Milena Bartlová Masaryk University, Brno Gothic? Renaissance? Mannerism? Interpretation Models for Central European Sculpture After 1500 Some two years ago, like many of you I was walking through the important exhibition of Slovak Gothic art in Bratislava, and I was showing around a large group of Czech historians and archivists'. They didn't ask the questions which we, art historians usually ask before the objects of our research - and which we, in turn, teach our students to ask, and to which we are used to giving our own answers. The situation forced me to see some well known historical topics of art with fresh eyes and I would like to invite you to share the experience for a moment. The sculptures forming a group attributed to a fictive Master of the Royal Figures from Matejovce (Mateóc / Matzdorf) in Spiš (Szépes / Zips) look definitely queer and deformed, but they cannot be sidetracked as low quality production (Fig. 2, 3)2.1 was reminded of similar reactions to the name-giving relief of the Master of Lamentation from Žebrák, who was probably active in České Budějovice (Budweis) in Southern Bohemia around 1520 and must have learned from Hans Leinberger's style in the neighboring Upper Bavaria (Fig. 1)3. We are used to dismissing similar disturbing phenomena by calling them "expressive". They were analyzed in a classical way in the twenties and thirties of the 20th century by Wilhelm Pinder et al. In the framework of mentality and cultural styles of that period they were understood as means of making the complicated nature of the transitional period visible in forms of visual arts, being tacitly compared to contemporary expressionist art. With the help of the tertium comparationis of "expression", another group of features typical for some of the Central European wooden sculpture of the first quarter of the 16* century, namely the new quality of extremely developed spatial values, was assigned under the same label. Here we can mention, for example, such carvings as the Zwettler Altarpiece and its related group, including the Altarpieces from Mauer bei Melk and from Breisach, the Habsburg hold in Switzerland; or the Abtenauer Altarpiece by Andreas Lackner4. Again, Hans Leinberger must be counted here, and also paintings, e.g. the Holy Blood Altarpiece from Pulkau in Upper Austria, or the sculptures and panels from Banská Štiavnica (Selmecbánya / Schemnitz) in Slovakia (Upper Hungary)5. 1 The form of the conference lecture has been retained in the present text. It was written in the framework of the Research Centre for History of Central Europe at the Masaryk University Brno (MSM0021622426). For the exhibition in Bratislava see: Gotika, [Exh. Cat. Slovenská národná galéria], Bratislava 2004. 'Gotika. Dějiny slovenského výtvarného umenia, ed. D. Buran, Bratislava 2003, pp. 757-758 (Gábor Endrödy). 1 P. Kováč, Sv. Trojice z Českých Budějovic Mistra žebráckého Oplakávání, "Ars" 1996, p. 142-151. 'Geschichte der biledenden Kunst in Österreich. Spätmittelalter und Renaissance, ed. A. Rosenauer, München 2003, pp. 345-348, 361-362 (L. Schultes). s Geschichte der biledenden Kunst in Österreich..., p. 358 (L. Schultes); Gotika..., pp. 735-739 (M. Šugár and G. Endrödy). The expressive quality of these features, developed often in sensuously rounded forms, modeled in deep relief with audaciously undercut draperies and details, was interpreted as a "Late Gothic Baroque" art. The existence of such a label does not, however, satisfy our need for understanding any more. It was based on the assumption, that there exists a special kind of art historical "law of return". According to it, each artistic style inherently and inevitably develops in a series of periods following each other: the primitive, the classical and the baroque6. The exaggerated and expressive forms of the first quarter of the 16th century thus not only made visible the pains accompanying the birth of the Reformation, but, at the same time, marked the final phase of the Gothic style. We are, however, unable to believe any longer in clearly defined laws which would rule the coming and passing of visual styles. We should also take into account the fact, that formally similar formal features in 17th and 18th century art, from where the category of "baroque" was taken, are no longer explained as expressions of passionate nature of either artists or the period as such, but as thoughtfully devised rhetorical and theatrical devices introduced into visual art as specific means of indicating differing operational modes. What I will try to do in my contribution will be to search for such qualifying categories that would help us to understand better the admittedly incoherent group of artworks introduced above. The more matter-of-fact oriented art historians might feel that this is a vain undertaking, since the artworks will certainly remain the same before as after. I am convinced, however, that giving names is not an innocent activity