Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Re-dressing the nation : Allotria’s 1876 Festzug Karl V and late nineteenth century Munich art practices Wieber, Sabine 1996

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_1996-0611.pdf [ 16.77MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0087812.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0087812-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0087812-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0087812-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0087812-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0087812-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0087812-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

RE-DRESSING T H E NATION: ALLOTRIA'S 1876 FESTZUG KARL V AND L A T E NINETEENTH C EN TU R Y MUNICH ART PRACTICES by SABINE WIEBER B.A., The University of British Columbia, 1994 A THESIS SUBMITTED TN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE F A C U L T Y OF G R A D U A T E STUDIES (Department of Fine Arts) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October 1996 © Sabine Wieber, 1996 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT The time span between Germany's unification in 1871 and the onset of World War I in 1914 provided a very fertile ground for both avant-garde and state-supported modes of artistic production. Yet, while the new Reich was perceived by the outside as having brought unity to Germany's formerly fractured agglomeration of individual states, the nation was actually marked by internal rifts, tensions and competing aspirations. Munich was an important center for art and culture during this period. By the 1870's its well known Royal Academy attracted a large body of international students, including a considerable number from North America. Munich was also renown as an art center at this time as it was the nexus for numerous artist groups organized under both national and regional auspices. Allotria, formed in 1873, was the local artist society which, due to the prominence of many of its members as academic professors, was recognized as Munich's pre-eminent group. This institutional body provided a social space that encouraged an informal but important intersection of artists and "friends of the arts." In other words, the promotion of a common social life between sectors of the upper echelons of Munich society and academic and independent artists was one of Allotria's key objectives. Allotria's 1876 artist festival the Feslzug Karl Vbecame a highly visible event that was viewed as central to Munich's artistic pre-eminence in numerous newspaper and journal accounts of the time. This study will address the ways in which this particular festival could be read on one level as signifying a specific national identity by evoking a period of unity through reference to Charles V and the Holy Roman Empire. I will also explore how a northern Renaissance visual vocabulary carefully manipulated in the festival and in the different representations that circulated before and after its staging, could be interpreted as working to contest these very notions. It is thus, tensions and discontinuities within the festival's seemingly homogenizing references and visual vocabulary that this study is interested in tracing out. How could Munich's artists and upper classes represent themselves as heirs to a particular Germanic tradition and therefore, as supporters of the new nation while also laying claim to their threatened position of cultural superiority with the new Reich? What import did the northern Renaissance idiom have at this specifc socio-political juncture and how did various rhetorical strategies specific to different modes of representation functioning within this cultural practice and its re-presentations serve to rationalize particular kinds of regional patronage systems and artistic practices by Allodia's academic and independent artists? Ultimately, I will argue that the festival's re-enacting of an historic event that took place during Germany's last experience of unity as an European power, was neither a nostalgic turning to the past nor simply a means to establish a genealogy that linked Munich's citizens to what was now a celebrated moment in the context of a only recently formed German nation. Rather, I will examine how the artist festival of the Festzug Karl V served to facilitate active reworkings of this past that accommodated particular forms of self representation crucial to new market relations, to systems of patronage within Munich's modern middle class culture and to a new status of the artist assertively promoted by Allotria. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ii Table of Contents iv List of Figures v Acknowledgments viii Epitaph 1 Introduction 2 I The FestzugKarl V: Nation, City, and Art 12 i Articulating Allotria's 1876 festival 16 ii The Dilemma of Nation and Region 21 iii Art, Institutions, and the New Middle Class 23 II The FestzugKarl Fin the Contemporary Press 33 i The Traditions of Nineteenth Century Munich Artist Festivals 33 ii The Festzug Karl Vand Nineteenth Century Discourses on a German Renaissance 36 iii Festzug Re-presentations in Print 40 iv The Festzug and Munich's Burgertum 45 v Festzug Representations in Time and Space 52 vi The 1876 Fasching and the Carnivalesque 55 III The FestzugKarl V: Photography, Munich Art Practices, and Patronage Systems 61 i The New Medium of Photography 61 ii The Festzug and Photography 63 iii Photography and Nineteenth Century Discourses on a northern Renaissance 65 iv The Festzug Photographs and Community of Viewers 68 v The Festzug Photographs and Late Nineteenth Century Munich Art Patronage 71 vi The Festzug Karl V, Market Relations, and Munich's Malerfurslen 74 Conclusion 81 Bibliography 85 Figures 92 LIST O F FIGURES Fig. 1 Leo von Klenze, Odeon and Leuchtbergpalais against the Bazar, 1840. Copperplate Engraving. Munich: Stadtbibliothek, Monacensia-Abteilung. Source: Habel, Das Odeon in Miinchen, fig. 2. Fig. 2 Fr. August von Kaulbach, Lenbach and his Colleagues gathered in the Abenthum, 1886. Lithograph for the Lenbachiade, 16,9 x 23,7 cm. Munich: Stadtmuseum, Graphic Collection. Source: Grassinger, Munchner Feste und die Allotria, p. 58. Fig. 3 Carl von Piloty, Invitation to the Paul-Rubens Festival. 1857. Lithograph. Source: Grassinger, p. 35. Fig. 4 The Costume Festival of Munich's Artist Society Allotria, 1876. Xylograph published in Leipziger Illustrierte Zeitung, February 1876. Based on a drawing by E. Horstig, 35,5 x 49,9 cm. Munich: Stadtmuseum, Graphic Collection. Inventory Number 35/ 610. Fig. 5 Fr. August von Kaulbach, Invitation to Allotria's 1876 Artist-Costume-Festival \Kunstler-Maskenfest\, 1876. Lithograph, 34 x 29,6 cm. Munich: Stadtmuseum, Graphic Collection. Source: Franz von Lenbach, fig. 367. Fig. 6 Franz Widnmann, Admission Ticket to the Festzug Karl V, 1876. Source: Grassinger, p. 73. Fig. 7 Franz Hanfstaengl, Painter Franz von Lenbach in Costume from the Period of Charles V, 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Cologne: private collection. Source: Lenbach. fig. 403. Fig. 8 Friedrich Muller, Painter August von Kaulbach dressed as Emperor Charles V , 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. Source: Lenbach, fig. 402. Fig. 9 Franz Hanfstaengl. Eugen Hanfstaengl as Herold, 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. Source: Lenbach, fig. 394. Fig. 10 Friedrich Muller, Painter Claudius von Schraudolph in Armour and Pelt 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. Source: Lenbach, fig. 395. Fig. 11 Franz Hanfstaengl, Franz von Defregger as Albrecht Purer, 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. Source: Lenbach, fig. 396. Fig. 12 Franz Hanfstaengl, C. von Schraudolph as Lansquenet with Sword for two Hands \BihdnderJA876. Cabinet Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. vi Source: Lenbach, fig. 397. Fig. 13 Franz Hanfstaengl, Franz von Seitz dressed as a Turkish Commander, 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. Source: Lenbach, fig. 398. Fig. 14 Franz Hanfstaengl, Rudolf von Seitz with his Wife and Daughter: costumed a la Holbein, 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. Source: Lenbach, fig. 399. Fig. 15 Franz Hanfstaengl, Architect Georg von Hauberrisser and Wife, dressed as a northern Renaissance Tradesmen and his Wife. 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. Source: Lenbach. fig. 400. Fig. 16 Schulz and Suck, Painter Eduard Teimer and Wife from Karlsruhe. 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. Source: Lenbach. fig. 401. Fig. 17 Friedrich Muller. Lady in Costume from the Period of Charles V. 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Cologne: Private Collection. Source: Lenbach. fig. 404. Fig. 18 Friedrich Muller, Unkown Lady, costumed as a 16th Century Biirserinn, 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Cologne: Private Collection. Source: Lenbach. fig. 406. Fig. 19 Lolo von Hornstein. dressed as Holbein's Daughter as depicted in "Madonna des Biierermeisters Meyer", 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Cologne: Private Collection. Source: Lenbach. fig. 378. Fig. 20 Franz Hanfstaengl, Fighting Scene of Five Men in altdeutschen Costumes, 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. Source: Lenbach. fig. 408. Fig. 21 Friedrich Muller. Jester, 1876. Cabinet Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. Source: Lenbach, fig. 409. Fig. 22 Rudolph Kuppelmayr, Costume Design for the Festzug Karl V, 1876. Pencil, Feather and Water Color, 31,3 x 38,5 cm. Munich: Stadtmuseum, Graphic Collection. Source: Grassinger, p. 81. Fig. 23 Ludwig Herterich, Costume Design for the Festzug Karl V, 1876. Pencil, Feather and Water Color. Munich: Stadtmuseum, Graphic Collection. Source: Grassinger, p. 80. Fig. 24 Friedrich August von Kaulbach, Costume Design for the Festzug Karl V, 1876. Pencil and Water Color, 29,9 x 18,8 cm. Munich: Stadtmuseum, Graphic Collection. Source: Lenbach, fig. 388. i vii Fig. 25 Heinrich Lossow, Costume Design for the Festzug Karl V. 1876. Pencil and Water Color, 36,7 x 22,4 cm. Munich: Stadtmuseum, Graphic Collection. Source: Lenbach. fig. 387. Fig. 26 Ferdinand Theodor Hildebrandt, Per Krieger und sein Kind. 1832. Oil on Canvas, 104 x 92 cm. Berlin: Staatliche Museen PreuBischer Kulturbesitz/ Nationalgalerie. Source: Peters, Stilgeschichte der Fotographie in Deutschland. fig. 225. Fig. 27 Renaissance Beauty. 1864. Photograph. Munich: Stadtmuseum. Source: Peters, fig. 227. Fig. 28 Einer. der Edler wurde. 1899. Caricature from Munich's Fliegende Blatter. Source: Dangl, Die Fliegenden Blatter als Spiegel ihrer Zeit, p. 76. viii A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S I am indebted to the University of British Columbia for its financial support through a University Graduate Fellowship which enabled me to focus on my studies and thesis research. I would like to thank my thesis advisors Dr. Maureen Ryan and Dr. Rose Marie San Juan for their generous support and encouragement throughout this project. I was able to benefit from their astute criticism, helpful suggestions, and painstaking scrutiny. Our numerous conversations have not only enriched my ways of thinking about issues and problems related to this thesis but continuously re-invigorated my interest in art history. I should like to thank my fellow graduate students and all other faculty of the department for many stimulating discussions in our seminars and for all their generosity throughout these past two years. Lastly, I would like to dedicate this thesis to my great-aunt Hedwig Englbrecht whose stories have brought the Munich of the turn of the century to life and who has inspired and supported me from the beginning of this journey. ! "Festivals are like a bright butterfly: How much time, how much hardship and how much preparation is required to give splendor and joy to one evening, when within a few hours all the magic evaporates to be gone forever. "x 1 Karl Salzle, "Das Leben im Fest," Ein Halbes Jahrhundert Munchner Kulturgeschichte (Munich: Thiemig, 1959) 139. 2 Introduction In late January of 1876, Germany's leading art journal Die Kunstchronik published the following announcement which heralded not only the first artist festival to be held in over a decade, but one where 16th century costumes that referred to the reign of the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, were to be requested of participants: "Kunstlermaskenfest in Munich. Munich has not witnessed a large scale artist-carnival festival (Kunstler-Carnevals-Fest) .in thirteen years. It is thus very good to hear that Allotria, a society composed of artists, took it upon herself to organize a costume ball in the grand hall of the Odeon on February 19th, just like the earlier immensely popular and sought after artist festivals. The main part of the festival will be a procession, for which costumes from the first part of the 16th century were chosen. This procession will be lead by Charles V and his substantial court... Committees formed of artists such as Defregger, Fliiggen, Gedon, Fr. Kaulbach, Lenbach, Reinherz, K. Seitz and Wagmuller will oversee the execution of this undertaking. We have learned that they plan to allow participation only if dressed in costumes of the aforementioned period; however, we doubt that they will be able to succeed with such project.1 As it turned out, Allotria, the Munich based artist society which had organized the Festzug Karl V, enforced the stipulation of mandatory 16th century costume, and the event was subsequently extolled by newspaper and magazine accounts as one of Munich's most lavish and successful artist festivals. The 1876 Festzug Karl V brought together Munich's leading academic artists, delegates from other nationwide artist organizations, prominent members of Munich society, and figures from the Bavarian royal court. Taking place during a period of social, economic, and political transition that followed Germany's unification in 1871, the festival at its broadest and most general level, offers crucial insights into Munich's daedalian Kunstpolitik1 and into the politicization of art and culture in Imperial Germany. As part of a larger strategy to re-assert Munich's status as a cultural metropolis, numerous memoirs, letters, novels and Festschriften coming out of late nineteenth century Munich, underscore the city's multifold artistic fabric and ascribe particular eminence to its lavish artist festivals.3 Given both the obvious import of this form of cultural practice to Munich's artistic reputation and the central role ascribed to such festivals in fashioning identity, this study will set out to investigate the significance of Allotria's re-imagining of a Renaissance past to Munich's artists, their art practices, and to their attendant market relations and patronage systems. As I will trace out in this thesis, the Festzug's re-staging of Emperor Charles V's historical passing through Munich in 1530, effectively opened up a range of different ways in which audiences could engage with the festival. A major focus of this study will be an examination of the revival of a northern Renaissance visual vocabulary in the many representations of the Festzug Karl Fand how this language could both forge and respond to specific notions of identity for its participants. In particular, I have been interested in ways in which the festival could intersect with contested and competing notions of nation in 1876. Several conceptualizations of the Festzug which circulated in contemporaneous newspaper accounts and art journals such as Kunstchronik and Zeitschrift fur Bildende Kunst directly linked the Festzug to debates concerning Germany's new status as nation. For example, art critic Sigmund Lichtenstein in addressing Allotrian artists' re-vival of a specifically Germanic form of the Renaissance, stressed in 1876, the importance to modern German art practice of the origins and legacies that could serve as an antidote to foreign influence: "Especially the German [artist] needs to be left alone with himself because too often does he forget his very own (ureigene) creative forces and legacies, especially when trying to dress in costumes of other Volker. Such a masquerade however, is the worst possible in relation to the creative field. ... He must not deny his own origins or else he will sink to a level of empty imitation of foreign conceptions."4 A particular subject of investigation explored in the following chapters will be the significance (and threat) of current concepts of nation to both artists and to a specific and increasingly self-conscious socio-economic group, Munich's Burgerlum. At the same time, I am also interested in assessing the ways in which an ephemeral event such as the 1876 festival, could work to contest the very notions of nation it set out to construct and image. It must be stated from the very outset that the ephemeral ity of the Kumllerfesl represents a challenge for this project. Exacerbating this problem in the case of the 1876 event, is the fact that many of Munich's archives were destroyed during the bombings of World War II resulting in the loss of important information on the 19th century. In particular, the extensive archive and historical collection of all Munich artist societies maintained by the Munchner Kiinstlergenossenschaft, is now lost. Through research in Munich however, I have been able to draw on a range of visual re-conceptualizations of the 1876 event. These include, the 4 representation of the artists' ball on an engraved invitation that was sent out to major artists and social figures who were associated with the festival (Fig. 5); a set of drawings that had been executed by academic artists and exhibited as guidance for the festival costume designs (Figs. 19-22); a graphically embellished admission ticket to the celebration (Fig. 6); a magazine xylograph depicting festival participants watching the re-enactment of a 16th century chivralic exercise that concluded the official procession of Emperor Charles V and which in turn, opened the festival ball (Fig. 4); and a collection of art photographs or Kabinett Pholographien, that showcased festival participants posing in the elaborate historical costumes that evoked the 16th century Renaissance period under Emperor Charles V (Figs.7-18). The visual artifacts that form the base of this investigation must be recognized as re-presentations of an event that already functioned as a representation of problematic and discontinuous historical events in the first place. Complicated and multifarious inter-relations were brought to the forefront by the festival's status as a nebulous and fleeting system of signification, and by its multiple representations which strove to release this practice from its local, immediate and ephemeral frame of reference. A guiding point informing my analysis, will be that no matter how punctiliously such translations into symbolic form were conceived by their producers, subsequent interpretations of visual signs, styles and symbols by audiences of varying viewing positions, are crucial to any understanding of the festival's significance and impact. A central tenet of this study is that the visual materials that represent the festival not only encompass a range of different media each with different viewerships and agendas, but that the various components of the festivals' representations also functioned at different moments in time. For example, and as will be developed more fully in the following chapters, the invitation and admission ticket (Figs. 5 and 6) served to entice potential participants with images of the event that differed significantly from those forwarded in the xylograph (Fig. 4) and photographs (Fig. 7-21) that summed up the Festzug as a series of memories. As I will be arguing, these various modes of representation and their distinct visual codes did not impose fixed meanings; rather they circulated among diverse audiences and promoted heterogeneous vantage points. It will become obvious that in the case of the Festzug Karl V, it is the interstices between festival 5 practice, visual representations and audience responses, that can be used to unveil some of the social tensions tied to class formation and national identity that were mediated by the 1876 event. So far, late 19th century Munich artist festivals have not been the subject of significant investigation. In light of this, Jacob Wolfs 1925 publication: Munchner Kunstlerfeste; Munchner Kunstlerchroniken has served as a standard reference on Munich Kunstlerfeste as a whole. Wolfs objective had been to chronicle all local 19th century artist festivals, not in terms of a critical analysis but as a form of nostalgic commemoration.5 However, his study is useful in that it includes many first-hand accounts of both the festivals themselves and of artists involved in their conception. It was only in 1986 that this important yet neglected cultural practice was investigated in a more critical fashion by German art historian Andreas Haus. Haus wrote an important entry for a 1986 exhibition catalogue accompanying a retrospective for Munich's most famous Malerfurst or princely painter, Franz von Lenbach. Haus' essay "Gesellschaft, Geselligkeit, Kunstlerfest,"6 is of interest in that it not only specifically addresses the Festzug Karl Fbut also registers a first attempt to connect Munich artist festivals to a broader socio-political framework. His investigation also has significance on another level. Given the length of Franz von Lenbach's office as Allotria's president from 1879 to 1904, Haus was able to use Lenbach's 'Allolria' archives to excavate some crucial dynamics between artist festivals, artist societies and individual artist personalities. Since my own study starts from the premise that the Festzug Karl V must be seen as both a function and active agent in a larger scope of social and political relations, Haus' work has been a valuable departure point for me. Ursula Peters is another art historian who has conjured up the Festzug within her larger study of 19th century photography Stilgeschichte der Fotographie in Deutschland 1839-1900.7 Peters should be credited with linking an important set of visual materials associated with the 1876 Festzug, the photographs of festival participants in northern Renaissance costumes, to late 19th century photographic historical genre scenes which were in themselves sought-after commodities. For a more general background on 19th century German festivals and processions, Wolfgang Hartmann 6 has been a ground breaking scholar. His 1976 publication Der Historische Festzug suggests reasons for the enormous popularity of historical processions and costume festivals in 19th century Germany while putting forth a more complex argument in place of the rather homogenizing concept of "historicity." While analysis of artist festivals has been limited, critical work on the artist society that organized the Festzug Karl Vis also lacking. Peter Grassinger's 1990 book Munchner Feste und die Allotria is the most recent publication to address this subject. Grassinger re-constructs Allolria's involvement in specific festivals and provides numerous valuable illustrations.8 Before Grassinger's endeavor, a chronological description of Allotria events had been compiled in the form of a commemorative Festschrift for Allotria by several authors in 1959. As part of this publication, historian and &\\OVJ-Allotrian Karl Salze contributed a survey of Allolria's 1876 festival which evocatively re-imagines some of the event's clutter and noise; its rustling costumes, rattling historical weapons and props, trumpet fanfares opening FesZ-speeches and comical poems, laughter, dancing and insoucient amusement. Yet, while providing valuable archival documentation, Salzle does not offer any discriminating or critical evaluation of the event's individual components. Aside from these two major publications, the artists group Allotria has found sporadic entry into art history through monographs on specific artists who had been members of the society. Invariably here, however, emphasis has been given to the particular artist's role within Allotria as opposed to any critical analysis or questioning of this institution. One point that clearly emerges from these studies is that research on 19th century Munich and its cultural practices has in great part been determined by what is in effect, a very local celebration of artists and of the art institutions within which they operated.9 It would seem that this focus has been encouraged by the larger political issue of Germany's strongly developed regionalism. In this context, historian James Sheehan has noted in a 1981 essay entitled "What is German History?" that "German local and regional [political and cultural] history is written and read by those in the locality itself." Sheehan has also argued that "such histories are of interest primarily to people who share the experiences of the Heimat [or homeland]."10 In short, Sheehan effectively points out that in 19th century Germany, allegiance to one's region generally preceded 7 that to the nation state.11 The ensuing study of the Festzug will by the nature of its subject, explore and raise some of the implications and contradictions inherent in such regional concerns. Several factors can be pointed to as having thwarted modern analyses of Munich art institutions and artist festivals in the 19th century. One has already been mentioned, namely that these practices were ephemeral events. A discipline that was conceived as a field of study for "Fine Arts" has been for the most part, resistant to the incorporation of cultural practices such as the Festzug. Only in the past twenty years or so, have formerly strict categories such as "high" and "popular" art been critiqued, their boundaries blurred or dismantled, and new methodologies been introduced. This study considers itself very much part of this re-dressing of art history. In the process however, it is not enough to merely foreground heretofore neglected media such as printed materials and photography. This study also details the relevance of exposing the real political implications that art historical and institutional categorizations have had and continue to have. It is within the ways of writing art history that a second reason for the discipline's neglect of artist festivals must be situated. Much art historical analysis of the 19th and 20th century has perpetuated a modernist argument focused on dissenting artists, movements and practices while leaving aside analysis of so-called academic art and conservative institutions. One result has been that the writing of an art history investigating 19th century art institutions, has been associated with problematic attempts to resurrect conservative official representation - that is the storage rooms full of canvases designated as "bad art" which such art organizations and institutions produced. This has had far reaching implications for studies of Munich's Allolria. Allolria was closely affiliated with Munich's art Academy and Munich's local chapter of the German Art Association ox Munchner Kiinstlergenossenschafl. The majority of members of both these organizations produced the forms of "official" art that was hugely successful in the 1870's and 80's century, but which have been increasingly scorned from 1892 onwards.12 This thesis does not seek to retrieve such institutional forms of representation although, many historians have instigated a reappraisal of neglected academic or mainstream artists on just such grounds over the past ten to fifteen years. 