A preliminary version of this essay was presented at the Center for Literary and Cultural Studies at Harvard University. I wish to thank the following institutions andindividuals for facilitating my access to the archival materials on which this study is based: Historisches Archiv der Stadt Köln;Gesellschaft für Rheinische Geschichtskunde, Cologne; Universitätsbibliothek Bonn, Handschriftenabteilung: Universitätsarchiv Bonn; Warburg Institute, University of London; Landesamt für Denkmalpflege Sachsen-Anhalt, Halle; Professor J. B. Trapp; Dr. Joachim Deeters; Dr. Hans-Joachim Krause; Klaus Dziobek, and Ursula Hausen. An Andrew W. Mellon Faculty Fellowship in the Humanities at Harvard University and a Research Time Stipend from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada made the research and writing of this possible. I am very grateful to Professors Roger Chickering, John Shearman, and Walter Simons for their insightful readings of this essay; special thanks are due to Professors Bryce Lyon and Joanna Ziegler, whose critical questioning contributed significantly to the genesis and shaping of my argument.

1. Lamprecht, Karl, Deutsche Geschichte, 12 vols. (Berlin, 1891–1909);Google Scholar

idem, Deutsches Wirtschaftsleben im Mittelalter. Untersuchungen über die Entwicklung der materiellen Kultur des platten Landes auf Grund der Quellen zunächst des Mosellandes, 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1885–1886).Google Scholar For a complete list of Lamprecht's writing, see Schönebaum, Herbert, “Zum hundertsten Geburtstag Karl Lamprechts am 25. Feburay 1956,” Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Karl Marx Universität Leipzig, Gesellschafts- und sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe, 5 (1955/1956): 7–16.Google Scholar For the major historical studies, see Schorn-Schütte, Luise, Karl Lamprecht. Kulturgeschichtsschreibung zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik (Göttingen, 1984), 345–67.Google Scholar After this article was completed, Roger Chickering published an intellectual biography of the historian, Karl Lamprecht: A German Academic Life (1856–1915) (Atlantic Highlands, N. J. 1993).Google Scholar

2. See, for instance, the recent article by Gossman, Lionel, “Jacob Burckhardt as Art Historian,” The Oxford Art Journal 11 (1988); 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar To my knowledge, the only art historian to date who has begun to consider Lamprecht's importance for the discipline of art history is Sir Ernst Gombrich (see note 13 below). For an early discussion of Lamprecht's study of art history, see Doren, Alfred, “Karl Lamprechts Geschichts theorie und die Kunstgeschichte,” Zeitschrift für Aesthetik und allgemeine Kunstwissenschaft 11 (1916): 353–89.Google Scholar

3. For breif critical accounts see Sauerländer, Willibald, “Alois Riegl und die Entstehung der autonomen Kunstgeschichte am fin de siècle,” in Bauer, R., ed., Fin de Siècle. Zu Literatur und Kunst der Jahrhundertwende (Frankfrut a.M,. 1977), 125–39Google Scholar, or Podro, Michael, The Critical Historians of Art (New Haven and London, 1982), esp. part 2.Google Scholar

4. For a discussion of Wölfflin's studies with Burckhardt and his gradual turning away from cultural history, see Lurz, Meinhold, Heinrich Wölfflin. Biographie einer Kunsttheorie (Worms, 1981), esp. 53–58.Google Scholar Lurtz, part 3, discusses Wölfflin's intellectual development during the 1880s, 1890s, and later. See also Gantner, Joseph, ed., Jacob Burckhardt und Heinrich Wölfflin. Briefwechsel und andere Dokumente ihrer Begegnung 1882–1897, 2d ed. (Basel, 1989).Google Scholar

5. For a comparative discussion of the disciplines that Burckhardt and Lamprecht's work embraced, see Schorn-Schütte, Karl Lamprecht, part A, sections 1–3, esp. 36–37; Schönebaum, Herbert, “Karl Lamprecht: Leben und Werk eines Kämpfers um die Geschichtswissenschaft 1856–1915,” unpublished ms. (1956), 27–68Google Scholar, copies of which are deposited at the university libraries in Leipzig and Bonn, as well as at the Historisches Archiv der Stadt Köln (hereafter HASK). Schönebaum based his study on documentary evidence as well as on his personal knowledge of Lamprecht, for he was Lamprecht's last assistant in Leipzig. For a useful treatment in English, see Weintraub, Karl J., Vision of Culture (Chicago and London, 1966), chap. 4, 161–207.Google Scholar

6. Riehl, who taught at the University of Munich, was an important representative of a popular, folkloristic approach to cultural history. See Smith, Woodruff D., Politics and the Sciences of Culture in Germany 1840–1920 (New York and Oxford, 1991), 40–44.Google ScholarSpringer's, Anton cultural historical studies included Kunsthistorische Briefe. Die bildenden Künste in ihrer weltgeschichtlichen Entwicklung (Prague, 1857)Google Scholar and his celebrated Handbuch der Kunstgeschichte (Stuttgart, 1855), which appeared in many later editions.Google Scholar See Springer's, memoirs, Aus meinem Leben (Berlin, 1892);Google ScholarClemen, Paul, “Anton Springer,” Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, vol. 35 (1893): 315–17;Google Scholar and Waetzoldt, Wilhelm, Deutsche Kunsthistoriker, vol. 2 (Leipzig, 1924), 106–30Google Scholar. See also the comments on Springer below.

