What do you think?
Rate this book
Court, Cloister, and City: The Art and Culture of Central Europe, 1450-1800
The collapse of Communism in Central and Eastern Europe opened the doors to cultural treasures that for decades had been hidden, forgotten, or misinterpreted. Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann looks at Central Europe as a cultural entity while chronicling more than three hundred years of painting, sculpture, and architecture in Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Austria, Ukraine, Lithuania and western parts of the Russian Federation. Kaufmann surveys a remarkable range of art and artifacts created from the coming of the Renaissance through to the Enlightenment.
"Kaufmann throws considerable light on one of the more neglected and least understood periods in art history."— Philadelphia Inquirer
"A wonderful book which does justice both to a formal analysis of the art and to an explanation of broader political and economic forces at work."— Virginia Quarterly Review
"Important and stimulating, Kaufmann's study examines the cultural legacy of a region too little known and understood."— Choice
"Peaks of the creative heritage which [Kaufmann] describes reserve their message—and their surprises—for those who visit them in situ. But invest in Kaufmann's volume before you go."—R. J. W. Evans, New York Review of Books
"Kaufmann throws considerable light on one of the more neglected and least understood periods in art history."— Philadelphia Inquirer
"A wonderful book which does justice both to a formal analysis of the art and to an explanation of broader political and economic forces at work."— Virginia Quarterly Review
"Important and stimulating, Kaufmann's study examines the cultural legacy of a region too little known and understood."— Choice
"Peaks of the creative heritage which [Kaufmann] describes reserve their message—and their surprises—for those who visit them in situ. But invest in Kaufmann's volume before you go."—R. J. W. Evans, New York Review of Books
576 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1995
97 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
Read
April 21, 2023Weighing in at 1,392 grams this is a narrative history of the art and culture of the central European elites between the Renaissance and the French Revolution. It feels often like a unfolding series of responses through time of one artist to another in either acceptance or denial of their work and ideas. It's a very ambitious work, illustrated through with black and white plates, and any number of paragraphs could inspire, or have been derived from, book length studies. In spanning the time and space that it does it invariably has the capacity to disappoint or irritate as well as to delight and inform, so cavaet lector.
It pushes, well shoves really, the reader to think in terms of reading buildings - why this style, what does the location tell us - a consistent theme is the new church or aristocrats' palace built on top of the demolished properties of the dispossessed losers of religious or political struggles, to remember that that one region's golden age often comes at the expense of their neighbours troubles, and that being bombastic and assertive are signs of the insecurity of the new regime, not its self confidence; though for succeeding generations given the opportunity to fake it until you make it they may become genuinely bombastic and assertive.
Because this is a survey of central Europe, and in fact of Christian controlled central Europe at that, areas ruled over by the Ottomans are an obvious gap in the narrative - and this is a problem for Hungary which is in the story, partially disappears and then comes back. Secondly various regions lurk in the wings as sources of inspiration or examples to either follow or to reject which naturally can't be treated in a study which is already wide ranging.
One of the changes was of production for a limited group of patrons who alone might be expected to understand layers of meaning in a work this is exemplified by the circle around the Emperor Rudolf II in Prague at the turn of the with century; and the shift to production aimed at broadcasting messages to a wide audience, an example might be the buildings commissioned by the warlord Wallenstein decorated with paintings depicting himself as the God Mars, in the 1630s.
It seems that if you have ever stood before a Renaissance painting and wondered what it was about, that was partly the point - common people, begging your pardon, were not meant to understand. Another change is that at the end of the book the first rulers are creating spaces for the public to see works of art - even for free, for the purposes of enlightenment and education - and if the name Joseph II comes to your mind you are entirely correct.
Naturally this led me to think about nudes. I have come across the view that the point of paintings on classical subjects featuring naked ladies is that they feature nudity. This being an older book, it doesn't take that line, stressing instead that the stories illustrated come from Ovid's [book:Ovid's Metamorphosis., this is interesting because the ovidian tales while they do feature nakedness and sexual violence, also carry with them the knowledge that there was violence and abuse which sometimes founded powerful dynasties. At the same time it was a restricted field of knowledge to the extent that several histories of painters from the seventeenth century included a translation of Ovid. Other literary works from classical antiquity didn't have the same impact. But I digress.
We see the influence of Italy,which in some cases meant Venice rather than Florence, upon the region to it's north, at first diffused and patronised by royal court, later by nobles, to some extent also by Town councils,(in these two cases particularly in Poland) and the church (though the cloister part of the title is the least developed part of the discussion).
In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries drawing on a particular influence, Italian, Dutch, or French seems to line up with the ruler's political allegiances, but by the late eighteenth century there seems to have been a disconnection, one might have conservative politics yet patronise radical architecture for instance.
Building might reflect actual political power - as in the case of Louis XIV and Versailles or be a substitute as in the case of Augustus the Strong of Saxony - which is unhelpful to the observer discovering their palaces for the first time and perhaps that is the point through the arts; either collecting or architecture, rulers could compete in a more equal manner than they could on the battlefield, and in that competition they could all ein, apart from their subjects who naturally paid the price in any case.
Da Costa argues that earlier for Rudolf II collecting and building was perceived as a way of actually controlling the world. One collected a microcosm which symbolically or magically have you control over the macrocosm but equally really demonstrated power and influence. Then again collections could show dynastic heritage and political networks just as new building projects - the most dramatic examples coming from eighteenth century Russia where an embodiment of political aspirations.
