny ern obarvench 6 Loutna ve futrlu 1 Chytara 1 Housle s futrlem dvoje V komoe vedle svtnice po lev ruce Stoleek malik, na nm modr soukenn kobereek 1 Sesliky nzk s zbradlma s modrm suknem potaen 4 V sklep proti svtnici zadn Velk dubovej stl 1 Star zelen barven truhla 1 Tabulky ifer kamenn 2 tcek krtk taen 1 Pistol s nmeckma stroji pr 1

Pistol starodvnch pr 1 Dragounsk kord 1 V zadn svtnici Stolek starch malch, na tch sprost tureck trafovn a na dvouch koen star koberce 5 Okrouhlej malej stoleek 1 idliek sprostch 7 Star rhaky pi oknch z zelenho harasu 3 Velk almara nzk, v n ji nepotebn lky 1 V malm pokojku pi t svtnici Srcadlo [!] v pacovanm rm 1 Khamplfutter star, peygelovho dla 1 Stoleek nzk mal, na nm star ahan harasov koberec 1 Postlka mal, nzk, star 1 Na n modrace [!] a polt Kord sen 1 Dlouh kord 1 Tesek 1 pacrhlky 3 Opasovac nov khinky 2 Stevc novch pry 2 V mal komrce proti t svtnici Postlka pod nebsy [!] na jednu osobu 1 Pi n zelench kronraovch rhak i s vncem kusy 4 Na n vzan deka vlnn, modr a bl 1 Deka z tlaenho pltna 1 Deka z tureckho bavlnnho pltna s prostradlem 1 Velk peina 1 a men 1 2 Polt 1, podhlavnky 3 4 Modrace 2 Polte modracov 3 idliky 3 Almrka sprost oechov barvy 1 Githara 1 Seslika mal star 1 Schreibkastl, v nm 3 mosazn pera, jeden cirkl a elezn t 1 cirkl Na mzhauzku Postlka zavrac zelen 1 Stoleek tyrhrann star, na nm koen koberec 1 Tabulka star erven 1 Star almara 1 V n hlinnch blch lkv 11 Koky 4 Mistika majolikov 1

A nco jinho sprostho rozlinho hlinnho ndob V svtnici na pavlai Pltn modr rhaky pi oknch 3 Ped polikou t takov rhak 1 Stl tyrhranat er/ve/n obarven 1 Stoleek erven star 1 Tabule s kipsovma gurami v dev fasovan 2 Klidmuky mal 2 Kmen na ten barvy 1 Stoleky malsk 2 rky malsk 2 Pltno gruntovan na rmch, kusy 2 Rmy velk k obrazm 2 panihelsk ze, toliko dva plty 1 Flor na rm nataen 1 idliky prost 3 V hoejm toku, kde se malovvalo v svtnici V starm futrlku loutna 1 Prostedn basa 1 Trombamarna 1 Klidmu velk 1 Tabule star velk 1 Pltno nataen na rm a gruntovan pro malovn velkho obrazu do olte 1 Item pltna gruntovanho na rmch, nataenho k malovn kus 5 rk velk malsk 1 Dole v dom Kryt vz toliko sama korba, ponvad pan vdova sama cel spodek v nov dlati dala V podzemnm sklep Sud ervenho vna lta 1680 zrostlho 10 vder It[em] ervenho vna tho lta soudek 2 vdra Actum anno et die ut supra. L. S. Maximilian eelick z Rozenwaldu, commissarius Pan p[urkmistr] a pni krlovskho Starho Msta praskho r povolovati, aby tento invent tu, kde nle, do knh mstskch vtlen a vepsn byl. In consilio Antiquae Urbis Pragensis 3. septembris 1691. Pavel Kratochvle syndicus. RT

352 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

172

The Old Town in Prague, 5 June 1691

Albta krtov marries Frantiek Theol Kleo of Roudn and enters into nuptial agreement with him. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka paprovch listin (Collection of Documents on Paper), sign. AMP PPL IV6425. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Lta Pn 1691 dne 5. msce ervna mezi urozenou pan Albtou ovdovlou krtovou, rozenou Rozovou, mtnnkou krlovskho Starho Msta praskho, jakoto nevstou z jedn a urozenm panem Frantikem Theophilem Kleo z Roudn, t mtnnem tho msta, jakoto enichem, z strany druh, staly se smlouvy svatebn dobrovoln takov. Jako umnivi sob jmenovan pan Frantiek Kleo z Roudn v stav svatho manelstva vstoupiti a oblbive sob k tmu stavu za budouc choti a manelku svou tolik jmenovanou pan Albtu krtovou jak pi n, tak i pi pnch ptelch jejch toho snan povyhledval, aby jemu se zakzala, co i taky dnenho dne v ptomnosti z obouch stran dodanch a tuto tolik podepsanch pnv ptel vykonno jest, take jedin na tom pozstv, aby skrze sprvce duchovnho k tmu stavu potvrzeni byli. Aby pak oba, jak pan enich strany vna, tak i pan nevsta strany obvnn opaten sv nleit mli, proe pedn pan nevsta msto vna polovici domu svho nkladnickho od starodvna Korandovsk eenho s hvozdem, sladovnou a jinm psluenstvm od neb[otka] pana

otce jejho urozenho a vysoce uenho pana Vclava Rozy, obojch prv doktora a Jeho Milosti csask nad apelacmi na Hrad praskm rady, j pan nevst a pedelmu panu maneli jejmu knihami mstskmi krlovskho Starho Msta praskho libro contractuum rubro primo, folio 328 k ddinmu vldnut odevzdanho a postoupenho, potom pak shoevi v tom neastnm velikm ohni, znova zase od pan nevsty jejmi prostedky vystavenho, postupuje, dv a odevzdv, ihned k jmn, dren a dokonalmu ddinmu vldnut, sob na tu polovici domu dnho prva vceji nepozstavujce a to panu enichovi Frantikovi Kleovi z Roudn, ddicm a budoucm jeho za prav vno a msto sumy vnn, take on pan enich, dadouce tyto smlouvy svadebn tolik i ped potvrzenm crkevnm do knh mstskch vloiti, dokonalm pnem a vladaem tho polovinho dlu ihned bti m. Naproti tomu zadruh pijmajce pan enich toto rozepsan vno od pan nevsty se v vdnost, takov zase domem svm na rynku Starho Msta praskho proti rathauzu lecm, U erven liky eenm a panu enichovi

docela pinleejcm, jak knihy mstsk libro contractuum rubro 2, fol. 323 plnji ukazuj, vak toliko do jedn polovice obvuje, take pan nevsta budoucn, kdyby pana enicha ivobytm pekala, polovici tho domu dokonalm ddickm prvem uti m a v takovm pbhu pan enich jen toliko s druhou polovic domu vldnouti a ddicm svm zanechati mocti bude. Piem vak zatet jak pan nevsta, tak i pan enich sob v moci zanechvaj, aby budoucn sebe jinaeji bu skrze posledn vli a kaft aneb skrze spolen statkv vzdn aneb jinm jakmkoliv povolenm prvnm zpsobem zaopatiti mohli. Na potvrzen toho jak pan enich, tak i pan nevsta, t pni ptel z oboj strany dodan vlastnmi rukami se podepsali a sekrty sv pitiskli, jim pnm ptelm vak beze kody. A budou mocti tyto smlouvy svadebn s povolenm slavnho magistrtu jak doteno kadho asu, t i dve potvrzen crkevnho v neptomnosti jedn, neb druh strany do knh mstskch se vloiti a vepsati dti. Stalo se v mstech praskch dne 2. julii lta Pn 1691. Albta krtov, rozen Rozov

Frantiek Theol Kleo z Roudn mp. Joann Vclav Benol, dkan a prelt vye[hradsk] Jan Karel Dyryx z Bruku na Rotenberku, na svdom mp. Samuel Globic z Buna, pi Jeho Milosti csask krlovsk kance[li] mstodrick expedici koncipista ut testis Karel Frantiek Grnitzer mp. Karel Frantiek Felix mp. na svdom Povoleno k vloen do knih mstskch in con[silio] Antiquae Urbis Pragensis 3. julii 1691. Pavel Kratochvle The reverse: Ingrossatum libro contractuum rubro 2, fol. 324 Johann Frantz Felix mp. Z nazen pana kancle zanechn tento originl v kanceli a dn toliko vejpis autentick z piny t, e se originl v kanceli teprv od pan nevsty korigroval a msto tetiny polovice domu Korandovskho napsno bylo. RT

173

The Old Town in Prague, 30 September 1691

Appendix to the inventory of Karel krta the Younger, issued on the occasion of separating the inheritance after the new marriage of Albta krtov, born Rozov. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber obligationum caeruleus 5, 16911696 /1709/, sign. 3601, f. 110v113v. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Lta Pn 1691 dne 30. msce septembris u ptomnosti urozench a statench vladyk pana Maximilina eelickho z Rosenwaldu

a pana Bohuslava Vokovskho z Kundratic, jakoto od slavnho magistrtu krlovskho Starho Msta praskho z msta radnho

deputrovanch pnv komisav mezi urozenou pan Albtou, prv krtovou, nyn Kleovou, rozenou Rozovou, z jedn a urozenm

panem Samuelem mladm Globicem z Buna, pi Jeho Milosti csask krlovsk kanceli mstodrick koncepistou k rad pidanm, t

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 353

panem Vclavem Rudolfem Vynem z Klarenburku, k ruce nezletilho sirotka Vclava Jana Boho krty ad hunc actum zzenm kurtorem strany druh, stala se dokonal podnost a podlen pozstalosti krtovsk, jak nsleduje. Jako urozen a staten vladyka pan Karel krta z Zvoic, Jeho Milosti csask krlovskho soudu nejvyho purkrabstv rada a mtnn dotenho Starho Msta praskho vykroive z prostedku ivch dne 2. januarii bcho 1691 lta, po sob pan vdovu, nadjmenovanou pan Albtu, tehd krtovou, ji nyn Kleovou a jedinkho [!] s n zplozenho syna Vclava Jana Boho veho jmn svho, kterto v podn invent uvedeno a v knihy mstsk libro inventariorum ab anno 1688, folio 100 vepsno jest, ddice ab intestato zanechal, pod tm pak podotknut pan vdova, pikroive k druhmu manelstvu a chtce jak syna svho pi sob, tak tak pozstalost na nj pipadlou titulem porunickm opatrovati a spravovati, aby dvji nleit podnost a podlen se stalo, pi slavnm magistrtu objednala. Proe takov podlen a podnosti inn pedsevzato a k ruce sirotka dv tetiny cel pozstalosti dle prva mst[skho] C 42 vybran jsou. Pedn co se penz dote, vynalo se na zkladch 2980 zlatch rnskch, na obligacch 5700 zlatch rnskch, z domu U Korand pochzejcch 2100 zlatch, vychzejc ouroky z kapitlv a do 30. septembris vynej 469 zlatch, 33 krejcar, po smrti neb[otka] pana krty pijato 177 zlatch, co by sice v jedn sum na 11 426 zlatch, 33 krejcar se vztahovalo, odrazce ale odtud funeralia a pi tom potebnch nkladv 583 zlatch, 3 krejcar, t oustn odkaz a nazen neb[otka] pana krty na volt do kostela svatho Havla 300 zlatch, jako i co skrze ztrtu jet za ivobyt jeho stalou na zkladch kodovati se, pijde 108 zlatch, nemn strany invente, t stravy a sluby dtinsk dveky a jinch v pin pozstalosti a sirotka bezelstnch vydn 275 zlatch, co ve ped pny komisai v podnm potu specicrovno a adjustrovno in v jedn sum 1267 zlatch, a tak zstane ist quantum k rozdlen 10159 zlatch rnskch, 33 krejcar, odkud dv tetiny sirotku

pinleej, toti 6773 zlatch, 2 krejcar, kterto pan mate v dobrou bezpenost pivsti a aby z nich k dobrmu sirotka interesse vychzeti mohly, zaopatiti se vynasna. Za druh: od zlata a stbra pro sirotka vybran est stbrnch lic, kord s stbrnejma ki, dv slnky 17 lotu vc, dva zlat prsteny s eskejma diamanty asi za 5 zlatch, mimo eho jeden kok s teklem na tech knokch, ji pedtm odjinud darovan, sirotku zstv. Co se pak dote dvouch zlatch prstenv s routovejma diamanty jako i stbrnejch hodinek, takov prsteny pan mate v 90 zlatch jest ujala a naproti tomu hodinky stbrn, a vej acovan byly, jen toliko v 18 zlatch sirotku propustila a k doplnn jeho dvouch tetin jet na penzch 54 zlatch doplatiti m. Erb krtovsk z jaspisu s dvouma stbrnma groi, t majestt na vladyctv, jako i vechny knihy a muzikln instrumenta pan mate pro sirotka zanechv. Za tet: rozstavive pan mate vechny obrazy na ti dly, z nich dva dly vybran dle numer a vypsn invente nsleduj tyto: N[umer] o 18, 1013, 16, 17, 20, 22, 27, 28, 31, 33, 35, 4143, 46, 47, 4951, 53, 55, 56, 58, 59, 6265, 6770, 72, 73, 7578, 8183, 86, 87, 90, 92, 93, 95, 96, 99, 100, 102, 105, 106, 108, 110112, 115, 117124, 130, 136141, 143, 144, 147150, 153, 155, 157160, 162164. Mimo kterchto v inventi podle numer specicrovanch obrazv jet nkter patnj obrazy se vynaly, z nich npodobn dva dly pro sirotka vybran jsou, toti lit[era] A svat Barbara, B ti zabit Danielky, C nedomalovan Pyramus a Thysbe, velkej kus, D et E konterfekty star csae Maximilina a Rudolfa, F ensk osoba, G staroitn konterfekt musk, H abrys na papru podlepen, Snmn Syna Boho z Ke, I Armenian s fajfk, K konterfekt malho dtte, L zaat musk konterfekt, toliko hlava, M nedodlan konterfekt musk, N zaat obraz do olte, O zaat konterfekt ensk osoby, P konterfekt njakho mladho pna, Q hlava musk, R konterfekt duchovnho pna, S konterfekt csaovny Eleonory, T starodvn, ensk osoba, V konterfekt musk v kyrysu, W konterfekt ensk osoby, X mezek v rm, Z est konterfekt sprost

malovanch, dohromady svinutch. Za tvrt: ostatn malsk vci a do prodaje jich in indiviso zstanou, kterto byve na dvoje zmky zamknut, jedny kle pan mate a druh zpotku jmenovan pan Globic za sebou mti bude. Za pt: chodic aty i jin pod rubrikou atv v inventi poznamenan vci, byve sice na vtm dle ji spotebovan, t proleel a zkaen, nicmn za 100 zlatch, 45 krejcar zpenen jsou, z nich sirotku 67 zlatch, 10 krejcar nle jako i npodobn. Za est: co tak za tch sirotku patcch osum vder vna se utriti mocti bude, k sirotm penzm se pilo. Za sedm: ty namle se nachzejc bl aty k poteb sirotka pan mate obrtiti a vynaloiti chce. Za osm: od cejnu dv tetiny sirot vynej 110 liber, kterto pan mate na penze za 40 zlatch pivedla. Za devt: ostatn vechny mobilia v inventi specicrovan, nemoha se nleit do dlv poloiti, pod ochranou a potem pan matee zstanou a z tch mobili bu in natura aneb z penz za n strench dv tetiny sirotku nleeti budou. Za dest: dm od starodvna U Hjk een na Starm Mst praskm, vedle ernho vorla nedaleko Mince lec, jak by nejdvji dobrej kupec na nj se vynael, prodn bti a z trhovch penz dv tetiny sirotku nleeti, pod tm pak uitky z nho vynachzejc, po sraen kontribucch a jinho bezelstnho vydn, tolik do dvouch tetin sirotku k ruce potati se maj. A jako nadepsan pan Albta prv krtov, nyn Kleov, jakoto vlastn mate asto pravenho sirotka Vclava Boho krty tm zpsobem celou pozstalost otcovskou pod svou sprvu a opatrovn pijala, proe tak pro bezpenost tho sirotka v t pin vechno a velijak jmn sv mohovit i nemohovit v nejlepm prvnm zpsobu zapisuje a hypotecruje. Kterto instrumentum s povolenm slavnho magistrtu bez ptomnosti stran do knih ms[tskch] vloeno bti me. Na potvrzen toho zpotku jmenovan strany vedle pnv komisav vlastnmi rukami se podepsaly a sekrty sv pitiskly. Actum ut supra. L. S. Maximilin eelick z Rozenwaldu, commissarius

L. S. Bohuslav Jan Vokovsk z Kundratic, commissarius L. S. Albta Kleov, rozen Rozov L. S. Samuel mlad Globic z Buna, k rad pidan L. S. Vclav Rudolf Vyn z Klarenburku, ad hunc actum zzen kurtor Povoleno k vloen do knih mstskch in consilio Antiquae Urbis Pragensis 15. aprilis 1692, consule domino Joanne Christophoro Mauck a Knigshan, Paul Kratochvle. RT

354 DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OEUVRE OF KAREL KRTA THE YOUNGER

174

The Old Town in Prague, 22 May 1693

A child named Josef was buried in the tomb by the altarpiece of Our Lady in the church of St Gallus. As it can be assumed from the boys age and the fact that the tomb in question was krtas, the deceased child was Vclav Jan of God, son of Karel krta the Younger, and the rst name was recorded wrongly. A similar mistake occurred during the baptism of the son of Karel krta the Elder, Vclav Bohumil, in 1653 when the father of the child was wrongly recorded as Frantiek krta. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika zemelch (Register of Deaths), 16451731, sign. HV Z1, p.49. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 4748.

Josephus [!] Screta 6 ann[orum] sepult[us] in crypta[m] apud altare B[eatae] M[ariae] V[irginis] Neapolitanae. RT

175

The Old Town in Prague, 31 December 1695

Testament of Albta Kleov, born Rozov, formerly krtov. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber testamentorum 4, 16811706, sign. 3746, f. 276r280r. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 17, 43; BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 11.

dui mou, jak se od tla rozdl, svrchovanmu Pnu Bohu Stvoiteli mmu, od kterho jsem ji doshla, zase pokorn odevzdvm tlo m aby do chrmu Pn svatho Havla dle nboenstv mskho katolickho poctiv pochovno bylo naizuji, aby za dui mou tyry sta m svatch se slouilo a to takto: u svatho Havla, kde tlo m odpovati bude, 220, u svatho Mikule v Starm Mst praskm 50, u svatho Jakuba 50, u Matky Bo na Loui 30, u svatho Jindicha 30 a u svatho Hatala 20 za mho univerzlnho ddice veho jmn mho mohovitho i nemohovitho, a naem by to koliv zleelo, ustanovuji a zizuji urozenho a statenho vladyku pana Frantika Theola Cleo z Roudn pana manela mho nejmilejho tyrem pozstalm po neb[otku] panu Jelenovi, bvalmu nad krlovskmi apelacmi rad, pan a pannm dcerm toti: pan Verunce nyn Jonkov a pannm Baruce, Jozice a Kaence, jedn kad na pamtku odkazuji na krtovskm dom, kdy by t

k prodeji piel, po jednom stu zlatch rejnskch louka na Brnce po mm otci synu mmu Vclavovi krtovi, tehd na iv zstvajcmu i ponvad nyn jsouce j v tomto kaftovnm zpsobu bez dt postaven Conrm[atum] 9. 4. 1699 [In the attached codicillus:] svatmu Hatalu v Starm Mst praskm odkazuji jeden obraz svatho Michala Archanjela a na olt jedno sto zlatch, kterto olt aby pan manel podle jeho vle sm postaviti dal Verunce Jonkov, rozen Jelenov zlat etzek, na kterm jest erb krtovsk pann Barboe Jelenov jeden holspantek s malejma diamanty, kter po neb[otkovi] panu krtovi panu maneli mm pochz RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 355

IV. Documents on Students and Workshop Collaborators and Assistants of Karel krta

Samuel Rafael Globic of Bun

176

The Old Town in Prague, 10 August 1656

The session of the Old Town painters guild considered admitting Samuel, son of the geodesist Samuel Globic of Bun, as an apprentice of Karel krta for the period of ve years. Jan Ji Rovensk of Libouhory and the uncle of the future apprentice, Daniel Globic of Bun are recorded as witnesses to the signing of the contract of apprenticeship. Archiv Nrodn galerie vPraze (Archives of the National Gallery in Prague), fund Prask malsk bratrstva (Prague Painters Confraternities), le Kniha protokol praskho malskho cechu zlet 16001656 (The Book of Protocols of the Prague Painters Guild from between 1600 and 1656), Acquisition No. AA 1209. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 5657; KUCHYNKA 1915, p. 44; HERAIN 1915, p. 60; NEUMANN 1974, p. 42; HALATA 1996, p. 189; RONK 1997, p. 40; NEUMANN 2000, p. 152. RT

Jan Bartolomj Klose

177

The New Town in Prague, 13 March 1669

Karel krta, as one of the witnesses, conrms that the marriage of Jan Bartolomj Klose, held on 29 January 1669, followed proper Catholic ordinance. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka paprovch listin (Collection of Documents on Paper), sign. AMP PPL IV2033b. Literature: PODLAHA 1916, p. 232; TOMAN 1993, p. 496; Radka Tibitanzlov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.26, p. 606.

Ich Endesunderschriebene bekhennen, das nachdem wir vor dem Ehrnvesten Herrn Joann Bartholomae Klose seiner Khunst ein Mahler freundlichen ersuchet worden, wir gerichten Ihme zu seiner gewiesen Noturft, das derselbe dem catholischen Gebrauch nach seine Copulation und Hochzeits Ehrentag ordentlich vollbracht habe, eine glauberwrdige Attestation ertheilen. Und wir nun in seinem Begehren verwaigerlich nicht erscheinen khnnen. Alle Attestiren wir hiemit der Wahrheit zuesteuer, das wir bey obgedachtes Herrn Joann

Bartholomae[us] Klose seiner ordentlichen ehrlichen Copulation, so bey Sankt Stephan dem Grssern in der Knig[lichen] Neuen Statt Prag den 29. Januarii nechst verwichene sechzehen hundert acht und sechzigsten Jahr gehalten worden, persohnlich beygewohnet [?] auch dieselbe nacher Haus beglaitet und das Mittagmahl bey ihnen eingenemben sollen. Urhkund dessen unsere aigen Handunderschrift und Petschaft. Geben Prag den 13. Martii anno 1669. Adam Ludwig Kayl von Sternburg mp.

W[enzel] M[oritz] Salomon v[on] Friedberg mp. Carl Screta Ssotnowsky von Zaworzicz mp. Hans Jacob Baunach, Burger, Handelman mp. RT

356 DOCUMENTS ON STUDENTS AND WORKSHOP COLLABORATORS AND ASSISTANTS OF KAREL KRTA

178

The New Town in Prague, 26 March 1669

Casparus Macarius, the parish priest at St Henry in the New Town in Prague, issues the certicate of baptism for the painter Jan Bartolomj Klose, who was baptized in accordance with Catholic ordinance on 26 September 1668 by the name Joannes Franciscus. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka paprovch listin (Collection of Documents on Paper), sign. AMP PPL IV2033a. Literature: Andrea Rousov Marcela Vondrkov, Karel krta ml. a krtovsk dlna, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, p. 425.

Ich Endeunderschriebener bekhene, das den 26. Septembris ingst verschlossenen sechzehenhundert acht und sechzigsten Jahrs Herr Johann Bartholomae Klosi der lb[lichen] Khunst ein Mahler, in der mir der Zeit anvetrauten Pfarrkirchen

Sancti Henrici der Knig[lichen] Neuen Stat Prag der catholischen Religion gem ordentlich taufen lassen und mit seinem Nahmen Joannes Franciscus geheien und genenner worden. Urkhund dessen mein eigene Handunderschrift und

Petschaft. Geben Prag den sechs und zwantzigsten Martii anno 1669. Casparus Macarius ad Sancti Henrici Neo Pragae parochus mp. RT

179

Prague, 13 December 1677

Carl Christof Franz Hilscher, the representative of the family of Gallas, writes to Frantiek Ferdinand Gallas about meeting J. B. Klose who worked for Karel krta for some time. Sttn oblastn archiv vLitomicch (poboka Dn) (State Regional Archives in Litomice [branch Dn]), fund Historick sbrka (rodinn archiv) Clam-Gallas (Historical Collection [Family Archives] of the Clam-Gallas Family), Frdlant, (1238) 15291947, Inv. No. 1575/XXI/6, le Korespondence (Correspondence), box 449. Literature: Andrea Rousov Marcela Vondrkov, Karel krta ml. a krtovsk dlna, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, p. 425.

Hoch und Wohlgebohrner Reichsgraf, Gnedig Hochgebietender Herr Herr Euer Hochgrf[lichen] Genaden khan nit gehorsamb mit diesen pahr [?] zu molestiren, weilen nun meine Zeit bey meinen Herrn nun hero lengst zum ein Eyde ist gelaufen und ich bey ihm nichts khan prosperiren, als thue ich gehorsambst Euer Hochgrf[lichen] Genaden zu wiesen, wofern mich nach die kurze Tag diesen Winter so netig nit hetten, als wolle ich mich unterdeen zum ein andern Mahler begeben. Die weil mein Herr hat mit mir gemacht, als ich bin von Ihro Hochgr[ichen] Genad[en] wieder zu ihm khomen, als hat ehr mir versprochen, das er mir wil ale Zeit etwas schenken auf Trunck und ich nie nichts empfangen hab, als aber jetzt und meine Zeit ist veroen und ich wolle wiesen, auf was fr ein Condition bey ihm weiter bin, als hat ehr mir viel Sachen ausgesetzt und

mir au Gerat alles, was ehr mir da Geringste manigsmahl hat vorgetregt zum ein Nathdarf, das ehr dach [!] vor allen einleiten, welche mir viel Zegnus khenten geben, hat versprochen zu schenken und wollte mir jetzt und gehrn etwas zum eine Nathdarf schaffen, was mir an Khleidung mangeln thuet, damit ich mit Euer Hochgrf[lichen] Genad[en] alezeit thuet molestiren, als khan ich bey ihm jetzt nicht bekommen, als hab ich jetzt mit ihm gemacht, da auf knftige Feuertag, was ehr mir hat au Gerath sol nach umb sonsten Arbeiten und nachdem thu ich Euer Hochgrf[lichen] Genad[en] gehorsambst bitten, wofern mich nach nit brauchten, so wolle ich mich auf die Alte Stadt zum Schwartzen Han aufen Kholmarck zum ein guten Mahler begeben, welcher hat bey gottseeligen Screta zeitlang auch gearbeit und der mich gehrn auf ein Zeit aufnemen

thut und nach Euer Hochgrichen Genad[en] verlangen mich wieder la, lase zur ale Stunden, wan Grfl[lichen] Genaden befehlen, neben khan ich mir etwas die Zeit etwas bey ihm verdienen, wie auch etwas nach Lernen, dan ehr nach sehr saubere Arbeit machen thuet und wan mich Euer Grichen Genad[en] verlangen, aber befehlen bin alezeit bereit aufgewarten. Als verhofe ich, da mich in diesem Euer Hochgrf[lichen] Genad[en] nit verdencken. Zu dero hochen Genaden mich gehorsamblich empfehle. Euer Hochgrf[lichen] Genaden und verpleibe [!] schuldigst gehorsamber, Carel Christof Franciscus Hylsher mp. Prag dem 13. Decemb[er] a[nno] 1677. RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 357

180

The Old Town in Prague, 1679

The inventory of property issued after the death of painter J. B. Klose lists a large number of paintings which the painter was, beside other things, selling in his shop. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber inventariorum, 16661685, sign. 1177, f. 600r601r. Literature: HOJDA 1985, pp. 4262 (edition); HOJDA 1993, pp. 64, 68, 81, 93; SLAVEK 2007, pp. 36, 124. RT

Frantiek Palinka
181

The Old Town in Prague, 16461656

Records in the guild book of the Old Town Painters confraternity inform about admitting Frantiek Palinka as the apprentice of Karel krta in 1646, about the end of his training and his release in 1653 as well as about the consequent contract of employment in krtas workshop. The last record related to Palinkas name is from 5 May 1656 when he was released by krta and left for Nuremberg. Archiv Nrodn galerie vPraze (Archives of the National Gallery in Prague), fund Prask malsk bratrstva (Prague Painters Confraternities), le Kniha protokol praskho malskho cechu zlet 16001656 (The Book of Protocols of the Prague Painters Confraternity from between 1600 and 1656), Acquisition No. AA 1209. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 5254; KUCHYNKA 1915, pp. 41, 44; HALATA 1996 (edition), pp. 151, 152, 159, 160, 166, 187, 191, 194; RONK 1997, pp. 8687. RT

182

(The Old Town in Prague), 13 April 1653

Karel krta admits the journeyman Frantiek Palinka, who apprenticed with him from 1 January 1646 to the end of December 1652, for the next three years as an employee of his workshop. Archiv Nrodn galerie vPraze (Archives of the National Gallery in Prague), fund Prask malsk bratrstva (Prague Painters Confraternities), le Doklady ouebnm pomru ze sbrky staromstskho malskho bratrstva (Documents on Apprenticeship from the Collection of the Old Town Painters Confraternity), 15801783, Acquisition Nos. AA 1216/I50. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, pp. 5254; BERGNER HERAIN 1910, cat. no. VI; NEUMANN 1974, pp. 42, 116; HALATA 1996, pp. 152, 159, 160, 166, 187, 191, 194; RONK 1997, pp. 8687; Vt Vlnas, in: SLVA BAROKN ECHIE 2001 A, p. 441, cat. no. II/4.110 (bibliography); TIBITANZLOV BERANOV 2009 (edition), pp. 7275, sheet no. 20; Radka Tibitanzlov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.20, p. 599. RT

358 DOCUMENTS ON STUDENTS AND WORKSHOP COLLABORATORS AND ASSISTANTS OF KAREL KRTA

Ondej Oktavin Petr of Kokov

183

The Old Town in Prague, 12 August 1657

Ondej Oktavin Petr of Kokov marries Anna Lenaov in the church of St Gallus. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka matrik (Collection of Registers), church of St Gallus, le Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16521704, sign. HV O1, p.552. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Copulati sun matrimonio servatis ab ecclesia quaescriptie dominus Andreas Petrus civis Antiq[uae] Urbis Prag[ensis] pictor cum honesta virgine Anna, derelicta post mortem

quiae defuncti Andreae Lenae, testes Bangel Chotoni et Victorino Francisco Ruuisdal, Clemens Fellerski. RT

184

The Old Town in Prague, 22 September 12 October 1659

The Old Town city council pays Ondej Petr for decorating work executed during the repair of the astronomical clock. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber certicationum, 16541662, sign. 1596, f. 104r, 106r, 108r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Mali od renovrovn hodin na ouet 50 zlatch Pan purkmistr a pni radn Starho Msta praskho r pi panu Fridrichovi Rapovi, spoluradnm a sprvci register obecnch naizovati, aby Andresovi Petrovi mali za prci a renovrovn hodin rathauzskch 50 zlatch rejnskch proti kvitanci odvsti nepominul. Ex consilio Antiquae Urbis Pragensis 22. septembris anno 1659. Consule domino Paulo Constantino Fiala de Feygelfeld Mikul Frantiek Turek z Sturmfeldu J[an] Hartung z Hartenfelsu M[aty] Max[milin] Macht

Malm certikac na 40 zlatch aby panu Andresovi Petrovi mali od renovrovn hodin rathauzskch na ouet 40 zlatch rejnskch proti kvitanci odvedl a zapravil. Ex consilio Antiquae Urbis Pragensis 6. oktob[ri] anno 1659. Malm na 20 zlatch aby panu Andresovi Petrovi mali od renovrovn hodin rathauzskch na dal ouet 20 zlatch rejnskch proti kvitanci odvedl a zapravil. Ex consilio Antiquae urbis Pragensis 12. oktob[ri] anno 1659. RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 359

185

The Old Town in Prague, 1668

Dispute between painter Ondej Petr and his neighbour, Vclav Moric Salomon Feydeker of Feydlberg, in the matter of an unauthorized extension of the house to the detriment of the rst. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber testimoniorum, 16641669, sign. 1077, f. 352r369v. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 56; RONK 1997, p. 88.

Svdom ku poteb pana Andresa Petra, mtnna a male v Starm Mst pra[skm] proti panu alomounovi Feydekerovi z Feydlbergku. Jest pravda, e jsem pi t vejchozi ptomen byl, kdy pan Andres Petr nm jist od pana Feydekera vyzdvien staven vykazoval a pravil, e se to mimo jeho vli tak dalece vyzdvihlo, ponvad on pan Andres Petr jen 3 trmy jemu panu Feydekerovi dovolil, ten pak e 4 trmy poloil a to staven a pod sam Ondeje Petra okno rozil. Kdy pan Feydecker pravil, e mu pan Ondej Petr to staven tak dalece, jak se vynachz, stavti povolil, odpovdl pan Ondej, e pravda nen. Kdy jsem vidl, e by se tu k nemu jinmu schylovati mohlo,

pravil jsem stranm, aby tch slov tak zanechali a konsortm mm jsem ekl, abychom li, vtom jsem z t kuchyn, kde se oni hdali, do svtnice el a jak jsem tam vstoupil, slyel jsem plesknouti a obrtiv se, ptal jsem se konsortv mch, zdali jest ho udeil a oni mi odpovdli, e udeil a vidl jsem, e pan Ondej Petr klobouk v rukou ml a na hlavu svou jej stavl, pravce, to pkn, to pkn. Jest pravda, e jsme potom vickni spolen z toho domu pry li a tu vc velice pi sob rozvaovali, e toho pan Feydeker nikoliv uiniti neml, neb jsme na mnozch vejchozch bvali a nikd nevidli, aby soused souseda pstmi traktrovati ml. jest pravda, e pan z Feydberku, kdy jemu pvod ty slova sm le ekl, tmu pvodovi nenadle siln

pohlavek pes tv dal, a mu klobouk s hlavy spadl nikoliv pravda nen, aby obalovan pvodovi toliko klobouk trejchovati ml, nbr patrn pohlavek pes tv jemu dal, me bti, e po tom pohlavku taky jemu klobouk trejchoval, nebo mu s hlavy spadl. vidl jsem, e ten pohlavek tak velik byl, a jak nle plasklo [!]. A klobouk pvodovi s hlavy spadl. pravda jest, tak jak se pamatuji, e obalovan pravil, zdali pan Eckhart pichz jako estipansk ouedlnk a nebo jako prokurtor malv, ponvad jeho zastv. Kdy pan Ondej Petr na to pravil, vak nen pravda a jest le, tehdy mu pan Feydeker nejen (jak v artikulu doloeno) o klobouk zavadil, ale

pohlavek dal, a mu klobouk spadl, na co pan Petr zdvhajce klobouk ekl, co je to za m dobrodin, to je pkn vc. Kdy pan Feydeker nejdvji panu Petrovi mluvil, e le, a on jemu na to zae ekl, e sm le, tehdy mu pan Feydeker na to pohlavek dal, a plasklo, jak nle. RT

186

Prague, 29 April 1672

On the dispute between Ondej Petr and his neighbour, Vclav Moric Salomon Feydeker of Feydlberg, in the matter of erecting a new chimney. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber appelationum 3, 16551670, sign. 1030, f. 384v. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 56; RONK 1997, p. 88.

O Vcl[ava] Morice Salomona a Ondeje Petra Slovutn a vzctn poctivosti ptel nm mil Jeho csask a krlovsk Milost krl a pn, pn ns vech nejmilostivj v pin Vclava Morice Salomona, kter za restituci in integrum contra lapsum fatalium apelationis v jistm mezi nm z jedn a Ondejem Oktavinem Petrem, mtnnem a malem staropraskm, z strany druh vzniklm nedorozumn o vyzdvien novho komnu a na to od

adu vaeho estipanskho vyneenm oznmen ponen d, nm suplikaci jeho skrze nejmilostivj reskript pod datum v Vdni 14. dne msce bezna jminulho 1671, nm ale teprv 27. dne msce dubna lta ptomnho 1672 dodanho, zase zptkem odeslati ril s tm nejmilostivjm poruenm, abychme t suplikujcho dost stran jeho odporn k odpovdi v asu prvnm propjeli a potom obho povce na to quod materialia zprvu svou s pipojenm dobrm zdnm nepomjeli. Proe vm nadjmenovanou

suplikaci jeho Salomona pleit odslme, ji vy dotenmu Oktavinovi Petrovi k dn odpovdi ke tyrem thodnm propjiti a nm potomn to ob k dalmu poven naemu odeslati nepominete. Dn na Hrad praskm dne 29. msce aprilis lta Pn 1672. Jan Frantiek hrab z Vrbna, vicepresident J[an] Vclav repl RT

360 DOCUMENTS ON STUDENTS AND WORKSHOP COLLABORATORS AND ASSISTANTS OF KAREL KRTA

187

The Old Town in Prague, 20 September 1672

Samuel Smicheus sells Ondej Petr the desolated house At the Sadleks for 30 Meissen three-scores. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka paprovch listin (Collection of Documents on Paper), sign. AMP PPL IV10836. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Lta Pn 1672 dne 20. msce septembris mezi panem Samuelem Smichaeusem Jeho Milosti csask krlovsk komory esk buchhalterie na Hrad pra[skm] rejtdinerem a mtnnem krlovskho Novho Msta praskho jakoto prodvajcm z jedn a panem Andresem Oktavinem Petrem, mtnnem krlovskho Starho Msta praskho, kupujcm z strany druh stala se a zaven jest smlouva trhov dobrovoln a nezruitedln, jak nsleduje. e jest nyn jmenovan pan Samuel Smichaeus jedno pust msteko, kde nkdy domek bval a ten temporum injuria[m], vzlt pak v neptelsk vdsk mst pra[skch] obleen k dokonal ruin a rozboen piel, mezi domy Vta

Olenskho a pana Fabina Harovnka z Sferynu, mtnna ji pravenho Starho Msta praskho, obostrann [!] lec a od starodvna U Sadlk een panu Ondejovi Oktavinovi Petrovi a pan Ann manelm, ddicm a budoucm jich za sumu 30 kop meskch zcela a zouplna zaplacench prodal a moc tto smlouvy trhov dokonale prodv Kterto smlouva trhov netoliko od stran kontrahrujcch, ale i tak od pnv svdkv k tomu dodanch podpisem rukou vlastnch i pitisknutmi sekrty jest utvrzena, dvajce pitom prodvajc plnou a dokonalou moc, aby nadepsan smlouva trhov od kupujcch manelv s povolenm slavnho magistrtu nadpipomenutho Novho Msta

praskho i bez ptomnosti jeho na nklad kupujcch vloena a vepsna bti mohla. Actum smlouvy trhov lta a dne svrchupsanho. Samuel Krypn Smichaeus, m[tnn] Novho Msta praskho mp. Dorota Smicheusov Andres Oktavin Petr, mt[tnn] Starho Msta praskho mp. Anna Petrov Jan Jaroslav Ctibor z Lew[enfeldu], mt[nn] Starho Msta praskho mp. k svdom Fabin Vclav Harovnk z Sferinu, m[tnn] Starho Msta praskho mp. RT

188

The Old Town in Prague, 2 May 1673

The Old Town city council disburses Ondej Petr the amount of 15 thalers for the portrait of Leopold I, executed for the local city hall. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber certicationum, 16681677, sign. 1598, f. 179. Literature: Andrea Rousov Marcela Vondrkov, Karel krta ml. a krtovsk dlna, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, p. 424.

