II. - Schloss Schwetzingen

Nomination 

for Inscription on the 

UNESCO 

World Heritage List 

Texts 

Schwetzingen 

A Prince Elector’s Summer Residence – 

Garden Design and Freemasonic Allusions

Editor: Wirtschaftsministerium Baden-Württemberg; 

Finanzministerium Baden-Württemberg; 

Stadt Schwetzingen 

All rights reserved (© 2006). 

Project Management 

and Contact: Landesbetrieb Vermögen und Bau Baden-Württemberg, 

Referat Staatliche Schlösser und Gärten, 

Schlossraum 22, 76646 Bruchsal 

gerhard.wenz@vb-bw.fv.bwl.de 

Informations: www.welterbeantrag-schwetzingen.de 

Redaction: Andreas Förderer 

Translation: Susanne Stopfel 

End-papers: Zeyher/Roemer 1809 

Jacket image: Orthographisches Luftbild © Stadt Schwetzingen 

Verso: Gesamtplan, Verdyck & Gugenhan, Landschaftsarchitekten 

Gestaltung: Struve & Partner, Atelier für Grafi k-Design, 

Sickingenstraße 1a, 69126 Heidelberg 

hs@struveundpartner.de

Nomination 

for Inscription on the 

UNESCO 

World Heritage List 

Texts 


A Prince Elector’s Summer Residence – 

Garden Design and Freemasonic Allusions

4 

Contents 

I. Introduction 7 

II. Schwetzingen – A Prince Elector’s Eighteenth-Century Summer Residence 9 

a) Elector Carl Theodor and his Palatinate – a World in Transition (Stefan Mörz) 9 

b) The Summer Residence of Schwetzingen – a Type and its Realization 

(Ralf Richard Wagner) 14 

c) The palace Gardens – a Unique Ensemble of Masonic Images (Monika Scholl) 20 

d) The Bathhouse – Synthesis of the Arts and Refuge of 

Elector Carl Theodor (Ralf Richard Wagner) 36 

e) The Mosque – an Embodiment of Eighteenth-Century Taste and Thought 

(Susan Richter) 46 

f) The Arabic Insriptions of the Mosque – a Manifestation of Inter-Cultural 

Dialogue (Udo Simon) 55 

g) The Palace Theatre – the Ideal of an Eighteenth-Century Theatre and Opera 

House (Monika Scholl, Peter Thoma) 63 

h) The Waterworks and Carl Theodor’s Scientifi c Experiments – Technical 

Monuments of the Highest Order (Kai Budde) 68 

i) The Palace Garden Arboreta – a Botanical Research Station (Rainer Stripf) 75 

j) Harmonious Opposites: Carl Theodor’s Garden – Absolutist Display and 

Utopian Idealism (Barbara Brähler) 81

Contents 

III. Schwetzingen – Historical Context 87 

a) The Prince Electors and their Schwetzingen Estate 87 

1. A Summarized Political History (Stefan Mörz) 

2. The Cultural Landscape of Schwetzingen (Svenja Schrickel) 

b) History of the Town of Schwetzingen (Joachim Kresin) 98 

c) History of the Palace 103 

1. The Origins of the Castle and Palace (Peter Knoch) 

2. The Palace Interior Through the Ages (Wolfgang Wiese) 

3. The Palace’s Fortunes in the 19th and 20th Centuries 

(Claudia Baer-Schneider, Peter Thoma) 

d) History of the Palace Garden 130 

1. The Origins of the Palace Garden (Uta Schmitt) 

2. The Schwetzingen Palace Gardens – a Study in Historic Garden 

Conservation (Hubert Wolfgang Wertz) 

e) The Summer Residence – Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Responses 156 

1. “A German Versailles” – Schwetzingen and its Status as Refl ected in 

Travel Accounts, Images and Literature (Susan Richter) 

2. The Schwetzinger Festspiele: the Legacy of the Summer Residence 

(Peter Stieber) 

IV. Biographies (Manuel Bechtold, Susan Richter, Ralf Richard Wagner, 

Hubert Wolfgang Werz) 167 

a) Rulers (in chronological order) 168 

b) Artists (in alphabetical order) 174 

V. Chronology (Tanja Fischer) 187 

VI. List of Monuments in Schwetzingen (Annegret Kalvelage) 191 

VII. Bibliography (Stefan Moebus) 207 

5

Voltaire (François-Marie 

Arouet), 1768. 

„ 

“ 

Before I die there is one duty I would discharge, and one comfort I crave: I yould see 

Schwetzingen again. That is the thought that fi lls my soul. 

SCHWETZINGEN, BLICK VON SÜDEN 

gest. von Barthélemy de La Rocque

I. Introduction 

In the eighteenth century a magnifi cent country 

seat was created at Schwetzingen under 

the Electors Palatine – a unique complex 

consisting of a town, palace and garden that 

has stood largely unchanged to the present 

day. In the Palatine summer residence of 

Schwetzingen, courtly life was geared towards 

pleasure and diversion – in contrast to the 

main residence of Mannheim, where the focus 

was on administration and display. It is this 

annual move of the entire court from Mannheim 

to the summer residence, for a stay of 

several months’ duration, that explains the 

unique conditions at Schwetzingen: a town 

wholly aligned with the palace but formally 

subordinate to it – a palace that seems huge 

compared to the town but at the same time 

quite unpretentious – a vast garden with a 

variety of buildings that maintains its status 

as an autonomous element. 

The more important a cultural monument, 

the more it is possible to discover about it. 

History, building history, art history, garden 

history, social history, the history of music, of 

the sciences, of ideas – invariably the visible, 

tangible remains refer to the past. And what 

was artifi cially divided up into disciplines and 

categories of research, because of the sheer 

complexity of history, retains its original unity 

in the cultural monument itself. 

This volume undertakes to illuminate the 

main aspects of the proposed nomination for 

inscription on the UNESCO World Heritage 

List from a number of different points of 

view. 

In Part I the focus is on individual aspects of 

the eighteenth-century summer residence of 

the Electors Palatine – the phenomenon of the 

Elector’s institutionalized annual move to his 

summer residence and back, the unique layout 

of the garden with its wealth of sculptures 

and “fabriques”, the status of the palace and 

gardens in terms of cultural history, the relics 

of scientifi c research and so on. 

But the eighteenth-century electoral summer 

residence and its appearance today can only 

be fully understood against the historical 

background that shaped it. Therefore, Part II 

of this volume is dedicated to the history of 

the site and the cultural landscape surrounding 

it, the genesis of the town, the palace and 

the palace gardens. There is also a supplementary 

essay giving an overview of the responses 

of visitors and the general public during the 

nineteenth and twentieth centuries. 

The concluding Parts III-VI provide a quick 

overview of the basic facts: short biographies 

of the rulers and the artists active at Schwetzingen 

(III), a chronology of major events (IV), 

a summarized description of the properties 

and objects inscribed on the list of monuments 

(V) and a bibliography of publications 

on the town, palace and garden (VI). 

The overall map with detailed captions 

included at the back is intended to give an 

idea of the property as a whole, and provide 

information to complement the essays. 

I. 

7

DER APOLLOTEMPEL 

Ivan Turgeniev in 

,Visionen‘,1864. 

gest. von Haldenwang 

„ “ 

What is that park down there with avenues of smoothly pruned limes, with solitary fi rs cut into 

shapes like umbrellas and fans, with columned halls and temples in the taste of Pompadour, 

with statues of nymphs in Berni’s style, of Rococo tritons in the midst of shallow pools, held in by 

balustrades of crumbling marble? Can this be Versailles? No, it is not Versailles! A small palace, 

built in the Rococo style as well, peeks out from behind a group of oaks. The moon is half-veiled, 

only faint light descending – it is as if a thin haze is spread on the ground. Is it mist, is it moonlight? 

The eye cannot tell. A swan is slumbering on one of the ponds, his long white back gleaming 

like the snow of our steppes once it is frozen, and there in the blue shadows, glow-worms shimmer 

like diamonds on the bases of statues. “We are near Mannheim”, said Ellis, “this is the park of 

Schwetzingen.” We are in Germany, then”, I thought, and listened. All was quiet, only a solitary jet 

of water fell somewhere, unseen, softly splashing.

II. Schwetzingen – A Prince Elector’s 

Eighteenth-Century Summer Residence 

a) 

Elector Carl Theodor and his 

Palatinate – a World in Transition 

During the second half of the eighteenth 

century, the Elector Palatine’s court was one 

of the most interesting and glittering of 

Germany. Mannheim was one of the European 

centres of music, and visitors from all over the 

continent fl ocked to the “Palatine Athens”. 

The transformation of a country and city 

ravaged by more than a century of almost incessant 

wars into one of the places of Europe 

an educated person simply had to see, was the 

achievement of two electors, Carl Philipp and 

his successor Carl Theodor. 

A Glittering Court 1 

A thoroughly Baroque despot for whom 

”splendour was always more important than 

reform” 2 , Carl Philipp (1661-1742), who ruled 

from 1716 to 1742, had inherited the electorate 

from his brother at a rather advanced age. 

The new elector fi rst moved the court back 

to the old residence in Heidelberg. In 1720 

he chose Mannheim as his new capital. Here, 

in the wide plain by the Rhine, Carl Philipp, 

praised as “Palatine Aeneas”, could found a 

truly baroque residence, a palace that was to 

be one of the biggest in Germany, surrounded 

by the spiritual and temporal pillars of 

electoral might: monasteries, barracks and 

no fewer than 54 aristocratic houses. Joined 

to the palace was the Jesuits’ college with 

its big church, a copy of Il Gesu in Rome, a 

visible symbol of the close symbiosis between 

the electoral house and the Catholic church. 

Protestant churches, by contrast, were relegated 

to the parts of town most distant from the 

Elector‘s home. 

1 For the follwing pages: Stefan Mörz, Haupt- und Residenzstadt. 

Karl Theodor, sein Hof und Mannheim (= Kleine 

Schriften des Stadtarchivs Mannheim, Nr. 12), Mannheim 

1998; Stefan Mörz, Aufgeklärter Absolutismus in der Kurpfalz 

während der Mannheimer Regierungszeit des Kurfürsten Karl 

Theodor 1742-77 (= Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für 

geschichtliche Landeskunde in Baden-Württemberg, Reihe B, 

vol. 120), Stuttgart 1991. 

2 Hans Schmidt, Kurfürst Karl Philipp, Mannheim 1964, p. 88. 

As neither Carl Philipp nor any of his 

numerous brothers had any male offspring, 

the Electorate fell into the hands of another 

collateral branch of the Palatine Wittelsbachs, 

the line of the dukes of Pfalz-Sulzbach (a 

poor and small territory in the Upper Palatinate). 

The elector’s heir was Carl Theodor 

(1724-1799), a young prince, orphaned at the 

age of four, who had been educated by his 

great-grandmother in Brussels, a devout old 

lady who imbibed him with the creeds of the 

house of Sulzbach and of her age – Catholicism 

and absolutism in the French/Spanish 

style. His native tongue was French, and he 

did not learn German until he was about six. 

When he was brought to Mannheim in 1734, 

his education was taken over by the 70-yearold 

Elector, a thoroughly un-intellectual 

soldier, who was assisted by a rather wily 

Jesuit and an equally old courtier, the Marquis 

d‘Ittre (1683-1766). In 1742, Carl Theodor, 

shy and of fragile health, was married to the 

Elector‘s grand-daughter, Elisabeth Augusta 

(1721-1794), a lively and very strong-minded 

young woman three years his senior who 

was interested in music, theatre, hunting, 

amusements and not much else. The wedding 

of Carl Theodor and Elisabeth Augusta turned 

out to be the grandest court spectacle that 

Mannheim ever was to witness. Most members 

of the Wittelsbach family were present, 

the Elector-Archbishop Clemens August of 

Cologne (1700-1761) married the couple, the 

newly erected opera-house was used for the 

fi rst time. 

When Carl Philip died the night before New 

Year’s Day of 1743, the 18-year-old Carl Theodor 

became Elector – and at fi rst was governed 

by his old instructor d’Ittre. The War of 

the Austrian Succession ravaged many of the 

young elector’s territories, and in 1743, even 

the court’s summer sojourn in Schwetzingen 

had to be broken off because of approaching 

foreign troups. As tax revenues fell drastically 

due to the war, d’Ittre, a stern old gentleman, 

insisted on the strictest economy. 

II. 

9


Fig. 1: The territories of the 

Palatine Wittelsbachs in the 

18th century (From: Pfalzatlas 

bzw. Mörz 1991). 

10 

Fig. 2: Elector Carl Theodor 

(1724-1799), painting by 

Johann Georg Ziesenis, 1758 

(Heidelberg, Kurpfälzisches 

Museum). 

II. Schwetzingen – A Prince Elector’s Eighteenth-Century Summer Residence 

However, when the war actions moved to 

more distant places, d’Ittre’s “miserly” ways 

became more and more unpopular with the 

courtiers and, fi rst and foremost, the electress, 

convinced her husband to spend more to 

restore the splendour of the Palatine court. 

Carl Theodor shared the view then commonly 

held by many rulers (and their subjects) that 

an impressive court was most important to 

demonstrate their status and gain much-coveted 

“fame”. Thus he followed his wife’s wishes: 

D’Ittre was forced to hand in his resignation, 

and only weeks later the Elector gave orders 

for the completion of the huge Mannheim 

Palace. It was doubled in size and offered 

suffi cient space for the display of the various 

collections as well as for the big library, new 

kitchens and the mews. By good fortune, the 

music-loving electress also encouraged her 

husband who, in this respect, was a kindred 

soul, to enlarge the court orchestra which 

was to become one of the wonders of the 

eighteenth-century world admired by many 

travellers – and by Mozart. From 1748, the 

court opera began to be used again permanently, 

and during the following decades a 

great number of “opere serie” were staged 

there, later to be complemented by “lighter” 

operatic pieces performed on the stage of the 

Schwetzingen theatre built in the 1750s. 

While Carl Theodor and his wife looked to 

France as regards design and architecture and 

to Italy as regards music, the Palatine court 

was organized on the model of the imperial 

court in Vienna. After all, the elector was one 

of the most eminent Princes of the Empire. 

Thus, in the 1770s, about 750 servants and 

250 guards were grouped in eight “departments”, 

dealing with the maintenance of the 

buildings and gardens, the court chapel and 

collections, the personal services to the elector, 

the court supply and kitchens, the stables and 

the pages, the court music, the court hunts 

and the personal services to the electress. An 

incredibly intricate “clock-work” of interdependent 

services helped to keep this huge 

organism going. Hardly anything could be left 

to spontaneous impulses, and even the elector 

was subject to rigid rules. 

And yet, ordinary people naturally envied 

this mass of well-clad and well-fed courtiers 

who enjoyed so many privileges. They hardly 

noticed that many of the lower retainers 

earned so little that they could never afford to 

marry, that they had to spend much of their 

lives in small and crammed rooms which they 

shared with several others. What people saw 

were the string of entertainments that all the 

year round (reduced, but not stopped, during

Lent) served to please and divert courtiers, 

visitors and, in many cases, the inhabitants of 

Mannheim and the neighbouring countryside, 

who could see the fi reworks, listen to the 

music and follow the electoral barges on the 

Rhine from a distance – and, as many observers 

stated, were extremely keen on these 

pleasures. The entertainments also emphasized 

the “august” position of the Elector 

Palatine. Thus the celebrations for birth- and 

namedays of both the Elector and the Electress 

in November, December and January 

lasted for more than six days each time in the 

1750s, including opera, theatre, gala-dinners 

and receptions, fi reworks, balls, and often 

incredibly expensive hunts both ”seated” and 

”par force”. Every May, after holding reviews 

of the Palatine troops in the Rhine plain near 

Mannheim, that were of more ornamental 

than practical value, the Elector and his court 

moved to Schwetzingen which served as the 

summer-residence until September. After 

the de-facto-breakdown of his marriage in 

the 1760s, Carl Theodor gave the palace of 

Oggersheim which had been the property of a 

relative of the electoral couple, to the Electress. 

From then on, Elisabeth Augusta chose 

to spend her summers there. Thus the Palatine 

court had in fact two summer-residences 

which both saw accomplished entertainments 

staged by the Mannheim orchestra and opera, 

the French theatre company and the ballet. 

“The Spirit of our Century” Transforms the 

Court3 From the early 1760s, the Elector wanted 

his court and reign not only to shine with 

the gold of architectural ornaments and the 

glitter of perfect entertainments; he aspired 

to be admired as a ruler who knew about and 

appreciated the “spirit of the age” – of the Age 

of Enlightenment. Well-read and intelligent, 

3 Wolfgang von Hippel: “Die Kurpfalz zur Zeit Carl Theodors 

(1742-1799) – wirtschaftliche Lage und wirtschaftspolitische 

Bemühungen”, in: Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins, 

N.F. 109/2000, pp. 177-244. 

Mörz 1991, as above; Mörz 1998, as above; Stefan Mörz, 

“Das Ende der alten Zeit: Der Raum Ludwigshafen im 18. 

Jahrhundert”, in: Geschichte der Stadt Ludwigshafen, vol. 1, 

Ludwigshafen 2003, pp. 133-197. 


he proved quite accessible to modern ideas. 

Twice he received Voltaire, the ”wise man of 

Ferney”, at Schwetzingen. 

Carl Theodor also began to emancipate 

himself from personal ties that had previously 

often restricted him. In 1758 his old Jesuit 

confessor died. In 1761, after almost twenty 

years of marriage, the Electress gave birth 

to a son that died in the same night. It was 

now clear that she would never have children 

again. From then on, the electoral couple 

began to drift apart. Carl Theodor was tired of 

his wife’s tantrums and her open display of 

affection for her lovers. He now took to several 

mistresses himself and fathered at least a 

dozen illegitimate children whom he provided 

well for. Moreover, Carl Theodor and Elisabeth 

Augusta had never had much in common, 

and the world of the enlightenment remained 

largely alien to the Electress. Even in their 

shared appreciation of music and theatre great 

divergencies began to appear: While Elisabeth 

Augusta retained her love for the Italian opera 


Fig. 3: Mannheim, copperplate 

by J. A. Baertels, 1758 (From: 

Walter, Stadtgeschichte 

Mannheim, Mannheim 1907, 

vol. 1). 

11


12 


and the French theatre, Carl Theodor was, 

unlike Frederick the Great, quite open for the 

development of the German “movement”. The 

French actors were sent away, and, in 1775, 

he had the fi rst German opera performed at 

his court. A year later the Elector founded 

the Mannheim National theater, a thoroughly 

modern, new type of court-institution, open to 

anyone who bought a ticket. Even before, the 

opera and the so-called “musical academies”, 

concerts of the famous Mannheim orchestra 

in the palace’s Rittersaal, had been open to the 

public – albeit a public that had to be welldressed, 

educated and carefully scrutinized by 

court-offi cials before they were admitted. 

The new spirit of the age transformed Carl 

Theodor’s splendid court in many more ways. 

Enlightened criticism of idle court-life was 

uttered in the Elector’s presence even by his 

leading minister, and gradually, the number of 

extravagant entertainments was reduced, while 

at the same time a comprehensive system 

of scholarly and scientifi c associations was 

established: The Academy of Sciences (1763), 

to which was later added a meteorological 

branch with the fi rst-ever world-wide system 

of weather-observation-posts; the Academy of 

Sculpture and Painting; A ”German Society” 

which was much favoured by Carl Theodor 

who tried to promote the purity and development 

of the German language. Attached to the 

scholarly associations were various institutions 

housed in the palace or nearby, such as 

the library and the collections of paintings, 

drawings, minerals, coins etc. all supervised 

by experts and open to the public. 

The Schwetzingen gardens also changed 

their appearence: an English section began 

to “embrace” the French garden laid out in 

front of the palace. This addition of a new 

part refl ecting the trends of the age, while 

still preserving the old baroque invention, can 

be seen as the most attractive expression of 

Carl Theodor’s ambiguous attitude towards 

old-style French absolutism and enlightened 

despotism. In his Schwetzingen gardens, a 

wonderful synthesis was reached which in his 

governance eluded him. In the 1780s, even 

the latest, pre-romantic fashion was included 

in the lay-out of the new part of the Schwetzingen 

gardens. Carl Theodor, who took a 

close interest in the development of Schwetzingen, 

opened the gardens to his subjects to 

allow them to refi ne their tastes and manners 

by looking at beautiful things. The same 

happened with the extensive gardens surrounding 

the Oggersheim palace which, however, 

quite in tune with the differences in outlook 

between Carl Theodor and Elisabeth Augusta, 

were all in the French taste. 

Enlightened openness, however, did not 

mean a renunciation of class distinctions: 

Throughout his reign, the Elector would only 

accept as accompanying ”Gentlemen of the 

Bedchamber” men of old aristocratic origin. 

Court-balls were open to the Mannheim 

bourgeoisie – but they were kept apart from 

the nobility by a silk string partitioning 

the Rittersaal. Similarly, the reduction of 

entertainments did not mean their immediate 

end. No less than 20 % of the total revenue of 

the electoral territories were still spent on the 

maintenance of the court. It has to be kept in 

mind, however, that the new academic institutions 

and collections also remained part of the 

“court-machine” and thus their cost was part 

of the aforementioned amount. It is also true 

that Carl Theodor refrained from builiding 

a new palace in Schwetzingen and, instead, 

placed the emphasis there on the enlargement 

of the gardens. The enormous sums necessary 

for the construction of an “à-la-mode”-summer 

residence were spent near Düsseldorf, where 

the new palace of Benrath also served as an 

assertion of the Palatine claims on the lowerrhenish 

dukedoms in the face of Prussian 

threats. 

The End of Courtly Splendour 

When, during the end-of-year-service at 

the court chapel of his Mannheim palace, 

Carl Theodor received the news that he had 

inherited Bavaria, his fi rst thought was: “Now 

the good days are over”. Required by the treaty

of mutual succession to reside in Munich, he 

left Mannheim and Schwetzingen. Only his 

wife, relieved at no longer having to keep up 

appearances, stayed behind, and kept a small 

court at Mannheim and Oggersheim. There 

still were some balls in winter in Mannheim, 

and rural “fêtes” during the Oggersheim 

summer. However, the excellent orchestra and 

the best singers had left for Munich; great 

court entertainments were a thing of the past. 

The refounded Nationaltheater and the 

collections that remained at the palace in 

Mannheim continued to attract large numbers 

of visitors, and the Schwetzingen gardens 


were not only maintained but enlarged. It 

all came to end when revolutionary armies 

swept through the electoral lands in the 

1790s. The treasures of the palace were taken 

to Munich, the court offi cials fl ed, and in 

1802 the Palatinate as a country ceased to 

exist. Carl Theodor, who during the 1780s had 

unsuccessfully tried to swap Bavaria for the 

Austrian Netherlands to create a “Kingdom of 

Burgundy” and had thus become extremely 

unpopular with his Bavarian subjects, died at 

the a table in Munich in February 1799. 

(Stefan Mörz) 


13


Fig. 1: ‘Kleine Pfalzkarte’ (Small 

Map of the Palatinate), etching 

by Egidius Verhelst after Christian 

Mayer, 1773 (Heidelberg, 

Kurpfälzisches Museum). 

14 


b) 

The Summer Residence of 

Schwetzingen – a Type and its 

Realization 

The Term “Summer Residence” 

The term “summer residence” evidently had 

no place in the academic language of the 

18th century – it does not appear in Johann 

Heinrich Zedler’s “universal dictionary”. 1 

For that reason we will start out by examining 

the term, in this case by comparing it with 

terms of similar meaning, such as “court”. A 

court, declares Zedler, is “where the prince is 

staying”. 2 A defi nition of “residence”, on the 

other hand, can be found in Moser’s book 

on courtly law: “The residence is the regular 

and continuous dwelling of the ruler in the 

place which is also the abode of the court 

and the ministries. This is where the ruler is 

really in his own home, and on determining 

the ceremonial and its rules the customs due 

to the residence should be observed, while 

in country and pleasure palaces much is 

1 Zedler’s “Universallexikon” is the major German encyclopedia 

of the 18th century, somewhat comparable to the Encyclopédie 

française. 

2 Johann Heinrich Zedler, Grosses vollständiges Universal-Lexicon 

aller Wissenschaften und Künste, Halle/Leipzig 1732 ff., 

vol. XIII, 1735, p. 405. 

dispensed with or excused.” 3 In his book about 

courtly ceremonial Rohr writes: “Great lords 

sometimes take a liking to a certain place in 

the country, and to please themselves not 

only do they build splendid palaces and fi ne 

country seats in those same places, they also 

instruct their chief ministers and court or 

military offi cials to build mansions there as 

well, in part so they can have them available 

at any time when they require their counsel 

or service, in part also because in this way the 

places where they wish to live are peopled and 

the people there can make a living. ... When 

they stay at those country houses a large part 

of the usual ceremonial is set aside, and a 

more liberal style of living is chosen.” 4 

More recent research assumes that the terms 

“court” and “residence” are interchangeable. 

The “court” may be characterized by three 

vital elements: 

1. The presence of an aristocratic courtly 

society, with women playing a part. 

2. The exhibition of splendour by means of 

material display. 

3. The refi nement and excellence of courtly 

manners and behaviour as opposed to 

those of the parts of society not represented 

at court. 5 

A residence is the place where the court stays 

for a certain duration of time on a regular 

basis and where the business of ruling is 

conducted. The residences thus possess the 

necessary qualities, or are suitably equipped 

to meet the demands of effi cient ruling and 

appropriate self-representation. An important 

aspect of effi cient ruling is the ability to 

communicate. At his residence the ruler 

must be in a position to receive information 

quickly and reliably, and make his decisions 

known as quickly and reliably to the largest 

possible number of subjects throughout his 

domain. For that reason it is imperative for 

3 Friedrich Carl von Moser, Teutsches Hof-Recht, Franckfurt/ 

Leipzig 1754, vol. II, p. 252. 

4 Julius Bernhard von Rohr, Einleitung zur Ceremoniel-Wissenschaft 

der Grossen Herren, Berlin 1733, ed. M. Schlechte, 

Leipzig 1990, pp. 83 f. 

5 Aloys Winterling, Der Hof der Kurfürsten von Köln 

1688-1794. Eine Fallstudie zur Bedeutung “absolutistischer” 

Hofhaltung, Bonn 1986, p. 2.

the residence to be situated on major roads or 

rivers. 6 

The Summer Residence of Schwetzingen 

The aforementioned criteria all apply to the 

summer residence of Schwetzingen. During 

the reign of Elector Carl Theodor the road to 

Mannheim was improved, and a relay station 

for the changing of horses was established 

where the road touched what today is the 

Mannheim suburb of Rheinau. It was extended 

well into the palace grounds, where 

it took the shape of the circular parterre’s 

transverse axis. The road to Heidelberg, built 

in the 17th century by Elector Carl Ludwig (r. 

1649–1680), was improved as well and lined 

with mulberry trees in the 18th century, a 

measure intended to support the silk industry. 

This axis connecting Heidelberg’s Königsstuhl 

hill with the summit of Kalmit in the Pfälzer 

Wald hills was used by the court astronomer, 

Johann Christian Mayer, as the baseline for 

his survey of the Palatinate. It received due 

consideration in the two maps he made and 

that are among the most precise of the 18th 

century. Sections of the axis are still visible 

in the course of today’s streets, Carl-Theodor- 

Straße and Kurfürstenstraße, as well as those 

of the former Heidelberg-Schwetzingen 

railway, a footpath, and the runway of an 

American air base. 

The rulers of the Palatinate only decided on 

their permanent residence when Elector Carl 

Theodor returned from a lengthy visit to his 

domains on the Lower Rhine, Jülich and Berg 

with the capital of Düsseldorf. On the court’s 

return in September 1747, Carl Theodor chose 

Mannheim to be his future residence. The 

immediate consequences were the enlargement 

of the residential palace at Mannheim 

and alterations made to the palace gardens of 

Schwetzingen – as well as the publication of a 

Palatine court calendar. 7 

6 Egon Johannes Greipl, Macht und Pracht. Die Geschichte der 

Residenzen in Franken, Schwaben und Altbayern, Regensburg 

1991, p. 9. 

7 Stefan Mörz, Haupt- und Residenzstadt. Carl Theodor, sein 

Hof und Mannheim, Mannheim 1998, pp. 44 ff. 


Restructuring the Town 

The village of Schwetzingen too was methodically 

converted into a summer seat worthy 

of the Palatinate. With Oberbaudirektor 

(director-in-chief of building) Galli da Bibiena 

in charge, a manifesto was passed on 16th 

July 1748 proclaiming that the Elector had 

commissioned “the aforementioned Bibiena” 

to draw up a plan for the settlement’s further 

development. Anybody wishful to build a 

house on the stretch of land specifi ed would 

have the site allotted to him by Bibiena, 

and would have to conform to certain rules 

regarding the style and appearance of the 

building. 8 By the building of two-storey stone 

houses the village of Schwetzingen was to be 

converted into a Baroque residence. Bibiena 

derived the dimensions of the new palace 

square from those of the court of honor: the 

palace square is precisely as wide, and twice 

as deep, as the court of honor. Its west side 

opens towards the palace; the east side has 

a closed front of buildings interrupted by 

one gap the width of the former mulberry 

avenue. The visitor arriving from the direction 

of Heidelberg emerges from this (narrow) 

avenue (today’s Carl-Theodor-Straße) into the 

wide open square terminated in the distance 

by the palace. The latter serves as a “point de 

vue” and also provides access to the grounds 

behind. In contrast to residences like Versailles 

or even the not-too-distant Karlsruhe, 

both structured by streets that originate from 

the palace, thereby emphasizing its dominant 

position, the palace of Schwetzingen serves 

as the termination of the road leading up to it 

from Heidelberg. 9 

The fi rst buildings to go up were the two Lshaped 

houses marking the eastern end of the 

square (today the offi ces of the local newspaper, 

Schwetzinger Zeitung, and an inn, the 

“Grüner Baum”). The plots were assigned to 

their new owners by Carl Theodor at no cost, 

as a recompensation for the loss of their land 

8 Badisches Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe 221/47 ’ 17th July 

1748. 

9 Wiltrud Heber/Anneliese Seeliger-Zeiss, Der Schwetzinger 

Schlossplatz und seine Bauten, Veröffentlichungen zur 

Heidelberger Altstadt, Heidelberg 1974, p. 2. 


15


16 


that had been expropriated to make room for 

the northern quarter-circle pavilion. The same 

year a private residence for the Jesuit Father 

Franz Seedorf was built on the square (today’s 

Palais Hirsch). 10 In 1778 a plot was carved out 

of the large garden originally extending on 

both sides of a summer house to build what 

is today’s brewery “Zum Ritter”. 11 The south 

side was almost complete when the barracks 

for the Elector’s mounted bodyguard was built 

there in 1752-1756. 12 It was not until 1760 that 

the corner house at the “palace” end was built, 

an inn at the time and a hotel and coffeeshop 

today (“Zum Erbprinzen” and Café Journal). 

The north side featured three stately buildings 

instead of a closed front. The northeastern 

corner was claimed by the private residence 

of the Elector’s master builder, Franz Wilhelm 

Rabaliatti (1716-1782), in 1755. The restrained 

use of architectural forms in the two fi ne 

townhouses, Palais Seedorf and Palais Rabaliatti, 

provides a marked contrast to the plain 

middle-class homes and functional buildings. 

However, the simplicity of the square’s architecture 

is not due to a lack of imagination. It 

is a conscious decision aimed at emphasizing 

the summer residence’s “country town” 

character. The palace square is an outstanding 

example of a methodically planned mid-18th 

century ensemble of its kind. It is part of the 

new town, completely and symmetrically 

aligned with the palace and garden, that was 

to be the Elector’s summer residence. As 

the “anteroom”, so to speak, of the palace’s 

court of honour, it was a major and necessary 

part of the layout, and it is essential to the 

appearance of the electoral summer residence 

to preserve it as such. 13 Despite the alterations 

of later years (a number of conversions and 

10 Father Seedorf was the electoral couple’s confessor and an 

important personage at the Palatine court. His status is appropriately 

refl ected by his house – he was the only member of 

the court to be given a house of his own at Schwetzingen, at 

the expense of the public. 

11 What was left of the garden made way for a 19th-century 

building today housing a café, the ‚Kaffeehaus’. 

12 Today the building is no longer recognizable as a unit; it 

has been divided into separate houses, without the original 

unifying colour scheme and without the central gable. The 

former barracks included the houses Schlossplatz No. 5, 6, 7, 8 

and 9. 

13 Wiltrud Heber, Der Schwetzinger Schlossplatz und seine 

Bauten, p. 5. 

rebuildings, the replacement of the mulberry 

trees with limes and chestnuts) the character 

of the square is still very much that of Carl 

Theodor’s day. 

Other buildings characteristic of a residence 

are the electoral stables 14 , the Ambassadors’ 

House 15 and the pages’ house. 16 

The Use of Schwetzingen as a Summer 

Residence 

During the reign of Elector Carl Philipp (r. 

1718–1742) Schwetzingen was already used 

as a summer residence on a regular basis. 

The Elector arrived in his Palatine territories 

in 1718, having stayed in Neuburg on the 

Danube before. He lived in Schwetzingen at 

fi rst before moving into his capital of Heidelberg. 

When Mannheim became the new 

capital in 1720, Schwetzingen was used for 

a while as a permanent residence as the new 

palace at Mannheim did not become habitable 

until 1731. Until then the Palatine court had 

to make do with the cramped provisionary 

quarters provided by the Palais Oppenheim 

on the Mannheim market square. For that 

reason the stays at Schwetzingen were happily 

prolonged whenever possible. 17 

Once Mannheim had been decided on as the 

new capital of the Palatinate in 1748, Elector 

Carl Theodor’s court left the city every spring 

on a regular basis to spend the summer at 

Schwetzingen. Evidence of this is provided 

both by the Saxonian ambassador and the 

Mannheim newspaper. The ambassador, 

Count Andreas Riaucour, wrote regular 

reports on the Palatine court’s migration, for 

example on 30th April 1771: “Mgr. L’Electeur 

part demain pour Schwezingen avec les 

14 The stable was built in 1750 as a barracks for the commanderin-chief 

of the Palatinate’s army, Prince Friedrich Michael von 

Pfalz-Zweibrücken-Birkenfeld, brother-in-law of the Electress. 

In 1759 Elector Carl Theodor bought it for use as a stable and 

coach house. Today it is a residential and commercial building. 

15 The Ambassadors’ House in Zeyherstraße is used as a 

courthouse today. Originally the private residence of a 

privy councillor and the Elector’s personal physician, von 

Jungwürth, it was bought by Elector Carl Philipp in 1732 

and used as lodgings for foreign ambassadors. The building 

director, Nicolas de Pigage, had an apartment here too. 

16 Pages were boys of noble birth sent to the court to be trained. 

Today the house in Zeyherstraße is used by the Schwetzingen 

tax offi ce. 

17 Hans Schmidt, Kurfürst Karl Philipp von der Pfalz als 

Reichsfürst, Mannheim 1963.

personnes qui ont été nommées pour 

l’accompagner à celle Campagne, ou il restera 

pendant l’été jusqu’a l’arriere saison.” 18 And on 

23rd April 1772: “Leur A S E sont arrivées a 

cette campagne hier matin avec les personnes 

qui ont l’honneur de les accompagner du 

nombre des quels je me trouve Msg. L’Electeur 

y passera tout les tems de la belle saison 

…” 19 . Schwetzingen even had its own rules 

for the courtiers. Riaucour writes: “La cour 

d’ici a fait imprimer et publier un Reglement 

pour la Nobleße d’ici par rapport aux jour 

de cour et des tables pendant la Campagne 

d’Eté à Schwezingen duquel j’ai l’honneur de 

joindre ici un Exemplairem mais la Nobleße 

n’en est pas trop content.” 20 The removal date 

was dependent on the weather, but as a rule, 

the moves took place in late April and late 

October. On the Elector’s name day, that of St. 

Charles Borromeo on 4th November, the court 

had to be back at Mannheim at the very latest 

– this was the beginning of the social season, 

or “Galatage”. According to Riaucour, the 

Elector once returned to Mannheim in May 

because of a “vent du Nord” (northern wind) 

– apparently the heating at Mannheim was 

more effi cient than at the summer residence. 21 

In the 18th century the local newspaper 

Mannheimer Zeitung also published regular 

reports on the court’s moves: “Yesterday His 

Serene Highness left his capital and residence 

for his summer residence of Schwezingen”. 22 

The logistics involved in this transfer of 

the residence from May to October were 

staggering. Food and wood were delivered 

by cart – not even the everyday necessities 

were available at Schwetzingen, they had 

to be brought from Mannheim or from the 

towns and villages that had been instructed to 

ensure the court’s provisioning. The baggage 

18 Sächsisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden. Loc 2626 Vol. XXIV 

of 23rd April 1771. 

19 Sächsisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden. Loc 2627 Vol. XXV of 

23rd April 1772. 

20 Sächsisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden. Loc 2626 Vol. XXIII 

of 1st May 1770. 

21 Sächsisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden. Loc 2627 Vol. XXV of 

12th May 1772. 

22 Bärbel Pelker, “Sommer in der Campagne – Impressionen 

aus Schwetzingen”, in: B. Pelker/S. Leopold (ed.), Hofoper in 

Schwetzingen. Musik - Bühnenkunst - Architektur, Heidelberg 

2004, pp. 9-37. 


train from Mannheim took linen, furniture, 

tableware and staff to Schwetzingen. The 

English music critic Charles Burney wrote: 

“The number of persons following the Elector 

to Schwetzingen during the summer months 

is anything up to fi fteen hundred, and all of 

them stay at that small place at the Elector’s 

expense”. 23 This number – fi fteen hundred 

people descending on the tiny market town 

– may well be accurate although there are no 

written records to prove it. Mörz has found 

evidence of 639 persons receiving salaries 

from the electoral court in 1776. 24 Most 

court servants were married. Their families, 

however, were not entitled to accommodation 

at the palaces; they had to fi nd lodgings 

for themselves. It is safe to assume that 

domestics’ families had no intention of being 

separated from their breadwinners for six 

months of every year, so presumably they 

moved to Schwetzingen as well. The seventy 

to eighty aristocratic courtiers each brought 

their own entourage, people who again had 

to be lodged somewhere in Schwetzingen. In 

fact the seemingly large number of fi fteen 

hundred is easy to explain. The modest palace 

23 Charles Burney, Tagebuch einer musikalischen Reise durch 

Frankreich und Italien, durch Flandern, die Niederlande und 

am Rhein bis Wien, durch Böhmen, Sachsen, Brandenburg, 

Hamburg und Holland 1770 – 1772, reprinted Wilhelmshaven 

1980, p. 228. 

24 Stefan Mörz, Haupt- und Residenzstadt, p. 82. 


Fig. 2: The summer residence 

of Schwetzingen, aerial 

photograph. East (top) to west 

(bottom): The town, the palace, 

the gardens (photo: LAD 

Esslingen, 2005). 

17


18 


could not accommodate the courtiers, their 

servants and the administration. The Elector 

paid for domestics’ board and lodging as long 

as they stayed at the houses of Schwetzingen 

citizens. Those not needed there all the time, 

such as the members of the court orchestra, 

were paid the travelling fares when they 

had to be present for performances. The 

administrative authorities, too, remained at 

Mannheim. However, as all documents had to 

be presented to the Elector, the offi cials had 

no choice but to commute to Schwetzingen 

on a regular basis – government business 

could not be suspended for six months a 

year. Evidently traffi c on the highroad to 

Mannheim was lively. Inventories of lodgings 

at Schwetzingen have survived from 1758 

and 1762. 25 In 1758 234 members of the court 

could not be accommodated at the palace, and 

the treasury paid out a total of 4442 Gulden 

(fl orins) for their lodging. The inventory 

also reports where exactly those people were 

staying. The inhabitants of Schwetzingen 

evidently profi ted from the court’s presence 

in a number of ways. There was the letting of 

rooms and selling of wares, but there was also 

the possibility of participating in the cultural 

life of the court itself. Burney writes: “The 

Elector ... has a concert played every night at 

his palace whenever there is no play at the 

theatre. When there is, however, not only his 

subjects but every foreign visitor may attend 

free of charge... Whoever walks the alleys 

of Schwetzingen during the summer must 

be under the impression that the town is 

inhabited entirely by musicians unceasingly 

plying their craft; in one house he may hear 

a fi ne violinist, in another, a fl autist; here, an 

excellent oboist; there, a bassoon, a clarinet, 

a cello or a concert of several instruments 

playing together.” 26 

The French philosopher Voltaire (1694-1778) 

writes about his stay at Schwetzingen in 

25 Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe, Pfalz Generalia 77/8506, see 

also Pelker 2004, pp. 19 ff. 

26 Burney [1980], pp. 228 f. 

1753: “Je suis actuellement dans la maison de 

plaisance de Mgr l’Electeur palatin.” 27 

The Typology of the Summer Residence 

A “maison de plaisance” is usually translated 

into German as a Lustschloss, that is a 

“pleasure palace” or, as it happens, a summer 

residence. But these terms, like “hunting 

lodge” or “hermitage”, often provide little 

useful information about the property so 

described. Krause has succeeded in providing 

a defi nition based not so much on terminology 

as on the uses the property was put to, 

and the precise nature of the pleasure sought 

and found in the country. According to this a 

summer residence is situated not too far from 

the ruler’s main seat of power. 28 The decisive 

element of its use is a moving of the residence 

there, for a limited time each year but on a 

regular basis. 

At Schwetzingen the ceremonial observed was 

based on that of the imperial Habsburg court 

at Vienna where the old Spanish-Burgundian 

ceremonial was practised. 29 During the reign 

of Emperor Charles VI (r. 1711–1740) a 

continous switching of residences is evident. 

In late April or early May the imperial court 

moved from the Hofburg at Vienna to the Laxenburg, 

an old moated castle outside the city. 

After a brief return to Vienna towards the end 

of June, the court moved again to spend the 

hot summer months at the so-called ‘Favorita 

auf der Wieden’. In mid-October it returned to 

Vienna to spend the winter there. 

However, neither the Favorita nor Laxenburg 

Castle were prestigious pleasure palaces of 

the ‘Maison de plaisance’ type. The decisive 

element is the fact that at those temporary 

seats of the emperor and parts of his court, all 

events subject to the court ceremonial could 

take place. For example, princes could be 

enfeoffed and large-scale audiences con- 

27 Henry Anthony Stavan, Kurfürst Karl Theodor und Voltaire, 

Mannheim 1978, p. 8. 

28 Katharina Krause, Die Maison de plaisance Landhäuser in der 

Ile-de-France (1660-1730), München/Berlin 1996, pp. 8 ff. 

29 See also Henriette Graf, Die Residenz in München. 

Hofzeremoniell, Innenräume und Möblierung von Kurfürst 

Maximilian I. bis Karl VII., München 2002; Brigitte Langer, 

Pracht und Zeremoniell – die Möbel der Residenz München, 

München 2002.

ducted. This is what distuinguishes a summer 

residence from a hunting lodge or the occasional 

stay of a ruling prince at a castle. 30 

What held for the emperor at Vienna held for 

Schwetzingen too. Carl Theodor frequently 

held ministerial conferences there and 

received high-ranking guests, among them 

the bishops of Speyer (August Philipp Count 

of Limburg-Styrum), Hildesheim (Friedrich 

Wilhelm von Westphalen) and Augsburg 

(Joseph Landgrave of Hessen-Darmstadt), 

Princess Christine of Saxony, the Electress 

of Saxony, Maria Antonia, Duke Carl von 

Curland, the Electors of Mainz (Emmerich 

Josef von Breidbach-Bürresheim and Friedrich 

Karl Joseph von Erthal), the Elector of Trier 

(Clemens Wenzeslaus Duke of Saxony), the 

Princes Radziwill and relatives from Bavaria 

and Zweibrücken. During the summer months 

at Schwetzingen the council of the Palatine 

ministers chaired by the Elector had near-daily 

sittings. Outside their holidays, (mid-July to 

mid-August) the ministers had a choice of 

staying at Schwetzingen or commuting there 

from Mannheim on a regular basis 31 . 

Even during the holidays the cabinet secretary 

had to be present at Schwetzingen in order 

to conduct government business with Carl 

Theodor. The palace inventories of the late 

18th century explicitly name a fi rst-fl oor 

“conference room” – but in view of the general 

lack of space in the electoral couple’s bel 

étage, it is likely that the conference room also 

served as an anteroom and cardroom. 

In 18th-century France, on the other hand, 

30 Andreas Pécar, Die Ökonomie der Ehre. Der höfi sche Adel am 

Kaiserhof Karls VI. (1711-1740), Darmstadt 2003, pp. 158 f. 

31 I am indebted to Stefan Mörz for this piece of information. 


there was no offi cial royal summer residence. 

During the reign of Louis XIV the one-time 

hunting lodge of Versailles became the 

permanent residence. In order to provide the 

King and selected guests, with opportunities 

for withdrawing from the court, smaller “fi lial 

palaces” were built. The fi rst of them was 

the Trianon de porcelaine in the immediate 

vicinity of the main palace; later it was 

replaced by the Trianon de marbre; later still 

there was the ensemble of twelve pavilions 

grouped round a central pleasure palace at 

Marly-le-Roy. But at the same time there were 

the great royal palaces of Fontainebleau, 

St. Germain-en-Laye and Compiègne, all of 

them suffi ciently spacious to lodge the entire 

French court. Nevertheless they were used 

only sporadically by the French kings, for 

hunting trips or excursions. 32 This is evident 

from the memoirs of the Duke of Saint-Simon 

and the letters of Lieselotte von der Pfalz and 

Madame de Sévigné. 33 

It was an era when courtly culture, fashion, art 

and architecture were dominated by France; 

nevertheless the summer residence appears 

to be a phenomen unique to the Holy Roman 

Empire of the German Nation. 34 

To conclude it may be stated that from 1718 to 

1778, Schwetzingen was the offi cial abode of 

the Palatine court during the summer. There is 

suffi cient justifi cation to call it the Palatinate’s 

summer capital. It is thus an authentic and 

characteristic example of the type described 

above, the offi cial summer residence. 35 

(Ralf Richard Wagner) 

32 The great royal palaces of France had conference rooms well 

suited for the business of ruling. Usually the court was present 

in full force, and so were the ministers. However, there is no 

noticeable continuity or regularity, or of the court’s staying 

there for several months at a time as was the case in the 

Geman summer residences. 

33 Die Memoiren des Herzogs von Saint-Simon 1691-1723, trans. 

and ed. by S. von Massenbach, Frankfurt a. M./Berlin 1990. 

Helmut Kiesel, Briefe der Liselotte von der Pfalz, Frankfurt a. 

M. 1981. Theodora von der Mühl, Madame de Sévigné - Briefe, 

Baden-Baden 1979. 

34 Other European states have not been considered in this 

examination. 

35 Bernd Roeck, “Staat ohne Hauptstadt. Städtische Zentren im 

Alten Reich der frühen Neuzeit”, in: H.-M. Körner/K. Weigand 

(eds.), Hauptstadt. Historische Perspektiven eines deutschen 

Themas, München 1995, pp. 59-72. 


19


20 


c) 

The Palace Gardens – a Unique 

Ensemble of Masonic Images 

Overview 

The appearance of the grounds of Schwetzingen 

Palace as we see them today was determined 

when the garden was enlarged and its 

layout altered on the orders of Elector Palatine 

Carl Theodor. The restored grounds, resplendent 

with their fl owers, bosquets and water 

features, the garden buildings that have all 

survived intact, and the near-complete set of 

original garden sculptures enable us to guess 

at the sheer splendour of the garden in Carl 

Theodor’s time. 

The unusually rich and varied garden “furniture” 

comprises about 280 pieces of sculpture 

(today replaced with copies for conservation 

purposes). There are statues and groups, busts 

and urns of different sizes and varied appearance, 

made of gilt lead, cast and chased lead, 

bronze, marble, sandstone, cast iron, beaten 

sheet iron – not to mention the benches and 

tables of sandstone and wood inviting the passer-by 

to linger. 1 

Among the highlights, however, are the seven 

small buildings or follies, the so-called “fabriques”, 

erected in massive stone over twenty 

years. They are very different in type, and 

each is dedicated to a particular theme. The 

area of the garden surrounding each of them 

refl ects this theme, both in its layout and in 

the plants used. 

Water represents an important element of 

the layout. A complex and sophisticated supply 

system involving two waterworks on the 

Leimbach stream, a reservoir and a deep well 

fed the high fountain of the Arion basin, the 

network of canals and the great basin as well 

as a multitude of lesser water features – wells, 

basins, springs and small streams. There are 

the cherub fountains in the circular parterre, 

the “water-spouting birds”, the bird bath, the 

Galatea basin, the Neptune basin and the nai- 

1 Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirks Mannheim, 

Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933. 

ads in the Apollo grove, the triton fountain 

near the Temple of Minerva, the seahorse 

fountain, the Roman water tower with its canal 

and the island in the orangery garden. 

The Signifi cance of the Garden Decoration 

The decorative sculpture in the Schwetzingen 

garden is signifi cant on several interconnecting 

levels in the context of 18th-century 

ideas. First of all the viewer experiences a harmonious 

park made up of two very different 

parts – the formality of late Rococo and the 

“jardin anglo-chinois” – and thus representing 

a blend of the old and the new. The richly varied 

appearance of the different sections, 

the colourful fl owers, the structure and accents 

provided by the sculptures and the picturesque, 

atmospheric views invite the stroller 

to tarry and enjoy. 

Mythological Signifi cance 

The set of four urns depicting the Ages of the 

World 2 on the palace’s terrace provide a heading, 

in a manner of speaking: they inform 

the educated visitor with a sound knowledge 

of antique mythology of the themes represented 

by the garden. The urns, works by Verschaffelt 

3 , line the slightly raised terrace. The 

sequence starts in the north with the Golden 

Age, characterized by paradisiac abundance 

and eternal youth as represented by garlanded 

youthful faces, and a basket of fl owers and 

fruit. The Silver Age demands work and activity 

of mankind – man must now earn his living, 

as shown by the farming tools and ears 

of corn. But there are envy and greed already 

– one face is shown with a string of pearls 

in her hair. The Bronze Age is characterized 

by war; here, Mars rules. The Iron Age, i.e. the 

current one, represents the lowest level and 

ends in utter moral decay. It is characterized 

by vileness, lawlessness and malice, and its 

symbol is the wolf. 

2 See also: Hermann Bauer, Barock, Kunst einer Epoche, Berlin 

1992, pp. 25 ff. 

and: G. Batz, Weltalter – goldene Zeit und sinnverwandte Vorstellungen, 

Hildesheim 1967. 

3 See also: Eva Hofmann, Peter Anton von Verschaffelt, Hofbildhauer 

des Kurfürsten Carl Theodor in Mannheim, Mannheim 

1982.

The subject of Ovid’s Metamorphoses is transformation. 

The fi rst book describes the origin 

and development of the world in four consecutive 

chapters. The group of four urns represents 

the way of the world on its inevitable, 

unstoppable course. Man is part of this process. 

The visitor will proceed from the terrace 

into the park, the domain of the ancient 

gods, to learn their tales and take pleasure in 

their all-too-human entanglements. But he will 

also fi nd cause for refl ection – they will confront 

him with the ethics underlying human 

existence. 

In his fourth Eclogue Virgil prophesies a fi fth 

Age of the World, another Golden Age. Man 

will have to work for his living, but he will do 

so under favourable conditions and a just and 

peaceful rule. The birth of a boy will initiate 

this golden age. Then the sun god, Apollo, will 

assume power. In the time of Emperor Constantine 

this idea found its way into the Chri- 


stian world view; it was interpreted to refer 

to the Second Coming. Several European rulers 

would use the analogy of the sun god as 

a means of self-representation, most notably 

Louis XIV. 

The Schwetzingen urns depict four ages of the 

world because the fi fth is represented by the 

garden itself. 

The Circular Parterre 

The circular parterre 4 is dedicated to the celebration 

of the arts. The central basin depicts 

the rescue of Arion. The poet is said to have 

4 On the iconography of the statues: Jörg Gamer, “Bemerkungen 

zum Garten der kurfürstlich pfälzischen Sommerresidenz 

Schwetzingen”, in: Carl Theodor und Elisabeth Auguste 

– Höfi sche Kunst und Kultur in der Kurpfalz, exhibition 

catalogue, Heidelberg 1979. Jörg Gamer, “Schloss und Park 

der kurpfälzischen Sommerresidenz zu Schwetzingen im 18. 

Jahrhundert”, in: Kunstgeschichtliche Gesellschaft zu Berlin, 

Sitzungsberichte, N.F. 19, 1970/71, pp. 11-17. 

On the chronology: Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler des 

Amtsbezirk Mannheim, Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933, 

pp. 321 ff. 

Wiltrud Heber, Die Arbeiten des Nicolas de Pigage in 

den ehemals kurpfälzischen Residenzen Mannheim und 

Schwetzingen, Worms 1986, pp. 440-466. 


Fig. 1: Sculptures in the palace 

garden, Schwetzingen (From: 

Münzenmayer/Elfgang/Scholl 

1999). 

Captions (number of objects in 

brackets) 

1 Arcadian Atalante; 2 

Boethian Atalante; 3 Ages of 

the World urns (4); 4 Groups of 

cherubs (4); 5 Arion fountain; 

6 Obelisks (4); 7 Lion urns 

(4); 8 Ceres; 9 Bacchus; 10 

Mercury; 11 Callirhoe; 12 Stag 

groups (2); 13 Lead urns with 

masks (4); 14 Lead urns (4); 15 

Water/Neptune; 16 Earth/Cybele; 

17 Fire/Vulcan; 18 Air/Juno; 

19 Justice; 20 Minerva; 21 

Cherubs in the bird bath (2); 22 

Lead urns in the vicinity of the 

birdbath (8); 23 Bacchus; 24 

Pan; 25 Group of bacchantes; 

26 Bust of Minerva; 27 Galatea 

basin; 28 Dove urns (2); 29 

Bust of Alexander; 30 Bust of 

Antinous; 31 Triton fountain; 

32 Temple and statue of 

Minerva; 33 Mercury; 34 Minerva 

Pictura; 35 Agrippina; 36 

Lycian Apollo; 37 Lead urns in 

the vicinity of the Lycian Apollo 

(8); 38 Lions (4); 39 Monument 

commemorating archaeological 

fi nds; 40 Monument in honour 

of the art of gardening; 41 

Avenue of balls; 42 Danube; 43 

Rhine; 44 Winter; 44b Autumn; 

45 Spring; 46 Summer; 47 

Cherubs holding shield (2); 48 

Flower urns (2); 49 Sphinxes 

(6); 50 Naiad fountain; 51 

Dolphin fountain; 52 Bust of 

a gladiator; 53 Bust of Solon; 

54 Wild boar; 55 Temple and 

statue of Apollo; 56 Water bell; 

57 Bust of Faustina; 58 Bust of 

Marcellus; 59 Bust of Domitian; 

60 Bust of Marciana Augusta; 

61 Water-spouting birds; 62 

Temple and statue of Botany; 

63 Gnomika; 64 Geometria; 65 

Fortuna; 66 Mars; 67 Poetry; 

68 Rhetorica; 69 Sea horse 

fountain; 70 Urns celebrating 

the arts (4); 

21


Fig. 2: Four allegorical urns 

– The Ages of the World, 

palace terrace, Peter Anton von 

Verschaffelt, 1762-1765 (photo: 

Förderer). 

Fig. 3: Fountain group, 

“Arion and the dolphin”, central 

basin of the circular parterre. 

Ascribed to Barthélemy Guibal, 

acquired for Schwetzingen 

c.1766-1768 in Lunéville 

(Lorraine) from the estate of 

Stanisław Leszczyński (photo: 

Scholl). 

22 


been warned in a dream sent by Apollo that 

his companions on a sea voyage would turn 

on him and throw him overboard. But because 

of his singing Apollo took mercy on him and 

promised to save him. The group at the centre 

of the basin depicts a dolphin carrying Arion, 

and his lyre, to the shore. Four small groups of 

cherubs playing with swans or sea monsters 

complement the central group. The theme is 

taken up by the parterre’s smaller basins; they, 

too, contain groups of cherubs with swans and 

sea monsters. The whole set of lead sculptures 

was bought at Lunéville; they are believed to 

be the work of Lorraine sculptor Barthélemy 

Guibal. 5 At Schwetzingen they had to be rearranged 

into a new ensemble, and reworked or 

repaired where necessary. Unfortunately no 

relevant documents have survived. Despite the 

dramatic subject matter the groups present a 

calm and harmonious ensemble. Together the 

great basin and the smaller fountains could be 

interpreted as a homage to music and the art 

of singing, both very much in evidence during 

Carl Theodor’s stays at Schwetzingen. 

Surrounding the great basin on the diagonals 

are four white marble urns believed to be 

the work of Francesco Carabelli. 6 One depicts 

a libation and a bull sacrifi ce. On another 

Music faces Poetry. Sculpture and Painting 

adorn the third; the fourth has Architecture 

and Astronomy. The elaborate urns on their 

grey limestone bases are dedicated to the 

arts. When they were put up after 1775 small 

basins were fi lled in for the purpose. The 

reliefs complement the subject of the great 

central basin by celebrating architecture and 

the fi ne arts. At the same time, thanks go to 

the gods for their gift of art and beauty. 

The fi rst plan drawn up by Court Gardener 

Johann Ludwig Petri already depicted four 

obelisks on the central parterre’s strips of 

lawn. Verschaffelt was to create four garlanded 

and festooned heads in relief for each of 

the four “pyramids” that were already under 

construction by 1766. The obelisks come 

in three parts. On a profi led square base is 

a block with a portrait medallion adorning 

each of its four sides. The obelisk proper rises 

above this, smooth edges enclosing “dripstone” 

panels. Unfortunately those depicted in the 

medallions can no longer be identifi ed; the 

heads may have been copies of works from 

Carl Theodor’s collection of classical art at 

Mannheim. 7 

In their shape and structure the obelisks are 

reminiscent of memorial stones; in this way 

5 Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirk Mannheim, 

Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933, pp. 332-337. 

6 Ibid., S. 352. 

7 Eva Hofmann, Peter Anton von Verschaffelt, Hofbildhauer des 

Kurfürsten Carl Theodor in Mannheim, Mannheim 1982, p. 

225. Wolfgang Schiering, “Der Mannheimer Antikensaal”, in: 

Antikensammlungen im 18. Jahrhundert, ed. H. Beck et al., 

Berlin 1981.

they call attention to the fact that all things 

are transitory. The garlanded and festooned 

portraits honour the memory of great 

men and women; their depiction, which is 

reminiscent of the portraits on antique coins, 

makes their achievements appear timeless 

and eternal. But obelisks were also considered 

a metaphor for light, an embodiment of the 

aspect of “gloria” – they allude to the “radiant” 

qualities and achievements of those portrayed. 

As relics of the civilization of ancient Egypt, 

obelisks had also served as symbols of 

wisdom, durability and eternity since the 

renaissance. 8 

The Main Axis 

The two groups of stags originally fl anking a 

cascade of water fl owing down into the mirror 

basin marked the transition from the parterre 

to the garden’s main axis. According to an old 

tale, a stag once fl ed into the garden during a 

hunt; the dogs caught up with it at this precise 

point. The stags provide a thematic counterpoint 

to the circular parterre with its homage 

to the arts, but in fact the connection is closer 

than it may appear at fi rst. The stag is sacred 

to the goddess Diana, Apollo’s twin sister, 

protectress of nature and all wild animals. If 

she hunted in company at all it was always 

with her brother. An unwelcome intruder, 

Actaeon, was turned into a stag himself and 

hunted down by his own dogs. Stag groups 

remained a popular subject well into the 19th 

century. Beneath their mythological trappings 

the hunting scenes also recall the aristocratic 

privilege of the deer hunt. Unusual aspects 

of the Schwetzingen groups are the powerful 

arrangement, the combination with water, the 

sheer size and dominant position. 

To the west are personifi cations of the four 

elements 9 . Earth and Fire are south of the 

main avenue, Water and Air north; they all 

turn their backs on one another. Verschaffelt’s 

8 See also Hermann Bauer, Barock, Kunst einer Epoche, Berlin 

1992, pp. 31 ff. 

Cesare Ripa, Iconologia, Rom 1603, p. 189. 



229. 


contract of 1766 is very specifi c about them. 

What was ordered were four sculptures 

representing Juno, Cybele, Pluto and Neptune, 

each surrounded by cherubs and fi tting 

attributes. The four elements of Greek natural 

philosophy are among the cosmological cycles 

popular in Baroque art. They are based on the 

conviction that the universe and everything 

within it is subject to unchanging laws and 

structures; they determine everything including 

Man in his limited, fi nite existence. 

Next are two marble statues of Justice and 

Minerva by Gabriel Grupello. 10 They have 

been moved out of the main axis and turned 

back towards the palace; in this position they 

face the two gilt-lead statues, the Boethian 

and the Arcadian Atalantes 11 , on the palace’s 

terrace. 

The main thoroughfare then takes the visitor 

to the avenue of balls. Eight herms bearing 

a cube and gilt ball each mark the corners of 

10 Udo Kultermann, Gabriel Grupello, Berlin 1968. 

11 Re. the attribution see: Udo Kultermann, Gabriel Grupello, 

Berlin 1968. 


Fig. 4: Obelisk, north half of the 

circular parterre’s transverse 

axis, Peter Anton von Verschaffelt, 

1762-69 (photo: Scholl). 

23


Fig. 5: Two stag groups 

terminating the circular 

parterre to the west, Peter 

Anton von Verschaffelt, 1766-69 

(photo: Scholl). 

24 

Fig. 6: Temple of Minerva, 

southern angloise, Nicolas de 

Pigage, 1767 – 1773 (photo: 

Förderer). 


two lawns. Despite their prominent position 

fl anking the main axis, their signifi cance 

could not be determined so far. 12 

The axis is terminated by the great basin with 

its two monumental groups representing the 

Rhine and the Danube. 13 Originally another 

pair of river deities, the Moselle and Maas, 

was to have graced the opposite bank, but 

they were scrapped for money-saving reasons. 

According to a note dated 1769 the original 

intention was a portrayal of the four rivers 

irrigating Carl Theodor’s domains. This group 

of four reappears both on the base of Carl 

Theodor’s monument at Heidelberg and on 

the monument in the Mannheim market 

square. Verschaffelt’s monumental sculptures 

12 Maria Christine Werhahn, Der kurpfälzische Hofbildhauer 

Franz Conrad Linck (1730-1793). Modelleur der Porzellanmanufaktur 

Frankenthal, Bildhauer in Mannheim, Neuss 1999. 



260. 

take up the tradition of antique river deities. It 

is reasonable to assume that he had seen the 

Nile group at the Vatican. 14 The visitor is faced 

with the extent and glory of Carl Theodor’s 

rule. 

The Southern Angloise 

Wisdom and Art, the intellectual and spiritual 

life, are the themes of the southern angloise. 

The parterre’s diagonal leads up to the Temple 

of Minerva 15 according to myth the inventor 

of the fl ute and trumpet, of clay-burning, the 

plough and rake, the yoke and bridle, the cart 

and the ship. Minerva is the creative force 

behind both the domestic arts and the science 

of numbers. She was the protectress of writers 

and poets. Although a goddess of the art of 

warfare, she preferred resolving confl icts 

by peaceful means. Conrad Linck’s gable 

relief 16 depicts Minerva’s benefi cal presence 

at Schwetzingen – she is sitting on a rocky 

outcrop watching over the laying-out of the 

garden that is presented to her on a scroll. 

The water supply, the cultivation of the soil, 

buildings, sculptures and plants in beds and 

tubs combine to form a work of art. Inside the 

temple is a marble statue by Grupello, reworked 

by Verschaffelt – a victorious Minerva 

carrying an olive branch. 

Outside is another representation of the goddess 

as the patroness of painters, a “Minerva 

pictura”. Opposite is a statue of Mercury, 

the god of trade and thus of progress, partly 

responsible for material well-being. Another 

sculpture, a work by Andrea Vaccha originally 

known as a “pleureuse antique” and today as 

a “Dying Agrippina”, alludes to the sublime in 

literature in its depiction of a tragic heroine. 17 

Terminating the avenue that forms the 

western boundary of the south angloise is 

a statue of Apollo by Paul Egell. Apollo, god 

14 Ibid., pp. 4 ff. 

15 Wiltrud Heber, Die Arbeiten des Nicolas de Pigage in 


Schwetzingen, Worms 1986, pp. 557 ff. 

16 Maria Christine Werhahn, Der kurpfälzische Hofbildhauer 

Franz Conrad Linck (1730 -1793). Modelleur der Porzellanmanufaktur 

Frankenthal, Bildhauer in Mannheim, Neuss 1999. 

17 Re. the naming of the sculpture see: Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler 

des Amtsbezirk Mannheim, Stadt Schwetzingen, 

Karlsruhe 1933, pp. 340-341.

of healing and redemption, protector of the 

home and averter of evils from the fi elds, is 

represented as Apoll Lyceios, the protector of 

herds. His lyre-playing also made him a god of 

music and leader of the muses. 18 

The Northern Angloise 

Here the theme is the uncivilized, natural life. 

The basin of Galatea 19 on the parterre’s northwestern 

diagonal corresponds to the Temple 

of Minerva. In the centre of the circular basin 

a white marble group by Grupello rises over 

some tuff rocks in the water. The nymph 

Galatea appears to have only just risen from 

her bath, wringing out her long hair with 

both hands. The fi sh-tailed triton at her feet 

looks up at her longingly. According to Ovid, 

the Nereid Galatea was loved by two men, 

the cyclop Polyphemus and Acis, the son of a 

Sicilian nymph. She could not return Polyphemus’ 

love, and on surprising her with Acis, he 

crushed his rival with a rock. Galatea escaped 

and later recalled her lover to life by turning 

the blood that emerged from under the rock 

into a spring of water. Grupello’s sculpture 

depicts Galatea and Acis; tragedy seems far 

away now. Two nearby vases feature two pairs 

of amorous doves, further emphasizing the 

theme of corporeal love. 

Formally the sculpture of Bacchus by Andrea 

Vaccha corresponds to the southern angloise’s 

dying Agrippina. Bacchus was revered as the 

god of wine and orchards, horticulture and 

vegetation. However, when he roamed the 

hills and woods in an ecstatic frenzy with 

his entourage of maenads and bacchantes, 

nothing was safe from them. Further north on 

the other side of the transverse path, the god 

Pan, a sculpture by Simon Lamine, is perched 

high on a dripping rock. Pan was the god 

of herds, herdsmen and cattle. A being half 

human, half animal in shape, he frequently 

joined the entourage of Bacchus, pursuing 

18 Klaus Lankheit, “Der kurpfälzische Hofbildhauer Johann 

Paul Egell (1691-1752) in: Barock in Baden- Württemberg, 

exhibition catalogue, Bruchsal 1981, pp. 36-57, and other 

publications by this author. 

19 Benjamin Hederich, Gründliches mythologisches Lexikon, 

Leipzig 1770, 1st ed.: Leipzig 1724, pp. 1134-35. 


nymphs and boys. The small group of bacchantes 

by Conrad Linck alludes to the subject 

as well, as do the small sea monsters of the socalled 

birdbath. They all represent aspects of 

the uncouth and physical, the animal instincts, 

in contrast to all that is civilized and refi ned. 

The Northern Bosquet 

The garden theatre 20 in the northern bosquet 

with its architecture and sculptures, amounts 

to a homage to the theatre. Six sphinxes 21 

in pairs fl ank the stairs leading down to the 

sunken auditorium. Verschaffelt characterized 

them as allegories of music, dance, comedy 

and tragedy, plus two guards – without, 

20 Wiltrud Heber, Die Arbeiten des Nicolas de Pigage in den 

ehemals kurpfälzischen Residenzen Mannheim und Schwetzingen, 

Worms 1986, pp. 485 ff. Eva Hofmann, Peter Anton 

von Verschaffelt, Hofbildhauer des Kurfürsten Carl Theodor in 

Mannheim, Mannheim 1982, pp. 234 ff. 

21 See also: Heinz Demisch, Die Sphinx. Geschichte ihrer 

Darstellung von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart, Stuttgart 

1977. 



southern angloise, detail: gable 

relief by Konrad Linck, c.1769 

(photo: Scholl). 


southern angloise, longitudinal 

section by Wilhelm Schweitzer, 

pre-1933 (From: Martin 1933, 

Fig. 167). 

25


Fig. 9: “Solomon receiving the 

plans of the Temple”, illustration 

from J.J. Scheuchzer, Physica 

Sacra Iconibus Illustrata, 

Augsburg-Ulm, 1731 (From: W. 

Kirk MacNulty, Freemasonry. 

A Journey through Ritual and 

Symbol, London 1991, p. 40). 

Fig. 10: “Temple de la Sagesse 

et de la vertu”, German Masonic 

print, c.1770 (From: A. van de 

Sande, Vrijmetselarij in de Lage 

Landen, Zutphen 1995, p. 168). 

26 


however, saying who is who. The trellises 

serving as scenery originally had their place 

on the trapezoid “stage”. A picturesque 

backdrop is provided by a rocky cliff, with 

two naiads resting on it. Between them they 

hold an urn from which Hippocrene, the well 

of inspiration, pours forth, gushing down a 

cascade and into a basin. Above them Apollo 

stands crowned with laurel and playing his 

lyre in a towering monopteros. The cliff is 

actually a two-storey building of sandstone 

and tuff; from inside the visitor can enjoy fi ne 

views, and on the west side there is a balcony. 

Garden theatres became a popular feature in 

Baroque gardens. The one at Schwetzingen 

is remarkable not only for the uncommon 

quality of its layout and decoration; it is also 

one of only a few surviving garden theatres in 

Europe. 

Adjoining the natural theatre to the north 

is the bathhouse with the “water-spouting 

birds” and the diorama. It is possible that 

the whole thing, an illustration of a fable 

by Aesop, is from Lorraine, as there used to 

be a similar installation in the park of La 

Malgrange. An eagle-owl that has caught a 

small bird is sitting in an oval basin. Above 

them is a circle of different birds all spitting 

water at the predator. Originally the birds 

were made of beaten sheet iron and painted, 

and alternated with fl owers and greenery. 

East and west of the basin are the two agate 

cabinets, small rooms for resting and enjoying 

the view, fl anked by aviaries. Agates and 

other semiprecious stones, coloured glass and 

pebble mosaics add to the cabinets’ fanciful 

character. Conrad Linck created the sandstone 

reliefs for the gables, and lead reliefs with 

gallant scenes representing the seasons for 

the interior. To the north was the diorama, 

another small building providing a point de 

vue – a cavelike trompe-l’oeil painted by Court 

Painter Ferdinand Kobell that appears to offer 

a view of an ideal landscape. No less than 

eleven arrangements of this type are known 

to have existed in the gardens of Louis XIV 

at Versailles, but the one at Schwetzingen is 

among the very few still in existence today. 

The Landscape Garden 

The changing attitude towards nature found 

expression in the most recent part of the garden, 

laid out in accordance with the principles 

of the jardin anglo-chinois. 22 Picturesque views 

of an ideal landscape seemingly having be- 

22 See also: Monique Mosser, “Paradoxe Architekturen oder 

kleiner Traktat über die fabriques”, in: Monique Mosser/ 

Georges Teyssot, Die Gartenkunst des Abendlandes. Von der 

Renaissance bis zur Gegenwart, Stuttgart 1993 (Milano 1990), 

pp. 259 -276.

come real, evoke Arcadia in the visitor’s mind. 

Varied and imaginative follies, the “fabriques”, 

complement this artful arrangement of poetic 

images. 23 The “fabriques” are halfway between 

architectural models and reality; they can be 

entered and invite lingering but do not lend 

themselves to habitation. In the second half 

of the 18th century they became part of a new 

architectural vocabulary 24 , and a successful 

type of building in their own right. Printed 

sample collections helped to spread awareness 

of the possible types. 25 However, beyond 

providing a pleasing sight, the “fabriques” also 

endeavour to be symbols closely connected 

with literature. Quotes and allusions make 

them into an intellectual game for the wellread. 

They are reminders of times long past 

and an enraptured world. The visitor enters 

an encyclopedia, so to speak, with entries 

presented for his perusal. 

This is the context in which the Schwetzingen 

follies should be read. The budding interest 

in the natural sciences was expressed by the 

Temple of Botany, with its surface resembling 

oak bark. A book on plants by Carl Linné serves 

as the attribute of the goddess of botany. 

Growth and decay in the course of the seasons 

as represented by the zodiac, provide the 

theme of the interior decoration. They refer to 

the unchanging circle of life all earthly things 

are subject to. 

The Temple of Mercury and the Roman water 

tower bear witness to the growing interest 

in the young science of archaeology. 26 The 

picturesque ruins, elaborately built of tuff and 

sandstone, appear by their cracked and broken 

surfaces to be in an advanced state of decay. 

23 John Dixon Hunt, “’Ut pictura Poesis’: der Garten und das 

Pittoreske in England 1710-1750”, in: Mosser Teyssot 1993, pp. 

227-238. 

24 Jean-Marie Morel, Théorie des Jardins, Analyse des fabriques, 

Paris 1776. 

25 Le Rouge, Jardins anglo-chinois ou détails des nouveaux 

jardins à la mode, 21 vols. 

Johann Christian Grohmann, Ideenmagazin für Liebhaber von 

Gärten, englischen anlagen und für Besitzer von landgütern, 5 

vols., 1796-1806. Quoted after Monique, “Paradoxe Architekturen 

oder kleiner Traktat über die fabriques”, in Mosser/Teyssot 

1993, pp. 259-276. The “lord of fabriques” is considered to 

be Charles Joseph de Ligne, who describes and evaluates his 

own garden in Beloeil (Belgium) and other European gardens 

in his book Coup d’oeil sur Beloeil et sur und grande partie 

des jardins de l’Europe, Paris 1781. 

26 Günter Hartmann, Die Ruine im Landschaftsgarten, Worms 

1981. 


The water tower, modeled on the Porta 

Nova at Rome, creates the impression that 

the water has found its way through the ruin. 

Nature, it seems, is about to reclaim what 

civilization and technological progress have 

taken away. 

The Temple of Mercury with its ruined 

dome and weathered surfaces is reminiscent 

of its ancient model, a tower-tomb. It is a 

picturesque reminder of the visitor’s own 

mortality, especially towards evening in the 

light of the setting sun. The message becomes 

even more poignant by comparison with the 

nearby mosque, built at the same time. 


Fig. 11: Statue of “Gnomonika”, 

northern shore of the great 

pond, ascribed to Peter van den 

Branden, court sculptor from 

1714, d. 1719/20 (photo: Scholl). 

27


28 


The mosque embodies many things: the 

interest in foreign civilizations and faiths, 

refl ections on Christianity, the issue of 

tolerance and not least the sheer delight in the 

magnifi cent exotic architecture. It was the last 

of the follies to be completed, and has never 

been furnished. 

The Masonic Symbolism Embodied 

by the Garden 

The knowledgeable 18th-century visitor might 

well have recognized yet another level of 

allusions, that referring to the philosophy of 

Freemasonry. 27 It is safe to assume that most 

visitors in Carl Theodor’s time could, in fact, 

“read” the garden in this manner – a large 

percentage of aristocrats, artists and intellectuals 

were themselves members. However, 

18th-century masonic symbolism is complex 

and very individual as the movement has 

no fi xed canon. Numerous infl uences found 

expression. Renaissance Humanism with its 

theosophic cosmology, in its turn inspired by 

antiquity, was one of them. Neo-Platonic ideas 

and an esoteric mysticism played a part. So 

did the usages of medieval lodges. Further 

infl uences were the Illuminati and, from the 

middle of the century, the “Strict Observance” 

as propagated by the German noble Freiherr 

von Hund, with its system of knightly degrees. 

The meanings are hidden within the formal 

layout of the garden, the statuary of the 

French part and the imaginative “fabriques” 

of the landscape garden. The visitor perceives 

them according to his individual insight, that 

is to say the degree of his initiation. 

The investigation of this complex subject 

matter, in connection with the Schwetzingen 

grounds, is still in its infancy. The insights 

listed here in a preview are the result of 

interdisciplinary research presented here 

also on behalf of – Dr. Andréa Kroon, The 

Hague, and Dr. Jan Snoek, Heidelberg. A more 

complete account has been published in 2006. 

27 Western Esotericism and Freemasonry have developed 

into academic fi elds in their own right. There are chairs of 

Freemasonry at the universities of Sheffi eld, Brussels and 

Leiden, and of Western Esotericism including Freemasony at 

those of Paris and Amsterdam. 

The results mentioned here have been made 

available strictly for the purposes of this 

document; their publication must be left to 

the discretion of the scholars concerned. 

The deeper meaning of the garden’s layout 

is suggested to visitors already on the terrace 

– every Freemason of that time would have 

known as a matter of course, that with the 

movement had already commenced a new 

Golden Age. 28 The concept of the opposing 

principles of Nature and Civilization, an 

18th-century favourite – the savage against 

the cultivated, the raw against the polished, 

the spiritual against the unrefi ned or animal 

– reappears continually throughout the 

garden. One of the main themes of the garden 

is the “taming of the wild”, that is the cultivation 

of nature. The hounds bring down the 

stag; the two Atalantes oppose Minerva and 

Justice. The southern angloise with Minerva 

and Apollo has its counterpart in the northern 

one with Bacchus and Pan. The cubic block of 

the sophisticated Temple of Minerva rises on 

a base of rough rock. The artful French garden 

adjoins the “natural” landscape garden. 

“Geometria”, “Gnomonika” and “Rhetorica” 

Unique works connected with 18th-century 

Freemasonry are the sculptures representing 

Geometry, Gnomony and Rhetoric. The statue 

west of the Temple of Apollo, ascribed to Peter 

van den Branden and identifi ed as “Geometria” 

on the plinth, depicts a man holding a 

rule, a plummet and a square. Freemasonry is 

derived from the medieval masons’ guilds or 

lodges. Work on the rough stone is symbolic 

of the work of moral self-improvement. The 

different stages of refi nement and completion 

of the workpiece require different tools. 