7. Lamprecht articulated this idea, for instance, in Initial-Ornamentik des VIII. bis XIII. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1882), 3Google Scholar (“sicher aber ist es, dass mit der Stammesbildung eine neue Epoche deutscher Geschichte begann, welche bis zur politischen Einheit Deutschlands im 10. Jahrhundert und bis zur volkstümlichen Erkenntnis der eigenen Nationalität in den folgenden Jahrhunderten geführt hat”). See also his Deutsche Geschichte, vol. 12 (Berlin, 1909), 4,Google Scholar for his statement that the Middle Ages afford “deutliche und in ihrer Art einzige Einblicke in das Jugendleben eines Volkes, in die Werdezeit nationalen Lebens und Wirkens.” His belief in the medieval sources of “national” German culture had its ideological orgins in the Romantic era, a period during which Gothic architecture had been championed as a typically “German” art form. Lamprecht's concentration on the Middle Ages in his 1880s work was significant for the fledgling discipline of art history, for it was not until this decade that medieval monuments of painting and sculpture began to be studied intensively in Germany.

8. Historical accounts of Lamprecht's activities in the Rhineland include Lewald, Ursula, “Karl Lamprecht und die Rheinische Geschichtsforschung,” Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter 21 (1956): 279–304;Google Scholaridem, “Karl Lamprecht, 1856–1915,” Bonner Gelehrte Beiträge zur Geschichte der Wissenschaften in Bonn, Geschichtswissenschaften (Bonn, 1968), 231–53.Google Scholar See also Schorn-Schütte, Karl Lamprecht, esp. 40–54.

9. Discussions of Lamprecht's student years include Schönebaum, “Karl Lamprecht,” 27–68: Schorn-Schütte, Karl Lamprecht, 21–40; and Chickering, Roger, “Young Lamprecht: An Essay in Biography and Historiography,” History and Theory 28 (1989): 198–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10. Lamprecht, Karl, Beiträge zur Geschichte des französischen Wirtschaftslebens im elften Jahrhundret, Staats- und sozialwissenschaftliche Forschungen, 1, vol. 3 (Leipzig, 1878)Google Scholar. Lamprecht's interests in economics were also developed during his student years.

11. Lamprecht's Habilitationsschrift on the chronicler Dietrich Engelhus (d. 1434), a study which Lamprecht never published, was approved by the History Seminar at the University of Bonn in July of 1880. He became extraordinary professor in 1885.

12. See Weintraub, Visions of Culture, for a succinct summary. For the development of German historical methodology, see Iggers, Georg G., The German Conception of History: The National Tradition of Historical Thought from Herder to the Present, rev. ed. (Middletown, 1983).Google Scholar

13. Ernst Gombrich referred to the place of the visual arts in Lamprecht's cultural historical program in In Search of Cultural History (Oxford, 1969), 26,Google Scholar and developed this argument further in Aby Warburg. An Intellectual Biography, 2d ed. (Chicago and London, 1986), 30–37.Google Scholar

14. For Lamprecht's vision of the interdependence of the visual arts and other realms of activity, see the recent critical discussion by Chickering, Karl Lamprecht, 53–55, 79–80.

15. See Lamprecht's related comments in Initial-Ornamentik, 1Google Scholar (“Für Keinen Zweig der geistigen Kultur unseres Volkes lässt sich die Entwickelung von verhältnismässig früher Zeit bis in die Jahrhunderte einer schon ausgedehnteren überlieferung besser überschauen, wie für die Kunst”).

16. The reciprocity between Lamprecht's studies of historical documents, such as charecters and tax records, and his studies of illuminated manuscripts is clear from statements he made in the preface to Initial-Ornamentik.

17. The literature on the Methodenstreit in 1890s Germany is vast. See most recently Chickering, Karl Lamprecht, esp. part 2, 108–283, with bibliography. Iggers, , New Directions in European Historiography, rev. ed. (Middletown, 1984), 80–85,Google Scholar sketches how the institutional structure of the German historical profession in the nineteenth century ensured ideological and scholarly conformity. It was inevitable that Lamprecht's work would be perceived as a threat to the established order. See also Iggers, The German Conception of History, 197–200.

18. Chickering, “Young Lamprecht,” 210, states that the Leipzig historian Georg Voigt introduced Lamprecht to the writings of Burckhardt and encouraged the young student to study art history. Schönebaum, ‘Karl Lamprecht,” 58–68, discusses Lamprecht's studies in Munich and raises the possibility that Springer may have played a role in encouraging Lamprecht's studies there. For Springer, see note 6 above.

19. See Dilly, Heinrich, Kunstgeschichte als Institution. Studien zur Geschichte einer Disziplin (Frankfrut a.M., 1979), 237.Google Scholar The eight universities were Berlin, Bonn, Prague, Vienna, Leipzig, Strasbourg, Giessen and Königsberg. See Ibid., 236–37, for statistics regarding the teaching of art history at German-speaking universities as an adjunct to disciplines such as aesthetics or theology.

