Seite - 98 - in Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte, Band LIX

Kristoffer neville98 medal collections in September, 1710.29 He soon expanded this field to include the invention of inscriptions and laudatory texts, as well as court ceremony and decoration, which brought him into collaboration with Fischer. By 1715 they worked closely together on the development of the iconographic program of the Karlskirche.30 Fischer and Heraeus collaborated on the 1712 manuscript of the Entwurff. The title page rec- ognizes the contributions of each, giving overall credit to Fischer, while acknowledging Heraeus for providing the accompanying text.31 The di- vided responsibility of the two men is further emphasized in the preface, which concludes, The author[,] Joh: Bernhard Fischers von Erlach, with no mention of Heraeus.32 The authorship of the book thus applied to the concept and the visual material, rather than to the text, as is more com- mon in modern contexts. Heraeus himself ac- knowledged this distinction, for nowhere in his correspondence with Carl Gustaf Tessin did he claim any credit for the work, which is always presented as Fischer’s. This was particularly ap- propriate in this case, for the book he sent to Stockholm contained no text, and thus none of his formal contribution. Heraeus’s contentment to detach texts he composed for numerous col- laborative projects – including this one – and publish them separately under his name suggests that this attitude held much more broadly.33 Fischer had a fully-developed concept of the content, structure, and visual materials for the book by 1710–12, when they were clearly elaborated on the title page, and claimed full authorship for the work himself. Very likely the conceptual and antiquarian work was largely fin- ished in the earlier part of this three-year period, although the drawings for the reconstructions of ancient monuments in particular can be dated only very generally before 1712.34 Heraeus, who arrived in Vienna in 1709 and was appointed to a court position in the following year, was there- fore probably more peripheral to the conceptual development of the project than has often been assumed.35 This need not imply that Heraeus played an unimportant role, however. On a purely prac- tical level, he mediated between Fischer and others involved in the project. This is of course very clear in the episode involving the Tessins, but Delsenbach, the engraver, later wrote that it was Heraeus who recalled him to Vienna af- ter a lengthy absence from 1713-1718.36 On a more intellectual level, he came to Vienna with a strong antiquarian background and an especial knowledge of coins and medals, which provided 29 For Heraeus, see Hammerlund, Ett äventyr i staten (cit. n. 7). 30 Sedlmayr, Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach (cit. n. 1), pp. 280–300. 31 Vienna, Austrian National Library, Cod. Mscr. 10791. The manuscript has not been the subject of a detailed study, though general descriptions are available in Kunoth, Die Historische Architektur Fischers von Erlach (cit. n. 1), pp. 17–18, and in Prange, Entwurf und Phantasie (cit. n. 1), pp. 53–56. 32 This is repeated in the manuscript dedication: […] In allertieffster und allerunterthänigster Unterwerffung Nieder- geleget von dem Autore (in singular). 33 Heraeus, Vermischte Neben=Arbeiten (cit. n. 20) and Carl Gustaf Heraeus, Gedichte und Lateinische Inschrif- ten, Nuremberg, 1721. 34 Prange, Entwurf und Phantasie (cit. n. 1), pp. 158–175. The primary exception is a drawing dated 1709 showing monuments that would reappear in the Entwurff as the Tomb-Pyramid of King Sotis (illustrated in Prange, Ent- wurf und Phantasie (cit. n. 1), p. 53). 35 Most authors assume some important role for Heraeus. See, for instance, H. Aurenhammer, Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach 1656–1723, Vienna 1956, p. 204. See also Matsche, Die Kunst im Dienst der Staatsidee Kaiser Karls VI. (cit. n. 28), pp. 44–45. Hammerlund, Ett äventyr i staten (cit. n. 7), p. 198, argues that the Entwurff is inconceivable in any form without Heraeus’s contribution, and suggests that the collaboration might have its origins in a possible meeting of the two men in Berlin in 1704.