at all. Just recall Adam in the Paradise in the second chapter of Genesis7 to realize that giving names means nothing less than knowledge in the sense of yielding power. More recently, critical philosophy of language barred us from a naive assumption, that the words we use to talk about images are merely accidental and therefore irrelevant. A case in point: The ubiquitous metaphor coined by Johann Huizinga in 1906 has labeled "Late Gothic" as the "Autumn of the Middle Ages". The context of this metaphor was at the same time both biologic and sentimental, in other words, typically fin-de-siecle. Its rich connotations of opulence, ripeness, ending, decay and general decline have informed the understanding of art which we have gathered here to study. Take for one, for example, the habitual interpretation of the branches in place of vaulting ribs and decorative traceries as dry twigs. Paul Crossley has suggested, in my opinion correctly, that these can be just as well interpreted as fresh branches of living shrubbery, which were twisted and bound by villagers of Northern Europe to build simple huts. Thus they could stand for signifiers of a mythic "native architecture of the German peoples", as described by Vitruvius8. Recently, Ethan Matt Kavaler has explained the "organic architecture" as means of presenting the dichotomy of order and disorder and, consequently, showing the images of "the nature in need of order, in need of authority and salvation"9. It does not make much sense to talk about the wooden sculpture in the first quarter of the 16th century as being "Gothic". If we compare it to a 13th, 14th and even a 15th century sculpture, almost everything is different: the concept of bodily form, relationship between draperies and the core of the figure, ontological (ontic) status of the image as related to the sacred themes and, last but not least, requirements of the audience for its narrative and psychological abilities. What remains is the common artistic task of creating a wooden figure or an altarpiece situated in a church environment in connection with the altar as the centre of the cult, and used in specific liturgical and social situations. We can recognize decorative elements of decisively Italian all'antique origin in many northern altarpieces around and after 1500, e.g., in the Altarpiece from Spišská Sobota (Szépess-zombat / Georgenburg) by Paul of Levoča, or in the Kefermarkt Altarpiece by the Kriechbaum workshop in Pas- 6 Among recent critical analyses of style, cf. C. Ginzburg, Style: Inclusion and Exclusion, [in:] Wooden Eyes. Nine Reflections on Distance, New York 2001 (Italian original 1998), pp. 109-138. 7 Gen. 2:19-20. 8 P. Crossley, The Return to the Forest: Natural Architecture and the German Past in the Age of Dürer, [in:] Künstlerischer Austausch: Artistic Exchange. Akten des XXVIII. Internationalen Kongresses für Kunstgeschichte, ed. T. Gaethgens, Berlin 1993, vol. 2, pp. 71-80. 9 E. M. Kavaler, Nature and the Chapel Vaults at Ingolstadt: Structuralist and Other Perspectives, "The Art Bulletin" 87, 2005, pp. 230-248, cited from p. 244. 342 Gothic? Renaissance? Mannerism? forms, modeled in deep relief Baroque" art. The existence as based on the assumption, artistic style inherently and ssical and the baroque6. The y made visible the pains ac-of the Gothic style. We are, coming and passing of visual in 17th and 18* century art, sions of passionate nature of itrical devices introduced into tegories that would help us to more matter-of-fact oriented linly remain the same before all. Just recall Adam in the less than knowledge in the a naive assumption, that the case in point: The ubiquitous jmn of the Middle Ages". The words, typically fin-de-siecle. informed the understanding of nterpretation of the branches in , in my opinion correctly, that twisted and bound by villagers ic "native architecture of the the "organic architecture" the images of "the nature in quarter of the 16th century as almost everything is differ-ie figure, ontological (ontic) nents of the audience for its creating a wooden figure or ;entre of the cult, and used in decisively Italian all'antiqua from Spišská Sobota (Szépess-Kriechbaum workshop in Pas-Wooden Eyes. Nine Reflections on <» ^fore the Reformation, [in:] 77» Altarpiece in the Rena- issance, eds. P. Humfrey, M. Kemp, Cambridge 1990, pp. 90-105. 