20. Compare note 6. In 1880 Anton Springer summarized the then-current state of research on medieval manuscript illumination in “Die Miniaturmalerei im frühen Mittelalter,” Zeitschrift für bildende Kunst 15 (1880): 345–53,Google Scholar a review of the first volume of Woltmann's, AlfredGeschichte der Malerei (Leipzig, 1879).Google Scholar Springer's article makes clear that German scholarship on medieval manuscripts was in a very preliminary stage by 1880. Springer, 353, called for intensive study of manuscripts. He responded to this manifesto in his own 1880s publications, which included Die Psalter-Illustrationen im frühen Mittelalter mit besonderer Rücksicht auf den Utrechtpsalter (Leipzig, 1880),Google ScholarDie Genesisbilder in der Kunst des frühen Mittelalters mit besonderer Rücksicht auf den Ashburnham-Pentateuch (Leipzig, 1884),Google Scholar and Der Bilderschmuck in den Sacramentarien des frühen Mittelalters (Leipzig, 1889).Google Scholar

21. Schönebaum, “Karl Lamprecht,” 61. See also notes 30 and 35 below.

22. Schönebaum, “Karl Lamprecht,” reports that Lamprecht read studies such as Otte's, HeinrichHandbuch der kirchlichen Kunst-Archäologie des deutschen Mittelalters (Leipzig, 1850)Google Scholar and was especially interested in the writings of the architect and theorist Gottfried Semper (1803–79). Lamprecht must have read Semper's Der Stil in den technischen und tektonischen Künsten, 2 vols. (Frankfurt and Munich, 1860–1863)Google Scholar, a treatise dealing with the material and technical determinants of art production.

23. See, for instance, Schönebaum, “Karl Lamprecht,” 62–67. During his stay Munich Lamprecht also wrote a lengthy essay on the idea of individual identity in the Middle Ages (“Über die Individualität und das Verständnis für dieselbe im deutschen Mittelalter”), which he published for the first time in the twelfth and final volume of Deutsche Geschichte (Berlin, 1909), 3–48.Google Scholar Conceptually, Lamprecht's essay owed a great deal to Burckhardt. In its tracing of progressive stages in the development of individual identity the essay also anticipated the periodization scheme employed in Lamprecht's Deutsche Geschichte. Chickering, “Young Lamprecht,” 211–12, points to a strong autobiographical element in Lamprecht's essay. Schorn-Schütte, Karl Lamprecht, 37, summarizes the ways in which Lamprecht's concept of intellectual culture differed from those of Burckhardt.

24. See Hansen, Joseph, Gustav von Mevissen. Ein rheinisches Lebensbild 1815–1889, 2 vols. (Berlin 1906).Google Scholar For the intellectual and personal bonds between von Mevissen and Lamprecht, see Lewald (as in note 8) and Schönebaum, Herbert, “Gustav Mevissen und Karl Lamprecht. Zur rheinischen Kulturpolitik von 1880–1890,” Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter 17 (1952): 180–96.Google Scholar

25. The lecture was given on the occasion of a Winckelmannfeier staged by the Verein von Altertumsfreunden in Bonn. Schönebaum, “Karl Lamprecht,” 94–95, indicates that the audience was surprised by Lamprecht's choice of topic.

26. Trier, Stadtbibliothek, Ms. 24 (Codex Egberti). In 1955, upon the death of the last duke of Saxe-Coburg, the Golden Evangeliary of Echternach entered the collections of the Germanisches Nationalmuseum in Nuremberg (Hs 156 1423). Lamprecht' lecture was prompted by an 1880 exhibition in Düsseldorf where the manuscripts had been displayed.

27. Kugler, Franz, Handbuch der Geschichte der Malerei, 2d ed., vol. 1 (Berlin, 1847), 140–41;Google Scholar the second edition of Kugler' Handbuch was prepared by Jacob Burckhardt. See also Schnaase, Carl, Geschichte der bildenden Künste, vol. 4,Google Scholar part 2, Das eigentliche Mittelalter (Düsseldorf, 1854), 467–68;Google ScholarWoltmann, Alfred, ed., Geschichte der Malerei (Leipzig, 1879), 250–56.Google Scholar Woltmann (1841–1880), who was professor of art history at Strasbourg, based his study of medival painting on notes made earlier by Gustav Friedrich Waagen (1794–1868), director of the Gemäldegalerie in Berlin.

28. Lamprecht, Karl, “Der Bilderschmuck des Cod. Egberti zu Trier und des Cod. Epternacenis zu Gotha,” Jahrbücher des Vereins von Alterthumsfreunden im Rheinlande 70 (1881): 56–112,Google Scholar plates 3–10 (line drawings). Almost immediately Lamprecht's article provided important directives for art historical study of the manuscripts. Compare, for instance, Kraus, Franz Xaver, Die Miniaturen des Codex Egberti in der Stadtbibliothek zu Trier (Freiburg in Breisgau, 1884).Google Scholar For a historiographical account of the literature on the manuscript with further references, see Rönig, Günther Franz, Codex Egberti. Teilfaksimile-Ausgabe des Ms. 24 der Stadtbibliothek Trier (Weisbaden, 1983),Google Scholar Text, 14–21. Rainer Kahsnitz, Mende, Ursula, and Rücker, Elisabeth, Das goldene Evangelienbuch von Echternach. Eine Prunkhandschrift des 11. Jahrhunderts (Frankfurt a.M. 1982), 198–99Google Scholar, place Lamprecht's article within the “most important scholarship” on the Golden Evangeliary of Echternach. Of the sixteen books and articles they cite, Lamprecht's 1881 study is the only one from the nineteenth century, except for a description appearing in the 1835 catalogue of the ducal gallery in Gotha.

