The question of the collections and furnishings found in Wallenstein's palaces and residences has yet to be dealt with exhaustively by contemporary research. Not unlike the imperial collections of Rudolf II, Wallenstein's collections were also afflicted by a series of confiscations and war plunderings. Therefore, in the attempt to arrange a renewed picture of these collections one will need to search for single items and collections of which there are only scarce and inaccurate mentions in the sources. [1]

This essay limits itself to the collections of the Wallenstein Palace in Prague, as we learn about them through the prism of the so called Confiscation Inventory written between March 6-9, 1634 (immediately after Wallenstein's execution in Cheb on February 25, 1634). The Inventory was written by two imperial agents (agents of the Czech Chamber), Johann Opitz von Ehrenstein and Marco Ciochi (Ciocca). The Inventory is a fascinating but also an isolated written account to help us characterise objectively Wallenstein's relationship towards fine arts, his personal taste and his part in deciding the final shape of what we could call "Wallensteinian" fine arts and architecture, or in a broader sense, the historical climate of the time. [2] In the future, it will be necessary to devote maximum attention to the circumstances of the Inventory's origin and to undertake a really complex analysis of this unique source.

In the days between Wallenstein's execution and March 6, the palace was also allegedly visited by Colonel Walmerode and his soldiers, probably in search of Wallenstein's treasure. [3] In the Inventory itself, we find indication that some rooms and pieces of furniture were sealed by the agents of Lieutenant-Colonel Suys: "sealed by order of Baron de Suys' commissioners". [4]

The Inventory is very detailed and registers the entire area, including the Wallenstien Palace (main building), Page Court and Riding School, then proceeding back through the Stables towards the main building with cellars to the neighbouring house of Jan of Feld, where the Kitchen was located. The Inventory ends with a register of the Garden and the Gardener's Room adjoining the Page Court. In spite of its large volume and statement in the title "Inventarium aller Mobilia" - Inventory of all movables, there are doubts as to its completeness. [5]

Apart from Wallenstein and his wife Isabella of Harrach, the palace was residence of his cousin, Maximilian, Count of Harrach, and his wife, Catherine of Harrach (Isabella's sister) and probably, on certain occasions, of other people who are mentioned in the Inventory and who belonged to Wallenstein's "Hofstaat". Count Pavel of Liechtenstein was the Chief Court Master, Julius of Hardegg was Master of Stables. [6] The Chief Armourer was Colonel Filip Bedrich Breuner. [7] Chief Chamberlain was Count of Dietrichstein. [8] "Herr Sitt" mentioned in the Inventory is probably Johann Caspar Sitt of Arnau auf Streittburgk, Chamber Councilor to Wallenstein and a burgher of Prague, who was responsible for Wallenstein's residence in Ji ín. We do not know the people mentioned in other functions in the Inventory by name: "Edelknabenhofmeister", "Praecepter der Edelknaben", "Zahlmeister", "Truchsas". Indirectly, we learn even more names: Steward "Wirth" Paul Schwertner, Building Scribe "Bauschreiber" Mattes Florye von Lambstein and Gardener "Ziergärtner" Hanns Wobott. Herr von Ausche and the valet to Isabella Harrach, Antoni, cannot be identified. With the analysis of historical collections, the greatest importance among the persons just mentioned belongs to Colonel Breuner, whose name is associated with information about a large number of guns in the palace (115 rifles and some pieces of armour). [9] The importance of the Inventory is stressed by the fact that the palace was later only slightly changed and it is therefore possible to "synchronise" the data of the Inventory with the ground plan of the building. [10] The Inventory was written with respect to a certain hierarchy and to a given functional definition of each room, although it might not always have agreed with the actual "state" of the interiors (e.g., the Inventory mentions the bedroom of the Duchess, although it does not mention that there was any bed in the room). Some rooms were left out - probably there were no objects to register (among them the Main Hall, the Upper, so called Astrological Corridor, Oratory of the Duchess, etc.) The authors of the Inventory knew - or were told - how the house was used and made this a principle for their procedure. First they listed the representation rooms, then Wallenstein's apartment, the apartment of his wife on the floor above, then Maximilian's apartment back on the first floor, his wife's apartment on the second floor and finally the rooms of Wallenstein's daughter Elisabeth on the second floor. The Inventory then goes on with closets on the third floor, which are connected by vertical access to rooms below, for instance with the apartments of both ladies. [11] The Inventory goes on with the wing of the stables (7 rooms) and with the four-winged page building. The last building of the area on the east side was the Riding School. The Inventory then goes back under the pages' rooms, where there were two smaller stables and a room that could be described - in analogy to the Prague Castle - as the Saddle Room ("Sattelkammer"). Then the Inventory returns through the main stables and back to the main building, this time on the ground floor and basement level. Under Wallenstein's apartment were his closet - "Unterstätte Quarderoba" - and the bathroom, "Badstuben". The next rooms listed are the Kitchen in the House of Jan of Feld, "Loggia", grottoes, fountains and statues in the garden and Gardener's house, and the carriage area - "Gschierrhof". Let us now proceed to individual artistic collections.



