The effects of the Thirty Years War varied widely with respect to individual regions. Some areas suffered more heavily [1] than others. Nor did the battles rage equally strong in all parts of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. It is therefore impossible to speak of a consistent architectural development in Germany.

During the Habsburg Dynasty towards the end of the 16th century, hardly asignificant building was erected, as most monies were needed for the war against the Turks. When something was built, it was usually a fortress along the Hungarian border. Around the turn of the century, Vienna experienced a strong resurgance of architectural activity. 1603 saw the beginning of construction on the Franciscan Church, and in 1607 the Jesuit Church of the court was renovated in a Baroque style. But building activity did not really gain momentum until 1618, when Kaiser Matthias moved his residence to the city. In short succession a host of order churches were founded or renewed. [2] Meanwhile around 1620/30, at a time when construction had virtually come to a standstill in most of Germany, other parts of the Habsburg Dynasty were experiencing the beginning of various major building projects. While modernization work around 1620 on Krems Cathedral monastary and Göttweig monastary concentrated on the churches, the monastaries of Seckau (from 1619/1625) and St. Lambrecht (1639/40-ca.1630) were having primarily their cloister buildings renovated. In Innsbruck, the former Jesuit Church (1619-22) was begun, but not completed until 1646, during which a comedy theater was built from 1628 to 1630. Starting in 1625, the impressive castle of Eggenberg [3] was built near Graz. In 1628, after years of construction, the consecration of the Salzburg Cathedral could finally be celebrated, where nearly all members of the Catholic League were in attendance. [4] Building activity in Salzburg, as in many other cities after 1620, concentrated on reinforcing city fortifications.

Bohemia and Moravia were also spared, for the most part, from the destruction of war. Following the Battle of the White Mountain in 1620, asemblance of peace could be established there, despite the persistant fighting in neighboring regions. These two Bohemian provinces saw not only the raising of religious buildings, as in Bavaria, but also of numerous noble residencies and palaces.

The duchy of Bavaria experienced a similar development. Though it was initially weakened financially through it's contributions to the League, it was not really affected by the war until sometime later. It is therefore not surprising that much building activity even occured during the Thirty Years War and continued through the beginning of the 1630s. The buildings were predominately churches. A host of pilgrimage churches and order churches were established through the support of the Wittelsbachs, who asumed the role of protector of Catholicism in Germany, fortifying the Catholic Church in its territories. [5] The Jesuits played a central role in Bavaria, founding almost 20 settlements between 1556 and ca. 1630, as wellas building some order churches after the outbreak of war. [6]

Additionally, a variety of cloister churches [7] and above all pilgrimage churches were built in the years between 1618 and 1630: St. Michael in Violau (1617-20) and the Chapel of the Five Saints in Aislingen (1629/30), both near Dillingen; the parish and pilgrimage church Maria Himmelfahrt in Tuntenhausen (1628-29, consecrated 1630), as well as the Maria Eck Chapel near Traunstein, completed in several phases between 1635 and 1642/43. But can these various foundations (private endowments) in Bavaria be explained merely from the historical context, as a result of a more widespread turning to religion in the face of impending war?

In the imperial free city of Augsburg, which was pulled into war in 1632 and beseiged and occupied by various aggressors thereafter, construction of the town hall's exterior continued until 1618, while the interior was not finished until 1624. Similarly, the town hall in the imperial free city of Nuremburg was expanded between 1616 and 1622 with an imposing addition. The elaborate designs of both buildings, as representative structures of the wealthy trade centers, are worthy architectural challengers for the palaces of the time.