It struck me that a problem, or a challenge for any one seeking to revive the arts of ancient Rome, was that Rome was so varied, it's architecture even in so far as artists were aware of it in the sixteenth century included a variety of styles, and building materials, it could be austere, it could be ornamented, it could be functional, or frivolous, it might even be double glazed (though I don't think that feature sadly was much imitated).
DaCosta is interested in showing the dominance of international styles and traditions across the region, running counter to national stories of art history.
It is striking that this period is both international in its openness not just to artistic styles but also transnational artists but also foundattional to sharply national self perceptions this for instance Albrecht Durer can be presented as exemplifying 'German' Art while coming from a family of Hungarian immigrants and personally keen to absorb international styles, or lateran ideal of Poland as the bulwark of Christian Europe is less by the self identified defendants of the not very European non-Christian Samartans who by the seventeenth century portray themselves as ancient Romans, or later yet the creation of the Russian empire is marked by the construction of palaces in French styles designed by non-Russian architects.
I bought this book while a student and studying something irrelevant to this book in a bookshop that has long since closed and been replaced - in this case by another bookshop. I am glad that I finally got round to reading it because it was a rich feast, plus of course the heft of the book means that reading it can count as cardiac exercise.
It pushes, well shoves really, the reader to think in terms of reading buildings - why this style, what does the location tell us - a consistent theme is the new church or aristocrats' palace built on top of the demolished properties of the dispossessed losers of religious or political struggles, to remember that that one region's golden age often comes at the expense of their neighbours troubles, and that being bombastic and assertive are signs of the insecurity of the new regime, not its self confidence; though for succeeding generations given the opportunity to fake it until you make it they may become genuinely bombastic and assertive.
Because this is a survey of central Europe, and in fact of Christian controlled central Europe at that, areas ruled over by the Ottomans are an obvious gap in the narrative - and this is a problem for Hungary which is in the story, partially disappears and then comes back. Secondly various regions lurk in the wings as sources of inspiration or examples to either follow or to reject which naturally can't be treated in a study which is already wide ranging.
One of the changes was of production for a limited group of patrons who alone might be expected to understand layers of meaning in a work this is exemplified by the circle around the Emperor Rudolf II in Prague at the turn of the with century; and the shift to production aimed at broadcasting messages to a wide audience, an example might be the buildings commissioned by the warlord Wallenstein decorated with paintings depicting himself as the God Mars, in the 1630s.
It seems that if you have ever stood before a Renaissance painting and wondered what it was about, that was partly the point - common people, begging your pardon, were not meant to understand. Another change is that at the end of the book the first rulers are creating spaces for the public to see works of art - even for free, for the purposes of enlightenment and education - and if the name Joseph II comes to your mind you are entirely correct.
Naturally this led me to think about nudes. I have come across the view that the point of paintings on classical subjects featuring naked ladies is that they feature nudity. This being an older book, it doesn't take that line, stressing instead that the stories illustrated come from Ovid's [book:Ovid's Metamorphosis., this is interesting because the ovidian tales while they do feature nakedness and sexual violence, also carry with them the knowledge that there was violence and abuse which sometimes founded powerful dynasties. At the same time it was a restricted field of knowledge to the extent that several histories of painters from the seventeenth century included a translation of Ovid. Other literary works from classical antiquity didn't have the same impact. But I digress.
We see the influence of Italy,which in some cases meant Venice rather than Florence, upon the region to it's north, at first diffused and patronised by royal court, later by nobles, to some extent also by Town councils,(in these two cases particularly in Poland) and the church (though the cloister part of the title is the least developed part of the discussion).
In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries drawing on a particular influence, Italian, Dutch, or French seems to line up with the ruler's political allegiances, but by the late eighteenth century there seems to have been a disconnection, one might have conservative politics yet patronise radical architecture for instance.
Building might reflect actual political power - as in the case of Louis XIV and Versailles or be a substitute as in the case of Augustus the Strong of Saxony - which is unhelpful to the observer discovering their palaces for the first time and perhaps that is the point through the arts; either collecting or architecture, rulers could compete in a more equal manner than they could on the battlefield, and in that competition they could all ein, apart from their subjects who naturally paid the price in any case.
Da Costa argues that earlier for Rudolf II collecting and building was perceived as a way of actually controlling the world. One collected a microcosm which symbolically or magically have you control over the macrocosm but equally really demonstrated power and influence. Then again collections could show dynastic heritage and political networks just as new building projects - the most dramatic examples coming from eighteenth century Russia where an embodiment of political aspirations.
It struck me that a problem, or a challenge for any one seeking to revive the arts of ancient Rome, was that Rome was so varied, it's architecture even in so far as artists were aware of it in the sixteenth century included a variety of styles, and building materials, it could be austere, it could be ornamented, it could be functional, or frivolous, it might even be double glazed (though I don't think that feature sadly was much imitated).
DaCosta is interested in showing the dominance of international styles and traditions across the region, running counter to national stories of art history.
It is striking that this period is both international in its openness not just to artistic styles but also transnational artists but also foundattional to sharply national self perceptions this for instance Albrecht Durer can be presented as exemplifying 'German' Art while coming from a family of Hungarian immigrants and personally keen to absorb international styles, or lateran ideal of Poland as the bulwark of Christian Europe is less by the self identified defendants of the not very European non-Christian Samartans who by the seventeenth century portray themselves as ancient Romans, or later yet the creation of the Russian empire is marked by the construction of palaces in French styles designed by non-Russian architects.
I bought this book while a student and studying something irrelevant to this book in a bookshop that has long since closed and been replaced - in this case by another bookshop. I am glad that I finally got round to reading it because it was a rich feast, plus of course the heft of the book means that reading it can count as cardiac exercise.