Bernku mstskmu na 15 tol[ar] za contrafay Jeho Milosti csask Leopolda I. Pan p[urkmistr] a pni radn Starho Msta praskho r pi panu Rudolfovi Peliknovi bernku mstskm naizovati, aby on estncte zlatch rejnskch z penz pokutnch, ostatek pak z starch restantv za ten

do msta radnho Jeho Milosti csask Leopolda I. zpsoben contrafay patncte skch tol[ar] panu Ondejovi Petrovi mali proti kvitanci odvsti hledl. Ex cons[ilio] Antiquae Urbis Pragensis 2. maii anno 1673, consule domino Joanne Daniele Globitz Buina. RT

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 361

189

Blina, 14 April 1674

Vclav Burian, the scrivener from the city of Blina, requests Ondej Petr, as the superior of the painters guild, to return the letter of preservation issued for his relative the painter Frantiek Burian. Archiv Nrodn galerie vPraze (Archives of the National Gallery in Prague), fund Prask malsk bratrstva (Prague Painters Confraternities), le Korespondence staromstskho amalostranskho malskho bratrstva (Correspondence of the Old Town and Lesser Town Painters Confraternities), 15921782, Acquisition No. AA 1218, le 24. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Urozen a vzctn poctivosti pane a pteli mn zvlt laskav, vedle pedvzkazovn mch vdy ckny povolnch sluebnost pnu v dobr pamti pozstvati bude, kterak jsem s pnem o zelen tvrtek z strany mho strejce, za kterho jsem rukojmm pi ouad zdejm, aby jemu list jeho zachovac, kter v truhlici jejich cechovn le, zae k na poteb vydn byl, rozmluven inil a na tom zstal, e kdy se u pna t

mal, kter se u n[ebotka] pna [?] na Mal Stran v hlybokm [!] sklep uil, i ped jeho smrt za vyuen dostal, zstavil, e takov list jemu zdrovn nebude, vak proti njak diskreci nejsme, abychom pny pny na truk vna spendrovati nejmli, z kterto piny pane pkn prosm, e nad dost mou a ku poteb m doten list zachovac v pacquetu zaopaten mn odeslati sob nest, zakazuji se pnu i jinm pnm

malskho umn a kunstlm zase vm dobrm odsluhovati a vedle bosk ochrany zstvm mmu laskavmu pnu k slubm povoln. Vclav Ignat[ius] Buryan, psa radn msta Bliny mp. Act[um] z Bliny 14. aprili 1674. PS: nech pn od Frantika male, strejce mho 2 [sk tolary] na truk vna za vdk pijti sob nest.

Urozenmu vladykovi a panu Andresovi Petrovi, mtnnu a mali v krlovskm hlavnm Starm Mst praskm, mmu zvlt laskavmu pnu a pteli jmilmu k d[odn]. Auf der Alten Stadt Prag gegen der Mntz, ahn der Ecken beym Guldener Ancker zu ertragen. Jest takovej list tmu jeho strejci vydn 1674, 3. decem[bri]. RT

190

The Old Town in Prague, 25 May 1691

he Old Town Book of Pledges (liber additionum, Erberklrungsbuch) records the painter Ondej Petr as deceased on 5 May 1691. Archiv hlavnho msta Prahy (Prague City Archives), Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), le Liber condictionum albus V, 16801700, sign. 2255, f. 198r. Literature: Apparently unpublished.

Anna Maria Sybila, vdova po O[ndeji] Petrovi z Kokova RT

191

s. l., late 18th century

The painter Ondej Petr is stated in the abstracts of Jan Quirin Jahn with the rst mentions about the traded duel between krta and a painter-foreigner who the former reportedly killed in the duel. Archiv Nrodn galerie vPraze (Archives of the National Gallery in Prague), fund Jan Jakub Quirin Jahn, le Poznmky kumlcm (Notes on the Artists), Acquisition No. AA 1222/8. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 54.

Andreas Octavian Peter wurde auch der Lange Peter genannt und 1656 den 4. julii in der Mahlerconfraternitaet einverleibt, auch in der Folge Oberltester. In der Sankt Nicolaikirche der Altstadt Prag war ehedem

ein Seiten Altarblat im Geschmack des van Dyck zu sehen. Er lebte unverheurathet. 1673 forderte er Carl Screta heraus, in welchen Zweykampf er vor des letztern Haus beym Schwarzen Hahn genant, jetzt N. 40

auf der Knigsstrasse, blieb und den 4. Sept[ember] bey Sankt Galli in der Gruft beygesetzt wurde. Descamps, p. 175. RT

362 DOCUMENTS ON STUDENTS AND WORKSHOP COLLABORATORS AND ASSISTANTS OF KAREL KRTA

Jakub Karel Praxl

192

Prague, 26 February 1674

Jan Jchym Slavata of Chlum and Koumberk enters into contract with Karel krta to admitting Jakub Karel Josef Praxl as an apprentice for the period from 26 February 1674 to 26 February 1678. Sttn oblastn archiv Tebo (poboka Jindichv Hradec) (State Regional Archives of the City of Tebo [branch Jindichv Hradec]), le RA Slavat zChlumu aKoumberka (Family Archives of the Family of Slavata of Chlum and Koumberk), Inv. No. 162, sign. III J 6a, box 48. Literature: NOVK 1917, pp. 16, 31; NEUMANN 2000, p. 152; SEKYRKA 2011, pp. 147152.

Hendt dato den 26. Februarii anno 1674 ist zwischen dem Hoch und Wohlgebohrnen Herrn Herrn Johann Joachim des Heyligen Rmischen Reichs Grafen Slawata von Chlum und Koschenberg, Regirern des Hauses Neuhausherrn auf Neuhaus, Teltsch, Neu Bstritz, Chlumetz, Platz, Serowitz, Roten Lhota, Mnich und Hainspach, der Rmischen Kayserlichen Mayestt Rath wrklichen Cammerer, Landrechts Beysitzer, obrister Hoehen Richter, Kniglicher Stadthalter und obrister Erb Mundshenkh in Knigreich Beheimb etc. Ein ist und dan dem Edlen Resten und Khunstraicher Herrn Carolo Screta Burgern und Mahlern in der Alten Stadt Prag anderen Theils contrahirt und nachfolgender Verdings Contract geschlossen worden, als nemlichen und vors erste verdingen Ihro Hochgricher Excellenz Ihme Herrn Screta dem Jacob Carl Joseph Praxl als eine freyledige Persohn die Mahler Khunst zulehrnen auf vier Jahr lang, als von obernenten 26. Februarii 1674 bis 26. Februarii khnftigen anno 1678. Jahrs, der Gestalt, da er Jacob Carl Praxl Ihme Herrn Screta unter wehrender dieser Zeith allen gehorsamb, wie es einem getreuen Lehrknaben gebhret, leisten solle, andertens wollen auch meher erwehnte Ihro Hochgriche Excellenz Ihme Herrn Screta unter wehnen der Zeit, vor die Lehr, Khost und Wohnung jhrlichen Einhundert Gulden reinisch und zwahr jedesmahls ein Halb Jahr voran fnftzig Gulden reinisch bezahlen. Drittens so solle sich oft bemelter Jacob Carl Praxl mit Kleidung und allem, was zur Mallerey vonnten, als Papier, Reiszeig, Tcher, Pensel, Farben und andern dergleichen Notdrfen zu versehen schuldig sein, jedoch der Gestalt, da Ihro Hochgriche

Excellenz alles dasjenige, was er Jakob Carl Praxl in diesen vier Jahren mahlen werde, zugehrig sein solle. Herentgegen und zum vierten verspricht mehr erwehnter Herr Screta ihme Jakob Carl Praxl in der Mahler Khunst treulich zu underweien und solle ihme Jakob Praxl diese vier Jahr hindurch nach die vllige Khost und Wohnung zu geben schuldig sein. Dessen zu wahrer Urkund und mehrer Bekraftigung seind dieses Contract zwey gleich lautende Exemplaria aufgericht, von beeden Theilen mit Handunterschrift und Petschaft verfertiget und jeden Theil deren eines zugestellt worden. Actum Prag die, mense et anno ut supra. L. S. Hans Joachim Slawata mp L. S. Carl Screta mp Den 26. Februar 1674 ich empfange fnfzig Gulden reinisch, bekenne mit dieser Schrift und Unterschrift, Carl Screta RT, TS

DOCUMENT No. 192 Count Jan Jchym of Slavata enters into contract with Karel krta to admitting Jakub Praxl as an apprentice; dated 26February 1674. Prague, State Regional Archives of the City of Tebo, branch Jindichv Hradec, Archives of the Family of Slavata, Inv. No.48 (photo: State Regional Archives of the City of Tebo)

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 363

Daniel Albrecht Studensky

193

Prague, 22 March 1658

Karel krta is authorized by Marie Eleonora of Waldstein, born of Rottal, to admit Daniel Albrecht Studensky, who perhaps apprenticed with him before, for six months to his workshop. stav djin umn Akademie vd R (Institute of Art History, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic), Oddlen dokumentace (Documentation Department), fund Jaromr NeumannKarel krta, opisy archivli (Duplicates of Archive Documents) (unclear original deposition of the sourcenot found). Literature: Andrea Rousov Marcela Vondrkov, Karel krta ml. a krtovsk dlna, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, p. 425.

Dass ich von der Hoch und Wohlgeborenen Frauen Frauen Maria Eleonora verwittibte Grn von Wallstein, geborene Grn von Rothal, wegen bei mir in der Lehr habenden Daniel Studensky laut den Accorde fr ein halben Jahr, weliches angefangen den 22. Martii und sich enden

werden 22. Septembris, anticipate fnfzig Gulden reinisch empfangen habe, bezeuge ich mit dieser meiner Handschrift und Unterschrift. Geschehen zu Prag den 22. Martii anno 1658. L. S. Carl Screta, Mahler in der Altstadt

Id est 50 Florin Rub.: Quittung pro 50 Florin wegen des Daniel Studensky RT, TS

Jan pindler the Younger

194

The Old Town in Prague, 15 October 1672

Karel krta issues the certicate of apprenticeship to Jan pindler the Younger who became his apprentice on 1 June 1667 for ve years. Archiv Nrodn galerie vPraze (Archives of the National Gallery in Prague), fund Prask malsk bratrstva (Prague Painters Confraternities), le Vun apropoutc listy staromstskho malskho bratrstva (Certicates of Apprenticeship and Letters of Discharge of the Old Town Painters Confraternity), 15951747, Acquisition Nos. AA 1216/I65. Literature: BERGNER HERAIN 1910, cat. no. VI; BERGNER HERAIN 1910, p. 46 (edition), tab. XIX; HERAIN 1915, p. 61; VSTAVA OBRAZ KARLA KRTY 1938, p. 23, cat. no. 29; NEUMANN 1974, p. 26; Tom Sekyrka, in: UMN A MISTROVSTV 1997, p. 56, cat. no. 1.20; TIBITANZLOV BERANOV 2009, p. 85, sheet no. 26; Radka Tibitanzlov, in: STOLROV VLNAS 2010, cat. no. XVI.28, p. 608. RT

Jakub Tucz
195

The Old Town in Prague, 29 July 1656

The session of the Old Town painters guild considered admitting Jakub Tucz from the New Town in Prague as an apprentice of Karel krta. Archiv Nrodn galerie vPraze (Archives of the National Gallery in Prague), fund Prask malsk bratrstva (Prague Painters Confraternities), le Kniha protokol praskho malskho cechu zlet 16001656 (The Book of Protocols of the Prague Painters Guild from between 1600 and 1656), Acquisition No. AA 1209. Literature: PAZAUREK 1889, p. 56; KUCHYNKA 1915, p. 44; HERAIN 1915, NEUMANN 1974, p. 42; HALATA 1996, p. 188 (edition); RONK 1997, p. 122; NEUMANN 2000, p. 152. RT 364 DOCUMENTS ON STUDENTS AND WORKSHOP COLLABORATORS AND ASSISTANTS OF KAREL KRTA

Sources
PRAGUE CITY ARCHIVES Parish Office at St Stephen in the New Town in Prague Liber memorabilium I, 16411706, Book No. 1, Inv. No. 1. Collection of Registers MS, Kostel Panny Marie pod etzem (church of the Holy Virgin under the Chain), Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16221745, sign. PM N2 O2. MS, Kostel sv. Tome (church of St Thomas), Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16321649, sign. TO N2 O2. NMP, Kostel sv. Jindicha (church of St Henry), Matrika zemelch (Register of Deaths), 16791699, sign. JCH Z6. NMP, Kostel sv. tpna (church of St Stephen), Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16411663, sign. T O1. SMP, Kostel sv. Havla (church of St Gallus), Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16521704, sign. HV N1. SMP, Kostel sv. Havla (church of St Gallus), Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16521704, sign. HV O1. SMP, Kostel sv. Havla (church of St Gallus), Matrika zemelch (Register of Deaths), 16451731, sign. HV Z1. SMP, Kostel sv. Jakuba (church of St James), Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16321710, sign. JAK O1. SMP, Kostel sv. Jakuba (church of St James), Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16711707, sign. JAK N3. Collection of Documents on Paper sign. AMP PPL V 1008 sign. AMP PPL IV 2033a sign. AMP PPL IV 2033b sign. AMP PPL IV 6425 sign. AMP PPL IV 10836 Collection of Manuscripts Kniha trhov (The Book of Markets) 20, 16241648, sign. 2021. sign. 1645. Pjem zdu t. a sv. Benedikta (Receipt Tnsk zdu (Tn church funds), Kniha of church funds at Tn and St Benedict), 15061614, rznch pot za lta 16541663 (The Book of Various Figures for the Period 16541663), sign. 1646. NMP, Kniha sirot tvrti sv. tpna (The Book of the St Stephen Orphans Quarter), 16901767, sign. 2288. NMP, Liber appelationum 6, 16891695, sign. 1006. NMP,Libertestamentorum5,16661708,NMP,sign.4084. SMP, Liber appelationum 2, 15941654, sign. 1029. SMP, Liber appelationum 3, 16551670, sign. 1030. SMP, Liber certicationum, 16541662, sign. 1596. SMP, Liber certicationum, 16681677, sign. 1598. SMP, Liber condictionum albusV, 16801700, sign. 2255. SMP, Liber contractuum albus, 16591733, sign. 4447. SMP, Liber inventariorum, 16661685, sign. 1177. SMP, Liber inventariorum, 16801688, sign. 1178. SMP, Liber inventariorum, 16871702, sign. 1179. SMP, Liber inventariorum, 17021712, sign. 1180. SMP, Liber obligationum No. 7, 16531674, sign. 2257. SMP, Liber obligationum No. 8, 16681676, sign. 2258. SMP, Liber obligationum No.11, 16781699, sign. 2261. SMP, Liber obligationum caeruleus 5, 16911696 /1709/, sign. 3601. SMP, Liber quietantiarum 2, SMP, Liber renovationum KniLiber secundus seu Continuatio Annalium Excalceato-Augustiniani Nostri Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, ac Patroni 15791650, sign. 2179. Liber primus Annalium Nostri Excalceato-Augustiniani Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, et Patroni Regni Bomiae, In Neo-Urbe Pragena Supra Zderas Situati Ab Anno partae Salutis MDCXXIII ad Annum usque MDCXLII Complectens. [] A Fratre Severino a Sancta Anna Ordinis Eremit. Fratrum Discal. Sancti P. N. Augustini Sacerdote Professo (issued c. 1749), Inv. No. 2451, manuscript 10 (formerly 3480 a). NATIONAL LIBRARY OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC Collection of Manuscripts and Old Prints Johann Carl Rohn, Ianus Bifrons respectans praeteria, asens praesentia prospiciens futuris seu Liber Archivi Primus Sanctae Crucis, sign. VII A 10 a. Annuae litterae provinciae Boemiae Societatis Jesu 16711674, sign. XXIII C 105/8. Rudolf Kuchynka Karel krta, box RK 2 Archives of Abolished Monasteries Annales Monasterii S. Wenceslai Eremit[arum] Discal[ceatorum] S[ancti] P[atris] Augustini ab Anno 1623 usque ad Annum 1659 (issued 1659), Inv. No. 2450, manuscript 9 (formerly 3479). Old Manipulation sign. H 199/5, Inv. No. 1399, box 926. Inv. No. 1986, sign. L 32/33, box 1291. Inv. No. 1580, sign. K 1/33, Smrt csaovny Marie, manelky Ferdinanda III. (Death of Empress Maria, Wife of Ferdinand III), box 1053. sign. S 21/7/rok 1663, Inv. No. 3139, box 2109. sign. S 21/71670, Inv. No. 3139, box 2109. sign. S 162/24, Inv. No. 3280, box 2251. sign. S 162/25, Inv. No. 3280, box 2251. INSTITUTE OF ART HISTORY, ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC, DOCUMENTATION DEPARTMENT Jaromr Neumann Karel krta, opisy archivli (Duplicates of Archive Documents) LIBRARY OF THE ROYAL CANONRY OF PREMONSTRATENSIANS AT STRAHOV Collection of Manuscripts Jan Quirin Jahn: Aneckdoten zur Lebensgeschichte berhmter Mahler und Beurtheilung ihren Wercke, sign. DA II 7. Archives of the Prague Archbishopric Recepta 1708, VVI, Inv. No. 3023, box 1001. Summarium rerum memorabilium Conventus MicroPragensis S[anc]ti Thomae Apostoli Ordinis Fratrum Eremitarum Sancti Patris Augustini [] a P. Theobaldo Gruber (issued 1756), manuscript No. 6, sign. Ia 5. Archives of the Redemptorist Order Diarium Residentiae in Sacro Monte I, Inv. No. 105, sign. P 5. Synopsis historiae sacromontanae, sign. P 131. NATIONAL ARCHIVES, PRAGUE Archives of the Czech Province of the Augustinian Order Diarium exitus Monasterii Pragensis S. Thomae Tempore R. P. SS. Theol. Doct. et Magistri fratris Angelici de Tapparellis [16371665], Inv. No. 142, sign. IIc 7. New Manipulation sign. G 1/M/1, box 193. sign. K 1/4, box 290. sign. K 1/4, Inv. No. 1580, box 1055. sign. R 56/1, box 745. sign. S 162/24, Inv. No. 3280, box 2251. sign. S 212/1, box 870. sign. S 212/2, box 985. STATE REGIONAL ARCHIVES IN KLATOVY Archives of the City of Klatovy 13531945 (1956) Inv. No. 84, Kopi list odeslanch radou a purkmistrovskm adem (Kniha copiarum) (The Duplicate Book of Letters Sent by the Council and the Burgomasters Office [The Copiarum Book]) 16571662, Evidence No. K 68. Inv. No. 85, Kopi list odeslanch radou a purkmistrovskm adem (Kniha copiarum) (The Duplicate Book of Letters Sent by the Council and the Burgomasters Office [The Copiarum Book]) 16691681, Evidence No. K 69. NATIONAL MUSEUM ARCHIVES, PRAGUE Collection F Inv. No. 169, Praha, Star Msto, vci obecn i soukrom (Prague, Old Town, Community and Private Matters), 16451670, box 132. Religious Confraternities Pamtnice duikovho bratrstva pi kapli sv. Barbory kostela sv. Mikule na Mal Stran (The Memorial Book of the All Souls Day Confraternity with the St Barbara Chapel of the St Nicolas church at Pragues Lesser Town), box 133, sign. XVII/57. Family Archives of the Slavatas of Chlum and Koumberk Inv. No. 162, sign. III J 6a, box 48. Prague Painters Confraternities Korespondence staromstskho a malostranskho malskho bratrstva (Correspondence of the Old Town and Lesser Town Painters Confraternities), 15921782, Acquisition No. AA 1218. Akta o cechovnm olti sv. Luke v Tnskm chrmu (Files on the Guild Altarpiece of St Lucas in the Tn church), 16501779, Acquisition No. AA 1220. Chamber Books Kniha pamtn na spisy (The Memorial Record Book), 1665, Book No. 453. Kniha pamtn na spisy (The Memorial Record Book), 1666, 1667, Book No. 454. Registry 16431646, Book No. 445. Registry 1653, Book No. 448. STATE REGIONAL ARCHIVES IN TEBO (BRANCH JINDICHV HRADEC) Family Archives of the Czernin Family (Czernin Central Administration) Lista der eingekhaufften Bielder, ernnsk galerie (Czernin Galerie 166*1799), box 761. ARCHIVES OF THE NATIONAL GALLERY IN PRAGUE Jan Jakub Quirin Jahn Vpisy k umlcm (Abstracts on the Artists), Acquisition No. AA 1222/8. Bohemian Section of the Court Chamber year 1653, box 512. STATE REGIONAL ARCHIVES IN PLZE (BRANCH NEPOMUK) Family Archives of the Falknov Branch of the Nostitz-Rieneck Family, 13641945 edn spisy eskho mstodritelstv (Official Records of the Bohemian Governors Office) 16171721, Inv. No. 34, sign. DD 4, box 6. SMP, Liber testamentorum II, 16191658, sign. 2206. SMP, Liber testamentorum 4, 16811706, sign. 3746. SMP, Liber testimoniorum albus, 16541660, sign. 1095. SMP, Liber testimoniorum 27, 16581664, sign. 1076. SMP, Liber testimoniorum, 16641669, sign. 1077. SMP, Manuale dictorum, 16381641, sign. 1169. SMP, Manuale dictorum, 16901693, sign. 1312. SMP, Protocollum consilii, 1628, sign. 1296. SMP, Protokol vejpovd, psah a relac (Protocol of Testimonies, Oaths and Reports), 16581668, sign. 1247. Liber sextus seu Continuatio Annalium Excalceato-Augustiniani Nostri Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, et Patroni Regni Bomiae Neo-Pragae Supra Zderas erecti ab anno partae Salutis M DCC XX V ad annum usque M DCC L II., Inv. No. 2456, manuscript 15 (formerly 3480 f ). Regni Bomiae, In Neo-Civitate Pragensi Supra Zderas Situati ab Anno Partae Salutis MDCXLII ad Annum usque MDCLXIII Complectens. [] A Fratre Severino a Sancta Anna Ordinis Eremit. Fratrum Discal. S. P. Augustini Sacerdote Professo (issued 1749), Inv. No. 2452, manuscript 11 (formerly 3480 b). STATE REGIONAL ARCHIVES IN LITOMICE (BRANCH DN) Historical Collection (Family Archives) of the Clam-Gallas Family Frdlant, (1238) 15291947, Inv. No. 1575/XXI/6, Korespondence (Correspondence), box 449. Frdlant, (1238) 15291947, Inv. No. 1963, 2192, Cat. No. 549. Gallas Familienakten, Dluhy Antonna Gallase (Debts of Antonn Gallas), 16611674, Inv. No. 1450, box 417. STERREICHISCHE NATIONAL BIBLIOTHEK, WIEN Literrae Annue provinciae Boemiae Societatis Jesu 16701674, Cod. 11963.

ha obnov (The Book of Restorations), 16301678, sign. 70.

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 365

Literature and Editions of Sources

BALBN 1665 Bohuslaus Balbinus, Diva Montis Sancti seu Origines et miracula magnae Dei hominumque Matris Mariae, in Sancto Monte Regni Bohemiae, ad Argentifodinas Przibramenses, quotidiana populi frequentia, et pietate, in statua sua mirabili, aditur, et colitur: V. libris comprehenda, Pragae 1665. BALBN 1666 A Bohuslav Balbn, Pepodiwn Matka Swato Horsk Marya, W Zzracch a Milostech swch na Hoe Swat nad Mstem Pjbrami Hor Stjbrnch den po dni wjc a wjc se stkwgjc [], Litomyl 1666. BALBN 1666 B Bohuslaus Balbin, Verisimilia humaniorum disciplinarum seu Juducium privatum de omni litterarum (quas humaniores appellant) articio quo in libello praecepta epistolarum [] proponitur. [], Pragae 1666. BALBN 1681 Bohuslaus Balbinus, Liber III. Decadis I. Miscellaneorum Historicorum Regni Bohemiae, Topographicus et Chorographicus, qui Fines et Terminos totius Bohemiae, tum ipsorum Districtuum guras, Arces, Oppida, et Urbes [] continet, ac complectitur; Tum Opera Publica Bohemiae, Pontes, Basilicas et Templa Celebriora, Palatia, Coenobia, Aedicationes sumtuosas [], Pragae 1681. BALBN 1682 Bohuslaus Balbinus, Miscellanea Historica Regni Bohemiae Decadis I. Liber IV. Hagiographicus, seu Bohemia Sancta, Continens Sanctos et Beatos Bohemiae, Moraviae, Silesiae, Lusatiae, [], Pragae 1682. BALBN 1683 Bohuslaus Balbinus, Miscellanea Historica Bohemiae, Decadis I. Liber V. Parochialis et Sacerdotalis in duas divisus partes; quarum Prior Parochias omnes Veteris Bohemiae, per Decem Archidiaconatus recitat; [], Pragae 1683. BERNKOV 2004 Maruka Bernkov, Korespondence magistrtu msta Klatov s malem Karlem krtou, Sbornk prac z historie a djin umn 3, Klenov 2004, pp. 183 185. BERGNERHERAIN 1910 Pavel Bergner Jan Herain, Karel krta (16101674). Pspvek k ocenn jeho dla, asopis Spolenosti ptel staroitnost eskch XVIII, 1910, pp. 41-51. BREVIS RELATIO 1910 Brevis relatio arcis Pragensis cum Parva Parte a Suecis captae, et quid deinceps diebus ibidem et in tota civitate extraque notatu dignum utrinque contigerit, in: Alfred Jensen, Smrre Bidrag till det Trettioriga krigets historia (16391648), Gteborg 1910, pp. 5689. DOBALOV 2004 Sylva Dobalov, Paijov cyklus Karla krty: Mezi vtvarnou tradic a jezuitskou spiritualitou, Praha 2004. DVORSK 1966 Ji Dvorsk, Nkolik poznmek ke krtovm obrazm ze svatovclavskho cyklu, Umn XI, 1966, pp. 305306. FEJTOV 1996 Olga Fejtov, Screta Carolus, Nkolik poznmek k obrazu Karla krty Svat Vclav, Listy lologick CXIX, 1996, pp. 171172. HALATA 1996 Martin Halata (ed.), Kniha protokol praskho malskho cechu z let 16001656, Praha 1996. HAUPT 1998 Herbert Haupt, Von der Leidenschaft zum Schnen. Frst Karl Eusebius von Liechtenstein (16111684), Wien Mnchen Weimar 1998 (VII, 727 s.) (= Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte des Frstenhauses Liechtenstein; Vol. 2), Nr. 1736. HERAIN 1915 Karel Vladimr Herain, esk malstv od doby rudolnsk do smrti Reinerovy. Pspvky k djinm jeho vnitnho vvoje v letech 15761743, Praha 1915. HOJDA 1985 Zdenk Hojda, K vyuit praskch pozstalostnch invent pro vzkum vtvarn produkce a umleckho ivota v 17. stolet, in: Doc. dr. Pavlu Preissovi, DrSc. k 60. narozeninm, unpublished typescript, 1985, Library of the National Gallery in Prague, sign. D 1565, pp. 4262. HOJDA 1993 Zdenk Hojda, Vtvarn dla v domech staromstskch man v letech 16271740 (Pspvek k djinm kultury barokn Prahy I), Prask sbornk historick 26, 1993, pp. 38102. HOJDA 1994 Zdenk Hojda, Kulturn investice staromstskch man v letech 16271740 (Pspvek k djinm kultury barokn Prahy II), Prask sbornk historick 27, 1994, pp. 47104. HOROV 1995 Andla Horov (ed.), Nov encyklopedie eskho vtvarnho umn, I, Praha 1995. KESNEROV 1976 Gabriela Kesnerov, 100 starch eskch kreseb z Grack sbrky Nrodn galerie v Praze, Praha 1976. KILIN 2011 Jan Kilin, krtovy mlnick vinice, in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta a malstv 17. stolet v echch a Evrop, Praha 2011, pp. 161165. KONEN 2002 Lubomr Konen, Bohuslav Balbn a emblematika, in: Idem, Mezi textem a obrazem. Miscellanea z historie emblematiky, Praha 2002, pp. 4466. KOPEEK 2009 Josef Kopeek, Karel krta na Svat Hoe, in: Podbrdsko. Sbornk Sttnho okresnho archivu v Pbrami IX, 2009, pp. 164-175. KON 1968 Ivo Kon, Cyriack klter a chrm sv. Ke Vtho v baroku, Umn XVI, 1968, pp. 173195. KON 1987 Ivo Kon, Vyehradsk invente mezi gotikou a barokem, Umn XXXV, 1987, pp. 540547. KOTKOV 2006 Olga Kotkov (ed.), Albrecht Drer, Rencov slavnost 15062006 (exh. cat.), Praha 2006. KRAM 1938 Vincenc Kram (ed.), Karel krta, Vstava obraz Karla krty (exh. cat.), Praha 1938. KROPEK 1992 Ji Kropek, Vtvarn umn u Bohuslava Balbna, in: Zuzana Pokorn Martin Svato (edd.), Bohuslav Balbn a kultura jeho doby v echch. Sbornk z konference Pamtnku nrodnho psemnictv, Praha 1992, pp. 111121. KRUMMHOLZ 2005 Martin Krummholz, Obrazov sbrka Jana Vclava Gallase, Umn LIII, 2005, pp. 273285. KRUMMHOLZ 2007 Martin Krummholz (ed.), ClamGallasv palc. Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach. Architektura vzdoba ivot rezidence (exh. cat.), Praha 2007. KUCHYNKA 1915 Rudolf Kuchynka, Manual praskho podku malskho z let 16001656, Pamtky archeologick a mstopisn XXVII, 1915, pp. 2446. KUCHYNKA 1919 Rudolf Kuchynka, Fahrenschonovy vpisy z knih a listin staromstskho podku malskho, Pamtky archeologick a mstopisn XXXI, 1919, pp. 1424. MACHYTKA 1990 Lubor Machytka, Svat Vclav v pozdnm dle Karla krty, Umn XXXVIII, 1990, pp. 206228. MDL 2010 Martin Mdl, Kresba Stigmatizace sv. Frantika z Assisi a ternbersk kaple v kostele praskch hybern, in: Alena Volrbov (ed.), Ars linearis II. Graka a kresba v eskch zemch v evropskch souvislostech, Praha 2010, pp. 5865. NEUMANN 1964 Jaromr Neumann, Obrazrna Praskho hradu, soubor vybranch dl (exh. cat.), Praha 1964. NEUMANN 1974 Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (exh. cat.), Praha 1974. NEUMANN 2000 Jaromr Neumann, krtov: Karel krta a jeho syn, Praha 2000. NEVMOV 2004 Petra Nevmov, Funkce obrazu v umn jezuitskho du, in: Milena Bartlov (ed.), Djiny umn v esk spolenosti: otzky, problmy, vzvy. Pspvky pednesen na Prvnm sjezdu eskch historik umn, Praha 2004, pp. 107115. NOVK 1917 Josef Novk, Slavatov a umn vtvarn, in: Pamtky archeologick XXIX, Praha 1917, pp. 1736. NOVOTN 1946 Antonn Novotn, Jak ivot Prahou el (15761830), Praha 1946. OPOENSK 1910 Hanu Opoensk, Dokumenty historicko-umleck z archivu lovosickho, asopis spolenosti ptel staroitnost eskch XVIII, Praha 1910, pp. 134135. OULKOV 2010 Petra Oulkov, Knstlerische Ausstattung von Altren und Kapellen der von Jesuiten betreuten Bruderschaften in Prag, in: Bohemia Jesuitica (15562006), Tomus 2, Petronilla emus (ed.), Praha 2010, pp. 12171238. OULKOV 2011 Petra Oulkov, Poznmka k Paijovmu cyklu Karla krty, in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta a malstv 17. stolet v echch a Evrop, Praha 2011, pp. 39-47. OUTRATA 1986 Jan Jakub Outrata, Kostel Panny Marie ped Tnem v Praze architektonick vvoj ve stedovku a souasn oprava, in: Stalet Praha XVI. Pamtkov pe v uplynulm desetilet, Praha 1986, pp. 147169. PAZAUREK 1889 Gustav Edmund pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte des XVII. Jahrhunderts, Prag 1889. PAOUT 1874 Julius Paout, K djinm olte sv. Luke v Tnskm chrmu Praskm, Pamtky archeologick a mstopisn IX, 1874, pp. 813815. PODLAHA 1916 Antonn Podlaha, Materilie k slovnku umlc a umleckch emeslnk v echch, Pamtky archeologick XXVIII, Praha 1916, pp. 215-257.

366 ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OUEVRE OF KAREL KRTA

PODLAHA 1917 Antonn Podlaha, Materilie k slovnku umlc a umleckch emeslnk v echch, Pamtky archeologick XXIX, Praha 1917, pp. 136151, pp. 269289. PODLAHA 1919 Antonn Podlaha, Materilie k slovnku umlc a umleckch emeslnk v echch, Pamtky archeologick XXXI, Praha 1919, pp. 106 116. POPELKA 1994 Liselotte Popelka, Castrum Doloris oder Trauriger Schauplatz: Untersuchungen zu Entstehung und Wesen ephemer Architektur, Wien 1994. PREISS 1955 Pavel Preiss, krtv oltn obraz v tku, Zprvy pamtkov pe 15, 1955, pp. 158159. PREISS 1958 Pavel Preiss, Jan Quirin Jahn a esk klasicismus, Sbornk Nrodnho muzea, Series A, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1958, pp. 121180. PREISS 1979 Pavel Preiss, Barockzeichnung. Meisterwerke des bhmischen Barocks, Praha 1979. PREISS 2006 Pavel Preiss, esk barokn kresba. Baroque Drawing in Bohemia, Praha 2006. PREISS 2008 Pavel Preiss, Patria mihi pro coelo est. Karel Maxmilin Laansk, k Bohuslava Balbna. Nkolik poznmek ke kulturnmu prolu baroknho lechtice, in: Ibid., Koeny a letorosty vtvarn kultury baroka v echch, Praha 2008, pp. 153175. PIBYL STOLROV Petr Pibyl Lenka Stolrov, K stle rostouc slv naeho pilnho umlce. Karel krta mezi vcarskem, a Itli v zrcadle nov objevench pramen, see chapter in this book, pp. 7379. RYBIKA 1869 Antonn Rybika Skutesk, Karel krta otnovsk ze Zvoic, Nstin rodoa ivotopisn, Praha 1869. SEKYRKA 1997 Tom Sekyrka (ed.), Umn a mistrovstv: Prask malsk bratrstva 13481783 (exh. cat.), Praha 1997. SEKYRKA 2011 Tom Sekyrka, Karel krta a jeho zkaznci ve svtle archivnch pramen, in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta a malstv 17. stolet v echch a Evrop, Praha 2011, pp. 147152. SKIVNEK 1980 Frantiek Skivnek, Vvoj znaku Miseron z Lisonu, Heraldika XIII, 1980, pp. 119, 33. SKIVNEK 1983 Frantiek Skivnek, Genealogie Miseron z Lisonu, vol. II., Heraldika a genealogie. Zpravodaj esk heraldick a genealogick spolenosti 16, 1983, no. 2, pp. 6596.

SLAVEK 1993 Lubomr Slavek (ed.), Artis pictoriae amatores, Evropa v zrcadle baroknho sbratelstv (exh. cat.), Praha 1993. SLAVEK 2005 Lubomr Slavek, Prask cicerone Jan Quirin Jahn, in: Jan Royt Petra Nevmov (edd.), Album amicorum: sbornk ku poct prof. Mojmra Horyny, Praha 2005, pp. 2637. SLAVEK 2007 Lubomr Slavek, Sob, umn, ptelm: kapitoly z djin sbratelstv v echch a na Morav 16501939, Brno 2007. SLAVEK 2008 Lubomr Slavek, Honest et eruditus civis et artifex: umleck a knin sbrky vzdlanch manskch umlc 18. stolet (Brno, Moravsk Tebov, Praha), in: Documenta Pragensia 27, Praha 2008, pp. 875914. SMOLK 18821884 Josef Smolk, Pamtnk Jindicha Dobikovskho z Malejova, Pamtky archeologick a mstopisn XII, 18821884, pp. 538546. STOLROV 2010 Lenka Stolrov, Karel krta a Zalp, in: Lenka Stolrov Vt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674. Doba a dlo (exh. cat.), Praha 2010, pp. 6465. STOLROVVLNAS 2010 Lenka Stolrov Vt Vlnas (edd.), Karel krta 16101674. Doba a dlo (exh. cat.), Praha 2010, pp. 1725. STOLROV 2011 Lenka Stolrov, krtova lta vandrovn, in: Karel krta 1610-1674: Doba a dlo (in print). MAL 1948 Jindich mal, Dv zprvy o innosti krtov v kltee bosch augustinin v Praze na Zderaze, Pamtky archeologick. Historie 43, 1948. RONK 1996 Michal ronk, Kostel Panny Marie ped Tnem, in: Pavel Vlek et al., Umleck pamtky Prahy, Star Msto a Josefov, Praha 1996, pp. 100109. RONK 1997 Michal ronk, Prat mali 16001656, Misti, tovaryi, uednci a toli v Knize Staromstskho malskho cechu Biograck slovnk, Praha 1997. RONK 2006 Michal ronk, Jan Ji Heinsch, mal barokn zbonosti, Praha 2006. OVEK 2002 Ivan ovek et al., Zsady vydvn novovkch historickch pramen z obdob od potku 16. stolet do souasnosti, Praha 2002. TIBITANZLOVBERANOV 2009 Radka Tibitanzlov Martina Beranov (eds.), so that he trained in the art of painting, Kestn, vun a zachovac listy z fondu Prask malsk bratrstva, Praha 2009.

TIBITANZLOV 2011 Radka Tibitanzlov, Karel krta man Starho Msta praskho, in: Lenka Stolrov (ed.), Karel krta a malstv 17. stolet v echch a Evrop, Praha 2011, pp. 153160. TOMAN I Prokop Toman, Nov slovnk eskoslovenskch vtvarnch umlc, Part I, Praha 1993. URBAN 1973 Stanislav Urban, Posledn ez z rodu Miseroni. K ivotu a dlu Ferdinanda Eusebia Miseroniho, Umn XXI, 1973, pp. 515527. VLNAS 1992 Vt Vlnas, Maxmilin lejnic jako mecen Karla krty (K vzjemnm vztahm barokn historiograe a vtvarnho umn), in: Zuzana Pokorn Martin Svato (edd.), Bohuslav Balbn a kultura jeho doby v echch. Sbornk z konference Pamtnku nrodnho psemnictv, Praha 1992, p. 136145. ZAP 1857 Karel Vladislav Zap, Invent pozstalosti po Karlu krtovi ze Zvoic, Pamtky archeologick a mstopisn II, 1857, pp. 325328, 368. ZAPLETALOV 2010 Jana Zapletalov, Karel krta: Notes from the Archives in Italy, Umn LVIII, 2010, pp. 152158. ZVOLNKOV 2007 Pavla Zvolnkov, Jezuitsk kostel Jmna Je v Teli (diss., Seminar of Art History, Masaryk University), Brno 2007.

