Seite - 96 - in Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte, Band LIX

Kristoffer neville96 him to reconsider. Although the degree to which Fischer intended the book for the imperial court versus a broader audience is unclear, Joseph had been deeply interested in architecture, and had shared this interest with Fischer, his instructor in architecture.26 With the accession of Charles VI, he quickly became aware of the more immedi- ate utility of the book as an impressive gift for the new emperor, a token of his dedicated service given in hope of reconfirmation of his position.27 The presentation piece would have lost much of its value if it were a published book – even a rich one – available to anyone with an interest in architectural reconstructions, for it could not then be offered as a unique piece created for the emperor. Any publication plans in these years would thus have been pushed back. The dedica- tion page, dated 1712, supports this. Once the manuscript had been presented, Fischer was free to publish the work immediately. He could use all of the materials he had already prepared, with the exception of any dedication page. Given the evident state of preparation, even this may have been engraved, but with a dedication to Joseph I.28 A newly-cut plate was clearly required for the new emperor, and was presumably given the date of the foreseen publication. The possible plan to publish immediately after the presentation of the manuscript seems also to have been delayed. Most obviously, the date of the title page would have been adjusted if such an edition had been produced. On a prac- tical level, this must be in part because Fischer soon became involved with a series of new com- missions – the Clam-Gallas palace in Prague; the Karlskirche and imperial stables in Vienna, among others – which simultaneously kept him away from the Entwurff and created material for him to add to the book. The Karlskirche is the best-represented building in the work, with four plates, but it was begun in 1715, and the plates depicting it were apparently still unavailable at the beginning of 1720, since they were not in- cluded in the Tessins’ volume. COLLABORATION AND AUTHORSHIP The arrival of Carl Gustaf Heraeus in Vienna and his subsequent involvement in the project may also have forced a reconsideration of the pro- ject. He came to Vienna in 1709 after a number of years as an itinerant antiquarian, and was ap- pointed inspector of the imperial antiquities and 26 H. Reuther, “Entwurf einer historischen Architektur” in: Kunsthalle Nürnberg (ed.), Der Traum von Raum: ge- malte Architektur aus 7 Jahrhunderten, exhibition catalogue, Kunsthalle und Norishalle Nürnberg, 13.09.1986– 23.11.1986, Marburg 1986, pp. 113–121, suggests that the Entwurff may have been conceived within the context of this relationship, and have been intended as a sort of instruction book in architecture for the emperor. Lorenz, Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach (cit. n. 1), p. 44, points out that Fischer’s position at court likely influenced his choice of ancient monuments, as several that were in Habsburg territories were included while more familiar ones, such as the Pantheon, were not. Too much emphasis on a court audience is however difficult to reconcile with the (later) announcement that the very limited first edition would be available in selected bookshops throughout the empire. 27 Sedlmayr, Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach (cit. n. 1), p. 233, suggests that Heraeus may have suggested to Fischer the presentation of a historical-architectural work to the emperor, since he planned something comparable in a history of the Habsburgs presented through medals. 28 This is complicated by the role of Heraeus, who evidently wrote the dedication, since he published it separately under his name in Heraeus, Vermischte Neben=Arbeiten (cit. n. 20). Heraeus came to Vienna in 1709 and was appointed to a court position in September of 1710, leaving a very small window for him to have become involved in any sort of collaborative work on the Entwurff by that year. See F. Matsche, Die Kunst im Dienst der Staatsidee Kaiser Karls VI. Ikonographie, Ikonologie und Programmatik des “Kaiserstils,” vol. I, Berlin 1981, p. 279.