November 21, 2023
I doubt whether works like this still are written and published, and by that I mean such comprehensive syntheses, based on thorough knowledge, broadly oriented with sufficient eye for detail, and gorgeously illustrated. Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann covers the entire period from the 15th to the 18th century, for the German countries (and there were quite a few of them), and what is now Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and Austria with occasional extensions into northern Italy, the Low Countries, the Baltic and western Ukraine. You just have to do it. Although it must be said that 'art and culture' in this case mainly is high culture, with apparently a special preference for architecture. A solid book this is, with a very dense text, inevitably verging on the encyclopedic. But DaCosta Kaufmann also has a very clear message: openness and cosmopolitanism characterized Central Europe more than ever during this period. I don't know whether I would dare to say that with such certainty for the period after 1990. More in my History account on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show....
PS. Many thanks to the dear GR-friends that offered me this book!
PS. Many thanks to the dear GR-friends that offered me this book!
August 20, 2022
In a word: fascinating.
Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, professor of Art and Archeology at Princeton University, teaches and publishes on European art and architecture 1500–1800 in its global context, the theory and practice of world art history, and the geography and historiography of art.
His learning is immense and combines a wide ranging vision of art history combined with prodigious knowledge of individual artworks.
This survey of the art and culture of central Europe during in the centuries from the Reformation to the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire, combines philosophy and history of art and culture, and links changes in thinking about art to changes in the institutional and behavioural bases of society. Kaufmann's knowledge of individual artists and their works is extensive, often conveyed in detail. His writing is dense, his thinking complex. His work needs time to absorb.
Each chapter opens with a broad view of development in a particular region or period, then gives multiple examples of artists and craftsmen who produced works for the courts, cloisters and cities of the title – monarchs, aristocracy, clergy, churches and religious houses, merchants and burghers. It’s extensively illustrated in black and white (how I would love to see colour images of these works) but most of the images are too small to see properly.
It’s a book I could read over and over, learn something each time and perhaps have a better chance of remembering some of the detail, so I’ve bought it, having had it out from the university library for months. I look forward to being able to dip back into it and look up images for artists, art works and buildings on the internet - much as I would love to travel to this part of the world, I don't think it’s ever likely to happen now.
In his introduction, Kaufmann shares the ideas that he wants to convey in this book. Some of the points that caught my attention were:
Monuments always carry symbolic meaning, nations and ethnic groups ‘press artefacts into the service of their cultural ideology, nationalist and ethnocentric’. Many remnants of others’ heritages were destroyed in the twentieth and into the twenty first century as wars and revolutions waged across Central Europe and the Balkans.
Throughout, he presents Central Europe as a cultural entity, with extensive connections between the countries of the region and beyond to Italy, the Netherlands and France.
Art during this period had more to do with aspects of identity other than those of ethnicity or nationalism – family, estate, craft, class, city, religion and region. The areas he includes are roughly those of historic Poland-Lithuania and Hungary; Catholic or Protestant Christian in religion, and the Holy Roman Empire. Its collapse in 1800, after defeat by Napoleon’s armies, marks the end of the period discussed in this book, and ‘the period of Revolution that also marks the beginning of the modern nation state’.(p21).
Kaufmann observes that art is rooted in society and connected especially to other aspects of culture. He shares Gombrich’s view that cultural history tries to read monuments for what they reveal of the culture that created them. ‘It involves an effort of interpreting how styles, forms, symbols, words become charged with cultural meaning’.
Kaufmann set himself the mighty task of interpreting the cultural meaning of artistic styles in the history of Central European society. Such styles relate to cultural and intellectual movements, as distinct from periods such as the ‘Baroque’. He has deliberately selected works from ‘high culture’, not popular or vernacular, because he believes they ‘can reveal the processes of change and development that constitute what is generally understood by the history of art or culture’ (p23).
He also insists that the works produced in Central Europe were of equal quality to those found elsewhere, and that mostly they suffer from lack of attention by Anglophone art historians, especially in the period up to 1800. This book is the first in two generations, he says, that surveys the region as a whole during those culturally formative centuries.
These parts of Europe were always actively connected with others. When influences came from elsewhere – Italy, the Netherlands, France- they were assimilated and reinterpreted locally in various ways, often transformed in the process.
-------
I have so many markers sticking out of the book that I can’t possibly make notes of all the things that caught my attention, ‘aha’ moments, and scraps of information that would help me win a trivia night if ever the right questions were asked.
Eg
As the Renaissance spread from Italy to other parts of Europe, Italian culture became a unifying element in European culture, along with Judeo-Christian religious ideas.
One of the first places that Renaissance Italian artists were commissioned to work outside Italy was Hungary (1465), then Muscovy (Russia). Both were Christian frontier states at that time, with borders confronted by the Ottoman Turks. Hungary had long connections with Italy – parts of it had been part of the Roman empire.
Russian rulers were tied to Orthodox and Byzantine traditions, including ways of expressing grandeur through representative shows of ritual patronage (32 and claimed to be protectors of the Orthodox faith and the rightful heirs of the Byzantine rulers.
Antagonism to the west, or Latin culture was a constant in Russia. Xenophobic influences were strong in Russia from an early date so the ground for accepting Italian Renaissance influences was not fertile.
There’s a fascinating few pages on why and how Italian painting differed so dramatically from that of Russia. Italian artists gradually introduced both expressive and narrative elements into religious imagery, aiming for a humanising vision to encourage individual connection with the deity [and the vast array of his deputies].
Russian icons, on the other hand, relate ‘to the religious goal of evoking the world beyond the senses’. Where the Italian cultural mindset was to seek innovation, the Russians favoured stasis, repetition from the past and standardised representations.
