Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-w7rtg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-13T21:28:41.075Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preliminaries for a bibliography of museum collection catalogues: Some Historical Observations on a Hitherto Neglected Aspect of Museum History

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 June 2016

Frits Keers
Frits Keers*
Affiliation:
Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Get access

Abstract

Catalogues of 18th century private and municipal collections are the precursors of museum catalogues. But museum catalogues proper date from the establishment of the Musée du Louvre and the publication of its first catalogue in 1793. In this catalogue can be found the essential features of the museum catalogue: a printed list of objects in the collection, in systematic order, and including descriptions which facilitate identification of the objects by the public. From the Louvre catalogue of 1793 a continuing line of development leads to the present day, although different catalogues have adopted different methods of organising their entries, in some cases echoing the arrangement of the collections within the museum building. Two centuries of publishing, and recent developments in editing art historical texts, suggest that there is a serious and growing need for a bibliography of museum catalogues. A few such bibliographies already exist, devoted to single institutions (such as the Louvre) or cities (Berlin, Munich), but there is no comprehensive bibliography comparable to Frits Lugt’s unique listing of auction catalogues. A start should be made on this enormous task.

Type
Research Article
Information
Art Libraries Journal , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , 1997 , pp. 26 - 34
Copyright
Copyright © The Art Libraries Society 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

This is a somewhat altered version of a speech delivered at the European Art Libraries Conference on museum catalogues, which was held at the Civico Museo Revoltella Galleria d’Arte Moderna, Trieste in co-operation with BiArte Associazione Italiana Biblioteche, sezione Friuli Venezia Giulia, December 2nd-4th 1996. I am grateful to the organizers for the invitation to speak on the topical issues discussed in this contribution. To Eric Wulfert, Amsterdam, I extend my gratitude for his most welcome help with the translation of the first draft of the original text. To Gillian Varley, Chair of ARLIS/UK & Ireland, thanks are due for her offer to have it published and her final editing.

1. Bering Liisberg, H. C. Kunstkammeret: Dets stiftelse og œldste historie. Copenhagen, 1897 Google Scholar. — Many items from a considerable number of Scandinavian collections were in the exhibition ‘Wunderkammer des Abendlandes: Museum und Sammlung im Spiegel der Zeit’, Kunst- und Ausstellungshalle der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Bonn, 25th November 1994-26th February 1995.

2. Lépicié, , Catalogue raisonné des tableaux du Roy avec un abrégé de la vie des peintres fait par ordre de Sa Majesté. Paris, 1752–54 Google Scholar. (Two vols).

3. Two more notorious examples of private collections — one royal, the other civilian — prefiguring a museum catalogue are:

Cumberland, Richard. An Accurate and Descriptive Catalogue of the Several Paintings in the King of Spain’s Palace at Madrid; with some Account of the Pictures in the Buen-Retiro. London, 1787 Google Scholar.

West, Consul. Raisonneret Catalog over Consul West’s Samling af Malerier med Indledning samt Liste over Haandtegninger, Figurer, Kobbertstik og trykte Vœrker Samlingen tilhörende. Copenhagen, 1807 Google Scholar.

4. Terwesten, Pieter. Catalogus Van een gedeelte van ’t Vorstelyk Kabinet Schilderyen, van Zyne Doorl. Hoogheid, den Heere Prince van Orange en Nassau, […]. The Hague, 1770 Google Scholar.

5. Lijst van het Koninklijk Kabinet van Schilderijen in ’s Gravenhage, 1817.

6. Broos, Ben P. J. Intimacies and Intrigues: History Painting in the Mauritshuis. The Hague/Ghent, 1993 Google Scholar.

7. Rivalz, , Analyse des différens ouvrages de peinture, sculpture et architecture, Qui sont dans l’hôtel de Ville de Toulouse. Toulouse, 1770 Google Scholar. cf. Georgel, Chantal. ‘Petite histoire des livrets de musée’, in the catalogue of a most fascinating exhibition, La jeunesse des musées. Paris: Musée d’Orsay, 1994, p.207–214 Google Scholar.

van Dyk, Jan. Kunst en historiekundige beschryving en aanmerkingen over alle de schilderyen op het stadhuis te Amsterdam. Amsterdam, 1758 Google Scholar; second edition 1760; the third and last edition including an additional listing of all the paintings was published in 1790.

