Class 1: Introduction to the history of

Readings:

At Louvre (IHT article) What is Art History? Old Czech Legends, Alois Jirasek General Historical Overview of Prague

______

Weekly sites to visit and tasks: to be completed in your journal

• City Museum of Prague (metro stop ‘Florence’): What kinds of material evidence are presented at the museum that documents the early formation of the Prague settlements and the establishment of the medieval towns? On the map included in your handouts, draw and label the important features of Prague’s historical center: the four medieval towns, the location of the fortification walls and towers, churches, important buildings, markets, etc.

• Vyšehrad fortress (walk from metro stop ‘Vyšehrad’, or up from the river bank by the train bridge): Using your map, identify and describe some of the important sites or artistic works in the fortress area. In particular find and describe the Vyšehrad Cemetery and Slavín. What is the significance of this cemetery?

______

At Louvre, Many Stop to Snap but Few Stay to Focus By Michael Kimmelman, August 3, 2009

PARIS — Spending an idle morning watching people look at art is hardly a scientific experiment, but it rekindles a perennial question: What exactly are we looking for when we roam as tourists around museums? As with so many things right in front of us, the answer may be no less useful for being familiar. At the Louvre the other day, in the Pavillon des Sessions, two young women in flowered dresses meandered through the gallery. They paused and circled around a few sculptures. They took their time. They looked slowly. The pavilion puts some 100 immaculate objects from outside Europe on permanent view in a ground floor suite of cool, silent galleries at one end of the museum. Feathered masks from Alaska, ancient bowls from the Philippines, Mayan stone portraits and the most amazing Zulu spoon carved from wood in the abstracted S-shape of a slender young woman take no back seat, aesthetically speaking, to the great Titians and Chardins upstairs. The young women were unusual for stopping. Most of the museum’s visitors passed through the gallery oblivious. A few game tourists glanced vainly in guidebooks or hopefully at wall labels, as if learning that one or another of these sculptures came from Papua New Guinea or Hawaii or the Archipelago of Santa Cruz, or that a work was three centuries old or maybe four might help them see what was, plain as day, just before them. Almost nobody, over the course of that hour or two, paused before any object for as long as a full minute. Only a 17th-century wood sculpture of a copulating couple, from San Cristobal in the Solomon Islands, placed near an exit, caused several tourists to point, smile and snap a photo, but without really breaking stride. Visiting museums has always been about self-improvement. Partly we seem to go to them to find something we already recognize, something that gives us our bearings: think of the scrum of tourists invariably gathered around the Mona Lisa. At one time a highly educated Westerner read perhaps 100 books, all of them closely. Today we read hundreds of books, or maybe none, but rarely any with the same intensity. Travelers who took the Grand Tour across Europe during the 18th century spent months and years learning languages, meeting politicians, philosophers and artists and bore sketchbooks in which to draw and paint — to record their memories and help them see better. Cameras replaced sketching by the last century; convenience trumped engagement, the viewfinder afforded emotional distance and many people no longer felt the same urgency to look. It became possible to imagine that because a reproduction of an image was safely squirreled away in a camera or cell phone, or because it was eternally available on the Web, dawdling before an original was a waste of time, especially with so much ground to cover. We could dream about covering lots of ground thanks to expanding collections and faster means of transportation. At the same time, the canon of art that provided guideposts to tell people where to go and what to look at was gradually dismantled. A core of shared values yielded to an equality among visual materials. This was good and necessary, up to a point. Millions of images came to compete for our attention. Liberated by a proliferation, Western culture was also set adrift in an ocean of passing stimulation, with no anchors to secure it. So tourists now wander through museums, seeking to fulfill their lifetime’s art history requirement in a day, wondering whether it may now be the quantity of material they pass by rather than the quality of concentration they bring to what few things they choose to focus upon that determines whether they have “done” the Louvre. It’s self-improvement on the fly. The art historian T. J. Clark, who during the 1970s and ’80s pioneered a kind of analysis that rejected old-school connoisseurship in favor of art in the context of social and political affairs, has lately written a book about devoting several months of his time to looking intently at two paintings by Poussin. Slow looking, like slow cooking, may yet become the new radical chic. Until then we grapple with our impatience and cultural cornucopia. Recently, I bought a couple of sketchbooks to draw with my 10-year-old in St. Peter’s and elsewhere around Rome, just for the fun of it, not because we’re any good, but to help us look more slowly and carefully at what we found. Crowds occasionally gathered around us as if we were doing something totally strange and novel, as opposed to something normal, which sketching used to be. I almost hesitate to mention our sketching. It seems pretentious and old-fogeyish in a cultural moment when we can too easily feel uncomfortable and almost ashamed just to look hard. Artists fortunately remind us that there’s in fact no single, correct way to look at any work of art, save for with an open mind and patience. If you have ever gone to a museum with a good artist you probably discovered that they don’t worry so much about what art history books or wall labels tell them is right or wrong, because they’re selfish consumers, freed to look by their own interests. Back to those two young women at the Louvre: aspiring artists or merely curious, they didn’t plant themselves forever in front of the sculptures but they stopped just long enough to laugh and cluck and stare, and they skipped the wall labels until afterward. They looked, in other words. And they seemed to have a very good time. Leaving, they caught sight of a sculptured effigy from Papua New Guinea with a feathered nose, which appeared, by virtue of its wide eyes and open hands positioned on either side of its head, as if it were taunting them. They thought for a moment. “Nyah-nyah,” they said in unison. Then blew him a raspberry.

