AHAS 14
ACTA HISTORIAE ARTIS SLOVENICA 14, 2009
Vsebina / Contents
DISSERTATIONES
Jure MIKUŽ, Pomeni in antropološke funkcije poznosrednjeveške podobe: ikonografija in ikonologija (tudi) za našo rabo
Meanings and anthropological functions of image in the Late Middle Ages: iconography and iconology (also) for Slovene use
Polona VIDMAR, Nagrobnik Friderika IX. Ptujskega ter njegova gotska in baročna recepcija
The tombstone of Friedrich IX of Pettau and its reception in the Gothic and Baroque periods
Didier MARTENS, Die Gregormesse der Niklauskirche zu Vimperk (Vinski vrh bei Polzela) im internationalen Beziehungsgeflecht. Zur Rezeption eines Stiches des Israhel van Meckenem
Maša sv. Gregorja pri Sv. Miklavžu na Vimperku (Vinski vrh pri Polzeli) v spletu mednarodnih povezav. K recepciji grafičnega lista Israhela van Meckenema
Ana LAVRIČ, Svetniški zavetniki vojvodine Kranjske v 17. in 18. stoletju. Kulturnozgodovinska in ikonografska predstavitev
Patron saints of the Duchy of Carniola in the 17th and 18th centuries. Cultural-historical and iconographic presentation
Beti ŽEROVC, Savani na Prvi razstavi slovenskih umetnikov v Trstu leta 1907
The Sava Group at the First Exhibition of Slovene Artists in Trieste in 1907
Victor BARANOVSKIY, Irina KHLEBNIKOVA, Janko Lavrin in njegove povezave z ruskimi likovnimi umetniki v letih 1908–1917
Janko Lavrin and his connections with Russian artists in the years 1908–1917
Damjan PRELOVŠEK, Plečnikovo inženirstvo
Plečnik’s engineering architecture
MISCELLANEA
Helena SERAŽIN, Marijin oltar v santuario dell’Apparizione di S. Vio na Pellestrini. Giovanni Battista Mazzoleni (1699–1769) – kipar in štukater?
L’altare della Madonna nel Santuario dell’Apparizione di S. Vio a Pellestrina. Giovanni Battista Mazzoleni (1699–1769) – scultore e stuccatore?
Barbara MUROVEC, Jana ZAPLETALOVÁ, Delo Janeza Andreja Straussa na Moravskem
A work by Johann Andreas Strauss in Moravia
Alessandro QUINZI, Grafika sv. Alojzija Gonzage in Stanislava Kostke Gottfrieda Bernharda Göza po sliki Antonia Balestre
L’incisione dei Santi Luigi Gonzaga e Stanislao Kostka di Gottfried Bernhard Göz da Antonio Balestra
Lidija TAVČAR, Grofičinim šopkom ob rob. Neobjavljeni tihožitji Marije Auersperg Attems
Two unpublished still-lifes by Maria Auersperg Attems
Alenka KLEMENC, Sternenov avtoportret s Steletom in Gabrom in njihova skupinska fotografija
Sternen’s self-portrait with Stele and Gaber and their group photograph
DOCUMENTA
Emina FRLJAK, Barbka GOSAR HIRCI, Polonca ROPRET, Andrej HIRCI, Konservatorsko-restavratorski posegi in naravoslovne preiskave na Tintorettovem Sv. Miklavžu v Novem mestu
Conservation and restoration treatments and material analyses on St. Nicholas by Tintoretto in Novo mesto
POVZETKI / SUMMARIES
Victor BARANOVSKIJ, Irina KHLEBNIKOVA
Janko Lavrin in njegove povezave z ruskimi likovnimi umetniki v letih 1908–1917
Članek obravnava skoraj neraziskano sodelovanje znanega slovenskega literarnega zgodovinarja, kritika, esejista, raziskovalca ruske književnosti in prevajalca Janka Lavrina (1887–1986) s predstavniki različnih smeri ruske likovne umetnosti v obdobju 1908-1917: od akademika Borisa Kustodijeva do vidnih slikarjev avantgarde Mihaila Le-Dantjuja (1891–1917) in Vere Ermolajeve (1893–1937).
Poudarek je na odkrivanju in pojasnjevanju vloge Janka Lavrina v nastanku in delovanju avantgardne skupine Bezkrovnoe ubijstvo (Umor brez krvi). Skupina, ki ni razglasila svojega nastanka, se je pojavila v Sankt-Peterburgu v letih pred prvo svetovno vojno, njeno delovanje pa je prenehalo spomladi 1917 v zvezi z valom demokratičnih sprememb v ruskem kulturnem in umetniškem življenju po februarski revoluciji. Skupina je znana po tem, da je izdajala na hektografu tiskano necenzurirano revijo istega naslova z risbami sodelavcev in spremljajočimi besedili. Ustvarjalno najplodnejši leti sta bili 1915 in 1916. Skupina Umor brez krvi je edinstven pojav, in ne glede na njeno komornost je vpisana v zgodovino »bojnega desetletja« ruske avantgarde (1907–1917).
Izstopajoča osebnost Janka Lavrina je sprožila celo nastanek revije. Njegovo z dogodki bogato in večplastno življenje je postalo stalni vir navdiha za sodelavce skupine. Lavrinu so bili posvečene trije zvezki revije Umor brez krvi. Med njimi je najobsežnejši in likovno najuspešnejši Albanski zvezek (1916), h kateremu sta ilustracije prispevala M. Le-Dantju in V. Ermolajeva. Literarno vsebino zvezka predstavlja v paradigmi skupine (humor, ironija, hiperbola, groteska) podani življenjepis Janka Lavrina, likovno gradivo (7 risb) pa je odražalo avantgardne slogovne usmeritve mladih slikarjev.
Albanski zvezek revije je postal podlaga za novatorsko gledališko igro Ilje Zdaneviča (1894–1975) Janko, kralj albanski, prvo v vrsti njegovih »transracionalnih« iger. K uspehu njene premiere 3. 12. 1916 je pripomogla avantgardna scenografija in kostumografija, ki sta jo (s pomočjo pisca) ustvarila sodelavca skupine slikarja Vera Ermolajeva in Nikolaj Lapšin (1891–1942).
Janko Lavrin and his connections with Russian artists in the years 1908–1917
The paper presents the almost unresearched collaboration of the well-known Slovene literary historian, critic, essayist, researcher into Russian literature and translator Janko Lavrin (1887–1986) with the representatives of various trends in Russian fine arts between 1908 and 1917: from the academician Boris Kustodiev (1878–1927) to outstanding painters of the avant-garde, such as Mikhail Le-Dantiu (1891–1917) and Vera Ermolaeva (1893–1937).
The main emphasis in laid on the revealing and explication of the role Lavrin played in the establishment and functioning of the avant-garde group Beskrovnoe ubijstvo (Bloodless Murder). The group, which did not announce its beginning, emerged in Sankt Peterburg in the years before World War I and it came to an end in the spring of 1917 as a result of the wave of democratic changes in the cultural and artistic life in Russia after the February Revolution. The group is known for having published an uncensured review of the same title, printed by means of a hectograph and containing drawings by the group members and accompanying texts. The most creative and prolific were the years 1915 and 1916. The Bloodless Murder group was a unique phenomenon and in spite of its chamber character it inscribed itself in the history of the “fighting decade” of the Russian avant-garde (1907–1917).
The outstanding personality of Janko Lavrin even gave rise to the publishing of a review. His dynamic life, rich in events on several levels, became a source of inspiration for the members of the group. As many as three volumes of the review Beskrovnoe ubijstvo were dedicated to him. The most extensive one and the most successful in terms of visual arts was the Albanian Number (1916), illustrated by Le-Dantiu and Ermolaeva. The literary content of the volume presented, in the paradigm of the group (with humour, irony, hyperbole, grotesque), the biography of Janko Lavrin accompanied with pertaining illustrations (7 drawings), which manifested the avant-garde stylistic orientation of the young artists.
The Albanian Number of the review became a foundation for an innovative theatrical play by Ilya Zdanevich (1894–1975), Janko krulj albanski (Janko, the King of Albania), the first in his series of “transrational” plays. The success of the first night performance on 3 December 1916 was based on the avant-garde scenography and costumography which were designed (with the help of the playwright) by the members of the Bloodless Murder group, the painters Vera Ermolaeva and Nikolai Lapshin (1891–1942).
Emina FRLJAK, Barbka GOSAR HIRCI, Polonca ROPRET, Andrej HIRCI
Konservatorsko-restavratorski posegi in naravoslovne pre4iskave na Tintorettovem Sv. Miklavžu v Novem mestu
Leta 2008 je bil Tintorettov Sv. Miklavž iz stolne cerkve v Novem mestu prepeljan v ZVKDS Restavratorski center v Ljubljani. Natančnemu pregledu in analizi pridobljenih rezultatov preiskav so sledili konservatorsko-restavratorski posegi, ki so potekali v skladu s sodobnimi standardi, ki veljajo v stroki. Članek natančno obravnava rezultatae naravoslovnih preiskav, ki dodatno potrjujejo Tintorettovo avtorstvo.
Conservation and restoration treatments and material analyses on St Nicholas by Tintoretto in Novo mesto
St Nicholas is a large altarpiece painted by Jacopo Tintoretto in his late period for the then chapter house, now the cathedral, in Novo mesto. Like most of Tintoretto’s works, the painting of St Nicholas bears no date or signature. From the time when it was painted in the 16th century to the 19th century, the canvas remained almost untouched. However, in the 19th century it underwent a series of restoration treatments, which considerably changed its appearance.
The most extensive treatment, which resulted in the changed format of the painting, was to alter its original square shape, creating a semi-circular upper border. This was carried out when St Nicholas was placed within the new high altar in 1868. A chronological account of the painting’s restorations was written by Marinka Dražumerič in 2000 (Slike imajo svojo usodo. Zgodba Tintorettove slike sv. Miklavža iz kapiteljske cerkve v Novem mestu), while the archival data on the provenance of the painting were collected and published by Jože Gregorič in 1936. Dražumerič’s and Gregorič’s findings were the starting point of the current restoration treatment and the reason for writing this article, in which the authors aim to foreground the importance of close cooperation between the different experts working in the field of the protection of cultural heritage.
In May 2008, the painting was taken to the Department for Easel Painting at the Restoration Centre of the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage of Slovenia. By incorporating state-of-the-art technologies, the following analyses were carried out: multispectral analysis, X-ray radiography, stratigraphy of paint layers, pigment analysis, ground layer analysis and the analysis of binders.
