Buzási Enikő szerk.: In Europe' Princely Courts, Ádám Mányoki, Actors and venues of a portraitist's career (A Magyar Nemzeti Galéria kiadványai 2003/1)
János Kalmár: POWER AND THE PRINCELY COURT IN EARLY 18th-CENTURY EUROPE
Johann Cyriak Hackhofer - Johann Andreas Pfeffel - Christian Engelbrecht: Public feast of Emperor Joseph I and his wife, Wilma Amelia, in Vienna in the Knight's Hall of the Hofburg, in 1705. Engraving same time signified the increasingly greater degree to which the image of the ruler had been profaned. Spectacular court entertainment was also governed by ceremony. Jousts, which originated in medieval times, had grown slightly "tamer" beginning in the 16 th century: the role of the winner was assigned before the joust, thus physical strength was no longer an aspect. The winner, who was in other respects also (more) successful, always had to be the more distinguished person. Skill and elegance took the place of bravery; the cavalier replaced the knight. The tournament was transformed into a theatrical performance, a ballet, in which one had the opportunity to demonstrate their horsemanship and proficiency in dressage. The French caroussel or the Viennese Roßballett, in which the performers paraded in groups in brightly coloured costumes, provided an excellent occasion for this. The circus was a natural evolution of these pageants. 96 The author of Theatrum Ceremóniáié, a great compilation of the rituals of every European court from the beginning of the 16 th century, chose the title of his work quite aptly, 97 for it reflects that which characterises court ceremonies from approximately the middle of the 17 th century: the court was viewed as the theatrum mundi, 9 * or world theatre, in which the text and choreography was prescribed by ritual, creating such pressure for uniformity, that every role-player had to conform to a prescribed behavioural norm. There was no place for improvisation or individuality. One risked success if he tried to break free of the rigidly constructed, pyramidal court hierarchy, the chains of the client-system, or criticised it in any way. 99 Personal dependence is not all that court ritual expressed. Because of the role ceremony played in elevating the rank of the ruler, importance was placed on the spectacle of the ceremony in addition to the contents. Conscious efforts at theatricality were apparent in the dress, meals, diplomatic acts, receptions, church rituals, festivals, and every other manifestation of ceremony in the court. As a result, in addition to their immediate function, all of the above were considered opportunities for artistic expression, giving the appearance that the court aesthetic was more comprehensive than the bourgeois aesthetic. After all, the court did not make value distinctions between art for its own sake (sublime) and everyday spectacle, 100 in other words between works that are ephemeral ("for consumption") and works that are to be preserved ("for decoration"). This is why ritualism can be considered the aesthetics of the era preceding the rise of the bourgeoisie. 101 The hierarchy reflected in the ceremony effected the material environment of the court too. Julius Bernhard von Rohr, who later published a book on rituals, 102 wrote
