Archduke Leopold Wilhelm was born in Graz on January 6, 1614, the younger son of Archduke Ferdinand (1578-1637), at that time regent of Inner Austria and Emperor Ferdinand II after 1619, and his spouse Maria Anna of Bavaria (1574-1616). [1] The primogeniture established by Ferdinand II in his testament of 1621 excluded Leopold Wilhelm from succession to the throne, and he was designated for the clergy already in early childhood. Fortunately for his later career, he thus received a thorough education. [2]

Very early, he acquired a whole series of ecclesiastical titles: in 1625, at the age of eleven, he was named bishop of Passau and Strasbourg as the successor of his uncle, Archduke Leopold V, who reverted to the laity. [3] In both dioceses, counter-Reformation measures begun under Archduke Leopold were continued and the Jesuit order strengthened, for example through the expansion of the Jesuit school founded in 1612 in Passau and the establishment of a seminary for priests in 1638. In 1627, Leopold Wilhelm was named titular bishop of Halberstadt and remained so until the diocese reverted to the Elector of Brandenburg according to the terms of the Peace of Westphalia, though the archduke continued to bear the nominal title of bishop until his death. In 1629, as a result of the Imperial Edict of Restitution providing for the restoration of Protestant bishoprics and convents to Catholicism, above all the north of Germany, Leopold Wilhelm also became nominal archbishop of Magdeburg. While this accumulation of bishoprics violated the stipulations of the Council of Trent, in context of the Thirty Years' War it was supported by the curia as a necessary reinforcement of the Catholic side. Even within the German Catholic camp, however, it represented a potential for conflict, since the Imperial Diet, above all Maximilian of Bavaria (though he himself had supported the amassing of bishoprics by the Wittelsbach house in the Rhineland), viewed it as a dangerous buildup of imperial power. As early as 1635, Leopold Wilhelm was forced to abdicate the archbishopric of Magdeburg to the duke of Saxony through the terms of the Peace of Prague; in 1637, however, he received the very wealthy diocese of Olmütz in the Erblande and in 1655 the bishopric of Wroclaw as well.

In 1639, Leopold Wilhelm received as coadjutor the expectancy for the office of Grand Master of the Order of Teutonic Knights, a militant title from the tradition of the order, and on May 4, 1642, he was enthroned as Grand Master, six months after the death of his predecessor Johann Caspar von Stadion. Also in 1639, he was named governor of Bohemia by his older brother, the new emperor Ferdinand III (1608-1657), who also made him commander-in-chief of the imperial army in place of the hapless count Matthias Gallas. In the spring of 1640, he and his general Octavio Piccolomini defeated the Swedes at Kolin and Königgrätz, forcing them to retreat northward as far as the Weser river, and in 1641 they successfully relieved the besieged city of Regensburg. Despite these early successes, however, the disadvantageous military situation made the supreme command of the imperial army a thankless task which brought no glory to the archduke, though personal engagement on his part was by no means lacking. In the summer of 1641, the allied imperial and Bavarian troops under Leopold Wilhelm with Piccolomini and General Wahl were defeated at Wolfenbüttel by the Swedes and the French. At that time, the Bavarian general wrote to Elector Maximilian concerning the young archduke: "Mit reinem Gewissen kann ich sagen, daß, wenn seine erzherzogliche Durchlaucht noch ein wenig den Krieg practicirn, dieselben ein solcher Kriegsheld werden, als in langer Zeit nit gewesen; dann Sie die Stuckkugeln ebensowenig achten als wenn eine Mucken vorüberfliegen thät. Ich vermein, wann wir deutsche Häupter hätten, es sollt alles wohl abgehen." [4] After early successes in expelling the Swedes from Moravia and Silesia, the archduke risked the battle of Breitenfeld near Leipzig on November 2, 1642, against the advice of Piccolomini. The imperial forces were defeated by the numerically inferior Swedish army under the command of Lennart Torstenson, and Swedish troops once again occupied large parts of Moravia and Silesia. Leopold Wilhelm thereupon abdicated supreme command and withdrew to his episcopal see in Passau. Piccolomini went over to the Spanish side, and in 1643 Emperor Ferdinand III once again named Gallas as his lieutenant-general. After the latter's defeats in the fall of 1644 and winter of 1644-45, he was relieved by Hatzfeld as commander-in-chief, who in March 1645 lost the decisive battle of Jankau in southern Bohemia against the Swedes under Torstenson. Swedish troops advanced into the northern part of Lower Austria almost to Vienna, threatening to unite with the Transylvanian prince Georg Rakoczyzu. In this desperate situation, Archduke Leopold Wilhelm was once again summoned to the supreme command of the imperial army. [5] Gallas and after 1646 Hatzfeld were placed at his side as generals, and he received powers that no imperial commander had possessed since Wallenstein. The plans of the imperial council of war called for the imperial army under Leopold Wilhelm to fight against the Swedes, while the army of the Liga would oppose the French in the southwest of Germany. Leopold Wilhelm forced the opposing troops to withdraw from Franconia and withdrew his own army to the Danube to protect the troops and avoid disastrous campaigns. He recognized that no military victory could be gained over Sweden and France, and thus supported the party in favor of a treaty at the court in Vienna as well as Count Johann Adolf Schwarzenberg at the negotiations in Westphalia. In the late fall of 1646, Leopold Wilhelm once again relinquished supreme command and was named governor of the Spanish Netherlands by his cousin and brother-in-law King Philip IV of Spain. [6] The appointment of members of the Austrian line as governors of the Netherlands already represented a long tradition; the best-known and most successful example had been Archduke Albert VII, who had reigned from 1598 to 1621 with his spouse Isabella Clara Eugenia and had brought a period of relative peace to the northern provinces of the Low Countries with the Twelve-Year Truce (1609-1621).