The main objective of these analyses was a detailed study of paint layers on the Tintoretto in Slovenia, which was compared to similar studies abroad. For the purposes of comparison, this study drew on analyses carried out on four works by Tintoretto owned by the National Gallery in London. The London studies comprised stratigraphy of paint layers, IR photography and X-ray radiography. The pigments used by the artist on the National Gallery paintings were compared with the palette used when Tintoretto painted St Nicholas. This article discusses the results of the material analyses carried out on the painting of St Nicholas, which provide additional evidence that Tintoretto is indeed the author of the painting in question.
A detailed investigation of the painting and an analysis of the results were followed by a conservation and restoration treatment conducted in accordance with the contemporary standards of this discipline. Materials of old treatments, including lining, filling, retouching and varnishing, were removed by methods which had no adverse effects on the composition of the painting.
The lining canvas was thoroughly removed, while the old adhesive was removed only to an extent whereby no additional damage was made to the deteriorating original canvas. No strong abrasive solvents were used for the removal of the old filling, retouching and varnishing; only minimal recommended concentrations were applied. Parts of old over-painting which were hard to remove were left untouched to avoid any treatment which might be damaging to the original paint layer. The materials used for consolidation had been tested and used before by experts abroad. New lining and the insertion of patches on the damaged canvas were carried out with reversible materials, avoiding the application of any destructive methods. Filling in and retouching of paint layers were also carried out with removable materials. All conservation and restoration treatments were constantly supervised by an expert commission.
Sternenov avtoportret s Steletom in Gabrom in njihova skupinska fotografija
Na Umetnostnozgodovinskem inštitutu ZRC SAZU se je pred nedavnim našla fotografija, ki osvetljuje skupinski portret slikarja Mateja Sternena (1870–1949), na katerem je upodobil sebe v družbi s Francetom Steletom in Antejem Gabrom (platno hrani Umetnostnzgodovinski inštitut). Trojica se je v letih 1942 in 1943 redno srečevala pri Gabru v Kresiji, kjer so razpravljali o začetkih slovenskega impresionizma. Stele si je pogovore skrbno zapisoval (prim. Acta historiae artis Slovenica, 7, 2002, str. 189–202), Sternen pa jih je »dokumentiral« na oljnem skupinskem portretu, ki pa je ostal nedokončan. Najdena fotografija kaže skupino udeležencev pogovorov, kakor jih vidimo na sliki, slikarjevo mesto pa na posnetku zaseda druga oseba, kajti Sternena vidimo stati na desni strani prizora pred slikarskim stojalom, ko med slikanjem opazuje skupino. Ker je bila fotografija posneta naknadno in z nekoliko drugega kota, kot so upodobljenci predstavljeni na slikanem portretu, je ne moremo razumeti kot pripomoček umetniku v slikarskem procesu, čeprav je znano, da si je Sternen pri slikanju sicer veliko pomagal s fotografijami. Kljub temu posnetek predstavlja zanimiv dokument o srečanjih trojice.
Sternen’s self-portrait with Stele and Gaber and their group photograph
At the Institute of Art History at the Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts a photograph has been recently found which throws light on a group portrait by the painter Matej Sternen (1870–1949), showing himself and the art historians Professor France Stele and Ante Gaber. The three would regulary meet in the years 1942 and 1943 and discuss the beginnings of Slovene impressionist painting in the early 20th century, in which movement Sternen had also participated. Stele noted down their talks (cf. Acta historiae artis Slovenica, 7, 2002, pp. 189–202), whereas Sternen documented the meetings in an oil painting which, however, remained unfinished. The photograph shows the group as it is composed in the painting, but the place of the painter is occupied in the shot by another person, since Sternen is seen standing before the easel at the side of the scene, observing the group and painting the portrait. Because the photograph was taken subsequentlyand from a somewhat different angle than the one from which the three sitters are seen in the painting, it can hardly be counted as a help in the painting process, although Sternen is otherwise known to have made full use of photography. Nevertheless, it remains an interesting document of the meetings of the three men.
Ana LAVRIČ
Svetniški zavetniki vojvodine Kranjske v 17. in 18. stoletju. Kulturnozgodovinska in ikonografska predstavitev
V 17. in 18. stoletju sta na recepcijo svetnikov na Kranjskem odločilno vplivala zgodovinopisca Janez Ludvik Schönleben in Janez Vajkard Valvasor. Prvi s knjigo Carniolia antiqua et nova sive inclyti ducatus Carnioliae annales sacro-prophani, Tomus I. (1681), v katero je vključil tudi svetniške osebe, povezane z Emono (npr. Maksima in Pelagija), kar je bila izredno pomembna novost, ki je izhajala iz njegove znanstvene ugotovitve, da je Ljubljana naslednica antične Emone. Drugi s sestavkom Von den Heiligen der Crainer v knjigi Die Ehre des Herzogthums Krain (1689), kjer je predstavil več kot šestdeset na Kranjskem češčenih oz. z deželo tako ali drugače povezanih svetnikov. Na njihov izbor je vplivala geografska razprostranjenost vojvodine Kranjske, ki je v tem času segala tudi na Kras in daleč v Istro.
Prispevek obravnava glavne zavetnike Kranjske, posveča pa se tako historiatu njihovega češčenja in zaščitniške vloge kot tudi likovnim upodobitvam oz. ikonografskim vprašanjem. Kot prva izpostavlja sv. Mohorja in Fortunata, ki naj bi po legendi na ozemlju Kranjske oznanjala krščansko vero že v prvem stoletju. Ob ustanovitvi ljubljanske škofije leta 1461 sta postala njena zavetnika, njun patronat pa se je dejansko raztezal na celotno deželo. V ljubljanski stolnici ju je ovekovečil Pietro Liberi (1674/1675), v kapiteljski (zdaj stolni) cerkvi v Novem mestu pa Tintoretto (ok. 1582).
Sledita sv. Primož in Felicijan, katerih deželno zavetništvo je bilo povezano z njunimi relikvijami, ki so prišle v deželo v srednjem veku. Najprej so počivale na gori nad Kamnikom, v času turških vpadov so jih prenesli v Kamnik, 1628 pa deloma vrnili na prvotno mesto. Leta 1632 so kamniški meščani cerkvi na gori podarili sliko s prizori njunega mučeništva, ki se vsebinsko opirajo na legendo, kakršno v nekoliko skrajšani verziji podaja Legenda aurea. Deželni pomen sv. Primoža in Felicijana prezentira matrikula bratovščine kranjskih plemičev, kjer nastopata na frontispicu v vlogi opornikov.
Sv. Ahacij je postal glavni varuh vojvodine Kranjske potem, ko je na njegov god leta 1593 kranjska vojska dosegla slovito zmago nad Turki pri Sisku. Zaradi tega so ga večkrat upodabljali v zvezi s tem dogodkom, tako npr. na podobi bitke pri Sisku, ki jo je dal škof Hren leta 1622 naslikati za ljubljansko stolnico, ali na sliki Sv. Ahacij zmagovalec nad Turki, ki so jo ok. leta 1600 naročili Auerspergi za cerkev nad Malim Ločnikom blizu Turjaka. Bežeče Turke so vključili tudi na sliko sv. Ahacija v Matenji vasi (skupaj s pendantom, sliko sv. Tilna, jo je mogoče atribuirati Antonu Cebeju, kar dopolnjuje doslej znani umetnikov opus).
Schönlebnove ugotovitve so spodbudile interes za svetnike, povezane z Emono, zlasti za sv. Pelagija, ki naj bi bil po pričevanju rokopisov z nemškega območja rojen v Emoni v Karniji, tj. na Kranjskem. Njegov kult je bil sicer vezan na istrsko Emono (Aemonio), tj. Novigrad, kamor naj bi ga zanesli romanski prebivalci »kranjske« Emone, ko so ob slovanskih vpadih ob koncu 6. stoletja bežali na istrsko obalo. V ljubljanski stolnici ga je Giulio Quaglio upodobil leta 1703 na iluzionistični kupoli, skupaj z drugimi zavetniki mesta, škofije in dežele. Za Kamnik je njegovo podobo naročil tamkajšnji župnik, član ljubljanske Academie operosorum Maksimilijan Leopold Rasp. Slika (preslikana) se ikonografsko ujema z upodobitvami svetnika v evropski umetnosti, odstopa pa od novigrajske tradicije, kjer ga upodabljajo kot diakona, ker so ga po priljubljenem vzorcu oglejskih dvojic »priredili« v klerika in povezali z emonskim (novigrajskim) škofom Maksimom.
Omenjenega škofa Maksima so propagirali tudi v Ljubljani. Gre za prvega znanega emonskega škofa iz 4. stoletja, ki so ga tedanji kranjski zgodovinopisci nekritično istovetili s precej starejšim Maksimom iz Efeza. Čeprav Maksim Emonski v resnici nikdar ni bil razglašen za svetnika, so v Ljubljani njegov god obhajali kot praznik duplex majus. V ljubljanski stolnici ga je na iluzionistični kupoli leta 1703 upodobil Giulio Quaglio, za nišo pod kupolo pa je v letih 1712–1713 njegov kip izklesal Angelo Putti. Tu ga spremlja tudi istrski mučenec sv. Florij, ki so ga operozi smatrali za emonskega škofa. Od istrskih svetnikov so med zavetnike Kranjske v tem času prištevali tudi pičenskega škofa Nikefora. Ikonografsko od vseh treh izstopa le zadnji, ki ga običajno upodabljajo z medvedom.
Od tržaških mučencev so na tedanjem ozemlju Kranjske kot zavetnika častili sv. Servula (Socerba), kateremu sta na Primorskem posvečeni cerkvi na Artvižah in v Socerbu. Slednja je znamenita zato, ker stoji v bližini gradu Socerb, od koder je le tristo metrov do t. i. Svete jame, v kateri naj bi po izročilu svetnik živel kot eremit. Upodabljajo ga kot mladeniča v rimskem oblačilu, včasih v vojaški opravi. Nastopa tudi v prizorih, ko z Božjo pomočjo premaga kačo oz. zmaja, ali ko zanj pripravljajo kotel z vrelim oljem.