8 Rather, this study attempts to elucidate the complex set of structures and hierarchies around which the Munich art scene of the 1870's was organized and within which artists of all tenets operated. Studies of visual culture in particular in France and England, have set about this re-assessment. However, especially in the case of German art, extensive new research is required to carry out these kind of paradigm shifts.13 I see focusing on Munich's art system and a particular festival that was organized within it, as contributing to this necessary analysis of a larger field of relations and tensions. The present study then, sets out to investigate a cultural practice that articulated a complex set of identities through a range of representational forms. What emerges is that the interactions of Allotrian artists, festival participants and specific constituencies within Munich's art system were not always coherent. One of my key arguments is that while the Festzug Karl V and its visual representations were purported to anchor social and political identity within existing political and ideological structures, the resulting visual vocabularies and forms could actually contest the very notions the festival was understood to buttress. This mode of analysis comes out of a reading of cultural historians Michel Foucault, Michel de Certeau and Roger Chartier. Foucault's work, in itself diverse and discontinuous, figures importantly in this study in that he challenged traditional modes of writing history. Through specific investigations of the ways in which modern subjectivity was and is constituted, Foucault proposed a model of history that avoided and deliberately displaced homogenous meta-narratives and casualties. This study's interest in the multifold and heterogeneous power relations between various players in Munich's late 19th century art system is tied to Foucault's notions of discourse and practice. On a most basic level, Foucault's method investigates the sets of assumptions that categorize forms of knowledge and practices and in so doing, assesses the (re)production and circulation of meaning within social and institutional contexts.14 It is important to point out that contrary to Michel de Certeau, Foucault sees practice as en-webbed in discourse. If discourse can be defined as a "historically, socially, and institutionally specific structure of statements, terms, categories and beliefs"15 then, discursive practices refer not only to the set of rules which govern a discourse but 9 the "object enunciations and concepts or theoretical choices which that discourse constitutes."16 Art historian John Tagg expands on this, by describing discursive formations as heterogeneous spaces or "field[s] of material acts [and operations],"17 in which multiple networks of social practices and power relations are at play. By mapping out visual spaces of Festzug representations then, this study will examine the ways in which a range of discourses intersected with both the festival as a social practice and with the representations which gave it its many forms.18 However, Foucault himself has explored the relations between discursive forms of knowledge and power and has stated that "where there is power, there is resistance."19 Discursive terrains are always infiltrated with disruptions, manipulations and hybridizations and my investigation of the Festzug Karl Kwill take these into account. Of particular use here is the work of historian and theorist Roger Chartier. Chartier has noted in his essay "Texts, Printing, Readings," that "the acceptance of messages and models [discourses] always operates through adjustments, arrangements or resistances."20 Michel de Certeau's postulations of ways in which viewers or readers negotiate cultural productions are important to Chartier's work and have also been essential to this study. Discursive fields are not static and are thus always open to re-appropriation. As de Certeau has pointed out, users of culture - as opposed to producers of culture - can employ local tactics to disrupt and resist prescribed fields of knowledge and power.21 It is important to note that these disruptions are tactical in that they are "articulations of a place within [a] structure that is irreducible to it."22 While de Certeau sees practice as not reducible to discourse, this study positions itself as working in ways that incorporate the two. The Festzug's visual representations in this context, are seen as containing, limiting and permitting oftentimes fissured and contradictory practices which in turn, conjured up manifold and overlapping responses. In order to effectively lead the reader through what I pose as the most crucial issues around the 1876 Festzug Karl V, this thesis will be divided into three sections. Section I opens up an investigation of the festival procession and ball with its emphasis on the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, by looking at how contemporary news media presented the event. The festival's 10 relation to Germany's recent unification in 1871, issues bearing on national identity, and the significance of Munich's regional art institutions and societies will be introduced here. A brief discussion of Allolria's genesis, its agenda and its members concludes this Section. Some of the themes raised here will recur throughout the study and will be reconsidered in different perspectives in succeeding Sections. In Section II, the Festzug is contextualized within a tradition of festivals in Germany and the significances of a current re-appraisal of the German Renaissance are elaborated. Within this context, the representations associated with the Festzug, the preliminary drawings, the invitation and the engraved festival ticket are problematized by looking at their visual strategies and inter-relations. In illuminating some of the central contradictions and fissures evidenced in these forms, the visual vocabularies employed in relation to postulated audiences are explored in light of de Certeau's and Chartier's arguments that modes of readings can never be controlled. The important concept Burgertuin will also be considered in Section II as will be the challenges this new public's patronage posed to traditional art practices. Section III canvasses one more body of visual materials that emerged from the Festzug Karl V. Photographs of festival participants in elaborate Renaissance costumes are used to re-address how forms of nation, identity, and art patronage could intersect in relation to the festival. Section III focuses in on the role of academic artists in late 19th century Munich, their modes of production and the ways in which Munich's art market and patronage systems were maneuvered around the vested interests of the festival's particular constituencies. 11 ' "Kiinstlermaskenfest in Miinchen. Seit dreizehn Jahren sah Miinchen kein groBeres Kiinstler-Carnevals-Fest mehr. Um so erfreulicher ist es, daB die aus Kiinstlern bestehende Gesellschaft "Allotria" es unternommen hat, am 19. Februar 1876 im groBen Saale des k. Odeons ein Kostiim-Fest zu veranstalten., wie soche friiher auBerordentlich beliebt und gesucht waren. Der Haupttheil dieses Festes wird in einem Festzuge bestehen, fur den das Kostiim der ersten Halfte des 16. Jahrhunderts gewahlt ward. An der Spitze des Zuges wird sich Kaiser Karl V . befinden, und durch die verschiedenen Gruppen desselben reicher Wechsel herbeigefuhrt werden. An dem Unternehmen betheiligen sich als Komite-Mitglieder die Kunstler Defregger, Fltiggen, Gedon, Fr. Kaulbach, Reinherz, K. Seitz und Wagmiiller. Bis jetzt besteht zwar die Absicht, den Eintritt nur solchen Personen zu gestatten, die im Kostume der bezeichneten Zeit erscheinen; doch zweifelt man, ob dieses Vorhaben auch wird durchgefuhrt werden konnen." Kunstchronik 11, nr. 15, 21 Jan. 1876: 246. 2 Robert Jensen gives a succinct definition of this crucial 19th century concept in Marketing Modernism in Fin de Siecle Europe: "Kunstpolilik -a word favored by German writers and artists of the fin de siecle to describe the bickerings and the struggles over professional identity, over juries, art school appointments, and so on." (Princeton: Princeton UP, 1994) 12. 3 Such as Thomas Mann's novel Gladius Dei for example^ 4 "Gerade der Deutsche hat es nothig, manchmal ungestort mit sich allein gelassen zu werden, weil es ihm nur zu haufig begegnet, daB er seine ureigene Schopferkraft vergiBt, um sich in das geistige Kostiim anderer Volker zu verkleiden. Eine solche Maskerade ist aber auf dem Gebiete des SchafFens das Unheilvollste, was es gibt ... Er darfF seine eigene Urspriinglichkeit nicht verleugnen, wenn sie nicht zur bedeutungslosen Nachafferin fremder Schopfungen herabsinken will." Zeitschrift fur Bildende Kunst 11 (1876): 37; see also Kunstkronikl 1. 5 Incidentally, Jacob Wolf was a Munich native and it can be argued that in 1925, when Berlin's art community had firmly established Berlin as Germany's leading artistic center, Wolfs chronicle on one level, represented a longing for Munich's former glory as the Empire's cultural metropolis. 7 Andreas Haus, "Gesellschaft, Geselligkeit, Kunstlerfest," Franz von Lenbach (Munich: Lipp, 1987). 7 Ursula Peters, Stilgeschichte der Photographie in Deutschland 1839-1900 (Cologne: Du Mont, 1979). ^ Many of which have been taken from Allotria's own satirical magazine or Kneipzeitung. 9 It should also be noted that the majority of publications dealing with these subjects have been put forth by local historians and publishing houses. James J. Sheehan, "What is German History? Reflections on the Role of the Nation in German History and Historiography," Journal of Modern History 53 (Mar 1981): 11. 11 The conflicts surrounding Germany's recent reunification serve as powerful reminders of the magnitude and socio-political realities of these sentiments. 12 In 1892, Germany's first secessionist group was formed in Munich, to be followed by the Berlin Secession in 1898. ' 3 What further complicates the study of 19th century institutional practices are the extremely problematic nationalistic elements in many of artistic productions emerging from this context. German academic art of the last quarter of the 19th century was/is oftentimes conceptualized as paving the way for a National Socialist state and culture. In my view, this is certainly a valid consideration but too linear an equation that eradicates many of the complexities associated with these two different moments. 1 4 Patricia O'Brian argues in "Foucault's History of Culture" that Foucault has contributed a methodology and not a social theory to the writing of history. O'Brian in The New Cultural History. Lynn Hunt ed. (Berkeley: U of California Press, 1989) 25-46. 1 5 J.W. Scott, "Deconstructing Equality-Versus-Difference," in Alison Blunt, Travel. Gender, and Imperialism (London: Guilford Press, 1994) 3. 1 6 Foucault, Archaeology of Knowledge, in Diane Macdonnel, Theories of Discourse: an Introduction (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986) 95. 1 7 John Tagg, Grounds of Dispute (Minneapolis: U of Minnesota Press, 1992) 13. 1 8 Visual representations are not to be reduced to discourse in that they are interdependent yet distinct elements of discursive formations. '9 M . Foucault, History of Sexuality, in ed. Nicholas B. Dirk et al, Culture. Power. History (Princeton: Princeton U Press, 1994) 8 2 0 Roger Chartier, "Texts, Printing, Readings," in L. Hunt, New Cultural History 173. 2 1 Michel de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life, trans. Steven Rendall (Berkeley: U of California Press, 1984) intro. 2 2 Tagg 16. 12 I The Festzus Karl V: Nation, City, and Art The Festzug Karl Vwas a lavish cultural production during which leading academic artists re-imagined Charles V's triumphal entry into Munich in 1530. The event was divided into an official procession that re-contextualized Charles' historic procession and a subsequent ball that was less structured. Allolria's procession actually moved Charles V's original triumphal entry which had taken place in Munich's multi-communal streets into a more private and exclusive realm that of the bourgeois festival hall. As was reported in numerous journal and newspaper accounts, the 1876 Festzug was of such large scope that nearly Munich's entire artistic community had been recruited for its realization.1 Lavishly costumed artists posing as Renaissance figures of a wide range of vocations and status, marched into a splendidly decorated festival hall under the sounds of trombones and brass ensembles. Their entry was enthusiastically received by a clapping and cheering crowd of invited guests who had also dressed up in Renaissance garb. The pageant wound its way through the hall and came to a stop just underneath a theater box especially designed for members of Bavaria's royal household. Academician August von Kaulbach who was dressed as Emperor Charles V and his Empress who was enacted by the wife of key festival organizer Lorenz Gedon, concluded the procession. Once the "Imperial couple" had been led to their impressive thrones on center stage, Allolria's master of ceremonies initiated a number of choreographed interludes.2 This Festzug was an extravagant affair which had taken members of Allotria weeks to arrange. On one level, its theme and form responded to what its organizers perceived to be Munich's position within a new German nation and to Munich's specific institutional fabric.3 Furthermore, a specific segment of Munich society, the Burgertum or bourgeoisie, was given particular visibility in context of Allolria's 1876 Festzug Karl V. Allotrians designated their 1876 celebration as Festzug Karl V which in the German language, already circumscribes the event's configuration as a historical procession. Historian Wolfgang Hartmann has observed in his 1976 study entitled Per Historische Festzug that this was a mode of representation or "Festform," that experienced a significant revival in the 19th century and that "was maybe the most characteristic and popular product of the 19th century 13 and its historical imagination."4 Clearly, Charles V's original entry into Munich in 1530 had very different agendas and claims than its re-enactment 350 years later. In early modern Europe, triumphal processions were central to courtly and civic codes of behavior and one of the most frequently employed cultural practices for the glorification of a ruler. Triumphal processions made visible different communities, confirmed their bonds to one another and to their ruler, and marked out each participant's place within social hierarchies. When Charles V revived the tradition of being crowned by a pontiff and went to Bologna to receive the crown from Pope Clement VII in 1530, it was important that he then proceeded through his most important Southern German principalities in order to make visible and legal his new status as Holy Roman Emperor.5 Precipitated by the size of his Empire which stretched from the Rhine to the Danube and from the Alps to the Baltic, and in conjunction with his own cultural background of having been raised in a Burgundian and Netherlandish tradition, Charles V actually spent little time in his German speaking lands.6 Historian Francis Yates observed in her 1975 study on the Imperial theme in late 16th century Europe that "the revival of imperialism in Charles V was a phantom revival," by which she means that the notion of Empire was out of sync with the political realities of the Holy Roman Empire which as a governing body, was being challenged by emerging European nation states. In this context, Charles V's highly visible entry into Munich and other Reich-cities had even further symbolic import in that it enabled him both to assert a sense of personal power and authority where he had little, and to spread the Imperial theme "in the symbolism of propaganda" when there was in fact, no coherent Empire.7 In the case of Allolria's Festzug Karl V, the triumphal procession had shifted its sphere of signification from the space of the city to an increasingly internal bourgeois space of the Odeon. The Festzug's acting out of a supposedly 'real' historical moment was in fact a carefully conceived mode of collective self-representation for particular social groups who had come to power since Germany's unification in 1871. It is one of the arguments of this study that within the framework of Allolria's festival, specific Munich constituencies re-imagined history in ways that legitimized and justified shifting economic and socio-political structures and hierarchies of import to Munich's problematic status within the new nation state. Wolfgang Hartmann has characterized 14 the re-writing of history in the context of late 19th century historical processions by pointing to the ways in which re-enactments of an appropriated past situated modern participants as benefitting from specific kinds of legacies: "The identification with historical models and with the exemplary course of history presupposes the view [on part of the festival participants], that 19th century civil society is the legitimate heir and culminator of past political, economic and cultural processes. The present then, is regarded as the historical keystone of a German nation which took several centuries to blossom and flourish."8 As the following sections will develop, the Festzug facilitated a re-conceptualization of a specific historical moment in ways that accommodated and sanctioned very new relations of power.9 Festzug participants' Selbslinszinierung -the staging of the self in a particular way - in terms of direct descendants of their German Renaissance ancestors, did attempt to re-work a fractured historical moment to assert unity and continuity. Yet, this tracing out of the German Renaissance as a moment of national unity, while placing specific festival communities within a genealogy that validated their self-ascribed roles as heirs to Germany's cultural, political and economic legacy, also effectively collapsed complex socio-historical inter-relations into deterministic casualties. While this ciphering of historical disjunctures by the Feslzug's visual vocabularies signified on multiple levels, some contemporary observers, such as newspaper accounts of the event, suggest that the Renaissance visual vocabulary marshaled by the festival implicated its participants within a nationalistic and pro-Reich discourse.10 This raises a number of complexities. Late 19th century German historians conceived of nation as a pre-condition that was based on shared national, ethnic, linguistic, and cultural heritages with history circumscribing the ways in which nationhood came into being. Historian Heinrich von Treitschke for example, published a multi-volume tract entitled Deutsche Geschichte in 1879 and asserted that the German Volk existed as a "natural cultural entity," well before the proclamation of the Reich in 1871.'1 Modern historians on the other hand, and theorists like Homi Bhabha, have postulated nation as a conceptual unit that is based on shared discourses and practices.12 In this context, nation is not a given but exists within the realm of the imaginary. Given the fact that the Festzug was discussed in terms of representations of "nation" in contemporaneous journal and newspaper accounts, it is important to ask both how "nation" was articulated in a specific context such as 15 the 1876 festival, and how the Festzug used aspects of a Renaissance past to conceptualize nationhood? As will emerge in this study, the ways in which the Festzug expressed concepts of nation were specific to Munich and were closely tied to the festival constituencies' vested interests and as such, were not necessarily in line with other enunciations of "nation" in the same period. If the Festzug organizers managed to cast specific segments of late 19th century Munich society into the roles of Renaissance personas, the Festzug'?, visual vocabularies then, could be taken up as one way of uniting members of both the Burgertum and the aristocracy under the aegis of a shared past in order to signify a modern sense of nation-ness.13 Certainly, the German Renaissance had great currency during the early years of the new Reich. The historian Julius Lessing in 1877 for example, declared the German Renaissance and its "heroes" as the unifying forefathers of the 1870's: "Our time, with its forceful national revival feels itself drawn to the grand time of the Reformation ... [and] if we want to mirror ourselves in the lustre of our German past, if we are looking for symbols of beauty and dignity then we are to turn to the time of Luther, of Albrecht Durer and of Hans Holbein. That this attitude of mind is instilled in our contemporary arts, our poets and even festivals of our days is clearly recognizable."14 As this quote clearly suggests, contemporaneous writers like Lessing were able to relocate a fissured historical reality into a continuous framework in order to legitimize the cultural claims of the nation in 1876. Lessing's statement took part in what was a major re-evaluation of Germany's achievements in the 16th century - a phenomenon which will be more closely investigated in Section II. Here however, this evocation of the past and of specific artists like Durer and Holbein, points to the way in which the Festzug's visual vocabularies could serve to rework past historical disjunctures for example, between the Reformation and Charles V's staunch backing of the papacy, into a unified legacy of use to the present. In this context then, the festival's allusions to a specifically German Renaissance event constructed a field of meanings and symbols that aggregated participants into "an imagined political community"15 of Reich citizens and as such, worked to make visible and tangible the conceptual space of the new German nation. In other words, the Festzug could serve as a form of nation-space in articulation and dissemination.16 There were conflicts and contradictions in this representation however, which will be explored in 16 the discussion of the Festzug^ visual representations. i Articulating Allotria's 1876 festival When ephemeral practices such as the Festzug Karl V become the focus of art historical investigation, it is important to distinguish between various levels of representation. The event, a procession where Munich's artists and upper echelons of society dressed up in Renaissance costumes, was a cultural strategy that accommodated particular practices and vested interests. The Festzug's function in terms of explicating social status, was but one of its diverse aspects. Complex inter-relations emerged in the course of the event but were constrained to an immediate and local time-space juncture. This is not to say however, that alliances and tensions coming to a head in or through the Festzug, remained within its confines. On the contrary, this study argues that the ripples the festival sent across Munich's social fabric were felt for a long time after. Due to the ephemerality of such practices, its relations and inter-connections are not always easy to ascertain and cultural historians have to rely on symbolic forms to retrace some of the debates and constituencies that had a stake in the event. The following section will briefly deal with some textual representations of the Festzug Karl Vand then proceed into a more extensive analysis of the several visual manifestations of the event. Contemporary newspaper reports are the most substantial textual source available to this project. As a genre, newspaper writing is problematic in that it often times perpetuates the myth of objective observation when in reality, its narrative structures are representations in and of themselves. In addition, newspapers circulated in specific socio-political contexts and thus, became entwined in complex inter-relationships of discourses and practices. Textual accounts of the Festzug thus, took on active roles of representation in that they not only reflected the festival events but in addressing particular readerships with a range of interests and loyalties, actively constructed the event in certain guises.17 Historian Karl Salzle contributing to the 1959 Allotria Festschrift, has provided a valuable archival documentation of events and personages associated with the 1876 Festzug. Salzle's text serves as a basis for this study's first approach to the Festzug and its re-enactment of Charles V's procession with all its complex and often contradictory associations.18 The Festzug took place in 17 Munich's foremost middle-class festival-hall, the Odeon, on February 19th of 1876. The Odeon had been conceived by King Ludwig I's leading architect Leo von Klenze and opened its gates in 1828 (Fig. 1). It was one of Munich's first official concert halls and ball auditoriums built outside of the royal court and designated for a specific social strata, an increasingly influential Biirger-class.19 In the context of the festival and its import for the formation of a coherent Burgertum identity in the mid 1870's, the Odeon's origins as a hurgerliche festival hall should not go unnoticed. In this charged physical local then, Allolria re-staged Emperor Charles V's passing through Munich in 1530 while en route from Bologna to the Imperial Diet of Augsburg. Allolrians had painstakingly planned their 1876 commemoration of this event and numerous committees had been formed to organize its preparations. Most important to Allolria was the development of strict guidelines which could regulate the stylistic authenticity or Slilechtheit of the upcoming Festzug. To this end, students of the Munich Academy had been dispatched to the Alte Pinakothek which held the Wittelsbach collection of'old masters', with instructions to copy dress and jewelry from Renaissance portraits.20 The decoration of the festival hall, the music, the litters used in the re-enactment of Emperor Charles' entry, the costumes of participants and attendants as well as their various paraphernalia, were all to be rendered in what was to be an "authentic" northern Renaissance mode. Furthermore, in attempts to salvage at least some aspects of this ephemeral event for posterity, participants posed for two of Munich's foremost photography studios in order to "record" their involvement in the event (Figs. 7-18). According to contemporaneous accounts, Munich was filled with excitement and preparations weeks before the actual festival. A reporter for Bavaria's national or iiberregionale daily newspaper the Allgemeine Zeitung„ evoked the enthusiasm surrounding the Festzug while also noting its complex impact: "As is well known, important events cast their large shadows well in advance of their actual occurrence. So did the shadow of our 'costume-festival' as it was officially known, cause an uproar among Munich's otherwise innocent population ... One could be surprised by the first acquaintance one met under the bright sky with the unexpected question: 'are you a lancquenet or a capuchin?'... It was very dangerous to be a happily married husband, even more fateful to be the father of an unmarried daughter ... since, following female logic, it was impossible to not partake in the festival while consistent with male logic even harder to do so ... According to unconfirmed reports, seventeen divorces on the grounds of festival-refusal are on the books thus far."21 18 Through a tone of mild ridicule and irony, the writer flagged the Festzug as a social event which could disrupt the workings of marital relations, while also underscoring how the festival functioned within the realm of gossip and localized social interactions. This same article proceeded, by describing the day of the Festzug, both inside the Odeon and outside. Accordingly, invitees continued to arrive at Munich's train station throughout the day and the city center swarmed with Renaissance personas: "one couldn't cross the street without bumping into a Reformer from Augsburg, [or] a patrician from Nuremberg." 2 2 When the Odeon opened at 5:30 pm, guests dressed in 16th century costumes began to filter in, under the gaze of crowds of curious onlookers who had lined the sidewalks to witness the spectacle. B y 7 pm, carriages with members of the royal household drove up and their passengers were escorted to a specially outfitted box on the Odeon's upper level. Historian Salzle has observed that "even these ladies and gentlemen were costumed, what a rare occurrence!" 2 3 Finally, an hour later, the double doors of the main hall opened to the sounds of a march composed for the occassion by court conductor Baron von Perfall, and Allolria's historic procession made its grand entrance into the Odeon. Several hundred individuals each with specifically assigned roles and costumes wound their way through a hall that was already filled to capacity. 2 4 According to Salzle's research, chief organizer and steward of the festival, artist and academician Lorenz Gedon, led the procession dressed as a herald. He was followed by a troop of lancquenets dressed in detailed Trachl with spears in their hands, and a group of hunters, some with live falcons on their arms and others with boar and bear as game trophies. This first section was completed by a train representing unmarried noble women or Edelfraulein who carried wind chimes, and who in turn, were backed up by a cluster of peasants. A section of members of the various guilds, craftsmen, Burgers and town councilors followed closely behind. This segment of the Festzug was closed by a group of six disguised convicts and their hangman. In describing the procession, it should be pointed out that members of diverse 16th century social ranks and trades were present. These ranged from representatives of the curia to monks of various orders, from artists and intellectuals to Reformers, from sovereigns to knights and peasants, and included social marginalia like the convicts. The procession closed with the legation of Charles V's court, 19 the entourage of the Emperor, and ultimately with the "Emperor" and "Empress" who had been seated in a splendid stilecht litter that was carried by four peasants.25 Upon the entry of the "royal couple" into the festival hall, the entire procession came to a halt and cheered as Emperor Charles and his Empress, portrayed by artist von Kaulbach and the wife of Lorenz Gedon, ascended their festival thrones on center stage. One of the Emperor's heralds launched into a prologue especially written for this occasion and announced that a chivralic display would take place shortly. Before the tournament started however, a group representing an 'oriental' delegation requested an audience with the Emperor. Upon being given permission to enter, a group of elaborately made up individuals, dressed in costumes replete with turbans and daggers, presented themselves to the Emperor and showered him with gifts and praise. Figure 13 for example, represents Franz von Seitz dressed as a Turkish member of this delegation. At last, two knights in full armor rode into the hall on mock horses each of which was actually manned by two individuals. Following a tournament competition, the loser was declared outlawed (vogelfrei) while the Empress opened the ball by asking the winner for the evening's inaugural dance. Hereby, the official part of the festival was concluded and a more casual mingling and celebrating commenced. Allotria's satirical magazine Kneipzeitung had once published the artist society's ten commandments, and Salzle asserts that the evening of February 19th complied with Allotria's tenth commandment's that called for boisterousness and revelry: " Wasjedem gelustet, das treibe er munter Vom Vornehmslen bis zum Kiinstler herunter, Denn wer nicht liebt We in, Weib und Gesang ein Narre bleibt sein Leben lang."26 Sporadic humorous interludes seem to have been staged throughout the evening as a means of breaking up the sobriety of the earlier procession. An example of such activity was a rehearsed fight that purportedly was to start among a group of peasants. According to Salzle, this fight nonetheless took on a life of its own in that it soon turned into a huge Gaudi or jovial farce, involving audience members not only cheering for the two parties but also taking part in the skirmish. Andreas Haus noted in 1986 that the Feslzug's success should be largely credited to its organizers' clever fusion of "precisely thought out stylistic and artistic display [that commingled] with high spirited jest."27 20 Attention should be called to one rather unusual aspect of the festival. The event itself was exclusive and only individuals who had either been personally invited by Allotricms or who could afford one of the limited tickets for sale. However, Munich's local newspaper Munchner Neueste Nachrichten noted on its front-page that the festival hall was opened for a general public on the day following the Festzug: "The [festival] committee was kind enough to leave the entire decorations intact all of Sunday [the day after the Festzug] and thus, the beautiful festival hall in the Odeon is now available for viewing from 9 am to 6 pm. An admittance fee of 20 Pfennig, without setting any limits to any further charitable gestures, will benefit the 'Society of Volunteers Looking after the Poor'. The hall will be illuminated in full brilliance just the way it was left by the upper echelons of society last night."28 This admission granted to the genaral public seems to have served two main purposes. First, it enhanced Allotria's prestige in that it showed the society's benevolence toward the less fortunate, be they the members of Munich society who had not been able to attend or the cited "unfortunate poor" who were to benefit from the admittance fee. Second, the ability to view the festival decorations further legitimized^//o/na'.y role as Munich's leading artist society. To have as many people as possible stand witness