Paintings

The portraits of statesmen, which we found at the very beginning of the Inventory, can be explained as official, politically motivated pictorial decoration. In the Knight Chamber, "In Herzogs Ritterstuben", we find "Ihr kays. May. und Kayserin ganz Contrefait", i.e. full-length portraits of the Emperor Ferdinand II and his wife. Following the logic of Emperor - King hierarchy, in the next interior "Anti-Kammer" there are " Ihr königl. May. und Königin ganz Contrefait", i.e. full-length portraits of Emperor's son Ferdinand III. and his wife. We find the same historical personalities in the same hierarchical sequence repeated in the northern wing, in the rooms leading to Wallenstein's study (accessible from the main staircase); this time, the portraits are listed in the Inventory as "...halbe Contrefait", half-length paintings. This reflects the lesser importance of this second entrance way to the Duke's apartment as well as the fact that these interiors are smaller than those just described in the southern wing (where the main "representational" axis was).

As far as the pictorial decoration of the palace is concerned, the Inventory mentions still portraits in the apartment of Wallenstein's wife - in her audience room there were portraits of Spanish King Philip IV (?), Archduke Leopold and his wife, another Archduke Leopold, the archbishop of Passau, and daughters of Emperor Ferdinand II, probably Marie Ann (1610-1665) and Cecily (1611-1644). The authors of the Inventory mention explicitly that these were full-length portaits, so that a room of 7,3 x 16,6 m with four windows and four doors must have been quite overcrowded with paintings. We could also consider a "politically motivated" way of hanging the paintings, because the people portrayed here are politically less significant than those on the first floor. In the room adjoining Isabella's bedroom, the Inventory mentions yet another painting, showing Virgin Mary. Some of the portraits, including idealised portraits of Wallenstein's predecessors, have been preserved in the palace till today. It is likely that the portrait of Ferdinand III is identical with the one registered in the Duke's apartment.