9. Catalogue of principal Pictures, to be found, in the Town-House at Leyden.

10. e.g., Berbie, Gerard. Description Des Principaux Ouvrages de Peinture & Sculpture; Actuellement Existans Dans les Eglises, Couvens, & lieux publics de la Ville d’Anvers, Donnée au jour pour l’utilité des Voyageurs. 4th ed. Antwerp, 1768 p.4 Google Scholar.

11. Catalogue des objets contenus dans la Galerie du Muséum Français, décrété par la Convention nationale, le 27 juillet 1793, l’an second de la République Française. Paris, 1793 cf. MdeV 1927 no.105 (see note 37).

12. It is amusing to relate that the Pinacoteca Ambrosiana in Milan once owned a series of Four Elements by Jan Brueghel the Elder from the private collection of Cardinal Federico Borromeo of which two panels, i.e. ‘Earth’ and ‘Air’, were looted by the French and swept off to Paris. Until rather recently, on small signs attached to the frames of both remaining pictures in Milan, the legends disclosed the fate of the missing two counterparts by indignantly stating they had never been returned.

13. It is worthwhile to mention that it makes fascinating reading. Obviously, the catalogue had to be edited under high pressure of time — nothing much has changed since - and the same is true for the installation of the museum — idem. Not only are there two different names employed for the new institution (‘Muséum français’ on the title page, and ‘Muséum National’ on page 5) but on more than one occasion the same artist’s name occurs in different spellings, and the text abounds with misprints. As far as the actual hanging, the accrochage is concerned, a painting by Bakhuizen appears to have hung between Patel and Vouet, and it may come as a real shock to modern eyes to discover Teniers’ down-to-earth daily-life paintings with Claude on either side.

14. Waagen, G. F. Art Treasures in Great Britain. London, 1854 (three vols); Galleries and Cabinets of Art in Great Britain. London, 1857 Google Scholar.

15. Waagen, G. E. Kunstwerke und Kunstler in England und Paris. Berlin, 1837–39 (three vols). Kunstwerke und Künstler in Deutschland. Leipzig, 1843–45 Google Scholar (two vols).

16. Waagen, G. F. Die Gemäldesammlung in der Kaiserlichen Ermitage zu St. Petersburg nebst Bemerkungen über andere dortige Kunstsammlungen. München, 1864. Die vornehmsten Kunstdenkmäler in Wien. Wien, 1866–67 Google Scholar (two vols).

17. Waagen, G. F. Verzeichniss der Gemälde-Sammlung des Königlichen Museums zu Berlin, 1830 Google Scholar cf. Tümmers I, no.799; fourteenth and last edition 1860 cf. Tümmers I no.820 (see note 39).

18. What this system when elaborated into extreme specification ultimately leads to, can be seen when we take a close look at Karl Woermann’s catalogues of the gallery in Dresden. The system here gets close to failure because the various subdivisions become excessively detailed to the point of obscuring the general survey. — Woermann, Karl. Katalog der Königlichen Gemãldegalerie zu Dresden. 1st ed. Dresden, 1887; seventh and last edition 1908 Google Scholar.

19. Göthe, Georg. Nationalmusei Tafvelsamling: Beskrifvande Förteckning. Första Afdelningen: Utlãndske (icke-Nordiske) Mestare. Stockholm, 1887 Google Scholar. A rather inconvenient method consists of the combination of an alphabetical sequence of artist’s names to which serial numbers are assigned. This necessarily implies that with each new acquisition one must renumber the whole contents for subsequent editions of the catalogue, or else add a suffix to already existing numbers. What this leads to in the end is demonstrated by the nine editions of van Riemsdijk, B.W.F. Catalogus der schilderijen, miniaturen, pastels, omlijste teekeningen, enz. in het Rijks-Museum te Amsterdam. Amsterdam, 1903 Google Scholar; ninth and last edition 1934.