The choice of Leopold Wilhelm as governor resulted not least of all from the military responsibilities connected with the post. While according to the Peace of Westphalia Spain had made a special treaty with the northern Low Countries, recognizing them as an independent state not only de facto, as already in the Twelve-Year Truce, but also de jure, it remained in a state of war with France, which continued until the conclusion of the Peace of the Pyrenees in 1659. In 1647-48, from his base in the Netherlands and with the support of the Duke of Lorraine, Leopold Wilhelm defeated France at the battles of Armentières, Landrecy, and Dixmuiden as well as at the conquest of Furnes and Estaires and finally at the battle of Lens on August 20, 1648.

Archduke Leopold Wilhelm's greatest significance, however, lies in the area neither of politics nor of war, but of cultural history. Favored by the existing historical circumstances at the time he assumed the governorship of the Netherlands, in the years that followed the archduke established one of the largest and most important picture galleries of the 17th century. About half of his collection has remained together to this day, and now constitutes an important part of the Gemäldegalerie of the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. [7]

It was not until his arrival in Brussels that Leopold Wilhelm began to collect pictures on a large scale. Previously, he had possessed neither the opportunity nor the financial resources in a land exhausted by a long war, even if the example of his famous predecessors Archduke Ferdinand II and Emperor Rudolf II had persuaded him of the importance of collecting as an element of princely decorum. Even more decisive may have been the example of his royal relative Philip IV, who far surpassed all other princes of his time in both the scope of his collecting activity and his personal connoisseurship. The artistic climate of the Netherlands, a bastion of painting for centuries, may also have encouraged the proclivities of the archduke, who came from a land poor in significant painting.

In 1636, when the archduke received the famous English collector Arundel in Vienna, one of the attendants noted the spare furnishings of the archducal quarters and the absence of pictures. [8] In 1647, Leopold Wilhelm possessed a Kunstkammer, a number of pictures, and a library, as is documented in the inventory drawn up on the occasion of the archduke's departure for the Low Countries (Leopold Wilhelm arrived in Brussels on April 11, 1647). [9] In the same year he gave commissions to his Netherlandish court painters Jan van den Hoecke and Frans Luycx, who followed him to the Netherlands. In a testament of 1651 in Brussels, [10] he bequeathed the Kunstkammer as well as his pictures in Brussels and Vienna to his brother Ferdinand III; the tapestries, on the other hand, were designated for the latter's son Leopold, the later emperor. A codicil also mentions pictures in Passau and Königstetten.