With the outset of war, many cities renovated their peripheral walls with respect to the new defensive technologies. Munich placed massive bastions in front of the city gates. Bremen began building large rampart systems in 1623 and Lübeck accelerated the development of its fortification system, as decided in 1595 (but not completed until 1660/70). Ulm also continued strengthening its bastions and outer walls, as begun at the start of the century, transforming the city between 1616 and 1623 into a veritable fortress of the Union. Frankfurt, on the other hand, decided relatively late (1627) to set up defenses, which were not completed until the end of the century. The bishopric of Mainz, because of its central position on the Rhine and Main Rivers, constantly played an important role: after the the city's fortifications were developing too sluggishly at the start of the 17th century, work began in 1620 on the Jakobsfeste, then known as Schweickhardtsburg, where building continued through Swedish occupation.Gustav Adolf, who had made Mainz his headquarters, also had a military city built on the opposite bank of the Rhine in 1631, the so-called Gustavsburg, which was destroyed four years later, after the withdrawal of the Swedish troops. [8]



1. Religious Architecture

The conflict between the Protestant and Catholic confessions had a major influence on the tractat literature of the 16th century. The Protestants, in particular, attempted to distinguish their churches, even architecturally, from those of the Catholics. [9] John Calvin, in his 1536 treatise, "Institutiones Christianae religionis," criticized the "Dei habitacula," [10] the imposing houses of God. Johannes Aeschardt also denounced the architectural extravagance of churches in his 1617 tractate on church architecture, "Examen disputationis R. Bellarmini de Templis," in which he proposes using the money instead for charitable Christian causes. [11] Beyond such references, however, the texts fail to offer any more concrete discussion of the form and appearance of Protestant churches, though the Temple of Solomon is oft refered to as a paragon, and reconstructed mostly at that time as an oblong building with three longitudinal aisles, and occasionally with a basilica. Josef Furttenbach, in his 1628 treatise "Architectura civilis" refers mainly to the Florence Duomo, expressing his partiality for the three-aisled, oblong structure with free-standing columns and a trefoiled apse. [12] Later, his 1649 thesis on "KirchenGebäw," published posthumously by his son, offers more detail about his ideas on church architecture. Furttenbach's describes the ideal church as a building of utility without great aesthetic elaboration: a simple rectangular space free of vaults (for better acoustics) and of supports (for unhindered views) with free hanging galleries, which he called "stages." Above the small apse there should be a library with direct access to the pulpit. [13]

While architecture theory does not offer any clear definition about the form of Protestant churches, it should not come as a surprise to discover very contradictory solutions in architecture praxis. A unique version of Protestant architecture appears in palace chapels, built primarily in Saxony and eastern regions of the Empire in the 16th and 17th centuries. [14] The first of their kind was constructed in Hartenfels Palace near Torgau in 1543/44 and consecrated by Martin Luther, who, it is therefore believed, also influenced its design. [15] The building is 23 meters long with Late Gothic vaults and double galleries along the sides. The altar is set just before the chancel's back wall, with a musicians gallery above it; a choir, as such, was not included. In the subsequent decades, the church was frequently refered to as a model of Protest church architecture.

The choice of a more gothic architecture around 1600 could be seen as a conscious opposition to the Renaissance and early Baroque style in Italy, the center of Catholicism. Yet this position was not always consistent. Increasingly after 1600, Renaissance forms began to appear throughout Germany. Even Protestant churches began to show "modern" Italian architectural detail, as demonstrated on the two most important churches in the Weser river region, the city church in Bückenburg (1610-1615) and the main church of Beatae Mariae Virginis in Wolfenbüttel (ca. 1608-1620). Both employ the traditional Gothic hall church structure, yet the columns are topped with modern Renaissance capitals.

In this context, the construction of two other churches are of particular importance: the court Church of Our Lady in Neuburg and the former Church of the Holy Trinity in Prague. The Protestant Duke Philipp Ludwig wanted the new church of Neuberg (completed in 1603) to represent Italian style with two flanking towers each crowned with a dome. He intended to create a "Trutz-Michael" (Defiant Michael), and with a Protestant building outdo the Jesuit St. Michael's Church in Munich, completed just a few years earlier. Joseph Heintz designed the plans in obvious reference to Bohemian projects. Yet the church council found the plans problematic, criticizing the niches between the supports as disfunctional: they made it difficult to hear the sermon, they lead to increased costs, and beyond that, these "anguli" (niches) were too reminiscent of the "old papal churches." [16] Ultimately, all sides agreed to build a hall with three aisles, setting galleries between the piers. The church was erected between 1607 and 1624. The difference to St. Michael's lies de facto in the design of the galleries as well as in the loss of the side chapels and transept, thereby essentially achieving a re-dimensioning of the architecture in favor of functionality.