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 367

Family Tree of krta otnovsk of Zvoice

Markta Krtk ( 1564) JAN KRTA 5 July 1587, Prague (St Nicolas, SMP) Aneka Vodolnsk of Vodoln ( before 1603)

Mikul Vorlin of Vorlin

1581

Albta

Vclav Vorel

Jindich 1595

1593

Ludmila Molina Kalit of Otrsfeld

Zuzana Langov of Hirschberg ( 1608)

Kateina Nibicov ( 1625)

Pavel

Elika atn of Olivt

Anna before 1587

Martin Behem of Bawenberg

Kundrat krta September 1613

Kateina Herkulesov of Morchendorf ( after 1638)

Jan 7 January 1650, Schaffhausen

Kundrat

Jindich after 1638, Poland

9 July 1645 KAREL KRTA Veronika * 16081611, Prague Grnbergerov (Our Lady before Tn) 12 March 1686, Prague 1 August 1674, Prague (St Henry) (St Gallus)

Aneka 1636, Prague

Jan Baptista Reymund

Ester

Kateina

368 ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OUEVRE OF KAREL KRTA

Dorota Kalit ofOtrsfeld

Ji c. 1617, Prague

Vorila Zvonaov ofCimperk

Kateina

1601

Kapar Luk of Bohuslavice

Anna

Vclav Vincenc Pseck

Daniel after 1623, Danzig

Judita ofAltenberg

Ludmila

Ludvk Kordk

Johana

1608

Jan Angel of Englsberg

1 Jan krta, from Olenice near Kuntt by origin, was awarded the rights of burgher of the Old Town in Prague in 1559. krta, afurrier, publican and wine trader by initial profession and later the official of the Tn church funds, was appointed the Old Town councillor in 1575. He owned several mills, vineyards and houses in Prague (At the Three Tails, At the merhas and On the Hill in the Prague New Town). The ruler ennobled him to the rank of acountry gentleman with the title otnovsk of Zvoice in 1570 and, ten years later, his coat-of-arms was amended. For Jans testament and inventory, see: Josef Teige, Zklady starho mstopisu Praskho I, Praha 1910, pp.101104. 2 Jindich was awarded the rights of burgher of the Old Town in Prague in 1593. He held the position of tax revenue office scrivener from 1594.

3 Kundrat was appointed junior draftsman of the Bohemian Chamber in 1600 and the Buchhalter (accounting councillor) for the same institution ayear later. He purchased the house At the Black Deer in the Old Town in Prague in 1598. He also owned the houses At the Three Swallows, At the Paving and At the Stonecutters in the New Town in Prague, as well as amill in erlnek, two vineyards at pitlsko in Meziho near Libe, avineyard with apress below Mlnk chteau and ahouse on the outskirts of the city of Mlnk. 4 Pavel owned several houses in Kutn Hora and Prague. He was appointed scrivener of the Kutn Hora mint in 1604 where he also held the position of the coin official between 1608 and 1612. He was the master of the mint in Prague between 1619 and 1620 and was eventually in the service of Karel of erotn the Elder from 1631.

5 Daniel studied and graduated at Herborn in Hessen. After returning to Prague, he was successively employed as secretary of the Bohemian Chamber (from 1603), dei defensor (the defender of faith) of the Lower Consistory and Utraquist Academy, and one of the Prague governors (from 1618). He owned the houses At the Chmels and houses on the Linhart Square (At the Anchor) and in Vladislavsk Street. He and his wife ed to Danzig after the Battle of the White Mountain where Daniel held the position of secretary of the local city council. 6 Ji, aphysician by profession, owned the merhas house. His widow, Vorila Zvonaov of Cimperk, litigated for his inheritance with his brothers for many years. 7 Jan lived in Germany (Bremen) from 1616 at the latest. He later settled in the Swiss city of Schaffhausen where he was active as

aphysician and also founded the branch of the family which is still there to now. His son Jindich followed in his steps as aphysician and was an outstanding pharmacologist. 8 Jindich is recorded in 1626 in East Bohemiain Zmrskwhere he wrote aFrench and Italian entry to the commonplace book of Jindich Dobkovsk of Malejov who dwelled on the erotn estates in Brands nad Orlic. Dobkovsk and krta later left for Poland where krta (along with his mother) procured his brother Karel in 1638 to seek the rendition of the family property in Bohemia in the name of the two. Dobensk later reported that Jindichs heirs lived in Russia as late as in the early 20th century.

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 369

Family Tree of krta otnovsk of Zvoice

9 July 1645 KAREL KRTA Veronika * 16081611, Prague Grnbergerov (Our Lady before Tn) 12 March 1686, Prague 1 August 1674, Prague (St Henry) (St Gallus)

Karel krta the Younger * cca 1650, Prague (St Gallus) 2 January 1691, Prague (St Gallus)

2 June 1679

Albta Rosov 1699, Prague

Vclav Bohumil * 5 October 1653, Prague (St Gallus) before 1677, Prague

Anna Kateina * 16 April 1680, Prague (St Gallus) before 1691

Karel Rafael * 19 August 1681, Prague (St Gallus) 11 October 1681, Prague (St Gallus)

Mikul Frantiek * 7 December 1682, Prague (St Gallus) before 1691

Albta Dominika * 5 August 1685, Prague (St James) before 1691

Vclav Jan of god * 9 March 1688, Prague (St James) 22 May 1693, Prague, (St Gallus?)

370 ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OUEVRE OF KAREL KRTA

Jilj Jelen ( 1685)

20 February 1675

14 October 1685 Jan Karel Fridrich Fischer Veronika * 23 January 1657, Prague ( 1704 ) (St Gallus) before 1704, Prague

Antonn * 13 June 1659, Prague (St Gallus) before 1677, Prague

Veronika 1717, Praha (St Nicolas)

Daniel Elias Jonk

Kateina Anna 1724, Prague (St Martin in the Wall)

Barbora married Hajnicov?

Johanna

9 Albta Rosov, the daughter of the lawyer, appellate councillor and author of the Latinwritten grammar book of Czech, Vclav Jan Rosa, married Frantiek Theol Kleo of Roudn after the death of her rst husband, Karel krta the Younger. Only four years later, she issued atestament according to which she wished to be buried in the church of St Gallus. However, no reports about either her death or her funeral survived in the relevant registers, but the possibility that she would have been laid to rest somewhere else than the family tomb is very low. Even Albtas surviving husband Kleo of Roudn buried his nineteen-year old daughter Frantika in presbyterio in crypta scretiana in 1727. 10 Veronika married Jilj Jelen, the Juris Doctor and appellate councillor, in 1675 and probably had four daughters with him. After his

death, she married Jan Karel Fridrich Fischer, aregistrar with the Office of Land Registers. According to the inventory issued after his death in 1704, there were several paintings by krta in his household. 11 Vclav Bohumil and Antonn probably died young, but before 30 June 1677 at the latest when Karel the Younger and daughter Veronika are recorded as the only descendants of Karel krta in the Land Registers. 12 Anna Kateina, Albta Dominika and Mikul Frantiek apparently died in their childhood because their names do not appear in the inventory issued after the death of Karel krta the Younger. Some of his children were not baptized in the church of St Gallus but at St James. The house At the Konrads (Registry No. 693), which was donated to Karel krta the Younger and his wife by his father-in-law,

Vclav Rosa, and where the family probably also lived, came under the latter parish. 13 Vclav Jan of God is mentioned videlicet for the last time in his mothers testament of 1695. The date of his death does not appear in the St Gallus registers. We, however, cannot exclude that he is identical with the child buried on 22 May 1693 at St Gallus under the name Josef krta. Considering the fact that there was no other krta family living in the St Gallus parish, that the age of the deceased child corresponds to the age of Vclav Jan in the same period (about 6 years) and the child was moreover laid to rest in krtas tomb, we can assume that his rst name was recorded wrongly. Asimilar mistake occurred during the baptism of the son of Karel krta the Elder, Vclav Bohumil, in 1653 when the father of the child was recorded as Frantiek krta instead of Karel.

Note: The symbol of adagger in the family tree of krta otnovsk of Zvoice does not inform about the date of death (which is unknown to us in most cases) but about the burial of the deceased person. The only exception is Karel krta the Younger whose dates of both death and burial were documented, and we thus state the date of death in the table.

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 371

The family tree was compiled according to information excerpted from the following:

Sources
PRAGUE CITY ARCHIVES Parish Office of the Holy Trinity in the Splen Street, Kniha nadac (The Book of Endowments), Inv. No. 18. Collection of Manuscripts: Liber inventariorum 1, New Town in Prague, 16591718, sign. 1196, f. 546. Liber testamentorum 4, Old Town in Prague, 16811706, sign. 3746, f. 276r280r. Liber testamentorum 2, Old Town in Prague, 16191658, sign. 2206, f. 34r36r. Pjem zdu t. a sv. Benedikta (Receipt of church funds at Tn and St Benedict), 15061614, sign. 1645, f. 136r. Liber obligationum caeruleus 5, Old Town in Prague, 16911696 /1709/, sign. 3601, f. 110v113v. Collection of Registers: St Gallus church, Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16521704, sign. HV N1, pp. 13, 69, 95, 288, 298, 312. St Gallus church, Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16521704, sign. HV O1, pp. 629, 637. St Gallus church, Matrika zemelch (Register of Deaths), 16451731, sign. HV Z1, pp. 20, 44, 49, 66, 205. St James church, Matrika narozench (Birth Register), 16711707, sign. JAK N3, pp. 192, 222. St James church, Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16321710, sign. JAK O1, p. 30. St Henry church, Matrika zemelch (Register of Deaths), 16791699, sign. JCH Z6, p. 176. Church of the Holy Virgin under the Chain, Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16221745, sign. PM N2 O2, p. 120. St Thomas church, Matrika oddanch (Register of Marriages), 16321649, sign. TO N2 O2, fol. 18v. NATIONAL ARCHIVES Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), A. P. lechta: Doplky k dosud znmm zprvm o rodu krt otnovskch ze Zvoic, Part I, sign. B 114. Sbrka genealogick Dobenskho (Collection of the Dobensk Genealogy) [1841] [1919], krta otnovsk, Inv. No. 1062. INSTITUTE OF ART HISTORY, ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC, V.V.I Fund Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta opisy archivli (Duplicates of Archive Documents).

Literature
BERGNERHERAIN 1910 pp. 8, 10, 11. NEUMANN 1974 pp. 1417, 4446, 48. NEUMANN 2000 pp. 12, 13, 15, 130, 133. PAZAUREK 1889 pp. 917, 20, 21, 42, 43, 46, 47. PODLAHA 1917 pp. 142, 287. PODLAHA 1919 p. 114. RYBIKA 1869 pp. 35, 9, 10, 18. SMOLK 18821884 p. 542. ZAPLETALOV 2010 pp. 152158.

Internet Sources accessed on 4 December 2010

http://www.stadtarchiv-schaffhausen.ch/Biographien/Biographien-HV/Wepfer_Johann_Jakob.pdf

Translated by Lucie Vidmar

372 ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS ON THE LIFE AND OUEVRE OF KAREL KRTA

Reports on Karel krta in European Literature of 17th and 18th Centuries

JOHANA BRONKOV

1 The only hardly accessible text also exists in facsimile: Cornelis de Bie, Het gulden cabinet van de edel vry schilderconst (Lier 1661), Soest 1971. In 2009, the Gent University digitized the book on Googlebooks. Although profusely quoted, De Bies work has not been critically treated in detail yet. Let us mention at least the most fundamental bibliography: Gerard Lemmens, Introduction, in: Het Gulden Cabinet der Edel Vry Schilderconst, Soest 1971; Christiaan Schuckman, Cornelis de Bie (unpublished dissertation), Universiteit Utrecht 1984; idem, Cornelis de Bie, in: Jane Turner (ed.), The Dictionary of Art 4, London 1996, p.38. 2 Facsimile of the rst German edition: Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der Bau-, Bild- und Mahlerey-Knste, Nrnberg 16751679, ed. Christian Klemm, Nrdlingen 1994. The project Sandrart.net (J.W.Goethe Universitt in Frankfurt and Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florence /Max-Planck-Institut/) was launched in 2009 with the aim of presenting the annotated German edition of Sandrarts Teutsche Academie online. The pages of the project also offer an updated Sandrarts bibliography. Let us mention here only the basic monograph by Christian Klemm (Joachim von Sandrart: Kunst-Werke und Lebens-Lauf, Berlin 1986) and amiscellany from the recent conference: Sybille EbertSchiffererCecilia Mazzetti di Pietralata (edd.), Joachim von Sandrart: ein europischer Knstler und Theoretiker zwischen Italien und Deutschland, Akten des Internationalen Studientages der Bibliotheca Hertziana, Rome 34 April 2006, Mnchen 2009. 3 J. Sandrart, Teutsche Academie 1679 (see note 2), the sheet inserted between pages 356 and 357. 4 Artur Rudolf Peltzer (ed.), Joachim von Sandrarts Academie der Bau, Bild- und Mahlerey-Knste von 1675: Leben der berhmten Maler, Bildhauer und Baumeister, Mnchen 1925. 5 Comp.Lucia Simonato, LAcademia nobilissimae artis pictoriae (1683) di Joachim von Sandrart: genesi e fortuna in Italia, Studi secenteschi 45, 2004, pp.139173.

Cornelis de Bie (16271711?), the rst biographer who ever took notice of Karel krta, included a brief report about the Bohemian artist in his Het gulden cabinet van de edel vry schilderconst (Lier 1661) or, respectively, in its second volume dedicated to living artists. De Bie probably received information about krta from one of his own compatriots who had encountered krta in Rome. It is the credit of this Lier notary and rhetorician that the Bohemian painter entered biographic literature as a member of the Bent society (Bentvueghels) under the cognomen Slach-sweert (Slagzwaard; Claymore in English) and as a painter of portraits and well-composed, both small- and large-dimensional paintings, enjoying a successful career in Prague. The length of De Bies individual biographies follows rather varied criteria. For example, the extent of the verses under Rembrandts and Berninis names roughly corresponds to the treatise on krta while the biography of De Bies native from South Netherlands, Franoise Duquesnoy, exceeds them many times. krtas biography can be found among the Netherlandish artists and is preceded by those of Salomon Koninck (Amsterdam 1609 Amsterdam 1656) and Justus van Egmond (Leiden 1601 Antwerpen 1674) and followed by Leonaert Bramer (Delft 1596 Delft 1674), one of the founding members of the Bentvueghels society. The second foundation stone of krtas biographic tradition was laid by Joachim von Sandrart (16061688), more exactly by the German and Latin version of his monumental Teutsche Academie (or, respectively, II 1679, 1683). In the relatively comprehensive biography of krta, Sandrart outlines the henceforth passed on itinerary of the artists Italian journey Venice Bologna Florence Rome. These general stops, obligatory for wandering painters at that time, are added to by the factual date of krtas arrival in Rome the year 1634 when Sandrart still lived in the Eternal City. The biography is supplemented by the rst list of places where krtas works could be found, and bespeaks of the authors familiarity with Prague topography, originating from the times of his local studies with Aegidius Sadeler. The prestigious place reserved to the Bohemian painter i.e. between the biographies of Rembrandt and Schnfeld is moreover sketched in by krtas portrait, the copper engraving by Philipp Kilian, executed after the artists model. The print presents six artists: copper engraver and goldsmith Michel Leblond (Frankfurt am Main 1587 Amsterdam 1656), copper engraver and painter Aegidius Sadeler (Antwerpen 1570 Prague 1629), woodcarver Georg Petel (Weilheim 1590/93 Augsburg 1633/34) and copper engraver Matthaeus Merian the Elder (Basel 1593 Schwalbach/Taunus 1650), and nally, our painter as paired with the famed Rembrandt van Rijn (Leiden 1606 Amsterdam 1669). The German original of Sandrarts biographies remained the Central-European domain up until the publication of the Peltzers 1925 edition while the Roman world, if it knows Sandrart at all, keeps quoting from the Latin translation, executed by Christian Rhodi during the artists lifetime and under his supervision.
EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 375

The 1704 Abecedario pittorico by Pellegrino Antonio Orlandi (16601727) exemplies the shift in perceiving biographies: they were increasingly taking on the nature of an encyclopaedic compendium of knowledge, were freed of subjective criteria and laid new emphasis on the sources used. In the case of krta, it is the Latin version of Sandrart. The absence of other references proves that there was no living memory of the Bohemian painter in Italy. Abecedario received numerous supplementary re-editions during the 18th century (Bologna 1719, Venezia 1754, Napoli 1763, Firenze 1788) where krtas entry remained unchanged. Abrg de la vie des peintres, which Roger de Piles (16351709) was writing as a disclosed spy during his ve-year imprisonment in The Hague and published it in Paris in 1699, however, does not contain krtas name. Neither can it be found in the two following reeditions of the 18th-century French text (1715, 1767), the rst of which was still revised by the artist. The lists of the oldest biographers of the Prague painter thus included Roger de Piles unjustly. Carolus Screta only appears in the German translation which came out one year after his death (1710) in Hamburg under the title Historie und Leben der berhmtesten europaeischen Mahlerverfertiget von de Piles. Similarly as in the case of some other German painters the editors added a chapter devoted to the Flemish and German schools in accordance with Sandrart. krtas biography here is nothing but a slightly abbreviated version of his biography published in Teutsche Academie of 1679. Arnold Houbraken (16601719) does not provide any new information; he solely condenses De Bies entry and moreover totally omits krta in the index of names. Although he quotes Sandrart as one of his sources in the introduction to De groote Schouburgh, he apparently has no ambition to elaborate any further on krtas biography. Houbraken, with his somewhat unclear stylistics, thus contributes to later misinterpretations; also because his ambiguous formulation allows for attributing krtas nickname Slazgwaard to Baur. The mistake is then codied by the German translation of Houbraken, whose index states Slagzwaart 220. S. Willem Bouwer. The confusion is repeated by Hoogewerff up to the mid-20th century in the still fundamental publication devoted to Schilderbent, although Swillens in the index of the new edition of Houbraken correctly assigns the abovementioned nickname to Carolus Screta. The most recent and extensive interpretation of De groote Schouburgh by Hendrik J. Horn does not mention krtas name in its almost one thousand pages a single time. To the contrary, in Czech literature Jaromr Neumann elevates Houbraken to a source of primary information; undoubtedly due to the low accessibility of De Bies treatise which this doyen of krta research most probably did not have to hand. Yet another biographer of our artist is the Dutch painter, author and satirist Jacob Campo Weyerman (16771747), who became renowned for, besides other things, challenging Houbrakens statements and whose wit and sharp tongue took him as far as to a lifetime of imprisonment for calumny. Weyermans note about krta, however brief and dependent on De Bies account, is worth attention not only because it provides a relatively time-relevant interpretation of concepts used by the rst biographer, i.e. it identies De Bies term ordonnantien with history paintings and correctly attributes krta the nickname Zlagzwaard. The authors aim here also is to eliminate De Bies ambiguities by modernizing his language, as is proved by as peculiar as artful and rhythmically improved adaptation of De Bies verses to a form which much better suits the Dutch of the rst quarter of the 18th century. Weyerman probably assumes krta to be Netherlandish, and therefore clears up his entry from the remark about the more famous Baur who, as a German, has no place in his treatise. Jean Baptiste Descamps (17141791) does not bring any new ndings about krta, either; he only translates De Bie to French, taking Weyermans elaborations into consideration. His only novelty is labelling the already abolished Bent society as Bande Academique and establishing krtas cognomen in the Norman dialect, Espadron. In chronological order, there follow the notes by Bolognano Marcello Oretti (17141787), which survived only in manuscript form. The local patriotism of the author is, however, directly proportional to his mistakes and inaccuracies. Sandrarts reference to krtas journeying via Bologna sufficed Oretti to classify the Bohemian painter to the group of artists of the Bologna school. His account abounds in mistakes and misunderstandings, from a misspelled rst name of krta and his alleged activity in the churches of Naples to the wrongly given year of the publication of the Latin translation of Sandrarts treatise.
376 REPORTS ON KAREL KRTA IN EUROPEAN LITERATURE OF 17TH AND 18TH CENTURIES

6 Roger de Piles, Abrg de la vie des peintres, avec des reexions sur leurs ouvrages, et un Trait du peintre parfait; De la connoissance des desseins; De lutilit des estampe, Paris 1699. 7 Abreg de la vie des peintres: avec des rexions sur leurs ouvrages, et un trait du peintre parfait; de la connoissance des desseins; de lutilit des estampes, 2. d., revue&corrige par lauteur; avec un abreg de sa vie,&plusieurs autres additions, Paris 1715. Abreg de la vie des peintres, avec des rexions sur leurs ouvrages, nouvelle edition, considerablement augment, AmsterdamLeipzig: Arkstee&Merkus 1767. 8 Arnold Houbrakens Grosse Schouburgh der niederlndischen Maler und Malerinner, ed. Alfred von Wurzbach (Quellenschriften fr Kunstgeschichte und Kunsttechnik de Mittelalters und der Renaissance, 8), Wien 1880, pp.220, 463. 9 Godefrius Joannes Hoogewerff, De Bentvueghels, s-Gravenhage 1952, p.133. 10 Pieter T.A.Swillens (ed.), De groote schouburgh der nederlantsche Konstschilders en Schilderessen door Arnold Houbraken, Maastricht 19431953, II (1944), p.352. 11 Hendrik J.Horn, The Golden Age Revisited: Arnold Houbrakens Great Theatre of Netherlandish Painters and Paintresses, Doornspijk 2000. 12 Comp.Jaromr Neumann, Kitalskm zatkm Karla krty, UmnIII, 1955, p.322. 13 On Weyermans life and work, see Ton J.Broos, Tussen zwart en ultramarijn. De levens van schilders beschreven door Jacob Campo Weyerman (16771747), Amsterdam 1990. 14 Broos (see note 13) mentions Weyermans adaptation of verses dedicated to krta by De Bie on p.95. He, however, deals solely with the linguistic aspect of the matter. Our painter still remains unrecognized and is only quoted as Carolus Creeten (also in the index on p.366). Nevertheless, as seen in note 70 (p.311), the author puts side by side the expressions used in krtas biographies by De Bie (ordonnantien, conterfeyten), Houbraken (pourtretten) as well as Weyerman (Historieschilder en Konterfyter) in order to outline Weyermans style of working with texts. 15 The correct French spelling would be Espadon. 16 The index of artists including Orettis manuscript was published by Roberto Landi, Indice degli artisti compresi nellopera manoscritta di Marcello Oretti Notizie de Professori del dissegno, LArchiginnasio 78, 1983, pp.103198. Orettis Paolo Screta was introduced to the Czech public by Jana Zapletalov, krta, Sandrart, Oretti: poznmka ke krtovu psoben vItlii, UmnLVII, 2009, pp.398402. 17 Sandrart writes about ktas journey from Venice to the south, stating that driven by his desire for art, he left for Bologna and Florence and at these schools, too, he excellently developed on his own knowledge. The sake of the text is probably nothing but rhetorical gures which can probably be best translated as he did not pass Bologna and Florence unnoticed or he also became familiar with the contemporary art in the two towns. Comp.J.Sandrart, Teutsche Academie 1679 (see note 2), p.327; idem 1683, p.323.

18 Jaromr Neumann, Karel krta 16101674 (exh. cat.), Praha 1974, p.287; idem, krtov, Praha 2000, p.157. 19 Gustav E.Pazaurek, Carl Screta (16101674). Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte desXVII.Jahrhundertes, Prag 1889, p.18, note 1; J.Neumann, Karel krta (see note 18), p.287; J. Neumann, krtov (see note18), pp.9, 11, 157. 20 Pietro Zani, Enciclopedia metodica critico-ragionata delle belle arti, Parma 1821, vol. I, p.16. Zanis host was probably Francis Joseph Liebsteinsky of Kolowrat (c. 17501825), one of the founders of the Society of Patriotic Friends of the Arts. The Parma abbot writes that he had the opportunity to see Kolowrats collection of old prints and was enchanted by Parmigianinos work which the Count purchased from the Venice art dealer, Giovanni Antonio Armano. (Giunto aPraga mi trasferii dal Conte Kollovrat, gran conoscitore di stampe e profondo naturalista, acui io era stato raccomandato. Egli mi ricolmo di cortesie, e mi fece vedere il celebre suo gabinetto. Ma la prescrittami strettezza di tempo mi tolse di poter osservare ed annotare amio comodo. Ne ripassai non ostante alcuni portafogli, ed abbattutomi nellopera del Parmigianino ne rimasi incantato Essa fu gi del sig. Antonio Armano, e da questo ceduta al Conte Kollovrat fu aumentata sino al gradi in cui ora si trova. Parler altrove delle sue particolarit. Proseguii il mio viaggio per Dresda.). 21 Ibid., pp.1617.

Although Fsslins Allgemeines Knstler-Lexicon, arranged in alphabetical order, explicitly refers to Descamps as the most modern authority, the author of krtas entry is in fact also familiar with the previous biographers, with Cornelis de Bie in the lead. The thoroughly compiled overview of authors who had ever published portraits of the individual artists, included at the end of the volume, does not even miss krtas portrait in Sandrart. The inventory of the Dresden gallery, issued by Johann August Lehninger, is complemented by a brief biography of krta and bespeaks of the knowledge of new biographic data published by Jan Quirin Jahn (1776). It lays emphasis on the painters journey to Dresden and lists it chronologically, i.e. after his return to Prague. Jaromr Neumann mistakenly attributed the inventory to Roger de Piles. He was apparently led astray by the introductory words of the title (Abrg de la vie des peintres), because Pazaureks bibliographic search of the oldest literature on krta, from which he regularly departed, does not mention the name of the editor. Pietro Zani (17481821?) visited Prague in 1792, as he states in the introduction to his work, and was hosted by Count Kolowrat in the city. He, however, did not stay long and soon continued on his journey from Vienna to Dresden. We do not know whether he had time to stop by some Prague works by krta he probably encountered them in Dresden where, to the contrary, he stayed for a longer period of time. Zani systemizes all available reports about artists and arranges them in tables in the nineteen volumes of his Enciclopedia metodica critico-ragionata delle belle arti (Critically Arranged Methodical Encyclopaedia of Fine Art). But the critical character, proclaimed in the title, unfortunately gave way to the effort to arrive at maximum exhaustiveness. This is also why Zani, the abbot of Parma, is the only author whose work exactly reects Orettis mistakes he mentions as much as three artists named Screta. In the case of our painter he moreover refers to the name form Creten, established by Descamps. The attributes ascribed to krta testify that the author also drew from the works by previous biographers. He, however, newly states the nickname Raffaello della Boemia. The entry on krta in Ticozzis 1830 Dictionary of Artists of All Nations (or, more precisely, Dictionary of Architects, Sculptors, Painters, Engravers in Wood and Stone, Minters of Medallions, Mosaicists, Jewelers of Niello, and Makers of Intarsio Work of All Nations) is a free reinterpretation of Descamps eighty-year old record. It does not only testify to the apparent inertia in copying biographies but also to the geographic and mainly linguistic distance between the Roman and German worlds. Translated by Lucie Vidmar

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 377

Edition of Selected Documents

Cornelis de Bie, 1661

Het Gulden Cabinet vande Edele Vry Schilderconst, inhoudende den lof vande vermarste schilders, architecte, beldthowers ende plaetsnyders van dese eeuw, TAntwerpen: Ian Meyssens 1661, p. 251.

Ten tijde van dien uytnemenden Schilder Willem Bouwer, die seer fraey ende aerdich in verlichtery was, ghelijck in [he]t eerste deel is verhaelt, heeft Carolus Creten met den selben Willem Bouwer ghewoont in Italien en creegh tot

Roomen voor jnen bendt-naem het Slach-sweert, den welcken seer fraey is in [he]t schilderen, ordonnantien, conterfeyten soo groot als cleyn, dat rijn const van veel Heeren des Landts werdt opghetrocken ende in groote weerden ghehouden woonende

teghenwoordich tot Prage, daer hy in groot estime is ende dese vry Schilder-const noch daeghelijcks oeffent. Die soeckt Picturas cracht en edelheyt te weten

Die sy den Schilder schenckt, en mildelijcken geeft Ontdeckt, en siet maer aen de Const van Carel Creten Die wel het meeste van Pictur[a]s volmaecktheyt heeft.

Joachim von Sandrart, 1679

Lacademia todesca della architectura, scultura & pittura oder Teutsche Academie der edlen Bau-, Bild- und Mahlerey-Knste. Der teutschen Academie zweyter und letzter Haupt-Theil, Nrnberg: in Verlegung des Authoris 1679, III. Buch, XXII. Capitel, p. 327; Tafel OO. (after p. 356). [p. 326] CCLX. Carolo Screta, Mahler von Prag. Komt nach Venedig, Bolognen, Florenz, Rom und wieder auf Prag: Seine Werke.

[p. 327] CCLX. Carolo Screta, von Prag wurde in seiner Kindheit bey Zeiten in einem zierlichen Sitten- und Tugendwandel angefhret und daraufhin zu der edlen Mahlerkunst gezogen, dern grndliche Regeln er vermg einer ihme angebornen Arbeitsamkeit wol ergriffen und sich noch in frher Jugend ein schnes Lob darmit erworben. Weil nun damals der Blutbegierige Mars aus seinem Vatterland die friedfrtige Musen und Knste verjaget, auch er eine grere Wienschaft zu erlangen suchte, begab er sich in Italien und hielte sich in Venedig etliche Jahre rhmlich und also auf da er alles denkwrdige sich bstmglichst zu Nutzen machte und nicht allein einen schnen Kunstschatz samlete, sondern auch von diesem Reichtum den Kunstliebenden wieder allerhand schne Bilder und beliebige Historien mittheilte und dieselbe mit Ausbildung natrlicher Affecten, wolgezeichneten Inventionen, guter Manier, knstlichen Erhebungen und herlichem Colorit zierte, dannenhero diese seine Stuck stark gesucht und reichlich bezahlet worden zu immer

mehr und mehr wachsendem Ruhm unsers arbeitsamen Knstlers. Von dannen begab er sich durch noch immeranreitzende Kunstbegierde getrieben nach Bolognen und Florenz und mehrte auch auf diesen Kunstschulen merklich seine Wienschaft, Anno 1634 kam er nach Rom und perfectionirte sich daselbst durch msigkeit und Flei dergestalt, da er sich reich genug schtzte, wieder in sein Vatterland Prag zuruck zu kehren und daselbst die Frchte seines Fllhorns auszuschtten. Als er daselbst von denen Anverwandten und Kunstliebenden bewillkommet worden, fand er die edle Mahlkunst in einem tiefen Schlamm uerster Verachtung stecken und gleichsam gar aus der Stadt verbannisiret, dannenhero bemhte er sich mglichst, dieselbe durch frtreiche Kunstwerke wieder zu erheben und den Schmutz von ihrem Gesichte abzuwaschen, wie er dann sie wieder auf ihre vorige Stelle gesetzet und in Flor gebracht, sich selbsten aber durch seine schne Qualitten, Freundlichkeit und lblichen Tugendwandel bey hohen und

niedern Standspersonen beliebt und geehrt gemacht. Seine schnen Werke alle zu erzehlen, wrde die beliebte Krze dieses Werks allzuviel erweitern, dernthalben melden wir nur, da seine Werke meistens in groen Historien und Contraften bestanden, so bey den hchsten Potentaten selbiger Landen in groen Ehren gehalten werden, wie derselben sehr viele in Prag bey S[ancti] Nicolai, auf der kleinen Seiten bey S[ankt] Thomas und S[ancti] Wenceslai, in der Neustadt bey S[ankt] Stephan, in der Layenkirchen, zu S[ancti] Martini, Salvatoris, in der Jesuiten-Closter, desgleichen zu Knigssaler Closter, in Plaer Closter, zu Leiteritz in der Bischofskirchen, zu S[ancti] Laurentii in Melnich und an andern mehr Orten zu sehen, die alle gnugsame Zeugnus geben, da unser Knstler nich allein ein universaler Theoreticus, sondern auch ein wolerfahrner Practicus gewesen seye und der Natur in allem rhmlichst nachgefolget habe. Wordurch er dann auch ein solches Lob erhalten, da alles, was von hoher Hand

verlangt und wichtig schiene, ihm angedinget worden, so da man wol sagen mag, es seye dieser discrete Screta der andere Apelles auf diesem Kyserlichen Musen-Parnass gewesen, aus deen klugen Hirn die frnehmste Conclusiones und Emblemata (dern auf dieser uralten Universitt mehr als an andern Orten herfr kommen) entsproen, weil seine kluge inventiones denen Kupferstechern zu allerhand lblichen Ausbildungen jederzeit richtige Anleitung gegeben. Nach vieler Arbeit und lblich-verrichteten Lebens- und Tugendslauf ist er endlich im 60ten Jahr seines Alters in Prag unter dem Lob- und Leidklang aller Kunstliebenden verschieden, und deelben Contraft zu seiner unsterblichen Gedchtnus in die Kupferblatte OO. gesetzet worden. [after p. 356] Tafel OO. CAROL SCRETA V[on] PRAG MAHLER I v[on] Sandrart del[ineavit], Philipp Kilian s[culpsit]
1 Joachim von Sandrart, Teutsche Academie der Bau-, Bild- und Mahlerey-Knste, Nrnberg 16751679, ed. Christian Klemm, Nrdlingen 1994, Teutsche

378 REPORTS ON KAREL KRTA IN EUROPEAN LITERATURE OF 17TH AND 18TH CENTURIES

Academie 1675, II, Buch 3., p. 364: print signed OO and quoted with an explanatory note next to the list of prints executed by Philipp Kilian: Blatten AA.BB.CC.DD.GG.OO.enthaltene Teutsche Meistere, welche alle mit sich in das Buch eines groen

Lobs dieses berhmten Knstlers Namen ziehen, und der Ewigkeit einverleiben, zumal tglich derselben noch mehr in dieses Buch und auch sonst von seiner edlen Hand erwartet werden.

Joachim von Sandrart, 1683

Academia nobilissimae artis pictoriae, Norimbergae: [Autor] 1683, Partis Secundae Liber III., Cap. XXII, pp. 323324.

CCLX. CAROLUS SCRETA Pragensis, Postquam in aetate sua juvenili ad vitam educatus esset omni morum probitate conspicuam, ad artem pictoriam dehinc applicabatur; cujus praecepta fundamentalia, vi innatae sibi laboriositatis tam profunde maxime bibebat, ut in tenera adhuc aetate magna tamen jam laude dignus judicaretur. Cum autem sanguinolenta Mavortis arma e[x] patria ejus quicquid pacicum esset, adeoq[ue] Musas quoq[ue] et artes procul fugassent, ipse ad majorem quoque adspirans studii sui perfectionem, in Italiam discedens, Venetiis per aliquot annos laudabiliter ita degebat, ut omnia inibi memorabilia, quoad ejus eri posset, in usum suum converteret, nec sibi tantum egregium artis colligeret thesaurum, sed ex his quoq[ue] opibus varias graphicophilis imagines, historiasq[ue] satis delectabiles communicaret, quas expresso undiq[ue] affectu naturali, inventione decore delineata, pingendi modo optimo, levatione articiosa, et coloribus verissimis

exornabat, ut haecce illius opera ambiose efflagitarentur, numerato pro illis pretio satis splendido, in perpetuum famae articis nostri laboriosissimi incrementum. Urgente autem perpetuo animum ejus anxioq[ue] ad ulteriora hujus artis desiderio Bononiam abibat atq[ue] Florentiam, inq[ua] Academiis istorum locorum peritiam suam insigniter locupletabat. Anno autem 1634 ad nos Romam quoq[ue] veniebat, ibiq[ue] continuata laborum sedulitate ad tantam properabat perfectionem, ut divitem se satis aestimaret, pro reditu in patria[m], in qua[m] copiae suae cornu effunderet. Exceptus autem ibidem ab agnatis et technophilis, nobilissimam artem nostram in extremo contemptae vilitatis barathoro demersam, et ex Urbe Pragensi quasi exulem reperiebat, unde manibus pedibusq[ue] in id intendebat, ut operibus eandem clarissimis iterum elevaret, detersaq[ue] e[x] vultu ipsius spurcitie isthac squalida, in pristinam restitueret sedem atq[ue] existimationem, quod pro

voto etiam eidem succedebat, et ita quidem, ut ipse simul ob morum civilitatem virtutumque culturam omnigenam apud quoscunque omnium statuu[m] amorem mereretur et honorem eximium. Prolixa omnium operum ejus enarratio studium brevitatis in hoc opere nimium quantum disturbaret, unde id saltem referimus, picturas ejus, historias plerumque fuisse megalographicas, et viventium icones, quae omnes apud illius Provinciae primores magni fuerunt aestimatae, prout exempla illarum extant plurima Pragae in templo S[ancti] Nicolai, in latere minori in templo D[ivi] Thomae, S[ancti] Wenceslai; in Neapoli ad D[divi] Stephani fanum, in templo Laicorum in aede S[ancti] Martini, Salvatoris, in Collegio Patrum Societatis Jesu, sic et in coenobio Knigsalensi, item Plassensi, nec non Lauteritiae in templo episcopali, ad S[ancti] Laurentii Melniciani, pluribusq[ue] in locis aliis e[x] quibus omnibus sufficie[n]tissime apparet. Articem nostrum non theoreticu[m]

saltem fuisse universalem, sed Practicum quoque peritissimum, qui naturam in omnibus secutus sit simplicissime, unde tanta quoque eidem laus enata fuit, ut quicquid ab optimatibus desideraretur, et majoris esset ponderis, ad ipsum deferretur. Quam ob causam haud absrequis dicere posset, secretiorum haru[m] scientiarum possessorem Scretam, alterum in Caesareo hoc Musarum Parnasso fuisse Apellem, e[x] cujus cerebro praecipuae conclusiones atqu[ue] emblemata, (qualia in antiquissima hac Universitate eduntur plura, quam ullis in locis aliis) pronasco solerent; cum argutissimae ejus inventiones chalcographis ad varias ansam sufficientem praeberent editiones. Peractis autem deniq[ue] laboribus plurimis, cursuq[ue] vitae virtutum que laudabiliter emenso, anno aetatis 60 Pragae ex hac vita discessit, dolentibus immensum technophilis omnibus, nos autem in immortalem nominis ejus memoriam iconem ejus tabula[m] nostra[m] O.O. exhibere voluimus.

Pellegrino Antonio Orlandi, 1704

Abecedario pittorico nel quale compendiosamente sono descritte le patrie, i maestri, ed i tempi, nequali orirono circa quattromila professori di pittura, di scultura, e darchitettura diviso in tre parti, Bologna: Costantino Pisarri 1704, p. 112.

Carlo Screta da Praga si ferm gran tempo in Venezia, poi in Roma, dove si port, lanno 1634. Indi alla Patria, ed in ogni luogo diede bellissimi saggi del suo alto sapere; danni 60 mor. Sandrart fol. 324.

2 The rst edition of 1704 contains amisprint: Patica instead of Patria, which is corrected in the following editions.

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 379

Roger de Piles, German edition 1710

Historie und Leben der berhmtesten europaeischen Mahler, so sich durch ihre Kunst-Stcke bekand gemacht, samt einigen Rexions darber und Abbildung eines vollkommenen Mahlers, nach welcher die Mahlerey als einer Regul kann beurtheilet werden, wobey auch der Nutzen und Gebrauch der Kupferstcke und Erklrung der gebruchlichen Mahler-Wrter, Hamburg: Benjamin Schiller 1710, pp. 620623.