Leopold Wilhelm's court painters functioned as artistic advisers, playing an active role in acquisitions and themselves appearing as the buyers of pictures. The court painters were first of all Jan van den Hoecke, [11] who had pursued a typical career with education in the Netherlands, a sojourn in Italy, and activity at the imperial court, and who had followed the archduke from Vienna to the Low Countries. Later, David Teniers the Younger and Jan Anton van der Baren also served in this capacity. On the occasion of the governor's first trip to Antwerp in 1648, Hoecke corresponded with one of his relatives, the art dealer Matthys Musson, as to whether the official gift of the city of Antwerp should be presented in the form of money or in works of art. Hoecke wrote that the archduke would rather have money, in order to be able to use this sum to purchase works of art in accord with his own taste, for he would like to see the most beautiful paintings in Antwerp and buy the things that pleased him the most. [12]

Around the middle of the 17th century, large collections were dissolved as a result of the English Civil War, causing large numbers of works of art to change hands as never before. The military and political successes of the new governor Leopold Wilhelm made him an interesting potential buyer. Accordingly, the collection of the Duke of Buckingham, carried to safety in Amsterdam from England, was brought to Antwerp, since a possible sale seemed more likely there than in the Dutch republic: "without exception Antwerpe will afford many chapmen and the Archduke's good success in Flandre will make him prodigal in these curiosities," wrote the English royalist Stephen Goffe from The Hague in June 1648 to Aylesbury, financial adviser of the young Duke of Buckingham, heir to the collection. [13]

The collection had been established about 30 years before by George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham (1592-1628). As a royal favorite from 1614 on, Villiers had succeeded in making a rapid ascent at the court of King James I. He began to collect art less from inner disposition, love of art, or connoisseurship, than from the persuasion that such collecting was an indispensable part of princely splendor. [14] He was assisted by the Dutch painter and art dealer Balthasar Gerbier, whom he took into his service in 1619 and who in the next years acquired with unbelievable speed more than 400 paintings in Italy, France, Spain, and the Netherlands, as well as antique sculptures. Here the question of the financial appreciation of the collection was not the least important consideration: "Our pictures, if they were sold a century after our death, would sell for good cash, and for three times more than they cost." [15] Among the first acquisitions were a series of ten Biblical scenes by Paolo Veronese and his workshop from the collection of Charles of Croy, Duke of Aerschot, [16] while among the largest was the purchase of the antiquities collection of Peter Paul Rubens. [17] George Villiers' life came to an abrupt and unexpected end with his murder in 1628. At least part of his collection of pictures, sculptures, and cut stones was listed in an inventory of 1635, drawn up immediately after the remarriage of his widow and intended as part of a testamentary contract securing the possession of the collection for the duke's minor son, George Villiers, 2nd Duke of Buckingham (1628-1687). [18] A second list, [19] drawn up in 1648 and consisting of four parts recording Italian, Netherlandish, and anonymous pictures and finally sculptures, contains the works brought from London to the Low Countries to save them from threatened confiscation by the English Parliament, [20] under negotiation since 1644. In February 1648, these works of art, consisting of the higher quality two-thirds of the objects named in the inventory of 1635, were shipped to safety in Amsterdam and then, as already mentioned, brought to Antwerp with the intention of offering them to Leopold Wilhelm. Apparently, however, the collection was not immediately sold to the archduke, but rather pawned with the painter Frans Wouters, dean of the Antwerp painters' guild, and the merchant Lionel Corham. Only in late 1649, when the pledge was redeemed for 30,000 guilders and new debts needed to be paid, did the sale of the collection become inevitable. A few paintings were sent to Brussels for Archduke Leopold Wilhelm's scrutiny, while others were assessed in Antwerp by Gerard Seghers and Cornelis Schut on the archduke's behalf. [21]

