Results found: 2

Search results

Sort By:

Limit search:

Wczesnonowożytna rezydencja jako „konstelacja” obiektów na przykładzie Szczecina w przededniu wojny trzydziestoletniej

100%

Makała R.

Biuletyn Historii Sztuki

2021

vol. 83

issue 3

475-503

A residence from the modern era was until the mid-20th century perceived, first of all, from the angle of extensive multi-function palace-and-garden ensembles from the late 17th and the 18th century. However, the research conducted in the last quarter of the 20th and in the first decades of the 21st century verified this vision, since until the mid-17th century in Europe another residence type stemming from the mediaeval tradition functioned. The growing complexity of the court ceremonial beginning in the late Middle Ages and the extension of courts made rulers and their architects face the question of creating an architectural and spatial (not only urban) setting for new court activities; they also had to tackle the significantly more down-to-earth issue of securing infrastructure facilitating the day-to-day functioning of the ruler and his courtiers, stables, store rooms, or arsenals. The solution was sought not only through the extension of the already existing structures, and creating in them zones meant to serve definite tasks, both utilitarian and ceremonial. The process actually started already in the Middle Ages, together with the development of hunting lodges connected with the ruler’s main residence. Around 1600, this type of the residential complex reached the apogee of its development, and complexity at the same time. Later alterations and function changes caused that today the reasons for which particular elements of such complexes were given specific forms and the reasons for their location are being discovered painstakingly. At the turn of the 17th century, a ruler’s residence was composed of many buildings, garden ensembles, and hunting domains (it also included areas serving other functions) which all together created a complex. Its operations were defined by the ceremonial and residential and formal needs of other than the ruler and his closest family dynasty members, as well as by equally important utilitarian issues: location of offices, courtiers’ dwellings, storages, arms storages, etc. The changes which occurred in residential structures from the second half of the 17th century including, first of all, the concentration of functions within a large comprehensively planned palace and park ensemble caused that today it is difficult to reconstruct how the heterogenic residence from the earlier period had operated. The account written down by Philip Hainhofer of Augsburg in 1617 being a report of his six-weeks’ stay at the court of Philip II, Duke of Pomerania, (on the occasion of delivering the largest cabinet ever created to the client) is one of the most important sources allowing to become acquainted with the operation mode of such residences. It is a very special text in view of the status and reality perception of both protagonists: the author and the Duke, also because of their mutual relations. A correspondent of many rulers, providing them with precious (not only political) information, Hainhofer, a middleman between clients and artists, and frequently instigator of the works created, was at the same time a great art connoisseur, consciously and reflexively watching the objects presented to him. For the Duke of Pomerania interested in science and art he was a conversation partner, but also the target of the propaganda actions of the court; a wide range of Hainhofer’s correspondents (in Germany, Italy, and in France) permitted to hope that he was going to spread wide the image of Pomerania as a wealthy country ruled in an enlightened manner. At the same time, Philip II was for Hainhofer the most important client whose favour it was necessary to keep by all means. In effect, a special extended stay programme was prepared for Hainhofer, covering e.g. visits to many parts of the residential complex, taking part in hunting, or meeting with scientists and highly-ranked courtiers. Hainhofer returned the favour to Philip II by means of a panegyric account which, however, was never printed, most likely only because the Duke died unexpectedly the following year. The text, luckily preserved until today and published for the first time already in 1834, is thus an idealizing picture of the court life and the residence, and actually more strictly, of the set of facilities and landscape designs creating a sort of a ‘constellation’ to which the form and the functioning manner of respective elements is assigned by the court ceremonial, but also with the location versus communication routes, hunting domains, and other elements of the complex in mind. Apart from the obvious elements: a castle or an urban palace constituting the main ruler’s residence, a hunting lodge or castle, a suburban villa, namely so-called Lusthaus (pleasure palace, maison de plaisance), such a residential complex included gardens, home farms, as well as vantage points which were excursion destinations, as well as carefully arranged lieux de memoire displaying the oldness and grandeur of the dynasty and its European bonds.

Artykuł stanowi próbę ukazania heterogenicznego typu zespołu rezydencjonalnego, dominującego w Europie do połowy XVII w. na przykładzie rezydencji księcia pomorskiego Filipa II. Relacja Filipa Hainhofera z 1617 r. (spisana przy okazji dostarczania księciu zamówionego specjalnie kabinetu) jest podstawą do ustalenia sposób funkcjonowania poszczególnych części zespołu i wyznaczanych ceremoniałem i życiem dworu relacji między nimi.

Dr Jacek Kriegseisen (1965–2021) in memoriam

100%

Makała R.

Materiały Zachodniopomorskie

2021

vol. 17

231-232

Refine search results

1 Biuletyn Historii Sztuki

1 Materiały Zachodniopomorskie

2 Makała R.

2 2021

Search results

Wczesnonowożytna rezydencja jako „konstelacja” obiektów na przykładzie Szczecina w przededniu wojny trzydziestoletniej

Dr Jacek Kriegseisen (1965–2021) in memoriam