An antiquity-based program, most visible in the choice of iconography for the statues in the Garden, probably manifested itself also in the palace interiors. In the first two rooms of the representational axis, the Inventory mentions a twelve-piece cycle of paintings (in each) - "Heidnischer Kaiser Contrfait, Heidnischer Kaiserin Contrfait" - portraits of antique Emperors and Empresses. This fact suggests two things: firstly, the paintings must have been hanging over the wall coverings and, secondly, their size must have been quite limited - either they were just heads or half-length pictures. Such a sequence of Roman Emperors and Empresses must have had its programmatic justification. The idea of later imperial halls and imperial rooms, Kaiserzimmern, a vital part of Baroque castles and monasteries, is already present here, especially in the interiors with the most formal, official function. We can find another "pagan painting", i.e. painting with a mythological scene, in the apartment of the Duchess. A third large group of paintings, called "Landscapes" in the Inventory, might or might not have fit into the artistic program of the palace. Their concentration in the study (14 paintings) and the adjoining bedroom of Wallenstein (8 paintings) suggests that these might have been war scenes featuring single battles of the Thirty Years War. [12] Such a series of war scenes is to be found in the Harrach picture gallery in Rohrau Castle near Vienna. The large-scale paintings, attributed to Peeter Snayers (1592-1667), depict (according to inscriptions in the middle top part) various battle scenes in the "Czech War" - Pisec en Boheme 1619, Horn 1619, Wienn 1619, Prachatitz en Boheme 1620, Prespurg en Ongrie 1621. The battle at Písek between the imperial army and the army of the Estates was fought on September 26, 1619, at Vienna on November, 27-29, 1619, at Horn on September, 13, 1620, (the date mentioned on the painting is probably wrong) and at Prachatice October, 18-21, 1620. The battle at Bratislava was fought in June, 1621. The Snayers paintings, including a portrait of Karel Bonaventura Buquoy on horseback, commander of the imperial army at that time, could have possibly come to the Harrach collection after the marriage of Marie Catharina, Countess Buquoy, to Count Carl Anton Harrach in 1719. [13] If we take into account that both Wallenstein's wife Isabella (1601-1654) and her sister, Catherine, wife of Maximilian of Wallenstein, came from this family, it is natural that one could seek objects from Prague in the property of the family later on, as is the case of Wallenstein's reputed dagger that is kept at Rohrau with the tell-tale description: "Stachdegen Wallensteins, gefunden auf dem Sarg von Isabella, Gräfin Harrach" - "Wallenstein's dagger, found on the coffin of Isabella, Duchess Harrach." In addition to Buquoy, Wallenstein too took part in the battles depicted in the paintings. Snayers later painted a series of further victorious battles for another imperial commander, Octavio Piccolomini, of which the monumental Battle at Thionville in 1639 is found in the collection of the Náchod Castle.

As far as the pictorial decoration of the so called Main Stable is concerned, we find ourselves on unfamiliar ground. Under the title "Im Hauptstall" (in the Main Stable), the Inventory mentions only a single detail: "Eiserne Raffen 34 Stuck" (iron manger/crib, 34 pieces). The mangers have not been preserved in the palace. They were placed in niches, only some of which are still visible in the stable today, and the rest could probably be found in the brick lining. However, three surviving drawings of the stable, made in February 1654 [14], show us the shape of the manger. The first drawing is the front view of the southern wall of the stable, corresponding to one unit of the vault, the second drawing shows the same section of the stable as a perspective view from a slight bird's-eye viewpoint. The third drawing is the ground plan of the stable, from which the placement of the niches is clearly visible, as well as the fact that the horses were standing only along the southern wall. These plans are just twenty years younger than the Confiscation Inventory. In spite of this, a comparison of these two sources poses a problem. In the perspective drawing, one can see an oblong picture of a horse in profiled frame above the niche. In the front-view drawing, there is an empty square above the niche. Apart from the drawings, we have an important testimony of a visitor, who saw the palace only a couple years later. J.M. Schottky [15] quotes the work of an English traveler, Edward Brown, published in Nürnberg in 1685. "...obendrauf aber hängt das Gemälde von dem Pferde in Lebensgröße, und sein Name und Vaterland geschrieben - Monte d'Oro, Belledonna, Espagnoletta, Masquerido oder das Allerliebste..." - "Above it hangs the life-sized painting of the horse, with its name and country written on it - Monte d'Oro, Belledonna, Espagnoletta, Masquerido or Best-Loved..." Another palace visiter, Nicodemus Tessin [16] who came to Prague in May, 1688, did not remark on the pictorial decoration of the stable, and, Tessin being an architect, he was more brief in his characteristics of the palace though the paintings might still have been there. What is important in Tessin's description is his overall evaluation of the stable's architecture: "Der Stall ist sehr hoch undt schön..." - "The Stable is very high and beautiful" - telling us among other things, that the pillars between stalls and mussels under niches were of brown marble. [17] In the space of 59 x 8,6 m, the stalls for horses were located only along the southern wall and their number - 34 - ist exactly twice the number of the vault lunettes. The arrangement of the stalls was bound to the architecture of the stable with a complicated pattern of stucco vault. According to the ground plan, there was a fire place at the shorter, eastern wall. The entrance is exactly in the middle of the southern wall, and the windows of this wall bring enough light into the interior. The fact that the Swedish ruler was so interested in the architectural form of Wallenstein's Stable and that he had the above mentioned drawings sent to him is an importance thing when considering the role of this interior. The fact that no paintings of horses are mentioned in the Inventory could be explained by assuming that their frame was a steady part of the wall or that they were frescoes like those in the Chapel, in the Astrological Corridor, etc. When compared to reality, the drawings prove inprecise in placement of the niches that are put on the axis of each vault field. From today's situation, two niches are in one vault field. It is therefore not clear whether the paintings were above each of the niches or only in each of the vault fields, which seems more probable. Then, we would have a hypothetical number of 17 paintings. The paintings could have also hung on the opposite northern wall, so that this number cannot be final. The English traveler talks about life-sized portraits of horses, so that it is more likely that in each lunette was one large painting, much larger than as shown on the drawings of the Swedish author. [18]