In late May 1650, the majority of the paintings was sold for 70,000 guilders or 7,000 pounds; the main purchaser was Archduke Leopold Wilhelm, acting on behalf of his brother Emperor Ferdinand III and acquiring pictures for 5,000 pounds: "The bargain is now concluded for 70,000 glds for the Paintings .... This 7,000' is to bee paid thus 5,000' by the ArchDuke for the Emperour, 1,000' by one Cassiopine a Marchant for those pictures which the Emperour shall refuse of the collection now in Antwerp engaged, and 1,000' by Frizwell and his partners for those pictures wch ly in Zealand." [22]

In the Teutsche Academie, [23] Joachim von Sandrart was the first to name the reason for the emperor's purchase of the pictures: "es sind aber solche meist von kayserlichen Majestät, Ferdinandi dem Dritten ... zur Ersatzung derer auf Einnehmung der Stadt Prag von General Königsmarck nach Schweden abgeführten in die neuerbauten kayserlichen Zimmer erkauffet worden nun auch daselbst aufgerichtet zu sehen." [24] Perhaps, however, Ferdinand III was also interested in the recovery of imperial property, i.e. that portion of the 115 paintings bequeathed by Emperor Rudolf II to his brother Albert VII, paintings which, perhaps via the Rubens collection, had come into the hands of the Duke of Buckingham. [25] There were other cases, as well, in which Leopold Wilhelm was commissioned by the imperial court to acquire works of art in the Netherlands, for example a number of tapestries in 1652. [26]

Soon after his debut as a powerful buyer in the world of Netherlandish art trade - even if thus far he had only acted on behalf of his imperial brother - Leopold Wilhelm acquired for himself the paintings of the Duke of Hamilton and in so doing laid the foundation for his own collection of primarily 16th-century Italian art.

James, 3rd Marquess and after 1643 1st Duke of Hamilton (1606-1649), belonged to one of the leading noble families in Scotland. [27] A friend of Charles I since earliest youth, he had accompanied the king along with a small entourage on the latter's adventurous courtship journey to Spain in 1623. At the beginning, he did not share the king's enthusiasm for painting, though his father had already possessed an important collection of Venetian painting as well as pictures by Caravaggio, Rubens, and Reni. In 1631-32, Hamilton fought in Germany on the side of King Gustav Adolf, and after his return to England began his rapid political ascent as the closest confidante of King Charles I in Scottish affairs. Like George Villiers before him, he acquired his picture collection as an external sign of princely splendor, but also as an instrument for cultivating the favor of the king, to whom he made gifts of pictures and from whom he also received works. [28]

In particular, he made use of his brother-in-law Basil Viscount Feilding, the English chargé d'affaires in Venice, for his art purchases. Hamilton's extensive correspondence with Feilding from 1635 to 1638 is preserved, [29] making the negotiations with various Venetian collectors - in particular the heirs of Bartolomeo della Nave, the procurator Michiel Priuli, and the painter and art dealer Nicolas Régnier - the best documented transactions of the 17th century.

The first success in cooperation with Basil Feilding involved the purchase of 18 pictures from Nicolas Régnier (1591-1667), a Flemish painter trading in art in Venice. [30] Among these works, which were sent to London in April 1637, were Venetian paintings of the 16th century as well as pictures by contemporaneous artists. [31] Considerably more extensive and important was the purchase of the collection of Bartolomeo della Nave, of which ca. 200 pictures can be traced to Archduke Leopold Wilhelm. The collection was already famed among contemporaries as the most important collection of 16th-century Venetian painting in Venice itself. [32] King Charles I was interested in its purchase and participated in a buying syndicate with three other collectors from July 1636 on. The Earl of Arundel, otherwise the king's greatest rival as a collector, appears at that time to have been one of the partners, for Charles I commissioned William Petty, Arundel's wily business agent, to negotiate the purchase of the collection; his efforts, however, remained unsuccessful. Only Hamilton met with success in 1637, the following year, through the mediation of Basil Feilding; a letter from Hamilton to Feilding [33] indicates that the purchase of the collection for 15,000 ducats was intended as a favor to the king, who also had a financial share in the transaction; nevertheless, the pictures remained in Hamilton's possession.