to the luxury, ingenuity and splendor of the Festzug re-enforced Allotria's local and possibly even national, pre-eminence. Delegates from other German artist societies had been invited to first, legitimize Allotria by virtue of their physical presence and second, to have them attest to the Feslzug's splendor and ingenuity once they returned home. The opening of the Odeon to Munich's general public must be seen as a similar mode of legitimatization and display. On this professed \eve\,Allotria's strategy was a resounding success. For years to come, individuals who had been involved with the festival or even Munich's general population continued to praise the Festzug as Munich's most memorable artists' festival.29 Here it should be noted that the Festzug's textual representations might be considered as implying that the festival was a seamless and homogenous affair, one that unproblematically associated Munich's aritsts and social elites with an event that could be seen as a forerunner of the modern nation state. However, this reading of the festival in terms of a supposedly coherent system of significations raises a number of questions when set against Germany's tense socio-21 political climate as well as Munich's very particular matrix of art institutions and systems of art patronage. ii The Dilemma of Nation and Region Germany's unification in 1871 came about rather differently than anticipated by German liberals throughout the 19th century. In contrast to Germany's first chance at unification in 1848, the German nation state was neither founded democratically nor instigated by a revolution of'the people' but rather, was the result of external political conflicts and extended diplomatic negotiations. Essentially, Germany's unification was "imposed from above" by Prussian minister-president Otto von Bismarck's politics of "Blul und Eisen, " or blood and iron. The rise of a unified nation state was engineered so that individual states retained a degree of sovereignty but were bound overall by a federal economic, legal and military constitution.30 Historians have problematized this peculiar way to unity and here described the new Empire's numerous internal dilemmas in terms of conflicting centrifugal and centripetal dynamics that threatened to tear what was in effect, a fragile conglomeration of antagonistic forces.31 These specific tensions have a bearing on Munich's 1876 Festzug Karl V. Germany's new constitution, essentially a modified version of Prussia's constitution, claimed to "form this eternal federation of German princes in guardianship of the federation's territories and in benefit of the German Volk"?2 However, German society was in no way as unified as the concept of Volk implied and the aggregation of ethnically and culturally diverse territories and peoples under the auspices of a federal state was highly problematic. Soon after 1871, voices of dissent rose and quickly gained visibility and support.33 Prussia's political primacy within the new nation offered one point for dissent. Berlin's role as state capital and Prussia's King Wilhelm's ascension to the imperial throne was questioned by particularistic forces with strong anti-Prussian sentiments. The Reichstag or federal council, convened in Berlin which as the Empire's new political center, also hosted and foreign ministers and rulers on official state visits. Prussia also lay claim to primacy in national political decisions. The Reichstag was composed of fifty-eight seats, out of which Prussia held seventeen. This enabled Prussia to block any constitutional amendments deemed not in its own interest. Furthermore, Prussian minister-president-turned-German Reichskanzler Otto von Bismarck, had put an effective system of checks and balances into place that under the guise of a democratic parliamentary constitution essentially upheld traditional power structures and hierarchies. As historian Jurgen Reulecke has succinctly observed, the "initially exuberant hopes of liberals, to gradually transform a formerly authoritarian state (Obrigkeitsstaat) into a democratic system by means of introducing liberal structures, quickly proved an illusion."34 In actuality, the ugly reality of what Theodor Mommsen has labeled "pseudo-constitutional absolutism"35 was hidden behind the shining facade of democratic nationhood. The political imbalances between the German states fanned the flames of Germany's ever-present regionalism. As the new constitution severely curbed political powers of formerly sovereign states, Germany witnessed the emergence of lobbyists who advocated a new regional patriotism. Munich was not immune to these developments as segments of Bavarian society were particularly susceptible to this kind of parochialism, given that the state had been resistant to unification in the first place. However, regional strife over status within the national government's decisions was only one point of contention in the new nation. Economic disparities also contributed to further splits underneath the supposedly homogenous facade that Germany feigned to the outside world. Industrialization in Germany compared to that in England or France, had had a late start. However, rapid industrial development following 1840 had massive impacts on the socio-economic make-up of the German states. The ensuing economic and socio-political powers of a new social strata in control of heavy industry and large banking houses or Grofibanken, were considered by many as a real threat to Germany's traditional mode of production, agriculture. The cleft between urban and rural populations expanded through the century and exacerbated regional conflicts. Due to varying concentrations of natural resources, the Southern states like Bavaria, derived their gross income primarily from agriculturally based resources, while industries in Northern Prussia relied heavily on secondary and tertiary industries. While these cleavages magnified regional antagonisms, the Griinderrausch of 1871 -73, the huge economic boom initiated largely by France's war reparation payments resulting from the Franco-Prussian war, 23 affected all modes of production. The guiding principle of economic liberalism: "laissez-faire, laissez-aller; le monde va de lui meme," was fully embraced during the early years of the nation state and all socio-economic sectors experienced some sort of economic upswing.3 6 iii Art, Institutions and the New Middle Class The complex changes in the political and economic sector initiated by the proclamation of the Reich in 1871, had an effect on Munich's art system which included Munich's local art institutions, the body of works prduced by the city's artists working within this frame, as well as the social, political and economic relations within this complex matrix of practices. Artists of all persuasions operated within this art system and the Festzug Karl V was but one specific cultural practice in this complex network.37 German art historian York Langenstein has claimed that the 19th century was characterized by an "embourgeoisiement of the arts,"38 that is a gradually increasing influence on aesthetic debates and practices on the part of the middle classes while Germany's formerly dominant art patrons, the Catholic Church and the State, yielded their monopoly to this emerging Burgertum.39 This development had a crucial impact on traditional art institutions and on the specific constellations of artistic practices to which the Festzug gave form. Munich's oldest and most famed art institution, the Royal Academy which had opened in 1766 as a private school was particularly transformed over the course of the 19th century. In 1808, two years following Bavaria's newly proclaimed status as kingdom, Maximilian I granted Royal Charter to the school. 4 0 As the Koniglich Bayerische Akademie, the institution was now eligible for state subventions and its constitution underscored the Academy's public function in that it claimed "to elevate the level of national skill;" "to give a public presence to the arts;" "to further the intellect and customs of out Volk;" and "to grant independence and liveliness of instruction."41 In short, the Academy was to be a state Bildungs institution in the fullest sense of the German word, Bildung: to teach while simultaneously forming character. Before Germany's unification in 1871, contemporary writers postulated art as a powerful remedial force that could benefit the individual and the world 4 2 24 During this time, Munich's Academy was central-Europe's pre-eminent art school. Indeed, between 1808 and 1845, it housed Europe's only chair o f animal and landscape painting',43 a point which signals an important relation to Munich's emerging private art market in the 19th century which essentially revolved around genre, landscape and animal paintings. As educators and self-proclaimed arbitrators of taste, academic professors and administrators divided the teaching process into a strict hierarchical system with the master atelier and history painting at its apex.44 Over the course of the 19th century, the training of qualified artists remained the Academy's main objective. However, with the Burgertum's increasing influence in the art sector, its charter's stipulation to make the arts available to a wider public by means of regular exhibitions took on new meanings. The Academy's administrative body decided to exhibit the work of students, faculty and independent artists publicly on a regular basis. Munich's first Salon was in fact mounted in 181.1. and continued in a three-year rotation until 1858. To advance art and its Bildungs-function, a second type of state supported public institution emerged during the period: the public museum. Munich witnessed the implementation of a number of important museums under King Ludwig I (1825-48), whose claims of wanting to give wider ("public") access to the arts belied his political ambitions to transform the state capital of Munich into a cultural center of international recognition and envy. Ludwig I's urban renewal project included the construction of Germany's first public museum in 1830. Built for Ludwig's extensive collection of antiquities, the Glyptothek was conceived as a classical temple by renown architect Leo von Klenze. Only six years later, another Wittelsbach art collection was transferred into Ludwig's second public museum. The Alte Pinakothek as this institution came to be known by virtue of its extensive collection of'old masters', was also the first museum of its kind in Germany. However, if there was one public institution that bespoke Ludwig's progressive attitudes, it was the Neue Pinakothek, which he had constructed in 1853 to house his personal collection of contemporary German and international art. Only works executed after 1800 were admitted into this museum.45 However, decisions concerning the kind of art that was to enter these various state-sponsored public collections were controlled by Bavaria's head of state under advice from leading members of the Royal Academy. Consequently, these collections while public, did not always give comprehensive representation to art production but favored specific modes over others. While both the Academy and museums continued to remain largely state controlled, a truly bourgeois mode of Kunslpflege or support of the arts and art appreciation, was implemented by a group of educated upper-middle class individuals in the form of the Kunstverein. This was an alliance formed between "friends of the arts" and artists to promote a contemporary art scene, and one of Germany's first institutions of this type, originated in Munich in 1823/ 4. Membership could be purchased in the form of'shares', and the monies collected were used to acquire art works for the Kunstverein's yearly raffle. Even if coming away empty-handed from these raffles, each member at least received an engraving of the painting chosen as Jahresgabe. By means of regular exhibitions, lectures and publications, members of the Kunstverein actively endorsed contemporary art. In the process, alliances between local artists and Burger developed, which in turn, opened up important opportunities for genre and landscape painters whose subject matter had placed them at the bottom of the Academy's hierarchy. When shown at Salons, these artists were invariably forced to exhibit their works under disadvantageous conditions. In part due to the Kunstverein's active promotion of genre, animal and landscape paintings, a substantial market for this kind of art developed from mid-century onwards. Joachim Grossmann has conceptualized the Kunstverein as one of the key-contributing forces to the embourgeoisiement of art in the course of the 19th century.46 The alliance promoted art produced in and outside of the Academy and thus fostered an emerging market system 4 7 It must be kept in mind however, that while the Kunstverein's objective was the promotion and support of contemporary art and artists, it was essentially run by 'patrons of the arts' rather than by artists themselves. Thus, while conceived as an effective instrument for Kunstforderung, the Kunstverein soon metamorphosed into a mingling ground for a local bourgeoisie in search of social status and identity. As artists grew increasingly dissatisfied with Kunstverein politics, they founded their own alliance in 1856: the Allgemeine Deutsche Kunslgenossenschaft or General German Art Association. As a national, artist-led guild-like organization, the Allgemeine Deutsche Kunstgenossenschafl served to represent professional interests and supplied artists with some kind of social insurance. The Allgemeine Deutsche Kunstgenossenschafl was composed of both academic and independent artists. It was divided into twenty-one local chapters each of which was to oversee to the organization of contemporary art exhibitions. While most of the Allgemeine Deutsche Kunstgenossenschafl'?, chapters functioned in a sense as complimentary venues to the salons, Munich's chapter of the Allgemeine Deutsche Kunstgenossenschafl, the Kiinsllergenossenschaft, took on a different role. Since its first Salon in 1811, the Munich Academy had difficulties fulfilling its charter-prescribed exhibition responsibilities. Not allowed to charge admission fees, organizers of these triennial Salons were under constant financial pressures, and also lacked appropriate exhibition venues. As a matter of fact, only five years prior to the founding of the Allgemeine Deutsche Kunstgenossenschafl, the Royal Academy's faculty had voted to involve independent artists in the organization of its Salons; the important 1858 exhibition celebrating Munich's 750th anniversary and the Academy's 50th anniversary (belated) had been the result of their first joint effort. The exhibition proved a huge success and the Academy initiated a series of petitions to rid itself of further exhibition responsibilities. In 1863, King Maximilian II granted an amendment to its charter which put Munich artists as opposed to the Academy in charge of academic Salons. The Kimstlergenossenschaft was not only given permission to use Munich's two pre-eminent state exhibition grounds, the Glaspalasl (1854) and the Kunsl- und Industrie Ausstellungsgebaude (1845), but was also provided with substantial state subsidies.48 By 1868, the Kunstlergenossenschaft had been granted a royal charter by Maximilian's successor, King Ludwig II and from 1869 onwards, their international salons would become one of Munich's main cultural attractions.49 Important to this study is the Munchner Kunstlergenossenschaft's, second mandate which stressed the "encouragement of relationships of artists to each other and to friends of the arts, especially through the promotion of a common social life."50 Thus, the Kunstlergenossenschaft organized regular social events to which artists and members of Munich's higher echelons of society were invited. These events largely served to foster what art historian Joachim Grossmann has postulated as a means of "differentiation and formation of a Sonderbewufitsein, a sense of 27 identity or consciousness that asserts oneself as different) while disseminating their [i.e. the artists] own interests in a broader social context."51 Before the Kunstlergenossenschaft organized artists on a national level in 1856, numerous local artist societies had already been in existence in Munich since the early 19th century. The Allgemeine Deutsche was in a sense the parent organization to these microscopic interest groups that had conglomerated around a wide range of issues and concerns. While most artist societies retained close ties to the Kunstlergenossenschaft, Allotria, the institution in charge of the organization of the 1876 Festzug Karl V, had actually been called into life over a dispute during the Kunstlergenossenschaft's 1873 general assembly. During this general meeting, the interior design for Munich's pavilion at the Vienna World's Fair was under debate and a group of artists, in particular academy professors Lorenz Gedon, Franz von Lenbach, Wilhelm Diez and Gabriel Max, called for new approaches to the ways in which art had traditionally been exhibited.52 Before long, this discussion grew heated and Kunstlergenossenschaft president Konrad Ftoff attempted to re-assert order by exclaiming: "Auf solche Allotria kann man sich nicht einlassen!" -1 won't allow such skylarking! Allotria became the rallying cry of approximately fifty artists who immediately resigned from the and named their newly-formed society Allotria.53 Allotria was an appropriate name for this artists group because on one level, the promotion of a shared social life to escape harsh realities of the every-day, was its main objective. Allotria could call many extremely successful artists as well as a range of academic professors its members and these individuals regularly gathered in one of Munich's oldest inns, the Ahenthum, to play a card game called Tarock and drink.5 4 It is significant that as an artist society, Allotria was not formed around a particular mode of painting or specific ideologies but around this notion of Geselligkeit or gregariousness.55 Fritz von Ostini noted in his contribution to the 1959 Allolria's Festschrift that "advocates of all styles could frequent within Allotria's circles, as long as they were respectable human beings and [were] welcomed as friends."56 From numerous exaggerated caricatures out of the society's own satirical magazine Kneipzeitung. it appears that their evening carousing was often associated with the crude and rowdy (Fig. 2). Another characteristic of Allotria was its amalgamation of academic artists and 'regular' citizens in the context of their evening gatherings. Men from Munich's upper tiers of society were declared Ehrenmitglieder or honorary members, and mingled with the city's most famed art practitioners.57 This is important to keep in mind for the subsequent analysis of the Festzug Karl V because one aspect of both these pub evenings and the more official festivals was that they encouraged alliance-forming activities between artists and potential patrons which could cross social realms. In each instance, prominent Munich citizens were allowed into what was posed as an inner sanctum of bohemian social practices at the same time as A/lotrian artists were given the opportunity to cultivate new patrons and clients. By 1876 then, Munich's art system essentially evolved around two poles, the Academy and the art market. While academicians produced "elevated" history paintings commemorating Bavaria's role in past historical junctures for official consumption, the art market was tailored toward more of a private sector of buyers who were interested in the purchase of portraiture, landscape and genre paintings. This market had initially been opened up by the Kunstverein's promotion of non-academic art in the early 19th century. By the 1870's however, a thriving system of private art dealers and public artist-organized art exhibitions had emerged.58 Robin Lenman argues in Die Kunst die Macht und das Geld, that the invention of new reproduction techniques also contributed significantly to the rise of an active "modem, nationally and internationally integrated art market."59 This exploding printing industry not only fed a large segment of graphic artists but according to Lenman, it also created a "visually sophisticated and discriminating audience."60 To this must be added that the post-war economic Grunderboom and subsequent accumulation of excess wealth by specific sections of the social strata, also had great import on local markets and art consumption. Art as status symbol was in high demand and artists who supplied the kind of paintings that were popular, had an opportunity to amass great wealth and prestige. The aforementioned Malerfiirsten stand as a powerful reminder of this.61 However, the influence and wealth of this group of privileged academic artists also signaled a nepotism that was prevalent among the main players in Munich's art system. Since most of Allotria's artists were academicians, decisions concerning the Royal Academy for example, would often be made within the confines of the Abenthum. Not only were the vested interests of Allotrian artists taken into account but Allotrian artists would often give commissions to one another or recommend fellow Allotrian drinking partners to their own patrons. Lastly, despite Allolria's coming into being in dissent with the Kunstlergenossenschaft, these antagonistic fronts were soon mended and Allotrian artists became very influential in determining exhibitioning policies of Munich's Internation Art Exhibitions held at the Glaspalast.62 It has been observed that one of the key shifts concurrent with increasing import of market relations throughout the 19th century, was the Academy's decreasing influence as sole arbitrator of good taste and Bildung. However, by 1876 the Academy was still Munich's most prestigious art institution. Its professors were paid high salaries in addition to holding immense social power. Under the auspices of Allotria, Malerfursten, academicians and respected members of Munich society all came together to escape pressures within a capitalist mode of existence, as well as to socialize and to network. While Allolrians promoted an image of camaraderie and union to the outside, tensions and conflict from within were frequent. The following Section will explore some of the ruptures and tensions that have a relevance to the Festzug Karl V, and will also investigate several ways in which the festival could have been taken up by different audiences. 30 1 Hermann Schlittgen, Erinnerungen (Munich: Albert Langen, 1926); Peter Grassinger, Munchner Feste und die Allotria (Dachau: Verlaganstalt Bayerland, 1990); "Die Allotria in Munchen," in Kunstchronik 22 (19 May 1886): 513-516; and Karl Salzle, "Der Grosse Kreis der Allotria," Ein Halbes Jahrhundert Munchner Kulturgeschichte (Munich: Thiemig, 1959). 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 4 "Dennoch ist der historische Festzug das vielleicht charakteristischste und popularste Produkt des 19. Jahrhunderts in seinem historischen Denken." Wolfgang Hartmann, Der Historische Festzug (Munich: Prestel, 1976) 7. 5 This tradition can be traced back to Charlemagne who had first received an imperial crown by the Roman pontiff in 800. Charles V went to Bologna ten years after his coronation in Aachen. Bologna was chosen over Rome as the locale for his coronation due to an impending threat of Turkish advancement into central Europe. Incidentally, Charles was the last German Emperor to be crowned by the pontiff. 6 Benefiting from Habsburg politics of marriage and allodium (Heirats und Hausmachtpolitik) of his grandfather Maximilian I, Charles V , upon receiving the imperial crown, became head of the Austrian hereditary lands (Erbldnder), of Hungary and Bohemia, of the Netherlands and Burgundy and of the Spanish hereditary lands including its American colonies. It should also be noted that this fragile conglomeration called the Grofireich, already split apart in 1556 under Charles V's successor, his brother Ferdinand II . 7 Francis Yates, Astraea (London: Routledge & Kegan, 1975) 1. In fact, Charles V held a great degree of authority within his inherited territories of Spain and the Netherlands while the German lands contested his ruler ship. 8 "Die Indentifikation mit den geschichtlichen Vorbildern und mit dem exemplarischen Ablauf der Geschichte setzt die Einstellung voraus, daB die biirgerliche Gesellschaft des 19. jahrhunderts legitimer Erbe und Vollender der politischen, wirtschaftlichen und kulturellen Prozesse der Vergangenheit sei. Gegenwart gilt hier als "der geschichtliche SchluBstein "eines mehrhunderjahrigen Neubaues der aufbluhenden deutschen Nation." Hartmann 8. 9 In a sense, the festival served as lebendige Geschichtsschreibung, lebendig denoting both alive and in process. 1 0 Such as "Der Munchner Kunstlerball," Beilage Allgemeine Zeitung 23 Feb. 1876: 804; "Die Allotria in Munchen," Kunstchronik 22 (1876"): 515; Munchner Neueste Nachrichten. 20 Feb. 1876: 152; and reviews of the 1876 Kunst -und Gewerbeauslellung in Munich which connect the exhibition to Allotria's festival earlier that year, such as "Zweck und Ziel der allgemeinen deutschen Kunst- und Kunstindustrie- Ausstellung in Munchen," Beiblatt zur Zeitschrift far Bildende Kunst. 34 (2 June 1876): 559 ff. ' ' Wolfgang Hardtwig, Nationalismus und Biirgerkultur in Deutschland 1500-1914 (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1994) 197. 1 2 Literature on NATION is indeed abundant: Homi Bhabha, Nation and Narration (1990); Liah Greenfeld, Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity (1992) and Hermann Glaser, Bildungsbiirgertum und Nationalismus: Politik und Kultur im Wilhelminischen Deutschland (1993) are but a few examples. ' 3 The Biirgertum (category) is made up of Burgers (components). 1 4 Julius Lessing, Die Renaissance im heutigen Kunstgewerbe (Vortrag im wissenschaftlichen Veein der koniglichen Singakademie: Berlin, 1877) 4. '5 Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities (London: Versus, 1993) 6. 1 6 The term "dissemination" comes out of a reading of Homi Bhabha's Nation and Narration (London: Routledge, 1990). 1 7 These debates will be evidenced in greater depth in this study's upcoming visual analysis. However, they are alluded to here, in order to contextualize the use approach of the textual sources. 1 8 Salzle was himself a long-standing member of Allotria. ^ 9 Munich's bourgeoisie of all levels, would remain the Odeon's principal users until its destruction during World War II. With only its facade remaining, it has been reconstructed in the Fifties and now serves as seat for Bavaria's provincial government. Unfortunately, merely its address "Odeonsplatz 3", recalls the building's formerly glorious days. 2 0 Salzle 146. 2 ' "Grosse Ereignisse werfen bekanntlich ihre Schatten schon lange vorher ehe sie wirklich eintreten. So hatte denn auch der unseres 'Costiimfestes,' wie die officielle Version lautete, schon seit Wochen die harmlose Munchner Bevolkerung in bedeutende Aufregung versetzt... Man konnte vom ersten besten Bekannten auf der StraBe beim heitersten Himmel ganz unverhofft mit der Frage iiberrascht werden:' Sind Sie ein Landsknecht oder Kapuziner?'... Es war sehr gefahrlich ein gliicklicher Gatte, wahrhaft verhangniBvoll Vater einer unverheirateten Tochter zu sein ... War es nach weiblicher Logik ja unmoglich dieses Fest nicht mitzumachen und nach mannlicher noch schwieriger es zu thun ... So stunden derm nach sicherlich unverbiirgten Nachrichten siebenzehn Ehescheidungen wegen verweigerten Ballbesuches bereits in Ausicht." Beilage Allgemeine Zeitung 23 Feb. 1876: 804. 22 Allgemeine 804. 23 Karl Salzle, "Das Leben im Fest," Ein Halbes Jahrhundert 148. 2 4 This number might actually be one of Salzle's exaggerations. 25 According to Salzle, one could encounter Albrecht Diirer, Hans Holbein, Erasmus von Rotterdam, Hans Sachs and Ulrich von Hutten. Salzle, "Leben im Fest" 149. 26 Salzle, "Leben im Fest" 152. Contrary to the standard of this paper to translate any German into English, this rhyming verse remains in its original to retain its poignancy. . 27 Andreas Haus."Gesellschaft, Geselligkeit, Kunstlerfest," Lenbach 103. 28 Miinchner Neueste Nachrichten 20 Feb. 1876: Frontpage. 2 9 The success of Allotria's 1898 festival In Arcadia for example, was consistently measured in relation to the Festzug in reviews in Kunstchronik or Bavernland. 3 0 Furthermore, this new nation was Kleindentsch in that it excluded Austrian territories. Discussions about Klein-versus Grofideutschland had occupied thinkers throughout the 19th centuty. [This was of course came to a head again in 1938 with Austria's Anschluss to Nazi Germany] 3 1 Such as North/ South; Protestant/ Catholic; Industrialists/ Workers; Aristocracy/ Bourgeoisie; and numerous others. 3 2 Werner Conze, " Das Deutsche Kaiserreich 1871-1918. Wirtschaftlich-Soziale Bedingungen," Kunstpolitik und Kunstforderung im Kaiserreich, E. Mai, H . Pohl and S. Waetzoldt eds. (Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1982) 17. 3 3 Again, similarities can be detected between the aftermaths of Germany's 1871-unification and the events surrounding its 1989 reunification. 3 4 Reulecke 295. 3 5 Hermann Glaser, Bildungsburgertum und Nationalismus (Munich: DTV, 1993) 134. 3 6 "Laissez - faire" economics persisted until the 1880's when state interventions were implemented. 3 7 Either rejecting and reacting against the establishment, as was the case with the various avant-garde secessions, or navigating within it, like the group of artists under investigation here. 3 8 York Langenstein, Per Miinchner Kunstverein im 19. Jahrhundert (Munich: Uni Druck, 1983). 3 9 The term embourgeoisiement must be used with caution in that it can set up a homogenization of complex and intricate inter-relations. 40 Napoleon I had elevated Bavarian Elector Maximilian IV Joseph (1756-1826) to the status of King in 1806, as a gesture of gratidute for his support during the Continental wars. 4 1 "den Kiinsten ein offentliches Dasein geben", "die Nationalgeschicklichkeit erhohen'", "Geist und Sitten unseres Volkes vermehren", and "Freiheit und Lebendigkeit des Unterrichts zu garantieren." Ekkehard Mai, "Problemgeschichte der Miinchner Kunstakademie," Tradition und Widerspruch. 175 Jahre Kunstakademie Miinchen. Thomas Zacharias ed. (Munich: Prestel Verlag, 1985) 110. 4 2 It must be remembered that the Academy's inauguration took place during the height of the Romanitic movement when paroles such as "Heil der Welt durch Kunst" (salvation through the arts) were taken extremely seriously. 