Because of this difference, Italian architects had more success in Russia than did painters or sculptors. Russia, he says, had no tradition of sculpture or three-dimensional representation comparable to that of western Europe.
There’s far too much of substance and detail for me to offer more of Kaufmann’s discussion, but standout sections for me were chapters on patronage and collecting in all spheres – aristocracy, bourgeoisie and religious institutions; Dürer; the effects of the Reformation, Catholic Reformation and religious wars on the arts; and the changing ideas about the role and meanings of art over the centuries.
I’ve given it 5 stars for intellectual content and enduring interest despite the heavy writing,
Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, professor of Art and Archeology at Princeton University, teaches and publishes on European art and architecture 1500–1800 in its global context, the theory and practice of world art history, and the geography and historiography of art.
His learning is immense and combines a wide ranging vision of art history combined with prodigious knowledge of individual artworks.
This survey of the art and culture of central Europe during in the centuries from the Reformation to the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire, combines philosophy and history of art and culture, and links changes in thinking about art to changes in the institutional and behavioural bases of society. Kaufmann's knowledge of individual artists and their works is extensive, often conveyed in detail. His writing is dense, his thinking complex. His work needs time to absorb.
Each chapter opens with a broad view of development in a particular region or period, then gives multiple examples of artists and craftsmen who produced works for the courts, cloisters and cities of the title – monarchs, aristocracy, clergy, churches and religious houses, merchants and burghers. It’s extensively illustrated in black and white (how I would love to see colour images of these works) but most of the images are too small to see properly.
It’s a book I could read over and over, learn something each time and perhaps have a better chance of remembering some of the detail, so I’ve bought it, having had it out from the university library for months. I look forward to being able to dip back into it and look up images for artists, art works and buildings on the internet - much as I would love to travel to this part of the world, I don't think it’s ever likely to happen now.
In his introduction, Kaufmann shares the ideas that he wants to convey in this book. Some of the points that caught my attention were:
Monuments always carry symbolic meaning, nations and ethnic groups ‘press artefacts into the service of their cultural ideology, nationalist and ethnocentric’. Many remnants of others’ heritages were destroyed in the twentieth and into the twenty first century as wars and revolutions waged across Central Europe and the Balkans.
Throughout, he presents Central Europe as a cultural entity, with extensive connections between the countries of the region and beyond to Italy, the Netherlands and France.
Art during this period had more to do with aspects of identity other than those of ethnicity or nationalism – family, estate, craft, class, city, religion and region. The areas he includes are roughly those of historic Poland-Lithuania and Hungary; Catholic or Protestant Christian in religion, and the Holy Roman Empire. Its collapse in 1800, after defeat by Napoleon’s armies, marks the end of the period discussed in this book, and ‘the period of Revolution that also marks the beginning of the modern nation state’.(p21).
Kaufmann observes that art is rooted in society and connected especially to other aspects of culture. He shares Gombrich’s view that cultural history tries to read monuments for what they reveal of the culture that created them. ‘It involves an effort of interpreting how styles, forms, symbols, words become charged with cultural meaning’.
Kaufmann set himself the mighty task of interpreting the cultural meaning of artistic styles in the history of Central European society. Such styles relate to cultural and intellectual movements, as distinct from periods such as the ‘Baroque’. He has deliberately selected works from ‘high culture’, not popular or vernacular, because he believes they ‘can reveal the processes of change and development that constitute what is generally understood by the history of art or culture’ (p23).
He also insists that the works produced in Central Europe were of equal quality to those found elsewhere, and that mostly they suffer from lack of attention by Anglophone art historians, especially in the period up to 1800. This book is the first in two generations, he says, that surveys the region as a whole during those culturally formative centuries.
These parts of Europe were always actively connected with others. When influences came from elsewhere – Italy, the Netherlands, France- they were assimilated and reinterpreted locally in various ways, often transformed in the process.
-------
I have so many markers sticking out of the book that I can’t possibly make notes of all the things that caught my attention, ‘aha’ moments, and scraps of information that would help me win a trivia night if ever the right questions were asked.
Eg
As the Renaissance spread from Italy to other parts of Europe, Italian culture became a unifying element in European culture, along with Judeo-Christian religious ideas.
One of the first places that Renaissance Italian artists were commissioned to work outside Italy was Hungary (1465), then Muscovy (Russia). Both were Christian frontier states at that time, with borders confronted by the Ottoman Turks. Hungary had long connections with Italy – parts of it had been part of the Roman empire.
Russian rulers were tied to Orthodox and Byzantine traditions, including ways of expressing grandeur through representative shows of ritual patronage (32 and claimed to be protectors of the Orthodox faith and the rightful heirs of the Byzantine rulers.
Antagonism to the west, or Latin culture was a constant in Russia. Xenophobic influences were strong in Russia from an early date so the ground for accepting Italian Renaissance influences was not fertile.
There’s a fascinating few pages on why and how Italian painting differed so dramatically from that of Russia. Italian artists gradually introduced both expressive and narrative elements into religious imagery, aiming for a humanising vision to encourage individual connection with the deity [and the vast array of his deputies].
Russian icons, on the other hand, relate ‘to the religious goal of evoking the world beyond the senses’. Where the Italian cultural mindset was to seek innovation, the Russians favoured stasis, repetition from the past and standardised representations.
Because of this difference, Italian architects had more success in Russia than did painters or sculptors. Russia, he says, had no tradition of sculpture or three-dimensional representation comparable to that of western Europe.