The same rivals encountered each other once again in the purchase of the collection of the Venetian senator Priuli, containing above all one outstanding picture, a St. Margaret by Raphael. [34] With Basil Feilding representing the Marquess of Hamilton and William Petty negotiating for Earl Arundel, the latter drove up the price of the collection from 3,500 to 5,000 ducats in order to dispense with the competition. [35] Shortly after the sale of his pictures, Priuli fell down a staircase to his death; Venetian gossip claimed that he could no longer live without his saint. [36] At the same time, Feilding also acquired pictures from other sources, including three mythological scenes by Domenico Fetti for 350 ducats. [37]

In 1643, after the English Civil War had already begun, Hamilton was elevated to Duke by Charles I as a reward for his political services. In the following years he fought above all in Scotland, but lost the decisive battle of Preston (August 17-19, 1648) against Oliver Cromwell; he was captured, condemned to death, and executed on March 9, 1649. His brother and sole heir fled to Holland, taking the art collection with him. Already a few weeks later, Archduke Leopold Wilhelm possessed a number of these pictures; the rest he bought over the course of the next few months. [38]

Contrary to common assumption, Leopold Wilhelm did not acquire any works from the collection of King Charles I of England, which was sold beginning in the fall of 1649 in the so-called Commonwealth Sale. [39] Only two of Leopold Wilhelm's pictures were previously found in the collection of Charles I. [40]

Next to the Italian pictures with their illustrious provenience from prominent collections, the much more numerous Netherlandish works in Leopold Wilhelm's collection tend to recede into the background. Here we find paintings from the 15th to the early 17th centuries as well as works by contemporaneous Netherlandish artists. Leopold Wilhelm had acquired a small but select group of 15th-century Netherlandish pictures on the Antwerp art market, including the portrait of Cardinal Albergati by Jan van Eyck. The latter was bought on April 5, 1648, from the dealer and collector Peeter Stevens, who made a note of the purchase in the margin of his copy of Van Mander's Schilder-Boeck. [41] The important group of pictures by Pieter Brueghel the Elder stems from the former collection of Emperor Rudolf II and was apparently incorporated into the gallery of the archduke only in Vienna, as the introductory text of David Teniers' Theatrum Pictorium seems to indicate. Teniers here prints an excerpt from a letter written to him by an unnamed friend in Vienna - probably the canon Anton van der Baren, who had accompanied Leopold Wilhelm to Vienna - describing the archducal gallery in the Stallburg. Other pictures unknown to Teniers are also mentioned in this context, among them pictures of the months of the year by Brueghel the Elder. [42]

Of the 880 pictures by Netherlandish and German painters named in the inventory of 1659, around 330 stem from contemporaneous artists active during Leopold Wilhelm's regency in the Netherlands, testimony to the support and patronage of the archduke. The majority of them, around 260 pictures, are works by painters from the southern Low Countries, above all from Antwerp; 70 of them are mentioned by name in the inventory of the collection. These artists were born between ca. 1580 and 1635 and thus represent three successive generations, from painters at the end of their careers in mid-century, such as Frans Snyders (1579-1657) or Gaspar de Crayer (1584-1669), to the youngest generation such as the Dutchman Frans Mieris the Elder (1635-1681). To be sure, the archduke's collection does not constitute an exact reflection of the full scope of painterly production in the Spanish Netherlands, since on the one hand Leopold Wilhelm's personal preferences are perceptible, and on the other religious paintings intended for the public, such as altarpieces, are not represented. Nonetheless, the collection bears eloquent witness to the range and variety of artistic production in the southern Low Countries, despite the many years of continuous war with France.

The 70 pictures by Dutch painters or those of northern Netherlandish origin, on the other hand, appear more modest in comparison: only 22 artists are represented, with about 10 pictures by unknown artists. Here the compiler of the inventory was less sure of himself in the recording of artists' names than with the Flemish painters, and also made mistakes through the obviously incorrect reading of signatures. The names of great and well-known Dutch painters are absent: there is nothing by Frans Hals, no landscapes by van Goyen or Ruisdael, and only one painting by Rembrandt which now is longer preserved, while the rest are primarily genre paintings, including seven pictures by Ostade.

