Abstract
I made my contribution by considering whether and in what sense it is possible to label Kutná Hora as "Rudolfinian". Either only in the historical sense, ie during the reign of Rudolf on the Czech throne (1576-1611)? Or is it possible to compare it with a similar cultural phenomenon as Rudolfinum Prague was from the beginning of the 1680s until the beginning of the Baroque? Then I focused on the revision of art-historical and historiographical discourse on social and artistic events in Kutná Hora in the Rudolfinian period (from a cultural-historical point of view), roughly from the 1970s to the present.
Although even in the light of new findings it was not possible to prove a deeper interest, personal interventions and specific influences of Rudolf II. to focus on artistic events in the city, nor to concentrate the evidence for the claim that Kutná Hora would be a specific cultural phenomenon like Rudolfinum Prague, yet it is clear that between 1580 and 1612 the number of public and private orders in the city increased, the number of (artistic) craftsmen and the stylistic characteristics of the works changed, new genres and themes were introduced, the demands of clients and the artistic quality of most works increased.Thus, I monitored the social status, professional classification and proclaimed ambitions of the customers of the works of art emerging at that time, or their relationship to the royal court, but also the confessional and national characteristics. At the same time, I dealt with their artistic demands and interests, the issue of taste and cultural outlook.It turned out that investments in art in both private and public spaces were part of the representation of the new emerging urban elite, which was not tied to the city's tradition.
It was either newcomers, mostly Germans and Lutherans, who often married wealthy wealthy Kutná Hora widows, acquired city rights and invested in mining; or in a similar way, the property and influence were acquired by members of the local poorer families who had made a career in the city or mining authority and used it for enrichment.The chronicler records of the Kutná Hora heraldic burgher Mikoláš Dačický show that from the point of view of the natives, these new people had declining morals and at the same time a great need to present themselves ostentatiously. As a result of these findings and a comparison of preserved works of art in the broader context of the late Renaissance, I came to the conclusion that Rudolfinian Kutná Hora was a social rather than a cultural phenomenon.The lack of interest of Rudolf II. and the lack of control over Kutná Hora mining and mint enabled the entry and career growth of people who were not interested in fine arts as such, but were a way for them to represent their social mobility and ambitions.