29. See Lamprecht, “Der Bilderschmuck,” 56–61, esp. 61, for his outline of the need to consider both art historical and cultural historical dimensions of the manuscripts. He identified and compared their specific Carolingian-Germanic, Italo-Roman and Byzantine elements (his terms), and then, 112, raised the issue of the “individuality” of those who executed the medieval manuscripts in relation to the broader Weltanschauungen of their day.

30. Lamprecht, Initial-Ornamentik. His text was accompanied by 44 pages of black-and-white plates showing many decorated initials from Rhenish manuscripts. Lamprecht states in the preface that the illustrations were made after his drawings, and particularly after his tracings made over the original images.

31. See, for instance, Schöbaum, “Karl Lamprecht,” 95–101, Lewald, , “Karl Lamprecht,” 244–45, and Schorn-Schütte, Karl Lamprecht, 37, n. 121Google Scholar, who also relates Initial-Ornamentik to Lamprecht's 1878 essay on medival individuality.

32. Anton Springer' lengthy review appeared in the Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen (1883): 769–84. Schönebaum, “Karl Lamprecht,” 100, reports that in a personal letter of 12 Nov. 1882 to Lamprecht the Leipzig art historian praised the young man's work (“Ihre Kulturgeschichte setz wohl fortwährend Keimblüten an. Das gibt ein prächtiges Werk, das ich gern noch zu ereleben wünschte”). Woermann's, Karl review was published in the Zeitschrift für bildende Kunst 18 (1883): 414–15.Google Scholar Woermann (1844–1933) had become acquainted with Lamprecht in the Rhineland, for the he had been professor of art history at the Art Academy in Düsseldorf before moving to Dresden in late 1882. Schönebaum, “Karl Lamprecht,” 100, reports that Woermann immediately asked the historian to send him some of the tracings. Jaro Springer, son of Anton Springer, wrote a positive evalution of Lamprecht's, book in the Repertorium für Kunstwissenschaft 6 (1883): 398–400.Google Scholar Another review by an art historian, Woldermar von Seidlitz of the Dresden Museums, appeared in the Historische Zeitschrift 50, N. F. 14 (1883): 489–92.Google Scholar

33. In this connection, it is important to point out that the history of ornament occupied a central position in the thought of major German-speaking art theorists, such as Gottfried Semper (see above note 22), Alois Riegl, and many others, during the second half of the nineteenth century. Indeed Lamprecht's pathfinding exploration of medieval manuscript ornament contributed singnificantly to this larger topical debate which engaged art historians, ethnologists, and anthropologists alike.

34. Lamprecht, Intial-Ornamentik, 26–32 (“Kunstgeschichtlich wichtige Handschriften des Rheinlandes vom 8. -13. Jahrhundert”). Lamprecht published a second, less detailed list in “Kunstgeschichtlich wichtige Handschriften des Mittle-und Niderrheins,” Jahrbücher des Vereins von Alterthumsfreunden im Rheinlande 74 (1882): 130–46.Google Scholar

35. These materials (S 2713 [Rh 5, 1–8]) are Lamprecht's papers (hereafter NL Lamprecht) deposited at the Universitätsbibliothek Bonn, Handschriftenabteilung. They include Lamprecht' notebooks and index cards recording the locations and call numbers of each manuscript he encountered, as well as correspondence with directors of the archives. The two notebooks comprising Lamprecht's Notizen über illustrate Handschriften” (S2713 [Rh 7]), for instance, provide valuable insights into Lamprecht's working process. They record not only his observations (iconographic features, descriptions of the colors employed for the illuminations, etc.), but also contain sketches that Lamprecht made of ornamental and figural elements.

36. Lamprecht, Deutsches Wirtschaftsleben (as in note 1). In this pioneering study Lamprecht explored the development of material culture (materielle Kultur) in the Mosel region during the Middle ages. He sought a total view of the interactive dynamics of topography, settlements pattern, and economic and religious structures in the region. Documents, rather than the deeds of individuals, served as the focal point of Lamprecht's study. See most recently Chickering, Karl Lamprecht, 80–83, for an account of the significance of Lamprecht's study and the reactions of German historians to it.

37. Lamprecht, Karl, “Der Dom zu Köln seine Bedeutung und seine Geschichte,” printed in brochure form, Bonn, 1881,Google Scholar republished in Lamprecht's, Skizzen zur Rheinischen Geschichte (Leipzig, 1887), 213–45;Google Scholar“Verse und Miniaturen aus einer Evangelienhandschrift des 10. Jahrhunderts der Kölner Dombibliothek (jetz Darmstädter Hofbibl. Nr. 1948),” Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde 9 (1883): 620–23;Google Scholar“Bildercyclen und illustrationstechnik im späteren Mittelalter,” Repertorium für kunstwissenschaft 7 (1884): 405–15.Google Scholar

38. Lamprecht reviewed von Gebhardt, Oskar and Harnack, Adolf, Evangeliorum codex graecus purpureus Rossanensis (Leipzig, 1880)Google Scholar in Jahrbü.cher des Vereins von Alterthumsfreunden im Rheinlande 69 (1880): 90–98;Google Scholar and Scheibler, L., Die hervorragenden anonymen Meister und Werke der Kölner Malerschule von 1480–1500 in Mitteilungen aus der historischen Literatur 10 (1883): 155ff.Google Scholar