To judge from the numerous small-format pictures mentioned in the inventory, including a no longer extant group of still lifes and nature studies with flowers, fruits, and insects in watercolor on parchment by Joris and Jakob Hoefnagel or Jan van Kessel, the archduke had a special affinity for the small, perfectly-painted cabinet picture, from which one might surmise a somewhat retrospective taste, oriented to the Kunstkammer of the early 17th century. An additional self-contained group is constituted by the spiritual flower pictures of Daniel Seghers, Jan van den Hecke, and Jan Anton van der Baren, a specific achievement of the Jesuit order in Antwerp. [43]

In comparison with other princely collections of the period, we know much about the extent and composition of Leopold Wilhelm's gallery; in addition to the sporadic written documents, we are also informed by the gallery pictures and the Theatrum Pictorium of David Teniers the Younger (1610-1690), as well as the inventory of 1659. While in the nature of the case the inventory records the entire collection and is thus of inestimable documentary value, both the gallery pictures and the Theatrum Pictorium show only a part of the collection.

The gallery picture, a genre limited locally to Antwerp and originating at the beginning of the 17th century as a creation of cabinet painting, [44] originally represented primarily fictive collections. David Teniers' gallery pictures of the collection of Leopold Wilhelm, on the other hand, are gallery portraits. His paintings bring the development of this pictorial type to both its climax and its conclusion. All of the paintings shown represent existing pictures from the collection of the archduke, who himself is portrayed with various members of his court, thus further increasing the documentary character of these gallery pictures. Aside from the numerous repetitions and copies, eleven gallery pictures are still preserved today, dating to the years between 1651 and 1653. They show different rooms of the governor's residence in Brussels with different parts of the collection, though Teniers did take certain liberties in the arrangement of the pictures.

Since the spatial disposition shown in the large gallery picture in Vienna is repeated in a similar form in other gallery pictures as well, [45] it seems likely that the painting represents an existing gallery in the palace at Coudenbergh in Brussels. Three other gallery pictures in Brussels, the Prado, and another in Munich [46] show an entirely different spatial arrangement, but are once again so similar to each other that one might suppose that these, too, represent the same hall of the archduke's gallery.

A total of about 150 paintings from the collection of Archduke Leopold Wilhelm are reproduced in the various gallery pictures. In all the paintings, Italian works from the collection predominate, while a few gallery pictures show paintings of exclusively Italian origin, for the most part from the Hamilton collection. The large gallery picture in the Vienna Gemäldegalerie, [47] for example, was probably made immediately after the purchase of the Hamilton pictures and especially for this occasion, as is suggested by a replica of 1651, which but for a few details agrees with the first picture. [48] The painting shows a spacious room lit from the left by two windows. The group of persons in the left foreground consists of the archduke, the painter Teniers himself, the dwarf-like Canon van der Baren, and at the far left Count Johann Adolf von Schwarzenberg, the archduke's chief steward. [49] To the right, pictures stand on the floor or lean against chairs, an arrangement which emphasizes important pieces such as the St. Margaret by Raphael from the collection of Procurator Priuli, Esther before Ahasuerus by Veronese, obtained for the Hamilton collection from an unknown source and now in the Uffizi, and Titian's Bravo from the collection of Bartolomeo della Nave; these paintings reappear prominently in other gallery pictures as well. Other paintings hang on the side wall of a tall enclosed doorway which projects out into the room between the two windows. In contrast to the seemingly random arrangement of pictures on the floor and wall at the left - a disposition which bears the mark of realism - the rear wall shows five strictly parallel rows of pictures, tightly ordered from floor to ceiling. There is no attempt whatsoever at the illusion of depth, and not a finger's breadth of space appears between the picture frames. This wall appears not as a part of the interior space, but as a catalogue, an impression that is strengthened by the arrangement of the pictures in rows of equal height. Here Teniers changes scale from painting to painting: since most of the pictures shown are preserved, their actual size relationships can easily be compared. In the second row, for example, the Fratricide of Cain by Palma Giovane [50] and the Raising of the Boy of Nain by Paolo Veronese, [51] each of which are about a meter high, hang next to the Raising of Lazarus by Pordenone, [52] a picture nearly twice as large, which is shown in actual size in one of the gallery pictures in Munich. [53]