Carolus Screta Von Praag (sic!), lernete in seiner Jugend die gruendliche Regeln der Mahlerey, vermge des ihm angebohrenen Fleisses, sehr wo[h] l, und brachte sich noch in frher[e] Jugend ein schnes Lob damit zuwege, und weilen damals die Knstler durch den Krieg verjaget wurden, er auch eine grssere Wissenschaft zu erlangen suchte, begab er sich nach Italien, und hielte sich in Venedig etliche Jahre rhmlich und also auf, da er alles denkwrdige bestmglichst sich zu Nutzen machte, und nicht allein einen Schatz von Knsten samelte, sondern auch von diesen Reichthum denen Kunstliebenden allerhand schne Bilder und beliebige Historien miteilte, und dieselbe mit Ausbildung natrlicher Affecten,

wohlgezeichneten Inventionen, guter Manier, kunstlichen Erhebungen, und herrlichen Colorit, zierte. Dannenhero dieseseine Stcke sehr gesuchet, und reichlich bezahlet wurden. Von dannen begab er sich nach Bologna und Florenz, und mehrete auch auf diesen Kunst-Schulen seine Wissenschaft mercklich. Anno 1634 kam er nach Rom, und perfectionierte sich daselbst durch seine Embsigkeit und Flei dergestalt, da er genug zu haben vermeinete, womit er in sein[en] Vaterland nach Praag kehren, und dieser seiner Frchte geniessen kon[n]te: Als er nun daselbsten ankam, fand er die edle Mahl-Kunst in auserster Verachtung stecken, und gleichsam gar verbamnisret, daher es sich mglichst bemhete,

dieselbe durch frtreiche Kunstwerke zu erheben, wie er denn auch gethan, und selbige wieder in grosse Flor brachte, sich selbste aber durch seine Schne Qualitten, Freundlichkeit, und tugenhafften Wandel, bey hohen und niedrigen Standespersonen, beliebt und geehrt gemacht. Seine Wercke haben meistens in grossen Historien und Contrefaiten bestanden, so von dene[n] hohen Potentaten selbiger Landen in grossen Ehren gehalten worden, wie denn derselben sehr viel in Praag, bey S[anc]t[i] Nicolai, auf der kleinen Seiten bey S[ank]t Thomas und S[anc]t[i] Wenceslai, in der Neustadt bey S[ank]t Stephan, in der Luen Kirchen, zu S[anc]t[i] Martini, Salvatoris, in dem Jesuiter Kloster, desgleichen zu Knigs-Saaler

Kloster, im Plasser-Kloster, zu Leiteritz in der Bischofs-Kirchen, zu S[anc]t[i] Laurentii in Melnich, und anderen Orten mehr zu sehen, die alle genugsam Zeugnis geben, da dieser Knstler nicht allein ein universaler Theoreticus, sondern auch ein wolerfahrener Practicus gewesen sey, und der Natur in allen rhmlichst nach gefolgt habe, wodurch er denn auch ein solches Lob erhalten, da die grosse Herren alle wichtige und grosse Gemhlde bey ihm machen liessen, und haben seine Fluge Inventiones denen kupferstechern zu allerhand lieblichen Ausbildungen jederzeit richtige Anleitung gegeben. Er ist im 60sten Jahr seines Alters zu Praag gestorben.

Arnold Houbraken, 1719

De groote Schouburgh der Nederlantsche Konstschilders en Schilderessen, Amsterdam: vor den Auther 1719, II, p. 144.

Waar aan wy ook laten volgen Carolus Creten van Praeg. Deze heest met den vermaarden Willem Bouwer, die zeer fraay, en geestig in Waterverwe schilderde, lang

in Italien gewoont; hij schilderde pourtretten, en was in de Roomse bend bekent, met den bynaam Slagzwaart.

Jacop Campo Weyerman, 1729

De Levens-beschryvingen der Nederlandsche Konst-Schilders en Konst-Schilderessen, s-Gravenhage: Bocquet 1729, II, p. 217.

Karel Creeten Was ook een Tydgenoot van dat paar konstryke Broeders, een Knaap gedoopt het Zlagzwaard by de Roomsche Schilderbende, die een verdienstig Historieschilder en Konterfyter is geweest, volgens de getuygenis van den Lierschen

Kronykschryver, Kornelis de Bie, aldus by ons verandert. Wie dat Picturas macht en adel poogt te weeten, Die zy milddaaglyk haar Lievelingen geeft, Bezie de konst van Karel Creeten, Die geen gering gedeelt in hare gonsten heeft.

380 REPORTS ON KAREL KRTA IN EUROPEAN LITERATURE OF 17TH AND 18TH CENTURIES

Jean Baptiste Descamps, 1753

La vie des peintres amands, allemands et hollandois, avec des portraits gravs en taille-douce, une indication de leurs principaux ouvrages, et des rections sur leurs diffrentes manieres, Paris: Jombert 17531764, II, p. 367.

Charles Creten Creten tait contemporain et ami de Guillaume Bauer; ils voyagrent et demeurerent ensemble Rome. Creten fut appell par la Bande Acadmique, lEspadron. On aimait

en Italie sa maniere de peindre le Portrait et celle de composer lHistoire. On lengagea retourner Prague, li[e]u de sa naissance, o il a joui dune grande rputation. On ne sait sil y est mort, nien quel temps.

Marcello Oretti, after 1760

Notizie de professori del dissegno, cio pittori, scultori ed architetti bolognesi e de forastieri di sua scuola raccolte ed in pi tomi divise da Marcello Oretti bolognese Accademico dellInstituto delle scienze di Bologna, Volume quinto. Bologna, Biblioteca comunale dellArchiginnasio, B 127, f. 556. Jana Zapletalov (ed.), krta, Sandrart, Oretti: poznmka ke krtovu psoben v Itlii, Umn LVII, 2009, pp. 400401.

Paolo (!) Screta dipintore or nel 1634. Era costui nativo della citt di Praga. Studi con indefessa applicazione la pittura, in Venezia per varii anni, indi in Bologna acquist maggior fondamento in quelle Accademie ove dimostr il suo valore, pass a Roma lanno

1634, replic studi, ed indi ritorn in patria. Dipinse ritratti, e storie, ammiransi varie opere in Praga nel tempio di S. Niccol, in un laterale minore del tempio di S[an] Tommaso e di S[an] Wenceslao ed in Napoli, nella chiesa de laici a S[anto] Stefano, in S[an] Martino, e del

Salvadore, nel colleggio de Gesuiti, ed in altri luoghi. Si fece dunque onore con avere fabricato per lode dellarte e mor in Praga nellanno sessantesimo della et sua con dispiacere di chi lo conosceva e ci ricavasi dalla Accademia de Pittori di Gioacchino Sandraert, editione

di Norimberga 1633 nel libro terzo e pagina 323 e ci serva per memoria di Paolo Screta della scuola di Bologna.
3 Jana Zapletalov, krta, Sandrart, Oretti: poznmka ke krtovu psoben v Itlii, UmnLVII, 2009, p. 401. The scholar transcribes this as fuori which, however, does not make any sense.

Johann Rudolf Fssli (ed.), 1763

Allgemeines Knstler-Lexicon, oder: Kurze Nachricht von dem Leben und den Werken der Mahler, Bildhauer, Baumeister, Kupferstecher, Kunstgiesser, Stahlschneider etc etc. Zrich: Heidegger 1763 I, p. 504, p. 765.
vdeckch edic dokument ze 16.20. stolet pro poteby historiograe, Praha 2002, p. 61.

Screta (Carolus), war ein Zeitgeno und Freund des Wilhelm Baur; sie reiten miteinander gen [sic] Rom, die Italiaener schaetzten seine Art Portraite zu mahlen, und seine Composition in historischen Gemaehlden sehr hoch, hernach kam

er aus Begehren seiner Mitburger in seine Vaterstadt Prag zuruecte, woselbst er auch in grossem Ansehen verstarb. Descamps D. 2. P. 365. [p. 765] Carolus Screta. P. [= Mahler] I. Sandrart. P. I. Tab. O. O.

4 Probably from angesehen. 5 We transliterate the text in the framework of the unied modication following the norms valid for the period prior to 1750, even though it was written more than a decade after this date. Ivan ovek et al., Zsady vydvn novovkch historickch pramen z obdob od potku 16. stolet do souasnosti. Pprava

Johann August Lehninger, 1782

Abrg de la vie des peintres, dont les tableaux composent la Galerie electorale de Dresde. Avec le dtail de tous les tableaux de cette collection et des eclaircissemens historiques sur ces chefs-doeuvres de la peinture, Dresde: Frres Walters 1782, pp. 258259.

XII. Charles Screta N en 1619. [Il] tudia la peinture en Italie et stablit Prague, o il fut reu dans la Confrrie des Peintres en 1644. De-l il se rendit Dresde, o il fut appell pour peindre les portraits de lElecteur Jean George III., de M[a]d[amm]

e lElectrise et des deux Princes ses ls. Ces portraits ont t gravs par Samuel Weishun. On ne trouve gure dorn et de att dans ses ouvrages; cependant son dessein est toujours correct, qualit quil sest acquise par une tude soigneuse des Antiques, daprs les quels il dessina sans

cesse. Il avait une facilit singulaire imiter les diffrentes manieres des grands peintres; cependant il sattacha prfrablement celle du Guide. Bartholom Klosse est le meilleur de ses lves; il mourut Prague en 1674, ag de 70 ans. Les tableaux suivants de ce peintre

faisaient autrefois partie de ceux quon conservait dans la Bibliothque du Couvent des Peres Augustins dchausss de St. Wenceslas Prague. Actuellement il ny en a que les copies, depuis que la Galerie Electorale est orne des originaux. Il y a ici de lui:

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 381

No. 84. G. E. Portrait de Bernhard Witte, Commandeur de lOrdre de Malthe; sur toile de 4 pieds pouces de haut, 3 pieds 2 pouces de large. 173. G. E. St. Mathieu; sur bois, de 3 pieds 3 pouces de large, 2 pieds 6 pouces de haut. 174. G. E. St. Marc, avec le lion; sur bois, de la mme grandeur. 175. G. E. St. Luc, avec le taureau; sur bois, de la mme grandeur. 176. G. E. St. Jean, avec laigle; sur bois, de la mme grandeur. 449. G. E. St. Grgoire affis, une colombe sur son paule, lisant dans un livre quil tient lev. Sur bois, de 3 pieds 5 pouces de haut, 2 pieds 10 pouces de large. 450. G. E. St. Jrme, demi-nu,

en action dcrire; demi-gure. Sur bois, de 3 pieds 6 pouces de haut, 2 pieds 10 pouces large. 451. G. E. St. Paul, caracteris par son glaive, la doite leve et lautre pose sur le bord dun livre. Sur toile, de 3 pieds 5 pouces de haut, 3 pieds de large. 452. G. E. St. Ambroise, feuilletant un livre; sur bois, de 3 pieds 6 pouces de haute, 2 pieds 10 pouces de large. 480. G. E. Buste de Mose, levant les tables de la loi; sur bois, de 2 pieds de large, 1 pied 9 pouces de haut.

6 Jan Bartolomj Klosse ( 1679).

Pietro Zani, 1821

Enciclopedia metodica critico-ragionata delle belle arti dellabate D. Pietro Zani Fidentino, Parma: Tipograa Ducale 1821, Vol. VII, p. 107; 1823, Vol. XVII, p. 182.

Vol. VII, p. 107 Creten Carlo, chiamato Espadron, Sereta, o Secreta, ed il Raffaello della Boemia PR. = Pittore ritrattista P. = Pittore di storia tanto sacra, che profana D. = Disegnatore I. = Incisore di stampe a bulino, detto dai Tedeschi Kupferstechner Kunststecher ed anche Plattenscheneider Ted. = tedesco, qui sono compresi tutti gli arteci dellAlta

e Bassa Alemagna, formanti una sola scuola Merito: Cel. = celebre (bravissimo, celeberrimo, celebre, mediocre, molto mediocre) Nascita: 1611 Morte: 1674 Vol. XVII, p. 182 Screta Paolo, P. PR., Tedesco, f. (= oriva) 1634 Screta Michele, P., Tedesco Screta C = Creten

Stefano Ticozzi, 1830

Stefano Ticozzi, Dizionario degli architetti, scultori, pittori, intagliatori in rame ed in pietra, coniatori di medaglie, musaicisti, niellatori, intarsiatori dogni et e dogni nazione, Milano: Gaetano Schiepatti 1830, Vol. I, p. 375.

Creeten (Carlo) and a Roma con Guglielmo Baver, ed ebba col dalla banda accademica il soprannome di Espadron. Non tard a farsi conoscere buon pittore non meno con piccoli quadri di storia che con somigliantissimi ritratti, ed assai compiacevasi del soggiorno di Roma, dove conosceva di aver molto approttato nellarte. Pure

prevalse lamor di patria, e non ebbe motivo di dolersi di esservi tornato; perocch non gli mancarono vantaggiose commissioni, n constanti dimostrazioni di stima per parte de suoi compatriotti. Fior alla met del diciassettesimo secolo.

382 REPORTS ON KAREL KRTA IN EUROPEAN LITERATURE OF 17TH AND 18TH CENTURIES

The Historical Writings of Vilm Slavata of Chlum and Koumberk

A Little Employed Source on Bohemian History of the First Half of the 17th Century
ALENA RICHTEROV

1 Josef Truhl, Katalog eskch rukopis c. k. Veejn aUniversitn knihovny prask, Praha 1906, p.23, No. 59. 2 Alois BackerKarl Sommervogel, Bibliothque de la Compagnie de Jsus 7, BruxellesParis 1896, le 18431855. 3 enk Zbrt, Bibliograe esk historie 4, Praha 1909, p.216, No. 3812. 4 Jezuit aKlementinum, held between 24 April and 15 June 2006 in the Klementinum Gallery which had just opened at that time. The exhibition was accompanied by apublication with introductory essays and acatalogue of exhibits, entitled Jezuit aKlementinum (see also the separate English version, The Jesuits and the Clementinum), Alena RichterovIvana ornejov (edd.), Praha 2006. 5 Let me give only ashort selection: Josef Jireek, Pestoupen Vilma Slavaty kcrkvi katolick, asopis katolickho duchovenstva 3, 1862, pp.401435; Josef Dobi, Vilm Slavata, asopis historick1, 1881, pp.267309; 2, 1882, pp.3456; Josef Jireek, Leben des Obersten Hofkanzlers von Bhmen Wilhelm Grafen Slavata, Prag 1876; Petr Maa, Oslavy jubilejnho lta vm aesk lechta, in: Jihoesk sbornk historick 66, 1997, pp.117123; idem, Zrozen tradice (slavatovsk vystn romberskho ahradeckho odkazu), in: Vclav Bek (ed.), Posledn pni zHradce, esk Budjovice 1998 (Opera historica 6, 1998), pp.513552; Thomas Winkelbauer, Frst und Frstendiener. Gundaker von Liechtenstein, ein sterreichischer Aristokrat des konfessionellen Zeitlaters, WienMnchen 1999, pp.107119; Petr Maa, Svt esk aristokracie (15001700), Praha 2004, pp.547549; idem, Von der Selbstapologie zur Apologie der Gegenreformation: Konversion und Glaubensvorstellungen des Oberstenkanzlers Wilhelm Slawata (15721652), in: Ute Lotz-HeumannJan-Friedrich MissfelderMatthias Pohlig (edd.), Konversion und Konfession in der Frhen Neuzeit, Gtersloh 2007, pp.287322.

The Czech-written manuscripts held in the National Library of the Czech Republic include many valuable sources on Bohemian history but I will pay attention to only one of them in this essay. The spine of the manuscript with the signature XVII.B.12 reads The Story of Throwing Two Bohemian Counts out of the Prague Castle Windows [Pbh o vyhozen dvouch hrabat eskch z oken hradu praskho]. When Josef Truhl was compiling the catalogue of the Klementinum manuscript collection, he recognized it as a transcript of part of the work entitled The Historical Writings of Vilm Slavata [Historick spisovn Vilma Slavaty] or, more particularly, part of its rst volume describing the Prague defenestration and the second volume, featuring the events of 1611 and 1615 and the period between 1617 and 1619. The attached transsumta also include two other texts: a document about the election of Ferdinand II (f. 717v729v) and, on f. 514v55v, the Czech translation of the apologia of the Jesuit order, written by the distinguished German Jesuit Adam Tanner (15711632). Previous provenance of the Klementinum manuscript is unknown, and even though the volume bears the older signature T. 26. In folio minori, scholars have still not been able to identify its origin. The Tanners apology of the Society of Jesus was rst published in print in 1618, rst as written in Latin and then in a German translation. Slavata, however, was probably writing this part of his most extensive work between 1638 and 1640, and the origination of the Klementinum manuscript can thus be dated to approximately the 1640s. And although Truhls catalogue of Czech manuscripts was published as early as in 1906 and although enk Zbrt included notice of this manuscript as well as its other duplicates surviving in the Klementinum fund in his bibliography three years later, the volume in question has long been omitted, almost ignored by historians. It only received more attention due to the Czech version of the Tanners apology of the Society of Jesus. It also was one of the items on display at the spring 2006 exhibition The Jesuits and the Clementinum, organized in connection with the 450th anniversary of the Jesuits arrival in Bohemia. The preparatory works on the exhibition and the accompanying catalogue consequently awoke interest in other texts contained in this volume, and especially in the portrayal of the Prague Defenestration. For that matter, the latter text even captivated the ancient Klementinum librarians the most and made them therefore inscribe the binding of the entire volume with the above-mentioned title. The author of the considerably extensive work which became common under the more correct title The Historical Writings instead of the misrepresenting title Memoirs, used in the older partial edition, was Vilm Slavata of Chlum and Koumberk (1 December 1572 19 January 1652). The direct eyewitness of historical convulsions which in turn inuenced developments in the whole of Europe has always enjoyed the considerable interest of historians and his life story was thus described in countless studies. I want to avoid repeating the facts so frequently mentioned, and will therefore focus on only one aspect in this
EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 385

work: Slavatas inconsistent personality which as if encompassed most of the contrasts of his era. The son of a poor noble family, where he received a rigorous upbringing in the spirit of the Czech Brethren, converted to Catholicism after staying with his Catholic relatives, the lords of Hradec to whom he also owed the nancing of his Grand Tour to Italy. This step resulted in a substantial turn in his life: it allowed him to marry Lucie Otlie, the sister of the last lord of Hradec, Jchym Oldich. The marriage was linked with Slavatas extraordinary upswing on the social scale which elevated him to the rank of the richest Bohemian magnates, forever liberated him from nancial troubles and brought him a prominent social position. He even came to rule the house of the Hradec lords after the death of his brother-in-law and intensively promoted the myth of the succession of the Hradec, Romberk and Slavata families. The conversion also opened the door for him to acquire distinguished positions. Although Slavata keeps assuring his father in the letters from that period that he would not actively aspire to any office in order to avoid accusations of careerist motivation linked with such a weighty step, he in no time attaches a postscript that he would do so only if these were offered to him. If we, however, consider his astonishing career in the clerical hierarchy, the offices were probably offered to him rather strongly: he was the Karltejn burgrave between 1604 and 1611, was appointed court judge in 1611 and the supreme court judge several years later, was active as the head of the Bohemian Royal Chamber between 1612 and 1618 and, ten years later, nally achieved the ultimate goal, becoming imperial privy councillor in 1628. Apart from several other honorary degrees and offices, he held the most prestigious award, craved by the leading European aristocrats the Order of the Golden Fleece. But he nevertheless felt underestimated towards the end of his life, especially with regard to the injuries suffered after he was unceremoniously ung from the Hradschin Castle window into the ditch below. As a convert, he as if again was proof of the well-known Czech proverb about the turncoats, because he always ranked among the advocates of the most rigid Catholic line and the supporters of the hardest sanctions for the Estates rebels. He, however, did not signicantly participate in taking hold of and breaking up their conscated properties during the post-White Mountain predation; Slavata only purchased Koumberk from the vast conscates contrary to many old Bohemian families who, without blushing, were unashamed enough to lay the foundations of their considerably extensive dominions during that very period. But he still took maximum advantage of every suitable opportunity to valorise his immaterial estates instead the social status of his family. The real strength of his faith is proved by the fact that after his conversion he underwent eight-day exercises with the Jesuits every year. He devotedly believed in miracles, most probably under the inuence of his own several experiences. This also may be why he fell for mysticism at the end of his life and found himself in tow of the charismatic visionary, Hieronymus Gladich SJ. Slavata also was a very conscientious and diligent officer, even keeping diary records about his activities with great preciseness from the beginning of his clerical career. He certainly approached the duties related to all the offices he held very responsibly, and many of his pleadings and written treatises as well as their duplicates which he made for himself survive. The disposition of a reliable officer is moreover rather soundly proven by Slavatas ardent fondness for the written word although it was not just his own writing activities but mainly dictating or assigning parts of texts to copyists, proofreaders and the like. We will probably never be certain whether he was moved to do this by the irresistible urge to record everything that would otherwise be forgotten or not expressed strongly enough or, possibly, by the exorbitant sense of responsibility even though Slavata himself often belittled his motivations of this kind in an effort to amuse and enlighten his friends. All these possible motives seem to correspond with his promise given to the Jesuits in summer 1644 when the ten principles which would rule his future life also included to continue on the started historiography ( in scribendo historiae iam ab aliquibus annis a me inceptae ). The earliest text written by Vilm Slavata is most probably The Notes from between 1601 and 1603 [Zpisky z let 1601 a 1603]. The manuscript a result of the authors dictation is held in the Jindichv Hradec archives and its edition was published by Antonn Rezek in 1887. A similar type of literary work, loosely following up on the earlier publication, is The Notes of Vilm Slavata from 1607, 1608, 16131615 [Zpisky Vilma Slavaty z let 1607, 1608, 16131615]. They are known from a manuscript treasured in the library of the Knights of the Cross with
386 THE HISTORICAL WRITINGS OF VILM SLAVATA OF CHLUM AND KOUMBERK

6 Vclav BekJosef HrdlikaPavel KrlZdenk Vybral, Vk urozench. lechta veskch zemch na prahu novovku, PrahaLitomyl 2002, pp.6162. 7 Frantiek Tepl, Pro se stal Vilm Stavata zChlumu aKoumberka zeskho bratra katolkem?, Sbornk Historickho krouku 13, 1912, pp.205221; 14, pp.2541, 171181, esp.p.174. 8 Frantiek Palack, Pehled souasn nejvych dstojnk aednk zemskch idvorskch vkrlovstv eskm od nejstarch as a do nynjka, Praha 1832, tables III andIV. 9 P. Maa, Von der Selbstapologie (see note 5), p.297, where the author also quotes from his earlier articles on the given subject. 10 His copybooks as well as other sources worth attention are part of the family documents held in the State Regional Archives of the City of Tebo (hereinafter, SOA Tebo), branch Jindichv Hradec, fund Rodinn archiv Slavatov (Archives of the Slavata Family). The edition of the books of copies is currently in preparation by the Historical Institute of the Philosophical Faculty of the South-Bohemian University in esk Budjovice. 11 Josef Jireek, Pamti nejvyho kancle Krlovstv eskho Vilma hrabt Slavaty, I, Praha 1866, p.6. 12 P. Maa, Von der Selbstapologie (see note 5), p.297. 13 Zpisky Vilma Slavaty zlet 16011603, Antonn Rezek (ed.), Praha 1887 (Rozpravy krlovsk esk spolenosti naukVII /2, No. 4). The manuscript is deposited in SOA Tebo, branch Jindichv Hradec, fund Rodinn archiv Slavatov (Archives of the Slavata Family).

14 Amore recent duplicate, executed by the Knights of the Cross with the Red Star, can be found in the Prague library of the same order under sign.XXI C 33. Ji Prak described it in his Katalog rukopis kiovnick knihovny nyn deponovanch ve Sttn knihovn SR, Praha 1980, pp.9697, Nos. 82 and 83. Rezeks duplicate was available to Kamil Krofta in the early 20th century and it today forms part of Rezeks inheritance. For the contents of the texts, see Kamil Krofta, Zpisky Vilma Slavaty ovcech moravskch zl. 1607, 1608, 16131615, esk asopis historick 16, 1910, pp.4451; Jaroslav echura, Zmoravskho adovn Vilma Slavaty, in: Ludk BezinaJana KonvinJan Zdichynec (edd.), Ve znamen zem Koruny esk. Sbornk kedestm narozeninm prof.PhDr.Lenky Bobkov,CSc., Praha 2006, pp.142153; Zdenk Vybral, Autorita amoc vpamtech urozench, in: Vclav BekPavel Krl (edd.), Pam urozenosti, Praha 2007, pp.119133. 15 The National Archives, fund d kapucn, manuscript No. 3325. For more on the subject, see Marie Tonerov (ed.), Prvodce po rukopisnch fondech vesk republice,IV.Rukopisn fondy archiv vesk republice, Praha 1998, p.162. 16 The National Library of the Czech Republic, manuscript sign.XVII.D.35. The manuscript in question was described by J. Truhl (see note 1), p.63, No. 165. For more details on the contents of the manuscript, see Josef Poliensk, Vilma Slavaty relace ojednn vpin knectv Opavskho 16141615. Pspvek kpoznn politickho mylen pedblohorskch ech, Slezsk sbornk 51, 1953, pp.488498. 17 Josef Salaba, Slavatova apologie jezuit, esk asopis historick4, 1898, pp.324332; Antonn Markus, Stavovsk apologie zroku 1618, esk asopis historick 17, 1911, pp.5874, 200217, 304315, 421435; Josef Hrdlika, Slavatova obrana jezuitskho du ajeho pedstavy okonfesijnm uspodn ech zpotku 17.stolet, Folia Historica Bohemica 23, 2008, pp.225249. 18 SOA Tebo, branch Jindichv Hradec, Rodinn archiv Slavatov, Inv. No. 109, sign. III A1, box 13, f. 213323; on this, see J. Hrdlika, Slavatova obrana (see note 17), p.233. 19 Ji Plach the Elder (15861655) abandoned his family name after joining the Jesuit order in 1604 and was thereinafter recorded under the adopted name Ferus. For more on this, see Anna Fechtnerov, Ji Ferus andJi Plach, in: Pavel R.Pokorn (ed.), Pocta Dr. Emm Urbnkov. Spolupracovnci aptel k70.narozeninm, Praha 1979, pp.427457. 20 The South-Bohemian Research Library in esk BudjoviceZlat Koruna, Department of Manuscripts and Old Prints (historical funds), sign. IJH 3. The description of the manuscript can be found in: Bohumil Ryba, Soupisy rukopis astarch tisk zfondu Sttn vdeck knihovny veskch Budjovicch 3, esk Budjovice 1985, p.250. For more details on this, see J. Hrdlika, Slavatova obrana (see note 17), pp.231233. 21 A. Markus, Stavovsk apologie (see note 17), p.233. 22 Slavatas correspondence survived as part of the archive documents of the Slavata family archives; see SOA Tebo, branch Jindichv Hradec, Rodinn archiv Slavatov. The author of the present treatise drew solely on the notes from the foreword to the earlier edition of the rst two books of The Historical Writings; see J.Jireek, Pamti nejvyho kancle (see note 11), pp.56.

the Red Star, although the original 17th-century quarto manuscript is missing and its duplicate, in part corrected after the original, was made in the latter half of the 19th century. Even Antonn Rezek still worked with the original manuscript but he did not believe it to be Slavatas autography. It, then, remains a mystery why Rezeks duplicate is not identical with the text of the duplicate executed by the Knights. Nor is anything known about the circumstances of the origination of yet another surviving manuscript, The Memoirs of the Moravian Issues 16071616 (Pamti o vcech moravskch 16071616), deposited as part of the archive documents of the Capuchin order. These latter notes are mainly dedicated to Slavatas participation in the Moravian assemblies where he acted as the commissioner representing the emperor. The fact that Slavata along with other participants were authorised to negotiate in the matter of the Opava Duchy between 1614 and 1615 was probably linked with his abovementioned activity. Slavata issued a detailed, Czech-written report from the session, whose contemporary duplicate survived in the collection of manuscripts held in the Prague National Library. During 1622 and in the rst six months of 1623, Slavata worked on a voluminous text entitled The Defence Plea of the Honourable Fathers of Societatis Jesu, i.e. the Society of Jesus, against the Decree of the Estates of the Bohemian Kingdom; Those who Call Themselves Utraquists [Obrann odpov ctihodnch otcv Societatis Jesu, to jest Tovarystva Jeovho, proti obecnmu decretu stavv krlovstv eskho, tch, jeto se po oboj nazvaj], it is the apologia of the Jesuit Order. Slavatas original, Czech-written manuscript was deposited in the library of the Jesuit College in Jindichv Hradec. It was transferred to the local library of the Franciscan monastery in the late 18th century, where it could still be found during the 1930s. All trace of it vanished during the troubled 1950s at the latest. The bulk of the archive documents on Slavata, however, also include two surviving Czech fragments of part of the rst volume, personally corrected by Slavata sometime during the 1620s. Another contemporary transcript of the Czech version of The Defence Plea faced a similar fate as the original manuscript: it, too, was to be deposited in the library of the Franciscan monastery in Jindichv Hradec; it, too, is missing, but there is still its conscientious duplicate, executed between 1914 and 1916 due to the unceasing effort of the Czernin archive keeper and historian, Frantiek Tepl. Slavata wished The Defence Plea to be translated into Latin and German. If the German version was indeed made, it is missing as well. The Latin translation, ascribed to the Jesuit Ji Ferus-Plach, is known from the manuscript originating from the second quarter of the 17th century, which arrived at the library in Zlat Koruna from the library of the Jindichv Hradec Franciscan monastery. And although reports from the early 20th century mention yet another manuscript of the Latin version to be held in the library of the Prague Metropolitan Chapter, no evidence of it can be found in printed catalogues. The inspiration beyond the most extensive literary achievement by Slavata, i.e. his Historical Writings to which he devoted the last fteen years of his life, was more than tangible. Visiting Regensburg in 1626 as a member of Emperor Ferdinand Is entourage, he had the opportunity to encounter the treatise by Heinrich Matthias of Thurn. He simply could not disregard Thurns words advocating the Defenestration as a fair retaliation for breaching the preceding written agreements between the Utraquist Estates and the Catholics, and he thus decided to respond after discussing the matter with his friends, especially Jaroslav of Martinic and Heinrich of Kolowrat. He had enough sources at hand to draw on: his own notes and texts written right after the unfortunate event, the Martinic report, and the duplicates of the related vast correspondence. Slavata then provided the individual les of his dictated text with the detailed description of all the events and with many detours and duplicates of important documents to his friends, asking them to correct the possible mistakes, and afterwards engaged in their nal editing. The work was therefore nished in 1640, resulting in two comprehensive volumes. Right after, Slavata became inspired by the idea of the Jesuit Ji Ferus-Plach as to the necessity to follow up with the Hjek Chronicle [Hjkova kronika]. He himself thus took charge of not only substantiating the hereditability of the Bohemian royal throne but also writing the Bohemian history from the arrival of the Habsburgs to the Bohemian throne and later extended the subject to the history of Austrian and German lands and then also to events in other European countries.
EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 387

He moreover continued sending the nal les for correcting while many mentions about this are contained in his correspondence where we can also nd frequent notes about how he obtained his sources: hand-written duplicates, printed treatises or just their excerpts. In his letter to Ji Ferus-Plach of 22 February 1638, Slavata very favourably values the German Jesuit apologia, considering it substantial for his purposes. It is rather interesting that, according to its title, it is a work by Tanner whose Czech translation is part of our discussed manuscript (XVII.B.12). As the original plans continuously expanded, Slavatas working method changed. While the third and the fourth books are still only commented compilations, he decided to turn the collected material, translated into Czech, into his own text from the fth book on. No wonder then that the entire treatise, on which Slavata worked almost to the end of his life, nally formed fourteen large volumes divided into 49 parts. The very many manuscripts in which the individual parts of The Historical Writings survived to our day seem to prove that they represented very popular reading up to the 18th century. The original volumes of the Czech text, written on only the right side of the page, are today held in the archives of Jindichv Hradec, although older literature states that the tenth book is missing (and was replaced by a duplicate in 1888) and the second book became part of the collection of Jan Peter Cerroni through Tom Peina of echorod and Leopold ernk and is today deposited in the Moravian Archives in Brno. Another most complete collection from the 17th century (Books I, II, III, VIII, IX, X) was in the possession of Tom Peina of echorod and now forms part of the National Museum Library where moreover yet another bulk is held: the rst eight books which, however, represent a more recent duplicate from as late as the 1720s that arrived at the museum library in 1846 from the inheritance of Professor Mikan. Well-equipped in this respect also was the library of Tom Antonn Putzlacher, later acquired for the Prague Lobkowicz library from his inheritance. The author of The Historical Writings wished his work to be translated into German. The German translation is solely known in the case of the rst eight books while probably only the rst two books or, eventually, the depiction of the Defenestration were translated into Latin. Among the rst ones to use Slavatas text as the source to older history were the Czech historians Bohuslav Balbn, Tom Peina of echorod and Jan Beckovsk. Most desired from the beginning of the publishing of the partial editions of texts from The Writings were the passages related to the Defenestration and the immediately preceding events, while the abbreviated passages came out as early as in 1820, 1845 and 1850. Josef Jireek then took charge of compiling a more complete edition of selected parts. On the basis of the Jindichv Hradec manuscript, Jireek published the portrayal of the Hungarian events during the reign of Ferdinand I in 1857 and, several years later (in 1866 and 1868), the edition of the rst two books or, more precisely, two volumes under the slightly confusing title Memoirs nally came out within the series Monumenta historiae Bohemica thanks to his unceasing care. The foreword to the rst volume of the edition not only informs about the circumstances of the works origination but also provides an extensive regesta of all the other books of The Writings, regesta of notes on their writing from Slavatas correspondence and the list of manuscripts known in that period: besides the manuscripts deposited in the central institutions (what is, today, the National Library of the Czech Republic, the National Museum Library and the sterreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna), it mainly states the manuscripts held in private property at that time, most of which were successfully identied in the list of manuscripts known today (see Appendix 2). The modern edition of another part of the work Slavatas interpretation of the religious history in the Bohemian lands was published only in the early 20th century. The portrayal of the causes and developments of the Prague Defenestration and the future fates of its three passive participants thus enjoyed the greatest interest from the very beginning. Its main asset lies in the fact that it is a compilation of their own reports recorded shortly after the events. Yet another substantial source besides the reports of the eyewitnesses is the portrayal in the Church History [Historie crkevn], written by Pavel Skla of Zho and employing the reports of those who mainly participated in the events prior to the Defenestration. Throwing three officials out of the Prague Castle windows represented such a scandalous affair at that time that it instantly became the scoop of all the contemporary communication media and media networks. It was then immediately
388 THE HISTORICAL WRITINGS OF VILM SLAVATA OF CHLUM AND KOUMBERK

23 Ibid., pp.712. 24 Aletter addressed to J.Ferus-Plach and dated 22 October 1642; Ibid., p.11. 25 Ipresent the list of the hitherto discovered manuscripts of the Czech, German and Latin versions in Appendix 2. The list, however, in no way aspires at completeness because it could not depart from personal research of the relevant volumes but was instead exclusively issued on the basis of the tools available at the time of writing the present essay. 26 SOA Tebo, branch Jindichv Hradec, Rodinn archiv Slavatov, Inv. Nos. 8497. See Marie Tonerov (ed.), Prvodce po rukopisnch fondech vesk republiceII.Rukopisn fondy archiv vesk republice, Praha 1998, p.188. The loss of the two volumes had already been reported by Josef Jireek, Pamti nejvyho kancle (see note 11), quoted below, p.29. Iam immensely grateful to MrsStanislava Novkov, the head of the Department of Funds and Collections, SOA Tebo, branch Jindichv Hradec, for providing me very detailed information on the preservation and structure of the individual les; see also Appendix 2 to the present essay. The second book is held in the Moravian Archives in Brno, G12Collection Cerroni, sign. Cerr II 352. The description of the manuscript including the notes as to its provenance can be found in: Mojmr vbensk, Cerroniho sbrka 13. stol.1845, Brno 1973 (Inventories and Catalogues of the SOA Brno Funds, No. 26. G 12), p.591, Inv. No. 468. 27 The National Museum Library, sign. III B 4. Collection Mikan is listed in the manuscript sign. IC 1 /18; its description is provided by Frantiek Michlek Barto, in: Soupis rukopis Nrodnho musea vPraze, Praha 1926, pp.1315, 115116. 28 The National Library of the Czech Republic, the Lobkowicz library in Prague. The two volumes of the manuscript sign.XXIII.C.48 /12 contain the Czech version of Books I, II, III andVIIIX while the eight volumes of the manuscript sign.XXIII.C.31 /18 contain eight books of the German translation. Descriptions of the manuscripts are part of: Milada Svobodov, Rukopisy ze sbrek Tome Antonna Putzlachera, Michaela Schustera adalch nelechtickch bibliol ve fondu prask lobkowiczk knihovny vNrodn knihovn esk republiky, Praha 2011, records Nos. 30 and 18. 29 Josef Liboslav Ziegler, Zprva hrabte Vilma Slavaty otom, co se vkanceli esk na hrad praskm dne 23. mje 1618 rno ped vyhozenm zokna krlovskch mstodrcch dlo apromlouvno bylo, Dobroslav I, Vol. 3, 1820, pp.53101; Jakub B.Mal, Pspvek khistorii esk sedmnctho stolet, asopis eskho museum 19, 1845, pp.190212; idem, Pbhy Jaroslava zMartinic aVilma Slavaty po jich vyhozen zokna, asopis eskho museum 24, 1850, pp.4980. 30 Josef Jireek, Dje krlovstv uherskho za panovn FerdinandaI.SvazekI.Od Leta 15261546, Vilma hrabte Slavaty zChlumu azKoumberka, vladae domu Hradeckho, pna na Hradci Jindichov, Stri, Teli, irovnici aMlnice, nejvyho ddinho enka krlovstv eskho, csav FerdinandaII.aIII.skutenho tejnho rady akomornka, ryte Zlatho rouna, Vde 1857; idem, Pamti nejvyho kancle krlovstv eskho Vilma hrabte Slavaty zChlumu aKomberka, vladae domu Hradeckho, pna na Hradci Jindichov, Stri, Teli, irovnici aMlnice, nejvyho ddinho enka krlovstv eskho, csav FerdinandaII.aIII.skutenho tejnho rady akomornka, ryte Zlatho rouna (nar.1.prosince 1572, zem. 19.ledna 1652) od L.1608 do 1619, Vol. I, 1608, 16181619, Part II, 1611, 1615, 16171619, Praha 1866 and 1868 (Star pamti djin eskch. Monumenta historiae Bohemica, II, department III, Vols. 12). 31 Vilm Slavata zChlumu aKoumberka, Pehled nboenskch djin eskch, Hanu Opoensk (ed.), Praha 1912. 32 Fridolin Machek, Defenestrace prask r.1618, esk asopis historick 14, 1908, pp.197211, 297311, 436451. 33 Pavel Skla ze Zhoe, Pavla Skly ze Zhoe Historie esk 15, Karel Tieftrunk (ed.), Praha 18651870 (Monumenta historica Bohemiae, Vol. 2); Pavel Skla ze Zhoe, Historie esk od defenestrace kBl hoe, Josef Janek (ed.), Praha 1984.