4 3 This chair was eliminated in the 1840's when Diisseldorf had taken over the Munich Academy's position as leading art institution and reforms were deemed necessary to re-gain status and prestige. The efforts payed off by the early 1850's when Munich's Academy could re-claim fame as Gemany's utmost effective and popular teaching institution. In the early 1870's, enrollment numbers took on such extraordinary dimensions that the following control measures were instigated: fees were raised considerably, a new pre-school to filter out average from talent, was introduced and cries for a new Academy building gained impetus (the new aAademy building was inaugurated in 1876, the year of the. Festzug Karl V). 4 4 At the time, master ateliers were deemed extremely progressive and the Paris Academy was the only other European institution that had implemented this system. Just as a reminder, Berlin's Academy did not have Meisteralelieres until Anton von Werner's extensive institutional reforms in 1874! 4 5 It should be noted that until 1876, when the Berlin Nationalgalerie opened its doors, the Neue Pinakothek was Germany's only museum that built its collection from contemporary art only. These visible monuments played a role in Munich's 19th century image as a major art center as Johannes Sepp, looking back onto Ludwig I's reign, observed in 1869: "While Berlin developed into a military barrack, Frankfurt into a comtoir, Leipzig into a school, Munich took on the character of a museum." 32 Johannes N . Sepp. Ludwig Augustus und das Zeitalter der Wiedergeburt der Kunste (Schaffnausen: 1869) 334. 45 "Verburgerlichung der Kunst" is a key- tenet in numerous contemporary analyses of early 19th century art systems. Joachim Grossmann's Kiinstler. Hof und Biirgertum is but one of the most recent examples (Berlin: Akademischer Verlag, 1994). 4 7 According to Lenman, Germany's developing train system fostered this development in that exhibitions could be transported to various cities where local Kunstvereine re-installed them. 4 8 0 n e would assume that the 'price' of these state subventions was increased government controls but apparently, contemoorary politicians consistently refused to use the government's support of the arts to influence the Genossenschaft in aesthetic issues." Makela 9. 4 9 These salons were more than mere exhibitions. Miriam Makela writes in The Munich Secession that "the Genossenschaft underscored its populism by instituting features at the salons that would attract a heterogenous audience." These features included beergardens, lotteries, concerts and elaborate trompe-1' oeil interiors to simulate luxurious and extravagant settings. (Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990) 11. 5 0 "Statuten der Miinchner Kunstlergenossenschaft," Makela 8. 51 Grossmann 169. 5 2 The pavillion under debate in early March of 1873, never actually materialized at Vienna's World's Fair. However, during this meeting, future Allotrian artists called for an exhibition concept cohering with Richard von Wagner's notions of a Gesamtkunstwerk. Rather than just supplying paintings for the exhibition room at the World's Fair, they envisioned a re-furbishing of the entire room with elaborate wallpapers, heavily gilded frames for the paintings, lush carpets et cetera, to exhibit the works in a context and create an 'overall viewing experience' that incorporated all the senses. 5 3 When the aforementioned academic professors left the Miinchner Kunstlergenossenschaft, their student bodies from the Academy followed suit. 5 4 This facility was used until their own club house was built a few years later. 5 5 The term is so engrained in the history of colloquial German that it is almost impossible to translate it. 5 6 "Verfechter aller Richtungen in ihr {Allotria] verkehren konnten, wenn sie menschlich geschatzt und als Freunde gem gesehen waren." Fritz von Orsini, "Die Miinchner Allotria," Ein Halbes Jahrhundert 12. 5 7 According to Orsini, Aitfierordentliche (extraordintary i.e. non-artist) members comprised: civil servants, writers, professors, actors, singers, musicians, bankers, advocats, and lawyers. Ein Halbes Jahrhundert 15. 5 8 Munich's leading art dealers from the 1860's onwards were the galleries Bernheimer, Bohler and Heinemann (some of these survived into the second half of the 20th century). 59 Robin Lenman, Die Kunst. die Macht und das Geld 60. 60 Lenman 60. 61 It should be briefly mentioned that not all artists living in Munich during this perios were this successful. As a matter of fact, a segment of artists Lenman referred to as "artists' proletariat" (Kiinstlerproletariat) grew in swindeling proportions. The art market could simply not support the great number of artists that had settled in Munich in the course of the 19th century. 6 2 Makela 12. II TheFestzue Karl Vin the Contemporary Press i The Traditions of Nineteenth Century Munich Artist Festivals Since the end of the 19th century, Munich's Malerfursten and their elaborately organized artist festivals have been repeatedly cited as one of the city's distinguishing cultural features.1 It is important to note however, that this cultural phenomenon was not unique to Bavaria's capital. As Berlin's 1873 Medici festival or Vienna's 1879 Festzug anldfilich der Silberhochzeit des Kaiserpaares indicates, other cities also put on important artist organized festivals.2 Why then have historians and chroniclers of Munich's cultural past asserted this particular artistic practice as Munich's unique and inimitable feature? For one, while artist festivals were popular throughout 19th century Europe, Munich's seemed to have exceeded others in both size and scope. While it lies beyond the scope of this study to situate the range of 19th century German artist festivals, a survey of them does serve to contextualize some of the specific features of the Festzug Karl V. From the outset, artist festivals had been associated with very particular aspects of Munich's rich cultural legacy. Germany's earliest 19th century artist festivals originated in Rome where a group of German artists known as the Nazarenes, were living under self-imposed exile from Napoleon's domination of central Europe.3 This fraternal society gathered around similar artistic agendas and notions of camaraderie and Geselligkeit. Crown prince Ludwig of Bavaria often mingled with the Nazarenes and it was in his honor that they instigated one of Germany's first 19th century artists festivals in April of 1818. No doubt responding to renewed regional loyalties that had been given impetus with the overthrow of Napoleon's rule, festival participants showed their allegiance to Bavaria and to the crown prince, by dressing in old German attire or Tracht and singing traditional German songs or Nationallieder as gestures of their patriotism.4 Ludwig, who already envisioned a grand urban renewal program for Munich once he ascended to the Bavarian throne, used this festival to persuade artists to return to Germany where he assured them that commissions would be abundant.5 34 When Ludwig I came to power in 1825 (-1848), many Nazarenes, among them the future director of Munich's Royal Academy, Peter von Cornelius who was to forge a name as one of Munich's most well known artists, flocked to Munich to participated in Ludwig's grand scheme of elevating the city to one of Europe's leading cultural centers.6 Indeed, so many European artists arrived in Munich that during the height of his urban renewal programs, the number of artists out-numbered assignments. This surplus of artists would prove to be a recurring predicament throughout the 19th century with the result that Munich frequently featured a population of artists who, despite branching out into areas such as book-illustrations or advertising, could barely sustain themselves. Art historian Robin Lenman has noted that by the 1870's a very visible social stratum of impoverished artists had formed, the so-called "artist proletariat."7 However, the initial influx of artists during the 1820's also brought about an unprecedented revival of the arts. A major component in Munich's re-invigorated art scene was the formation of its first artist societies. The spectrum of their activities ranged from communal outings or Kiinstlerausfluge to evening carousals and small scale festivals within the confines of their own societies. A group of artists who gathered around sculptor Ludwig Schwanthaler is but one example. According to Peter Grassinger's reminiscences, artists would meet in Schwanthaler's atelier where he had created a medieval drinking parlor called the Humpenburg and re-enact rites of sociability and exercises of chivalry which they perceived as stemming from the days of German knighthood.8 In her 1988 dissertation on late 19th century Munich academician Lorenz Gedon, Doris Bachmeier argues that Schwanthaler's artist society was an "intellectual center" from which one of the key-aspects of all 19th century artist festivals emanated: "The elevation of one's own being, the enchantment through an illusory world conjured up by artists already went as far as merging appearance and reality - Sein und Schein - in the course of these convivial festivals."9 Bachmeier is not the first to theorize artist festivals as "the staging [or coming to life] of Allotrian artists' dramatic world of painting,"10 and the present study will explore this factor in the specific context of the Festzug Karl V. 35 While individual societies arranged sporadic festivals throughout the early 19th century, Munich's first large scale Kunsl/erfest, the Wall emle infest, took place in March of 1835. For the first time, artists of Munich's several societies united to communally organize a lavish costume festival. Its theme harkened back to Friedrich Schiller's literary Wallenstein-trilogy.11 The Wallensteinfest was staged during Germany's annual carnival or Fasching, in February and set the standard for ensuing artists festivals. From the Wallensteinfest onwards, Fasching artist festivals were composed of a costume procession with a specific theme followed by a ball. The next significant artist festival or Kunsllerball took place during Munich's 1840 carnival season. This time, Albrecht Diirer's legendary encounter in Nuremberg with Emperor Maximilian (1493-1519) was re-enacted.12 Jacob Wolf has observed that this festival was also preserved for posterity in Gottfried Keller's 1854 novel Zum Grunen Heinrich.1 3 Sporadic festivals by either individual artists societies or in conjunction with others took place throughout the 1840's but it was not until 1857 that another large scale costume festival intervened in Munich's socio-cultural scene. Munich's three leading artists societies, Jung Miinchen, Kiinstlersdngerverein and Stubenvoll-Kunsllerverein, conceived what was to become the Paul-Rubens-Fesl, which re-enacted Peter Paul Ruben's historic engagement to Helene Fourment (Fig. 3). 1 4 Art historically, the Paul-Rubens-Feslwas significant in that it was the first Kunsllerball for which future academy director and key figure in the Festzug Karl V, Carl von Piloty was entrusted with the artistic conception. Each of the three Kimsllerfesle shared a concern with reconstructing past artistic vocabularies and focused on particular artists. Clearly, possible meanings and implications of such a focus need to be foiled against specific social, political and cultural junctures and in conjunction with the Festzug Karl V, these intersections will be fully explored. What is important here is that Doris Bachmeier has observed of these early festivals that the historical themes were vehicles for leisure and social interaction, and crucially, a new form of art commodity: "during the first half of the 19th century, the high-spirited relief of creative potency in festival-laughter and theater-fun, the prioratization of thematic effects over the intellectuality, of the sensuous over the poetic, was restricted to the close circles of artists and artist societies. In the course of the seventies [1870's], this protected treasure, which 36 had been cultivated in internal circles for long enough, was eventually introduced and sold as the new ideal work of art to an already 'art-crazed' public.1 5 Andreas Haus who provided the base for Bachmeier's views on artist festivals, ascribes responsibility for this development to Allotria. He argues that the organizers of Allotria's festivals, and it should be recalled that the Festzug Karl V was the first in their long legacy, knew how to "satisfy the needs (Schmuckbediirfnis) of a bourgeoisie that wanted to be represented in an aristocratic mode of festival splendor and ornate decoration."16 ii The Festzug Karl F"and Nineteenth Century Discourses on a German Renaissance Allotria's Festzug Karl V and its re-image(n)ing of empires past (that of Charles V in the 16th century) and of the present (that of Kaiser Whilhelm I in the 1870's) brought into play a particular set of visual vocabularies that encased the festival procession in a mode of representation associated with northern Renaissance high art. In other words, a specific event from Germany's past was reconstructed through reference to a high art language which could assert the interests of new social configurations within Munich and the new nation. Contemporary newspaper reports took up the Festzug's revival of a German Renaissance past and its visual vocabulary as a celebration of nation. 19th century debates postulated the art historical construct of the northern Renaissance as the source for an indigenous German style and typically, such references were enmeshed in contemporaneous historical discourses on the relevances of the 16th century.17 Art historian Robin Lenman has observed that one contributing factor to a prospering revival of a German Renaissance style was its supporters' continuous re-assertions of this neo-Renaissance as a national mode of expression, one capable of challenging France's predominance in the aesthetic field.1 8 After Germany's military victory over Napoleon Ill's armies at Sedan, contemporaries believed that Germany should also assert a cultural superiority over the arch enemy, France. In mid century, historians Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Jahn and poet Ernst Moritz Arndt had already been actively involved in positioning what was at that time still a divided Germany, as a unified Kulturnation; in effect, a nation based on shared culture, whose citizens or Burger were obliged to guard their inherited culture from "poisonous" foreign 37 influences. Franz von Reber elaborated on this tradition in the conclusion of his three-volume Geschichte der Neueren Deutschen Kunst (1884): "If 16th century Germans can be commended for their own liberation from the chains of Roman domination and for the freeing of the intellect through the Reformation, then they can take credit in the 19th century for ending French predominance not only in the realm of European politics but also in the arts and matters of taste. Theirs [that of the French] was a foreign rule that was hardly had any less pernicious and nerve-racking (enlnervend) than the Roman was once! The history of our art is thus the history of our intellectual liberation and it is through this deliverance that contemporary art gains its import."19 As this source makes clear, both cultural and political Franco-phobia worked its way through specific constituencies within the new nation. Consequently, increasing numbers of critics judged visual culture by determining the degree to which a work either resisted or was permeated by what was considered to be French aesthetics and modes of representation. It must be recalled that these debates took place in a cultural climate that had just witnessed the publication of Charles Darwin's translated version of the Origin of Species in 1871. On one level, Darwin's treatises on evolution and "survival of the fittest" in part, could give further ammunition to late 19th century discourses claiming the inherent superiority of the German blood and Volk.20 An interest in a specifically German Renaissance had several manifestations that were seen as particularly relevant to the new image of the nation and Munich's place within it. Doris Bachmeier for example credits Gedon, who was also the chief organizer of the Festzug, with "proclaiming the German Renaissance as the new national style in the early 1870's and thus, setting a movement in motion which was carried by both [Munich's] Biirgertum and its Kiinstlerschaft (artists)."21 Yet, while academic professor of architecture Gedon was indeed highly respected in Munich's art community, the ideologization of a particular style can neither be credited to a single individual, nor should it be fixed to a specific date.22 Notions of a German Renaissance had been picked up by artistic practices from mid-century onwards and the term "neo-Renaissance" connoting the revival of a German Renaissance artistic vocabulary was already current by the time Gedon declared it as the German Empire's new national style. A full historicization of the term would exceed the parameters of this study yet, a brief circumscription is required in order to contextualize the Feslzug's stake in it. There were several manifestations of an interest in this German Renaissance as understood in the 19th century. This was the case with the design for the city's new civic hall. In the late 1860's, a mounting revival of an interest in the German Renaissance as the source for a new visual vocabulary reached its first pinnacle in connection with a heated debate surrounding the plans for this building. Art historian Friedrich Pecht23 and Munich historian G. Sepp carried on a literary feud in the Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung and the Augsburger Postzeitung during which Pecht called for a neo-Renaissance style and Sepp for a Gothic style as appropriate architectural languages for Munich's new city hall. Historian Heinz Gollwitzer has detailed this debate in depth and has stressed the ferocity with which sides were taken.24 By the 1870's the protagonists were headed by Munich newspaper magnate Georg Hirth and by August Reichensperger, but the stakes were still the same: what historical style was best suited to image a major city within the newly proclaimed nation? The two fronts continued to focus on the respective merits of what was understood to form a German Gothic and a German Renaissance style. Examining aspects of Hirth's and Reichensperger's debates brings the politicization of art and culture in this period to the forefront. In the new political reality called the second German Reich, art was used to collaborate in the forging of identities. Thus, Hirth constructed the German Renaissance as a truly "patriotic"25 style, and his partisan Wilhelm Lubke argued that the German Renaissance could be associated with both the nation state and an essential German nature. The period, Lubke argued, "was artistically valuable and full of life since its main element was one of national experience, custom and culture, and in its best works speaks to our German nature ... Let's try to understand and study its original beauty: then, we will be able to find this style as a desirable expression of our own national soul."26 Lubkes's assertion implied that a northern Renaissance stylistic vocabulary linked the present with an historical period which was purportedly defined by a strong sense of national identity. An important part of this argument was that the German Renaissance was characterized by a strong Biirgertum. In an influential essay published in 1876 and entitled "Die Deutsche Renaissance und die Kunstreformbestrebungen der Gegenwart," Rudolf von Eitelberger had overtly connected the conception of a northern or German Renaissance mode with a 16th century Biirgertum "... afterall, this style was indigenous to urban centers and the Biirgerclasses themselves were the real enforcers of the Renaissance ... it was the craftsmen and members of the 39 guilds who were the carriers of progress in middle class circles and who gave this German movement its unmistakable character: artistic-commercial, burger I ich-QtTicimt [competent] and steadfast."27 These historical associations were important to Munich Festzug of 1876. In re-enacting Charles V's procession, the 19th century Burger proposed a direct lineage to the glorified Burger of the 16th century. There are many more examples of this kind of ideological alignment of 19th century Reich citizens with their Renaissance predecessors; however, as the previous citation suggests, these manifestations were all part of a discourse that sought to legitimize a very contemporary phenomenon: late 19th century Burger's claims to socio-political power.28 In short, a neo-Renaissance mode in painting, fashion, architecture or the arts and crafts could, as Ursula Peters has pointed out, be appropriated as "representative of a burgerliches as well as German-national consciousness."29 As has been noted earlier, the Festzug's re-imaging of Charles V's Holy Roman Empire as one mode of legitimization and historicization of the 1871 Empire, was highly problematic in that the very historical moment that was re-constructed was in itself riddled with contradictions and socio-political fissures. Francis Yates' description of the Holy Roman Empire as a "phantom" entity, effectively signals Charles V's difficulties in attempting to unify a diverse political reality into a centralized state. While an analysis of the Holy Roman Empire is well beyond the scope of the present study, an indication of some of its key socio-political antagonisms is useful to the point at hand. First, the 16th century was the age of Luther and the Reformation. The conflict between Roman Catholicism and emerging Protestantism, tore up entire states and drove a wedge between entire populations of believers. As a matter of fact, Charles, a Catholic himself, had sided with the Papacy and banished Luther from the Reich in 1521. In addition, political and economic discontent among peasants caused rural unrest even before the outbreak of the Peasant War in 1524. Indeed, while the 16th century is usually connected with the emergence of a powerful Burger class, the distribution of wealth was never homogeneous. In addition, Charles V, who was later to be hailed as one of Germany's most illustrious emperors by Allotria's festival in 1876, was actually of Netherlandish descent and thus his cultural background prevented him from 40 spending extensive periods in his German speaking territories. In short, the past which was celebrated by the Festzug as one of unity and strength was in fact a very unstable historical juncture. This historical reality made the re-inscription of nationhood and consensus onto Charles V's Reich a highly problematic strategy. iii Festzug Representations in Print As the previous Sections have shown, the 1876 Festzug Karl V was in itself a representation that revived a particular historical moment in order to implicate participants in a discourse on nation and on a cultural and social legacy that was in itself contradictory. As a result, the Festzug's visual representations and the ways in which various audiences engaged with these, did not always cohere with any one system of signification. While the festival as a social practice, revived a particular historical moment, its meanings were generated within particular time and space constellations where its significations were not only fleeting, but constantly in flux in that they entered the realm of memory the minute they were enacted or reinforced. This has important implications for the print materials emerging out of and re-presenting, the Festzug. These visual and textual forms worked to configure and cohere the festival's evanescent language. Yet it was not a homogenous narrative that was produced. As cultural historian Roger Chartier has pointed out, "every textual or typographic arrangement that aims to create control and constrain always secretes tactics that tame or subvert it."30 In other words, regardless of how visual or textual languages are directed towards specific readings, there are always slippages and inconsistencies which act as potential anchoring points for a reader's differing responses. Theorist Michel de Certeau has employed the concepts of strategies and tactics in his analysis of cultural mechanisms. Since these terms are also central to this study, a brief excursion into the ways in which de Certeau brings these into play is vital. His important groundwork has generated much discussion and continues to stimulate cultural historians to date. In de Certeau's Arts de faire these categories were used to suggest potential ways in which viewers and/ or readers negotiated cultural productions. Contrary to the common association of consumption with passivity, de Certeau's consumers of culture are actively engaged in the formation of 41 "systems of operational combination," ("lex combinatoires d'operation"), which also compose a culture, one that "invents itself by poaching in countless ways on the property of others."31 Important inter-relations are set up here between the makers and the users of culture in that according to de Certeau, consumers form their own trajectory paths through the space of any text. These paths are unforeseeable and uncontrollable by makers of culture.32 It is within de Certeau's conceptualizations of the everyday that this study grounds its use of cultural strategies and tactics. He calls a strategy that which "assumes a place that can be circumscribed as proper and thus serves as the basis for generating relations with an exterior distinct from it. In contrast, a tactic is that which "cannot count on a proper [a spatial or institutional localization], nor thus a borderline distinguishing the other as a visible totality."33 It is important to de Certeau's work that consumers' "ways of operating" are tactical in character in that they depend on time while the spaces produced by makers of culture are strategic "victories over time." De Certeau's approach to the processes of meaning making and signification helps to open up the investigation of Allotria's Festzug Karl V by suggesting ways in which the visual representations of the festival can be construed as nodal spaces that were designed to formulate a tight and controlled system of signification, one that reproduced specific social relations without revealing connections to the systems of power that sustained them. If the Festzug representations were configured to actively posit particular subject-positions by implicating viewers into a range of specific discourses, then the degree of a subject's compliance with these representations determined the success of this cultural strategy. Yet, regardless of how tightly visual elements are arranged to facilitate these kinds of prescribed readings, slippages in the ways in which images are actually taken up by viewers can never be entirely foreclosed. Even the most hermetic representation is inscribed with gaps and contradictions that serve as centrifugal points for alternate ways of reading. De Certeau's observation that consumers' movements across visual/ textual spaces form "unreadable paths"34 raises a serious challenge to any investigation of visual culture. This study argues that in the case of the Festzug Karl V, interstices between festival practice, visual representations and audience responses can actually be used to unveil some of the social tensions that were being mediated by the festival. If it was one of the festival's strategies to 42 anchor social and political identity during a shifting historical juncture, then the excavation of ruptures tied to issues of class formations as well as urban and national identity can also register the modi operandi on the part of audiences and readerships. Since the various visual representations of the ephemeral Festzug are all that remains to be worked with today, their visual elements can serve as potential ciphers for tactical appropriations of larger cultural strategies. A xylograph that was published in one of Germany's leading illustrated weeklies, the Leipziger lllustrierte Zeitung. a few days after the festival (Fig. 4) stands as one of the major representations of the 1876 Festzug?5 The Leipziger lllustrierte Zeitung had started publication as early as 1843 and was one of the first German newspapers to include sophisticated and detailed woodcuts depicting Germany's latest social and political events. This kind of high quality illustrated journalism gained the Leipziger lllustrierte Zeitung a broad reputation.36 Thus while the journal was produced by university-educated publishers and editors and its readership was mainly composed of the educated upper classes or Bildungburgertum, through circulation in clubs, libraries and the numerous other biirgerliche institutions, a broader segment of society had access to the publication as well. As an image of the Festzug, the xylograph depicts the splendidly decorated interior of Munich's Odeon filled with festival participants in Renaissance garb. Many of the costumes in the illustration are rendered in such detail that their evocation of distinct estates within the society of the Holy Roman Empire is discernable. In this representation, 16th century princes and members city councils are portrayed seated to the right of the imperial couple Charles V and his wife, with lower-ranking subjects delegated to the main floor. These aspects of the image raise an interesting question that bears on the status of the modern participants in the 1876 re-enactment: who in modern Munich was allowed to dress up as whom? Did social hierarchies in place during the 19th century in fact influence the composition of Charles V's re-imagined procession? Considering Allolria's aforementioned Speziwirtschaft, social standing and 43 connections in contemporary Munich most likely played a role in the participation and role assignment. The majority of individuals in the xylograph are depicted with their backs turned to the viewer and are either looking up and onto the stage or at the chivralic tournament in progress just below it. The viewer's point of view in turn, is slightly elevated, facilitating an overall perspective on the scene. The foreground is illuminated by an indiscernible light-source which allows for a detailed display of various costumes. The middle ground is cast in shadow, while the two knights on horseback in the process of attacking one another stand out only because they are projected against the raised and well-lit stage and adjacent boxes. Light, placement and the density of lines etched into the wood block from which this image was printed, are used to direct the viewer's gaze through the pictorial space. Particular attention is focused onto the enthroned Emperor and Empress by means of a