Yet, as much as the outward appearance of the church ostensibly shares features with the Catholic church architecture in Bavariaóparticularly the Italian capitals and the ornamentation, clear references to contemporary Protestant church architecture do exist. For example, the rectangular floor plan corresponds to the main church in Wolfenbüttel, with its six piers divided into three aisles, while the elevation is reminiscent of the palace chapels in Hillerød and Heidelberg. Both Heidelberg's Friedrichsbau chapel (1601-1607) as well as the church in Hillerød's Frederiksborg Palace (1602-1616) are oblong buildings with side spaces instead of a transept, with a gallery running between them. [17]

Catholic models played a much more significant role in the planning of the former Trinity Church in Prague. Following the 1609 decree of the "Majesty's Letter", the Lutheran parish began building a church in the Lesser Town (Malâ Strana) in 1611. The project was in part subsidized by the Protestant rulers, as they saw it their duty to establish a Protestant cathedral in the primarily Catholic, imperial residence city. [18] The double-tower facade of the Protestant church had a Catholic church as its model, the Trinitý dei Monti church in Rome. In this way, a patron saint became crucial for the architectural form. The lack of any galleries in the interior are just as contrary to Protestant church architecture as are the three chapel niches in the nave. It is probable, because of the clear precedence set by the Catholic churches of the previous decades in Prague, that the Protestants - just as in Neuburg initially - were attempting to emulate the Catholic churches of the city by building the most representative church possible.

Such interchanging of floor plan types and architectural models was not only possible in poly-confessional Prague. Even in the thoroughly Catholic region of Upper Bavaria church types were borrowed from the other confession, but in this case, the Catholics sampled from the Protestant church architecture. The court chapel in the Munich Residence of 1600-1603 is a startling example. [19] Prince Elector Maximilian I of Bavaria, the self-named patron of the Catholic church in Germany, had his court chapel built in (of all styles) that of a Saxonian Protestant palace church, initially even doing without a choir, which was later added around 1630. Another remarkable example is the St. Michael's church in Munich, which was to a great extent based on the Il Gesù Church in Rome. Yet during building, the Jesuits replaced the screened-off oratories with open galleries, which at that time were more common in Protestant churches.

In this regard, it would seem that the Catholics were not particularly interested in distinguishing their churches architecturally from those of the Protestants. Rather than considerations of confessional specificity, functionality and the respective regional style seem to have been more decisive criteria in choosing the type of church to build. In the case of the pilgrimage church in Tuntenhausen, the hall church form was selected as being more functional for processions. [20] Maximilian I of Bavaria appears to have opted for the Protestant palace chapel, as it economized space and it had already proved itself as a palace church.

Likewise, just as the Protestants employed the more common Early Baroque style in Prague and Neuberg, even reaching compromises in terms of their church forms, the Jesuits decided in favor of galleries for their monastic order churches in the Rhineland between 1590 and 1620, even decorating them mostly with Late Gothic motifs. [21] This is evident insofar as the orders strove for a more uniform church architecture. The order churches in Bavaria are mainly modelled after the pilastered church, as exemplified by St. Michael's in Munich, but also show some Early Baroque influence. Meanwhile, the Rhineland Jesuit churches were based on the churches by their Bohemian brothers, that is, on an architecture developed from the 15th century Hussites. [22] But here again, of primary concern was not religious belief but functionality. Both the Jesuits and their Bohemian brothers needed a place of worship tailored to their respective services, which also accomodated a larger congregation; and independent of their confession, they each favored the church with galleries.