The source of inspiration for such a unique portrait gallery is possibly the famous hall "La sala dei Cavalli" in Palazzo del Te in Mantua. In the Mantua palace, each horse is also identified: "Battaglia, Dario, Morel favorito, Glorioso...". [19] Because of the theme of the paintings one can assume that they were the work of artists active in Prague. We know that Prague painters Ambrosius Fritsch and Jan Schlemüller worked for Wallenstein; the paintings could of course have also been a work of Baccio Bianco, the main painter of the palace. In any case, the cycle of horse portraits presents a striking typological innovation in Central Europe, which then influenced the numerous cycles of animal paintings (horses, dogs) at Baroque castles in Bohemia and Moravia.

The last work that needs to be mentioned is the altar painting, Murder of St. Wenceslas, in the chapel. The Inventory mentions only Großer altar mit Bild 1 Stuck - Large altar with painting 1 piece - so that it does not include the large painting of Apotheosis of St. Wenceslas in the altar extension, which must have been an integral part of the altar from the very beginning. According to Zden k Wirth, the painting is stylistically a work of Schlemüller, who was probably author of the altar in the chapel at Ji ín. [20] The stylistic comparison of the altar painting with the frescoes in the chapel, depicting also the St. Wenceslas Cycle, supports a hypothesis that Baccio Bianco was also author of the painting. The typus of the main figure and his clothes are in both cases almost identical. The outstanding artistic quality of the altar ensures Baccio Bianco a priviledged position in the development of Czech Baroque painting. The fact that the saint's death depicted at the altar coincides with the way Wallenstein himself was murdered remains a play of fate - a different scene for the main altar would have been very unlikely.



Wall coverings

The most frequent item among the movables of the palace, which we can even count, were the leather wall coverings. If we consider the untypical specification of 171 wall coverings in "Junge Herzogin Ritterstuben" - "Knight's Chamber of the Young Duchess" - as a mistake and read the data of the Inventory as "Tapezerey klein und groß 17 + 1 Stuck", then we arrive at a total number of 154 wall coverings in the palace. The leather wall coverings were decorating most rooms of the palace's apartments and the only "competition" to them were woven tapestries from the Netherlands. A typical item from the Inventory, "Blau und Goldt wenedisch Lederne tapezerey" - "Blue and gold Venetian leather wall covering" - suggests that these were pressed, gilded wall coverings with a predominantly blue backround. This color scheme can be hypothetically (as all scholars notice) derived from the coat-of-arms colors of the Wallenstein family. The only exception was Duke Maximilian's bedroom, where red color is mentioned. The description "Venetian" does probably not describe the provenience of the wall coverings. At the Prague Castle, there were wall coverings from Flanders [21] and we also know of Spanish wall coverings. The Inventory does not give enough evidence and it also leaves us in doubt as to the size of the wall coverings. The very fact that they were included in the Inventory suggests their "movability". Indeed, the fact that they could be at any moment taken down from the walls and removed proved fatal later on. In spite of this, one can assume from the characteristic data about the various rooms that these were not typical small squares or rectangles (measuring about one ell, such as can be found in museum collections today), because then the wall could not have been completely covered. For instance, the Duke's study had a perimeter of 21 m and had nine "large" wall coverings. One can then assume that these coverings were bands, or stripes, whose height corresponded with the height of the room to the cornice or ceiling (about 4 m) and whose width might have been about 2 - 2,5 m. This calculation corresponds with all the rooms in which wall coverings were hanging. It is interesting that the number of wall coverings is identical in rooms that are located above each other in the palace. The Inventory reference to "große und kleine" - "large and small wall coverings" - in a room, is likely just one or two small ones that we can imagine hanging above the doors as supraports. Today there is practically nothing left in Prague of this stately number of wall coverings that created luxurious decoration of sixteen large palace interiors. The only room which has leather wall coverings today - the Knight's Chamber on the first floor - was in Wallenstein's time decorated by tapestries and the contemporary arrangement dates from 1866-1867, when the interior was painted by Petr Maixner. [22] They were created by joining small rectangular pieces with repeating floral and zoo-morph motives. The rhombi pressed in the background could have had a different color in the past and the wall coverings could have been part of the original decoration of the palace. In any case, every clarification of the fate of Wallenstein's wall coverings will be an important contribution to scholarly research.