white banner, the Thronhimmel, that runs horizontally behind their seats, thus, making them stand out from the crowd below. Significantly, this banner sports the Imperial Eagle, the symbol of both the Renaissance Reich of Charles V and the new Gennan nation formed in 1871. It has been mentioned earlier that Allothan organizers moved Charles Vs historic procession from an exterior communal city space to the bourgeois interior of the Odeon. However, to suggest aspects of the outside, Allotria's decoration committee had placed foliage and trees around the center stage, which are then imaged in the print. To the left of this foliage and just above what were, in the actual procession, imitation tapestries, more theater boxes are depicted and roughly sketched and anonymous faces extending towards the upper edge of the pictorial space, evoke in part just how well attended the festival was. Emperor Charles and his wife are both depicted as engrossed in the tournament unfolding before them. A few members of the crowd are shown carrying banners displaying various 16th century coats of arms. The faux 'tapestries' had been painted on board by leading academic artists and depicted historical scenes from the lives of Maximilian I and his grandson and successor Charles V, including the latter's triumphal coronation in Bologna and his travels to the Imperial Diet. A newspaper report in the Allgemeine Zeitung described how these elaborately painted boards were to convey the illusion of precious Renaissance gobelins [tapestries] and the xylograph obviously took part in this conceit by rendering the forms as if they were indeed tapestries.37 Clearly, the xylograph was designed to give readers of the newspaper in which it was published, "a piece" of Munich's most elaborate artist festival to date. The fact that the Leipziger lllustrierte Zeitung was a weekly published in Prussia and not Bavaria evinces the import and recognition that Allolria's Festzug received nation wide. Ursula Peters quotes Jakob Werner, publisher of the Leipziger lllustrierte Zeitung as asserting the use of illustrations in conjunction with text as an effective means to "increase the vividness and clarity of current events ... graphics raise the viewer's interest and comprehension of the described [textual] occurrences."38 In short, the xylograph must be conceptualized as a powerful visual reinforcement of the Festzug as an extraordinary event, one which underscored both the links of Emperor Charles V to the modern German nation (the prominent display of the emblem of the two regimes, the Imperial Eagle, made this particularly clear) and by extension, the primacy of Allotrian artists. As indicated earlier, the Leipziger lllustrierte Zeitung circulated primarily among a Bildungsburgertum in which context, the xylograph's visual vocabulary took on specific meanings. For one, this representation reinforced what Wolfgang Hartmann postulated as a particular function of 19th century historical processions. According to Hartmann, this mode of representation could cast modern day Munich citizens into self-ascribed roles as the "legitimate heirs of past political, economic and cultural processes", in which "the present is regarded as the historical keystone of a German nation which took several centuries to blossom and unfold."39 In depicting Festzug participants dressed up as their Renaissance predecessors, the xylograph constructed a pictorial space that on the surface at least, worked to buttress textual assertions of the festival's engagement with a particular legacy of the new nation. In the process, the image effaced any obvious signs of current class structures or social tensions and struggles. It conveyed instead, a seemingly harmonious mingling of three distinct social segments from which festival participants had been drawn: aristocracy, upper middle classes or gehobenes Biirgertum, and academic artists who could be counted among the upper middle class since they had received an institutional education at the Royal Academy and consequently, belonged to the Bildungsburgertum. In the xylograph any such social tiers are impossible to distinguish. In a 45 sense, the Renaissance costumes as a whole, worked to efface differences and in the representation at least, the Biirgertum's cravings for recognition appear to have been fulfilled. Yet while the supposedly seamless pictorial narrative of the xylograph could serve to mediate social boundaries that were both under pressure and in the process of change, this image of the Festzug Karl Fas providing a social space of unproblematic access raises a number of contradictions. Since the Burgertum plays an important role in any assessment of the Festzug" s tensions and ruptures that were reworked both through the elaborate festival program and by the Leipziger Illustrierte Zeitung's xylograph, this study will now turn to a brief contextualization of this social formation. iv The Festzug and Munich's Burgertum Burgertum and burgerliche Gesellschaft are two recurring terms in debates about Germany's 19th century social fabric. Burger is difficult to translate in that it has very specific historical references and connotations.40 In the early modern period, it designated a non-noble inhabitant of a free German city who earned a living through trade or commerce. During the Enlightenment, the term evolved to define a free individual or citizen endowed with civil rights and by 1876, it had metamorphosed into the equivalent of a French ciloyen and bourgeois combined. Together, these citizens fonned a burgerliche Gesellschaft which as Jurgen Kocka has pointed out, functioned as an "economic, social and political order that, in overcoming absolutism, estate privileges and clerical tyranny, ha[d] realized and reinforce[d] the principles of freedom and equality for all individuals in its jurisdiction."41 Historians have analyzed the burgerliche component of a society by the degree of social, political, and economic influence of the Burgertum at a particular historical moment. However, Burgertum is a clearly problematic term in that it typically is understood to encompass a diversity of sub-categories. Thus, one can describe the Bildungsburgertum, a formally educated component and one that was actively engaged in terms of culture; the Wirtschaftsbiirgertum or professionals of the industrial sector; the Kleinbitrgertum or petty bourgeoisie; the upper and middle Beamtentum; civil servants, and so forth. It is in fact easier to point out who was not part of the Biirgertum: the aristocracy, the clergy, peasants and rural and urban working classes. Jurgen Kocka has underlined the complex composition of the Biirgertum in the 19th century German states: large merchants, manufacturers, bankers, entrepreneurs, industrial directors and -share-holders, doctors, lawyers, professors, teachers of upper educational institutions such as the Gymnasium or high school, judges, scientists, academically qualified engineers, upper civil servants who were university educated and any other academically educated individuals, for example, certain artists belonged to this configuration.42 This listing of the wide range of professionals who called themselves Burger indicates that the term Biirgertum can only be said to imply cohesiveness. Incoherence and erasure of difference are always part of categorization and rather than criticizing the shortcomings of the category "Biirgertum", it is more useful to unravel the term instead. The late 19th century Biirgertum was not a monolithic class in that members shared neither social nor professional cohesion, wealth or education. Consequently, large socio-economic gaps existed between for example, multimillionaires and state employees, or between academic proteges and university drop outs. Indeed, Kocka has noted that "the formation Biirgertum proves to be entirely situational; it comes and goes with changing conditions. Not only the Biirgertum's form but the degree of its existence varies in time and space."43 In 1860, historian J.C. Bluntschli attempted to ascertain that which united the Burger for the new edition of the dictionary Deutsches Sprachworterbuch. Of the Biirgertum he noted their similar educations and social needs and added: "They get along with one another, gather socially in a comfortable manner, show collective character traits, share fundamental convictions, and they also have mutual interests in politics and culture."44 Thus in Bluntschi's formulation, members of the Biirgertum constructed their lives according to collective perceptions, structures and interpretations. That Bluntschi points toward culture as a defining factor of Biirgertum identity has crucial implications for this study. If a sense of communal identity is constructed through culture, then the Festzug Karl V was an important cultural practice that contributed to the formulation and dissemination of shared biirgerliche conventions and modes of existence. One determinant of how these kind of social communities were structured can be assessed through the 47 categories of "inclusion-exclusion." This is to say that identity and group membership can be defined through individual differentiations from an "Other" or "that which I am not."45 In this conceptualization, members of one particular social formation not only share specific characteristics that identify individuals as in-siders but they do so, in often antagonistic relations to other social compositions. During the late 18th century, when a self-conscious Biirgertum was still in its infancy, the nobility, absolutist monarchies and clerical authority were declared as one common enemy.46 However, by the 1870's these social fronts had shifted drastically and as Kocka has observed, a "differentiation from that which was 'below' " 4 7 in other words, the working classes was much more necessary. Germany's explosive industrialization and the ensuing urban growth of the 1840's and 1850's had initially given rise to growing proletarian classes which by the 1870's had become increasingly politicized and conscious of their own rights. One consequence of a perceived threat emanating from this "third estate" was that no matter how divided various sectors within the Biirgertum were, this social strata would stand as a united front against the working classes in general and the rising labor movement in particular.48 The complex inter-relations within the Biirgertum have a bearing on Allolria's 1876 Festzug. By reviving a historical moment that was, in 1876, associated with national pride and unity the Festzug on one level, implicated participants in a discourse of a shared past which constructed notions of a consensual community. Yet, this forging of a homogeneous representation was in effect, ruptured by the very subject it tried to summon. A reading of Paul Smith's Discerning the Subject4 9 in which he examines subject positions within disciplinary structures of knowledge, provides a helpful model to suggest some of the potential ruptures in the festival's constructs of nationhood and national identity on a level of the individual subject. Two key-concepts of Smith's psychoanalytical apparatus should be briefly introduced at this point: interpellation and individuation. Louis Althusser takes interpellation to be the process by which the discursive 'hails' individuals. Individuation on the other hand, is that which encompasses a subject's resistance to an ideology when his or her subject position has already been construed in a specific social context. If subjectivity is the nexus of ideological interpellation and individuation then 48 according to Michel de Certeau, each individual must be understood as a locus in which "an incoherent and often contradictory plurality of relational determinations interact."50 If it was one of the festival's main functions to represent a collectivity under the auspices of the new German nation, then it should also be kept in mind that difference is always inscribed in this collective whole. The very term "collectivity," stemming from the Latin collectives meaning aggregation of several or many individuals, already foregrounds notions of multiplicity. Measuring the festival's success as cultural strategy, festival participants' multiple responses and appropriations of the Festzug signify a sense of failure, but from a tactical vantage point, these ruptures can actually be conceptualized as opportunities. What I am arguing is that the ability to be represented in the festival and to raise difference, could open up momentary and context-specific opportunities that might not have been possible outside of the festival space. For example, independent artists who had been called upon by Allotricm organizers to fill vacant positions within the procession, but who were not part of Munich's institutional art practices, gained a voice in the course of the festival. By being included in a collective from which they were usually excluded by virtue of their dissenting modes of representation, such interest groups had the opportunity to make inroads into the festival's cultural strategies, whether they be the status ascribed to Allotricm artists or the authority given to Renaissance modes of representation as the nation's only appropriate visual language. Yet, the multiple ways of operating within the festival practice and the multiple ways of reading its (re)representations still took place within a field organized in terms of a set of dominant discourses. Indeed, de Certeau's concept of tactical subversions is based on the notion of responses to cultural strategies that are in place already. While the trajectories viewers forni across discursive spaces remain invisible, it is possible when dealing with visual culture, to search for some of the pictorial spaces that have the potential to dislodge prescribed readings. In the xylograph of the Festzug published in the Leipziger Illustrierte for example, festival participants in the image are frequently represented with their backs turned to the viewer. As a visual strategy, this compositional feature can serve to directly involve a viewer in what is being depicted in the xylograph. The subjects' backs provide symbolic entry points into the image in that a viewer 'becomes' this subject. As the barrier between 'real' space and picture space collapses, the viewer can imagine her or himself to be an eyewitness to the procession. Yet, in the Leipziger lllustrierte xylograph, this representational strategy is immediately countered by the elevated vantage point from which a presumed viewer observes the scene. Since it is impossible to be both in the scene and overlook it, that is to be slipping into a participant's body and being a disembodied 1/ eye at the same time, a sense of disjuncture becomes part of the image. This visual cleavage suggests a first leverage for what, to use de Certeau's terms, becomes a tactical poaching of the pictorial space. Another such area of this image is found in the darkly shaded middle ground. This area is visually even further foregrounded, by the wood-cut technique of xylography which enabled the engraver to cut extremely fine lines out of the wood block, to position these in very close proximity and to accomplish an effect of dark shading. If the festival was conceived as a shared celebration of Germany's new status as nation, then the obvious visual hierarchy that is created by these effects between an anonymous mass on the ground level and individualized figures on stage, has a range of consequences. If this xylograph was intended as 'objective' reportage, then it simultaneously opened up alternative readings of the festival in terms of social stratification and distinction. Certainly, festival reports in the Allgemeine Zeitung had outlined how involved participation in the Festzug was. Indeed, as part of a veiled criticism, the newspaper's article pointed out that the festival actually excluded large segments of society.51 The xylograph's visual elements at one level, enable this mode of critical reading by their organization of the picture space. The image also suggests that it was certainly more rewarding in terms of visibility and prestige to be filling the role of a prince or knight than to be a peasant in the festival. These ambiguities within the xylograph serve as visual sparks, but the kind of readings the image ultimately ignited were ultimately dependent on the viewer. Since this xylograph was published in a weekly newspaper for the educated and as such, was widely accessible among a middle class public, it is ultimately impossible to make explicit assertions about its reader/ viewership responses and conjectures remain speculative. 50 This brings the study back to the Festzug. If practice is through representation then the festival itself calls for investigation through Smith's and de Certeau's analytical lenses. In order to access the potential for resistance to the festival's discursive interpellations, tensions and slippages within the seemingly homogenous configurations of the Festzug procession need to be addressed. By contrasting the gaps between the festival's representational strategy and the socio-political positions and ideologies of the participants themselves, alternate readings of the event can be evoked. Here, it should also be noted that the festival practice itself is more conducive to this investigative mode than the magazine xylograph in that information about festival participants is more readily available than less secure assumptions about potential reader/ viewerships of the image. As has been outlined earlier, the inception of the German nation in 1871 was highly charged and dissent permeated the Empire's purportedly sealed fabric. In particular, Bavaria's merger with the North German Confederation to constitute a unified Empire had been contested and it took Bismarck's yielding of special privileges to convince this largest of the South German states to adjoin.52 Yet, despite political concessions, anti-state and anti-Prussian sentiments in Bavaria remained strong throughout the end of the century.53 In addition, the symbolic nation-space articulated by the Feslzug's visual vocabulary was undermined by the Empire's actual socio-political conditions which made any affiliation of a traditionally antagonistic Burgertum and the aristocracy problematic. In turn, these tensions served to challenge the festival's ability to fully anchor participant interpellation. The Burgertum benefited greatly from the outcome of the Franco-Prussian war. France's reparation payments in excess of five billion gold francs and the elimination of inter-state tariffs and duties after unification, were a significant boost to Germany's economy. This period of the Griinderboom, or prosperity and euphoric optimism in all economic sectors, lasted from 1871 to 1873.54 Encouraged by a capitalist free market system, speculators ranging from industrial barons to small scale entrepreneurs invested in local and national economies and some individuals amassed immense fortunes. It was largely the Wirtschaftsburgertum which took credit for turning 51 Germany into one of Europe's most economically dynamic nations, but with prosperity, the Biirgertum worked to consolidate their economic and social status through conspicuous consumption and participation in 'high society'.55 However, German late 19th century society often referred to as Unlertanengesellschaft, continued to be structured around traditional hierarchies and rituals represented through titles of nobility and military honors.56 Thus, the German Biirgertum upon reaching maturity, tended to appropriate "status symbols and styles heretofore regarded as aristocratic"57 rather than evolving their own. It has frequently been postulated that the growing hedonism associated with late 19th century German middle class culture was closely connected to its members' cravings for social recognition. No expense was spared by so-called "parvenus" to cultivate an image of "grande dame, connoisseur, or 'man of the world'."58 During this historical juncture, economic power was represented as social power through ostentatious entertainment and conspicuous consumption. The large amounts of money which were spent by the Biirgertum to both stage and participate in the Festzug serves as a pertinent example of this conduct. However, the fostering of aristocratic lifestyles and feudal standards by the upper middle classes however, was not necessarily indicative of an existent fusion with the nobility. In effect, as social historian Dolores Augustine has noted, the "industrial and pre-industrial elites failed to merge... certainly, the aristocracy resisted bourgeoisification and segregated itself socially."59 Money-feudalism (Geldfeudalitdt) was definitely considered by contemporary critics as inferior to 'true' blue-bloodedness. Moreover, actual political power also remained with a German aristocracy and Prussian Junker aristocrats in particular. Thus, while the Biirgertum had supported the move toward unification on an ideological and economic level from the 1850's onward, the proclamation of the Empire failed to fulfill its utopic visions of a true biirgerliche society in that the new nation still left the middle classes politically paralyzed. In order to reify itself, the Biirgertum as one of the most important economic supporters of Germany's modern capitalist society, fell back on feudal titles and rankings as measure of accomplishment and identity.60 Significantly, within such a context, the Festzug Karl V represented one opportunity for the Biirgertum to emulate feudal modes of representation and to share a social space with the aristocracy, while aristocrats were in turn invited to partake in a late 52 19th century bourgeois social practice in Munich's most famous burgerliche hall. Thus, on one level, Allotria's 1876 artist festival satisfied both constituencies' urges to represent its members as historically legitimized and as contemporaneously influential social groups. v Festzug Representations in Time and Space This study will now briefly focus its attention on a set of two more representations of the Festzug: an invitation to the "Costiim - Fest" (Fig. 5) and a lavishly embellished illustration that served as an admission ticket (Fig. 6). These stand in very interesting relations to the xylograph in that they functioned in completely different temporal spaces. In contrast to the newspaper xylograph which was published after the event had already taken place, the invitation and ticket circulated before the Festzug even commenced. Invitations generally advertised the Festzug in terms of location and time while admission tickets determined one's box- and seat number.61 There is yet another temporal cleavage between invitations that had been sent out well in advance and tickets which were physically brought to the event to obtain admittance. It has not been possible to determine if admission to the Festzug was by invitation only or if tickets were actually for sale. Some contemporaneous newspaper reports suggest that tickets might have been sold in very limited numbers.62 This study assumes that invitations were received by all of the participants in the processions and its attendedant theatrics while admission tickets were required by invitees who did not partake in the actual re-creation of Charles V's entry into the city. Nevertheless, the intricate relations between the xylograph, the invitation and the admission ticket signal the constant symbolic transformation of the event itself. At the time the invitations were sent out, the Festzug functioned in the future and then again, in terms of the later newspaper xylograph as a series of memories for different constituencies via the Leipziger Illustrierte Zeitung. This dynamic between the various representations ties modes of interpretation closely to specific time-space constellations. Not only did different audiences make meaning of the Festzug in relation to their place in society and their ideological make-up, but the ways in which these images could be taken up, were contingent on their spaces in time. 53 An interesting visual discrepancy emerges between the festival invitation and the admission ticket. The ticket depicts four musicians dressed in Renaissance attire situated within a space that shifts between readings as an elevated stage, a theater box, or the lighted open window of a Renaissance castle. Visually, this is indicated by several features: the border of the ticket itself which simultaneously frames an indeterminate but recessed space; the articulation of a foreground casement or balustrade marked out by the lush folds of rich fabric that drape over it; and by the yellow-gold field which sets off the figures and at the same time, evokes the glow of background candles in an evening interior. Here, the festoon that is created by the draping of material over the edge of the parapet, functions as a visual space to advertised the festival's date and its organizers: "Allotria - 19. Februar 1876." Three musicians are playing horns while the fourth is in the process of beating a set of drums that are splendidly adorned with garlands. The whole scene evokes the opulence of Renaissance court musicians through the costumes, decorations and even the instruments themselves and as such, the invitation reinforced the festival theme of Festzug Karl V. However, the elaborate image on the admission ticket also conveys a sense of informality, play-acting, dress-up, celebration and mutual enjoyment. The ways in which the musicians are placed on center-stage, dressed up as Renaissance persona and amusing both themselves and others, cast a lighter note on the historical procession's purported seriousness. February was the season of carnival afterall, and this ticket virtually invites festival participants to engage in the carnivalesque. A quick glance over the invitation (Fig. 5) might initially suggest that it also deploys the same jovial Renaissance references that have just been suggested in relation to the admission ticket. However, the invitation's significations work in other ways. Within its visual space, a young woman leans forward while her elaborate dress and hat are set off against a white field. Her body is turned toward the viewer and her right leg almost protrudes out of the picture space. Her head is slightly tilted and her eyes are in direct contact with an assumed viewer. After catching the viewer's attention this way, her right hand continues to beckon the viewer's gaze into the pictorial space, across her body and via her left hand to the writing on a vertical invitation in the background: "Costume Ball in the Odeon - Allotria - Munich 19. February 1876." This female 54 figure literally summons the viewer into her space in order to read the invitation and by doing so, she symbolically invites a viewer to the upcoming event. Aside from its clever pictorial constructions, this invitation also solicits interest in terms of the ambiguity that rests on the way in which the female figure is dressed. While her attire does evoke some Renaissance elements by means of the square plunging neckline of her dress, the upright stiff collar and the elaborate gathers and puffs on the sleeves, her look is in fact that of a well dressed woman of fashion in the 1870's. Decked out in a dress that evokes the latest 19th century style, she can be visually equated to modern fashion plates that had immense currency through middle class fashion magazines. Thus, while the text on the invitation anchors the Festzug as a historic costume ball, its visual vocabulary overlaid the festival with notions of an up-to-date fashionability. In relation to the admission ticket then, this invitation formulated different and maybe even contentious notions of identity through the imaging of stylish and expensive contemporary dress. This transforms the Renaissance visual vocabulary, potentially for some retardaire and regressive in 1876, into an image of progress and modernity. In this context then, the Renaissance past was coded through fashionable display and serves to underscore the hybridity of the festival vocabularies while further complexifying potential viewer positions. This aspect of the invitation, calls up the Festzug Karl Vs division into an official historical procession and an ensuing ball. 6 3 It could be argued that on a surface level, the ball was less regulated than the rigidly prescribed procession. However, the ball also functioned as a crucial rite of sociability that was patrolled by specific sets of social rules, standards and expectations. The ball as social practice had emerged from genteel culture and evolved into complicated inter-relations of encoded conventions and manners which once adhered to, served to form a symbolic community. David Scobey's argument concerning forms of sociability ariticulated through the upper middle class promenade in 19th century New York, is of particular use here. Scobey has argued that, "as a ritual, promenading performed much the same function which Claude Levi-Strauss ascribes to myth-making: the symbolic resolution of real contradictions. Being and being seen mediated a complex nexus of social and ideological tensions in late nineteenth-century New York." 6 4 While the ball cannot be equated with public 55 promenading, Scobey's insights serve as an important point of departure for this study. Allolria's festival ball construed a social space in which the close proximity of aristocracy and haute bourgeoisie was to temporarily efface and reconstitute social tensions prevalent outside the festival realm. Adherence to a shared set of codes then, could construct identity and collectivity by marking out festival participants as insiders' against 'outsiders'. It should be stressed though, that this shared sociability did not eradicate real conflict. This mode of self-representation was in fact another instance of bourgeois appropriation of court etiquette and aristocratic codes of behavior. Yet with this, the unequal power relations originating in feudal regimes were foregrounded at the same time. Within the context of the Festzug, this raises a set of contradictions. The Biirgertum in 1876 actually had the economic power to live an aristocratic lifestyle that the nobility itself could no longer afford. On one level, social rites such as the ball can be postulated as fusing grounds for the aristocracy and upper middle class in that they facilitated concrete interactions between the two segments that while temporal, could also have consequences that outlasted the festival moment. For instance, marriage was one of the few ways in which the Biirgerclass could aquire noble titles while the aristocracy could benefit economically by receiving dowry moneys and property. While such exchanges were an important aspect of the Festzug, it is important to bear in mind that in the end, the Biirgertum's access to aristocratic circles or even the throne outside of the festival space, essentially remained closed off 6 5 vi The 1876 Fasching and the Carnivalesque This section must close with a brief return to the Festzug's connection to 1876 Munich's carnival season. Traditionally, German carnival takes place annually in mid-February and is the time of year when social structures and institutions are ritually inverted by a set of symbolic practices and images. Immediately following the carnival season is Lent, a time of fasting and abstinence which aims to restore order after this turbulent time of the "world turned upside-down."66 Debates around carnival and the carnivalesque are abundant. Mikhail Bakhtin for example, argues that carnival's role reversal had the power to invert and criticize hegemonic social structures. In contrast, Roger Charter and Terry Eagleton assert that these patrolled reversals of hierarchies actually strengthened the interests of the official culture that carnival supposedly disputed.67 This study positions itself with Allon White who argued in 1982 for the carnival as a symbolic site of struggle within specific socio-political contexts: "the most that can be said in the abstract is that for long periods carnival may be a stable and cyclical ritual with no noticeable politically transformative effects but that, given the presence of sharpened political antagonism, it may often act as catalyst and site of actual and symbolic struggle. "68 Within these terms, the Festzug Karl V becomes problematic in that while operating in part, as a carnivaleque practice, its format as a historical procession foreclosed the kind of symbolic inversions and ritual contestations of power that had constituted Munich's carnival season. For example in the festival, all participants were required to dress up, but their costumes did not engage in the transgressions which Stallybrass and White have associated with the carnivalesque; that is the transformation of "gender, territorial boundaries, sexual preferences, family and group norms" into the grotesque body in terms of "excrement, pigs and arses."69 On the contrary, those proceeding through the Odeon hall did so according to a rigid and pre-determined cultural script which was defined in terms of normative cultural codes and values. Certainly, some symbolic inversions can be found in the Festzug, for example, members of the Burgertum dressing up as princes and peasants, aristocrats playing artists, or artists playing the role of king and Emperor. But these do not work as the kind of transgressions of hierarchical structures theorized by the carnivalesque. Indeed, the Festzug Karl Vv/as not the 'world turned upside-down' but in fact, the 'world turned right-side-up'. 