20. e.g., A Catalogue of the Pictures in the National Gallery. London, 1840. As the collection at this time numbered only 177 items, there obviously was still no need felt for an alphabetical index.

21. e.g., Wornum, Ralph N. Descriptive and Historical Catalogue of the Pictures in the National Gallery: With Biographical Notices of the Painters. 14th ed. London, 1854 p.14 Google Scholar.

22. Fortunately, the conversion to this systematic presentation came about without the extreme consequences as demonstrated by Woermann in Dresden (see note 18). The Anglo-Saxon sense of clear organisation culminated eventually in the exemplary and monumental series of post-1945 publications under the editorship of Martin Davies. Stockholm, by the way, developed along similar lines, in as much as the historical-topographical system was implemented here as well (see note 19).

23. Spengler, Johan Conrad. Catalog over det Kongelige Billedgalleri paa Christiansborg. Copenhagen, 1827 Google Scholar.

24. [de Laet, Jan] Catalogue du Musée d’Anvers. Antwerp, 1847 Google Scholar. For its appreciation in the early years of this century, cf. [de Mont, Pol] Koninklijk Muzeum van Schoone Kunsten te Antwerpen: Beschrijvend Catalogus I: Oude Meesters. Antwerp, 1905 p.XI Google Scholar.

25. See note 6. — We must understand that the reality of the museum collection catalogue is in fact more complicated than can be outlined here. One only rarely comes upon a copy which conforms exclusively to one of the models presented above. Much more common, in fact, are catalogues that contain a mixture of features from various systems. In order to distinguish them as clearly as possible, preference has been given to stressing the specifics of each for the sake of a more convenient classification.

26. cf. MdeV 1927 nos.136-169 (see note 37).

27. Villot, Frederic. Notice des tableaux exposés dans les galeries du Musée national du Louvre, ire partie: Écoles d’Italie. Paris, 1849 Google Scholar. Cf. MdeV 1927 no.172 (see note 37).

28. Mündler, Otto. Essay d’une analyse critique de la Notice des Tableaux du Musée National du Louvre accompagné d’observations et de documents relatifs à ces mêmes tableaux. Paris, 1850 Google Scholar. — Tarral, Claudius. Observations sur le classement actuel des tableaux du Louvre, et analyse critique du nouveau catalogue. Paris, 1850 Google Scholar (two vols).

29. Villot, Frédéric. Notice des tableaux exposés dans les galeries du Musée national du Louvre, ire partie: Ecoles d’Italie et d’Espagne. Paris, 1852 Google Scholar. Cf. MdeV 1927 no. 178 (see note 37).

30. As far as I know, there exist no official proceedings of the Viennese convention.

31. de Stuers, Victor. Notice historique et descriptive des tableaux et des sculptures exposés dans le Musée Royal de La Haye. The Hague, 1874 Google Scholar.

32. Gronau, Georg. ‘Uber die Numerierung in Galeriekatalogen’. Museumskunde vol. 11, 1915 p.189–193 Google Scholar.

33. This preference, of course, only refers to the additional information which comes forward from this particular way of organizing the material. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the bibliographical criteria which have to be met by modern museum catalogues.

34. e.g., [Matthäi, Johann Friedrich]. Neues Sach- und Ortsverzeichniss der Königlich Sächsischen Gemälde-Gallerie zu Dresden. Dresden, 1826 Google Scholar.

35. Schlie, Friedrich. Beschreibendes Verzeichniss der Werke älterer Meister in der Grossherzoglichen Gemälde-Gallerie zu Schwerin. Schwerin, 1882 Google Scholar.