These tools thus acquire a symbolic value; 

by themselves or in groups they represent 

different degrees of initiation, and the 

functions of Lodge offi cials. The compasses 

and square are symbolic of Freemasonry 

as a whole. A knowledge of geometry, the 

28 See also: Frances A. Yates, Astraea. The Imperial Theme in 

the Sixteenth Century, London/Boston 1975. And id.: The 

Rosicrucian Enlightenment, London/Boston 1972.

fi fth of the “septem artes liberales”, was of 

special signifi cance to master builders. It was 

considered to be the concept underlying the 

divinely ordained structure of the universe. 

God was revealed to mankind in its ordered 

and harmonious structure. To Freemasons, it 

was the most important of the arts and the 

one Freemasonry associated with. 

Nearby is the sculpture identifi ed as “Gnomonika”. 

It depicts a sculptor who appears to be 

working on the stone cube of a sundial. However, 

the workpiece would have been of little 

practical value as it has three dials. The cube, 

hewn from the natural rock and smoothed, 

was one of the stonemasons’ masterpieces and 

is representative of the thoroughly mastered 

craft. The three surfaces with dials remind the 

Freemason that his time should be divided up 

sensibly, leaving time for his profession, for 

charitable works and for prayer. The same is 

represented by the 24-inch rule, used primarily 

for work on the rough stone. 

The sculpture of “Rhetorica” – a male fi gure 

with a beehive – again defi es interpretation 

except in a Masonic context. The beehive 

serves both as a symbol for the community of 

masons and to represent work for the community 

as a whole. It is also symbolic of work 

and diligence. 

There are no pieces in the garden sculpture of 

the time comparable to these three allegories. 

They make no sense except as Masonic symbols. 

No other life-size statues representing 

this context are known from the fi rst half of 

the 18th century. The Schwetzingen statues 

of “Geometria”, “Gnomonika” and “Rhetorica” 

must be considered to be among the earliest 

Masonic sculptures in existence. 

Arion 

The Arion group represents the leitmotiv of 

the Schwetzingen garden. According to the 

version of the tale preferred by the 18th century, 

Apollo warned Arion that the sailors on his 

ship would be turning on him, and promised 

to save him. 29 Arion recognized the dolphin to 

29 Benjamin Hederich, Gründliches mythologisches Lexikon, 

Leipzig 1770, 1st ed. Leipzig 1724. 


be the rescuer sent by Apollo, and was carried 

ashore by the dolphin. He then saw to it that 

the evildoers were punished but forgot to 

return the creature to the water. The supposed 

“fi sh” suffocated on dry land. The moral core 

of the story runs like this – the dolphin, then 

considered to be a fi sh, i.e. “Ichtus”, that is 

Christ, dies on the orders of Apollo, that is 

God, to save Arion, i.e. mankind. Thus the 

Arion group depicts in fact, the sacrifi cal 

death of Christ for the salvation of sinful Man. 

At the same time the attempted murder of 

Arion also echoes the Hiramic legend, a core 

element of Freemasonry. Hiram Abif, Master 

Builder of Solomon’s Temple, fell victim to 


Fig. 12: Statue of “Geometria”, 

northern shore of the great 



1714, d. 1719/20 (photo: Scholl). 

29


Fig. 13: Masonic carpet 

depicting stonemasons’ tools, 

an unhewn stone and a temple, 

France c.1745 (From: James 

Stevens Curl, The Art and 

Architecture of Freemasonry, 

London 2002, Fig. 32). 

30 


a conspiracy of fi fteen of his fellowcrafts. 

Three of the malcontents tried to obtain the 

secret Master’s Word by force. They waylaid 

Hiram when he returned from the temple 

but could not force him to reveal the Word. 

One of them hit Hiram with a 24-inch rule, 

another with a square; the third fi nally killed 

him with a setting maul. The murderers 

hastily buried the body and marked the 

place with a sprig of cassia. When the master 

builder was missed at work, the conspirators’ 

repentance was deep. King Solomon ordered 

these twelve repentants to look for the body 

and also retrieve the lost Master’s Word. They 

were to fi nd Hiram Abif’s body and give it 

a decent burial. The men decided that the 

fi rst word spoken among them should be the 

future Master’s Word. With the help of the 

“fi ve points of fellowship” they succeeded in 

raising the decaying body. The exclamation of 

“Mach-benak”, the fl esh falls from the bone, is 

reported to have been used as a substitute for 

the lost Master’s Word. 

The Masonic ritual of raising a master is derived 

from this legend. But beyond that the 

death and raising of the Master Builder Hiram 

Abif is viewed as a symbolic representation of 

Jesus Christ, his resurrection and the eternal 

life promised by God. The central relevance of 

the legend in Masonic thought is echoed by 

the central position of the Arion fountain in 

the garden at Schwetzingen. 

Obelisks 

In the 18th century the obelisk was the generally 

accepted symbol of everything Egyptian. 

A novel published in 1731 by Abbé Jean 

Terrasson, Séthos, histoire ou vie tirée des 

monuments anecdotes de l’ancienne Égypte. 

Traduite d’un manuscrit grec, was of key importance 

to 18th-century Freemasonry. The 

tale is set in Egypt; a young prince must pass 

numerous tests and temptations in order to 

earn his right of initiation in the Isis cult. The 

very long novel cites many Masonic principles, 

including a condemnation of random acts 

of power on the part of a ruler. Séthos has to 

“earn” his claim to the throne even though he 

is entitled to it by birth. 

The garden visitor is reminded that he must 

strive to pass the tests he is faced with and 

that, conscious of his own mortality, he should 

consider the examples set by those depicted. 

In this sense, even Carl Theodor himself is 

reminded by the obelisks to earn his inherited 

title by proving himself worthy of it, to wield 

power with moderation and to serve the best 

interests of his subjects. 

Temple of Minerva 

As an outstanding example of the garden’s “fabriques”, 

the Temple of Minerva will be considered. 

It was built between 1766 and 1773. 

The structure rises on a slight elevation of artifi 

cial rock and is reminiscent of a Roman prostylos. 

In front of the rectangular building is a 

krepis with fi ve steps supporting the four Corinthian 

columns of the portico. They support 

the entablature with a three-banded architrave 

and frieze. The triangular gable features a 

depiction of Minerva. The space between the 

two middle columns is larger than that separating 

them from those on the sides. The grid 

created by the columns is continued inside

in the pattern of the portico fl oor and ceiling. 

Inside, benches line the walls on both sides, 

and there are two cylindrical sacrifi cal altars 

decorated with bulls’ skulls. A statue of Minerva 

graces the back wall. The frieze of sacrifi cial 

knives, axes and bowls to receive the blood is 

continued on the interior walls. The coffered 

ceiling is refl ected by the marble fl oor. 

The back of the temple gives access to its basement. 

This is a rectangular room with two 

niches at the sides that receive light through 

circular openings. Benches on all the walls 

offer seating. The room has a groin vault. A 

shaft leads under the stairs; there is another in 

the fl oor in the middle of the room. 

The temple’s central sculpture is Minerva, depicted 

as a so-called Masonic triad – that of 

Wisdom, Beauty and Strength. The owl at her 

feet represents wisdom. The goddess demonstrates 

strength by her armour and the allusion 

to Hercules, whose lion skin is just visible on 

her right shoulder. Beauty is represented by the 

goddess herself; she also carries a branch, identifying 

her as Athena Nikephorus. The order is 

Corinthian, the Masonic symbol of wisdom. 

In the gable relief, the goddess is sitting on a 

craggy rock, characterized by her helmet and 

the Gorgon’s head on her shield and accompanied 

by the Christian virtues of Faith, Hope 

and Love. Faith is recognizable by her scroll, 

Love by the fl ames and shattered idols, Hope 

by her spade and gaze directed heavenward. 

On the left, in a posture similar to that of Minerva, 

sits Discretion looking at the assembly 

and pointing to a chiselling cherub with 

her right hand; her left forefi nger is raised in 

front of her closed mouth. She is the guardian 

of the Masonic secret, one of the Masonic core 

values. Minerva inspecting the scroll is reminiscent 

of a 1731 book illustration of some 

signifi cance for Masons, that was repeatedly 

paraphrased in the course of the 18th century: 

that of King Solomon inspecting the plans for 

the Temple. 

According to ancient mythology, Minerva 

gave mankind the science of numbers; it is 


thus hardly surprising that symbolic numbers 

abound in the layout of the temple. The 

pleasantly harmonious appearance is due not 

least to the fact that most of its proportions 

adhere to the golden section recommended 

by Vitruvius. Familiarity with proper propor- 

tions is part of the basic knowledge of a master 

builder. The cosmic principle of duality is 

expressed both by the two-colour fl oor and by 

the fl oor’s refl ecting the ceiling (the Hermetic 

“as above, so below”). 


Fig. 14: Statue of “Rhetorica”, 

southern shore of the great 



1714, d. 1719/20 (photo: Scholl). 

31


Fig. 15: Temple of Mercury, 

southwestern part of the palace 

gardens, Nicolas de Pigage, 

begun 1784 (photo: Förderer). 

32 


In Mariology, Mary is described as the “domus 

sapientiae” 30 which Christ, divine wisdom 

incarnate, chose to dwell in. Wisdom has a 

special place among the “seven gifts of the 

Spirit”. In the 17th and 18th centuries divine 

wisdom was usually not depicted as Christ, 

but as a richly dressed and crowned woman 

with a halo. 31 The temple of wisdom is therefore 

a temple of Mary. This also explains why 

the altars are not placed in front of the temple 

as they were in antiquity, but inside it. Like 

the bulls’ heads, sacrifi cial daggers and bowls, 

they allude to the death of Christ. 

Pigage’s Temple of Minerva is a Masonic 

“Temple de la sagesse et de la vertu”. It is a 

sophisticated piece of garden architecture, 

surrounded not by a landscape garden, like 

its English models, but by a French formal 

garden. The Schwetzingen temple marks the 

beginning of a new development, and may 

be considered the earliest surviving example 

in a European Continental garden. Among its 

unusual features is the basement, laid out to 

resemble a room hewn in rock. It may have 

30 Lexikon der christlichen Ikonographie, Freiburg 1968, vol. 4, p. 

40. 

31 See also: Paul von Naredi-Rainer, Salomos Tempel und das 

Abendland. Monumentale Folgen historischer Irrtümer, Köln 

1994, pp. 103 ff. 

served for Lodge meetings, but its uses are not 

known. 

The ‘Fabriques’ in the Landscape Garden 

Beyond the signifi cance of individual 

picturesque buildings, the function of the 

“fabriques” as a whole should be pointed out. 

The bathhouse, the Temple of Botany, the 

Roman water tower, the Temple of Apollo, the 

Temple of Mercury and the mosque are connected, 

despite their individual uniqueness. 

Formally, the connection is the watercourse. 

In the sequence given they also represent the 

course of the day and the cycle of life, death 

and rebirth, in analogy to the 18th-century 

Masonic rites of initiation symbolizing the 

candidate’s death and rebirth. 

The Temple of Botany represents morning 

and birth, embodied by the female element 

of sowing, planting, cultivating. The so-called 

Roman water tower recalls the Porta Nova and 

thus symbolizes rebirth into a new life. The 

bathhouse, too, celebrates morning and sunrise 

in the fresco of its ceiling. The bathhouse 

and the “water-spouting birds” are places of 

leisure; the bodily pleasures are very much a 

part of it, although the raw animal urges have 

been refi ned into sophisticated desire. It is 

safe to assume that the 18th-century visitor 

was quite aware of the meaning hinted at by 

the birds, the shells, the amethysts and the 

shape of the whole structure, all alluding to 

erotic adventures and the shape of the female 

sexual organs. At the same time the bath is 

reminiscent both of birth and of ritual cleansings. 

Here, too, the mastering of the physical 

urges is an issue. 

The Temple of Apollo symbolizes masculinity, 

life, midday. The plaques depicting the sun 

refer both to the sun god and to the sun king. 

The rayed sun is one of the most common 

symbols of 18th-century Freemasonry. The 

Schwetzingen Temple of Apollo recalls the 

Temple of Solomon of contemporary Masonic 

imagery, and the sun is depicted on the apron 

of the Masonic Grand Master as well.

Death and evening are symbolized by the 

Temple of Mercury, the shape of which recalls 

a Roman high tomb. It also represents the 

“destroyed temple”, which can be taken to 

refer to the Old Covenant between God and 

mankind, or to the death of Jesus Christ. The 

destroyed temple was an image of special 

signifi cance to 18th-century Freemasonry. In 

the image, sunlight streaming through the 

broken roof, lights upon the golden plaque 

bearing the name of God, which covers the 

grave of Hiram, and which is symbolically 

rediscovered in the vault beneath the temple 

in masonic ritual. 

The symbolism of the mosque is the most 

evident. The opposite of the Temple of 

Mercury, it represents the New Temple, the 

New Jerusalem, the Resurrection, and its 

ritual is symbolic of the candidate’s rebirth. 

The “blazing star” above the entrance, which 

reappears elsewhere in the building and 

the cloisters, is among the most prominent 

symbols of Freemasonry. 

The Artists 

The overall concept of the garden’s architecture 

and sculpture is entirely the work of 

Nicolas Pigage. 32 In offi cial documents his 

career makes quick reading. Born at Nancy 

in 1723, he became a student of the École 

militaire in Paris around 1743, and of the 

Académie Royale d’architecture in 1744. In 

1746 he was awarded two medals. In 1759 

Pigage applied for a corresponding membership, 

which he received in 1763. In the 

Procès Verbaux his contacts are documented 

up to 1788. In January 1781, Pigage had 

announced the publication of a book about 

the Schwetzingen landscape garden which 

regrettably never appeared. 33 In January 1783, 

the members asked Pigage for a “plan démonstratif 

des jardins qu’il fait à Mannheim” [they 

were probably thinking of Schwetzingen]. 34 It 

is impossible to tell whether or not Pigage’s 

32 Biography taken from: Wiltrud Heber, Die Arbeiten des 

Nicolas de Pigage in den ehemals kurpfälzischen Residenzen 

Mannheim und Schwetzingen, Worms 1986, pp. 1-5. 

33 See also: ibid., n. 1086. 

34 Ibid. S. 482. 


travels in the Netherlands, France, Italy and 

England were already undertaken at the 

Elector’s instructions. 

From the beginning the Elector had great 

confi dence in his garden architect’s work, 

something that becomes evident from his 

promoting Pigage to “Premier Architecte de 

Son Altesse Serenissime Palatine”. After the 

court’s removal to Munich, Pigage continued 

on his own authority; nevertheless, Carl 

Theodor appears to have still taken a personal 

interest in the work on his garden. The few 

surviving documents indicate that the plans 

were always submitted to him and their 

execution approved. Pigage had been working 


Fig. 16: Royal Arch degree, 

illustration from: Maconnerie 

des Hommes, Collection C.M.C. 

“Prins Frederik”, The Hague 

(From: J. Bruintjes (ed.), Ken 

Uzelf. Vrijmetselarij in Noord 

Nederland, Drachten 1998, Fig. 

9, p. 23. 

Fig. 17: Mosque, Nicolas de 

Pigage, begun 1784 (photo: 

Scholl). 

33


Fig. 18: Mosque, window in the 

west front (photo: Scholl). 

Fig. 19: A “blazing star” 

motif from the mosque interior 

(photo: Förderer). 

34 


for Carl Theodor for 47 years when he died on 

30th July 1796. 

Pigage was assisted by notable artists, trained 

at the academies of Europe before being 

employed as court sculptors by Carl Theodor. 

Among the sculptors working for the gardens 

were Paul Egell, Peter Anton von Verschaffelt, 

Franz Conrad Linck, Matthäus van den 

Branden and Simon Peter Lamine. 

In addition, works by Franceso Carabelli, 

Andrea Vacca, Gabriel Grupello, Heinrich Charasky, 

and Barthélemy Guibal were brought to 

Schwetzingen. 35 

In view of the garden’s complex iconography, 

it is evident that Pigage as the architect, and 

Carl Theodor as the patron, were thoroughly 

35 See also: Maria Christine Werhahn, Der kurpfälzische 

Hofbildhauer Franz Conrad Linck (1730 -1793). Modelleur der 

Porzellanmanufaktur Frankenthal, Bildhauer in Mannheim, 

Neuss 1999. 

familiar with the ideas and “secret” imagery 

of Freemasonry, and consequently must have 

been masons themselves. 36 From the depth 

of their knowledge, both of them must have 

reached the degree of Master Mason at least. 

Carl Theodor probably presided over a court 

lodge that met at the palace. The clock on the 

palace front made it very evident to visitors 

that this was a freemason’s abode – the dial 

has the blazing star at its centre. 

Summary 

Formally the Schwetzingen gardens are 

primarily expressive of the late Baroque age. 

The layout is characterized by a harmonious 

balance and clear structure. For the southern 

angloise, Pigage designed the Temple of 

Minerva, a piece of garden architecture 

inspired by early English landscape gardens, 

such as Kew Gardens. However, the temple 

itself is modeled on contemporary depictions 

of the “Temple de la sagesse et de la vertue”, 

and as such is not out of place in a formal 

French garden. 

It seems as if Pigage, despite some “modernizing” 

of details, never questioned the structure 

of the French garden as such. The contrast 

between a sophisticated, refi ned layout on the 

one hand, and a naturalistic one on the other, 

must therefore have been deliberate. Earlier 

gardens in the French style tend to display 

recurrent elements expressive of a generalized 

symbolic language, and realized with 

near-canonical rigidity. At Schwetzingen the 

choice of elements is very individual. There 

is no grand celebration of the ruling prince. 

The iconography at fi rst glance appears very 

unusual, considering that Carl Theodor was 

an Absolutist ruler. However, considered in 

the context of 18th-century Freemasonry and 

theosophy, the layout takes on a new and 

complex signifi cance. We may well ask if that 

might not have been the real “point” of the 

garden’s sculptural and architectural features. 

36 According to Le Forestier Carl Theodor was a member of a 

Lodge himself from c.1760: René Le Forestier, Les Illuminés 

de Bavière et La Franc-Maconnerie Allemande, Genève 1974, 

pp. 452 and 462. The sources used by Le Forestier have 

unfortunately perished in WWII.

The Schwetzingen grounds provide new food 

for thought regarding the development of 

garden art too. Hitherto the landscape garden 

was considered a formal representation of 

masonic iconography. At Schwetzingen it 

becomes evident that both the French garden, 

with its traditional array of sculptures, and the 

landscape garden, with its carefully arranged 

“fabriques” are capable of expressing very 

complex masonic ideas. 

Schwetzingen was chosen by Carl Theodor to 

be his summer residence; here he stayed in 

the company of selected guests, who delighted 

in discovering the garden’s hidden secrets. 

It is not electoral power and glory that is 

displayed here; instead there emerges, in 

carefully chosen images, a different, “secret” 

and “forbidden” belief. Of course there was 

also the Mannheim residence that spoke of 

Carl Theodor’s political power and status in 

the grand, sweeping gestures appropriate to 

the Elector. 

The blazing star on the dial of the palace 

front’s clock, no longer complete today, and 

the incorrectly executed star symbols in the 

newly renovated mosque are proof, that a 

cultural monument can be preserved only if it 

is understood. For that reason further research 

is indispensable. 

The grounds of Schwetzingen Palace are 

among the very few lavishly decorated and artistically 

valuable European gardens of the late 

18th century, that have retained their original 

appearance to the present day. Moreover, the 

garden is a unique monument of Freemasonry 

that has no equal in all of Europe. 

(Monika Scholl, Jan Snoek & Andréa Kroon) 



Fig. 20: Masonic carpet, 

copperplate engraving from: 

Leonard Gabanon, La Desolation 

des Entrepreneurs modernes 

du Temple de Jerusalem ou 

Nouveau Catechisme des 

Francs-Macons, 1747 (private 

property). 

Fig. 21: Schwetzingen Palace, 

clock on the west (garden) front. 

The hands and the painted 

dial form a “blazing star” motif 


35


Fig. 1: Aerial view of the bathhouse 

and garden (left to right): 

Diorama, water-spouting birds, 

bathhouse, Temple of Apollo 

and natural theatre (photo: LAD 


36 


d) 

The Bathhouse – Synthesis 

of the Arts and Refuge of Elector 

Carl Theodor 

Building History 

Palatine Oberbaudirektor (director-in-chief of 

building) Nicolas de Pigage laid out a number 

of separate gardens at Schwetzingen, in 

accordance with the fashion of the time; but 

unlike the gardens created, for example, by 

Emmanuel Héré (1705-1763) in Lorraine, they 

were integrated into the layout of the garden 

as a whole. Pigage accomplished this not only 

through his geometrical network of paths 

crisscrossing the entire garden, but also by 

creating axes of view continually leading from 

one part of the garden to another. 

The so-called bathhouse, by type a classic 

French-style “Maison de plaisance” like Maisons, 

Vaux-le-Vicomte, Champs, was intended 

as a private refuge with its own garden for 

the Elector Palatine. In this the bathhouse 

continues the tradition of the “fi lial palaces” of 

Versailles, Trianon and Marly. In fact it follows 

its French models to the extent of being built, 

like the Trianon, off to one side – without, however, 

copying the axis and exact distance. The 

bathhouse is fi rst mentioned in the Etrennes Palatines 

of 1769, a type of calendar: “Le bosquet 

& le bâtiment des bains aux quels on travaille. 

Ces bains dans le gôut des Anciens porteront le 

nom de Thermes Théodoriques.” 1 The Etrennes 

refer to the previous year; so work on the 

bathhouse probably started in 1768. It does 

not appear in the garden plan of 1767, in the 

plans by copperplate engraver Egidius Verhelst 

or in those by the garden architect Le Rouge 

of 1769. Verhelst’s plan was even included in 

the Etrennes Palatines of 1769, even though the 

text, as quoted above, mentions the building of 

the bathhouse. Le Rouge’s plan merely has a 

basin where the “water-spouting birds” would 

be, with a caption saying “bains”. 

The Sckell plan of 1783 is the fi rst to show the 

fi nished structure and its surroundings. An 

important, so far unused source is provided by 

the reports of the ambassador of Saxony, Count 

Andreas Riaucour. 2 On 4th July 1772, his secretary, 

Zapf, sent a report to Dresden which can 

only refer to the completed bathhouse: “Schwezingen, 

ce 4 Juillett 1772. Mrsg. L’Electeur y 

arriva à 11 h de Schwezingen, et s’entretint 

avec S. A. Roiales dans l’appartement de Mad. 

La Princesse, jusqu’a ce qu’on se rendit à table, 

après la quelle ils allerent dans le nouveau 

batiment prendre le caffé, et s’amuserent avec 

une partie de jeu, la quelle fi nie, Mrsg. Le 

Prince, après avoir pris congé de S.A.S. E. et 

de Madame la Princesse sa sœur partit pour 

Coblence.” 3 As the bathhouse was the only 

building within the Schwetzingen grounds to 

have furniture, it is the only possible venue for 

the entertainments described. It must therefore 

have been built between 1768 and 1772. The 

interior decoration probably took until 1775 

before it was completed. 4 

1 Etrennes Palatines pour l’année 1769. A Mannheim de 

l’imprimerie de l’Académie, Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg, 

Sammlung Batt VII, 83. 

2 Count Andreas Riaucour had been agent of the Electorate 

of Saxony at Mannheim since 1748; in 1752 he became 

Privy Councillor and special envoy of Saxony. In 1754, he 

married the daughter of a Palatine minister, Heinrich Ernst 

Wilhelm Freiherr von Wrede, und was raised to the nobility 

by the Emperor. In 1768, Elector Carl Theodor made him a 

member of the Löwenorden, a Palatine order of merit. In 1778, 

Riaucour accompanied the court to Munich. 

3 Sächsisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden, Geheimes Cabinet 

Loc. 2627 Vol. XXV 1772, 4th Juli 1772. 

4 [Artikel Schärf zum Badhaus???]

Infl uences and Models 

The architect Nicolas de Pigage modeled the 

building’s outer appearance on the famous 

villas of the Veneto (e.g. Villa Rotonda, Villa 

Malcontenta, Villa Rocco della Pisana, Villa 

Forni-Cerato) and their Palladian imitations 

in England (e.g. Chiswick House, Keddelston 

Hall, Syon Park, Kenwood). The bathhouse 

is the result of a thorough study of tracts on 

architecture and architectural history. Suggestions 

by Vitruvius, Palladio, Serlio, Scamozzi, 

Alberti, Blondel, Perrault and Adam were used, 

ranging from antiquity to the 18th century. 

The bathhouse front was modeled on the Villa 

Rocca della Pisana. The villa of the Pisani family 

at Lonigo near Vicenza was built in 1576 by 

Vincenzo Scamozzi, a pupil of Palladio. It has 

a two-storey front elevation and an octagonal 

tambour with a hipped roof. Obelisks sit on 

the corners of the main roof, a feature Pigage 

copied for the Schwetzingen bathhouse along 

with the tambour and the front elevation. Chiswick 

House in England was another model. 

The villa, in its turn inspired by antiquity by 

way of Palladio and Scamozzi 5 , had been built 

in 1725-29 for Lord Burlington just outside 

London. At Chiswick House the impression 

left by Palladio’s villas on the Brenta, was such 

that Lord Burlington had a river diverted to run 

past his house, and christened it Brenta. 

Nicolas de Pigage, for his part, planned the 

Schwetzingen bathhouse with an eye to the 

existing Apollo canal. The educated 18thcentury 

visitor of course, understood the canal 

to represent the Brenta, and recognized the 

inspiration. The allusion also characterized 

the bathhouse as a private residence. At the 

same time the similarities to Chiswick House 

point to another function. Chiswick House 

was not built to serve as a dwelling. It was 

an expression of its builder’s cast of mind, a 

place to meet and discuss art and politics. It 

provided the host and his guests with a setting 

for witty conversation. Chiswick House was to 

5 Richard Hewlings, Chiswick House and Gardens, London 

1998, p. 1: “[...] to create the kind of house and garden that 

might have been found in the suburbs of ancient Rome.” 


be a temple of the arts, its architecture based on 

nature and reason. 

Nicolas de Pigage was familiar with French 

architectural theory, for example that of 

François Blondel, and the French element in 

the ancestry of the Schwetzingen bathhouse 

should not be forgotten. Another of the models 

of this private little palace was the Trianon de 

Porcelaine, built in 1670 by Le Vau next to the 

Versailles canal. The magazine Mercure Galant 

spread an awareness of buildings of this type, 

such as the Trianon de Marbre and Marly-le- 

Roi, inspiring in European rulers, the wish to 

own such a private refuge too. The bathhouse 

is a typical pavilion in the French sense of the 

word, its uses – to serve as the ruler’s private 

refuge and bathhouse – modeled on those of 

the famous pavilions of Marly. In 1687, Louis 

XIV had commissioned Marly-le-Roi, a pleasure 

palace surrounded by twelve pavilions for the 

use of selected friends, as a refuge from the 

rigours of courtly life. The King’s sojourns at 

Marly-le-Roi grew longer, and eventually one of 


Fig. 2: Nicolas de Pigage, 

design for the bathhouse 

garden, no date, pen and ink 

(Bayer. Verwaltung der Staatl. 

Schlösser, Gärten u. Seen). 

Fig. 3: The bathhouse from the 

east (photo: Förderer, 2006). 

37


38 

Fig. 4: The bathhouse from the 

south (photo: LAD Esslingen, 

2006). 

Fig. 5: Anton Graff, longitudinal 

section of the bathhouse, 

1799 (From: Badische Heimat, 

2002/1, p. 171). 


the pavilions was converted into a bathhouse. 6 

Marly-le-Roi is considered the prototype 

of pavilions, and in southern Germany in 

particular many imitations were built. 7 In the 

18th century Palladian infl uence was strong in 

France as well, especially in the work of Ange- 

Jacques Gabriel. It is particularly evident in the 

Petit Trianon at Versailles, which he built in 

1762-68 for Madame de Pompadour. The small 

fi lial palace became famous under the aegis of 

Queen Marie Antoinette. With its cubic shape 

and the sophisticated layout of its fronts, by 

means of colossal pilasters or columns, it recalls 

6 Jeanne Marie/Alfred Marie, Marly, n.p., 1947, p. 13: “En 1687, 

les voyages devenant plus fréquents et plus longs, le Roi 

décide, pour les commodités de la cour, de consacrer un des 

pavillons, le cinquième à gauche, aux bains; les baignoires sont 

installées au rez-de-chaussée et les cuves, une pour l’eau froide 

et l’autre pour l’eau chaude sont au premier étage. Tous les 

accessoires des bains étaient garnis de dentelles d’Angleterre.” 

7 Among them the group of pavilions of the demolished 

Favorite at Mainz and the pavilions built by the bishops of 

Fulda in Bad Brückenau, still in existence today. 

Palladian ideal buildings. At the same time its 

fi ne detail and raised terrace clearly mark it 

as belonging to the French tradition. The Petit 

Trianon is a precursor of the “goût grec” and 

early French Classicism. It unites the grace of 

the Rococo period and the “belle simplicité” 

of Classical antiquity. The layout of its fronts, 

and the character of the pavilion as a private 

dwelling for a king – or a king’s mistress, 

Madame de Pompadour – certainly infl uenced 

the look of the bathhouse. 

The Schwetzingen bathhouse is thus modeled 

on the work of Andrea Palladio and Vincenzo 

Scamozzi, English Palladianism and Gabriel’s 

pavilion, the Petit Trianon at Versailles. The 

theory of the “maison de plaisance” was laid 

down by François Blondel in a 1737 tract, that 

was widely read. According to Blondel the 

“maison de plaisance” is a type of building with 

a particular ground plan, elevation and set of 

rooms, and clearly defi ned by them. 8 It developed 

as a result of certain attitudes of 17th- and 

18th-century society, which valued time spent 

in the country. 9 However, when it came to the 

individual building, the uses it was destined 

for, and the personal requirements and ideas of 

its builder, played a large part too. 

The Use of the Schwetzingen Bathhouse 

by Elector Carl Theodor 

The Schwetzingen bathhouse, too, represents 

the personality and likings of its builder Carl 

Theodor. The well-known Strasbourg scholar 

Johann Daniel Schöpfl in (1694-1771) described 

Carl Theodor as the most scholarly prince in 

Germany and in 1768, wrote about him: : “Il 

faut convenir qu’il n’y a point [de] prince en 

Europe qui favorise tant les lettres comme ce 

prince et ce n’est pas par insinuation, affectation, 

vanité; cela vient de lui même et de son 

bon naturel...”. 10 By temperament the Elector 

Palatine was quiet and often melancholy. The 

8 Dietrich von Franck, Die “maison de plaisance”. Ihre Entwicklung 

in Frankreich und ihre Rezeption in Deutschland. 

Dargestellt an ausgewählten Beispielen, diss., München 1982, 

p. 5. 

9 Katharina Krause, Die Maison de plaisance. Landhäuser in der 

Ile-de-France (1660-1730), München/Berlin 1996, p. 8. 

10 Stefan Mörz, Aufgeklärter Absolutismus in der Kurpfalz 


Theodor (1742-1777), Stuttgart 1991, p. 56.

French ambassador François Bonaventure 

Tilly Marquis de Blaru (1701-1775) wrote: 

“J’ai souvent besoin de l’amitié que ce Prince 

a la bonté de me témoigner pour le tiers de 

l’affreuse mélancholie où je l’ay quelque fois vû 

plongé. … Le duc est dissimulé, parle peu, et on 

ne peut guère savoir au juste ce qu’il pense.” 11 

Carl Theodor loved solitude and liked to go for 

solitary rambles in his Schwetzingen garden, 

by then open to the public. This inclination was 

his very own trait, while the tendency to retire 

into a more private sphere was characteristic 

of his times. And so Carl Theodor created a 

private refuge protected by the walls and gates 

surrounding his bathhouse. Here he could do 

as he pleased. The manner of Carl Theodor’s 

using his bathhouse becomes evident from 

the notes of the Swabian poet and musician, 

Christian Friedrich Daniel Schubart (1739- 

1791), who wrote in 1791: “In the midst of 

these entertainments I received orders to go to 

Schwetzingen immediately, and play for the 

Elector – an order the more pleasing to me as 

it was usually very diffi cult to obtain a hearing 

with this prince. I drove there with young 

Count Nesselrode and was called in immediately. 

The Elector was in his bathhouse, as he often 

is, a small but exceedingly tasteful building in 

the garden; the Princes Gallian and Isenburg 

were with him, Frau von Sturmfelder and another 

couple of cavaliers. He had dispensed with 

most of his splendour, the mien of the sceptical 

ruler, and appeared to be merely a good man 

and gracious host. His appearance bespoke 

health and manly vigour. The friendly glance he 

casts over strangers and locals, soothes the fear 

inspired by his power and fame. Looking at his 

serene face, one soon forgets the star sparkling 

on his breast and announcing his greatness. He 

received me so graciously that my awkwardness 

soon gave way to ease. After inquiring very 

kindly after my circumstances, he himself 

played, almost diffi dently, a fl ute concert 

accompanied by two Toeschi and the violoncellist 

Danzy. Afterwards I played a number of 

pieces on the piano, sang a Russian war song I 

11 Mörz 1991, p. 19. 


had made, rose, talked about literature and art 

and gained the Elector’s full approval. “I will 

listen and talk to you more often”, he said with 

the most pleasant expression when I took my 

leave. This initial success poured joy and hope 

into my heart.» 12 

This is the only source telling us about the 

uses the bathhouse was put to by its builder. 

However, it is likely that Carl Theodor, who was 

deeply interested in literature, music and the 

natural sciences, gathered like-minded friends 

in the bathhouse, thus making his refuge into a 

place of inspiration and intellectual interchange. 

Description and Function 

Access and exterior 

The bathhouse is a rectangular, one-storey building 

with a central octagonal tambour. The 

simple transverse rectangle is the most common 

solution for ground plans of the early 

Classicist era, particularly for country palaces 

and townhouses. Two paths lead up to the bathhouse. 

Next to the natural theatre to the north, 

there is a small lawn with a central water feature, 

a so-called champignon d’eau in a circular, 

monolithic sandstone basin. The lawn is lined 

12 Christian Friedrich Daniel Schubart, C. F. D. Schubart’s, des 

Patrioten, gesammelte Schriften und Schicksal, Stuttgart 1839, 

pp. 150 f. 


Fig. 6: Bathhouse vestibule/Oval 

Hall (photo: LAD Esslingen, 

2006). 

39


40 


with hornbeam hedges and decorated with four 

sandstone busts. 13 In order to provide a point 

de vue from the theatre, Pigage built a small pavilion 

which served as a transition to the former 

menagerie (today, the arboretum). The pavilion 

is lined entirely with delftware tiles and 

could be used as a summer dining room – the 

bathhouse kitchen is right next to it. The bathhouse 

is raised slightly above the lawn in the 

manner of a belvedere, and reached by a short 

fl ight of steps. Originally there was an iron gate 

here separating the public grounds from the 

Elector’s private garden. Pigage designed a plaque 

with the Elector’s monogram “CT” and the 

symbols of his rank, the electoral hat and ermine 

cloak, to surmount this front of the building. 

One would expect to fi nd a door beneath, 

but there is just one window in the central projection. 

The same layout is repeated on the side 

facing the Apollo canal. In this way Pigage indicates 

that the building is a ruler’s house but nevertheless, 

a private area. 

The main approach is from the west and the 

Temple of Apollo. This is the only approach 

that could be used by coaches. However, the 

monumental gate framed by rusticated blocks, 

at fi rst only leads into the dark basement of the 

temple. From there the visitor can pick his way 

to the rocky stairs leading to the bathhouse. 

The stairs divide just above the wild boar grotto; 

the ends were originally closed off with iron 

gates. The visitor had to be a personal guest of 

Carl Theodor to proceed further. 

Access to the bathhouse is via a semicircular 

portico. Pigage designed this as an “intrada” 

with two Tuscan columns. It is based on 

antique thermae architecture, which in 18thcentury 

building was fi rst refl ected in English 

interiors. The wall apses with statues in niches, 

were brilliantly used by the English architect 

Robert Adam in the fi rst half of the 18th century, 

both with and without a set of columns in 

front. 14 His models were drawings by Andrea 

Palladio of the Baths of Diocletian in Rome. In 

13 The busts are sandstone copies by the sculptor Franz Conrad 

Linck after casts from the Chamber of Antiques at Mannheim. 

14 For example at Kedleston Hall, Syon Park, Osterley Park and 

Kenwood. 

France elements of thermae architecture were 

used on the exteriors of buildings. 

Thus, in 1770, the architect Claude-Nicolas Ledoux 

created an entrance with an open semicircular 

portico for the house of the dancer, Marie- 

Madeleine Guimard on the Chaussée d’Antin in 

Paris. Expert literature has consequently identifi 

ed Ledoux as the spiritus rector, who fi rst 

transferred an element of interior decoration 

to the outside of a building. However, Palatine 

building director Nicolas de Pigage did the 

same in 1768/69, when building the Schwetzingen 

bathhouse, creating an ideal entrance in 

the spirit of Classicism before his more famous 

colleague did. 

The intrada motif appears on the northern and 

southern fronts. In the middle of the concave 

wall is a door, which can be shuttered by slatted 

doors. Flanking each door are two niches 

surmounted by shell motifs in stucco. In keeping 

with recent fi ndings, the walls are painted 

a pale yellow with a pattern of drops. On either 

side of the intrada are fake doors surmounted 

by sopraportas depicting water nymphs. 

The niches of the southern intrada contain a reworked 

plaster statue of a faun accompanied 

by a goat kid 15 and a Cupid by the court sculptor, 

Peter Anton von Verschaffelt. 16 The northern 

portico has reworked plaster casts modeled 

on the Apollino Tribuna 17 and Idolino. 18 

Both porticoes are deliberately simple in appearance; 

early Classicist doctrine held that the in- 

15 The statue of the satyr accompanied by a small goat, is fi rst 

mentioned in 1676; it was discovered near the church of S. 

Maria Vallicella in Rome. It is an imperial-era marble copy of a 

Greek bronze dating from the 2nd half of the 3rd century BC. In 

1724 it came into the possession of the Spanish King, Philipp V. 

He had it put up in his summer palace of San Ildefonso; hence 

the name, “Ildefonso Faun”. In 1839, the statue was taken to the 

Prado in Madrid, where it is still on view. 

16 The casts were modeled on pieces from the Mannheim 

Chamber of Antiques. Another cast of the “Ildefonso Faun” at 

Mannheim was bought by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe for 

his house in Weimar, and still adorns the staircase there. 

17 The marble statue of Apollino was excavated c.1500 in Rome, 

and in 1684 came into the possession of the Medici family. It 

is a Roman marble copy, below life-size (hence the diminutive, 

‚Apollino’), after a larger-than-life original by the sculptor 

Praxiteles or his school. It is on display in the tribuna of the 

Uffi zi in Florence, hence the name, “Apollino Tribuna”. 

18 The bronze original of the Idolino is a Roman copy, dating 

from the 1st century BC, of a Greek sculpture of the High 

Classical era associated with the sculptor Polyklet. The 

statue, discovered in 1530 near Pesaro, belonged to the Duke 

of Urbino. It has been part of the Medici collection since 

1630. At fi rst it was displayed in the Uffi zi; today it is in the 

Archaeological Museum in Florence.

herent nobility of the shapes was best presented 

in this way. 

Interior 

The bathhouse’s central room is the Oval Hall, 

not, as might have been expected, the bathroom. 

It was designed by Pigage as a “salon 

à l’italienne”. Wall niches contain four statues 

that might be interpreted as personifi cations 

of the times of day. Surmounting them are medallions 

depicting the seasons. Beneath them, 

griffi ns support marble consoles. The mezzanine 

within the tambour is decorated with stucco 

reliefs by Giuseppe Pozzi (1732-1811) depicting 

cherubs and garlands of fl owers. The oval 19 

painting on the ceiling is entirely fl at, without 

any suggestion of a dome, and enclosed within 

a wreath of oak leaves in gilt wood. It is a painting 

in oils on canvas, and was fastened to the 

ceiling as a “quadro riportato”. The artist was 

Nicolas Guibal, a court painter from Württemberg, 

and the subject is “Aurora chasing away 

the night”. 20 

The hours, the seasons and Aurora as the rising 

dawn, are symbolic of the passing time which 

carries Man along with it, a fate he cannot escape. 

Two anterooms adjoin the Oval Hall; they are 

part of the suite of “function” rooms but also by 

their very nature belong to the living quarters 

on the narrow sides of the building. Painted 

a bright pink, they give access to the Elector’s 

private rooms. Their Classicist décor includes 

reeds, shells, cherubs and swans, and refers to 

the pleasures of the bath, and quite possibly 

those of physical love as well. 

The anterooms give access to four corner 

rooms. They surround the Oval Hall with its 

“dayrise” theme, and might be interpreted as representing 

the times of day. 

On the east side are a study and the so-called 

Chinese Room; in the west are the bathroom 

and bedroom. 

19 More oval ceiling paintings by Nicolas Guibal have been 

preserved at Monrepos (“Adonis leaving Venus”) and Schloss 

Solitude (“Allegory of the wealth of the country”). 

20 The biography of Nicolas Guibal in the appendices contains a 

detailed description. 


The Chinese Room has oak wainscoting with 

four inset panels covered with imported Chinese 

wallpaper. The paper depicts small fi gures of 

craftsmen and peasants going about their business 

against a landscape background. 

Flanking the chimneypiece were consoles made 

by the Frankenthal porcelain manufactory supporting 

fi gures in the fashionable Chinese style. 

The consoles and fi gures have been lost but 

will be replaced. The furniture includes a replica 

of the original porcelain chandelier by Franz 

Conrad Linck, four corner cupboards and four 

chairs. 

The study is the most elaborate of the rooms, 

with wainscoting of polished walnut, jacaranda, 

mahogany and rosewood. The room has an alcove 

fl anked by two Corinthian columns. Here 

Pigage uses a motif familiar from throne and 

audience rooms – the Corinthian order is reserved 

for rulers. The furniture one would expect 

is a grand chair draped with an ermine cloak, 

and a coat of arms. The bathhouse, however, 

was intended for Carl Theodor the private gentleman, 

and so the alcove contains a daybed, 

and the wall behind is decorated with a landscape 

painting. 

What draws the eye in the study are seven 

landscapes by Court Painter Ferdinand Kobell. 

21 They fi ll the height and breadth of the 

small room, in a way reproducing the view into 

the garden and making the room appear larger 

than it is. Mirrors installed above the fi replace 

and on the narrow sides of the alcove add 

to this effect. The landscapes serve to blur the 

room’s boundaries; through the window the 

spectator sees a garden landscape no different 

in type than the ones painted on the walls. 

It is only logical that the bedroom should face 

west towards the setting sun. The bed is placed 

in an alcove that can be shut off with curtains. 

A bed of this type was useless for offi cial receptions; 

is thus another proof of the bathhouse’s 

intensely private atmosphere. Two side cabinets 

bear witness to the functionality of the layout 

– they contain a wardrobe and a “retirade” 

with the Elector’s commode. The “basalt ware” 

21 See also the biography of Ferdinand Kobell in the appendices. 


41


Fig. 7: Nicolas Guibal, painting 

on the ceiling of the Oval 

Hall: “Aurora chasing away 

the night”, 1772, oil on canvas 

(photo: LAD Esslingen, 2006). 

Fig. 8: The Elector’s study in the 

bathhouse; landscape paintings 

by Ferdinand Kobell (photo: 

LAD Esslingen, 2006). 

42 


wedgwood vases on the mantel are an early example 

of the Elector’s appreciation of English 

art. The room is currently in the process of 

being restored; it will receive a yellow wallpaper 

of Peking silk decorated with birds of paradise 

and exotic fl owers, like the one that decorated 

it at the time. 

For the bathroom, Pigage used stucco and semiprecious 

stones to create a grotto. An oval marble 

bathtub is sunk into the fl oor. The convex 

wall behind it is decorated with a stucco curtain. 

A roof lantern directly above provides light 

and ventilation. Four rectangular stucco reliefs 

depict naiads bearing water urns. They are the 

work of Joseph Anton Pozzi and closely modeled 

on the reliefs of the Fontaine des Innocents 

by Jean Goujon in Paris. Mirrors line the ceiling 

and doors, adding to the room’s sophistication. 

The water was piped into the basin via lead serpents 

and an urn; an overfl ow pipe also served 

as plug. The water was heated in the bathhouse 

kitchen and conducted to the bathhouse via 

subterranean pipes. 22 

The surprising elements of the bathroom are 

the reversion to antique motifs, and its intimate 

character. 

Grounds 

The unadorned bathhouse exterior refl ects the 

stylistic preferences of Classicism, which valued 

the simplicity and modesty of antique art, 

but also the modern attitudes of the patron. 

The bathhouse in the Schwetzingen grounds 

might well be described as an example of the 

age of Enlightenment in visual form – modern 

architecture united with an enlightened 

mindset. 

To the west, the bathhouse was adjoined by 

a private garden separated from the rest of 

the grounds by walls and slatted wooden 

fences. In the centre of this “giardino segreto” 

are the so-called water-spouting birds. Pigage 

mentions this installation in the “information” 

written for the treasury on 8th May 1776. 

It was probably completed by that time, 

because it was turned over to Court Builder 

Huschberger for maintenance: “Le Pavillon 

des Bains avec celui à côté pour sa cuisine, 

avec les vollieres, les cabinets. Les Berceaux, 

et le Pavillon d’optique, qui se trouve dans 

l’Enceinte de son petit jardin particulier.” 23 The 

oval basin is surrounded by a white wooden 

railing. In the centre on a stylized stump is an 

eagle-owl holding a pheasant in its talons. Its 

wings are spread wide; two jets of water spout 

from its beak. The open space is surrounded 

by walls of trellis, the top of which bends 

inwards; twenty more birds are perched on 

22 The lead pipes and copper kettles remained in place until 

claimed by a war-related metal-collecting drive in 1916. 

23 Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe 221/39, 8th May 1776.

the edge, spitting water down into the basin. 

The whole thing illustrates a fable by the 

ancient poet, Aesop – the evil eagle-owl has 

killed a bird, and is consequently screamed 

and spat at by the good birds. Originally the 

birds were made of sheet iron and painted in 

their natural colours. In 1995, copies made 

of sheet copper were installed. An inventory 

dated 1926 gives exact numbers: 1 eagle-owl 

and pheasant, 12 large birds, 8 mediumsized 

birds, 12 small birds. Today 20 of the 

original 32 birds are left; the twelve small 

birds – that were not connected to the water 

system – have been stolen. The birds are very 

natural-looking, some with wings spread. 

Some can even be identifi ed: there is a turkey, 

a cockatoo, a capercaillie, a goose, a hoopoe, a 

Great Bustard, a hen and a rooster. The natural 

impression was heightened by the four 

aviaries originally installed on the diagonals 

of the open space; the birds enlivened the 

scene with their twittering. On the transverse 

axis are two small buildings known from their 

décor as the agate cabinets. One charming 

aspect of the fountain is that the visitor can 

walk all round the central basin beneath the 

jets of water. Instead of the usual fountain 

hurling water into the air, which then returns 

to earth in an arch, the water jets converge 

on the basin. The inspiration for the waterspouting 

birds was, once again, Versailles. The 

labyrinth there featured 39 fables of this type, 

made widely known by copperplate illustrations, 

among them a scene resembling the one 

at Schwetzingen. However, the installations 

at Versailles were dismantled very soon while 

the Schwetzingen fountain survives. 

Most guide books state that the birds, like 

many of the garden’s more remarkable sculptures, 

were brought from Lunéville. There is 

another possibility. Kurt Martin believed them 

to be from the gardens of the Lorraine palace 

of La Malgrange, quoting a French garden 

guide book of 1818: “C’est à la Malgrange 

que Stanislas avoit placé cette scène”. 24 In a 

plan of La Malgrange Emmanuel Héré writes, 

24 Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirks Mannheim. 

Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933, p. 266. 


under Caption No. 35: “Bassin de Rocaille avec 

un grand nombre d’Oiseaux remplissant un 

demi dôme de treillage, jettant de l’Eau en 

abondance sur un Hibou.” 25 A semicircular 

“berceau en treillage” with a central half-dome 

surrounds and surmounts a circular tuff 

basin. The birds were probably perched on 

the latticework of the half-dome, with the 

25 Julia Rau-Gräfi n von der Schulenburg, Emmanuel Héré. 

Premier Architect von Stanislas Leszczynski in Lothringen 

(1705-1763), Berlin 1973. 


Fig. 9: Bathroom in the bathhouse 

(photo: LAD Esslingen, 

2006). 

Fig. 10: Chiswick House 

(England, near London), c.1725 

(photo: postcard). 

43


44 

Fig. 11: Petit Trianon (France, 

Versailles), Ange-Jacques 

Gabriel, 1763-1768 (From: Le 

guide du Patrimoine: Ile de 

France, Paris 1992, p. 711). 

Fig. 12: Schwetzingen, bathhouse 

garden: water-spouting 

birds (photo: Förderer). 


eagle-owl in the basin below. An old depiction 

of the installation in a painting by G. Mangin 

at the Musée Historique Lorrain, provides an 

incomplete view as the artist apparently chose 

the half-dome as his viewpoint. 

The termination of the bathhouse garden 

is the diorama; Pigage called it a “pavillon 

d’optique”, its popular name is “The End of the 

World”. Terminating a tunnel-shaped “berceau 

en treillage” Pigage built a pavilion with two 

side rooms that remain invisible from the 

berceau. They are decorated with painted wall 

coverings somewhat like the stucco used in 

the bathhouse, and their ceilings are painted 

with netting with birds fl ying overhead, 

perhaps alluding to the nearby aviaries. The 

main room, open at the front, has an apse-like 

extension at the back, with an opening surrounded 

by tuff rocks. The apse is elaborately 

decorated with semiprecious stones and stucco 

mosses, shells and rocks to imitate a grotto. 

A small basin with a rim of iron reeds is set 

in the outer wall. Water fl ows down from 

the grotto’s ceiling into the basin. Behind the 

opening, Pigage built a semicircular wall decorated 

with a painting depicting an unspoiled 

Rhine meadow. The model painting was 

created by Court Painter Ferdinand Kobell; 

the fresco itself is by a set painter, Willwerth. 

Pigage left a little space between the wall and 

the pavilion, and dispensed with a roof; the 

fresco thus has natural lighting with shadows 

moving with the time of day, and the occasional 

bird appearing. The impression is that 

of looking through a dark tunnel at a distant 

river meadow. The whole idea would appear 

to herald the enthusiasm for the recreated 

nature of the English landscape garden. The 

layout is unique today, but its models can 

be found, once again, in the gardens of the 

Polish King in exile, Stanisław Leszczyński, 

at Lunéville. There, at one corner of a canal 

leading to the so-called rocher – an artifi cial 

landscape with scenarios manipulated by 

automatons – were three similar grottoes; 

looking in, the visitor could see a painting of 

the island of Capri. Nothing remains of the 

installation itself, but it is depicted on the 

wainscot brought to Lunéville from Einville 

Castle. 26 Pigage no doubt knew of it, and 

recreated it for Schwetzingen. It was liked so 

much that after his stay at Schwetzingen in 

1782, Emperor Joseph II asked Pigage to send 

him the plans so he could have one built for 

himself at Schönbrunn near Vienna – a plan, 

however, that was not realized. 

Summary 

Looking at the layout of the bathhouse and its 

garden along its longitudinal axis, it is evident 

that Nicolas de Pigage worked with the 

26 The author does not know whether or not the painting 

survived a recent fi re in Lunéville.

interplay of light and shade as one would with 

spotlights on a stage. An imaginary visitor 

would start out in full sunlight (weather 

permitting) from the little open space near the 

wild boar grotto. Before him the overgrown 

and shady “berceau en treillage” opens, 

widening towards the bathhouse. The ground 

rises almost imperceptibly, and the shade 

blurs the distance, which is really too small 

to allow for a proper respectful approach. 

The building itself is in full sunlight again. 

On entering the bathhouse and looking back, 

the visitor is faced with an effect like that of 

a fourth-wall stage with a naturally lighted 

background – here, the wild boar grotto, 

designed as a point de vue by Pigage. When 

the visitor enters the Oval Hall and looks out 

the north door, his gaze is directed slightly 

downwards by another shady, trumpet-shaped 

“berceau en treillage” – which again blurs the 

actual distance – towards the bright open area 

of the water-spouting birds. Behind that there 

is another berceau, another open space and 

yet another, longer berceau terminating in 

the sunlit diorama which thus appears to be 

much further away than it actually is. Pigage 

has used the contrast of light and shade in a 

manner worthy of the theatre stage, creating a 

setting the depth of which cannot be guessed. 

His contemporaries appear to have been 

deeply impressed by this subtle manipulation 

of the senses. In fact, the axes created in 

this way – from the wild boar grotto to the 

bathhouse, and from the bathhouse to the 

Diorama – are reminiscent of the main axes 

of the palace and garden that really do lead 

off into the distance, terminated by the far-off 

hills of Königstuhl and Kalmit. Both are 

important landmarks within the Palatinate. 

The Baroque system of axes/avenues leading 

up to a precisely calculated point, has its 

origin in the Absolutist self-image of the ruler. 

The Schwetzingen bathhouse, however, adds a 

playful and charming variant. 




Fig. 13: Versailles, the so-called 

maze (destroyed): water-spouting 

birds (From: S. Pincas, 

Versailles, Paris 1995, p. 182). 

Fig. 14: View towards the 

diorama (photo: Förderer). 

45


46 

Fig. 1: Mosque and courtyard, 

aerial view (photo: LAD 



e) 

The Mosque – 

an Embodiment of 

Eighteenth-Century Taste 

and Thought 

The mosque at Schwetzingen is the only 

surviving 18th-century garden mosque in 

Europe. Similar buildings at Kew, Kassel- 

Wilhelmshöhe, Burgsteinfurt and Hohenheim 

have been pulled down, some as early as the 

late 18th century; the passion for garden 

mosques was a short-lived one. 1 The building 

at Schwetzingen, with its cloister and the 

so-called Turkish garden, is of particular 

signifi cance, as here alone the architectural 

and historical origins of the Oriental fashion 

in late 18th-century garden art can be studied 

and understood. 

From the west the visitor is presented with a 

view of the main front, a church-like central 

plan with a portico, attic, tambour, dome and 

cubic extensions on the sides. Quarter-circular 

walls connect the central building with two 

“minarets”. From this side the layout of the 

building as a whole is not visible. 

1 Martin Gaier, “Die Moschee im Schwetzinger Schlossgarten”, 

in: S. Ögel (ed.), Okzident und Orient, Istanbul 2002, pp. 47-71, 

esp. p. 56. 

Approaching from the east, however, the 

visitor is shown a different and impressive 

view – the latticed walks, separate from the 

main building, elaborately roofed and arranged 

like a cloister. On this side the structure 

is surrounded by an Oriental-looking garden 

with meandering paths. The entrance to the 

cloister in the east is marked by a pavilion; 

its corners are emphasized by oval pavilions 

set diagonally. The short east and west sides 

each have a pavilion attached to them on the 

outside, the longer north and south sides have 

two small pavilions each. The openings and 

latticed windows allow numerous views of the 

pavilions and the main building. 


A Turkish garden is fi rst mentioned in the documents 

on 18th August 1774, when architect 

Nicolas de Pigage reported on its completion. 

It may be assumed that work on it was begun 

around the spring of 1774 or in the winter 

preceding it. A plan by Court Gardener 

Friedrich Ludwig Sckell – which differs from 

the garden actually created – was probably 

drawn up in the summer of 1773. 2 From 1779 

onwards, the cloister and pavilions were built 

in this jardin turc; they were probably largely 

completed by 1784. 

Work on the mosque proper was carried out 

in 1782-95, that is to say after Elector Carl 

Theodor had moved to Munich. 3 As a building 

it is fi rst mentioned in the documents in 

1782. 4 According to a report by Pigage, all 

fronts of the main building were completed 

in 1786, as were the dome and the quartercircular 

walls connecting the central block and 

the minarets. 5 

It is evident that the work proceeded steadily 

but very slowly. The chief reason was the fi - 

nancial situation. Older research has assumed 



Schwetzingen, part II, Darmstadt 1986, p. 595. 

3 Heber 1986, S. 596-600. Cp. also Claus Reisinger, Der 

Schloßgarten zu Schwetzingen, Gerlingen 1987, pp. 63 f. 

4 The term Mosqué was fi rst mentioned in the building 

documents in 1782. Heber 1986, p. 596. 

5 Reisinger 1987, p. 63.

the huge cost of fl . 120 000; this, however, has 

not been proved so far. 6 

Architectural Models 

The use of Islamic motifs in European architecture 

was largely dependent on the view 

the given era had of the Orient and its people. 

Very much in the spirit of the Enlightenment, 

William Hodges argues in favour of an 

unbiased view of exotic buildings, and against 

a myopic insistence on the inherent superiority 

of Classical antiquity: “Or am I supposed 

to close my eyes to the majesty, boldness 

and splendour of Egyptian, Indian, Moorish 

or Gothic monuments, those magnifi cent 

wonders of architecture? Find fault with them, 

denounce and despise them without pity, 

because they are richer in their shapes and 

cannot be brought to conform to the rules, the 

pattern and the columns of the Greek hut?” 7 

In the 1770s Oriental architecture increasingly 

claimed a place next to the Classical ideal. In 

England commercial and colonial interests 

focused the attention on an “Orient” much 

farther east, in India and China; in Germany 

the Ottoman east came to be of cultural and 

architectural interest, not least due to several 

centuries of intermittent Ottoman wars. This 

is the cultural context of the garden mosque 

built by Nicolas de Pigage from 1779 to 1795. 

From the late 1780s an image of antiquity 

and an image of the Orient faced – and 

complemented – each other at Schwetzingen 

in the shapes of the mosque and the Temple 

of Mercury, built from 1784. 8 

6 Reisinger 1987, S. 63; see also the individual bills examined 

by Heber, Heber 1986, pp. 595 ff. They amount to approx. fl . 

36,000, but for several years there are no details at all, so the 

documents must be considered incomplete. For example, no 

bricklaying costs are mentioned. 

7 William Hodges, Monumente indischer Geschichte und Kunst, 

vol.1 (=Abhandlung über die ersten Muster der indischen, 

maurischen und gothischen Baukunst), Berlin 1789, p. 9. Re. 

Hodges cp. Stefan Koppelkamm, Exotische Architekturen 

im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert, (= catalogue of an exhibition 

organized by the Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen at the 

Design Center Stuttgart, 2nd Sept.-4th Oct. 1987), Berlin 1987, 

p 24. 

8 Another combination of a mosque and a ruined temple occurs 

in a design by R.F.H. Fischer for the “Floride” at Hohenheim, 

Württemberg, of 1795/96. Cp. the elevation of a mosque with 

Roman ruins, 1795/96, in: Ludwig Marczoch, Orientalismus 

in Europa vom 17.-19. Jahrhundert in der Architektur und 

Innenraumgestaltung, diss., Frankenberg/Eder, 1989, vol. 2, 

fi g. 174. 


No documents survive that could shed light 

on the models that inspired Pigage when he 

designed the mosque itself, and laid out that 

part of the garden, or the plans that were 

used. We will, however, attempt to demonstrate 

some parallels to other designs and 

layouts of the time. 

The Courtyard and Cloister 

Pigage was certainly familiar with the folios 

on architectural history published in 1721 by 

the imperial court architect, “Hoff- und Lustgebäu 

Ober-Inspector” Johann Bernhard Fischer 

von Erlach (1656-1723). The third volume 

deals with a number of Arab and Turkish buildings 

as well as examples of Persian, Siamese, 

Chinese and Japanese architecture. Not only 

did Fischer von Erlach present ground plans 

and detailed depictions of the great mosques 

of the Ottoman empire; he even included a 

view of the most sacred areas of Mecca. 9 The 

house of God rebuilt by Abraham, the Black 

Stone, the tomb of the Prophet and the well of 

Ishmael, are all situated within a rectangular 

layout with numerous covered walks with 

domed pavilions and rectangular gatehouses. 

The similarities between the cloister of the 

Schwetzingen mosque and the depiction and 

description by Fischer von Erlach is striking. 

9 Picture (“Prospect von einen theil der großen Stadt Mecha) 

in Harald Keller (ed.), Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach. 

Entwurf einer historischen Architektur, Dortmund 1978, p. 90. 


Fig. 2: Johann Bernhard Fischer 

von Erlach, view of the holy 

places of Mecca (Entwurf einer 

historischen Architektur, Vol. 

3, 1721). 

47


48 

Fig. 3: View through the entrance 

pavilion and courtyard 

towards the main building 


Fig. 4: William Chambers, 

view of the mosque at Kew, 

1763 (Plans, elevations, and perspective 

views of the gardens 

and buildings at Kew in Surrey, 

London 1763). 


Pigage’s layout has two gatehouses modeled 

on the corner pavilions at Mecca, and four domed 

pavilions to accentuate the corners of his 

own cloister. The assumption that Pigage used 

Fischer von Erlach’s book as a model is thus 

not too far-fetched. The entry under “Q” in 

Fischer von Erlach’s captions for the covered 

walk depicted reads: “Many of the domes are 

lit with thousands of lamps like a cloister.” 10 

10 Keller 1978, p. 91. 

And in fact the covered walk at Schwetzingen 

is described in the building documents as 

a cloître or cloister. Even today, numerous 

hooks and devices for the fi tting of lanterns 

can be seen. Without referring to Fischer 

von Erlach’s depiction of Mecca specifi cally, 

Heber, too, assumes that at Schwetzingen 

Pigage had used his architect’s imagination 

to create a “historical architecture” in keeping 

with Fischer von Erlach’s ideas. 11 It is thus not 

surprising that this part of the garden should 

have been described as a “Mecca” in Cay 

Lorenz Hirschfeld’s Theorie der Gartenkunst 

published in 1785: “Consider, for example, the 

scene known as Mecca, consisting of a number 

of Turkish buildings connected by walks 

or arcades. These are so narrow that just two 

people can walk side by side.” 12 Apparently 

he used what had become the popular name 

for that area. There is another indication that 

the courtyard was intended as an imitation 

of the holy sites of Mecca. The Palatine 

court calendar of 1799, explicitly connects 

the courtyard of the mosque and the tombs 

of prophets: “entourés d’une arcade, aux 

environs de laquelle on observe les oratoires 

et les logements des prêtres turcs”. 13 Without 

being an exact imitation of the Prophet’s tomb 

,the courtyard was apparently meant to be 

associated with Mecca. 

Planning for this area had started in 1773, 

long before any mosque building had been 

designed; it is unclear whether a mosque was 

even planned at that time. Quite possibly the 

area was designed independently and with a 

signifi cance of its own. 

There are more indications that this was the 

case. Pigage did not integrate the mosque with 

the cloister but instead kept the two separate. 

The mosque’s front and main gate face west, 

away from the cloister. 14 The building is clearly 

not meant to be the focal point and chief 

11 Heber 1986, p. 653. 

12 Hans Foramitti (ed.), Christian Cay Lorenz Hirschfeld: Theorie 

der Gartenkunst, vol. 5, Leipzig 1785, reprint, Hildesheim 

1973, p. 344. 

13 Quoted after Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirkes 

Mannheim. Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933, p. 298. 

14 The reasons were not aesthetic as Martin Gaier believes. Gaier 

2002, p. 52.

attraction of the cloister, which is entered 

from the east by way of an elaborate pavilion, 

and exited through an identical pavilion in the 

west. Access to the mosque is through a back 

door only, and via a connecting covered walk. 

Another chief source of inspiration that must 

be considered besides Fischer von Erlach, is 

William Chambers’ mosque in Kew Gardens. 

It is unclear whether or not the Palatine 

architect ever visited England and saw it with 

his own eyes. 15 He may have been familiar 

with it from the numerous depictions. 16 That 

he was familiar with it is evident from the 

close resemblance of his own mosque’s four 

corner pavilions to the mosque at Kew. 17 The 

resemblance is not just in details like the 

ogee arches of the doorways, the palm shaft 

columns and the tambour design; the domed 

buildings as a whole resemble miniature 

versions of William Chambers’ mosque. This 

in turn was closely modelled on a depiction 

of the imperial baths at Buda in Fischer von 

Erlach 18 , which makes the corner pavilions 

another element inspired, albeit indirectly, by 

a Fischer von Erlach image. 

So far there has been no close comparison 

of the corner pavilions with the mosque that 

was built in 1778 in nearby Hohenheim, 

Württemberg, and drawn in 1780 by David 

Dillenius. It, too, was closely modelled on Kew 

and thus bore a marked resemblance to the 

Schwetzingen corner pavilions. Moreover, it 

was approached via a trellised walk connecting 

it with two smaller pavilions and the 

two minarets. 19 The Hohenheim mosque thus 

suggests another possible model for Pigage’s 

corner pavilions, that was much closer 

geographically. It may also have inspired 

the idea of another, larger mosque building, 

not part of the system of covered walks but 

clearly connected to them. Chronologically, 

15 Gaier assumes that Pigage visited England but does not 

provide proof. Gaier 2002, p. 55. 

16 For example the one published by Georges Le Rouges in 1787. 

Cp. Marczoch 1989, part 2, fi g. 155. 

17 Heber 1986, pp. 617 f., Gaier 2002, pp. 56 f. 

18 Fischer von Erlach described his depiction of the imperial 

baths at Buda as “remarkable Arab architecture that has been 

much praised” (denckwürdige Arabische Architektur, die sehr 

gerühmt und estimiret wird.) Marczoch 1989, part 2, fi g. 154. 

19 Hohenheim, mosque, 1778, drawing by David Dillenius, 1780. 

Marczoch 1989, fi g. 156. 


too, it is entirely possible that Pigage’s layout 

was inspired by Hohenheim; the Hohenheim 

mosque was completed a year before building 

started on the cloister in the Palatine summer 

residence. In the later 18th century, there 

was a lively exchange of artists between the 

Palatinate and Württemberg; Pigage himself 

travelled to Württemberg. 20 The similarities 

20 Stefan Moebus, “Ein Künstleraustausch zwischen Württemberg 

und Kurpfalz”, in: Schwäbische Heimat, No. 1999/3, pp. 

329-340. 


Fig. 5: Northwestern corner pavilion 

in the mosque courtyard 


Fig. 6: William Chambers, 

section of the central room of 

the mosque at Kew, 1763 (Plans, 

elevations, and perspective 

views of the gardens and 

buildings at Kew in Surry, 

London 1763). 

49


Fig. 7: Interior detail of a 

corner pavilion at Schwetzingen 


50 

Fig. 8: Hohenheim mosque. 

Drawing by David Dillenius, 

1780. 


between the Schwetzingen mosque and 

Hohenheim were noted by contemporaries 

too, as shown by a letter written by Friedrich 

Hölderlin in 1788: “They have a Turkish 

mosque (a temple) here; some people might 

not even notice it among all these beauties, 

but I liked it best of them all. The whole thing 

is like Hohenheim and the solitude taken 

together, as far as I am concerned.” 21 

It should be mentioned that another mosque 

had been built in 1783/84 at Kassel-Wilhelmshöhe, 

once again modeled closely on Kew. 22 

However, the Schwetzingen cloister, with its 

21 Hölderlin was probably referring to the mosque in the 

Hohenheim garden, built 1778. Cp. Andrea Berger-Fix/Klaus 

Merten, Die Gärten der Herzöge von Württemberg im 18. 

Jahrhundert, exhibition catalogue, Worms 1981, catalogue no. 

51: Hohenheim mosque. 

Friedrich Hölderlin in a letter to his mother, in: Adolf Beck 

(ed.), Hölderlin: Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6. (Briefe), Stuttgart 

1954, p. 32. 

22 On German reactions to the Kew mosque: Adrian von Buttlar, 

“Chinoiserien in deutschen Gärten des 18. Jahrhunderts”, in: 

Sir William Chambers und der Englisch-Chinesische Garten in 

Europa, Stuttgart 1995, pp. 72 ff. 

corner pavilions, is unique among the German 

imitations in its individual and imaginative 

reworking of the inspiration, provided by Kew 

and the depiction of Mecca by Fischer von 

Erlach. 

The Mosque Building 

The Schwetzingen mosque is not a purely 

Oriental building. The use of the dome is 

characteristic of the style of an Ottoman 

mosque; but then this, on the other hand, 

developed as a reaction to the Byzantine 

dome of the Hagia Sophia, which left such an 

enormous impression on Turkish architects 

after the capture of Constantinople, that they 

consequently copied it and tried to improve 

on it . 23 Christian and Islamic forms were thus 

blended and reinterpreted. In this context, the 

octagonal central plan of the Schwetzingen 

mosque with its tambour and dome could be 

considered an embodiment of the blending 

of numerous architectural infl uences. Domed 

tambours, for example, are not a frequent 

feature of Ottoman mosques, but they are not 

unheard of either. 24 

Pigage was evidently trying to use authentic 

Islamic elements in the design of his mosque. 

At the same time, he relied on his own knowledge 

of European and contemporary forms, 

to provide architectural points of reference 

and a connection with familiar categories. In 

his mosque, Pigage used traditional shapes 

of Islamic buildings – the square, octagon 

and circle. At the same time and contrary to 

Islamic tradition, which tends to keep these 

elements distinct and separate, he combined 

them into an indivisible whole. 25 

On the east side of the Schwetzingen mosque 

there are two round towers; in the west, two 

quarter-circular walls connect the building 

with the minarets. The two slender minarets 

are based on Turkish models, but do not 

taper to a point; instead they are crowned 

with onion domes. The western front has a 

23 Ulya Vogt-Göknil, Die Moschee. Grundformen sakraler 

Baukunst, Zürich 1978, pp. 127 ff. 

24 One example of a free-standing tambour is the Selimiye 

mosque in Istanbul. Cp. Vogt-Göknil 1978, p. 111. 

25 Heber 1986, p. 626.

Classicist portico. The mosque is thus a blend 

of European Baroque and Classicist as well as 

Islamic architectural shapes. 

So far no direct models have been identifi ed 

for the mosque building. The elements 

derived from Ottoman architecture were 

probably found in the available ground plans 

and depictions of mosques on the one hand, 

in European buildings inspired by Oriental 

models, on the other. 

The ground plan of the Schwetzingen mosque 

is strikingly reminiscent of European 

churches, especially of Fischer von Erlach’s 

grand Karlskirche in Vienna. 26 There are the 

church’s two equal-sized vestries, turned into 

“cabinets” in the mosque; there are the four 

niches in the main hall, and the front portico 

with its four closely spaced columns and 

the architrave that rounds the corners. 27 An 

interesting feature is the placing of the two 

monumental columns within the church front. 

Sedlmayr has pointed out that in placing the 

columns in front of the church, Fischer von 

Erlach refl ected the positioning of minarets 

in front of mosques, a feature he knew very 

well, having published numerous examples 

in his great folio work. 28 In positioning his 

minarets in front of the mosque, Pigage draws 

on Fischer von Erlach once more – although 

the massive columns have become slender 

minarets again, more reminiscent of Fischer’s 

depictions of the Sultan Suleiman or Sultan 

Ahmed mosques, than the Karlskirche. 

The gable points, on the other hand, are 

probably derived from those decorating the 

entrance of the Sultan Ahmed mosque, again 

in a depiction by Fischer von Erlach. 29 

It is safe to state therefore, that the design of 

the mosque itself and the cloister was infl uenced 

as much by Fischer von Erlach as it was 

26 For the Karlskirche ground plan cp. Keller 1978, p. 116. A 

connection with the Karlskirche is established in Reisinger. 

Reisinger 1987, p. 65. 

27 Gaier sees more of a connection with Chambers’ Alhambra, 

which is not unlikely given the pointed leaf ornaments. Gaier 

2002, p. 55. 

28 Hans Sedlmayr, “Die Schauseite der Karlskirche in Wien”, in: 

Epochen und Werke, vol. II, Wien 1960, p. 117. The opinion is 

shared by Heber. Heber 1986, p. 617. 

29 Keller 1987, p. 86. 


by Chambers, whose contribution has been 

stressed much more frequently by researchers. 

The Historico-Cultural Context 

The Schwetzingen mosque was never used 

as a pheasant house 30 or as an exotic garden 

house for the pursuit of amorous adventures 31 

– even though other garden mosques were. 

Those buildings, however, while imitating the 

outer appearance of a mosque, retained the 

characteristics of a Rococo turquerie – exoticlooking 

structures serving as stage sets or 

curiosities in gardens, frivolities dressed up as 

sacral buildings. Garden architecture usually 

having a purpose, decorative or otherwise, 

the Schwetzingen buildings appear to have 

baffl ed contemporary visitors. On 14th July 

1780, the author Wilhelm Heinse wrote 

to Friedrich Jacobi concerning the cloister, 

work on which had just begun: “The Turkish 

building they are working on seems silly to 

me; I can see neither a point nor a use.” 32 The 

Schwetzingen mosque and cloister were well 

beyond the usual idea of garden houses and 

follies. As Gaier wrote, the mosque appears to 

30 For example Hohenheim. Berger-Fix/Merten 1981, p. 78. 

31 The Steinfurt mosque of Prince Ludwig von Bentheim, built 

1783. 

32 Wilhelm Körte (ed.), Briefe zwischen Gleim, Wilhelm Heinse 

und Johann von Müller. Aus Gleims literarischem Nachlasse, 2 

vols., Zürich 1806, vol. 1, p. 418. 


Fig. 9: Ground plan of the 

mosque, Wilhelm Schweitzer, 

c.1930 (From: Martin 1933, 

p. 292). 

51


Fig. 10: Johann Bernhard 

Fischer von Erlach, ground 

plan of the Karlskirche, Vienna 

(Entwurf einer historischen 

Architektur, Vol. 3, 1721). 

52 


represent nothing but itself. 33 Pigage built two 

structures, refl ecting a wholly new view of the 

Orient and a serious contemplation of Islamic 

issues, rather than decorative shells for some 

unrelated purpose. 

Johann Gottfried Herder’s statement that the 

East had been the cradle of all religions refl 

ects the late 18th century’s growing scholarly 

interest in the Orient. Earlier on, due to the 

centuries-long Ottoman wars, Christianity and 

Islam had merely perceived the “imperialist” 

aspects of each other, and thus, the opposite 

and different. The age of Enlightenment 

looked for convergences both on the praxeological 

and the epistemological levels. The 

result was a “sympathetic identifi cation”, as 

the scholar Edward W. Said called the growing 

willingness towards the end of the 18th 

century, to discover aspects of relationship or 

shared attitudes within the “other” and alien. 34 

Fischer von Erlach’s view of Mecca is much 

more than a document of the Oriental fashion 

popular in the 18th century. In fact, the architect 

stresses the importance of a knowledge 

33 Gaier 2002, p. 59. Another explanation that does not apply 

here is the possibility of the mosque’s representing a triumph 

over the Ottomans, and thus a symbol of political and religious 

victory. This is how Ulrika Kiby interprets the Ottoman 

elements in the architecture of the Belvedere in Vienna. 

Ulrika Kiby, Die Exotismen des Kurfürsten Max Emanuel in 

Nymphenburg, Hildesheim 1990, pp. 167 ff. 

34 Edward W. Said, Orientalismus (transl. L. Weissberg), 

Frankfurt a. M. 1981, p. 110. 

of Oriental languages, history and religion for 

the understanding of one’s own origins and 

those of others, when he writes in his caption 

that “according to the Mohammedans this is 

where the house built by Abraham and the 

well of Ishmael are, and where Mohammed 

wrote his Alcoran”. 

Further surprising discoveries were that of a 

common philosophical heritage derived from 

antiquity, and numerous parallels, such as 

the Islamic and Christian interpretations of 

Aristotle’s De anima. 35 

Most of all it was probably the aspect of 

reason, that the era of Enlightenment found 

in the Koran, which had become available in 

translations into many European languages. 36 

The discovery of a near-rational faith in 

God, based on the reasoning and all-proving 

“Alcoran” left many thinkers, and some deists 

in particular, with an impression of Islam as 

an “ideal”, “reasonable” religion. 37 Many books 

were written about the issue. One of them was 

a tract by Henri de Boulainvillier (1658-1722), 

La vie de Mahomet, published posthumously 

in 1730 and translated into German in 1747. 38 

It argues that the Koran addresses believers 

as sensible, thinking individuals and appeals 

to their reason. However, Islam is in accord 

35 Nizar Samir Gara, Die Rezeption der Philosophie des 

Aristoteles im Islam, Diss. Heidelberg 2003, pp. 15 ff. Cp. also 

Carl H. Becker, Das Erbe der Antike im Orient und Okzident, 

Leipzig 1931. 

36 As early as 1746, a German translation of the 1734 version 

by George Sale, an English lawyer, was available to interested 

readers. In 1772, the fi rst direct translation from Arabic was 

published in Frankfurt am Main, entitled “The Turkish Bible” 

(Die türkische Bibel, oder des Korans allererste teutsche 

Übersetzung) and translated by David Friedrich Megerlin. 

There is no proof that this edition was in the Mannheim court 

library; however, it was spectacularly successful, and it may 

be safely assumed that the Palatine court was aware of its 

existence. 

37 Diethelm Balke, “Orient und Orientalische Literaturen. 

Einfl uß auf Europa und Deutschland”, in: Reallexikon der 

deutschen Literaturgeschichte, Berlin 1965, vol. 2, pp. 816-868, 

particularly p. 828. At the same time, there were very different 

interpretations of Islam too. In Voltaire’s writings, it became a 

paradigm of the fanaticism inherent in every religion, and was 

described in terms considered anathema to Enlightenment: 

“superstition”, “enthusiasm” and “fanaticism”. “Enthusiasm” 

may describe a state of religious frenzy but also and more 

generally an unhealthy, feverish imagination. “Fanaticism”, in 

Voltaire’s eyes a synonym of “superstition”, was aimed mainly 

at the unenlightened obscurantism of the Catholic church. To 

Leibniz, “fanaticism” was evidenced by a tendency to rely on 

immediate strong feeling, unchecked by reason – fanaticism 

was thus a lack of clear thinking. In applying these terms to 

Islam, Islam becomes a religion devoid of reason. 