34 The survey of sources is stated by F. Machek, Defenestrace (see note 32), pp.197211; his quotation of sources is, however, devaluated by the incomplete information as to the places of their deposition. 35 The original of the report, entitled Ungefehrliche, doch wahrhafte Beschreibung, was am Montag, Erchtag und Mitwochen oder die drei Tg vor dem Fest Ascensionis mit dem kniglichen Herren Statthaltern unnd thails aus dem Mittel der H.Stende sub utraque auf dem kniglichen Prager Schloss in der behemischen Hofkanzlei sich verloffen und zugetragen hat anno 1618, is today part of the family archives of the Lobkowicz family, held in the chteau Nelahozeves. The duplicate of the report reportedly survived in the collection of transcripts of the Prague National Archives; on this, see F. Machek, Defenestrace (see note 32), p.197. 36 Ibid., p.198, where the author quotes the source without identifying it more closely. It cannot be excluded that this is an anonymous report, today deposited in SOA Tebo, branch Jindichv Hradec, box 18. Iam very grateful to Mrs Stanislava Novkov from the Jindichv Hradec archives for this information. 37 The treatise by Frantiek Mare, Das Martinicsche Geschichtswerk, Mitteilungen des Institus fr sterreichische Geschichstforschung, 1885, pp.310311, quotes the unnished duplicate of the report, held in manuscript form in the Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cod. Nr.5056. It is deposited under the title Wahrhafte und eigentliche Beschreibung alles dessen, so sich vor ind bey Heransttzung der Herren obersten Landoffizieren aus dem Prager Schlo im Jahre 1618 zugetragen, von einem, welcher allen und jeden personlich beygewohnt, aufgezeichnet worden ist, as it was also published by Josef Antonn Riegger, Archiv fr Geschichte und Statistik, insbesondere von Bhmen, II, Dresden 1793, pp.498537, and based on Putzlachers manuscript, today held in the National Library of the Czech Republic, sign.XXIII.C.5 /1, pag. 669730. Its modern edition was published in: Miroslav Toegel et al. (edd.), Documenta bohemica bellum tricennale illustrantia, II, Praha 1972, pp.4251. Other manuscripts Istate are, in the Prague National Library: the manuscript from the possession of Frantiek Martin Pelcl, later in the Dn library of Thun-Hohensteins (current sign.XIX.A.35), and manuscript sign.XVII.A.35; in the Strahov library: manuscript sign. DH I9, sign. DG III 43; in the National Museum Library: manuscripts sign.VI C 8,VI G 2,VIII A18; in the Frstenberg library at Kivoklt: manuscripts sign. Iand 14, sign. II b 3, and most probably also in SOA Litomice, the Episcopal library of Emmanuel of Waldstein: manuscript sign. B IF 87. The escape was described on the basis of museum manuscripts as well as other sources by Miloslav Volf, Jaroslav Boita zMartinic po defenestraci, Stedoesk sbornk historick 7, 1972, pp.7690. 38 F. Machek, Defenestrace (see note 32), p.201, quotes the original letter by Fabricius, today held in the Saxon State Archives (Dresden); he, however, does not identify the source in more detail. The duplicate of the report, executed by the care of Knight Jan Jenk of Bratice after the duplicate held in the Lobkowicz archives in Roudnice, is in the manuscript of the National Museum Library, sign. IV G 13 /1, under the label Bohemica I. 39 The manuscript entitled Vera et compendiosa relatio eorum, quae ante, in et post eiectionem ex fenestra cancelariae in regno Bohemiae duorum comitum Guilielmi Slavatae et Jaroslai aMartinicz, imperatoris ec regis Bohemiae Mathiae austriaci in dicto regno locum tenentium una cum secretario Philippo Fabricio ipsa vigilia ascensionis sive 23. mai Anni 1618 acciderunt is held by SOA Tebo, branch Jindichv Hradec, Rodinn archiv Slavatov, box No. 18, Inv. No. 116. 40 J. Jireek, Pamti nejvyho kancle (see note 30), Vol. 2, pp.99114; see the manuscript from the National Library of the Czech Republic, sign.XVII.B.12 on f. 19r39r. 41 Ibid., Vol. 1, pp.8194, in the presently stated manuscript held by the National Library of the Czech Republic, sign.XVII.B.12 on f.1r18r. 42 Ibid., p.9. 43 P.Martinus Santinus (c. 15771655 in Prague), P.Melchior Trevinius (c. 15531628 in Prague). For more biographical data, see Karl Fischer, Catalogus (generalis) provinciae Bohemiae (16231773) et Silesiae (17551733), Mnchen 1985 (reproduced typescript), pp.137 and 167.

reected in the reports issued by the envoys at the court, in the courtiers correspondence, the reports and correspondence of the Prague Jesuits as well as in the contemporary journalism although the historians have hitherto drawn only little from those reports, published in both written and printed newspapers. Naturally, the information provided by those who experienced the moments of mortal threat rst-hand is of extraordinary value. We can hardly expect them to be impartial but, on the other hand, their bias can be rather eloquent. The reports are highly stylised, are products of personal partiality and the lapse of time, but they echo so many features of personal characters as to serve as clues to how variously each of the participants coped with the suffered trauma. Right after the incident, during his one-year involuntary sojourn in the palace of Polyxena of Lobkowicz, Vilm Slavata wrote the rst record of what occurred between 21 and 23 May 1618, entitled Ungefehrliche, doch wahrhafte Beschreibung and addressed it to his hostess husband, the Supreme Chancellor Zdenk Popel of Lobkowicz. The effort to promptly inform the competent officials about the course of events and to also compensate the still fresh impressions by describing the traumatic experience is clearly apparent from the unsettled ow of thoughts and the curtness of expression. A brief excerpt of Slavatas report was the anonymous Concise Description of Events which Occurred in Prague on 23 May 1618 [Krtk vypsn udlost dne 23. kvtna 1618 v Praze se stalch], which slightly modies the part of the Supreme Burgrave, Adam of Sternberg. It thus seems that the writer most probably moved in the closest burgraves circles. The second direct participant of the Defenestration, Jaroslav Boita of Martinic, began recording his experiences during his refuge in Bavaria where he ed soon after his rescue and concealed escape from the country. Martinics report, entitled Wahrhafte und eigentliche Beschreibung, survived in numerous duplicates and its edition was compiled by Josef Antonn Riegger in 1793 from the manuscript which was at that time in the possession of Tom A. Putzlacher. The portrayal by Martinic is much starchier in style and is considerably self-centred; the author, after all, was not an especially good observer. A brief description of the event was also provided by the secretary of the German expedition, the university master Filip Fabricius, via his letter most probably addressed to the Secretary of the Court Chamber, Mattias Arnoldino of Clarstein. It mainly revolves around the writers own experience, and a major part of the account was employed by Pavel Skla of Zho in his History [Historie]. The complete text of Fabricius report was then copied by Knight Jan Jenk of Bratice to the manuscript which today forms part of the National Museum collections. All the above-mentioned accounts were reected by Vilm Slavata as soon as he returned to the subject after approximately two decades rst in his Czech-written report, known from the Latin translation entitled Vera et compendiosa relatio and dated 1640 and, soon afterwards, in his Historical Writings. The latter treatise mentions the May 1618 events in two places. Slavata described all the negotiations preceding the critical act in its second book, drawing from his own earlier texts. He then elaborated on the events that occurred in the course of and shortly after the Defenestration in the rst book where he, surprisingly enough, mainly employed the text by Martinic who also probably knew the account of Fabricius. The structure of the present Klementinum manuscript (sign. XVII.B.12) varies from the other surviving manuscripts of The Historical Writings to a certain extent: it begins with the depiction of the course of the Defenestration i.e. with the only excerpt from the rst book. The author then directly continues with the portrayal of the preceding negotiations and then follows the structure of the second book. Remarkable among the inserted texts is especially the Tanners Jesuit apologia. Slavata was certainly very familiar with it and considered it substantial, which is also apparent from his correspondence of February 1638. The manuscript is executed in a single hand and probably after a hardly legible model because the writers frequent mistakes were additionally corrected by someone else. And while the scrivener was most likely uent in Czech although he seemed to struggle with declining the term count he was obviously more troubled by the Italian and Latin. The inconsistency in writing the names of the Jesuits P. Martinus Santinus and P. Melchior Trevinius testies to the uncertainty of not only the writer but also the proof-reader. The Italian name of the eld surgeon Petr Thomasoni is both inscribed and corrected mistakenly in the major part of the text, even though the proof-reader additionally included the
EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 389

correct term bonesetter [barb] instead of the confusing dyer [barv] in all mentions about Thomasoni. As far as I can assume on the basis of the earlier edition, however, the latter term was most probably also used in Slavatas fair copy from Jindichv Hradec. But the Klementinum wording is not totally identical with the one of the Jindichv Hradec volume the two very often vary in terminology and word order and some words or parts of sentences were left out. The events that occurred within the connes of the Office, in the Prague Castle ditch and on the Hradschin bulwarks on 23 May 1618 have been sufficiently documented almost minute by minute. We nevertheless cannot resist mixed feelings while reading the following text. Slavata included it in his Writings only two decades after the distressing experience, mainly taking over the texts written by his partner during that period. Since the historians have only little employed the Klementinum manuscript, I nd it useful to present here the edition of the part of the text featuring the development of the Defenestration and the rescue of its leading protagonists. The description of the glints of fatal anxiety which everyone in a similar situation would inevitably experience is especially striking due to the thorough portrayal of the attire of the two main actors and mainly the very detailed picture of the luxurious hats and jewellery of which they were stripped before being ung from the window, let alone the unvoiced accusation that their adversaries thus intentionally enriched themselves. The depiction of the subsequent events then reects considerable differences in the characters of the two leading protagonists, and Slavata eventually comes out a little better from the comparison. The menials carried Slavata to the Lobkowicz palace where he somewhat recovered from the concussion, caused by a serious head injury, with the help of the bonesetter Petr Thomasoni. He then confessed to the canon of the St Vitus chapter, Jan Ctibor Kotva of Freifeld, and sent a message to his wife, informing her that she had better not even try to get to him. The source, however, does not inform us at this point about things that followed shortly after; we only know that Slavata was forced to sign an extremely unfavourable waiver and to agree to his house arrest in the Lobkowicz palace which eventually stretched to almost a year. But he immediately began recording the entire affair even despite the arduous conditions and not only provided them in writing to the supreme chancellor but also adroitly delivered them to his adversary thanks to his wifes contacts with the wife of Count Thurn. The second leading actor in the Defenestration cause, Martinic, reached the house of Polyxena of Lobkowicz unharmed, climbing up the cast ladder and getting inside through the window. He began confessing himself to the canon Kotva, but as soon as his personal confessor P. Santinus SJ arrived, he gave preference to him. Immediately afterwards, he began planning his conspiratorial escape from Prague with the help of the canon Kotva and the two Jesuits, P. Martinus Santinus and P. Melchior Trevinius. His rst prudent step was obtaining the funds necessary to accomplish his goal, and he thus authorised Kotva to withdraw 300 ducats from his writing table. It is worth noticing that Martinic at the same time totally ignored the heavily injured Slavata lying in the adjacent room, arguing that some untrustworthy persons might recognize him. He then procured for himself the poorest rags possible from the domestics, and the bonesetter Thomasoni helped him turn into a vagabond whom even his own servants could not recognize. Clad in the degrading costume, Martinic arrived at his own palace in the early evening in the company of the bonesetter, although conspiracy conned him to the attic. He immediately summoned his wife, ordering her to leave her fathers house where she had sought refuge after receiving the news about the fate of her husband and to join him without delay. He then set off on foot as far as to the White Mountain, wearing the same disguise and being accompanied by the bonesetter and a servant, and hastily left the place in a borrowed modest carriage for his own village of Tuchlovice and then via Plasy toward the Bavarian border. The future fates of the two leading actors of the Defenestration remained rmly tied to the events of the fateful 23 May, and the two certainly never forgot them. Translated by Lucie Vidmar

44 Jireeks edition of the Jindichv Hradec manuscript states dyer [barv]. 45 Avillage situated approximately 6 km from the city of Nov Straec in Central Bohemia. See Antonn ProfousJan Svoboda, Mstn jmna vechch: jejich vznik, pvodn vznam azmny, Part4, S, Praha 1957, p.394. The village was in the possession of the Martinic family of Smeno from 1611.

390 THE HISTORICAL WRITINGS OF VILM SLAVATA OF CHLUM AND KOUMBERK

Edition of Selected Documents

My preparatory works on the text for the edition departed from the grammatical rules for transcribing modern texts, as commonly employed in cataloguing modern manuscripts written in the Czech language. Several expressions in the original manuscript are given in humanist italic. The words in question are not only Latin and Italian; there are also some Czech terms which the writer wanted to emphasize. I therefore accentuate all these by italics in the text below. Wrongly recorded terms are left in the same form as in the original, but are accompanied by a notice indicating the mistake: exclamation mark in square brackets [!]. The words, syllables and letters added by the proof-reader are stated in simple slashed brackets: //, the words and

syllables crossed-out by the proof-reader are in double slashed brackets: ////. The comparison of the present version with the earlier edition of the text, executed by Jireek on the basis of the original Jindichv Hradec manuscript, exposed a considerable number of divergences between the two versions. Making them completely available in the footnotes would disproportionately burden the text to such an extent that it would make it chaotic and non-transparent. I thus decided to only graphically emphasize the divergences between the two versions in bold. Parts of the text which were left out from the Klementinum manuscript but are stated in Jireeks edition are in bold in square brackets: [].

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 391

National Library of the Czech Republic, manuscript sign. XVII.B.12

F. 1r
Jak se to vyhozen z okna dlo, co se pi tom sbhlo. Pedn nejni divu, e v Svat msk i, ve vech krlovstvch, knetstvch, zemch, v celm kesanstvu, tak mezi Turky a Tatary, i do kterchkoliv mst se to doneslo a k vdomosti pilo, za zl to ujali a za neslun a pokuty hodn bti soudili a vykldali, e osoby eskho nrodu z vych 2 stavv, panskho a rytskho, tak hanebnho za pamti lidsk neslchanho a v dnch kronikch svta tohoto se nenachzejcho skutku [se] dopustili a dva J. M. Csae jakoto krle eskho, vrchnosti sv nejmilostivj, pny mstodrc a nejvy ouednky zemsk krlovstv eskho z okna ukrutn do hlubokho pkopu vyhoditi se opovili. Co jsou v tom vysoce vsadnm mst, kter od starodvna bylo, i jet a posava pedn Tribunal Justitiae, z an a Pavel Kapl, moc shli a popade jej za ob ruce tuze dreli a akoliv se oba hrabata nadli, e je z kancele ven ze dve snad do njakho arestu povedou, ale oni kicce: Nyn se k tmto nboenstv naeho neptelm opravdov zachovme, vedli sou pedce hrab z Martinic pmo k oknu ji otevenmu, z eho on snadno znamenaje spsob blzk smrti sv, hlasit jest [z] volal: I ponvad tu pro Boha, vru jeho svatou katolickou a J. M. Csae, vrchnost na nejmilostivj, umti mm, tedy rd vecko trpliv snsti a podstoupiti chci, jen za propjen mn brzy zpovdlnka mho, tak abych se mu nejprve z hchv mch vyznal, pro milosrdenstv Bo velice dm. Ale mnoz ptomn obyvatelov, zvlt z vych stavv, nechtve jeho dosti vzlt tak hrub tkho tla, skoro nic neukodil. Jako pak od nkterch dobrch a hodnovrnch pobonch lid to za jist praveno a vyznno bylo, e jsou prv tehd, jdouce z Starho Msta Praskho pes velik most, s processi zptkem zase do kostela, slove Matky Bo pod etzem v Menm Mst Praskm, pi tom ponejprve z okna kancelskho vyhozenm Pannu v povt se vznejc, Nejblahoslavenj Pannu Marii rodiku Bo, kterak jest ona, jakoto nejpednj jeho Patrona, jej v tom pdu na svm roztaenm a jemu podloenm plti v povt zdrovati a tak i na zem tm leheji ne tak padnouti, jako sednouti nechati, a tak od jist prv tu ptomn smrti vysvobodce pi ivobyt a dobrm zdrav dobrotiv zachovati rila, dobe vidli. Cokoliv sice on sm hrab z Martinic tak dokonale nevdl, vak v tom se dobe pamatujce, [e] ihned vrchnosti jich, tak skrze od dnho d, prvo a spravedlnost a poestnost milujcho, nikd jim schvleno nebylo, nbr pokad pvodov tch hanebnch skutkv a vdcov ukrutnch mordv vedle prva a spravedlivosti nleit ztrestni bejvali. Ale aby osoby stavv Krlovstv eskho, obzvlt pak z stavu panskho a rytskho, takovch vraedlnch skutkv nad osobami z stavu panskho a rytskho J. M. Csae krlovskmi mstodrcmi a nejvymi ouednky zemskmi tho Krlovstv eskho, i k tomu vlastnmi svmi krevnmi ptely, bratry, strejci a ujci tak vztekle se dopustiti mli, toho se dn podobn pklad nenachz. A tak slun ti echov, kte se toho dopustili, pi vech jinch nrodch v zlou povst jsou veli a skrze n tak i jin nevinn echov t zl povsti u mnohch nevinn a ouastna bti museli. A nejni divu, e jemu hrabti z Turnu, jakoto pednmu vdci takov hanebnosti to zl proheen jeho vytali a ped oi kladli. Ta pak ohavn ukrutnost tch nekatolickch

F. 2v
povoliti, zase mu to v odpov dali: Ale prv hned tob sem jet ty elmovsk jezovity pivedeme! Nad m hrab z Martinic, e zpovdlnka nikoliv obdreti nemohl, velmi se zarmoutive, nepominul jest ihned sob sm v srdci svm Attritionem et Contri//t//tionem formirovati a hchv svch srden eleti, takto se pobon modliti JESU FILI DEI VIVI, miserere mei, Mater Dei, memento mei, Jei synu Boha ivho, smiluj se nade mnou, Matko Bo pamatuj na mne. V tom pak vej doten osoby hrabte z Martinic od zem pozdvihly a jej v ernm kanavaovm tupltykytou poditm plti a s raprem a tulichem, vak bez klobouku (kterto s pknou zlatou, drahm kamenm, ve diamanty a rubny, ozdobenou rou, nkdo jemu z ruky mocn vytrhl) po hlav z okna ven do hlubiny zmeckho pkopu hanebn jsou vyhodily a kdy on tam dol letce ustavin vdycky nejsvtj jmna JESUS MARIA po nkolikrte pod jedno za druhm siln vzval, tak e musel aneb lehce jest na zem upadl, rovn jakoby se

F. 1v
slove Krlovsk kancel esk, jest, tmto hanebnm zpsobem uinili, po svm a obrnm hrub prudkm (beze v uctivosti [a] etrnosti) vak [!] tu ptomnm J. M. Csae jakoto krle eskho pnm mstodrcm domlouvn a pi tom svrchu psanch dvouch hrabat zlobivm dotkn, anobr pespli [vetenm,] bezprvnm a nespravedlivm pro stlou vrnost [je]jich na smrt odsuzovn, akoliv jsou hrabata zase jim na to ze v stdmosti sv nleitou odpov dvali, to ve co se koliv zlho jim nevinnm od nich tak jzliv pitalo, z sebe podstatn a zgruntu pravdy odvozovali, i tak proti tomu jich nepodnmu a prv barbarskmu (a nepi vzteklmu) processu, dostaten protestrovali. Vak v tom ukrutnm zazlen svm na dn d a prvo nic dbti, ani pravd a spravedlivosti dnho msta dti nechtjc, s hroznou furi nkter osoby z vych stavv sami se do nadepsanch dvouch hrabat

F. 3v
jak jen z okna vystren do povt se dostal, prv v tom astm svatch jmen JESUS MARIA hlasit vzvn, kdy jest ku Pnu Bohu silnou nadji ml, e tu ji dvno sob vinovanou muedlnickou korunu zajist tu ji doshne, pilo mu ped oi, jakoby se to nejpknj nebe otevelo a jej do sebe mezi Svat vyvolen k vn radosti pijti chtlo. Jako pak i z tch, kte jsou tho hrabte z Martinic z okna vyhazovali, jedna osoba stavu panskho (toti pan Voldich ze Vchynic) slyce, jak jest se horliv on pod milosrdnou ochranu Blahoslaven Panny Marie porouel, tyto rouhav slova promluvil: Uhldme, zdali mu co jeho Marijia spome, a kdy to sm patrn z okna spatil, e t hrab z Martinic iv a zdrv dole na zemi sedl, tehdy takto propovdl: Psahm Bohu, e jest mu Jeho Marijia spomohla. A akoliv v kronice esk se nachz, e nkdy chasa obecn zbouive se v Mstech Praskch, vceji ne jednou many radn osoby z rathouzu z oken na plac a rynek vyhzeli a tam rozlinmi svmi zbranmi

F. 4v
obyvatelv z vych dvouch stavv krlovstv eskho tak hrub se rozmohla, e jsou oni jine nechtli, ne prv dotenho zlho pkladu tehdej bouliv hlzy [!] prask zouplna ve vem nsledovati. Neb jak oni na tom nepestali, e jsou nkter osoby radn z oken rathouzu na plac vyhzeli, ale i vn dole na zemi jet je pedce velijakmi zbranmi svmi a k smrti dobili, tak t podobn tito, vida, e hrab z Martinic pi tom t zlm pdu na svm zdrav dn kody nevzal, nicmn nepli mu dalho ivota, nbr pedce ho docela usmrtiti usilovali a na nj ukrutn z runic stleli. Hrab Slavata pak vdve, jak se s hrabtem z Martinic, vrnm ptelem a milm tovaryem jeho, zachzelo, z toho snadno se domejleje, e ho tolik potk, nic jinho k tomu neekl, ne toliko spjave ruce vzhru pro Pna Boha a jeho Svat milosrdenstv dal za dovolen sob toho, aby se prve z hch svch zpovdati mohl, potom jakoukoliv smrt jemu uiniti chtj, e ji mile snsti chce, ale mnoz z nich kieli:

F. 2r
nestoudn dali a na n outok nsiln uinili. Nejprve pak na hrab z Martinic tyi osoby z stavu panskho a jedna z rytskho, toti Vilm Star z Lobkovic, Albrecht [ze] Smiic, Voldich ze Vchynic, Jan Litvn

F. 3r
posadil, tak e mu z obzvltn Pna Boha naeho, skrze nejplatnj Blahoslaven Panny Marie pmluvu astn obdren milostiv ochrany, ten pehrozn pd na zdrav jeho,

F. 4r
usmrtili [azamordovali]. Vak i to jak od tehdej Nejmilostivj

392 THE HISTORICAL WRITINGS OF VILM SLAVATA OF CHLUM AND KOUMBERK

F. 5r
Nechceme my nyn ty elmovsk jesovity sem uvsti, dosti si se jim prve zpovdal. A tak ty osoby, kter jsou nejprve hrabte z Martinic vyhodily, jim to Hendrych Mathes z Turnu, stoje za hrab Slavatou, tyto nmeck slova ekl: Edle Herrn, da habt ihr [den] andern, Vzctn pni, tuto mte druhho. Potom jsou t hrab Slavatu popadli a jej od zem vyzdvihe s pltm a raprem tak z tho okna po hlav do pkopu vyhodili. Kter pi vyzdvien v okn, znamenaje se svatm Kem, v prsy sv se udeil a skrouen ekl: DEUS propitius esto mihi pecatori. Boe bu milostiv mn hnmu. A kdy se pravou rukou zachytil a drobet tho okna drel, tu jest od jednoho z nich hrukou a nebolito knopkem [!] od tulichu v lnky prstv svch nemlo stluen byl a tak neltostiv pedce dol vyhozen. Klobouk jeho, na nm pkn muk s zlatmi remi diamanty obsazenmi byl, v kanceli zstal, etz pak jeho zlat i pi nm tak pkn zlat kek ernm melcem

F. 6r
spti a tebas tu jak v Bo, tak i blinho svho slub a lsce spasitedln ivot svj dokonati. Vak obvajce se, kdyby vstal a dol el, e by lid z oken odevad hledc jej spatujce, tm vce jet po jeho ivot dychtli a na nj stleli. Proto naschvle [se] mnohem mdlejm bti, neli jest byl, stavl a jakoby ji prv k smrti pracoval, se v moc jest sebou od zem vyhodil a tak se do toho pkopu i s pltm, raprem a tulichem dol svalil a velmi tce a k hrabti Slavatovi koulel. Tu se potom rukami siln na zemi zadrave u nho zastavil, kter[m]to prudkm se vyhozenm a tak daleko dolv koulenm od rapru a tulichu hrub se potlouke, na levm boku sob jest velikou modinu krv podelou s nemalou bolest spsobil. Vak jakkoliv t hrab z Martinic, nedave sob v t milosrdn lsce niemu peketi, beze veho strachu jest se vedle dotenho hrabte Slavaty, jakoto starodvnho pana ujce, vagra, kmotra a bratra svho, vdycky dvrn a

ven z okna kal, zase pobon opakoval, toti: DEUS esto mihi propitius peccatori, applicirujc tch 5 slov ku pti ranm Krista Pna. Mezitm jsou nkte lid, na vtm dle pant sluebnci a elednov (mezi nimito tak lesn myslivci a hejduci byli) z velikho palce okolo navalili [!] nad tm pkopem, v nm ti dva nbon pni jeden sedl a druh mizern leel, rychle s chvtnm beli a jak ti z hry a z oken palce dol hledc pni tuze volali a kieli: Stlejte na [je]jich ki a zabte je do konce, tak ihned nkolik ran pod z rozlinch runic z oboj strany, jak z oken palc, tak z tch naproti valm, dol na ty oba pny se stalo, z nich dv na hrab z Martinic pily, jedna blzko hlavy po lev stran skrze obojek v spsob okru sbran a druh nad levm ramenem skrze kanavaov pl a prav pod nm skrze piccatelie pi ern aksamitov suknice naskrze proly a v tom kadm kusu, jak v obojku tak i v plti a v suknice

maznm asi za tejden t rny, hned od t doby vdycky na tom mst a dosava, bl znamen zetedln se spatuje. Kdy jest asto psan hrab z Martinic tu rnu namle jen jako njak utpnut ucejtil a pedce voln ramenem hejbal, hned jest sm jako nad tm ustrnul, tomu boskmu na sv hn osob patrnmu zzraku, e jemu jak ten hrozn z tak vysoka do t hlubiny prudkej pd, tak i to vechno stlen a jedna mal uctn rna skoro nic neukodila a na zdrav jeho nic neublily, velice se podivil. Proe mysl horlivou ku Pnu Bohu vzdychajc srden takto zvolal: // Quae// Optime [!] Deus ita ne me inoccisibilem et quasi immortalem facis ! Kdy jsou k tm oboum pnm nkte vrn sluebnci jejich skrze zadn nebolito dolej pod adem nejvyho purgkrabstv praskho zmeckou branou dolv do pkopu li, tehdy ku pekce toho nemekali jsou ihned protivnci jich tak na n z obouchstrannch oken hru

F. 8v F. 7v
po dvouch dosti velikch dr//ch// uinily, vak dle skrze kabt karmaznov do konce nepily a tlu jeho nic nepokodily, jak toho nad dotench obojku, suknice a plti naschvle pro pamtku piln schovanch, patrn znamen dosava zstvaj a zjevn ukazuj, e ty ob strany [!] z velkch a silnch dlouhch runic s hrubejmi opravdovejmi kulkami (a jak zprvy dochzely) od tho Hendricha Matesa z Turnu myslivce a hejduka uinn byly. Kterto vak obouch ran hrab z Martinic (mimo sam jich uslyen) jest neucejtil, ani o nich nic nevdl, a po mnoha nedlch a v tch atech svch nhodou je spatil. Zatm pak s tm hrabtem Slavatou v pkop sedce Pnu Bohu se vn modlil. V tom pila opt rna z njak dlouh runice upmo na hrab z Martinic a projdouce kulka [nejprve] naskrze pl s udlnm v nm dosti velik dry, [trela ho] v lev rameno a na rukv jen karmazn nco mlo natrhlo, vak jej ani podvku pltnnou ani koile nepotrhala. Nicmn pedce to rameno (bez obzvltn kody) drobet zranila, b stleti a tm nkolik jich zptkem zase odehnali, nepestali jsou tolik nkte z oken vyhledajc pni hlasem na sv sluebnky a jin lidi, kte proti nim [a] na valch s runicemi a jinmi zbranmi pohotov stli, tuze kieti: I bte do pkopu pedce k nim dolv a ji jednou dobite [a usmrte] je ! Nade je jeden [znich] myslivec aneb hejduk zase s kikem odpovdl: Ej ert v, kde jest dol cesta. J psahm Bohu, e nevm jak a hned nemohu k nim dolv nijak pijti. V tom kiku byve tu pan sekret Filip Fabricius, kter ihned po tch dvouch hrabatech z tho okna do tho pkopu vyhozen a na tle svm nejsa kodn uraen, vida, e jest hrab z Martinic ji prostelen a obvaje se tak podobn rny, tie jest od zem vyvstal i sm z toho pkopu bez plt a klobouku, upmo k pvozu bel. Na cest pak hned blzko zadn brny zmeck nahodil se jeden dobr znm jeho, kter mu rd vlastnho svho plt a klobouku zapjil. I dave se pes vodu, nebolito eku Vltavu peplaviti, do domu svho v Starm Mst

F. 5v
ozdoben z hrdla jeho pi tm z okna vyhozen strhli a tak roztren v rukch svch zachovali. T hrab Slavata pak, kdy tak z okna vyhozen ji dol letl, prv v tom pdu hrub o jednu kamennou msu dolejho okna hlavou zavadive, sob jest kodliv t hlavu svou a do kosti hluboko prorazil a tak na zem levm bokem, hlavou pak a tv svou na kmen tce pade, hned od toho msta beze veho se zastaven pedce dle a do hlubiny pkopu mizern se dol koulel. Kterto veje potom naschvle zmena byve, nalo se, e od okna a dol na zem mc pes 28 loket a od toho msta prvnho padnut pedce a do hlubiny tho pkopu, kde jest se t hrab Slavata koulel a tam polomrtv leel, jet pes 32 lokte, ve praskch, vyn. Z t rny na hlav hrabte Slavaty krev do st mu tekla, tak e ponal hrab chroptti a se dusiti. Pan hrab z Martinic, sed na tom mst, kde padl a slye to tk hrabte Slavaty chroptti a se dusiti, milosrdnou lskou hnut [jsa], resolviroval se jemu jakpakkoliv ku pomoci pi

F. 6v
velice milho, obzvlt pak toho muedlnictv vrnho tovarye, na zem posadil a hned jemu hlavu v plti jeho hrub zavinutou, pkn rozvinouce ven vyndal, kterto [!] po lev stran ji otekla a v tvi i na oku (kterho ani otevti nemohl) hrub modr a krv podbhl, svrchu pak na lebce a do kosti hluboko proraena byla. Co uhldaje hrab z Martinic, ne bez velikho utrpen a politovn, vyave z kapsy sv facelet, nm jest pnu tu krev, kter z t rny hlavy jeho dolu a do st prudce tekla a pna dusila, piln vudy odtral a mve u sob na tm facatelu [!] svm stbrnou malou apatiku s rozlinmi silnmi balsmy, nebolito mastmi pivzanou, z n jest hbit lakov balsm vyndal a nm pna ji v mdlobch lecho pod nosem i na idovinch mazal a tak s pomoc Pna Boha jej zase vzksil a od blzkho zaduen astn vysvobodil i tak mile napomnal, aby pn to tk souen trpliv snel a modlce se s nm Pnu Bohu dui porouel. Co jest hned uinil a tu pedelou svou modlitbu,

F. 9r F. 8r
Praskm lecho pospil, kde se mlo zastavive ihned sob landkoho zjednal. Vak nechtl jest tu tak e z t rny jedna aneb [nejvce] dv krpje krve vyly a pro zhojen

F. 7r
kterou jest prve hned pi vyhozen se EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 393

hned sob na vz sednouti, a tak zjevn skrze msto jeti, ale radji pedce pky a do vsi N. pl mle od Prahy pky el a landkomu za sebou jeti kzal. Potom pak v t vsi hbit na vz vsedl a upmo do Vdn odjel i po vystn na t cest rozdlnch nepleitost a nebezpeenstv s pomoci Bo astn do Vdn pijel a tam o tch vcech vech pbzch praskch J. M. Csai i jinm pnm rozprvl. Ale hrab z Martinic oekvaje tu pedce v pkop kadho tm okamen na sebe jak z runice tak iavl, neb kordem smrtedln rny, aneb poslednho strachu ji sob sm (z velik nadje obdren t muedlnick palmy) dostiv vinoval, aby jen brzy opravdov trefen i bez velikho a prodlouilho trpen do konce zabit byl, vdyckny jest stle dui svou Jeho Svat Bosk Milosti horliv porouel, tmito asto openmi krtkmi modlitbami: In manus tuas Domine commendo Sp/iri/ tum me/um/.

pro ustavin [na n]stlen pedce z vrn sluebnosti a upmn lsky tam do hlubiny toho pkopu astn beze kody k nim pili. Jeto sice dnej ani jedinkej ze vech neptel jich, kte by jim dle na zdrav koditi chtli (bezpochyby z obzvltnho zen a opatrovn Boho) k nim tak dolv nidnejm vymylenm spsobem pijti nemohli. V tom jest hrab z Martinic, spative tu tak mnoho dobrch lid, e hrab [jimi dobe opaten aod nich snadno zpkopu vyneen bti me, sm od sebe jest vyvstal anapomenouc je, aby hrab Slavatu, hrub] milho pana bratra a tovarye jeho jakoto neduivho a vt pomoci potebujcho neopoutli i tak s nm se rozehnave, od nho jest odeel. A akoliv sice od toho prvnho po vyhozen z okna pdu svho do pkopu na zem dnho jest na tle kodlivho ourazu nevzal, vak ponvad jest potom teprva tm dobrovolnm, dle se do hlubiny toho pkopu k hrabti Slavatovi pro spo

hrab z Martinic z toho hlubokho pkopu nahoru k domu pan Polyxeny Lobkovsk, rozen z Perntejna, nejvy pan kanclov Krlovstv eskho a ji knn z Lobkovic piel, tu jest uhldal jeden velk (bez pochyby z Jej Milosti nazen) oknem dol a na zem sputn ebk a hned po nm s dobrou nadepsanho pana Kotvy pomoc nahoru lezl a skrze to spodn okno do tho domu beze kody piel. Neb akoli mezi tm vdy pedce rebelt neptel stojce z druh strany proti tomu domu na valch hrozn stleli a zvlt jeden z dlouh runice namiv na hrab z Martinic, prv kdy jest po ebce nahoru //do horu// do okna lezl, tikrte pod vytiskl a tak snadno, kdyby obzvltn ochrany Bo nebylo, jednou ranou tho hrab z Martinic i za nm pana Kotvu oba spolu treti a z toho ebka dol sraziti mohl. Vak mocnm Boskm zenm pokad jemu t runice zklamala a nikdy dn ohe vydati [akulku vysteliti] nechtla. Potom hrab z Martinic

F. 12r
nemocnm dlal, jakoby hned v nkter hodin ivot svj dokonati ml. Vak jednomu dobrmu katolickmu lovku Petrovi Thomasovi [!], zemskmu chirurgo pedse jest, kde ho co bol, vyjevil a ty sv jak v botcch a na stehnch voden, tak i tu na levm ramenu malou ranku svou ukzal i njakm olejem pomazati dal. A ponvad jest asto psan hrab z Martinic ji toho asu v tom tak hroznm rumoru, potupen a potluen, prva a spravedlnosti pravm podvizen (!) a dokonalm zbouen, neposti[h]ly cel Prahy, ale hned pod v esk zem (neb jsou tehd tu v Praze skoro vichni obyvatel celho krlovstv eskho, vzlt nekatolitt pod oboj, pi tom nepodnm sjezdu svm byli a lid vlen jak prv tejn, tak ji i zjevn verbovali a najmali) svm dle v Praze aneb kdekoliv v zemi esk zstnm [i] tudy zajist nsledujc nsilnou smrt svou nic ku vce k slub sv a J. M. Csai, vrchnosti sv nejmilostivj, ani k dobrmu vlasti sv mil hrub neastn prospti a pomoci nemohl. Proto jest se ve jmno Pna Boha svho, nepoch/ybn/

F. 9v
Redemisti me Domine DEUS veritatis. T MARIA, mater gratiae, Mater misericordiae, Tu nos ab hoste protege et hora mortis suscipe. Co podobn t hrab Slavata oekvaje, zdali tak na nj stel, jest uinil a Pnu Bohu se tmi pedelmi slovy svmi pobon modlil. V tom jest ho hrab z Martinic nepomenul, pokud me, aby vstanouce spolu s nm z toho msta odeli a salvrovati se hledli. Ale on velice mdlej to dal za odpov: Akoliv rukami a nohami sice hejbati me, vak majce hlavu hrab potluenou a zrannou, e mu nejni mon ji pozdvihnouti a z toho msta se hnouti. Zatm pak mnoz protivnci jich radujce se, nkterm osobm, kter tak potkali, tyto slova mluvili: Ji ty dva mrtv tam le! Psi umrl nebudou vce kousati. Ale nezdailo se jim, tak jako t obecn chase, aby ti pni hned po jejich vli usmrceni byli, nbr oba dva i s tetm panem sekretem samou pedivnou pomoc Bo ivi zstali a potom z moci tch neptel svch do konce vysvobozeni byli.