57 1 Both Grassinger and Salzle engage in this celebration and alike many other late 19th century representations of Munich's cultural fabric such as an influential article in Bavaria's regional journal DasBavernland entitled "Das Gesellige Leben Miinchner Kunstler," Das Bavernland: lllustrierte Halbmonatschrift fur Baverns Land und Volk (Jahrgang 1928). 2 Vienna's 1879 festival for example, is dealt with in context of a 1985 exhibition: Traum und Wirklichkeit; Wien 1870-1930. Historisches Museum der Stadt Wien (Vienna: Eigenverlag der Museen der Stadt Wien: 1985). 3 Ironically, this affiliation of artists had initially formed under the precept of nationalistic and anti-Napoleonic convictions but would eventually be called to Munich by King Ludwig I, whose father had been aiding Napoleon against Prussia. 4 In 1818, a decree was passed that outlawed the wearing of altdeutsche Trachl in public as "expression of rapturous and revolutionary convictions" (als Ausdruck schwarmerischer revolutionarer Gesinnung). Wolf 16. 5 Wolf 18. 6 Cornelius should be credited for introducing a classicizing mode of painting to audiences in Bavaria's capital. To this day, his elaborate fresco cycle in the Ludwigskirche stands testimony to his impetus. 7 Lenman 114. ^ Later in his career, when Schwanthaler had become a wealthy and recognized artist, he actually built a 'medieval' castle in the Isar-Valley, the Burg Schwaneck. There, he gathered his friends to re-enact lavish battles and historic scenes adapted from the middle ages. Wolf 21 ff. 9 "Die Erhohung des eigenen Daseins, die Verzauberung der Wirklichkeit durch die selbst geschaffene Scheinwelt ging hier bereits soweit, daB Sein und Schein bei den geselligen Festen ineinander ubergingen." Doris Bachmeier. Lorenz Gedon 1844-1883. inaugural diss. Ludwig Maximilians Universitat Munchen (Munich: Uni Druck, 1988) 106. 10 Haus as well as Klaus Eggert have observed this "schauspielerische Verlebendigung ihrer [Allotrian] Bilderwelt," 1 1 Wolf 34. 1 2 Grassinger 19. Haus 102. 1 3 Wolf 35. 1 4 Grassinger 35. 1 5 "In der ersten Halfte des 19. Jahrhunderts war "die ubermutige Entlastung der kreativen Potenzen in Fest-Ulk und Theatergaudi, im Vorrang des Stofflichen vor dem Geistigen, des Sinnlichen vor dem Poetischen" (246) nur auf den engeren Kreis der Kunstler und der Kunstlergesellschaften beschrankt gewesen. Im Laufe der 70er Jahre wurde dieser gehiitete Schatz, der lange genug im internern Kreis kultiviert worden war, gehoben und der kunstbegeisterten Offentlichkeit als neue ideale Kunstwerke vorgefuhrt und verkauft. Bachmeier 107. 16 "dem Schmuckbediirfnis einer iippigen, auf adelige Representation schielenden Bourgeoisie mit Festglanz und kunstvoller Dekoration zu dienen suchte." Haus 100. ' 7 It must be clarified that in the following discussion on the German Renaissance, this study will employ Festzug as encompassing B O T H the festival and the photographic representations of its participants. 1 8 Lenman 103 f. 19 "Haben die Deutschen das Verdienst, im sechzehnten Jahrhundert die Fesseln der romischen Herrschaft gebrochen und durch die Reformation die Geister befreit zu haben, so konnen sie im Neunzehntern das kaum geringere beanspruchen, in Europa dem franzosischen Ubergewicht nicht nur in der Politik, sondern auch im Reiche der Kunst und des Geschmacks ein Ende bereitet zu haben. Es war das aber eine Fremdherrschaft, die kaum weniger verderblich und entnervend auf die Welt lastete, als einst die Romische! Die Geschichte unserer heutigen Kunst ist daher zugleich die unserer geistigen Befreiung und erhalt erst durch sie ihre Bedeutung." In Wolfgang Frhr. von Lohneysen, "Einfluss der Reichsgriindung von 1871 auf Kunst und Kunstgeschmack in Deutschland," Zeitschrift fur Religions- und Geisteseeschichte 12 (1960): 44. 2 0 Which is not to say that this study ascribes to the rather simplistic and linear theory of Third Reich Nazism growing directly out of late 19th century nationalistic discourses. 2 1 Bachmeier 58. 2 2 Lorenz Gedon was also Munich's leading voice for the Kunstgewerbe-Bewegung (arts and crafts movement). He was a relentless advocate for the recognition of arts and crafts objects as (high) art forms. 2 3 Pecht published a number of influential art historical books (Deutsche Kunstler im 19. Jahrhundert (1877) and Die Miinchner Kunst in 1888) as well Germany's influential art historical magazine Kunst for Alle (1886 onwards). 2 4 Heinz Gollwitzer, "Zum Fragenkreis Architekturhistorismus und politische Ideologie," Zeitschrift fur Kunstgeschichte 32 (1979): 1-14. 58 2 5 Hirth in Gollwitzer 10. 2 6 "Denn vor alien Dingen liegt in ihm ein Element echt nationaler Anschauung, Sitte und Kultur, und er spricht in seinen besten Werken unsere deutsche Art an ... Suchen wir ihn also zu verstehen und auf seine orginale Schonheit hin zu studieren: Dann werden wir fur unser nationales Wesen in ihm einen erwiinschten Ausdruck gewinnen." Wilhelm Lubke, Geschichte der Deutschen Renaissance (1872) in Gollwitzer 11. 2 7 "aber vorallem war diese Kunstrichtung heimisch in den Slddlen und die bitrgerlichen Gewerbe waren daselbst die eingent/ichen Trdger der Renaissance geworden ... und es waren die Handwerker und Angehorige der Gilden, die Trager des Fortschritts in biirgerlichen Kreisen, die der deutschen Bewegung ihre unverwechselbare Pragung gegeben hatten: kunstlerisch-gewerblich, burgerlich-tuchtig und charaktervoll." Eitelsberger in Lenman 104. 2 8 It is interesting to note that Burger in this context meant citizen but that late 19th century social realities made a reading of the term Burger much more specific; in effect, some Burger were given greater biirgerlich [er] status than others. 2 9 Peters 221 30 Roger Chartier, New Cultural History 174. 3 1 Michel de Certeau, Practice of Everyday Life (Berkeley: U of California Press, 1984) xi. 3 2 Once this space has been constructed however, de Certeau is quick to point out that "although they are composed with the vocabularies of established languages (...) and although they remain subordinated to the prescribed syntactical forms (...), the trajectories trace out the ruses of other interests and desires that are neither determined nor captured by the systems in which they develop, de Certeau xyiii. 3 3 de Certeau xix. 3 4 de Certeau xviii. 3 5 Leipzig was an important intellectual center in Prussia, not Bavaria! Xylography is a technique of wood engraving that was developed in the early 19th century and was closely tied to the emergence of the newspaper press. To increase the speed and quality of print making, xylography was invented as a technique that facilitated an easier handling or the wood block in that the blocks were no longer cut longitudinally but across the trunk. This made a richer gradation of tone values possible (by use of a copper engraving burins instead of knives). Printmaking Tecchniques: A Guide to the Process and History of original Print-making. A. J. Weelen ed. (London: Octupus Book Ltd., 1982). 3 6 A number of subsequently famous German artists have worked for the Leipziger Illustrierte before being able to sustain themselves through painting alone. 3 7Allgemeine Zeitung 23 Feb. 1876: 804. 3 8 Peters 143. 3 9 Hartmann 8. 40 A distinct literature on German history deals exclusively with the Burgertum, the so-called Burgertum sforschung. Wolfgang Mommsen and Jiirgen Kocka are but two historians who have contributed significantly to this field. This study's discussion was greatly stimulated and informed by the three-volume collection of essays Burgertum im 19. Jahrhundert. edited by Jiirgen Kocka (Gottingen: Vandenhock & Ruprecht, 1995). 4 1 Kocka (Vol. I) 23. 4 2 This study uses the term Burgertum when referring to the range of professions just outlined but excluding the Kleinbi'trgertum. Tradesmen, small scale merchants, restaurant owners et cetera, became increasingly segregated from the Burgertum which evolved into delineating a propertied (Besitzbiirgertum) and educated bourgeoisie (Bildungsbiirgertum) throughout the late 19th century. Also, this study will employ the term upper middle class interchangeably with Burgertum. 4 3 "Die Formation Burgertum erweist sich als durch und durch konstellationsabhangig; sie entsteht und vergeht mit sich wandelnden Konstellationen. Nicht nur die Art des Btirgertums, sondern auch der Grad seiner Existenz variiert in Zeit und Raum," Kocka 17. 4 4 "Sie versthen sich wechselseitig leicht, finden sich gesellschaftlich bequem zusammen, zeigen gemeinsame Charakterziige, haben gemeinsame Grundanschauungen, sie haben auch gemeinsame Interessen der Kultur und der Politik." Kocka 17 4 5 These notions are based on a reading of Michel de Certeau's Heterologies: Discourse on the Others (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, n.d). 4 ^ The role of reading societies (Lesegesellschaften), freemasonry, social clubs and student corps in relation to the emergence of a middle class public sphere and identity has been well documented by scholars such as York Langenstein, Der Munchner Kunstverein im 19. Jahrhundert (Munich: Uni Druck, 1983). 4 7 "die Abgrenzung 'nach unten'." Kocka 15. 59 4 8 Kocka 15-18. 4 9 Paul Smith, Discerning the Subject (Minneapolis: U of Minnesota Press, 1988). 50 de Certeau xi. 5* "The beautiful, just like the sunlight, and the warmth, must be accessible to everyone since such things belong to the innermost nature of the world" read the Allgemeine Zeitung 20 Feb. 1876: 805. 52 These included the right to retain its own postal and telegraph system, its own railroads, the rights to affirm command over its army in peace time and most importantly Kulturhoheit or autonomy in cultural and educational matters. 5 3 See for example, a letter written in 1892 by artist August Endell to a cousin in Berlin after his arrival in Munich. Endell describes the hostilities he encountered as a Prussian newcomer as follows: " [there are] enough Bavarians who are nationally oriented, but [there are] many more who are so stubbornly and idiotically particularistic that one might think they had lost their minds." Makela 15. 5 4 The word Griinder translates into founder and refers directly to the founding of the Reich. 5 5 It is worth noting that the English and French middle and upper middle classes were engaged in this same process much earlier in the 19th century. The German Biirgertum's late blossoming must be largely attributed to Germany's delayed industrialization which only took place from the 1840's/ 50's onward. It can be argued that Germany's rapid transformation from a predominantely agrarian to industrial society (within less than 30 years) had more severe social repercussions than in other European societies where this same change was brought on more gradually. 5 6 Kocka 24. 5 7 Dolores Augustine, Patricians and Parvenues (London: Berg Publishers, 1994) 243. 5 8 Augustine 244. The satirical print, Einer der Edler wurde (Fig. 28) sums up these contentions. Its title translates into "one who turned noble" but the prefix edel is also used in the German language to elevate the regular to something special (for example in this image, an Edelfink is not just a regular finch but a very rare and exotic one). This representation also constructs a parvenue who has come into money and lives the life of an aristocrat so ostentatiously that any sense of social grace is lacking. While this satirical image is highly exaggerated, it still speaks to the conditions in German society from the 1870's onward. 5 9 Augustine 245. 60 Imperial Germany is often characterized as being plagued by a title craze (Titelsucht), but it should also be noted that in a society organized by principle of birthright as opposed to principle of achievement, real socio-political power came with such titles. For example, to gain access into the military or the higher civil service, a von was mandatory. Augustine quotes the going rate for Baron as one million marks (187). Late 19th century title mania and parvenues are taken up as current issues in Heinrich Mann's novels which he used as a medium to analyze relations between the Reich's different social classes. In novels such as Der Untertan or Schralaffenland. Mann proposed Griinderzeit-society as fostering a culture of parvenues whose unrestrained and frenzied obsession with social titles rendered them ultimately politically and socially impotent. 6 1 The admission ticket available to this study has obiously not been used since neither box- nor seat number have been assigned to the designated blank-spots. 62 Information about Allotria's 1898 festival In Arcadia establishes that tickets for this festival were sold publically but that the prices were high and only an elite could afford to participate in the eveny (Wolf 199). It has to also be remembered that with any Kunstlerfest, further expense was also occured by the required costumes and props. 6 3 On a superficial level it could be argued that the invitation addressed the ball and the admission ticket the procession. However, representational boundaries are never that clear and in context of the actual festival practice they in fact collapsed. During the ball, festival participants actually might have had greater license for appropriation or even subverting strict social etiquette since they were partially disguised in Renaissance costume. 6 4 David Scobey, "Anatomy of the Promenade," Social History, May 1992: 225. 6 5 Kocka also cautions his readers that the actual inter-weaving of aristocracy and upper middle classes was less pronounced in 19th century Germany than in contemporary England, France or Italy. He cites statistical data which indicates that 24% of sons and 32% of daughers of Germany's richest entrepreneurs and captialist (i.e. bankers) married into the pre-industrial elite. While these are not small numbers, they nonetheless indicate less of a merging than often times asserted. Kocka 47. 66 A term coined by Mikhail Bakhtin who was one of the first to contribute to the understanding of the carnivalesque through his influential 1920's study Rabelais and his World, trans. H . Iswolsky (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1968). 6 7 Roger Chartier, Cultural History: Between Practices and Representations, trans. L . Cochrane (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1988) 60 Terry Eagleton in Stallybrass and White eds., The Politics and Poetics of Transgression (Cornell: UP, 1993). Their introduction includes an excellent in-depth discussion of the various debates and positions on Carnival and the Carnivalesque. 6 8 Allon White in Stallybrass and White 14. 6 9 Stallybrass and White 24. 61 HI The FestzusKarl V: Photography, Art Practices and Patronage Systems i The New Medium of Photography One more body of visual representations of the Festzug Karl Fhas survived until today in the form of an extensive set of photographs. The majority of these represent distinct festival participants in their Renaissance costumes while others show groups of individuals re-enacting historical scenes. A point of interest here, lies in the fact that these photographs were not taken directly at the festival itself but at Munich's leading photography studios of Franz Hanfstaengl and Friedrich Muller where festival participants posed in their costumes. There is a clear distinction to be drawn then, between the costuming within the ball and the photographs of festival participants in costume. These two separate modes of representation and display are not to be collapsed. Photography had been introduced in Munich shortly after the French government publicized Daguerre and Nieple's photographic process in 1839. The same year, Munich academic professors of painting von Steinheil and von Kobell experimented with this new medium, and two of their photographs of the Ludwig I's Glyptothek were exhibited in Munich's Kunstverein. With this, the stage for a critical reception of photography as a new medium was set. Critics vacillated between hailing photography as a new mode of understanding of what one contemporary observer called "reality itself," or considering photography as an art form. According to one 19th century German commentator for example, "photography makes it possible to inspect reality or Wirklichkeit, up close in the comforts of one's own home."1 Acknowledging this medium's potential, this critic underlined its documentary rather than transformative or artistic powers, "since it does little other than copying lifeless nature [nature meaning all of the external world here]; to observe and grasp the living through intellect or Geist, is foreign to photography."2 Judging from this statement, this one commentator did not see photography as a threat to art or to painting which typically in the 19th century were viewed as transforming the external world through the medium of the artists' intellect and temperament. In the course of the 1840's, portrait photography quickly established an important market for itself in that photography's postulated objectivity served 19th century interests in empirical 62 observation and physiognomy.3 As cheaper plates replaced expensive silver ones, the cost of photographic reproductions decreased and critics' concern with photography's increasing 'mass appeal' gained resonance.4 With an ensuing popularity of photographic productions such as Disderi's cartes-de-visile, the perceived gap between cheap 'mass' photography and expensive 'art' photography widened and so called Kunslfotographen (art photographers) began to insist on the artistic value of their mode of representation.5 Thus, in an 1865 essay entitled "Die Kunstwurde der Photographie", Ernest Raulbach claimed that: "photography, in and of itself a blossom of science, becomes an art form when entrusted to the hands of an artist."6 This discussion of course, was deeply entwined with vested economic interests. Photographer Hanfstaengl, whose studio was one of the sites for the Festzug photographs, was a particularly popular and successful art photographer in Munich. He had been court photographer to Maximilian II and again to Ludwig II which, in light of the fierce competition for the license as Hojphotograph, was not only an accomplishment but indicated as well his high status among the photographic community and Munich society. The following undoubtedly exaggerated and cynical contemporary motto is indicative of his reputation: "One didn't know Rome unless one had seen the Pope, one didn't know Munich unless one had been burned onto a photographic plate by Hanfstaengl."7 Today, the photographs of Festzug participants are mostly in private possession but through research in Munich, I was able to locate a considerable portion of Hanfstaengl's photographs in the Stadtmuseum's Maillinger Sammlung.8 Obviously, caution is required when viewing these images in the context of a museum archive in that such collections have assembled images into a coherent unit which was not the case in 1876. Prior to the formation of this archive, the photographs were seen as a singular body of work only once, when shown in 1876 at Hanfstaengl's and Midler's studios for clients' perusal. The photographs were subsequently sold as individual Kabinett Photographien, which meant that they were dispersed among the households of festival participants.9 ii The Festzug Karl F a n d Photography At this point, it is important to call attention to the fact that the use of photography to represent the Festzug Karl V was unprecedented. Allotrids artist festival broke with a tradition that dated back to Baroque court festivals. From the 17th century onwards, it had been common to collect etchings and/ or engravings for commemorative booklets or folders that were published after a festival or procession. In fact, even the aforementioned early 19th century festivals such as the Albrecht-Diirer-Fest or the Paul-Rubens-Fesl which have been cited earleir, still stimulated representations in printed form. Photography as a mode of representation fox Allotria'?, Festzug established a new tradition and from 1876 on, photographs were taken of all major Munich artist festivals. The Festzug photographs can be divided into three categories: Several show single male and female figures dressed up as a wide variety of Renaissance figures (Figs. 7-13 and 17-19). Their enacted personas range from knight, herald, lansquenet, artist, and Emperor to Biirgerinnen of various backgrounds and even a daughter of an artist who is shown kneeling as a pious Renaissance maiden in prayer (Fig. 19). A second category (Figures 14 to 16) is composed of couples in Renaissance costumes, again depicted as filling various socio-historical ranks. A third category is comprised of historical genre scenes (Figs. 20 and 21) which, for example, re-staged a skirmish between five lansquenets. A closer examination of the first two categories, reveals that most subjects are either seated or standing in front of a dark background, each in a similar frontal pose, with sparse pieces of furniture indicating an altdeutsches or old German Renaissance interior. In these, the lighting focuses on facial expressions as well as elaborate costumes, marking them out in terms of empirical accuracy. An upper-class Burgerin (Fig. 18) for example, stands in a dignified position with her back straight and her left hand touching the folds of her exquisite dress, all visual clues that are reminiscent of painted portraits of rulers of elites from past epochs. Another female figure who is depicted as part of a Renaissance couple (Fig. 16) and is seated in an armchair, evokes the traditon of throne-portraits of past rulers. Male figures in all photographs project an air of confidence by directing their gaze to the camera lens and situating themselves in a proud and erect posture (Figs. 9-12). 64 These stylistic aspects of the Festzug photographs in conjunction with the costumes worn by their sitters, convey a sense of formal coherence which at best, was highly contrived. All photographs display their subjects in what functioned as German Renaissance dress, all featured appropriate accessories such as jewelry, hats, shoes and other props, including the occasional dagger and sabre. Preliminary sketches (Figs. 22-25) from which the costume patterns were to be developed, assured this form of coherence. Karl Salzle has pointed out a set of approximately one hundred costume sketches all of which are now also part of the Maillinger Sammlung. Allotria's costume-committee, largely composed of painting professors from the Munich Academy, had sent academic students to the Alte Pinakothek a few weeks prior to the Festzug. There, they copied 16th century fashions from the extensive Wittelsbach collection of paintings by Holbein, Durer, Cranach and other northern Renaissance painters. These sketches, some of which were even done by professors of the Academy such as August von Kaulbach or Karl Seitz, are highly competent pencil drawings enhanced with watercolor. After the academic students returned with their sketches, they were subsequently exhibited in the public space of the pub, the Abenthum, so that guests invited to the Festzug could choose patterns for their tailors to execute. They give seemingly precise renderings of 16th century fashions which are especially elaborate and detailed when suggesting women's costumes (Fig. 22). The sketches range from depicting playful costumes for young women, to uniforms for lansquenets including appropriate weaponry, to more severe attires for the middle aged Burger. These drawings and watercolors underscore the Festzug's objective of reconstructing an all-encompassing, lively and historically accurate image of German Renaissance society. Significantly, this involved pre-festival agenda was deemed necessary by organizers who strove for a truthfulness or Stilechlheil of attire as worn during the period of Charles V . 1 0 Here again, Allotria's Kiinstlerball set a precedent in relation to earlier festivals in that up until this point, it had been a common practice to rent costumes from theaters or special carnival stores.11 Viewing the photographs in the Stadtmuseum's storage rooms makes their coherence on multiple levels even more compelling. Couples for example re-invented themselves as Renaissance husband and wife. In one such image (Fig. 14) the viewer is confronted with what 65 appears to be a Renaissance aristocratic family including their young child. The patriarch is dressed in a coat with ermine collar and trousers that are bound at his knees with white tights underneath. His hat indicates his supposedly elevated status in a court hierarchy, and combined with an elaborate chain around his neck, he calls up associations with one of Holbein's well known paintings of Henry VIII. His stoutness, his beard and in particular his right hand resting on his hip displaying his 'casual' authority, makes this allusion to Henry VIII as painted by Holbein even more pertinent. His wife is portrayed in a dress that is cut to evoke conventional northern Renaissance patterns: it is velvet with a squared low neckline, a high waistline and fitted bodice that opens up into an elaborately patterned under-dress. Her sleeves are loose from shoulders to elbow where they tighten up and sport what seems to be fur ruffles. A choker of precious stones re-asserts the opulence of her attire. Their son is also dressed in a typical northern Renaissance outfit with a similar squared neckline and white ruffle-collar and a medallion around his neck. He is wearing tights and a velvet overcoat gathered at the waist with a corded sash. In comparison to the two individual subjects briefly analyzed earlier, this Renaissance couple is certainly more opulently and luxuriously dressed, suggesting their Festzug status as aristocracy. iii Photography and 19th Century Discourses on a northern Renaissance That these photographs deliberately evoke for the viewer forms of northern Renaissance painting was no coincidence. As has been noted earlier, organizers and participants of the festival deliberately dressed and acted as Renaissance personas to insert themselves into a very specific German historical genealogy. The photographs did not rupture this aspect in fact, they encased the Festzug's historical reconstruction into a high art vocabulary, one which reinforced artistic traditions of naturalism and realism which by the 19th century was seen as the typical feature of a northern Renaissance vocabulary. The use of photography to convey these notions was in turn, highly significant in that 19th century photography was in itself understood as a medium of the real. It should be recalled here, that the Festzug's all encompassing cultural strategy of recycling a northern Renaissance visual vocabulary did not stand in isolation during the 1870's but operated 66 within a larger constellation of events. As I have shown earlier, the northern Renaissance in general and its Germanic aspects in particular, were a current focus at this time. Historical genre painting emerged as a popular mode of representation in Germany. In her study on 19th century photographic Stilgeschichte, Ursula Peters refers to paintings such as Theodor Hildebrandt's Der Krieger und sein Kind (Fig. 26).12 This painting is in effect a genre scene that cast its protagonists in primarily 16th century attire and costume while lacing its subject matter with highly sentimental overtones. A father in full 16th century military uniform is holding his young child, as he either has just returned from war or is about to leave for it. These historical genre paintings received increasing attention and as Peters asserts, their taking of "[19th century] ideal of a good middle-class domesticity back to the epoch of the Renaissance" was especially popular with a middle-class audience.13 At the time the festival photographs were produced and circulated in Munich, an entire photographic genre of individuals in costume, so called Kostumstiicke or costume pieces developed a market of its own. Photographers engaged in this mode of representation simply dressed their subjects in historical costumes and took portraits of them. In this context, the festival photographs could have been understood by contemporary viewers as re-constructing a specific event, that is the Festzug, or they could have been read as generic costume pieces. In her study of various modes of 19th century photography, Peters has linked photographic costume pieces to mid 19th century historical genre paintings.14 While such causal links are problematic, it can certainly be asserted that the 1860's and 1870's proved a fertile ground for these kinds of photographic reproductions of which the anonymous "Renaissance beauty" (Fig. 27), photographed as early as 1864, is but one example. This study has devoted much attention to connecting a revival of a Renaissance visual vocabulary with the emergence of an increasingly powerful and self-conscious Burgertum. The genre of photographic costume pieces and its associated viewing practices are part of many of the paradigms outlined earlier: escape into an idealized pictorial space, re-creation of a.Schein (dream) world in which every-day power relations are either veiled or inverted, sumptuous display of conspicuous consumption as social marker, and appropriation of the past to represent the present. Peters also mentions Allotria's 67 Festzug as a mode of expression for a growing bourgeois sense of identity and self-awareness. She postulates the festival photographs as re-creating a coherent pictorial reality that could call up high art's own pajnting traditions and practices. This concurs with her earlier thesis of "art photography being a reflex of painting," or of photography reacting to the world of painting.15 However, it must be noted that Peter's assertion that late 19th century art photography was not produced in a cultural vacuum but was instead enmeshed in the same artistic debates as painting, does serve to privilege one medium (art) over the other (photography). What is being argued here, is that painters and photographers were both part of contemporary discussions on the relevance of a northern Renaissance as a visual vocabulary. Moreover, the fact that photographic costume studies as well as the Festzug photographs were displayed in bourgeois homes, assigned these productions a status of art works. Being cabinet photographs, the festival representations were displayed either next to or in place of oil paintings. 