What is Art History?

Many students do not get a chance to study art history until they take a college course, so art history may be a new field of study for you. Even though you are new to analyzing the visual arts, the skills you have learned in other fields will serve you well in this discipline. If you have ever analyzed a poem or developed an understanding of a historical period, you are prepared to think and write like an art historian. You must still make an argument about something, but in this case you will use art (instead of, say, dialogue from a play) to build and defend your argument. Although art historians vary in their approaches to art, there are a few common approaches that form the backbone of the field. The following handout describes these approaches briefly and lets you know what you might need to do to tackle a paper or assignment in this field. Just remember: there is more than one way of doing art history. Understanding your instructor's approach to art will help you meet his or her expectations in your writing.

Assignment sleuth work When your instructor hands out an assignment, first figure out what type of assignment it is. The basic questions of art history often appear in a few traditional types of assignments. We've presented a summary of five of them below. Becoming acquainted with the five types will help you begin to understand your assignment. Recognize, however, that many assignments combine more than one of these types. Most assignments will fit into one or more of the types, but don't try to make your assignment fit them if it does not. Some professors prefer to take a less traditional approach to the assignments they write, and they may be looking for less traditional responses from their students. Start by reading the assignment carefully to see what is being asked. Some professors in introductory classes will start with at least one of the following assignments at the beginning of the semester in order to get you thinking like an art historian.

1) Formal analysis This assignment requires a detailed description of the "formal" qualities of the art object (formal here means "related to the form," not "fancy" or "elegant"). In other words, you're looking at the individual design elements, such as composition (arrangement of parts of or in the work), color, line, texture, scale, proportion, balance, contrast, and rhythm. Your primary concern in this assignment is to attempt to explain how the artist arranges and uses these various elements. Usually you have to go and look at the object for a long time and then write down what you see. As you will quickly see from the page length of the assignment, your instructor expects a highly detailed description of the object. You might struggle with this assignment because it is hard to translate what you see into words—don't give up, and take more notes than you might think you need. Why would your instructor ask you to do this assignment? First, translating something from a visual language to a textual language is one of the most vital tasks of the art historian. Most art historians at some point describe fully and accurately their objects of study in order to communicate their ideas about them. You may already have found this tendency helpful in reading your textbook or other assigned readings. Second, your instructors realize that you are not accustomed to scrutinizing objects in this way and know that you need practice doing so. Instructors who assign formal analyses want you to look—and look carefully. Think of the object as a series of decisions that an artist made. Your job is to figure out and describe, explain, and interpret those decisions and why the artist may have made them. Ideally, if you were to give your written formal analysis to a friend who had never seen the object, s/he would be able to describe or draw the object for you, or at least pick it out of a lineup. In writing a formal analysis, focus on creating a logical order so that your reader doesn't get lost. Don't ever assume that because your instructor has seen the work, he or she knows what you are talking about. Here are a couple of options: ▪ summarize the overall appearance, then describe the details of the object ▪ describe the composition and then move on to a description of the materials used (acrylic, watercolor, plaster) ▪ begin discussing one side of the work and then move across the object to the other side ▪ describe things in the order in which they draw your eye around the object, starting with the first thing you notice and moving to the next

Some instructors want your formal analysis to consist of pure description with little or no interpretation. In this case, you should just describe your object. Others will expect you to go further and comment on the significance of what you have observed. Find out which way your instructor wants you to write your formal analysis in your particular assignment. Most art historians include formal analysis at some point in their essays, so there are a lot of examples to look at in the textbook and other readings, but you will probably have to be more in-depth than they are.

2) Stylistic analysis You may be asked to look at an object and talk about style. Some instructors will want you to discuss how an object fits into a particular stylistic category—for example, Impressionism, Renaissance, or early Macedonian. More often, they will ask you to compare two works in either the same or very different stylistic categories—e.g., comparing one Impressionist painting by Monet to one by Morisot or comparing a Caravaggio still life to a Picasso still life. You will still focus on the formal qualities of the objects, but this time you will probably be expected to make a conclusion about one of the following: ▪ how the work fits the stylistic category ▪ how the work does not fit the category ▪ how two works with the same type of content look totally different from each other, because of the style (for example, both paintings are still lifes, but they show different approaches to three- dimensionality, etc.)

A stylistic analysis will acquaint you with some of the larger historical trends and forces in the culture and how they influenced the development of art.

3) Iconography/iconology This kind of assignment occurs in courses covering art before the Modern period. Here you will look for a particular element that occurs in the object (an object, action, gesture, pose) and explain either: ▪ when that same element occurs in other objects through history and how this object's representation of it is unique, or ▪ what that element means generally in art or to art historians—in other words, the traditional association an art historian might make between that depiction and some other thing.

For example, there have been thousands of paintings of Hercules choosing between Virtue and Vice. Let's say you are assigned one of these paintings (e.g., Annibale Carracci's version), and you are asked to find out what is unique about it. You would go look at other versions, like Paolo Veronese's, and compare how they both show Hercules making his choice. You do not have to focus on the actual making of the object here, but instead on the way the subject is represented: Carracci has Virtue and Vice in Ancient clothing, but Veronese shows them in contemporary Venetian costumes. Then, you might have to say what that means: Carracci spent a lot of time in Rome looking at Ancient art, so he was interested in using Ancient art works as models in his paintings, but Veronese was showing off one of the main industries of Venice (textiles)—or, Veronese wanted his patrons to think about how they might fit into the scenario instead of keeping the story in the past. If you are confused, read Erwin Panofsky's essays on iconology and iconography, in which he defines these terms more extensively. Be warned that Panofsky makes a clear distinction between iconography and iconology, but many art historians do not—they often use the word "iconography" when they mean both. Art historians study iconography and iconology so often that they have compiled reference texts that list many of the famous works that show particular themes—you might use these as a resource, so ask the art librarian about them. One such resource is the Dictionary of Subjects and Symbols in Art by James Hall.