39. Lamprecht was responsible for editing the first ten issues of the Westdeutsche Zeitschrift (1882–1891) with Felix Hettner, director of the Provincial Museum in Trier. In the preface to the first volume (n. p.) the editors outlined the Journal's comprehensive scope of inquiry. In the accompanying Korrespodenzblatt 11 (1882, n. p.)Google Scholar Lamprecht and Hettner also announced a plan to publish a guide to the manuscript holdings of Rhenish archives. The project bore the imprint of Lamprecht's art historical interests, and indeed might be regarded as a sort of appendix to them, for considerable efforts were to be devoted to cataloguing and studying illuminated manuscripts. The materials discussed in note 35 above were also linked to this undertaking, which however, came only to partial fruition in a catalogue of the manuscripts held in the Stadtarchiv in Düsseldorf: Ilgen, Theodor, ed., Wegweiser durch die für die Geschichte des Mittel-und Niederrheins wichtigen Handschriften, I. Teil: Der Niederrhein, Westdeutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Kunst, supplement 2 (Trier, 1885).Google Scholar For a discussion of the importance of the Westdeutsche Zeitschrift, see Chickering, Karl Lamprecht, 77–78. See also Lamprecht's, assessment of the achievements of the journal in his notice “An die Leser der Zeitschrift,” Westdeutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Kunst 10 (1891): 413–14Google Scholar. Lamprecht's withdrawal from the editorial post was necessitated by his transfers to the universities of Marburg and Leipzig.

40. Springer, Anton, “Die deutsche Kunst im zehnten Jahrhundert,” Westdeutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Kunst 3 (1884): 201–27;Google Scholar Henri Pirenne, “De organisation des études d'historie provinciale et locale en Belgique,” ibid., 4 (1885): 113–38. The relatioship between Pirenne and Lamprecht and its significance for their work is discussed by Lyon, Bryce, Henri Pirnne. A Biographical and Intellectual Study (Ghent, 1974), esp. 63, 128–36;Google Scholaridem, “The Letters of Henri Pirence to Karl Lamprecht (1894–1915), ” Bulletin de la Commission Royale d'Historie 32 (1966): 161–231.Google Scholar See also Schorn-Schütte, karl Lamprecht, 320–28.

41. Much of this information appeared in the detailed Korrespondenzblätter which accompained each issue of the Westdeutsche Zeitschrift.

42. The principal sources are Lamprecht's papers held at the Universitätsbibliothek Bonn (see above note 35); Lamprecht's correspondence with Gustav von Mevissen in the von Mevissen papers (hereafter NL von Mevissen), HASK, Best. 1073 Nr. 119; and the records of the Gesellschaft für Rheinische Geschichtskunde, also deposited at the HASK.

43. See Schönebaum, “Karl Lamprecht,” 148–49; idem, “Gustav Mevissen und Karl Lamprecht,” 190. Lamprecht was considered for the position vacted by Karl Woermann (see above note 32), who moved to the Dresden Museums. See Schorn-Schütte, Karl Lamprecht, 54, and esp. Lewald, “Karl Lamprecht,” 241–44, for a discussion of the other posts for which Lamprecht was considered during his years in the Rhineland. He was among those considered for Jacob Burckhardt's history chair in Basel when Bruckhardt assumed the first chair of art history there in 1886.

44. Lamprecht thanked Delisle (1826–1910), an international authority on manuscripts, in the introduction to Die Trierer Ada-Handschrift, Publikationen der Gesellschaft für Rheinische Geschichtskunde, 6 (Leipzig, 1889)Google Scholar, discussed below. For Springer, see notes 6 and 20; for Janitschek, see note 46.

45. See note 37.

46. Janitschek, Huber, Geschichte der deutschen Malerei (Berlin, 1890).Google Scholar Janitschek, trained in Graz, Vienna, and Prague, had been called to Strasbourg in 1881 as the successor to Alfred Woltmann (see note 27). His earlier publications included Leone Battista Albertis kleinere kunsttheoretische Schriften (Vienna, 1877)Google Scholar and Die Gesellschaft der Renaissance in Italien und die kunst (Stuttgart, 1879).Google Scholar

47. For instance, Janitschek, , “Zwei Studien zur Geschichte der carolingischen Malerei,” Strassburger Festgruss an Anton Springer zum 4. Mai 1885 (Berlin and Stuttgart, 1885), 1–30.Google Scholar

48. Lamprecht, ed., Die Trierer Ada-Handschrift. The Carolingian manuscript is held in Trier, Stadtbibliothek, Ms. 22.

49. As director and coordinator of the project, Lamprecht carried on an extensive correspondence, now deposited at the HASK (Acta der Gesellschaft für Rheinische Geschichtskunde, Publikationen VI. Betreffend Antrag Janitschek, Herausgabe der Trierer Adahandschrift. Korrespondenz des Geschäftsführers Lamprecht, 1886 bis 1890, Nr. 56/1–4). These papers contain Lamprecht's exchange with scholars such as Delisle, Janitschek, and Springer.

50. Janitschek's art historical discussion of the Ada manuscript, 63–111, formed the largest section of the book. The two other members of Lamprecht's scholarly team were Peter Corssen, who discussed the particularities of the Biblical text, and Felix Hettner (see note 39), who amplified Schnütgen's comments on the bookcover by discussing its Roman cameo. Lamprecht outlined the goals of the project, vii-viii, To my knowledge, Lamprecht's method of using specialists from different fields for a monographic study of a manuscript represents the first endeavor of this sort.

