Page - 75 - in Jacopo Strada and Cultural Patronage at the Imperial Court - The Antique as Innovation, Volume 1

75Travel—Wenzel Jamnitzer and perfectionism is astounding if one presumes, as appears to have been the case, that the designing architect never set foot in the place. To my mind this unity of conception, this lack of compromise with local usage even in unim- portant details, presupposes that the execution of the plans—be they Giulio’s or Covo’s—was regularly supervised by someone who perfectly understood the requirements of the building, and had sufficient comprehension and expe- rience of Giulio’s style to be able confidently to resolve any unforeseen contin- gencies that might arise during construction. Even if ‘Meister Sigmund’ can be identified with Sigismund da Preda, who twenty years later was a highly respected Imperial architect in Vienna—this plausible identification is proposed by Sarzi—it is very unlikely that he would have been capable of such supervision.18 The solution to this enigma must be 18 Sarzi relates De Preda’s surname ( he was also known as ‘de Prettis’) with the Mantuan locality Breda, ignoring that according to Thieme-Becker De Preda was a native of Pisa, while other sources refer to Pratovecchio, in the Casentino, as his birthplace, cf. Wart- ena/ Erichsen 2009, p. 97. This would certainly not have prevented him from arriving in Landshut by way of Mantua. De Preda’s best known work is the Kaiserspital in Vienna (de- molished in 1903), construction of which began shortly after his death in 1549. If Benedikt Figure 2.4 Landshut, Stadtresidenz: the “Italian” lantern of the chapel, seen from a back window.