Die Fuggerkapelle bei St. Anna in Augsburg.

Art historians often have a complex love-hate relationship with the burial chapel that Georg, Ulrich, and Jakob Fugger constructed between 1509 and 1518 in the church of St. Anna in Augsburg. With its elaborate architecture and sumptuous decoration, the chapel is universally recognized as one of the pivotal examples of early Renaissance art in Germany, epitomizing modernity - with its fascinating mix of transalpine stylistic and design elements - and one merchant family's own social ambitions in constructing the largest and most expensive structure of the period. Our negative response to the Fugger Chapel is triggered solely by the complete lack of firm evidence concerning its architect and artists, with only the ill-fated brass grille meriting certainty as emerging from the Nuremberg workshop of Peter Vischer the Elder. For over a century now, art historians such as Philipp Maria Halm (1920-28), Karl Feuchtmayr (1952), and Norbert Lieb (1952), have offered their theories, and yet no scholarly consensus exists. By far the best and most comprehensive effort is the new monograph by Bruno Bushart, former director of the Stadtische Kunstsammlungen in Augsburg, whose handsome volume offers an intelligent assessment of the chapel and its art. Fully cognizant of the prevailing diversity of art historical opinions, the author patiently argues his points while correctly raising a host of still unresolved and perhaps unresolvable questions. Even when disagreeing with some of Bushart's conclusions, the reader admires the stimulating presentations.

Chapter one provides a superb introduction to the history of the project. Bushart discusses the Fugger brothers' choice of the Carmelite church of St. Anna plus the aspirations of the patrons and the church priors, who were willing to accept the elaborate chapel as a means for expanding their increasingly cramped sanctuary to the west. Bushart addresses both the physical and archival evidence to offer a logical schedule for construction. Such a large project did not go unnoticed by the Fuggers' contemporaries who offered their opinions, positive and negative. Such comments typically stressed its sumptuousness, its modern or Italianate style, and its high costs. Bushart examines the different financial estimates, which ranged from about 12,000 to over 30,000 gulden (38-41). He compares known expenditures for other contemporary projects as a gauge before concluding that, apart from the unfinished brass grille, the Fuggers spent about 15,000-16,000 gulden on their chapel. The author then carefully recounts the subsequent history of the chapel, which includes the dosing of the church by Protestants between 1534 and 1548, the dramatic alterations of 1817 when the choir stalls and other works were removed amid celebrations of the 300th anniversary of the Reformation, and the bombing damages of 1944 with the subsequent renovations.

Chapter two, which focuses on the chapel's architecture, is certainly the most controversial part of Bushart's book. The actual discussions of the structure, including its design, models, materials, and even colors, are nicely done. The identity of the architect, however, is unknown. The letters LS or SL appear on one of the pillars and on a sketch of the interior; are these monograms for the same master? In the past, local sculptor Sebastian Loscher has been proposed by Halm, Lieb, Feuchtmayr, and others as the architect simply because of convenient similarities of his initials. Unfortunately, the drawing may date only to the 1530s and Loscher's own activities seem to have been exclusively sculptural. Was the architect Italian? Given the Fuggers' prominent activities in north Italy, they easily could have selected a Venetian master; as Bushart attempts to demonstrate, however, the architectural forms, while reminiscent of Mauro Codussi, are applied very differently. Could it be a German who had studied in Italy? This long discourse ultimately leads back to the author's theory, first voiced in 1971, that the architect was none other than Albrecht Direr. Although I am admittedly wary of most attempts to ascribe virtually everything good in German Renaissance art to the great Nuremberg master, I appreciate Bushart's skilled exposition (99-111). Direr did work for the Fuggers on several occasions. A drawing - now lost - of the three brothers, presumably done before Georg's death in 1506, is documented in the seventeenth century; furthermore, Direr designed the epitaphs of Georg and Ulrich for this chapel. Bushart argues that Durer stopped in Augsburg in 1505 on his way south to Venice, received the commission at this time, and brought the plans back with him two years later. While in Venice he looked carefully at recent structures. Bushart reminds us that the Fugger Chapel, however grand, is just a chapel, an extension of the current church that is infinitely simpler in design than devising a whole new building from scratch. As proof the author offers a close reading of Durer's contemporary prints and drawings, which reveal a greater interest in architecture than before this trip, as well as a more speculative account of his possible associations with Master Hieronymus who is portrayed in his Feast of the Rose Garlands (1505-06) in Prague. While skeptical of adding to Durer's oeuvre, particularly in the face of Katherine Luber's equally controversial hypothesis that the artist made only one trip to Venice - a prospect that would necessitate the redating of a host of works to 1505-07 - Bushart makes the seemingly unthinkable at least worth considering.

One of the great virtues of this book is its comprehensiveness. Bushart addresses all aspects of the decoration through a perspective that allows him to demonstrate the interrelationships of the different parts. Chapter nine offers a useful overview of the state of the chapel in 1509, 1517, around 1522, and around 1530. Other chapters focus upon the epitaphs, the brass grille, the altar, the organs with their painted wings, the choir stalls, the numerous statuettes of putti, and the art historical position of the Fugger Chapel in relation to other contemporary burial chapels. Again the clarity of each discussion is admirable even when one disagrees with his conclusions, the most notable of which attributes the major sculptures to Hans Daucher. For the first time ever, the Fugger Chapel has a fitting monograph.

JEFFREY CHIPPS SMITH University of Texas, Austin