Confessional reasons were repeatedly used, especially by the Protestants, when choosing the architectural style, but ultimately such reasons were only of secondary importance. Though Catholics tended to favor churches with chapels and barrel vaults, while Protestants preferred galleries and Gothic hall churches, religious architecture in the 17th century cannot be defined absolutely according to confession.

During the Thirty Years War, many churches were plundered and damaged, then often re-consecrated. When imperial troops conquered a city, Protestant churches would be re-sanctified as Catholic. Or the other way around, if the Swedes and their allies took over a town, all Catholic churches became Protestant. Following the peace treaty, confessions were re-established in the various regions of the empire. The treaty stated, for example, that the Silesian principalities belonging to the Habsburgs were to be re-Catholicized, meaning all the Protestant churches had to be closed. Only three churches, the so-called Churches of Peace, were allowed to be built in front of the town gates of Schweidnitz (Swidnica), Jauer (Jawor), and Glogau, between 1654 and 1658.



II. Secular Architecture - Royal Palaces and Noble Residences

Not all areas were directly affected by the initial events of the war, which allowed the completion of those buildings already under construction. This was the casewith two residences, which, because of their close geographic proximity to one another, shared many similarities: these were the residence of the Archbishop of Salzburg and that of the Wittelsbach aristocracy in Munich. As Bavaria's political importance grew increasingly stronger, its capital city Munich also gained new significance, which in turn was intended to be reflected in the renovation of the residence. What began as sporadic alterations under Prince Albrecht V. (1550-1579) to accomodate his art collection, later became a systematic renovation under his grandson Maximilian I (1597-1651). [23]

The expansion of the residence occured mainly between 1612-1617. Work on the imperial court took precedence, with its imperial staircase and hall. From 1612 to 1616 a new frontal element, with a 33 window fenestration, was set before the various building section of different heights, becoming one of the most monumental facades of the residence. [24] In the years after 1618, the interior design of the residence and the completion of the garden followed, yet in general, the building activity seems to have slowed. Between 1619-1638, massive bastions had to be built to protect the city from aggressors. Construction was brought to a complete standstill in the Spring of 1632, when Gustav Adolf's advancing troops conquered much of Bavaria, and Munich was only able to buy its freedom through a large ransom.

The architectural division of the residence's various facades was merely painted on, and was intended to articulate to the viewers of the day through the selection of historical models certain political ideas and issues. While rustication can be seen as a general trait of royal residences, the colossal order over two stories could be a reference to the Emperor's Palace in Granada begun in 1536 or to Amalienburg, the Habsburg residence in Vienna, begun in 1575. Individual window forms, particularly the rondel above the rectangular windows, can be traced back to the Ambras Palace near Innsbruck.

The construction of significant palaces and residences was also started during the first years of the war: after the Weimar Palace suffered damages from fire in 1618, work on the new building was started immediately. In 1627 margrave Christian von Bayreuth began building his residence, Scharffeneck Palace near Baiersdorf in Franconia. However, the war brought both projects to a halt in 1630. The Weimar Palace could later be completed after the war, albeit according to revised plans, but the Scharffeneck Palace was destroyed in 1632 and never reconstructed. [25] Both buildings were layed out symmetrically in four wings, a popular plan for palaces and residences throughout Germany, which, like much of the architectural detail, was based primarily on Italian forerunners.

Yet, the Italian forms were interpreted in different ways. For instance, the architect of the Scharffeneck Palace, the court master builder Valentin Juncker of Ansbach, was German; as a result, he was reliant on engravings and architectural tractats for understanding the Italian forms. An important model for Juncker was the Palace in Ancy-le-Franc (Burgundy) built by Sebastiano Serlio from 1538-1546, which Serlio published in his "Tutte l'opere d'architettura." [26] Though Juncker seems to have been less impressed by Serlio's engravings, depicting an early (or a revised?) version, and more focused on the views provided by J. Androuet Ducerceau, [27] who depicted the finished building.