38 Henri de Boulainvilliers, Das Leben des Mahomeds mit historischen 

Anmerkungen über die Mahomedanische Religion 

und die Gewohnheiten der Muselmänner, Lemgo 1747.

not merely with reason, but even with natural 

right. It is hardly surprising that Goethe, 

fascinated by this interpretation, came to the 

only possible and logical conclusion in his 

collection of poems, West-östlicher Divan. In 

the “Book of Proverbs” it says: “If Islam is 

submission to God, in Islam we all live and 

die.” 39 

Somewhat more cautiously but respectfully 

nevertheless, Herder wrote in his philosophical 

work on history, Ideen zur Philosophie der 

Geschichte der Menschheit: “The religion of 

Mahomet impresses a calmness of the soul, 

a unity of character on Man, which in fact 

may be as dangerous as it is useful, but is still 

in itself both worthy and praiseworthy.” 40 At 

the same time Herder extols Muhammad as a 

campaigner against idolatry and champion of 

the doctrine of monotheism. 41 

The Historical Context of the Inscriptions 

and Adages 

The building of the Schwetzingen mosque 

must be considered in the general context 

of a wide availability of Islamic literature 

and a new, optimistic view of Islam, as a 

“reasonable” religion in the late 18th century. 

This is refl ected by the choice and distribution 

of the inscriptions on the walls. Nicolas 

de Pigage decided on decorating the eight 

cartouches surmounting the archivolts in the 

Schwetzingen mosque, with the name of Allah 

in Arabic letters. Here the inscriptions are a 

means of organizing the space. There are also 

fi ve quotations from the Koran. Inscriptions 

on or in buildings, from the 16th through 

the 18th century, always serve to explain the 

function, use or dedication of the building. 42 

The fi rst verse of the fi rst sura on the black 

marble slab in the central gable of the portico, 

may be considered programmatic for the 

building as a whole: There is no deity other 

39 Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, West-östlicher Divan. Buch der 

Sprüche (= Goethes Werke in zwölf Bänden, vol. 2, Gedichte 

und Versepen), Berlin/Weimar 1966, p. 63. 

40 Johann Gottfried Herder, Ideen zur Philosophie der Geschichte 

der Menschheit, Darmstadt 1966, p. 521. 

41 Ibid. p. 515. 

42 Peter Diemer, Inschriften an Bauten des 16.-18. Jahrhunderts 

in Deutschland, Tübingen, n.d., p. 9 f. 


than God. This statement is supported by the 

quotes in the neighbouring cartouches. The 

mosque was thus dedicated to the deliberate 

intellectual approaching of another religion, 

once the centuries-old threat posed by it 

had been eliminated by the realization of a 

shared geographic and philosophical ancestry 

and, more than anything else, by the shared 

intellectual trait of reason. Reason dictated the 

realization that all religions could be traced 

back to one principle, belief in a superior 

being. As Voltaire stated in Zadig in 1747, 

“You are all of the same opinion, and there is 

nothing to quarrel about.” 43 

Lessing’s idea of an equal acceptance of the 

three monotheistic religions has no place in 

the Schwetzingen mosque. Tolerance in Carl 

Theodor’s Palatinate was what contemporary 

thinking meant by it, a tolerating of religious 

and denominational minorities. The mosque 

thus remains an expression of a changed 

intellectual, spiritual and political view of the 

Orient, 44 and of the abandoning of a mere 

fashion – the decorative turquerie – in favour 

of a place for the contemplation and appreciation 

of Mahomedism. 

43 Voltaire: Zadig (In: Sämtliche Romane und Erzählungen, 

Frankfurt a. M./Leipzig 1992, p. 169). 

44 The 18th century also saw the beginnings of independent 

Oriental politics on the part of the German states. Cp. Erika 

Günther, Die Faszination des Fremden. Der malerische 

Orientalismus in Deutschland, Münster 1990, p. 19. 


Fig. 11: Johann Bernhard 

Fischer von Erlach, Sultan 

Ahmed Mosque in Istanbul 

(Entwurf einer historischen 

Architektur, Vol. 3, 1721). 

53


54 

Fig. 12: Detail of the cloister 

ceiling (photo: Förderer). 


On 7th June 1815, the young author August 

Count of Platen-Hallermund went on an 

outing from Neckarau to Schwetzingen. 

Afterwards he noted in his journal: “We then 

proceeded to the Temple of Minerva. There 

was a mosque not too far from it. It was 

unlocked and explained to us, how it was 

built entirely after the fashion of real Turkish 

churches. The buildings adjoining it are 

rather large. Inside there is a number of fi ne 

inscriptions, e.g. “The fool carries his heart 

on his tongue, the wise man keeps his tongue 

in his heart”, or “Gather gold as much as you 

need, and wisdom as much as you can”. It 

would have served its purpose already if every 

curious visitor would only take these sayings 

to heart.” 45 

45 Oskar Hufschmied, “Der Dichter Graf von Platen in Mannheim”, 

in: Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, 1909, no. 1/ January, 

pp. 55-58. 

The Décor of the Cloister 

The ceilings of the trellised walks are 

decorated with tapestry-like depictions of a 

starry sky, refl ecting the signifi cance of the 

open skies and the celectial bodies in Islamic 

culture. According to the Koran, the sky is 

roof and ceiling to the earth, created by Allah 

as another fi nite space to complement it. 46 

Into this space he set the sun, moon, and the 

planets, the cyclic movements of which prove 

Allah’s greatness to Man. Sura 7, 54 of the 

Koran reads: “The night overtakes the day, 

as it pursues it persistently, and the sun, the 

moon, and the stars are committed to serve 

by His command.” 47 Consequently, the phases 

of the moon are depicted in the cloister’s four 

corner pavilions to represent the courses of 

the celestial bodies, and so the unalterable 

laws of God. 

There is no contradiction in depicting the 

starry sky in the cloister, which is part of the 

earthly sphere, or in the “earthly” wisdom of 

the inscriptions. Rather they underline the 

purpose of the mosque and the cloister – to 

be a metaphor of the world in the shape of a 

“temple of Mahomet”. 48 

(Susan Richter) 

46 Vogt-Göknil, ibid., pp. 81ff. 

47 Der Koran, Sure 7, 54 (Leipzig 1980, p. 157). 

48 Johann Zeyher/J. G. Rieger (Hg.), Schwetzingen und seine 

Gartenanlagen. Mit acht von Jury und Schnell gestochenen 

ansichten und dem Plane des Gartens, Mannheim 1824, p. 

113.

f) 

The Arabic Insriptions of the 

Mosque – a Manifestation 

of Inter-Cultural Dialogue 

The mosque and the two pavilions giving 

access to the cloister, are decorated with 23 inscriptions, 

not counting those consisting just 

of the word allâh. 18 of them have a German 

translation added; 20 are based on identifi able 

Arabic originals, if not necessarily a single 

source, which makes it likely that the remaining 

three had authentic sources as well. Most 

of the inscriptions are faulty as regards the 

vowel-marks and diacritical prints, betraying 

an insecure hand, not certain which “point” 

belonged to which consonant. Some diacritical 

markings are almost indistinguishable from 

the points. 1 The lettering is based on the Turkish 

nekshi, with Maghrebinian infl uences; on 

the whole, the calligraphy is not conspicuously 

individual. It is likely that the artist copied 

the writings from a printed source. 2 The 

letters are often placed separately, even when 

they should be written together; probably 

there were small gaps in the typeface, and the 

artist copied those too. The strokes between 

letters that sometimes appear in Arabic print, 

have been adopted as well – the copyist may 

have taken them for relevant parts of the 

printed words. Another indication of a printed 

model are the star-shaped marks terminating 

some inscriptions. Marks like these appear in 

Rostgaard’s Arabum philosophia popularis. 

Five of the Schwetzingen inscriptions have 

been taken from this collection, compiled 

towards the end of the 17th century by Danish 

archivist Friedrich Rostgaard, from the information 

provided by his Arab teacher, Yaqûb 

Sulaimân ad-Dimashqî (1665-1729). It was pu- 

1 Only the consonants and long vowels appear in written 

Arabic. Short vowels are sometimes indicated by special 

marks. Some consonants are only identifi ed by the number of 

points above or beneath the basic form. 

2 The writing is reminiscent of the letters set by Samuel Luchtmans 

and Son of Amsterdam, and used for the 1748 and 1767 

editions of the Grammar of Erpenius. There are also strong 

similarities to the appearance of the typeface in Rostgaard. Cp. 

Fig. 1. 


blished in 1764 by Johan Christian Kall. 3 Eight 

are from a collection of 200 sayings based on 

research by Joseph Scaliger (1540-1609) and 

published in 1614 at Leyden by a Dutchman, 

Thomas van Erpe (1584-1624), entitled Kitâb 

al-Amthâl seu proverbiorum arabicorum 

centuriae duae... cum interpretatione latina & 

scholiis Josephi Scaligeri et Thomae Erpenii. 

The material was taken from the famous 

collection of Arab philologist Abû ‘Ubaid and 

other, later sources. Most of the Schwetzingen 

inscriptions are from those later, post-Classical 

sayings, the so-called amthâl muwallada. 

Only the untranslated Arabic texts on the mo- 

sque front and the eight plaques bearing the 

word allâh are specifi cally religious in content, 

and refer to God. The translated sayings of the 

interior are vaguely ethical and rather general 

in nature, and would be unlikely to meet with 

opposition even from agnostics. 

The plaques on the front speak of monotheism, 

of the transitoriness and sinfulness of 

Man, of God’s mercy and omnipotence, of 

responsibilities in this life and of the duty to 

praise God. 

The arches of the interior hall remind readers 

of the lasting value of wisdom and right 

action. Eagerness to learn, moderation in 

outward appearances and intellectual ambitiousness 

are praised. 

3 Arabum philosophia popularis, sive sylloge nova proverbiorum. 

A Jacobo Salomone Damasceno dictata excepit et interpretatus 

est perillustris vir Fridericus Rostgaard, edidit cum 

adnotationibus nonnullis Joannes Christianus Kallius, Hafniae 

1764. This Syrian Christian, also known as Salomo Negri, had 

been educated at a Jesuit mission school in Damascus before 

being sent to Paris. Around 1697 he had taught Arabic to 

Rostgaard. Later he went to London, and he also spent a year 

at Halle. Among his pupils were some of the most eminent 

linguists of the day. Cp. Johann Fück, Die arabischen Studien 

in Europa bis in den Anfang des 20. Jahrhunderts, Leipzig 

1955, p. 96. 


Fig. 1: Arabic text of the saying 

“Without hope nothing will succeed” 

from Rostgaard’s Arabum 

philosophia popularis, ed. 1764 

by Johan Christian Kall. 

55


56 


The plaques in the cupola extol the virtues 

of moderation and diligence as well as hope, 

discretion and the pursuit of knowledge, and 

warn against envy, immoderateness, laziness 

and bad company. 

The inscriptions of the entrance pavilions recommend 

moderation and reserve, steadiness, 

persistence, diligence and care in choosing 

one’s friends. 

The topics mentioned most frequently are 

wisdom and folly (six times), discretion or 

contemplation and talkativeness (four times) 4 , 

diligence and laziness (four times), the pursuit 

of worldly goods, and transitoriness or 

mortality (three times). 

On the whole, the ideal that emerges is one 

of modesty and moderation with a touch of 

the elitist – an outwardly unassuming but 

intellectually ambitious man quite fastidious 

regarding the company he keeps. 

The Inscriptions of the Main Front 

The plaques set in the front bear untranslated 

Arabic texts in gilt lettering. It is hardly a 

coincidence that those distinctly Islamic texts 

are the ones without translation; probably 

the intention was to create a semblance of 

authenticity. Not one of the inscriptions is free 

of mistakes. There is less vowelization than in 

the other inscriptions. The numerous mistakes 

beg the question whether or not the provider 

of the texts and/or the sculptor even had a 

printed source. 

The intended meaning of the inscription on 

the marble slab set into the central gable of 

the portico may be taken to be “There is no 

deity other than God”, which is the fi rst part 

of the Muslim confession of faith. However, 

the word for deity (ilâh) has been confused 

with that for God (allâh), so the translation 

is, in fact, “There is no God other than God”. 

Characteristically enough, the second part, 

“and Muhammad is the messenger of God”, 

has been omitted. It is the second part, 

however, that constitutes the specifi cally 

Islamic element. 

4 It is striking that despite the lack of space and the necessity to 

select only a few sayings, discretion is mentioned repeatedly. 

The Arabic inscription on the top plaque to 

the right of the portico reads: “You shall give 

[alms] before death comes.” This is a shortened 

version of Sura 63, Verse 10 of the Koran, the 

full text of which reads: “You shall give from 

our provisions to you before death comes to 

one of you, then you say, ‘My Lord, if only 

You could delay this for a short while! I would 

then be charitable and join the righteous.’” 5 

The lower plaque has a shortened variation of 

Sura 112, Verses 1-4. The full text should read: 

“Proclaim: ‘He is God, One in Himself; God, 

the Inscrutable. Never did He beget. Nor was 

He begotten. None equals Him.’” The prophet 

himself is said to have described this short 

sura, the title of which might be translated as 

“Pure Devotion”, as the equivalent of one third 

of the Koran. The last two verses have been 

amalgamated into “Neither was He begotten 

nor does any equal Him.” 6 

The plaques on the left side are hardly 

vocalized at all. The translation of the top one 

reads: “Praise be to you and praise belongs 

to you alone. Hallowed is your name and 

there is no God other than you.” This is not a 

text from the Koran but a shortened version 

of a sequence said during the ritual prayer 

between the opening words and the recitation 

from the Koran. Traditionally it is considered 

to be a prayer fi rst said by Caliph ‘Umar (d. 

644). One translation available in German 

literature at the time, gives a rather vague idea 

of both the traditional text and the inscription 

on the mosque. 7 Here, too, the term for God 

has been confused with the term for a deity. 

The lower plaque reads: “Glorify GOD and 

implore Him for forgiveness. He is the 

Redeemer.” This is evidently a variation of 

Sura 110, Verse 3 – “You shall glorify your 

Lord, and implore Him for forgiveness. He is 

the Redeemer.” 8 

5 Some letters and additional marks are faulty; some letters that 

should be linked stand alone. 

6 The original word signifying “the Never-Changing” is 

unrecognizable in the inscription. In the word yakun letters 

that should be linked are separate, and the k is faulty. 

7 Cp. Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirks 

Mannheim. Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933, p. 303. 

8 The last letter of the fi rst word is hard to identify, the last 

word is near-indecipherable. The diacritical points are missing 

in two places; in one place the vocalization is insuffi cient.

The Inscriptions of the Interior 

All the inscriptions in the arches are faulty as 

regards vocalisation and the points identifying 

consonants. The much-voiced belief that they 

are Koran quotes is incorrect. The sayings 

are bipartite and, with the exception of one, 

antithetical in structure. 

„ERWIRB DIR GOLD SO VIEL DU 

BRAUCHST : UND WEISHEIT SO VIEL DU 

KANST” (“Gather gold as much as you need 

and wisdom as much as you can.”) 

The sayings may have been taken from the 

anthologies of proverbs compiled by Scaliger 

and Erpenius, that have been mentioned 

above. Erpenius provides a translation, 

“Acquire tibi aurum mensura, at scientiam 

sine mensura”, and a summary, “Eruditioni, 

non opibus in infi nitum studendam esse.” 9 

„DER THOR HAT DAS HERZ IM MUNDE : 

DER WEISE DIE ZUNG IM HERZEN” (“The 

fool carries his heart on his tongue, the wise 

man keeps his tongue in his heart.”) 

This is in Erpenius, 1614, p. 53, no. LXXXIII, 

with a translation by Scaliger, “Cor stulti in 

ore eius : lingua autem prudentis in corde 

eius” and a note, “Simile in Proverbiis Siracidis, 

Cap. 21.” The saying, or variations of it, 

appears in several other sources as well. 10 

“WISSENSCHAFT IST EINE KRONE : 

VERSTAND EINE GOLDENE HALS ZIERDE” 

(“Scholarship is a crown, understanding a 

golden necklace.”) 

9 In the 1614 edition, p. 74 No. XXIX. In the extended 1775 

edition entitled Selecta quaedam ex sententiis proverbiisque 

Arabicis a Thom. Erpenio olim editis. Cum versione latina 

et accessione centum proverbiorum, mere Arabicorum 

emendavit E. Scheidius, Mooien Hardervicum, p. 38 no. 68. 

Both times the writing is correct: ....bi-lâ qiyâsin instead of the 

faulty...bi-ka qiyâsin of the inscription. 

10 The same version appears in a 12th-century compilation: 

Ebu Medini Mauri Fessani Sententiae quaedam Arabicae. 

Nunc primum edidit ac latine vertit Franciscus de Dombay, 

Vindobonae 1805, p. 60 no. 282, with translation, «Cor fatui 

est in lingua eius, et lingua prudentis in corde eius.» In 

reverse order in Georg Wilhelm Freytag, Arabum proverbia 

sententiaque proverbiales, vocalibus instruxit, latine vertit, 

commentario illustravit et sumtibus suis editit, Bonnae ad 

Rhenum 1838-1843, 3,1 p. 475 no. 2860, translation «Lingua 

prudentis in corde est, et cor stulti in ore.» This version, also 

in Johan L. Burckhardt, Arabic Proverbs or the manners and 

customs of the modern Egyptians, illustrated from their 

proverbial sayings current at Cairo translated and explained, 

London 1830, p. 58, with a more literal translation, “The 

tongue of the wise is in his heart, the heart of the fool in his 

mouth.” 

The faulty vocalization al-ahmaqa instead of al-ahmaqi 

testifi es to a sketchy knowledge of Arabic grammar. 


The literal translation of the fi rst half of 

the original would in fact be “Scholarship 

is a crown for the youth”, or even “for the 

noble-minded”. The original is once again 

in Erpenius, 1614, p. 71 no. XXII; Scaliger’s 

translation reads “Scientia diadema est puero, 

& intellectus torques aureus”, and his note, 

“similia in proverbiis Salomonis.” 11 

“REICHTUM UND DIE WELT VERGEHEN 

: GUTE HANDLUNGEN BLEIBEN EWIG” 

(“Wealth and the world will pass, right action 

endures.”) 

Erpenius 1614, p. 82 no. XLVI, translation 

by Scaliger, “opes et mundus praeteribunt; et 

durabunt opera bona”; appears in Freytag as 

well. 12 

The inscriptions in the cupola are riddled with 

fewer mistakes and typographically closer to 

the Arabic. The plaques are smaller, and the 

sayings are no longer antithetical; most are 

simple and rather general maxims, warnings 

and pieces of advice. 

„DER THOR HAELT WARNUNG FUER 

FEINDSCHAFT” (“A fool takes a warning for 

hostility.”) 

In Rostgaard 1764, p. 157 no. CCCCVIII, 

with a translation, “Ne moneas stultum; pro 

inimico habebit (te)”, and a note, “Ex sacro 

scriptura desumtura est.” 

„HOERE DEN RATH DES KLUGEN” (“Listen 

to the advice of the wise.”) 

A more literal translation would be “Take the 

advice of the wise.” In Erpenius, 1614, p. 78 

no. XXXVI, translation by Scaliger, “Admitte 

consilium prudentis.” The word al-‘âqil is 

divided up between lines 2 and 3 although 

word division is not practiced in Arabic. Iqbil 

is used instead of iqbal. 

“WER ALLES BEGEHRT GEHT LEER AUS” 

(“He who wants everything gets nothing.”) 

11 In the extended edition of 1775 on p. 36. Also in Freytag 3,1 

p. 352 no. 2114 with translation, “Doctrina est corona juveni 

et ingenium est torques aurea.” Here the saying continues “et 

veritas lux clara et mendacium ignis ordens.” 

The points of two letters in the Arabic inscription are faulty 

(li-l-fatî instead of li-l-fatâ and tawfun instead of tawqun). 

12 (12 ) There 3,1 p. 503 no. 3020 with translation, “Opes 

mundusque pereunt; sed proba opera manent.” 

Faulty vocalization and points (tabqî instead of tabqâ, narûlu 

instead of tazûlu). 


57


58 


In Rostgaard, 1764, p. 159 no. CCCCXVI, 

translation “Qui petit totum, praeterit 

totum” and note, “In ambitiosos; cum non 

adipiscuntur illud honoris fastigium, pro quo 

tamen obtinendo omnia bona consumserunt.” 

Another possible translation would be “What 

you want wholly you will lose wholly.” 

“VERSCHWIEGENHEIT ERWIRBT LIEBE” 

(“Discretion wins love.”) 

Literally: “Discretion earns her followers’ 

love.” Variations of the saying reappear in the 

collections of al-‘Askarî, al-Bakrî, Abû ‘Ubaid 

und Maidânî. 13 It is ascribed to al-Aktham, an 

ancient Arab sage associated with numerous 

legends. In Erpenius, 1614, p. 60 no. XVIII; in 

the 1775 edition on p. 30 with a translation, 

“Taciturnitas conciliat suis amorem” and an 

explanation ascribed to Maidânî but untraceable 

there, “Meidan: Nempe amorem aliorum 

erga se, siquidem (taciturni) eo ipso tuti sint. 

Adhibetur in commendatione paucitatis 

sermonis.” 

“DER NEID RUHT NIEMALS” (“Envy never 

rests.”) 

With a variation of the last word (râha instead 

of marâha) in Erpenius, 1614, p. 54 no. 

LXXXV, with a translation, “Inudiae nulla est 

quies.” 

“LIEBE DEN FLEIS, ER IST EIN GROSER 

SCHAZ” (“Love diligence, it is a great treasure.”) 

Literally: “Acquire industriousness, for it is a 

great treasure.” In Erpenius, 1614, p. 74 no. 

XXVII, translation by Scaliger: “Aquire diligentiam, 

ea enim est thesaurus magnus.” 

“OHNE HOFFNUNG GELINGT KEIN WERK” 

(“Without hope nothing will succeed.”) 

Literally: “Without hope the work will come to 

harm.” In Rostgaard 1764, p. 170 no. CCCCL- 

VII, with a translation, “Si (non esset) spes, 

irritum esset opus.” 14 

13 (13) For example Abu l-Fadl Ahmad Ibn Muhammad 

al-Maidânî, Madjma’ al-amthâl, I. II, Beirut 1961, I. p. 557. A 

variation in Abû ‘Ubaid al-Qâsim Ibn Sallâm, Kitâb al-amthâl, 

ed. ‘Abdalmadjîd Qatâmish, Beirut 1980, p. 43 no. 34. Cp. 

Riad Aziz Kassis, The book of proverbs and Arabic proverbial 

works, Leiden 1999, p. 150. 

14 The word al-amal “hope” is divided; the last word is badly 

written and barely identifi able as al-’amal “work”. Cp. Fig. 1 p. 

55 and Fig. 2 p. 59. 

“FLIEHE DIE FAULHEIT, SIE BRINGT 

SCHADEN” (“Avoid laziness, it is harmful.”) 

In Erpenius, 1614, p. 74 no. XXVIII, translation 

by Scaliger, “Recede a pigritia; quia ipsa 

est plena damno”. More mistakes – ab‘ud for 

ub‘ud and mumtali‘a for mumtali‘u. 

The Inscriptions of the Cloister 

Entrance Pavilions 

The execution of the two barely-vocalized 

inscriptions on decorative plaques on the 

exterior of the eastern entrance pavilion was 

neither expert nor careful; letters that should 

have been written together have been separated, 

and there are unnecessary strokes. The 

two sayings could not be traced so far. 

“WEGEN DER ROSE BEGIEST MAN DIE 

DORNEN” (“For the sake of the rose one 

waters the thorns.”) 

Rose und tulip motifs are common in Islamic 

art and were associated with “Ottoman” taste. 

In literature the rose is often associated with 

the prophet Muhammad. As a symbol of wisdom, 

beauty and purity it is a motif common 

to many religions and civilizations. 15 

“lN DEN SOMMERTAGEN SEY DER AMEISE 

GLEICH” (“On summer days be like an ant.”) 

Fuchs and Reisinger interpret the sayings in 

the context of a monastery and garden, and 

the monkish rule of “ora et labora”: Gardening 

and diligence are called for on the side facing 

the kitchen garden, contemplation is required 

on the one facing the cloister16 – the inwardfacing 

plaque of the eastern entrance pavilion 

reads: 

“REDEN IST SILBER SCHWEIGEN GOLD” 

(“Talk is silver, silence is golden.”) 

This very common piece of wisdom is in 

Rostgaard, 1764, p. 63 no. CXXV, translated 

“Loqui est argentum, tacere est aurum” and 

characterized as an enconium silentii. The 

15 In the Christian tradition it is among the insignia of the 

Virgin Mary; among Freemasons, the mystic rose is a symbol 

of enlightenment encountered during the last stage of the 

spiritual quest. Cp. Daniel Béresniak, Symbole der Freimaurer, 

Wien 1998, p. 80. 

16 Carl Ludwig Fuchs/Claus Reisinger, Schloß und Garten zu 

Schwetzingen, Worms 2001, p. 176.

association of talk and silver is in the Bible in 

Psalms 12:7 and Proverbs 10:20. 17 

“EINSAMKEIT IST BESSER ALS BOESE 

GESELLSCHAFT” (“Solitude is better than bad 

company.”) 

Variants are in Abû Hilâl al-‘Askarî, Kitâb 

Djamharat al-amthâl, I. II. Beirut 1988, II. p 

330 no. 1780, and in Burckhardt 1830, no. 77. 

Another word split over two lines. 

The plaques facing the cloister on the eastern 

entrance hall of the mosque read: 

“WECHSEL IN DER FREUNDSCHAFT 

BRINGT VERDERBEN” (“Change in friendship 

leads to disaster.”) 

and 

“EIN LASTER DES WEISEN GILT FUER 

TAUSEND” (“One vice in a wise man counts 

for a thousand.”) 

In Rostgaard, 1764, p. 90 no. CXC, with 

translation, “Crimen prudentis pro mille criminibus 

(habetur)”, and note, “Quanto quisque 

maiorem prudentiae famam sibi comparavit, 

tanto errores eius in oculos magis incurrunt, 

nec paratam facile veniam habent.” 

Collections of Proverbs and the Image of the 

Orient 

Considering that most of the sayings do 

appear to be based on Arabic originals, we 

may ask ourselves whether a particular genre 

was chosen. 

The study of proverbs in the widest sense is 

an important area of Arab language studies. 

The aforementioned Kitâb al-amthâl by Abû 

‘Ubaid (d. 838) is considered the earliest 

collection (in the sense of an original compilation); 

the anthology by al-Maidânî (d. 1124) is 

the best-known work within a long tradition. 

Most of the sayings in the collections belong 

to a limited number of preferred topics. One 

of them is marked by the opposite poles of 

wealth and poverty. The sayings comment 

on wastefulness and a wise use of money, 

17 Also in Freytag vol 3,1 p. 92, from two 16th -century 

manuscripts in Berlin and Paris, with a translation, “Narratio 

argentea, silentium vero aureum est.” Cp. Büchmann, Gefl ügelte 

Worte, Berlin 1864, p. 32. 

The Arabic word for “silver” has one faulty letter; however, in 

some dialects this is pronounced the same way as the proper 

one. Sukût “silence” is missing its article. 


diligence and sloth, duties and luxuries, 

munifi cence, the renunciation of wealth, 

contentment &c. Discourse and silence is 

another topic; the proverbs refer to eloquence, 

fi tting and convincing speech, the merits and 

meaning of silence and so on. 18 

There are several types of sayings: a) those 

presenting one specifi c case of a regular and 

familiar occurrence as representative of all 

other cases; b) proverbial sayings, usually 

generally known, characterizing a recurring 

situation by means of an image or metaphor 

that can be used as a part of any sentence; c) 

formulaic expressions of a type used in exclamations, 

forms of address, prayers and so on; 

d) sententious maxims in verse. 19 This form, 

also known as gnomic poetry, includes words 

of wisdom and advice, mottoes, maxims and 

18 Cp. Kassis 1999, pp. 116 ff. 

19 Rudolf Sellheim, Die klassisch-arabischen Sprichwörtersammlungen 

insbesondere die des Abû ‘Ubaid, ‘s-Gravenhage 1954, 

p. 18 quotes examples that could easily join the sayings of the 

Schwetzingen mosque: “A secret is a treasure entrusted”, “A 

promise is a gift”, “A look may give evidence of hatred” &c. 


Fig. 2: Inscription from the 

mosque tambour 

59


60 

Fig. 3: Mosque, detail of the 

west front 


apophthegms (adages). Usually a piece of 

experience or advice is put into abstract form. 

Amthâl of this category are often ascribed to 

sages or philosophers and frequently have 

their exact equivalents in the sayings of European 

civilizations; they offer little information 

about Islam or Arab culture specifi cally. 20 

Especially popular are attributions to Solomon 

or a pre-Islamic sage mentioned in the Koran, 

Luqmân; in this way the sayings acquire a 

certain quasi-religious authority. 

Most of the inscriptions of the Schwetzingen 

mosque belong to the Gnomic category. 

The success of a collection of proverbs culled 

from Greek and Latin sources and published 

by Erasmus of Rotterdam in 1500, 21 inspired 

an interest in the proverbs of other nations; 

in them, it was believed, both the individual 

characteristics and the universally valid 

elements of their thinking found a lively and 

concise expression. In 1591, Joannes Drusius 

had published a collection of Apophthegmata 

Ebraeorum ac Arabum. The above-mentioned 

Erpenius published several collections that 

were in turn re-edited by others. By the end of 

the 17th century, Agnellini’s compilation had 

been published in Italy and Galland’s Paroles 

20 Cp. Sellheim 1954, p. 26. 

21 Desiderii Erasmi Roterdami veterum maximeque insignium 

paroemiarum i.e. Adagiorum collectanea, Paris 1500. 

remarquables in France. 22 Moreover, proverbs 

were popular as reading to be included in 

grammar books, for example in Erpenius’ 

Arabic grammar edited by Albert Schultens 

(1686-1750). 23 Proverbs from the classic 

collection of Maidânî were published in 1758 

by Johann Jakob Reiske, and in 1795 by N. G. 

Schroeder. 24 

Even earlier than the expert world, the 

aristocratic and educated circles of 17thcentury 

Europe, and of France especially, had 

developed a lively interest, almost a passion, 

for all things Chinese and generally exotic 

and Oriental; it reached its heyday during 

the Rococo period. The Jesuits who had been 

active in China since around 1600, provided 

detailed information about Far Eastern culture 

and literature, and enlightened minds soon 

discovered parallels between Confucianism 

and their own reason-driven approach to morals 

and religion. The enthusiasm people like 

Leibniz, for example, felt for Chinese moral 

philosophy was transferred to the Orient as a 

whole, including the Islamic world. 

One of the earliest and most infl uential exponents 

of an unbiased approach to the Orient 

was Bartholomé d’Herbelot (1625-1695), who, 

besides studying Greek and Latin at Paris, had 

learned to speak several Oriental languages as 

well. In his “Oriental Library” he attempted to 

compile all worthwhile information about the 

East, culled from Arab, Persian and Turkish 

sources, and arranged in alphabetical order. 

The immense work was published after 

d’Herbelot’s death by his collaborator, Antoine 

Galland (1646-1715), a man with fi rst-hand 

experience of the East. Galland also compiled 

noteworthy sayings by Arab, Persian and 

Turkish authors in order to demonstrate to 

his readers that the Oriental mind was as 

22 T. Agnellini, Proverbii utili e virtuosi in lingua Araba, Persiana 

e Turca, gran parte in versi, con laloro espiegatione in lingua 

Latina et Italiana, Padova 1688. This book was not available to 

me. Antoine Galland, Les Paroles remarquables, les Bons Mots 

et les Maximes des Orientaux. Traduction de leurs ouvrages en 

Arabe, en Persan et en Turc, avec des remarques, Paris 1694. 

23 Erpenii grammatica Arabica of 1748, also in the 1767 edition. 

24 Johann Jakob Reiske, Sammlung einiger arabischer 

Sprüchwörter, die von den Stecken oder Stäben hergenommen 

sind. Leipzig 1758. N. G. Schroeder Meidanii Proverbiorum 

Arabicorum pars, latine vertit et notis illustravit H. A. 

Schultens, opus posthumum, Leiden 1795.

capable of wit, acumen and humour as the 

European one, and added maxims taken 

from the collections published by Erpenius 

and Golius. 25 He is also the translator of the 

edition of the Arabian Nights, which appeared 

in twelve volumes in 1704-17; translations 

into German and English soon followed, and 

in this way a wider audience came to regard 

the East as a world of colourful adventure and 

vivid imagination. 

Among scholars and educated amateurs 

interested in the Orient, the realization had 

spread, that the intellectual achievements of 

the Eastern civilizations would have to be 

valued just as highly as the European heritage, 

if only they were known and understood. 

The age of Enlightenment freed language and 

cultural studies from their theological trappings, 

and postulated an unbiased approach 

to foreign civilizations and their cultural 

manifestations. 26 

The Signifi cance of the Inscriptions as Part 

of the Mosque 

The unusual combination of architectural 

styles in the mosque has drawn much 

comment. 27 The portico is reminiscent of a 

temple, the dome of a Baroque church, the 

25 Cp. Fück 1955, p. 101. The fi rst edition of d‘Herbelots book, 

a 1060-page volume, was published in Paris in 1697, under 

the title Bibliothèque orientale, ou dictionaire universel 

contenant généralement tout ce qui regarde la connoissance 

des Peuples de l’Orient, Leurs Histoires et Traditions véritables 

ou fabuleuses... It was extended in 1776 and 1780. 1785-1790 

a four-volume German translation by J. CH. F. Schulz appeared 

in Halle, with useful additions by Reiske and others. 

26 For all that, it must be remembered that for a long time 

afterwards, the image of the Orient was shaped more by 

European tastes and preconceived ideas about culture than 

actual contacts. Cp. Karl Ulrich Syndram, “Der erfundene 

Orient in der europäischen Literatur vom 18. bis zum Beginn 

des 20. Jahrhunderts”, in: G. Sievernich/H. Budde, Europa und 

der Orient 800-1900, Berlin 1989, pp. 324-342. 

On the other hand, German versions of the Koran were 

around as early as the 17th century, even if the earliest of 

them were translations of translations: Schweigger 1616, 

1623, 1659; Lange 1688; Nerreter 1703; Arnold 1746; Megerlin 

1772; Boysen 1773, 1775; Wahl 1823. Similarly in other 

European languages, e.g. French: Du Ryer 1647, 1775; Savary 

1751; English: Ross 1649, 1688, 1719; Sale 1734 et al.; Dutch: 

Glazemaker 1658, 1721, 1734 &c. 

27 According to Stefan Koppelkamm, Exotische Architekturen im 

18. und 19. Jahrhundert, p. 38, Baroque and Chinese elements 

have been combined with ideas that made up the image of 

a “mosque”. The tent-shaped roofs of the “priests’ cabinets” 

might as well belong to a Chinese garden house. 


inscriptions and minarets of a mosque. 28 

The “pattern” of a mosque, however, is the 

Ottoman domed building with at least one, 

frequently two or even four minarets. The 

minaret is considered the belltower of the 

Orient, the most obvious symbol of the 

building’s sacral dedication. For the very 

reason that the minaret is considered such an 

unmistakable symbol of Islam, its building 

in non-Islamic parts is often met with fi erce 

opposition – much more than the building 

of a mosque without minarets. However, the 

number of minarets is not fi xed; strictly speaking 

they are not even necessary. The minimal 

requirements of an Islamic place of worship 

are minimal indeed – the only indispensable 

elements are cleanliness and proper orientation 

for prayer. The Schwetzingen mosque, 

however, lacks a clearly identifi ed mihrâb 

niche indicating the direction of Mecca. 

This is usually situated opposite the main 

entrance so that the room is properly oriented, 

even when the mihrâb is not specifi cally 

28 The minarets were designed to evoke the towers of the 

Karlskirche at Vienna, built after the victory over the Turks 

and in turn reminiscent of Trajan’s Column in Rome. Cp. 

Fuchs/Reisinger 2001, p. 171. They may also evoke the 

columns of Jakin und Boas in front of the Temple of Solomon 

in Masonic imagery. Cp. Béresniak 1998, pp. 61-62. 

Fig. 4: Mosque interior 


61


Fig. 5: Mosque courtyard, back 

front of the entrance pavilion 

62 


identifi ed by architectural or other means. In 

the Schwetzingen mosque, what is opposite 

the main entrance is the passage leading 

to the courtyard and cloister. There are no 

ablution facilities either, although these may 

well be located outside the building even in 

an authentic mosque. Usually a mosque will 

have a minbar or pulpit, frequently a wooden 

construction with stairs, which it would 

have been possible to build later. 29 Often the 

mosque has a courtyard enclosed by walls; the 

walls may form the back wall of a colonnade, 

but the airy construction of the Schwetzingen 

“cloister” bears little resemblance to one. 

The main hall of the mosque aims at height 

and lofty distance; the hall itself is quite 

small. It is decorated with ornamentation that 

despite some reminiscences, cannot be called 

Oriental. 30 If the mosque, as Heber assumes 

from the many crescent shapes, symbols not 

only of the Ottomans but also of Diana, was 

intended to have a special connection with 

the hunter goddess 31 , it certainly does not 

lend itself to social gatherings after the hunt. 

29 According to a contemporary witness, the box surmounting 

the western entrance, with its painted curtain, was intended 

to serve as a pulpit. Cp. Martin Gaier, “Die Moschee im 

Schwetzinger Schlossgarten”, in: Semra Ögel, Okzident und 

Orient, Istanbul 2002, p. 53. 



Schwetzingen, I. II. Worms 1986, I. p. 626. 

31 Heber 1986, pp. 651-652. 

The room is altogether too cool and lacking 

in intimacy. It is better suited as a place of 

worship for a small community – not, one 

suspects, of Muslims, although this, too, has 

been known to occur. 32 

As a whole the mosque is given a note of 

playfulness and lightness by the blend of 

architectural styles on the exterior, a serene 

grace by its location and surroundings, and a 

degree of severity by the sacral atmosphere 

and the inscriptions of the interior. The specifi 

cally Islamic aspect is represented merely by 

the word allâh and the use of Arabic letters. 

The morals conveyed by most of the inscriptions 

are not specifi c to any religion, or in 

fact to religion as such; they vacillate between 

generally applicable ethics and a suggestion of 

numinous transcendency. 33 What is unmistakable 

is the tendency to appeal to an élite of 

the virtuous and the wisdom-seekers. There 

is, however, another possibility. In an age of 

courtly over-refi nement and stylization, as 

well as delight in allusions and mysteries, an 

age when the necessity of exerting caution for 

moral and political reasons was paramount, 

the inscriptions may have conveyed both a 

direct and an indirect message, a concrete 

and an abstract meaning, that became evident 

only to the initiated. 

It is this very openness to a variety of interpretations 

that adds to the mosque’s appeal, 

the slightly unsettling atmosphere this place 

communicates, and always did – for the very 

reason that it never was just another garden 

folly born of a fashionable taste for the exotic. 

(Udo Simon) 

32 Despite not really being an Islamic sacral building, the 

mosque has been used in this capacity – after the Franco- 

Prussian War of 1870/71 by wounded prisoners of war staying 

at a Schwetzingen hospital, and in the 1970s and 1980s by 

Muslims from the Rhine-Neckar region. Cp. Muhammad S. 

Abdullah, Geschichte des Islams in Deutschland, Graz 1981, p. 

21. 

33 Some of the adages are reminiscent of the recommendations 

in Pythagoras’ Carmina aurea. E. g. “Moderation is best in 

all things”, “Beware of doing what will incur the envy of 

others”, &c. Cp. Hans Daiber, Neuplatonische Pythagorica in 

arabischem Gewande. Der Kommentar des Iamblichus zu den 

Carmina aurea, Amsterdam 1995.

g) 

The Palace Theatre – the Ideal of 

an Eighteenth-Century Theatre 

and Opera House 

The Schwetzingen palace theatre 1 is a historical, 

architectural and technical marvel of the 

late 18th century. Opened fi ve years earlier 

than its counterpart at Ludwigsburg, today it 

is the oldest theatre in Baden-Württemberg 

and may be considered the oldest surviving 

galleried theatre in the world. 

Built from plans by the architect Nicolas 

de Pigage, opened on 15th June 1753, with 

an opera by Ignaz Holzbauer, for a quartercentury 

it was a major centre of the opera 

with a programme of unequalled variety. In 

July 1763, Mozart himself, with his father and 

sister, was among its visitors. 

With Elector Carl Theodor’s move to Munich, 

the palace theatre fell into oblivion. During 

the 19th century under the rule of the Archdukes 

of Baden, a few performances were 

staged by the Karlsruhe court; beyond that the 

theatre was used for a number of purposes 

– for example, as a drying room for hops. 

In 1937, it was rescued from oblivion, and 

returned to its original function. 


The building documents surviving from the 

18th century are incomplete, and so is our 

knowledge of the building history 2 : On 20th 

May 1752, Pigage drew up the expected costs 

on the basis of a plan that no longer exists. 

The contracts with the bricklayer, the carpenter, 

the metalworker and the wood merchant, 

were concluded on 2nd June 1752; contracts 

with the sculptor, the painter and the gilder 

had to be postponed for lack of specifi c 

plans. Four days later, the treasury issued an 

urgent appeal to the craftsmen concerned to 

1 Silke Leopold/Bärbel Pelker (eds.), Hofoper in Schwetzingen. 

Musik – Bühnenkunst – Architektur, Heidelberg 2004. 

An interdisciplinary overview of the many aspects of the 

Schwetzingen palace theatre. 

2 See also Monika Scholl/Peter Knoch: “Bretterbude? Neue 

Erkenntnisse zur Baugeschichte des Theaters”, Leopold/Pelker 

2004, pp. 251-301. 


agree on the sequence of building measures, 

to coordinate their efforts and to avoid 

delays. No more than six weeks later the 61 

craftsmen received a gift of wine because the 

wooden construction was completed. In late 

September they were awarded a special “bread 

bonus”. It is unclear whether the theatre was 

actually completed by that time, but it appears 

to have been functional – on 10th September 

1752, the set painter received a commission. 

However, it was only on 30th December that 

Pigage drew up his fi rst overall statement; 

minor jobs were still being done in January 

1753. 

The massive walls enclosing a timber 

construction rise over a T-shaped ground plan 

(Fig. 1). The pit was fi tted out with latticed boxes 

on the ground fl oor, and open galleries on 

the two fl oors above; each gallery featured one 

central semicircular box. The wooden railings 

were covered with hessian. The woodwork of 

the walls and ceiling remained visible and like 

the hessian was either painted with distemper 

or covered with decorative painting. 


Fig. 1: This plan of the 

Schwetzingen garden by Joseph 

Kieser, with a design for the 

palace by Balthasar Neumann, 

c.1753 (61,0 x 93,2 cm), shows 

the theatre as it looked shortly 

after its completion. 

Fig. 2: Nicolas de Pigage, longitudinal 

section of the theatre; 

pen and ink, grey wash (42,5 

x 117,6 cm). The three plans, 

rediscovered in 1991, show the 

theatre after 1762. Analyses 

performed during recent renovation 

work have confi rmed 

that Pigage’s drawing shows 

the earliest “look” of the house 

and galleries, immediately 

after the building’s completion. 

The depiction of some details, 

notably in the stage area, is 

somewhat vague. 

63


Fig. 3: Nicolas de Pigage, cross 

section of the theatre looking 

east; pen and ink, grey wash 

(41,8 x 56,4 cm). Condition 

after 1762. The remains of 

the original fl oor construction 

have confi rmed a double layer 

of fl oorboards in the pit. The 

latticed boxes, the central boxes 

on the narrow galleries and 

the painted decoration have 

all been confi rmed as part of 

the earliest layout by recent 

studies. 

64 


Access to the upper galleries was via steep 

single staircases in the halls on both sides; 

they, and the deep central boxes, made the 

galleries exceedingly cramped. 

There are few original documents to tell us 

about the rebuilding that was embarked on 

just ten years later. In the summer of 1761, 

a wooden passage was built to connect the 

theatre with the set storeroom in the adjacent 

quarter-circle pavilion. 

On 31st March 1762, the Elector informed 

his treasury of a planned enlargement of the 

theatre, the extent of which is unknown. It included 

an extension built on to the stage that 

was completed in 1762, as well as alterations 

to the stage itself and the building of a new 

staircase ( Fig. 2) (Fig. 3). 

A memorandum dated 5th March 1771, 

mentions further work. Building timber in a 

variety of sizes and qualities was ordered; the 

theatre required repairs in a number of places. 

In his estimate of running costs for 1775, 

Pigage anticipated paving work all round the 

building, as water had found its way inside 

on several occasions, damaging the stage 

machinery. 

It is likely that the rebuilding was complete in 

1776, because in his list of all the work done 

by himself for Schwetzingen and Mannheim, 

so far Pigage mentions the work on the 

theatre too, listing the backstage extension, 

the new staircase, facilities for the spectators 

and a new interior decoration. 

The new staircase at the front of the building 

provided the ground fl oor with a lobby, and 

access to the upper storeys became easier. On 

the galleries Pigage removed the central boxes 

and moved the walls further back. This exposed 

the timber structure, which was lined with 

wood and covered with hessian, resulting in 

the arches still visible today. The new interior 

decoration was enriched by three-dimensional 

papier maché elements including the satyr 

masks on the supports and the draperies on 

the parapets. The galleries’ back walls and the 

ceiling were covered with hessian as well. 

Originally the interior colour scheme had 

been in shades of red and grey, reminiscent of 

sandstone. Now these colours were replaced 

with pale grey, yellow and white. 

When the court had moved to Munich in 1777, 

the theatre fell into oblivion and was used 

for a variety of purposes until voices were 

raised in the 1920s, demanding a thorough 

renovation of this architectural jewel. In 1937, 

the theatre, with its historic stage machinery 

repaired and a new fi re prevention scheme 

installed, was restored to its original function. 

When part of the stage was demolished in 

1971/72, during a major restoration, part of 

the historic building was lost. Nevertheless, 

the appearance of the auditorium is still 

that of the second building stage in the 18th 

century. 

An Ideal Theatre Building of the Late 

18th Century 

Carl Theodor’s small “comedy house” at 

Schwetzingen remained a private electoral 

theatre, even after the rebuildings of the 18th 

century. The west wing of the Mannheim 

palace still housed the large, magnifi cent 

court theatre, the electoral “opera house”, 

and this facilitated the outfi tting of both the 

auditorium and the stage, according to the

latest developments in theatre technology, 

with the sole aim of ensuring the best possible 

performing conditions. 

The location of the theatre within the palace 

grounds may at fi rst appear odd, but it met 

the conditions for a mid-18th century court 

theatre, that had been developed in France 

to an admirable degree. The building, simple 

on the outside, was to be placed at a distance 

from the main palace, to prevent potential 

fi res from spreading. 

At the same time, the courtiers had to be 

sheltered from heat and rain while getting 

there. 

A more comfortable staircase and more space, 

due to the enlargement of the galleries, were 

among the chief amenities provided by Carl 

Theodor’s rebuilding measures. Pigage’s 

laying-out of the ground fl oor extension as a 

columned hall, created a foyer of the type that 

became fashionable towards the end of the 

18th century, for visitors to engage in conversation 

and partake of refreshments during the 

intervals. 

This phase, the theatre’s second “look”, 

refl ected the intellectual background of the 

Age of Enlightenment. Inspired by French 

developments, European theatre changed 

during the second half of the 18th century. 

The attention of spectators was more on the 

happenings on stage than it had been. The 

galleried theatre was a logical consequence as 

it provided an undisturbed view of the stage 

and better acoustics. At Schwetzingen, Pigage 

got rid of the latticed “incognito” boxes on the 

ground fl oor, removed the galleries’ central 

boxes, and connected the separate balconies at 

the sides with the main galleries. 

Besides a stage technology that was unique 

in its time, Pigage also created excellent 

acoustics in the house, introducing the latest 

developments of Italian theatre architecture. 

Among the chief measures was an auditorium 

built entirely of wood, which acted as a giant 

soundbox contained within the massive outer 

walls. A hollow space beneath the double 

wooden fl oor of the orchestra pit made the 


fl oor a sounding-board; hollow spaces behind 

wooden walls and beneath fl oors, both in the 

pit and on the balconies, provided additional 

soundboxes. 

The seemingly modest wooden surfaces 

everywhere in the auditorium, were designed 

to aid the optimal spreading and unfolding of 

sound too – the material neither absorbs nor 

distorts sound. 

It is possible that the opera performances that 

dominated the stage during the 1770s, with 

the high demands they made on the building’s 

acoustics, provided the occasion for the 

covering of the back walls with hessian. 

Once the rebuilding was complete, Pigage 

was free to decorate the auditorium in a 

modern taste as well. The light colour scheme 

dominated by pale yellows and greys, and the 

predominance of clear ornamental shapes, are 

early indications that the Classicist era was 

ahead. 

The Sage Machinery – an 18th-Century 

Technological Masterpiece 

The stage machinery was built by Nicolas 

de Pigage in 1752, along with the theatre 

itself. It was used for 25 years until the time 

when the court moved from Mannheim and 

Schwetzingen to Munich. Like the theatre, 


Fig. 4: The house, condition 

of 2006. 

65


Fig. 5: Nicolas de Pigage, cross 

section of the theatre looking 

west; pen and ink, grey wash 

(41,3 x 57 cm), condition 

after 1762. The plan shows the 

galleries as they were just after 

completion. Compared to today 

they were considerably deeper 

and more spacious. Parts of 

the fl yloft and the borders are 

visible too. 

66 


the machinery was overhauled and rebuilt, 

but during the late 18th and the 19th century 

the theatre was hardly used any more. The 

alterations in the course of the 20th century 

were tantamount to a gradual dismantling. 

The Baroque stage machinery of the Schwetzingen 

court opera was demolished in the 

1950s. Wooden constructions were replaced 

by modern ones of steel, and in 1971, the 

historical stage was pulled down. The loss is 

particularly regrettable in view of the fact that 

the machinery was still largely intact at the 

beginning of the 20th century. 

Today’s stage possesses a modern technology 

capable of meeting all the demands made on a 

contemporary theatre. 

A dDescription of the Baroque 

Stage Machinery 

The main stage, 16m wide and 19,5m deep, 

had fi ve groups of three sets each, plus additional 

pairs of sets; the wooden construction 

holding the painted sets was made of posts, 

not the usual ladders. The sets were moved 

by a shaft in the stage below with fl ies and 

counterweights. The below stage also featured 

trapdoors and adjustable stage lighting. 

Six shafts were mounted in the fl yloft for the 

moving of ceiling parts and other features; 

several more were mounted on the galleries 

and beneath the roof. Only the shafts for the 

backcloths, the borders and the house curtain 

had to be assigned permanently; the others 

could be used for fl ying machines, cloud 

chariots and the like, and freely assigned to 

varying purposes. 

The available machinery lent itself to a variety 

of productions; changes could be made within 

seconds. 

A comparison of Pigage’s elevations, probably 

from the 1760s, with depictions by Schweitzer 

from the 1920s and 1930s shows mainly 

agreements, the chief difference being that 

Pigage’s drawings depict the machinery with 

the ropes in place: a comparison with other 

stage machineries can thus help to comprehend 

the function of individual elements, such 

as the borders. In the longitudinal section 

these are shown gathered up and turned up 

at the sides. Little can be inferred about the 

curtain, the backcloth and their machinery. 

They are shown in cross-section; the curtain is 

gathered up at the sides; the backcloth depicts 

a building; the sets show walls with columns 

and arcades. Neither depiction provides any 

information about the lighting of the house 

or about additional features, like thunder or 

rain machines, although according to other 

sources, both were available. Unfortunately 

the shafts for the counterweights have 

been omitted in the drawings; no traces of 

them have as yet been discovered in today’s 

building. 

On the whole, though, Pigage’s drawings, 

probably intended to document things after 

the completion of the building, give a clear 

and detailed idea of the layout of the wooden 

theatre and the functioning of its sets and 

borders. 

The roof truss above the house has been 

preserved, and as it is identical in both 

dimensions and construction to the one above 

the stage, it gives an excellent idea of the 

working conditions in the fl yloft, surrounded 

by machinery and ropes. 

The few pieces of the stage that have been 

preserved are in the care of the Mannheim

offi ce of the State Agency for Property Assets 

and Construction (Bauleitung Schwetzingen 

des Landesbetriebs Vermögen und Bau Baden- 

Württemberg); they are kept in the orangery 

building. 

The Mannheim offi ce has commissioned the 

construction of a model built to a scale of 1:20, 


and presenting the machinery in a state of 

functionality. In this way, with the help of the 

remaining pieces of the stage and the model, 

the workings of the Baroque stage machinery 

may at least be displayed and understood. 

(Monika Scholl/Peter Thoma) 


67


68 

Fig. 1: Upper Waterworks, 

exterior (photo: Förderer). 

Fig. 2: Upper Waterworks and 

ice cellar, ground plan (From: 

Barock in Baden-Württemberg, 

exhibition catalogue, Bruchsal, 

27.6.-25.10.1981), Karlsruhe 

1981, p. 307). 


h) 

The Waterworks and Carl 

Theodor’s Scientifi c Experiments 

– Technical monuments 

of the Highest Order 

In the time of Elector Carl Theodor (1742- 

1799) the summer residence of the Electors 

Palatine, Schwetzingen Palace, was a centre of 

scientifi c endeavours and institutions, among 

them a physics cabinet, a meteorological 

station and a small amateur observatory on 

the palace roof. The great central axis running 

the length of the palace gardens was part of 

the baseline for a survey of the Palatinate and 

the site of the observation of the transit of 

Venus in 1761. The two waterworks supplying 

the garden are magnifi cent testimonies to 

18th-century water and pumping technology. 

“Water Art”: The Pumping Stations in the 

Schwetzingen Grounds 

Supplying the water features of the gardens of 

Schwetzingen Palace – the basins, fountains, 

cascades and artifi cial streams – required an 

elaborate system of pipes, pumping stations 

and waterworks. Two pumping stations in the 

vicinity of the grounds have been preserved, 

both dating from the 1770s. They are remarkable 

technological achievements and among 

the oldest surviving works of their kind in the 

modern age. 1 

Once the palace and garden had been enlarged 

and improved by Alessandro Galli-Bibiena 

(1687-1769?) und Nicolas de Pigage (1723- 

1796) in Elector Carl Theodor’s time, the 

Schwetzingen well expert Thomas Breuer, 

and the sculptor Peter Anton Verschaffelt 

(1710-1793), travelled to France to study the 

pumping machine at Marly near Versailles, 

and the layout of the Versailles park. The 

purpose of the trip was to gather information 

that could be used for a new waterworks in 

the Schwetzingen grounds, that would supply 

the garden’s water features. Once the travellers 

returned, a detailed model of the planned 

Schwetzingen waterworks2 was built. 

The old waterworks, a simple water wheel, 

no longer met the requirements. The wheel’s 

tubs scooped water from the Leimbach 

stream and poured it into a large container, 

installed 25 feet above ground. The unfi ltered 

water tended to clog up the pipes, and the 

rotting organic particles contained in it, 

caused unpleasant smells in the park. A more 

effi cient pump drawing water from a deep 

well was required. An installation consisting 

1 Rainer Slotta, Technische Denkmäler in der Bundesrepublik 

Deutschland, vol. 2, Bochum 1977, p. 308. 

2 Slotta 1977, p. 307. A very detailed description of the machinery 

of the two Schwetzingen waterworks is on pp. 308-312.

of a pumproom and machinery, and using an 

old wooden water tower (built in 1729), was in 

operation by 1764. 

The well borers, Thomas and Johann Breuer, 

were commissioned to build the machinery; 

Nicolas de Pigage was to design the new water 

tower. In 1771, Pigage declared work on the 

Upper Waterworks to be fi nished. 

The so-called Upper Waterworks consists 

of a pumproom, the water tower and the 

engineer’s cottage. The pumps drew water 

from four deep wells into leaden containers 

placed at a height of 18m and 10m respectively, 

from there to supply the park’s larger 

and smaller fountains. The pumps drew 13,2 

litres per second; the Upper Waterworks thus 

produced 570m 3 within twelve hours. 3 

In 1774, Pigage complained about the lack of 

a pump and reservoir to supply the cascade 

at the Temple of Apollo, resulting in the building 

of another pump, the Lower Waterworks. 

This is inconspicuously situated at the lower 

end of the park, behind the Roman water tower, 

hidden away in a simple private house. It 

uses the same type of machinery as the Upper 

Waterworks. Water is pumped into two raised 

containers; from there it fl ows via the Roman 

aqueduct to the bird-bath and the Galatea basin, 

with a drop of about 14m. An interesting 

detail is the bone mill once driven by the waterworks; 

here the bones from the electoral table 

were ground into meal, that was then used 

to fertilize the extensive kitchen gardens. 4 A 

date cut into a cogwheel shows the mill to 

have been built in 1779; it is thus one of the 

oldest of its kind in Germany. 

The Physics Cabinet 

The modernizing of science in the Palatinate 

set in when Elector Carl Theodor (1742-1799), 

himself an amateur scientist, appointed the Jesuit 

Christian Mayer (1719-1783) to the new 

chair of Experimental Physics at Heidelberg. 

On the ground fl oor of the old university building, 

Mayer established a physics cabinet 

3 Albert Baur, Zauber des Wassers. Die Wasserspiele im 

Schwetzinger Schlossgarten, Schwetzingen 1994, p. 39. 

4 Baur 1994, pp. 42-43. 


where he demonstrated the workings of machines 

and models, and gave lectures on chemistry, 

mineralogy, and astronomy. The Elec- 

tor presented the university’s physics cabinet 

with an electrostatic generator, a microscope, 

a sundial and a pneumatic pump. 5 

There must have been a small private physics 

lab at Schwetzingen Palace as well, with the 

Elector himself operating the machinery. In 

1776, another was established in the left wing 

of Mannheim Palace. 6 In the same year the 

Elector had entrusted the running of the cabinets 

in his palaces to the physicist Johann Jakob 

Hemmer (1733-1790), who modeled the 

cabinets at Mannheim and later Düsseldorf 

on those established by French scientist Abbé 

5 GLA Karlsruhe, Akte Pfalz Generalia 77/7908, inventory of 

1776. 

6 Adolf Kistner, Die Pfl ege der Naturwissenschaften in 

Mannheim zur Zeit Karl Theodors. Mannheim 1930, p. 72. 


Fig. 3: Cross section of the ice 

cellar with the ice storeroom, 

the vaulted passages and the 

venison storeroom above (From: 

Barock in Baden-Württemberg, 

exhibition catalogue, Bruchsal, 

27.6.-25.10.1981, Karlsruhe 

1981, p. 307). 

Fig. 4: View from the Roman 

water tower towards the aqueduct 

and the Lower Waterworks 


69


Fig. 5: Detail: water wheels in 

the Lower Waterworks (photo: 

LAD Esslingen, 2006). 

70 

Fig. 6: Bone mill (bowls 

and pestles) in the Lower 

Waterworks (photo: LAD 



Jean Antoine Nollet (1700-1770). Between November 

and Easter, Hemmer offered introductory 

courses in physics at the Mannheim lab; 

it is safe to assume that similar demonstrations 

were offered during the summer months 

at Schwetzingen, probably involving burning 

glasses, a large metal concave mirror and an 

electrostatic generator. 7 Unfortunately we do 

not know where exactly these devices were 

kept at Schwetzingen Palace. 

7 Kistner 1930, p.72. In the autumn of 1770 a number of 

melting experiments using metal concave mirrors were 

conducted at Mannheim Palace. 

Lightning Conductor 

Hemmer’s fi elds of research were meteorology 

and electricity, and he was a member of the 

Mannheim Academy of Sciences. He is best 

known for his contribution to the introduction 

of lightning conductors to the Palatinate. 

His aim was the averting of lightning damage; 

lightning that struck the electoral stables 

at Schwetzingen in 1769, may have given him 

an added incentive. The lightning conductor 

recommended by Hemmer was a vertical rod 

with a horizontal cross at the top. It was made 

of wrought iron, with copper tips attached to 

the ends. There were also simpler versions 

consisting of an iron rod with a single copper 

tip. The lightning conductors were put up on 

buildings more or less under Hemmer’s personal 

supervision. 

Hemmer mounted the fi rst of them on 15th 

April 1776, on the roof of Trippstadt Castle. 

On 17th July 1776, it was the turn of Schwetzingen 

Palace 8 , a number of private residences 

in Mannheim and the magazines of Heidelberg 

and Mannheim (a Klauber engraving 

of 1782 shows the Mannheim arsenal with 

Hemmer’s lightning conductors in place). 

They can still be seen on the roofs of the palace, 

the mosque and the Upper Waterworks 

at Schwetzingen, as well as on those of the 

Hockenheim and Reilingen town halls. 

Meteorology 

Privy Councillor Georg von Stengel had been 

systematically working on weather observation 

since 1758. In the palaces of Mannheim 

and Schwetzingen he had fi tted out small meteorological 

stations for the purpose; three 

times a day he recorded the weather, the wind 

direction as well as air pressure, warmth and 

humidity. 9 The Elector, too, appears to have 

owned a few meteorological instruments 

which he occasionally took with him on his 

travels. After the move from Mannheim to 

Munich, Georg von Stengel kept him informed 

about the weather in Mannheim. In 

1780, the Elector approved the founding of a 

8 Kistner 1930, p. 82. 

9 Kistner 1930, p. 97.

“Societas Meteorologica Palatina” which became 

the third branch of the Mannheim Academy 

of Sciences; Hemmer was appointed its 

secretary. The society’s aim was the precise 

prediction of weather conditions for the seasons, 

in order to provide valuable agricultural 

assistance. 

The Schwetzingen Observatory 

On the roof of the central block of Schwetzingen 

Palace there is a small platform with 

a fl agpole. From the roof truss, the unusually 

solid substructure of the platform becomes 

evident; it looks rather excessive for a mere 

fl agpole. But then the massive beams supported 

a small observatory with a movable 

dome from 1764 to 1773. 

Since around 1758, a small collection of 

astronomical instruments has been kept at 

Schwetzingen Palace. Among the most important 

were the instruments bought by Christian 

Mayer on his 1757 trip to Paris – a portable 

quadrant by Canivet, the second-beating pendulum 

clock by André Le Paute – as well as 

several telescopes by the English instrument 

maker John Dollond, that were later provided 

by the Elector, and a quadrant by Jeremias 

Sisson. 10 

In 1757, the court sent Mayer to Paris on a 

trip to study hydraulics and astronomy. 11 He 

was given the task of writing a report on the 

water supply system of Paris, and examining 

the possibility of adopting the system for 

Mannheim. He was also expected to study astronomy 

as practiced in the French capital. He 

was accompanied by a professor of mathematics 

from Würzburg 12 , Franz Huberti (who had 

installed a small observatory on the bell-tower 

10 When the Swiss scholar and mathematician Johann Bernoulli 

(1744-1807) visited German observatories in 1768-1770, in 

order to get an idea of their equipment, he noted that most of 

them had obtained their more important instruments from 

London. Along with Kassel and Göttingen, he also mentions 

the small makeshift observatory at Schwetzingen; there he 

found a French quadrant (made by Canivet), an English achromatic 

telescope by Dollond, and a small English quadrant by 

Sisson. 

11 GLA, 77/No 7908 Pfalz Generalia, Kunstsammlungen, 

Verzeichnis aller kurfürstlichen Instrumenten so auf hiesiger 

Sternwarte in Mannheim, theils in Heydelberg sich befi nden. 

Lit. B. ad N. 40 and 41, dated 24. 11. 1776. 

12 Kistner 1930, p. 211, n. 67. 


of the Würzburg university church as early as 

1757) 13 , and by an aristocrat friend. 

In Paris, Mayer met scientists Bernard Forest 

de Belidor (1693-1761) 14 and Antoine Deparci- 

eux (1703-1768) 15 , and with them visited the 

wells outside Paris and the city’s network of 

water distribution sites. 16 He also made the 

acquaintance of another astronomer, Josephe 

Jerome de Lalande (1732-1807), who in turn 

introduced him to his colleagues, César 

François Cassini de Thury (1714-1784), Joseph 

Nicholas de Lisle (d.1758), Abbé Nicolas-Louis 

de Lacaille (1713-1762) and Pierre Bouger 

(1698-1758). 17 

Abbé de Lacaille provided valuable advice 

when Mayer bought the portable quadrant 

from instrument maker Canivet. 18 From the 

13 Adolf Kistner, “Der kurpfälzische Hofastronom Johann 

Nepomuk Fischer...”, in: Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter (MGB), 

36th year, 1935, col. 124, n. 13. 

14 Bernard Forest de Belidor (1693-1761) was Professor of 

Mathematics at the artillery college of La Fère as well as a civil 

engineer and fortifi cations expert. He wrote the multivolume 

Architecture Hydraulique (1737-39). 

15 Antoine Deparcieux (1703-1768) studied mathematics at 

Paris, made sundials and water pumps and was interested in 

hydrodynamics and hydraulics. In 1746, he made a name for 

himself with a demographic survey, “Essai sur les probabilités 

de la durée de la vie humaine”. 

16 GLA, 77/No. 7908, 1776 inventory of instruments . 

17 De Lacaille had been the assistant of Cassini de Thury during 

the survey of the meridian from Paris to Dunkirk in 1739-40; 

Pierre Bouger had participated in the 1733 expedition to 

Peru, led by the astronomers Charles-Marie La Condamine 

(1701-1774) and Louis Godin (1704-1760). 

18 GLA, 77/No.7908, 1776 inventory of instruments. 


Fig. 7: Lightning conductor 

on the palace’s northwest 

pavilion (central block) (photo: 

Förderer). 

71


72 

Fig. 8: Anniversary of the 

transit of Venus in 2004. 


horologist, André Le Paute Mayer bought an 

upright clock with a second-beating pendulum, 

which cost 12 louis d‘or, with the intention 

of using it for his astrological observations. 

The quadrant has been preserved; the clock’s 

whereabouts are unknown. It was fi rst put up 

in one of the rooms at Schwetzingen Palace, 

that was briefl y used as an astronomy cabinet, 

but went missing in the 20th century. 

The quadrant was the fi rst instrument usable 

for both astronomy and geodesy, that was 

acquired by the small astronomy lab in 

Schwetzingen. It was used for land surveying 

(triangulation) and for determining the 

altitude of stars. 

Mayer’s aim was to determine a meridian 

and make a full survey of the Palatinate. 19 In 

1760, he ordered a semicircumferentor with 

a compass and two telescopes (graphometer) 

from Canivet, and in 1761, he ordered a copy 

of the French unit of measure, a toise (c.1,949 

m). With the quadrant he now had the 

complete, state-of-the-art equipment for his 

planned survey. 

19 GLA 213/No. 3540 Mannheim Stadt. Acta die neue Sternwarte 

betreff. Vol. I, Denkschrift Mayers zum Neubau einer Sternwarte 

in Mannheim vom 31. 12. 1771, p. 171. 

The Transit of Venus, 1761 

Astronomers set great store by the transit of 

Venus across the sun on 6th June 1761. From 

the observations made at the time, and from 

measuring the angles of Venus entering and 

exiting the sun’s disk, they hoped to gain 

new evidence of the derivation of the solar 

parallax, and thus of the distance from the 

earth to the sun. Measuring was to take place 

in numerous places all over the globe; almost 

200 astronomers were at their posts at more 

than 120 observation sites. In Europe the 

transit began early in the morning. 

At Schwetzingen, a wooden platform was 

built in the garden in front of the orangery, 

and on this Mayer arranged his observation 

instruments. 

At this point the question arises about which 

“orangery” was being referred to. Today’s 

orangery, with its open square was built by 

Nicolas de Pigage in 1761-63, and its garden 

with the bridges is even later (1764). 20 It must 

be assumed that the documents refer to the 

north and south quarter-circle pavilions, built 

after the Old Orangery of 1755 had been 

pulled down and called “the new orangery 

buildings” in the plans. 21 Mayer’s observation 

platform would have been on the cleared site 

of the former Old Orangery, more or less on 

the park’s central axis and west of the Arion 

fountain. The site was suffi ciently distant 

from the palace, which was off to the east, to 

permit an unobstructed view. 

The platform would have been a simple raised 

wooden construction with a fl oor of solid 

planks, spacious enough for the astronomer, 

his assistant, and his equipment. From there 

the instruments were pointed at the rising 

sun. The transit had started well before 

sunrise, and in Schwetzingen it was over 

around 8.35 a.m. 

It had been hoped that the measurements 

taken all over the world, in what was in effect 

20 Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Die Schwetzinger Orangerien”, in: 

Der Süden im Norden. Orangerien – ein fürstliches Vergnügen. 

(Ed. Oberfi nanzdirektion Karlsruhe Staatliche Schlösser 

und Gärten und Arbeitskreis Orangerien in Deutschland e. V.), 

Regensburg 1999, p. 67. 

21 Wertz 1999, fi g. on p. 58, plan of expropriations between 1748 

and 1762.

the fi rst international scientifi c collaboration, 

would allow a determination of the solar 

parallax to a quarter-second 22 , but the results 

proved unusable. The numbers arrived at for 

the solar parallax were between 8.5’’ and 10.5’’, 

which corresponds to a solar distance between 

155 million and 125 million kilometres. 23 

That same year, Mayer suggested the building 

of an observatory on the palace roof, and the 

Elector gave his permission. The idea was not 

just to observe the sky. A facility was required 

for the determination of a baseline that was 

essential for a trigonometric survey of the 

Palatinate. A meridian (north-south) was 

needed too, in order to align the astronomical 

instruments. 

The observatory, probably consisting of a 

small wooden tower with a movable copper 

roof and a narrow catwalk, was completed 

by 1764. 24 The movable dome had an inner 

diameter of c.3,25m. Mayer considered the 

small tower to be a temporary solution 25 ; 

he was hoping for a larger observatory in 

Mannheim. 

The general appearance of the tower has been 

preserved by a medal of Frankenthal porcelain 

displayed by the Bayerisches Nationalmuseum 

in Munich. 26 The observation dome was 

probably taken to the Mannheim observatory 

in 1773. 

Work on the “Basis Palatina” and the 

“Charta Palatina” 

In March 1762, Mayer met Cassini de Thury 

again, who stayed at Schwetzingen to settle 

details of the impending mapping of the 

countries bordering France with the Elector. 

The mapping would cover the territories on 

the Rhine – the Palatinate, Baden-Durlach and 

22 Maurice Daumas, Scientifi c Instruments of the Seventeenth & 

Eighteenth Centuries and their Makers, London 1972, p. 128. 

23 Rudolf Wolf, Handbuch der Astronomie, vol. 2, p. 252. 

24 Unfortunately there is no known depiction of this observatory. 

From the description of the Mannheim observatory, 

a few conclusions may be drawn – it is assumed that the 

Schwetzingen observatory was transferred there once the 

building at Mannheim had been completed. There are some 

good depictions of that structure, with the small observatory 

on its roof. 

25 GLA 213/3540 Acta die neue Sternwarte zu Mannheim betreff. 

Vol.I, Denkschrift Mayers vom 31. 12. 1771, p. 165. 

26 For this piece of information the author is indebted to Mr. 

Ralf Wagner, Schwetzingen Palace administration, 2005 


Baden-Baden. That the Palatinate was quite 

interested in a new survey of its territories 

too, became evident from the opinion of the 

Palatine surveyor Theodor Traitteur: “We have 

geographic maps in abundance,[…] most of 

them drawn on the basis of guesswork, of a 

general inspection, of the cartographer’s imagination, 

rarely on that of actual locations, let 

alone astronomical latitude and longitude”. 27 

Once Cassini had left, Mayer embarked on his 

own surveys for a map of the Palatinate. The 

instruments were at his disposal, and he had a 

baseline as well in the shape of the fl awlessly 

straight avenue, built by Elector Carl Philipp, 

which ran from Rohrbach near Heidelberg, 

right up to the palace’s court of honour and, 

which had been used by Cassini for that very 

purpose. Mayer extended the line through the 

park’s main axis up to the eastern shore of the 

Rhine near Ketsch. 

The great central axis of the palace garden, 

and the Carl-Theodor-Straße leading up to 

the palace, are thus sections of the original 

baseline for the mapping of the Palatinate. 

The former avenue can still be seen on aerial 

views, a straight line through the Rhine valley, 

27 Theodor Traitteur, Über die Größe und Bevölkerung der 

Rheinischen Pfalz, Mannheim 1789, p. 22. 


Fig. 9: Small map of the 

Palatinate, Egidius Verhelst 

after Christian Mayer, 1773. 

73


74 


although it was intersected by the railway in 

later years. 

Later writers have confi rmed Mayer’s precise 

survey, more precise than that undertaken by 

Cassini de Thury. 28 Mayer found the distance 

to be 6.238,72 toises (toise du Perou), approximately 

12,16km. On this baseline from Ketsch 

to Rohrbach, Mayer aligned his triangular net. 

The merits of triangulation were that only 

one baseline had to be precisely measured; 

the remaining sides of the triangle could be 

determined mathematically. Mayer published 

his fi ndings in 1763, in a tract printed at 

Mannheim, Basis Palatina 1762, ad normam 

academiae Regiae Parisinae scientaiarum 

exactam bis dimensa, anno 1763, novis 

mensuris aucta et confi rmata, recentissimisque 

observationibus et calculis stabilata. Ten 

years later he published his map of the region 

surveyed between Heidelberg, Mannheim 

and Schwetzingen, the small Charta Palatina 

drawn to a scale of 1:75000. It covered an area 

of 360 km 2 . 

Geographical Position of the Schwetzingen 

Observatory 

Measurements taken during the lunar eclipse 

of 17th March 1764, and the eclipses 

28 Andreas Weiss, “Die Charta Palatina des Christian Mayer” 

in: Mitteilungen des Historischen Vereins der Pfalz, vol. 

26, Speyer 1903, pp. 1-40., Hans Schmidt, “Der Urmassstab 

Christian Mayers” in: Mannheimer Hefte, No.1, 1976 pp. 

14- 18, Heinrich Merkel, Die geodätischen Arbeiten Christian 

Mayers in der Kurpfalz, Karlsruhe 1928, “Kartographie und 

Vermessungswesen” in: Kistner, 1930, pp. 48-56. 

of Jupiter’s moons in 1765 and 1766, allowed 

Mayer to determine the exact longitude of the 

Schwetzingen observatory (26° 18” 30’). To 

determine its latitude, Mayer measured a total 

of 76 meridian heights between 1765 and 

1766, calculated the mean and gave the value 

as 49° 23” 4,5’. 

Finally, he determined the Schwetzingen 

meridian that was needed for the aligning of 

the planned survey. For this Mayer used the 

azimuth method. 

In 18th-century Germany only eight places 

had been precisely located by astronomical 

means, and Mayer’s work was widely applauded. 

29 Experts noted with satisfaction 

that Schwetzingen now had its place among 

those select few, that the relevant fi ndings 

would be included in the yearbooks of foreign 

academies, that the scientist himself would 

be honoured by the membership of those 

academies. 30 

Suddenly, Schwetzingen had a place in the 

coordinate system of the Earth’s survey. To the 

Elector it must have been a pleasant thought 

that at least as far as astronomical positioning 

was concerned, his summer residence had 

now caught up with Paris and London. 

(Kai Budde) 

29 Kistner, 1930,pp. 53. 

30 GLA 213/3540 Acta die neue Sternwarte zu Mannheim betreff. 

Vol. I., Denkschrift Chr. Mayers vom 31. 12. 1771, p. 2.

i) 

The Palace Garden Arboreta – 

a Botanical Research Station 

Somewhat hidden behind the long orangery 

building completed in 1761 by Nicolas de Pigage 

(1723-1796), there are two separate areas, 

the arboreta. The collections of woody and 

shrubby plant species, assembled for scientifi c 

purposes and with a collector’s passion, were 

famous in their day. Work on the fi rst arboretum 

started in 1777, in the time of Elector 

Carl Theodor (1724-1799). From 1804, the tree 

collection was continued by Archduke Carl 

Friedrich (1728-1811). 

The Arborium Theodoricum 

“The garden contains a collection of all kinds 

of native and foreign trees and shrubs, that 

occur in the Palatinate; they are labeled with 

their names for the instruction of young 

gardeners. This is a very good and proper 

institution.” 1 

Thus, the philosopher and art theoretician 

C. C. L. Hirschfeld (1742-1792) describes the 

strip of land in the northwest of the Schwetzingen 

palace garden, in his fi ve-volume book 

about garden art, Theorie der Gartenkunst 

(1779-1785). He is referring to the Arborium 

Theodoricum, the fi rst area there to be laid out 

in the English style in 1777. A comparatively 

narrow strip of about 400 x 80 m behind the 

menagerie and the canal that had formed the 

garden’s boundary until then, was selected 

for the purpose. The Arborium Theodoricum 

with its layout based on naturalistic principles 

was to provide a contrast to the strictly formal 

French garden, characterized by axes and 

symmetry. 