4) Provenance/patronage study Some assignments require you to examine the life of the object itself: the circumstances surrounding its production and/or where and why it has changed hands throughout history. These assignments focus on either: ▪ how, when, where, and why the patron (the person who orders or buys the object, or generally supports the artist) asked for or acquired the object from the artist. The assignment may ask you to comment on what the patronage suggests about how artists made their living at different points in history, or how/why patrons chose the artists they did, or ▪ the history of the object passing from artist to patron to museum, etc. Such assignments usually appear in classes oriented toward museum studies.

The assignment may also ask you to comment on the significance of this history. For example, why/how a bust of the Goddess Sekhmet from the Temple of Mut could end up as one foot of a British garden bench, and what that says about the owner's attitudes toward the object.

5) Theory/criticism All four of the previous assignment types focus on the object itself (the painting, sculpture, drawing, or building). However, in some courses, particularly in Modern Art courses, you may be asked to look beyond or through the object toward theoretical, historical, or social contexts of the object, artist, or time period. This may include consideration of how a work of art was used in its particular context. Instructors may want you to talk about how the formal or stylistic qualities of the object reflect or affect the time in which they were made. More specifically, you may be asked to look at the object's relationship to ideas about gender, class, artistic creation, culture, or politics associated with that time. Or you may be asked to connect artworks with the theories of a particular person (for example, the connection between paintings by Surrealist Salvador Dali and Sigmund Freud's dream analyses). Let's take one popular modern artist and look at how many different ways he has been studied from a theoretical/critical perspective. Jackson Pollock's abstract expressionist paintings have been discussed as all of the following (to list just a few): ▪ stemming from and/or helping to create an American post-war culture of masculinity and superiority ▪ exploring the relationship between American culture and its "Native American roots" ▪ portraying a stylistic progression from a more realistic/naturalistic representation to a more abstract representation that emphasizes the flatness of the canvas and the paint over content or narrative ▪ pointing out the cowardice and malleability of wealthy American patrons.

As you can see, these assignments may leave you a fair amount of latitude in finding and pursuing a topic. Regardless of the theoretical perspectives you use or apply, be sure that your paper contains a strong argument. Remember to pay attention to what your instructor does in class—learning to recognize and understand the theories your instructor uses can help you both in studying for class and in following your instructor's assignments. Remember, too, that even when you are writing a theory/criticism paper, the art object or objects should be at the forefront of your discussion. The theory or criticism should arise out of the art, rather than be superimposed on it. A good way to keep your focus on the object is to write a formal analysis before getting into the theory; you may not include this analysis in your final paper, but writing it will give you insight into the object or objects you are discussing. You may also wish to keep an image of the object or objects in view as you write.

Tracking down the resources After you analyze what type of assignment you have been given, you will need to review resources that will help you to answer that type of question. You may have to find any or all of the following books or materials: ▪ the object itself or a book that talks about it at length ▪ your textbook (look through the whole thing—there are often helpful glossaries and timelines, and bibliographies for further reading) ▪ standard art-historical reference texts (especially for iconographical or patronage studies); if your instructor hasn't let you know what these might be, see the art librarian or browse the reference section of the art library ▪ theory or analysis that has already been written (usually articles or books rather than survey texts or dictionaries)

The more object-oriented research assignments will require you to spend more time with monographs, catalogues raisonnées, and art history reference books. The first two types of books focus on an artist's entire body of work and/or biography and give details that might not show up in a more theoretical text (like the measurements of the objects, their provenance, details about their condition, etc.). The more theoretical the assignment, the more time you will spend reading journal articles and (sometimes indirectly related) books. Even when writing a more theoretical paper, don't ever forget the art object—it is the reason for your paper and your primary "text," and should be emphasized accordingly. The "pure" formal analysis is the only paper in which description alone is enough—so if you are asked to compare two objects, do not just list their similar and different qualities. Instead, suggest what those differences or similarities mean and analyze them on some level.

Additional resources Several books have been written specifically to help you write a paper in art history. All are pretty widely available, so check your library and local bookstores:

Acton, Mary. Learning to Look at Paintings. New York: Routledge, 1997.

Barnet, Sylvan. A Short Guide to Writing about Art. New York: Harper Collins College, 1993.

Taylor, Joshua. Learning to Look: A Handbook for the Visual Arts. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago, 1981.

Many professors have used Taylor's book at some point, so keep that in mind. If you need more examples of how art history can be done, read articles in Art Bulletin or Art Journal or one of the many other journals available in the field. The list of sources cited in the bibliography of your textbook (if you have one) may provide another way to understand the various approaches in art history. Pick a few that cover the same time period or monuments and glance over them. Since textbooks are usually compilations of various arguments in the field (they're called survey texts because they survey the field), they will be too general or combinatory to really show you how art history is usually written. For help understanding art history jargon and theory, check out the following resources:

▪ Pointon, Marcia. History of Art: A Student's Handbook. New York: Routledge, 1997.

▪ Words of Art (an online glossary of terms and concepts). http://web.ubc.ca/okanagan/creative/links/glossary.html.

To look up recent articles (for the last 20 years or so), ask your librarian about ▪ Art Index ▪ RILA, BHA, and Avery Index

Also check out www.lib.unc.edu/art/index.html.

Citation style Art history does not have an established documentation style, although Chicago predominates. The Art Bulletin is considered the conservative flagship journal of the discipline, and once a year they provide their ideal documentation style. This journal probably provides the safest choice if you seek a model style. 01 Old Czech Legends, excerpts Alois Jirásek, 1894

Come and listen to the legends of olden times! Hear about the ancestor of us all, learn about our forefathers and how they came to our homeland and settled along the Labe [lah-bay] (Elbe) and the [Vel’-tah-va], (Moldau) and other rivers of this country! See what has been preserved from the darkness of vanished ages, harken to what remains of the stories told by past generations who worshipped their gods in the dimness of the forest and who made sacrifices to springs in quiet glades, to lakes, rivers, and blazing fires! Consider how Czechoslovakia looked in those earliest of years, before our people came to it. There were in no cities or towns, but only a few poor scattered villages, inhabited by descendants of former settlers — Romans and Germanic barbarians — who spoke a different language. The land had not been ploughed. Everywhere — on the plains, in the hills and in the valleys — the vegetation grew more wildly dense than nowadays. Huge forests covered the mountains and reached down into the plains. The valleys that were not heavily wooded were covered with thick, tall grass. There were plenty of swamps, enlivened by the calls of waterfowl, and numerous black, stagnant waters, so quiet that they seemed enchanted, reflecting old moss-covered trees…

…Everywhere there was strength and wealth. This was a fertile land, a land of plenty, waiting only for the arrival of an industrious people who could use its gifts. Such a people came and cultivated it, improved it by hard labour, made it holy by their efforts and by the blood they shed in many wars to defend it. From the Slavic East came a nation, our ancestors under their leader, whose name was Čech. Our legend begins!

Father Čech Beyond the Carpathian Mountains, on the plains of the Vistula River was located the homeland of the Slavic peoples from time immemorial. Various tribes and clans, all related in language and customs, used to live there. It came to pass that they quarreled bitterly and shed blood over the various boundaries between them. Tribe fought tribe and clan battled clan, and many people were killed. In this time there lived two brothers, Čech and Lech [ch as in ‘loch’], who belonged to a powerful tribe. One day they decided to leave their war-torn country. They said to one another: ‘Let us find a new place to live, where our kin can mind their business undisturbed, and live in peace…’

…Their decision was carried out. They called together the members of their tribe, and all made ready to leave: they offered sacrifices to their gods, gathered together their belongings, and said farewell to their homeland. They started westward towards places unknown. Clan after clan followed, each made up of numerous families, all friends and relatives…

…They came upon the hill Řip [R-sheep] which Lord Čech ascended. He looked all around him, and what he saw pleased him. It was a beautiful country, the soil fertile and the rivers well- stocked with fish. He told his people, ‘Now we have found the land we were seeking. Only, what shall we call it?’ ‘Call it by your name,’ they cried: ‘Cechy!’ [Cze’-chy] And so it was…

…The communities prospered and all went well. It was not long before the countryside became crowded, and they solved that problem when Čech’s brother Lech and his followers moved somewhat to the east…

…Their population grew in numbers and wealth and the leaders built small castles for themselves. After thirty years in the new land, Father Čech, as he had come to be called, died in his castle. He was 86 years old. As was the custom, they cremated him, sacrificing bread, meat, and arrows. They gathered up his ashes, buried them and built a mound over them. On the way home from the funeral nobody turned his head to look back at the mound, for this was forbidden. And so the Age of Čech passed.

Father ‘Pace’ and His Daughters After Čech’s death, the people had no leader, and quarrels and crimes, unknown before, began to spread. The elders of the tribes met and decided that they needed a leader. They sent for Čech’s brother, Lech, to come back and reign over them, but he did not want to leave his own followers, and recommended that they choose a leader from among the heads of their own clans, suggesting ‘Pace’, who lived in a castle nearby. They agreed that this was a good idea and unanimously chose ‘Pace’. They took him to Čech’s burial mound, placed Čech’s hat on his head, and gave him tech’s cane to carry. This ceremony completed, ‘Pace’ became Duke of Czechy. He ruled long and wisely. He founded a school where they taught religion, hymns, prophecy, and magic. Since this was before anyone in the country knew how to write, everything had to be memorized. Magic was considered the highest form of learning, pleasing to the gods. ‘Pace’ would go into seclusion and ask for the guidance of his gods. Once they told him to move away from his small castle, and look for a proper spot on the shore of the river Vltava (Moldau), and build a castle there. So the important men of the tribes went and found such a place on a steep cliff overlooking the river, where there was a spring of clear water. There they built a castle to be the seat of government, calling it Vyšehrad [Vish-eh-rod], meaning High Castle, and traces of it stand to this day. ‘Pace’ lived and ruled there for some thirty years. When he died, he left no sons, only three daughters: Kazi [Kah’-zee], Teta [Tay’ta] and Libuše [Lib’-ush-ay]. These girls were all slender and beautiful, wise and good. Kazi knew medicine, for she knew the healing powers of various herbs and plants and the use of magic incantations, and she treated the sick from far and wide. She lived in her own castle, Kazín [Kah’-zeen]. Teta lived in Tetín [Tet’- ye-n], and was especially learned in their pagan religion: she was a priestess. The youngest daughter, Libuše had the gift of prophecy. At times she would go into a trance and make predictions. On such occasions, people would be somewhat afraid of her. Yet she was the most beautiful, the wisest, and the best beloved of the three sisters, and after their father’s death she was chosen as leader in his place. While she had a castle of her own, Libušin [Lib’ush-een], she lived in Vyšehrad thenceforth. All the land was happy.

Libuše There were no regular courts, but people came to Libuše to settle their disagreements. She would sit under a linden tree in the castle courtyard, on a raised rug-covered platform, surrounded by twelve of the wisest men of the realm. Once she had to decide between two neighbours who were quarrelling bitterly over the boundaries of their holdings. In all fairness, she decided in favour of the younger one, whereupon the elder flew into a rage, and screamed for all to hear: What kind of justice can we expect from a woman? Long-haired, but short on brains! Let her sew and spin, but not be a ruler and a judge! Where else does a woman rule over men, except here? We are the laughing-stock among nations, and we cannot stand for such a judge any longer!’ Everybody was dumbfounded, but nobody came to Libuše’s defence. When nobody spoke up for her, she flushed with shame and sorrow. She turned to her critic and said, ‘You are right! I am a woman, and I rule like a woman, not with a rod of iron, but with compassion, which you take for weakness. You need a stricter ruler, and your demand shall be fulfilled. Go home now, in peace! Let the people choose a duke to rule them, and I shall marry whomsoever they choose…’

…In the morning, Libuše called for a gathering of the heads of clans, to be held on a day soon after the harvest. On the appointed day came many leaders from far and wide, some alone, and others with their retinue, some old, others young, some on foot, others on horseback. The castle courtyard was decorated for the meeting. There was much noise and clamour, as everybody wondered who would he chosen. Trumpets were blown to call the meeting to order, all grew quiet, and gazed to Libuše on her throne, with her sisters by her side. Libuše made her speech: ‘All of you know why I called you together. You did not appreciate the freedom I gave you, so the gods inspired me to tell you that I shall rule you no longer. You want a man, a duke who will take away your children to serve him, who will choose the best of your cattle and horses for taxes according to his whims. You want to serve a master and to pay for it, as so far you have not had to do. In return, you will not have to he ashamed of having a woman ruler. So he it! Go ahead and choose a duke, but do so wisely and carefully, because it is easy to put someone in power hut hard to get rid of him. However, if you wish, I can advise you as to whom to choose.’ ‘Tell us! Advise us!’ they called out, as they had no proper candidate. Libuše rose, her eves grew dreamy, and it became clear that she was in a prophetic trance. In a far-away voice she said: ‘Beyond the hills is a small stream called Bělina [Be-yell’-eena]. On its banks, where it makes a bend, there is a little village, Stadice [Stah’-de-tsay]. A hundred and twenty paces beyond the village, upstream, in a narrow valley, there is a field where you will find your future duke, a ploughman. He has two oxen: one is brown, with a white head, the other one is brown with a white streak down its hack, and white hind legs. Go, take along the clothing fit for a duke, give the man my message, and bring him back here to be your ruler and my husband. His name is Přemysl [Pray’mish- el] and our descendants will rule here forever. You will not have to ask the way. My white horse will lead you, just follow him. When the horse stops by a ploughman and neighs, that man will be Přemysl. You will be certain it is he when you see him eating off an iron table. Messengers set out according to her, instructions, with her beautiful white horse in the lead. It was early autumn, and the weather was sunny. The steed went with a sure step, not looking to left or right, hardly stopping to rest. When the cavalcade did stop, he was always the first to start up again. And so they went over hill and dale, and on the third day they arrived at a small village situated in the bend of a stream, in a narrow valley. A little boy ran out to see what was going on and they asked him, ‘Is this Stadice?’ ‘Yes,’ he told them. ‘And does a man called Přemysl live here?’ ‘Yes, and that’s Přemysl up there, ploughing,’ the boy replied, pointing to the valley upstream. They saw a tall young man following the plough, drawn by two oxen, one brown with a white head, the other brown with a white streak down its back, and snow-white hind legs. As they came up to the man, Libuše horse stood still and neighed gaily. The plough man stopped his work, and the messengers offered him the ducal robes, trimmed with the finest furs, and told him why they had come: ‘Hail, man of destiny, Duke given us by the gods! Let your oxen go, put on these robes, get on this white horse, and come with us! The whole Čech nation has chosen you for its judge, protector, and duke...’

…Soon the wedding of Libuše and Přemysl was celebrated in the castle amidst general merrymaking.

Libuše Prophecies Libuše showed her husband the state treasure, stored in a rock- walled chamber in the castle basement: there, in the candlelight, it shone with iron, bronze, silver, and pure gold: swords, shields, coats of mail, as well as gold nuggets and silver and gold jewellery set with all manner of gems. She showed him her secret garden, wherein dwelt her god Perun. She took him to her other favourite haunts. Together they studied the law of the land, and Přemysl made many changes, many stricter rules that would restrain the people for ages to come. Once, when at twilight they and their court were strolling along the river, one of the old knights held forth: ‘What changes since I first set foot here! At that time, there was nothing hut deep woods all around, and now it is all built up.’ Then, pointing down-stream, towards the northwest, where a thin wisp of’ smoke from a hunter’s fire could be seen above the trees across the river, he continued, ‘But it will be a long, long time before the woods over there are ever cleared and free of wolves! And how about the woods beyond...?’ He did not finish his sentence, for nobody was listening to him any more, all eyes had turned on the young duchess in their midst. Her face had taken on an intense, rapt expression, her eyes blazed, and everybody present realized that she was being inspired by the gods. Libuše paid no attention to anyone, not even to her husband. She extended her arms towards the opposite shore, towards the northwest, and spoke: ‘I see before me a large city, whose glory shall touch the stars! I see a spot above the river, where the brook Brusnice [Brus’-ni-tsay] makes a bend. A steep cliff rises above it. When you come to the woods above this cliff, you will find a man there, cutting a threshold for his house. There you will build a castle and call it Praha [Prah’-ha, from prah, meaning threshold,] (Prague). And just as people stoop when they enter a house, so will they bow to the city around my castle. It will be a noble one, respected by all the world!’ She fell silent, the spirit of prophecy that had filled her had departed. They did as she had commanded, found the man and the place, just as she had told them they would, and built a castle. The strongest walls with parapets were to the west, where access to it was easiest. They dug a deep moat there, and built a sturdy gate. The walls were of rock, covered with a plaster of mud. The castle Praha was very strong, second only to Vyšehrad.

General Historical Overview of Prague

Prague (in Czech: Praha) is the capital city of the . It has served as the capital city of Czechoslovakia, as well as the centre of the Bohemian kingdom, since the ninth century. Today, the city of Prague is divided in 57 municipal districts and 22 administrative districts. The capital is headed by the Mayor, Pavel Bem, and the population consists of approximately 1,200,000 residents. Many significant architectural styles can be seen in Prague, and the historic centre of Prague is on UNESCO's World Heritage List. Most of the significant architecture in the historic centre was built in the 14th century under the patronage of the Holy Roman Emperor Charles IV. The city plays host to a range of succeeding styles, particularly that of the Gothic and , and also includes fine examples of Cubist architecture, a style unique to Prague. Significant structures in Prague are the Charles Bridge (Karluv most), the (Pražský hrad), as well as the , Lesser Town and the Jewish quarter. It also is the location of the Klementium and the Karolinum (Universita Karlova, or ), founded in 1348, it is the oldest university north of the Alps.

Early History of Prague The area on which Prague was founded was settled in ancient times since the Paleolithic Age. Prehistoric cultures in the area included the Gravettian culture. Around 200 BCE the Celts had a settlement in the south, called Závist, but later they were replaced by Germanic tribes. The Slavs conquered the site from the 6th century CE onwards, though for a period were subdued by the Eurasian Avars. As a developing area, the initial fortified settlement that was to become Prague was situated on a hill over-looking the Vltava River, with the primary defensive structures ideally placed to overlook the valley to the north east and the curve of the river to the east. An early history written by Cosmas of Prague, the Chronica Boëmorum, describes the legendary founding of the Bohemian state and the marriage between Princess Libuše and the Ploughman, Premysl, beginning the Premyslid dynasty which centered in Prague. The first Bohemian ruler acknowledged by contemporary historians however was the Czech Prince Bořivoj Přemyslovec, who moved his primary fortification from Levý Hradec (a fortified settlement north of Prague) to Prague in the second half of the 9th century. His wife, Ludmila, was canonized as a patron saint of Bohemia after her death and is credited with the conversion of her husband. Bořivoj's grandson, Prince Wenceslas, initiated friendly relations with the Saxon dynasty in order for Bohemia to play a greater role in the empire. Orientation towards the Saxons was not favored by his brother Boleslav I of Bohemia, and Wenceslas was assassinated on September 28, 929. He was buried in St. Vitus' Rotunda, the church which he founded and on which grounds the future St. Vitus' Cathedral would be built upon. St Wenceslas' Chapel in the Cathedral is placed on the very foundations of the Rotunda. A few years later, Wenceslas was canonized and also became a patron saint of Bohemia. In 962, Boleslav changed his mind and Bohemia became part of the newly instituted Roman Empire when Otto I the Great from the Saxon dynasty became emperor. The city Prague became a bishopric in 973, under the archbishopric of Mainz. The first Czech bishop was Adalbert, who was canonized in 999. The bishop's palace was built within the grounds of the Prague Castle.

Founding of the medieval Prague towns In the 13th century the Přemyslids were finally able to assert their independence. Otakar I in 1212 extracted a formal edict from the Emperor, known as the Golden Bull, which secured the royal title for himself and his descendants. During this period, Prague began to prosper due to its central positioning on Central European trade routes. Upon the discovery of large silver deposits in the nearby town of Kutná Hora, Prague began minting its own coins, known as groschen. Under King Wenceslaus II the minting code Ius regale montanorum was created, resulting in coin reforms that ultimately led to the implementation of the groschen. The groschen became one of the most widely circulated type of coin in Medieval Europe. During this time the first of four medieval townships were incorporated in the Prague basin. The Old Town (Staré Město) was founded in 1230 by the Přemyslid king Wenceslas I (in Czech, Václav I). This was primarily a trading and market town, with its center on the (Staroměstske Naměstí) Later, in 1257 the Lesser Quarter (Malá Strana) was established as a smaller market area across the river, protected by Prague Castle above. This area kept its medieval commercial character until it was destroyed by fire in 1541. The third town to be incorporated was the area directly outside the gates of Prague castle, thus its relatively small market served primarily as providing the wares for the upper nobility and royalty.

Prague under Charles IV: The First Golden Age Holy Roman Emperor Charles IV initiated a great deal of Gothic-era building work that remains in the city today. His reign is considered one of the Golden Ages of the history of the Bohemian kingdom. Whilst he was still heir to the throne, he negotiated for Prague to become an independent archbishopric in 1344. Under the auspices of Charles IV, Prague was the effective capital of the Holy Roman Empire. As well as commissioning the university, St. Vitus' Cathedral and the Charles Bridge, many new monasteries and churches were built and the forth medieval town of Nové Mesto - New Town – was established in 1348. Designed to accommodate the influx of clergy and students attending the new institutions, the town planning of the New Town was far ahead of its time, and it was intended to link the southern fortress of Vyšehrad with the Old Town. King Vladislav II had built the first bridge (the Judith Bridge) on the Vltava in 1170, which crumbled in 1342. To replace the bridge, Charles IV commissioned a stone bridge, known as the Charles Bridge, as a testament to his reign and to signify the financial, cultural and architectural dominance of his city. Some remnants of what was the Judith Bridge remain on the western bank of the city. Fluent in Czech, French, German, Latin and Italian, Charles was able to summon a wide variety of artists and thinkers to Prague, among them Petrarch. Notably, he promoted the as the official language alongside that of German and Latin, and his reign is also considered to be 'golden' due to his reigning over a time of peace in whilst the rest of the continent was involved in the Hundred Years' War.

The Bohemian Reformation In the late 14th and early 15th century Prague was the centre of the Bohemian Reformation. With the increased influence of the church after its independence from the archbishopric of Mainz, debauchery and petty theft increased amongst the Czech clergy, which led to reformers attacking the practices of the Church. Jan Hus, a peasant-born preacher and lecturer, gave sermons against the excesses of the clergy at the Bethlehem Chapel (Bethlémská kaple). He had been inspired by the works of English reformer John Wycliffe, whose heretical works had reached Prague, and further disturbed the church by preaching to the population in the Czech language against the corrupt tendencies of the current church administration. In 1412, Hus and his followers were excommunicated and banished from Prague, whereupon they began spreading their reformist teachings across Bohemia. The Council of Constance summoned Hus to answer charges of heresy in 1414, and left under assurances from Emperor Sigismund that he would receive safe passage. He was subsequently imprisoned at Constance and burned at the stake on July 6, 1415. The execution of Hus in Constance ignited widespread riots in Prague, and led to the Hussite Wars of 1419-34. During continuing riots after King Vaclav endorsed the return of anti-Hussite priests to their parishes, several councilors were thrown from the windows of the New Town Hall (Novomestská radnice) [Prague's first defenestration]. This triggered the Pope to declare a crusade against the Czech heretics.

The great fire of 1541 In 1541 a great fire began in the Lesser Quarter and wiped out the dwelling places of the medieval tradesmen and clergy who had lived in Lesser Quarter and Hradcany. Due to Vienna being under siege by the Turks at the time, the Habsburg nobility chose to pursue their major building projects in Prague until the threat subsided. As a result, architecture from this period has been well preserved. Whilst the castle remained intact, the left bank of the Vltava river was wiped out and in place of the old Gothic town, the newly ascendant Catholic nobility began to build palaces. The fire never reached the Old Town, and thus the medieval street plan of this area still remains intact although baroque structures were later built upon the original Gothic buildings.

Rudolf II: Prague as Imperial Capital The imperial court was switched from Vienna to Prague by Emperor Rudolf II (1576-1614) in 1583, the first and only time Prague would be the centre of the Habsburg Empire. Rudolf II was fond of alchemy, astronomy and art, and thus Rudolfine Prague played host to a wide variety of international artists and astronomers from the "The School of Prague" painters and surrealist painter Giuseppe Archimboldo, to court astronomers Johannes Kepler and Tycho Brahe, who invented modern astronomy. Rudolf endowed Prague with some of the finest examples of Mannerist architecture still extant in Europe. Rudolf's architectural vision for the imperial residence was coherent, ambitious, and proto-baroque.Rudolf granted considerable liberty in terms of academic, political, and religious freedom. He sought the company of scholars, who often published and disseminated unorthodox opinions he permitted marriage between Catholics and Protestants. Rudolf was aware, however, that some members of the clergy and nobility wished to limit freedom of expression and conscience; while there was constant tension in Prague during this period between tolerance and intolerance, tolerance predominated. On 9 July 1609, Rudolf II, acting as Holy Roman Emperor, issued a Majesty that decreed freedom of religion in Bohemia. The Bohemian estates had sought such a decree since the end of the Hussite Revolution in the early 15th century. The Hussite Revolution had left Prague, and Bohemia generally in disarray, as the archbishop converted to the Hussite cause, and Catholic orders and imperial forces left the city. For over a century, fundamental issues remained unresolved concerning religious practice and authority, the structure of the social-political order, and Bohemia's relationship with the Holy Roman Empire and the church. This was a time of economic and cultural prosperity for the Jewish community, confined to the Jewish Quarter with the largest population in the Diaspora. Rudolf's religious tolerance was answered by the Catholic church's intervention. It forced the heirless monarch to abdicate in favor of his Catholic brother Matthias. As Matthias also had no heirs, he put forward his cousin Ferdinand II as his successor. The largely Protestant Czech nobility in Prague resisted. The nobility's uprising of 1611 was a precursor to their actions in 1618 that led to the Thirty Years War. The defenestration of Catholic leaders and the destruction and theft of Catholic objects illustrates that the mobs were not randomly destroying, but trying to halt Catholic renewal. This conflict "signaled the end of peaceful coexistence" of Catholics and Hussites in Prague.

Thirty Years' War, Counter Reformation and the ‘Dark Ages’ (Doba temna) In 1618, members of the Bohemian estates (the nobility) threw Habsburg officials out of a window of the Prague castle, killing them. The Prague defenestration, which has been viewed as the catalyst for the outbreak of the Thirty Years' War, is one of the best known acts of uprising in early modern Europe. The (Bíla Hora) in 1620 solidified the position of the Habsburgs over the Czech lands. This was the first battle of the Thirty Years War. The Protestant forces of the "Winter King" Frederick of Palatinate were defeated by Habsburg Emperor Ferdinand II. As well as the loss of sovereignty, the battle resulted in the decimation of the Bohemian and Moravian aristocracy, and after the war there was a mass emigration of religious and intellectual figures. Due to the Peace of Westphalia, which was signed at the end of the Thirty Years' War, a large majority of the Bohemian nobility who survived the battle went into exile, and their properties were handed over to loyal Catholic nobles. From this period would emerge the dominance of Albrecht von Waldstein, who within five years of the battle owned a quarter of Bohemia from either compulsory purchase or in return for money loaned to Emperor Ferdinand. After Waldstein staged a rebellion against Ferdinand in 1634, the emperor immediately hatched a plot to murder him. During Habsburg rule, Prague became largely under the sphere of German influence, with the Czech rendered to a dialect. It is due to the influence of the Habsburgs that the city was endowed with the numerous Baroque palaces and monasteries which are still extant today.

The 19th century and Czech nationalism In the time of Emperor Joseph II (reigned 1765 to 1790) language in Bohemia did not connote nationality but social class, as German was the language of culture and civility and Czech was the language of the peasantry. In the course of the 19th-century national revival a rejuvenated Czech language became a component of the invented traditions of a Czech nation conceived as having been oppressed by the Germans since Hussite times, while immigration from the countryside made Czech the first language of the Prague working class and of a growing middle class. The connections between language and nationality made Prague the city of three nationalities, Czech, German, and Jewish; by 1880a certain Czech identity could now be seen as self-evident. Only in the last 100 years has the city of Prague begun to spread out beyond the ancient perimeter of its original four self-governing towns. This was largely due to the town planning of Charles IV, which had been conducted on a grand scale, as it was only until the industrial revolution that the suburbs began to extend beyond the boundaries of the medieval town.

Development in the 20th century: The First Republic World War I ended with the defeat of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the creation of Czecho- slovakia. Prague was chosen as its capital and Prague Castle as the seat of president (Tomáš Masaryk). At this time Prague was a true European capital with highly developed industry. By 1930, the population had risen to 850,000.

The Second World War Hitler ordered the German army to enter Prague on 15 March 1939 and from Prague Castle proclaimed Bohemia and Moravia a German protectorate. For most of its history Prague had been a multiethnic city with important Czech, German, and (mostly Czech- and/ or German-speaking) Jewish populations. From 1939, when the country was occupied by Nazi Germany, and during World War II, most Jews fled the city. In 1942, Prague was witness to the assassination of one of the most powerful men in Nazi Germany - Reinhard Heydrich (during Operation Anthropoid). Hitler ordered bloody reprisals. At the end of the war Prague suffered several bombing raids by the U.S. Air Force. Over 1000 people were killed and hundreds of buildings, factories and historical landmarks were destroyed (however the damage was small compared to the total destruction of many other cities in that time). Once the outcome of the war was decided and it was known that Germany would surrender to the allies, Prague revolted against the Nazi occupants on 5 May 1945 two days before Germany capitulated, on May 7. Four days later the Soviet army entered the city. The majority of the German population either fled or was expelled in the aftermath of the war.

Cold War After World War II, Prague was a city in the territory of military and political control of the Soviet Union (see Iron Curtain). In 1948 Czechoslovakia came under Communist one-party rule, which lasted for 40 years until the Velvet Revolution in 1989. The early years were characterized by harsh Stalinist rule and the suppression of political, cultural and artistic dissent. The 4th Czechoslovakian Writers' Congress held in the city in 1967 took a strong position against the regime. This spurred the new secretary of the Communist Party, Alexander Dubček to proclaim a new deal in his city's and country's life, starting the short-lived season of the "socialism with a human face". It was the Prague Spring, which aimed at the renovation of institutions in a democratic way. The Soviet Union and its allies reacted with the invasion of Czechoslovakia and the capital in August 1968 by tanks, suppressing the reform and ushering in the era of ‘normalization’ in which the government took a hard-line position in order to return things to the way they were before the reforms of the 1960s.

Era after the Velvet Revolution In 1989, after the riot police beat back a peaceful student demonstration, the Velvet Revolution crowded the streets of Prague and the Czechoslovak capital benefited greatly from the new mood. In 1993, after the split of Czechoslovakia, Prague became the capital city of the new Czech Republic. In the late 1990s Prague again became an important cultural centre of Europe and was notably influenced by globalization. In 2000 anti-globalization Protests in Prague (some 15,000 protesters) turned violent during the IMF and World Bank summits. In 2002 Prague suffered from widespread floods that damaged buildings and also its underground transport system. Prague launched a bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics, but failed to make the Candidate city shortlist. Due to low political support, Prague's officials chose in June 2009 to cancel the city's planned bid for 2020 Summer Olympics as well.