For the new palace in Weimar in 1618, an architect was employed, who was familiar with Italian style from firsthand experience: Giovanni Bonalino from Grisons, who brought with him a team of French-Swiss builders. According to Bonalino's plans, the palace was to be three-storied throughout with slightly protruding corner wings of the same height as the rest of the building. The look of a city palace was to be diminished through the addition of rounded bastions at the corners and entrances, which would give the residence the semblance of a fortification.

Like the wall sections dividing [28] the exterior facade, the rhythmic, pilastered facade to the courtyard also reflects the influence of Italian palazzo architecture. Pilastered facades were widespread in Italy since the "Cancelleria" in Rome (1489-1511), whose courtyard also demonstrates a change in orders. Only the staircases are not Italian. Bonalino planned to house them in four corner towers in the courtyard, a solution which could also be found in the palaces of Chambord (ca. 1519-1550) and Dresden (ca. 1549).

Bonalino left Weimar in 1526, though work on the palace continued, if only slowly during the war. Building was ceased entirely in 1630, but resumed years later and was finally completed in 1662 according to revised plans no longer based on Italian models, but instead on French palais architecture. Respectively, only three of the four originally planned wings were built. [29] The French tradition employed only three wings, defining a court of honor or cour d'honneur [30], as well as a so-called Pavilion, which served both as eye-catcher and as a final fourth facade to the courtyard. The pavilion-like building with its curved roof was later removed during renovation work following the fire of 1774.

Such a stylistic shift could be understood as a reaction to the events of war and the resulting political and confessional situation. Weimar had been ruled by the Protestant Wettin Dynasty. While the Catholic rulers of the empire, foremost the Kaiser in Vienna, as well as the Wittelsbachs in Munich, and the Archbishops of Salzburg, all built their residences clearly in the Catholic Italian tradition, Protestant Weimar abandoned its original plans in favor of architectural traditions found in France, the Kaiser's arch enemy.

The three-winged model was even used during the war in the northern and eastern areas of the empire. The earliest example is the hunting palace in Neustadt-Glewe, south of Schwerin, built for Duke Adolf Friedrich I of Mecklenburg. The Emden architect Ghert Evert Piloot (died 1629) designed the plans for this prototypical three-winged structure with its nearly square cour d'honneur. Piloot had been working in the area for some years prior, and had been involved with the Schwerin Palace. Sadly, the hunting palace was damaged by imperial troops in 1637 as it was nearing completion. [31]

Another such three-winged residence was the palace in Plön (1633-1636) which opened to the sea, and was home of the Protestant Schleswig-Holstein-Plön nobility. The Plön Palace is one of the few residences that could be completed during the war. Probably due to its peripheral location, but mainly because of the Peace of Lübeck (1629), that allowed work to continue undisturbed.

In another example of switching plans, the building of the Friedenstein Palace in Gotha began according to Italian models, but was later re-conceived as "non-Italian." Gotha became a residence city in 1640/41, following the division of the estate. Duke Ernst von Sachsen-Gotha had a new palace built (1643-1654), which he named the Friedenstein (stone of peace) Palace [32] as expression of his longing for peace. In 1646 the Duke and his administrators were able to move into the new building. After the palace building itself was complete, excavation of the walls and the construction of the bastions could begin, which were finished in 1662/65.

However, before the actual building began, there was a complicated planning phase, from which numerous documents and particularly several models remain intact. [33] One of the earliest models, dated 1643 and attributed to Andreas Rudolph (1601-1679), the court's master builder and fortress engineer, reveals a symmetrical, three-storied, four-winged building with a rectangular courtyard, lined with arcades on almost all sides and stories (only on the north wing was an arcade sacrificed to accomodate a large hall). A second model, until recently thought to be the work of the master fortress builder Matthias Staudt, has been newly attributed to the master builder Nikol Teiner by Georg Skalecki. [34] The building was planned in four wings with a uniform facade design, despite the various window forms. When it came to the realization, a third model was brought into the planning, which has been attributed to the master fortress builder Caspar Vogel from Erfurt. This new model was based on a completely different concept. The four wings were replaced by three wings opening to the garden, with monumental arcades on the ground floor. Although the three wings and the two tower-like pavilions on the garden side attest to French influence, the palace has neither the court of honor as an entrance, nor does the long fenestrated facade indicate the buildings subdivisions. The form of the windows is conspicuously simple, with Gothic window splays. Otherwise, little attention is payed to decorative detail, allowing the building's volume to achieve maximum effect.