51. The publication is physically large (approximately 46 x 35 cm.) and contains 38 full-scale reproductions, 35 of which were made from high-quality photographic plates. The luxury publication also contained three chromolithographs. Lamprecht's Die Trierer Ada-Handschrift was an outstanding representative of a new genre of manuscript studies combining in-depth scholarly analysis with high-quality techniques of reproduction.

52. For Lamprecht's view of the project, see Schönebaum, “Karl Lamprecht,” 173–74. Reviews included those by Springer, Anton in Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen (1890): 633–51;Google ScholarNeuwirth, Joseph in Repertorium für Kunstwissenschaft 13 (1890): 196–210;Google Scholarand by Frimmel, Theodor in Zeitschrift für bildene Kunst, N. F. 1 (1890): 83.Google Scholar

53. Verzeichnis der Vorlesungen an der Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität zu Bonn, Winterhalbjahr 1881/182, “Geschichte der deutschen Malerei während des Mittelalters und der Renaissance”; Sommerhalbjahr 1882, “ Grundzüge der deutschen kulturgeschichte im Mittelalter”; Sommerhalbjahr 1885, “Geschichte der rheinischen Cultur mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Kunst” Sommerhalbjahr 1887, “Ausgewählte Kapitel aus der rheinischen Kunstgeschichte”; Winterhalbjahr 1887/88, “Grundzüge der deutschen kulturentwickelung im Mittelalter.”

54. Meinecke, Friedrich, Erlebtes 1862–1901 (Leipzig, 1941), 106,Google Scholar admitted to being “gepackt durch Lamprechts strömenden und anschauungsreichen Vortrag” on economic history in the winter semester 1883–1884. See his further comments, 104, on Lamprecht's teaching.

55. Ibid., 104. Meinecke stated that there were three students in Lamprecht's economic history class during the winter semester of 1883–1884. Lewald, “Karl Lamprecht und die Rheinische Geschichtsforschung,” 292, quoting Lamprecht, asserts that there were ten history majors at Bonn during the early 1880s. These students included, most notably, Georg von Below (1858–1927) and Friedrich Meinecke.

56. Immatriculation records, Rheinische-Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität in Bonn, Universitätsarchiv. Aby Warburg (Anmeldebuch, Nr. 63 des Universitätsalbums, winter 1886–1887 to winter 1887–1888, and Anmeldebuch, Nr. 467 des Universitätsalbums, summer 1889) took four courses from Lamprecht: selected chapters in Rhenish art history (summer 1887), the development of German culture during the Middle Ages (winter 1887–1888), German constitutional and economic history (winter 1887–1888), as well as German history from the end of the Hohenstaufen to Kaiser Maximilian (summer 1889). Vöge (Anmeldebuch, Nr. 439 des Universitätsalbums, summer 1887 to summer 1888) enrolled in seven of Lamprecht's courses, including the first three above. His other courses were: German economic history (summer 1887), tutorial in economic history (summer 1887), German history until the Treaty of Verdun (summer 1888) and a course on the Germania of Tacitus (summer 1888). Clemen spent the winter semester 1887–88 and summer semester 1888 in Bonn. Although the course records in his Anmeldebuch have been lost, it is clear from surviving correspondence that he enrolled in Lamprecht's classes during those two semester. I discuss these three men's studies at Bonn in greater detail in a book I am completing on the pioneering German medieval art historical scholarship between 1885 and 1914.

57. Although historians such as Meinecke or von Below took Lamprecht's classes, their historical work did not bear the imprint of Lamprecht.

58. Warburg's lecture notes from Lamprecht's courses on “Ausgewählte Kapitel aus der rheinischen Kunstgeschichte” (13 pages, summer 1887), “Grundzüge der deutschen Kulturentwickelung im Mittelater” (95 pages, winter 1887–1888) and “Deutsche Geschichte vom Ausgang der Staufer bis auf Kaiser Max” (146 pages, summer 1889) are preserved at the Warburg Institute (see below).

59. Warburg's notes show that Lamprecht's morphological scheme for the Kulturzeitalter discussed later in his Deutsche Geschichte was well developed by this time.

60. Gombrich, Aby Warburg, 30–37.

61. Ibid., 54. Gombrich noted that Lamprecht referred to Janitschek's work in his classes and suggested that the choice of Janitschek had been “encouraged by Lamprecht.” Gombrich, however, does not appear to have been aware of the ongoing collegial relationship between Lamprecht and Janitschek during the 1880s. Correspondence from the Die Trierer Ada-Handschrift project (see note 49), Nr. 56/2, Korrespondenz, 1889–90, confirms Gombrich's suggestion. In a letter of 15 October 1889 from Venice, Janitschek thanked Lamprecht for referring the young students Warburg and Clemen (see below) to him.

62. See Wuttke, Dieter, “Die Emigration der Kulturwissenschaftlichen Bibliothek Warburg und die Anfange des Universitätsfaches Kunstgeschichte in Grossbritannien,” in Bredekarmp, Horst et al. , eds., Aby Warburg. Akten des internationalen Symposions Harmburg 1990 (Weinheim, 1991), 145–47.Google Scholar Wuttke provides a general discussions of Warburg's interest in Lamprecht's theories of culture in relation to Warburg's participation in the planning of the university in Hamburg (founded 1919). See also Wuttke, , “Aby M. Warburgs Kulturwissenschaft,” Historische Zeitschrift 256, no. 1 (1993): 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

63. Letter to his family of 14 May 1887 from Poppelsdorf bei Bonn, in which he described his courses for the coming semester: “Der Dritte im Bunde ist Professor Lamprecht… Er liest deutsche Wirtschaftsgeschichte; ich mache auch seine Übungen mit. Er hält ausserdem eine einstündige Vorlesung über rheinische Kunst, dies mit Kleinen Excursionen. Wie ich von Clemen höre hat ihn auch Springer sehr gelobt.