Kot posebno deželno zaščitnico pred Turki so na Kranjskem častili sv. Peregrino. Njene relikvije so ljubljanski diskalceati dobili iz Rima, prenosa v njihovo cerkev pa se je 5. oktobra 1660 udeležil tudi cesar Leopold s spremstvom, kar je dalo dogodku in s tem svetnici poseben pomen ter širše, tj. deželne razsežnosti. Na njen patronat je gotovo vplivala bližnja turška nevarnost. Po razpustu diskalceatov leta 1787 so relikvije prehajale iz rok v roke, nekaj časa jih je imel v lasti smledniški baron, ki je v Valburgi namenil svetnici poseben oltar s podobo njenega mučeništva (pobijajo jo z gorjačami, kar ustreza opisu v ljubljanski Diskalceatski kroniki), 1796 pa so pristale v Tunjicah. Počivajo pod menzo velikega oltarja, stenska slika (preslikana) pa poleg svetničinega lika kaže tudi njeno mučeniško smrt (pod udarci verig oz. bičev, kar ustreza Valvasorjevemu opisu).
Patron saints of the Duchy of Carniola in the 17th and 18th centuries. Cultural-historical and iconographic presentation
In the 17th and 18th centuries the reception of saints in Carniola was decisively influenced by the historiographers Johann Ludwig Schönleben and Johann Weichard Valvasor. The former exerted influence with his book Carniolia antiqua et nova sive inclyti ducatus Carnioliae annales sacro-prophani, Tomus I. (1681), in which also the saintly figures related to the Roman town of Aemona were included (e.g. Maximus and Pelagius); this was an exceptionally important novelty proceeding from the author’s scientific finding that Ljubljana (Laibach) was the successor of the ancient Aemona. Valvasor’s impact came from the chapter Von den Heiligen der Crainer in his book Die Ehre des Herzogthums Krain (1689), where he presented more than sixty saints worshipped in Carniola or related with the land in this or that way. Their selection depended on the geographical extent of the Duchy of Carniola, which in this time reached also to the Kras (Karst) area and deep into Istria.
The paper deals with the principal patron saints of Carniola, presenting the history of their worship and their role as patrons as well as their depictions in visual arts or iconographic questions. First Sts. Hermagoras and Fortunatus are discussed. According to a legend, they spread Christian religion on the territory of Carniola already in the first century A.D. When a diocese was founded in Ljubljana in 1461, they became its patron saints, but their patronage actually extended over the entire province. They were depicted by Pietro Liberi in a painting for Ljubljana Cathedral (1674/1675) and by Tintoretto in the altarpiece for the chapter church (present cathedral) in Novo mesto (c. 1582).
The next two discussed saints are Sts. Primus and Felicianus, whose patronage over the province was related to their relics that had been brought into the country in the Middle Ages. They found their first place in the church on the slope of a mountain above Kamnik; in the time of Ottoman incursions they were transferred to Kamnik; and in 1628 they were partly returned to the original place. In 1632 the citizens of Kamnik donated a painting featuring the scenes of the saints’ martyrdoms to the church in the mountains. The contents of the scenes rely on the legend whose slightly shortened version was presented in the Golden Legend (Legenda aurea). The importance of Sts. Primus and Felicianus for the province is exemplified in the register of the confraternity of Carniolan noblemen: on its frontispiece they are presented in the role of pillars.
St. Acacius became the chief patron saint of the Duchy of Carniola, when the Carniolan army won a gloriuos victory over the Ottomans near Sisak on the name-day of the Saint in 1593. On account of this he was often depicted in relation to this event, for example in the painting of the Battle of Sisak which bishop Hren commissioned in 1622 for Ljubljana Cathedral; or in the painting St. Acacius the Victor over the Turks, which was commissioned by the Auersperg family around the year 1600 for the church above Mali Ločnik near Turjak. Fleeing Turks were also included in the picture of St. Acacius at Matenja vas (it can be attributed, together with its companion piece, i. e. the picture of St. Egidius, to Anton Cebej; this attribution expands the artist’s oeuvre known before).
Schönleben’s findings spurred interest in the saints related to Aemona, particularly St. Pelagius, who, according to certain manuscripts from the German lands, was supposedly born in Aemona in Carnia, i.e. in Carniola. His cult was otherwise related to the Istrian Aemonia, i.e. Novigrad, where his relics were believed to have been brought by the Roman inhabitants of the “Carniolan” Aemona when at the end of the 6th century they fled from Slavic inroads to the Istrian coast. Giulio Quaglio painted Pelagius in the illusionistic dome in Ljubljana Cathedral in 1703, together with other patron saints of the city, the diocese and the province. A picture of him was also commissioned for the church in Kamnik by Maximilian Leopold Rasp, the parish priest there and member of the Academia operosorum of Ljubljana. The painting (now overpainted) iconographically corresponds to the portrayals of the Saint in European art, but it diverges from the tradition of Novigrad, where he is presented as a deacon, because, following the popular pattern of Aquileian pairs, he was “adapted” to a cleric and connected to Maximus, the bishop of Aemona (Novigrad).
The above-mentioned bishop Maximus was also promoted in Ljubljana. He was the first known bishop of Aemona of the 4th century, whom Carniolan historiographers of the time uncritically identified with the much older Maximus of Ephesus. In spite of the fact that Maximus of Aemona was never really proclaimed a saint, his name-day was celebrated in Ljubljana as a duplex majus feast. In 1703 he was presented in the illusionistic dome in Ljubljana Cathedral by Giulio Quaglio, and Angelo Putti carved a marble statue of him (1712–1713) which is placed in a niche under the dome, where he is accompanied by the Istrian martyr St. Florius, whom the Operosi held for bishop of Aemona. Of Istrian saints also Nicefor, bishop of Pičen, was counted among the patron saints of Carniola in that time. Iconographically only this one of all three stands out; he is usually depicted with a bear.
Of the martyrs of Trieste St. Servulus was worshipped on the then territory of Carniola as the patron saint. In the Littoral region of Slovenia two churches are dedicated to him, i.e. in Artviže and Socerb. The latter church is popular because it is located in the vicinity of the castle of Socerb, from where the so-called Holy Cave (Sveta jama), in which the saint, according to tradition, lived as a hermit, is only three hundred metres away. He is depicted as a young man in Roman costume, sometimes in military apparel. He also appears in scenes in which, with the help of God, he defeats a snake or a dragon, or when a cauldron of boiling oil is being prepared for him.
As a special patron saint who protected Carniola against the Ottomans, St. Peregrina was worshipped. Her relics were obtained from Rome by the Discalceate Friars of Ljubljana. Their transference into the Discalceate church on 5 October 1660 was also attended by Emperor Leopold with his train, which bestowed special importance on the event and consequently on the Saint herself, and provided wider, i.e. provincial, dimensions. Her patronage was certainly influenced by the imminent Ottoman threat. After the dissolution of the Discalceate Order in 1787 her relics moved from hand to hand. For some time they were in the possession of the baron of Flödnig (Smlednik), who destined a special altar for the Saint in the church at Valburga, with an altarpiece showing her martyrdom (she is being killed with clubs, which corresponds to the description in the Ljubljana Discaceate Chronicle). In 1796 the relics ended their wanderings in the church at Tunjice. They are placed under the mensa of the high altar, while the wall painting (overpainted) shows, besides her lerge-scale figure, also the scene of her martyr’s death (met under the blows of chains or whips, which corresponds to Valvasor’s description).
Didier MARTENS
Maša sv. Gregorja pri Sv. Miklavžu na Vimperku (Vinski vrh pri Polzeli) v spletu mednarodnih povezav
K recepciji grafičnega lista Israhela van Meckenema
Nedavno odkrita freska Maše sv. Gregorja v koru Miklavževe cerkve na Vimperku (Vinskem vrhu) pri Polzeli ni avtorsko delo v najožjem pomenu besede, saj izhaja iz grafične predloge bakrorezca Israhela van Meckenema (ok. 1440–1503), delujočega v Bocholtu ob spodnjem Renu. Predlogo je freskant iz prve polovice 16. stoletja kopiral dokaj zvesto, vendar poenostavljeno; izpustil je npr. nekatera Arma Christi, ki jih je van Meckenem vključil v kompozicijo. Očitno se je trudil, da bi grafiko učinkovito prenesel v novi medij: iz približno 20 x 15 cm velikega lista je nastala monumentalna freska, ki so jo morali verniki dobro videti tudi z večje razdalje.
Na Vimperku delujoči freskant pa ni niti edini niti prvi umetnik, ki je za predlogo uporabil van Meckenemovo grafiko. Maša sv. Gregorja, hranjena v cerkvi sv. Janeza Krstnika v Nideggnu (Severno Porenje-Vestfalija, okrožje Düren), lokalno porensko delo iz ok. 1500, je za tisti čas zelo zvesta kopija lista, tokrat prilagojena posebnostim oltarnega tabelnega slikarstva. Grafiko so uporabljali tudi na Nizozemskem, najverjetneje v Bruslju. Zgodnjegotski cerkveni prostor, kakor ga je zasnoval van Meckenem, pa tudi posebno izčrpno predstavljena Arma Christi so tamkajšnjim slikarjem očitno služili kot predloge. Slikarjem, ki so bili negotovi v perspektivi ali ki jim simbolni jezik pasijonske ikonografije ni bil domač, je postala grafika neke vrste referenčno delo, iz katerega so si lahko izposodili tisto, česar si niso drznili zasnovati sami. Dele van Meckenemove Maše sv. Gregorja prepoznamo tako na sliki v pariškem Musée de Cluny kot tudi na sliki v Srednjerenskem muzeju v Koblenzu, na obeh pa so te delne izposoje kombinirane z drugimi predlogami.
Die Gregorsmesse der Niklauskirche zu Vimperk (Vinski vrh bei Polzela) im internationalen Beziehungsgeflecht. Zur Rezeption eines Stiches des Israhel van Meckenem
Das gerade entdeckte Wandgemälde der Gregorsmesse im Chor der Niklauskirche zu Vimperk (Vinski vrh bei Polzela) ist keine Schöpfung im eigentlichen Sinne des Wortes, sondern geht auf eine graphische Vorlage zurück: einen Stich des in Bocholt am Niederrhein tätigen Kupferstechers Israhel van Meckenem (c. 1440-1503). Der Freskomaler aus der ersten Hälfte des 16. Jahrhunderts hat sein Modell relativ treu kopiert, aber vereinfacht. Er hat zum Beispiel einige von Israhel van Meckenem dargestellte Arma Christi weggelassen. Ihm ging es offensichtlich darum, eine mediengerechte Übertragung des Stiches zustande zu bringen. Aus dem ungefähr 20 x 15 cm messenden Blatt wurde ein monumentales Fresko, das im ursprünglichen Zustand für die Gläubigen aus der Entfernung gut sichtbar sein musste.