A large nursery had been established in the 

northwestern part of the garden, as early 

as 1769. Here woody plants were grown to 

supply the electoral gardens. The nursery 

may have inspired Carl Theodor to create 

1 Christian Cay Lorenz Hirschfeld, Theorie der Gartenkunst, 

5 vols, Leipzig 1779-1785. Rpt. Hildesheim 1973. Quotation 

from: Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, Orte für Seele und Geist, 

Schlösser Baden-Württemberg, No. 3, 2004, pp. 24-27, p. 24. 


an arboretum, a kind of educational garden 

with a variety of trees and shrubs, exotic as 

well as native. Pigage described it as “a living 

dictionary of garden trees and shrubs” and 

called it the “Arborium Theodoricum” 2 in 

honour of the Elector. With regard to the new 

gardening philosophy (“dans le style de la 

nature”), he referred to this part of the garden 

as “sauvage”. 3 

Garden Layout and a Knowledge of Trees 

In Germany the journey to England undertaken 

by Prince Leopold III. Friedrich Franz von 

Anhalt-Dessau (1740-1817) in 1764, signalled 

the beginning of gardening modelled on 

English landscape gardens. The park of Wörlitz 

on the Elbe became a tourist attraction 

of European status. Its collection of woody 

plants was inspired by the famous gardens 

of Chelsea and Kew. With the development 

of landscape gardening, the attitude towards 

trees and shrubs changed as well. They were 

no longer easily replaceable raw materials for 

formal gardens; they were considered more individually. 

Innumerable species were collected 

from all continents and planted in specialized 

garden areas. They were equally popular with 

experts and educated amateurs. 

England had thus become a must for anybody 

interested in the art of gardening. Friedrich 

Ludwig von Sckell (1750-1823), born in 

Weilburg on the Lahn and the son of a court 

gardener, Johann Wilhelm Sckell (1721-1792), 

quickly proved his gift for garden layout when 

working with Pigage. In 1770, the Elector sent 

the young man on a study trip to France and 

England, the great European centres of garden 

design. From August to December 1776, 

Sckell was in England again on the Elector’s 

instructions, and there he met up with Pigage. 

Sckell had been asked to complete his studies 

and buy new plants for Schwetzingen, and 

had taken the opportunity to learn more about 

dendrology, the science of woody plants. 

2 Pigage: “Information sur les dépenses en Batimens et en 

jardins de la Cour” (1776). In: Wiltrud Heber, Die Arbeiten des 

Nicolas de Pigage in den ehemals kurpfälzischen Residenzen 

Mannheim und Schwetzingen, Worms 1986, p. 469. 

3 From: “Etat general”, 1784. In: Heber 1986, p. 471, s. n. 2. 


75


Fig. 1: View of the Arborium 

Theodoricum (photo: R. Stripf). 

76 


On his return to Schwetzingen Sckell was 

commissioned to lay out a park in the English 

style. He had brought a shipload of trees 

from England. A year later, in 1777, Sckell’s 

fi rst work, the “Arborium Theodoricum”, was 

taking shape. The fi rst landscape garden at 

Schwetzingen was supplied with another 

canal to serve as a new outer boundary. 

„The merit of a natural garden is not in its 

great size, but in its inherent artistic value, 

its beautiful shapes and images” 4 , Sckell was 

to write later. In fact, he had all the elements 

of a landscape garden at his disposal. The 

long narrow island created by the canals was 

modelled into a gentle valley and laid out as a 

meadow surrounded by trees and shrubs. Two 

meandering paths (the “belt walk”) presented 

an ever-changing scenery. Skilfully arranged 

groups of trees and shrubs guided the visitor’s 

eye down the valley. Dense shrubbery hid the 

rectangular canals from view. In one place 

Sckell had the paths and canals meet in a complicated 

knot; this is the garden’s picturesque 

high point. Water is presented as a serene 

pool, a thundering cascade and a meandering 

stream. Because the layout of the Arborium 

Theodoricum dispenses with axes, the view 

4 Quoted in: Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Schöne Formen und 

Bilder”, in: Fürstliche Gartenlust – Historische Schlossgärten in 

Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart 2002, pp. 44-55, p. 47. 

towards the Temple of Botany opens up as if 

by chance – the structure is not intended to 

be the central “point de vue” of this part of the 

garden. 

In accordance with gardening theory, the garden 

was supposed to blend into the landscape. 

Sckell’s inspiration was landscape painting: 

“With regard to the different shades of plants, 

it should always be kept in mind that the light 

green trees must be placed in the foreground 

and the dark green ones in the background, so 

the former stand out clearly against the latter, 

and display their shapes and silhouettes to 

advantage.” 5 

Imports and Experts 

The main focus of the new was on its theoretical 

and scientifi c uses. Unlike the great nursery, 

which simply supplied trees, the arboretum 

was a collection of valuable plants on display. 

Both areas of the garden combined made up a 

whole of theory and practice. The fi rst exotic 

specimens were delivered from England, 

France and the Netherlands to Schwetzingen, 

in the shape of young plants or seeds. Many 

interests and areas of research could create 

the scientifi c impetus to lay out an arboretum. 

Plants were collected according to geographic 

or systematic criteria; the demands they made 

on their site could be taken into account as 

well as aesthetic considerations. The systematic 

classifi cation of exotic woody plants 

was made easier too. Sckell himself gives an 

indication of the variety of species suitable for 

a garden: “The plant world offers more than 

four to fi ve hundred trees and shrubs, foreign 

as well as native, for the garden artist to use 

in decorating his garden and creating picturesque 

combinations.” 6 Sckell drew up long 

lists of “native and foreign trees and shrubs 

that can be used in most gardens” 7 based on 

different sets of criteria. Even today they 

are still used for the re-planting of historic 

gardens. 

5 Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell, Beiträge zur bildenden Gartenkunst 

für angehende Gartenkünstler und Gartenliebhaber, 

München 1825, rpt. Worms 1982, p. 112. 

6 Sckell 1825, p. 109. 

7 Sckell 1825, p. 238.

The science of botany, which reached a heyday 

in the 18th century, is celebrated in the Temple 

of Botany. The interior walls are decorated 

with portrait medallions of famous scientists 

– Theophrastus (372-287 BC), Pliny the Elder 

(23-73 AD), Jean Pitton de Tournefort (1656- 

1708) and Carl von Linné (1707-1778). When 

the temple was built, the world’s greatest 

natural scientist was Carl von Linné, who had 

died shortly before. Linné had introduced 

the binomial nomenclature into the scientifi c 

world. Linné’s system of the plant kingdom 

(sexual system) was based mainly on the 

number and arrangement of the stamens 

and pistils. Linné himself considered it to be 

too artifi cial and wanted a system that took 

the entire plant into account. He brought 

order to a multitude of naming systems and 

made international communication easier. 

The names of many of the plants listed in the 

arboreta are Linnéan in origin. Linnés system 

(“Systema Plantarum”) challenged the garden 

artist to attempt a blending of art and science. 

Aesthetically pleasing planting schemes and 

the collecting of plants according to scientifi c 

considerations, could be hard to reconcile in 

a traditional formal garden. The more relaxed 

layouts of English landscape gardens opened 

up greater possibilities. 

Tournefort had described numerous plants 

and established a new classifi cation system, 

based on the form of the corolla, which was 

among the most successful and widely used 

pre-Linnéan systems. In Greece and little Asia 

he discovered more than 1000 new plants. 

Pliny, an ancient Roman writer and scientist, 

wrote a 37-volume natural history (Naturalis 

historia), which represents the fi rst encyclopedic 

description of natural phenomena, 

including botanic ones. Theophrastus, a Greek 

philosopher and the most remarkable among 

the pupils of Aristotle, left numerous writings 

including several on botany. 

In this slightly separate part of the Schwetzingen 

garden, an area for the studying of 

woody plants, an increasing number of foreign 

trees was included with the native ones. 


In 1784, young Sckell planted a “ginkgo of the 

Japanese”, 8 as he called it. He had bought it in 

the Netherlands as a special rarity, and paid 10 

fl . for it. This species of tree had been discovered 

in Japan towards the end of the 17th 

century by a German physician and botanist, 

Engelbert Kaempfer of Lemgo, who described 

it in his 1712 book, Amoenitatum Exoticarum. 

Linné described the plant in 1771 and found 

a name for it, Ginkgo biloba L. (L. is for Carl 

von Linné, as the author of the name). A new 

ginkgo to the right of the temple was planted 

on 13th September 2000, to commemorate 

the 250th anniversary of Sckell’s birthday, and 

his contribution to the Schwetzingen garden 

and the art of gardening in general. Some of 

the arboretum’s trees are sure to date from 

Carl Theodor’s time, among them, a common 

oak (Quercus robur) at the entrance of the 

Arborium Theodoricum (its bark supplied the 

model for the exterior walls of the temple at 

the other end of the garden), a London plane 

(Platanus x hispanica) and a European white 

elm (Ulmus laevis). 

The scientifi c importance of the arboretum becomes 

evident from a document dated 1795. 

The Elector had ordered a stock-taking of the 

garden and buildings, which was documented 

8 Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, Ginkgo biloba: “Die größte Merkwürdigkeit 

…”, in: Schlösser Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart, No. 1, 

2001, pp. 14-17, p. 14. 


Fig. 2: Temple of Botany (photo: 

R. Stripf). 

77


Fig. 3: Relief portrait of the 

scientist Carl von Linné in the 

Temple of Botany (photo: R. 

Stripf). 

78 

Fig. 4: Entrance gate of 

Zeyher’s arboretum (photo: R. 

Stripf). 


in a “Protocollum commissionale”, probably by 

Sckell. Under §9 he writes: “The small English 

garden (arboretum) with its plants and kinds 

of wood, the walks and the small vineyard, 

deserves to be kept from neglect because of its 

fi ne and varied collection of foreign trees and 

its beautiful layout, and because it is inexpensive 

to maintain. (Especially considering that 

this excellent garden does not merely provide 

pleasure to visitors but also serves to educate 

the forestry offi cials themselves about types of 

trees, this request should be granted in full.)“ 9 

The Zeyher Arboretum 

After the diffi cult time of the French occupation, 

the parts of the Palatinate on the eastern 

bank of the Rhine became part of the new 

Grand Duchy of Baden in 1803. Sckell – now 

in the service of the Grand Duke – did his best 

to remain in charge of Schwetzingen until he 

was appointed court garden supervisor of all 

Bavaria, and left Schwetzingen for Munich. 

In 1804, Johann Michael Zeyher (1770-1843) 

succeeded Sckell as garden director. Having 

formerly worked at Ludwigsburg, Karlsruhe 

and (as court gardener of Margrave Carl 

Friedrich von Baden) at Basel, he was now 

put in charge of all the gardens of the Grand 

Duchy of Baden. One of Zeyher’s major 

scientifi c accomplishments was his collection 

of plants and animals from all over the world 

(“Herbarium Zeyheri”), which was destroyed 

when the palace at Karlsruhe burned down 

during during WWII. 

At Schwetzingen Zeyher’s task was to convert 

the old menagerie, which had been closed 

down in 1778, into another arboretum – something 

Carl Theodor had been planning for 

some time. For the “Draissche Forst-Institut” a 

botanical garden was laid out with the stated 

task of “planting every woody plant at all 

obtainable” 10 . For this purpose Zeyher had the 

menagerie buildings pulled down with the 

exception of the basin. 

The criteria that had applied for Sckell’s 

landscaped meadow did not apply here. The 

focus was not on the picture, as a whole, but 

on the appearance of the individual plant, the 

complete presentation of varieties and species 

from a botanical point of view. The arboretum 

was intended to give an overview of the “fl ora 

palatina” “for the forester to fi nd everything 

of value to him, that these parts will produce... 

9 „Protocollum commissionale” of 30.6.1795 and 9.9.1795. In: 

Heber 1986, p. 476. 

10 Johann Michael Zeyher, Verzeichniss der Gewaechse in dem 

Grossherzoglichen Garten zu Schwetzingen. Mannheim 1819, 

p. 4.

The newly acquired, and sometimes very 

rare, kinds of wood have been industriously 

propagated, and used for bartering purposes” 

11 . From 1806 onwards, Zeyher published 

a number of inventories of the plants grown 

at Schwetzingen. 12 The inventory of woody 

plants published in 1809, lists 827 varieties. 13 

In his 1819 inventory, Zeyher mentions a 

total of 9,500 varieties. 14 The inventories are 

important documents for today’s replanting 

schemes. 

A large iron gate surmounted by a gilt crown 

gives access to the arboretum. It was probably 

in 1825 that Zeyher wrote: “The arboretum. 

Immediately behind the orangery we enter 

this part of the garden. It was laid out in 1804, 

at the orders of His Royal Highness, the Archduke 

Karl Friedrich von Baden. Native and 

foreign woody plants are grouped together 

as much as possible. There is a pleasant pond 

here enclosing a beautifully planted island. 

During the summer the greenhouse plants are 

displayed here, and at the foot of a a shady 

wall, the alpine plants are situated, some in 

pots, some in the soil [...] This collection is 

probably one of the most complete in Germany, 

and maintained with great care.” 15 

About the nursery, Zeyher writes: “Beyond 

the bridge is the entrance to a nursery 

thirteen acres in size and containing more 

than 240,000 foreign trees and shrubs. All the 

archducal gardens are supplied from this rich 

store, and the plant-lover, too, may buy here 

whatever he needs for his own garden.” 16 

Zeyher was concerned for the English garden 

“where natives and visitors like to linger”. In 

the plan of the garden submitted by him in 

1809, the layout of the entire garden becomes 

evident. The symmetrical paths within the 

11 Zeyher 1819, p. 4. 

12 Johann Michael Zeyher, Verzeichniss sämmtlicher Bäume 

und Sträucher in den Grossherzoglich-Badischen Gärten zu 

Carlsruhe, Schwezingen und Mannheim, Mannheim 1806. 

13 after Wertz 2004, p. 27. 

14 Zeyher 1819, p. 5. 

15 Johann Michael Zeyher, probably 1825. In: Repr. Freiburg 

1983, pp. 146 f. 

16 Johann Michael Zeyher/Georg Christian Roemer, Beschreibung 

der Gartenanlagen zu Schwetzingen. Mannheim 1809, p. 36 

f. (First edition, with a “Verzeichniss sämmtlicher Bäume, 

Glas- und Treibhauspfl anzen des Schwezinger Gartens”). Rpt. 

Freiburg 1983. 


menagerie area were later replaced with 

meandering walks. 

Some decades later, around 1840, disturbances 

of growth and the thick planting necessitated 

the felling of trees. However, it is thanks to 

these measures, that the grand ducal arboretum 

still retains some of its original plants, 

among them Austrian pines (Pinus nigra) 

and a pale green Japanese Zelkova (Zelkova 

serrata). 

The Arboreta Today 

About thirty years ago a restoration of the old 

arboreta was embarked on. Many new plants 

were planted, that now complement the old 

collection of trees. Today, the two arboreta 

contain about 180 species and varieties of 

woody plants belonging to about 50 families 17 . 

Besides the above-mentioned woody plants, 

dating from the early years of the arboreta, 

a number of other fi ne trees are on display. 

There are some magnifi cent deciduous 

cypresses (Taxodium distichum) from North 

America, a picturesque tulip tree (Liriodendron 

tulipifera), an Italian maple (Acer 

opalus) and spreading yews (Taxus baccata). 

There are also numerous younger trees and 

shrubs, planted more recently, the choice of 

which was suggested by Zeyher’s inventories. 

17 e.g. Jost Fitschen, Gehölzfl ora, Wiebelsheim 2002. 


Fig. 5: Autumn at Zeyher’s 

arboretum (photo: R. Stripf). 

79


80 

Fig. 6: Tree “Taxodium 

distichum” (photo: R. Stripf). 


The box so characteristic of Renaissance and 

Baroque gardens, as well as of the traditional 

rustic or cottage garden, is represented by approximately 

25 varieties. The plants are left to 

grow freely, allowing a study of their growing 

habits and the size, colour and shape of their 

leaves. The genus Magnolia is represented by 

18 species and varieties too. 18 

As well as measures to preserve the character 

of the plant collections for scientifi c purposes, 

steps are also taken to keep the historical 

tradition of a landscaped garden alive. Sckell’s 

criteria for the picturesque grouping and arrangement 

of trees and shrubs are taken into 

account, especially in the older arboretum, the 

“Arborium Theodoricum”. 

The woody plants of both arboreta have been 

identifi ed with labels giving their botanical 

and common names, their family and place of 

origin. They are also listed and described in a 

guidebook. 19 

(Rainer Stripf) 

18 after Wertz 2004, p. 27. 

19 Rainer Stripf, Die Arboreten des Schwetzinger Schlossgartens, 

München/Berlin 2004.

j) 

Harmonious Opposites: 

Carl Theodor’s Garden – Absolutist 

Display and Utopian Idealism 

Garden Art – Refl ections of an Era of Change 

Like few other 18th-century gardens, the 

grounds of Schwetzingen Palace refl ect the 

many faces and complexities of an era poised 

between tradition and progress, full of change 

and turmoil, social as well as philosophical. 1 

Even in itself the complex is a powerful testimony 

of the interaction of social theory and 

garden theory. 

Like an open book, the Schwetzingen palace 

garden displays the subtle transitions from 

Absolutism to Enlightenment, oppression to 

liberty, formalism to naturalism, and the changing 

relationship between man, architecture 

and nature. The ideal of formality, represented 

by the French geometric garden, is challenged 

by that of naturalness as expressed 

by the open English landscape garden. Between 

Le Nôtre’s aim of “shaming Nature by 

means of Art” at the centre of the garden and 

Rousseau’s principle of a “Return to Nature” 

at its periphery, the intimate Rococo cabinets 

serve as connecting links. The old is not built 

over but accepted and preserved. In this way, 

the palace garden represents an ideal embodiment 

both of the Janus-faced latter half of the 

18th century and of the Palatine court in general, 

and Elector Carl Theodor in particular. 

The Gardens of Schwetzingen Palace – 

Expression of an Unsettled Character? 

The sequence of different layouts, and their 

respective historical and intellectual contexts, 

1 Re. 18th-century gardens: Park und Garten im 18. Jahrhundert 

(= Colloquium of the Arbeitsstelle 18. Jahrhundert, 

Gesamthochschule Wuppertal 26.-29. 9. 1976), Heidelberg 

1978; Iris Lauterbach (ed.), Der französische Garten am Ende 

des Ancien Régime, Worms 1987. Select bibliography on the 

Schwetzingen gardens: Dieter Hennebo / Alfred Hoffmann, 

Geschichte der Deutschen Gartenkunst, vol. II, pp. 361 ff; 

Ferdinand Werner, “Der Garten der kurfürstlichen Sommerresidenz 

Schwetzingen”, in: Lebenslust und Frömmigkeit 

Kurfürst Carl Theodor zwischen Barock und Aufklärung (exhibition 

catalogue), Regensburg 1999, pp. 63 ff; Carl Ludwig 

Fuchs / Claus Reisinger, Schloß und Garten zu Schwetzingen, 

Wiesbaden 2001. 


is more than a refl ection of the greater political 

and philosophical developments of their 

time. It also refl ects the personality of Elector 

Carl Theodor. The many-faced appearance of 

the palace gardens might be due to the caprices 

of a ruling prince, but it might also refl ect 

a process of adjustment to, and identifi cation 

with, the requirements of the age, and the growing 

intellectual emancipation of a ruler coming 

into his own. 

Elector Carl Theodor occupies a position between 

an Absolutist claim to power and an Enlightened 

modernity. 2 The more approachable 

part of his personality is evident from his lively 

interest in innovative artistic movements, 

and his scientifi c and philosophical curiosity. 

At the same time, introducing ideas to him required 

a measure of skill and persuasiveness 

on the part of his advisors – a certain reserve 

concerning both people and ideas was one of 

Carl Theodor’s essential traits. 3 He could oc- 

2 Liselotte Homering, “Zwischen absolutistischem Machtanspruch 

und bürgerlicher Aufgeklärtheit – Kurfürst Carl 

Theodor und das Theater”, in: Lebenslust und Frömmigkeit […] 

1999, pp. 305 ff; Stefan Mörz, “Aufgeklärter Absolutismus in 

der Kurpfalz während der Regierungszeit des Kurfürsten Karl 

Theodor 1742-77”. In: Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für 

geschichtliche Landeskunde in Baden-Württemberg, Reihe B, 

vol. 120, Stuttgart 1991; id., “Un prince attentif – Carl Theodor 

als Landesfürst”, in: Lebenslust und Frömmigkeit […] 1999, pp. 

211 ff. 

3 Mörz 1991, p. 86. 


Fig. 1: Garden plan (From: 

Carl Ludwig Fuchs/Claus 

Reisinger, Schloß und Garten 

zu Schwetzingen, Worms 2001, 

p. 208). 

Captions 

1 Palace; 2 South quarter-circle 

pavilion; 3 North quarter-circle 

pavilion; 4 Palace theatre; 5 

Orangery; 6 Arion fountain; 

7 Stag fountain; 8 Temple of 

Minerva; 9 Wild boar fountain; 

10 Galatea basin; 11 Bird bath; 

12 Rock of Pan; 13 Memorial 

stones; 14 Mosque; 15 Temple 

of Mercury; 16 Rhine and 

Danube statues; 17 Chinese 

bridge; 18 Mask fountain; 19 

Temple of Apollo; 20 Natural 

theatre; 21 Porcelain cabinet; 

22 Bathhouse; 23 Waterspouting 

birds; 24 Pheasant 

yard; 25 Diorama; 26 Temple of 

Botany; 27 Roman water tower; 

28 Obelisk and aqueduct; 29 

Lower Waterworks; 30 Upper 

Waterworks; 31 Ambassadors’ 

House 

81


Fig. 2: Aerial view of the circular 

parterre (LAD Esslingen, 

2005). 

82 


casionally be both irresolute and easily infl uenced, 

and he was melancholic by nature. This 

complex personality, poised between scepticism 

and a capacity for true enthusiasm, was 

concealed behind a pleasant, kind manner. 

All of these traits might be said to be refl ected 

by his garden, the plurality of its architectural 

and gardening styles and fashions and the 

harmonious whole they present. 

The Circular Parterre – an Icon of Absolutist 

display 

The building of a new palace in the centre 

of the circle with its French-style layout 4 

as originally planned, would have been the 

architectural incarnation of Absolutist control 

and expansionism. However, the palace was 

not built. Instead the prominent position was 

given to a circular basin with the fi gure of 

Arion at the centre. It may seem surprising at 

fi rst glance, that such an insignifi cant character 

from Classical mythology should have 

been given this honour. But in fact Arion, 

a companion of Apollo, represents a veiled 

allusion to the quasi-Apollinic existence of the 

roi soleil, Louis XIV, and by association to that 

of Elector Carl Theodor as well. 

4 On Baroque gardens: W. Charles / William J. Mitchel / William 

Runnball Jr., Die Poesie der Gärten. Architektonische Interpretationen 

klassischer Gartenkunst, Basel/Berlin/Boston 1991, 

pp. 23 ff; Wilfried Hansmann, Gartenkunst der Renaissance 

und des Barock, Köln 1983. 

But how did the French gardening style, 

already considered somewhat outmoded at 

the time, come to dominate the Schwetzingen 

garden? The clear structure of the circle with 

its surrounding quarter-circle pavilions was an 

appropriate shape for an open-air reception 

hall, such as the modest palace could not 

provide. But its make-believe aspect, and the 

opportunities for display it offered, may also 

have appealed to a prince who in his early 

years favoured an Absolutist attitude, but was 

in fact quite dependent on his advisors. 

Rococo Playfulness 

Adjacent to this grand statement at the centre 

of the Schwetzingen garden are the small-scale 

open-air cabinets, more characteristic of the 

spirit of the times. Here the capricious mirth 

of Rococo unfolds in a number of separate 

“rooms” laid out according to the principle of 

varieté, and often giving the impression of inviting 

the visitor to play and merriment. The 

pleasure groves and green parlours embody 

the new freedom to dispose of one’s time, to 

retire into the private sphere, in keeping with 

the spirit of the Enlightened era. 

Here the sonorously Baroque is replaced by 

a refi ned playfulness, that manifests itself 

in images of vibrant grace. The uncertainty 

and aimlessness that also characterized late 

18th-century courtly society, and the search 

for guidelines, occasionally take the shape of 

mannerisms or decadences of both style and 

essence, unmistakable signs of an era coming 

to an end. The appreciation of freedom and 

variety expressed by the multitude of motifs, 

and the delight in everything exotic, foreign, 

bizarre and fantastic, takes on the old formality 

represented by the garden’s geometric 

areas. In France this development – the 

replacement of courtly formality and outward 

display by the private and intimate – took 

half a century. At Schwetzingen the transition 

happened almost instantaneously.

Absolutism and Enlightenment 

Elector Carl Theodor chose the so-called 

bathhouse, a hermitage in the shape of a 

summer house, to be his private refuge. The 

linear development, and thus disciplining, 

of the surrounding nature by the trellises 

of the “water-spouting birds”, is in keeping 

with Baroque tradition. The paysage sauvage 

depicted by the diorama, on the other hand, 

refl ects the longing for an earthly paradise, 

an attitude more characteristic of the era of 

Enlightenment. The same is exemplifi ed by 

the sculptures of the “water-spouting birds”, 

illustrating as they do an Aesop fable about 

the Humanist ideals of solidarity and human 

brotherhood. 

The natural theatre, too, shows the infi ltration 

of old structures by new ideals. The theatre 

was built in 1766, along with its stage backcloth, 

a “hill of the muses” surmounted by the 

Temple of Apollo, here characterized as the 

god of both the arts and the muses. Situated 

in the immediate vicinity of the bathhouse, 

which was used by Carl Theodor during his 

stays at the summer residence from c.1776, 

the theatre again suggests the Elector’s identifi 

cation with the god, as well as his generous 

patronage of the arts and, more generally, the 

lively musical “scene” at the Palatine court. 

In 1772, a terrace was added at the back of 

the stage structure, another indication of 

the Elector’s changing world view. Viewed 

from here, the structure becomes a temple of 

Reason, a sun temple, and Apollo takes on the 

aspect of Helios, the sun god. By association, 

Carl Theodor now appears as the radiant 

fi gure of an enlightened ruler. 

The building of the mosque heralds the 

– belated – arrival of the Oriental fashion or 

turquerie in the garden. The “architectural 

view” towards the east in those years, was the 

embodiment of a romantic need to project 

hopes and desires onto the Orient. However, 

this phenomenon also indicates a willingness 

to distance oneself from one’s own culture, 

to take a critical look through the eyes of 

a stranger. The mosque is a statement of 


this attitude, and of the values of the Age of 

Enlightenment it is based on. 

The English Landscape Garden 

Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell was the man 

responsible for the introduction of the English 

gardening style in Schwetzingen. The newly 

redefi ned relationship between man and 

nature took the shape of the “ideal disorder” 

of a landscape garden, a utopia suggesting 

the earthly paradise. 5 Of course nature is not 

really given free rein; rather, it is exalted and 

idealized – but the gardener’s arrangements 

remain invisible. Critics of the movement 

were quick to point out that the attempt to 

5 Götz Pochat, Geschichte der Ästhetik und Kunsttheorie – von 

der Antike bis zum 19. Jahrhundert, Köln 1986, pp. 376 ff. 


Fig. 3: “Partie sauvage”, view 

towards the Temple of Mercury 

(photo: Brähler). 

Fig. 4: Roman water tower and 

obelisk (photo: Förderer). 

83


84 

Fig. 5: Part of the english 

garden near the Temple of 

Botany (photo: Brähler). 


create a semblance of nature by artistic means, 

might well be called vain and presumptuous. 

Sckell’s “lines of beauty” manifest themselves 

in softly meandering paths through seemingly 

dense shrubs, inviting visitors to go for a 

walk. In this, he was inspired by Rousseau 

and Shaftesbury. According to Rousseau, 

all landscapes attract the viewer’s attention. 

Moreover, experiencing the spirit of nature 

is inseparable from experiencing the spirit 

of self. The natural experience inspires a 

dreamy state of mind and an awareness of the 

beholder’s essence. According to Shaftesbury, 

the unspoiled wildness of the English garden 

refl ects the harmonious unity of the world. 

There are both idyllic and heroic landscapes 

at Schwetzingen, both incorporating literature 

and history, somewhat reminiscent of the ideal 

landscapes of Poussin. They are expressive 

of a longing for Arcadia, a Utopian attempt to 

achieve a sense of unity with nature in order 

to reclaim a “natural” human state of moral 

integrity. 

Another aspect reminiscent of Poussin is the 

way the landscape refl ects the contrast of 

living nature and the transitoriness of human 

life. The slight melancholy adds a romantic 

touch to the English landscape garden: it 

seems that eternal nature has reclaimed the 

works of man. 

Next to the landscaped areas, kitchen gardens 

were laid out; to the south of the circular 

parterre an orchard and a vergetable garden 

were planted. Here, too, the new interest in 

natural phenomena is evident – an interest 

that has to lead to new sciences like botany. 

In the second half of the 18th century botany 

was considered very important; the ability to 

identify plants was part of a sound education. 

In order to give this scientifi c progressiveness 

its due, an arboretum was laid out in 1777, the 

fi rst to become part of a landscape garden, the 

so-called Arborium Theodoricum. 6 Here trees 

and shrubs were planted that were considered 

rarities, or had newly arrived in Central 

Europe; they provided illustrative material for 

scientifi c research, but were also the subject 

of a considerable collecting passion. Friedrich 

von Sckell created a walk-in dictionary 

complemented by the Temple of Botany, as it 

were, the sanctuary of the new science. 

Conclusion 

The Schwetzingen palace garden represents a 

unique blending of the eras of Absolutism and 

Enlightenment. It resembles an encyclopedia 

– “as one wanders through it, one turns the 

leaves of the book of this world.” 7 

(Barbara Brähler) 

6 Rainer Stripf, Die Arboreten des Schwetzinger Schlossgartens, 

Führer / Staatliche Schlösser und Gärten, München / Berlin 

2004 

7 Monique Mosser / Georges Teyssot, Die Gartenkunst des 

Abendlandes von der Renaissance bis zur Gegenwart, 

Stuttgart 1993, p. 259.



85

RUINE DES MERCURTEMPELS 

86 

Nikolaus Harnoncourt, 1983 

„ “ 


The time I spent at Schwetzingen in the spring of 1983 has become a special time in my long 

career – an enchanted castle set in an unreal park, and this incredibly atmospheric little theatre. 

[…] In such an ambience you end up being enchanted yourself, as in Alcina’s fl ower garden – the 

music must be played in a different way from the factories in the large cities.

III. Schwetzingen – Historical Context 

a) 

The Prince Electors and their 

Schwetzingen Estate 

1. A Summarized Political History 

The Electors Palatine who used Schwetzingen 

as hunting-lodge and later as their regular 

summer-residence, were among the most 

powerful princes of the Empire. 

Originally, they had been known as Counts 

Palatine of the Rhine 1 , a title and offi ce the 

development of which is “among the most 

diffi cult and least clear in German constitutional 

history” 2 . In Merovingian times, the 

Counts Palatine had been stewards of the 

royal “palatium” that is, palace. They were 

also used as royal offi cers to represent their 

master in the provinces. Thus, in the East 

Frankish Kingdom, later to become Germany, 

the offi ces of Counts Palatine for various 

regions developed. All but one became sooner 

or later extinct; only the position of the Count 

Palatine of the Rhine survived. 

His possessions had originally centred around 

the lower Rhine, but the ever-increasing 

temporal power of the Rhenish archbishops 

(Cologne, Mainz, Treves), combined with the 

fact that the Hohenstaufen Emperors bestowed 

large chunks of their possessions around 

the mouth of the Neckar, on the Counts 

Palatine, they had appointed from the ranks 

of their relatives, meant that the “Palatinate” 

“drifted” up the Rhine and came to be situated 

in the region south of Mainz, and north of 

what today is Alsace. 

From 1214, the offi ce and possessions of the 

Count Palatine fell to the Wittelsbach family, 

who developed a Palatine and a Bavarian 

branch, which in turn split up into many more 

“sub-branches”. The counts whose territories 

stretched from the border of Lorraine to the 

the border of Bohemia, were among those 

princes who became electors of the German 

king, a privilege that was confi rmed in the 

1 For the development of the “Palatinate”: Meinhard Schaab, 

Geschichte der Kurpfalz. Band 1: Mittelalter, Stuttgart 1988; 

Geschichte der Kurpfalz, Band 2: Neuzeit, Stuttgart 1992. 

2 G. Waitz, Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte 7, 1876, p. 176. 

Golden Bull of 1356. That is how the Counts 

Palatine became known als “Elector’s Palatine”. 

The electors gained more and more infl uence 

along both banks of the Upper Rhine down to 

the Swiss border. However, a series of rather 

unfortunate confl icts with ensuing defeats 

in the late 1400s and early 1500s, meant 

that they missed the chance of becoming the 

principal power in what today are Alsace and 

Baden. 

Still, enough power and prestige remained for 

them to continue as one of the important princes 

of the Empire. Their defection from the 

Roman-Catholic church during the Reformation, 

embracing fi rst Luther’s and later Calvin’s 

teachings, was thus of major importance for 

the history of Southern Germany. 

Grossly over-estimating their strength, the 

electors played the role of the leading Protestant 

and Calvinist power in Germany, stirring 

confl icts with the neighbouring Catholic 

territories, and establishing close family links 

with ruling houses of both the Netherlands 

and Britain. Their risky policy culminated in 

the assumption of the crown of Bohemia by 

the Elector Frederick V. (1596-1632) which, as 

is well known, led to the outbreak of the Thirty 

Years War. The “Winter-King”, beaten by 

the Habsburg Emperor in the famous “Battle 

of the White Mountain”, lost Bohemia and all 

his other possessions. The Palatinate, in turn 

occupied by Spanish, Bavarian, Swedish and 

French troops, suffered from plunderings, 

destruction, famine and plague, and, by the 

end of the war, was left devastated and almost 

totally depopulated. 

The Peace of Westphalia 1648, restored to 

the Winter King’s son an electorate that was 

much reduced in size and power. When his 

succession died out in 1685, the Neuburg 

branch of the Palatine Wittelsbachs inherited 

the electorate. This was hotly contested by 

Louis XIV. of France, whose brother had been 

married to the Winter King’s granddaughter 

– the famous Liselotte of the Palatinate, 

Duchess of Orleans (1652-1721), whose 

letters confer such a vivid picture of the Sun 

III. 

87


88 


King’s court. During the War of the League of 

Augsburg (in German called “War of Palatine 

Succession”), Louis XIV. applied the notorious 

“scorched-earth”-tactics which left a trail of 

almost complete destruction in the Palatinate 

and the neighbouring territories. Faced with 

the still visible traces of these barbaric acts, 

Voltaire, when coming to Schwetzingen in 

the 1750s, felt such shame, that he suggested 

to his Italian secretary, Collini (died 1806), to 

also pretend to be a native of the peninsula. 3 

The Wars of Spanish, Polish and Austrian 

Succession were also partly fought in the 

central territories of the electorate, driving 

many of its inhabitants into emigration. It was 

not until the early 1750s, that a long period 

of peace began, lasting to the outbreak of the 

revolutionary wars in 1792. The number of 

inhabitants grew sharply during this period 

– and it was only then, after almost 200 years, 

that it reached and surpassed the fi gures of 

the late sixteenth century! 

By the peace of Rijswick in 1697, which ended 

the War of the league of Augsburg, the French 

king had abandoned his attempt to annex the 

Palatinate. It remained in the hands of the 

Neuburg branch of the Palatine Wittelsbachs. 

Apart from the electorate proper, they also 

ruled over the dukedoms of Jülich and Berg on 

the lower Rhine around Düsseldorf, acquired 

in 1610, and the dukedom of Neuburg on the 

Danube, which had been given to the Palatine 

Wittelsbachs in the early sixteenth century. In 

1742, the House of Neuburg died out and the 

representative of yet another collateral line, 

the Count Palatine of Sulzbach in the Upper 

Palatinate, Carl Theodor (1724-1799), inherited 

the electorate. Sulzbach and a few counties by 

the mouth of the Rhine, the new elector had 

inherited from his mother, were added to the 

Palatine territories. Altogether, in the 1790s, 

the electoral lands comprised about 17,000 

square kilometres and had about one million 

inhabitants. 

Although the elector could rely on a rather big 

income from his lands – a French diplomat 

3 Cosmo Alessandro Collini, Mon séjour auprès de Voltaire, 

Paris 1807, p. 105. 

called Carl Theodor, the “richest uncrowned 

monarch”, the fact that the Palatine territories 

stretched from the mouth of the Rhine to the 

Danube meant that they were incoherent and 

frayed – quite unlike the other electorates. The 

various dukedoms and counties had their own 

history and customs; in many, though, not in 

the electorate proper, the elector’s power was 

restricted by powerful estates which jealously 

guarded their rights and refused to be 

adequately taxed. Each territory was exposed 

to military attack by one or more of the great 

European powers. An independent foreign 

policy or a military establishment, suffi cient 

to deter a potential aggressor, were quite 

beyond the means of the electors. 

The religious situation in the Palatinate was 

equally delicate: The House of Neuburg had 

originally embraced Lutheranism in the 16th 

century, but had reconverted to Catholicism in 

the early 17th century. The Catholic zeal of the 

Neuburg electors subjected their new possessions 

to what has been called a “belated counterreformation”. 

And although the attempt at 

a re-conversion of the Palatinate as a whole 

failed, the electors succeeded in completely 

changing the religious setup of the ruling 

caste, supplanting an “imported” catholic 

aristocracy, that formed a “landed gentry” (that 

had not existed before in the Palatinate) for 

the old mainly bourgeois Calvinist elite. The 

Catholics, once a disadvantaged and disparaged 

group, became the privileged minority 

in the state. In 1705, the intervention of the 

great Protestant powers led to a settlement 

that preserved an uneasy balance between the 

denominations throughout the 18th century. 

While the Elector Johann Wilhelm (1658- 

1716) had resided in Düsseldorf to avoid 

the ravages of the War of the League of 

Augsburg, his brother and successor Carl 

Philipp (1661-1742) moved the court back to 

Heidelberg, the old capital of the Palatinate. 

A confl ict of the staunchly Catholic Elector 

with the Heidelberg Calvinists, over the use of 

the Heilig-Geist-Church, and an unauthorised 

reprint of the Heidelberg Catechism, which

condemned Catholicism as “cursed idolatry”, 

served as a pretext for moving the capital of 

the electorate to Mannheim in 1720. During 

the subsequent half-century, not only Mannheim 

was enlarged and beautifi ed with the 

enormously big electoral palace and various 

government buildings, aristocratic houses and 

grand Catholic churches. The new Catholic 

aristocracy also turned the countryside around 

the new residence into an area “studded” 

with smaller and bigger aristocratic countryhouses, 

and the electoral family not only used 

Schwetzingen as their summer-palace, but 

also built another big palace at Oggersheim 

just beyond the Rhine, destroyed in 1794, and 

several other country-houses and huntinglodges 

nearby. Thus, baroque splendour and 

refi ned tastes spread across the heartland of 

the electorate. 

The second half of the 18th century, however, 

saw the spread of a different movement 4 . 

Among the ruling elite, the infl uence of “the 

spirit of the age” began to be felt. Even in such 

a comparatively small state as the Palatinate, 

which, apart from Mannheim, could not boast 

of any bigger town, a new generation of upper- 

and middle-class people infl uenced by the 

Enlightenment, had grown up. Many of them 

presented their ideas to the Elector: Catholic 

clergymen wanted to promote reform in the 

Church and to fi ght “superstition”, well-read 

farmers advocated agricultural improvements, 

both aristocratic and bourgeois civil servants 

from all tiers of government, proposed a 

rationally structured, well-governed body 

politic, teachers hoped for better educational 

establishments, legal experts wanted to 

abolish the “dark” statute-books and confused 

judicial system and replace them with just 

and rational creations. 

The young Elector, Carl Theodor, intelligent 

and well-read, proved quite accessible to 

modern ideas. This mirrored a European trend 

– the increasing infl uence of enlightened 

4 For Carles Theodore’s reign: Stefan Mörz, “The Palatinate. The 

Elector and the mermaid”, in: German History. The Journal of 

the German History Society, Vol. 20, Number 3 (Special Issue: 

Imperial Principalities on the Eve of Revolution: The Lay 

Electorates), London 2002, pp. 332-353. 


ideas on practical governance in many states. 

Apparently, the Elector was driven by a 

mixture of motives: genuine interest, a strong 

desire to be praised by the contemporary 

“philosophes”, and the realization that quite a 

few of the intended reforms could consolidate 

his power base. Carl Theodor was ready to 

take up a lot of the projects suggested to him, 

so much so that in the mid-1770s, government 

offi cials complained that so many important 

reforms were being discussed at the same 

time, that they were completely overburdened. 

From the rotation of crops to the abolition of 

torture, many improvements were discussed 

and partly implemented. 

However, the Elector’s “enlightened” impulses 

were constantly at war with his traditional Catholic 

upbringing, and the staunchly absolutist 

creeds he had been taught by his relatives and 

his tutors. Carl Theodor grew up to become 

a sceptic – sceptical of tradition, but also 

sceptical of the lure of “the spirit of the age”: 

While he called a “Life of the Saints” a “bunch 

of lies” 5 , he also compared the age of enlightenment 

to a mermaid with an attractive head 

but a terrible fi sh-tail. 6 He received Voltaire at 

Schwetzingen and paid generous tribute to his 

anti-clerical and even anti-Christian plays, but 

also gave shelter to the conservative jesuits 

driven out of France by Louis XV. 

In 1777, Carl Theodor became Elector of Bavaria, 

after the death of the last male member of 

the Bavarian branch of the Wittelsbach family. 

The treaty of mutual succession obliged him 

to reside in Munich. Count Oberndorf (1720- 

1799), a minister of the Elector, who enjoyed 

his particular confi dence, was appointed 

stadholder of the Palatinate with far-reaching 

competences. The Mannheimers were deeply 

shocked by their master‘s departure. One 

night, returning from the theatre shortly 

before he left for Munich, the Elector and his 

wife were besieged in their coach by desperate 

people who, with tears and cries, beseeched 

them not to leave them and lamented their 

5 Recounted by the librarian Jung (Traitteur papers, Wittelsbach 

family archive (GHAM Munich, Corr. 882 Vg). 

6 Karl Theodor to Voltaire, Jan 12, 1757, in: Voltaire, Correspondence, 

ed. Theodore Bessel, Geneva 1953 ff., no. 7116. 


89


90 


cruel fate. 7 It was not to be. Carl Theodor and, 

with him, his glittering court and famous 

orchestra, left the town, which as a result lost 

direct access to the monarch and vital cultural 

impulses. The departure of the court also 

meant a severe economic setback, not only 

for Mannheim, but also for the Frankenthal 

industries, fi rst and foremost for the porcelain 

manufacture, which now had to compete with 

its Bavarian counterpart. 

The late 1780s also saw violent local upheavals, 

obviously infl uenced by the events in 

France, where the “inalienable rights” of all 

humans were invoked. Despite such ominous 

“grumbles”, the Elector, frightened by riots in 

Munich, returned to Mannheim for almost 

a year in 1788/89. It was rumoured that 

he wanted to move back his court to the 

Palatinate. But things had changed: his long 

absence had gradually weakened the ties 

between the Mannheim and Palatine population 

and the ruling house. As Sophie von La 

Roche put it, 8 those Mannheimers who “expect 

laughter and festivities” from their monarch 

were deeply disappointed when Carl Theodor 

fi nally decided to move back to Munich. “The 

Elector is publicly abused in the most vicious 

terms” 9 , the Austrian ambassador reported 

-- again a sign of a time that witnessed the 

storming of the Bastille a month later. At 

fi rst, the French revolution found many a 

sympathetic observer in the Elector Palatine’s 

lands, and riots erupted in various parts of the 

country. The government tried to counter this 

develpoment by censorship and the imprisonment 

of “dangerous” people. However, when 

the revolutionary armies began to invade the 

electorate and, quite indiscriminately, looted 

the posessions of aristocrats, wealthy farmers, 

enligthened civil servants and even the poor, 

the sympathies waned. The vast majority of 

the population just wanted to survive. 

7 Memoirs of Stefan von Stengel (ed. G. Ebersold) (Schriften 

der Gesellschaft der Freunde Mannheims, vol. 23), Mannheim 

1993, p. 100 f. 

8 Quoted in: Ingeborg Görler (Ed.), So sahen sie Mannheim, 

Stuttgart 1974, p. 54. 

9 Despatch of Count Lehrbach, June 7, 1789, quoted in Friedrich 

Walter, Mannheim in Geschichte und Gegenwart, vol. 1, 

Mannheim 1907, p. 774. 

By 1798, the whole of the Palatine territories 

on the left bank of the Rhine had fallen into 

French hands and remained part of the French 

Republic and Napoleon’s Empire until 1814. 

The remaining “rump-electorate”, heavily 

burdened by debts Carl Theodor had incurred 

during the revolutionary wars, was abandoned 

by the Wittelsbachs and given to the new 

Electorate and later Grand-Dukedom of Baden, 

under the “Reichsdeputationshauptschluß” in 

1802/03. Attempts of Bavaria to recuperate 

the lands between Mannheim and Heidelberg 

after 1815 failed. Thus, the Rhine remained 

the border between the Bavarian new “Palatinate” 

created by the Congress of Vienna and 

Baden. 

The downfall of the German monarchies after 

1918, paved the way to ideas to redraw the 

borders of the German states. Some notable 

reformers in and around Mannheim claimed: 

“The Rhine should no longer be a border” 

between lands, that were closely bound up 

with each other through history and economic 

development. These ideas were taken up 

after the second World War. However, as the 

Palatinate and Northern Baden belonged to 

different zones (French and American), the 

attempts to form a German state comprising 

the formerly Palatine lands on the left and 

right bank of the Rhine failed. Instead, a 

regional network, supported by municipalities 

and big industry was founded, that in the past 

decades has achieved some notable successes 

to create common institutions (regional public 

transport, cultural events etc.). In 2005, the 

“Rhine-Neckar-triangle”, as it has come to be 

called, was accorded the status of a “European 

Metropolitan Region”. At its heart are situated 

the former electoral residences in Mannheim, 

Schwetzingen and Oggersheim. 

(Stefan Mörz)

2. The Cultural Landscape of Schwetzingen 

Today’s Schwetzingen is situated in the northwestern 

part of Baden-Württemberg, on the 

low terrace of the Rhine valley, about 18 km 

southeast of Mannheim and 12 km west of 

Heidelberg. To the north is the alluvial fan, 

created by the Neckar river where it meets the 

Rhine; today the Leimbach stream runs in the 

old channels. To the west, the largely unwooded 

plain that has been settled since antiquity, 

is bordered by the Rhine meadow; south are 

the Hardt forests. East the Bergstraße, once 

an important north-south connection running 

through Heidelberg, skirts the foot of the 

Odenwald hills. 

The Transformation of Schwetzingen into a 

Hunting Lodge (c.1225-1720) 

As early as c.1225, when Heidelberg 

became the main residence of the Palatine 

Wittelsbachs, the Hardt forests and the 

nearby settlement of Schwetzingen became 

of interest as a hunting ground. 10 From the 

Palatinate’s rising to the rank of an Electorate, 

during the mid-14th century and into the 

early 18th century, the Electors gradually 

transformed Schwetzingen and its surroundings 

into an aristocratic hunting lodge 

and electoral hunting ground, permanently 

altering the appearance of the region west of 

their capital, in the process. 11 The only major 

interruptions of this development were the 

Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648) and the Palatine 

War of Succession (1688-1697). 

The “fort” 12 (i.e. fortifi ed manor) of Schwetzingen 

fi rst appears in a written document of 

1350; it was probably Elector Ludwig V., who 

10 Cp. Karl Wörn, “Auf dem Weg zur Großen Kreisstadt. Aus 

Geschichte und Kultur Schwetzingens”, in: Badische Heimat, 

1/1993, pp. 29-40. P. 32: In the 13th century Elector Ludwig I. 

gave Heidelberg and Schwetzingen to his wife as a present. 

Cp. Walter Koch, “Die Schwetzinger Hardt. Die sieben 

Hardtgemeinden und die Renovationskarte der ‚Haard’ aus 

dem Jahre 1782”, in: Badische Heimat, 3/1986, pp. 113-120. P. 

114: Elector Ludwig II. adds the Hardt of Schwetzingen to the 

Palatine possessions. 

11 Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler Badens, Vol. 10, Kreis 

Mannheim, Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe/Baden 1933. P. 6: 

In the 15th century, Elector Ludwig III systematically acquired 

land in and around Schwetzingen. See also Ralf Richard 

Wagner, “Das Goldene Zeitalter der Kurpfalz”, in: Badische 

Heimat, 1/2004, pp. 20-35. In the 16th century, the Schwetzingen 

forests were used both as a communal pasture and an 

electoral hunting ground. 

12 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 5. 


turned it into a hunting lodge in the course of 

the 16th century. 13 According to contemporary 

depictions, 14 the building was situated on the 

outskirts of two settlements, the Unterdorf 

(Lower Village) in the north and the Oberdorf 

(Upper Village) in the south (see Fig. 1). 

It is assumed that the Unterdorf, with its 

church and market originated as a “Haufendorf” 

(an irregularly shaped village of 

buildings arranged round a central square), 

the Oberdorf as a “Straßendorf” (a settlement 

of houses lining one main street). An open 

space, today occupied by the palace square, 

separated both settlements. 15 During the 

Thirty Years’ War, Schwetzingen was sacked; 

towards the end of the war the castle was 

probably burned down. 16 

After the war Elector Carl Ludwig I. had the 

ruined castle converted into a palace with a 

garden 17 , and a tree-lined avenue, the “Neuer 

Weg”, was built to connect the new structure 

with Heidelberg Castle via Plankstadt. 18 

Later, a pheasant-house was added to the new 

palace. 19 Early in the Palatine War of Succession, 

the village and palace were burned to 

13 Max Miller/Gerhard Taddey (eds.), Handbuch der historischen 

Stätten Deutschlands, Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart 1980, p. 

733. 

14 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 23, fi g. 15 und 16. 

15 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 400. 

16 Martin 1933, p. 7. 

17 Cp. Wilfried Schweinfurth, “Schwetzingen – Residenzstadt 

oder Stadt mit Residenz?”, in: Badische Heimat, 2/2001, pp. 

229-242. 

Schweinfurth 2001, p. 231. 

18 Schweinfurth 2001, p. 234. Cp. Martin 1933, p. 41. Here, 

however, a path leading from Oftersheim to Schwetzingen is 

called ‚Neuer Weg’. 

19 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 89 


Fig. 1: Samson Schmalkalder, 

View of Schwetzingen, 1690, 

section of map (Karlsruhe, 

Badisches Landesmuseum). 

At the end of the 17th century 

the electoral hunting lodge of 

Schwetzingen bordered two 

settlements. 

91


Fig. 2: Old map, time of origin 

unknown (Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv). 

At the beginning 

of the 18th century several 

paths connected Schwetzingen 

with the neighbouring villages. 

In order to create a visual link 

between the capital and the 

electoral hunting lodge the 

road from Schwetzingen to 

Heidelberg was laid out as an 

avanue of mulberry trees. 

92 


the ground, along with the Palatine capital of 

Heidelberg itself. 20 

Notwithstanding the destruction of his capital, 

the ruling Elector remained interested in 

Schwetzingen as his offi cial residence during 

the hunting season. 21 Early in the 18th century, 

Johann Wilhelm von der Pfalz Neuburg 

had the palace rebuilt along with the middle- 

class buildings; the plans were by Adam 

Breuning, a court of honour wing was added 

on the east side, and the pheasant-house was 

converted into a falcon house. 22 A new eastern 

boundary was created for the grounds, in the 

shape of a moat fed by the Leimbach stream. 23 

In 1718, Elector Carl Phillip moved his offi cial 

residence to Schwetzingen, provisionally at 

fi rst, from there to supervise the rebuilding 

of Heidelberg. In accordance with Baroque 

custom, the relationship between the capital 

of Heidelberg and the palace at Schwetzingen 

found expression in the buildings themselves. 

Early in the 18th century, it had been discovered 

that the Schwetzingen palace was situated 

on a straight line connecting the Königstuhl 

hill, and thus Heidelberg Castle, with the 

Kalmit, the highest of the hills of the Pfälzer 

Wald. This line was to be given form – an 

avenue of mulberry trees 24 leading towards 

Königstuhl in one direction (see Fig. 2), a wide 

20 Martin 1933, p. 7. 

21 Martin 1933, p. 7. Conceivably the court’s removal to 

Schwetzingen during the rebuilding of Heidelberg was already 

being considered at this time. 

22 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 89. 

23 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 29, Fig. 19. 

24 Cp. Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Schwetzingen – der barocke 

Garten”, in: Fürstliche Gartenlust. Historische Schlossgärten in 

Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart 2002, p. 23. 

lane cut into the woodland of Ketscher Wald 25 

towards the summit of Kalmit in the other. In 

this way a view of the distant hills would be 

opened up. 

Around 1720, the conversion of the palace 

into the hunting lodge of the Electors ruling 

from Heidelberg was complete. It is highly 

likely that Schwetzingen was characterized by 

built-up areas following individual roads, with 

the two original settlements still separated by 

an open space. 26 

The Unterdorf area, with its church and market, 

was bordered in the northwest by the buildings 

on what is today’s Wildemannstraße, in 

the east by the Heidelberger Tor (Heidelberg 

Gate), the exact position of which is unknown. 

The central triangular marketplace served as 

a junction of the roads to Mannheim, Oftersheim 

and, via Plankstadt, to Heidelberg. 27 The 

village of Oberdorf to the south, along what 

is today’s Karlsruher Straße, was bordered by 

the Speyerer Tor (Speyer Gate) on the Leimbach, 

and what today is Zähringer Straße. On 

the southwestern outskirts was Schwetzingen 

Palace, a three-wing structure with several 

outbuildings enclosing a court of honour; on 

the east side it was separated from the village 

by a water-fi lled moat. 28 

To what degree the mulberry avenue, that was 

to constitute the central axis between Schwetzingen 

Palace and Königstuhl hill was actually 

created, has not yet been proved. 29 Attempts 

to continue this axis by creating a wide lane 

in the Ketscher Wald forest had failed – the 

chapter of Speyer Cathedral refused to have 

part of its forest cut down for the purpose. 30 

The Conversion of Schwetzingen into a 

Temporary/Summer Residence (1720-1806) 

Around 1720, the ruling Elector decided to 

move the Palatinate’s capital from Heidelberg 

25 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 43. 

26 Cp. Schweinfurth 2001, pp. 232 ff., Fig. 3. 

27 Cp. Schweinfurth 2001, pp. 232 ff. 

28 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 29, Fig. 19. 

29 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 41. 

30 Martin 1933, p. 43.

to Mannheim. 31 The conveniently small 

distance between Schwetzingen and the new 

capital, and the fact that the estate already met 

the conditions required for a Palatine hunting 

ground, led to the estate being gradually 

turned into a summer residence by Electors 

Carl Philipp and Carl Theodor, in the decades 

that followed, up to the dissolution of the 

Palatinate in 1803. 

Until 1731 and while the new residential 

palace at Mannheim was being built, Schwetzingen 

served as a temporary residence. 

Local conditions made for an unsatisfactory 

government seat, both functionally and in 

view of the fact that the electoral seat of 

power required a suitably grand setting, and 

so Elector Carl Philipp started on a number 

of additions and conversions. In between the 

scattered houses lining individual streets, new 

buildings went up – houses for the “Ackerbürger”, 

town-dwelling farmer-craftsmen, as well 

as administrative buildings and private homes 

for court offi cials. Probably the existing 

streets were retained; the new buildings were 

arranged according to contemporary models, 

in rows of houses lining the streets. Major 

alterations to the palace itself were limited to 

the erection of a few additional outbuildings, 

and the redesigning and slight enlargement 

of the existing garden towards the west (see 

Fig. 3). 32 

The long-planned lane cut into the Ketscher 

Wald forest now came into being as well. 33 

After the succession of Elector Carl Theodor 

in 1742, the enlargement and conversion of 

Schwetzingen into a stately summer palace 

continued with renewed vigour. A master plan 

for the redesigning of the entire town had 

been created by Alessandro Galli de Bibiena. 34 

It featured a system of axes radiating from the 

31 The decision to move the government seat from Heidelberg 

to Mannheim was the result of a quarrel with the Reformed 

citizens of Heidelberg, concerning ownership of the 

Heiliggeistkirche on the one hand, and of the fact that 

Heidelberg’s situation on a sloping hillside made it unsuitable 

for rebuilding in the modern Baroque style, on the other. 

32 Cp. Martin 1933, pp. 128 ff., Fig. 109. 

33 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 43. 

34 According to the latest research, the plans survive only in the 

shape of descriptions of the “New Town”, while their execution 

is evident from later maps. By all appearances, no actual plans 

have survived. 


palace, serving to connect the electoral seat of 

power, both with the nearby settlements and 

with the surrounding countryside – an image 

of the summer palace as a radiant centre and 

an embodiment of the principles of Absolutist 

town planning. 

An orthogonal network of streets 35 was 

aligned with the straight line connecting the 

Königstuhl and Kalmit hills, the mulberry 

avenue was further emphasized as the central 

axis, and in front of the palace a square marketplace 

was added that also served to connect 

35 Today: Carl-Theodor-Straße, Friedrich-Straße, Herzog-Straße, 

the former footpath east of the electoral stables, and Zähringer-Straße. 


Fig. 3: Expropriation plan 

of 1758 showing the palace, 

the old orangery, the garden 

as it looked in Carl Philipp’s 

time, the market square, the 

quarter-circle pavilions and 

the expropriations of 1753 

(Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv). 

In the course of the 18th 

century, the Electors converted 

Schwetzingen into a stately 

summer residence. The requisite 

town and garden planning 

necessitated numerous 

expropriations. 

93


Fig. 4: Garden plan and 

projected “star avenue”, 1769 

(Karlsruhe, Badisches Landesmuseum). 

In the second half 

of the 18th century, there were 

plans to connect the palace 

garden with a landscaped 

stretch of forest via a path. An 

enclosure for shooting fallow 

deer with an eight-lane “hunting 

star” and a connecting avenue 

were built. 

Fig. 5: Christian Mayer, 

“Kleine Karte der Pfalz” (A 

Small Map of the Palatinate), 

1773, section (Karlsruhe, 

Generallandesarchiv). At the 

end of the 18th century, the 

townscape of Schwetzingen, 

and its relationship to the 

surroundings, refl ected the 

alterations of Carl Theodor’s 

time and the town planning by 

Bibiena, which was in keeping 

with Absolutist ideas. 

94 


the Oberdorf and Unterdorf settlements. 

East of the square, new streets were built at 

right angles to the central axis; existing ones 

were integrated into the layout, and the great 

roads to Mannheim and Oftersheim were 

improved and emphasized. A huge amount 

of earthwork was required to create the new 

streets; it seems reasonable to assume that the 

newly developed area between the villages of 

Oberdorf and Unterdorf, had been considered 

unsuitable for building before – a possible 

explanation of the fact that the settlements 

had remained separate for centuries. 36 

Sources indicate that Bibiena envisioned a 

standardized front of townhouses lining both 

the marketplace and the central axis. The 

36 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 400. 

sole exception was the plot, taking up most 

of the square’s north side and separated from 

it by a wall; here a house and garden for Carl 

Theodor’s father confessor were built. However, 

this appears to have been a decision based 

on the Elector’s wishes, rather than his master 

builder’s intentions. 

As explained above, the whole layout of the 

“New Town” 37 was aligned with Schwetzingen 

Palace, while the palace itself merely received 

a few outbuildings and a new kitchen building 

south of the court of honour; earlier plans for 

a rebuilding had been abandoned. 

In the course of the town’s restructuring, 

the palace’s modest garden was redesigned 

as well (1753-58); the plans were by Johann 

Ludwig Petri. Up to the beginning of the 19th 

century, the work was continued and refi ned 

by Nicolas de Pigage (1766-74) and Friedrich 

Sckell (1778-1804); decorative buildings and 

water features were added, and the park 

was enlarged further. Petri took up the idea 

of using the straight line connecting the 

Königstuhl, the palace and the Kalmit as a 

central axis, and thus created the park’s main 

thoroughfare. About 200m west of the palace, 

another axis was to intersect it at right angles 

in the centre of a circular parterre, allowing 

an unobstructed view of the surrounding 

countryside. West of this, later plans envisioned 

landscaped areas gradually merging into 

the countryside; a path was to lead to a stretch 

of carefully tamed woodland (see Fig. 4) 38 . 

The new layout of both the town and the park 

necessitated expropriations, and the existing 

plot structure was severely disturbed (see 

Fig. 3). 

After Elector Carl Theodor had inherited the 

domains of the Bavarian house of Wittelsbach, 

the residence was moved from Mannheim 

to Munich in 1777. Once the court had left, 

building at Schwetzingen declined. When the 

Palatinate was dissolved in 1803, the character 

of the Schwetzingen townscape, and the 

town’s relationship to its surroundings, were 

37 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 401. 

38 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 163, Fig. 126.

still characterized by the alterations made in 

Carl Theodor’s time, and by Bibiena’s plans 

based on the principles of Absolutist town 

planning (see Fig. 5). 39 

The important existing roads to Oftersheim 

and Mannheim had been improved and made 

up; the road to Mannheim had been straightened 

in parts. 40 By the 1760s, parts of the 

planned building along the central axis and 

the marketplace were completed 41 , (see Fig. 

6) among them the stables 42 and the southern 

front of the square. It is reasonable to assume 

that the resident court had served to further 

and inspire local trade and craftsmanship 43 

and left its permanent mark on a settlement, 

that had been rural in character before. The 

demand for lodgings caused by a growing 

population, had resulted both in more densely 

built-up areas, and in a larger town. 44 

The layout of the palace remained basically 

that of the early 18th century. Functional 

defi cits had been compensated for by the 

addition of extensions and small additional 

structures, while some existing outhouses 

had been demolished. 45 The Leimbach still 

marked the town’s eastern boundary, but its 

course had been adapted to the new extension 

housing the kitchens 46 and other newly 

erected outbuildings. 

The plain garden of the early 18th century 

had been completely restructured by the 

designs of Petri, de Pigage and Sckell; it was 

now characterized by the geometrical French 

style, as well as that of the English landscape 

garden, and had been extended towards the 

west by 900m into what had been arable 

land. The great east-west axis constituted 

the park’s central path, continuing into the 

surrounding countryside as a lane cut into 

the woodland. According to historic maps, the 

plan to reshape the eastern part of the axis as 

39 Cp. Schweinfurth 2001, pp. 236 ff., Fig. 3a 

40 Cp. Martin 1933, pp. 44 ff. 

41 See also Martin 1933, p. 43, Fig. 32. 

42 Martin 1933, p. 427. 

43 Schwetzingen had been granted market rights in 1759. 

44 Cp. Schweinfurth 2001, pp. 236 ff. 

45 Cp. Martin 1933, pp. 89, 95, 423. During the 1750s the old 

orangery was pulled down; the dilapidated stables were 

demolished in the 1760s, and the former pheasant-house in 

the 1770s. 

46 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 71 ff. 


a mulberry avenue was still being considered 

(see Fig. 5 and 7). 

The transverse axis took the shape of an 

avenue of trees running to the southern 

boundary of the park; northwards it continued 

beyond the park until it met the Mannheim 

road, where the new crossing had been shaped 

into a circus. 47 Of the planned hunting park 

southwest of the palace gardens, an eight-lane 

“Jagdstern” (a star-shaped enclosure) housing 

fallow deer had been built; it was connected to 

the garden by an avenue (see Fig. 4). 48 

47 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 44. In the second half of the 19th century, 

Christian Mayer S. J. used the axes as coordinates when 

conducting the fi rst exact survey of the Rhine valley (Fig. 

5); the cartographical result was the “Basis novae Chartae 

Palatinae” (Fig. 7: Basis novae Chartae Palantinae. 1773.) 

48 Cp. Wertz 2002, p. 25. 


Fig. 6: Ground plan of the new 

market square, with residents’ 

names, c.1775 (Karlsruhe, 

Generallandesarchiv). By the 

middle of the 18th century, 

the alterations were clearly 

showing in the layout of the 

town. The new square and main 

street were lined with a closed 

front of handsome townhouses. 

Fig. 7: Christian Mayer, 

‘Basis novae Chartae Palatinae’, 

engraving by C. Verelst, 1773 

(Karlsruhe, Generallandesarchiv). 

The palace formed the 

focal point of a Baroque system 

of axes, created by the electoral 

town and landscape planning 

– in keeping with Absolutist 

ideas, it was to dominate its 

surroundings, the radiant 

centre of the town. 

95


Fig. 8: Map showing the 

boundaries of Schwetzingen, 

1872-78, section. When the 

town grew in the course of the 

19th century, Bibiena’s plan 

was largely followed. In 1870 

,Schwetzingen became part 

of the railway network, and a 

station was built on the eastern 

perimeter of the town. 

96 


The Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries 

In the course of the 19th century, the town of 

Schwetzingen expanded largely on the lines 

laid out in Bibiena’s Baroque building plan. 

Densely built-up areas developed along the 

existing roads to the north, south, and east. 

To the west of the garden, the areas of arable 

land grew to include what had formerly been 

woodland (see Fig. 9). 

Until well into the second half of the 19th 

century, Schwetzingen was connected to the 

neighbourhood by two major roads. One road 

led up from Mannheim and continued south; 

the other was the former electoral avenue 

connecting Schwetzingen to the “Bergstraße”. 

When the fi rst direct railway from Mannheim 

to Karlsruhe via Schwetzingen was opened in 

1870, the town received its fi rst railway connection. 

The station building was erected on 

the eastern outskirts, along with the railway 

lines running at right angles to the former 

Heidelberger Straße, the Baroque east-west 

axis (see Fig. 8). The extension of the railway 

network continued with the construction of 

the Heidelberg-Speyer line. In the Schwetzingen, 

Eppelheim and Plankstadt areas, this 

was built in places to run exactly where the 

old avenue leading to Heidelberg had been, 

with the inevitable damages resulting. 49 The 

49 Cp. Joachim Stephan, “Infrastruktur und Zentralität. Die 

Amtsstadt Schwetzingen und das Straßenbahnprojekt 

Schwetzingen-Ketsch”, in: Badische Heimat, 1/2004, pp. 73-84. 

older road to Heidelberg, further to the north, 

became important again. During the 1920s, 

the tramways system was extended, with a 

line connecting Schwetzingen and Heidelberg 

via Carl-Theodor-Brücke and Nadlerstraße. 

Unlike the former electoral capital of Mannheim, 

Schwetzingen escaped destruction 

during WWII. Later extensions were built on 

the existing road network. In 1974, two largescale 

projects were completed: a new hospital 

was built south of the palace gardens, and to 

the north, high-rise apartment blocks went 

up; both structures were intended to mark the 

respective ends of the town’s great transverse 

axis. The built-up areas not only of Schwetzingen 

itself, but also of the neighbouring 

communities of Oftersheim and Plankstadt, 

kept growing; today the three towns have 

largely merged into one. 

The importance of the railroad system 

declined with the rise of individual transport 

in the course of the 20th century. Both the railroad 

and tram lines connecting Schwetzingen 

and Heidelberg were abandoned. Today, two 

motorways and a high-speed train line run 

past the town area, connecting Schwetzingen 

to the long-distance network through a 

number of new connecting roads. 

The Historic Cultural Landscape of 

Schwetzingen Today 

The surroundings of Schwetzingen, the 

appearance of the town itself and its 

ground plan in particular, are still largely 

characterized by the large-scale building and 

landscaping undertaken by the ruling Electors 

of the 18th century. 

Even today Bibiena’s plans for a “New Town”, 

drawn up as part of Schwetzingen’s conversion 

into a summer residence, are clearly 

visible in the course of the streets. The layout 

of today’s palace square and main axes has 

survived almost unaltered, as have the street 

courses of the earlier settlements, the villages 

of Oberdorf and Unterdorf. The former electoral 

avenue and the market square are lined 

with a closed front of individual buildings, as

intended by the Baroque building plan. The 

Baroque structures 50 have been added to, and 

occasionally replaced, in the course of the 

19th and 20th centuries. Traces of the earlier 

rural buildings survive in some of the side 

streets. 

As in earlier times, the Leimbach, serving as 

an open moat, separates the town centre from 

the palace area. The shape and layout of the 

palace itself 51 and the garden adjoining it to 

the west, still convey the appearance of the 

18th-century summer palace. The original 

intention of extending the main axes beyond 

the confi nes of the park is still apparent: north 

towards the circus, this is achieved by the 

houses on the tree-lined Lindenstraße avenue, 

west up to the motorway crossing by the trees 

lining the street, where the original lane used 

to be cut into the woodland. Southwest of 

the gardens where the hunting park used to 

be the eight-lane “Jagdstern” survives in the 

shape of a crossing of eight paths. 

Large sections of the main west-east axis, 

the avenue of mulberry trees created at the 

beginning of the 18th century to connect 

Schwetzingen and Heidelberg, survive in the 

form of paths and of sections of the former 

railway route to Heidelberg, still directing the 

50 Cp. parts of the 1760s stables and the buildings to the south of 

the square. 

51 Cp. Martin, pp. 76, 190 ff. Besides the palace itself the 1760s 

waterworks and the guardhouses from the late 18th century 

survive. 


view towards Königstuhl. Likewise, the older 

Schwetzingen-Heidelberg connection further 

north still recalls the 17th-century road, the 

“Neuer Weg”. 

Up to the present day, the early 21st century, 

the historic cultural landscape of Schwetzingen 

is characterized largely by the heritage 

of its Palatine past. Supplementing this are 

the remains of the earlier rural settlements, 

and the heritage of the industrial age. 

(Svenja Schrickel) 


Fig. 9: Section of a topographic 

map of the Archduchy of Baden, 

1838. In the course of the 19th 

century, much woodland in the 

vicinity of Schwetzingen was 

developed for farming. 

97


Fig. 1: Document from the 

monastery of Lorsch. The fi rst 

written proof of the existence 

of Schwetzingen, dates from 

766. A woman named Agana 

transferred her entire property 

in Schwetzingen “quidquid 

proprietatis in Suezzingen 

habeo” to the monastery of 

Lorsch (facsimile, Stadtarchiv 

Schwetzingen). 

98 


b) 

History of the Town of 


Prehistory and Early History up to the First 

Written Reference 

The Codex Laureshamensis, the 12th-century 

collection of documents of the abbey of 

Lorsch1 , contains the fi rst written reference 

to Schwetzingen, there called Suezzingen, in 

the Gift of Adana dated 21st December 766. 2 

The name is derived from a personal name, 

Suezzo, and translates as “part of Suezzo’s 

place”. However, archaeological fi nds prove 

that the site was settled well before that time. 

Situated on the southern alluvial fan of the 

Neckar, on the bank of the Leimbach stream, 

it was settled from Neolithic times (5000 

BC) through the Celtic era (300 BC) to that 

of the Neckar Suebes (100 AD), a Germanic 

tribe from the lower Neckar. 3 Grave fi nds 

from Merovingian times (500-700 AD) point 

to two settlements, confi rmed by entries 

in the Lorsch Codex, dated 805 and 807. 4 

The denomination of Suezzingen superiore 

indicates that Schwetzingen, situated in the 

Frankish district of Lobdengau, at the time 

had an upper and a lower village. These 

unconnected core settlements are still visible 

within the layout of the town. To the south is 

the Oberdorf or Upper Village, a settlement 

1 World heritage site since 1991. 

2 Karl Josef Minst, Lorscher Codex: deutsch, Urkundenbuch der 

ehemaligen Fürstabtei Lorsch, Lorsch 1968, p. 278. 

3 Karl Wörn, Schwetzingen zur Jahrtausendwende; Geschichte 

– Kultur – Wissenschaft, Schwetzingen 2000, pp. 7-11. 

4 Minst 1968, pp. 283 f. 

made up of the houses lining what today is 

the Karlsruher Straße. North is the Unterdorf 

(Lower Village), an unmistakable “Haufendorf” 

(i.e. a closely built-up village clustering 

round a central square or pond) with a town 

hall and church. The fort of Schwetzingen 

between the two, was probably not built until 

the 13th century. 

New Lords: the Counts Palatine 

In the 11th and 12th centuries, not only 

the abbey of Lorsch, but also the bishops 

of Worms, lords of the Lobdengau, and the 

convents of Aldenmünster and Schönau 

at Schwetzingen were very wealthy. The 

Counts Palatine, serving as bailiffs and thus 

entrusted with the management of the Lorsch 

properties up to the abbey’s decline in 1232, 

fi rst acquired property of their own “in villa 

Swezingen” 5 in 1288. The settlement included 

a church, the patronage of which Counts 

Palatine Rudolf and Ludwig transferred to the 

monastery of Neuburg in 1305, in exchange 

for an estate at Seckenheim and the sum of 60 

Pfund Heller. Its location in the Unterdorf and 

the patronage of St. Pankratius, fi rst mentioned 

in 1435, have survived. The church was 

destroyed during the Thirty Years’ War and 

rebuilt in 1736-1765, from plans by Sigismund 

Zeller, Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti and 

Nicolas de Pigage. 6 Full Palatine overlordship 

is documented from 1350 by the levying of 

taxes. A cellarer managed the Palatine estates 

and taxes, including the mill, the “Herrengut” 

estate and the sheep farm. At this time, the 

castle was still owned by the Erligheim family. 

By 1472, however, it belonged to the Counts 

Palatine and was used as a hunting lodge 

conveniently situated on the game-rich slopes 

of the Schwetzinger Hardt, rather than a 

military stronghold. 7 

5 Regesten der Pfalzgrafen am Rhein: 1214-1508, ed. Badische 

Historische Commission, ed. Adolf Koch and Jakob Wille, Vol. 

1, Innsbruck 1894, p. 69. 

6 Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirks Mannheim 

– Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933, pp. 5, 8, 404-412. 

7 Die Weistümer der Zehnt Kirchheim, ed. Karl Kollnig, 

Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für geschichtliche 

Landeskunde in Baden-Württemberg; Reihe A, Quellen; Vol. 

29, Stuttgart 1979, pp. 206 f.

Changes of Faith, War and Reconstruction 

Very little information about Schwetzingen 

has survived from the Reformation era. The 

Peace of Augsburg, signed in 1555, made 

the “cuius regio, eius religio” (“he who rules, 

his religion”) principle obligatory for the 

Schwetzingen subjects too – the result being 

that they had to change their faith several 

times. From 1698 to 1703, the Catholic church 

was used by all confessions. After 1703, the 

Reformed and Lutheran communities had 

to make do with improvised churches for a 

while. The Reformed church, built in 1758 and 

much altered in 1888 and 1913, has served as 

the town’s principal Protestant church since 

the “Badische Kirchenunion”, the merging of 

the Protestant churches of Baden, of 1821. 8 

During the Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648) 

the village and castle suffered pillages and 

billetings; in 1635, both were burned to the 

ground by imperial troops under General 

Gallas. Elector Carl Ludwig had the castle 

rebuilt as a domicile for his second wife, 

Luise von Degenfeld. A newly constructed 

road, lined with walnut trees and running 

in a straight line towards the “Dicker Turm” 

(Squat Tower) of Heidelberg Castle, allowed 

him to travel quickly between Heidelberg and 

Schwetzingen. 9 The later mulberry avenue 

probably adopted the same course. 

In March 1689, the village and castle were 

incinerated again in the course of the Palatine 

War of Succession (1688-1697). On the orders 

of Elector Johann Wilhelm the castle was 

rebuilt and enlarged in 1698-1717. The village, 

on the other hand, was not completely rebuilt 

even two decades after the War of Succession. 

The “Schwetzinger Schatzungsbuch” of 1717, 

lists a number of new houses, but it also 

mentions dilapidated buildings, bad living 

conditions and empty lots, proof of the bad 

economic situation caused by the war. 10 

8 Martin 1933, pp. 418-420. 

9 Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe 221/Schwetzingen Nr. 447. 

10 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen B 404. 


Schwetzingen’s Heyday 

When the electoral court was transferred 

from Heidelberg to Mannheim in 1720, 

Schwetzingen became Elector Carl Philipp’s 

summer residence. In order to create a grand 

entry, the east-facing court of honour was 

laid out, and the road leading up to it from 

Heidelberg was turned into a straight avenue 

lined with mulberry trees. Its course from 

the foot of Königstuhl hill to Schwetzingen, 

and its continuation as an axis leading on to 

Kalmit, the highest point of the Pfälzer Wald 

hills, is clearly visible to the present day. By 

all appearances, this axis was fi rst designed 

to focus attention on the palace alone, thus 

reinforcing the separation of the Oberdorf and 

Unterdorf parts of the small town. 11 It was left 

to Elector Carl Theodor, who came into power 

in 1742, to turn the mulberry avenue into 

the most prominent feature of his summer 

residence’s new Baroque townscape. It was on 

this road, which also provided the basis of the 

enlargement of the palace gardens, that from 

1748 onwards, Oberbaudirektor (director-inchief 

of building) Alessandro Galli da Bibiena 

(1687-1748) constructed his “New Town” with 

11 Martin 1933, pp. 400 f. 


Fig. 2: Gmelin plan, 1809. In 

1809 Wilhelm Gmelin drew 

not only the palace gardens 

but the market town too. The 

churches and all electoral 

buildings, among them the 

barracks of the mounted guard 

on the market square and the 

stables on the mulberry avenue, 

are marked in darker colour. 

(Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe 

G Schwetzingen/51). 

99


Fig. 3: Aerial photograph, 1965. 

Carl-Theodor-Straße, the town’s 

main axis, and the square 

blocks lining it are clearly 

visible (Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen, 

Fotosammlung). 

100 


its market square and the four square blocks 

of buildings adjoining it to the east. 12 The side 

streets meeting the avenue at right angles, 

the new Mannheimer Straße and the Gassengartenweg, 

later Friedrichsstraße, opened 

up the new residential areas. The intention 

was to connect the two separate settlements, 

thus creating a new town centre, that would 

replace the old village square between the Catholic 

church and the town hall, and provide 

an entry to the palace. Bibiena’s layout of the 

market square, twice the depth of the court of 

honour, creates a space that focuses attention 

on the palace by way of the buildings lining it, 

merging the court of honour and the marketplace, 

the palace, and the town into a unifi ed 

whole. 13 

At fi rst, the new town centre was to provide 

homes for those inhabitants, who had lost 

their properties when the new northern 

quarter-circle pavilion was built, and the “New 

Town” laid out. But private building declined 

due to the regulation that new houses had 

to be urban in character. To attract investors, 

sites were given away free of cost, and 

12 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen U 54. 

