RKD STUDIES

The preference for a symmetrical display of paintings developed gradually during the 17th century: paintings were being arranged in pairs or groups. The first traces in the early 17th century of this practice can be found in the grand palaces of cardinals and other aristocratic collectors in Rome, who became aware of decorative systems in the presentation of large numbers of paintings.¹ Later on, this symmetrical arrangement would be called ‘à la mode Françoise’, because the French King Louis XIV (1638–1715) arranged his art collection according to these principles.² By the end of the 17th century, landscapes and still lifes were rarely hung separately and analogous narrative subjects were also paired together.³ Descriptions in inventories suggest that pairs were not just hung side by side, but were probably mainly arranged symmetrically around other paintings.⁴ The arrangement was based on mirror symmetry on either side of one central axis or, where appropriate, alongside multiple axes.⁵ According to the concept of paragone (meaning ‘comparison’), an aesthetic ideal from the 16th and 17th centuries, the symmetrical arrangement could reveal narrative connections between the paintings.⁶ Paragone was used to describe various types of competitive relationships, for example between a painting and a sculpture, ancient and modern art, or between painters from the same or from different schools. Visitors to the gallery would be encouraged to make comparisons and thereby start a conversation about art. The main point was to discover similarities and distinctions between individual artists, including their approaches of subject matter and types of brushwork. At the end of the century, collectors viewed the image of their collection as a whole; an art gallery could be praised for its balanced presentation of different subjects and sizes and for its composition as an aesthetic unit.

Gallery paintings, a subject that became popular in the Southern Netherlands in the 17th century, show art collections and other objects of curiosities exhibited in elegant rooms. David Teniers II (1610–1690), who was curator of the impressive art gallery formed by Archduke Leopold Wilhelm of Austria (1614–1662) in the Coudenberg Palace at Brussels, painted the Archduke’s collection several times. In these works, there is no symmetrical presentation yet. What the arrangement of the collection looked like in reality, however, we cannot tell exactly from these representations, as they are largely fictitious. Some of the pictures that appear in Teniers’ works were indeed paintings that belonged to the Archduke. A picture by Teniers from circa 1651 [8] shows an arrangement of paintings are from ceiling to floor, organized by size, but not strictly symmetrical. The engravings by Frans van der Steen (1625–1672) after Nikolaas van Hoy (1631–1679) in Teniers’ catalogue (Theatrum Pictorium, c. 1660) probably give a more accurate picture of the arrangement of Leopold Wilhelm’s collection in the Stallburg-Galerie in Vienna [9]. Gallery paintings became a popular genre, also outside the Southern Netherlands, and many collectors would commission artists to represent their galleries, or, rather, an idealized vision of it.

In 18th-century France, it became customary to display paintings in a 'cabinet de tableaux', a separate room or series of rooms in which pendants were placed on either side of mirrors or a larger painting, so that the eye was guided from the centre to the sides.⁷ Paintings arranged as pendants could either be by the same artist or by different painters, sometimes even from different schools or countries and periods. Combining pairs of old and modern paintings became fashionable among collectors, who commissioned contemporary artists to create pendants to paintings by old masters they already owned or had recently acquired. An example of this was the commission by the collector Aignan Thomas Desfriches (1715–1800) to Claude Joseph Vernet (1714–1798) to paint a landscape that was to be a counterpart of a painting by Willem van de Velde (I or II?).⁸ The fashion also blew over to Britain: in 1801, Francis Egerton, 3rd Duke of Bridgewater (1736-1803) commissioned Joseph Mallard William Turner (1775–1851) to paint a matching companion piece to his painting by Willem van de Velde II (1633-1707).⁹

8
David Teniers (II)
Portrait of Leopold Wilhelm, Archduke of Austria (1614-1662) in his Brussels gallery of paintings, c. 1651
Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, inv./cat.nr. GG 739

9
Frans van der Steen after Nikolaas van Hoy published by David Teniers (II)
A view into the Staburg Gallery of Archduke Leopold Wilhelm of Austria, c. 1660
Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv./cat.nr. RP-P-2014-60-202

10
Johann Michael Bretschneider
Picture gallery, dated 1702
Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum, inv./cat.nr. Gm 603

It is clear that Wrschowetz was quite early to adopt a symmetrical display of his paintings. To achieve this arrangement, he commissioned local artists to create counterparts for his Old Master paintings, which largely consisted of still lifes. Although there is no visual evidence of the appearance of Wrschowetz's painting gallery, we can clearly see his intentions in terms of presentation from the 1723 sale catalogue. The inventory list is sorted by room. Row A) lists all the paintings in the ‘gallery’, while row D) indicates the ‘cabinet pieces’ and counterparts. Wrschowetz mostly paired paintings by the same artists according to subject, such as Daniel Seghers’ (1590-1661) two pictures of sculpted cartouches with flower garlands around Mary and Christ (c. 1650–1655),¹⁰ or Johann Adalbert Angermeyer’s (1674-1740) hunting pieces of dead birds.¹¹ There are some interesting pairs, such as a portrait by Hans Burgkmair I (1473–1531) which served as the counterpart of Portrait of an unknown old man by Govert Flinck (1615–1660), or a copy after Peter Paul Rubens, with a Rape of Europe paired with a depiction of Venus by an anonymous painter.¹²

Gallery paintings by the Bohemian artist Johann Michael Bretschneider (1656–1729) show that the trend of symmetrical arrangement had already been picked up early by collectors in Bohemia and Austria at the turn of the century. Bretschneider’s gallery picture of 1702, in which the symmetrical arrangement is implemented across the full width of a long wall, was probably made in Prague and shows an idealised image of a collection, which probably did not exist in this form [10]. Interestingly, Wrschowetz had two gallery paintings in his collection that served as counterparts: one by the Augsburg painter Johann Heinrich Schönfeld (1609–1684) of about 1670 [11], and the other by the Flemish artist Jan Onghers (1659–1735), which was painted at least 20 years later in Prague at the request of Wrschowetz [12].¹³ The depicted gallery by Onghers shows an arrangement of paintings (mainly) from Wrschowetz’ collection, mirroring its counterpart. In any case, Wrschowetz owned the large painting represented in the middle of the short wall, which has been identified as St. John Preaching in the Desert by the Italian painter Pasquale de’ Rossi (1641–1722), now in Dresden.¹⁴ Other paintings have not been identified, but two landscapes could be attributed to Joos de Momper II (c. 1564–1635).