Der in Vimperk tätige Freskenmaler ist weder der erste, noch der einzige Künstler, der sich mit Israhel van Meckenems Stich auseinandergesetzt hat. Eine in der St. Johannes Baptistkirche zu Nideggen (Nordrhein-Westfalen, Kreis Düren) aufbewahrte Gregorsmesse, wohl eine lokale rheinische Arbeit um 1500, darf als eine für die Zeit recht treue Kopie des Blattes betrachtet werden. Diesmal wurde es der Eigenart der Gattung der Tafelmalerei für Altäre angepasst. Auch in den Niederlanden, höchstwahrscheinlich in Brüssel, wurde der Stich rezipiert. Der von Israhel van Meckenem entworfene frühgotische Kirchenraum, aber auch die besonders ausführlich dargestellten Arma Christi haben dort offenbar eine Vorbildfunktion für Maler erfüllt. Für diejenigen, die im perspektivischen Zeichnen unsicher waren, und denen, die Symbolsprache der Passionsikonographie nicht geläufig war, wurde der Stich zu einer Art Referenzwerk, aus dem man sich das holen konnte, was man lieber nicht auf eigene Gefahr erfinden wollte. So sind Teile der Gregorsmesse des Israhel van Meckenem sowohl auf einer Tafel im Musée de Cluny in Paris wie auf einer des Mittelrhein-Museums in Koblenz zu erkennen. Diese teilweisen Entlehnungen sind auf beiden Werken mit anderen Vorlagen kombiniert worden.
Jure MIKUŽ
Pomeni in antropološke funkcije poznosrednjeveške podobe: ikonografija (tudi) za našo rabo
Ikonografijo in ikonologijo razumemo kot pisanje in razmišljanje o podobah, ali pa obratno, kot podobo zapisanega, podobo racionalne besede. Če pomen prvega odnosa med besedo oziroma besedilom in podobo ikonografijo vzpostavlja, pa jo drugi, kakor bomo pokazali v tem prispevku, spodbija. Pozni srednji vek je bil čas tranzicije, dinamičnega družbenega prehoda v novi vek. Cerkev sama ni bila enotna, znotraj nje so bila različna trenja in težnje, nasprotja med redovi, med različnimi oblikami duhovščine, med sakralnim in profanim. Zato je še toliko težje govoriti o enoviti institucionalni doktrini, ki bi jo izražala likovna umetnost. Nasprotno, zelo priljubljeni so bili prizori, ki so kazali prav največje paradokse doktrine, kot so utelešenje, brezmadežnost ipd. Ti so zapovedano sveto resnico, naj je bila še tako abstraktna in nedoumljiva, dopolnjevali in pojasnjevali z realističnimi motivi in komentarji, povzetimi iz vsakdanjega življenja. Da bi bile podobe dostopne in razumljive, si sveto in laično v njih ne nasprotujeta, ampak sta spojena in se dopolnjujeta v eno, med seboj nerazdružljivo vsebino. Resničnost vanje ni vdirala samo kot naturalistični slog, ampak tudi kot izbira iz narave znanega motiva in njegovega videza ali kot meditativna in apotropejska funkcija. Podoba je v tako intenzivni interakciji s svetom, da moramo njen pomen razbirati tako iz referenc znotraj nje same kakor iz rekonstrukcij podatkov iz vsakdanjega življenja. V njem pa je bilo, v odnosu do svetih stvari, polno pomislekov, večpomenskosti, fetišizma in ostankov animističnega pojmovanja. Ko razkrivamo silnice tega časa, se pokažejo popačenja, potlačitve in dvoumnosti kot simptomi, ki nam to dobo razkrivajo skozi svojo navzočnost v slikah kot različni simboli, pomeni in vsebine. Zato lahko s Schapirovo pomočjo v mišnici vidimo hkrati religiozne, družbene, psihološke in seksualne pomene. Prepričanja so bila omajana, strašilni in grozeči ikonografski program visokega srednjega veka bi ljudi lahko odvračal od prave vere in jih napeljeval k dvomom in krivoverskim mislim. Zato so teologi in vsi drugi, ki so vplivali na naročila, skrbeli predvsem za pastoralno funkcijo, podoba je morala doseči željen učinek tudi na račun netočnosti oziroma neskladij z naukom. To pa je, kot je pokazal že Berliner, dopuščalo ustvarjalcem svobodo. Tako si lahko razložimo tudi očitna protislovja, ki jih ni najti v nobenem besedilu, ko vidimo, kako samorog položi glavo v Marijino naročje v motivu, ki do potankosti povzema prizor oznanjenja, ko Marija s plaščem v prizoru dvojnega priprošnjištva posreduje pri svojemu sinu, ki je prav tako odet s plaščem, pod katerim varuje vernike in od katerega se odbijajo puščice jeze, ki jih Bog proži z neba, ali Križanje, kjer Kristus z ranjenim in prebodenim telesom skupaj z Marijo pod križem objokuje samega sebe, razpetega na križ.
Meanings and anthropological functions of image in the Late Middle Ages:Iconography and iconology (also) for Slovene use
Iconography and iconology are understood as writing and reflection about images, or vice versa, as the image of what is written, the image of the rational word. If the meaning of the former relation between the word, or text, and the image constitutes iconography, the latter nullifies it, as the present paper is going to show. The Late Middle Ages were the time of transition, of dynamic social passage to the Modern Period. The Church was not in harmony, there were several collisions and different tendencies inside it, controversies between religious orders, between different grades of clergy, between the sacred and the secular. Therefore it is difficult to speak about a uniform institutional doctrine expressed in the fine arts. On the contrary: very popular were exactly those scenes that featured the greatest paradoxes of the teachings, such as the incarnation, the immaculateness, etc. They complemented and explained the prescribed holy truth, no matter how abstract and incomprehensible it was, with realistic motifs and comments taken from everyday life. With the purpose that the images be available and comprehensible, the sacred and the lay in them do not contradict but are complementary and mingled within a single, inseparable content. Reality did not force its way into the images only as an introduction of the naturalistic style, but also as a motif chosen from nature and familiar in its appearance or as a meditative and apotropaic function. The image enters in so intense interaction with the world that its meaning must be read both from the references within itself and from the reconstruction of the information from the daily life. However, in relation to holy things there were lots of distrust, multi-layered meanings, fetishism and remains of animistic beliefs in this quotidian life. When we try to discover the forces operating in this time, deformations, oppressions and ambiguities turn up as symptoms which reveal this era through their presence in the pictures as different symbols, meanings and contents. Therefore, with the help of Meyer Shapiro, we can see in a mousetrap at the same time religious, social, psychological and sexual meanings. The beliefs were shaken, the deterrent iconographical programme of the High Middle Ages could have diverted people from the true religion and inspired doubts and heretical thoughts. So the theologians and all others who had influence on art commissions took care primarily of the pastoral function; the image had to achieve the desired effect also at the expense of inaccuracy or disagreement with the doctrine. And this left place for the artists’ freedom, as Berliner has already demonstrated. In this way we can explain the evident discrepancies – which cannot be found in any text – such as the unicorn laying its head in Mary’s lap in the motif which precisely imitates the scene of the Annunciation; Mary with the protecting cloak in the scene of the double intercession, when she intercedes with her son, who is likewise donned in a cloak under which he protects the believers and from which the arrows of wrath rebound which God is throwing from the sky; or the Crucifixion in which Christ, his body wounded and pierced, together with Mary at the foot of the cross deplores his own crucified self.
Barbara MUROVEC, Jana ZAPLETALOVÁ
Delo Janeza Andreja Straussa na Moravskem
Leta 1994 je Bohumil Samek v prvem delu topografije Moravske in Šlezije med umetninami, ki sodijo k nekdanji opremi cerkve sv. Egidija (v mestu) Bystřice pod Hostýnem, naštel tudi signirano in datirano sliko Križanja: Joh[ann] Andr[eas] V. Strauss Pinxit A[nn]o 1782. Zdaj v župnišču hranjena podoba je na Moravskem povsem brez konteksta, saj je njen avtor, baročni slikar Janez Andrej Strauss (1721–1783), ki je deloval v Slovenj Gradcu za naročnike iz Štajerske in Koroške (v današnji Sloveniji in Avstriji), tam popolnoma neznan. Čeprav zaenkrat ne vemo ničesar zanesljivega o okoliščinah nastanka slike in njenem naročniku ter ne moremo z gotovostjo trditi niti, da jo je Strauss naslikal prav za cerkev v Bystřici pod Hostýnom, in moramo torej odprto pustiti tudi možnost, da je lahko na Moravsko prišla precej po (kadarkoli po) nastanku, njeno poznavanje oziroma ponovno odkritje pomembno prispeva k vrednotenju Straussovega opusa. Dosedanje sklepe o poznem Straussu bo potrebno vsaj delno korigirati; Križanje je namreč datirano v zadnje leto pred slikarjevo smrtjo, torej je iz obdobja, za katero velja, da je bil Strauss tako rekoč popolnoma izključen iz umetnostnega dogajanja.
A work by Johann Andreas Strauss in Moravia
In the first part of his topographical art inventory of Moravia and Silesia of 1994 Bohumil Samek mentions a painting of the Crucified Christ among the works of art that belonged to the former furnishings of the church of St. Egidius (Jiljí, Gilles) in the town of Bystřice pod Hostýnem. The painting, now housed in the parish house there, is signed and dated: Joh[ann] Andr[eas] V. Strauss Pinxit A[nn]o 1782. It is completely without a context in Moravia, since the artist, i.e. the Baroque painter Johann Andreas Strauss (1721–1783), who worked in Slovenj Gradec (Windisch-Graetz) for patrons from Styria and Carinthia (in present-day Slovenia and Austria), is altogether unknown in the Czech Republic. Although, for the time being, no reliable facts are known about the circumstances of the origin of the painting and the person who commissioned it, nor can it be positively stated that Strauss painted it exactly for the church in Bystřice pod Hostýnem – hence the possibility that it was only subsequently (at any time) brought to Moravia should not be excluded – the knowledge of it, or its re-discovery, nevertheless significantly contributes to the evaluation of the painter’s oeuvre. The hitherto conclusions about the late Strauss will certainly have to be revised, partly at least; namely, the Crucified Christ is dated in the year before the painter’s death, thus it was executed in the period when Strauss, as has been believed so far, was no longer active as a painter.