There’s far too much of substance and detail for me to offer more of Kaufmann’s discussion, but standout sections for me were chapters on patronage and collecting in all spheres – aristocracy, bourgeoisie and religious institutions; Dürer; the effects of the Reformation, Catholic Reformation and religious wars on the arts; and the changing ideas about the role and meanings of art over the centuries.
I’ve given it 5 stars for intellectual content and enduring interest despite the heavy writing,
Read
October 22, 2024In 1996 the British historian Norman Davies published a doorstopper on European history simply called Europe: A History. His main message was that Eastern Europe had been treated neglectfully by historians for far too long, as if it were another, inferior continent, and the book therefore paid ample attention to the eastern half of Europe. A few years earlier, in 1992, art historian Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann (Princeton University) produced this sturdy book, and it contains an equally compelling message: Central Europe was (and is) a crucial part of Europe. DaCosta Kaufmann limited himself to the period 1450-1800, and in particular to the high culture of that era, which allowed him to go into much more detail than Davies. But as said, the message was more or less the same, and that is no coincidence: both works were written in the period 1990-1992, just after the fall of the Iron Curtain, when Central and Eastern Europe returned to forefront of European culture, after years of deprivation and neglect.
DaCosta Kaufmann admits that his geographical demarcation is not obvious, because the boundaries continued to shift during this period and beyond. Central Europe is “a conglomeration of many smaller entities, and a few larger ones, with no such ordering principles.” Precisely because of this variability and the relatively small scale, the region appears to have developed an openness to all kinds of influences. For example, the author points to the flourishing of the Italian Renaissance in Hungary, at the court of King Matthias Corvinus, almost simultaneously with that in Italy itself. His central message is “that as in many earlier periods since antiquity, Central Europe was clearly conjoined to the rest of Europe. At several times Central European centers became metropolises of (‘high’) culture, and accordingly of artistic production”. And DaCosta Kaufmann uses no less than 460 pages (without the notes) to prove this, with the necessary nuances of course. With regard to the latter, he does not fall into the classic trap of art history to constrain itself to homogeneous movements and periods: he has an eye for local adaptation, for the subtle shifts that occur when external influences are appropriated. “Divided and diverse themselves, the peoples of the region were open to adopting forms that had been made elsewhere, and to translating or transforming them to their own purposes.” In that sense, this book is both a substantive and material illustration of the wealth that Central Europe has to offer in the period discussed.
DaCosta Kaufmann admits that his geographical demarcation is not obvious, because the boundaries continued to shift during this period and beyond. Central Europe is “a conglomeration of many smaller entities, and a few larger ones, with no such ordering principles.” Precisely because of this variability and the relatively small scale, the region appears to have developed an openness to all kinds of influences. For example, the author points to the flourishing of the Italian Renaissance in Hungary, at the court of King Matthias Corvinus, almost simultaneously with that in Italy itself. His central message is “that as in many earlier periods since antiquity, Central Europe was clearly conjoined to the rest of Europe. At several times Central European centers became metropolises of (‘high’) culture, and accordingly of artistic production”. And DaCosta Kaufmann uses no less than 460 pages (without the notes) to prove this, with the necessary nuances of course. With regard to the latter, he does not fall into the classic trap of art history to constrain itself to homogeneous movements and periods: he has an eye for local adaptation, for the subtle shifts that occur when external influences are appropriated. “Divided and diverse themselves, the peoples of the region were open to adopting forms that had been made elsewhere, and to translating or transforming them to their own purposes.” In that sense, this book is both a substantive and material illustration of the wealth that Central Europe has to offer in the period discussed.
May 14, 2019
I can't believe there is only one review of this? C'mon.
This is one of those endlessly fascinating books you find from time to time, on a subject you are sort of peripherally aware of, don't know too much about, but that sucks you in from the moment you peek inside.
Kaufmann's thesis is simple: stop treating Central European art as tidy little nationalistic islands operating in a vacuum. It just wasn't like that. Art wasn't like that, religion wasn't like that, and society wasn't like that. It was a rich, multiethnic morass of all kinds of artists and craftsmen that fed off of and bled over each other creating all kinds of neat fusions.
The primary focus is on the Germanic bits of CE, and the closer-in Slavic bits, but there is a healthy dose of Poland in here, with some East Slav shifizz as well.
It might seem dense at times, especially once you get into all the crosscurrents and migrations from and into Italy, and Italians wandering out of the Renaissance to bring sweet lovin' to the beer-swilling north, but it'll all come together in the end.
Nicely plated as well.
This is one of those endlessly fascinating books you find from time to time, on a subject you are sort of peripherally aware of, don't know too much about, but that sucks you in from the moment you peek inside.
Kaufmann's thesis is simple: stop treating Central European art as tidy little nationalistic islands operating in a vacuum. It just wasn't like that. Art wasn't like that, religion wasn't like that, and society wasn't like that. It was a rich, multiethnic morass of all kinds of artists and craftsmen that fed off of and bled over each other creating all kinds of neat fusions.
The primary focus is on the Germanic bits of CE, and the closer-in Slavic bits, but there is a healthy dose of Poland in here, with some East Slav shifizz as well.
It might seem dense at times, especially once you get into all the crosscurrents and migrations from and into Italy, and Italians wandering out of the Renaissance to bring sweet lovin' to the beer-swilling north, but it'll all come together in the end.
Nicely plated as well.
October 15, 2022
This book might be summed up as “how the renaissance found its way across central Europe and what it looked like when it got there.” But it’s nowhere near as simple as that; Kaufman covers so much ground and explores so many aspects of central European culture, and does so with such erudition, that it would be inappropriate to comment on just a few examples, to the exclusion of others. It’s also a book that demands dedicated reading while also prompting one to explore related topics — e.g. the political history of the Holy Roman Empire, the Thirty Years War, the emergence of renaissance humanism, etc. I will need to return to the book multiple time to do it justice.