In addition to the paintings, statues and small sculptures from the collection are represented as well; a table of pietra dura, supported by a sculpture of Ganymede by Adriaen de Vries, appears in a total of seven gallery pictures. [54]

The frames of most of the gallery pictures bear inscriptions with the artists' names as well as a few numbers corresponding to the later inventory of the collection. From this we may deduce that the inventory of 1659 was based on a previous inventory of 1651 containing about 300 pictures, [55] perhaps drawn up in connection with the testament of the archduke from the same year. [56]

A few years after the completion of the gallery pictures, David Teniers was occupied with a second great task in the service of Archduke Leopold Wilhelm: the publication of the Theatrum Pictorium, a picture catalogue of the archduke's gallery. The first part of the work, with 244 etchings of the Italian pictures, was published in Brussels in 1660, at a time when the gallery had already been taken to Vienna. The dedication page, dated 1658, shows a portrait of the archduke followed by the title and preface in French, Latin, Spanish, and Flemish. Teniers, who proudly showed himself with the chamberlain's keys as ayuda de cámara at the court of Leopold Wilhelm, noted in the preface that the publication was prepared at his own cost. [57] The description of the arrangement of the gallery in Vienna, based on a letter from an unnamed informant, is illustrated at the end of the book in an etching by F. van der Steen after a drawing by Nikolaus von Hoy, showing a view of the Stallburg gallery - and not, as is often assumed, of the gallery in the palace at Brussels.

The etchings were executed by a number of different artists. All of them bear the name of the painter and the size of the original at the lower edge of the plate, as well as the name of the engraver. The most prolific artists, each of whom executed more than 50 plates, were Jan van Troyen with primarily multifigure compositions, Lucas Vorsterman the Younger with mostly portraits and half-figures, and Pieter van Liesebetten. Theodor van Kessel prepared 27 etchings with strong light-dark contrasts; here, as in the 29 pages by Quirin Bol, landscapes predominate. A number of additional engravers, including Nikolaus van Hoy, who followed the archduke from the Netherlands to Vienna and was named imperial Kammermaler in 1660, and Wenzel Hollar, are represented with individual pages.

The sequence of the plates follows a certain art historical order. At the beginning stand works by Raphael, followed by six, for the most part alleged works by Bellini, then Michelangelo, Giorgione, Leonardo, Correggio, Mantegna, and Barocci. There follow the large groups of pictures by 16th-century Venetian painters, which constitute the main part of the work: there are 47 pictures by Titian alone, followed by Tintoretto, Veronese, Schiavone, Bassano, Palma Vecchio and Palma Giovine, and finally Fetti. At the end of the work stands Lotto, as well as Italian painters of the 17th century such as Reni, Manfredi, Varotari, and Valentin.

The differences in attribution between the Theatrum Pictorium and the inventory drawn up at nearly the same time are striking. Most of the attributions in the inventory betray a more critical eye than the captions in the Theatrum Pictorium, which perhaps, in accord with its panegyric character, seeks to attribute as many paintings as possible to famous artists. Of the thirteen Giorgiones illustrated in the Theatrum Pictorium, for example, only seven are unequivocally named as originals in the inventory, while two others are tentatively attributed to the artist with the note "man halt es von Giorgione Original" ("considered an original Giorgione").

As a prototype for the etchers, Teniers prepared reduced, painted copies of the pictures in the exact size of the etchings, [58] to which he lent his personal character through the quick, fluid application of paint. 120 of these Pastiches were acquired by John, 1st Duke of Marlborough (1650-1722), and held in Blenheim Palace until 1886. [59] Today they are scattered throughout many collections: larger groups are found in the Princes Gate Collection in London, the Gemäldegalerie of the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna, the Wallace Collection in London, the Chicago Art Institute, the Johnson Collection in Philadelphia, and other museums, as well as on the art market.

Leopold Wilhelm's military successes of the years 1647 to 1653 could not be maintained; in 1654, all the conquests of the previous years were lost again. The archduke abdicated the governorship of the Low Countries and on May 9, 1656, quitted his residence in Brussels for the Erblande. As his future place of residence was still uncertain, his pictures, tapestries, Kunstkammer, and furniture were first sent to Passau, where they arrived on July 2, 1656. [60] Only in the following year was the collection brought to Vienna and the future installation in the Stallburg prepared.