Damjan PRELOVŠEK
Plečnikovo inženirstvo
Plečnikova arhitektura je bila zaradi nekompatibilnosti s funkcionalistično estetiko v preteklosti večkrat označevana za neoklasično, ali celo eklektično. V resnici pa v sebi skriva veliko izvirnosti in tehničnega znanja. Šolanje pri dunajskem reformatorju arhitekture Ottonu Wagnerju je Plečnika naučilo zdravega razmerja med strukturo in okrasjem. Okrasje na njegovih stavbah zato ni namenjeno le samo sebi, temveč dopolnjuje, pojasnjuje in utemeljuje njihove konstruktivne dele ter je kot tako enakovredna sestavina celote. Z domiselnim uvajanjem izrazito inženirskim prijemov je Plečnik v Wagnerjevem duhu reformiral tradicionalno umetnost in nakazal nekatere rešitve, ki jih je uresničil šele poznejši čas. Z zgodnjo rabo železobetona je razgrnil njegov estetski potencial, ki se je skrival v kombinaciji različnih teksturnih rab. Manj pa ga je privlačila možnost ukvarjanja z bravuroznostjo železobetonskih konstrukcij, kljub temu pa je v svoji dunajski cerkvi sv. Duha že leta 1910 s tem gradivom, na enak način kot pri gradnji mostov, sezidal empore. Tudi pri nekaj let prej zgrajeni Zacherlovi hiši na Dunaju (1903-1905) je spodnjemu trgovskemu delu stavbe z napredno železobetonsko konstrukcijo zagotovil želeno mobilnost, tako, da je uživala enak ugled v inženirskih krogih. Ob urejanju praškega gradu se je Plečnik močneje zbližal z antično umetnostjo, vendar ga je zmagoviti pohod češkega funkcionalizma spodbudil h gradnji širokega cerkvenega zvonika v predmestju Vinohrady, katerega notranjost dokazuje, da je bil tudi sam sposoben ustvarjati skrajno moderno, čeprav tega ni imel za pravi smisel arhitekture. Zato je zanimivo betonsko klančino dodatno prekril z bogato okrašenim fasadnim plaščem. Razvoj funkcionalistične arhitekture je Plečnika prisilil, da se je postavil v bran klasičnih humanističnih vrednot, kar se je odražalo v domiselni rabi antičnih stavbnih elementov, katerih najvidnejši zunanji znak je bil steber. Vendar je znal Plečnik tudi na tak način slediti potrebam svojega časa. Vrh njegovih prizadevanj je neuresničeni projekt slovenskega parlamenta (1947), ki rešuje problem prekritja velikega centralnega prostora. Plečnik mu je namenil manjšo plitvo kupolo in jo postavil na poševne stebre, s čimer je optimalno rešil tudi statični del naloge.
Plečnik’s engineering architecture
Because of its incompatibility with the Functionalist aesthetics, Plečnik’s architecture was often defined in the past as being Neoclassical or even eclectic. But the truth is that it contains a great deal of originality and technical knowledge. During his training with the Vienna reformer of architecture, Otto Wagner, Plečnik learned to observe a sound relationship between structure and decoration. Therefore, the ornamentation of his buildings was never an end in itself, but it complements, explains and supports their constructive elements and is thus an equivalent constituent part of the whole. With his ingenious introduction of markedly engineering approaches Plečnik reformed the traditional art in Wagner’s spirit and pointed to some solutions which were fully realized only in a later time. His early use of reinforced concrete revealed its aesthetic potential offered by the combinations of different texture applications. He was less attracted by the possibility of dealing with the bravura use of reinforced concrete constructions; nevertheless, he employed this material in his Vienna church of St. Spirit already in 1910, namely for the gallery, which was constructed in the same way as bridges. Likewise, a few years earlier in his Zacherl house in Vienna (1903–1905), he secured the required mobility in the lower, i.e. business, part of the building, by means of a modern reinforced iron construction, so that the building was equally appreciated also in the circles of technical engineers. While arranging Prague Castle, Plečnik got closer to the art of antiquity, but the victorious march of Czech Functionalism encouraged him to build a broad church tower in the suburb of Vinohrady, whose interior proves that he was capable of producing fully modern designs, although he did not believe it to be the true aim of architecture. Therefore he additionally surrounded the interesting concrete slope with richly ornamented façade shell. The development of Functionalist architecture forced Plečnik to defend classical humanistic values, which found expression in his imaginative use of antique building elements, of which the most conspicuous one was the column. However, in this way too Plečnik knew how to follow the requirements of his time. The culmination of his efforts was the unrealized project for the Slovene parliament building (1947), which solves the problem of roofing a big central space. Plečnik planned a smaller shallow dome, rested on slanted columns, which also meant an optimal solution to the static part of the task.
Alessandro QUINZI
Grafika sv. Alojzija Gonzage in Stanislava Kostke Gottfrieda Bernharda Göza po sliki Antonia Balestre
K seznamu grafičnih del, ki so bila povzeta po slikah veronskega slikarja Antonia Balestre (1666–1740), gre prišteti tudi podobico Sv. Alojzija Gonzage in Stanislava Kostke Gottfrieda Göza (1708–1774). Augsburški slikar in grafik ni nikoli obiskal Italije in je najbrž Balestrovo sliko, ki je nastala za jezuite v Veroni, poznal preko druge prevodne grafike, morda tiste, ki jo je vrezal Filip Andrej Kilian (1714–1759).
L’incisione dei Santi Luigi Gonzaga e Stanislao Kostka di Gottfried Bernhard Göz da Antonio Balestra
Nel fondo Attems–De Grazia della Biblioteca del Seminario teologico di Gorizia si conserva una busta con le immagini devozionali appartenute al primo arcivescovo di Gorizia Carlo Michele d’Attems (1711–1774). Tra queste si trova anche la stampa di piccolo formato (90x140 mm) dei Santi Luigi Gonzaga e Stanislao Kostka, incisi e pubblicati ad Augusta dal pittore e incisore Gottfried Bernhard Göz (Velehrad 1708 – Augusta 1774) come denuncia la firma in calce: G.B. Göz Sc. et e(xc.). Oltre alla tecnica del puntinato, l’immagine si caratterizza per l’assenza di qualsiasi cornice tracciata a delimitare la composizione figurativa, caratteristica che il suo autore provvederà a tutelare con un apposito privilegio imperiale come denuncia l’abbreviazione C.P.S.C.M. ossia Cum Privilegio Sacrae Cesareae Majestatis. Concesso per la prima volta il 15 gennaio del 1742 il privilegio è stato prorogato per dieci anni nel 1755 e per altri cinque nel 1766. La stampa qui esaminata è stata dunque realizzata entro questa parentesi cronologica, che il Wildmoser restringe al 1742–50. Non è stato però rilevato che questa piccola stampa va a incrementare il catalogo delle incisioni tratte dalle opere di Antonio Balestra (1666–1740), poiché ripropone in controparte e con alcune semplificazioni lo Stendardo con i ss. Luigi Gonzaga e Stanislao Kostka realizzato nel 1727 per i gesuiti di Verona. Del Göz non è documentato alcun viaggio in Italia e deve aver conosciuto l’opera del Balestra tramite un disegno o un’incisione come quella del concittadino Philip Andreas Kilian (1714–1759). A questo proposito non vanno dimenticati i continui e duraturi rapporti del Göz con i gesuiti. La circolazione di modelli iconografici era infatti favorita dai canali degli ordini religiosi com’è documentato anche Gorizia da una Thesenblatt con i ss. Luigi Gonzaga e Stanislao Kostka. Il foglio, conservato nel monastero di Sant’Orsola, è stato verosimilmente realizzato ad Augusta, ma è rapportabile alla pala dipinta da Gaspare Diziani per i gesuiti di Belluno. L’incisione è stata infine tradotta in colori da Johann Michael Lichtenreit nella pala destinata all’altar maggiore della cappella della Madonna eretta nell’orto del convento delle orsoline, ordine legato, com’è noto, a quello gesuitico.
Helena SERAŽIN
Marijin oltar v santuario dell'Apparizione di S. Vio na Pellestrini. Giovanni Battista Mazzoleni (1699–1769) – kipar in štukater?
Prispevek se v prvem delu navezuje na članek Damir Tulić, Per Francesco Cabianca in Praesidium Venetorum – Templum Apparitionis Beatae Mariae Virginis a Pellestrina, Arte documento, 25, 2009, pp. 184–189, v katerem je avtor kipe na Marijinem oltarju oratorija na Pellestrini na podlagi stilnih primerjav pripisal beneškemu kiparju Francescu Cabianca (1666–1737). Archivio di Stato di Venezia v fondu Provveditori sopra Monasteri hrani dokumentacijo, iz katere je Cabiancovo avtorstvo jasno razvidno (priloge 1–3). Kipar je bil skupaj s kamnosekom Giovanni Battista Mazzoleni (1699–1769) 27. avgusta 1728 na podlagi najugodnejše ponudbe izbran na javnem natečaju za izvajalca del, oltar pa sta mojstra nato izdelala do konca tistega leta.
Dokumenti, povezani z Marijinim oltarjem v santuario dell'Apparizione di S. Vio na Pellestrini so pomembni predvsem zato, ker je to prvo doslej znano in dokumentirano delo Giovannija Battista Mazzolenija, ki je v umetnostnozgodovinski literaturi predstavljen kot arhitekt, kipar in štukater po rodu iz kraja Zogno severno od Bergama. V resnici vemo o njem zelo malo; maloštevilni, doslej znani dokumenti so bili v preteklosti interpretirani tako, da je bila slika o Mazzoleniju nejasna in polna nasprotujočih si podatkov. Po natančni analizi rojstnih podatkov in podatkov o njegovih družinskih članih sledi ugotovitev, da je šlo najverjetneje za dva Giovannija Mazzolenija, vrstnika in soimenjaka: prvega, doma iz Zogna in poročenega s Catarino, s Trstom najverjetneje povezuje le poroka sina Pietra Antonia s Tržačanko Anno di Vicenzo Monte leta 1768, drugi, poročen z Magdaleno, pa bi dejansko utegnil biti beneški kamnosek, ki je živel med Benetkami, Gorico, Trstom in Dalmacijo.