64. Vöge described his response to Lamprecht's work in letters sent during the summer semester of 1887 to Clemen, who was still studying in Leipzig at the time. In a letter of 16 May 1887, for instance, Vöge stated: “Meine Nebenfächer sind also Geschichte—und zwar vor allem Geschichte der Wirtschaft und Verfassung, der äusseren Kultur, wenn man will; auf historische Facta werde ich mich weniger einlassen: es müssen ja solche Neigungen doch auch bei Examen berücksichtigt werden. Auch hat gerade diese Seite, die Lamprecht hervorhebt— für mich besonderen Reiz. Ich finde, dass es so ganz ungemein mehr bildet und den Gesichtskreis erweitert.” Cited with permissions of the Landesamt für Denkmalpflege Sachsen-Anhalt.

65. I discuss Vöge's work with the Bonn art historians Henry Thode (1857–1920) and Carl Justi (1832–1912) in my book, In the meantime, see my article, “Wilhelm Vöge and the Role of Human Agency in the Making of Medieval Sculpture: Reflections on an Art Historical Pioneer,” Konsthistorisk Tidskrift 62 (1993): 78–93.Google Scholar

66. In Die Trierer Ada-Handschrift correspondence (as in note 49), Nr. 56/2, Korrespondenz, 1889–1890, is a letter of 10 November 1889 from Janitschek in Strasbourg in which he thanked Lamprecht for sending Vöge to him. Referring also to Clemen (see below), Janitschek remarked that “mit der Zeit werden dann doch tüchtige Arbeiter für die Kunstgeschichte des Mittelalters herangezogen sein.

67. Vöge, Wilhelm, Eine deutsche Malerschule um die Wende des ersten Jahrtausends. Kritische Studien zur Geschichte der Malerei in Deutschland im 10. und 11. Jahrhundert, Westdeutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Kunst, supplement 7 (Trier, 1891).Google Scholar

68. Ibid., 1.

69. In order to promote publication relating to the study of Rhenish history and culture, von Mevissen made funds available to Lamprecht on a discretionary basis. These funds were administered separately from monies that von Mevissen gave to support publications of the Gesellschaft für Rheinische Geschichtskunde. The studies of the so-called Mevissianer appeared as supplementry volumes of the Westdeutsche Zeitschrift. All of these studies were of a historical nature, with the exception of Vöge's dissertation and a later study by Braun, Edmund, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Trierer Buchmalerei im frühen Mittelater, Westdeutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Kunst, supplement 9 (Trier, 1896).Google Scholar

70. NL von Mevissen, Best. 1073, Nr. 119, letter of 23 January 1891 from Marburg in which Lamprecht confirmed that he had received 2,000 Reichsmark, 1,000 of which were destined for Vöge's study and 1,000 for an inventory of the Koblenz archive. In a letter of 10 October 1891 from Leipzig, Lamprecht outlined delays in the production of Vöge's book. On 23 December 1891 he stated that he had paid the Lintz's che Buchhandlung in Trier. Lamprecht's correspondence with the publishers (NL Lamprecht, S 2713 [Z2b]) also shows that he assumed full responsibility for the production of Vöge's disseration.

71. In a letter to von Mevissen of 10 November 1891 from Leipzig (NL von Mevissen, Best. 1073, Nr. 119), Lamprecht outlined his ideas for the publication, naming Vöge as the specialist best suited for the undertaking. Lamprecht's correspondence with von Mevissen over the next year contains numerous references to the project. For further documentation held at the HASK, see Gesellschaft für Rheinische Geschichtskunde, Abgelehnte Publikationen, Akten, 1882–1906, Nr. 40/1, no. 15 (“Vöge, Rheinische Miniaturmalereien des 10. und 11. Jahrhunderts [1892]”).

72. NL von Mevissen, Best 1073, Nr. 119, letter to von Mevissen of 24 September 1892 from Friedrichsroda. Detailed estimates of costs are contained in the Gesellschaft für Rheinische Geschichtskunde file, ibid., as is Lamprecht's evaluation of Vöge's work (“Gutachten des Herrn Prof. Lamprecht”) dated 1 June 1892: “Über den Bearbeiter Vöge Können Janitschek und ich nur das Beste aussagen. Er ist unser beiderseitiger Schüler, wirkennen ihn als unverdrossen, eindringlich und kritisch.”

73. In a letter of 5 December 1892, ibid., Vöge was informed of the decision reached at a meeting of the Gesellschaft held on 3 December. Documents in the file show that Lamprecht wished to spare no expense on the project, especially for photographs and chromolithographs. His tally of the costs totalled 9,310 Reichsmark, making the publication prohibitively expensive.

74. Vöge, Wilhelm, Die Anfänge des monumentalen Stiles im Mittelalter. Eine Untersuchung über die erste Blütezeit der französischen plastik (Strasbourg, 1894)Google Scholar. Vöge's study receives detailed analysis in my book.