Tapestries

The Confiscation Inventory is an irreplaceable if unfortunately incomplete source for the analysis of the furnishings of the Prague Palace. In the case of tapestries we have to refuse from the very beginning ideas about the fanstastically large number of them in the palace. When J. Bla#z#ková speaks about 180 pieces, already the topography of the palace resists such a number. It is clear that tapestries and leather wall coverings belonged to the standard equipment of the rooms - by locating the Inventory within the palace and by considering the size of the tapestries, one can deduce their number with higher probability.

The fate of Wallenstein's tapestries was, again, similar to that of the famous collections of Rudolf II - the palace was plundered by the soldateska of the Swedish king Koenigsmarck at the same time as the Prague Castle (1648). Similarly to the Rudolphinian collection, we face the problem of having the original Inventory but an empty building.

In the Inventory, the tapestries appear as "Gewürgte Niderlandische Tepezerey" - "Woven Dutch Tapestries" - and are further specified "mit unterschiedtliche großen Figuren" - "with figures of various size" - in the case of the Knights Chamber, "with small figures" in the Ante-Chamber, "with figures" in the room next to the Oratorium of the Duke, and "large" in the Ante-Chamber of Wallenstein's daughter, or left without further specification. On the first floor, there were ten pieces hanging on the walls of the Knight's Chamber, and seven pieces in the southern Ante-Chamber and in the northern anteroom near the staircase outside of the Duke's private rooms. In case of the second floor, the data supplied by the Inventory is less precise. Like on the first floor, they were in the anteroom of Wallenstein's daugher. However, the entry "gewirkte tapezerei, große - 58" - "woven tapestry, large, 58 pieces" - is too high. Maybe there was a transcription mistake and it should have been "large and small = 5 + 8". Another specification in the Inventory: "schlechte Tapezerei = 3" could mean a second possibility, namely that the tapestries were not hung but rolled and stored while the palace inhabitants were absent. Apart from this the Inventory mentions the tapestries only twice more: in the rooms above the Main Stable (twice at 5 pieces), i.e. rooms that were used to accomodate prominent courtiers or guests. If we add the data from the Inventory, we arrive at the number 47. [23] Our result differs strongly from the 180 mentioned by J. Bla ková, the only scholar so far who has dealt with Wallenstein tapestries. [24] Even though her result has to be refused, the Wallenstein tapestry collection was by no means insignificant. Therefore, it is even more fortunate that a small number of them could be found and that it is quite likely that more objects will be identified in the future, especially in the collection of the Swedish general Wrangel in Skokloster, where, as some sources say, a part of the war booty was taken. This collection includes about 17 tapestries, the date of origin and subject of which corresponds with those assumed for the Wallenstein palace (Cyrus and Kroesus, Trojan War, Alexander Great). J. Bla ková tried to find Wallenstein's tapestries based on a photograph of the anteroom in the southern wing. Recently, a complete collection of old photographs of the palace from the end of the 19th century by Jindrich Eckert was discovered, and the number of identified tapestries rose to 9 pieces (today they are located at Veltrusy and Libochovice Castles in the Czech Republic).