Po davčnem popisu iz leta 1740 je Giovanni Mazzoleni stanoval v župniji S. Stae, kjer je imel od leta 1711 v najemu enonadstropno hišo z delavnico, ki pa je bila v času popisa prazna. Bržkone zaradi svojega poklica je bil v času, ko so se v župnijski cerkvi postavljali novi oltarji, izvoljen za gvardijana bratovščine Svetega zakramenta, ki je poskrbel za postavitev bratovščinskega in hkrati tudi velikega oltarja te cerkve; 1715, 1727 in 1728 je v ta namen izplačal kamnoseka Alessandra Vivianija ter kiparja Giuseppeja Toretti in Paola Gropelli. Sledilo je naročilo za Pellestrino, 1732 pa ga zasledimo tudi med člani Arte dei tagliapietra v Benetkah; na popisih med 1737 in 1745 je naveden kot fuori Venezia, kar se ujema z navedbo v davčnem popisu.
Kot piccapietra je 26. septembra 1736 s frà Lorenzom di San Eliseo, priorjem samostana carmelitani scalzi na Kostanjevici pri Gorici podpisal pogodbo za tlakovanje prezbiterija z raznobarvnim marmorjem tako, kot je v beneški cerkvi S. Maria di Nazareth – Scalzi to naredil kamnosek Marco Mazzoleni, morda Giovannijev sorodnik, po naročilu istega frà Lorenza di San Eliseo, ki je bil konec 17. stoletja prior samostana bosonogih karmeličanov v Benetkah. Ker je v Gorici v prvi polovici tridesetih let primanjkovalo dobrih kamnosekov – altaristov, je 28. januarja 1737 v mestu za osem let najel hišo z vrtom, ki jo je smel predelati v delavnico. Leta 1749 je izdelal veliki oltar župnijske cerkve v Moraru, med leti 1751 in 1755 pa tri fontane v Trstu: fontana dei Continenti (1751), fontana del puttino (1753) in fontana di Nettuno (1755). Morda zadnje njegovo delo je bilo naročilo za dokončanje velikega oltarja v župnijski cerkvi v Nerezišću na Braču 1758, ki ga ni izvedel v celoti.
V vseh dokumentih je Mazzoleni naveden le kot piccapietra, tagliapietra, mastro ali professor degl'altari, nikoli pa ne nastopa kot kipar in štukater, kar sta mu pripisala Ranieri Maria Cossar, Storia dell'arte e dell'artigianato in Gorizia, Pordenone 1948, pp. 108–109 in Maria Walcher, L'attività goriziana dello scultore G. B. Mazzoleni, Studi goriziani, 41, 1975/1, pp. 153–167. Že primerjava kipov na njegovih dokumentiranih delih pokaže, da gre za dela različnih rok, celoten goriški opus pa temelji zgolj na predpostavki, da je Mazzoleni avtor kipov zato, ker takrat v mestu ni bilo nobenega drugega kiparja ali kamnoseka, ki bi jih lahko izlesal. Končna ugotovitev bi torej bila, da je bil Giovanni Battista Mazzoleni predvsem kamnosek, stilna raznolikost kipov na njegovih oltarjih in vodnjakih pa nakazuje na to, da je kiparsko dekoracijo naročal pri različnih beneških in furlanskih kiparjih - provenienca kipov in polnjenje vrzeli v Mazzolenijevem opusu bosta tako stvar nadaljnjih raziskav.
L’altare della Madonna nel Santuario dell’Apparizione di S. Vio a Pellestrina Giovanni Battista Mazzoleni (1699–1769) – scultore e stuccatore?
Il contributo prende le mosse dall’articolo di Damir Tulić, Per Francesco Cabianca in Praesidium Venetorum – Templum Apparitionis Beatae Mariae Virginis a Pellestrina, Arte documento, 25, 2009, pp. 184–189, nel quale lo studioso ha attribuito le sculture dell’altare della Madonna nell’oratorio di Pellestrina al veneziano Francesco Cabianca (1666–1737) sulla base di confronti stilistici. La paternità del Cabianca trova conferma anche nella documentazione del fondo dei Provveditori sopra Monasteri conservato presso l’Archivio di Stato di Venezia (allegati 1–3). Il 27 agosto del 1728 lo scultore, assieme al lapicida Giovanni Battista Mazzoleni (1699–1769), si è infatti aggiudicato il bando pubblico per l’erezione dell’altare grazie all’offerta migliore e i due maestri hanno portato a termine la commissione entro la fine dello stesso anno.
I documenti legati all’altare della Madonna nel Santuario dell’Apparizione di S. Vio sull’isola di Pellestrina sono però importanti perché documentano la prima opera sinora nota di Giovanni Battista Mazzoleni, nativo di Zogno a nord di Bergamo, che negli scritti storico artistici compare anche nelle vesti di architetto, scultore e stuccatore. In realtà sappiamo ben poco del Mazzoleni e gli scarni dati a disposizione sono stati in passato interpretati in modo da fornire un’immagine poco chiara e contraddittoria. A seguito di un’attenta verifica dei dati anagrafici e delle notizie riguardanti i membri della sua famiglia si deve concludere che erano due i Giovanni Mazzoleni coetanei e omonimi: il primo, nativo di Zogno e sposato con Caterina, è verosimilmente legato a Trieste solo per il matrimonio del figlio Pietro Antonio con la triestina Anna di Vicenzo Monte nel 1768; il secondo, sposato con Maddalena, potrebbe essere il nostro lapicida veneziano che ha vissuto e operato tra Venezia, Gorizia, Trieste e la Dalmazia.
Sulla base del censimento erariale del 1740 sappiamo che Giovanni Mazzoleni abitava nella parrocchia di S. Stae, dove aveva in affitto dal 1711 una casa di un piano con bottega, che però nell’anno del censimento risultava vuota. Probabilmente per via del mestiere esercitato il Mazzoleni è stato anche eletto alla carica di guardiano della Confraternita del SS. Sacramento proprio mentre si stavano erigendo i nuovi altari della parrocchiale. La confraternita ha infatti finanziato il proprio altare, quello maggiore. Negli anni 1715, 1727 e 1728 lo stesso Mazzoleni si fece carico dei pagamenti riguardanti il lapicida Alessandro Viviani e gli scultori Giuseppe Torretto e Paolo Gropelli. Al 1728 risale la già ricordata commissione di Pellestrina, mentre nel 1732 il Mazzoleni compare tra i membri dell’Arte dei tagliapietra a Venezia. Negli elenchi redatti tra gli anni 1737 e 1745 è ricordato come fuori Venezia, fatto che trova conferma con quanto riportato nella tassazione del 1740.
Il 26 settembre 1736 il Mazzoleni, in qualità di piccapietra, sottoscrive con fra Lorenzo di San Eliseo, priore del convento dei carmelitani scalzi sulla Castagnevizza presso Gorizia, un contratto per la pavimentazione in marmi policromi del presbiterio della chiesa conventuale. Lo stesso frate, quando era priore dei carmelitani scalzi a Venezia alla fine del Seicento, aveva commissionato un identico lavoro per la chiesa di Santa Maria di Nazareth detta degli Scalzi allo scalpellino Marco Mazzoleni, forse un parente del nostro Giovanni. Poiché nella Gorizia della prima metà degli anni Trenta del Settecento mancavano scalpellini e altaristi qualificati, il 28 gennaio del 1737 Giovanni Mazzoleni aveva preso in affitto per otto anni una casa con orto con la facoltà di trasformarla in bottega. Nel 1749 il Mazzoleni esegue l’altar maggiore della chiesa parrocchiale di Moraro e tra gli anni 1751 e 1755 le tre fontane per Trieste: dei Continenti (1751), del Puttino (1753) e del Nettuno (1755). Forse la sua ultima opera, rimasta incompiuta, va individuata nella commissione allogata nel 1758 per il completamento dell’altar maggiore della chiesa di Nerezišće sull’isola di Brač (Brazza).
In tutti i documenti il Mazzoleni è citato solo come piccapietra, tagliapietra, mastro o professor degl’altari, mentre non compare mai come scultore o stuccatore, ruoli che gli sono stati attribuiti da Ranieri Mario COSSAR, Storia dell’arte e dell’artigianato in Gorizia, Pordenone 1948, pp. 108–109 e Maria WALCHER, L’ attività goriziana dello scultore G.B. Mazzoleni, Studi goriziani, 41, 1975/1, pp. 153–167. Già il solo confronto tra le sculture che ornano le opere documentate del Mazzoleni evidenzia la presenza di mani diverse, mentre l’attribuzione dell’intero corpus di opere goriziane si fonda solo sul presupposto che al tempo non vi era in città alcun altro scultore o tagliapietra al quale poter attribuire tali opere. In conclusione si può ritenere che Giovanni Battista Mazzoleni fu sopratutto uno scalpellino mentre le differenze stilistiche tra le sculture che adornano i suoi altari e le fontane indicano che la decorazione scultorea è stata assegnata a vari scultori veneziani o friulani. L’identificazione dell’origine delle sculture e l’attribuzione di nuove opere del Mazzoleni sono dunque i compiti che attendono le ricerche future.
Lidija TAVČAR
Grofičinim šopkom ob rob. Neobjavljeni tihožitji Marije Auersperg Attems
Bidermajerska slikarka grofica Marija Auersperg Attems (1816–1880) je med redkimi starejšimi likovnimi ustvarjalkami na Slovenskem, ki ji je stroka posvetila sorazmerno precej pozornosti in ji je bila pred nedavnim posvečena tudi samostojna razstava (prim. razstavni katalog Grofičini šopki. Marija Auersperg Attems, Gorenjski muzej – Galerija Prešernove hiše v Kranju, Kranj 2009). Doslej jo je predstavljalo šest cvetličnih tihožitij, ki jih je leta 1911 grof Ervin Auersperg, dedič posestva in gradu Šrajbarski turn, grofičinega priljubljenega prebivališča, podaril tedanjemu Deželnemu muzeju Rudolfinumu v Ljubljani, a so bile pozneje razdeljene med Narodni muzej (inv. št. N 17851–17852) in Narodno galerijo (inv. št. NG S 967–970). Znana je tudi njena upodobitev interierja s Šrajbarskega turna (Neue Galerie am Landesmuseum Joanneum, Gradec, inv. št. VIII/198). Članek predstavlja dve doslej še ne objavljeni Marijini cvetlični tihožitji iz likovne zbirke Slovenske akademije znanosti in umetnosti, in sicer Cvetje v vazi (olje na lesu, 36,5 x 30 cm, inv. št. MSAZU/13, na hrbtni strani: Marie Auersperg = Attems. 1845.) in Cvetje na polici s steklenim vrčkom (olje na lesu, 26 x 31,5 cm, sign. d. sp., monogram: MA (prepleteno), na hrbtni strani: Marie Auersperg = Attems. 1846.). Sliki izhajata iz umetnostne zbirke Josipa Lenarčiča z Vrhnike, ki je 1903 skupaj s Karlom Kotnikom od Ervina Auersperga odkupil Šrajbarski turn, v zbirko SAZU pa so prišle po drugi svetovni vojni. Drobni deli se v celoti ujemata z doslej znanimi slikarkinimi tihožitji, tako v izbiri cvetlic kakor v njihovem aranžmaju (kompoziciji) in načinu slikarske obdelave, tako da ne prinašata bistvenega novega vedenja, zanimivo pa je, da je ena slika podolžnega formata, saj so sicer vse preostale pokončne.