Eisenmann, Oscar. Katalog der Königlichen Gemälde-Galerie zu Cassel. Kassel, 1888 Google Scholar.

Riegel, Herman. Herzogliches Museum: Beschreibendes und kritisches Verzeichniss der Gemälde-Sammlung. Braunschweig, 1900 Google Scholar. Not to be overlooked is this author’s earlier publication on the gallery in Braunschweig, in: Beiträge zur niederländischen Kunstgeschichte, II: Die niederländischen Schulen im herzoglichen Museum zu Braunschweig, kritischkunst-geschichtlich bearbeitet. Berlin, 1882.

36. Lugt, Frits. Répertoire des catalogues de ventes publiques. The Hague, 1938–53 Google Scholar (two vols).

37. Keers, Frits. ‘Bibliografische aantekeningen bij Ben Broos, Liefde, list en lijden: Historiestukken in het Mauritshuis’. Oud Holland vol. 109, 1994 p.137–140 esp. p. 139 CrossRefGoogle Scholar note 8.

38. de Vasselot, J. J. Marquet. Répertoire des catalogues du Musée du Louvre (1793-1917) suivi de la liste des directeurs et conservateurs du musée. Paris, 1917 Google Scholar, listing 388 items, de Vasselot, J. J. Marquet. Répertoire des catalogues du Musée du Louvre (1793-1926). Paris, 1927 Google Scholar, listing 465 items. In previous notes, this publication has been referred to as MdeV 1927. - Following the first edition of Marquet de Vasselot, and adorned with a preface from his hand, Denise Jalabert published a useful Répertoire des catalogues des Musées de province (Paris, 1924) offprint from Bulletin de la Société de l’Histoire de l’Art français, 1923.

39. de Ricci, Seymour. Description raisonnée des peintures du Louvre, I: Ecoles étrangères: Italie et Espagne. Paris, 1913 p.XI–XXIV Google Scholar. An absolutely exemplary descriptive bibliography of Louvre catalogues is Michon, Etienne. Bibliographie des catalogues du Musée des Antiques du Louvre (Besançon, 1916), offprint from Bibliographe moderne nos. 4-6 1914–15 p.241–301 Google Scholar.

40. Tümmers, Horst-Johs. Verzeichnis der Kataloge und Führer kunst- und kulturgeschichtlichen Museen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und in Berlin. [West] Berlin, 1975–79)Google Scholar. Band 1: Kataloge und Führer der Berliner Museen (1975), listing 2029 items (in previous notes, this publication has been referred to as Tümmers I); Band 2: Kataloge und Führer der Münchner Museen (1979), listing 2392 items (all published).

41. See note 28 p.LI-LVIII.

42. Kaiser, J. W. Beschrijving der schilderijen van het Rijksmuseum te Amsterdam. The Hague, 1880 p.XIV–XVI Google Scholar.

43. Cantón, F J. Sánchez. Museo del Prado: Catálogo. Madrid, 1933. p.XIII–XXI Google Scholar. - Another useful bibliography of catalogues of the gallery in Vienna was published by Glück, Gustav, Katalog der Gemäldegalerie (Vienna, 1928) p.XVIII–XXIII Google Scholar, continued and considerably enlarged by Baldass, Ludwig, Katalog der Gemäldegalerie (Vienna, 1938) p.XV–XX Google Scholar.

44. Scherer, Val. ‘Zentrale für Museumskataloge’. Museumskunde vol. 9 1913 p.154–156 Google Scholar. The same author had anticipated Tümmers (see note 39) by embarking on a first scholarly descriptive bibliography of Berlin catalogues, in ‘Bibliographie Deutscher Museumskataloge’. Museumskunde vol. 11 no. 1 1915 p.25-32, no. 2 p.88-105, no. 3 p.156-163; vol. 12 no. 4 1916 p.112-134.

45. For obvious reasons but unfortunately, both Marquet de Vasselot’s (see note 38) and Tümmers’ (see note 40) bibliographies are only partly descriptive.