Any individual chapter — e.g. the chapter on Dürer and his contemporaries — considering its intellectual depth and breadth of inquiry, would merit a comprehensive review. It’s unlikely that any review I could offer would do justice to the entire work.
Kaufman makes a compelling case for the Holy Roman Empire — with its vast number of principalities, each with their own court, prepared to patronize artists, architects and other learned men — being a golden era for the advancement of renaissance art and culture across Europe. Rather than a few large nation states, each determined to guard and promote its own ideas and forms of culture, the HRE was made up of many ethnicities and local cultures where each was regularly exposed to the influence of its neighbors; and renaissance-informed artists frequently traveled from one jurisdiction to another, carrying new ideas with them. So the HRE might, ironically, be viewed as a forerunner of the EU of our day — a common market of ideas rather than a common market of goods and services.
Today, largely because of the kleptocratic behavior of despots, the building of vast palaces and the accumulation of precious artistic artifacts is rightly condemned as wasteful self-glorification and an egregious burden on the rest of society. But Kaufman argues that the princely patronage of artists over centuries has caused to come into being great works that may otherwise never have been created. And the treasures they accumulated have often become the cultural legacy of succeeding generations. Hence an argument in favor of the princely pursuit of magnificence. Certainly anyone who has visited the Hermitage or the Uffizi is likely to applaud the achievements of Catherine the Great or the Medici, whether we approve of their motives or not
The book reminds us that one may learn every bit as much about the nature of a society from a study of its art and architecture as from the history of its wars and prominent personalities.
Impressive, richly detailed, scholarly — while also being completely engaging and readable.
Any individual chapter — e.g. the chapter on Dürer and his contemporaries — considering its intellectual depth and breadth of inquiry, would merit a comprehensive review. It’s unlikely that any review I could offer would do justice to the entire work.
Kaufman makes a compelling case for the Holy Roman Empire — with its vast number of principalities, each with their own court, prepared to patronize artists, architects and other learned men — being a golden era for the advancement of renaissance art and culture across Europe. Rather than a few large nation states, each determined to guard and promote its own ideas and forms of culture, the HRE was made up of many ethnicities and local cultures where each was regularly exposed to the influence of its neighbors; and renaissance-informed artists frequently traveled from one jurisdiction to another, carrying new ideas with them. So the HRE might, ironically, be viewed as a forerunner of the EU of our day — a common market of ideas rather than a common market of goods and services.
Today, largely because of the kleptocratic behavior of despots, the building of vast palaces and the accumulation of precious artistic artifacts is rightly condemned as wasteful self-glorification and an egregious burden on the rest of society. But Kaufman argues that the princely patronage of artists over centuries has caused to come into being great works that may otherwise never have been created. And the treasures they accumulated have often become the cultural legacy of succeeding generations. Hence an argument in favor of the princely pursuit of magnificence. Certainly anyone who has visited the Hermitage or the Uffizi is likely to applaud the achievements of Catherine the Great or the Medici, whether we approve of their motives or not
The book reminds us that one may learn every bit as much about the nature of a society from a study of its art and architecture as from the history of its wars and prominent personalities.
Impressive, richly detailed, scholarly — while also being completely engaging and readable.
January 23, 2014
It is not often that I read an art book from cover to cover. I tend to use them more as reference books which I dip into - over the years I will have read there right through, some sections more than once, others less thoroughly as I scan them, looking for something specific. Art books can be quite tedious with their inevitable lists of artists, works, architects and buildings with brief descriptions... almost monotonous.
This book is one of those rare exceptions that is not only informative and educational but also quite illuminating and often fascinating. It had me gripped from the very beginning when Da Costa Kaufmann explains the differences in the ways that the Italian Renaissance impacted on Eastern and Central Europe. In Russia, for example, it played a more restricted role due to the special mission the Russians saw themselves as having as preservers of the Orthodox faith, and all the prohibitions that accompanied it, with a rejection of the Latin "deviation". Architecture played a greater role in transmitting Renaissance ideas from Italy, but even here the Italians were forced to work to Russian traditional forms (as on the Kremlin) and the desire to imitate, even exceed Byzantium, meant that the Italian impact was muted. It is no coincidence that Russian ideas had to change before she could play a more active role in Europe.
In Central Europe, on the other hand, with its greater religious, cultural and political links with Italy the impact was much greater. The multi-ethnic states of Poland and the Habsburgs had an international art which served and drew on the talents of many regions, and Italians and Germans worked side-by-side and we see the dissemination of Renaissance ideas through foreign patronage.
Whilst the influence of the courts was great, the economic wealth of the Hansa encouraged the creation of art outside the court, especially in public buildings (and especially, churches) and we see the development of a "civic" expression of status and wealth. Kaufmann gives us a fascinating history of the development of this art, especially in the German and Bohemian lands and points out that whilst there is a tendency to see the Renaissance in Germany as an ethnic expression produced by ethnic Germans, the Renaissance is characterised by the production of hybrid styles which merge the Italianate with traditional local forms.
Kaufmann also gives us a super explanation of the impact of the Reformation on Church art. Initially the reformists questioned the place of images in the Church but it wasn't long before a form of Protestant iconography arose (partly in response to the radicalism of the iconoclasts) centred on themes such as the Last Supper and epitaphs. In church architecture we see the creation of an open space and the prominence of the pulpit.