13 Martin 1933, p. 402. 

builders enjoyed years of tax exemption. 14 

Grand buildings, like the electoral stables built 

on the mulberry avenue by Prince Friedrich 

von Pfalz-Zweibrücken, and the barracks of 

the mounted guard on the new market square, 

increasingly characterized the appearance of 

the new town. Bibiena’s successor, Nicolas 

de Pigage (1723-1796), continued the town’s 

transformation. In 1767, the Franciscan order 

was given a building site adjacent to the 

electoral stables, the result being that “not 

only did the town of Schwetzingen grow 

more beautiful, the surroundings of the palace 

gained in liveliness too”. 15 

While the architectural remodelling of 

Schwetzingen provided a considerable 

economic boost on the one hand, on the other, 

it endangered the inhabitants’ means of living 

through the extension of the palace gardens, 

and the resulting loss of arable land. New 

sources of income were discovered through 

the cultivation of tobacco, and craftsmen, 

traders and innkeepers were in demand. In 

fact, during the summer months, when the 

court was in residence and visitors fl ocked to 

Schwetzingen, the catering trade became one 

of the major sources of income. When Schwetzingen 

was granted market rights in 1759, 

and one weekly market as well as two annual 

fairs were authorized along with a number of 

tax advantages, another economic upswing 

set in. 16 The population, now urban rather 

than rural, increased from 443 inhabitants 

in 1727 to 1538 in 1777. 17 When the court 

moved to Munich in the winter of 1777/1778, 

building waned, the visitors and court offi cials 

stayed away, and industry and commerce fell 

into decline. Schwetzingen reverted from 

the splendours of a summer residence to the 

insignifi cance of a provincial town. 

14 Eugen Seyfried, Heimatgeschichte des Bezirks Schwetzingen, 

Schwetzingen 1925, p. 147. 

15 Martin 1933, p. 422. 

16 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen U 2. 

17 Die Stadt- und die Landkreise Heidelberg und Mannheim, 

offi cial description, ed. Staatliche Archivverwaltung Baden- 

Württemberg, Karlsruhe 1970, Vol. 3, p. 855.

Schwetzingen in the 19th Century 

The territorial reorganizations of Napoleon 

brought about the end of the Palatinate in 

1802/03. Schwetzingen became part of the 

Grand Duchy of Baden, remained a garrison 

town and became the seat of a Bezirksamt 

– a local government authority – until 1924. 

Its character as an administrative centre of 

urban character, its high tax yield and the 

court administration still required by the 

palace and the gardens, already famous at 

the time, convinced Grand Duke Leopold 

to grant Schwetzingen the town charter in 

1833. One of the benefactors of the newly 

minted “town” was the garden director, Johann 

Michael Zeyher (1770-1843), who was given 

the freedom of the town in appreciation of his 

many donations for schools and institutions 

for young people. It is due to his efforts, 

that Schwetzingen became a school town 

– al-though the Baden Revolution of 1848/49, 

and the severe retributions that followed, 

crippled any further efforts of this nature for 

many years. The middle-class confi dence and 

sense of identity, that had been cultivated in 

the new clubs and societies and furthered by 

democratic ideas, was crushed by Prussian 

troops. For some of the revolutionaries, 

emigration was the only course left. 18 

Around 1850, the industrialization set in, starting 

with the intensive culture of crops such 

as hops, tobacco, and asparagus. Asparagus in 

particular, cultivated in the palace gardens for 

the fi rst time in 1668, 19 and much improved 

in the late 19th century by the varieties grown 

by the court garden inspector, Gustav Unselt 

(1866-1924), came to be a local specialty of 

worldwide reputation. Well-known fi rms like 

the tinned-foods company Bassermann and 

the cigar maker Neuhaus, established themselves 

once Schwetzingen had been connected 

to the Rhine valley railway line in 1870, 

trading the local produce world-wide. 

18 Revolution im Südwesten: Stätten der Demokratiebewegung 

1848/49 in Baden-Württemberg, ed. Arbeitsgemeinschaft 

hauptamtlicher Archivare im Städtetag Baden-Württemberg, 

Karlsruhe 1997, pp. 562-566. 

19 Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe 67/942, pp. 1250-1256. 


With the railway connection to Mannheim 

and Karlsruhe, and the line to Heidelberg and 

Speyer, that was opened in 1873, both tourists 

and new citizens found their way to Schwetzingen. 

Town planning allowed extensions 

along the railway line and in the eastern part 

of the town. 20 

The Twentieth Century to the Present 

Early in the new century, the basic conditions 

for the establishment of new and important 

industrial settlements were provided by 

measures to ensure the water supply, the 

construction of a sewerage system and the 

introduction of electricity. 21 The economic 

depression after WWI brought shut-downs 

and unemployment, resulting in an increased 

popularity of the NSDAP, the National 

Socialist Party. 

After Hitler had seized power in 1933, the persecution 

of political opponents and of Jewish 

citizens set in. With the deportation of the 

Jewish community to Gurs on 22nd October 

1940, the history of the Jewish community, 

established in 1700, came to an end. 

For Schwetzingen, WWII ended on 30th 

March 1945, when American troops occupied 

the town. The war had left 799 dead or missing, 

and 187 buildings damaged or destroyed. 

Parts of the town were quickly rebuilt, and 

20 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen A 7; K 102. 

21 Jörg Schadt, “Das Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen im Dienst an 

Verwaltung und Bürgerschaft”, in: Badische Heimat, 1/2004, p. 

16. 


Fig. 4: Letterhead of Leopold 

Hassler. The company was 

one of several, that had a 

part in the industrial rise of 

Schwetzingen. In its letterhead, 

it proudly promises rapid 

delivery of its tinned goods by 

rail (Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen, 

A710). 

101


102 


as early as 1946, the Schwetzinger Festspiele 

(Schwetzingen music festival) took place for 

the fi rst time, with the town still run by the 

US military. Ever since 1952 (the founding 

year of the land of Baden-Württemberg) it has 

been an annual event, and the institution that 

brought Schwetzingen international fame as a 

festival city. 

In the years after 1945, the town was faced 

with several urgent tasks: to remedy the 

serious lack of living quarters, to push ahead 

with road construction and the extension 

of public transport, to provide schools with 

suitable rooms and facilities, to improve the 

health service, to attract more industries. 

Other municipal tasks could only be solved by 

specifi c administrative unions. But conditions 

improved, and in consequence, the population 

increased; on 30th March 1993, Schwetzingen 

attained the status of a “Große Kreisstadt”. 22 

Today Schwetzingen is a pleasant modern 

city with the fl air of history and a lively and 

varied cultural scene. The European idea is 

represented by its twin cities of Lunéville in 

France (since 1969), Pápa in Hungary (since 

1992) and Spoleto in Italy (since 2005). 

(Joachim Kresin) 

22 Wörn 2000, pp. 54-78.

c) 

History of the Palace 

1. The Origins of the Castle and Palace 

The following text reviews the state of research 

into the origins of the palace complex 

(up to 1700) and reports on current research 

regarding developments in the 18th, 19th and 

20th centuries. 


When Carl Theodor became ruler of the 

Palatinate in 1742 at the age of eighteen, 1 

the heritage included, among other things, 

the summer palace at Schwetzingen. At the 

time, the palace’s core buildings were almost 

identical to those still visible today, with the 

exception of the later kitchen building and 

the quarter-circle pavilions 2 . Both of Carl 

Theodor’s predecessors – Johann Wilhelm 

(1690-1716), who rebuilt the palace after 

the ravages of the Palatine War of Succession, 

and Carl Philipp (1716-42), who used 

Schwetzingen as the regular residence of the 

Elector Palatine up to the completion of his 

new palace at Mannheim 3 – had been fond of 

their summer retreat, and the opportunities 

it offered as a hunting lodge. The Palatinate 

hunts were widely famous. 4 

The new Elector was faced with a team of 

veteran court architects (Bibiena, Rabaliatti 

and Zeller), 5 whose building style had shaped 

the Absolutist “look” of the residences of 

Mannheim and Schwetzingen for the past 

four decades, and, who had more or less 

1 1724-1799; 1733 Count Palatine in Sulzbach; 1742 Elector 

Palatine; 1777 Elector Palatine and Elector of Bavaria. 

2 North pavilion built 1748-50, south pavilion 1753-55. 

3 „For a period of more than ten years, Carl Philipp had to make 

do with the ‘Oppenheimer Haus’ serving as a palace during 

the months spent in his winter residence – the summers were 

spent in the country, at Schwetzingen Palace” and “it was only 

in 1731, that Carl Philipp moved into his new palace”, from: 

Stefan Mörz, “Haupt- und Residenzstadt; Carl Theodor, sein 

Hof und Mannheim”, in: Kleine Schriften des Stadtarchivs 

Mannheim, no. 12, Mannheim 1998, pp. 19 and 24. 

4 Die Lust am Jagen, exhibition catalogue, Staatliche Schlösser 

und Gärten Baden-Württemberg (ed.), Ubstadt-Weiher 1999. 

5 Alessandro Galli da Bibiena, b. Parma 1687, d. Mannheim 

1748, from 1719 primus architectus of the Elector. Francesco 

(Franz Wilhelm) Rabaliatti, 1716-1782, pupil of Bibiena, 1742 

appointed court architect by Carl Philipp. Sigismund Zeller, 

1680-1764, succeeded Court Builder Breunig in 1727. 


divided up the building work due to be dealt 

with among themselves. 

While Mannheim had been planned on the 

drawing board, a new city 6 with a prestigious 

residential palace, there was a centuries-old 

heritage to be considered at Schwetzingen. 

Palatine history and tradition demanded to be 

treated with respect. Even after the ravages 

infl icted fi rst by the Thirty Years’ War, and 

later by the Palatine War of Succession of 

1689/93, pulling down the old buildings and 

replacing them with a new palace was never 

even considered, damaged though they must 

have been. 

Johann Wilhelm: Reconstruction and 

Absolutist Beginnings 

It was the interest Carl Theodor’s predecessor 

Johann Wilhelm von Pfalz-Neuburg 7 took in 

the Palatinate, after the devastation infl icted 

on it by Louis XIV’s French troops, that 

gained him a standing with the inhabitants 

of his heartland. He had spent many years at 

his Düsseldorf residence, seemingly without 

taking much notice of Schwetzingen. Now, 

however, that attitude changed – the estate at 

Schwetzingen was renovated and converted 

into a comfortable summer palace. The only 

hindrance was the claim of ownership of the 

widow of Johann Wilhelm’s predecessor. The 

Elector made several offers, but Wilhelmine 

Ernestine of Denmark 8 refused to sell. 

It did not prevent Johann Wilhelm from 

embarking on the necessary repairs, although 

Court Architect Alberti’s 9 plans for a grand 

6 Mörz 1998, s. n. 3, pp. 19, 24. 

7 Johann Wilhelm v. Pfalz-Neuburg, Duke of Jülich and Berg, 

Elector Palatine, b. 19th April 1658 in Düsseldorf, d. 8th June 

in Düsseldorf; succeeded his father as Elector Palatine on 2nd 

September 1690. The Palatine War of Succession (1688-1697) 

prevented the planned move from Düsseldorf to Heidelberg. 

Supported by his second wife, Anna Maria Luise of the Medici 

family (1667-1743), he made his Düsseldorf residence into one 

of the major European centres of the arts; the Palatinate had 

nothing comparable to offer to this splendour-loving Baroque 

prince. After: Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon, 

DAHM, Christof, Vol. III, 1992, cols. 171-174. 

8 Ernestine Wilhelmine of Denmark, b. 20th June 1650. She 

married Elector Karl II (1651-1685) in 1671, a marriage that 

remained without issue and thus led to the Palatine War of 

Succession. She died on 23rd April 1706 at Schwetzingen, 

in the palace given to her by her husband on 22nd February 

1681. 

9 Count Matteo Alberti, born in Venice, 1690-1716 Oberbaudirektor 

of Johann Wilhelm, active mainly in the Rhineland 

(Schloss Bensberg). 


103


104 


new palace to be built in the plain near 

Heidelberg were still being considered. 

And so, after an amount of fussing from 

the treasury, 10 which persisted in calling 

attention to the depressing fi nancial situation, 

fi fteen carpenters erected a new roof to cover 

the core buildings in 1701. The document 

recording this agrees with the results of a 

dendrochronological analysis conducted in 

2003. 11 

During the years that followed, Johann Adam 

Breunig 12 rose from the position of foreman 

to that of architect in charge. Several times 

he was dispatched to see the Elector at 

Düsseldorf, about the plans for the layout 

of the court of honour. When Wilhelmine 

Ernestine died in 1706, the palace fell to the 

court treasury. Now Johann Wilhelm was free 

to press on with his conversions and extensions. 

A court of honour facing east towards 

the town was decided on. 13 Two extensions 

were added at right angles to the east front 

of the old palace building in order to hide its 

lack of symmetry. The protruding north and 

south wings and the resulting court made for 

a grand, stately Baroque solution. Compared 

to the old core building, the space available for 

the housing of the courtiers and the kitchen 

had been increased fi vefold. 

Contrary to a popular tradition carried on 

by older publications, that reconstructed the 

building history from archival documents, 

recent dendrochronological tests on the 

building itself have yielded new facts about 

the exact time of building. 14 The wings of the 

court of honour with the chapel, the “cavaliers’ 

house” in the northern and the “ladies’ house” 

in the southern wing, have been found to date 

from 1711/12. 

10 The court treasury served as the equivalent of a building 

department too. 

11 Samples analyzed by: Labor für Dendroarchäologie, Dr. S. 

Bauer, Trier, LSB-Nr. 131/03. 

12 Johann Adam Breunig, b. in Mainz, 1684 a resident of 

Heidelberg, d. 1727. Work on Heidelberg Castle in 1698 under 

Court Architect Petrini and 1699 under Flemal; rose from 

master mason to foreman within a few years, and became 

Palatine Master Builder in 1708. 

13 The ground plans (1711) of the fi rst design proposal and the 

modifi ed execution design (signed by Breunig), have been 

preserved; Generallandesarchiv (GLA) Karlsruhe. 

14 Typed report; P. Knoch, Büro f. Bauforschung, Heidelberg, 

2005. 

With Breunig’s help, Johann Wilhelm’s 

Düsseldorf court architect, Sarto 15 , succeeded 

in doubling the area covered by the old core 

building. The garden wing was built on to the 

old castle’s west wall, the moat conveniently 

serving as a cellar. The addition of two massive 

protruding towers at the corners, resulted 

in a symmetrical garden front and a building 

that concealed the medieval castle behind. 

Only the passage leading into the court of 

honour, which fails to follow the central axis, 

betrays the fact that older buildings had to be 

taken into account. Most of the building work 

went on in 1715/16; the formal principles 

used for the court of honour were applied to 

the “garden” front as well. 

An analysis of the colours used for the facades 

after 1700, revealed that originally lime 

plaster was covered in white lime paint; the 

sandstone elements were painted brick-red. 16 

It is remarkable that the newly built rooms 

were painted the same colours straight away, 

i.e. that the interior colour scheme matched 

that of the outer walls. Only after the completion 

of every other surface, saffron-coloured 

oaken window frames were installed. Shutters 

probably painted forest green or dark brown, 

added to the lively colour scheme. 

While analyses based on dateable alterations 

of the outer walls of the entire palace were 

conducted in 2002-2005, a full analysis of 

the building history of the comparatively 

small core building has not been attempted 

so far. As regards the medieval origins of 

the Schwetzingen palace, we have to rely on 

archival documents and their interpretation 

by a handful of authors: 17 

Origins 

A “fort” at “Sweczinge” is mentioned for the 

fi rst time in 1350. That was the year when 

Elector Ruprecht I acquired the usufruct from 

15 Sarto (dates unknown) succeeded Alberti as building 

superintendent at the electoral court of Düsseldorf. 

16 Documentation of colour analysis; P. Knoch, Büro f. Bauforschung 

in Heidelberg, 2005. 

17 The resulting “research backlog” is being tackled by building 

research measures, coordinated with the ongoing restoration 

work. However, an extensive and detailed documentation of 

the core building has not been undertaken so far.

members of the Erlickheim family, probably 

belonging to the lower aristocracy. 18 At the 

time, the building must have been in existence 

for several decades. Details of the outer walls 

and of the foundations, a small part of which 

was recently uncovered, suggest that the 

oldest parts date from the last third of the 

13th century (see Building phase I). 

This is suggested by the large rusticated 

blocks with pointed or undressed bosses and 

wide recessed margins, used for the lower 

parts of the south tower (cp. Fig. 1). They 

conform to the traditional look of fortifi ed 

buildings, made to appear rough and powerful, 

like the rock itself, and utterly impregnable 

to the eyes of the beholder and potential 

attacker. A moat is reported to have provided 

further protection, although no documents 

survive regarding either its width, depth 

and length or its exact location. There is no 

doubt that there was a large forecourt serving 

as a general service yard. It was probably 

surrounded by the usual barns, stables and so 

on, buildings that were torn down when the 

space was converted into a court of honour at 

the latest, that is to say around 1700. The fort 

itself, lower than the present core building, 

by at least two storeys, has been shown by 

building analyses to have had walls 24m, 

24m, 20m, and 26m in length (the south, 

west, north and east wall). Adjoining the east 

and south curtain wall at right angles, is the 

south tower serving as a donjon; it marks the 

southeastern corner of the “fort”, and from its 

shape and the texture of its walls, certainly 

belongs to the fi rst building phase. 

(Cp. 16, Findings N°1, Building phase I) 

Palatine Ownership and the Conversion into 

a Hunting Lodge 

In 1427, the estate fi nally came into Palatine 

ownership under Elector Ludwig III, surnamed 

“the Bearded”. 19 Beyond this fact hardly 

18 Rudolf Sillib, Schloß und Garten in Schwetzingen, Heidelberg 

1907, pp. 2-3; Hermann Blank, Schwetzingen – eine Geschichte 

der Stadt und ihrer Häuser, Vol. 1, Bürgermeisteramt 

Schwetzingen (ed.), Schwetzingen 1979, p. 43. Kurt Martin, 

Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirks Mannheim, Stadt 

Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933, p. 5. 

19 Sillib 1907, p. 2; Martin 1933, p. 6. 


any material survives from the 15th century 

– apparently few changes were made to the 

building (cp. Building phase II). 

Social changes, the growing infl uence of 

Renaissance thought and attitudes, as well 

as the invention of gunpowder and fi rearms, 

prepared the ground for major alterations of 

the entire estate, that were fi rst tackled in the 

1520s ( cp. Building phase III). 

Elector Ludwig V, appropriately surnamed 

“the Builder” 20 , brought about Schwetzingen’s 

conversion from a “château fort” into a 

“château de plaisir”. Major rebuilding took 

place. Nothing remains of the embrasures that 

certainly existed; large stone-framed windows 

were opened up to allow a better lighting of 

the rooms. Two storeys were added to the 

entire building (cp. Fig. 2). The large four-vaulted 

rectangular extension added by Ludwig V 

in the fi rst half of the 16th century, extended 

the building by about 8m to the north, and 

was built over the moat that had more or less 

lost its original function (cp Fig. 10). 

The south side received an extension as 

well, again at the expense of the moat, that 

probably existed here as well. An inscription 

carved into a sandstone block in the south 

wall of the new extension, the only one of 

its type at Schwetzingen, provides the date: 

“PFALZGR..LVDWIG/CHVRF. 1541”. (cp. Fig. 

8) 

It is characteristic of the changing times, that 

here as elsewhere, defensibility was sacrifi ced 

for the sake of comfort. The former castle 

became an electoral hunting lodge. Splendid 

hunting parties were organized on a regular 

basis, and the nearby hunting grounds were 

popular with the Elector’s extended family 

and aristocratic friends. A later descendant, 

Elector Ott-Heinrich, 21 himself a man whose 

personality would shape both Heidelberg 

and the Palatinate, comments repeatedly on 

the pleasant stays at Schwetzingen, and his 

20 Blank 1979, p. 46. 

21 Otto Heinrich, b. 10th April 1502 in Neuburg, elder son of 

Count Palatine Ruprecht “der Tugendhafte” (the Virtuous) 

and Elisabeth von Bayern-Landshut; d. without issue on 12th 

February 1559 in Heidelberg. Count Palatine of Pfalz-Neuburg 

1505-1559, Elector Palatine 1556-1559. 


105


106 


successors appear to have agreed wholeheartedly. 

For Schwetzingen the 16th century was a predominantly 

peaceful time. Several wars were 

fought in southern Germany, but only once, 

in 1546, is there mention of the repercussions 

of the War of the Schmalkaldic League. 

Count Eberhard von Erbach was lodged at 

the palace with a small contingent. There is 

no mention of damage or harm, however. 

Thus, the Schwetzingen palace with its new 

Renaissance garb, created by Ludwig V, was 

left undisturbed up to the Thirty Years’ War. 

Not even the marriage of Friedrich V 22 to 

Elizabeth Stuart, daughter of the English king 

James I, who introduced a royal court and lifestyle 

to the Palatinate, changed things for the 

Schwetzingen hunting lodge. In his description 

of the newlyweds’ arrival at Heidelberg 

in May 1613, Gotthard Vögelin specifi cally 

mentions this property belonging to the 

young Elector: “His Grace the Elector also 

owns a fair castle called Schwetzingen, a mile 

from Heidelberg, with a fi ne stock of deer 

in its forests, which extend for two miles.“ 23 

Evidently the hunting-mad couple were quite 

satisfi ed with the lodge – which by that time 

may well have looked a little old-fashioned, 

having last been modernized seventy years 

before. But like the small hunting lodge of 

Wolfsbrunnen 24 in the vicinity of Heidelberg 

Castle, another hunting ground, Schwetzingen 

was not required to provide the luxuries of 

a residence; the “simple life” was considered 

adequate. If Friedrich and Elizabeth had 

wished for display at Schwetzingen, they 

would not have hesitated to convert the estate 

accordingly. 

His quest for importance and political power 

led Friedrich to make a bid for the crown 

of Bohemia in 1619; he was crowned on 

4th November 1619, at St. Vitus Cathedral 

22 Elector Friedrich V (1596-1632), in 1613 married the daughter 

of the King of England, Elizabeth Stuart (1596-1662), both 

aged sixteen at the time; elected King of Bohemia in 1619. He 

initiated the magnifi cent rebuilding of Heidelberg Castle and 

the laying out of the Hortus Palatinus. 

23 Martin 1933, p. 7, note 1. 

24 „Jagdgelage am Wolfsbrunnen”, copperplate engraving 

by Matthäus Merian the Elder., Kurpfälzisches Museum, 

Heidelberg, inventory no. S. 2278. 

in Prague. 25 The Prague Defenestration of 

1618 sparked the Thirty Years’ War, bringing 

peace at Schwetzingen to an end. In 1621, 

Tilly’s troops marched through the Palatinate, 

pillaging and burning as they went, and the 

old hunting lodge was not spared. 26 The documents 

record an amount of damage, although 

the building was evidently still habitable – in 

1633, Swedish troops moved in to use it as an 

outpost against Heidelberg. Two years later 

the history of the Renaissance castle came to 

an abrupt end. Imperial troops led by General 

Gallas, Count of Campo and Duke of Lucca, 

wreaked enough havoc to render the buildings 

uninhabitable for years to come. 27 

Friedrich V and the Aftermath of the Thirty 

Years’ War 

By the time Tilly’s troops moved in, Friedrich 

V – the Winter King – had been living in exile 

at The Hague for years, along with his large 

family, and he was not to leave it again until 

his death in 1632. 28 Afterwards Count Palatine 

Ludwig Philipp von Simmern was appointed 

guardian of the royal children. The heir to the 

Electorate was Carl Ludwig, his elder brother 

Friedrich Heinrich having died in a naval accident 

in 1629. After the end of the Thirty Years’ 

War, in 1648, the Palatinate (minus the Upper 

Palatinate) was fi nally returned as agreed in 

the Peace of Westphalia. Carl Ludwig became 

Elector, returned to Heidelberg, and embarked 

on a determined rebuilding of the country. 29 

As early as 1650, the court offi cial Hans Karg 

drew up a detailed report on the ruined palace 

at Schwetzingen and the utility buildings. 30 

The report has survived and provides information 

about the state of the palace itself and the 

outbuildings, especially those surrounding the 

forecourt, no trace of which remains today. 

25 Rosalind K. Marshall, “Elizabeth Stuart – die Winterkönigin”, 

in: Der Winterkönig – Friedrich von der Pfalz, exhibition 

catalogue Augsburg 2003, Stuttgart 2003, p. 40. 

26 Sillib 1907, p. 4. 

27 Kayser, Schauplatz der Stadt Heidelberg, 1733, pp. 351, 364, 

400. 

28 Der Winterkönig – Friedrich von der Pfalz exhibition 

catalogue 2003, p. 171. 

29 Kayser 1733, p. 209. 

30 Martin 1933, p. 18, n. 1-3.

In 1655, cleaning up and renovating work 

was begun in order to render the complex 

habitable again (cp. Building phase III). Carl 

Ludwig’s family circumstances were one 

reason for him to press ahead with work at 

Schwetzingen. 

In 1650, the Elector had married Charlotte von 

Hessen-Kassel (1627-1686); the union produced 

two children, Prince Karl and Elisabeth 

Charlotte (“Liselotte von der Pfalz”), later to 

become Duchess of Orléans and sister-in-law 

of King Louis XIV of France. The marriage 

was not happy, and Carl Ludwig turned to 

Baroness Luise von Degenfeld (1636-1677), 

one of his wife’s ladies-in-waiting. When the 

Elector proposed a divorce in 1657, Electress 

Charlotte refused to agree to it; it was not 

until fi ve years later that she retired to 

Kassel. 31 

In 1657, the palace at Schwetzingen was 

suffi ciently restored for Luise von Degenfeld 

to take up residence there, removed from the 

seat of power at Heidelberg, but in a manner 

befi tting her station, with a small court of her 

own. In 1658, the Elector took her wife in a 

morganatic marriage. 

Wedding Politics and their Outcome: The 

Palatine War of Succession 

Political considerations, and not least the 

hope of putting an end to the frequent 

French invasions of the Palatinate 32 , caused 

the Elector to marry his daughter Elisabeth 

Charlotte to the brother of the Sun King, Duke 

Philipp of Orléans. 

The marriage took place in 1671. Afterwards, 

Elisabeth Charlotte lived at the French court; 

she never returned home, not even for a visit. 

Nevertheless, she took a lively interest in 

Palatine events and affairs, including those at 

Schwetzingen – as is evident from the famous 

correspondence she left to posterity. 33 

Carl Ludwig continued to improve conditions 

at the palace. In 1664, the dining hall was 

31 Kayser 1733, p. 210. 

32 In 1674, Turenne established his headquarters at Schwetzingen 

for a few weeks; Sillib 1907, p. 6. 

33 Briefe der Liselotte von der Pfalz, Helmuth Kiesel (ed.), 

Frankfurt a. M. 1981/86. 


expensively decorated with gilt-leather 

“wallpapers” 34 . Building was going on near 

the eastern curtain wall and in the rooms on 

the west side, under the direction of Daniel la 

Rousse 35 . 

In 1677, three years before his death, the 

Elector had an inventory drawn up, with 

special emphasis on the “Turkish tapestries” at 

Schwetzingen 36 , a sign of his fondness for the 

place. There were, however, no major changes 

to the building itself or extensions of the 

estate (cp. Building phase III) – this was left to 

his successors. 

After the Elector’s death, on 28th August 1680, 

his son Karl came into the inheritance. The 

next year he gave the palace and everything 

belonging to it to his wife, Wilhelmine 

Ernestine of Denmark, whom he had married 

in 1671, as a gift for life. In 1684, she commissioned 

Johann Peter Wachter 37 to build 

a pheasant house with an octagonal ground 

plan 38 ; on a number of maps it is shown to 

have been in the southwestern part of the 

grounds. There are no known plans or views 

of the building 39 (cp. Schmalkalder view). 

After a rule of only fi ve years, Elector Karl, 

brother of the Duchess Elisabeth Charlotte 

of Orléans, and the last of the Pfalz-Simmern 

line, died without issue. The title passed to 

the Pfalz-Neuburg line, and Philipp Wilhelm 

von Pfalz-Neuburg became Elector. The 

succession was contested by King Louis XIV, 

who claimed the inheritance in the name of 

34 The Portuguese Jews at Mannheim were commissioned to 

decorate the dining hall walls with gilt leather “of the kind 

used at Friedrichsburg, Bacchus and Ceres in gold, on a green 

background”; Sillib 1907, pp. 5-6. 

35 Daniel la Rousse (dates unknown) was employed at Heidelberg 

Castle, the fortress of Friedrichsburg and elsewhere; 

Heinrich Gropp, Das Schwetzinger Schloss zu Anfang des 18. 

Jahrhunderts, diss. Karlsruhe, Leipzig 1930, pp. 14-15. 

36 Nikolaus Schwarz, appointed steward in the autumn of 1677, 

was instructed to draw up the inventory – and to make sure 

that nothing went missing during the stays of aristocratic 

visitors; Sillib 1907, S. 6. 

37 Johann Peter Wachter (dates unknown), appointed architectural 

clerk at Heidelberg in 1665, later an electoral master 

builder and treasury offi cial. 

38 In 1698, Petrini was commissioned to repair the dilapidated 

pheasant house. In 1704, the passages of the pheasant house 

– where the Elector had stayed – were said to be decaying. In 

1717, the building was converted into a falcon house. Further 

repairs were carried out in 1746 and 1751. In 1776, Pigage 

reports on the demolition of the building; Martin 1933, p. 89 

n. 1-8. 

39 Samson Schmalkalder, Ansichten von Schwetzingen im Jahre 

1690, GLA KA, Bd. XX fol. 41, 68, 78. 


107


108 


his brother’s wife – a claim that was entirely 

without foundation. 

In the Palatine War of Succession that 

followed, French troops occupied the country 

for the fi rst time in 1689, destroying Heidelberg 

Castle and ravaging the surroundings. 

Schwetzingen did not escape either. On 

22nd March 1698, a treasury offi cial, Johann 

Thomas Urspringer, wrote: “The outer walls 

of the palace at Schwetzingen are standing 

fi rm, the middle storey, however, has collapsed 

down to the lowest vaults... “. 40 Rebuilding the 

palace was out of the question considering 

the condition of the Palatinate, and Philipp 

Wilhelm was unable to take charge again. He 

died in 1691, leaving it to his son and heir, 

Johann Wilhelm to rebuild his predecessors’ 

badly damaged old hunting lodge, as a stately 

summer residence in the spirit of Absolutism 

for the Electors Palatine. 

The Conversion into a Summer Residence 

Under Johann Wilhelm and Carl Philipp 

As described above, Johann Wilhelm 

undertook a complete restructuring of the 

estate in the years from 1700 to his death 

in 1716 (Building phase IV). The east-west 

axis, originally created by Carl Ludwig in 

the shape of an avenue east of the palace, 

was given added emphasis by the wings 

surrounding the court of honour in the east, 

and the jutting corner towers of the new west 

building. The original intention had been to 

create a visual connection between the palace 

at Schwetzingen and the “Squat Tower” of 

Heidelberg Castle. 41 Johann Wilhelm’s brother 

and successor, Carl Philipp 42 , resurrected this 

idea. His main project was the building of 

the orangery, which was to house the famous 

collection of orange trees 43 from Düsseldorf 

over the winter. This building was aligned on 

the axis between the Königstuhl hill, rising 

behind Heidelberg Castle and the summit 

40 Martin 1933, p. 24, n. 1.; Gropp 1930, p. 22, n. 46; Sillib 1907, 

p. 7. 

41 Martin 1933, p. 41, n. 1 and 2. 

42 Carl Philipp von Pfalz-Neuburg, 1660-1742, succeeded 1716. 

43 Sillib 1907, p. 10; Martin 1933, p. 129, n. 2, bill for the 

shipping of 760 plants from Düsseldorf to Schwetzingen, 15th 

Nov. 1724. 

of Kalmit, the highest hill of the “Pfälzische 

Haardt” 44 . In order to enlarge the (originally 

rather modest) garden and create the necessary 

space for the building of the orangery, 

land belonging to a number of Schwetzingen 

farmers was expropriated – eleven years later 

they were still waiting to be recompensed. 45 

The commission went to Galli da Bibiena, 

who was appointed chief architect by the new 

Elector, and probably started building in 1718. 

Two undated plans 46 show almost identical 

ground plans for the orangery and its location 

close to what today is the Arion basin. Its 

south side is connected with the palace via a 

roofed passage; the remains of this are still 

visible next to the palace’s south wing (cp. 

Volume 2, dendrochronological plan). A full 

description of the building can be gained from 

a detailed list of bricklaying work done for 

the “electoral orange-house”, dating from 25th 

February 1726. 47 

Kurt Martin describes the chief parts of the 

building thus 48 : “The central room of the old 

orangery building was a large hall taking 

up the entire depth of the building, and 

emphasized on the outside by the fact that it 

protruded markedly. The curving segments 

that constituted the wings enclosed the garden 

(as it was then); in this way, the orangery 

constituted a corresponding architecture to 

that of the palace. At the end of each wing 

there was a pavilion, probably accentuated by 

the structuring of the elevation. To the west, 

the hall featured two small protruding alcoves; 

between them was a terrace with steps leading 

down to the open grounds. The garden front, 

too, featured a base of low steps that served to 

raise the architecture above its surroundings. 

Above the central hall was a gallery which 

probably protruded towards the garden. The 

outside wall was structured by lesenes of 

rough stone, and covered with plaster; the 

44 Expropriation plan of 1758 with the old palace garden, GLA 

KA; Martin 1933, Fig. 109. 

45 Gropp 1930, p. 81. 

46 Expropriation plan, 1753-58; ground plan of the old orangery 

and the quarter-circle pavilions by Schreiber and Hoffer, 

c.1753, GLA KA; Martin 1933, Figs. 109 and 69. 

47 Gropp 1930, D. Anhang, pp. 145-156. 

48 Martin 1933, pp. 90 ff.

ooms could be heated, the ceilings were 

stuccoed, and the hall appears to have been 

covered in Dutch tiles.” The orangery took a 

long time to build; it was fi nally completed in 

1728, after ten years of work. 

Enlargement of the Summer Residence 

Under Carl Theodor 

However, it was in use for less than twenty 

years. In 1746, four years after Carl Theodor 

had taken over as Elector, the great hall of 

the orangery could no longer be used for the 

theatre performances, that had taken place 

here before. The construction was fl awed and 

the building unsafe, especially the timberframe 

construction of the gallery and roof. 

By that time, Bibiena had probably started on 

the designs for the quarter-circle pavilions. 

A circular parterre in front of the palace was 

being planned. The pavilions were to be built 

in the spaces between the crossing main 

axes, running north-south and east-west. It 

is unclear whether the idea of a new palace 

building in the north was already being 

considered. But the necessity of providing 

a suitable space for the wintering of the 

valuable exotic plants required prompt action. 

In 1748, Bibiena embarked on the building 

of the northern quarter-circle pavilion 49 . He 

was not to see its completion, however. His 

successor, d’Hauberat 50 , continued his work 

as chief architect from 1748, but he died 

the next year. The pavilion was probably 

completed in the spring of 1750. Whether or 

not the promising young architect, Nicolas 

de Pigage from Lunéville, taken on by Carl 

Theodor on 10th February 1749, as director 

of gardens and water features 51 , supervised 

the last stages of building, is unclear. Pigage, 

very close in age to the Elector himself, was 

commissioned to continue planning the new 

49 According to the dendrochronological analysis, the timber was 

cut 1747/48, confi rming the preliminary planning phase, the 

supplying of materials and the (documented) start of actual 

building in 1748 (analysis of DP.-Nr. 31-38, 2003, LSB-Nr. 

131/03). 

50 Guillaume d’Hauberat succeeded Froimon at Mannheim in 

1726; in 1734, he was a master builder working for the court 

building department headed by Bibiena. 

51 Nicolas de Pigage, b. 3rd August 1723 in Lunéville, d. 30th July 

1796 in Schwetzingen. 


electoral residence 52 , a task begun by Bibiena a 

few years earlier. 

By 1750, the site of the second pavilion had 

not yet been determined. Only after the plans 

for a new palace at Schwetzingen had been 

abandoned, in 1753, did Rabaliatti propose 

the building of a southern pavilion. In this 

way, the existing east-west axis created by 

the symmetrical western palace front would 

be continued by the quarter-circle pavilions. 

Preparations had been going on for at least a 

year, as evidenced by the felling date of the 

logs used – 1752. 

There was a lot of building going on at 

Schwetzingen in those years. Pigage, promoted 

to Oberbaudirektor (director-in-chief 

of building) in 1752, was commissioned 

the same year to build a court theatre. The 

most recent interpretation of the documents 

suggests that this was built in the course of a 

few months, adjoining the back of the north 

quarter-circle pavilion. 53 

However, recent analyses appear to contradict 

this. The building of the brick structure alone, 

with its high mansard roof, within six months, 

is hard to imagine. Moreover, within that time, 

a complex three-storey timber construction 

would have had to be built as well, to provide 

the substructure for the galleries and seats, 

not to mention the elaborate stage machinery. 

54 Further analyses are under way. 

The surviving bills tell of considerable 

and rising costs, which Pigage justifi ed by 

pointing out the numerous changes of plans 

and enlargements. Instead of the estimated 

5900 fl . the building ended up costing 22790 

fl . 42 kr. Shortly after the theatre had been 

completed, Carl Theodor ordered work on the 

southern pavilion to begin. Franz Wilhelm 

Rabaliatti completed it in 1754. The stately 

halls, among them a dining hall and a gaming 

room, added to the palace’s available space 

52 So far it has not been examined how far planning had actually 

proceeded, and whether or not foundations had been laid on 

the axis towards the north, behind the north quarter-circle 

pavilion. 

53 Monika Scholl/Peter Knoch: “Bretterbude? Neue Erkenntnisse 

zur Baugeschichte des Theaters”, in: S. Leopold/B. Pelker (eds.), 

Hofoper in Schwetzingen. Musik – Bühnenkunst – Architektur, 

Heidelberg 2004, pp. 251-301. 

54 P. Knoch, ongoing studies and examinations. 


109


110 


and were frequently used by the court. Plays 

were performed on a regular basis in Pigage’s 

threatre, opened in 1752, especially during 

the summer. Soon the Elector asked his chief 

architect to enlarge both the auditorium and 

the anteroom, both already deemed too small. 

Ten years after the theatre’s completion, 

Pigage skillfully managed almost to double 

the number of seats on the galleries. A new 

staircase on the west side gave easy access to 

the upper storeys. 

At the same time, Pigage designed and built 

an orangery in the northwest of the garden, 

not far from the transverse north-south axis. 

Its structure is clean and simple, the windows 

face south; the central projection houses the 

gardener’s apartment, and at the eastern end 

a greenhouse was added that was remarkably 

modern for its time. The orangery’s south side 

is unique among the palace buildings, in that 

it features an elaborate painted trompe-l’oeil 

architecture. 

Another building, begun in 1761, was an 

extension at the back of the court of honour’s 

southern wing, intended to house the kitchens. 

It provides a direct connection between 

the palace and the passage leading to the 

southern quarter-circle pavilion. The building 

runs parallel to the court of honour wing; 

it housed the kitchens on the ground fl oor, 

and servants’ quarters above (s. dendroplan). 

When it was completed in 1764, the major 

projects were largely accomplished. Only a 

number of small extensions of the garden 

wing and on the roof of the main building 

were left to be completed. They were the 

Electress’ “writing alcove” on the south side of 

the fi rst fl oor 55 ; the Elector’s writing cabinet, a 

half-timbered structure on the north side, the 

so-called “Green Pavilion” 56 ; and the observatory 

on the roof 57 . However, they had little 

impact on the appearance of the palace as a 

whole. The “Reichsdeputationshauptschluss” 

of 1803, 58 gave the Palatinate east of the Rhine, 

including Schwetzingen, to the Grand Duchy 

of Baden. Maintenance work and the reapportion 

of parts of the building, and individual 

rooms, to serve different functions, were 

the major changes. Even after 1919, when 

the estate became the property of the Baden 

family, little changed up to the present day. 

The following plans (Building phase I-IV) 

constitute a summary of the architectural 

history of the Schwetzingen palace in four 

stages. Building phase IV also included the 

addition of the quarter-circle pavilions, the 

theatre and the kitchen block to the palace 

complex. 

55 DP-Nr. 79, felled after 1760 (LSB-Nr. 131/03-2) 

56 DP-Nr. 78, 1778. 

57 DP-Nr. 66-67, 1762. The Jesuit Father Christian Mayer, electoral 

court astronomer, made his epoch-making discoveries here. 

The fi rst result was the “Small Map of the Palatinate”, one of 

the most precise cartographic surveys of the 18th century; see 

Martin 1933, pp. 74-5 and Sillib 1907, p. 16. 

58 Carl Eduard Vehse, Die Höfe zu Baden, Leipzig/Weimar 1992, 

pp. 98f.

The Castle of the von Erlickheim Family, 

Last Third of the 13th Century 

The core building of the medieval moated 

castle at Schwetzingen is still recognizable in 

a few places of today’s building (cp. Fig. 16). 

When combined into a plan of the ground 

fl oor, 59 they reveal a building measuring c.24 x 

24 x 20 x 26m (the south, west, north and east 

walls). The walls are aligned with the points 

of the compass; the north and south walls 

are parallel and adjoin the east wall at right 

angles. The west wall is a diagonal, extending 

the rectangle in the southwestern corner. 

No reason has been found for this; property 

59 All major renovation work to date has been based on a survey 

of the main building made in 1975 (Staatl. Hochbauamt 

Mannheim, Bauamt Schwetzingen). Measuring of the historic 

structures has been going on along with the renovation work, 

for example, in the cases of the fruit storehouse (roof truss), 

chapel, and north wing (1998-2004). 


boundaries or the course of the Leimbach 

stream may have been accountable. On the 

whole, the shape of the original fort was that 

of a “Kastell”, which conforms to the ground 

plans of moated castles in the plain. 

Evident characteristics of the medieval 

castle are the large rusticated blocks of the 

southeastern tower, the donjon and the stretch 

of curtain wall in the east (cp. Fig.1; Findings 

1). They come to about mid-height and feature 

a very characteristic surface. Most of the 

individual blocks have a strongly projecting 

boss, which may have been a result of the 

manner in which they were quarried, or may 

have been hewn out of the quarried block 

afterwards. The recessed margin is usually 

rough and effected with a mason’s axe. The 

occasional hole left by tongs points to the 

manner of lifting and placing the blocks. The 


111


Fig. 1: Findings 1 – East front 

of the moated castle: the lower 

part of the southeast tower with 

join of the remaining part of 

the curtain wall. 

bb. 2: Findings 2 – Southern 

view of the central block with a 

projecting extension. Behind it, 

the top fl oor of the octagonal 

stair tower. 

112 


masonry is regular, and most courses are 

of equal height. The east side of the donjon 

and the curtain wall built onto it, are still in 

existence; they are the only medieval walls of 

any size remaining within the palace. The masonry 

is disturbed in places, pointing to later 

alterations. However, it is not inconceivable 

that later openings made use of existing ones, 

e.g. embrasures, that were merely enlarged. 

No detailed analysis has been attempted so 

far. 

An indication of the height of the original 

castle’s enclosing wall is given by the original 

southwestern corner, which was re-used in 

today’s south wall and is still visible (Fig. 6, 

Findings 2). The surface treatment of the 

corner blocks is the same as that of the east 

side. 

The original west moat, which became a 

cellar in the course of later extensions, can be 

entered in two places. The medieval surfaces 

are evident here as well. Moreover, the transition 

from the basement, probably the original 

inner wall of the moat, to the castle wall is 

visible. An unbossed edge approximately 15 

cm in depth, carved at an angle of 45° with an 

axe, marks the place where the ground fl oor 

rose above the basement. 

So far no detailed plans covering relationships 

in height have been prepared. It is likely, 

however, that the height and shape of the 

southwest base’s upper edge corresponds to 

that of the original northwestern corner (Fig. 

3, Findings 3, southwest side; Fig. 4, Findings 

4, northwest corner). 

Three medieval stone courses survive on the 

inside of the northwestern corner beneath the 

later staircase (cp. Building phase II) (Fig. 5, 

Findings 5). 

At least the rectangle of the original building 

is largely defi ned. The exact location and look 

of the gate and the details of the courtyard 

to the west are unclear. Of the rooms only a 

barrel-vaulted room survives in the southwestern 

corner, on the ground fl oor of the former 

donjon, that very probably dates from that 

period (Findings 6).



Fig. 3: Findings 3 – Base with 

the bank of the moated castle’s 

former west wall. 

Fig. 4: Findings 4 – Construction 

joint in the base between 

the original west wall and the 

Renaissance extension, with its 

bossed bank. 

Fig. 5: Findings 5 – Remains 

of the medieval curtain wall 

beneath the fi rst courses of the 

Renaissance stair tower. 

113


114 


Friedrich V and the conversion of the ‘château 

fort’ into a ‘château de plaisir’ during 

the fi rst half of the 16th century 

The progress in weapons technology in 

the course of the 15th and 16th centuries, 

rendered medieval fortifi cations largely 

obsolete. Realizing this, Ludwig V converted 

the castle from a fortress into a Renaissance 

hunting lodge. Both the southern and the 

western moats were built over; at the back of 

the donjon, an octagonal stair tower housing 

a spiral stair was added to give access to the 

two newly added storeys (Fig. 7; Findings 2; 

Findings 7). Another was built on the east 

side 60 (cp. Fig. 11; Findings 12). Immediately 

adjoining this, an octagonal room with 

striking fl oor-level windows was built (cp. Fig. 

60 Excavation fi ndings made during work on the foundations, 

2006 . 

2; Findings 2a; Findings 8). From the shape of 

the jambs and the window vaults on the east 

and west sides, the building appears to date 

from the second third of the 16th century. The 

only inscription of its kind at Schwetzingen 

gives the date 1541, and the builder, Ludwig V 

(cp. Fig. 8) 

Next to the medieval north wall, Ludwig built 

a hall. The ground fl oor room is divided up by 

three transverse arches into four rectangular 

vault bays of equal size. The three western 

vaults are emphasized by box ribs with 

keystones bearing coats of arms or dates. The 

eastern vault still retains its keystone and 

the stumps of its original ribs, but has been 

converted into a ribbed vault. A bay set in 

the middle of the narrow east side is shaped 

like a tower on the outside; the idea may have

een to create a counterpart to the donjon, 

and a certain symmetry. Several features of 

the exterior wall provide information about 

the building. A construction joint and a break 

in the basement, mark the join of the medieval 

north-west corner (Fig 4; Findings 4a; 

Findings 9). The upper edge of the basement 

is no longer smooth; it has acquired a quarter-round 

moulding. The former north-west 

corner, dating from the mid-16th century, 

is still visible in the shape of quoins from 

ground fl oor to roof (Fig. 10; Findings 10). To 

the left of them, two of the original fl oor-level 

windows have survived; the sill is a reworked 

Baroque version (Fig. 10; Findings 11). 

The southwestern corner of this, the palace’s 

largest single building, features another stair 

tower with a spiral staircase, which resembles 

the one on the south side (Fig. 11; Findings 

12). 

The surface treatment of the building recalls 

that of the older medieval one; some of the 

old rusticated blocks were even re-used in 

the walls. Mostly, however, new blocks with 

cushion-shaped bosses have been used. The 

deliberate roughness suggesting well-fortifi ed 

strength, has become a Renaissance conceit 

(Fig. 6, original south corner; the shape of the 

blocks changes between the second and third 

fl oor). 

The building done in the 14th and 15th 

centuries (tinted purple) is hard to determine 

without invasive measures. Easiest to identify 

is the square, barrel-vaulted room adjoining 

the donjon to the east (Findings 13). All that 

remains apart from it is probably stretches of 

wall, that somehow escaped the later rebuilding. 



Fig. 6: Findings 6 – Quoins of 

the former southwestern corner. 

Medieval rusticated blocks 

underneath, the added storeys 

with cushion-shaped bosses 

on top. 

Fig. 7: Findings 7 – In the 

centre is the octagonal 

Renaissance stair tower on the 

south side. 

115


Fig. 8: Findings 8 – Inscription 

on the southern extension. 

116 

Fig. 9: Findings 9 – Western 

part of the base of the 

Renaissance extension, with 

cushion-shaped blocks. 

Fig. 10: Findings 10 and 11 

– Former northwest corner of 

the Renaissance extension with 

quoins over the entire height. 


Fig. 11: Findings 12 – Remains of the base of the former eastern 

stair tower, resting on a massive grid of oak beams. 

Fig. 12: Findings 14 – Vertical joint marking the location of the 

demolished stair tower, which was in line with the surviving base at 

the bottom of the picture.

Reconstruction Under Carl Ludwig from 

1655 and Early Baroque Tendencies 

The ravages of the Thirty Years’ War and 

new demands on the estate persuaded Carl 

Ludwig to rebuild the surviving parts of the 

palace. In particular, he replaced the ruined 

north-eastern stair tower (cp. Fig. 11; Findings 

14) with the double staircase, still standing 

today. It adjoins the hall built by Ludwig V to 

the east and gives access to its upper storeys. 

The materials of the older, octagonal stair 

tower are re-used in the building, especially 

in the foundations 1 (cp. Fig. 16; Findings 18). 

Rusticated blocks with corners shaped into 45° 

degree angles are numerous. 

A recessed double arcade adjoins the staircase 

(cp. Fig. 13; Findings 15), connecting it with 

1 During underpinning work done in 2006, the relevant exterior 

areas were exposed down to the natural soil. 


the main building and providing access to the 

western rooms of the upper storeys. 

Exactly opposite, an identical arcade with the 

same early Baroque features, was installed, 

probably for symmetry’s sake (cp. Fig. 14; 

Findings 16). From the shape of the new 

windows and doors, the alterations on the 

ground fl oor west of the courtyard, appear to 

have been part of the building done by Carl 

Ludwig (cp. Fig. 15; Findings 17). 


117


Fig. 13 (left): Findings 15 

– Double arch on the north side 

of the old enclosed courtyard. 

Fig. 14 (right): Findings 16 

– Mirror-image double arch on 

the south side. 

Fig. 15: East front of the central 

block, re-used materials. 

Fig. 16: East front of the central 

block. 

118 

III. Schwetzingen – Historical Context

The Development of a Baroque Summer 

Residence after 1700 

In the course of the 18th century, the Schwetzingen 

palace underwent a complete conversion. 

In keeping with the Electors’ Absolutist 

self-image, the palace was not merely rebuilt 

after the war; it was enlarged beyond recogni- 

tion. Lack of space forbids us to discuss the 

major extensions of the original core building 

– the wings enclosing the court of honour, 

the quarter-circle pavilions, the theatre and 

the kitchens (but see the ground plans and 

plan of dendrochronological fi ndings in Vol. 

2, Images). It is remarkable that the centuries-old 

existing buildings were respected, 

instead of being pulled down and replaced 

with an entirely new palace, something that 

was common elsewhere. The old castle was 

converted and expanded into a Baroque 


complex. Johann Wilhelm’s fi rst large project 

was the building of the two “court of honour” 

wings in 1711/12 (cp. Fig. 17; Findings 19, 

20). They were symmetrical structures built 

onto the north and south ends of the main 

(east) front, creating a spacious open square. A 

balustrade and gate separate it from the town. 

The entrance is marked by two symmetrical 

guardhouses. 

This extension was the fi rst step towards the 

18th-century summer residence. Even the top 

fl oors and roofs of the two eastern towers 

were rebuilt to achieve a more symmetrical 

appearance. 

The new west wing was built directly onto 

the diagonal west wall of the old building. 

The new garden front, fl anked by two massive 

towers at the corners, now ran parallel to the 

main front (this was the main result of the 


119


120 

Fig. 17: Aerial view of the 

palace. 

Fig. 18: West front of the 

palace. 


building done in 1715/16). Seen from the 

west, no trace now remained of the medieval 

castle (cp. Fig. 19; Findings 21). 

The symmetry of the entire plan, aligned on 

an axis running from Königsstuhl hill to Kalmit 

summit, was retained as the basic formal 

principle for the next three decades; Johann 

Wilhelm’s successors applied it to the town 

and garden as well. Accordingly, Carl Phillip’s 

orangery, built in the 1720s, was placed to 

mark the garden’s western boundary and the 

end of the main axis, and when it was pulled 

down, the new quarter-circle pavilions built 

by Carl Theodor on either side of the palace’s 

garden front, were once again aligned on the 

main axis. (cp. dendroplan). 

The last part of the 18th-century palace to be 

completed was the so-called “Green Pavilion”, a 

writing cabinet for Elector Carl Theodor, that 

was built on to the west wall of the nort-west 

tower after 1778. 

(Peter Knoch/Robert Erb)



Fig. 19: Castle grouns. 

The grey marked areas display 

the immense increase of the 

building during the reign of 

Carl-Theodor. 

121


Fig. 1: Room on the fi rst fl oor 

of the central block, historical 

photograph dating from the 

early 20th century (Staatliche 

Schlösser und Gärten Baden- 

Württemberg, Bruchsal). 

122 


2. The Palace Interior Through the Ages 

The palace of Schwetzingen, once a medieval 

fortress, underwent many alterations in the 

course of its 650-year history. Not only the 

building itself, but also its interiors, were much 

changed over time. Especially the demands 

made on a Baroque summer residence necessitated 

a lot of refurbishing. From the time 

before the Palatine War of Succession only a 

few Gothic rooms with oriels survive. As regards 

the interior decoration and furnishing, little 

is known even of the early Baroque period. 

The earliest remains date from the time of 

Elector Carl Philipp (1716-1742): fi ne stuccoed 

ceilings on the fi rst fl oor and a recess for 

an oven on the second. Between 1748 and 

1785, Elector Carl Theodor commissioned the 

architect Nicolas Pigage (1723-1796) to redecorate 

a number of rooms in a Rococo style. 

Pigage, who was director of gardens and water 

features too, had little chance of infl uencing 

the outer appearance of the palace – the look 

of the main building, wings and quarter-circle 

pavilions, had long been determined. Only 

in the design of the interior could he make 

his infl uence felt, and he cooperated with 

the Elector in designing the mantelpieces, 

wainscoting and stuccoed ceilings. When the 

rooms were apportioned, those in the north 

of the ground and fi rst fl oors became Carl 

Theodor’s apartments (Rooms 103-107), while 

the southern rooms on the ground and fi rst 

fl oors became those of the Electress, Elisabeth 

Auguste (Rooms 115-127). The medieval 

core building did not allow a symmetrical 

layout modeled on that proposed by French 

theoretician Blondel, and so the two linear 

suites of rooms (enfi lades) were arranged 

east-west and north-south instead. Both 

include antechambers, salles de compagnie or 

salles d’assemblée, chambres de parade and 

cabinets. 

The second fl oor was reserved for the apartments 

of Duke Christian von Pfalz-Zweibrücken 

(1722-1775) and Count Palatine Friedrich 

Michael von Pfalz-Zweibrücken (1724-1767). 

When Carl Theodor’s long-awaited son and 

heir died, they had become next in the line of 

succession. The rooms were not elaborately 

decorated, however. 

The most valuable and authentic interior of 

the electoral age is without a doubt, that of 

the bathhouse in the Schwetzingen grounds. 

Built c.1775 by Pigage and the court craftsmen 

from Mannheim in a neo-Classical style, it 

has survived intact, except for some pieces of 

furniture. This is where Carl Theodor retreated 

when he wanted to be merely “a good 

man and pleasant companion”. 61 The interior 

betrays the Elector’s very modern personal 

taste; the intimacy and functionality displayed 

here did not become customary until the 19th 

century. The walls and furniture are designed 

to complement each other; the precious 

materials add to the dignity of the rooms. 

Besides the court carpenters Zeller and Graf, 

Carl Theodor employed a master furniture 

maker from Osthofen, Johann Georg Wahl. 

Among other things, Wahl created a highly 

decorated bureau for the Elector’s bedroom; 

it was taken to Munich at the end of the 18th 

century, and today is at Schloss Berchtesgaden. 

Furniture makers from Mannheim built 

simple, solid furniture in the Louis XVI or 

61 Christian Friedrich Daniel Schubart 1777. From: Dietrich 

Rentsch, Schloss und Garten Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1987, p. 

44.

Rococo styles, with geometric inlays. The 

court furniture maker Jacob Kieser, who 

created the bathhouse furniture, was considered 

the leading craftsman in pre-Classicist 


After Carl Theodor’s move to Munich in 1778, 

the electoral interest in Schwetzingen waned. 

For a while Carl Theodor thought of returning, 

and a number of building projects and 

interiors were completed or even embarked 

on, among them the Green Pavilion built onto 

the north front next to the garden, and several 

sopraportas by the court painter, Leidensdorffer. 

But inevitably the disuse brought its 

own consequences. Pieces of art and furniture 

were taken away to be used elsewhere; in 

the time of the next Elector, Max Josef von 

Pfalz-Bayern, only second-rate pieces were left 

at Schwetzingen. 

The year 1803 brought another massive 

change. With the backing of Napoléon, the 

House of Baden took over the Palatinate, 

and the former summer residence became a 

country retreat used by members of the court 

as a garden palace, a place to receive visitors 

or to go hunting. 

The new ruler, Karl Friedrich von Baden 

(1728-1811), used the former apartments of 

Electress Elisabeth Augusta on the fi rst fl oor. 

The lodgings of his wife, Luise Karoline Countess 

of Hochberg, were on the second fl oor 

directly above her husband’s. The countess’ 

apartments received new, modern furniture 

almost Biedermeier in style, and in 1804, 

the rooms were decorated with matching 

hand-printed wallpaper, made by the fi rm 

of Zuber in Rixheim, Alsace, and depicting 

romantic mountainous scenery. They have 

survived largely intact, making the so-called 

Hochberg rooms the most authentic rooms in 

the palace. It is thanks to the next generation 

of inhabitants, that they were preserved. Karl 

von Baden (1786-1818) and his wife Stéphanie 

Napoléon (1789-1860) occasionally stayed in 

the fi rst-fl oor rooms, and they left the interior 

decoration largely as they found it. The 

somewhat austere Consulat furniture of the 


second fl oor went well with the new Empire 

style, introduced by the princesse impériale. 

The interior was altered once more around 

1840, when the great autumnal manoeuvre 

of the 8th German corps was about to take 

place nearby. The palace of Schwetzingen 

became a headquarters of royalty – the King 

of Württemberg, the Grand Duke of Hessen 

and the Prince of Bavaria stayed here. Grand 

Duke Leopold I von Baden (1790-1852) used 

the occasion to raise his prestige, and had 

the rooms redecorated. The idea was not to 

create a unifi ed whole, but to manufacture 

an occasion for display. For this purpose, 

furniture and other items from the palaces of 

Karlsruhe, Bruchsal, Favorite, Mannheim and 

elsewhere, were brought to Schwetzingen. 

Inevitably older and newer styles mixed. 

Nevertheless, most of the furniture remained 

in place until 1918, when the palace of 

Schwetzingen was opened to the public. After 

WWI, with the rule of the House of Baden at 

an end, the furniture was sorted and arranged 

into random, occasionally fanciful “ensembles” 

– the Elector’s apartments received a set of 

Empire and Biedermeier furniture. Names and 

functions were invented for the rooms; in this 

way the Elector’s bedroom became a sitting 

room. The existing inventories were ignored, 


Fig. 2: Room on the second fl oor 

of the central block, present 

appearance (LAD Esslingen, 

2005). 

123


Fig. 3: Bathhouse, Elector 

Carl Theodor’s study (From: 

Carl Ludwig Fuchs/Claus 

Reisinger, Schloß und Garten 

zu Schwetzingen, Worms 2001, 

p. 153). 

124 


and after WWII, attempts at stocktaking 

revealed an urgent need for action. It was only 

in the 1970s, however, that it was decided to 

work out a consistent presentation strategy 

based on the historic layout. 

The plan to recreate the palace’s original 

appearance sparked a lengthy and hard-fought 

discussion in the 1980s. However, the intended 

use of the palace as a museum was never 

in question. The intention was to present 

historic events and processes in their authentic 

setting, and the presentation of these 

settings had to be worked out accordingly. It 

was decided that the fi rst fl oor would provide 

a context for the Palatine heyday in the 

days of Carl Theodor and Elisabeth Auguste 

(around 1775), and the second would serve as 

a fi ne background for the furnishings from 

the times of the Princes of Pfalz-Zweibrücken 

(c.1775) and the Elector of Baden (c.1804). 

Original pieces were recovered from museums 

and palaces all over Baden; other suitable 

items were purchased as replacements. In this 

way, life in the summer residence of Schwetzingen 

could be recreated for visitors. 

As the historical overview has shown, in 

the course of the centuries, massive changes 

were made to the interior of the palace. 

Nevertheless, the garden, the building and 

its interior decoration combine into a unifi ed 

whole. Once this was the setting for the gay 

festive life of the electoral court 62 , and today 

it provides both an invaluable heritage site 

and an equally invaluable source of knowledge 

and insight. This is what the palace of 

Schwetzingen represents. 

For the near future, plans are underway to 

recover or replace items of furniture and 

interior decoration, among them the sets of 

Frankenthal porcelain, listed in the inventories. 

Suitable sets, produced by the electoral 

manufactory, are available on the art market. 

The original collection of seventeen paintings, 

depicting hunting themes, once displayed 

at Schwetzingen and currently in storage, 63 

will be displayed again in suitably renovated 

rooms on the third fl oor. 

(Wolfgang Wiese) 

3. The Palace’s fortunes in the 

19th and 20th Centuries 

The 19th Century 

Besides the evidence gained from restoration 

work and building analyses, it is archival documents 

that provide information about the 

work done at Schwetzingen, its palace and 

gardens, in the past. The number of surviving 

documents is very large, and it includes the 

correspondence between the local administration 

and its superiors, as well as letters to and 

from tenants and craftsmen. 64 Nevertheless, 

these documents frequently provide only circumstantial 

evidence of the condition of buildings 

or the work being planned and executed. 

Very often there is no precise detail. For 

62 Rentsch 1987, p. 3. 

63 Anna Hierl-Linzer, “Die Schwetzinger Jagdgemälde”, in: 

Jahrbuch der Staatlichen Kunstsammlungen in Baden-Württemberg, 

Vol. 35, München 1998, pp. 105-123. 

64 Most of the relevant archival documents are at the main 

archive of Baden-Württemberg, the Generallandesarchiv 

Karlsruhe (GLA). They are listed in an inventory, “Verzeichnis 

der im Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe verwahrten Archivalien 

über die Stadt Schwetzingen”, 1958.

that reason, there is no full chronology of building 

measures and uses for any of the electoral 

buildings at Schwetzingen. 

Repairs and Alterations 

The palace of Schwetzingen was rarely visited 

by its owners after the electoral court had 

moved to Munich (1778) and the property had 

fallen to the Grand Dukes of Baden (1803). 

The House of Baden did little beyond organizing 

the occasional festive event, using the 

garden and a few halls in the southern quarter-circle 

pavilion as well as the corps de logis, 

for the purpose. Thanks to this general lack of 

interest, the palace itself and the smaller buildings 

were spared large-scale alterations during 

the 19th and the fi rst decades of the 20th 

century. Only the occasional detail, such as 

wallpaper or furniture, was adapted to current 

taste, at the request of the archducal family. 65 

On the other hand, the property needed to be 

maintained. Even from Carl Theodor’s time 

documents tell of constant repairs. 66 During 

the entire 19th century, the respective owners 

were aware of the need to keep the buildings 

and grounds in good shape (Fig. 1). 67 For that 

reason, a slater was commissioned to inspect 

all roofs twice a year, and repair them where 

necessary. 68 A glazier was given the task of 

keeping the windows clean and intact. 69 Shutters, 

doors, mountings, fl oors, gutters 70 and 

65 In 1804, a number of second-fl oor rooms in the corps de logis 

received new wallpaper (cp. Kurt Martin (ed.), Die Kunstdenkmäler 

Badens 10,2, Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933, p. 

83). In 1904, the Archduchess herself chose the wallpaper for 

her bedroom (GLA 56/3905). 

66 The “protocollum commissionale” of 1795, gives a detailed description 

of the condition of the garden and its buildings (GLA 

221/46). Moreover, in 1776, Nicolas de Pigage (1723-1796) 

summarized all work done in the past 15 years [„Les ouvrages 

tout à fait neufs, qu´on a fait depuis 15 ans à Schwetzingen 

(GLA 221/39)]. 

67 One document dated 1812, explicitly states the importance 

of an annual sum for maintenance and the repair of damages 

caused by “time, war or malice” (GLA 221/208). From the fi rst 

half of the 19th century, some lists survive, drawn up by the 

court builder and the steward, and listing all necessary work 

done and the cost incurred, entitled “Die auf die Unterhaltung 

des herrschaftlichen Schlosses und der dazugehörigen 

Nebengebäuden zu Schwetzingen […] verwendeten Kosten 

1804-1809” (GLA 221/36); “Die Unterhaltung des herrschaftlichen 

Schlosses und der dazugehörigen Nebengebäude 

1810-13” (GLA 221/7). 

68 Documented for the years 1813 (GLA 56/3901), 1850 (GLA 

56/3903) and 1901 (GLA 56/3904), among others. 

69 Documented in 1809 (GLA 56/3901) and elsewhere. 

70 For example, in 1858, the stone gutters near the quarter-circle 

pavilions were to be cemented with a mixture of cement and 

linseed oil (GLA 56/3903). 


other parts prone to deterioration were kept 

in working order. The repair and occasional 

renewal of coats of plaster and paint was seen 

to – one example is the repainting of the corps 

de logis and the wings with grey-green lime 

paint in the 1830s, a detailed description of 

which has survived. 71 Occasionally, large-scale 

renovation work became necessary, for example 

on the mosque 72 and the bathhouse 73 . 

As well as maintenance work, there were 

measures in connection with the letting of 

certain buildings, or fi nding new uses for 

them. In particular, this concerned the working 

quarters, the side wings, the quarter-circle 

pavilions and the orangery. Rooms were 

let to private individuals for residential purposes, 

which, despite the rules of conduct, re- 

71 GLA 56/3901 and 237/36923. 

72 Documented work on the mosque includes repainting and 

urgent repairs in 1821 (GLA 56/3901); unspecifi ed repairs in 

1830 (GLA 56/3979); work on the badly damaged dome in 

1868 (GLA 56/3904). 

73 For example, numerous repairs of the roof and the stonework 

in 1810-12 (GLA 221/57); repairs in 1886 (GLA 54/11); a 

restoration of the ceiling painting in 1890 (GLA 56/3904); 

dry-rot control measures in the entire building in 1902ff. (GLA 

56/3904). 


Fig. 1: Section of an early 

19th-century document listing 

the expenses for the upkeep of 

the palace (“Die auf die Unterhaltung 

des herrschaftlichen 

Schlosses und den dazugehörigen 

Nebengebäuden zu 

Schwetzingen […] verwendeten 

Kosten 1804-1809”) (Blatt 16v, 

Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe, 

221/36). 

125


Fig. 2: Plans for the conversion 

of the right wing of the palace 

into a home for the blind, 

Fischer 1866 (Generallandesarchiv 

Karlsruhe 221/76). 

Fig. 3: Green Pavilion, photo 

of 1912 (Generallandesarchiv 

Karlsruhe 56/3905). 

126 


sulted in damage to the buildings. 74 A number 

of institutions were housed in the palace 

74 Regulations from the year 1803 forbid the keeping of animals 

and storing of damp products in the apartments, as well as 

alterations not authorized by the court building department 

(GLA 221/73). 

buildings too, among them the bursary (north 

wing, 1850-1909), the Ministry of Justice (north 

wing, from 1909) and a trade school (north 

wing, 1908-1923). The south wing accommodated 

a school for the blind (1866; Fig. 2) and 

the kitchens, a cookery school (1890). 75 The 

middle section of the orangery was converted 

into a horticultural college (1899). 76 Apparently 

little care was taken to make sure that 

these uses were compatible with the historic 

buildings. On the contrary – once tenants had 

contacted the court building department, they 

were at liberty to adapt the rooms to their requirements, 

which could include the moving 

of stairs, walls and doors, as well as the laying 

of water pipes and the installation of taps. 77 

A similar fate was reserved for the quarter-circle 

pavilions. The letting of rooms for events 78 , 

and of the attics as drying rooms for tobacco 

and hops, 79 on the whole caused little damage. 

But the fi tting-out of schoolrooms 80 , a gymnasium 

81 and a synagogue, 82 required walls to 

be built, windows to be bricked up and entrances 

to be moved. The worst damages occurred 

when military institutions were housed in 

the pavilions. The historic structures were not 

suited for the arena that was fi tted out in the 

northern pavilion (1816-24) 83 , against the opposition 

of the garden director, Johann Michael 

Zeyher (1770-1843), who rightly anticipated 

damage to the building 84 , or for the stabling 

of 60 cavalry horses (south quarter-circle pavilion 

1849) 85 either. The same went for the repeated 

use of both quarter-circle pavilions as 

a sickbay, which usually required alterations 

of the buildings themselves, as well as the surrounding 

grounds (1870-1873; 1916-1918). 86 

Some effort was made to protect the interior 

75 GLA 221/76 and 54/3. 

76 GLA 56/3904 and 56/3920. The rooms were converted into 

apartments only 13 years later (GLA 56/3971). 

77 GLA 56/3964 and 56/3971. 

78 Cp. GLA 54/3. 

79 GLA 56/3973. 

80 From 1897 (GLA 56/3995 and 56/3972). 

81 From 1869 (GLA 56/3959). 

82 From 1897-1914 and again from 1918 (GLA 56/3971 and 

56/3972). 

83 GLA 56/3900. 

84 GLA 56/3900. 

85 At the same time, weapons and cannon were stored in the 

north pavilion (GLA 56/3903 and 237/36922). 

86 GLA 56/1204.

y panelling the walls with wood and, as a precaution, 

removing the valuable marble chimneypieces; 

but when the military moved out 

again, it nevertheless left a damaged building. 

For all that, during the fi rst half of the 19th century, 

the buildings were maintained with great 

care, even though they were rarely used by 

their owners. The value and status of the property 

was evidently known and appreciated. 

Maintenance and repairs were carried out, 

despite the straitened fi nancial circumstances, 

and they were carried out using traditional 

techniques and materials. 

However, as the century progressed, a change 

of attitude regarding the palace becomes evident. 

The efforts at maintenance decreased, 

while the use of rooms increased. The authorities 

in charge apparently cared less and less 

about the suitability of these uses for the historic 

buildings. 87 Very few objections based on historical 

considerations are expressed in the documents. 

A rare exception is the court building 

department’s insistence on the preservation of 

the Green Pavilion (Fig. 3), that had been destroyed 

by a falling tree – or rather its careful 

rebuilding using the existing materials: 

„The small green structure, together with the 

corner of the palace wall, the roofs and small 

towers, makes for a delightful ensemble, that 

would suffer badly if the pavilion were to be removed. 

Besides, it is a simple but unique piece 

of architecture; its loss would be regrettable.” 88 

(Claudia Baer-Schneider) 

The 20th Century 

Early in the 20th century, the historic documents 

were critically incorporated, and the 

buildings were documented in a manner that 

was exemplary for the times. In the 1920s, the 

architect Wilhelm Schweitzer drew up ground 

plans, elevations and sections (Fig. 1) of most of 

the buildings. In 1933, Kurt Martin published a 

massive monograph on Schwetzingen, that had 

been commissioned by the Staatliche Denkmalpfl 

ege, the authority in charge of historic mo- 

87 Very rarely objections are voiced, e.g. by the court building 

department regarding schoolrooms in the south quarter-circle 

pavilion. These were ignored (GLA 56/3972). 

88 GLA 56/3905. 


numents; it contained the results of his extensive 

research, many photographs and a large 

part of Schweitzer’s plans 89 . 

However, there are few documents regarding 

building measures undertaken in the fi rst half 

of the 20th century. 90 The main palace building 

was renovated in the 1920s, under the direction 

of the architect Fritz Hirsch. The central block 

was painted a dark maroon-red, the court of honour 

wings, a golden yellow, to emphasize the 

different ages of the buildings. 91 Hans Möhrle 

was in charge of a thorough renovation of 

the theatre in 1937 – the northern quarter-cir- 

89 The original plans by Wilhelm Schweitzer are at Schwetzingen 

Palace, department: Bauleitung des Landesbetriebs 

Vermögen und Bau Baden-Württemberg, Amt Mannheim. 

Kurt Martin’s monograph has remained a major work 

of reference to the present day: Die Kunstdenkmäler des 

Amtsbezirks Mannheim. Stadt Schwetzingen, ed. Kurt Martin, 

Karlsruhe 1933. 

90 Written sources: GLA 508/146, 508/147, 237/42321 to 42323. 

Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen Abt. A, No. 1243 Verwaltungssachen, 

XIII Staats-, Kreis- und Bezirksverwaltung, 2. Großherzogliches 

Haus. – The records were kept from the beginning 

of the 20th century to the 1920s. They are at the Regierungspräsidium 

Karlsruhe, Referat 25 (former Landesdenkmalamt, 

Außenstelle Karlsruhe). Plans: GLA 424 K/001 to 004. They 

include plans of alterations to the orangery 1899/1900, plans 

of the north and south quarter-circle pavilions and the court 

gardener’s house, and as-is plans of the palace. G 021 to 062: 

19th-century ground plans, a few 20th-century rebuilding 

plans. All are at the Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe, Referat 

25. 

91 Schwetzinger Zeitung, “Ochsenblut und Eigelb - der 

Schwetzinger Farbenstreit”, n.d., early 1930s; the article states: 

“In 1924/25 the palace has been rescued from its state of 

decay by a thorough renovation. The State of Baden invested 

a million and a half [...] the entire palace has received a new 

garb in brilliant red and yellow. [...] This colour treatment has 

met with a storm of protest [...].“ 


Fig. 4: Wilhelm Schweitzer, 

ground plan of the Temple of 

Apollo, c.1930 (From: Martin 

1933, p. 197). 

127


Fig. 5: Photo taken in 1937: The 

new palace restaurant in the 

north quarter-circle pavilion 

(From: Leopold/Pelker 2004, 

p. 349). 

128 


cle pavilion was converted into a theatre lobby 

and palace restaurant. Some of the additions 

and furniture, imitating historic styles and of 

remarkably fi ne craftsmanship, have survived 

(Schlossrestaurant und Kurfürstenstube). 

The palace was spared destruction during 

WWII. In the second half of the 20th century, 

large-scale and costly renovation and maintenance 

work was carried out. The palace theatre, 

the main palace building, the Temple of 

Apollo, and fi nally the mosque and bathhouse, 

were carefully and thoroughly renovated. The 

relevant reports and plans have been archived 

by the authority in charge, the Schwetzingen 

planning offi ce of the Baden-Württemberg 

State Agency for Property Assets and 

Construction, Mannheim department (Bauleitung 

Schwetzingen des Landesbetriebs Vermögen 

und Bau Baden-Württemberg, Amt 

Mannheim; bis 2004: Staatliches Vermögens- 

und Hochbauamt) and incorporated in a management 

plan, the “Baupfl egekatalog”. 92 

All building and repair work done in the 

course of the 20th century was supervised by 

the State Department for the Conservation of 

92 Baupfl egekatalog: A documentation, drawn up as part of 

the management plan by Hans-Dieter Proske, director of the 

Bauleitung Schwetzingen, which documents the history of 

uses and alterations of every building in the palace grounds. 

The Bauleitung Schwetzingen keeps approx. 1,000 plans, 

reports and documentation, incomplete up to 1980, complete 

since then. 

Monuments (Staatliche Denkmalpfl ege), and 

refl ects the ongoing international discussion 

on the treatment of historic buildings. 93 Considering 

the sheer number of individual measures, 

only two examples taken from the palace 

and garden can be discussed in detail. 

Two Examples of Building and Preservation 

Measures 

The palace theatre: The palace theatre was extensively 

renovated in 1971-74, after a very 

controversial discussion about the future of 

the Schwetzinger Festspiele. The demolition 

of the historic stage, a concession to massive 

pressure from the public, is considered a 

severe loss today, even if recent research has 

shown that only fragments of the original machinery 

had been left at the time 94 . When the 

house was renovated in 1999-2005, the work 

was prepared and accompanied by thorough 

historical and architectural research 95 . Improvements 

of the fi re protection system were 

combined with measures to secure and clean 

the fragile interior. Wherever reliable fi ndings 

were available, the original look could be reconstructed. 

For example, the worn velvet carpet 

in the historical house was replaced with 

a wooden fl oor of the type the fi ndings have 

shown to have been used. Some 20th-century 

repainting has been allowed to stay in place, 

to protect layers of original paint underneath. 

The orangery had been converted into a 

horticultural college in 1899/1900; after 

1945, it served as a metalworking shop and 

a storeroom. In 1993-1999 it was extensively 

renovated. Prior to this, a survey was conducted 

(Fig. 2), the roof and in fact the entire 

timber construction were repaired with the 

utmost regard to the original materials, much 

of which was still in place, and the building’s 

93 Application of the law for the protection of cultural monuments 

(Monument Protection Act of Baden-Württemberg) of 

1975 and the Venice Charter of 1964. Item 793 29 in the state 

budget of the Land of Baden-Württemberg: Schwetzingen, 

restoration of palace, 1962; overall expenditure up to 2005: 

€52m; budgeted: €71m. 

94 Bärbel Pelker, “Zeitzeugen berichten – Dokumente zum historischen 

Bühnenhaus und Wiederaufbau (1901-1974)”, in: Silke 

Leopold/Bärbel Pelker (eds.), Hofoper in Schwetzingen. Musik, 

Bühnenkunst, Architektur, Heidelberg 2004, pp. 305-388. 