Članek tudi popravlja napačno atribucijo Auerspergovi, ki ji je bilo pripisano neohranjeno sadno-cvetlično tihožitje, dokumentirano le na fotografiji v INDOK centru Ministrstva za kulturo RS (prim. Miha Preinfalk, Auerspergi. Po sledeh mogočnega tura, Ljubljana 2005, str. 208, sl. 200). Ob ustrezni računalniški povečavi skenirane fotografije se je pokazala signatura holandskega slikarja cvetličnih tihožitij Cornelisa Johannesa van Hulstijna (1813–1879), ki je več let živel na Slovenskem in slikal za plemiške družine v širši okolici Celja.
Two unpublished still-lifes by Maria Auersperg Attems
The Biedermeier amateur paintress countess Maria Auersperg Attems (1816–1880) spent the greatest part of her life in the present-day Slovenia, i.e. in the castles of Šrajbarski Turn (Turn am Hard) and Dornava (Dornau). Quite a number of mentions in old literature bear witness to her paintings kept in the homes of her relatives and friends as well as her own. However, her known surviving works are but few. Nevertheless, she is one of the rare women artists of the 19th century that have been paid relatively great attention by Slovene art historians. Her themes were limited to still-lifes, mostly flowers or fruit, of which only six have been known before; they were donated to the Provincial Museum Rudolfinum in Ljubljana in 1911 by the heir of Šrajbarski Turn castle, Erwin Auersperg. Later on, four were handed over to the National Gallery of Slovenia (inv. nos. NG S 967–970) and two were retained by the (renamed) National Museum of Slovenia (inv. nos. N 17851–17852). Presentations of the artist also feature a depiction of an interior from the castle of Šrajbarski Turn, housed in the Neue Galerie am Landesmuseum Joanneum in Graz (inv. no. VIII/198), and a fruit still-life survives in the Auersperg family archive in Vienna (for the most comprehensive presentation of the artist see exhibition catalogue Grofičini šopki. Marija Auersperg Attems, Gorenjski muzej – Galerija Prešernove hiše v Kranju, Kranj 2009).
The paper presents two small-scale flower still-lifes by Auersperg, which have not yet been published; they are kept in the collection of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts, inventory numbers MSAZU/13, oil on panel, 36,5 x 30 cm, and MSAZU/101, oil on panel, 26 x 31,5 cm, signed bottom right, in monogram: MA; on the back of both, inscribed in ink: Marie Auersperg = Attems. and date, on the former: 1845, and on the latter: 1846. The paintings proceed from a private collection of the landowner and industrialist Josip Lenarčič of Vrhnika. They came into his possession when in 1903 he and another landowner of Vrhnika, Karel Kotnik, jointly bought the Šrajbarski Turn castle and estate from Erwin Auersperg. Obviously, several paintings by Maria Auersperg Attems remained in the castle when it was sold. The two pictures were acquired by the Academy after World War II. They perfectly correspond with the previously known Auersperg still-lifes in terms of content (the choice of flowers), composition and painting style; however, the longitudinal format of MSAZU/101 is an exception, since all the rest are upright.
The paper also refutes the attribution to Auersperg of a still-life that only survives in a photograph (fig. 3; see Miha Preinfalk, Auerspergi. Po sledeh mogočnega tura, Ljubljana 2005, p. 208, fig. 200). Careful examination of a sufficiently magnified scan of the photo (owned by the INDOK Centre of the Ministry of Culture of the RS) showed the signature of the Dutch painter of still-lifes Cornelis Johannes van Hulstijn (1813–1879), who spent a number of years in Slovenia and painted for aristocratic families in the area around Celje.
Polona VIDMAR
Nagrobnik Friderika IX. Ptujskega in njegova gotska in baročna recepcija
Relief z upodobitvijo viteza v oklepu in napisom ob obodu plošče je edini ohranjen del tumbe Friderika IX. Ptujskega, ki je stala nad grobnico gospodov Ptujskih v prezbiteriju cerkve ptujskega dominikanskega samostana. Pokojnik je upodobljen v verižni srajci in popolnem ploščnem oklepu, na glavi ima čepico s krznenim zavihkom, manjka pa mu plašč, ki je sodil k takšni noši. V desnici drži prapor, levica mu počiva na ročaju meča. Njegove noge stojijo na ležečem psu. Vertikalna drža telesa je poudarjena z baldahinom in psom, ki nadomešča konzolo ali podstavek. V zgornjih vogalih sta upodobljena preroka z napisnima trakovoma. Baldahin s krogovičjem in fialami, stebrički in kapiteli prepričljivo členijo ploskev in ustvarjajo nišo za figuro. Ozadje notranjega polja je ravno in ne banjasto poglobljeno, kakor na številnih primerljivih nagrobnikih. Ob nogah pokojnika sta upodobljena oba grba gospodov Ptujskih s ščitkom, šlemom, ogrinjalom in šlemnim okrasom. Na heraldično desni strani je t.i. vurberški grb z zmajem, na levi pa t.i. borlski grb z narobe obrnjenim sidrom. Večina umetnostnih zgodovinarjev je s primerjalno metodo relief pripisala neznanemu salzburškemu kiparju in navedla številne primerjave v sočasni sepulkralni plastiki. V osnovno skupino primerljivih nagrobnikov sodijo nagrobniki Bertolda Emmerberškega (umrl 1403) v Bertholdsteinu pri Fehringu, Matthäusa Grannsa (umrl 1448 ali 1449) v Burghausnu, legendarnega vojvode Domicijana v Millstattu, nekaj sočasnih nagrobnikov cerkvenih prelatov in s pridržkom tudi nagrobnik Jurija Schweinbecka (umrl 1449) v župnijski cerkvi v Ljutomeru. Razrešitvi vprašanja o avtorju Friderikovega nagrobnika se je najtesneje približal Albrecht Miller, ki ga je pripisal Mojstru iz Seeona. Mojster iz Seeona je po njegovem mnenju „z veliko verjetnostjo“ identičen z v virih omenjenim kiparjem Hansom Paldaufom. Mojster naj bi nagrobnik Friderika Ptujskega izdelal okoli leta 1440, ko je imel delavnico še v Mühldorfu na Innu; služil pa mu je tudi kot predloga za viteška nagrobnika Matthäusa Grannsa in nagrobnik Bertolda Emmerberškega. Naročnik Friderikovega nagrobnika je bil najbrž njegov svak in prijatelj Janez grof Schaunberški, saj na to posredno kažejo omembe v ohranjenih listinah in tradicija postavljanja nagrobnikov iz adneškega marmorja v rodbini Schaunberških. Posredniško vlogo med naročnikom bi lahko odigral salzburški nadškof Janez Reisberg (1429–1441), ki je verjetno pri Mojstru iz Seeona/Hansu Paldaufu okoli leta 1435 naročil model za svoj pečatnik. Nagrobnik Friderika Ptujskega odlikujejo odlična kiparska izvedba, inovativnost v postavitvi vertikalne pokojnikove figure v bogat arhitekturni okvir, razgibanost figure in pretanjena čustvena oživitev pokojnikovih potez, ki omogoča gledalčevo vživetje v figuro.
Okoli leta 1449 je Friderikov nagrobnik recipiral neznani mojster nagrobnika Jurija Schweinbecka v župnijski cerkvi v Ljutomeru. S Friderikovega nagrobnika je prevzel figuro v sodobnem oklepu in brez plašča ter umestitev grbov ob nogah figure. Oprl pa se je tudi na starejše vzore v sepulkralni plastiki, predvsem na nagrobnik leta 1424 umrlega vojvode Ernesta Železnega v samostanski cerkvi v Reinu pri Gradcu. Kipar je od starejšega spomenika prevzel banjasto poglobljeno notranje polje, strogo frontalno in togo upodobljeno figuro, držo rok, blazino pod pokojnikovo glavo in namestitev simbolnih levov. Eklektična celota deluje izrazito monumentalno. Kljub nižjemu stanu smemo tudi v rodbini vitezov Schweinbeckov govoriti o tradiciji nagrobnikov iz adneškega marmorja, saj sta poleg Jurijevega ohranjena še nagrobnik njegove matere in deda v cerkvi sv. Jožefa v Voitsbergu ter nagrobnik njegove sorodnice Uršule v cerkvi sv. Jurija na Ptuju.
Baročno recepcijo Friderikovega nagrobnika najdemo v tretjem zvezku rokopisa Leopolda barona Stadla, Ehrenspiegel des Ertzogthums Steyer, ki je nastajal po letu 1731. Neznan risar je risbo izvedel po Stadlovem naročilu, saj se v konceptu natančno ujema z drugimi v rokopisu upodobljenimi nagrobniki. Na naročnikovo željo sta upodobljena osrednji motiv in napis, manj pozornosti je posvečene detajlom. Risar je spremenil razmerje med višino in širino reliefa ter opustil arhitekturne elemente in figuri prerokov. Opuščeni so vsi ikonografski elementi, ki ne služijo neposredno reprezentiranju, zato pa so dokaj natančno upodobljeni oklep, čepica s krznenim zavihkom, meč, bodalo, prapor, grba in simbolični pes pod Friderikovimi nogami. Poudarjena so torej vsa znamenja gosposkega stanu. Baročne risbe in grafike srednjeveških nagrobnikov imajo visoko dokumentarno vrednost, posebno v primerih, ko se spomeniki niso ohranili. Primerjava Stadlovih risb z ohranjenimi nagrobniki pa pokaže, da so risarji opuščali detajle, velikokrat napačno interpretirali upodobljene elemente ali pa so jih poenostavili. Po risbah ni mogoče soditi o kiparski kakovosti in času nastanka originala, kadar je le-ta izgubljen.