F. 10v
moen jemu od jist (skrze zaduen) smrti prudkm svalenm a tak nejvce raprem a tulichem se potluenm v bocch a na stehnech drobet sob ublil a nemoha pro bolest sm od sebe a na tak pkrej vrch dobe jti, tehdy jest se jednomu vrnmu sluebnku svmu za ruku vsti dal. A kdy jest mezi jinmi tak ji tu v pkop od velebnho pana Jana Ctibora Kotvu z Freifeldu, prothonotarium apostolicum a hlavnho kostela Sv. Vta na Hrad praskm kanovnka (kter nedvno ped tm u tho hrabte z Martinic dkanem Smetanskm a celho kraje slnskho byl a potom probotem litomickm uinn, jemu se tak t hrab z Martinic, kdy na panstv svm Smeanskm bydlel, nkdy zpovdal) k sob na schvln jdoucho spatil, a hned jest obejmouce ho s nemalou radost takto nahlas promluvil: Ejhle milosrdn Pn Bh r mn tuto zpovdlnka odslati, vtejte a zdrvi bute, mj vinovan a velice milej pane Kotvo. Kterto vzhlede na nj slzavma oima, zase pkn podkoval a pi tom volnost svou k slub jeho [zakazoval, ism ho tak tomu vrnmu sluebnkovi jeho]

F. 11v
v dotenm (!) dom, slove Pertejnskm, do zadn komory eledn veel a tu hned kleknouce poal se tmu panu preltovi Kotvovi zpovdati. e tak prv v tom mimo nadji (bezpochyby i z obzvltnho zen Boho) mnohctihodn Pater Martinus Santinus Soc. JESU ordinrn zpovdlnk jeho k nmu piel do t komory, jak ho hrab z Martinic spatil, ihned s pknou svou panu Kotvovi uinnou omluvou a s dobrm jeho spokojenm znova se tmu Patri Sant[ino] skrouen zpovdal a po pijat absoluti nkter modlitby vy//k//kave, na jedno prost eledn loe se poloil, ne tak proto, jakoby tak hrub neduiv jsouce niakho (!) odpoinut poteboval, jako radji a vce proto, kdyby kdo tak k nmu do komory piel, aby ho kad vidouce tak leeti za mnohem nemocnjho i k smrti nebezpenjho ml a drel, neli jest v skutku byl. Jako pak, kdy jsou k nmu rozdln potom osoby pod spsobem navtven jeho pily, tehdy jest se jim (zvlt tm, kter jest vce za kodliv pehe neli za upivn (!) ptely sv poznal, akoliv [jest sice] takovch nemnoho k sob poutti dal) tak hrub se

F. 12v
z vnuknut jeho Svatho, //pro// salvirovati, tak tu pedivn a zzran zachovalho zdravho ivota svho k dalm Pna Boha a choti jeho [crkve] svat katolick, t J. M. Csae [a] krle a pna svho i celho slavnho domu Rakouskho, vrnm a platnejm slubm tak nakonec resolviroval, aby hned toho jet dne z Prahy ven vyjel [a] tak furiae crudeli, nebolito vzteklosti a ukrutnosti neptel crkve svat zhy ustoupil. Vak v tom jest se sice dnmu (krom mlo nkterm dvrnjm ptelm a sluebnkm svm domcm) nesvil, ale v slun tejnosti dle jest sob nadepsanmu zemskmu barb//v//i Petrovi Thomasovi [!] netoliko bradu nzko osthati a runickm prachem smoenm oerniti, ale i tv drobet pokleti, k tomu t jaksi niemn a star aty, dave je sob od rozdlnch osob zeldky zadn v tm dom sem i tam po kusch koupiti, na sebe jest oblkl a pro penze jest poslal svrchu jmenovanho pana Kotvu s kli od schreibtische do domu svho, kter vyave 300 duktv jemu jest je

F. 10r
Jako pak poslal jest brzy Pn Bh tm dvoum pnm nkolik vrnch sluebnk jich, i nkte jin dob a poctiv lidi ku pomoci, ktekoliv a [!] ne bez velikho strachu

F. 11r
vsti pomhal. Jak jest pak doten

394 THE HISTORICAL WRITINGS OF VILM SLAVATA OF CHLUM AND KOUMBERK

pinesl a odvedl. Mezitm pedpsan vrn sluebnci hrabt Slavaty, i nkte jin dob lidi nad pnem ltost majce, v tom pkop

pitom vak ustavin Pnu Bohu se k ochran du i tl svch pobonmi modlitbami svejmi horliv poroueli. Tak zase, kdy jsou o jich zptkem odtaen zvdli, z toho se nemlo potili a doten knn

a tovaryem (mimo to o [!] jsou sice sob po sluebncch svch vzkazovali) jet dle a vce nco mluvil a mile [se] rozehnval: vak vidve pi pnu nkter osoby nemleliv, kterm se on v tom dviti nesmj[ce], znti dti nechtl, musel jest z poteby (a nerad) pedce spn projti. A jak jest z t svtnice,

obleenho a na tvi poklenho, pna svho vlastnho nepoznave tam pustiti nechtl, a po dlouhm peovn, sotva jest se tmu barb//v//i na to, aby tak s nm jeho sluebnka a v barb//v//stv uedlnka tam vjti nechal, pknmi slovy namluviti a naprositi dal, e jest teprva tak pna svho neznmho do domu vpustil. A vejdouce tam oba, hned jest hrab z Martinic naped po zadnch velikch schodech

F. 13r
vidouce, e pnu sammu od sebe vstti a odtud jinam jti, ani po ebce do okna lzti (jako hrab z Martinic uinil) nikoliv mon nen, nemekali jsou pkn pna od zem vyzdvihnouti a tm pkopem okolo zjevn pedce skrze vej dotenou [zadn] brnu zmeckou nahoru pmo do dom knny z Lobkovic a do eledn svtnice (prv pi t komoe tak eledn, v kterej milej a vrnej tovary a ptel jeho hrab z Martinic jet leel) vnsti a tu jsou pana hrab mdlho na njak tam ustlan modraci poloili. Ten pak zemsk barb//v// Petr Thomaso//vi// [!] uznave toho velikou potebu bti, jest neprodlen tmu hrabti Slavatovi ilou krev pustil, nkter k posilnn [i] tranky dval pti a obzvlt tu na hlav jeho rnu obvazoval, i sice jak se mu za nejlep vidlo pna hojil a opatil. Kterto hrab Slavata drobet okave nepominul jest t vej dotknutmu panu kanovnku Kotvovi (neb o panu Paterovi Santinovi, e vedle svtnice v komoe u hrabte z Martinic jest, tehd nic nevdl) skrouen se zpovdati i na to pobon se Pnu Bohu modliti.

F. 14r
za tu jej moudrou a dobrotivou, prv mateskou ochranu velice hrub dkovali. A akoliv tak jsou tch obou hrabat ob pan manelky urozen pan, pan Lucia Otilia Slavatov, rozen z Hradce a na Hradci a pan Maria Eusebia z Martinic, rozen z ternbergku, po dovdn se toho pnv manelv svch hroznho pdu a velijakho pedce trvajcho velikho smrti jich nebezpeenstv, chtly jsou r//d//dy k nim hned na Hrad Prask pijti, [apovinn] tam je sob manelsky opatrovati. Ale ponvad se to jim nijak dobe treti nemohlo, ani od nich samch, pnv manelv jich obouch k tomu dnm spsobem povoliti [se] nechtlo, proto aby tudy od nich samch, v kterm mst zstvaj, hned tak brzy proneeno [a] vyjeveno nebylo, tehdy kad dobr a upmn lsky manelsk povdom lovk sm pi sob zdrav souditi me, jakou jsou pehrozn velikou alost ty ob pan v srdci jich tehd snely, kdy jsou proti dostiv vli sv ku pnm manelm svm nejmilejm v tom jich tkm a nebezpenm

F. 15r
na palac (!) domu tohoto piel, spative tu vn dva mnohoctihodn Patres Soc. JESU toti, Patrem Melchiorem Trevinnium a Patrem Martinum Santin[um], kdy jest prv mimo n el, nemohl se zdreti, aby je tak z prosta minouti ml, nbr z obzvltn sv k nim vdycky majc lsky jednoho z nich loktem ruky sv drobet uhodil a tm vzltnm [!] slovkem a Dio jest jim valeditiroval. Potom pak z tho domu hrab z Martinic, skzave dotenmu Petro Thomasovi [!], barb//v//i zemskmu drobet ped sebou jti, pedce jest asi dvadceti kroejv za nm ulic tou a tak vdy dle skrze cel Hrad Prask a vechny brny zmeck i rozdln ji pi nich vude osaeno varty (nebyvi nikdy od dnho poznn) astn a na Hradany proel. Tu rozmejlejce se, zdali by tak pedce beze veho pan manelkou svou se rozehnati dle jti i potom docela odejti ml, pilo mu na pam, neb na mysl, e jest Kristus Pn [aspasitel n], vstave z mrtvch, hned se nejblahoslavenj Pann Marii rodice Bo sv k obzvltnmu jejmu poten mile ukzal. A proto tak jest se na

F. 16r
nahoru a pod krovy bel a dotenho Petra barb//v//e pro pan manelku svou do jejho pokoje nebolito fraucimoru (nevdouce o tom, e doma nejn) poslal. A kdy jest od nho zprvu vzal, e pan Adam star ze ternbergku nejvy purgkrab prask, vlastn pan otec jej, jak jest o tom hanebnm hrabte z Martinic, zet a syna svho velice milho z okna vyhozen dokonale zvdl, hned jest pro tu pan manelku jeho, jakoto dceru svou hrub milou s vozem a komi, tak aby ku pnu spn pijela a pn j nesmrn zarmoucenou tm lpe u sebe titi mohl, naschvln odeslal a ona e hned ku panu otci svmu poslun jela a tam zstvala, tehdy jest se tho Petra Thomaso//i//ni dodal, aby on spn do domu tho nejvyho pana purgkrabho seel, tam pan hrabince z Martinic v tejnosti poeptal, e ji pan manel jej v dom svm dkuje Pnu Bohu, iv a zdrav jsouce, daje ji, aby chceli ivho [ho] vidti, neprodlen k nmu potichu pijela ! Co jest ihned rda uinila a jen sama druh pes Hradansk plac pospc k nmu jest dom jen upmo pod krovy pila.

F. 13v
V tom pak jest nenadle jedna siln troppa osob z vych stavv nekatolickch pod oboj spolu [s] sluebnky a eldkou jich, ve na konch, ped t knny z Lobkovic dm s nemalm hurtem pijely na konch, z nichto Hendrich Mates z Turnu a jin pedn toho pozdvien a skutku ohavnho pvodov hned jsou upmo nahoru do knnho pokoje beli a tu knn zstrany tch obouch hrabat velmi tuze domlouvali, ptajce se na n, kde by se zdrovali a pi tom dajce, ponvad nepochybuj, e kdekoliv v dom jejm ukryti jsou, proto aby jim hned vydni byli. Kterto dobr knna umla jest srdnatou a rozumnou odpovd svou [je] pkn z tho domu svho odbti, a hned zptkem zase vypraviti. Kdy jsou pak hrab Slavata a hrab z Martinic o pchodu t troppi k domu a [k] vyhledvn k smrti osob jich zvdli, jak sou se slun toho nemlo ulekli,

F. 14v
spsobu postavenm nijak pijti nesmly a je uhldati nemohly. Proto vak pedce nepominuly jsou, jak nejlpe mohly, jim tejn s vrnm svm na n manelskm spomnnm a vzkazovnm velijak posilnn a lkastv odslati, kterho jsou vak t pni manel jich, jsouce bez toho sice od Pna Boha mnohem vce posilnni, namle uvali. Nbr hrab z Martinic dle sv uinn Resoluti pkn se s dobrodinc svou, knnou z Lobkovic rozehnave, ve jmno Bo okolo sedm hodiny nmeck k veern, jet v ble-svtlm dni, vyel jest tak kared pevleen z t eledn komory a vejdouce do setnice, v n jest hrab Slavata zrann a tce nemocn leel, a by hned tu byl hrub rd s pnem, jakoto svm dvnm dvrnm a nejmilejm pnem ujcem, vagkrem, bratrem

F. 15v
tom ustanovil a pes hradansk plac upmo k domu svmu el: vak do nho pednmi vraty vjti nechtl, ne pedce vedle nho tou malou ulikou okolo jdouce, z n potom zadnmi vraty do tho domu svho vjti chtce, nad dotenho ped sebou jdoucho barb//v//e Petra Thomasoni jest zvolal a jemu ten oumysl svj vyjevce ekl, e se k pan manelky sv jen meliko zastaviti a j zzrak Bo na sob, e pedivn iv a zdrav zstv, ukzati chce, proto aby na vrata zatloukl. Kdy jest pak nkolikrte na n tloukl, po dosti dlouh chvli pijdouce vrtnej jen mlo drobet vrata otevel a Petra barb//v//e sob znmho do domu [bez odporu] jest vpustil, ale za nm hrab z Martinic tak kared

F. 16v
Tu pak jsou se, akoliv krtce vak hrub mile spolu vtali a hrab z Martinic ukzave pan manelce sv tu od prostelen na lev ruce sv nekodnou rnu a na znamen, e i sice na celm tle svm dosti zdrav i jet erstv na nohch jest, schvln ped n skkajc ti capreoli vysok udlal, tak brzy zase jsou se, akoliv pehoce, vak pedtrpliv (oba se hned ve vem sam vli Bo docela oddave) spolu rozehnali. A tak t hrab z Martinic ani dtem svm vlastnm se neukzave, vak je (kterch tehd osm ivch bylo) doten manelce sv, jakoto jich [vech]

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 395

vlastn pan matei in meliori forma poruive, ve jmno Bo z domu svho pedce tou zadn ulic, dle mimo klter kapucnsk a potom strahovsk a dosti daleko na Blou horu s vej psanm Petrem barb//v// em pky, bez obzvltn bolesti neb tkosti doel a naleze tam dva kon toliko s malm prostm a starm ji spotebovanm korem, slove koles, od svrchu dotenho pana Jana Ctibora Kotvy sob zapuen (ponvad jest svch vlastnch kon a vozu, proto aby skrze

vecka msta Prask bez poznn a zajet osoby sv bezpen neprojel. Proto mysl svou k Mnichovu do Bavor obrtil, a i proto tam (vak ne obyejnou cestou) jeti docela se resolviroval, e jest nkdy pan otec jeho dobr apamtihodn, pan Jaroslav Boita z Martinic, J. M. Csae radda a komornk, hned z mld v slub J. M. vzcn pamti Albrechta knete Bavorskho (nynjho Jeho M. knete Maximilina pana dda)

toti v svtek slavnho na Nebe vstoupen Krista Pna 24. maji, teprva k verou do kltera Plaskho du jeho cistercienskho pijel. Vak dnmu se tam krom sammu opatu tho kltera,

F. 18r
velebnmu knzi Jimu Vasmuciusovi (kter a dosava iv zstv) znti nedal. Kterto pan opat jeho vhldn k sob pijal a[jest] pivtal, i hned bez mnohho hluku do jednoho istho pokoje tie uvedl, a jemu i sluebnkm jeho jsti a pti i klisnm obroku poruiti dal.

F. 17v
nejprve za edlknoba a potom za komornka byl, s tou nepochybnou nadj, e od tho J. M. knete MAXImiliana (ji kurta) t od J.M. knete Vilma pana otce a J. M. knete Albrechta, vlastnho pana bratra jeho Milosti rd vidn a pod dobrotivou Jich Milost ochranu v tom pokojnm katolickm mst Mnichov bezpen se za nkter as, a do milostiv J. M. C. vle pozdreti moci bude. Kdy pak ji od Prahy pes ti mle do jedn vsi sv Tuchlovice een pijel, tu jest hned rychle ty dva kon z koru vyphnouti a je s podkovnm panu Kotvovi zase odeslati, jin pak dobr tyi klisny ze dvoru svho vzti a do toho starho koru zaphnouti dal: a tak tm spnji jedouce, astn jest na druh den,

F. 17r
n poznn nebyl, uvati bezpen nesml) vsedl jest na ten korek a vzal na nj s sebou tho Petra Thomasoni barb//v//e a jednoho sluebnka svho erstvho, pky pi tom koru bcho. Cestu pak svou, a by nejradji byl do Vdn upmo J. M. Csai, krli a pnu svmu nejmilostivjmu vzal, vak ponvad se jest slun obval, e ti pozdvien neptel, jak se o odjezdu jeho dov, hned nejvce na tu vdeskou cestu hdati [aza nm rychle na konch polce, tudy jej vudy piln hledati] budou, tak aby ho dostati, zajti, zptkem zase do Prahy pivsti, a tu dle sv po smrti jeho nejv dychtc v//l//ly ukrutn dobti mohli, anby snad [ani] skrze

396 THE HISTORICAL WRITINGS OF VILM SLAVATA OF CHLUM AND KOUMBERK

Preliminary List of Hitherto Found Manuscripts

CZECH VERSION Brno, Moravian Archives Fund G 12 Collection Cerroni, Inv. No. 468, sign. Cerr II 352, Book 2 (Parts 710), after 1639 (provenance: Tom Peina of echorod) Chye, chteau, Library of the family of Laansk of Bukov sign. R 11, 6 volumes, 1693 (duplicate by Hans Altmann of Zmost) Jindichv Hradec, State Regional Archives Tebo, Department Slavata Family Archives, Inv. Nos. 8496, 13 volumes: Volume I (8 parts), Volume 2 (Parts 12, 13, 14 from Book 3; part of Parts 15 and 16 from Book 4), Volume 3 (Parts 1114), Volumes 49, the missing Book 10 was replaced by its duplicate in 1888 (Parts 4042, 49), Volume 11 (Parts 43 and 44), Volume 12 (Parts 44 and 45), Volume 13 (Parts 13 and 14), XVII + 1888; Slavata Family Archives, Inv. No. 97, excerpts from Books 1 and 2, XVII (provenance: Tom Peina of echorod); Slavata Family Archives, supplements without Inv. No., Part 33 (heading Titulov dvouch z okna vyhozench pnv, krlovskch mstodrcch) Kivoklt, state castle, Frstenberg Library sign. I b 7, excerpts from Books 1 and 2 (beside others, Parts 1, 7, 8, 9, 10), XVIIex (provenance: Vclav Felix Leopold merovsk of Lidkovice); sign. I b 8, excerpts from Books 1 and 2 (besides others, Parts 1, 8, 9, 10), XVIIex; sign. I b 16, 8 volumes, Books 18 (Parts 135), XVII (provenance: Bedich Dollenstein); sign. II b 6, excerpts from Books 1, 2 and 3 (beside others, Parts 1, 7, 1114), XVIII (provenance: Waldstein Library in Duchcov) Litomice, State Regional Archives Episcopal Library of Emmanuel of Waldstein: sign. BIF 92/18, 8 volumes, XVII.; sign. BIF 91, part of Book 1 (?), XVIIex Olomouc, Research Library sign. III 81, Book 2, 1783 Prague, Library of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic sign. 1 TC 2, 4 volumes, XVII Prague, National Museum Library sign. I C 1, 8 volumes, Books 18, XVII (provenance: Professor Mikan); sign. II B 5, 2 volumes, Books 12, XVII (provenance: Bedich Dollenstein); sign. III B 4, 8 volumes, Books 13, 810, XVII (provenance: Tom Peina of echorod); sign. III C 17, 2 volumes, Books 12, XVII (provenance: Knight Jan of Neuberk); sign. III C 28, XVII (provenance: JUDr. Eduard Langer, Broumov); sign. III C 29, XVII (provenance: Episcopal Seminar in Hradec Krlov); sign. IV B 3, Books 12, XVII (provenance: Josef Novovesk); sign. V A 19, Books 12, XVII; sign. V C 7, Books 12, XVII (provenance: H. Sobslav Pinkas) Prague, National Library of the Czech Republic sign. XVII.B.12, part of Book 1, Book 2, 1640s; sign. XVII.B.26, part of Book 1, Book 2, XVII / XVIII; sign. XVII.D.29, part of Book 1, Book 2, XVIII (provenance: Library of the Plasy Monastery); Library of the Kinski Family, sign. F.VI.128 and F.VI.129, Books 12, XVII; Prague Lobkowicz Library, sign. XXIII.C.48 /12, 2 volumes, Books 13, 810, before 1796 (provenance: Tom Antonn Putzlacher); Library of the Tepl Monastery, sign. Tepl A 22, 7 volumes, Books 12, 48, XVII Prague, State Regional Archives Waldstein Family Archives, Inv. Nos. 242253, Books 910, XVII; VS [Estate] Smeno, Inv. Nos. 122129, Books 39, XVII Prague, Strahov Library sign. DH I 24, part of Book 4 (Part 17), 16661983 (provenance: Bohuslav Balbn) GERMAN VERSION Jindichv Hradec, State Regional Archives Tebo, Department Slavata Family Archives, supplements without Inv. No., 2 volumes, Book 2, part of Books 7 and 8, XVII Hradec Krlov, Museum of East Bohemia sign. MS 96 and sign. MS 97, 2 volumes, XVIIIin Prague, National Library of the Czech Republic sign. XVI.C.12, Book 1 (Parts 16) and Book 2 (Parts 710), XVIImed ; Prague Lobkowicz Library, sign. XXIII.C.31/18, 8 volumes, Books 18, XVIImed + XVIIIex (provenance: Tom Antonn Putzlacher) LATIN VERSION Litomice, State Regional Archives Cistercians from Osek, Inv. No. 2793, part of Book 1, XVIIex / XVIIIin Prague, National Museum Library sign. VI G 5, part of Book 1, XVII / XVIII Wien, sterreichische Nationalbibliothek Cod. 14207, Books 1 and 2, XVIII Cod. 14214*, Latin excerpts with Czech quotes, 1659 (provenance: Jesuit college in Jindichv Hradec)

EDITION OF HISTORICAL SOURCES 397

398 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Selected Bibliography

399 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sources
ARCHIVES OF THE CAPITAL OF PRAGUE Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), Kniha manskch prv 2, Nov Msto prask, 16571684, sign. 560. Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), Kniha rukojemstv a obnov, Nov Msto prask, 16361678, sign. 97. Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), Liber conventionum I, Star Msto prask, 16611769, sign. 4596. Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), Liber inventariorum 16871702, sign. 1179. Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), Liber obligationum caeruleus 5, 16911696 /1709/, sign. 3601. Sbrka rukopis (Collection of Manuscripts), Manuale dictorum 16381641, sign. 1169. ARCHIVES OF THE NATIONAL GALLERY IN PRAGUE Fond J. Q. Jahn, Jan Jakub Quirin Jahn, Umleckohistorick popis Prahy, Mal Strany a Hradan, s. d. [between 1767/691773], acq. no. AA 1222/38. ARCHIVIO STORICO DEL VICARIATO DI ROMA SantAndrea delle Fratte, sign. s. a., n. 38, 1634 S. Lorenzo in Lucina, 1634, sign. s. a., n. 134, f. 28. S. Maria del Popolo, sign. s. a., n. 65, 16331636. S.MariadelPopolo,sign.s.a.,n.65,1635. BOLOGNA, PINACOTECA COMUNALE DELLARCHIGINNASIO Marcello Oresti, Notizie deprofessori del disegno, cio pittori, scultori, ms., sign. B 123B 135/2. MUSEUM OF THE MLAD BOLESLAV REGION Archiv Matoue Konenho (Archives of Matou Konen), sign. A 3254 / Praha O1607, f. 3r. PRAGUE, THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES File Archiv zruench klter (Archives of Abolished Monasteries), Annales Monasterii S. Wenceslai Eremit. Discal. S. P. Augustini ab Anno 1623 usque ad Annum 1659, inv. no. 2450, ms. 9. File Archiv zruench klter (Archives ofAbolished Monasteries), Liber primus Annalium Nostri ExcalceatoAugustiniani Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, [] A Fratre Severino a Sancta Anna Ordinis Eremit. Fratrum Discal. Sancti P. N. Augustini Sacerdote Professo, written ca. 1749), inv. no. 2451, ms. 10 (formerly 3480 a). Fond Archiv zruench klter (Archives of Abolished Monasteries), Liber secundus seu Continuatio Annalium ExcalceatoAugustiniani Nostri Asceterii Sub Patrocinio Sancti Wenceslai Martyris, inv. no. 2452, ms. 11 (formerly 3480 b). PRAGUE, THE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC Annuae litterae provinciae Boemiae Societatis Jesu 16711674, sign. XXIII C 105/8. PRAGUE, STRAHOV LIBRARY OF THE ROYAL CANONRY OF THE PREMONSTRATENSIANS Collection of manuscripts, Jan Jakub Quirin Jahn, Aneckdoten zur Lebensgeschichte berhmter Mahler und Beurtheilung ihrer Werke, late 18th century, sign. DA II 7. STATE REGIONAL ARCHIVES TEBO Department Jindichv Hradec, Rodinn archiv Slavatov (Archives of the Slavata Family), inv. no. 109, sign. III A 1, cart. 13. Department Jindichv Hradec, Rodinn archiv Slavatov (Archives of the Slavata Family), inv. no. 8497.

Literature and Sources

CRISTINA ACIDINI LUCINAT Tadeo e Federico Zuccari: fratelli pittori del Cinquecento, Milan 1998. MAREK ADAMSKIPIOTR UKASZEWICZFRANZ WAGNER (edd.) Michael Willmann (16301706) (exh. cat.), Salzburg 1994 (Schriften des Salzburger Barockmuseums, sv. 19). SIGMUND GRAFADELMANN DOROTHEA DIEMER (edd.) Neue Beitrge zu Adriaen de Vries. Vortrge des Adriaen de Vries Symposiums vom 16. bis 18. April 2008 in Stadthagen und Bckeburg, Bielefeld 2008. BERNARD AIKEMA (ed.) Lucas Cranach: laltro Rinascimento: Il pictor doctus del Cinquecento tedesco, amico di Luther a Roma (exh. cat.), Roma 2010. GIOVANNI BATTISTA ALBERTI Discorso dellorigine delle accademie publiche, e private, e sopra limpresa de gli Affidati di Pavia, Genova 1639. LEON BATTISTA ALBERTI Das Standbild. Die Malkunst. Grundlagen der Malerei = De statua. De pictura. Elementa picturae, edd. Oskar Btschmann Christoph Schublin, Darmstadt 2000. LEON BATTISTA ALBERTI On Painting, ed. John R. Spencer, New Haven London 1966. LEON BATTISTA ALBERTI On Painting, ed. Martin Kemp, London 1991. SIBYLLE APPUHN-RADTKE Das Thesenblatt im Hochbarock: Studien zu einer graphischen Gattung am Beispiel der Werke Bartholomus Kilians, Weienhorn 1988. SIBYLLE APPUHN-RADTKE Visuelle Medien im Dienst der Gesellschaft Jesu. Johann Christoph Storer (16201671) als Maler der Katholischen Reform, Regensburg 2000. DANIEL ARASSE Le dtail: pour une histoire rapproche de la peinture, Paris 1992 (rev. 2008). MARIANO ARMELLINI Le chiese di Roma dal secolo IV al XIX, Roma 1891. ALOIS BACKERKARL SOMMERVOGEL Bibliothque de la Compagnie de Jsus 7, Bruxelles Paris 1896. GAUVIN ALEXANDER BAILEYPAMELA M.JONES (edd.) Hope and Healing. Painting in Italy in a Time of Plague (15001800), Chicago 2005. BARBORA BALOV (ed.) Generationen Interpretationen Konfrontationen, Bratislava 2007. BOHUSLAV BALBN Diva Montis Sancti: seu Origines & Miracula Magnae Dei Hominumque Matris Mariae, Quae In Sancto Monte Regni Bohemiae, ad Argentifodinas Przibramenses [] in Statua sua mirabili, aditur, & colitur [], Pragae 1665. BOHUSLAV BALBN Pepodiwn Matka Swato Horsk Marya, W Zzracch a Milostech swch na Hoe Swat nad Mstem Pjbrami Hor Stjbrnch den po dni wjc a wjc se stkwgjc [], Litomyl 1666. BOHUSLAV BALBN Rukov humanitnch discipln = Verisimilia humaniorum disciplinarum, ed. Olga Spevak, Praha 2006. BOHUSLAUS BALBINUS Miscellanea Historica Bohemiae, Decadis I. Liber V., Pragae 1683. RUTH BALJHR Johann von Spillenberger, 16281677: ein Maler des Barock, Weienhorn 2003. PAOLA BAROCCHI (ed.) Trattati darte del Cinquecento I, Bari 1960. PAOLA BAROCCHI (ed.) Trattati darte del cinquecento: Fra manierismo e controriforma II, Gilio Paleotti Aldovrandi, Bari 1961. LILIANA BARROERO Il se rendit en Italie. Artisti stranieri a Roma nel Seicento, in: Roma moderna e contemporanea I, 1993, pp. 1334. MILENA BARTLOV (ed.) Djiny umn v esk spolenosti: otzky, problmy, vzvy. Pspvky pednesen na Prvnm sjezdu eskch historik umn, Praha 2004. MILENA BARTLOV Nae, nrodn umn. Studie z djepisu umn, Brno 2009. FRANTIEK MICHLEK BARTO Soupis rukopis Nrodnho musea v Praze, Praha 1926. MARKTA BATOVTEREZIE CVACHOV Loreta. Prvodce poutnm mstem, Praha 2001. SALVATORE BATTAGLIA Grande dizionario della lingua italiana XIX, Torino 1998. RENA BAKOV (ed.) Umleck pamtky Prahy. Nov Msto, Vyehrad, Vinohrady (Praha 1), Praha 1998. FRANS BAUDOUIN Rubens in Context: Selected Studies, Antwerpen 2005. FRANS BAUDOUIN Rubens pictor doctus, zijn bibliothek en zijn lectuur, in: Prosper Arents (ed.), De Bibliotheek van Pieter Pauwel Rubens: een reconstructie, Antwerpen 2001, pp. 4787. BETTINA BAUMGRTEL Die Ohnmacht der Frauen: sublimer Affekt in der Historienmalerei des 18. Jahrhunderts, Kritische Berichte 18, 1990, no. 1, pp. 520. REINHOLD BAUMSTARK (ed.) Rom in Bayern. Kunst und Spiritualitt der ersten Jesuiten (exh. cat.), Mnchen 1997. MICHAEL BAXANDALL Giotto and the Orators: Humanist Observers of painting in Italy and the discovery of pictorial composition 13501450, Oxford 1971. NICASIUS BAXIUS Sanctus Thomas a Villanova, Cognomento Eleemosynarius, ArchiEpiscopus Ecclesiastes Imp. Caroli V. a Sanctissimo Papa Nostro Alexandro VII. Anno M.DC.LVIII. in Festo

401 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Omnium Sanctorum Fastis eorundem adscriptus, Monachii 1659. JULIAN BELL Five Hundred Self-Portraits, London 2000. GIOVANNI PIETRO BELLORI Le vite de pittori, scultori e architetti moderni, Roma 1672. GIOVANNI PIETRO BELLORI Le vite de pittori, scultori e architetti moderni, ed. Evelina Borea, Torino 1976. HANS BELTING Bild und Kult. Eine Geschichte des Bilder vor dem Zeitalter der Kunst, Mnchen 19912. DANIELE BENATIANTONIO PAOLUCCI (edd.) Guido Cagnacci: protagonista del Seicento tra Caravaggio e Reni (exh. cat.), Milano 2008. ALENA BERGEROVVLASTIMIL BERGER Pspvek k svatovclavsk tematice v dle Karla krty. Rentgenologick przkum, Umn XXXVIII, 1990, pp. 228230. PAVEL BERGNERJAN HERAIN Karel krta (16101674). Pspvek k ocenn jeho dla, asopis Spolenosti ptel staroitnost eskch XVIII, 1910, pp. 4151. ANTONINO BERTOLOTTI Artisti belgi ed olandesi a Roma nei secoli XVI e XVII. Notize e documenti raccolti negli achivi romani, Firenze 1880. ANDRZEJ BETLEJJZEF SKRABSKI(edd.) Fides ars scientia. Studia dedykowane pamici Ksidza Kanonika Augustyna Mednisa, Tarnw 2008. JAN BIAOSTOCKI Books of Wisdom and Books of Vanity, in: In Memoriam J. G. van Gelder 19131980, Utrecht 1982, pp. 3767. JAN BIAOSTOCKI Lantico: regola della natura nel Seicento, in: Il Classicismo. Medioevo. Rinascimento. Barocco, Atti del Colloquio Cesare Gnudi, Bologna 1993, pp. 259265. JAN BIAOSTOCKI The Doctus Artifex and the Library of the Artist in the XVIth and XVIIth Centuries, in: De arte et libris: Festschrift Erasmus 19341984, Amsterdam 1984, pp. 1122. JAN BIAOSTOCKI The Message of Images: Studies in the History of Art, Wien 1988. ILARIA BIANCCHI La politica dlle immagini nellet della Controriforma: Gabrielle Paleotti teorico e committente (dissertation thesis), Bologna 2008. CORNELIS DE BIE Het gulden Cabinet vande edel vry schilder const, inhoudende den lof vande vermarste schilders, architecte, beldthowers ende plaetsnyders van dese eeuw, TAntwerpen: Ian Meyssens 1661 (reprint Soest 1971). ROLF BIEDERMANN Die Zeichnungen des Johann Heinrich

Schnfeld, in: Jahrbuch der Staatlichen Kunstsammlungen in Baden-Wrtemberg, Band 8, 1971, pp. 119194. TOM VCLAV BLEK Djiny konskac v echch po r. 1618 I, II, Praha 1882, 1883. VOJTCH BIRNBAUM Pvodn prel kostela P. Marie Vtzn na Mal Stran, Pamtky archeologick 34, 19241925, pp. 219221. VOJTCH BIRNBAUMANTONN MATJEKJOSEF SCHRNIL ZDENK WIRTH eskoslovensk umn, Praha 1926. OLDICH JAKUB BLAEK AKOL. Barok v echch. Vbr architektury, plastiky, malby a umleckch emesel, Praha 1973. OLDICH JAKUB BLAEK Italsk podnty a ohlasy v barokovm sochastv ech, Umn XXVIII, 1980, pp. 493503. OLDICH JAKUB BLAEK Jan Ji Bendl, prask socha asnho baroka, Pamtky archeologick 40, 1937, pp. 5591. OLDICH JAKUB BLAEK Jan Ji Bendl. Ti sta let od smrti zakladatele esk barokov plastiky, Umn XXX, 1982, pp. 97115. OLDICH JAKUB BLAEK Jan Ji Bendl. Vbr ezeb praskho sochae ranho baroku (exh. cat.), Praha 1982. OLDICH JAKUB BLAEK Rokoko a konec baroku v echch, Praha 1948. OLDICH JAKUB BLAEK Sochastv baroku v echch. Plastika 17. a 18. vku, Praha 1958. OLDICH JAKUB BLAEK Umn baroku v echch, Praha 1971. OLDICH JAKUB BLAEK VCLAV HUSA Materilie k djinm baroknho vtvarnictv v echch I, Roenka Kruhu pro pstovn djin umn za rok 1935, Praha 1936, pp. 5981. OLDICH JAKUB BLAEK VCLAV HUSA Materilie k djinm baroknho vtvarnictv v echch II, Roenka Kruhu pro pstovn djin umn za rok 1936, Praha 1937, pp. 526. OLDICH JAKUB BLAEK PAVEL PREISSDAGMAR HEJDOV Kunst des Barock in Bhmen. Skulptur Malerei Kunsthandwerk Bhnenbild (exh. cat.), Essen Recklinghausen 1977. ANTHONY BLUNT Artistic Theory in Italy 14501600, Oxford 1994 (1st ed. 1962). HENNING BOCKTHOMAS W.GAEHTGENS (edd.) Hollndische Genremalerei im 17. Jahrhundert: Symposium Berlin 1984, Berlin 1987 (Jahrbuch Preussischer Kulturbesitz/ Sonderband 4).

DIDIER BODART Les peintres des Pays-Bas mridionaux et de la principaut de Lige Rome au XVIIme sicle, Bruxelles Roma 1970. OLIVIER BONFAIT (ed.) Roma 1630. Il trionfo del pennello (exh. cat.), Milano 1994. OLIVIER BONFAIT ET AL. (edd.) Poussin et Rome, Paris 1996. RGINE BONNEFOIT Johann Wilhelm Baur (16071642). Ein Werbereiter der barocken Kunst in Deutschland, Tbingen Berlin 1997. RICHARD BSEL Jesuitenarchitektur in Italien 15401772, Teil I. Die Baudenkmler der Rmischen und Neapolitanischen Ordensprovinz, Wien 1986. RICHARD BSELHERBERT KARNER Jesuitenarchitektur in Italien (15401773), Teil II., Die Baudenkmler der mailandischen Ordensprovinz, Wien 2007. FRANCESCA BOTTACIN Tiberio Tinelli, Pittore e Cavaliere (15871639), Mariano del Friuli 2004. FRANCESCA BOTTACIN Tra Pittura e Poesia. Tiberio Tinelli e lAccademia degli Incogniti, Studi veneziani NS XLI, 2001, pp. 247258. GIOVANNI BOTTAR Raccolta di lettere sulla pittura, scultura ed architettura, S. Ticozzi (ed.), Milano, 1822. JACQUES BOUSQUET Recherches sur le sjour des peintres franais a Rome au XVIIe sicle, Montpellier 1980. WOLFGANG BRASSAT Das Historienbild im Zeitalter der Eloquenz. Von Raffael bis Le Brun, Berlin 2003 (Studien aus dem Warburg-Haus 6). ANNA MARIA BRIZIOMARCO ROSCI I quadroni di San Carlo del Duomo di Milano: La Veneranda Fabbrica del Duomo di Milano nella ricorrenza del quarto centenario dellingresso in Milano dellArcivescovo Carlo Borromeo, Cardinale di Santa Prassede, Milano 1965. TON J.BROOS Tussen zwart en ultramarijn. De levens van schilders beschreven door Jacob Campo Weyerman (16771747), Amsterdam 1990. CELESTE BRUSATI Artice and Illusion. The Art and Writing of Samuel van Hoogstraten, Chicago London 1995. CORNELIS DE BRUYN Reizen van Cornelis de Bruyn door de vermaardste delen van Klein Azi, Delft 1698. LUDK BEZINAJANA KONVIN JAN ZDICHYNEC (edd.) Ve znamen zem Koruny esk. Sbornk k edestm narozeninm prof. PhDr. Lenky Bobkov, CSc., Praha 2006. BEKET BUKOVINSKLUBOMR KONEN (edd.) Mnchen Prag um 1600, Praha 2009 (Studia Rudolphina 9, Sonderheft).

BEKET BUKOVINSKLUBOMR SLAVEK (edd.) Pictura verba cupit. Sbornk pspvk pro Lubomra Konenho, Praha 2006. JOHN BURY El Grecos Books, The Burlington Magazine CIXXX, 1987, pp. 388391. BRUNO BUSHART Deutsche Malerei des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts, Knigstein im Taunus 1967. KLAUS BUSSMANNHEINZ SCHILLING (edd.) 1648. Krieg und Frieden in Europa (exh. cat.), Vol.. 2: Kunst und Kultur, Mnchen 1998. KLAUS BUSSMANNHEINZ SCHILLING (edd.) War and Peace in Europe. Exhibition Catalogue; Essay Volume II. Art and Culture (exh. cat.), Mnster 1998. VCLAV BEKJOSEF HRDLIKAPAVEL KRL ZDENK VYBRAL Vk urozench. lechta v eskch zemch na prahu novovku, Praha Litomyl 2002. VCLAV BEKPAVEL KRL (edd.) Pam urozenosti, Praha 2007. IAN CAMPBEL (ed.) The Paper Museum of Cassiano dal Pozzo, Ancient Roman Topography and Architecture I, London 2004. DAVID CAST The Calumny of Apelles: A Study in Humanist Tradition, New Haven London 1981. GIOVANNI BATTISTA DECAVALIERI Antiquarum statuarum Urbis Romae primus et secundus liber, s. l., s. d. [Roma post 1570/ante 1584]. CENNINO CENNINI Trattato della pittura. The Craftmans Handbook. The italian Il Libro Dell Arte, translated by Daniel V. Thompson Jr., New York 1960. ANTHONY COLANTUONO Guido Renis Abduction of Helen. The Politics and Rhetoric of painting in seventeenthcentury Europe, Cambridge University Press 1997. GREGORIO COMANINI Il Figino, Mantova 1591. Conmemoracin del 450 aniversario de la muerte de Santo Toms de Villanueva, Valencia 2008. ELIZABETH CROPPER Bound theory and blind practice: Pietro Testas notes on painting and the Liceo della pittura, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 34, 1971, pp. 262296. ELIZABETH CROPPER Ideal of painting: Pietro Testas Dsseldorf notebook, Princeton 1984. ELIZABETH CROPPPER Vincenzo Giustinianis Galleria. The Pygmalion Effect, in: Cassiano dal Pozzos Paper Museum, vol. I, Ivrea 1992, pp. 101126. ELIZABETH CROPPER Virtues wintry reward: Pietro Testas

402 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

etchings of the Seasons, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 37, 1974, pp. 249279. ELIZABETH CROPPERCHARLES DEMPSEY Nicolas Poussin: Friendship and the Love of Painting, Princeton 1995. JI AREK Z djin staromstskch dom, Prask sbornk historick 19, Praha 1986, pp. 534. JAROSLAV ECHURAZDENK HOJDAMARTINA NOVOZMSK Njemnci na Starm Mst praskm roku 1608. Rekonstruovan edice shoelho rkp. 324 z Archivu hl. m. Prahy podle opisu uloenho v Archivu Nrodnho muzea, Praha 1997 (Documenta pragensia, monographia, vol. 3). KAREL ERNJI M.HAVLK Jezuit a mor, Praha 2008 (Kninice Djin a souasnosti XXXIV). VCLAV ERN A do pedsn nebes. trnct studi o baroku naem i cizm, Praha 1996. PETR ORNEJ Vliv poblohorskch konskac na skladbu feudln tdy, in: Acta Universitatis Carolinae, Philosophica et Historica I. Studia historica 14, 1976, pp. 178189. IVANA ORNEJOVJI KAE JI MIKULECVT VLNAS Velk djiny zem Koruny esk VIII. 16181683, Praha Litomyl 2008. THOMAS DACOSTA KAUFMANN Court, Cloister & City. The Art and Culture of Central Europe 14501800, London 1995. THOMAS DACOSTA KAUFMANN The School of Prague. Painting at the Court of Rudolf II., Chicago London 1988. FRANZ DAMBECKJOSEF KROTTENTHALER Pfarr- und Wallfahrtskirche Neukirchen zum Hl. Blut, Mnchen Zrich 1964, p. 12 (Kleine Kunstfhrer, vol. 728). SILVIA DANESI SQUARZINA (ed.) Caravaggio e i Giustiniani. Toccar con mano una collezione del Seicento (exh. cat.), Milano 2001. SILVIA DANESI SQUARZINA The collections of Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani. Part I: Documents for the History of Collecting, The Burlington Magazine CXXXIX, 1136, 1997, pp. 766791. SILVIA DANESI SQUARZINA The collections of Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani. Part II, The Burlington Magazine CXL, 1139, 1998, pp. 102118. SILVIA DANESI SQUARZINA (ed.) La collezione Giustiniani: inventari, Torino 2003. LADISLAV DANIEL (ed.) Bentan. Malstv 17. a 18. stolet z eskch a moravskch sbrek (exh. cat.), Praha 1996.