Sharing architectural responsibility for the palace project was the master builder Andreas Rudolph, who is probably to thank for the incorporation of elements derived from earlier projects. Many details can be traced back to buildings erected decades earlier. Duke Ernst was not interested in innovative palace architecture, but wished instead to demonstrate dynastic continuity through references to earlier Saxonian residences, such as Augustusburg Palace. However, for the subsequent development of palace architecture in Saxony, particularly for the palaces in Zeitz and Weissenfels, it was not the Gotha palace which was held up as the paragon, but the Palace in Weimar, with its more interesting and more modern architectural details.



III. Secular Architecture - Palaces of Army Commanders and Army Suppliers

While the construction of royal residences were plagued with problems during the war years and, save for the palaces in Plön and Gotha, rarely completed, the palaces of military commanders and the business savvy army suppliers were usually finished by war's end. Here as well, the owner's confession and respective political orientation, played a decisive role in the determination of architectural style. Palaces in Catholic Bohemia and Moravia uniformly emulated the Italian style, while the only residence built at this time in a correspondingly Protestant region was designed by a French architect. This was the palace for the Major General Joachim Heinrich Vieregge, built in 1657 in Rossewitz in the region of Mecklenburg, and designed by Charles Philippe Diessart. [35]

Palaces in Bohemia and Moravia, on the other hand, were built for Catholic commanders and war profiteers, who had acquired land after the Protestants were forced to flee after their defeat at White Mountain (1620). Thus, it is not surprising that such landed officers, many of whom had acquired their rank and wealth during the war, tended to design their new homes somewhat extravagantly, to demonstrate their newfound social status.

An especially characteristic example can be found in the Palace Holleschau (Czech: Holesov) in Moravia. Johann Freiherr von Rottal from Steiermark (Austria), who reached Captain in 1610, then Count in 1641, began building the residence in 1652. [36] He hired the architect Filiberto Luchese (1660-1666), a molding master and architect, whose presence in Austria can be documented back to 1640, where he had renovated and restored numerous noble palaces. This new job involved a rectangular palace with small, hexagonal corner towers and an interior courtyard lined with arcades. While the two main stories are described by pilaster strips on the outer facade, a colossal Tuscan order with an angulated cornice extends over both stories on the courtyard facade. The colossal order, though originally used exclusively in religious architecture, was also used in Germany, for example on the Viennese Hofburg and on the so-called Kaiserhof (Emperial Court) of the Munich Residence (1612-1618). That a former captain, who only just received his noble status a few years earlier, would choose such a court design, could almost be considered presumptuous.

Another example can be found in the summer residence of Count Michna in Prague. Paul von Michna (ca. 1572-1632), a butcher's son, made a considerabl e fortune during the Thirty Years War as an army supplier. He was ennobled for his contributions to the strengthening of the Catholic faith and even served as Secretary in the Bohemian Court Chamber. In 1625 he acquired a small summer residence in Prague's Lesser Town. His nephew, Count Wenzel Michna, then renovated and expanded the building in 1644/45. Financial problems permitted only the north projection-wing facing the garden to be completed. The details are of Italian influence, though no single reference can be named: the prominent, large niche with the glassed door in the middle story recalls Vignola's Villa Giulia (1551-1555) in Rome. The busts in the round niches above the windows are often compared to their Roman predecessors: the Villa Medici (renovated in 1564) and the Casino Borghese, designed by Hans von Xanten, known as Giovanni Vasanzio. The stucco garland motif can also be found in the stucco ornamentation in the courtyard of the Palazzo Spada, also in Rome. Even the attic story can be traced to an Italian forerunner.