19th century debates on the worthiness of photography as an art form have relevance here. According to advertisements in contemporary magazines, Hanfstaengl and Muller undoubtedly considered themselves as artists who practiced Kunstfotographie. By the 1860's, as in other European centers, a group of German critics and photographers called for the elevation of photography into the realm of art. They claimed that photography had outgrown its initial function as the mere mechanical recording of current events. For example, photo critic Ludwig Schrank insisted in 1866 that the photographs need not be limited to "copying" an external visual reality but rather could register individual artistic "visions": "each self-confident photographer who has been endowed with an artistic spirit, is absolutely capable of realizing his artistic visions within the means provided by photography [technology]... Photography is the kind of art which records a mirror image of an idealized model through photosensitive substances."16 According to Schrank then, a mechanical transcription of an external reality is elevated to the realm of art through the agency of the photographer. In late 19th century Germany, subject matter largely distinguished art photography from news-photography. Certain contemporary critics praised art photographers' abilities to arrange imaginative and theatrical or pictorial photographic spaces. An article on genre photography in the magazine Photographischen Mitteilungen. in 1864 thus made the point that: "These kind of pictures prove that photography, 68 while considered by many as a mere trade or mechanical multiplication, is definitely capable of bringing forth truly artistic accomplishments."17 Given that the Festzug and the festival photographs were encased in a high art visual vocabulary associated with a northern Renaissance painting then, the photographs' claim to a status as art commodities in themselves, had crucial implications. If a northern Renaissance vocabulary and its German Renaissance associations could serve to legitimize specific painting practices, patronage systems and market relations, then photography's escalating demands for recognition as an art form actually threatened this complex web of relations. An interesting cleavage thus opens up between what is depicted in the Festzug photographs and for example, their material reality. By showing festival participants in Renaissance costumes, posing in front of dark backgrounds with a seemingly natural light illuminating faces, jewelry and other details, the photographs supported 19th century associations with Renaissance portrait forms. Yet, when hung in Griinderzeit Salons, these photographs claimed the status of art works and some of the high art discourses and practices they seemed to support quickly collapsed. As has been noted, photography was in the process of challenging a traditional art market of'high art' productions. The festival photographs as commodities in themselves then, must be recognized as jeopardizing the very systems they were purported to legitimize and strengthen. If they were to assert and foster specific modes of painting and patronage systems, then their material realities as photographs in effect slipped out of theses systems and made actual incursions into a market structured around painting. iv The Festzug Photographs and Community of Viewers One of the key questions that arises when dealing with the Festzug photographs devolves on their circulation and their viewership. How and by whom were these photographs seen? While assertions about possible audiences for visual culture are always difficult to make, this study is fortunate in that the photographs' designation as cabinet pieces allows for some insights into their circulation. Cabinet pieces, be they paintings or photographs were especially popular among Burger(s) in the last part of the 19th century. As the name suggests, these material objects were commodities to be placed on a cabinet or in a looser sense, to be hung on a wall. As has been 69 noted, the Burgerlwn's accumulation of new wealth during the Griinderboom was accompanied by an increased desire for social recognition and representation. One means of fulfilling this craving for recognition, was to emulate aristocratic modes of behavior.18 Ursula Peters has observed that the "burgerIiche taste for a "grand style" especially penetrated those areas [of socio-cultural life] that were best suited for elaborate display."19 Undoubtedly, GrunderzeU homes represented one space in which wealth and anticipated social status could be ostentatiously displayed. Important studies on German 19th century bourgeois Wohnkultur, that is modes of living and styles of furnishing, have emerged over the past decade.20 As part of a distinct Wohnkultur of nouveau-riche citizens of the new Empire, salons were a key component of every Burgerhome, be that an average house or an extravagant mansion. These salons were usually found at the front of a residence and as part of biirgerliches etiquette, callers of equal or higher social standing, were led into this 'show-room' to then be received by the matron and/ or master of the house. In a sense, the residents of a Burger house were symbolically represented by their salon before any visitor acutally met them. As a result, extreme consideration was given to the make up of this room. Anything valuable, decorative and indicative of its owner's good taste and culture was placed here.21 Robin Lenman has argued that this Heimkult or cult of the home, again served as a refuge from the Existenzkampf characteristic of capitalist societies such as imperial Germany. In particular, he points to the 1876 arts and crafts exhibition in Munich which is considered by Lenman as the culmination of this GrunderzeU obsession with spectacularization. Here, visitors actually walked through 'ideal' rooms that were fully furnished in a neo-Renaissance style. Significantly, the alldeutsch salon was at the height of fashion at this time and Georg Hirth's influential publication, ultimately collected in 1882 in book form Das Deutsche Zimmer der Renaissance , became a bible of good taste for contemporaneous imitators.22 That the arts and crafts exhibition took place five months after the Festzug Karl V, underscores just how potent the festival's German Renaissance vocabulary was within Munich's larger cultural sphere. The German Renaissance as it was conceptualized and appropriated by Griinderzeit individuals then, was clearly construed as the one style most suited to represent and encompass current burgerliche needs and agendas. 70 It was in such Griinderzeit salons that the festival photographs would have been displayed and incorporated into an overall decorative program. Here, the festival photographs not only contributed to the salon's Wohnkultur but also served as agents of burgerliche identity and status. That is, if the Festzug could have been read as forging specific notions of identity for its participants, then the photographs continued this process in that they displayed sitters in a northern or German Renaissance mode complete with splendid costumes, jewelry, and strategic props long after the event had ceased.23 The photographs not only 'documented' their owner's presence at Allotria's, splendid evening, but also asserted participants as privileged enough to partake in a prestigious "imagined community" of art patrons. For visitors in the home, they also evoked the significant of the so called Germanic Renaissance while simultaneously marking subjects and the owners of the photographs as legitimate heirs of this significant past. In short, to commemorate the Festzug in form of photographs to be hung in a salon, served to detain the impact of an otherwise ephemeral event and all its complex associations. On another level, the photographs further 'interiorized' Charles V's historical procession through Munich. If the Festzug moved Charles' entry from the communal space of the city into the bourgeois space of the Odeon festival hall, then the photographic representations transferred the Festzug into the even more intimate and private realm of the burgerliche home. The festival photographs' complex role in the construction of meanings around the Festzug Karl V opens up more questions about the term "northern Renaissance" itself. While this study has attempted to locate this vocabulary in terms of its 19th century uses, it nevertheless remains a highly problematic concept. In 19th century debates, the term 'northern Renaissance' continued to fluctuate between describing a historical moment and an art historical style. While 19th century art historians for the most part referred to the northern Renaissance as a style this designation became confused and thrust together in the course of the festival practice. Fundamentally, "northern Renaissance" as an art historical term is also problematic. It is partly defined in terms of high art categories of oil painting and old masters, yet it also raises the question of how genre painting's incorporation of subject matters from the every-day, operated within this construct. If the term "northern Renaissance" is used as a static umbrella term, as was 71 the case in most 19th century art historical writings, then the complex and antagonistic positions that were being negotiated and given visibility during this art historical juncture are erased. Taking all these complexities into account then, it remains that in posing for photographs a la Renaissance instead of posing for paintings, 19th century Munich patrons were not merely looking back into the past to fashion identity but were actively articulating a modern middle class culture through the new medium of photography. v The Festzug Photographs and Late 19th Century Munich Art Patronage The same audience that sat for the Festzug photographs was indeed, still actively purchasing and commissioning painting, making the relationship between contemporary painting and photography an important one. A broad spectrum of Munich citizens who were in financial positions to purchase art or to be otherwise actively engaged in artistic debates, supported academic art productions, in Germany in the last quarter of the 19th century, genre painting, including historical genre scenes as well as portraiture and animal painting, best encompassed a burgerliche conception of art. Genre paintings' depictions of scenes from every-day life while always popular in Germany, became increasingly idealized in the course of the century. By the 1870's, rural populations and their family life in particular, had advanced as genre paintings' favorite subject matter. Idealization has always been a crucial aspect of genre painting, but Munich's leading academic genre painters such as Franz von Defregger for example, took it to an extreme. In his work, subjects are cast in theater-like settings and embedded in pathos-laden anecdotes. In describing late 19th century genre painting, Ursula Peters has noted that "the idealizing view of external reality becomes increasingly sentimental and the every-day is either represented in a trivializing manner or as sentimental idyll." 2 4 This "idealized view of reality" was exactly what a majority of Griinderzeit patrons searched for in artistic productions. The predominance of genre images, animal painting and portraiture in the Munich market had significant implications for Allotria's Festzug Karl V. A saying that circulated in 1876 and which remained alive until 1925 when Jacob Wolf incorporated it into his study of Munich artist festivals, asserted the cultural superiority of Munich's academic artists in the following terms: 72 "Munich artist do not just paint al fresco, they live al fresco!"25 The irony of this statement lies in the fact that Munich's academic artists indeed, painted less "al fresco" than their counterparts in other artistic centers. Contrary to Berlin's academic artists for example, Munich academicians could not rely on large scale state commissions to earn a living. Munich's respected history painters such as Theodor von Piloty or August von Kaulbach of course, produced large history paintings, the most elevated genre category, for the Munchner Kiinsllergenossenschaft's international exhibition in the Glaspalast and for Vienna's 1873 and Philadelphia's 1876 World's Fairs. But Munich's patronage system and the 1870's, fast growing art market encouraged predominantly genre, portraiture and animal painting. This situation can largely be attributed to three factors. First, as has been outlined in Section II of this study, Munich clearly held a position of political sovereignty and cultural predominance before the Reich's unification. Its Academy drew students from all of Germany, Central Europe, and even the United States, with academic art forms thriving and in demand. After the proclamation of Prussian King Wilhelm as Emperor and the elevation of Berlin to the imperial capital however, Munich's status as independent kingdom ceased and Germany's distribution of cultural power began to slowly shift. With the Emperor residing in Berlin, state commissions for history paintings, sculptures, new buildings and other projects to embellish this new state capital, were given mainly to Berlin's local artists. Also, when Anton von Werner was appointed director of the Berlin Academy in 1874, he effected restructuring measures and modernized this institution which quickly grew to pose a serious threat to Munich's Academy 2 6 In short, from 1871 onwards, the Munich Academy embarked on a slow downward spiral in terms of influence and reputation. A second factor that hinged Munich's art system being hinged to a private market and patronage system lay with Bavaria's monarch, King Ludwig II. His reign lasted from 1864 to 1886, but by 1870, he had begun to show signs of schizophrenia and his lifelong pre-occupation with building fairy-tale castles and his fixation with Richard Wagner, proved detrimental to many of Munich's artists who had relied on his royal patronage.27 Thus, contrary to his name-sake and grandfather Ludwig I, who had the financial means and political ambitions to extensively support local artists, Ludwig II's marked absence had a significant effect on art and patronage. 73 Lastly, it should be recalled that economically, Bavaria lacked the kind of natural resources that were located in Germany's Northwest, and which had enabled Prussia to become the Empire's economic focal point for heavy industry. Munich's economy was structured around trade and commerce, and indeed Munich had become one of Southern Europe's leading trans-shipment centers. While Bavaria's economy was far from being crippled, it nonetheless could not support the kind of large-scale cultural economy that Prussia's industrial barons, such as Thyssen, Siemens or Krupp represented. Moreover, as Miriam Makela states, "those [Munich collectors] who could have afforded the cost of a major collection of contemporary art, such as local brewers like Matthias Pschor and Johann Sedelmayr, evidently preferred to bequeath money for the creation of public monuments."28 As a result of these three economic realities of the 1870's, Munich's artists relied primarily on a private art market. As in other centers, traditional state institutions such as royal academies were supplanted in late 19th century Munich by active exhibition practices of the artist-run Kunstlergenossenschaft and by the increasingly influential private art dealerships. The Munich art market had a particularly influential role in governing modes of art production during the last quarter of the 19th century. Although inter-relations between money and art were seldom acknowledged in contemporary 19th century writings, they were perpetually enmeshed. In 1893 for example, Dutch painter Roland-Horst complained that, "the work of art has become merchandise as good as any other, merchandise for speculation."29 While extended study of Munich's national and international market relations exceeds the scope of this study, it must be noted that struggles over markets were definite realities. Since the 1850's, what has come to be known as the "Munich school" had gained fame and recognition for its genre and animal paintings. During the 1870's, these subject matters were purchased increasinglyby patron's from Munich's upper Biirgertum, who hung these works in their new homes as signifiers of social status and objects of beauty.30 74 vi The Festzug Karl V, Market Relations, and Munich's Malerfursten The artist and art patrons represented in the Festzug photographs take on additional significances, given Munich's late 19th century market relations and systems of patronage. The photographs' reconstructions of a historical moment made allusions to a high art visual vocabulary in ways that had a number of implications for Allotria's academic artists involved in the conception of this Kiinstlerball. The photographs' naturalistic mode of expression and Renaissance allusions could evoke a direct link between 16th and 19th century art practices. As noted above, genre paintings were the most sought after modes of production n Munich's art market during the 1870's. Portraiture and genre painting were asserted in contemporary discourse as the dominant mode of representation during the Renaissance when Burger and aristocrats commissioned genre works and portraits for private residences. Thus, through the photographs' visual vocabularies, private systems of patronage could be marked out as indigenous to Bavaria since the Renaissance. Continuing this 'glorious' painting tradition then, contemporary artists cast themselves as guardians of culture while using the past to legitimize a thoroughly modern practice. In short, artists and art patrons who fashioned themselves as Renaissance personae articulated a modern identity during the particular economic and political intersection of 1876. The festival photographs, while authenticating the Feslzug's re-imagination of Charles V's Holy Roman Empire, also signaled Allotrian artists' revival of the Renaissance as a potent strategy for rationalizing a private market system, and for legitimizing certain forms of genre, animal and portrait productions. The particularly elevated status of Munich academic artists in the last quarter of the 19th century also plays a role here. A number of festival photographs depict leading academic artists posing as Renaissance artists. Given that the Festzug had been arranged by Allotria and that this leading Munich artist society was largely composed of academic artists, it is not surprising that this group used both the procession and the ball to mingle with Munich's upper echelons of society.31 To share a social space with aristocrats, members of the royal household and the creme de la creme of Munich society, not only opened up opportunities to aquire new patrons and commissions but also indicated these artists' influential roles in Munich's social fabric. By 75 virtue of their institutional education, academic artists were members of the Bildungsburgertum and in a society that was structured around Bildung as a social marker, their elevated status is not surprising. The sheer number of academic artists who boasted the prefix von in their names speaks for itself.32 As has been noted earlier, Berlin as Germany's new capital, continued to gain increasing import as an artistic center from 1871 onwards. Munich however laid claim to being Germany's leading cultural center since Kurfurst Karl Theodor had moved his collection from the Mannheim court to Munich in 1777.33 In the context of shifting political and cultural power relations within the Empire, art historian Miriam Makela has argued that the representation of Munich as an artistic and cultural center was particularly important at this time:3 4 "It was in this context [Bavaria's loss of autonomy as a sovereign state] that Munich's local artists assumed increased importance, for their achievements now came to be regarded as a kind of substitute for Bavaria's independence. To be sure, the state could no longer exert the political influence it once had ... but, residents reasoned, Bavaria could still function as the nation's cultural and spiritual leader, for the unification did nothing to displace Munich as preeminent art center in Germany."35 Academic artists carried a heavy burden of being called upon to produce works that aligned Munich's cultural scene with a pro-Reich paradigm while simultaneously asserting their city's superiority over other imperial centers. This responsibility was rewarded however, with an almost exaggerated amount of recognition and admiration. The ensuing veneration of the artist did not pass unnoticed and English painter John Lavery for example, noted of artists in Munich in 1880 that, "the status of a painter was equal to that of a general in the army; he was covered with decorations at public functions and saluted as a person of distinction." Art and theater critic Theodor Goering reiterated this point observing that Munich painters commanded: "an officer's position in "society," with rank determined by the value or success of his pictures... It would not be easy for an aristocrat conscious of his social prerogatives to include a musician among his friends, as a painter frequently is. The latter is invited to the summer villas of the aristocracy, where he is regarded as a companion, a chum, as it were."36 Thus, Munich artist Franz von Defregger's personification as Albrecht Diirer (Fig. 11) in a Festzug photograph warrants particular attention in that it most pronouncedly signals Allotrian artists' active self-construction as direct heirs of Renaissance artists. This phenomenon clearly 76 conveys an image of Defregger alias Durer as a humanist who had severed his ties to an artisan class and promoted himself as learned genius. Defregger, dressed in sombre colors and with a fine quality fur collar finishing off his scholarly attire, is shown seated in a chair, his direct eye contact with the viewer serving to convey an air of confidence and self-assurance. Most importantly, he is depicted holding a letter in his right hand and looking up from the papers he has placed in front of him, as though in the process of study. He is clearly not a craftsman in the midst of physical labor, but rather a thinker and intellect seemingly caught in his intellectual pursuits. In context of the brutal realities of 19th century capitalism, artists needed to be, as they have been in the Renaissance, revered as intellects and as priests of spiritual truths. Andreas Haus describes how art in the early years of the newly forged German Empire, played an important role in this time of social change. According to Haus, Griinderzeit art was to: "envelop a social reality that was marked by divisions and contradictions into a decorative jungle of un-overseeable harmony; create a corset made out of an energetic magic derived from color and aesthetic form, to strengthen the frail sense of self of modern individuals and imbue this Griinderzeit-Qgo with a sense of dominance that was directly derived from the splendor out of which this corset had been made.3 7 In this kind of cultural climate, the photograph of Defregger and his remarkable affinity with Renaissance portraits of Durer, becomes an active re-articulation of the age-old cult of the "artist as genius" or Geniekult. The Festzug's re-imag(in)ing of northern Renaissance artists brought an already current trend to a head. Throughout the 19th century, an increasing number of German artists declared Albrecht Durer and the mode of painting that he was understood to have introduced, as both a forefather and an artistic inspiration. In 1871 for example, the 400th anniversary of his death was celebrated at his grave in Nuremberg. The national art journal Kunstchronik emphasized the artists' currency: "During the celebrations of the 400th anniversary of Durer's death, it was decided that from then onward, a celebration was to be held at his grave at regular intervals of five years. Thus, artists and friends of the arts in the early morning hours of 21st of May, gathered at the grave of the old master, which was decorated with laurel leaves and which is located in the ancient and venerable graveyard of St. Johannis. After the recital of a serious piece of music, which accorded with the significance of the celebration, the curator of the Bavarian arts and crafts museum, Herr Dr. von Schorn gave a speech in which he described Diirer's accomplishments in detail and those attending were asked in closing that the legacy of this foremost artist be kept alive by actively promoting an art that ennobles every-day life."38 77 In a sense, Diirer was 're-invented' by contemporary art history as a gentiluomo of the northern Renaissance whose studio, humanitatis had liberated him from artisanship and whose mode of artistic expression opened up a field of investigation that was to be continued by contemporary artists. Hermann Grimm's 1873 Diirer monograph is but one example of this retrieval of Diirer as the alleged founder of a modern German art as asserted by institutional art practices.39 This construction of the artist-as-genius and priest of spiritual truth while closely connected to late 19th century institutional art practices, did not remain without lucrative economic benefits for certain segments of Munich's artistic community. Allotrids president for almost twenty years, Franz von Lenbach, serves as perfect example of an artist whose art was at a premium during the 1870's and 80's and who consequently was able to amass a fortune by painting primarily portraits of individuals from Munich's upper echelons of society.40 With late 19th century Munich being largely structured around capitalist value systems, financial earnings served as a chief measure for professional success. Entrepreneurial artists such as Franz von Lenbach fared extremely well in that he always supplied the art market with what was en vogue. He was also one of Munich's most lustrous Malerfurst, one who not only possessed great wealth, but had also earned the highest social honors and held political influence that exceeded the artistic realm. His elaborate Italian Renaissance villa in the heart of Munich, which today, serves as the Lenbach Museum and houses an extensive collection of German Expressionists as well as changing exhibitions of contemporary art, attests to his status a princely painter 4 1 This villa best illustrates Lenbach's progressive and market oriented spirit. Completed in the early 1880's, the Lenbach Haus not only served as living quarters for the painter and his family but also housed an enormous private atelier which was open to the public and led straight into the part of the villa that had been conveyed into a show and sales room for his work. Princely lifestyles such as Lenbach's, lent artist and academic professor August von Kaulbach's personification of Emperor Charles V in the Festzug an interesting twist; in the physical absence of King Ludwig II from Munich's social scene, the "Artist as King" (Fig. 8) compensated or even re-created some of the magnificence traditionally befitting of the royal court. A thriving private market for portrait and genre painting with the Burgetumr as relentless patrons and buyers of art, enabled Lenbach and 78 those like him, to actually live like kings. They owned mansions in Munich, employed servants, moved in the best circles, gave elaborate dinner parties and private festivals, owned country estates (two examples are those of Lenbach on the Siarnberger See and of Defregger in Bolzano),42 and in traveling Europe were welcomed by the most esteemed households in their host-cities. In short, conspicuous consumption was rampant among Munich's Malerfiirsten and according to Miriam Makela, both Lenbach and Kaulbach's widows were included in the register of Bavarian millionaires published in 1914.43 That their wealth came at the expense of other less fortunate artists has been outlined by Robin Lenman. He articulates the dark side of Munich's art system when observing that Munich's artistic community was shaped like a pyramid along socio-economic lines. At the top, Lenbach and his like reigned while at its broad bottom, Munich's "artist proletariat" fought for survival. The Malerfiirsten and their vested interests controlled Munich's art world and unless dissenting artists were willing to expand into the fields of advertising or publishing for example, financial success was extremely difficult to ascertain. It can certainly be argued that the Malerfiirsten'?, elaborate lifestyles and their grandiose reign during artist festivals such as the Festzug Karl Fwere also integrally entwined with Munich's asserted fame as Germany's leading artistic center. Artists casting themselves in the mold of their Renaissance predecessors found a fertile ground for their artistic practice in Munich, while Munich in turn, would not have been considered Isar-Athens without their success. In 1885, Lenbach underlined the illustrious role he wanted to play within the artistic community: "I wanted to build myself a palace that would outshine everything that had come before; there, the powerful centers of European art should be united with the present. " 4 4 And in 1889, he emphasized the social and artistic links this status would enforce: "My villa should be the center of artistic life and social interests in Munich." 