95 Monika Scholl, “Bretterbude? Neue Erkenntnisse zur Baugeschichte 

des Theaters”, in Leopold/Pelker 2004, pp. 251-302.

eastern part was restored to its original 

function as an orangery, again using as much 

as possible of the authentic materials. Thus, 

the plants are once again displayed on a clay 

fl oor, as excavations have shown this to have 

been the case originally. The middle section 

of the building now houses an exhibition 

about orangeries generally, and the history 

of the Schwetzingen orangery in particular, 

while a number of sculptures removed from 

the garden for reasons of conservation and 

replaced by copies, are now displayed in the 

western part (Figs. 3 + 4) 

Prospects 

A large catalogue of future measures (in the 

management plan: Area of action B-1, Sections 

1.1-1.13) illustrates the work still waiting to be 

done. At present, work on the Lower Waterworks, 

the Temple of Mercury and the arbour 

walks surrounding the grand parterre, as well 

as a renovation of the palace’s exterior walls, 

are under way. 

Besides the major renovation measures, a 

long-term commitment listed in the budget of 

the Land of Baden-Württemberg, a thorough 

maintenance is the main priority. It is based 

on the detailed Baupfl egekatalog (management 

plan, Part C II.); in emergencies the 

Bauleitung Schwetzingen (the locally based 

department of the Landesbetrieb Vermögen 

und Bau Baden-Württemberg, i.e. the State 

Agency for Property Assets and Construction) 

has the authority and capabilities to react 

quickly. 

Questions regarding the appropriateness 

and innocuousness of measures due to be 

implemented, are carefully considered; the use 

of authentic construction methods, techniques 

and materials is part of the renovation 

scheme. Repairs and renovations are based on 

insights gained from observation and analysis 

of the existing buildings, ideally supplemented 

by archival documents. 

The main focus is on repair and careful 

renovation; reconstruction of earlier building 

stages is limited to cases where they are 


documented reliably. Use is subject to the 

requirements of the historic buildings, and 

limited accordingly. 

(Peter Thoma) 


Fig. 6: Palace theatre, building 

stages/alterations of the 

lobby, Peter Knoch, Büro für 

Bauforschung, 2003/2004 

(original document: Bauleitung 


Fig. 7: Orangery, Record of 

damages to an 18th-century 

window, Büro Crowel, 1997 

(original document: Bauleitung 


129


Fig. 1: Plan showing expropriations 

between 1748 and 1760 

(section); the new quarter-circle 

orangeries are superimposed on 

the old pleasure garden (Generallandesarchiv 

Karlsruhe). 

130 


d) 

History of the Palace Garden 

1. The Origins of the Palace Garden 

Architectural conditions and older gardens 

on the site of Schwetzingen Palace 

There is no documentation pointing to any 

gardens at Schwetzingen Palace during the 

14th and 15th centuries. The fi rst garden 

mentionend appears in 17th-century documents, 

and in the letters of Elisabeth Charlotte 

von der Pfalz (“Liselotte von der Pfalz”) 1 . 2 It 

was her father, Elector Carl Ludwig 3 , who had 

rebuilt the palace after the devastations of the 

Thirty Years’ War and made it into a residence 

for his second wife, Luise von Degenfeld. The 

garden created along with it, featured hedges, 

paths, trees, vegetables, herbs, fl owers and 

1 Elisabeth Charlotte von der Pfalz, 1652-1722, married to the 

brother of Louis XIV of France. 

2 Cp. Martin 1933, pp. 18, 22. 

3 Elector Palatine Carl Ludwig, 1617-1680; r. 1649-1680 

walks overgrown with vines. 4 Access from the 

palace to the garden was via a bridge, because 

the water-fi lled moats surrounding the 

original fortifi ed manor were still in place. In 

1682, half of the orange and lemon trees from 

the garden of the Friedrichsburg at Mannheim 

were brought to Schwetzingen. 5 No information 

survives concerning the housing of the 

citrus trees in winter. 

During the Palatine War of Succession 

(1688–1697) parts of the palace were destroyed 

again. Elector Johann Wilhelm 6 had it 

rebuilt and enlarged; the moats were fi lled 

in, the wings enclosing the court of honour 

were added, and the gatehouses were built 

(1710/11). An extension was added to the west 

of the corps de logis (1715-17), which today 

forms the palace’s garden front. 

In 1720, Elector Carl Philipp 7 moved his 

court from Heidelberg to Schwetzingen, and 

in 1731, on to Mannheim. Schwetzingen, 

however, remained the summer palace. 

The palace garden, created by the Elector is 

the fi rst of which depictions to survive. It 

appears in a plan documenting expropriations 

between 1748 and 1760 (see Fig. 1), and there 

is also an undated view of the palace, that 

shows the garden as well. This extended west 

from the palace, and between 1718 and 1728 

an orangery was built at its western end 8 by 

the architect Alessandro Galli da Bibiena 9 . 

The garden was bordered by a long one-storey 

building in the south and a wall in the north. 

A wide central path leading from the palace 

to the orangery divided the space. Smaller 

paths crossing diagonally and at right angles, 

subdivided both halves. The centre featured 

a fountain in a circular basin; in 1725, the 

fi rst water wheel on the site of today’s Upper 

Waterworks was constructed to supply it. 10 

In 1731, Johann Friedrich Armand von 

4 Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe (GLA) Kopialbuch 942 

Heidelberg Urkunden-Abschrift Nro.363 (original dated 22nd 

May 1669). 

5 Thomas Alfried Leger, Führer durch den Schwetzinger Garten, 


6 Elector Palatine Johann Wilhelm, 1658-1716, r. 1690-1716. 

7 Elector Palatine Carl Philipp, 1661-1742, r. 1716-1742. 


Der Süden im Norden, Regensburg 1999, pp. 59 f. 

9 Alessandro Galli da Bibiena, d. 1748, architect. 

10 Martin 1933, p. 190.

Uffenbach 11 noted in his travelling journal: 

“In the middle of the garden there is a large 

basin of water, and in the centre of this a tall 

jet of water rises from an untidy jumble of 

stones, to a height of almost 40 feet; this water 

feature is contrived by a special mill and a 

system of pumps.“ 12 

In 1724, Carl Philipp ordered 447 orange trees 

and 313 other exotic plants to be moved from 

Düsseldorf to Schwetzingen. 13 Uffenbach 

describes the arrangement of plants in tubs 

thus: “the noblest thing here is, I believe, 

the number of Italian plants and trees; the 

garden is fi lled with them almost like a small 

forest. Many of them are remarkable for their 

considerable size and set in their own boxes, 

and amongst them the statues, larger than life 

in size, beautifully fashioned and gilt all over, 

are a magnifi cent sight.“ 14 The son of the chief 

court gardener Betting 15 who died in 1747, 

describes the garden thus: “small in size but 

well-cultivated and pleasant, the Schwetzingen 

palace garden, originally laid out to display 

the orange trees, presents to the eye a regular 

grove of bitter oranges and lemons in the 

shape, both of trees and of hedges, the like 

of which will hardly be found even in the 

princely gardens of Colorno and all’Imperiale 

in Italy.“ 16 The garden was also decorated with 

bulbs and sanded areas of different colours. 17 

South of the formal garden were the kitchen 

gardens. Nearby was an enclosure housing 

turtles, kept for the eggs that were popular at 

the Elector’s table. 18 

11 Johann Friedrich Armand von Uffenbach, 1687-1769, 

Frankfurt patrician, musician and scholar. 

12 Johann Friedrich Armand von Uffenbach, travelling journal 

1731, quoted in Max Arnim, “Johann Friedrich von Uffenbachs 

Reise durch die Pfalz 1731”, in: Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, 

July/August 1928, 29th year No.7/8, pp. 158-159. 

13 Martin 1933, p. 129. 

14 Johann Friedrich Armand von Uffenbach, Reisetagebücher 

(travelling journals) 1731, p. 158. 

15 Johann Betting, fl . as head gardener 1725-1747, d. 1747; son: 

Nicolas Betting, d. c.1780. 

16 GLA 221/212. 

17 Martin 1933, pp. 136-137. 

18 Johann Friedrich Armand von Uffenbach, Reisetagebücher 

1731, p. 161. 


Palace Extension Under Elector Carl Theodor 

Between 1748 and 1750, Elector Palatine 

Carl Theodor 19 ordered a new orangery to be 

erected at Schwetzingen. The structure went 

up north of the palace and was called the northern 

quarter-circle pavilion for its distinctive 

ground plan. Its location still allowed for the 

possibility of building an entire new palace, 

west of the new pavilion, and laying out the 

garden to the south. The architect in charge 

was Alessandro Galli da Bibiena. After his 

death in 1748, the responsibility briefl y passed 

to Guillaume d’Hauberat 20 before Nicolas de 

Pigage 21 took over as architect in charge. 22 At 

the same time, work started on the new marketplace, 

today’s palace square, using Bibiena’s 

designs; in this way the main entrance to the 

palace received a grand architectural setting. 

19 Elector Palatine Carl Theodor, 1724-1799, r. 1743-1799, Elector 

of Bavaria from 1777. 

20 Guillaume d’Hauberat, d. 1751, architect. 

21 Nicolas de Pigage, 1723-1796, architect and landscape 

architect. 

22 For details see also Wiltrud Heber, Die Arbeiten des Nicolas de 

Pigage in den ehemals kurpfälzischen Residenzen Mannheim 

und Schwetzingen, Worms 1986, p. 255. 


Fig. 2: Johann Ludwig Petri, 

1753, plan of the garden (“Plan 

der Chur-fürstl.: lust gärtnerey 

Schwetzingen in der pfaltz”) 

(Kurpfälzisches Museum 

Heidelberg). 

131


Fig. 3: Nicolas de Pigage, 1762, 

design for the palace garden 

and hunting park (Bayerische 

Verwaltung der staatlichen 

Schlösser, Gärten und Seen). 

132 


The decision to forego the building of a new 

palace was made in 1750, which also settled 

the question of where to build the second 

quarter-circle pavilion. On 8th June 1753, 

the architect Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti 23 was 

commissioned to oversee its construction. 

Work must have progressed rapidly, for by 

the summer of 1754, Court Plasterer Giuseppe 

Antonio Albuccio 24 was at work decorating the 

rooms. 25 The quarter-circle pavilions served as 

orangeries and as a setting for court functions. 

The building of the second one determined 

the layout of the garden, and in 1753, work on 

the open spaces started. 

23 Franz Wilhelm (Francesco) Rabaliatti, 1716-1782, architect. 

24 Giuseppe Antonio Albuccio, d. 1776, master plasterer. 

25 Heber 1986, p. 293. 

The Origins of the Palace Gardens at 


A. An Overview of the Development of the 

Garden 

The basic design for the Schwetzingen palace 

garden (see Fig. 2) was provided by Johann 

Ludwig Petri 26 , head gardener of the Duke of 

Pfalz-Zweibrücken 27 . Petri came up with the 

idea of quarter-circular arbour walks facing 

the pavilions, thus establishing the circular 

shape of the parterre as a whole. The circle 

itself was bisected by an elaborate main axis, 

running west from the palace and continued 

through an arrangement of bosquets, and 

further structured by a less showy transverse 

axis. For the beds, Petri envisioned angloises 28 

immediately behind the arbours, and traditional 

bosquets further west. Avenues of trees 

lined the central crossing and both sides of 

the bosquet area. 

Carl Theodor approved the design on 28th 

May 1753, and Petri immediately started on 

its realization. As the pleasure garden would 

take up the space currently occupied by the 

kitchen gardens, Petri also laid out a new 

kitchen garden. After 1756, however, work 

proceeded very slowly due to fi nancial and 

staff shortages. When Petri left the Elector’s 

service at his own request in 1758, only the 

basins in the parterre, part of the avenues and 

the arbour walks (without their central and 

terminal pavilions) had been completed. 

Independent of the garden itself, work 

had started in 1757 on a hunting park, the 

“Sternallee” ("Star avenue"), in a stretch of 

woodland further southwest. Here, too, things 

came to a standstill in 1759. 

In 1761, Nicolas de Pigage took over as chief 

architect for all the projects. The next year a 

fresh start was made with a new team. Pigage, 

supervisor of gardens and water features since 

1749, and building director since 1752, was 

named garden director; Theodor van Wyn- 

26 Johann Ludwig Petri, 1714-1794, landscape gardener, head 

gardener at Zweibrücken. 

27 Christian IV von Pfalz-Zweibrücken, 1722-1775. 

28 The angloise is a type of bosquet characteristic of the Rococo 

style; it is described in the section “The angloises” (see below.).

der 29 was taken on as chief court gardener and 

Johann Wilhelm Sckell 30 as court gardener. 

It was necessary to fi nd a new accommodation 

for the plants in tubs, and so in 1761, 

Pigage started on a new orangery with its 

own parterre north of Petri’s pleasure garden; 

it was fi rst used in the winter of 1762/63. At 

the same time, work started on the angloise 

and “natural theatre” adjoining the orangery 

garden to the west. From 1762 to 1766 the 

orchard and kitchen gardens, on the southern 

periphery of the garden, were enlarged and 

restructured. 

In 1762, Pigage presented an “ideal design” 

(cp. Fig. 3) that retained Petri’s basic layout, 

but extended the bosquet area westwards, 

concluding with a basin. Those parts of the 

garden already under construction at the 

time are depicted quite realistically in the 

design; the features Pigage envisioned on the 

southern and western peripheries, however, 

were never built. The star avenue, in the plan 

designed to take up more space than the 

entire garden, was never realized in those 

dimensions either. 

The large-scale extensions necessitated a 

larger water supply, and the old water wheel 

built by Carl Philipp was insuffi cient to 

ensure it; so another pumping station, called 

the Lower Waterworks, was built north of the 

garden in 1762-1765. 31 

On a wedge of ground north of the orangery, 

a menagerie was built in 1763-1767. When 

the potted plants had been moved to the new 

orangery garden for the winter of 1762/63, 

work on the middle part of the pleasure 

garden could be resumed. The extension westwards 

and the continuation of the transverse 

axis towards the north necessitated further 

expropriations. 

According to Pigage’s list of 24th May 

1764, 32 the circular parterre, the avenues and 

probably the northern angloise were the fi rst 

features to be built, followed from 1765 by 

29 Theodor van Wynder, d. 1777, chief court gardener 1762-1777. 

30 Johann Wilhelm Sckell,1721 – 1792, court gardener. 

31 GLA 213/109 of 31.7.1762, GLA 213/110 of 24.7.1764, Heber 

1986, p. 328. 

32 GLA 213/110 of 24.7.1764, Heber 1986, S. 425-426, s. n. 24. 


the southern angloise and the large bosquets, 

completed in 1771. From 1766 onwards, work 

continued on the large terminal basin that 

nevertheless was not completed until after 

1775. As early as 1766, Pigage had decided on 

the selection of statuary for the garden, along 

with the sculptor Peter Anton von Verschaffelt 

33 , who was commissioned to create a large 

number of statues for the circular parterre, 

the angloises and the bosquet with the 

natural theatre. A statement dated 1773 shows 

Verschaffelt to have supplied sculptures for 

the large bosquets and the terminal basin. 

Pigage’s execution plan of 1767 (cp. Fig. 4) 

gives an idea of the state of things at the 

time. It proves Pigage to have stayed close to 

Petri’s design in building the circular parterre. 

The interior layout of the bosquets, the large 

basin that formed the culmination of the 

middle garden, and the system of bordering 

canals, however, are Pigage’s contribution. 

The kitchen garden to the south, the orangery, 

the menagerie and the angloise with the 

natural theatre were all completed by 1767. 

Probably the same holds for the “seahorse 

33 Peter Anton von Verschaffelt, 1710-1793, sculptor, worked for 

the Palatine court from 1752. 


Fig. 4: Nicolas de Pigage, 1767, 

execution plan for the enlarging 

of the garden, original lost. 

133


Fig. 5: Friedrich Ludwig Sckell, 

1783, plan of the garden 

(Bayerische Verwaltung der 

staatlichen Schlösser, Gärten 

und Seen). 

134 


garden” occupying the wedge of ground 

between the southern quarter-circle pavilion 

and the vegetable garden, which appears in 

this plan for the fi rst time. The details of the 

four quadrants within the circular parterre, 

and the area west of the kitchen garden, were 

not realized the way they appear in the plan; 

neither were the two features on the narrow 

sides of the great basin ever built. 

A description of the garden around 1768 

survives in the Etrennes Palatines for 1769, 

a type of calendar. 34 The ground plan of the 

garden, by Egidius Verhelst, is almost identical 

to Pigage’s execution plan of 1767, although 

it already shows the “bulge” on the west side 

of the great basin and the nursery on the 

northwestern side of the garden, established 

in 1769. 

From 1769/70, the bathhouse was built west 

of the menagerie. Like the natural theatre 

nearby, it was completed around 1775. 

In 1770, the star avenue was fenced in, and 

deer were released to turn it into a functional 

hunting park. The dilapidated Upper 

34 Etrennes Palatines pour l’année 1769. Mannheim 1769, 

Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg, quoted after Heber 1986, 

pp. 461-462. 

Waterworks, dating from Carl Philipp’s time, 

received a new water tower in 1771/72, 35 and 

parts of the pumping station were rebuilt in 

1776/77. 

The nursery was signifi cantly enlarged in 

1774, when stock from the dissolved nurseries 

of Mannheim and Heidelberg was moved to 


According to offi cial documents, preparatory 

work for large-scale landscaping was done that 

same year. A long narrow island was created 

on the northern border of the garden, and 

the creation of a view west from the Temple 

of Apollo was embarked on. At the same 

time, work on the Turkish garden west of the 

orchard was progressing. In the following 

years, attention was focused on completing 

the bathhouse area and other parts of the 

garden already under construction. 

In 1777, Pigage was joined by the young 

landscape gardener Friedrich Ludwig Sckell 36 , 

son of the court gardener, Johann Wilhelm 

Sckell. Elector Carl Theodor had generously 

paid for the talented young man’s travels to 

France and England, there to study the latest 

developments in garden design. Sckell put the 

knowledge he had gained into practice after 

his return in 1777, laying out the Arborium 

Theodoricum on the artifi cial island, that had 

been created in the north of the garden. 

That same year, Carl Theodor became Elector 

of Bavaria, and in 1778, the court had to be 

moved to Munich. The Elector remained 

interested in the work going on in his garden, 

and at fi rst his absence did not impair things, 

but after a few years, the funds set aside for 

the former summer palace were cut back 

more and more. 

A Temple of Botany was built in the Arborium 

Theodoricum in 1778, and the ruin of a 

Roman water tower with its own aqueduct in 

1779. That year, work on the Turkish garden 

was resumed as well. The mosque, mentioned 

35 Heber 1986, p. 332. 

36 Friedrich Ludwig (von) Sckell, 1750-1823, landscape gardener, 

court gardener from 1792, 1799 garden director for the 

Palatinate of the Rhine and Bavaria, from 1804 court garden 

supervisor.

for the fi rst time in 1782, was completed by 

1792. 

The English garden to the west of the great 

basin and the Temple of Apollo are already 

present on Sckell’s plan of 1783 (cp. Fig. 

5), as is another nursery on the southwestern 

border of the garden, and the Turkish garden 

in the shape it eventually took. In 1784 Pigage 

mentions for the fi rst time a “monument” 37 

to be built west of the mosque. Between the 

mosque and the intended site of this monument, 

a pond surrounded by a landscaped 

area was created in 1786. In 1787, the decision 

was made to erect a belvedere – today known 

as the Temple of Mercury – on the foundations 

of the monument. This was completed 

by 1792 at the latest. The area surrounding 

the Temple of Mercury fi rst appears on a plan 

drawn by Schneeberger in 1806 (cp. Fig. 6). 

This plan also shows that the nursery on the 

southwestern border had been abandoned and 

the area integrated into the garden proper. 

In 1792, Friedrich Ludwig Sckell succeeded 

his deceased father in the post of court gardener. 

The record of a very detailed stock-taking 

survives from the year 1795; not too far 

from Schwetzingen, the battles of the French 

revolutionary wars were being fought, but nevertheless, 

a commission of experts had come 

to Schwetzingen for the purpose of inspecting 

the buildings and garden. 38 The record shows 

that the fl owers and the orangery plants were 

much reduced, and so was the degree of maintenance, 

but the gardens were still being cared 

for. 

Pigage died in 1796, and Sckell succeeded him 

as building and garden director. In 1803, those 

parts of the Palatinate situated on the east 

bank of the Rhine (rechtsrheinische Kurpfalz), 

including Schwetzingen, became part 

of the Grand Duchy of Baden. Sckell continued 

at Schwetzingen until 1804, working for 

Grand Duke Carl Friedrich von Baden 39 . Then 

Carl Theodor’s successor, Elector Maximilian 

Joseph, summoned him to Munich and made 

37 GLA 221/45 of 1784; Heber 1986, pp. 469, 471. 

38 GLA 221/46 Protocollum Commissionale of 1795. 

39 Carl Friedrich von Baden, 1728-1811, fom 1746 Margrave, 

from 1803 Prince Elector, from 1806 Grand Duke. 


him court garden supervisor for all of Bavaria. 

His post at Schwetzingen was given to Johann 

Michael Zeyher. 40 

The plans of the palace garden drawn up in 

Zeyher’s time, reveal a strong tendency to “al- 

low things to grow”, due in part to the reduced 

degree of maintenance, but also indicative 

of a stated preference for a more natural 

appearance. Zeyher also remodeled parts of 

the garden in accordance with this attitude. 

From 1804 onwards, he planted an arboretum 

on the site of the former menagerie, converted 

the sea horse garden into a landscaped 

area (cp. Fig. 6 and Fig. 7) and turned the great 

basin into a natural-looking pond (cp. Fig. 

8). In 1834/35 the court of honour, until then 

just an open space for the reception of visitors’ 

coaches, received two large oval beds (cp. 

Fig. 9). They consisted mostly of lawn, but 

they were bordered with lilac trees and enclosed 

oval fl owerbeds, probably planted with 

roses. 

Zeyher was also active as an author; in 1809, 

he collaborated with Georg Roemer to publish 

a guidebook to the gardens of Schwetzingen. 41 

This was followed by another guidebook, 

published in 1826, this time with Johann 

40 Johann Michael Zeyher, 1770-1843, grand ducal court 

gardener, garden director in Schwetzingen. 

41 Johann Michael Zeyher/Georg Christian Roemer, Beschreibung 

der Gartenanlagen zu Schwetzingen, Mannheim 1809. 


Fig. 6: Schneeberger, 1806, 

garden plan (“Plan des 

Churfürstlichen badischen 

Hoffgarten zu Schwetzingen”) 

(Generallandesarchiv 

Karlsruhe). 

135


Fig. 7: Johann Michael 

Zeyher, 1809, “Plan von dem 

Grosherzoglich Badischen 

Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen”, 

engraving by E. Wolff 

(Bayerische Verwaltung der 

staatlichen Schlösser, Gärten 

und Seen). 

Fig. 8: Carl Hout, 1834, “Plan 

des Großherzoglich Badischen 

Schloß-Gartens Schwetzingen”, 

lithograph by S. Bühler, Mannheim 

(Bayerische Verwaltung 

der staatlichen Schlösser, 

Gärten und Seen). 

136 


Georg Rieger as a collaborator. 42 Both books 

were reprinted several times. Earlier works 

by Zeyher were an inventory of the trees and 

shrubs to be found in the palace gardens of 

Baden, at Karlsruhe, Mannheim and Schwet- 

zingen, which was published in 1806, and 

an inventory of the plants of Schwetzingen, 

which appeared in 1809. 43 

B. The Development of Individual Areas 

B.1. The Circular Parterre 

The circular parterre is derived largely from 

Petri’s garden design of 1753 (cp. Fig. 2). In it, 

the semicircle of the quarter-circle pavilions is 

complemented by two quarter-circle “berceaux 

en treillage”, i.e. latticework arbour walks, to 

form a full circle. Parthenocissus quinquefolia 

was trained up the latticework. The circular 

42 Johann Michael Zeyher/Johann Georg Rieger, Schwetzingen 

und seine Gartenanlagen, Mannheim 1826. 

43 Verzeichnis sämmtlicher Bäume, Glas- und Treibhauspfl anzen 

des Schwezinger-Gartens, ed. Johann Michael Zeyher 1809. 

ground plan was divided up by a crossroads 

with a circular fountain basin at the intersection, 

surrounded by four scrolled parterres 

(parterres de broderie). These are beds planted 

in ornamental shapes reminiscent of elaborate 

embroidery, outlined by low box hedges and 

fi lled in with coloured gravel. The beds are 

framed by knee-high box hedges, a style that 

came into fashion in the mid-18th century and 

replaced the earlier framing border. 

The main axis, running east-west, is lined by 

four “parterres à l’angloise”. These Petri laid 

out as lawns with a central basin each, and 

surrounded by fl owerbeds. Decorative paths 

divided up the lawns. The framing fl owerbeds 

were broken up, as it were, by scrolled patterns 

inserted on the narrow sides, a feature 

belonging to the latest gardening fashion. The 

transverse axis running north-south, features 

four lawns with obelisks at their centres, 

surrounded by lawn beds planted with trees. 

They are terminated at both ends by “allées en 

portique”, latticework pergolas, the supports of 

which are planted with trees. 

The main axis is lined with two avenues of 

lime trees; the transverse axis is laid out with 

three avenues of lime trees. At the time, the 

trees were no longer cut into geometric shapes; 

the aim was rather to keep them looking 

like natural if youthful trees, in accordance 

with the late Baroque preference for a more 

natural look. 

Petri fi lled the wedges between the intersection 

proper and its circular frame with 

bosquets of fl owering shrubs; they are also 

mentioned in his detailed plan of the water 

feature in the exact centre (Fig. 10). 

To the west, Petri extended the main axis 

beyond the circular parterre. The entrance was 

marked by a semicircular basin with waterspouting 

stags. From this the water ran over a 

sill and into a rectangular basin. 

On the whole, Petri’s design, the composition 

as well as the proportions, is consistent with 

the rules laid down by contemporary theo-

eticians, especially those of Antoine Joseph 

Dezallier d’Argenville. 44 

In May 1753, Petri embarked on the levelling 

of the site and ordered 2,400 lime trees from a 

nursery at Haarlem, along with elms, acacias, 

ash-trees and laburnums. 45 . Towards the end 

of the year, the dilapidated orangery, built 

by Carl Philipp, and the adjacent gardener’s 

house made way for the new avenues. In 

1754, the basins in the centre of the circular 

parterre were built. 46 A detailed plan by Petri 

survives (Fig. 10). Of the four smaller circular 

basins originally surrounding the large central 

one (“B” in the plan) the foundations survive 

in the scrolled parterres, while the circular 

basins drawn in the corners of the plan have 

not been found. In 1756, work started on the 

arbour walks, originally without the central 

and terminal pavilions. 47 

From 1764 onwards, Pigage had the parterre 

beds laid out, the avenues planted and the arbour 

walks completed. 48 His plan of 1767 (see 

Fig. 4) shows that he followed Petri’s design in 

this. The obelisks and the water-spouting stags 

were created by the sculptor Peter Anton von 

Verschaffelt in 1766/67. 49 The transverse axis 

received additional oval lawns in front of the 

green arcades created in 1764. The palace’s 

terrace was separated from the garden by a 

curving, bisected grassy slope, the ends of 

which were emphasized between 1762 and 

1766, by four urns created by Verschaffelt. 

The oval basins in the parterres of the main 

axis were decorated with groups of cherubs 

and water-spouting swans. The central basin 

featured four more cherubs astride herons 

and swans; the main fountain, however, 

emerges from the mouth of a dolphin bearing 

the legendary poet and singer, Arion. The lead 

statues are the work of Barthélemy Guibal 50 

44 Antoine Joseph Dezallier d´Argenville, 1680-1765, garden 

theoretician, principal work La Théorie et la Pratique du 

Jardinage, 1st ed. Paris 1709. 

45 Martin 1933, p. 142. 

46 Martin 1933, pp. 144-145. 

47 GLA 213/108 of 12.7.1756 and GLA 221/98 of 26.9.1757, 

cp. Wiltrud Heber, Treillagearchitekturen im Zentrum des 

Schwetzinger Schlossgartens – report, Karlsruhe 1992, pp. 

9-10. 

48 GLA 213/109 of 20.7.1761, Heber 1992, p. 10. 

49 Martin 1933, pp. 330-332. 

50 Barthélemy Guibal 1699-1757, sculptor, active in Nancy. 


and originally graced the palace garden of Lunéville. 

They were part of the estate left by the 

titular King of Poland and Duke of Lorraine, 

Stanisław Leszczyński ‘ who died in 1766. 51 

The four marble urns in the scrolled parterres, 

surrounding the central fountain, are the work 

of Italian sculptor Francesco Carabelli. 52 

The proposed layout of the four quarters of 

the circle is the same in Pigage’s plans of 1761 

and 1767, and in Egidius Verhelst’s design in 

the Etrennes Palatines. It was never realized, 

however. The fi rst design known to have 

51 Stanisław Leszczyński, 1677-1766, 1704-1709 King of Poland, 

from 1736 Duke of Lorraine. 

52 Francesco Carabelli, b. 1737, date of death unknown, sculptor. 


Fig. 9: Johann Michael Zeyher, 

1835, design for the new layout 

of the court of honour (Generallandesarchiv 

Karlsruhe). 

Fig. 10: Johann Ludwig Petri, 

1754, plan of the central part 

of the garden (“Plan der 

Mitleren Partie des Chur-fürstl: 

Lustgartens zu Schwetzingen”) 

(Heidelberg, Kurpfälzisches 

Museum). 

137


138 


been put into practice appears in the plan by 

Sckell dating from 1783 (cp. Fig. 5). It shows 

boulingrins, sunken lawns lined by borders 

planted with shrubs. Zeyher’s guidebook of 

1809 confi rms this: “On all sides of this central 

garden, there were once fl owering shrubs cut 

close to the ground and tied to lattices in the 

four hollows in the ground”. 53 

Sckell’s plan dating from 1783 is already 

missing the parterre’s ornamental scrolled 

patterns 54 . In 1803, the stag basin and the 

mirror basin were removed; Zeyher had the 

stag basin restored in 1820, in a different 

shape. Towards the end of the 18th century 

the lime trees were no longer cut into shape, 

and grew into high cramped avenues encroaching 

on the borders framing the angloises. To 

make up for this, the slope leading down from 

the grand terrace was planted with fl owers in 

the 19th century. The shrubby borders in the 

sunken gardens grew increasingly luxuriant 

as well: “now these lovely shrubs grow freely, 

lilacs and jasmine exuding their perfume and 

scattering their fl owers without hindrance, 

the guelder rose swelling with lushness, the 

berberis, privet and red and white whitethorn 

displaying their magnifi cence and fi lling the 

air all around with frangrance”. 55 Eventually 

the shrubs collapsed, and Zeyher replaced 

them with china roses, that proved not hardy 

enough for the climate. Nothing is known 

about the origin of the lilac growing in the 

sunken gardens today. 

B.2. The Angloises 

West of the quarter-circle arbour walks 

framing the central parterre are the “bosquets 

à l’angloise”. The shape they actually took fi rst 

appears in Pigage’s execution plan of 1767 

(see Fig. 4). There are no exact dates for the 

construction of the northern angloise. However, 

as the southern one is described as “Le 

second bosquet à L’angloise derriere Le grand 

berceau circulaire à gauche” 56 in Pigage’s 

53 Zeyher/Roemer 1809, p. 24. 

54 GLA 213/113 of 6.9.1798, letter written by Sckell to Elector 

Carl Theodor at Munich. 

55 Zeyher/Roemer 1809, pp. 24-25. 

56 GLA 213/110 of 24.7.1764, Heber 1986, p. 426. 

1764 list of features to be built, the northern 

angloise must have been under construction 

at the time. 

It is a “bosquet à l’angloise” typical of its 

Rococo setting – chest-high surrounds fi lled 

with fl owering shrubs. “Varieté” is provided 

by a complex and dense network of paths 

including meandering walks. They provide 

the strolling spectator with a wealth of views 

towards the large number of statues and surprising 

“points de vue”. The extended diagonal 

of the central parterre leads up to the Galatea 

basin. This has a rim of tuff; the sculptures 

are the work of Gabriel de Grupello 57 , brought 

from Düsseldorf to Schwetzingen in 1767. 58 

The western part of the angloise contains 

the so-called bird bath. Following its main 

north-south axis, two water courses meander 

down towards a central basin. The rim of this 

“zig-zagging basin” 59 is made of mortar and 

covered in pebbles. The two groups of lead 

cherubs in the basin are from the estate of 

Stanisław Leszczyński at Lunéville. The nearby 

Bacchus was created by Italian sculptor 

Andrea Vacca 60 and moved to Schwetzingen 

from Düsseldorf. The curves of the “zigzagging 

basin”, like those of the meandering 

paths, are evidence of the Rococo preference 

for a more “natural” setting. The same goes 

for the plinthless statues merging with the 

surrounding greenery. The statue of Pan on 

a tuff-covered rock close to the bird bath is a 

fi ne example. The sculpture, by Peter Simon 

Lamine 61 , was placed there late in 1774. 62 

Work on the southern angloise started in 

1765. 63 From the circular parterre, an opening 

in the arbour allows a view of the Temple of 

Minerva (built 1767-1773, cp. Fig. 11). 64 It was 

fi rst mentioned in the Etrennes Palatines of 

1769, but the earliest correct depiction of the 

area’s exact layout appears in Sckell’s overall 

57 Gabriel de Grupello, 1644-1730, sculptor, from 1695 to 1716 

active at the Palatine court in Düsseldorf. 

58 Martin 1933, p. 368. 

59 GLA 221/46 Protocollum Commissionale of 1795. 

60 Andrea Vacca, dates unknown, sculptor, probably active in 

Carrara. 

61 Peter Simon Lamine, 1738-1817, sculptor, from 1771 court 

sculptor in Mannheim. 

62 GLA 221/39 of 10.11.1774. 

63 GLA 213/110 of 24.7.1764, Heber 1992, p. 14. 

64 Heber 1986, p. 557.

plan of 1783 (cp. Fig. 5). Leading up to the 

temple is a lawn with a low triton fountain by 

Konrad Linck, 65 that also serves as an entrance 

to the forecourt and the temple itself. This is 

approached via two ramps on the sides. Plane 

trees bordering the lawn recall the sacred 

groves of antiquity. The temple contains a 

statue of Minerva by Grupello. 66 

The western part of the angloise is taken up 

by the so-called avenue of urns. Originally 

it had a roof of eight cross-vaults made of 

living elm trees and propped up by wooden 

supports. Placed between the vaults were four 

busts modeled on Classical art and eight urns. 

In the centre of the avenue was an octagonal 

basin, that held a wild pig by Lorraine 

sculptor, Barthélemy Guibal. At the southern 

end of the avenue is the so-called Lycian 

Apollo by Paul Egell 67 , originally displayed at 

Mannheim. 68 

Mediating between the Minerva Grove and 

the avenue of urns is a crossroads decorated 

with statues brought from Düsseldorf. There 

is a Mercury and a Minerva Pictura, both by 

Grupello, and an Agrippina by Andrea Vacca 

of Carrara. 

Between the angloises was the mirror basin, 

like the semicircular stag basin, one of the 

features extending the main axis west beyond 

the circular parterre. The terraced walks on 

both sides were lined with latticework arches 

overgrown with greenery, an extension of the 

avenues lining the main axis. Rows of Eastern 

red cedar cut into cones are set on the banks. 

The corners are occupied by four seated 

statues by Verschaffelt, representing the four 

elements. The ramps and stairs leading down 

to the mirror basin are decorated with urns. 

In the vicinity of the mirror basin, Pigage proved 

himself to be a master of subtle lighting 

effects. The avenue of urns with its roof of 

cross-vaults, provided a semi-shaded area. By 

contrast the adjacent bird bath, visually an 

65 Konrad Linck, 1730-1793, from 1762 modeller for the 

Frankenthal porcelain manufactory, from 1763 court sculptor. 

66 Martin 1933, p. 211. 

67 Paul Egell, 1691-1752, sculptor, from 1720 Palatine court 

sculptor. 

68 Martin 1933, p. 342. 


extension of the avenue of urns, was open to 

the sky. In between were the dark vaults of 

the green arcades, and in the centre the mirror 

basin, an open surface refl ecting the sky. 

The mirror basin was removed in 1803, 

along with the stag basin. The same year the 

octagonal central basin of the urn avenue was 

fi lled in as well, 69 and the leaden wild pig was 

moved to the grotto between the bathhouse 

and the Temple of Apollo. The stag basin was 

restored in 1820 in its present shape. 

B.3. The Large Bosquets 

Beyond the angloises to the west are two 

large bosquets. Between the angloises and 

the bosquets is the so-called avenue of lions. 

It is named for two pairs of lions guarding 

the stairs leading to the orangery garden at 

one end, and the entrance to the Turkish 

garden and mosque at the other. The lions, 

by Verschaffelt, were completed by 1773 at 

the latest. 70 Two waist-high hedges divide the 

avenue into a wide central lane fl anked by two 

narrow ones. 

The bosquets are laid out in larger dimensions 

than the angloises, and structured by an austerely 

geometric network of orthogonal and 

69 GLA 221/214 of 20.4.1803 and 6.7.1803, Heber 1992, pp. 29, 

31. 

70 Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv München Abt. I, Allg. Staatsarchiv, 

Fürstensachen 832 1/3 of 30.8.1773, copy of 1777, quoted 

in Martin 1933, pp. 342-346; Heber 1986 pp. 432/433. 


Fig. 11: Carl Kuntz, c.1795, 

Temple of Minerva, coloured 

aquatint. 

139


140 


diagonal paths. Originally small paths wound 

through the beds, but they disappeared when 

cutting was neglected in the 19th century. The 

paths and cabinets are defi ned by high clipped 

hornbeam hedges. They make it impossible to 

gain an overview of the bosquet as a whole, 

and the changing views confuse visitors and 

add to the labyrinthine effect. 

The northern bosquet has a square central 

room laid out as a quincunx. A qunicunx is a 

hall of trees planted on a regular grid, providing 

shade but allowing a free view. It was a 

popular planting scheme in the 18th century. 71 

The centre of the southern bosquet was taken 

up by an oval, sunken lawn enclosed by colonnades 

of trees. This layout follows the rules 

set down by Dezallier d’Argenvilles. Between 

the bosquets, the garden’s central axis continues 

through a long tapis vert broken up by a 

circular “inset” in the centre. The lawn is lined 

with avenues of lime trees on both sides. Originally 

the lawn featured a row of elm trees 

cut into balls on each side. The eight corners 

of the “interrupted” tapis vert are marked by 

elaborate balusters, each bearing a golden ball. 

The documents regarding the completion of 

the large bosquets mention two monuments 

by Verschaffelt in the southern bosquet. One 

commemorates historic fi nds excavated when 

building started in 1765. At the time, weapons, 

urns and other items had been unearthed that 

were believed to date back to a battle between 

the ancient Romans and Germans. The second 

monument was erected in praise of Carl Theodor 

and the garden he created. It is dated 1771 

and was probably placed here when that part 

of the garden was completed. 

B.4. The “allée en terrasse” 

The whole of the bosquet area is enclosed 

north, west and south by an “allée en terrasse” 

that was begun in 1764 and created along 

with the bosquets themselves. 72 This is an elevated 

avenue, running on a bank and providing 

both a clear dividing line between the 

71 Iris Lauterbach, Der französische Garten am Ende des Ancien 

Régime, Worms 1987, S. 212. 

72 GLA 213/110 of 24.7.1764, Heber 1992, p.14. 

bosquets and the rest of the garden, and a fi ne 

view when used as a promenade. The tree 

chosen for it was the horse chestnut, that had 

been introduced into Europe in the 16th century 

and become fashionable in the 17th and 

18th centuries. 

B.5. The Large Basin, the Bordering Canals 

and Avenues 

In his 1764 list of features to be built, Pigage 

envisioned the building of a “grande pièce 

d’Eau au bout des jardins” in 1766. 73 This was 

a large rectangular basin west of the bosquets, 

taking up the entire width of both of them. 

The garden’s central axis was to be extended 

right across it, continuing over a landscaped 

bay on the further side of the basin, an open 

fi eld and on through a lane cut into the woodland. 

The basin was lined by chestnut avenues, 

at the ends of which statues were placed 

to provide “points de vue”. The avenues continued 

east, enclosing the garden; a water channel 

ran alongside, and on the further bank of 

this, another line of trees. A carefully worked 

out system of dams made sure that the water 

in the channels remained in motion. They 

were fed by the Leimbach, a natural stream 

running past the palace grounds; the water 

was admitted in the southwestern corner of 

the estate, and drained back into the Leimbach 

through a number of outlets on the north side. 

Beyond the avenues, a “bois champêtre” (rustic 

woodland) was planned that would be outside 

the gardens proper. Work on the basin took 

several years; the basin and channel rims were 

still under construction in 1775, as were the 

plinths for two statues of river deities representing 

the Rhine and Danube. 74 Danube appeared 

in Verschaffelt’s 1773 bill 75 ; the Rhine, 

however, was not put up until some time between 

1776 and 1779. 76 Four large ornamental 

urns marked the corners of the basin. 

73 GLA 213/110 of 24.7.1764, Heber 1992, p.14. 

74 cp. Pigage’s list of impending work of 16.5.1775, GLA 221/39 

of 16.5.1775 and 231/111 of the same date, Heber 1986, p.467. 

75 Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv München Abteilung I, 

Allgemeines Staatsarchiv, Fürstensachen 832 1/3 of 30.8.1773, 

copy of 1777. 

76 Martin 1933, pp.348-349.

In the 19th century Zeyher converted the 

great basin into a pond with gently curving 

banks. He started on the north, west and 

south sides in 1823/24; by 1834, the east side 

had been redesigned as well (cp. Fig. 8). The 

statues at the ends of the former avenues remained 

in place, the corner urns were removed 

and taken to the palace garden at Karlsruhe. 

B.6. The Orangery and Orangery Parterre 

The expensive upkeep of exotic plants in orangeries 

was an important element of aristocratic 

display in the 17th and 18th centuries. Accordingly, 

orangeries and their accompanying 

parterres were often of central importance in 

the layout of palaces. From the mid-18th century 

onwards, interest fl agged somewhat, and 

consequently the orangeries could be moved 

to the periphery of gardens, which is what 

happened at Schwetzingen. 

The new orangery, begun in 1761, was fi rst 

used in the winter of 1762/63. The glass house 

at the eastern end was added in 1770. The 

parterre on the south side is situated somewhat 

lower than the building itself, and enclosed 

by a canal. Bridges were planned for 

the narrow sides only. Pigage’s original plan 

of 1762 envisioned a lawn structured by paths 

for the presentation of plants in tubs; the 

layout actually realized is refl ected by Sckell’s 

garden plan of 1783. After 1777, the corners 

of the parterre were graced by four stone urns 

by Johann Matthäus van den Branden. 77 Two 

of them have since been replaced by cherubs 

holding coats of arms. To the east and west, 

arcades of elms served as a windbreak. Today 

they are cut of lime trees. Statues of the four 

seasons are displayed in niches cut into the 

hedges near the four ends of the arcades. According 

to recent research, these are the work 

of Westphalian sculptor Johann Wilhelm Gröninger 

(1675-1724). 78 The statue of Autumn 

77 GLA 62/1136 of 6.8.1777, Heber 1986, p. 352; Johann Matthäus 

van den Branden, 1716-1787, sculptor, from 1740 Palatine 

court sculptor. 

78 Udo Grote, “Die Statuen der Jahreszeiten und der Schlossgarten 

von Schwetzingen”, in: Westfalen und Italien, ed. Udo 

Grote, Petersberg 2002, pp. 125-152. 


was considered missing after c.1825; it was 

rediscovered in the palace garden at Gondelsheim, 

and a copy was restored to the original 

site in 2004. South of the orangery garden, a 

wall bridges the difference in height to the 

adjacent “allée en terrasse”, which constitutes 

the boundary of the interior pleasure garden 

as designed by Petri. 

B.7. The Angloise and the Natural Theatre 

Along with the orangery, Pigage built the 

angloise and natural theatre adjoining it to 

the west. The Temple of Apollo, described by 

Pigage as a “Belvédère de théâtre de Verdure” 

79 , is fi rst mentioned in September 1762. 

It takes the form of a monopteros, a circular 

open structure (cp. Fig. 12). On the west 

side the foundations are fashioned as terraces 

– hence, presumably, the term “belvedere”. The 

intention was to provide a view by restructuring 

the area beyond the canal in 1774, but no 

details are known. In contrast to the architectural 

detailing of the west side, the temple 

foundations rising above the natural theatre 

are made to look like a rock surface with a waterfall. 

The water gushes from an urn held by 

two naiads. On both sides of the cascade doorways 

give access to grottoes beneath the temple. 

Hedges serving as backdrops enclose the 

stage on both sides. It is a feature unique to 

Schwetzingen that the proscenium was made 

of latticework, framing the stage and, along 

with the trellis structure surrounding the auditorium, 

providing an architectural setting. 

The fi rst performance took place at Pentecost, 

1775; the proscenium was completed around 

1777. 

The transverse axis of the natural theater 

leads up to the porcelain cabinet 80 , built 

between 1762 and 1764, in the north and 

to a fountain built into the wall bordering 

the “allée en terrasse” in the south; this was 

fi rst mentioned in 1775 and described as a 

“fontaine du mascaron”. 81 Like the naiads, 

the statue of Apollo in the temple and the 

79 GLA 213/109 of 14.9.1762, Heber 1986, pp. 425, 485. 

80 Heber 1986, p. 486. 

81 GLA 221/39 of 16.5.1775 and GLA 231/111 of 16.5.1775, Heber 

1986, p. 505. 


141


142 


Temple of Apollo, coloured 

aquatint. 


sphinxes in the theatre auditorium, it is a 

work by Verschaffelt. 

B.8. Menagerie to ar boretum 

In 1763-1767, a menagerie was built north of 

the orangery and the bosquet with the natural 

theatre. It had a central basin surrounded 

by cages, and an enclosing wall. 82 The cages 

held mainly birds; an attempt to keep chamois 

failed. 83 Towards the end of the 1760s, a 

pheasant house was added on the west side. 84 

After 1784, part of the former menagerie was 

used as a nursery for rare plants. 85 On what remained 

of the area, Zeyher established an arboretum 

in 1804. He created a landscaped gar- 

den and planted numerous trees and shrubs. 

Zeyher’s inventory of 1809 lists 827 different 

species and varieties for the arboretum alone. 

86 In addition, Zeyher displayed a collection 

of alpine plants along the southern wall. 

B.9. The Bathhouse Garden 

The bathhouse was built on a narrow strip of 

ground west of the menagerie and close to the 

Temple of Apollo. Documents fi rst mention it 

82 Heber 1986, p. 428. 

83 Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, Year XXVIII Sept. 1927 No. 9. 

84 GLA 213/110 of 24.7.1764, Heber 1992, p. 14. 

85 GLA 221/45 of 1784, Heber 1986, p. 469. 

86 Zeyher 1809, Verzeichnis sämmtlicher Bäume, Glas- und 

Treibhauspfl anzen des Schwezinger-Gartens. 

in October 1770. 87 It is the centre of an enfi lade 

of garden rooms. At the southern end, a grotto 

serves as “point de vue” of a narrowing arbour 

walk. Towards the north, the axis continues 

through the bathhouse and another arbour 

walk to the “water-spouting birds”, and then via 

yet another arbour to the diorama, known as 

the End of the World, a concave wall painted 

with a trompe-l’oeil landscape. 

At the “water-spouting birds” the arbour walk 

opens to reveal an oval basin. A number of 

metal birds are perched on the curving trellis 

walls, busily spitting water at an owl sitting in 

the basin. 

The bird sculptures are probably from the garden 

of Malgrange Castle in Lorraine, part of 

the estate of Stanisław Leszczyński. Four aviaries 

and two small cabinets lined with minerals 

have been built into the exterior walls of 

the trellis structure. The whole area was intended 

as a “giardino segreto” (private garden) for 

the Elector, and accordingly, it was sheltered 

and hidden from view by trellises, shrubs, 

screens and walls, and closed off by gates. The 

bathhouse’s western forecourt, shaped like a 

basket of fl owers, likewise served to keep strollers 

at a distance. 

The “boulingrin” east of the bathhouse in front 

of the porcelain cabinet received another water 

feature in 1776, a “champignon d’eau” 

(bell fountain) 88 fed by the overfl ow from the 

natural theatre’s artifi cial waterfall. Nearby, 

two sculptures of cherubs playing with goats 

bought by Linck were put up. 89 The bathhouse, 

its kitchen, the aviaries, the cabinets and the diorama 

were completed by 1776 at the latest. 90 

B.10. The Seahorse Garden 

At the back of the southern quarter-circle pavilion 

is the seahorse garden. It fi rst appears 

in Pigage’s execution plan of 1767 (cp. Fig. 

4). The group of seahorses it is named for, 

probably belonged to a large monument by 

87 GLA 221/ 440, “Specifi cation” by Johann Wilhelm Sckell dated 

26.10.1770. 

88 GLA 221/39 of 16.5.1775 and GLA 231/111 of 16.5.1775, Heber 

1986 pp. 505-506. 

89 GLA 221/18 of 9.8.1775 and 14.8.1775, Martin 1933, p. 353; 

and Heber 1986, p. 467. 

90 GLA 221/39 of 8.5.1776.

Grupello put up in Düsseldorf fi rst, and in 

Mannheim afterwards. 91 In Schwetzingen it 

provided a focal point at the end of a lawn, 

lined with trellis and set with small fl ower 

parterres extending in front of the south quarter-circle 

pavilion’s dining hall. 92 The rest of 

the area was laid out as a bosquet. Early in the 

19th century, Zeyher converted the seahorse 

garden into a landscaped area, but retained 

the topography of the Baroque lawn. In 

this he probably followed an undated plan by 

Sckell (Fig. 13), that shows precisely this type 

of conversion. The seahorse sculpture was moved 

to the Karlsruhe palace garden in 1823/24, 

but today a copy is back in place; the original 

is kept at Schwetzingen too, in the southern 

quarter-circle pavilion. 

B.11. The “Star Avenue” Hunting Park 

Around 1757, work on a hunting park had 

started in a stretch of woodland called “Am 

Knaubloch”, south of the palace gardens. In 

this the court clarinettist, Michel Quallenberg, 

tried his hand at the rôle of “entreprenneur” 

on his own account. Due to its layout, 

the hunting park was known as the star avenue, 

or alternatively as the “Java”; the origins 

of this term are unknown. It consisted of eight 

lanes radiating from a common centre, and 

three circular paths laid out in concentric circles 

around it. Between two of the lanes there 

was a spiralling path, the so-called Schneckenallee. 

93 The paths were lined with hornbeam 

hedges; seating was provided by wooden 

benches, 94 that were later replaced with 

stone couches. In 1759, work on the star avenue 

came to a temporary standstill. In Pigage’s 

ideal plan of 1762 (cp. Fig. 3), the star avenue 

took up more space than the garden itself. 

In reality, however, it was never built in the 

planned dimensions. It was used as a hunting 

park from 1770; in that year it received an enclosing 

fence and a groundskeeper’s house, 

91 Martin 1933, pp. 323-324. 

92 cp. GLA 221/46, Protocollum Commissionale 1795 and Fig. 4, 

Pigage 1767 and later plans. 

93 cp. plan in GLA 391/36120, a redrawing of a plan from 1782. 

94 GLA 221/ 440 of 23.1.1759. 


and pheasants and later fallow deer were released. 

95 

B.12. The kitchen gardens 

From 1754 onwards, Petri laid out new 

orchards and vegetable gardens along with 

the pleasure garden, and had them secured 

with walls and wrought-iron gates. 96 He had 

ordered apple, pear, cherry and peach trees 

from Haarlem in 1753. 97 Another batch of 

fruit trees was delivered in 1756, among them 

63 types of pear, 53 types of apple, 32 types 

of peach and 24 types of apricot. Lining the 

north wall were greenhouses; 98 here and in 

hotbed boxes, fruits and vegetables, even 

asparagus, were started. 

Between 1762 and 1766, Pigage enlarged 

the kitchen gardens as well as the pleasure 

garden. The greenhouses in the vegetable 

garden were rebuilt, and an additional 

pineapple house as well as “serres volantes 

à la Hollandaise” were built. In the orchard 

“bosquets de fruits”, regular plantations of 

fruit trees, were created. 99 The enclosing walls 

95 GLA 221/ 440. 

96 Martin 1933, p. 146. 

97 Martin 1933, p. 142. 

98 for details cp. Heber 1986, pp. 316-317. 

99 GLA 213/110 of 24.7.1764, Heber 1986, p. 316. 


Fig. 13: Friedrich Ludwig 

Sckell, undated plan of the 

seahorse garden (Mannheim, 

Reiß-Engelhorn-Museen). 

143


144 


Temple of Botany, coloured 

aquatint. 


of the kitchen gardens had espaliers; the 

vegetable garden featured additional free-standing 

trellises. 

B.13. The Nurseries 

As early as 1763, decorative and fruit trees 

were ordered from Holland to be raised in 

the nursery. 100 The exact position of this 

early nursery is unknown. In 1768/69, land 

on the northwestern border of the garden 

was expropriated for another nursery. 101 The 

Etrennes Palatines of 1769 report this to have 

been planted with many select fruit trees. 102 In 

1774, the nurseries of Heidelberg and Mannheim 

were merged with that of Schwetzingen. 

Consequently, the available area at Schwetzingen 

had to be enlarged. In October 1774, 

the Elector issued an order that avenues and 

main roads should be lined with fruit-bearing 

or otherwise useful trees. To this end, Court 

Gardener Johann Wilhelm Sckell drew up 

an inventory of the Schwetzingen nurseries 

that was published in December 1774, in an 

edition of 1600 copies. 103 

In 1784, Pigage mentions two nurseries 104 that 

are in Sckell’s plan of 1783 as well (cp. Fig. 5). 

The second one, on the southwestern border 

100 GLA 221/39 of 3.10.1763. 

101 Heber 1986, pp 460/461. 

102 Etrennes Palatines pour l’année 1769, quoted in Heber 1986, p. 

461-462. 

103 in GLA 77/3959 of 21.12.1774. 

104 GLA 221/45 of 1784, Heber 1986 pp. 469, 471. 

of the garden, was probably dissolved again 

when the vicinity of the Temple of Mercury 

was laid out around 1786 (see below). In the 

remaining one, Zeyher grew trees and shrubs 

for the creation and maintenance of every 

one of the Grand Duke’s gardens in Baden. 

Ordinary citizens, too, could choose from a 

large range of reasonably priced fruit trees 

for planting on roads or in private gardens. 

In 1809, Zeyher listed 303 types of apple, 193 

types of pear, 19 types of apricot, 38 types of 

peach, 62 types of cherry, 53 types of plum 

and 40 types of grape. 

B.14. The Arborium Theodoricum 

The Arborium Theodoricum was the fi rst 

garden laid out by young Friedrich Ludwig 

Sckell. It is an arboretum, a collection of trees 

and shrubs intended for research purposes. 

Pigage describes it as “La nouvelle Isle qui 

sera appellée le Lexicon vivant des arbres et 

arbustes des jardins”. 105 It is situated on the 

long island at the northern boundary of the 

garden. The island was created in 1774, by 

diverting part of the Leimbach into an outer 

channel. Soon after, work appears to have 

come to a standstill. On his return from his 

study trip to England in 1777, Sckell converted 

the narrow strip of ground into a grassy, 

undulating valley enclosed by woodland. The 

scenery is structured by solitary trees or small 

groups on the slope. The whole constitues a 

landscape painting that can be entered, and 

is experienced from a number of carefully 

selected positions. These are reached by a footpath 

that encircles the entire area, carefully 

concealed and fi tted into the vegetation and 

the terrain. This so-called belt walk is one of 

the core elements of English landscape gardens. 

Two garden buildings grace the western 

end of the Arborium Theodoricum, a Temple 

of Botany (Fig. 14) and the ruin of a Roman 

water tower 106 (Fig. 15). The Temple of Botany 

is a circular structure covered with imitation 

oak bark. It was erected in 1778, and the 

decoration was completed in 1780. The statue 

105 GLA 221/39 of 10.11.1774. 

106 Leger 1829, p. 364.

of Botany it shelters, is a reworked Ceres of 

Italian origin, thought to be by Francesco 

Carabelli. The temple is fl anked by two large 

urns by Johann Matthäus van den Branden, 107 

and two sphinxes of unknown origin guard 

the approach. The temple itself provides 

the focal point of the view west through the 

valley, and with its pond and stream, forms a 

graceful ensemble; the temple’s mirror image 

in the pond is a deliberate touch. Work on the 

Roman water tower started in 1779 and was 

completed the next year at the latest. 108 At the 

same time, an aqueduct was built that brought 

water from the Lower Waterworks further 

north, which then gushed down the building 

into the mirror pond created by artifi cially 

widening the Leimbach stream. Adjoining the 

water tower to the east is a semicircular, halfruined 

row of arches, providing the backdrop 

for an obelisk, put up to commemorate the 

fi nds excavated here during building work in 

1777. The entire ensemble is reminiscent of 

an Italian landscape with Roman ruins. The 

immediate vicinity of the Temple of Botany 

and the water tower is concealed by skilfully 

planted shrubbery, and only becomes visible 

at close distance. 

B.15. The Turkish Garden 

Within the garden’s symmetrical layout, the 

Turkish garden provides the counterpart 

of the bosquet with the natural theatre. It 

includes the mosque, a rectangular, cloistered 

court and the surrounding garden. The 

latter was created by Sckell as a “bosquet 

à l’angloise”, with irregularly shaped beds 

and curving paths. To reinforce the “natural” 

effect, the beds are not enclosed by hedges or 

trellises. The Turkish garden was fi rst mentioned 

in 1774, and then it disappears from 

documentation for several years. 109 It was only 

in 1779 that work was resumed. At fi rst only 

the cloister and pavilions and the surrounding 

garden were planned; the mosque appears 

in the building ledgers for the fi rst time on 

107 GLA 62/1136 of 6.6.1779, Martin 1933, p. 361; Heber 1986, p. 

582. 

108 Heber 1986, p. 582. 

109 GLA 221/39 of 18.8.1774, Heber 1986, p. 436. 


28th November 1782. The subject of the entry, 

however, is a sculptor’s pay; so the mosque 

must have been well beyond the foundations 

stage. 110 The overall plan by Friedrich Ludwig 

Sckell dating from 1783 (Fig. 5) shows an octagonal 

ground plan, that is to say, the mosque 

without its portico, minarets and extensions 

on the sides. The cloister was still lacking the 

four pavilions on the long sides. Lack of funding 

delayed the completion of the building. 

The main body of the mosque was completed 

in 1791, the minarets in 1792, but the building 

was never furnished. 111 Decorative mosques in 

gardens came into fashion during the second 

half of the 18th century, a fashion inspired 

by by William Chambers 112 mosque at Kew. 

Today, however, the Schwetzingen mosque is 

the only one surviving from the 18th century 

in the whole of Europe. 

B.16. The Landscape Garden Surrounding the 

Temple of Mercury 

The ruined Temple of Mercury is situated on 

a hill on the extension of the axis running the 

length of the great basin, and a little south of 

the mosque’s axis. Its ground plan is triangular, 

and it is surmounted by a tambour and 

dome. Part of the dome is missing; cracks are 

110 Heber 1986, pp. 596-597. 

111 GLA 221/46, Protocollum Commissionale 1795. 

112 William Chambers, 1723-1796, architect (garden buildings at 

Kew), author (wrote about Chinese gardens). 



Roman water tower, coloured 

aquatint. 

145


146 

Fig. 16: Nicolas Marie Joseph 

Chapuy, no date, Temple 

of Mercury and view of the 

pond and mosque, engraving 

(Mannheim, Reiß-Engelhorn- 

Museen). 


visible everywhere. On the south side is the 

entrance to the basement, set into half-ruined 

cyclopean walls made of large sandstone 

blocks. 

In 1784, work on a “monument” had started 

on the site. 113 Hirschfeld 114 reported in 1785 

that the structure was to represent a “monument 

of King Sesostris” and, that “mummies 

and funerals” were to be displayed in the basement. 

115 The foundations were built. In 1786, 

Pigage asked for permission to start planting 

in the English garden opposite the mosque, 

and to complete the small pond. 116 The canal 

was extended into a lake for the purpose, the 

bridge spanning it was moved south, away 

from the mosque’s axis, and the avenue of 

trees lining the canal was cut down. In 1787, 

it was decided to build, not a monument, 

but a ruin to serve as a belvedere and “point 

de vue” for the mosque 117 , and in 1792, the 

temple was completed. Thanks to the pond 

in between, the view from the temple to the 

mosque, and vice versa, is stunning (Fig. 16). 

The two structures are connected by footpaths 

along the shore. The southern path leads over 

a three-way bridge which also provided access 

113 GLA 221/45 of 1784, Heber 1986, pp. 469, 471. 

114 Christian Cay Lorenz Hirschfeld, 1742-1792, garden theoretician, 

principal work: Theorie der Gartenkunst, Leipzig 1785. 

115 Hirschfeld 1785, Vol. 5, pp. 344-345. 

116 GLA 213/ 112 of 28.10.1786, Heber 1986, p. 473. 

117 GLA 213/112, “promemoria” of 18.6.1787, Heber 1986, p.654. 

to a small island (cp. Fig. 6). The bridge could 

be swiveled to a position where it no longer 

touched any of the shores, a feature that 

appears to have caused much merriment and 

teasing among visitors. 118 

B.17. The English Garden 

The area occupied by the English garden 

west of the Baroque grounds appears for the 

fi rst time in Pigage’s execution plan of 1767 

(cp. Fig. 4). In it, the entire area, with the 

exception of the axes leading west, is fi lled in 

with “forest” symbols (“bois champêtre”). The 

two regular-looking features on the short sides 

of the great basin are called the “cirque” and 

the “amphithéâtre de verdure” in the Etrennes 

Palatines. 119 They were never built. 

The fi rst hints of what things actually looked 

like are provided by Pigage’s 1774 list of work 

to be done in the area west of the Temple 

of Apollo: “Dans les plantages Sauvages 

derrière le Temple d’Apollon il doit venir pour 

point de vue une allée plantée et façonnée 

par touffes sauvages d’arbres et arbustes à 

fl eurs.“ 120 The earliest known layout, however, 

is that realized by Sckell in the 1780s (cp. 

Fig. 5). The long boulingrin lined with larches, 

west of the Temple of Apollo was probably 

retained from the earlier layout. In 1779, the 

“Chinese Bridge” was built spanning the canal 

on the north side of the great basin. 121 With 

or without its mirror image, it makes for a 

fi ne “point de vue” from many directions. In 

the inventory of features listed in Pigage’s 

“Etat général des Batiments et jardins” 122 of 

1784, the area west of the Temple of Apollo 

fi gures as “Le grand jardin anglois”. On the 

other hand, the landscape garden west of the 

great basin, listed for the fi rst time here, is 

described as “la grande partie sauvage plantée 

dans le Stil de la nature, laquelle fait le fond 

et l’Extremité de tous les jardins”. Pigage notes 

that this part was not yet complete. 

118 Zeyher/Roemer 1809, p. 59. 

119 Etrennes Palatines pour l’année 1769, s. n. 36, quoted in Heber 

1986, pp. 461-462. 

120 GLA 221/39 of 10.11.1774. 

121 Heber 1986, p. 470. 

122 GLA 221/45 of 1784, Heber 1986, pp. 469, 471.

The English Garden in the west of the 

grounds, permitted Sckell to plan in grand 

style. His fi rst effort, in the cramped surroundings 

of the Arborium Theodoricum, had been 

characterized by a small-scale layout and a 

meandering circular path. The English garden 

in contrast shows a landscape artist’s mature 

style, with sweeping slopes and generously 

curving footpaths. His effective use of trees in 

lines, groves and solitary individuals, created 

a varied scenery, that made use of points of 

view both within the garden and beyond its 

borders. Those borders are concealed by a 

“Ha-ha”, a sunken fence invisible from within. 

Sckell also provided the bay of the great 

basin with an irregular shoreline and planted 

weeping willows on the water’s edge. 

With the completion of the English garden, 

the grounds at Schwetzingen had reached 

their fi nal extent, an extent that has remained 

more or less unchanged to the present day. 

(Uta Schmitt) 


2. The Schwetzingen Palace Gardens – a 

Study in Historic Garden Conservation 

The wealth of material on the history, 

development and current state of the Schwetzingen 

palace grounds makes it evident that 

well-informed efforts to preserve the gardens 

by administrative, planning and gardening 

measures must have been under way from a 

very early stage – a manner of proceeding that 

is generally summarized by the term “historic 

garden conservation” (German Gartendenkmalpfl 

ege) today. 

The building of the northern quarter-circle 

pavilion in 1749, originally intended as 

an orangery, initiated the conversion and 

extension of the grounds of the Schwetzingen 

summer palace under Elector Carl Theodor 

(1724-1799), a patron of the arts and sciences. 

A formal garden in the Régence and Rococo 

style took shape, which was enlarged from 

1777 onwards, after the manner of an English 

landscape garden. Young architects and landscape 

artists, such as Nicolas de Pigage (1723- 

1796) and Johann Ludwig Petri (1714-1794), as 

well as Friedrich Ludwig Sckell (1750-1823), 

the son of Court Gardener Johann Wilhelm 

Sckell (1721-1792), who literally grew up in 

the grounds, were responsible for the creation 

of a unique work of art, acknowledged to be 

a major achievement in the history of the 

European garden. 

After forty years of building, the garden, with 

its impressive circular parterre, grand avenues 

and varied bosquets, the themed gardens with 

their remarkable buildings, statuary and water 

features, and the fi rst landscaped areas created 

by Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell, was fi nally 

complete. It would have been understandable 

if work on it had come to a premature end 

as Elector Carl Theodor, and thus the entire 

Palatine court, was obliged to move to Munich 

in 1778 – he had come into the heritage of the 

Duchy of Bavaria. 123 The move constituted a 

major change in the history of the Palatinate, 

and the Elector rarely had the time to visit his 

123 M. Henker, “Die jülisch-bergische Frage in der wittelsbachischen 

Hausunion von 1724”, in: Zs. f. bayerische 

Landesgeschichte 37, 1974, pp. 871-877. 


147


148 


former palace. He did, however, remain deeply 

interested and involved in the continuation 

of the work at Schwetzingen, and funded 

it generously. The more formal parts of 

the garden were simplifi ed in accordance 

with the changing fashions, and part of 

the scrolled parterres, trellises and topiary 

was removed, but the architectural layout 

remained untouched, and despite the limited 

space available, the landscape gardens were 

completed in an exemplary way. 

Sckell’s Maintenance Proposal of 1795: 

the “Protocollum commissionale” 

Soon the barely-completed work of art was 

endangered. From 1793 onwards, French 

revolutionary troops occupied the parts of the 

Palatinate west of the Rhine, and threatened 

the eastern parts and the former capital of 

Mannheim. Elector Carl Theodor, worried 

about the survival of his gardens at Schwetzingen, 

felt obliged to order an inspection of 

the gardens, buildings and administration 

(rescript dated 18th May). Its purpose was 

a general stock-taking, an analysis of the 

fi ndings and the determination of appropriate 

measures to preserve the estate under wartime 

conditions, which meant a reduction of the 

funds available for staff and maintenance. The 

task fell to the “Hofbau- und Gartenkommission”, 

a committee founded in 1770 to oversee 

the maintenance of the electoral palaces and 

gardens. 124 The inspection took place from 1st 

July to 10th August, 1795; present were the 

chairman of the court treasury, Freiherr von 

Perglas; a councillor of the treasury, Lionhard; 

the director-in-chief of buildings and gardens, 

Nicolas de Pigage; the court gardener, 

Friedrich Ludwig Sckell; the chief gardener 

in charge of the kitchen gardens, Johann van 

Wynder; and the steward in charge of the buildings, 

Theodor Zeller. The resulting report, the 

“Protocollum commissionale” 125 , was largely 

written by Sckell; it contains a wealth of 



Theodor, Stuttgart 1991, pp. 238, 250 f. 

125 Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe (GLA), 221/46 of 30.06.1795, 

Sheet 1. 

information about the condition of the palace 

buildings and gardens and the measures decided 

upon for their maintenance. 

There are detailed descriptions of the individual 

parts of the garden, both pleasure and 

kitchen gardens, and instructions pertaining 

to their future upkeep; there is an inventory 

of orangery plants, again with instructions for 

their treatment and a possible reduction of 

their number; a list of every building in the 

garden, including the greenhouses, with assessements 

of the necessary repairs; an inventory 

of the waterworks and plumbing, of gardening 

tools and their condition; and there are 

data regarding the materials needed for running 

maintenance. Listed, too, is the produce 

grown for sale in the nurseries and vegetable 

gardens. The precise lists of staff, and pay, 

needed for seasonal work bear witness to the 

effort at least to maintain the appearance of 

the Schwetzingen garden, despite the need to 

cut costs “until times are better” 126 . 

The way the “Protocollum commissionale” 

is structured is strikingly reminiscent of 

the “maintenance books” developed in the 

1960s, by the Bavarian Staatsgärtendirektor 

(state director of gardens) Christian Bauer 

(1903-1978), for the purpose of ensuring a 

continuous and well-informed care of parks 

and gardens, in keeping with historical considerations, 

entitled “Parkpfl egewerk”. They 

listed long-term measures based on historical 

documents and an analysis of the current 

condition of the garden in question; their 

success was to be reviewed, and the fi ndings 

used for further action. Bauer intended his 

“Parkpfl egewerk” – in effect, a management 

plan – to grow into an unbroken record of a 

garden’s development over time. 

Sckell’s own opinions regarding the continued 

existence of the Schwetzingen grounds 

were not made public until 23 years after 

the inspection, when he published his book, 

Beiträge zur bildenden Gartenkunst. Budding 

landscape gardeners and garden lovers in 

general are encouraged to maintain the old 

126 GLA, 221/46 of 02. 07.1795, Sheet 11.

formal gardens, where they still survive, 127 

especially in the case of important gardens 

surrounding stately buildings. “The circle 

in front of Schwetzingen Palace is the very 

example of such a regular, showy feature 

between a palace and its more natural, or 

public, grounds. Although I have never been 

an admirer of trellises, however necessary and 

indispensable they may be to the formal gardens 

and however splendid and appropriate 

they may appear, gracing the surroundings of 

the bathhouse at Schwetzingen... I would still 

put the case for the fi ne arbour there, outlining 

the upper half of the aforementioned 

circle... the more so as it provides a shady, 

graceful and, if I may say so, almost romantic 

walk.” 128 

The “Protocollum” shows this statement to be 

based on Sckell’s very detailed demands regarding 

the upkeep of the Schwetzingen gardens 

from 1795 onwards. It was his job to make 

these demands as he had been appointed 

court gardener on 25th April 1792, succeeding 

his father in the post. 129 The certifi cate of 

appointment specifi es the gardens entrusted 

to his care, including the pleasure gardens, 

nurseries, orangery and “those new gardens 

which his knowledge and artistry will devise 

and build” as well as whatever alterations 

might require a “special care and attention 

calling for his expert knowledge”. 

The suggestions for the garden’s future 

upkeep made by Sckell during the inspection 

tour were reviewed by the committee 

members, only occasionally modifi ed and in 

the end, approved by all. Starting out with 

the circular parterre, Sckell was primarily 

concerned with the shrubby borders with rare 

plants, taking up the boulingrins in front of 

the quarter-circle pavilions and the arbour 

walks. Their survival was to be ensured by 

special care, but also by the replacing of dead 

specimens. Another concern was the treatment 

of plants grown on the trellises in the 

circular parterre, the arcades, colonnades and 

127 Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell, Beiträge zu bildenden Gartenkunst, 

2nd improved edition, München 1823, p. 202. 

128 Sckell, 1823, pp. 204-205. 

129 GLA, 221/111. 


arches in the bosquet areas, especially with 

regard to their pruning and tying-up. Sckell 

thought that money could be saved by cutting 

the topiary boxwood less often; the lawns, 

however, must be cared for, and the upkeep 

of the circular parterre’s tree-lined paths was 

deemed essential too. On the other hand, the 

summer planting of the borders lining the 

central parterre must have been a far cry from 

the original Baroque showiness, if Sckell’s 

proposal to limit it to delphiniums, poppies 

and Michaelmas daisies was taken up. 

To maintain the meandering paths in the 

angloises, Sckell asked for regular trimmings 

of the trees lining them. All the hornbeam 

hedges within the large bosquets and 

elsewhere in the garden were to be clipped 

annually, and while repairs could be suspended 

for a year for money-saving reasons, this 

had to remain an exception. 

The “Protocollum” tells us that Sckell urged 

a regular clipping of the trees in order to 

maintain the avenues, for example the chestnut 

trees of the allée en terrasse surrounding 

the bosquets, according to Sckell, one of the 

best walks and worth maintaining. Generally, 

all avenues of fi rs, larches, sweet chestnuts 

and limes should be tended, and missing 

trees replaced, because they were essential to 

the garden’s appearance and worth keeping 

for that reason alone 130 . Losses among the 

ball-shaped topiary trees on the long sides of 

the tapis vert, on the other hand, were not to 

be replaced. The gravel on the paths was to 

be kept, and replaced at need, for it improved 

their appearance and discouraged weeds. And 

Sckell was determined to keep the orangery 

parterre with its lawns, slopes, gravel paths 

and elm arcades in pristine condition. 

Of special concern was the upkeep of the 

landscaped areas. This meant that Sckell’s fi rst 

work ever, the “Arborium Theodoricum”, and 

especially its large collection of trees had to be 

carefully maintained because “this excellent 

garden is not only pleasant to visit, but also 

provides instruction for foresters regarding 

130 GLA, 221/46 of 01.07.1795, Sheet 5. 


149


Fig. 1: The central parterre in 

1935. After pruning had been 

neglected the limes had grown 

to a height of 30m and a width 

of 12m. The detailed layout of 

the parterre beds suffered in 

consequence, and was given 

up as well (Postcard No. 208, 

published by Photohaus Thomé, 


150 


kinds of trees.” 131 Twice a year all weeds were 

to be removed from the paths in the English 

garden, to prevent them from becoming overgrown 

and to keep walking there pleasant. 

The care and maintenance of trees and copses 

is explained with the example of the garden 

surrounding the Temple of Mercury. “The 

charming and picturesque views provided by 

this garden should be preserved with much 

care, especially as the expense is small. Only 

where groups of trees grow tangled together, 

obstruct the view of other groups, or interfere 

with the picture as a whole, must they be 

thinned out. Generally care should be taken 

that trees that are of value must not be cramped 

and ruined by other trees; it is necessary, 

and useful too, to provide them with space 

and air by thinning out the others.” 132 This 

principle serves as a reminder that the care of 

wooded areas always involves taking decisions 

from an artist’s point of view, and that for that 

reason, it must take fi rst place among garden 

preservation issues. Sckell was also concerned 

about safety issues, for example the possible 

dangers presented by the huge old plane trees 

lining the left arbour walk in case of storm. 

He proposes a gradual cutting back of those 

trees that are too close to the trellises, and a 

felling of old and rotten ones. 133 

131 GLA, 221/46 of 02.07.1795, Sheet 8. 

132 GLA, 221/46 of 02.07.1795, Sheet 9. 

133 GLA, 221/46 of 04.07.1795, Sheet 19. 

Sckell does not fail to point out the importance 

of the Schwetzingen nurseries. At 

fi rst they had provided the trees and shrubs 

necessary for the planting of the gardens; 

later they had supplied every electoral garden 

in the Palatinate and Bavaria. Sckell makes 

a point of listing the material value of the 

“many thousands of trees and shrubs”, names 

the advantages of growing them in a local 

clime, and mentions the propagation of many 

outlandish plants grown for experimental 

purposes and given to the electoral forests. 134 

But the main current advantage of the nurseries, 

according to Sckell, was their use when 

it came to the growing of fruit trees, to help 

rebuild those parts of the Palatinate that had 

been ravaged by the war. His detailed account 

of possible improvements in maintaining the 

nurseries gained Sckell the permission to keep 

this institution. 

Putting the measures proposed in the “Protocollum 

commissionale” into practice was a 

task that at fi rst fell to Sckell himself. When 

Pigage died in 1796, Sckell was entrusted 

with the management of both the buildings 

and the gardens, and continued to arrange 

and improve until he moved to Munich in 

1804. On leaving Schwetzingen, he gave clear 

proof of his concern for the palace gardens 

when he wrote: “The court gardener, being 

entrusted with the care of this garden, should 

not merely be familiar with the common craft, 

but should also be at least a little learned in 

the art of creating gardens, so that the areas 

laid out in the naturalistic taste will not be 

ruined through ignorance, but will remain in 

their original shape, as images of beautiful 

Nature.” 135 A requirement that has lost none of 

its relevance today. 

The Early 19th Century and the Predominance 

of Botanical Interests 

Sckell’s successor in the Schwetzingen garden, 

since 1803 belonging to the Grand Duchy 

134 GLA, 221/46 of 02.07.1795, Sheet 12. 

135 GLA, 221/103, letter by Sckell dated 17th April 1804.

of Baden 136 , was the court gardener and later 

garden director Johann Michael Zeyher (1770- 

1843). At the request of his sovereign, Grand 

Duke Carl Friedrich von Baden (1728-1811), he 

established an arboretum in place of the former 

menagerie, which also served as an educational 

botanical garden for a scientifi c institution, 

the “Drais’sche Forstinstitut”, that had its 

seat at Schwetzingen for a time. 