Because of the character of the tapestries that were covering the walls entirely and making the rooms warmer they were usually made in series. Wallenstein's tapestries are a part of the Decius Mus Cycle, which is based on the VII. Book of Titus Livius' History of Rome. In 340 B.C., during the war between the Romans and the Latins, in the war camp near Capua, the two consuls, Titus Manclius and Decius Mus, had an identical dream. They saw a man of superhuman size who told them that only that army could win whose general would die in the battle. The consuls asked the haruspices for a prophecy. Decius Mus was then induced by the priests to the Gods of the Underworld and to the Goddess Earth. At the battle of Veseris under MountVesuvius he fell under the enemy's arrows.

The designs for the Decius Mus Cycle were created by Petr Paul Rubens on commission of the Pallavicini family from Genua, probably in 1616. The first tapestries according to these designs, today in Liechtenstein, were woven in Brussel's workshops in 1618. Rubens drew a total of 8 scenes, which were later modified, connected, divided etc. In Wallenstein Palace there are 4 scenes evident in the photographs - in the first one Decius Mus tells his soldiers about his decision to sacrifice himself for the country (in the main hall), in the second Decius Mus is being initiated to the Gods of the Underworld and in the third is the battle under Mount Vesuvius. Only a small portion of the fourth scene (in the anteroom) is visible and is insufficient to be identified accurately. J. Bla#z#ková identified only the Initiation to the Gods and dated it in 1630, with Antwerp as place of origin.

In case the tapestries were really commissioned by Wallenstein or for him, we would face one more example of personification that can be observed in the palace - e.g. Wallenstein as Mars on the fresco in the Main Hall and the Astronomical Corridor, as Neptun in the Sala Terrena and, through his first names, as St.-Wenceslas and Albrecht in the Chapel and the Oratory. The theme, topos of the altruistic general, sacrificing himself for the good fortune of the country, might shed new light on Wallenstein's contradictory character, where playing with death, dreamy visions and prophecies belong like the second side of a coin to his rational coldness, calculation and military ruthlessness.

In the 19th century there were at least two more tapestries in Wallenstein's study, although in the photograph one can identify only the topic of the one on the left (on the Western wall), which is Salomo's trial. This tapestry made in Brussels around 1600 shows Salomo and two women with an already older child, which the King wisely reunited with his real mother, as we can read in the First Book of Kings (3, 16-29). This Old Testament allegory of wise rule and wise decision-making is also in good harmony with the assumed artistic program of the palace and the specific interior. In this case it is also high-quality artwork (today at Libochovice Castle) as well as evidence of the taste of the commissioner, who, considering the high prices of these tapestries, must have been extremely generous in financial matters. Let us go back to the question of the tapestry topics as shown in the Inventory and pose a hypothesis, which might prove likely. The Inventory makes a distinction between tapestries with "large figures" and those with "small figures" - this might correspond to the difference between older tapestries form the time around 1600, where the figures appear much larger than in the "contemporary" tapestries, like those of the Decius Mus Cycle, where the figure proportions diminished substantially. There is, however, data from the Knights Chamber where figures were of various sizes - these might have been two series of tapestries of different date. The straightforward language of the imperial agents is of course far remote from specialised descriptions, for which we would be very grateful. Therefore all the more that we should "listen" to the tone of these extraordinary sources. The words "large" and "small" are used mostly to differentiate sizes of picture and wall coverings. It seems that with tapestries the notion was that - because it is an object of "visual" art - one needs to describe the "content" too, not just the size. The provenience "Netherlandish" corresponds to what we found out, even though this term in 17-th century inventories might have meant tapestries in general rather than a place of origin.

As a sort of aperçu to this excursus we can quote two details from studies of Z. Wirth [25], where he states, without mentioning the source, that Wallenstein himself asked his agent Hans de Witte in 1630 to buy in the Netherlands tapestries for the castle in Ji ín, and apart form number, size and date, he also determined their topic: historical scenes.

FOOTNOTES