LADISLAV DANIELJI PELNPIOTR SALWAOLGA PILAROV (edd.) Italsk renesance a baroko ve stedn Evrop. Pspvky z mezinrodn konference, Olomouc 17.18. jna 2003 / Renesans i barok woski w Europie rodkowej. Materiay midzynarodowej konferencji, Oomuniec 1718 padziernika 2003, Olomouc 2005. VINCENZO DANTI Il primo libro del trattato delle perfette proporzioni, Firenze 1567. Djiny eskho vtvarnho umn II/1. Od potk renesance do zvru baroka, Praha 1989. VLADIMR DENKSTEIN Vclav Hollar: Kresby, Praha 1977. JEAN BAPTISTE DESCAMPS La vie des peintres amands, allemands et hollandois, avec des portraits gravs en tailledouce, une indication de leurs principaux ouvrages, et des rections sur leurs diffrentes manieres, Paris 17531764. HANS DICKEL Deutsche Zeichenbcher des Barock. Eine Studie zur Geschichte der Knstlerausbildung, Hildesheim Zrich New York 1987 (Studien zur Kunstgeschichte XLVIII). DOROTHEA DIEMER (rec.) Adriaen de Vries: Neue Forschungen und eine bedeutende Ausstellung, Kunstchronik 52, 1999, pp. 242259. DOROTHEA DIEMERHANS REICHLE Ein Modello fr die Augsburger Zeughausgruppe und Werkstattfragen, Mnchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst, Dritte Folge, vol. LVII, 2006, pp. 3156. JAN DIVI Prask Loreta, Praha 1972. JOHANN GOTTFRIED DLABAC Allgemeines historisches Knstlerlexikon fr Bhmen und zum Theil auch fr Mhren IIII, Prag 1815. SYLVA DOBALOV Paijov cyklus Karla krty: Mezi vtvarnou tradic a jezuitskou spiritualitou, Praha 2004. SYLVA DOBALOV Poznmka k obrazu Karla krty z kostela sv. Vavince v Povce, Obasnk mlnick, 2005, May, pp. 1618. JOSEF DOBI, VILM SLAVATA asopis historick, 1881, pp. 267309; 2, 1882, pp. 3456. JOSEF DOBROVSK (ed.) Bhmische Litteratur auf das Jahr 1779, Prag 1779. LUDOVICO DOLCE Dialogo della pittura, Venezia 1557. WILLY DROST Barockmalerei in den germanischen Lndern, Wildpark Potsdam 1926 (A. E. Brinkmann /ed./, Handbuch der Kunstwissenschaft). ALPHONSE DUFRESNOY De arte Graphica, Roger de Piles (ed.), Paris 1668.

AMALIE DURAS Die Architektenfamilie Lurago, Prag 1933. MAX DVOK Briefe Kaiser Leopold I. an Wenzel Euseb Herzog in Schlesien, Archiv der sterreichischen Geschichte 80, 1893, pp. 459514. MAX DVOK Geschichte des Raudnitzer Schlossbaues 16521684, Roudnice nad Labem 1873. JI DVORSK (ed.) Die Kunst am Hofe Rudolfs II., Hanau 1988. JANINA DZIK Franciszek Lekszycki, malarz religijny baroku, Kalwaria Zebrzydowska 1998. SYBILLE EBERT-SCHIFFERERCECILIA MAZZETTI DI PIETRALATA (edd.) Joachim von Sandrart: ein europischer Knstler und Theoretiker zwischen Italien und Deutschland. Akten des Internationalen Studientages der Bibliotheca Hertziana, Rom, 3.4. April 2006, Mnchen 2009. FRANTIEK EKERT Posvtn msta krl. hl. msta Prahy. Djiny a popsn chrm, kapl, posvtnch soch, klter a jinch pomnk katolick vry a nbonosti v hlavnm mst krlovstv eskho I, II, Praha 1883, 1884 (reprint 1996). JAN A.EMMENS Ay Rembrandt, maal cornelis stem, Nederlands Kusthistorisch Jarboek 7, 1956, pp. 133165. BARBARA ESCHENBURG Landschaft in der deutschen Malerei: vom spten Mittelalter bis heute, Mnchen 1987. ROBERT J.W.EVANS Vznik habsbursk monarchie 15501700, Praha 2003. JI FAJTLUBOMR SRE Lapidrium Nrodnho muzea Praha. Prvodce stlou expozic eskho kamenosochastv 11. a 19. stolet v pavilnu Lapidria na Vstaviti v Praze, Praha 1993. MARCELLO FANTONILOUISA C.MATTHEW SARA F.MATTHEWSGRIECO (edd.) The Art Market in Italy (15th17th Centuries), Ferrara 2003. ANNA FECHTNEROV Ji Ferus a Ji Plach, in: Pavel R. Pokorn (ed.), Pocta Dr. Emm Urbnkov. Spolupracovnci a ptel k 70. narozeninm, Praha 1979, pp. 427457. OLGA FEJTOVVCLAV LEDVINKA JI PEEKVT VLNAS (edd.) Barokn Praha Barokn echie 16201740. Sbornk pspvk z vdeck konference o fenomnu baroka v echch, Praha, Anesk klter a Clam-Gallasv palc, 24.27. z 2001, Praha 2004. ANDR FLIBIEN Entretiens sur les vies et sur les ouvrages des plus excellens peintres anciens et modernes, Paris 16661688 (3rd ed. Trevoux 1725).

VITTORIO DE FEOVALENTINO MARTINELLI Andrea Pozzo, Milano 1996. KARL FEUCHTMAYR Der Fall Bendl, Das Mnster 10, Hft. 9/10, 1957, pp. 319335. PETR FIDLER Loggia mit Aussicht. Prolegomena zu einer Typologie, Wiener Jahrbuch fr Kunstgeschichte 40, 1987, pp. 83101. KARL FISCHER Catalogus (generalis) provinciae Bohemiae (16231773) et Silesiae (17551733), Mnchen 1985. VICTORIA VON FLEMINGSEBASTIAN SCHTZE (edd.) Ars Natura adiuvans: Festschrift fr Matthias Winner zum 11. Mrz 1996, Mainz am Rhein 1996. JOSEF FORBELSK panl, e a echy v 16. a 17. stolet, Praha 2006. ERIC FORSSMAN Dorisch, Ionisch, Korintisch, Stockholm 1961. HEINRICH GERHARD FRANZ Bauten und Baumeister der Barockzeit in Bhmen, Leipzig 1962. HEINRICH GERHARD FRANZ (ed.) Die Dientzenhofer. Barocke Baukunst in Bayern und Bhmen (exh. cat.), Rosenheim 1991. PAUL FRART DE CHANTELOU Viaggio del Cavalier Bernini in Francia, Palermo 1988. DAVID FREEDBERG A Source for Rubenss Modello of the Assumption and Coronation of the Virgin: a Case Study in the Response of Images, The Burlington Magazine CXX, 1978, pp. 432441. ELIKA FUKOV (ed.) Prag um 1600: Kunst und Kultur am Hofe Rudolfs II. (exh. cat.), Essen Wien Freren 1988. ELIKA FUKOV Rudolfnsk kresba, Praha 1986. ELIKA FUKOV (ed.) Ti francouzt kavali v rudolfnsk Praze, Praha 1989. ELIKA FUKOV et al. (edd.) Rudolf II and Prague: The Court and the City (exh. cat.), Prague London Milano 1997. ELIKA FUKOVJAMES M.BRADBURNE et ali. (edd.) Rudolf II. a Praha (exh. cat.), Praha 1997. ELIKA FUKOVLADISLAV EPIKA (edd.) Valdtejn. Albrecht z Valdtejna. Inter arma silent musae? (exh. cat.), Praha 2007. GIULIA FUSCONI (ed.) I Giustiniani e lAntico (exh. cat.), Roma 2001. JOHANN RUDOLF FSSLI (ed.) Allgemeines Knstler-Lexicon, oder: Kurze Nachricht von dem Leben und den Werken der Mahler, Bildhauer, Baumeister, Kupferstecher,

403 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Kunstgiesser, Stahlschneider etc etc., Zrich 1763. THOMAS W.GAEHTGENSUWE FLECKNER (edd.) Historienmalerei, Berlin 1996 (Geschichte der klassischen Bildgattungen in Quellentexten und Kommentaren I). PETER GANZMARTIN GOSEBRUCHNIKOLAUS MEIERMARTIN WARNKE (edd.) Kunst und Kunsttheorie 14001900, Wiesbaden 1991. FABIOLA GIANCOTTI Per ragioni di salute. San Carlo Borromeo nel quarto centenario della canonizzazione 16102010, Milano 2010. SILVIA GINZBURG CARIGNANI Domenichino e Giovanni Battista Agucchi, in: Domenichino (15811641), Milano 1996, pp. 121137. GIOVANNI PIETRO GIUSSANO Vita di S. Carlo Borromeo prete cardinale del titolo di Santa Prassede Arcivescovo Milano, Roma 1610. JOHAN VAN GOOL De nieuwe schouburg der Nederlantsche kunstschilders en schilderessen II, Haag 17501751. LUIGI GRASSI Teorici e storia della critica darte. Parte seconda: leta moderna il Seicento, Roma 1973. MINA GRIGORIRODOLFO MAFFEIS(edd.) Un altra belezza: Francesco Furini (exh. cat.), Firenze 2007. GNTHER GRUNDMANN Barockfresken in Breslau, Frankfurt am Main 1967 (Bau- und Kunstdenkmler des deutschen Ostens, Reihe C, Schlesien, vol. 3). JUSTYNA GUZE Ksika jako symbol treci intelektualnych w sztuce doby humanizmu: XVXVI w., in: O ikonograi wieckiej doby humanizmu: Tematy symbole problemy, Warszawa 1977, pp. 159243. MARTIN HALATA (ed.) Kniha protokol praskho malskho cechu z let 16001656, Praha 1996. JOANNES FLORIANUS HAMMERSCHMID Prodromus Gloriae Pragenae. Continens Urbium Pragenarum Fundationes [], Pragae 1723. FRANCIS HASKELLNICHOLAS PENNY Taste and the Antique: The Lure of Classical Scupture, 15001900, New Haven London 1982. HERBERT HAUPT Von der Leidenschaft zum Schnen. Frst Karl Eusebius von Liechtenstein 16111684, Wien Mnchen Weimar 1998 (Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte des Frstenhauses Liechtenstein Band II/2). MICHLE-CAROLINE HECK Thorie et pratique de la peinture. Sandrart

et la Teutsche Academie, Paris 2006 (Passagen XV). MICHLE-CAROLINE HECKFRDRIQUE LEMERLEYVES PAUWELS (edd.) Torie des arts et cration artistique dans lEurope du Nord du XVIe au dbut du XVIIIe sicle. Akten des internationalen Kolloquiums Lille 2000, Lille 2002. CHRISTIAN HECHT Katholische Bildertheologie im Zeitalter von Gegenreformation und Barock: Studien zu Traktaten von Johannes Molanus, Gabriele Paleotti und anderen Autoren, Berlin 1997. JITKA HELFERTOV Castra doloris doby barokn v echch, Umn XXII, 1974, pp. 290 308. EBERHARD HEMPEL Baroque art and Architecture in Central Europe. Germany / Austria / Switzerland / Hungary / Czechoslovakia / Poland, London 1965. JAN HERAIN Staromstsk rynk, Praha 1908. KAREL VLADIMR HERAIN esk malstv od doby rudolnsk do smrti Reinerovy. Pspvky k djinm jeho vnitnho vvoje v letech 15761743, Praha 1915. KAREL VLADIMR HERAIN Karel krta otnovsk ze Zavoic, Druh ploha eskho slova ze dne 23. jna 1910 (no. 242), pp. 1718. HOWARD HIBBARD Maderno and Roman Architecture 15801630, London 1971. RYSZARD HOOWNIAMATEUSZ KAPUSTKA (edd.) Nysa. Sztuka w dawnej stolicy ksistwa biskupiego, Wrocaw 2008. GODEFRIUS JOANNES HOOGEWERFF Bescheiden in Italie, Omtrent Nederlandsche Kunstenaars en Geleerden, s-Gravenhage 1913. GODEFRIDUS JOANNES HOOGEWERFF De bentvueghels, s-Gravenhage 1952 (Utrechtsche Bijdragen tot de Kunstgeschiedenis 1). GODEFRIUS JOANNES HOOGEWERFF Il conitto fra la insigne Accademia di San Luca e la banda dei pittori neerlandesi, Archivio della Societ romana di storia patria LVIII, 1935, pp. 189203. GODEFRIUS JOANNES HOOGEWERFF Intorno al sepolcro di Bacco. Le feste degli artisti olandesi e amminghi a Roma nel Seicento, in: Roma. Rivista di studi e di vita romana II, 1924, pp. 119128. GODEFRIUS JOANNES HOOGEWERFF Les fondations hospitalires et artistiques Belges Rome, in: Les Fondations nationales dans la Rome poticale, Torino 1981, pp. 6169 (Collection de lcole franaise de Rome 52).

GODEFRIUS JOANNES HOOGEWERFF Nederlandsche kunstennars te Rome (1600 1725), s-Gravenhage 1942. SAMUEL DIRKSZ VAN HOOGSTRATEN Inleyding tot de Hooge Schoole der Schilderkonst, Rotterdam 1678. HENDRIK J.HORN The Golden Age Revisited: Arnold Houbrakens Great Theatre of Netherlandish Painters and Paintresses, Doornspijk 2000. ANDLA HOROV (ed.) Nov encyklopedie eskho vtvarnho umn I, Praha 1995. MOJMR HORYNA Barokizace pasovskho dmu Luragovo dlo na rozhran ranho a vrcholnho baroka a esk architektura kolem roku 1700, Umn LII, 2004, pp. 218230. MOJMR HORYNA Krytof Dientzenhofer (16551722), Praha 2005. MOJMR HORYNA Novostavby K. I. Dientzenhofera v kontextu okoln zstavby, Architektura SR 48, 1989, pp. 3236. MIROSLAV HORYNAZDENK HOJDAPAVEL ZAHRADNK et al. (edd.). Valdtejnsk palc v Praze, Praha 2002. MOJMR HORYNAJOSEF HZLERLUBO LANCINGER Svtce u Tachova, bval pavlnsk kostel. Stavebn-historick przkum, SRPMO Praha 1975, ms. MOJMR HORYNAPETRA OULKOV Kostel Nejsvtjho Salvtora a Vlask kaple, Kosteln Vyd 2006. MOJMR HORYNAPAVEL PREISSPAVEL ZAHRADNK ernnsk palc v Praze, Praha Zblov 2001. ARNOLD HOUBRAKEN De groote Schouburgh der Nederlantsche Konstschilders en Schilderessen, Amsterdam, 17181721. ARNOLD HOUBRAKENS GROSSE SCHOUBURGH DER NIEDERLNDISCHEN MALER UND MALERINNER ed. Alfred von Wurzbach, Wien 1880 (Quellenschriften fr Kunstgeschichte und Kunsttechnik de Mittelalters und der Renaissance, 8). JOSEF HRDLIKA Slavatova obrana jezuitskho du a jeho pedstavy o konfesijnm uspodn ech z potku 17. stolet, Folia Historica Bohemica 23, 2008, pp. 225249. PETR HRUBMICHAELA HRUB (edd.) Barokn umn v severozpadnch echch, st nad Labem 2003. ERICH HUBALA (ed.) Die Kunst des 17. Jahrhunderts, Berlin 1970 (Propylen Kunstgeschichte, vol. 9). ERICH HUBALA Johann Michael Rottmayr, Wien 1981.

BOHDAN CHUDOBAZDENK KALISTAJOSEF VAICAJAN RACEKALBERT KUTAL, Baroko. Pt stat, Praha 1934. KAREL CHYTIL Prask Venuina fontna od B. Wurzelbauera, Praha 1902. JOSEPH IMORDE (ed.) Barocke Inszenierung. Akten des Internationalen Forschungscolloquiums an der Technischen Universitt Berlin, 20.22. Juni 1996, Emsdetten 1999. JAN JAKUB QUIRIN JAHN Nachrichten von einigen bhmischern alten und neuen Malern und Knstlern, in: Neue Bibliothek der schnen Wissenschaften und der freyen Knste, Bd. 19, Stck 2, Leipzig 1776, pp. 320332; Bd 20, Stck 2, Leipzig 1776, pp. 140152. PABLO JIMENEZ Vztahy panlska a ech, jejich doklady v rudolnsk kultue a umn (dissertation thesis FFUK), Praha 1996. HERMENEGILD JIREEK Obnoven Prvo a Zzen zemsk ddinho krlovstv eskho, Codex Iuris Bohemici 5/2, Praha 1888. JOSEF JIREEK Dje krlovstv uherskho za panovn Ferdinanda I. Svazek I. Od Leta 15261546, Vilma hrabte Slavaty z Chlumu a z Koumberka, vladae domu Hradeckho, pna na Hradci Jindichov, Stri, Teli, irovnici a Mlnice, nejvyho ddinho enka krlovstv eskho, csav Ferdinanda II. a III. skutenho tejnho rady a komornka, ryte Zlatho rouna, Vde 1857. JOSEF JIREEK Leben des Obersten Hofkanzlers von Bhmen Wilhelm Grafen Slavata, Prag 1876. JOSEF JIREEK Pamti nejvyho kancle krlovstv eskho Vilma hrabte Slavaty z Chlumu a Komberka, vladae domu Hradeckho, pna na Hradci Jindichov, Stri, Teli, irovnici a Mlnice, nejvyho ddinho enka krlovstv eskho, csav Ferdinanda II. a III. skutenho tejnho rady a komornka, ryte Zlatho rouna (nar. 1. prosince 1572, zem. 19. ledna 1652) od L. 1608 do 1619, I. dl. 1608, 16181619, II. dl. 1611, 1615, 16171619, Praha 1866 a 1868 (Star pamti djin eskch. Monumenta historiae bohemica, II, depart. III, vol. 12). JOSEF JIREEK Pestoupen Vilma Slavaty k crkvi katolick, asopis katolickho duchovenstva 3, 1862, pp. 401435. MIROSLAVA KACETLOV Autoportrt v eskm baroknm malstv (graduation thesis FFUK), Praha 2006. ZDENK KALISTA esk barokn gotika a jej rsk ohnisko, Brno 1970. ZDENK KALISTA Humprecht Jan ernn jako mecen

404 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

a podporovatel umn v dob sv bentsk ambasdy (16601663), Pamtky archeologick 36, 19281930, pp. 5378. MATEUSZ KAPUSTKAANDRZEJ KOZIEPIOTR OSZCZANOWSKI Op Nederlandse Manier. Inspiracje niderlandzkie w sztuce lskiej XVXVIII w. (exh. cat.), Legnica 2001, pp. 9394. MARIUSZ KARPOWICZ Dziaalno artystyczna Michaelangela Palloniego w Polsce, Warszawa 1967. MARIUSZ KARPOWICZ Jerzy Eleuter Siemiginowski, malarz polskiego baroku, Wrocaw Warszawa Krakw Gdask 1974. MARIUSZ KARPOWICZ Paolo Pagani w Krakowie, Biuletyn Historii Sztuki 54, 1992, pp. 6780. MARIUSZ KARPOWICZ Sztuka polska XVII. wieku, Warszawa 1975. FRANTIEK KAIKA Nostick palc ve stavebnm a historickm vvoji, 1999, ms. HANS-MARTIN KAULBACHMAREN WAIKEURSULA ZELLER (edd.) Johann Heinrich Schnfeld: Welt der Gtter, Heiligen und Heldenmythen, Kln 2009. WOLFGANG KEMP (ed.) Der Betrachter ist im Bild. Kunstwissenschaft und Rezeptionssthetik, Berlin 1992. WOLFGANG KEMP Disegno. Beitrge zur Geschichte des Begriffs zwischen 1547 und 1607, Marburger Jahrbuch fr Kunstwissenschaft XIX, 1974, pp. 219240. GABRIELA KESNEROV Nov Pragensia Vclava Hollara, Umn XXVIII, 1990, pp. 341347. GABRIELA KESNEROVANTHONY GRIFFITHS Vclav Hollar: Kresby a grack listy ze sbrek Britskho muzea v Londn a Nrodn galerie v Praze (exh. cat.), Praha 1983. GALINA KISLYKH Nemeckij, avstrijskij i vejcarskij risunok. Gosudarstvennyj Muzej Izobrazitelnych Iskusstv imeni A. S. Pukina, Vol. I, XVXVIII veka, Moskva 2009. INGEBORG KLEKLER Die Handschriften der Wrttenbergischen Landesbibliothek Stuttgart III, Stammbcher bis 1625, Wiesbaden 1999. CHRISTIAN KLEMM Joachim von Sandrart: Kunst-Werke und Lebens-Lauf, Berlin 1986 (Jahresgabe des Deutschen Vereines fr Kunstwissenschaft 1985/86). ULRIKE KNALL-BRSKOVSKY Italienische Quadraturisten in sterreich, Wien Kln 1984. TOM KNOZ Poblohorsk konskace. Moravsk prbh, stedoevropsk souvislosti, obecn aspekty, Brno 2006. MARIE KOEFOED (ed.) Johann Wilhelm Baur 16071642. Manirisme et baroque en Europe, Strasbourg 1998.

JOACHIM KHLERRAINER BENDEL (edd.) Geschichte des christlichen Lebens im schlesischer Raum, t. 1, Mnster 2002 (Religions- und Kulturgeschichte in Ostmittel- und Sdosteuropa, vol. 1). JOS KOLDEWEIJ Der gude sente Servas. De Servatiuslegende en de Servatiana: een onderzoek naar de beeldvorming rond een heilige in de middeleeuwen, Assen/Maastricht 1985 (Maaslandse Monograen Groot Formaat 5). JOS KOLDEWEIJ Van Maastricht naar Mnisech. Karel Scrteas Servatius uit 1654, Antiek. Tijdschrift voor oude kunst en kunstnijverheid, 30:5, 1995, pp. 208212. BJRN R.KOMMER (ed.) Adriaen de Vries 15561626, Augsburgs Glanz Europas Ruhm (exh. cat.), Augsburg 2000. LUBOMR KONEN Esilio publico Fridrich Falck a Kapar Bechteler, Umn XXXI, 1983, pp. 451456. LUBOMR KONEN Karel krta a Franois Le Roy, S. J. neboli: Historie tm detektivn, Bulletin of the National Gallery in Prague 10, 2001, pp. 8792. LUBOMR KONEN Mezi textem a obrazem. Miscellanea z historie emblematiky, Praha 2002. LUBOMR KONEN Nochmals zu Laokoon des Adriaen de Vries fr Albrecht von Waldstein, Studia Rudolphina 5, 2005, pp. 7779. LUBOMR KONEN krta a Tempesta, Drahomra a Proserpina, Opuscula Historiae Artium. Studia Minora facultatis philosophicae universitatis brunensis, F 45, 2001, pp. 7982. JOSEF KOPEEK Jan Ji Bendl na Svat Hoe, Podbrdsko XI, 2004, pp. 184188. JOSEF KOPEEK Karel krta na Svat Hoe, Podbrdsko IX, 2002, pp. 164175. JOSEF KOPEEK Svat hora, Kosteln Vyd 2006. MIROSLAV KORECK Praha v barevnm relifu, Praha 1975. IVO KON Cyriack klter a chrm sv. Ke Vtho v baroku, Umn XVI, 1968, pp. 173195. IVO KON esk ezbstv 16201650 a jeho spoleensk a historick pedpoklady (unprinted graduation thesis FFUK), Praha 1957. IVO KON Knihovna architekta Bonifce Wolmuta, Umn VIII, 1960, pp. 522 527. IVO KON (rec.) Reprezentativn obraz baroka

v echch, Umn XXIX, 1981, pp. 465469. IVO KON Umn a umlci baroka v Hradci krlov I. a II., Umn XIX, 1971, pp. 3569, 136189. VIKTOR KOTRBA esk barokn gotika. Dlo Jana SantinihoAichla, Praha 1976. VIKTOR KOTRBA Georg neb Cajetan Bendl i Caspar Bechteler, Umn XXII, 1974, pp. 308323. VIKTOR KOTRBA Pvod a ivot architekta Jana Blaeje Santiniho-Aichela, Umn XVI, 1968, pp. 535566. ANDRZEJ KOZIE Michael Willmanns Way to the Heights of Art and His Early Drawings, Bulletin of the National Gallery in Prague 78, 19971998, pp. 5466. ANDRZEJ KOZIE (ed.) Opactwo Cystersw w Lubiu i artyci, Wrocaw 2008 (Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis, vol. 3012, Historia Sztuki, vol. 26). ANDRZEJ KOZIE Rysunki Michaela Willmanna (16301706), Wrocaw 2000 (Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis, vol. 2212, Historia Sztuki, vol. 14). ANDRZEJ KOZIEBEATA LEJMAN (edd.) Willmann i inni. Malarstwo, rysunek i graki na lsku i w krajach ociennych w XVII i XVIII wieku, Wrocaw 2002. VINCENC KRAM Karel krta, Salon, 1932, no. 2, pp. 67, no. 3, pp. 2728. VINCENC KRAM (ed.) Vstava obraz Karla krty, Praha 1938. VINCENC KRAM Z mladch let Karla krty. Jakubv pchod k Labanovi, Praha 1938 (Pspvky k djinm vtvarnho umn 1). VINCENC KRAM Zpustoen chrmu sv. Vta, ed. Michal ronk, Praha 1998. MILO VCLAV KRATOCHVL as hvzd a mandragor. Prask lta Rudolfa II., Praha 1972. PETR KRATOCHVL (ed.) Velk djiny zem Koruny esk Architektura, Praha 2009. JARMILA KRLOV, Byl v naich zemch vbec manrismus, Vtvarn umn 19, 1969, pp. 6885. JARMILA KRLOV Centrln stavby esk renesance, Praha 1974. JARMILA KRLOV Das Oval in der Architektur des bhmischen Manierismus, Umn XXI, 1973, pp. 303331. JARMILA KRLOV Die Garten Rudolf II., Leids

Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 1, 1982, pp. 149160. JARMILA KRLOV Die rudolnische Architektur, Leids Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 1, 1982, pp. 271302. JARMILA KRLOV Giovanni Pieroni architekt?, Umn XXXVI, 1988, pp. 511542. JARMILA KRLOV Il Palladianesimo in Cecoslovacchia e linuenza del Veneto sullarchitettura ceca, Bollettino del Centro internazionale di studi di architektura A. Palladio 62, 1964, pp. 89110. JARMILA KRLOV Italt misti Mal Strany na potku 17. stolet, Umn XVIII, 1970, pp. 545 581. JARMILA KRLOV Kostely esk a moravsk renesance. Pspvek k typologii, Umn XXIX, 1981, pp. 137. JARMILA KRLOV La Toscana e larchitettura die Rodolfo II: Giovanni Gargiolli a Praga, in: Firenze e la Toscana dei Medici nellEuropa del 500. Atti del Convegno Internazionala di Studi III., Firenze 1983, pp. 10291051. JARMILA KRLOV Pietro Ferabosco und sein Schaffen im Knigreich Bhmen, Ostbairische Grenzmarken 11, 1969, pp. 183196. JARMILA KRLOV Poznmky k rudolfnsk architektue, Umn XXIII, 1975, pp. 499526. GEORG KREISBEAT VON WARTBURG (edd.) Geschichte einer stdtischen Gessellschaft, Basel 2000. THOMAS KREN Chi non vuol Baccho: Roeland van Laers Burlesque Painting about Dutch Artists in Rome, Simiolus 11, 1981, pp. 6380. LENZ KRISS-RETTENBERG (ed.) Wallfahrt kennt keine Grenzen, Mnchen 1984. ALOIS KROESS S.J. Geschichte der bhmischen Provinz der Gesellschaft Jesu, Wien 1910. KAMIL KROFTA Zpisky Vilma Slavaty o vcech moravskch z l. 1607, 1608, 16131615, esk asopis historick 16, 1910, pp. 44 51. JI KROUPA (ed.) V zrcadle stn. Morava v dob baroka 1670 1790 (exh. cat.), Brno Rennes 2003. JI KROUPAMICHAELA EFERISOV LOUDOVLUBOMR KONEN (edd.) Orbis artium. K jubileu Lubomra Slavka, Brno 2009 (Opera Universitatis Masarykianae Brunensis, Facultas Philosophica. Spisy Masarykovy

405 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

univerzity v Brn, Filozock fakulta 382). IVO KRSEKZDENK KUDLKAMILO STEHLKJOSEF VLKA Umn baroka na Morav a ve Slezsku, Praha 1996. ANDREW LADIS (ed.) The Craft of Art. Originality and Industry in the Italian Renaissance and Baroque Workshop, Athens, Ga. 1995. LUBO LANCINGERMILAN PAVLK Kostel sv. Ma Magdaleny na Mal Stran v Praze a Francesco Caratti, Umn XIV, 1966, pp. 109121. ROBERTO LANDI Indice degli artisti compresi nellopera manoscritta di Marcello Oretti Notizie de Professori del dissegno, L Archiginnasio 78, 1983, pp. 103198. LARS OLOF LARSSON Adriaen de Vries, Wien 1967. LARS OLOF LARSSON Adriaen de Vries v Praze, Umn XVI, 1968, pp. 255295. LARS OLOF LARSSON European bronzes 14501700 (Swedish National Art Museums), Stockholm 1992. KONSTANZE LAUFER Anmerkungen zu den Salzburger Altargemlden Johann Heinrich Schnfelds, Barockberichte 16/17, 1998, pp. 2329. HARTMUT LAUFHTTE (ed.) Knste und Natur in Diskursen der Frhen Neuzeit, Wiesbaden 2000 (Wolfenbtteler Arbeiten zur Barockforschung XXXV). MARILYN ARONBERG LAVIN (ed.) Il 60, Essays Honoring Irving Lavin on his Sixtieth Birthday, New York 1990, pp. 207226. VCLAV LEDVINKAJI PEEK Praha, Praha 2000. RENSSELAER W.LEE Ut pictura poesis. The Humanistic Theory of Painting, New York London 1967. JOHANN AUGUST LEHNINGER Abrg de la vie des peintres, dont les tableaux composent la Galerie electorale de Dresde. Avec le dtail de tous les tableaux de cette collection et des eclaircissemens historiques sur ces chefsdoeuvres de la peinture, Dresde: Frres Walters 1782. JAROSLAVA LENCOV Na okraj prac Kapara Bechtelera pro Prask hrad, Umn XXII, 1974, pp. 548553. JAROSLAVA LENCOV ezan dvee pozdn renesance a ranho baroka v Praze, Umn XXVI, 1978, pp. 464472. DAVID A.LEVINEEKKERHARD MAI (edd.) I Bamboccianti, Niederlndische Malerrebellen im Rom des Barock (exh. cat.), Milano 1991.

DOBROSLAV LBAL Dv dvno zanikl architektonick dla prask renesance, Stalet Praha 8, 1977, pp. 267273. DOBROSLAV LBALJAN MUK, Star Msto prask, architektonick a urbanistick vvoj, Praha 1996. MICHAELA LENKOV loha architekta Nicola Sebregondiho ve slubch vvody Albtrechta z Valdtejna, Zprvy pamtkov pe 58, 1998, pp. 116. HILDE LIETZMANN Die Deutsch-Lutherische Dreifaltigkeits, die sptere Ordenskirche Sta. Maria Victoria auf der Kleinen Seite zu Prag, Zeitschrift fr Kunstgeschichte 40, 1977, pp. 205226. DOROTHY LIMOUZE Aegidius Sadeler (15701629): Drawings, Prints and Art Theory (Ph.D. Dissertation), Princeton University 1990. DOROTHY LIMOUZE Umn rytiny na csaskm dvoe v Praze, Grapheion 2, 1997, pp. 1925. HUBERT LOCHER Raffael und das Altarbild der Renaissance. Die Pala Baglioni als Kunstwerk im sakralen Kontext, Berlin 1994 (Acta humaniora. Schriften zur Kunstwissenschaft und Philosophie). VILM LORENC Pspvek k mstopisu starho Zderazu, Prask sbornk historick 3, 19661967, pp. 86105. VILM LORENCKAREL TSKA ernnsk palc v Praze, Praha 1980. HELLMUT LORENZ (ed.) Geschichte der bildenden Knste in sterreich, Bd. 4: Barock, Mnchen London New York 1999. HUBERTUS LOSSOW Michael Willmann (16301706) Meister der Barockmalerei, Wrzburg 1994. WOLFGANG LOTZ Die ovalen Kirchenrume des Cinquecento, Rmisches Jahrbuch fr Kunstgeschichte 7, 1955, pp. 798. UTE LOTZ-HEUMANN JAN-FRIEDRICH MISSFELDER MATTHIAS POHLIG (edd.) Konversion und Konfession in der Frhen Neuzeit, Gtersloh 2007. LKIANOS Pravdiv vmysly, Vclav Bahnk (transl.), Praha 1983. JAROSLAV MACEKPETR MACEKMOJMR HORYNAPAVEL PREISS Oktavin Broggio 16701742 (exh. cat.), Litomice 1992. PETR MACEKJAN BERNEKPAVEL ZAHRADNK Bval klter bosch augustinin v Povce u Mlnka, Przkumy pamtek VIII, 2001, no. 2, pp. 737. PETR MACEKPAVEL ZAHRADNK Zmeck arel v Zkupech, Przkumy pamtek 3, 1996, pp. 334.

KAREL BOROMEJSK MDL Vtvarn umn. Karel krta, Ploha Nrodnch list k slu 278, 1910 (9. 10), p. 9. MARTIN MDL Distinguishing similarities style: Carpoforo and Giacomo Tencalla in Czech lands, Ars 40, 2007, pp. 225236. MARTIN MDL Kresba Stigmatizace sv. Frantika z Assisi a ternbersk kaple v kostele praskch hybern, in: Ars linearis II, in print. DENIS MAHON Studies in Seicento Art and Theory, London 1947. FRIDOLIN MACHEK Defenestrace prask r. 1618, esk asopis historick XIV, 1908, pp. 197211, 297311, 436451. EKKEHARD MAIANKE REPP-ECKERT (edd.) Triumph und Tod des Helden. Europische Historienmalerei von Rubens bis Manet, Milano 1987. EMILE MLE Lart religieux aprs le Consile de Trente: etude sur liconographie de la n du XVI sicle, du XVII, du XVIII sicle: Italie, France, Espagne, Flandres, Paris 1932. CARLO CESARE MALVASIA Felsina pittrice II, Bologna 1678. CARLO CESARE MALVASIA Felsina pittrice II, G. Zanotti (ed.), Bologna 1841. JAKUB B.MAL Pbhy Jaroslava z Martinic a Vilma Slavaty po jich vyhozen z okna, asopis eskho musea 24, 1850, pp. 49 80. JAKUB B.MAL Pspvek k historii esk sedmnctho stolet, asopis eskho musea 19, pp. 190 212. GIULIO MANCINI Considerazioni sulla Pittura I, ed. Adriana Marucchi, Roma 1956. KAREL VAN MANDER Den grondt der edel vry schilderkonst, Uitgegeven en van vertaling en commentaar voorzien door Hessel Miedema, Utrecht 1973. KAREL VAN MANDER Het schilder-boeck (facsimile van de eerste uitgave, Haarlem 1604), Utrecht 1969. FRANTIEK MARE Das Martinicsche Geschichtswerk, Mitteilungen des Institus fr sterreichische Geschichstforschung, 1885, pp. 310311. GIOVANNI BATTISTA MARINO Dicerie sacre sulla Pittura, la Musica e il Cielo, Milano 1618. ANTONN MARKUS Stavovsk apologie z roku 1618, esk asopis historick 17, 1911, pp. 5874, 200217, 304315, 421435.

ADRIANA MARUCCHILUIGI SALERNO (edd.) Considerazioni sulla Pittura II, Roma 1957. JEAN MICHEL MASSING Du texte a limage: La Calomnie dApelle et son iconographie, Strasbourg 1990. PETR MAA Oslavy jubilejnho lta v m a esk lechta, in: Jihoesk sbornk historick 66, 1997, pp. 117123. PETR MAA Svt esk aristokracie (15001700), Praha 2004. PETR MAA Zrozen tradice (slavatovsk vystn romberskho a hradeckho odkazu), in: Vclav Bek (ed.), Posledn pni z Hradce, esk Budjovice 1998 (Opera historica 6, 1998), pp. 513552. ANTONN MATJEK Djepis umn. Dl pt. Umn Novho vku III., Praha 1932. ANTONN MATJEK Galerie v Rudoln, Praha 1913. ANTONN MATJEKJAROSLAV MAL (edd.) Legendy o eskch patronech v obrzkov knize ze XIV. stolet, Praha 1940. BOHUMIL MATJKA Pestavba a vzdoba chrmu sv. Tome pi kltee poustevnk du sv. Augustina na Menm Mst Praskm, Pamtky archaeologick a mstopisn XVII, 1896, sl. 81152. VILM MATHESIUS (red.) Co daly nae zem Evrop a lidstvu. Od slovanskch vrozvst k nrodnmu obrozen, Praha 1939. JAROSLAV MATHON Prask olte v rannm baroku, Umn (tenc) XI, 1938, pp. 561571. Die Matrikel der Universitt Basel II 1532/331600/01, ed. Hans Georg Wackernagel, Basel 1962. Die Matrikel der Universitt Basel III 1601/021665/66, ed. Hans Georg Wackernagel, Basel 1962. FRANZ MATSCHE Gegenreformatorische Architekturpolitik. Casa-SantaKopien und Habsburger Loreto-Kult nach 1620, Jahrbuch fr Volkskunde NF 1, 1978, pp. 80118. EDUARD MAUR Problmy demograck struktury ech v polovin 17. stolet, esk asopis historick XIX, 1971, pp. 830870. JOSEF MAYER Architektonick dlo Jana Domenica de Baris, Stalet Praha 5, 1971, pp. 199209. ESTHER MEIER Joachim von Sandrarts LebensLauf: Dichtung oder Wahrheit?, Marburger Jahrbuch fr Kunstwissenschaft 31, 2004, pp. 205239. PATRICIA MEILAMAN Titian and the Altarpiece in Renaissance Venice, Cambridge 2000.