The arboretum, the nursery and the orangery 

provided the basis for Zeyher’s strong tendency 

towards botany and dendrology, which was 

to have its effect on his view of the garden 

entrusted to him. In his guidebook to the palace 

gardens of Schwetzingen 137 he describes 

the superb development of individual trees in 

the English garden, but also the fact that the 

avenues and bosquets were literally outgrowing 

their original structural purpose. Zeyher 

did nothing to check this development, with 

the result that the garden’s “unstable” works 

of art, that is to say those subject to natural 

growth, were exposed to neglect and eventually 

decay. Inevitably, the details of the layout 

suffered. The borders of the central parterre 

running alongside the lime avenues had to be 

given up due to the pressure of the trees. The 

shrubberies in the boulingrins collapsed, and 

china roses were planted as a substitute. The 

hornbeam hedges in the bosquets withered 

due to the overgrown trees. The Grand Duke’s 

habit of transferring statuary to other gardens 

made matters worse, especially when the 

“seahorses” sculpture was taken away to 

Karlsruhe, reducing the seahorse garden to 

insignifi cance. 

In view of all this, it is surprising that Thomas 

Alfried Leger in his guidebook of 1829 138 

should call Zeyher an untiring guardian and 

conscientious keeper of the garden and point 

136 The Margraves of Baden attained the electoral rank through 

the “Reichsdeputationshauptschluss” of 1803. The Palatinate 

east of the Rhine – the Ämter (districts) of Ladenburg, Bretten, 

Heidelberg with the cities of Mannheim and Heidelberg – was 

added to their domain. Membership in the “Rheinbund”, a 

military alliance of several German states with Napoleon’s 

France, that lasted from 1806 to 1813, gained Baden the status 

of a Grand Duchy. 

137 Zeyher/G. Roemer, Beschreibung der Gartenanlagen zu 

Schwetzingen, Mannheim 1809. 




out, as a special achievement, that Zeyher had 

perfected the landscaped areas bordering the 

garden. It is possible, however, that the comment 

is in exhortation as much as praise: Leger 

also voices his hopes that Zeyher would 

stick to his stated intention of protecting the 

garden from tendencies that “threaten to destroy 

it through a misconceived affection for 

Nature, and replace works of art with wild 

forests and fi elds.” In fact Zeyher had, with 

the permission of Grand Duke Ludwig (1763- 

1830) and entirely in accordance with Sckell’s 

ideas, converted the rectangular great basin 

into a pond with a natural-looking shoreline, 

that served as a transition to the landscape 

garden; it was completed in the winter of 

1823/24. 139 

When Zeyher had two large lawn beds laid 

out in the court of honour in 1835, he followed 

a contemporary tendency to make existing 

gardens more natural-looking, but he 

made no changes in the general layout of the 

Schwetzingen grounds. By enlarging the nurseries 

and planting an orchard, Zeyher placed 

additional emphasis on the economic aspects 

of the garden – aspects that had been of interest 

since the 18th century. They were cultivated 

until well into the 20th century; the proceeds 

helped to ensure that at least a modest 

degree of upkeep was still possible. 

139 GLA, 56/3976, Sheet 212.0 f. 


Fig. 2: The central parterre in 

2003. The replacement of the 

ageing limes with young trees, 

kept at a height of 9m by pruning, 

has restored the original 

proportions of the space. The 

beds, the layout of which has 

been reconstructed, can now 

develop naturally. (Landesmedienzentrum, 

Karlsruhe). 

151


152 


An Emphasis on Woody Plants: the Second 

Half of the 19th Century 

After Zeyher’s death in 1843, the grand ducal 

garden administration at Karlsruhe took charge 

of the garden at Schwetzingen. The opinion 

there was that the garden was well-kept 

“according to common understanding” 140 , but 

a number of old sins of omission were pointed 

out that had to be remedied. The thinning-out 

of the bosquets and the clipping of the plants 

bordering the avenues was considered urgent. 

The clipping of the avenues themselves was 

deemed insuffi cient; in particular, the views 

would have to be cleared. The lime trees bordering 

the main avenues would have to be cut 

back considerably. This measure was approved 

by Grand Duke Friedrich I (1826-1907) on 7th 

October 1875, after the clipping of the lime 

trees in 1870 had resulted in a surprising 

amount of new growth. The success of the 

measures taken in the main avenues led to a 

repetition of the process in the lesser avenues. 

This successful “rejuvenating” of the trees 

would be considered exemplary for decades; 

experts praised the method as “not intrusive 

but very effective, especially when repeated; 

forcing dormant buds in the lower parts of the 

branches to sprout, while keeping the majestic 

appearance of the trees intact.“ 141 

An offi cial inspection on 11th August 1875, 

made a point of calling the nursery that had 

been established on the orangery parterre 

utterly misplaced. The harmony between the 

original formal layout and the adjoining angloise 

with the natural theatre was being disrupted; 

alterations of this type were offi cially deplored 

“in the interests of the art of gardening”. It was 

suggested that a simple lawn would do much 

to improve the situation. On the other hand, 

the herbaceous borders planted in the central 

parterre by the garden inspector, Johann 

Wagner, met with approval. Special praise was 

reserved for Wagner’s efforts “to preserve the 

artistic creation of an earlier age, of a type that 

is a rarity in Germany, as far as the fi nancial 

140 GLA, 56/661, Dienst-Visitationen in den Großherzoglichen 

Hofgärten, report dated 17.07.1874. 

141 Anon., “Unerfreuliches Baumverjüngen”, in: Die Gartenkunst, 

12/1937, p. 120. 

means permit it.“ 142 The main task of the 

gardener was considered to be the preservation 

of the existing garden, and at Schwetzingen 

this appeared to be done successfully enough. 

The instalment of Court Gardener, and 

later Garden Inspector, Gustav Adolf Unselt 

(1866-1924) on 6th January 1899 was used as 

another opportunity to stress the necessities of 

preservation. The thinning-out of trees to allow 

views of the garden’s decorative buildings 

was considered to be of prime importance. 

However, it was felt that improvements of this 

type would have to be tackled in small steps 

– “in order to avoid unnecessary newspaper 

polemics.“ 143 

Expert Interest at the Beginning of the 20th 

Century 

The large number of publications in the early 

years of the 20th century, bears witness to the 

efforts of garden experts to get an accurate idea 

of the state of affairs at Schwetzingen. One 

essay, by G. Schoch, the Magdeburg garden 

director, examines the garden’s history and 

its condition around 1900. 144 According to 

Schoch, the large scheme of lasting value had 

been successfully preserved and enhanced 

at Schwetzingen, without sacrifi cing the old 

forms. A comparison of depictions showing 

the garden at the beginning and the end of the 

19th century, demonstrated the importance 

of maintaining the woody plants within the 

framework of the overall layout. Time itself, 

Schoch writes, continually alters the original 

images, necessitating corrections that require 

a high degree of artistic sensibility – after all, 

the gardener’s chief duty is to stay true to the 

vision of the original garden artist. According 

to Scholl, the creative vision of Sckell is more 

clearly visible at Schwetzingen than anywhere 

else; this is what constitutes “the value of the 

Schwetzingen garden if one wishes to understand 

Sckell’s manner, or the development of 

our classic German garden artistry”. In 1910, 

142 GLA, 56/661, inspection of 01.06.1882. 

143 GLA, 56/661, inspection of 07.03.1899. 

144 G. Schoch, “Klassische Stätten der Gartenkunst – Der 

Schloßgarten zu Schwetzingen und Ludwig von Skell”, in: Die 

Gartenkunst, 2/1900, pp. 21-28.

Schwetzingen is described as the most wellpreserved 

garden of the late Classical period. 145 

On the other hand, three years later, Ludwig L. 

Fuchs criticizes the fact that the clarity of the 

central circular parterre was being impaired 

by the avenues – the trees had evidently been 

allowed to grow wild again. 146 

After WWI, a discussion about the value of 

old gardens as historic monuments set in. 147 

Among the examples cited was the palace 

garden at Schwetzingen, which, due to its 

original architectural layout and the competent 

care taken of it, had been justifying the vision 

of its creators for more than a century. The 

main danger to gardens was considered to be 

the addition of buildings or garden features 

without due knowledge or understanding; 

in this way, many heritage sites had been 

impaired or partially destroyed. To prevent this 

from happening again, the former electoral 

parks and gardens should be “protected from 

ruin, destruction, wilful enlargement or 

reduction, as well as from being put to unsuitable 

uses” by the government. Moreover, a list 

of those state, communal and private gardens 

qualifying as works of art was called for, to 

facilitate their inclusion in an inventory of 

historic monuments and heritage sites. 

The Schwetzingen garden director, Gustav 

Adolf Unselt, spoke of his concerns for the 

survival of the garden in a public lecture. 

“Today we admire the generous layout of the 

garden, an effect its creators could not have 

foreseen. Unfortunately the current state 

of affairs makes the garden’s survival seem 

doubtful. This garden, originally created as one 

prince’s labour of love, has long provided the 

inhabitants of Schwetzingen and its surroundings 

with an incomparable recreation area, 

and visitors from afar with all the pleasure a 

work of art can provide.” 148 Unselt was also 

145 Wilhelm Schubert, “Geometrische und räumliche Gärten”, in: 

Die Gartenkunst, 5/1910, p. 73. 

146 Ludwig F. Fuchs, “Vier alte Gartenanlagen – Schwetzingen, 

Schönbusch und die Hofgärten Veitshöchheim und Würzburg”, 

in: Die Gartenkunst, 10/1913, pp. 143-149. 

147 W. v. Engelhardt, “Gartenanlage und Denkmalpfl ege”, in: Die 

Gartenkunst, 2/1922, pp. 13-15. 

148 Gustav A. Unselt, “Vortrag über den Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen”, 

unpublished manuscript, Sandhofen, 5th February 

1922. 


a talented organisator who managed, in the 

diffi cult years after WWI, to fi nance a modest 

degree of garden upkeep by the sale of produce 

– fruit and vegetables, fi sh, wood, grass, leaves, 

ice to supply the cellars of breweries and mud 

from the ponds to fertilize fi elds. 

The Forestry Commission in Charge of the 

Garden 

When the garden’s upkeep was entrusted to 

the state forestry commission in 1924, experts 

everywhere feared for its survival, the more so 

as a massive reduction in staff was announced 

at the same time. It was deemed incomprehensible 

“how such a cultural treasure, ranking at 

least as high as museums and art collections, 

could be left to perish like that.“ 149 Local history 

and heritage institutions and gardeneres were 

urged to take “energetic” action. However, 

the garden was far from doomed, as became 

evident from the criticism that was soon raised 

concerning a number of repair and maintenance 

measures. It was, however, the lack of a 

garden expert in charge of them, rather than 

the results that was being criticized. 150 The 

efforts at reconstruction were largely approved 

– it was noted that “a visit to the splendid 

garden has become a great pleasure again.“ 151 

To ensure the continued preservation of the 

palace gardens, experts considered the founding 

of a horticultural college at Schwetzingen. 

These activities in themselves served to bring 

the gardens of Schwetzingen to the attention 

of the public at large, and garden specialists in 

particular. 152 

Concepts of Appropriate Preservation 

The art historian Franz Hallbaum uses the 

example of Schwetzingen, to point out the 

constant threats to the work of art that is 

a garden. He calls for care and a sense of 

responsibility in looking after it, and provi- 

149 Anonym, “Inland-Rundschau”, in: Die Gartenwelt, 4/1924, p. 

32. 

150 Anonym, “Neue Gefahr für Schwetzingen”, in: Die Gartenwelt, 

5/1927, p. 76. 

151 Anonym, “Inland-Rundschau”, in: Die Gartenwelt, 18/1928, p. 

251. 

152 Diebolder, “Gartenbauhochschule in Schwetzingen”, in: Die 

Gartenwelt, 28/1928, p. 388. And: Diebolder, “Schlosspark 

Schwetzingen”, in: Die Gartenwelt, 35/1928, pp. 479-480. 


153


Fig. 3: Temple of Mercury 

in 1962. The lush vegetation 

obstructs the view towards 

the building and suppresses 

its original function within 

the garden as a whole (photo: 

Wertz). 

154 


ding suitable substitutes for old and decaying 

trees and their part in the whole. As well as 

a responsibility for the work of art, there is, 

according to Hallbaum, the responsibility 

of social ethics, the duty to preserve and 

improve a garden. To him, a lack of artistic 

sensibility and the predominance of scientifi c, 

botanical interests are mainly responsible for 

the encroachment of Nature upon Art and the 

resulting imbalance of height and width – in 

this case, of copse and lawn. He warns against 

a false sentimentality, where issues of garden 

care and the claims of art are concerned, and 

appeals to the artistic sense to take charge 

at Schwetzingen “so that the garden may 

again justify its reputation of being the most 

perfect blend of the two gardening styles we 

possess in Germany. In this way, we honour 

its creators, discharge our duties and create 

an obligation for the future.“ 153 Hallbaum 

propagated this programme in lectures he 

153 Franz Hallbaum, “Schwetzingen – Ein Arbeitsprogramm für 

seine künstlerische Erhaltung”, in: Die Gartenkunst ‘7/1928, 

pp. 102-105. 

gave for various institutions at Mannheim and 

Schwetzingen. 154 

The garden architect, Hans Gerlach, was of the 

opinion that the care of the palace gardens 

should not be entrusted to the initiative and 

competence of the individual garden director; 

instead, a long-term plan should be drawn 

up. The responsible authorities of the State 

of Baden were asked to take action, decide on 

appropriate guidelines and work out a programme 

for Schwetzingen. At the same time, 

Gerlach appealed to the relevant professional 

associations, to write up resolutions and not 

to allow the care of the garden to be entrusted 

to a mere forestry offi cial, but to make sure it 

was given to a garden expert instead. 155 As a 

consequence, Karl Heicke, garden director at 

Frankfurt, was commissioned to write a report 

for the improvement of the existing conditions 

in the Schwetzingen palace gardens. The 

report, dated 29th May 1937, concludes that 

“by careful attention to detail, the uniqueness 

and beauty of the park as a whole must be 

preserved for the future. 156 The fi rst measures 

were the replacement of withered chestnuts in 

the western allée en terrasse and the experimental 

trimming of limes in the Dreibrückentorallee; 

however, with the outbreak of WWII, 

the work came to a halt. 

The “Parkpfl egewerk” 

After the war the Mannheim garden director, 

Josef Bußjäger, did what he could to ensure 

the preservation of the Schwetzingen garden, 

which, unlike most palaces and gardens in 

Baden, had remained undamaged by the war. 

He considered the preservation of the lime 

avenues to be the top priority. 157 Christian 

Bauer, state garden director at Munich, was 

another advocate of the Schwetzingen garden 

in the 1950s. It was he who initiated the com- 

154 Anon., “Erhaltung des Schwetzinger Schlossgartens”, in: Die 

Gartenkunst, 12/1928, p.192. 

155 Hans Gerlach, “Der Schwetzinger Schloßgarten – Ein trauriges 

Kapitel zur Instandhaltung historischer Gärten”, in: Möllers 

Deutsche Gärtnerzeitung, 16/1930, p. 188. 

156 Karl Heicke, “Vorschläge für eine Verbesserung des Bestehenden 

im Schwetzinger Schlossgarten”, in: Die Gartenkunst, 

12/1937, pp. 249-256. 

157 Josef Bußjäger, “Wie können die 200jährigen Linden im 

Schwetzinger Schlosspark erhalten werden?”, in: Garten + 

Landschaft, 5/1958, pp. 122-123.

pilation of the “Parkpfl egewerk” (a detailed 

management plan drawn up for the individual 

garden), which was completed in 1970, one 

of the fi rst of its kind. 158 In the preface, Bauer 

explains that historic gardens rank with a 

country’s most precious cultural and artistic 

treasures, and that their value for the present 

is inestimable. The Schwetzingen garden 

with its magnifi cent avenues, its grand layout 

and the blend of architectural gardens and 

landscaped areas is described as “a high point 

in the history of the German garden, a garden 

of world status”. 159 Baroque and Rococo as well 

as landscape gardens were subject to certain 

formal principles, that had been neglected 

at times. Consequently, the condition of the 

garden in 1970 betrayed changes due to the 

fact that its aging, and even its decay, had 

been accepted as given. The danger had been 

known for decades, and expert opinions had 

been obtained, but the responsible authorities 

had shied away from taking the requisite 

drastic action. Now inventories suggested 

that the degeneration of the avenues was 

irreversible and that, although the bosquets 

and landscaped areas still presented an intact 

network of footpaths, the plants were dangerously 

aged. The purpose of the publication 

on hand was to document and assess this state 

of affairs, and to point out ways and means of 

regenerating the garden. Further losses must 

be avoided; the garden must be restored to its 

proper layout. 

In 1972, the responsible authorities approved 

the guidelines of the Parkpfl egewerk. It was 

recommended to tackle the urgent task of 

regenerating the Schwetzingen garden, as a 

cultural monument of European status, in 

keeping with its original design principles 

while respecting and enhancing its function 

as a recreational area. The work was to be 

carried out over a period of time. It was 

agreed that this regeneration, along with 

additional work on waterways, buildings, 

footpaths and sculptures, would result in a 

158 Christian Bauer/Walter Schwenecke, Parkpfl egewerk für den 

Schwetzinger Schlossgarten, unpublished, Karlsruhe, October 

1970. 

159 Bauer/Schwenecke 1970, S.1. 


general improvement of the condition of the 

whole estate. The requisite measures taken 

in the course of the past thirty years, such as 

the reconstruction of the central parterre 160 

or the replacing of the withered lime trees 

in the circular parterre, 161 are documented in 

detail in the later parts of the Parkpfl egewerk 

dating from 2005. They are a fi ne example of 

well-informed work adhering to the principles 

of historic garden conservation. A concept for 

the preservation and restoration spanning the 

next decade is attached to this “diary” of the 

Schwetzingen palace garden. 162 

(Hubert Wolfgang Wertz) 

160 Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Wiederherstellung und Unterhaltung 

von Parterreanlagen, dargestellt am Beispiel des 

Schwetzinger Parterres”, in: Gartendenkmalpfl ege, Stuttgart 

1985, pp.174-204. 

161 Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Maßnahmen im ‘Zirkel’ des 

Schwetzinger Schlossgartens”, in: Die Gartenkunst des Barock, 

conference of the German ICOMOS committee and the State 

Offi ce for Monument Preservation (Bayerisches Landesamt 

für Denkmalpfl ege), on Schloss Seehof near Bamberg 23.-26. 

September 1997. Ed. Florian Fiedler. Journals of the Deutsches 

Nationalkomitees/International Council on Monuments and 

Sites, No. 28, 1999, pp. 131-135. 

162 Uta Schmitt, Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, Fortschreibung 

des Parkpfl egewerks für den Schwetzinger Schlossgarten, 

unpublished, Bruchsal 2005. 


Fig. 4: Temple of Mercury in 

1998. Careful thinning out and 

regeneration of the trees and 

shrubs has allowed the temple 

to regain its assigned role as 

a belvedere and “point de vue” 

(photo: Landesmedienzentrum, 

Karlsruhe). 

155


156 


e) 

The Summer Residence – Nineteenth- 

and Twentieth-Century 

Responses 

1. “A German Versailles” – Schwetzingen 

and its Status as Refl ected in Travel Accounts, 

Images and Literature 

Schwetzingen as a travelling destination 

Foremost among the intentions of the travelling 

artists, scholars, diplomats and adventurers, 

who visited Schwetzingen up to the 

1770s, was to obtain access to the electoral 

court, to establish or renew contacts, if possible 

to be granted an audience. 

The beauty of the palace itself and its grounds 

did attract attention, but it was not usually 

the main topic of interest. Leopold Mozart’s 

journal entries about his stay in the Palatinate 

between 13th July and 2nd August 1763, are 

mainly concerned with the chief musicians 

of the Palatine court and a number of useful 

contacts; quite by the way, he mentions the 

palace and chapel, the garden with its star avenue 

and the theatre. 1 

The viewpoint of Christian Daniel Schubart 2 , 

who went hiking across the Palatinate for several 

months in 1773/74, was somewhat different. 

It was the urge to add to his education, 

rather than career considerations, that 

brought the Württemberg writer and journalist 

to Schwetzingen. Writing his autobiography, 

many years later, he would praise the fertile, 

lush, almost paradisiac scenery and the 

masterful harmony of the Schwetzingen gardens, 

a perfect blend of nature and art: “One 

might believe oneself to have been transported 

by magic to an island where everything 

is sound, where water-nymphs, sylphs, 

goblins and salamanders blend the tunes of 

water, air, earth and fi re until the most beau- 

1 Travelling notes of Leopold Mozart 1763, Internationale 

Stiftung Mozarteum, B/D 57, Blatt 12a, published in: Bärbel 

Pelker, “Sommer in der Campagne – Impressionen aus Schwetzingen”, 

in: B. Pelker/S. Leopold, Hofoper in Schwetzingen, 

Heidelberg 2004, pp. 9-38, here p. 26. 

2 Christian Daniel Schubart (1739-1791), critical journalist 

and “Sturm und Drang” poet, imprisoned in the fortress of 

Hohenasperg from 1777 to 1787 for political criticism. 

tiful symphony emerges.“ 3 To him the electoral 

garden appears like a piece of Arcadia regained, 

an intellectual and aesthetic rallying 

point. Here was the opportunity to combine a 

study visit with the enjoyment of art and nature. 

At least that is how it appeared to the rising 

18th-century middle class, the members 

of which took eagerly to Descartes’ belief, that 

travelling constituted a major element of a 

sound education. 

As the French cultural supremacy waned, the 

self-confi dence of other European nations, and 

their belief in the value of their own cultural 

heritage, increased. This was especially true 

for Germany. Justus Möser’s Osnabrückische 

Geschichte 4 of 1768, inspired by English accounts 

of travels to distant parts of the country, 

for the fi rst time described the individual 

merits of regions and cultural landscapes 

to a German audience. Trips to not-too-distant 

destinations became increasingly popular during 

the years that followed, and not just because 

of the manageable cost. They were also 

the result of a new appreciation of the natural 

and cultural beauties of Germany, of the realization 

that there was a unifying value in the 

“cultural nation” proposed by Friedrich Schiller, 

that transcended territorial borders. Travels 

to other regions became one aspect of a 

tentative identifi cation with the historical and 

cultural roots common to all Germans. 5 Part 

of this development were the Rhine cruises, 

with their strong emphasis on history, that inevitably 

led through a large part of the Palatinate. 

At the end of the 18th and the beginning 

of the 19th century, Schwetzingen became 

part of this particular “tour”. It was now considered 

a spot “worthy of being visited by any 

lover of art or nature travelling in these parts 

of the Rhine and Neckar valleys” 6 , as the ano- 

3 Christian Daniel Schubart, Schubarts Leben und Gesinnungen, 

2 vols. Stuttgart, 1791/1793, quotation from Vol. 1, p. 152. 

4 Justus Möser, Osnabrückische Reise, Osnabrück 1768. 

5 Re. Schiller’s concept of a “cultural nation” see Georg Schmidt, 

“Friedrich Schillers ‚Deutsche Größe’ und der nationale 

Universalismus”, in: W. Greiling/H.-W. Hahn (eds.), Tradition 

und Umbruch. Geschichte zwischen Wissenschaft, Kultur und 

Politik, Rudolstadt/Jena 2002. pp. 5-26, especially pp. 6 ff. 

6 Anon.: Wegweiser durch den Schwetzinger Garten. Mit zwölf 

Ansichten, Heidelberg 1830, p. 5.

nymous author of one garden guidebook put 

it in 1830. 

The garden of the summer residence in particular, 

opened to the public by Carl Theodor 

early in his reign, completed despite the 

fact that the court had moved to Munich in 

the meantime, and further enriched by features 

like the mosque and the Temple of Mercury 

since then, became a magnet for cultureloving 

tourists. In this way, the Schwetzingen 

garden became one of a number of exquisite 

European gardens, familiar to the public because 

they were open to the public. Versailles 

had been publicly accessible in the time of 

Louis XIV, the royal gardens at London had 

been opened during the 17th century as well; 

the rules of conduct for visitors of the Herrenhausen 

park date from 1720, those for Charlottenburg 

from 1741 and those for Brühl 

from 1748. 7 

Schwetzingen in Travel Literature 

Once the electoral residence had been moved 

to Munich in 1778, the reasons for visiting 

Schwetzingen changed. People no longer 

came for the sake of the court, but for that of 

the fi ne former residence and its beautiful gardens. 

The descriptions of the palace and grounds 

in visitors’ letters, journals and memoirs grew 

longer. Schubart’s enthusiastic response to the 

garden was shared by young Friedrich Hölderlin, 

who came visiting in the course of his 

fi ve-day tour of the Palatinate in the Pentecostal 

holidays of 1788. In a letter to his mother 

he wrote enthusiastically: “I had to get up at 

four o’clock again, and at fi ve I was sitting in 

the coach, to the relief of my weary limbs. We 

crossed the Rhine again, and a few hours later 

we reached the famous electoral pleasure 

gardens at Schwetzingen. It is no use describing 

them. You would have to see the whole 

splendour for yourself – the beautiful works 

of art, the exquisite paintings, the building, 

the water features and so on – if you want to 

get an idea of it. I’ll name just one detail. They 

7 Clemens Alexander Wimmer, Geschichte der Gartentheorie, 

Darmstadt 1989, p. 436. 


have a Turkish mosque (a temple) here; some 

people might not even notice it among all these 

beauties, but I liked it best of them all. The 

whole thing is like Hohenheim and the Solitude 

taken together, as far as I am concerned.“ 8 

If travelling constituted an ideal opportunity 

for self-education in the spirit of Enlightenment 

and promised a wealth of experiences, 

a garden constituted an ideal travelling de- 

8 Letter to his mother (Brief an die Mutter aus der Zeit vom 

6-15. Juni 1788, Nr. 23). Adolf Beck (ed.), Friedrich Hölderlin, 

Sämtliche Werke, Vol. 6: Briefe, Stuttgart 1954, p. 32. 

Hölderlin may be referring to the mosque in the garden 

of Hohenheim, which was built 1778. Cp. Andrea Berger- 

Fix/Klaus Merten, Die Gärten der Herzöge von Württemberg 

im 18. Jahrhundert (= exhibition catalogue), Worms 1981. 

Catalogue No. 15: Hohenheim mosque. 


Fig. 1: Front page of the 

guidebook written by Garden 

Director Johann Michael Zeyher, 

c.1824 (original: Schlossbibliothek 


Fig. 2: Notes about Schwetzingen 

in Leopold Mozart’s 

travelling journal (From: 

Leopold Pelker 2004, p. 26). 

157


Fig. 3: Bathhouse, view by 

“Jury”, c.1830, Verlag Franz 

Schwab (From: Leopold Pelker 

2004, p. 12). 

158 


stination. Gardens represented ever-varied 

small-scale versions of the world, offering the 

aesthetic pleasures of open-air art cabinets as 

well as educational “programmes” or – in the 

case of English gardens – landscape paintings 

made real. A garden was a carefully staged, allencompassing 

event. 

In order to facilitate the foreign visitor’s educational 

pleasure, descriptions pointing out 

the things worth seeing and knowing were 

required. In his Schwetzingen guidebook of 

1809, entitled Beschreibung der Gartenanlagen 

zu Schwetzingen. Mit acht Kupfern und 

einem Plane des Gartens, the garden director 

in charge, Johann Michael Zeyher, managed 

the remarkable feat of providing a catalogue 

of attractions and curiosities, presenting a full 

garden history and offering a learned interpretation 

of his garden’s characteristics according 

to contemporary gardening theories. His brilliant 

book was both the fi rst guidebook and 

the fi rst academic study of the Schwetzingen 

garden. In 1824, Zeyher, together with Rieger, 

published a revised and extended edition that 

also documented and explained his own part 

in shaping the grounds. 9 Only four years later, 

in 1828, the architect and Heidelberg professor 

Thomas Alfried Leger published an architectural 

guidebook for Schwetzingen, that 

9 Johann Zeyher/J. G. Rieger (ed.), Schwetzingen und seine 

Gartenanlagen. Mit acht von Jury und Schnell gestochenen 

ansichten und dem Plane des Gartens, Mannheim 1824. 

provided historical information about the palace 

and the buildings in the grounds. 10 Once 

a start had been made by these three books, 

the 19th century saw a vast number of palace 

and garden guidebooks for the use of a steadily 

growing number of visitors. The books 

were published in quick succession, enjoyed 

many reprints and invariably offered clear descriptions, 

intelligent arguments and amusing 

asides; they also tended to repeat the same 

statements almost word by word. In this manner, 

even glaring mistakes like the belief that 

Nicolas de Pigage had been travelling to Turkey 

on the orders of Elector Carl Theodor before 

building his mosque, were passed on. 

From the beginning of the 19th century, the 

garden guidebooks, as well as the more general 

guides to Heidelberg or the Palatinate, 

always stressed the number and quality of 

garden buildings as the garden’s chief architectural 

glory. Even in those rare cases when 

criticism was voiced – one Swiss guide to Heidelberg 

and its surroundings disapproved of 

the “bizarre unhistoric mix of structures imitating 

all sorts of archtectural styles” – a visit 

to the Schwetzingen gardens was strongly 

recommended. 11 Besides the Temple of 

Apollo, considered one of the garden’s most 

important features, it was the mosque that 

attracted most attention. Its exotic, quasi-Oriental 

charm and the examples of “Osmanic” 

thought expressed by the sayings that decorated 

it, appealed strongly to visitors. 12 It rose 

into view, a “magnifi cent building in the Oriental 

taste with a beautiful dome and two 

slender turrets”; 13 it was described in detail, 

and every one of the inscriptions was faithfully 

recorded. 

Thus the guidebooks played an important part 

in the process of Schwetzingen’s emergence 

as a cultural and historical attraction. They refl 

ect the town’s image of itself in the course of 

the transition from a princely seat of power 


ed. Karl von Graimberg, Mannheim 1928. 

11 Carl Pfaff, Europäische Wandelbilder: Heidelberg, Zürich, n. 

d., p. 72. 

12 Anon., Beschreibung der Garten=Anlagen zu Schwetzingen, 

Schwetzingen 1840. Published by Franz Schwab, No. 12. 

13 Ibid., No. 28.

to a monument of courtly life under the Ancien 

Régime, as well as the early 19th century’s 

attitude to its historical heritage: “The garden, 

originally created as if by magic through 

a prince’s fancy, has now become posterity’s 

common property, and Schwetzingen has 

been appointed its guardian.“ 14 At the same 

time, the maintenance and care of this inheritance 

provided the town with a chance of 

keeping the character and status of a summer 

destination visited by many tourists even 

without the attractions of a resident court. 

It was the appeal of the harmonious complex 

consisting of the palace, garden and theatre 

that caused many a visitor “originally intent 

on only a brief visit to this friendly town, 

to stay for weeks or even months, enjoying 

the summer in the groves and gardens of the 

beautiful palace grounds”. 15 In the course of 

the 19th century, the palace and garden with 

their “programme” of cultural and natural aesthetics, 

became a main attraction drawing a 

crowd of visitors in search of rest and relaxation 

as well as education. 

Another indication that Schwetzingen was 

well on its way to becoming a major tourist 

destination was the appearance of guides, the 

so-called Ciceroni, who were at the disposal 

of visitors from the early 19th century. Not 

only did they provide a more or less competent 

tour of the grounds, they also, for a small 

fee, unlocked the buildings for interested visitors. 

16 Having completed one such tour, the 

writer Count August von Platen noted laconically 

that the visit to the garden had not been 

entirely cheap. “However, we had to pay for 

our enjoyment of those marvels in good coin, 

and I would not recommend a visit of the garden 

to those who do not carry a purse. At the 

very least the Schwetzingen garden feeds its 

carers.“ 17 

14 Franz Schwab (ed.), Führer durch die Anlagen und Erklärer 

der Kunstwerke im Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen, n. d., p. 8. 

15 Schwab, n.d., p. 4. 

16 August von Platen describes this service: “There was a mosque 

nearby. It was unlocked and explained to us – how it was built 

quite after the manner of the genuine Turkish churches.” Oskar 

Hufschmied, “Der Dichter Graf von Platen in Mannheim”, 

in: Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, Year X, No. 1, January 1909, 

pp. 55-58, here p. 55. 

17 Hufschmied 1909, p. 55. 


Eminent Visitors 

As early as 1809, Zeyher stressed the importance 

he believed Schwetzingen to have attained 

as a an international travelling destination: 

“No traveller of any distinction will 

cruise these waters without casting anchor 

at Schwetzingen; a multitude of princes, dignitaries 

and great men have fl ocked to this 

German Versailles 18 , St. Cloud, Aranjuez 19 or 

whatever it may please you to call this strange 

place.“ 20 In 1894, Otto Schwarz proudly added 

a four-page list of eminent visitors to the seventh 

edition of his “practical and systematic” 

guidebook (Praktisch planmäßiger Wegweiser 

durch den Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen). 

It comprises royalty, aristocrats, diplomats 

and other persons of note, who had stayed at 

Schwetzingen between 1793 and 1894, usually 

accompanied by members of the archducal 

house of Baden. In 1815, the garden had provided 

a festive setting for a meeting of Tsar 

Alexander of Russia and Emperor Franz I of 

Austria. In 1830, the Dowager Grand Duchess 

Stephanie von Baden had shown the gardens 

to the Empress of Brazil, Amalia. Five years later 

Schwetzingen was one of the destinations 

visited by the Spanish princes Juan and Ferdinand 

on their tour of Europe. 21 The entry for 

14th August 1889, even mentions a splendid 

“suite and banquet” in honour of Nassereddin 

Shah of Persia. Thus Karl Schwab’s mid-19th 

century guidebook (Führer durch die Anlage 

und Erklärer der Kunstwerke) was justifi ed in 

proudly referring to the “world-famous palace 

garden, that has brought an immense, neverfailing 

stream of visitors setting in with the 

fi rst days of spring and not petering out until 

the late autumn”. 22 

Then as now visitors liked to inscribe their 

names on the walls of the garden follies. On 

the occasion of his own visit on 8th June 1815, 

August von Platen criticizes this unseemly ha- 

18 Inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage list since 1979. 

19 Inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage list since 2001. 

20 Johann Michael Zeyher, Beschreibung der Gartenanlagen zu 

Schwetzingen. Mit acht Kupfern und einem Plane des Gartens, 

Mannheim 1809; reprint of the original edition: Schwetzingen 

1997, p. 65. 

21 Otto Schwarz, Praktisch planmäßigen Wegweisers durch den 

Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen, Schwetzingen 1894, p. 34. 

22 Schwab n.d., p. 4. 


159


160 

Fig. 4: Postcard, c.1892 

(original: Schlossbibliothek 



bit, having seen the inscriptions on the walls 

of the minaret staircase: “It goes without saying 

that names are scrawled everywhere; I 

would not like to add my own to such a vulgar 

neighbourhood.“ 23 However, the details 

of most eminent visitors’ stays can be found 

in the visitors’ book of the Schwetzingen bathhouse, 

that was kept from 1793. 24 August 

von Platen wrote: “In one of the rooms there 

was a book for the use of visitors, and despite 

the fact that I have been ranting against the 

scrawling of names on walls just now, I nevertheless 

entered my name in that book, because 

I consider this an excellent custom and because 

I myself have been delighted to discover 

the name of a friend in such a place, something 

that happens quite frequently.“ 25 Platen’s 

own entry in the visitors’ book was a succinct 

Graf Platen=Hallermund, Lieutnant in bayrischen 

Diensten (“Count Platen-Hallermund, 

Lieutenant in the service of Bavaria”). 26 Other 

names in there are that of the Romantic writer, 

Caroline Günderode, who with her siblings 

went for a walk in the grounds on 21st July 

1804, and of Goethe’s muse “Suleika”: Marianne 

Willemer von Franckfurt am 25 May 1808. 27 

23 Hufschmied 1909, p. 56. 

24 Bathhouse visitors’ books from 1793 to 1810: GLA Karlsruhe, 

65/200 21 ff. 

25 Cp. Hufschmied 1909, p. 56. 

26 Visitors’ books GLA Karlsruhe, 65/20023. 

27 Visitors’ books GLA Karlsruhe 65/ 200 21/22. 

The visitors’ books refl ected the “rapt enthusiasm 

and admiration felt by many a visitor”. 28 

Images of Schwetzingen 

Long before the fi rst detailed description of 

the Schwetzingen garden appeared in print, 

the fi rst known pictorial representation of it 

had been published by the Baden court painter, 

Karl Kunz. In the 1790s, he produced six 

views of the most beautiful parts of the garden 

in the aquatint technique developed by 

Jean-Baptiste Leprince in 1765-1768 [kurze 

Liste mit den Bildmotiven, die ja bis in die 

heutige Zeit als Serie stehen]. The artist was 

mainly interested in the buildings in their respective 

surroundings; fi gures of admiring visitors 

enliven the pictures. Aquatint plates 

were considered especially delicate, and the 

number of high-quality prints was very limited. 

Nevertheless, the prints appear to have 

sold quickly. At the beginning of the 19th 

century, Garden Director Zeyher had made 

changes to some buildings, and so Kunz decided 

to produce a new series of copperplates. A 

large number of engravers in copper and steel 

followed his example; in the early 19th century, 

a series of garden views and plans were published 

in large editions. Notable among them 

are the steel engravings of Anton Rottmann 

(1795-1840) of Heidelberg and the prints of 

Louis Hoffmeister and Georg Michael Kunz 

(1815-1883); they appeared as illustrations in 

many guidebooks, and a collection of them 

was published under the title Vues lythographiées 

de Schwetzingen. 29 Towards the end of 

the 19th century, the fourth edition of Franz 

Schwab’s guidebook, Führer durch die Anlagen 

und Erklärer der Kunstwerke im Schlossgarten, 

still informs its readers that “all views of the 

palace gardens, created by the best artists both 

as excellent engravings and masterly photographs, 

are available at the palace gates in a 

variety of sizes.“ 30 

These views of the Schwetzingen gardens, 

published in their hundreds, helped consi- 

28 Schwarz 1894, p. 34. 

29 Charles de Graimberg (ed.), Vues lythographiées de Schwetzingen, 

Heidelberg n.d. 

30 Schwab n.d., p. 10.

derably in making the gardens widely known. 

What helped even more was the introduction 

of the picture postcard. In 1892, the Schwetzingen 

publisher Otto Schwarz produced the 

fi rst postcard depicting a number of small 

views of the garden. Schwarz, too, chose follies 

and architectural details for his card and 

with his small Gruss aus Schwetzingen (“Greetings 

from Schwetzingen”) created a medium 

that proved to have excellent publicity value. 

Today, more than 600 historical postcards 

are proof not only of a successful small-town 

publishing career, but also of the fl ourishing 

tourism at the former electoral summer residence. 

31 

Schwetzingen – a Blend of Styles 

Around 1770, a general enthusiasm for garden 

design set in that lasted into the late 1790s, 

and was encouraged by a large number of 

publications on garden theory. Goethe summarized 

this fashion in his annals, Tag- und 

Jahreshefte, in 1797: “An irresistible urge towards 

the country and garden life had gripped 

everybody then.“ 32 This led not only to a new 

type of educational tourism, the garden trip 

undertaken by both experts and enthusiasts, 

it also made gardens – both existing and in 

the process of being created – into a topic 

of public interest. Naturally Schwetzingen 

became a subject of this interest too. 

Schwetzingen, like Caserta near Naples and 

the Nymphenburg Gardens at Munich, is one 

of a very few gardens that present the contradictory 

styles of the older, formal Baroque 

garden and the new English landscape garden 

side by side. The solution found by the garden 

architect in charge, Friedrich Ludwig Sckell, 

was one of integration and preservation, and 

as such a novelty. As late as 1825, he described 

this approach in his writings on garden 

theory, Beiträge zur bildenden Gartenkunst, 

and explained it from a historian’s perspec- 

31 Wolfgang Schröck-Schmidt, “Postkarten vom Schwetzinger 

Schloss im Wandel der Zeit”, Schwetzinger Zeitung vom 15. 

Januar 2005, p. 10. Re. historical postcards in general cp. 

Herbert Leclerc, “Ansichten über Ansichtskarten”, in: Archiv 

für deutsche Postgeschichte, Frankfurt a. M. 1986. 

32 Erich Trunz (ed.), Goethes Werke. Hamburger Ausgabe, Vol. 

10. München 1981, p. 448. 


tive: “Yet this symmetrical manner, described 

by Curtius and Strabo in writing about the 

hanging gardens of the Babylonians, by Homer 

in writing about the gardens of Alcinous, 

and by Pliny the Younger in writing about 

his own Laurentinum, does have its merits 

and should never be removed completely.“ 33 

The reinterpretation of the non-modern as a 

tradition worthy of being preserved and charged 

with historical signifi cance legitimized 

the preservation of the symmetrical sections 

of the Schwetzingen grounds, thus creating 

a unique document of a change in gardening 

theory and taste. This phenomenon attracted 

the experts as well. In the 1780s, Christian Cay 

Lorenz Hirschfeld visited the garden, and paid 

tribute to it in the fi fth volume of his massive 

theoretical work, Theorie der Gartenkunst. 34 

The juxtaposition of the two gardening styles, 

one succeeding the other in the course of the 

18th century, permitted contemporary visitors 

to draw a direct comparison. From the Temple 

of Apollo both the formal French garden and 

the English landscape garden could be seen. 

It may have been his familiarity with these 

views that induced Friedrich Schiller, who 

visited Schwetzingen several times between 

1783 and 1785, to use the contrasting gardens 

as a literary metaphor in his play, Don Carlos. 

In the fi rst version of the play, the so-called 

Thalia Fragment, the Queen deplores “this 

magnifi cent maiming of God’s work” in the 

famous gardens of Aranjuez, notwithstanding 

the fact that they are considered the “eighth 

wonder of the world”. In conversation with 

the Marquis Posa, she is rather critical of the 

topiary and the symmetrical borders: “Admire 

these smooth walls of beech, the trees’ fearful 

ceremony, dainty and stiff and frozen like the 

court, like a sad parade all around me.” The 

royal recluse, on the other hand, prefers the 

natural refuge of the landscape garden: “Here 

I will show you my own world. This place I 

have chosen as my favourite. How beautiful it 

33 Friedrich Ludwig Sckell, Beiträge zur bildenden Gartenkunst 

für angehende Gartenkünstler und Gartenliebhaber, München 

1825. Repr., Worms 1982, p. 3. 

34 Christian Cay Lorenz Hirschfeld, Theorie der Gartenkunst, 5 

vols., Leipzig 1779-1785. Here Vol. 5, pp. 344 ff. 


161


162 


is, how kind, how intimate – this, I believe, is 

where Nature has fl ed from the persecution of 

Art. In unwatched liberty she dwells, noticed 

by few.” 35 

It is hardly surprising, therefore, that the 

Schwetzingen grounds with their unique 

combination of old and new styles, had a polarizing 

effect on visitors. The young poet and 

soldier, Count August von Platen-Hallermund, 

was thoroughly unimpressed when he noted 

in his diary in 1815: “We Germans are quick 

to use the word ‘tasteless’, especially when it 

comes to gardening, and I, too, have to confess 

that I believe the Schwetzingen garden, for 

all its fame, to be quite tasteless. It fl uctuates 

between the French and English manner, 

displaying the worst aspects of both.“ 36 

Literary Tributes 

From the late 18th century to the present 

day, the Schwetzingen garden has been 

attracting artists, among them many writers. 

Sometimes the impression left by the garden 

was so strong that it entered their work. 37 

Schiller immortalized the Temple of Apollo 

in a dystich, as well as writing the garden 

description of the Thalia Fragment quoted 

above. The young Romantic poet Eichendorff 

chose the Schwetzingen grounds as the setting 

of his 1816/17 novella, Das Marmorbild (“The 

Marble Image”), in which a statue of Venus is 

transformed into the goddess herself. 38 

The Russian writer Ivan Turgenev (1818-1883) 

visited the Schwetzingen garden on returning 

from Italy, and described it in a story, “Visions”, 

published in 1864. 39 

A similar fairy-tale feeling surrounds the garden 

in the memories of the philosopher, Ernst 

Bloch. In 1959, he published his book Prinzip 

35 Gerhard Kluge, Gerhard (eds.), Schillers Werke. Nationalausgabe, 

Vol. VI. Weimar 1974, pp. 374 f. (Don Carlos, I,4). 

36 Entry for 8th June 1815. In: Die Tagebücher des Grafen August 

v. Platen. Ed. G. v. Laubmann/L. v. Scheffl er., 2 vols., Stuttgart 

1896/1900. 

37 Re. writers visiting the Schwetzingen gardens cp. Susan 

Richter, “Schwetzingen im Spiegel der Dichtung”, in: Badische 

Heimat, Zeitschrift für Landes- und Volkskunde, Natur-, 

Umwelt- und Denkmalschutz, 1/2004, pp. 46-57. 

38 Joseph Freiherr von Eichendorff, Das Marmorbild, Leipzig n.d., 

pp. 135-190. 

39 Ivan Turgeniev, Visionen, Berlin 1864, p. 35. Re. Turgenev’s 

stay in Germany cp. Hartmut Müller, Literaturreisen. Der 

Neckar, Stuttgart 1994, pp. 303 ff. 

Hoffnung (The Principle of Hope, 1986). To him 

the garden is a symbol of the hope for an ideal 

world. This is how Bloch interpreted gardens 

in general, and the Schwetzingen garden, 

which he knew well as a representative of all 

of them. “Most beautiful is the palace garden 

at Schwetzingen. Along with the reeded ponds 

and the urns, all that is memorable in the 

world has been collected here in the shape 

of facades and dummies – a green exhibition 

hall. An exhibition hall, however, that presents 

nothing but moods and fantasies given voice, 

a natural treasury full of artifi cial, imagined 

valuables. […] This was the pleasure garden 

of princes, the stage of courtly masques and 

promenades, yet at the same time, a breath 

of rapture, of a fantastic remoteness lingers. 

Susanna’s aria from the Marriage of Figaro 

lives right here, the nobility of Mozart’s music 

is heard in these gardens next to the fl amboyance 

that creates its curious artifi cial world 

from history, mythology, foreign parts. And 

among all the empty facades these gardens 

are always furnished with, one is always 

missing, that of a church. Instead it is Arcadia 

that is represented – in the Baroque garden 

an Arcadia full of curiosities, in the English 

garden one with Zephyrus, nocturne and a 

crescent moon.“ 40 

Past Present – the Court Theatre 

Some attractions already well known to 18thcentury 

visitors were the musical “academies” 

of the court that were open to the public, and 

the plays performed at the new theatre built 

in 1753. The performers were mostly the 

members of the Mannheim court theatre and 

orchestra, and the Palatine subjects as well as 

interested visitors were allowed to attend free 

of charge. 41 In 1753, the year the theatre was 

opened, Voltaire was already busy praising the 

small stage’s large repertory. On 5th August 

he wrote: “Je suis actuellement dans la maison 

40 Ernst Bloch, Das Prinzip Hoffnung, Frankfurt a. M. 1973, p. 

452. 

41 The English traveller Charles Burney noted in his journal 

that concerts took place at the palace when no play was being 

shown at the theatre; when there was, however, not only the 

Elector’s subjects but all visitors could attend free of charge. 

Charles Burney, ibid., p. 228.

de plaissance de Mrg l’Électeur palatin. Il ne 

manque que de la santé pour y jouir de tous 

les plaisirs qu’on y goute. Comédie-Francaise, 

Comédie-Italienne, grand opera italien, opera 

buffa, ballets, grande chère, conversation, 

politesse, grandeur, simplicité, voilà ce que 

c’est que la cour de Manheim.“ 42 Some of his 

own works – Alzire ou les Américains, Nanine 

ou l’homme sans préjugé, Zaire and L’Indiscret 

– were performed in his presence and in his 

honour. On 30th September 1762, Voltaire’s 

tragedy Olimpie was played here for the 

fi rst time – a high point in the history of the 

Schwetzingen theatre. 43 Up to Carl Theodor’s 

move to Munich, the stage was used regularly 

during the summer months, and almost 

weekly in the 1770s. In 1772, the English 

music historian and critic Charles Burney 

described an atmosphere that was to remain 

familiar to later visitors of the Rococo theatre 

as well: “When you leave the Schwetzingen 

theatre in the summer, after the opera, and 

walk out into the Elector’s garden, you will 

be met by the most magnifi cent, exhilarating 

view imaginable.“ 44 After 1778, Schwetzingen 

for a while lost not just the court but the 

theatre, its second social centre, along with it. 

Only during the Elector’s sporadic visits, for 

example in 1785, was the small stage used. 

However, even when not in use, it constituted 

one of the attractions of the garden and was 

probably “admired by every connoisseur”, as 

Garden Director Zeyher put it as late as 1824. 45 

Once the archducal court of Baden had made 

sure that the theatre could be used once again, 

it was fi nally put back into service on Whit 

Monday, 1823. The members of the Mannheim 

court theatre performed two comedies 

by August von Kotzebue (Der Rehbock and 

Die Feuerprobe). It is an interesting detail that 

this time the performance was not primarily 

staged for the enjoyment of the courtiers, with 

42 Letter to his niece, dated 5th August 1753, No. 3548, Theodore 

Bestermann (ed.), Voltaire. Correspondance, 3 vols., Paris 

1975, p. 1011. Cp. Bärbel Pelker, “Sommer in der Campagne 

- Impressionen aus Schwetzingen”, in: B. Pelker/S. Leopold 

(eds.), Hofoper in Schwetzingen, Heidelberg 2004, pp. 29 ff. 

43 Pelker 2004, pp. 31 f. 

44 Pelker/Leopold 2004, appendix, p. 228. 

45 Zeyher/Rieger 1824, p. 173. 


visitors merely permitted to attend, as had 

been the case in the 18th century. The comedies 

were performed as part of the annual fair 

that took place over Pentecost – although this 

remained an isolated event. 46 

But then the artists responsible for the 

productions performed during the annual 

festivals of the 20th century, too, were to 

discover in the “country seat” atmosphere, and 

the love of the arts evident from the palace, 

the garden and the theatre, a genius loci as 

inspiring and enchanting as ever. The Austrian 

conductor Nikolaus Harnoncourt wrote: 

“The time I spent at Schwetzingen in the 

spring of 1983 has become a special time in 

my long career – an enchanted castle set in an 

unreal park, and this incredibly atmospheric 

little theatre. […] In such an ambience you end 

up being enchanted yourself, as in Alcina’s 

fl ower garden – the music must be played in 

a different way from the factories in the large 

cities.“ 47 


46 Zeyher/Rieger 1824, p. 174. 

47 Schwetzinger Festspiele, Schloß Schwetzingen 1972-1986, 

Süddeutscher Rundfunk Stuttgart 1986, p. 102. 


Fig. 5: Advertising Poster from 

the 1950ies. 

163


Fig. 1: Photograph of a performance 

at the Schwetzinger 

Festspiele of 2004: Der gute 

Gott von Manhattan, Adriana 

Hölzky (photo: M. Rittershaus). 

164 


2. The Schwetzinger Festspiele: the Legacy 

of the Summer Residence 

In 1952, the radio channel Süddeutscher 

Rundfunk organized the fi rst “Days of the 

Opera” at Schwetzingen Palace. Not unintentionally, 

the event coincided with the 

founding of the Land of Baden-Württemberg. 

The unifi cation of three areas, defi ned by the 

boundaries of the old occupation zones, into a 

new Bundesland was taken as an opportunity 

by the Süddeutscher Rundfunk to develop a 

cultural and educational policy for the new 

transmission area in northern Baden. Originally 

the initiative was taken by Alex Möller, 

chairman of the insurance company Karlsruher 

Lebensversicherung, Social Democrat 

party whip in the Landtag (state parliament) 

at Stuttgart and chairman of the board of 

the Süddeutscher Rundfunk. The search was 

for “an outstanding event in an outstanding 

location” 48 , and the decision was made on 

the strength both of the summer residence’s 

long musical tradition, and the magnifi cent 

setting provided by the theatre and landscape 

architecture at Schwetzingen. 

It was Elector Carl Theodor who truly initiated 

the Festspiele at Schwetzingen. When the 

Elector transferred the government business 

to Schwetzingen over the summer, courtly 

48 Peter Kehm, 1952, in: Bernhard Hermann/Peter Stieber (eds.), 

Ein Arkadien der Musik. 50 Jahre Schwetzinger Festspiele 

1952-2002, Stuttgart/Weimar 2002, p. 12. 

life followed him. Visitors like Voltaire and 

Christoph Willibald Gluck, Johann Christian 

Bach and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart bear 

witness to the Elector’s openness to new 

ideas and attitudes. There were hunts, balls 

and serenades at Schwetzingen; there were 

also operas, performed at the theatre built by 

Nicolas de Pigage and opened in 1752. True 

to the spirit of the mid-18th century, works 

by Goldoni were played; the triumph of the 

opera buffa was celebrated at Schwetzingen 

with performances of Baldassare Galuppi’s Il 

fi losofo di Campagna and Nicolo Piccini’s La 

buona fi gliuola. Not only well-known works 

were played; the Elector supported new 

compositions as well. The court director of 

music, Ignaz Holzbauer, who had been called 

to Mannheim in 1753, distinguished himself 

as a composer of operas for Schwetzingen. 

Several of his works, among them a “favola 

pastorale”, Il fi glio delle selve, Don Chisciotte, 

one opera serioridicola and the “festa teatrale 

per musica”, La nozze d’Arianna, were fi rst 

performed at the palace’s Rococo theatre. 49 

This tradition is carried on by the Schwetzinger 

Festspiele. Carl Theodor’s ideas still 

provide the guiding principle of the dramaturgy. 

To rediscover the old, initiate the new, 

provide opportunities for the young – this 

has been the artistic credo ever since 1952. 

On the one hand, forgotten or little-known 

18th-century works are performed, sometimes 

for the fi rst time in a contemporary 

production; examples are Henry Purcell’s 

ballet opera The Fairy Queen (1960), Georg 

Friedrich Händel’s Agrippina (1985), Cesare 

Corradi’s La Divisione del Mondo (2000) and 

Alessandro Scarlatti’s Telemaco (2005). On the 

other hand, contemporary art is propagated. 

More than 30 operas have been commissioned 

for the festival and performed at the palace’s 

Rococo theatre. The list reads like a Who’s who 

of music after 1945. Wolfgang Fortner and 

Hans Werner Henze, Werner Egk and Günter 

Bialas, Manfred Trojahn, Udo Zimmermann, 

49 Claus Helmut Drese, “Ein Arkadien der Musik. Oper in 

Schwetzingen einst und jetzt”, in: Hermann/Stieber 2002, pp. 

20-132.

Salvatore Sciarrino and Adriana Hölszky – the 

works they created for Schwetzingen have 

made opera history. Successful operas like Der 

Revisor, Elegy for Young Lovers, Die englische 

Katze, Enrico, Die wundersame Schustersfrau, 

Die tödliche Blume and Der gute Gott von 

Manhattan have become inextricably linked 

with Schwetzingen and its annual festival of 

music. 

Concerts are the festival’s second main 

attraction. Chamber and orchestra concerts, 

piano and song performances constitute an 

important part of the programme. Big names 

like Alfred Brendel, Gidon Kremer, Grigory 

Sokolov, the Emerson String Quartet and the 

Hagen Quartett perform on the Schwetzingen 

stage next to young, little-known artists and 

ensembles. Singers like Jessye Norman, Cecilia 

Bartoli and Teresa Berganza performed at 

Schwetzingen long before they were stars 

of the international stage. On Sundays and 

public holidays, matinées are reserved for 

young newcomers. Then there is the offi cial 

“contact week” for young musicians, the 

“Woche der Begegnung Junger Musiker”. For 

17 years now young artists from Germany 

and abroad have been meeting at the festival, 

rehearsing for one week under the guidance 

of experienced lecturers, and performing at an 

all-night event, the “Long Night at the Rococo 

Theatre”. The inclusion of music that straddles 

the genres of classical music, jazz and world 

music, in-depth introductions to the work of 

individual composers, and themed selections 

characterize the Schwetzingen programme. 

Thanks to the international exchange of 

programmes among radio channels the 

festival attendees are not alone in enjoying the 

Schwetzingen operas and concerts. Up to 700 

transmissions a year, all over the world, have 

made the Schwetzinger Festspiele the biggest 

Classical music event on radio. By now the 

event’s appeal has been established for more 

than 50 years, and there is more to it than 

a musical programme of the highest order. 

Schwetzingen Palace, with its historic concert 

halls, its electoral landscape garden and the 



incomparable atmosphere of its Rococo 

theatre, is as instrumental as the music itself 

in making the Schwetzinger Festspiele into 

the outstanding events they are. 

(Peter Stieber) Fig. 2: Flags at the Schwetzinger 

Festspiele. 

Fig. 3: Festival visitors in front 

of the north quarter-circle 

pavilion. 

165

DER MINERVATEMPEL 

Ernst Bloch, 1973. 


„ “ 

Most beautiful is the palace garden at Schwetzingen. Along with the reeded ponds and the urns, 

all that is memorable in the world has been collected here in the shape of facades and dummies 

– a green exhibition hall. An exhibition hall, however, that presents nothing but moods and 

fantasies given voice, a natural treasury full of artifi cial, imagined valuables. […] This was the 

pleasure garden of princes, the stage of courtly masques and promenades, yet at the same time, a 

breath of rapture, of a fantastic remoteness lingers. Susanna’s aria from the Marriage of Figaro 

lives right here, the nobility of Mozart’s music is heard in these gardens next to the fl amboyance 

that creates its curious artifi cial world from history, mythology, foreign parts. And among all the 

empty facades these gardens are always furnished with, one is always missing, that of a church. 

Instead it is Arcadia that is represented – in the Baroque garden an Arcadia full of curiosities, in 

the English garden one with Zephyrus, nocturne and a crescent moon.

IV. Biographies 

a) 

Rulers (in Chronological Order): 

Johann Wilhelm (1658-1716), Elector Palatine 

(1690-1716) 

Carl Philipp (1661-1742), Elector Palatine 

(1716-1742) 

Carl Theodor (1724-1799), Elector Palatine 

(1742-1799) 

Elisabeth Augusta (1721-1794), wife of Elector 

Palatine Carl Theodor 

Stéphanie Napoleon (1789-1860), wife of 

Grand Duke Karl of Baden 

b) 

Artists (in Alphabetical Order): 

Heinrich Charasky (1656-1710) 

Paul Egell (1691-1752) 

Gabriel de Grupello (1644-1730) 

Barthélemy Guibal (1699-1757) 

Nicolas Guibal (1725-1784) 

Ferdinand Kobell (1740-1799) 

Peter Simon Lamine (1738-1817) 

Franz Conrad Linck (1730-1793) 

Johann Ludwig Petri (1714?-1796?) 

Nicolas de Pigage (1723-1796) 

Giuseppe (Joseph Anton) Pozzi (1732-1811) 

Francesco (Franz Wilhelm) Rabaliatti (1716- 

1782) 

Friedrich Ludwig Sckell (1750-1823) 

Matthias (Mattheus) van den Branden (fl . 

1755-1788) 

Peter Anton von Verschaffelt (1710-1793) 

Johann Michael Zeyher (1770-1843) 

IV. 

167

IV. 

168 


a) 

Rulers (in Chronological Order): 

Johann Wilhelm (1658-1716), Elector Palatine 

(1690-1716). 

Johann Wilhelm (1658/1690-1716) was born 

in Düsseldorf on 19th April 1658, the fi rst son 

of Duke, later Prince Elector, Philipp Wilhelm 

(1615/1685-1690) of the Pfalz-Neuburg line 

and his wife Elisabeth Amalie von Hessen- 

Darmstadt, who had converted to Catholicism. 

As was traditional with the Neuburg line, he 

was educated together with his siblings by the 

patres of the Societas Jesu, in particular by P. 

Theodor Rhay. 1 The education of the sixteenyear-old 

prince was continued by a Grand 

Tour. With a small entourage of tutors and a 

few noblemen of his own age, he spent the 

years from 1674 to 1677 in France at the court 

of Louis XIV, in London and Oxford (where 

he received an honorary doctorate) and fi nally 

in Rome and Naples. 2 Shortly after his return 

he was called to the imperial court at Vienna 

where he married his fi rst wife, Archduchess 

Maria Anna Josepha, a half-sister of Leopold 

I, in 1678. As a belated “wedding present” 

the new husband received the governorship 

of the duchies of Jülich and Berg from his 

father. In 1690, he succeeded his father as 

Elector Palatine. Due to the Palatine War of 

Succession, Johann Wilhelm’s capital was not 

the ravaged city of Heidelberg, but Düsseldorf 

in the duchy of Berg. 

His fi rst wife died in 1689 due to a miscarriage; 

in 1691 he married Anna Maria Luisa, 

daughter of Cosimo III Medici, Archduke of 

Tuscany. 3 Early in his second marriage his 

art-loving Florentine wife suggested many additions 

to the hitherto rather modest Palatine 

art collection. The collection of antiques at 

1 Richard August Keller, Johann Wilhelm, lecture held on 7th 

November 1916 at Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, 1916, pp. 94f. Cp. 

Hermine Kühn-Steinhausen, Johann Wilhelm. Kurfürst von 

der Pfalz, Herzog von Jülich-Berg, Düsseldorf, 1958, p. 20. 

2 Kühn-Steinhausen, pp. 23-36, n. 1. 

3 Re. the wedding cp. Klaus Müller, Eine fürstliche Hochzeit im 

Zeitalter Ludwig XIV. Johann Wilhelm von Pfalz-Neuburg und 

Anna Maria Luisa von Medici, in: Wieland Koenig (ed.), Anna 

Maria Luisa Medici, Kurfürstin von der Pfalz, exhibition at the 

Stadtmuseum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, 1988, pp. 33-48, here pp. 

40 f. 

Mannheim, later to become very famous, was 

based on Johann Wilhelm’s collection of casts 

of Classical statues. The picture gallery, which 

included major works by Rubens, van Dyck 

and Rembrandt, was to form the foundation 

of the Alte Pinakothek museum at Munich in 

1805. 4 

The Treaty of Ryswick, which concluded the 

Palatine War of Succession in 1697, granted 

Wilhelm the return of those parts of the Palatinate 

occupied by the French in return for the 

promise (given without too much reluctance) 

not to reverse the French measures to re-catholicize 

the Palatinate, the so-called Rijswijker 

Klausel. The Protestant subjects never forgave 

their Elector. Johann Wilhelm still intended to 

settle at Heidelberg, the capital of the Palatinate; 

but the castle, destroyed in March 1689, 

presented a sight as desolate as the city itself, 

which had been razed in 1693. 

In view of the cost, and the general lack 

of space, there seemed to be little point in 

rebuilding Heidelberg Castle. Instead plans 

were drawn up for a prestigious new palace in 

the plain near Schwetzingen, a seat of power 

to rival Würzburg, Dresden and Berlin. The 

plan failed due to the dismal fi nances of the 

war-ravaged country. 

Johann Wilhelm and his wife were united in 

their passion for hunting. The Palatinate did 

not offer an adequate residence, and so it was 

decided in 1697, to rebuild the hunting lodge 

at Schwetzingen with its neglected garden, 

destroyed in March 1689, as the temporary 

(and, for the time being, only) residence 

combined with a hunting lodge. 5 

In the autumn of 1698, the treasury received 

orders to make the necessary funds available. 

The treasury reminded the Elector that times 

were hard and “necessary funds” hard to come 

by. 6 Thus the rebuilding was paid for mainly 

by the private fortune of Electress Anna 

4 Georg Poensgen, Die Gestalt des Kurfürsten Johann Wilhelm. 

Zur Gedächtnis-Ausstellung im Ottheinrichsbau des Heidelberger 

Schlosses, Juni- Oktober 1958, p. 4. 

5 Irene Markowitz, Schlösser und Gärten, in: Wieland Koenig 

(ed.), Anna Maria Luisa Medici, Kurfürstin von der Pfalz, 

exhibition at the Stadtmuseum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, 1988, 

pp. 81-91, here pp. 89 f. Cp. Kurt Martin, Die Baudenkmäler 

des Amtsbezirkes Mannheim, Karlsruhe, 1933, pp. 24. 

6 Qtd. after Martin 1933, p. 26, n. 10.

Maria Luisa. On 5th November 1700, work 

was begun with the intention that the palace 

should be habitable the following year. But 

the building was not completed until 1706/07, 

“even in view of the fact that it could never be 

a perpetual residence”. 7 

In 1711, Master Builder Adam Breunig, who 

had been working on the rebuilding, submitted 

two proposals for extensions to the palace, 

and the court of honour in particular. The 

idea was to eliminate the asymmetries of the 

central block’s garden front. 8 The conversion 

made rapid progress despite the meagre 

funds. The court of honour wings were completed 

in 1713. The same year the electoral 

couple immortalized themselves by means of 

two elaborate coats of arms (Palatinate and 

Medici) at the main entrance. 

During their stays in the Palatinate, Johann 

Wilhelm and Anna Maria Luisa used the 

Schwetzingen palace as a hunting lodge. 

The kill of a number of hunts organized 

between 1710 and 1716 is displayed in the 

palace, in the shape of 13 depictions of stags 

with cartouches. His hunting passion gained 

Johann Wilhelm the nickname ‚Der Jäger aus 

Kurpfalz’ (The Palatine Hunter) in contemporary 

literature, a title that has since become 

part of German folklore. 

Elector Johann Wilhelm died on 8th June 1716 

in Düsseldorf. His tomb is in the Church of 

St. Andreas. His widow returned to her native 

Florence in 1717. 9 


Carl Philipp (1661-1742), 

Elector Palatine (1716-1742) 

Carl Philipp was born on 4th November 1661, 

the fourth son of Duke Philipp Wilhelm von 

Pfalz-Neuburg. 10 He was the seventh of the 

Count Palatine’s 17 children. 

7 Martin 1933, p. 26, n. 10. 

8 Martin, pp. 26 ff., n. 10. 

9 Leo Peters, Der kurfürstliche Hof und der Hofadel, in: Wieland 

Koenig (ed.), Anna Maria Luisa Medici, Kurfürstin von der 

Pfalz, exhibition at the Stadtmuseum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, 

1988, pp. 49-55, here pp. 51 f. 

10 Re. biographical data cp. Hans Schmidt, Kurfürst Karl Philipp 

von der Pfalz als Reichsfürst, Mannheim 1963. 


As a younger son, Carl Philipp was originally 

destined for the church. In 1675, he was 

named a canon at Cologne; in 1677, he was 

a canon at Salzburg and a member of the 

Knights of Malta, and in 1679, he became a 

canon of Mainz. Personally, however, he inclined 

towards a military career, and in 1684, 

he entered the imperial service. He took part 

in many campaigns, including several during 

the Ottoman Wars. In 1697, he was among 

the candidates for the Polish crown but lost 

out to the Elector of Saxony, Augustus II “the 

Strong”. 

In 1705, he was made Governor of the Tyrol 

by the Emperor, and took up his residence in 

Innsbruck until 1717. 

When his brother, Elector Palatine Johann 

Wilhelm, had died without issue on 8th June 

1716, Carl Philipp succeeded him as Elector, 

at the age of 55. The major event of his early 

years as Elector was the moving of the Palatine 

residence from Heidelberg to Mannheim 

in 1720. The decision had been prompted by 

bitter quarrels between the Elector and the 

Protestant churches of Heidelberg. 11 But it was 

also in keeping with a general tendency of the 

times. The moving of residences away from 

11 Schmidt 1963, pp. 114 ff., n. 1. 

IV. 

Carl Philipp (1661-1742), 


169

IV. 

170 


old capitals, frequently with the intention of 

building new and prestigious palaces in more 

spacious surroundings, was not uncommon in 

the early 18th century. Several examples could 

be found in the vicinity – Rastatt, Karlsruhe 

and Ludwigsburg. 

During the reign of Carl Philipp, Schwetzingen 

was occasionally used as an alternative 

residence while the Mannheim palace was 

being built; afterwards it served as a hunting 

lodge and summer residence. The stuccoed, 

Régence-style ceilings date from Carl Philipp’s 

time. 12 In the garden, in the vicinity of today’s 

Arion fountain, the Elector had an orangery 

built. This housed the plants from the Düsseldorf 

orangery that had been brought to 

Schwetzingen in 1724, being shipped up the 

Rhine to Ketsch. There were 447 orange trees 

and 313 other plants in tubs. The orangery 

also contained a large hall for festivities, and 

was connected with the main palace by a 

passage. However, it soon became dilapidated, 

and was pulled down in 1755. 13 

Carl Philipp died on 31st December 1742. 

He had been married three times but left no 

male heir. His only daughter had died in 1728, 

leaving three granddaughters, the eldest of 

whom, Elisabeth Augusta, had been married 

to the nearest male relative and heir of the 

Palatinate – Carl Theodor, Count Palatine. 


Carl Theodor (1724-1799), 

Elector Palatine (1742-1799), 

Elector of Bavaria (1777-1799) 

Carl Theodor was born on 10th December 

1724 at Drogenbusch near Brussels; his title 

was then Count Palatine of Sulzbach. 14 In 

1733, he was engaged to be married to his 

cousin, Elisabeth Augusta, and after the death 

of his father, Duke Johann Christian von 

12 Carl Ludwig Fuchs, Schloß Schwetzingen, Schwetzingen 1991, 

p. 9. 


Der Süden im Norden, Regensburg 1999, pp. 59 ff. 

14 Susan Richter/Ralf Wagner: “Geburt und Taufe Karl Theodors. 

Eine Betrachtung zum 275. Geburtstag des Kurfürsten 1999”, 

in: Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, new series, Vol. 6. Ed. 

Gesellschaft der Freunde Mannheims und der ehemaligen 

Kurpfalz Mannheimer Altertumsverein von 1859, Ubstadt- 

Weiher 2000, pp. 297-304. The baptismal register confi rms the 

date of birth, 10th December 1724. 

Pfalz-Sulzbach, he became heir of the Palatinate 

in the same year. The ruling Elector Carl 

Philipp (b. 1661, r. 1716-1742) brought him to 

Mannheim in 1734 to be educated. In 1742, 

the marriage of Carl Theodor and Elisabeth 

Augusta was celebrated at Mannheim with 

much splendour. On New Year’s Eve of that 

year Carl Philipp died, and Carl Theodor 

succeeded him as Elector Palatine. 

The guiding principle of Carl Theodor’s 

foreign politics was the maintenance of peace 

and the avoidance of military confl ict. The 

Elector realized that small countries were 

better off remaining neutral than trying to 

meddle in the affairs of larger powers. During 

his 56-year reign, the transition from the 

age of Absolutism to that of Enlightenment 

is unmistakeable. Legal texts now cited the 

principles of reason and stressed human 

happiness and the benefi ts for the state 

arising from it. Thus Carl Theodor wrote to 

his sister-in-law, Franziska Dorothea, that “the 

happiness of the most insignifi cant among 

my subjects” was dear to him. 15 These sentiments, 

so characteristic of their time, in 1776, 

culminated in the abolition of torture in the 

Palatinate. 

Carl Theodor’s fostering of the sciences 

reached European status. Among the accomplishments 

of his academy, the Pfälzische 

Akademie der Wissenschaften founded at 

Mannheim in 1763, were the introduction of 

lightning conductors 16 , the discovery of new 

stars and the fi rst scientifi cally based weather 

observation in history 17 . The Elector’s interest 

in Classical antiquity, so evident from the layout 

of the Schwetzingen garden and its buildings, 

resulted in a trip to Italy in 1774/1775; 

another was to follow in 1783. Carl Theodor’s 

schedule – he visited Rome, Florence, Livorno, 

Pisa and Venice – bears witness to the 

15 Geheimes Hausarchiv München Correspondenz Akten 1313. 

The letter is without a year. 

16 In1776, Carl Theoodor became the fi rst German ruler to have 

his palaces outfi tted with lightning conductors; they are still 

visible on the roofs of Schwetzingen Palace. 

17 Carl Theodor owned some meteorological instruments 

himself; in his Mannheim and Schwetzingen cabinets he 

regularly took readings and noted down the results. These 

scientifi c statistics were conducted in all the 39 Palatine 

weather stations worldwide.

Elector’s scholarly and artistic inclinations but 

also to the personal interest an enlightened 

ruler took in a foreign country’s industrial and 

charitable institutions. 18 

The Elector’s library at Mannheim refl ects 

his wide-ranging intellectual interests. Of 

the 36,840 volumes 13,890 were historical 

in nature, 6,464 were scientifi c, 5,504 were 

belles lettres, and there were 5,400 theological 

tracts. 19 The library at Mannheim was among 

the fi rst princely libraries to be opened to 

the public. Very early Carl Theodor turned to 

the new movement in German literature, the 

so-called “Sturm und Drang”. 

It would be impossible to overstress Carl 

Theodor’s interest in music, and generous 

support of it. His incomparable patronage 

led to the emergence of a whole new musical 

school or style, today known as “Mannheimer 

Schule”. It was due to his personal involvement 

that the German language was fi rst 

used in opera. Contemporaries like Leopold 

Mozard praised the modern performing 

technique of the Mannheim orchestra and 

the extraordinary cooperation between its 

composers and soloists. “Music appears to 

be His Serene Highness’ favourite and most 

frequent pastime“ 20 , was what Charles Burney 

wrote on concluding the report of his visit to 

18th-century Palatinate. 

A large building programme was put into 

practice in Carl Theodor’s time. At Mannheim 

he had to be satisfi ed with decorating the 

interior of the palace built by his predecessors 

21 , but the Schwetzingen garden shows his 

hand. Among the churches built or completed 

in his time, is the Jesuit church at Mannheim, 

the enlargement of the Catholic church of St. 

Pankratius at Schwetzingen and the new buil- 



Theodor 1742-1777 (= Veröffentlichungen der Kommission 

für geschichtliche Landeskunde in Baden-Württemberg, Series 

B, Vol. 120), Stuttgart 1991, p. 58. 

19 Geheimes Hausarchiv der Familie Wittelsbach in München, 

Traitter’sche Papiere, Handschriften 215. 

20 Charles Burney, Tagebuch einer musikalischen Reise durch 

Frankreich und Italien, durch Flandern, die Niederlande und 

am Rhein bis Wien, […] 1770-1772, ed. Eberhardt Klemm, 

Wilhelmshaven/Locarno/Amsterdam 1980, p. 229. 

21 Interior of the great court library and the small private library 

of the Electress. 


ding of the pilgrimage church of Oggersheim. 

At Düsseldorf, his second residence in the 

Jülich and Berg heartland, he commissioned 

Nicolas de Pigage to build the summer palace 

of Benrath, a typical ‘maison de plaisance’ 

strongly inspired by the books of the French 

theoretician François Blondel. 

Late at night on New Year’s Eve, 1777, Carl 

Theodor received the news of the death of the 

Bavarian Elector, Maximilian III Joseph. The 

inheritance was settled by old contracts. Carl 

Theodor was to inherit Bavaria but was also 

required to move his residence to Munich. He 

died there on 16th February 1799. 


Elisabeth Augusta (1721-1794), Wife 

of Elector Carl Theodor 

Elisabeth Augusta was born 17th January 

1721, the eldest daughter of Duke Josef Carl 

von Sulzbach, heir of Elector Carl Philipp, and 

of Carl Philipp’s daughter Princess Elisabeth 

Augusta. After her parents’ premature deaths, 

she was raised in the household of her 

grandfather the Elector at Schwetzingen and 

Mannheim, together with her two sisters. In 

1732, Carl Philipp provided the girls with 

a small household of their own, that was 

watched over by his third (morganatic) wife, 

IV. 

Carl Theodor (1724-1799), 


171

IV. 

Elisabeth Augusta (1721-1794), 

wife of Elector Carl Theodor 

172 


Violantha von Thurn und Taxis, and in his 

own hand wrote out instructions for the 

princesses’ education. It was important to him 

that they received the tuition befi tting their 

rank. Besides domestic needlework they were 

to be taught proper “walking and curtsying”. 

Languages, genealogy and history were among 

his priorities too. 

On 17th January 1742, the eldest of the 

Elector’s granddaughters, Elisabeth Augusta 

(1721-1794), married her cousin Carl Theodor 

(1724/42-1799), heir apparent of the Palatinate. 

Elisabeth Augusta’s determination to provide 

the Palatine court and her husband’s reign 

with the splendour befi tting them led to a 

quick, and costly increase in courtly entertainment 

and display. Contrary to all the economy 

measures that should have been observed, 

due to the debts the Palatinate had run up in 

Carl Philipp’s time, under her patrronage huge 

sums were invested in spectacular divertissements. 

She initiated the building of a hunting 

park modelled on French ideas, the so-called 

“Karlsstern”, in Mannheim-Käfertal. Besides 

hunting, she was also interested in French 

comedies and music. Elisabeth Augusta 

re-established the regular performing of grand 

operas, and decreed that the opening night 

should always take place on her birthday, 

on 17th January – a rule that was observed 

well into the 1750s. In this way, the young 

Electress laid the foundations for the musical 

life of the Mannheim court. 22 Until 1754, Carl 

Theodor left the organization of court events 

entirely to his wife. 

With time, however, her infl uence waned 

– probably due to her failure to produce a 

child. When she fi nally and unexpectedly 

became pregnant in 1761, at the age of forty, 

services of thanksgiving were performed all 

over the country. Overjoyed, Carl Theodor 

told Voltaire of his impending fatherhood and 

informed the ruling houses of Europe. In early 

summer the Electress retired to Schwetzingen. 

In the night of 28th/29th June after heavy 

labour, she gave birth to a son who barely lived 

long enough for an emergency baptism. 23 

Bitter disappointment settled over the court. 

For Elisabeth Augusta, Schwetzingen had 

become associated with evil memories. She 

wrote: “I am glad to have left that cursed place 

where all sorts of disasters happen [...].“ 24 

In 1767, Carl Theodor bought her the 

small palace of Oggersheim. The property 

gave her an opportunity to stay away from 

Schwetzingen, and the task of converting and 

enlarging it occupied her fully. The separate 

dwellings were also evidence of a notable 

cooling in the electoral couple’s relationship. 