The tombstone of Friedrich IX of Pettau and its reception in the Gothic and Baroque periods
The relief effigy of a knight in suit of armour and the inscription in the margins of the slab is the only surviving part of the tombstone of Friedrich IX of Pettau which was placed above the tomb of the Lords of Pettau in the sanctuary of the church of the Dominican monastery in Ptuj / Pettau. The deceased wears a coat of mail and a complete plate armour and has a cap with fur fold on his head; missing is a cloak that also belonged to such an outfit. He holds a banner in his right hand, his left hand is rested upon a sword hilt and he stands on a recumbent dog. The vertical posture of the body is emphasized with a town canopy and the dog which is a substitute for a corbel or a stand. In the upper corners two prophets are carved, each with a banderole. The canopy with tracery and finials, colonnettes and capitals persuasively articulate the surface and create a niche for the figure. The background of the inner field is flat and does not recede concavely as it does in numerous comparable tombstones. By the feet of the deceased the two coats of arms of the Lords of Pettau are carved, with a shield, helmet, mantling and crest. On the heraldic right side there is the so-called Wurberg arms with a dragon, on the left there is the so-called Ankenstein arms with an upside-down anchor. By means of the comparative method the majority of art historians attributed the relief to an anonymous Salzburg sculptor and offered numerous comparable pieces of the sepulchral sculpture of the time. To the basic group of comparable items belong the tombstones of Berthold of Emmerberg (d. 1403) in Bertholdstein near Fehring; of Matthäus Granns (d. 1448 or 1449) in Burghausen; of the legendary duke Domitian in Millstatt; and a few contemporary tombstones of church prelates and, with reservation, also the tombstone of Georg Schweinbeck (d. 1449) in the parish church in Ljutomer. It was Albrecht Miller who drew most closely to the solution of the question about the sculptor of the Friedrich tombstone; he attributed it to the Master of Seeon. According to him, the Master of Seeon is “very likely” identical with the sculptor Hans Paldauf who is documented in archival sources. It is supposed that the Master carved the tombstone of Friedrich of Pettau around the year 1440, when he still had his workshop in Mühldorf on the Inn; it also served him as a pattern for the tombstones of Matthäus Granns and Berthold of Emmerberg. The patron who ordered the tombstone for Friedrich was probably his brother-in-law and friend count Johann of Schaunberg, because this is indirectly indicated by mentions in the surviving documents and can be inferred from the tradition in the Schaunberg family to erect tombstones made of the “red marble” from Adnet quarries south of Salzburg. The commission might have been placed through the agency of the archbishop of Salzburg Johann Reisberg (1429–1441), who around the year 1435 ordered a model for his seal probably from the Master of Seeon/Hans Paldauf. The tombstone of Friedrich of Pettau excels in high-quality sculptural execution, innovation in setting the upright figure in a rich architectural frame, the dynamism of the body and the delicate emotional enlivening of the deceased person’s facial features which enables the viewer’s co-experience of the figure.
Around the year 1449 an anonymous sculptor took the Friedrich tombstone as a model for his own tombstone of Georg Schweinbeck in the parish church in Ljutomer. He adopted the figure in the armour of the time without a cloak and the coats of arms placed next to the figure’s feet. However, he also relied on earlier examples of sepulchral sculpture, mainly on the tombstone of duke Ernest the Iron (d. 1424) in the Cistercian church in Rein near Graz. The sculptor adopted from the older monument the concave hollow of the inner field, the strictly frontal and rigid figure, the posture of the arms, the pillow under the head of the deceased and the inclusion of symbolic lions. The eclectic whole makes a markedly monumental impression. In spite of their lower rank, it is also possible to follow the tradition of tombstones made of the Adnet marble in the family of the knights of Schweinbeck, since besides the tombstone of Georg also the ones of his mother and his grandfather are also preserved in the church of St. Joseph in Voitsberg and the tombstone of his relative Ursula in the church of St. Georg in Ptuj.
Baroque reception of the Friedrich tombstone is evident in the third volume of the manuscript Ehrenspiegel des Ertzogthums Steyer by baron Leopold Stadl, composed after the year 1731. An anonymous draughtsman made the drawing to Stadl’s order, since its concept neatly corresponds to the rest of the tombstones depicted in the manuscript. According to the patron’s request, the central motif and the inscription are presented, whereas less attention is paid to details. The draughtsman changed the relation between the height ant the width of the relief and dropped the architectural elements and the figures of the two prophets. All iconographical elements that do not serve directly the purpose of representation were left out, but depicted with rather great precision are the armour, the cap with fur fold, the sword, dagger, banner, the two coats of arms and the symbolic dog under Friedrich’s feet. Thus the insignia of the noble status are emphasized. Baroque drawings and prints of medieval tombstones have a great documentary value, particularly in the case of monuments that have not been preserved. However, if the Stadl drawings are compared with the surviving tombstones it is evident that the draughtsmen left out the details, often interpreted the depicted elements in a wrong way or simplified them. It is not possible to assess the sculptural quality or the time of the origin of the monument if the latter does not survive.
Beti ŽEROVC
Savani na Prvi razstavi slovenskih umetnikov v Trstu leta 1907
Članek obravnava sodelovanje in likovno produkcijo društva Sava na Prvi razstavi slovenskih umetnikov v Trstu leta 1907. Na prvem mestu s pomočjo treh ohranjenih fotografij razstave iz Veselove zapuščine predstavi slike savanov, ki so bile na razstavi, med njimi tudi mnoge, ki so danes neznane ali izgubljene. Na podlagi te rekonstrukcije posameznih razstavljenih opusov nato analizira produkcijo in načine razstavljanja posameznih umetnikov. Razstavljanje in likovno produkcijo pri tem poskuša obravanavati v stalnem sorazmerju, saj sta bili dejavnosti za umetnike vitalno povezani in recipročni.
Tržaška razstava nam lahko pomaga trdneje datirati produkcijo savanov. Medtem, ko so zlasti Jakopičeva dela pogosto datirana občutno prezgodaj, Sternenova dela pogosto datiramo pretirano pozno. Na primer pri Sternenu nam tržaška razstava lahko za več njegovih del ali študij zanje (Mrak in študije zanj, Krajina (jutro) itd.) pomeni jasni ante quem. Prav tako nam poznavanje dodatnih del umetnikov razširja nabor njihovih že znanih motivov, oziroma pripomore, da njihove že znane motivne prioritete izstopijo bolj plastično in niansirano. S kontekstualizacijo slik, ki jih poznamo le iz starih črnobelih posnetkov, v okviru razstave, na primer Grohar, Jakopič, Jama in Sternen oprijemljiveje nastopijo kot krajinarji, pri Jakopiču in Sternenu se jasneje zariše tudi kontinuiteta njunega ukvarjanja z motivom meščanke (ženske) v interieru.
V članku so obravnavani še principi postavljanja razstav, ki so jim savani običajno sledili in jih lahko dokaj dobro rekonstruiramo tudi po obstoječi korespondenci med njimi. Ob upoštevanju danosti prostora, velikosti in višine sten, osvetlitve in podobnega, so svoje razstavne prostore ali oddelke poskušali organizirati v čim bolj ubrane in harmonične celote. »Kapitalci« so dobili najugodnejša mesta, sredine sten v višini oči; manjše slike so poskrbele za gladek prehod med temi izrazitejšimi deli. Barvno in tematsko sorodne slike so poskušali postavljati skupaj, med sorodne slike ni smela preveč drugačna ali prekričeča, da drugače ubranih slik ne bi motila ali jih celo »prevpila«. Opisani principi so lepo razvidni tudi pri tržaški razstavi, kjer sta bila skupaj postavljena bolj barvita in figuralna Sternen in Jakopič, z izrazito in vidno oblikujočo potezo. Na drugi strani sta skupaj »visela« Jama in Grohar, ki sta imela, razen Sejalca, krajinska dela, poenotena v tonu.
The Sava Group at the First Exhibition of Slovene Artists in Trieste in 1907
The paper discusses the participation of the Sava Group artists at the First Exhibition of Slovene Artists in Trieste (National Hall, October 1907) and their artistic production of the time. With the help of three photographs taken in the exhibition rooms and preserved in the legacy of Fran Vesel (National and University Library, Ljubljana) the artworks of the Sava Group members, exhibited on this occasion, are identified in the first place, several of which are untraced or lost today. Analysed on the basis of such reconstruction of individual exhibited oeuvres are the production and the manner of exhibiting of individual artists. The exhibition activity and current production are constantly observed in view of their inter-relationship, because for the artists they were vitally interconnected and reciprocal.
The exhibition in Trieste can be of considerable help in dating more reliably the production of the Sava members. Whereas particularly the works of Rihard Jakopič have often been greatly antedated, those of Matej Sternen, on the other hand, have often been postdated. It is exactly in the case of Sternen that the Trieste exhibition represents a clear ante quem for a number of his works or studies for them (Mrak/Dusk and studies for it; Krajina (jutro)/Landscape (morning), etc.). Furthermore, the knowledge of new works of the artists expands the list of their already known motifs, or helps that their already known thematic priorities become more conspicuous and nuanced. By means of the contextualization of the paintings (which we know only from old black-and-white photographs) within the framework of the exhibition, Ivan Grohar (1867–1911), Rihard Jakopič (1869–1943), Matija Jama (1872–1947) and Matej Sternen (1870–1949), for example, more distinctly appear as landscapists, and with Jakopič and Sternen the continuity of their dealing with the motif of a middle-class woman indoors receives clearer outlines.
The paper also presents the principles of staging the exhibitions which were usually followed by the Sava members and can be fairly well reconstructed also from the surviving correspondence between them. Taking account of the realities of the exhibition rooms, their size and the height of the walls, the lighting and the like they tried to organize their exhibition space or department into as balanced and harmonious a whole as possible. The “capital works” were given the most convenient place, i.e. the centre of the wall in the eye-height; smaller paintings were arranged so as to provide a smooth transition between these prominent works. The artists tried to group together the paintings that were similar in terms of colours and themes; no picture if it was considerably different or too gaudy was allowed among them lest it might disturb the harmony of the rest or even “shout them down”. The described principles are clearly evident also at the Trieste exhibition, where Sternen and Jakopič, being more colourful and figural and demonstrating a more expressed and visibly rendered brushwork, were mounted together. On the other side Jama and Grohar “hung” together, who exhibited, except for the latter’s Sejalec/Sower, landscapes, unified in tone.
login to post comments