406 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

JAROSLAVA MENDELOVPAVLA STTNKOV (edd.) ivot v barokn Praze 16201784. Seznam vystavench expont, Praha 2001. ANEKA MERHAUTOV (ed.) Katedrla sv. Vta v Praze (K 650. vro zaloen), Praha 1994. CYRIL MERHOUT O Mal Stran. Jej stavebn vvoj a dvn ivot, Praha 1956. MONICA MIATO LAccademia degli Incogniti di Giovan Francesco Loredan, Venezia (16301661), Firenze 1998. SERGIUSZ MICHALSKI Der Laokoon und die Ringer des Adriaen de Vries im Garten des Prager Waldsteinpalastes: Symbole der berwindung des bhmischen Aufstandes?, Studia Rudolphina 4, 2004, pp. 2831. JI MIKULEC 31. 7. 1627. Rekatolizace lechty v echch. je zem, toho je i nboenstv, Praha 2005. MELCHIOR MISSIRINI Memorie per servire alla storia della romana Accademia di S. Luca no alla morte di Antonio Canova, Roma 1823. GIORGIO MOLLISI Lopera a fresco di Carpoforo Tencalla, in: Carpoforo Tencalla da Bissone. Pitura del Seicento fra Milano e lEuropa centrale (exh. cat.), Milano 2005, pp. 5965. JAN MORVEK Giuseppe Mattei a Nov staven Praskho hradu 163844, Umn V, 1957, pp. 340355. JAN MORVEK Stavba jezuitsk rezidence ve Star Boleslavi, Umn VI, 1958, pp. 376401. JAN MORVEKZDENK WIRTH Valdtejnv Jin, Umn (tenc) VII, 1934, pp. 273282, 447466. JAN MORVEKZDENK WIRTH Valdtejnv Jin, pspvek k djinm baroknho stavitelstv v echch, Praha 1946. JOHANN JOSEPH MORPER Das Czernin Palais in Prag, Prag 1940. KARL MSENEDERGOSBERT SCHSSLER (edd.) Bedeutung in den Bildern. Festschrift fr Jrg Traeger zum 60. Geburtstag, Regensburg 2002 (Regensburger Kulturleben I). FRANCESCO MOZZETI Educare per immagini. Gesti di carit e attivismo caritatevole, Venezia Cinquecento VIII, 1998, pp. 5380. IVAN MUCHKAKVTA KOV Valdtejnsk palc, Praha 1996. WERNER MLLER Von Guarini bis Balthasar Neumann, Petersberg 2002. VRA NAKOV Architekt a stavitel Pavel Ignc Bayer pedstavy v literatue a skutenost, Umn XXII, 1974, pp. 224261.

VRA NAKOV Barokn architektura v zpadnch echch, Umn XXVIII, 1980, pp. 22 53. VRA NAKOV Giovanni Domenico Orsi de Orsini a Star Boleslav, Umn XXX, 1982, pp. 181183. VRA NAKOV Kostel sv. Vorily v Praze. K problematice esk barokn architektury kolem roku 1700, Sbornk prac Filozock fakulty Brnnsk univerzity, F 3031, 198687, pp. 3339. VRA NAKOV K typologii esk sakrln architektury 17. stolet, Umn XXXIV, 1986, pp. 138143. VRA NAKOVJAROSLAVA LENCOV Barokn pestavba Lobkovickho palce, Umn XLIII, 1995, pp. 425432. KAREL NAVRTIL Pamti hlavnho kostela farnho, fary a koly sv. Jindicha a sv. Kunhuty v Novm Mst praskm, Praha 1869. JAROMR NEUMANN Aktulnost eskho baroku, Umn XXX, 1982, pp. 385421. JAROMR NEUMANN esk barok, Praha 19742. JAROMR NEUMANN K italskm zatkm Karla krty, Umn III, 1955, pp. 308329. JAROMR NEUMANN Jan Krytof Lika, Umn XV, 1967, pp. 135176, 260311. JAROMR NEUMANN Karel krta, Praha 1956. JAROMR NEUMANN Karel krta 16101674 (exh. cat.), Praha 1974. JAROMR NEUMANN Ke komposinm principm krtova svatovclavskho cyklu, Vtvarn umn VI, 1956, pp. 162168. JAROMR NEUMANN Malstv XVII. stolet v echch. Barokn realismus, Praha 1951 (esk djiny III). JAROMR NEUMANN Osobitost eskho baroku, Umn LI, 2003, pp. 137146. JAROMR NEUMANN krtov. Karel krta a jeho syn, Praha 2000. PETRA NEVMOV La Capella Italiana della Citta Vecchia / Vlask kaple, Praha 2005. PETRA NEVMOV Vstavba a vzdoba Klementina v letech 15561773, (dissertation thesis FFUK) Praha 2001. JANA NIEDERMAIER Barocke Ambitenanlagen in Bhmen und Mhren, Mnchen 2009. FRANZ NIEHOFF (ed.) Mit Kalkl & Leidenschaft. Inszenierungen des Heiligen in der bayerischen Rokokomalerei,

Band I, Landshut 2003 (Schriften aus den Museen der Stadt Landshut 17). FRIEDRICH NOACK Das Deutschtum in Rom seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters, Stuttgart 1927. ARNE NOVK Nov bdn o eskm baroku slovesnm, Nae vda 16, 1935, pp. 189202. ARNE NOVK Praha barokn, Praha 1915. ANTONN NOVOTN Jak ivot Prahou el (15761830), Praha 1946. VLADIMR NOVOTN ast Jana Jiho Bendla na vzdob kostela sv. Salvtora v Praze, Pamtky archeologick XL, 1937, pp. 4155. PELLEGRINO ANTONIO ORLANDI Abecedario pittorico nel quale compendiosamente sono descritte le patrie, i maestri, ed i tempi, nequali orirono circa quattromila professori di pittura, di scultura, e darchitettura diviso in tre parti, Bologna 1704. PETRA OULKOV Klementinum: prvodce, Praha 2006. FRANTIEK PALACK Pehled souasn nejvych dstojnk a ednk zemskch i dvorskch v krlovstv eskm od nejstarch as a do nynjka, Praha 1832. ERWIN PANOFSKY Idea, contributo alla storia dellestetica, Firenze 1952. THE PAPER MUSEUM OF CASSIANO DAL POZZO: a catalogue raisonn: drawings and prints in the Royal Library at Windsor Castle, the British museum, the Institut de France and other collections, Francis Haskell Jenifer Montagu (edd.), London 20012004. GIAMBATTISTA PASSERI Vite depittori, scultori ed architetti cha anno lavorato in Roma, Morti dal 1641 no al 1673, Roma 1772. GUSTAV EDMUND PAZAUREK Carl Screta (16101674.) Ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte des XVII. Jahrhundertes, Prag 1889. JOSEF PEKA Postavy a problmy eskch djin. Vbor z dla, ed. Zdenk Kutnar, Praha 19902. RICHARD PENNINGTON A descriptive Catalogue of the Etched Work of Wenceslaus Hollar 16071677, Cambridge 1982. FRANOISE PERRIER Segmenta nobilium signorum et statuarum, Quae temporis dentem invidium evasere Urbis aeternae ruinis erepta, Typis aeneis abce commissa Perpetuae vene rationis monumentum, Roma 1638. JI PEEK Mansk vzdlanost a kultura v pedblohorskch echch 15471620 (Vedn dny kulturnho ivota), Praha 1993. JI PEEKVCLAV LEDVINKA Ponen a odstren. Msta versus poraen, Praha 1998 (Documenta pragensia XVI).

JAROSLAV PEINA (ed.) Sbornk k sedmdestinm Jana Kvta, Praha 1965 (Acta Universitatis Carolinae, Philosophica et Historica 1). JAROSLAV PEINA Skupinov portrt v eskm renesannm umn, Umn II, 1954, pp. 269295. ULRICH PFISTERERVALESKA VON ROSEN (edd.) Der Knstler als Kunstwerk: Selbstportrts vom Mittelalter bis zur Gegenwart, Stuttgart 2005. FRIEDRICH PIELJRG TRAEGER (edd.) Festschrift Wolfgang Braunfels, Tbingen 1977. ROGER DE PILES Abrg de la vie des peintres, avec des reexions sur leurs ouvrages, et un Trait du peintre parfait; De la connoissance des desseins; De lutilit des estampe, Paris 1699. ROGER DE PILES Abreg de la vie des peintres : avec des rexions sur leurs ouvrages, et un trait du peintre parfait ; de la connoissance des desseins ; de lutilit des estampes, 2. d., revue & corrige par lauteur; avec un abreg de sa vie, & plusieurs autres additions, Paris 1715. ROGER DE PILES Abreg de la vie des peintres, avec des rexions sur leurs ouvrages, nouvelle edition, considerablement augment, Amsterdam Leipzig 1767. ROGER DE PILES Historie und Leben der berhmtesten europaeischen Mahler, so sich durch ihre Kunst-Stcke bekand gemacht, samt einigen Rexions darber und Abbildung eines vollkommenen Mahlers, nach welcher die Mahlerey als einer Regul kann beurtheilet werden, wobey auch der Nutzen und Gebrauch der Kupferstcke und Erklrung der gebruchlichen Mahler-Wrter, Hamburg 1710. HEINRICH F.PLETT Rhetoric and Renaissance Culture, Berlin 2004. ANTONN PODLAHA Materilie k slovnku umlc a umleckch emeslnk v echch, Pamtky archeologick XXIX, 1917, pp. 136151, 269289. ANTONN PODLAHA Materilie k slovnku umlc a umleckch emeslnk v echch, Pamtky archeologick 29, 1919, pp. 106116. EMANUEL POCHE (ed.) Praha na svitu novch djin (tvero knih o Praze), Praha 1988. EMANUEL POCHE Prahou krok za krokem, Praha 19852. EMANUEL POCHE (ed.) Umleck pamtky ech 2 (K/O), Praha 1978. EMANUEL POCHEPAVEL PREISS Prask palce, Praha 1973.

407 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

ZUZANA POKORNMARTIN SVATO (edd.) Bohuslav Balbn a kultura jeho doby v echch. Sbornk z konference Pamtnku nrodnho psemnictv, Praha 1992. JOSEF POLIENSK Vilma Slavaty relace o jednn v pin knectv Opavskho 1614 1615. Pspvek k poznn politickho mylen pedblohorskch ech, Slezsk sbornk 51, 1953, pp. 488498. KAREL PORTEMAN Emblematic Exhibitions at the Brussels Jesuit College (16301685): A Study of the Commemorative Manuscripts (Royal Library, Brussels), Turnhout 1996. ROMAN PRAHL K potkm a pedpokladm djin umn (Frantiek Lothar Ehemant), Umn LII, 2004, pp. 310. JI PRAK Katalog rukopis kiovnick knihovny nyn deponovanch ve Sttn knihovn SR, Praha 1980. RUDOLF PREIMESBERGER Tragische Motive in Raffaels Transguration, Zeitschrift fr Kunstgeschichte L, 1987, pp. 89115. PAVEL PREISS Antonn Matjek a barokn umn, in: Antonn Matjek (18891950), sbornk pspvk z konference podan ke 100letmu vro narozen prof. Antonna Matjka katedrou djin umn FF UK v Praze, stavem pro teorii a djiny umn SAV v Praze a Nrodn galeri v Praze 31. ledna 1989, Praha 1989, pp. 4753. PAVEL PREISS Betrachtungen zu Karl krtas zeichnerischer Eigenart, Barockberichte XXXI, 2001 pp. 4252. PAVEL PREISS esk barokn kresba / Baroque drawing in Bohemia, Praha 2006. PAVEL PREISS Italt umlci v Praze. Renesance, Manrismus, Baroko, Praha 1986. PAVEL PREISS Koeny a letorosty vtvarn kultury baroka v echch, Praha 2008. ANTONN PROFOUSJAN SVOBODA Mstn jmna v echch: jejich vznik, pvodn vznam a zmny, vol. 4. S, Praha 1957. VLADIMR PIBYL Baroko ve Slanm Bval frantiknsk klter s kostelem Nejsvtj Trojice, Slan 1988. ORAZIO PUGLIESE (ed.) Venezia e la peste 1348/1797 (exh. cat.), Venezia 1980. KAREL PURKYN Karel Skreta. ivotopisn nstin, Kritick ploha k Nrodnm listm 1, 1864, pp. 103107. RENA POKORN-PURKYOV ivot t generac. Vzpomnky na velk Purkyn. Listy a lnky Karla Purkyn, Praha 1944, pp. 342346.

GABRIELE RAIMONDO Gli agostiniani scalzi, Genova 1955. JI RAK Vvoj utrakvistick organizace v dob pedblohorsk, Sbornk archivnch prac XXXI/1, 1981, pp. 179204. ISABELLE DE RAMAIX Aegidius II. Sadeler, The Illustrated Bartsch 72.1, ed. John T. Spike, New York 1997. ISABELLE DE RAMAIX Les Sadeler: De damasquineur graveur et marchand destampes. Quelques documents indits, Le livre et lestampe XXXV, 1989, no. 131, pp. 746. CARLO RIDOLFI Le Maraviglie dellArte, ovvero le Vite de glIllustri Pittori Veneti e dello Stato , ed. Detlev von Hadeln, I, II, Berlin 1914, 1924 (original edition Venezia 1648). FRANTIEK LADISLAV RIEGER (red.) Slovnk naun II/1, Praha 1862. JOSEF ANTONN RIEGGER Archiv fr Geschichte und Statistik, insbesondere von Bhmen II, Dresden 1793. PETER RIGETTIJOHANN CHRISTOPH PANNISCH Historische Nachricht sowohl von der Errichtung der Wellischen Congregation unter dem Titel Mariae Himmelfahrt als auch des dazu gehrigen Hospitals B. V. Mariae Ad S. Carolum Borromaeum. Bey Gelegenheit dey feyerlichen Begngni des zweyten Jahrhunderts von Errichtung ermeldter Congregation, Prag 1773. VCLAV RICHTER Stavebn vvoj kostela sv. Salvatora v Klementinu, Pamtky archeologick 34, 1925, pp. 336371. ALENA RICHTEROVIVANA ORNEJOV (edd.) Jezuit a Klementinum, Praha 2006. ALOIS RIEGEL Das Hollndische Gruppenportrt (Textband), Wien 1931. CESARE RIPA Iconologia, Padova 1625. ELIO DE ROSA (ed.) Roma Sacra I., Napoli 1995. MARCO ROSCI Il Cerano [Lopera completa], Milano 2000. SERGIO ROSSI Idea e accademia. Studio sulle teorie artistiche di Federico Zuccaro. I. Disegno interno e esterno, Storia dellarte XX, 1974, pp. 3756. ZDENK ROTREKL Barokn fenomn v souasnosti, Praha 1995. FRANOIS ROUSSET Traitte nouveau de lhysterotomotokie ou enfantement caesarien|qui est extraction de lenfant par incision laterale du ventre [], Paris 1581. JAN ROYT cta k Pann Marii a k eskm zemskm patronm v du Tovarystva Jeova v baroknch echch, in: Petronilla emus (ed.),

Bohemia jesuitica 15562006, Tomus 2, Praha 2010, pp. 12791309. JAN ROYT (ed.) Svat Vclav v umn 17. a 18. stolet, Praha 1994. LAURIE RUBIN (ed.) Children of Mercury. The Education of Artists in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, Providence 1984. UGO RUGGERI Pietro e Marco Liberi: pittori nella Venezia del Seicento, Rimini 1996. BOHUMIL RYBA Soupisy rukopis a starch tisk z fondu Sttn vdeck knihovny v eskch Budjovicch 3, esk Budjovice 1985. ANTONN RYBIKA SKUTESK Karel kreta otnovsk ze Zvoic. Nstin rodo a ivotopisn, Svtozor 3, 1869, pp. 4243, 5051, 5556, 63. VOJTCH SDLO Kostel sv. Frantika u kiovnk na Starm Mst praskm, Roenka Kruhu pro pstovn djin umn za rok 1934, Praha 1935, pp. 4467. JOSEF SALABA Slavatova apologie jezuit, esk asopis historick IV, 1898, pp. 324332. LUIGI SALERNO The Picture Gallery of Vincenzo Giustiniani I: Introduction, The Burlington Magazine CII, 1960, no. 682, pp. 2127. LUIGI SALERNO The Picture Gallery of Vincenzo Giustiniani II, The Inventory, part I, The Burlington Magazine CII, 1960, no. 684, pp. 93104. LUIGI SALERNO The Picture Gallery of Vincenzo Giustiniani III: The Inventory, part II, The Burlington Magazine CII, 1960, no. 685, pp. 135148. JOACHIM VON SANDRART Academia nobilissimae artis pictoriae, Noribergae 1683. JOACHIM VON SANDRART Lacademia todesca della architectura, scultura & pittura oder Teutsche Academie der edlen Bau, Bild- und Mahlerey-Knste, Nrnberg 16751679. JOACHIM VON SANDRART LebensLauf und Kunst-Werke des Woledlen und Gestrengen Herrn Joachims von Sandrart auf Stockau, Hochfrstl. Pfalz-Neuburgischen Rahts, Nrnbergh 1675. JOACHIM VON SANDRART Scupturae Veteris Admiranda, sive delineatio vera perfectissimarum eminentissimarumque statuarum, una cum artis hujus nobilisimae Theoria, Norimberga 1680. JOACHIM VON SANDRART Teutsche Academie der Bau-, Bild und Mahlerey-Knste. Nrnberg 16751680. In ursprnglicher Form neu gedruckt mit einer Einleitung von Christian Klemm, Nrdlingen 1994. Joachim von Sandrarts Academie der Bau- ,

Bild-und Mahlerey-Knste. Leben der berhmten Maler, Bildhauer und Baumeister, ed. Arthur Rudolf Peltzer, Mnchen 1925. MAMBRO SANTOS (ed.) Arcadie del Vero, Roma 2001. Saur Allgemeines Knstlerlexikon. Die Bildenden Knstler aller Zeiten und Vlker, Mnchen Leipzig 1992 . GIUSEPPE SCAVIZZI The controversy on images. From Calvin to Baronius, New York 1992. AURORA SCOTTI Opus italicum, unpublished ms. 2000. TATIANA SEDOV (ed.) Socilne vedy a humanistika oami mladch, Bratislava 2006. MAX SEIDEL (ed.) Europa und die Kunst Italiens. Internationaler Kongress zum hundertsjrigen Jubilum des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florrenz. Florenz, 22.27. September 1997, Venezia 2000. JOHN SHEARMAN Only Connect: Art and the Spectator in the Italian Renaissance, Princeton 1992. ALFRED SCHDLER Eine unbekannte Kleinbronze von Georg Petel, in: Lech-Isar-Land 1994, pp. 182187. JAROSLAUS SCHALLER Beschreibung der knigl. Haupt- und Residenzstadt Prag sammt allen darinn bendlichen sehenswrdigen Merkwrdigkeiten, Zweyter Band. Die Kleinseite, oder das III. Hauptviertel der Stadt Prag, Prag 1795. JAROSLAUS SCHALLER Topographie des Knigreichs Bhmen, Fnfter Theil, Leutmeritzer Kreis, Prag Wien 1787. PETER SCHATBORN (ed.) Drawn to Warmth, 17th-century Dutch Artists in Italy (exh. cat.), Zwolle 2001. JOANNES SCHMIDL Historia Societatis Iesu provincie Bohemiae, Pragae 17491754. FRITS SCHOLTEN (ed.) Adriaen de Vries (15561626), imperial sculptor (exh. cat.), Zwolle 1998. HENK VAN DE SCHOOR Bentvueghel Signatures in Santa Costanza in Rome, Mededelingen van het Nederlands Instituut te Rome 38, 1976, pp. 7786. JULIUS MAX SCHOTTKY Prag, wie es war und wie es ist, nach Aktenstcken und den besten Quellenschriften geschildert, Bd. I, II, Prag 1831, 1832. CHRISTIAAN SCHUCKMAN Cornelis de Bie (unpublished dissertation thesis), Universiteit Utrecht 1984. VINCY SCHWARZ (ed.) Msto vidm velik Cizinci o Praze, Praha 1940. LUCIA SIMONATO LAcademia nobilissimae artis pictoriae (1683) di Joachim von Sandrart: genesi

408 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

e fortuna in Italia, Studi secenteschi 45, 2004, pp. 139173. PAVEL SKLA ZE ZHOE Pavla Skly ze Zhoe Historie esk 15, ed. Karel Tieftrunk, Praha 18651870 (Monumenta historica Bohemiae, vol. 2). PAVEL SKLA ZE ZHOE Historie esk od defenestrace k Bl hoe, ed. Josef Janek, Praha 1984. PETR SKALICK Vera effigies sv. Vclava z nkdejho kostela sv. Vclava na Mal Stran v Praze, Umn LVI, 2008, pp. 437446. ANNA SKBOV Obnoven praskho arcibiskupstv v letech 15611562 a jeho vztah k prask universit, Acta Universitatis Carolinae Historia Universitatis Carolinae Pragensis VII/1, 1966, pp. 211. VILM SLAVATA ZCHLUMU AKOUMBERKA Pehled nboenskch djin eskch, ed. Hanu Opoensk, Praha 1912. MAURITSE SMEYERSE Jan van Eyck Pictor Doctus, Onze Alma Mater 45, 1991, pp. 305333. PAUL SMITHCAROLYN WILDE (edd.) A Companion to Art Theory, Oxford 2002. JOSEF SMOLK Pamtnk Jindicha Dobikovskho z Malejova, Pamtky archeologick a mstopisn XII, 18821884, pp. 538546. ANNA SOCHOROV Jezdeck pomnk sv. Vclava od Jana Jiho Bendla v Praze (Bc. thesis), Masarykova Univerzita Brno 2007. FRANCESCO SOLINAS (ed.) Cassiano dal Pozzo, Atti del seminario internazionale di studi, Napoli, 18 e 19 dic. 1987, Roma 1989. FRANCESCO SOLINAS (ed.) I segreti di un collezionista: le straordinarie raccolte di Cassiano dal Pozzo, 15881657 (exh. cat.), Roma 2001. JOHANN GOTTFRIED SOMMER Das Knigreich Bhmen II, Bunzlauer Kreis, Prag 1838. EUGENIO SONNINO Gli stati delle anime a Roma dalle origini al secolo XVII: origini, consistenza, contenuti; con appendice sulle altre registrazioni parrocchiali, Roma 1977. STANISLAV SOUSEDK Filosoe v eskch zemch mezi stedovkem a osvcenstvm, Praha 1997. DONATELLA LIVIA SPARTI Le collezioni Dal Pozzo: storia di una famiglia e del suo museo nella Roma seicentesca, Modena 1992. RICHARD E.SPEAR Domenichino, New Haven London 1982. JOHN R.SPENCER Ut rhetorica pictura: A Study in Quattrocento Theory of Painting, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 20, 1957, pp. 2644.

LUBOMR SRE Je provediteln rekonstrukce marinskho sloupu na Staromstskm nmst v Praze?, Zprvy pamtkov pe 59, 1999, no. 7, pp. 233240. LUBOMR SRE Sochask vzdoba hlavnho olte v kostele P. Marie Snn v Praze (unprinted graduation thesis), Filozock fakulta Univerzity Karlovy v Praze 1973. OLDICH STEFAN Mluva prask architektury, Praha 1956. OLDICH STEFAN O architektonickm tvaru Valdtejnsk Loggie v Praze, Umn XI, 1938, pp. 319325. OLDICH STEFAN Pozad praskho baroku, in: Artu Rektorys (red.), Kniha o Praze (Prask almanach) 3, 1932, pp. 5469, here p. 55. OLDICH STEFAN Prask kostely, Praha 1936. BOENA STEINBORN Malarz Daniel Schultz. Gdaszczanin w subie krlw polskich, Warszawa 2004. HOLGER STEINEMANN Eine Bildtheorie zwischen Reprsentation und Wirkung: Kardinal Gabriele Paleottis Discorso intorno alle imagini sacre e profane (1582) (dissertation thesis), Hildesheim 2006. LENKA STOLROV (ed.) Karel krta a malstv 17. stolet v echch a Evrop, Praha 2011. LENKA STOLROVVT VLNAS (edd.) Karel krta 16101674. Doba a dlo (exh. cat.), Praha 2010. FAMIANO STRADA De Bello belgico, decas prima, ab axcessu Caroli V Imp. usque ad initia Praefecturae Alexandri Farnesii Parmae ac Placentiae Ducis An MDLXXVIII, I, Romae 1632. CLAUDIO STRINATIALMAMARIA TANTILLO (edd.) Domenichino 15811641 (exh. cat.), Milano 1996. STRUN PRVODCE STTN SBRKOU STARHO UMN Praha 1938. CHRISTINA STRUNCK (ed.) Johann Paul Schor und die internationale Sprache des Barock: un regista del gran teatro del barocco, Mnchen 2008. DAVID SUMMERS The Judgement of Sense: Renaissance Naturalism and the Rise of Aesthetics, Cambridge 1990. MARTIN SVATO Jilj od sv. Jana Ktitele, Fridrich Bridel a jejich tzn Co lovk?, Literrn archiv. Sbornk Pamtnku nrodnho psemnictv 27, 1994, pp. 117157. MICHAL SVATO (ed.) Djiny Univerzity Karlovy I, 1347/481622, Praha 1995. MILADA SVOBODOV Rukopisy ze sbrek Tome Antonna

Putzlachera, Michala Schustera a dalch nelechtickch bibliol ve fondu prask lobkowiczk knihovny, Praha 2011. PIETER T.A.SWILLENS (ed.) De grotte Schouburgh der nederlantsche Konstschilders en Schilderessendoor Arnold Houbraken. II. Dl, Maastricht 19431953. JAROSLAV MAL Barokn cykly svatovclavsk. Jejich vznam v obraze sv. Vclava (dissertation thesis FFUK), Praha 1945. EVA MILAUEROV Ze stavebnch djin zmku Tuchomice, Stedoesk sbornk historick 5, 1970, pp. 9397. RENATA PAKOV (ed.) Mlnk-Povka. Sbornk vydan pi pleitosti znovuvysvcen kostela sv. Vavince v Mlnku-Povce obnovenho po povodni roku 2002, Mlnk 2004. IVAN PERLING Die Prager Altararchitektur, Sbornk prac Filosock fakulty brnnsk university, F 1415, 1971, pp. 279289. MICHAL RONK Jan Ji Heinsch. Mal barokn zbonosti (16471712) (exh. cat.), Praha 2006. MICHAL RONK Prask olte v dob ticetilet vlky, Documenta Pragensia IX/II, 1991, pp. 439447. MICHAL RONKJAROSLAVA HAUSENBLASOV Gloria & Miseria. Praha v dob ticetilet vlky, Praha 1998. VCLAV VILM TECH eskoslovensk malstv a sochastv nov doby, Praha 19381939. IVAN OVEK et al. Zsady vydvn novovkch historickch pramen z obdob od potku 16. stolet do souasnosti. Pprava vdeckch edic dokument ze 16.20. stolet pro poteby historiograe, Praha 2002. MOJMR VBENSK Cerroniho sbrka 13. stol.1845, Brno 1973 (Invente a katalogy fond SOA v Brn . 26. G 12). ANDREAS TACKE Das tote Jahrhundert. Anmerkungen zur Forschung ber die deutsche Malerei des 17. Jahrhunderts, Zeitschrift des Vereins fr Kunstwissenschaft 51, 1997, pp. 4370. JOSEF TEIGE Zklady starho mstopisu Praskho I, Praha 1910. FRANTIEK TEPL Pro se stal Vilm Stavata z Chlumu a Koumberka z eskho bratra katolkem?, in: Sbornk Historickho krouku 13, 1912, pp. 205221. STEFANO TICOZZI Dizionario degli architetti, scultori, pittori, intagliatori in rame ed in pietra, coniatori di medaglie, musaicisti, niellatori, intarsiatori dogni et e dogni nazione, Milano: Gaetano Schiepatti 1830.

PIETER JACOBUS JOHANNES VAN THIEL (ed.) All the Paintings in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1976. WENDY THOMPSON Pigmei pizzicano di Gigante, The Encounter Between Netherlandish and Italian Artists in Seventeenth-Century Rome (diss. Johns Hopkins University), Michigan 1997. MIROSLAV TOEGEL ET AL. (edd.) Documenta bohemica bellum tricennale illustrantia II, Praha 1972. MILAN TOGNER Antonn Martin Lublinsk 16361690, Olomouc 2004. MILAN TOGNER BaroknmalstvvOlomouci, Olomouc 2008. MILAN TOGNER (ed.) Krom Picture Gallery. Catalogue of the painting collection in the archbishops palace in Krom, Krom 1999. MARIE TONEROV (ed.) Prvodce po rukopisnch fondech v esk republice II. Rukopisn fondy archiv v esk republice, Praha 1998. MARIE TONEROV (ed.) Prvodce po rukopisnch fondech v esk republice, IV. Rukopisn fondy archiv v esk republice, Praha 1998. POMPILIO TOTTI Ritratto di Roma moderna, Roma: appresso Filippo de Rossi 1645. JOSEF TRUHL Katalog eskch rukopis c. k. Veejn a Universitn knihovny prask, Praha 1906. JANE TURNER (ed.) The Dictionary of Art IXXXIV, London New York 1996. MAURICE VAES Les fondations hospitalires amandes Rome du XVe au XVIIIe sicle, Bulletin de linstitute historique belge de Rome I (1919), pp. 161371. TPN VCHA Der Herrscher auf dem Sakralbild zur Zeit der Gegenreformation und des Barock. Eine ikonologische Untersuchung zur herrscherlichen Reprsentation Kaiser Ferdinands II. in Bhmen, Prag 2009. VOJTCH VANKJI K.KROUPA (edd.) Kutn Hora v dob baroka, Praha 2005 (Antuiqua Cuthna 1). BENEDETTO VARCHI Due lezzioni, Firenze 1549. GIORGIO VASARI Le vite de piu eccellenti, pittori, scultori ed architetti, ed. Gaetano Milanesi, vol. 7, Firenze 1881. PIERLUGI DE VECCHI Raffael, Mnchen 2002. THEA A.G.VIGNAU WILBERG SCHUURMAN Die emblematische Elemente im Werke Joris Hoefnagels, Leiden 1969. MILADA VILMKOV Bval klter dominiknek pi kostele sv. Anny, p. 211I, Stavebn-historick przkum Prahy, Praha SRPMO 1962.

409 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

MILADA VILMKOV Ke stavebnmu vvoji komplexu jezuitskch budov na Malostranskm nmst, Umn XIX, 1971, pp. 304313. MILADA VILMKOV Kostel sv. Salvatora v Klementinu. Stavebn-historick przkum Prahy, Praha SRPMO 1979, ms. MILADA VILMKOV Stavitel palc a chrm. Krytof a Kilin Ignc Dientzenhoferov, Praha 1986. MILADA VILMKOV Urbanistick vvoj zem maltzsk jurisdikce, in: Prask sbornk historick, 1966, pp. 7285. MILADA VILMKOVFRANTIEK KAIKA Kdlo panlskho slu ve stavebnm vvoji Praskho hradu, Pamtky a proda 1976, pp. 385391. Vita sancti Wenceslai, incipiens verbis Ut annuncietur, Antonn Podlaha (transl.), Praha 1917. PAVEL VLEK Dientzenhoferv skic a esk architektura 16401670, Umn XXXVII, 1989, pp. 473497. PAVEL VLEK Francesco Caratti, Umn XXXII, 1984, pp. 122. PAVEL VLEK (ed.) Encyklopedie architekt, stavitel, kamenk a zednk v echch, Praha 2004. PAVEL VLEK Giovanni Domenico Orsi a bval kostel sv. Norberta v Praze, Umn XXXIV, 1986, pp. 416433. PAVEL VLEK Ilustrovan encyklopedie eskch zmk, Praha 1999. PAVEL VLEK K asti kamenk a socha na stavb praskho opevnn v 17. stolet, Umn XXXIII, 1985, pp. 359378. PAVEL VLEK (ed.) Umleck pamtky Prahy. Mal Strana, Praha 1999. PAVEL VLEK (ed.) Umleck pamtky Prahy. Star Msto, Josefov, Praha 1996. PAVEL VLEKESTER HAVLOV Praha 16101700. Kapitoly o architektue ranho baroka, Praha 1998. VT VLNAS (ed.) Slva barokn echie. Stati o umn, kultue a spolenosti 17. a 18. stolet, Praha 2001. VT VLNAS (ed.) Slva barokn echie. Umn, kultura a spolenost 17. a 18. stolet (exh. cat.), Praha 2001. MILOSLAV VOLF Jaroslav Boita z Martinic po defenestraci, Stedoesk sbornk historick 7, 1972, pp. 7690. ALENA VOLRBOV Nmeck kresba 15401650: Umn kresby

v nmecky mluvcch zemch mezi renesanc a barokem (exh. cat.), Praha 2008. ALENA VOLRBOV (ed.) Vclav Hollar (16071677) a Evropa mezi ivotem a zmarem (exh. cat.), Praha 2007. JAKUB DE VORAGINE Legenda Aurea, Praha 1998. PETR VOREL Stbro v evropskm pennm obhu 16. 17. stolet (14721717), Praha 2009. JIINA VYDROVEMA SEDLKOV (edd.) Vstava Umn v echch XVII. a XVIII. stolet. 16001800. Prask baroko (exh. cat.), Praha 1938. JAROSLAV VYSTRIL Syn rebelv. Kulturn obraz ze 17. stolet, Olomouc 2005. FRANZ WAGNERBARBARA VON DER HEIDEN Wenig beachtete Meisterwercke der Barockmalerei in Salzburg, Barockberichte 8/9, 1994, pp. 306311. RENATE WAGNER-RIEGER Die Baukunst des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts in sterreich, Wiener Jahrbuch fr Kunstgeschichte 20, 1965, pp. 175224. Wenceslaus Hollar: 16071677, Drawings Paintings and Etchings (exh. cat.), Manchester 1963. JACOP CAMPO WEYERMAN De Levens-beschryvingen der Nederlandsche Konst-Schilders en Konst-Schilderessen, s-Gravenhage, 1729. ROBERT WILLIAMS Art, Theory, and Culture in Sixteenth-Century Italy: From Techne to Metatechne, Cambridge 1997. WIEBKE WINDORF Sakrale Historienmalerei in St. Peter in Rom. Faktizitt und Fiktionalitt in der Altarbildausstattung unter Papst Urban VIII. (16231644), Regensburg 2006. THOMAS WINKELBAUER Frst und Frstendiener. Gundaker von Liechtenstein, ein sterreichischer Aristokrat des konfessionellen Zeitalters, Wien Mnchen 1999. ZDENK WIRTH (red.) Djepis vtvarnch umn v eskoslovensku, Praha 1935 (eskoslovensk vlastivda 8). ARKADIUSZ WOJTYA Cardinale langravio i Conte savio dygnitarze Rzeszy w barokowym Rzymie, Quart 2 (4), 2007, pp. 2739. AUGUSTIN WOLF Frst Wenzel Lobkowitz, Wien 1869. CHRISTIAN WOLTERS Die Bedeutung der Gemldedurchleuchtung mit Rntgenstrahlen fr die Kunstgeschichte: dargestellt an Beispielen aus der niederlndischen und deutschen Malerei des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts, Frankfurt am Main 1938.

JOANNA WOODS-MARSDEN Renaissance Self-Portraiture: The Visual Construction of Identity and the Social Status of the Artist, New Haven London 1998. CASPARUS ZACHARIAS WUSSIN Dictionarium von dreyen Sprachen, Teutsch, Lateinisch, und Boehmisch, Prag 1700. FRANCES A.YATES The Art of Memory, London 1972. PIETRO ZANI Enciclopedia metodica critico-ragionata delle belle arti, Parma 1821. Zpisky Vilma Slavaty z let 16011603, ed. Antonn Rezek, Praha 1887 (Rozpravy krlovsk esk spolenosti nauk VII/2, no. 4). JANA ZAPLETALOV Karel krta: Notes from the archives from Italy, Umn LVIII, 2010, pp. 152158. JANA ZAPLETALOV Mezi Boloou a Krakovem: ivot a dlo italskho male Innocenza Montiho (16531710), Umn LIII, 2005, pp. 335346. JANA ZAPLETALOV krta, Sandrart, Oretti: poznmka ke krtovu psoben v Itlii, Umn LVII, 2009, pp. 398402. JANA ZAPLETALOV krtov z italskch archiv (in print). JOHANN HEINRICH ZEDLER (ed.), Grosses vollstndiges Universal-Lexicon aller Wissenschaften und Knste XXXVI, Leipzig Halle 1743. JOSEF LIBOSLAV ZIEGLER Zprva hrabte Vilma Slavaty o tom, co se v kanceli esk na hrad praskm dne 23. mje 1618 rno ped vyhozenm z okna krlovskch mstodrcch dlo a promlouvno bylo, Dobroslav I, sv. 3, 1820, pp. 53101. HENRICA M.ZIJLSTRA-ZWEENS Antieke karakterkoppen van Rubens, Hermeneus XLIX, 1977, 3, pp. 202206. MIROSLAV ZIKA Luragova tukatrsk dlna, Antonio a Tommaso Soldatti (graduation thesis FFUK), Praha 2002. MIROSLAV ZIKA Soldattiov a tukatrsk druina Carlo Luraga (graduation thesis FFUK), Praha 1998. JRGEN ZIMMER Josephus Heinzius architectus cum antiquis comparandus. Pspvek k poznn rudolnsk architektury mezi lty 15901612, Umn XVII, 1969, pp. 217246. PETRA SOPHIA ZIMMERMANN Die Architektur von Hans Vredemann de Vries. Entwicklung der Renaissancearchitektur in Mitteleuropa, Mnchen 2002. WILHELM ZOHNER Bartholomus Steinle. Um 15801628/29. Bildhauer und Director ber den Kirchen zu Weilheim, Weissenhorn 1993. MICHAELA ZRONKOV Pam o mst. Sobslav v manskch

pamtech 16321752 (unprinted graduation thesis), Jihoesk univerzita v eskch Budjovicch 2007. FEDERICO ZUCCARO Lidea de scultori, pittori e architetti, Torino 1607.

410 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

411 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

412 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

413 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

KAREL KRTA 16101674 STUDIES AND DOCUMENTS

The publication is issued within the research project Karel krta (16101674): His Work and His Era CZ 0112 no. 02 06/07 0121 IP 112 MK T. The project has received grants from Island, Liechtenstein and Norway within the framework of the Financial mechanism of the EEA. Editors of the publication Lenka Stolrov Vt Vlnas Authors of studies and editors of archival sources Tom Berger Johana Bronkov Sylva Dobalov Tom Hladk Mojmr Horyna Lubomr Konen Michal Koziel Petr Pibyl Alena Richterov Andrea Rousov Tom Sekyrka Lenka Stolrov Radka Tibitanzlov tpn Vcha Vt Vlnas Alena Volrbov Translation Joanne P. C. Domin Kateina Hilsk Evan W. Mellander Peter Stephens Lucie Vidmar Gita Zbavitelov Editing Katarna Rybkov Technical editing Kateina Holekov Photographs Albertina Archives of the National Gallery in Prague Archives of the National Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen Museum, Rotterdam Muses de Strasbourg Grzegorz Zajczkowski Instytut Sztuki PAN, Warszawa Prague City Archives Prague City Museum Museum of Mlad Boleslav Region Muzeum Narodowe w Warszawie Muzeum Narodowe we Wrocawiu National Gallery in Prague National Gallery in Prague Ale David National Gallery in Prague Oto Paln National Library of the Czech Republic State District Archives Klatovy State Regional Archives in Tebo tpn Vcha archives of authors Graphic layout Pavel Zelenka, Erika Huptychov (studio Marvil) Typesetting Ivana Minov (studio Marvil) Picture editing Radek Typovsk (Studio Marvil) Published by the National Gallery in Prague in 2011. National Gallery in Prague, 2011 ISBN 9788070354704 www.ngprague.cz