34 ception, starting with the Romantics at the beginning of the 19th century, considered the two as inevitable opposites". Recent inquiries in early 16* century art on both sides of the Alps begin to prove that the opposition between artistic, or aesthetic, images, and images in Christian cult, as confirmed by Hans Belting's seminal book Bild und Kult, may be too schematic. Raphael's Sixtine Madonna was construed as a thoroughly cultic image, and the "organic vaults" of Central European churches can be read as visualizing "dramas of redemption, of deliverance from the chaotic environment of an unreasoning nature (...), nature departing from God's initial imprint."'8 The shift in measures of the forms used for altarpieces may be also understood as a shift in roles from the private to the public: the mental setting of private devotion with its moralization and interiorization of religion fuses with the public character of cult images as the Reformation rises. These suggestions could be verified by future research looking for possible correlation between the employment of these new artistic forms and reformist attitudes of the patrons. To conclude, please allow me a brief summary: the way of creative assimilation in the North of what we recognize as Late Renaissance style was pursued effectively in painting between Albrecht Diirer, Albre-cht Altdorfer or Quentyn Massys, and the Romanists. The situation was different in sculpture in Central Europe, because of the strong tradition of great Late Gothic wooden carving. Inclusion of individual, mostly decorative and marginal Italianate motifs was one way of coming to terms with Renaissance art. Another effective way meant to appropriate from the South not forms or motifs, but the shift in the status of image from predominantly representing the holy, to the prevalence of artistic qualities. As far as this shift corresponded with pre-Reformation and Reformation ideas, it provided a basis for what we might want to call a specific "style". We in Central Europe should perhaps think more about the Anglo-Saxon tendency to call the whole period "Renaissance" instead of "Late Gothic". As Jeffrey Chipps Smith has recently noted, "the term Renaissance, however imperfect, still conveys the richness and diversity of these two centuries [1380-1580] better than competing labels, such as Late Gothic or Early Modern. This was a dynamic period of artistic innovation, not an end, as the term Late Gothic implies."19 Since, however, we have no adequate name to call this style, and since hardly anyone sane would wish to insert another one to the "goose-march of styles", we might as well leave the things as they are. 5. Virgine with Child, ca 1520, National Gallery, Prague 17 Cf. the brief but inspiring discussion of the topic in B. Decker, Das Ende des mittlelaterlichen Kultbildes und die Plastik Hans Leinbergers, Bamberg 1985, p. 119. 18 M. V. Schwarz, Unsichtbares sichtbar, [in:] Visuelle Medien in christlichen Kult, Wien 2002, pp. 173-216; cited from Kavaler, Nature..., pp. 244-245. 13 J. Chipps Smith, The Northern Renaissance, London 2004, p. 12. antics at the beginning of the 19th century, ie opposites". Recent inquiries in early 16th le Alps begin to prove that the opposition images, and images in Christian cult, as iminal book Bild und Kult, may be too schema was construed as a thoroughly cultic " of Central European churches can be read nption, of deliverance from the chaotic en-ature (...), nature departing from God's ini-sures of the forms used for altarpieces may in roles from the private to the public: the tion with its moralization and interiorization ic character of cult images as the Reforma-could be verified by future research looking sen the employment of these new artistic of the patrons. v me a brief summary: the way of creative what we recognize as Late Renaissance 1 in painting between Albrecht Dürer, Albre-;sys, and the Romanists. The situation was al Europe, because of the strong tradition of Irving. Inclusion of individual, mostly deco-e motifs was one way of coming to terms er effective way meant to appropriate from s, but the shift in the status of image from the holy, to the prevalence of artistic quali-rmation ideas, it provided a basis for what perhaps think more about the Anglo-Saxon hie". As Jeffrey Chipps Smith has recently ;hness and diversity of these two centuries irly Modern. This was a dynamic period of :e, however, we have no adequate name to ther one to the "goose-march of styles", we Gothic? Renaissance? Mannerism? Gotyk? Renesanse? Mameryzm? Modele interpretacyjne do analtzy rzezby srodkowoeuropejshej po roku 1500 Skoncentrowatam sie na pýtaniu, jakie okrešlenie pasuje najlepiej do skategoryzowania pewnej grupy šrodkowo-europejskich rzežb z pocza.tku szesnastego wieku. Charakteryzuje je wybujata forma, niekonwencjonalna kompo-zycja i przesadnie stylizowane i zdeformowane drapérie i fizjonomie postaci. Terminy „póžny gotyk" i „renesans" dostarezaja. pewnych modeli utatwiaja.cych interpretaci? dziet. Wedtug mnie powinnišmy równiež rozwažyč užycie terminu „manieryzm", poniewaž mamy tu do czynienia z dzietami powstaja.cymi równolegle z twórczošcia. wloskich manierystów okresu póžnego Michala Aniota. Grupy te maja. pewne cechy wspólne. Obydwie taczy szczególne podejšcie do pojgcia wizerunku jako dzieta sztuki, które w tychže samých dekádach stopniowo wyparto árednio-wieczna. koncepeje šwietego wizerunku. ;s mittlelaterlichen Kultbildes und die Plastik Hans Vien 2002, pp. 173-216; citedfrom Kavaler, Nature..., 347