As Kaufmann progress through his history he covers a number of fascinating and interesting topics. I was particularly interested in his explanation of the growth of specialist collections (Wunderkammer) where works of man-made art would be displayed alongside works of nature. Some natural objects (ostrich eggs or tusks) would be incorporated into man-made elements as if to complete them, or collaged in mosaics (pietra dure). These collections often also included scientific instruments. These "encyclopaedic" collections reflected the world in microcosm, and through organisation could give understanding of the macrocosm. Art was thus linked to the Renaissance view of the world; the four seasons corresponding to the four humours of Man and, in turn, to the four elements. Often, in the rooms where these collections were stored, there would be depictions of the elements or the seasons, or months of the year, on ceilings or panels (behind which relevant artefacts would be stored). Thus a ruler displayed not only his wealth but also his mastery of his world. This was an era of collecting which led to patronage (not only of artists but also scholars and scientists).
Kaufman goes on to look at the impact of the Thirty Years War and points out that not all of Central Europe was involved; Poland saw a golden age of architecture, and even in Germany and Bohemia there were important developments taking place, especially in literature and music, which laid the foundations for the work of the later C17th and early C18th. This was a period of artistic growth for Dresden and Augsburg, whilst Prague and other cities declined, and some Germans, such as Elsheimer, Holler and Kneller, worked abroad (Italy had a particular attraction) and had much impact on art where they practised. In Poland, art and architecture was used as a way of unifying the various and diverse ethnic elements after the Union of Lublin. In Bohemia we see the building of the ground-breaking Wallenstein Palace which was to have huge impact on later developments, especially in Austria. It can almost be argued that it was here that the Baroque grew up; size and grandeur became a metaphor for power.
I found Kaufmann's description of the developments in the post-war era particularly illuminating. In this victorious era for the Catholics, religious sculptures made a huge revival and were heavily influenced by Spanish works. Elaborate rituals and dramatic sermons, designed to move their audiences, had their visual counterparts, especially in Southern Germany and Austria. Sculptures of saints often interact with a central painting in a piece of theatre and can be compared to Bernini's work.
During the Thirty Years War the Habsburgs had moved their court from Prague to Vienna and a style was developed which resembled the Baroque of Rome and Bologna but, where once it had served the Church, it now served the nobility - it was an architecture of triumph.
The second decade of the C18th saw a boom in Church architecture in S Germany and the introduction of the Rococo style. It is more commonly seen in Bavaria which had strong links with France (where the style originated) and was imported by French gardeners and French-trained architects. The clergy seems to have competed with their secular counterparts in the splendour of their projects. In the typical interior everything (painting, sculpture, stucco and architecture) is fused into a whole. We also see a fusion of French and Italian elements (trompe d'oeil alongside rocaille). The joy of religion, of beauty as an expression of the divine, is what is intended to be communicated, and its apogee is to be seen in the Wurzburg Residenz and the work of Balthazar Neumann.
In the latter half of the C18th most Central European states were autocracies looking towards France and England for inspiration. State control of the arts, with the aim of independence from foreign influences, and improving quality, led to the setting up of academies. There is a plethora of styles and an interest in Chinoiserie (which grows out of the Enlightenment literary motif where exotic visitors are used to expose weaknesses in Western systems). The Neoclassical style becomes the public face of the enlightened ruler as a country gentleman, the Neo-Gothic is his more private face.
There are times where Kaufman managed to lose me but overall he gives a very clear and illuminating account describing the evolution of art and architecture in this part of Europe. The book is weaker when dealing with painting in depth (as with most art books). Quite detailed attempts to describe composition, vibrant painterly activity and the use of colour are actually wasted on us since there are no large-scale colour illustrations of the many works described and, anyway, this style of writing is more suited to film or television documentary.
The book ends with the disappearance of two of its main protagonists; the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth disappears in the Partitions, and the Holy Roman Empire is dissolved after the Revolutionary Wars (1806). The German states became secularised and separated from Austria, and the Free Cities disappeared. The loss of the huge diversity of states impacted on the variety of cultural activity - the new states had more centripetal tendencies. The disappearance of multi-ethnic states and a society in which foreign artists moved about freely was replaced by more nationalist ones with very specific (ethnic) agendas.
It is not difficult to see parallels with the world of today; the apparent internationalism and freedom of movement provided by the European Union is belied by a distrust of multiculturalism and the growth of nationalistic trends.
This book is one of those rare exceptions that is not only informative and educational but also quite illuminating and often fascinating. It had me gripped from the very beginning when Da Costa Kaufmann explains the differences in the ways that the Italian Renaissance impacted on Eastern and Central Europe. In Russia, for example, it played a more restricted role due to the special mission the Russians saw themselves as having as preservers of the Orthodox faith, and all the prohibitions that accompanied it, with a rejection of the Latin "deviation". Architecture played a greater role in transmitting Renaissance ideas from Italy, but even here the Italians were forced to work to Russian traditional forms (as on the Kremlin) and the desire to imitate, even exceed Byzantium, meant that the Italian impact was muted. It is no coincidence that Russian ideas had to change before she could play a more active role in Europe.
In Central Europe, on the other hand, with its greater religious, cultural and political links with Italy the impact was much greater. The multi-ethnic states of Poland and the Habsburgs had an international art which served and drew on the talents of many regions, and Italians and Germans worked side-by-side and we see the dissemination of Renaissance ideas through foreign patronage.
Whilst the influence of the courts was great, the economic wealth of the Hansa encouraged the creation of art outside the court, especially in public buildings (and especially, churches) and we see the development of a "civic" expression of status and wealth. Kaufmann gives us a fascinating history of the development of this art, especially in the German and Bohemian lands and points out that whilst there is a tendency to see the Renaissance in Germany as an ethnic expression produced by ethnic Germans, the Renaissance is characterised by the production of hybrid styles which merge the Italianate with traditional local forms.