75. There are six letters and one visiting card from Vöge to von Mevissen in NL von Mevissen, Best. 1073, Nr. 147. In a letter of 16 November 1891 Vöge expressed his gratitude for von Mevissen's financial support of his dissertation. In the remaining correspondence, dating from June and July 1894, Vöge outlined his desire to dedicate Die Anfänge des monumentalen Stiles to von Mevissen. For Lamprecht's dedication to von Mevissen, see Deutsches Wirtschaftsleben, vol. 1, v–vii.Google Scholar

76. In 1903 Vöge was considered for a teaching position at the University of Leipzig, which, however, he did not receive. In a letter of 19 January 1903 sent to Lamprecht from Hanover (NL Lamprecht, S 2713 [Korr. 51]), he stated: “In manchem bedauere ich es sehr, dass daraus nichts geworden ist. Gar zu gern wäre ich insbesondere ihnen und Ihrem Einfluß wieder nahegerückt gewesen nach so langer Zeit. Denn immer ist mir Ihre Bonner Lehrtätigkeit in dankbarster Erinnerung geblieben.”

77. For recent studies on Clemen, see Paul Clemen, 1866–1947. Erster Provinzialkonservator Rheinprovinz, exh. cat. (Cologne, 1991);Google Scholar and the collection of essays in Hansmann, Wilfried, ed., Paul Clemen. Zur 125. Wiederkehr seines Geburtstages (Cologne, 1991).Google Scholar

78. Paul Clemen, Die Porträtdarstellungen Karls des Großen, part 1 (Aachen, 1889).Google ScholarClemen's, entire dissertation appeared in the Zeitschrift des Aachener Geschichtsvereins 11 (1889): 185–271; 12 (1890): 1–147Google Scholar. The role played by Lamprecht in Clemen's choice of dissertation topic is mentioned in Hansmann, Paul Clemen, 1866–1947, 45.

79. Clemen taught at Bonn until his retirement in 1935. Like Warburg and Vöge, he had an international reputation in art history. He taught, for instance, at Harvard University during the academic year 1907–1908. See Pommerin, Reiner, “Paul Clemen in Harvard,” Jahrbuch der Rheinischen Denkmalpflege 29 (1983): 13–16.Google Scholar

80. NL Lamprecht, S 2713 (Korr. 17), letter of 23 February 1905, where he stated “dass die Anregungen, die ich bei Ihnen empfangen habe, für die ganze art meines geschichtlichen Denkens der Kunst gegenüber die nachhaltigsten und fruchtbarsten waren.”

81. In the early years of his stay in Leipzig, however, Lamprecht sought contacts with the Art History Seminar. Following the death of Springer in 1891, Janitschek, Lamprecht's colleague in manuscript studies, was named professor of art history at Leipzig. Janitschek died in 1893 and Lamprecht played an instrumental role in securing August Schmarsow (1853–1936), then professor in Breslau, to replace him. Although a cordial relationship existed between the two men at the outset, the memoirs of the art historian Weisbach, Werner, “Und alles ist zerstorben,” Erinnerungen aus der Jahrhundertwende (Vienna, Leipzig, and Zurich, 1937),Google Scholar who studied in Leipzig during the mid-1890s, paint a vivid picture of the tensions that erupted between the two highly competitive Ordinarein (esp. 158–60, 169–70, 173–74). In fact Lamprecht's encouragement of individual art history students at Leipzig was not as great as during the early years of his career in Bonn; this is confirmed by a list of the Leipzig dissertations supervised by Lamprecht (compiled by Schönebaum, “Zum hundertsten Geburtstag,” 16–21). Of the 150 dissertations for which Lamprecht served as co-examiner, only four (1891, 1893, 1894, and 1896) were by art history students. In addition, none of the 140 dissertations in history and cultural history which Lamprecht supervised at Leipzig treated art historical themes.

82. This is not to say that the art historians were unaware of the errors in Lamprecht's work. In a letter to Paul Clemen (n. d., probably 1889), Vöge complained that he had wasted time making a trip to Trier in search of manuscripts which were not there: “dazu kommt, dass ich höchstwahrscheinlich gar nicht gefahren wäre, hätte ich gewusst, dass Lamprechts Angaben in der Initial-Ornamentik wenigstens zum Teil direkt auf dem alten und schlechten Kataloge beruhen. Lamprecht hat mehrere miniierte Hs. aus Trier angegeben, die sich heute in Paris oder sonstwo befinden, jedenfalls nicht auf hiesiger Stadtbibliothek.” Cited with permission of the Landesamt für Denkmalpflege SachsenAnhalt.

83. I wish to thank professor Roger Chickering for suggesting the interdisciplinary impact of Lamprecht's defeat to me in a letter of 10 January 1993. Some later historians of art who considered art as the expression of a collective mentality, such as Wilhelm Worringer (1881–1965), referred to Lamprecht's work. See Worringer's, Abstraktion und Einfühlung (Munich, 1908)Google Scholar and Formprobleme der Gotik (Munich, 1911),Google Scholar especially for discussions of the Northern ornamental sensibility. Since Worringer's studies did not include extensive footnotes, it is impossible to determine whether he was referring to Lamprecht's 1880s art historical work, or to its distillation in Deutsche Geschichte.

84. I address some of these issues within my broader treatment of the intellectual background of 1890s medieval art historical scholarship in my book.