4 5 In this context, the invitation of delegates from other German cities to Allotria's Festzug Karl V took on yet another significance. It can be assumed that delegates arrived in Munich prior to the Festzug and were, if not housed then at least entertained, by fellow artists. To show off splendid life styles and social practices in front of these individuals, could not but re-assert Munich Malerfiirsten's recognition on a national level. 79 1 Ursula Peters, Stilgeschichte der Photographie 23. 2 Ibid 23. 3 Notions which have emerged from Enlightenment ideologies such as encyclopedic knowledge, rationality, positivism and individualism. 4 19th century critics already used this term but in relation to its present resonances, it should be noted that "mass appeal" was far more limited (in part brought on by different technologies, modes of dissemination of information et cetera). 5 He developed a special camera through which he was able to fit eight small pictures onto a single negative. Peters 210. 6 Peters 213. 7 Franz Hanfstaengl (Exhibition Catalogue: Munich Stadtmuseum, 1984) 18. 8 Hanfstaengl's grandson gave a large portion of his grandfather's studio-estate to the Stadtmuseum. A portfolio of the 1876 festival photographs was among this bequest. 9 And possibly even among those 'unlucky' members of Munich society who could not participate in the festival for lack of social influence but who still desired a piece of memorabilia from Allotria's famous Kiinstlerfest. 1 0 Kunstchronik 11. 21 Jan. 1876: 246. 1 1 According to one contemporary newspaper source, it appears that no tailor in Munich was able to take any more orders for Festzug costumes (or any other work) within days of Allotria's exhibition of the sketches. Allgemeine Zeitung: 804. 1 2 Peters 218. 1 3 Peters 221. ' 1 4 Peters 219. 1 5 Peters 219-226 and 261. 1 6 Schrank in Peters 217. 1 7 Peters 218. 1 8 The Festzug Karl Kas part of bourgeois ball-culture has already been analyzed earlier in this study. 1 9 Peters 261. 2 0 Such as Renaissance der Renaissance. Ein Burgerlicher Kunststil im 19. Jahrhundert (Exhibition Catalogue; Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 1992) or Wolfgang Bronner, "Schichtenspezifische Wohnkultur. Die burgerliche Wohnung des Historismus, Kunstpolitik und Kunstforderung im Kaiserreich. E. Mai, H . Pohl and S. Waetzoldt eds. (Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, 1982). 2 1 Often, these salons were so stuffed with furniture, carpets, heavy draperies, pillows, folwers, musical instruments and art, that they should have overwhelmed even the most prunkbedurftig (obsessed with splendor and magnificance) a visitor. Also, they usually were much larger than any other room in the house and in a sense, served as a true facade. 2 2 Published in bookform in 1882 but circulating in form of newspaper excerpts much earlier. 2 3 This study assumes that for the most part, festival participants would choose photographs that depicted themselves in costume. This is not to exclude re-enactments of historical scenes or a portrait of the "Emperor and Empress" from private purchasing practices. Unfortunately, I was not able to access archival data (such as receipts) that would allow insight into individual purchases since most of Hanfstaengl's business materials are no longer in existence. 2 4 Defregger's preferred subject matter were imagined incidents from Tyrol's wars of liberation that were usuallybased on historical events but were shamelessly exploited for the sake of emotional appeal. This topic not only supplied him with themes of suffering and heroism for his paintings but also had particular resonance in late 19th century Munich. Just as the Tyrolians had resisted Napoleon's foreign rule, so were certain groups of contemporary Bavarians antagonistic to Prussia's Fremdherrschafl and dominance over Bavaria in context of the 1871 Empire. 2 4 Peters 214. In this context, it can also be argued that if Munich artists indeed lived "al fresco", then the Festzug in a sense represented history painting "come to life". 2 6 It is interesting to note that many of the changes Anton von Werner instituted in Berlin, were measures that had been in effect at the Munich Academy for many years. Werner's introduction of master ateliers for example, was directly modeled on the Munich Academy's mode of teaching. 2 7 Ludwig I would only extend his patronage toward Wagner's Bayreuth Festspielhaus (1876) and upon succumbing to more frequent spells of schizophrenic episodes from 1880 onwards, he led an increasingly secluded yet eccentric life in his various fairy castles until his accidental drowning in 1886. 80 2 8 Makela 17. 2 9 Jensen 19. 3 0 An interesting economic stratification of this mode of behavior should be noted: while wealthy patrons purchased oil paintings, photography and/ or precious engravings, the Kleinbiirgertum predominantly bought cheaper reprints of significant paintings or cut out newspaper illustrations to hang into their homes. 3 1 At least all instrumental positions within this organization were occupied by academicians which is not to say that non-academic artists did not participate in A llotria's festivals or pub evenings. As a matter of fact, the coalescence of academic and independent artists within Allotria increased over the years. 3 2 The right to use this prefix was bestowed upon esteemed members of Bavarian society upon receiving the St. Michaelis-Orden. This medal originated in the Middle Ages and in the 19th century, still served to symbolically indicate its recipiant's elevation to nobility and presentability at court (Hoffahigkeit). 3 3 Earlier artist festivals have already been contextualized in this study as helping pave the ground for Munich's reputation as Isar-Athens —Isar being the river flowing through Munich. 3 4 Isabel Balzer's forthcoming PhD. dissertation "Exhibiting a Unified Germany" (Northwestern University) argues that by the time Berlin instigated its 1886 Jubilaums-exhibition, Berlin had taken over Munich's former position as the Germany's cultural metropolis. 3 5 Makela 15. 3 6 Makela 15. This also ties in with the aforementioned St. Michaelisorden, which was increasingly bestowed upon academic artists. 3 7 "Kunst hullte die von Bruchen und Widerspriichen brutal durchzogene soziale Wirklichkeit in einen dekorativen Dschungel unubersichtlicher Harmonie; Kunst vermochte es, der schwankenden ich-Starke der modernen Individuen ein mit alien Energien asthetischer Farb- und Form-Magie aufgeladenes Korsett zu stiften, aus dessen stutzendem Prunk sich das Ego der Griinderzeit noch eben mit dem Gefuhl der Dominanz erheben konnte. Haus 100. 3 8 "Als am 21. Mai 1828 der 400. jahrige Todestag Albrecht Durer's in Nurnberg gefeiert wurde, ward beschlossen, in Zwischenraumen von je funf Jahren am Grabe des Kiinstlers eine Feierlickkeit zu veranstalten. So versammelten sich denn am 21. in friiher Morgenstunde auf dem altehrwiirdigen Kirchhofe zu St. Johannis um die Lorbeergeschmiickte Grabstatte des groBen Meisters eine Anzahl Kunstfreunde und Kunstler. Nach dem Vortrag eines der ernsten Feier angemessensn Musikstiickes hielt der Kustos des Bayerischen Gewerbebmuseums, Herr Dr. von Schorn die Festrede, in welcher er in eingehender Weise das Wirken Dureres schilderte und zum SchluB forderte, das Andenken des Meisters durch Forderung der das Leben veredelnden Kunstbestrebungen zu ehren." Kunstchronik Beiblatt zur Zeitschrift Bildender Kunst. VI (1871) 579. 3 9 Hermann Grimm, Albrecht Diirer. Sammlung gemeinverstandlicher wissenschaftlicher Vortrage. Virchow & Wattenbach eds. (Berlin: 1873). 4 0 It must be added that Lenbach also portrayed numerous aristocrats and that today, he is probably best known for his many portraits of Reich chancellor Otto von Bismarck. 4 1 The Lenbach Haus holds one of the largest collections of works by members of the Blaue Reiter group (such as A. Jawlensky, M . Werefkin, G. Mtinther, and its most popular member W. Kandinsky). 4 2 Fritz August von Kaulbach and Franz von Defregger owned villas in the Kaulbachstrasse (named after Kaulbach's uncle); Arnold Bocklin a palace in the AuBeren PrinzregentenstraBe; Franz von Stuck a villa in the Prinzregenten StraBe today also a museum, and Adolf von Hildebrandt's mansion in the Maria- Theresien- StraBe which now houses the Monacensia library/ collection. 4 3 Makela 17. 4 4 Norbert Huse, Kleine Kunstgeschichte Miinchens (Munich: C.H. Beck, 1990) 186. 4 5 Huse 186. 81 Conclusion The 1870's were somewhat of a golden age for Allotria and the academic artists who were working under its auspices. As a leading Munich artist society, Allotria served as a space for the formation of identity and community while representing its members' vested interests. When Bavaria lost its political autonomy in 1871 and little doubt remained that of all the German states, Prussia wielded the most power in this new Reich under Emperor Wilhelm I, art and culture were advanced as important weapons in the battle for sovereignty. If politically debilitated by the unification, then at least culturally, Munich's local art community fought to retain the city's fame as the nation's artistic and spiritual leader. As one consequence of their active roles in engineering Munich's renown as cultural metropolis, official artists (and the majority of these artists gathered under the aegis of Allotria), were accorded high status and social standing. It is within this socio-political juncture that Allotria's 1876 Festzug Karl V was conceived and carried out. The festival's re-imaging of Charles V's historic passing through Munich in 1530 was encased in a visual vocabulary that referenced high art froms and had very specific resonances in Munich's late 19th century cultural fabric. While contemporaries could take up Allotria's Festzug in many different ways, a recurring engagement with the event in newspaper accounts for example, was on the level of nation. In gaining access to some of the multiple layers of self-construction and self -representation operating in and through this cultural practice, this study has investigated some of the ways in which 19th century discourses constructed a specifically German and northern Renaissance language to conjure up notions of empires past and present. Embarking upon this investigative path has brought to light communal needs to find ways of articulating a sense of national unity and identity through the appropriation of a specific history - that of the early 16th century. However, a central tenet of this thesis has been that the 1871 Empire's socio-political realities were fissured and as such, the constructs of nation which were ascribed to and evoked by Allotria's festival were highly problematic. Indeed, this was marked in the way in which the event was transformed in its many representational forms. 82 Allolria's Festzug shifted a cultural practice that originally had taken place within the communal space of the city into the new arena of the semi-exclusive bourgeois space of Munich's Odeon festival hall. The visual re-presentations of the procession of Charles V and the modern celebration itself, served to interiorize the event even further by circulating via printed forms and photography; these in turn, constructed communities within the private realm of the bourgeois interior. This study has elaborated some of the multifarious problems associated with Allolria's reconstruction of an event from the Holy Roman Empire. Ultimately, the past that was re-staged by the festival was a contradictory one and while celebrated in 1876 as the predecessor of Germany's'new nation state, Charles V's Empire was little more than a chimera. A major focal point within this study, the analysis of a number of different visual re-representations of the Festzug in print and photographic form, has provided one means of exploring the range of tensions that operated within the idealized construct of national unity. What I have tried to emphasize, is that the visual vocabulary associated with a northern Renaissance mode was one that was shifting and unstable; as a result, it could be appropriated to very different interests. By drawing on Michel de Certeau's concepts of cultural strategies and tactics, I have attempted to open up ways in which the Festzug's visual representations could have been taken up by a range of constituencies each with different stakes in Germany's new socio-political realities of nationhood and in Munich's particular art system. What emerges, is that Allolria's 1876 Festzug Karl V was neither a nostalgic turning to the legacy of German history nor simply a means to establish a genealogy that linked various festival constituencies to what was now a celebrated historical moment. Rather, I have suggested that this cultural practice and the ways in which it could be taken up by contemporaries, could accomodate particular forms of self-representation crucial to new market relations, to systems of patronage within Munich's modern middle class culture, and to a new status of the artist assertively promoted by members of Allotria. Within this frame, the Festzug with all its dramatic fanfare, music, and elaborate dress, became a multi-layered arena in which diverse communities of artists, aristocracy and Biirgertum negotiated what were in fact shifting representations of nation and class. 83 At the outset of this study, Karl Salzle's poetic description of 19th century German artist festivals as "bright butterflies"1 was evoked. On one level, this admittedly romanticized citation, has served to conjure up what historians have celebrated as a major manifestation of Munich's vital art culture - one where art and leisure could come together as vibrant spectacle. But Salzle's image also evokes metamorphosis in relation to Allotrids 1876 Festzug Karl V. T have used the metaphor to signal how process, transformation, and constant change were crucial to this festival's form. 84 1 Salzle 139. BIBLIOGRAPHY 85 Acht Tage in Munchen: Wegweiser fur Fremde und Einheimische. Munich: Druck und Verlag von Georg Franz, 1863 [new edition: Gerber Verlag, 1983]. "Allotria in Munchen." Kunstchronik 32 (1886): 516-23.. Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso, 1993. Augustine, Dolores. Patricians and Parvenues: Wealth and High Society in Wilhelmine Germany. London: Berg Publishers, 1994. Bachmaier, Doris. Lorenz Gedon 1844-1883. Diss. Ludwig Maximilians U. Munich: Uni Druck, 1988. Balzer, Isabel. "Exhibiting Unified Germany, 1871-1889: Bavaria, Prussia and the Display of Politics." Diss. Northwestern University, 1995. Bartmann, Dominik. Anton von Werner: Zur Kunst und Kunstpolitik im Deutschen Kaiserreich. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag fur Kunstwissenschaft, 1985. Berdahl, Robert M . "New Thoughts on German Nationalism." The American Historical Review 77 (1972): 65-80. Bhabha, Homi. "Narrating the Nation." Nation and Narration. London: Routledge, 1990. Blunt, Alison. Travel. Gender, and Imperialism: Mary Kinsley and West Africa. London: The Guilford Press, 1994. Bosl, Karl. "Munchen: Deutschlands Heimliche Hauptstadt." Zeitschrift fur Bayerische Landesgeschichte 30 (1967): 298-313. Botzenhart Manfred. Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte 1806-1949. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1993. Braun, Waltraud and Guenter Braun. Mazenatentum in Berlin: Burgersinn und Kulturelle Kompetenz unter sich verandernden Bedingungen. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1993. Chartier, Roger. Cultural History: Between Practices and Representation. Trans. L. Cochrane. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1988. "Texts, Printing, Readings" The New Cultural History. Ed. Lynn Hunt. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989. Clark, Timothy J. The Painting of Modern Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984. 86 Conze, Werner. "Das Deutsche Kaiserreich 1871-1918. Wirtschaftlich-Soziale Bedingungen." Ed. Ekkehard Mai et al. Kunstpolitik und Kunstforderung im Kaiserreich. Berlin: Gebriider Mann, 1982. Dangl, Hans. Die Fliegenden Blatter als Spiegel ihrer Zeit. Wurzburg: K. Triltsch Verlag, 1938. De Certeau, Michel. Practice of Everyday Life. Trans. Steven Rendall. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Dirks, Nicholas B. et al. eds. Culture. Power. History. Princeton: Princeton U Press, 1994. "Der Miinchner Kunstlerball." Beilage Allgemeine Zeitung. 23 Feb. 1876: 805-806. "Die Eroffnung der Deutschen Kunst- und Kunstgewerbe Ausstellung in Munchen." Beiblatt Zeitschrift fur Bildende Kunst 37 (June 1876): 585-593. Die Munchner Schule. Exhibition Catalogue. Munich: Bruckmann, 1979. Dreyfus, H. and Rabinow P. eds. Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago: 1982. Ebertshauser, Heidi. Kunsturteile des 19. Jahrhunderts: Zeugnisse. Manifeste. Kritiken zur Munchner Malerei. Munich: Bruckmann, 1983. Edwards, Elizabeth. Anthropology and Photography 1860-1920. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992. Eitelsberger, Freiherr von. "Die deutsche Renaissance und die Kunstbestrebungen der Gegenwart." Zeitschrift fur Bildende Kunst 11 (1876): 74-82. Festschrift: Ein Halbes Jahrhundert Munchner Kultur-Geschichte: Erlebt mit der Kunstlergesellschaft Allotria. Munich: Thiemig, 1959. Franz Hanfstaengl. Exhibition Catalogue, Stadtmuseum. Munich: n.p., 1984. Franz von Lenbach 1836-1904. Exhibition Catalogue, Lenbach Haus. Munich: Prestel Verlag, 1987. Franz von Stuck. Exhibition Catalogue, Museum Villa Stuck. Munich: Lipp GmbH, 1982. Friedel, Helmut. Lenbachhaus Munchen. Munich: Prestel Verlag, 1995. Friedrichs-Friedlander, Carola. Architektur als Mittel der Selbstdarstellung im 19. Jahrhundert. Munich: Miscellanea Bavarica Monacensia, Stadtarchiv, 1980. Glaser, Hermann. Bildungsburgertum undNationalismus: Politik und Kultur im Wilhelminischen Deutschland. Munich: DTV, 1993. 87 Gollwitzer, Heinz. "Zum Fragenkreis Architekturhistorismus und politische Ideologie." Zeitschrift fur Kunstgeschichte 42 (1979): 1-15. Grassinger, Peter. Munchner Feste und die Allotria: Ein Jahrhundert Kulturgeschichte. Munich: Bayerland, 1990. Grasskamp, Walter. Die unbewaltigte Moderne: Kunst und Offentlichkeit. Munich: Beck, 1989. Grimm, Hermann. Albrecht Diirer. Sammlung gemeinverstandlicher wissenschaftlicher Vortrage. Eds. Virchow& Wattenbach. Berlin: n.p., 1873. Grosslein, Andrea. Die internationalen Kunstaustellungen der Munchner Kunstlergenossenschaft im Glaspalast in Munchen von 1869 bis 1888. Eds. Karl Bosel and Richard Bauer. Munich: Uni Druck, 1987. Habel, Heinrich. Das Odeon in Munchen und die Fruhzeit des Offentlichen Konzertsaalbaus. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co., 1967. Hamann, Richard and Hermand Jost. Gruenderzeit. Munich: Nymphenburger Verlagshandlung, 1971. Vol. 1 of Epochen deutscher Kultur von 1870 bis zur Gegenwart 2 vols. Natural ismus. Munich: Nymphenburger Verlagshandlung, 1971. Vol. 2 of Epochen deutscher Kultur von 1870 bis zur Gegenwart 2 vols. Hardtwig, Wolfgang. Nationalism us und Burgerkultur in Deutschland 1500-1914. Gottingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1994. Hartmann, Wolfgang. Der Historische Festzug. Munich: Prestel Verlag, 1976. Haus, Andreas. Ernst ist das Leben, Heiter ist die Kunst. Exhibition Catalogue. Berlin: Preussischer Kulturbesitz, 1971. Haxthausen, C. and H. Suhr, eds. Berlin: Culture and Metropolis. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1990. Henning, Paul. "Einfuhr von Kunstwerken in America. Kunst und Kunstler 10, (1911/2): 621. Hirth, Georg. "Giebt es Volkscharakter in der Bildenden Kunst?" Wege zur Kunst. Vol. 1. Munich: 1902. Huebinger G. and Wolfgang Mommsen, eds. Intellektuelle im Deutschen Kaiserreich. Frankfurt: Fischer Verlag, 1993. Huse, Norbert. Kleine Kunstgeschichte Munchens. Munich: C.H. Beck, 1990. Jefferies, Matthew. Politics and Culture in Wilhelmine Germany: The Case of Industrial Architecture. Oxford: Berg Publishers, 1995. 88 Jensen, Robert. Marketing Modernism in Fin de Siecle Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994. Kahn, Julius. Munchens GroBindustrie und Grofihandel. Munich: Lindauersche Uni-Buchhandlung, 1913. Kennedy, Paul and Anthony Nicholls. Nationalist and Racialist Movements in Britain and Gemany before 1914. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd., 1981. Knapp, Steven. "Collective Memory and the Actual Past." Representations 26 (Spring 1989): 123-149. Kocka, Jiirgen, ed. Burgertum im 19. Jahrhundert. Vol. 1-3. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1995. Kraus, Andreas. Grundziige der Geschichte Baverns. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1984. "Kiinstlermaskenfest in Munchen." Kunstchronik 15 (1876): 245. Langbehn, Julius. Rembrandt als Erzieher. Von einem Deutschen. Leipzig: n.p., 1890. Langenstein, York. Der Munchner Kunstverein im 19. Jahrhundert: Ein Beitrag zur Entwicklung des Kunstmarkts und des Austellungswesens. Munich: Uni Druck, 1983. Lemagny, Jean-Claude and Andre Rouille. A History of Photography: Social and Cultural Perspectives. Cambridge: Campridge University Press, 1987. Lenman, Robin. Die Kunst, die Macht und das Geld: Zur Kulturgeschichte des Kaiserlichen Deutschland 1871-1918. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag, 1994. "Art and Tourism in Southern Germany, 1850-1930. The Arts, Literature, and Society. Ed. Marwick, Arthur. London: Routledge, 1990. Lichtenstein Sigmund. "Deutsche Kunst- und Industrieaustellung in Munchen." Zeitschrift fur Bildende Kunst 11 (1876): 290-298. Lohneysen, Wolfgang Frhr. von. "Der Einfluss der Reichsgriindung von 1871 auf Kunst und Kunstgeschmack in Deutschland." Zeitschrift fur Religions- und Geistesgeschichte 12 (1960): 2-44. Ludwig, Horst. KunstGeld und Politik um 1900 in Munchen: Formen und Ziele der Kunstfinanzierung und Kunstpolitik wahrend der Prinzregentenara (1886-1912). Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, 1986. Vol. 8 of Kunst, Kultur und Politik im Kaiserreich. 8 vols. 1982-86. Macdonnell, Diane. Theories of Discourse: An Introduction. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986. 89 Mai, Ekkehard and Stephen Waetzoldt, eds. Kunstverwaltung, Bau- und Denkmal-Politik im Kaiserreich. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, 1982. Vol. 1 of Kunst Kultur und Politik im Kaiserreich. 8vols. 1982-86. Mai, Ekkehard. "Problemgeschichte der Munchner Kunstakademie." Ed. Thomas Zacharias. Tradition und Widerspruch. 175 Jahre Kunstakademie Munchen. Muncih: Prestel Verlag, 1985. Ideengeschichte und Kunstwissenschaft im Kaiserreich. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, 1983. Vol.3 of Kunst Kultur und Politik im Kaiserreich. 8 vols. 1982-86. Kunstpolitik und Kunstforderung im Kaiserreich: Kunst im Wandel der Sozial-und Wirtschaftsgeschichte. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, 1982. Vol.2 of Kunst Kultur und Politik im Kaiserreich. 8 vols. 1982-86. Makela, Miriam. The Munich Secession: Art and Artists in Turn-of-the-Century Munich Princeton: University Press, 1990. Mann, Heinrich. Der Untertan. Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, 1994 [new edition]. Mommsen, Wolfgang. Burgerliche Kultur und Kunstlerische Avantgarde 1870-1918. Frankfurt: Verlag Ullstein, 1994. Mommsen, Theodor. Der Autoritare Nationalstaat; Verfassung. Gesellschaft und Kultur im Deutschen Kaiserreich. Frankfurt: Fischer, 1990. Munchner Neueste Nachrichten. 20 Feb. 1876: 152. Pecht, Friedrich. Geschichte der Munchner Kunst. Munich: Verlagsanstalt fur Kunst und Wissenschaft, 1888. Peters, Ursula. Stilgeschichte der Photographie in Deutschland 1839-1900. Cologne: Du Mont, 1979. Pixis, Theodor. "Wie ein Kiinstlerfest gemacht wird." Kunst und Handwerk 47 (1897-8): 269-284. Plessner, Helmuth. Die verspatete Nation: Uber die politische Verfiigbarkeit burgerlichen Geistes. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer Verlag, 1959. Ranke, Winifiried. Franz von Lenbach; Der Munchner Malerfiirst. Darmstadt: Kiepenheuer & Witsch, 1986. Rassow, Peter. Deutsche Geschichte. Stuttgart: Metzlersche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1987. Renaissance der Renaissance: Ein burgerlicher Kunststil in 19. Jahrhundert. Exhibition Catalogue. Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 1992. 90 Reulecke, Jiirgen. "Von der Revolution zur Reichsgriindung." Eds. Ulf Dirlmeier et al. Kleine Deutsche Geschichte. Stuttgart: Reclam Universal Bibliothek, 1995. Romantik und Restoration. Stadtmuseum Exhibition Catalogue, Stadtmuseum. Munich: Hugendubel Verlag, 1987. Roth, Eugen. Der Glaspalast in Munchen. Glanz und Ende 1854-1931. Munich: Suddeutscher Verlag, 1971. Salzle, Karl. "Der GroBe Kreis der Allotria." Ein Halbes Jahrhundert Munchner Kulturgeschichte. Munich: Thieming, 1959. "Das Leben im Fest." Ein Halbes Jahrhundert Munchner Kulturgeschichte. Munich: Thieming, 1959. Schlittgen, Hermann. Erinnerungen. Munich: Albert Langen, 1926. Scobey, David. "Anatomy of the Promenade." Social History 17. no. 2 (May 1992): 203-227. Sepp, Johannes N. Ludwig Augustus und das Zeitalter der Wiedergeburt der Kunste. Schaffhausen: n.p., 1869. Sheehan, James J. "What Is German History? Reflections on the Role of the Nation in German History and Historiography." The Journal of Modern History 53. no. 1 (March 1981): 1-24. Smith, Paul. Discerning the Subject. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988. Stallybrass, Peter and Allon White. The Politics of Transgression. Cornell: University Press, 1993. Stunner, Michael. Die Reichsgrundung: Deutscher Nationalstaat und Eurpaisches Gleichgewicht im Zeitalter Bismarcks. Munich: DTV, 1984. Szeemann, Harald. Der Hang zum Gesamtkunstwerk: Europaische Utopien seit 1800. Frankfurt: Verlag Sauerlander, 1983. Tagg, John. The Burden of Representation. Amherst: Univesity of Massachusetts Press, 1988. Grounds of Dispute: Art History. Cultural Politics and the Discursive Field. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota Press, 1992, Teeuwisse, Nicolaas. Vom Salon zur Secession: Berliner Kunstleben zwischen Tradition und Aufbruch zur Moderne. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag fur Kunstwissenschaft, 1986. Thomsett, Andrea. "Festival Presentation Beyond Words: The Stuttgart Baptism of 1616." Master's Thesis, U of British Columbia, 1990. Traum und Wirklichkeit: Wien 1870-1930. Exhibition Catalogue. Vienna: Stadt Verlag, 1986. Verein Berliner Kunstler: Versuch einer Bestandsaufnahme von 1841 bis zur Gegenwart. Berlin: Nicolaische Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1991. "Von der Deutschen Kunst- und Kunstindustrieausstellung in Muenchen." Beiblatt Zeitschrift fur Bildende Kunst 42 (July 1876): 665-668. Weber, Lie. Gegensatz des Deutschen und des Franzosischen Volksgeistes. Zugleich ein Mahnwort zur Selbstaufraffung des dt. Volkes. Leipzig: Pierson Verlag, 1891. Weelen, A. J., ed. Printmaking Techniques: A Guide to the Process and History of original Print-making. London: Octupus Book Ltd., 1982. Wolf, Georg-Jacob. Munchner Kunstlerfeste & Munchner Kunstlerchroniken. Munich: Bruckmann, 1925. Yates, Francis. Astraea. London: Routledge & Kegan, 1975. "Zweck und Ziel der Allgemeinen Deutschen Kunst- und Kunstindustrieausstellung in Munchen. Beiblatt Zeitschrift fur Bildende Kunst 34 (June 1876): 589. Fig. 1 Leo von Klenze. Odeon and Leuchtbergpalais against the Bazar. 1840. 93 Fig. 2 Fr. August von Kaulbach, Lenbach and his Colleagues gathered in the Abenthum, 1899. Fig. 3 Carl von Piloty. Invitation to the Paul-Rubens Festival 1857. 95 Fig. 4 The Costume Festival of Munich's Artist Society Allotria, 1876. Fig. 5 Fr. August von Kaulbach, Invitation to Allotria's 1876 Artist-Costume-Festivah 1876. Fig. 6 Franz Widnmann, Admission Ticket to the Festzug Karl V, 1876. I Fig. 7 Franz Hanfstaengl Franz von Lenbach in Costume from the Period of Charles V. 1876. 99 Fig. 8 Friedrich Muller, Painter August von Kaulbach dressed as Emperor Charles V, 1876. 100 Following Page: Fig. 9 Franz Hanfstaengl, Eugen Hanfstaengl as Herold. 1876. Fig. 10 Friedrich Muller, Painter Claudius von Schraudolph in Armour and Pelt. 1876. Fig. 11 Franz Hanfstaengl, Franz von Defregger as Albrecht Purer. 1876. Fig. 12 Franz Hanfstaengl, C. von Schraudolph as Lansquenet with Sword for two Hands, 1876. Following Page: Fig. 13 Franz Hanfstaengl, Franz von Seitz dressed as a Turkish Commander, 1876. Fig. 14 Franz Hanfstaengl. Rudolf von Seitz with his Wife and Daughter; a la Holbein, 1876. Fig. 15 Franz Hanfstaengl, Architect Georg von Hauberrisser and Wife, dressed as a northern Renaissance Tradesmen and his Wife, 1876. Fig. 16 Schulz and Suck, Painter Eduard Teimer and Wife from Karlsruhe, 1876. 103 Fig. 17 (top) Friedrich Muller, Lady in Costume from the Period of Charles V. 1876. Fig. 18 (bottom) Friedrich Muller, Unkown Lady, costumed as a 16th Century Burgerinn, 1876. 19 Lolo von Hornstein, dressed as Holbein's Daughter as depicted in "Madonna des Biirzermeisters Meyer", 1876. 106 Fig. 20 Franz Hanfstaengl, Fighting Scene of Five Men in altdeutschen Costumes. 1876. Fig. 21 Friedrich Muller. Jester. 1876. Fig. 22 Rudolph Kuppelmayr, Costume Design for the Festzun Karl V, 1876. 108 Fig. 23 Ludwig Herterich, Costume Design for the Festzug Karl V, 1876. 109 Fig. 24 (left) Friedrich August von Kaulbach, Costume Design for the Festzug Karl V, 1876. Fig. 25 (right) Heinrich Lossow, Costume Design for the Festzug Karl V, 1876. Fig. 26 Ferdinand Theodor Hildebrandt, Der Krieger und sein Kind. 1832. Fig. 27 Renaissance Beauty, 1864. Fig. 28 Einer, der Edler wurde, 1899. 


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items