The Eggenberg Palace provides yet another example. The owner, Hans Ulrich von Eggenberg (1568-1634), was neither a commander nor a supplier, but his success was a result of the war. Born into a Protestant family, he later converted to Catholicism which enabled his quick career achievement. He was named imperial prince in 1623 and five years later attained the title of duke. Parallel to his advancement, he aquired a variety of properties. For his new social standing, he now required a representative residence. Thus, under the direction of Giovanni Pietro de Pomis (1569-1633), work began around 1625 to renovate the old residence on the periphery of the city of Graz. Eggenberg did not live to see it completed. The courtyard was finished in 1644/1646, while work on the interior continued into the 18th century. [37]

The palace was surrounded by a moat and comprised four wings with tower-like corner projections. The large oblong courtyard was set slightly off-center with the building itself and surrounded on three sides - as was common in the Steiermark, and throughout Austria - with loggias, arcaded with rounded arches and Tuscan half columns, which are doubled at the entrances. A mezzanine level tops off the courtyard's facade. The protruding half columns suggests the influence of the Escorial, particularly because the architect and owner traveled to Spain together in 1626 and because Hans Ulrich von Eggenberg served as a diplomat to the Spanish court.

A completely different situation is introduced with the Wallenstein Palaces in Prague and Gitschin (Ji?in). Though he also experienced quick success, his city residence in Prague, built from 1624-1630, was not lavishly designed, though 25 surrounding houses had to be demolished to make room for it, and its facade had a fenestration of 19 window axes. Yet, compared to Italian palazzi, the individual stories appear surprisingly flat. Furthermore, the groundfloor windows extend so low, as to allow passers-by a look inside. Even the stocky side portals appear to belong more to a middle-class house than to a city palais.

The more impressive parts of the estate are the more private areas: the garden with bronze figures, the palatial riding stall, whose grandeur easily matched the imperial Stallburg in Vienna, and the monumental "Sala terrena," a garden loggia with three aisles and double columns, whose height with the roof almost surpasses that of the palace itself. Yet, as grand and imposing as Wallensteins loggia might appear, it seems as modest as the main facade of the palace when compared to the imperial garden loggia near Vienna, the new building [38] built under Maximillian II between ca. 1569-ca.1587.

Wallenstein also seems to have practiced the art of moderation on the facade of his palace in Gitschin, [39] the capital of the duchy of Friedland. From 1625 to 1633 he expanded the residence, thereby transforming the original building into a secondary wing, and adding two additional courtyards. The additions more than doubled the breadth of the front facing the market, creating, as with his palais in Prague, an elongated facade with only slight architectural subdivision. The individual stories are noticeably undefined, and the portico is unusually long, extending the entire length of the facade, an indication perhaps that a uniformity in the frontal design took priority over the prince's desire for a representational building.

In conclusion, the building activity of these regal residencies can be seen to decline during the Thirty Years War. Yet, as in the case of the Scharffeneck Palace, only seldom were they destroyed, [40] as though the acting Generals were not interested. It has even been reported that the Swedish King Gustav Adolf disgustedly rejected the suggestion from Friedrich von der Pfalz and other Protestant princes to destroy the residence of Munich. [41] Similarly, Wallenstein apparantly was impressed by the hunting palace in Neustadt-Glewe such that he ordered it restored, which nevertheless did not prevent the imperial troops from later damaging the building.

Architectural masterpieces, like those from the first two decades of the 17th century, are a rarity, with the exception of Wallenstein's palace in Prague.Significant for palace architecture is the political/confessional influence on the selection of models. Ultimately, it is a wonder that during the Thirty Years War the palaces were not secured with massive fortifications, nor the residences moved to fortresses.

FOOTNOTES