Kaufmann also gives us a super explanation of the impact of the Reformation on Church art. Initially the reformists questioned the place of images in the Church but it wasn't long before a form of Protestant iconography arose (partly in response to the radicalism of the iconoclasts) centred on themes such as the Last Supper and epitaphs. In church architecture we see the creation of an open space and the prominence of the pulpit.
As Kaufmann progress through his history he covers a number of fascinating and interesting topics. I was particularly interested in his explanation of the growth of specialist collections (Wunderkammer) where works of man-made art would be displayed alongside works of nature. Some natural objects (ostrich eggs or tusks) would be incorporated into man-made elements as if to complete them, or collaged in mosaics (pietra dure). These collections often also included scientific instruments. These "encyclopaedic" collections reflected the world in microcosm, and through organisation could give understanding of the macrocosm. Art was thus linked to the Renaissance view of the world; the four seasons corresponding to the four humours of Man and, in turn, to the four elements. Often, in the rooms where these collections were stored, there would be depictions of the elements or the seasons, or months of the year, on ceilings or panels (behind which relevant artefacts would be stored). Thus a ruler displayed not only his wealth but also his mastery of his world. This was an era of collecting which led to patronage (not only of artists but also scholars and scientists).
Kaufman goes on to look at the impact of the Thirty Years War and points out that not all of Central Europe was involved; Poland saw a golden age of architecture, and even in Germany and Bohemia there were important developments taking place, especially in literature and music, which laid the foundations for the work of the later C17th and early C18th. This was a period of artistic growth for Dresden and Augsburg, whilst Prague and other cities declined, and some Germans, such as Elsheimer, Holler and Kneller, worked abroad (Italy had a particular attraction) and had much impact on art where they practised. In Poland, art and architecture was used as a way of unifying the various and diverse ethnic elements after the Union of Lublin. In Bohemia we see the building of the ground-breaking Wallenstein Palace which was to have huge impact on later developments, especially in Austria. It can almost be argued that it was here that the Baroque grew up; size and grandeur became a metaphor for power.
I found Kaufmann's description of the developments in the post-war era particularly illuminating. In this victorious era for the Catholics, religious sculptures made a huge revival and were heavily influenced by Spanish works. Elaborate rituals and dramatic sermons, designed to move their audiences, had their visual counterparts, especially in Southern Germany and Austria. Sculptures of saints often interact with a central painting in a piece of theatre and can be compared to Bernini's work.
During the Thirty Years War the Habsburgs had moved their court from Prague to Vienna and a style was developed which resembled the Baroque of Rome and Bologna but, where once it had served the Church, it now served the nobility - it was an architecture of triumph.
The second decade of the C18th saw a boom in Church architecture in S Germany and the introduction of the Rococo style. It is more commonly seen in Bavaria which had strong links with France (where the style originated) and was imported by French gardeners and French-trained architects. The clergy seems to have competed with their secular counterparts in the splendour of their projects. In the typical interior everything (painting, sculpture, stucco and architecture) is fused into a whole. We also see a fusion of French and Italian elements (trompe d'oeil alongside rocaille). The joy of religion, of beauty as an expression of the divine, is what is intended to be communicated, and its apogee is to be seen in the Wurzburg Residenz and the work of Balthazar Neumann.
In the latter half of the C18th most Central European states were autocracies looking towards France and England for inspiration. State control of the arts, with the aim of independence from foreign influences, and improving quality, led to the setting up of academies. There is a plethora of styles and an interest in Chinoiserie (which grows out of the Enlightenment literary motif where exotic visitors are used to expose weaknesses in Western systems). The Neoclassical style becomes the public face of the enlightened ruler as a country gentleman, the Neo-Gothic is his more private face.
There are times where Kaufman managed to lose me but overall he gives a very clear and illuminating account describing the evolution of art and architecture in this part of Europe. The book is weaker when dealing with painting in depth (as with most art books). Quite detailed attempts to describe composition, vibrant painterly activity and the use of colour are actually wasted on us since there are no large-scale colour illustrations of the many works described and, anyway, this style of writing is more suited to film or television documentary.
The book ends with the disappearance of two of its main protagonists; the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth disappears in the Partitions, and the Holy Roman Empire is dissolved after the Revolutionary Wars (1806). The German states became secularised and separated from Austria, and the Free Cities disappeared. The loss of the huge diversity of states impacted on the variety of cultural activity - the new states had more centripetal tendencies. The disappearance of multi-ethnic states and a society in which foreign artists moved about freely was replaced by more nationalist ones with very specific (ethnic) agendas.
It is not difficult to see parallels with the world of today; the apparent internationalism and freedom of movement provided by the European Union is belied by a distrust of multiculturalism and the growth of nationalistic trends.
April 5, 2022
Dense, very detailed but on the whole insightful study of a neglected period of art-history, and a neglected region. It makes a strong argument for a permeation of Italianate Renaissance art further into Central Europe than previously recognised.
But what I found most interesting was the close ties it reveals between the Reformation and the collapse of Medieval Christendom and the creation of modern 'art', as well as trends in artistic styles. Sets the scene nicely, for those who might be interested, for MH Abrams The Mirror and the Lamp , a study of the Romantics.
But what I found most interesting was the close ties it reveals between the Reformation and the collapse of Medieval Christendom and the creation of modern 'art', as well as trends in artistic styles. Sets the scene nicely, for those who might be interested, for MH Abrams The Mirror and the Lamp , a study of the Romantics.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews