RIHA Journal 0028 | 16 September 2011 On the Hierarchy of Saints on Altars Visitation Records of Otto Friedrich Buchheim, the Bishop of Ljubljana ( !" # !!"$ Ana La%ri& 'eer re%iew and editing organized by+ Umetnostnozgodovinski inštitut Fran#eta Steleta ZRC SAZU, '(ubl(ana / France Stele Institute of Art History at t,e SRC SASA, '(ubl(ana Re%ie(ers+ Sib+lle Appu,n-Radtke, .iran /peli0 Slovenska verzija dostopna na / Slovenian version available at: (RIHA Journal 0027) Abstract The visitation records of Otto Friedrich Buchheim, the Bishop of Ljubljana from 1641– 1664, offer an insight into the rules governing the disposition of saintly figures in altar retables. The central place was accorded to the titular saint, while companion saints are positioned in pairs (separately for each level of the retable) in such a way that those of higher rank are placed on the more distinguished gospel side, whereas those of lower rank stand on the subordinate epistle side. The priority of one saint over another was not a matter of a random choice, but of a fixed hierarchical order which was created over the course of centuries in the Litany of All Saints and also in the hymns of the officium for All Saints Day; this hierarchy, as Buchheim remarks, is "in agreement with the general feeling of the Catholic Church". Ecclesiastical art in Slovenia shows that in the Gothic period the hierarchical principle governing the disposition of saintly figures was not yet firmly fixed, but it was fully established in the late Renaissance and Baroque periods, which coincides with the period of unification of the Litany of All Saints for the entire Catholic Church. Later it started to loosen again, yet it remained in force up to the 12th century. - – - – - – - – - [1] The research into the 17th century visitation records of the Diocese of Ljubljana undertaken in the 1990s focused on the artistic policies of the bishops of Ljubljana, particularly from the viewpoint of effectuating decrees issued and guidelines drawn up by the ,ouncil of Trent, or, respectivel , of implementing the instructions of ,atholic reform theoreticians!1 In terms of art histor , the records of Bishop Otto Friedrich Buchheim, the Bishop of Ljubljana from 1641–1664,1 "ho "as greatly interested in the arts and "ell8 1 'na Lavri9, Vizitacije ljubljanske škofije 17. stoletja kot vir za umetnostno zgodovino #t pescript thesis$, Ljubljana 166:* 'na Lavri9, ;i<itacije %ot vir <a slovens%o <godovino, in: Grafenauerjev zbornik, ed! ;incenc /ajšp et al!, Ljubljana 1666, 4?:8461* 'na Lavri9, Ljubljanska škofija v vizitacijah 17. stoletja. Vizitacije kot vir za umetnostno zgodovino, Ljubljana 1225, http=@@uifs!<rc8 sazu.si@A0Blavric!vi<itacije #accessed 1C (eptember 1211$! 1 For historical data see= France )olinar, Duchheim #Duchaim, Duchaimb, Buchheim$ Otto Friedrich, in: Die Bischöfe des !eiligen " mischen "eiches 1#$% bis 1%&'. (in biographisches Le*ikon, eds! Er"in .at< and (tephan E! Fanker, Berlin 1662, :C48:CC* France )olinar, Ljubljanski škofje, Ljubljana 1225, 1::8142, "ith earlier literature* for the BishopGs collecting and patronage see= 'na Lavri9, /ims%a sli%ars%a <bir%a ljubljans%ega >%ofa Otona Frideri%a Buchheima ter njegov prispeve% <a obnovo .ermani%a in cer%ve sv! 'polinarija, in: +cta historiae artis ,lovenica ? #122:$, C:8?4* 'na Lavri9, Hmetnostna dejavnost >%ofa Otona Frideri%a Buchheima v ljubljans%i >%ofiji, in: +cta historiae artis ,lovenica 6 #1224$, :1866* 'na Lavri9, Dove<ave >%ofa Otona Frideri%a Buchheima < This text is provided under the terms of the Creative Commons License %%-:;-NC-ND 3.03 RIHA Journal 0028 | 16 September 2011 read, proved to be of particular interest! 'mong other things, the records reveal the basis on "hich the ,hurch formed the rules for the disposition of saintl figures in altar retables. ' paper discussing this matter "as published in 166: in the journal Bogoslovni vestnik,: "hile the present paper is a ne" version #in (lovenian and in -nglish translation$, complemented particularl "ith 0uotations from sources and "ith a greater number of e&amples taken from (lovenian art! 314 'fter the ,ouncil of Trent, the ,atholic ,hurch—in controversies "ith Drotestants, but in %eeping "ith its traditionsIagain emphasised the holiness and dignit of liturgical spaces deriving from their consecration and the divine presence! 'ccordingl , the entire arrangement of churches and disposition of their furnishings "ere subordinated to the hierarch of the sacred* thus, church buildings, as hierarchicall organised units, also reflected the institutional structure of the ,hurch! Of prime importance "as the division of the building bet"een the sanctuar as a place of liturg and the clerg , and the nave as the place of the congregation! Jith regard to its distinction, the sanctuar had to be given particular visual emphasis, e!g! a vaulting, frescoes, marble pavement, etc., andI as recommended b ,arlo Borromeo— it also had to be separated from the area occupied b the lait b means of a rail and steps.4 The nave "as secondar to the sanctuar so its decoration "as simpler, as "as the 0ualit of its vaulting and floor! 'nother important division in the church "as bet"een the gospel and epistle sides, "hich also represented the division bet"een the t"o se&es; in ,arniola, ho"ever, the demarcation "as not mar%ed b a "ooden barrier, such as had been envisaged b the rigorous ,arlo Borromeo to separate the area for "omen from that for men!C 3:4 The gospel side, "here the gospel "as read #i!e! the right8hand side if vie"ed from the sanctuar at the nave, i!e! the position of the clerg * or the left8hand side if vie"ed from the nave at the sanctuar , i!e! from the position of the congregation, the so8 called G"omenGs sideG$ "as more distinguished than the epistle side, "here epistles "ere read #i!e! the left8hand side vie"ed from the sanctuar at the nave, i!e from the position of the clerg * or the right8hand side if vie"ed from the nave at the sanctuar , i!e! from the position of the congregation, the so8called GmenGs sideG$! This hierarch "as also e&pressed in the placement of the tabernacle in the "all on the gospel side, "hich in the )unajem in sli%ars%a oprema njegovih re<idenc v ljubljans%i >%ofiji, in: +cta historiae artis ,lovenica 11 #1225$, 4:86:* 'na Lavri9, Oto Frideri% Buchheim in njegovi %anoni>%i re<idenci v (al<burgu in Dassauu, in: +cta historiae artis ,lovenica 1: #122?$, 11181:6! : 'na Lavri9, O hierarhiji svetni%ov na oltarnih nastav%ih, in: Bogoslovni vestnik C: #166:$, ::58 :4:! 4 (ee particularl = (usanne Ea er8Kimmelheber, Bisch fliche -unst)olitik nach dem .ridentinum. Der ,ecunda-"oma/+ns)ruch 0arlo Borromeos und die mailändischen Verordnungen zu Bau und +usstattung von -irchen # B tuduv (tudien. /eihe Lunstgeschiche 11$, Eünchen 16?4, 112, 115, 111! For the ,ouncil of Trent, see also the fundamental "or%= Kubert Fedin, .eschichte des Lonzils von Trient, vols! 18C, Freiburg8Basel8Jien 16468165C! C Ea er8Kimmelheber, Bisch fliche -unst)olitik, 1C4! This text is provided under the terms of the Creative Commons License %%-:;-NC-ND 3.03 RIHA Journal 0028 | 16 September 2011 15th centur , for e&ample, "as often called the Gmore respectable placeG #locus eminentior, locus honorabilior$ b the visitators to the Ljubljana Diocese!6 Later on, "hen the tabernacle "as given an even more distinguished place on the high altar, thus defining and giving sense to the axis of the entire building, its original position on the gospel side "as intended for the storage of hol oils. If there "as an altar of the Kol (acrament in the church, its position "as usuall on the gospel side! The priorit of the gospel side over the epistle side "as evident in altar retables in the disposition of saints, "ho, if placed on the former side, "ere accorded greater honour according to the generall accepted hierarchical order! 344 The choice of saints to be "orshipped in a certain church "as left to commissioners, i!e! the congregation, founders or donors; but it "as naturall also conditioned b time, place, societ and personal factors. 5 'n e&act hagio8topograph of the dioceses in (lovenia has not et been made, although there have been several partial studies.? If completed, apart from the general image of the "orship of saints in (lovenian territor , it "ould also sho" specific local features. 'n overvie" of individual parishes "hich comprise independent hagiographic units is also interesting! -ach of these units should have been suitabl balanced in terms of content, but certain )atrocinia in some of them "ere repeated several times; as a "arning against accumulating the same )atrocinia, Bishop Otto Buchheim, for e&ample, even calculated repeated occurrences of the same titular saints of the churches and chapels in individual parishes.6 Jhen a congregation asked for a change of )atrocinium of an altar, church or chapel, their argument "as precisel that certain saints "ere alread sufficientl represented in their parish! -ven "ithin a single church, "hich is li%e"ise a complete hagiographic unit, several e&amples of the same patron saint occur, most often the Blessed ;irgin, to "hom even several altars "ere dedicated in a number of cases, and rather fre0uentl , several images. 3C4 's a rule, the image of the titular saint to "hom a certain altar "as consecrated "as intended for the central position in the altar retable! 's can be understood from 15th centur visitation records, retables did not al"a s correspond to the title of the altar! 6 ,f! 'rchiepiscopal 'rchive Ljubljana # B NO'L), ;isitations