In 1657, after the death of his brother Emperor Ferdinand III, Archduke Leopold Wilhelm appeared once more in the public eye of international politics as a potential candidate for emperor. In the Imperial Diet, his candidacy was supported primarily by the opposition to the legitimate heir, Leopold I, under the leadership of Johann Philipp von Schönborn, archbishop of Mainz. The election of Leopold Wilhelm would above all have served to accommodate the French interest in weakening the Hapsburg position.

In 1659, after the collection of Leopold Wilhelm had already been located in Vienna for some time, an extensive and thorough inventory was drawn up, perhaps on the occasion of the completion of the installation in the Stallburg. This inventory constitutes our most important source concerning the exact scope and composition of the collection. [61] The inventory was signed by four members of the archducal household: treasurer Christian Wasserfass, who had already drawn up an inventory of the Kunstkammer and library in 1647, [62] his deputy Hans Jacob Weinzerle, Matthias Henndt, and the court painter and chaplain Canon Jan Anton van der Baren, who had accompanied Leopold Wilhelm from the Netherlands. Van den Baren's intimate acquaintance with the collection of the archduke and with painting in general, especially contemporaneous Flemish art, makes it likely that he was the author of the inventory. He himself did not write it, however, for it is composed in German with noticeable Austrian accents. It is probable that the actual writing was the work of Christian Wasserfass. In editing the manuscript, Berger noted two different scribal hands.

The inventory consists of four parts. The paintings are divided into two separately-numbered groups; the first, a "Verzaichnuss der italienischen stuckh" (catalogue of Italian pieces) with 517 numbers, is followed by the "Mahlerey von teutsch unndt niderländischen Mahlern" (paintings by German and Netherlandish painters) with 880 numbers. The third part lists the drawings, the fourth the stones, statues, and other antiquities and figures. Despite the brevity of the entries, the information, which follows a consistent pattern, is precise and reliable. The indication of painting technique and material is followed by a description of the object of representation, which goes beyond a mere listing of the title to name the essential elements of the depiction. In addition, the frame of the picture is described and the size of the picture - unfortunately including the frame - is given in span and finger.

The compiler of the inventory was even conscious of the variation in measuring units at different times and places, and at the beginning of the inventory provided a length divided into ten parts, according to which 1 span of 10 fingers measures 20.8 cm. The entries conclude with the name of the artist. The attributions to artists of the 15th and 16th centuries are marked by the critical eye of a connoisseur and distinguish between signed works, secure, and questionable attributions; the entries for contemporaneous Netherlandish and especially Flemish painting could qualify as a primary source. The cooperation of a number of artists on one picture is precisely indicated, [63] and the author distinguishes between the source of the invention and the execution. [64]

A supplement to the inventory was continued until 1659, perhaps even until the death of the archduke in 1662. Two pictures by Frans Mieris the Elder [65] prove that even after his return to Vienna, Leopold Wilhelm kept close watch on artistic events in the Netherlands and bought the newest works, even of very young artists. Characteristically, in this case the artist is a "Fijnschilder," whose minute style in small format particularly appealed to the archduke's taste.

Increasingly ill, Leopold Wilhelm set his estate in order. In his testament of 1662 [66] (which therewith invalidated the older one of 1651), he bequeathed his art collection to the young emperor Leopold I and the rest of his estate to the latter's younger brother, the 13-year-old archduke Karl Joseph (1649-1664). At the General Chapter of the Order of Teutonic Knights in 1662, Karl Joseph was elected coadjutor and therefore successor of Leopold Wilhelm as Grand Master of the Teutonic Order; in addition, he assumed nominal succession in the dioceses of Passau and Olmütz. Archduke Leopold Wilhelm died on November 20, 1662.

His gallery was incorporated into the imperial collection, of which it constituted the principal part from that point on. [67] Though over the centuries it has been reduced to only about half its original size, the collection of Leopold Wilhelm may still be seen even today in the Gemäldegalerie of the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna.

FOOTNOTES