When Carl Theodor inherited the Electorate 

of Bavaria after the death of Elector Maximilian 

III Joseph, and moved his residence to 

Munich, Elisabeth Augusta decided to remain 

in the Palatinate. From then on her popularity 

at home grew, while that of her husband 

waned. By committing herself to charitable 

causes, she became more of a mother of the 

people than she had ever been in her younger 

years. 

In 1792/93, with the Palatinate west of the 

Rhine occupied by French revolutionary 

22 Stefan Mörz, Die letzte Kurfürstin, Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln 1997, 

p. 44 f. 

23 Mörz 1997, p. 59 f., n. 2. 

24 Friedrich Walther, “Elisabeth Augusta: Aus den Briefen der 

Kurfürstin an ihren Schwager Franz Clemens”, in: Mannheimer 

Geschichtsblätter 12/ 1930, Mannheim 1930, p. 246.

troops, who were already at the gates of 

Mannheim, the inhabitants informed their 

Electress, that they were glad to have her in 

their midst. Recognizing her cue, she declared 

her intention of being Mannheim’s fi rst 

citizen, and vowed not to desert her subjects 

in their plight. 25 Only when the threat posed 

by the French made it inevitable to accept 

Austrian help, because the Palatinate’s long 

neutrality no longer guaranteed safety, did the 

Electress retire to Weinheim. She died there 

on 17th August 1794. 


Stéphanie Napoléon (1789-1860), 

Grand Duchess of Baden 

Stéphanie Napoleon (1789-1860) was born 

at Versailles, the daughter of Captain of the 

Guards Claude de Beauharnais. When her 

aunt Josephine married Napoleon I, her family 

rose to the very top of the French hierarchy. 

Napoleon, long without children of his own, 

used his wife’s family in his dynastic politics. 

He considered Baden to be an important ally, 

and so he married his niece to the heir to the 

throne, Karl (1786/1811-1818). The marriage 

took place on 7th April 1806, in Paris. 26 

The young couple were assigned the Mannheim 

palace as a residence, and Schwetzingen 

as a summer retreat. For the fi rst time since 

Carl Theodor’s move to Munich in 1778, and 

until 1811, the palace was continually inhabited 

again. 

In the summer of 1807, the young poet 

Joseph von Eichendorff went for an extended 

ramble through the Schwetzingen grounds. 

Afterwards he told of having heard Stephanie 

singing: “We made a few more incursions into 

the garden, and from the castle we heard the 

Grand Duchess singing to the accompaniment 

of a guitar […].“ 27 Stephanie was considered to 

be an unusually gifted musician. During one 

25 Mörz 1997, p. 184, n. 2. 

26 Rosemarie Strattmann-Döhler, Stephanie Napoleon, 

Großherzogin von Baden, Karlsruhe 1989, p. 47. Cp. Rudolf 

Haas, Stephanie Napoleon, Großherzogin von Baden – Leben 

zwischen Frankreich und Deutschland, Mannheim 1976. pp. 

14 ff. 

27 Joseph Frh. v. Eichendorff: Tagebücher. In : Werke und 

Schriften, vol. 3, Stuttgart 1958/59. Entry for 28. 7. 1807, pp. 

199 ff. 


of her summer stays at Schwetzingen, her 

daughter Luise Amalie Stephanie was born on 

5th June 1811. 

The crown princess, evidently fascinated by 

gardens, asked her “chèr grandpère” the Grand 

Duke Karl Friedrich, for permission to create 

a garden on what had been the ramparts and 

fortifi cations of Mannheim. Karl Friedrich 

was concerned for the gardens of the former 

Palatine palaces himself; he not only granted 

the princess’ request, he also took up the suggestion 

of the Schwetzingen garden director, 

Zeyher (1770-1843), to create an “arboretum” 

there in the years after 1804. 

When Grand Duke Karl Friedrich died in 

1811, Karl succeeded him as the ruler of 

Baden, and the couple moved into the main 

residence in Karlsruhe. But the young Grand 

Duke soon fell seriously ill, and in 1818, he 

died after only seven years in offi ce. 

The marriage contract had granted Stephanie 

the palaces of Mannheim and Schwetzingen 

as dower houses. On 20th September 1819, 

she moved into the rooms prepared for her 

and her household on the main fl oor of 

the west wing and the corps de logis up to 

the “Rittersaal” at Mannheim. 28 Under her 

auspices a lively court developed there. 

After the Baden revolution of 1848/1849, 

watched by her with reactionary incomprehension, 

her small court became a remnant 

of the past. Gradually she became estranged 

from her “beloved Mannheim”, as she had 

called it once in a letter to its mayor. In 1859, 

she retired to Nice where she died on 29th 

January 1860 . 29 


28 Strattmann-Döhler 1989, p. 40, n. 1. 

29 Strattmann-Döhler 1989, p. 247, n. 1. 

IV. 

173

IV. 

174 


b) 

Artists (in Alphabetical Order): 

Heinrich Charasky (1656-1710) 

Nothing is known about the origins and training 

of the sculptor Heinrich Charasky (1656- 

1710). He had been a resident of Heidelberg 

since c.1690, and from 1693 was continually 

employed by the Elector, who was intent 

on rebuilding his Palatine capital of Heidelberg. 

In 1705, only a few years after the foundation 

stone had been laid for the new town 

hall, Charasky created the Hercules fountain 

for the square in front of it and the architectural 

ornament adorning a private residence, 

the house “Zum Riesen”. 30 He also fashioned 

two leaden, gold-plated statues after models 

created by Gabriel Grupello, a “Boethian” and 

an “Arcadian” Atalante 31 , both of whom were 

displayed in the grounds of the temporary 

residence at Schwetzingen from the reign of 

Elector Carl Philipp at the latest. Elector Carl 

Theodor later caused them to be moved to the 

new parterre; copies are still on display there. 

32 

Heinrich Charasky was also employed as an 

architectural clerk in the service of Elector Johann 

Wilhelm; in this capacity he was responsible 

for obtaining materials and for cost control, 

and he was involved in the rebuilding of 

Schwetzingen Palace between 1698 and 1710. 

The fi rst estimate of the costs and work involved, 

drawn up in 1699, was largely his work. 33 


30 Georg Poensgen, Die Gestalt des Kurfürsten Johann Wilhelm. 

Zur Gedächtnis-Ausstellung im Ottheinrichsbau des Heidelberger 

Schlosses, Juni- Oktober 1958, p. 15. 

31 Both Atalantes were huntresses, and thus companions of the 

goddess Artemis/Diana. According to Ovid’s Metamorphoses, 

the Arcadian Atalante participated in the hunt of the 

Calydonian boar, and was the fi rst to wound it; consequently 

she was awarded the creature’s head as a trophy. According 

to the Boethian legend, Atalante was a superb runner, and 

had taken a vow to marry none but the man who could beat 

her. Hippomenes, supplied by Aphrodite with three apples, 

challenged her and in the course of the race dropped the 

three shiny fruits. Unable to resist the temptation, Atalante 

paused to pick them up, losing precious time. Hippomenes 

consequently won the race, and married Atalante. 

32 Meinrad Büche, Schlossgarten Schwetzingen, Heidelberg 1991, 

pp. 21 f. 

33 Kurt Martin, Die Baudenkmäler des Amtsbezirkes Mannheim, 

Karlsruhe 1933, pp. 24 f. 

Paul Egell (1691-1752) 

Paul Egell (1691-1752), probably a native of 

Mannheim, trained with Balthasar Permoser 

in Dresden. He was an accomplished worker 

both in wood and in marble. Works by him 

can be found in many German cities, among 

them Hildesheim, Dresden, Durlach, Speyer, 

Mannheim and Schwetzingen. 34 

In 1729-1731, he created the famous altar of 

Hildesheim as well as a carved Head of Christ 

for the city’s cathedral. In 1734, he created the 

altar of the Immaculate Conception for the 

church of St. German in Speyer, pulled down 

in 1818. 

Following his appointment to the post of 

court sculptor in 1721, he received many commissions 

for the Elector’s residence at Mannheim. 

For example, he designed the casing of 

the grand organ and a number of important 

sculptures for the Jesuit church there. 35 

The gable of the Schlosskirche at Mannheim, 

with its depiction of the Holy Trinity, and the 

high altar are his work too. For the interior of 

Mannheim Palace, he created numerous works 

in stucco. 36 

Egell also carved a copy of the “Lycian Apollo”, 

again for the Mannheim residence. Elector 

Carl Theodor had it moved to Schwetzingen 

and put up in the southern bosquet. Today it 

has been replaced by a copy, and the original 

taken to the lapidarium in the orangery. 37 

Paul Egell died on 11th January 1752. In his 

capacity as court sculptor, he was succeeded 

by Peter Anton von Verschaffelt. 


Gabriel de Grupello (1644-1730) 

Chevalier Gabriel de Grupello (1644-1730) was 

born in eastern Flanders, at Ehrenstein Castle 

near Kerkrade. In 1658, he started training 

with Artus Quellinus. Later he undertook numerous 

trips to Paris, The Hague and Brus- 

34 Otto Knaus, Künstler am Hofe Carl Theodors, Schwetzingen 

1963, pp. 71 ff. 

35 Re. Egell’s work see Klaus Langkeit, Der kurpfälzische 

Hofbildhauer Paul Egell, Vols. I and II, München 1988. 

36 Ludwig Baron Döry, “Zu Egells Mannheimer Stukkaturen”, in: 

Mannheimer Hefte No. 1, Mannheim 1958. 

37 Oswald Zenker, Schwetzinger Schlossgarten, Schwetzingen 

1989, p. 63.

sels, where he was admitted to the guild of the 

“Crowned Four”. 

Elector Palatine Johann Wilhelm (1658/1690- 

1716) appointed Grupello court sculptor in 

1695, and director of the new foundry at Düsseldorf 

in 1699. In his capacity as court sculptor, 

Grupello cast the equestrian statue of the 

Elector for Düsseldorf and the so-called Grupello 

Pyramid, which still towers over the 

Mannheim parade ground. 38 With this pyramid, 

Johann Wilhelm expressed his image of 

himself as a ruler. Besides the river deities representing 

trade routes, there are references to 

all parts of the Elector’s domain. The structure 

is dominated by the four cardinal virtues that 

are also the virtues of the ruling prince, whose 

portrait appears in a medallion on the base. 39 

For the residential palace built in Carl 

Philipp’s time, from 1720, Grupello created 

a magnifi cent bronze coat of arms that was 

mounted over the main gate. 40 For Electors 

Johann Wilhelm and Carl Philipp, he made 

numerous sculptures for the Schwetzingen 

grounds. 

When Carl Theodor had the garden redesigned, 

many of Grupello’s statues were re-used, 

or put up elsewhere in the grounds. When the 

Temple of Minerva was built in the southern 

bosquet (1767-1773) the decision was made 

in 1767, to bring Grupello’s Minerva from 

Düsseldorf to Schwetzingen. It was reworked 

and restored by the sculptor Peter Anton von 

Verschaffelt, and put up in the new temple 

in 1773. 41 There are two more Minervas by 

Grupello at Schwetzingen, one an allegorical 

depiction of Minerva as Pictura, the other a 

warlike goddess. 42 Another Grupello statue, 

that of Apollo, was put up in the vicinity of 

the Minerva temple. 

However, the most charming of Grupello’s 

statues is the incomparable Galatea, a beauty 


1963, pp. 19 ff. 

39 Grundsätzlich zu Grupellos Werk: Udo Kultermann, Gabriel 

Grupello, Diss. Berlin 1968. 

40 Ludwig W. Böhm, Das Mannheimer Schloss, Karlsruhe 1994, 

p. 10. 

41 Wiltrud Heber, Die Arbeiten des Nicolas des Pigage in 


Schwetzingen, Part I, Worms 1986, pp. 557f. 


1989, p. 67. 


just risen from her bath. At her feet is a 

bearded Triton presenting her with all the 

treasure his domain has to offer – pearls, 

shells, aquatic plants. This group was brought 

from Düsseldorf as well to be put up in the 

northern bosquet. 43 The sculptor died in 1730 

at his native Ehrenstein Castle. 


Barthélemy Guibal (1699-1757) 

In 1721, the sculptor Barthélemy Guibal 

(29.01.1699 Nîmes – 05.05.1757 Lunéville) 

followed his teacher Francois Dumont 

(1687-1726) from Paris to the Lorraine 

capital, Nancy. After his teacher’s death, he 

became the chief sculptor of Duke Leopold 

of Lorraine, and after Lorraine had been 

ceded to the Polish king in exile, Stanisław 

Leszczyński, Guibal became Second Architect 

in 1738 . 44 Among his principal works are the 

Neptun and Amphitrite fountains in the Place 

Stanislas in Nancy, the statue of Louis XV in 

the same square, and the colossal fi gures of 

two saints on the towers of the church of St. 

Jacques in Lunéville. For the gardens of Stanislaw 

at Lunéville and La Malgrange, Guibal 

made numerous lead sculptures that today 

are in the Schwetzingen grounds. Among 

them are the central fountain of the circular 

parterre depicting Arion and four groups of 

cherubs, four more groups of cherubs distributed 

around the parterre, the wild boar next 

to the bathhouse and and two cherubs with a 

sea monster in the northern angloise. 45 

There are no documents about the sale of the 

lead sculptures to Schwetzingen. It was probably 

arranged by way of Nicolas de Pigage’s 

or Nicolas Guibal’s family connections. Garden 

Director Zeyher is the fi rst to mention it: ”... 

Arion and the swans in the large basin as well 

as those groups in the four smaller basins are 

made of lead. They were not made specifi cally 

43 Zenker 1989, p. 65, n. 3. Cp. also Udo Kultermann, “Die 

Gartenskulpturen Grupellos”, in: Düsseldorfer Jahrbuch, Vol. 

47, Düsseldorf 1955. 

44 Biographical data taken from Thieme/Becker, Allgemeines 

Lexikon der bildenden Künstler von der Antike bis zur 

Gegenwart, Leipzig 1999, Vol. 15/16, p. 265. 

45 The water-spouting birds were probably from Malgrange. 

However, as the originals are lost, and the present sculptures 

are copies of copies, their attribution to Guibal is tentative. 

IV. 

175

IV. 

176 


for this garden but are part of the estate of 

King Stanislaw, who died at Lüneville [sic!] 

in 1766; they were sold at ten sols a pound.” 46 

Judging by the very low price, the sculptures 

appear to have been sold for, the value of the 

raw material; taking them to Schwetzingen 

was probably rather more expensive. They 

must have been acquired in 1767/68, because 

the Etrennes Palatines Pour L’Année 1769 

mention the putting up of the sculptures. 

The leaden group in the central basin depicts 

Arion astride a dolphin, surrounded by three 

male cherubs and one female, playing with 

herons and swans. Arion, who appears in the 

writings of Herodotus and Ovid, was a Greek 

poet from the island of Lesbos, whose wealth 

aroused the envy of the sailors who were 

supposed to take him from Sicily back home 

to Greece. They decided to rob him and throw 

him overboard, but granted his fi nal request 

to be allowed to sing once more. Afterwards 

he cast himself into the sea, but a dolphin who 

had heard his singing carried him to safety. 

The life-size sculpture of a wild pig in the 

Schwetzingen grounds is among the best 

work of Barthélemy Guibal. Placed on a leaden 

base shaped like a rock and decorated with 

greenery, the creature defends itself against 

two dogs. Water spouts from its mouth, open 

in agony. Today the sculpture is situated close 

to the bathhouse, on top of a tuff grotto; 

originally it was in the southern angloise near 

the Lycian Apollo. 47 


Nicolas Guibal (1725-1784) 

The painter Nicolas Guibal (29.11.1725 Lunéville 

- 03.11.1784 Stuttgart) was the son of the 

sculptor, Barthélemy Guibal, who was his fi rst 

teacher. At 13 he was apprenticed to Claude 

Charles (1661–1747), court painter of Duke Leopold 

of Lorraine at Nancy. In 1740, he went 

to Paris to continue his training with Charles 

Natoire (1700 – 1777); in 1745, he became a 

member of the Academy. In 1749, Guibal went 

46 Johann Michael Zeyher and J.G. Rieger, Schwetzingen und 

seine Garten=Anlagen, Mannheim 1809, p. 82. 

47 Recent excavations have allowed the reconstruction of an 

octagonal basin with a central fountain. 

to Stuttgart and participated in the interior 

decoration of the old summer house, that was 

being converted into an opera house. Duke 

Carl Eugen von Württemberg paid for Guibal 

to spend several years in Rome, and in 1752, 

he joined the Roman studio of Anton Raphael 

Mengs (1728–1779). On 24th September 1755, 

he was appointed “premier peintre” back in 

Württemberg; in 1760, he was the director 

of the Ludwigsburg gallery. On 10th January 

1784, he was admitted to the Paris Academy 

as a full member. 48 Works by Nicolas Guibal 

can be found in the Württemberg palaces of 

Ludwigsburg, Monrepos, Solitude, Hohenheim 

and Stuttgart. His friendship with Nicolas de 

Pigage led to commissions in the Palatinate 

too. 49 The fi rst one was for the bathhouse in 

the Schwetzingen grounds; the painting on 

the ceiling of the Oval Hall is entitled “Aurora 

chasing off the night”. Nicolas Guibal’s 

painting refers back to the Roman tradition of 

painted ceilings, which had once again gained 

in importance towards the end of the 18th 

century, not least due to Mengs’ “Parnassus” in 

the gallery of the Villa Albani at Rome. 

Guibal also painted three sopraportas for the 

bathhouse bedroom. They still survive in situ, 

depicting cherubs sleeping or at play. Two 

more commissions for the Palatinate were a 

ceiling fresco for the townhouse of the Reichsfreiherr 

von Castell in Mannheim L 2, 9, showing 

the apotheosis of Elector Carl Theodor 

(destroyed during the war) and another ceiling 

fresco for Electress Elisabeth Auguste at Oggersheim 

Palace, depicting the founding of the 

Order of St. Elisabeth (destroyed in 1794). 

However, Guibal’s most interesting commission 

for the Palatinate was the title page and 

another six etchings for the “Catalogue raisonné 

et fi guré de la Gallerie de Dusseldorf”. 


48 Biographical data taken from Thieme/Becker, Allgemeines 

Lexikon der bildenden Künstler von der Antike bis zur 

Gegenwart, Leipzig 1999, Vol. 15/16, pp. 266 ff. 

49 Wolfgang Uhlig, Nicolas Guibal, Hofmaler des Herzogs Carl 

Eugen von Württemberg, Stuttgart 1981, p. 18.

Ferdinand Kobell (1740-1799) 

The painter and etcher Ferdinand Kobell 

(07.06.1740 Mannheim – 01.02.1799 Munich) 

fi rst studied law at Heidelberg. From 1760 he 

worked as a secretary for the court at Mannheim. 

In 1762, Elector Carl Theodor supplied 

him with a grant to attend the Mannheim 

drawing academy headed by Verschaffelt, 

and excused him from the civil service. In 

1764, Kobell was appointed set painter, and 

in 1766, cabinet painter. In 1768-70, he went 

to Paris, with another electoral grant, to train 

as an etcher with the copperplate engraver 

Johann Georg Wille. Inspired by his teachers, 

he studied Dutch landscape painting in 

particular. In 1771, Kobell was appointed 

cabinet landscape painter and received his 

fi rst major commission. He created seven 

wall paintings for the Elector’s study in the 

Schwetzingen bathhouse. Kobell’s paintings 

depict landscapes similar to the real views to 

be had from the windows. Their outstanding 

quality contributes much to the artistic value 

of the bathhouse. 

Kobell’s landscape paintings were very much 

to the taste of an era that adored 17th-century 

Dutch painting. The Chinese room in the 

bathhouse still features two monochrome 

sopraportas by him; another four are in the 

palace museum. The most remarkable among 

them is in the Elector’s cabinet; it is a copy of 

Jean Baptiste Creuze’s “The good mother”. 


Peter Simon Lamine (1738-1817) 

Peter Simon Lamine (1738-1817) was born 

in the Palatine capital of Mannheim. In his 

youth, numerous trips took him to Paris, 

Vienna, and Rome. He trained with Peter 

Anton von Verschaffelt. A grant from Elector 

Carl Theodor (1724/1742-1799) allowed him 

to spend the years between 1766 and 1771 in 

Italy to complete his studies. 50 

In the early 1770s Lamine created, within 18 

months, the sculpture of Pan for the grounds 

at Schwetzingen; it was much praised by his 


1963, pp. 117 f. 


contemporaries and is still well-known. The 

sculpture of the Arcadian god of herdsmen 

and shepherds, sitting on a large rock made of 

tuff, was put up in the northern angloise. 

In his Deutsche Chronik, the writer and journalist 

Christian Daniel Schubart describes the 

sculpture as an embodiment of mischievous 

humour: 

„In particular I have found masterpieces of 

the sculptor’s art, which unfortunately is on 

the decline in Germany: in the Schwetzingen 

grounds there is statuary that would not 

disgrace a fairy garden. Only recently a young 

sculptor, Mr. Lamini, has fashioned a satyr. 

A happy mood guided his hand, and wit 

inspired his chisel. On seeing the furrowed 

brow, the round deep eyes, the pointed, 

curved nose, the mocking smile, the almost 

Voltairean expression, there is nothing for it 

but to exclaim: Beautiful! Beautiful! This is 

beautiful![…]“ 51 

When Carl Theodor moved to Munich in 

1778, Lamine was commissioned to make 

another Pan for the Nymphenburg gardens. 

In 1795, he was given the task of making 

a sarcophagus for the wife of Elector Carl 

Theodor, Elisabeth Augusta (1721-1799), who 

had died the previous year. It was taken to 

Munich in 1805, and found its resting place in 

the church of St. Michael. 52 

When his teacher Peter Anton von Verschaffelt 

died in 1793, Lamine succeeded him as 

director of the Palatine drawing academy 

at Mannheim. However, in 1805 he left the 

Palatinate for Munich. He was called to the 

court of Carl Theodor’s successor, Elector 

Maximilian IV Joseph (1756/1799-1825) and 

made director of the Chamber of Antiques. 

In 1808, he became professor of sculpture at 

Munich. He died there in 1817. 


51 Christian Daniel Schubart, “Zwey und siebzigstes Stück. Den 5. 

December”, in: Deutsche Chronik, Augsburg 1774, p. 569. Cp. 

Oswald Zenker, Schwetzinger Schlossgarten, Schwetzingen 

1989, p. 67. 

52 Stefan Mörz, Die letzte Kurfürstin, Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln 1997, 

p. 204 f. 

IV. 

177

IV. 

178 


Franz Conrad Linck (1730-1793) 

Franz Conrad Linck (baptised 16th December 

1730 in Speyer; died 15th October 1793 

in Mannheim) was the scion of a family of 

sculptors at Speyer. He was apprenticed to 

his father Johann Georg Linck, and after his 

father’s death, he spent some time in the Prince-Bishop’s 

capital of Würzburg. He probably 

trained with Johann Wolfgang von der Auwera, 

who was working on the interior decoration 

of the palace. From 13th February 1753, 

Linck is known to have studied with Jacob 

Schletterer (1699-1774) at the imperial academy 

in Vienna 53 where he may have met another 

of the academy’s students, Franz Ignaz 

Günther. Linck was infl uenced by the works 

of Georg Raphael Donner (1693-1741), whose 

work is among the highlights of Austrian Baroque 

sculpture. The academy’s casts of Classical 

statuary gave him an understanding of 

antique sculpture. With letters of recommendation 

from Vienna, he next went to Georg 

Franz Ebenhecht (d. 1757) in Berlin. Ebenhecht 

worked as a sculptor for King Frederick 

the Great; at the time, he was working on 

the interior decoration of the palace of Sanssouci 

and the statuary for its garden. After 

Ebenhecht’s death and the outbreak of the Seven 

Years’ War, Linck returned to Speyer in 

1757 and at fi rst joined his stepfather’s workshop. 

In 1762, he took service with Elector Palatine 

Carl Theodor as a modeller for the Palatine 

porcelain manufactory of Frankenthal. 

Experts rank Linck’s models with those of Johann 

Joachim Kaendler (1706-1775) of Meißen 

and Franz Anton Bustelli (d. 1763) of Nymphenburg. 

54 In 1763, Linck was appointed Palatine 

court sculptor, but he continued to make 

models for Frankenthal, among them, in 1773, 

the porcelain chandelier for the Schwetzingen 

bathhouse. In 1789, Linck became a member 

of the Palatine drawing academy, and in 1790, 

one of its professors. 

53 Biographical data from: Maria Christiane Werhahn, Der 

kurpfälzische Hofbildhauer Franz Conrad Linck (1730-1793) 

Modelleur der Porzellanmanufaktur Frankenthal Bildhauer in 

Mannheim, Neuss 1999, pp. 15-21. 

54 Werhahn calls Linck a “Meister der Kleinplastik”, i.e. a master 

of small sculpture (Werhahn 1999, p. 35). 

He created many sculptures for the Schwetzingen 

grounds; they are listed here in chronological 

order: 

Gable relief of the Temple of Minerva; two altars 

and six benches in the Temple of Minerva; 

pair of grotesque tritons in the basin in front 

of the Temple of Minerva; eight pedestals bearing 

gilt balls in the tapis vert behind the stag 

basin; cherubs playing with a goat in the northern 

angloise; bust of Pompey in the pavilion 

north of the palace (lost); busts of Solon and of 

a gladiator in the natural theatre; busts of Domitian, 

Marciana, Marcellus, and Faustina in 

front of the bathhouse; gables bearing the initials 

of Elector Carl Theodor on the east and 

west bathhouse fronts; two garlanded urns 

decorating the north and south bathhouse 

gables; four medallions over the bathhouse 

windows; four leaden griffi ns supporting consoles 

in the bathhouse’s Oval Chamber; water 

urn and serpent-shaped leaden pipes for the 

bathhouse’s bathroom; two gable reliefs and 

six lead reliefs inside the agate cabinets; doorframe 

with a gable and relief for the Temple of 

Botany; reliefs on the Temple of Mercury. 

Linck’s work marks the transitional period between 

Rococo and Classicism. His large-scale 

works are modelled on Classical sculpture, 

which he had studied in the Hall of Antiques 

of the Mannheim academy of drawing and 

sculpture.. 55 His medallions are copies of pieces 

from the electoral coin collection. 

His last major commission from the Elector 

was for the statues of Carl Theodor and Minerva 

for the bridge spanning the Neckar at Heidelberg, 

which had been rebuilt after being 

destroyed by heavy ice in 1784. Franz Conrad 

Linck died on 15th October 1793 in Mannheim. 


Johann Ludwig Petri (1714-1794) 

Johann Ludwig Petri was a native of Eisenach 

and a scion of the court gardener’s family. He 

trained as a garden architect in Paris. From the 

1740s he served Duke Christian IV von Pfalz- 

55 See also the entry on Peter Anton von Verschaffelt.

Zweibrücken (1722-1775) in the capacity of 

court gardener at Saarbrücken and Zweibrücken, 

and worked as an advisor for other clients. 

He also advised on the electoral summer residence 

of Schwetzingen; from 1752, he put 

plans for the redesigning of the garden into 

practice without, however, giving up his post 

at Zweibrücken. His garden plan of 1753 provided 

the defi nitive design for the layout and 

planting of the central parterre. The plan clearly 

refl ects the contemporary fashions, as laid 

out by the theoretician Antoine Joseph Dezallier 

d’Argenville (1680-1765) in his book about 

Baroque gardening, La théorie et la pratique 

du jardinage. Petri, from 1755 chief court gardener, 

supervised the realization of his plan 

until his dismissal, at his own request, from 

the electoral service in 1758. 

Afterwards, he went back to working for the 

Dukes of Zweibrücken, rising to the positions 

of garden director and councillor. In 1770, 

Petri’s water regulation plans are mentioned 

in connection with the laying-out of a new suburb. 

The gardens he created for the duchy of 

Pfalz-Zweibrücken were largely destroyed during 

the turmoils of the French Revolution and 

the Napoleonic wars. Today only his grand circular 

parterre at Schwetzingen remains, an 

outstanding work of garden art and architecture. 


Nicolas de Pigage (1723-1796) 56 

Nicolas de Pigage was born on 2nd August 

1723, in the Lorraine town of Lunéville. His 

father, Anselm Pigage, was a stonemason working 

as a builder and architect; his mother, 

Anne-Marguerite Mathieu, came from a welloff 

and well-respected family of goldsmiths. 

At the age of about twenty, Nicolas de Pigage 

left Lunéville to embark on a military career 

at the École Militaire in Paris. But he soon 

abandoned his plans, and in 1744, he started 

56 Die biographischen Daten aus Wiltrud Heber, “Pigages 

Leben und Werk”, in: Ausstellungskatalog Nicolas de Pigage 

1723-1797. Architekt des Kurfürsten Carl Theodor. Zum 200. 

Todestag, hg. vom Stadtmuseum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf 1997, 

S. 16-24. 


studying architecture at the Académie Royale 

d’Architecture. The mathematician, physicist 

and astronomer Abbé Charles Étienne Louis 

Camus, known chiefl y as a technician and architectural 

theoretician, became his teacher. 

Pigage’s work at Schwetzingen began when 

Elector Carl Theodor appointed him director 

of gardens and water features on 10th February 

1749. The intention at the time was a 

complete architectural redesigning of both residences, 

Mannheim and Schwetzingen, on 

French models. Pigage submitted several designs 

for a new palace at Schwetzingen; for 

Mannheim the completion of the palace was 

envisioned. There were plans for the conversion 

and enlargement of several other Palatine 

properties as well. Pigage succeeded so well in 

his new position that, on 18th February 1752, 

he was appointed to the post of Oberbaudirektor 

(director-in-chief of building) previously 

held by Guillaume d’Hauberat, who had 

died in 1749. Within two and a half months 

he then built a theatre at Schwetzingen, which 

was used for performances in the summer of 

the same year. The second quarter-circle pavilion 

was built, and now the garden’s east-west 

axis had become irreversible. Pigage also supplied 

the plans for the redesigning of the interior 

rooms both at Schwetzingen and Mann- 

Johann Ludwig Petri 

(1714-1796) 

IV. 

179

IV. 

Nicolas de Pigage (1723-1796) 

180 


heim, and he wrote a report on the rebuilding 

of Speyer Cathedral when his expert opinion 

was asked. In 1756, Pigage became a member 

of the electoral treasury and was put in charge 

of another major building project, the palace 

and garden of Benrath near Düsseldorf, intended 

to be the Elector’s new summer palace 

and built in the years 1755-1773. At Schwetzingen 

he supervised the building of the new 

orangery with its own garden, the new extension 

to house the kitchens and the Temple of 

Apollo with the natural theatre, as well as the 

planting of the grand avenues. In 1756, he was 

made garden director, and pushed ahead with 

the extensions and alterations to the Schwetzingen 

gardens. In the autumn of 1767, Carl 

Theodor sent Pigage on a study trip to Italy. 

In January 1768, he became a member of the 

Academia di San Luca at Rome, and in March 

that year he was raised to the hereditary nobility 

by Emperor Joseph II. Pigage had been 

a corresponding member of the Paris academy 

since 1763; he was now a member of the 

two outstanding architectural academies of the 

18th century. At Schwetzingen the bathhouse 

was built as a private retreat for the Elector, 

with a magnifi cent interior. Pigage’s plans to 

extend the garden to the south-west, which 

would have meant a very considerable enlargement, 

were abandoned for fi nancial reasons 

with the sole exception of the star avenue. On 

another study trip, to England this time, Pigage, 

in 1776, met young Friedrick Ludwig Sckell 

who was studying English garden art on the 

instructions of Carl Theodor. The next year 

the two of them cooperated on another extension 

of the gardens at Schwetzingen, a landscaped 

area with the Temple of Botany and the 

Roman water tower, that became known as 

the Arborium Theodoricum. The removal of 

the electoral residence from Schwetzingen to 

Munich in 1778 impeded the realization of 

Pigage’s plans for the garden in the years that 

followed, but he nevertheless managed to accomplish 

the building of the Temple of Mercury 

and of the mosque with its Turkish garden. 

He also cooperated on many other projects at 

Mannheim, Heidelberg, Frankfurt and elsewhere. 

Nicolas de Pigage died on 30th July, childless, 

aged nearly seventy-three, in his apartment on 

the ground fl oor of the Ambassadors’ House at 

Schwetzingen. Numerous buildings and documents 

bear witness to his indefatigable and inspired 

work. 

(Manuel Bechtold) 

Giuseppe (Joseph Anton) Pozzi (1732-1811) 

The stucco plasterer Guiseppe Pozzi (1732- 

1811) was born into a family of artists from 

Ticino – builders, etchers, ivory carvers, ore 

casters. He trained to be a plasterer with his 

father at Castello S. Pietro. Afterwards, he 

went on a tour that took him to Germany. In 

1764, he is known to have worked on the Hungarian 

chapel of Aachen Minster. Only a year 

later he appears to have held a post as plasterer 

at the Palatine court. He settled at Mannheim, 

obtained the citizenship, and married. 57 

57 Cp. Hans Vollmer (ed.), Allgemeines Lexikon der Bildenden 

Künstler, Vol. 27, Leipzig 1933, p. 333. However, Giuseppe 

Pozzi is not mentioned in the Churpfälzischen Hoff- und 

Staats=Kalender (the Palatine court calendar ) of 1765. Joseph 

Anton Albuzio was another court stucco plasterer. Nicolas 

Pierron (ed.), Churpfälzischen Hoff- und Staats=Kalender, 

Mannheim 1765, p. 15.

Elector Carl Theodor (1724/1742-1799) gave 

him several commissions for his capital – the 

stucco for the rooms of Palais Bretzenheim, as 

well as the lobby and staircase of the national 

theatre, among others. 

Pozzi worked for the summer residence of 

Schwetzingen too, decorating the walls and 

ceilings of all the garden buildings. The coffered 

stucco ceiling of the Temple of Apollo 

was Pozzi’s work, as was the decoration of the 

Temple of Botany, which features four remarkable 

stucco medallions depicting botanists – 

Plinius, Linné, Tournefort and Theophrastus. 

The grotto-style interior of the bathroom in 

the Elector’s bathhouse was designed by him 

as well. 58 Particularly notable are the relief depictions 

of naiads created by Pozzi and modelled 

on Jean Goujon’s “Fontaine des Innocents” 

(1549). 59 


Francesco (Franz Wilhelm) Rabaliatti 

(1716-1782) 

Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti (1716-1782), an 

Italian and a native of Stella San Giovanni, 

started out as a sculptor. Nothing is known 

about his training afterwards, but according 

to his fellow architect Nicolas de Pigage 

(1723–1796), he quickly rose to the position of 

master builder. 60 The earliest written accounts 

of Rabaliatti’s activities in the Palatinate are 

from 1746 – he worked with his compatriot 

Alessandro Galli da Bibiena, who was building 

the Jesuit church at Mannheim. Only two 

years later, on 2nd January 1748, Rabaliatti 

was appointed court builder by Elector Carl 

Theodor (1724/1742-1799). 

In Mannheim Rabaliatti built the palace washhouse 

(1752) and the city’s fi rst observatory 

(1772). 

In Heidelberg he designed the plans for the 

Mannheim Gate (1750, destroyed 1856) and 


1963, pp. 87-92. See also Otto Knaus, Künstler am kurpfälzischen 

Hofe, Schwetzingen 1979, pp. 69-73. 



Schwetzingen, Vol. II, Worms 1986, p. 540. 

60 W. W. Hoffmann, Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti. Kurpfälzischer 

Hofbaumeister, Heidelberg, 1934, p. 4. 


the Jesuit seminary “Collegium Carolinum” 

(1753, today the administrative seat of the 

University of Heidelberg). 61 

Many of the buildings in the Schwetzingen 

palace grounds, too, show Rabaliatti’s hand. 

He completed the northern quarter-circle 

pavilion and was responsible for the building 

of the southern one. 

As court builder, Rabaliatti participated in the 

competition for a new palace at Schwetzingen, 

along with Balthasar Neumann and Nicolas 

de Pigage. Two plans by his hand survive. But 

Carl Theodor decided against a new building, 

and none of the plans were put into practice. 62 

Instead the Elector concentrated on the 

prestigious and varied layout of his garden, 

with Rabaliatti in charge of the water supply 

and contributing designs for the magnifi cent 

gates. 

Around 1755, Rabaliatti built himself a fi ne, 

quasi-aristocratic two-storey townhouse on 

the new palace square in Schwetzingen. On 

the roof a star was put up, a reminder of his 

native town, Stella, which is still there today. 

Numerous other houses designed by Rabaliatti 

were built in Schwetzingen between 1748 

and 1765, gradually transforming the former 

village into a small residence. 63 

Between Pigage the architect and Rabaliatti 

the court builder, a persistent rivalry developed, 

not least because the Italian often made 

independent decisions without asking for 

Pigage’s views. Rabaliatti died in 1782. 


Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell (1750-1823) 

Friedrich Ludwig Sckell was born 13th 

September 1750 in Weilburg an der Lahn, 

the son of Johann Wilhelm Sckell. His father 

moved to Schwetzingen with his family, and 

from 1762 worked as court gardener under 

Chief Court Gardener Theodor van Wynder. 

61 Re. Rabaliatti’s work in Heidelberg cp. Karl Lohmeyer, Die 

Baumeister des Rheinisch-Fränkischen Barocks, Wien/Augsburg 

1928, pp. 175 f. 

62 Hoffmann 1934, pp. 83 ff., n. 1. Cp. Claus Reisinger, Der 

Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1987, pp. 17 f. 

63 Hoffmann 1934, pp. 73 f., see n. 1. Cp. Wiltrud Heber, Der 

Schwetzinger Schlossplatz und seine Bauten, Heidelberg 1974, 

pp. 8 f. 

IV. 

181

IV. 

182 

Friedrich Ludwig Sckell 

(1750-1823) 


That same year, the court architect, Nicolas de 

Pigage, had taken over as director of garden 

architecture as well. With these appointments, 

the groundwork for garden design and 

maintenance of the highest order was laid. 

It was in these surroundings that young Sckell 

grew up, received a good education and came 

to be familiar with Pigage’s French garden style, 

in its late Baroque diversity and opulence. 

In 1770, he continued his training in Bruchsal 

and Zweibrücken; in 1771/72, he was in Paris, 

studying gardening theory and practice at 

Versailles and the Tuileries. Afterwards, he 

went to England for three years to study the 

new, and back home still largely unknown, art 

of landscape gardening. 

Back in Schwetzingen, Friedrich Ludwig 

Sckell was commissioned by his patron, 

Elector Carl Theodor, to create a landscaped 

garden in the grounds from 1777. It drew 

much praise when fi nished. More commissions 

followed, some outside the Palatinate. 

From 1789, Sckell was largely responsible for 

the design of the English Garden at Munich. 

In Schwetzingen he succeeded his father as 

court gardener in 1792; from 1796 he was 

Pigage’s successor as director of building and 

gardening, and in 1799, the Bavarian Elector 

Max IV Joseph made him Gartenbaudirektor 

(director of gardening) for the Palatinate as 

well as Bavaria. 

In 1804, Sckell left Schwetzingen to take the 

newly created position of court garden supervisor 

at Munich. He converted the Baroque 

park of Nymphenburg Palace into a landscape 

garden and determined the fi nal look of the 

English Garden. He also played a large part in 

the town-planning for Munich. 

In order to honour his outstanding achievements 

as a garden artist, King Maximilian I 

Joseph of Bavaria awarded him the Bavarian 

crown’s Order of Merit in 1808, and the nonhereditary 

title that went with it. Friedrich 

Ludwig von Sckell died on 24th February 

1823 in Munich. The enduring legacy of this 

leading German garden artist of his time, is 

the propagation of the English-style landscape 

garden in southern Germany, and its further 

development to a classical maturity in the 

fi rst quarter of the 19th century. His manifold 

professional experiences were left to posterity 

in a handbook, Beiträge zur bildenden 

Gartenkunst für angehende Gartenkünstler 

und Gartenliebhaber, two editions of which 

appeared in 1818 and 1825 at Munich. 


Matthias (Mattheus) van den Branden 

(aktiv zwischen 1755 und 1788) 

Little is known about the childhood of Matthias 

van den Branden. He probably trained with 

his stepfather, the court sculptor Christian 

Litz. Following a stay at Vienna, Matthias van 

den Branden was appointed court sculptor by 

Elector Carl Philipp (1661/1716-1742), at the 

age of 24. 64 

He made the altar of the church of St. Michael 

at Mannheim, as well as the decorative 

carvings on the bookcases of the large palace 

library (1756) and the library cabinet of 

Electress Elisabeth Augusta. 65 


1963, pp. 93 ff. 

65 Ludwig W. Böhm, Das Mannheimer Schloss, Karlsruhe 1994, 

p. 13. Cp. Wiltrud Heber, Die Arbeiten des Nicolas des Pigage 

in den ehemals kurpfälzischen Residenzen Mannheim und 

Schwetzingen, vol I, Worms 1986, p. 126.

In 1771, Carl Theodor commissioned Matthias 

van den Branden to create the monument 

of his deceased mistress Josepha Seiffert, 

Countess of Heydeck, at Zwingenberg Castle 

on the Neckar. 66 

After his stepfather’s death, Matthias van den 

Branden succeeded him as court sculptor, a 

position that entailed work at Schwetzingen 

as well. From 1762 onwards, he was given 

various commissions by Pigage (1723 – 1796), 

all connected with the layout of the parterres; 

it is believed that numerous statues, reliefs 

and urns are by his hand. 67 His last work is 

believed to be the artifi cially aged clay relief 

depicting a female personifi cation of Water, 

on the Roman water tower. 68 After a row with 

Pigage and the Elector’s move to Munich, commissions 

from the court grew less frequent. 

The sculptor died in abject poverty. 


Peter Anton von Verschaffelt (1710-1793) 

The sculptor and architect Peter Anton von 

Verschaffelt (Ghent 1710 – Mannheim 1793) 

was trained by his grandfather, Pieter de 

Sutter. From 1731, he was a student of Jacob 

Verberckt (1704-1771) and Jean François de 

Troy (1679-1752) at the Académie Royale de 

peinture et de sculpture in Paris. From 1734, 

he worked on the statuary of St. Sulpice as a 

member of the sculptor Edmé Bouchardon’s 

(1689-1762) studio. In 1737, Verschaffelt won 

the academy’s fi rst prize; from 1737 to 1751 

he worked as a freelance artist at Rome. Pope 

Benedict XIV commissioned work for several 

churches in Rome (S. Maria Maggiore, S. 

Croce in Gerusalemme, S. Maria Apollinare), 

Bologna (S. Pietro), Ancona (S. Ciriaco) and 

Lisbon (chapel of St. Rochus church) as well 

as the monastery of Monte Cassino. 

Other important works are a bust of Benedict 

XIV and a model for the bronze angel of the 

Castel Sant’Angelo. In 1745, Verschaffelt 



Theodor, Stuttgart 1991, p. 38. 

67 Heber 1986, p. 424, n. 2. 


1989, pp. 56 f. 


became a member of the academy of St Lucca 

at Rome. In 1751, through the agency of 

Cardinal Alessandro Albani, he was given a 

post with Frederick Lewis, Prince of Wales, 

at London. After the prince’s sudden death, 

Verschaffelt was sent on to Lord Dodington, 

with another letter of recommendation from 

the cardinal. 

In 1752, he succeeded Paul Egell as Palatine 

court sculptor, probably through the patronage 

of Friedrich Michael von Pfalz-Zweibrücken, 

Elector Carl Theodor’s brother-in-law. 

Verschaffelt did some work for Friedrich 

Michael’s summer residence of Oggersheim. 

At Mannheim the most important works 

by the new Palatine court sculptor were the 

statuary of the Jesuit church; the relief on the 

gable of the palace library; the colossal statues 

of Elector Carl Theodor and his Electress, 

Elisabeth Augusta, for the library hall; their 

busts in the court library; and two portrait 

busts of the philosopher, Voltaire. 69 For the 

palace of Benrath near Düsseldorf, Verschaffelt 

made four gable reliefs and groups of 

cherubs for the attic. Outside the Palatinate he 

was commissioned to redesign the choir of St. 

69 Bust of Voltaire “coiffe à la moderne” at Seattle (Art Museum); 

bust of Voltaire “à l’antique” at Paris (Louvre). 

IV. 

Peter Anton von Verschaffelt 

(1710-1793) 

183

IV. 

184 


Baaf at Ghent, with the monument of Bishop 

Maximilian van der Noot. He also submitted 

designs for the rebuilding of Speyer Cathedral, 

but only his design for the high altar was 

realized. 70 In 1775, he made a colossal bronze 

statue of the Austrian governor, Karl Alexander 

of Lorraine, for the city of Brussels; it was 

commissioned by the Estates of Brabant. 71 

In his capacity as an architect, Verschaffelt 

designed the Oggersheim pilgrimage church 

for the Electress in 1774, the arsenal of Mannheim 

in 1777, and the Palais Bretzenheim for 

the Elector’s illegitimate children in 1782. 

As early as 1752, Verschaffelt founded a 

private drawing school; Elector Carl Theodor 

raised it to the status of an academy of 

drawing and sculpture in 1769, and made 

Verschaffelt its director. In 1767, the Chamber 

of Antiques became a part of it. 72 

The largest number of works by Verschaffelt 

is concentrated at Schwetzingen. The fi rst 

contract with Verschaffelt is dated 29th 

August 1766, 73 and contains a list of sculptures 

required, complete with material, size, 

intended site, and price. He was to provide 

the following pieces: four pyramids for the 

parterre and a large group of “Glaucus and 

Scylla” for the basin; for the great avenue, two 

stag groups and the four elements; for the 

natural theatre, two dancing fauns and two 

fountains depicting groups of children; for 

the Apollo grove, two naiads and a statue of 

Apollo; moreover, four marble heads modelled 

on pieces from the Chamber of Antiques, 

eight leaden urns, and the restoration of a 

Bacchus statue. The contract states further 

that Verschaffelt had so far delivered eight 

plain stone urns, another 40 urns of bronzeplated 

clay, four urns representing the ages of 

the world, and a wall fountain. A statement by 

70 The high altar was destroyed in 1794. 

71 The statue, 4m in height, was destroyed in 1796. 

72 The Chamber of Antiques contained an outstanding collection 

of plaster casts for the academy’s students to work from. In 

the 18th century, it was a tourist attraction that drew many 

visitors, among them Goethe, Schiller, Herder, Heinse, the 

Humboldt brothers, Lavater, Schubart and Sophie von La 

Roche. Copies of Castor and Pollux and of the San Ildefonso 

faun found their way to Goethe’s house on Frauenplan in 

Weimar. 

73 Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv München, Allgemeines 

Staatsarchiv Fürstensachen 823 1/3 folio 40-43. 

Pigage dated 30th August 1773, 74 lists several 

more: two sandstone monuments in the large 

bosquet, six sphinxes at the natural theatre, 

four lions next to the stairs, two colossal 

sandstone busts modelled on pieces from the 

Chamber of Antiques, 18 leaden urns instead 

of eight, a small statue of Cupid, the personifi 

cation of the Danube for the great basin, 

and the restoration of older statues. On the 

other hand, the dancing fauns, the groups of 

children and the group of Glaucus and Scylla 

no longer appear. 

In a specifi cation dated 17th September 

1777, 75 the works are listed again, and Pigage 

also argues with Verschaffelt about a Cupid 

which, according to him, had not been ordered 

and was too expensive, besides. The high 

regard enjoyed by the Palatine court sculptor 

becomes evident from this Cupid. Ordered or 

not, the Elector had the fi gure cast in plaster 

again and displayed in the bathhouse with 

other outstanding casts of antique works. The 

original went to Munich with Carl Theodor. 

The fi nal invoice presented to Pigage, dated 

27th June 1779 76 , once again lists all the work 

done. 

In 1777, Verschaffelt was awarded the Pope’s 

Order of Christ, and in 1779, he was raised 

to the hereditary nobility; his full title was 

“Ritter Peter Anton von Verschaffelt, Kurpfalzbayerischer 

Direktor der Zeichnungsakademie 

zu Mannheim, erster Hofbildhauer, Ritter des 

päpstlichen Christusordens und Professor der 

Academie zu Rom”. 77 He died in 1793. 


Johann Michael Zeyher (1770-1843) 

Johann Michael Zeyher was born on 26th 

November 1770 at Obernzenn near Ansbach, 

the son of Seckendorf “artist gardener” and 

Imperial Privy Councillor Johann Michael 

Zeyher (1715-1793). After leaving school, he 

74 Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirks Mannheim, 

Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933, p. 342. 


Staatsarchiv Fürstensachen 823 1/3 folio 28-30. 


Staatsarchiv Fürstensachen 823 1/3 folio 34 f. 

77 Eva Hofmann, Peter Anton von Verschaffelt. Hofbildhauer des 


26.

served his apprenticeship with Court Gardener 

Johann Kern at Ansbach and became 

familiar with the English landscape style, 

when he helped with the restoration of the 

garden of Triesdorf Castle. He continued his 

training at the palaces of Ludwigsburg and 

Solitude near Stuttgart. 

In order to avoid Württemberg’s compulsory 

military service, Zeyher then went to Karlsruhe 

where he could also add to his knowledge 

of landscape gardening. From 1792, he 

worked for the botanical gardens of Basel University; 

in 1801, Margrave Carl Friedrich von 

Baden (1728-1811) made him court gardener 

and entrusted the garden of the margravial 

palace near Basel to his care. 

In 1804, Zeyher was called to Schwetzingen 

to succeed Friedrich Ludwig Sckell (1750- 

1823). In 1806, he was appointed director of 

gardening and took over the management of 

gardens all over Baden. Besides maintaining 

the palace gardens and effecting minor 

alterations, like those of the great pond and 

the arboretum, he supported nurseries and the 

planting of trees to line the country roads of 

Baden. His creative skills became evident in 

the redesigning of the grounds of Heidelberg 

Castle and of the palace square in Karlsruhe, 

as well as in the new gardens created to 

surround the pump room in the spa of Baden- 

Baden and the Roman baths at Badenweiler. 

As a botanist he made a name for himself 

with the setting-up of a tree collection for 

research purposes at the Schwetzingen arboretum. 

His scientifi c work culminated in the 

founding of the “Herbarium Zeyheri”, a large 

collection of preserved animals and plants 

from all over the world, that was destroyed 

during WWII. 

His love of the Schwetzingen grounds 

becomes evident in the Beschreibung der 

Gartenanlagen zu Schwetzingen, a guidebook 

he published in two editions together with 

Georg Christian Roemer. A third, even more 

detailed description of the garden entitled 

Schwetzingen und seine Garten-Anlagen was 

published in collaboration with J. G. Rieger. 


The inventory of trees and greenhouse plants, 

updated and extended regularly from 1806, 

serves as an important source of information 

about the plants of Schwetzingen to the 

present day. 

Zeyher’s services to his profession and 

country were recognized during his lifetime 

with the awarding of the Knight’s Cross of the 

“Zähringer Löwenorden” in 1825, the title of 

an Archducal Privy Councillor in 1826, and 

the freedom of the town of Schwetzingen in 

1835. When he died on 23rd April 1843, in 

the ambassadorial quarters of Schwetzingen 

Palace, the era of the garden directors had 

come to an end. 


Johann Michael Zeyher 

(1770-1843) 

IV. 

185

DIE MOSCHEE 

186 

Friedrich Hölderlin, 1788. 

„ “ 


[…] a few hours later we reached the famous electoral pleasure gardens at Schwetzingen. It is no 

use describing them. You would have to see the whole splendour for yourself, the beautiful works 

of art, the exquisite paintings, the building, the water features and so on – if you want to get an 

idea of it. I’ll name just one detail. They have a Turkish mosque (a temple) here; some people 

might not even notice it among all these beauties, but I liked it best of them all. The whole thing is 

like Hohenheim and the Solitude taken together, as far as I am concerned.

V. Chronology (Tanja Fischer) 

766 

First written reference to the settlement of 

“Suezzingen” in the Codex Laureshamensis 

(Lorsch Codex, a collection of documents 

detailing the possessions of, and gifts given to, 

the monastery of Lorsch). 

1350 

First written reference to the ‚Feste’ (fort or 

fortifi ed manor) of Schwetzingen. 

1427 

The ‘Feste’ of Schwetzingen is the property, 

without restrictions, of the Counts Palatine. 

1472 

Written documents refer to a “Schloss” 

(i.e. a palace, stately home or country seat) 

instead of a fort. Friedrich der Siegreiche 

(“the Victorious”) buys land from the town of 

Schwetzingen to lay out a garden. 

1541 

The palace is altered and enlarged under 

Elector Ludwig V. 

1618-1648 

Thirty Years’ War. Schwetzingen is plundered 

in 1621, and burned down in 1635, along with 

the palace. 

from 1656 

Rebuilding of the palace under Elector Carl 

Ludwig. 

1688-1697 

Palatine War of Succession. In 1689, the 

palace is destroyed again. 

1690 

Johann Wilhelm becomes Elector Palatine. 

1698-1717 

The palace is rebuilt and considerably enlarged 

by Elector Johann Wilhelm. To the east, 

the court of honour wings are added, while 

the core building is extended to the west. 

1716 

Carl Philipp becomes Elector Palatine. 

1718 

The fi rst orangery is built west of the palace 

by the architect Alessandro Galli da Bibiena 

(completed 1728). Between the palace and the 

orangery, a pleasure garden with a basin and 

fountain is laid out (waterworks built 1725). 

1720 

Elector Carl Philipp moves the residence from 

Heidelberg to Mannheim, and starts building 

a palace there. Schwetzingen is raised to the 

status of a hunting and summer residence; 

the Schwetzingen-Heidelberg axis is visually 

represented by an avenue of mulberry trees. 

1742 

Carl Theodor becomes Elector Palatine. 

1743-1778 

Schwetzingen serves as a summer residence 

for several months every year. During that 

time, the court and court orchestra move to 

Schwetzingen on a regular basis. 

1748 

Planning for a “New Town” is under way. Two 

medieval settlements are connected by a new 

palace square, a central axis (today’s Carl- 

Theodor-Straße) and residential quarters on 

both sides of it. The palace of Schwetzingen 

is converted to meet the requirements of a 

summer residence. The northern quarter-circle 

pavilion is built (completed 1750). 

1749 

Nicolas de Pigage (1723-1796) takes up work 

at Schwetzingen. Carl Theodor appoints him 

“Intendant dero Gärthen und Wasserkünsten” 

(i.e. supervisor of gardens and water features). 

V. 

187

V. 

188 

V. Chronology 

1752 

Johann Ludwig Petri (1714-1794) becomes 

court gardener at Schwetzingen. Work on 

the theatre is begun under Pigage’s direction 

(completed 1753). 

1753 

Opening of the palace theatre with the fi rst 

performance of the opera Il fi glio delle selve 

by Ignaz Holzbauer. Work starts on the 

southern quarter-circle pavilion. The circular 

parterre and the adjoining angloises are laid 

out by Johann Ludwig Petri. Voltaire stays at 

Mannheim and Schwetzingen. 

Until 1776: Regular peformances at the 

palace theatre (operas, plays, ballets). Musical 

“academies” take place in the ballroom. 

1757 

The Sternallee (“star avenue”), a hunting park, 

is laid out southwest of the grounds. 

1759 

Schwetzingen is granted market rights. 

1761 

The new orangery is built to the northwest 

of the north quarter-circle pavilion under 

Pigage’s direction. A new extension to house 

the kitchens is added to the palace. 

1762 

Pigage is appointed Gartenbaudirektor 

(≈ director of garden layout). He submits the 

so-called “Idealplan” for the enlarging of the 

palace gardens. Work starts on the Temple of 

Apollo and the natural theatre. 

1763 

The scientist Christian Mayer uses the axis 

leading from Heidelberg via Schwetzingen to 

the Rhine as the baseline of his survey of the 

Palatinate (1763 publication of Basis Palatina 

[…]; 1773 publication of the survey map, 

Charta Palatina, drawn to a scale of 1:75000). 

Leopold Mozart stays at Schwetzingen with 

his children, Wolfgang and Nannerl (lodgings: 

today’s Dreikönigstraße 6). 

1766 

A large set of sculptures for the garden is commissioned 

from Peter Anton von Verschaffelt 

(invoice submitted 1773). 

1768 

Work on the bathhouse starts under the 

direction of Pigage (completed c.1775). 

1771 

Completion of the Upper Waterworks providing 

water pressure to the eastern gardens 

(Arion fountain, stag fountain etc.). The Lower 

Waterworks supplying the western parts of 

the garden is completed in 1774. 

1775 

First performance of a play at the natural 

theatre, at the foot of the Temple of Apollo. 

1776 

Physicist Johann Jakob Hemmer installs the 

fi rst lightning conductors (still in place) on the 

palace roof. 

Pigage travels to England, and there meets 

up with young Friedrich Ludwig Sckell 

(1750-1823), who has been studying the art of 

English landscape gardening on the instructions 

of Elector Carl Theodor. 

1777 

Sckell and Pigage extend the palace gardens to 

the north, adding the landscaped area of the 

“Arborium Theodoricum”. 

1778 

Removal of Carl Theodor and his court to Munich 

on inheriting the Electorate of Bavaria. 

1779 

Work on the mosque starts (completed 1792).

1795 

Report of an inspection tour for the purpose 

of recording the garden’s stock, “Protocollum 

commissionale”, with recommendations by 

Friedrich Ludwig Sckell (court gardener since 

1792) for the preservation of the garden. 

1803 

The “Reichsdeputationshauptschluss” gives 

the Palatinate east of the Rhine, including 

Schwetzingen, to the house of Baden. 

Schwetzingen becomes the seat of a local 

government authority, and thus the administrative 

centre of the district (until 1924). 

1804 

Sckell leaves Schwetzingen to become court 

garden supervisor at Munich. Court Gardener 

Johann Michael Zeyher (1770-1843) is appointed 

as his successor. 

1806 

Zeyher becomes director of garden layout and 

horticulture (Gartenbaudirektor). Another arboretum 

is laid out north of the new orangery. 

In 1809, Zeyher publishes the fi rst guidebook 

of the garden. In 1823/24, the great basin is 

converted into a pond with a natural-looking 

shoreline. 

1833 

Schwetzingen is granted the town charter. 

V. Chronology 

1914-18 

The northern quarter-circle pavilion is used as 

a sickbay. 

1937 

The theatre is reopened after restoration; 

numerous performances take place. 

1938-45 

Slight war damage in town region. Castle and 

garden are spared. 

1952 

The music festival “Schwetzinger Festspiele” 

is organized for the fi rst time by the radio 

channel Süddeutscher Rundfunk, to become a 

major annual event. 

1970 

Completion of the Parkpfl egewerk (garden 

management plan) to provide a basis for the 

careful restoration of the palace garden, one of 

the fi rst of its kind in Germany. 

1993 

Schwetzingen is raised to the status of a 

“Große Kreisstadt” (i.e. the administrative 

centre of a district or “Kreis”). 

V. 

189

DIE RÖMISCHE RUINE 

Johann Michael Zeyher, 1809. 

„ “ 


No traveller of any distinction will cruise these waters without casting anchor at Schwetzingen; 

a multitude of princes, dignitaries and great men have fl ocked to this German Versailles, St. Cloud, 

Aranjuez or whatever it may please you to call this strange place.“

VI. List of Monuments in Schwetzingen 

(Annegret Kalvelage) 

This list includes all protected buildings in the 

nominated area and the buffer zone of the 

property nominated. The buildings are listed 

alphabetically by street and numerically by 

house number. 

Bahnhofanlage (Flstnr. 520) 

Gedächtnisbrunnen (Memorial Fountain), 

granite fountain with bronze reliefs of the 

electoral couple (recast 1956), the coat of arms 

of Baden and a copper fi sh-head gargoyle; 

three tiered basins; donated by a charity, the 

“Verein für gemeinnützige Zwecke” founded 

in 1871, design by Karl Hoffacker, director of 

the Kunstgewerbeschule Karlsruhe, executed 

by Hassler & Schehl, offi cially opened on 

9th September 1906, moved to the southern 

perimeter in 2004 § 2 

Bahnhofanlage 3 (Flstnr. 355) 

Entrance hall and roofed platforms (Platforms 

2 and 3); the two-storey building with projections 

was built in a late Classicist style shortly 

after 1870, on the new Mannheim-Karlsruhe 

railway and enlarged in 1897 § 2 

Bahnhofanlage 2-18, (Carl-Th.-Str. 12-20, 

Marstallstr. 3-23, street sections) (Flstnr. 

506/1 506/2, 507/8 u. 9, 508, 509/1, 510, 510/1, 

510/2, 510/3, 511, 511/1, 505/6, 510/4, 505/1, 

505/2, 505/6, 505/7, 507/11, 497/2, 496/2, 

495/2, 526, 526/1, 377, 512) 

Former Franciscan monastery, built 1767- 

1769, demolished 1907; some remains of the 

wall have been preserved § 2, A2 

Bahnhofanlage 8, 10 (Flstnr. 508/2, 509/1) 

Residential building. Two storeys, plastered, 

with transverse gables, sandstone dressings 

in a neo-Renaissance style. No. 10 was built, 

along with outbuildings and a cellar, for the 

wine merchant Ernst Ihm in 1895; it is the 

more elaborate of the pair, especially in the 

curved gable (entirety of items) § 2 

Bahnhofanlage 12 (Flstnr. 510/3) 

Villa Neuhaus, built in 1894 for the family of 

industrialist Caspar August Neuhaus. Solid 

construction, two storeys, brickwork and 

sandstone dressings, Neuhaus coat of arms 

and date “1894” in the bell gable, bay window, 

balcony, winter garden, various alterations and 

extensions dating from c.1916; winter garden 

by Architect Armbruster, garden front altered 

in 1924, in accordance with plans by Moosbrugger 

und Pfl aumer / Heidelberg; in 1933, 

extension with guest room and verandah 

facing the Clementine-Bassermann-Straße by 

Pfl aumer / Heidelberg, conversion of the top 

fl oor in 1937 § 2 

Bahnhofanlage 18, 20 (Flstnr. 526) 

Semi-detached residential building. Ashlar 

and plaster, two storeys, mansard roof, transverse 

gable, balcony, decorative balustrades, 

wrought-iron gate and much fi ne detail, 

inspired by late Baroque buildings, built 1903 

§ 2 

Bahnhofsanlage 18 

(photo: Kalvelage). 

VI. 

191

VI. 

192 


Bahnhofanlage 22, 24, 26, 28, 30 

(Flstnr. 528, 529, 529/3, 530, 531/2) 

Terrace of houses built around 1900 in historical 

revival styles. No. 22: Brick, two storeys, 

sandstone base and dressings, slight central 

projection with a balcony on consoles, scroll 

gable with date 1900; No. 24/26: Symmetrical 

pair of houses, two storeys, brick with 

sandstone dressings, one gable each; No. 28: 

Brick with sandstone dressings, two storeys, 

central projection with sandstone window bay 

and gable, built in 1895 for a businessman, 

Karl Spiegelberger, by Friedrich Ritter; No. 

30: Solid construction, plastered, sandstone 

dressings, corner turret, mansard roof, built 

pre-1895 for a teacher, Franz Dörfl er (entirety 

of items) § 2 

Bismarckstraße 1 (Flstnr. 416/1) 

Inn, “Badner Hof”. Solid construction, two 

storeys, plastered. Hipped roof with transverse 

gable, a fi ne example of a Biedermeier-era inn 

just outside the town centre, built 1883 § 2 

Bismarckstraße 2 (Flstnr. 552/11) 

Residential/commercial building. Clinker, one 

storey, slate-covered mansard roof, sandstone 

base, entrance and shop windows enhanced 

by sandstone features, entry with sandstone 

jamb, neo-Baroque, built 1891 § 2 

Bismarckstraße 21 (Flstnr. 533) 

Residential building. One storey, plastered, 

eaves facing the street, saddleback roof and 

central projection, sandstone dressings and 

casements, late 19th century § 2 

see Schlossplatz entirety of items 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 2 (Flstnr. 385) 



Residential/commercial building. Two storeys, 

plastered, eaves facing the street, saddleback 

roof with dormers, profi led eaves moulding, 

modern shop on the ground fl oor, built mid- 

18th century § 2 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 5 (Flstnr. 257/2) 

Residential/commercial building. Solid 

construction, two storeys, plastered; mansard 

roof, quoins, sandstone casements, belt course 

and eaves moulding, lived in from 1760 

by Philipp Wolf, from 1766, an inn, “Zum 

Churpfälzischen Hof”, reopened 1932 and 

called “Pfälzer Hof”, later a grocery § 2 



construction, two storeys, half-hipped roof, 

another storey added facing Friedrichstraße, 

various outbuildings at the back, built after 

1750 for Mayor Johannes Worff, after 1805, 

joined with the neighbouring house in 

Friedrichstraße § 2 


Residential/commercial building, mid-18th 

century, and malthouse, built 1890. Corner 

building: solid construction, two storeys, 

plastered, half-hipped roof; malthouse: clinker 

building with sandstone base, saddleback 

roof, central chimney, axial window arrangement, 

gemel and triplet windows, sandstone 

moulding surmounting the ground fl oor, two 

chevron cornices above; corner house built 

mid-18th century by Chief Court Gardener 

von Wynder; in 1795, converted into an inn, 

“Zum weißen Schwan”, by its new owner, 

Ludwig Hofmann; in 1816, taken over by 

Jakob Kleinschmitt who established a brewery, 

which became a middle-class company, the 

“Schwanen-Brauerei”; altered in the course 

of the 19th century, in 1890, converted to 

a malthouse by a company specializing in 

malting and brewing premises, E. Kasten 

& Co. of Mannheim; once brewing on the 

premises had stopped it remained a pub until 

1978; since 1987, the corner building has been 

known as the Kurpfalz-Passage § 2 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 8a-f (Flstnr. 504) 

Formerly the stables and barracks. Solid 

construction, corner pavilions, main gate 

surmounted by the coat of arms of Elector

Carl Theodor, in the west wing a gymnasium; 

stables built 1750-52, for the Palatinate’s 

commander-in-chief, Prince Friedrich von der 

Pfalz-Zweibrücken, by Major of the Artillery 

G. W. de l’Ange, bought 1759 by Elector Carl 

Theodor; two wings added by Franz Wilhelm 

Rabaliatti, fi rst wing completed 1760, second 

wing and coach house completed 1761; barracks 

of a regiment of dragoons in 1804-1806, 

1814-1815, 1819-1824; barracks dissolved 

after 1918 and the men moved to emergency 

quarters; in 1924, the coach house and 

Friedrichstraße wing destroyed by fi re; wing 

rebuilt in 1927 and central block converted to 

a department store, at the same time cellars 

and ground-fl oor shops were added and the 

exterior re-structured with pillars; alterations 

to the windows because of the conversion of 

the upper storeys into fl ats § 12 



construction, two storeys, plastered, eaves 

facing the street. Saddleback roof, segmental 

window arches on the fi rst fl oor, 19th-century 

shops on the ground fl oor; alterations c.1919 

include new door and shop windows designed 

by Moosbrugger und Pfl aumer of Heidelberg, 

core building from the 18th century § 2 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 14, 16, 18, 20 

see Bahnhofanlage 2-16, Former Franciscan 

monastery 


Residential building. Solid construction, two 

storeys, plastered, eaves facing the street. 

Saddleback roof with dormers, gateway on the 

side, entrance surmounted by balcony, axial 

structure, sandstone jambs, lesenes, Classicist 

mouldings; built 1881 § 2 


Residential/commercial building. Three 

storeys, plastered, rich Art nouveau ornament, 

sandstone dressings, ground fl oor of sandstone 

blocks, corner bay with bell roof, sculpted 


stone medallions in the parapet fi elds and 

stained-glass windows with leaden glazing 

bars, curved gables, date 1904, in a rosette on 

the gable § 2 



construction, three storeys, sandstone ground 

fl oor, upper storeys plastered with rich sandstone 

dressings, sculpted parapet fi elds, oriels 

and balconies on corbels, gable facing the 

Bahnhofanlage, half-timbered gable on one 

side, Art nouveau infl uences, built 1908, bomb 

damage in 1940, and subsequent alterations to 

the attic § 2 

Collinistraße 36, 38 (Flstnr. 4349/13) 

see Schlossplatz 10, entirety of items Schloss 

und Schlosspark, Lower Waterworks 

Dreikönigstraße 2 (Flstnr. 237) 

Formerly a Catholic school. Two storeys, 


roof with dormers and plain tiles, entrance 

gate, sandstone casements and doorframe, 

corner pilasters, profi led eaves moulding. Built 

1789 by Court Glazier Michael Metz, bought 

by a clerical organization and used as a school 

until the opening of the Hildaschule in 1900, 

afterwards a Catholic sisters’ home, attic 

converted to fl ats in 1997 § 2 

VI. 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 8 a-f 


193

VI. 

194 



Formerly an inn (Kranzwirtschaft), today 

tourist information. Two storeys, plastered, 

hipped roof, two arcaded wings at the back. 

Built c.1700 for Israel Mayer, from 1725 an 

inn, “Zum goldenen Löwen”, then a butcher’s 

shop (entirety of items) § 2 


Catholic youth centre. Solid construction, two 

storeys, plastered, eaves facing the street. Date 

of building, “1769”, verifi ed by wall anchor, 

19th-century alterations to ground fl oor § 2 

Dreikönigstraße 6 (Flstnr. 239/1) 

Residential/commercial building, formerly an 

inn, “Rotes Haus”. Late Baroque, two storeys, 

ground fl oor solid, fi rst fl oor half-timbered, 

plastered, eaves facing the street, a wooden 

gallery at the back, original door, 18th century 

§ 2 


Gate, formerly the entrance of an inn, “Zum 

goldenen Pfl ug”. Sandstone, built 1774 § 2 



entrance gate mid-front, shops on the ground 

fl oor, auricled casements on the fi rst fl oor, 

a wooden gallery at the back, staircase with 

landing under the gateway; probably built by 

a farmer, Johann Georg Dörnberger; date 1723 

on the cellar arch § 2 


Formerly an inn, “Zum Prinz Carl”, today a 

café. Three storeys, saddleback roof, another 

storey added on the side facing the street 

in 1832, core older; wooden ceiling in the 

ground-fl oor lounge, stuccoed ceilings on the 

fi rst fl oor. Built 1766 § 2 



plastered, eaves facing the street, gateway at 

the side, modern shop, built c.1725 for Georg 

Burkart Mayer § 2 




roof, built 1749, ground fl oor converted into 

an inn, “Zu den drei Königen”, in 1876; converted 

into a bank in the 1960s § 2 



eaves facing the street, saddleback roof, a wing 

and another transverse building at the back, 

half-timbered courtyard front, core dating 

from the 18th century, street front rebuilt in a 

late Classicist style c.1865 (entirety of items) 

§ 2 



eaves facing the street, saddleback roof and 

dormers, fi rst-fl oor stone front in a neo-Renaissance 

style, the modernized ground fl oor 

may have stone pilasters preserved behind the 

tiles § 2 




roof, converted ground fl oor (shop), two 

cast-iron columns by “Mack und Söhne 

Mannheim”, built c.1870 § 2 

Forsthausstraße (Flstnr. 425) 

Leimbachbrücke. Bridge of segmental arches 

built of rough sandstone spanning the 

Leimbach, mid-18th century § 2 

Forsthausstraße 7, 9 (Flstnr. 427) 

Ysenburg Palais, also known as the Bassermann 

House, a stately complex consisting of 

several buildings southeast of Schwetzingen 

Palace. Stucco by Albucci. North corner

uilding probably built from plans by Franz 

Wilhelm Rabaliatti c.1769. First owner was 

Chief Court Gardener Th. van Wynder; in 

1775, the middle part of the complex was 

built for the Prince of Ysenburg; in 1864-65, 

Gustav Bassermann bought the north wing 

and the part between the entrance gate and 

the Leimbach; in 1885, Clementine Bassermann 

bought the middle part and joined the 

buildings into one complex; in the late 19th 

century, another storey was added to the 

central building; c.1914, the wash-room was 

converted into a Tuscan columned hall; from 

c.1925 the building was owned by the council; 

today a private property § 12 

Forsthausstraße 11 (Flstnr. 4349/2) 

Forestry offi ce, “Haus des Grandveneur”. 

Solid construction, two storeys, plastered, 

hipped roof, stately original staircase, built 

1760, probably from plans by Franz Wilhelm 

Rabaliatti § 2 

Forsthausstraße 14 (Flstnr. 426) 

Residential building, part of the former head 

hunter’s offi ce. One storey, plastered, halfhipped 

roof, a polygonal extension at the side, 

built after 1750 § 2 

Friedrichstraße 2 (Flstnr. 483) 


plastered, eaves facing the street. Saddleback 

roof, fi rst known owner in 1775, Heinrich 

Judith; originally an inn, “Reichskrone”, today 

a shop on the ground fl oor, 2nd half of the 

18th century § 2 



construction, one storey, eaves facing the 

street. Saddleback roof, entrance gate midfront, 

ground fl oor converted (shop). Wooden 

gate marked “HH 1886“ § 2 



Residential building. Solid construction, one 

storey, eaves facing the street. Saddleback 

roof with dormers, entrance gate. Late 19th 

century § 2 

Friedrichstraße 20 (Flstnr. 474/1) 

Residential/commercial building, originally 

an artist’s studio. Two storeys, saddleback 

roof, richly decorative neo-Renaissance front 

and gable, all architectural elements – bays, 

casements, niche frames, gables – made of 

wood from designs by the owner, August Karl 

Allert, after the model of the hotel “Ritter” 

in Heidelberg; the sculptures (Bernhard von 

Baden, Elector Carl Theodor) and columns, 

cherubs and chimaeras made by the owner 

himself, an architect and sculptor of altars. 

Built 1902 § 2 

Gartenstraße 4 (Flstnr. 3651/12) 

Farm; house and stables, garden. Brick, one 

storey, eaves facing the street. Saddleback 

roof with dormers, sandstone base, gateway 

at the side, sandstone casements, original 

windows and shutters, original stairs, wooden 

fl oorboards. c.1900 § 2 

Forsthausstraße 7-9 


VI. 

195

VI. 

196 

Hebelstraße 1-3 



Hebelstraße 1-3 (Flstnr. 218) 

Town Hall. Solid construction, two storeys, 

slight central projection, tympanum enclosing 

a semicircular window, central axis emphasized 

by the entrance, a balcony above and a 

turret, storeys divided by a belt course, arched 

windows on the ground fl oor. Built 1821 by 

a building contractor, Christian Barfuß of 

Schwetzingen, from plans by the archducal 

architect, Johann Friedrich Dyckerhoff; c.1872 

alterations to parts of the ground fl oor; 1907, 

addition and conversion of the former Ihm 

House (2nd third of the 18th century, today 

No. 3); 1912 further alterations § 12 

Hebelstraße 2 (Flstnr. 178) 

Residential building. One storey, eaves facing 

the street, saddleback roof, gateway marked 

“H.Pf.1841Sp”, built for a butcher, H. Pfeifer 

§ 2 

Hebelstraße 4 (Flstnr. 179/1) 

Shared entry to the yard with No. 6 § 2 


Residential/commercial building, formerly 

the court pharmacy. Two storeys, eaves facing 

the street, plastered, saddleback roof, entrance 

mid-front; built after 1710 as an inn, “Zum 

goldenen Engel”, bought 1736 by the court 

treasury and converted to house the electoral 

slaughterhouse and court bakery; in 1802, 

acquired by pharmacist Franz Ludwig Krampe 

who was granted permission to use the title of 

court pharmacist in 1804 § 2 

Hebelstraße 6 (Flstnr. 179/2) 

Residential building, originally a farm. One 

storey, eaves facing the street, plastered, 

saddleback roof and gateway, date 1811 § 2 



the street, plastered, basket arch surmounting 

gateway, keystone marked “G. Sch 1782” § 2 


Reformed schoolhouse and residential 

building. One storey, eaves facing the street, 

half-timbered, saddleback roof, built before 

1718, served as a Reformed school under the 

direction of Johannes Reinle § 2 

Heidelberger Straße 1 (Flstnr. 52) 

Protestant parsonage. Solid construction, two 

storeys, plastered, half-hipped roof, sandstone 

dressings, a wall with a round arch connecting 

it with the church, original gate, built 1750 

§ 2 

Heidelberger Straße 1a (Flstnr. 50) 

Residential building. Solid construction, eaves 

facing the street, two storeys, plastered, built 

on to the Protestant parsonage in 1802 § 2 


Cellar. Ornate Renaissance arch predating the 

destruction of the town in 1689, one of very 

few surviving private buildings from the 17th 

century § 2 


Residential building and barn, parts of a 

former farm. Two storeys, gable facing the 

street; front part of the house solid brick, half-

timbered walls elsewhere, saddleback roof, 

gateway with round arch, door marked 1618, 

half-timbered barn in yard marked 1738; 

today’s house and barn originally constituted 

a farm together with today’s No. 12; the 

property was divided in 1859, and this half 

much altered and enlarged c.1860-1880 using 

18th-century parts and the vaulted cellar of a 

demolished outhouse; later a shop was added 

and the street front altered; c.1860-1880 § 2 


Residential building and barn, parts of a 

former farm; “Haus Springer“: two storeys, 

half-hipped gable facing the street, ground 

fl oor and gable solid construction, half-timbered 

upper storey, plastered; vaulted cellar from 

an earlier building, gateway with sandstone 

lintel (spolia) marked 1626, barn (originally 

belonging to No. 10) built by a shoemaker, 

Philipp Kupferschmidt; from 1737 property 

of a head forester, Johann Peter Osterheld; Baroque 

rebuildings, in 1832, sold to brickworks 

owner Siegel, divided in 1859, built probably 

1717 § 12 

Herzogstraße 3, 5, 7, 9 (Flstnr. 268/3, 268/3) 

Brewery, building complex consisting of 

brewing house with administration building, 

gateway, ground fl oor brick, plastered, brick 

dressings, imitation sandstone cornices, strong 

contrasts provided by horizontal elements, 

reminiscences of “Neue Sachlichkeit” architecture; 

brewing house with fi ne interior 

décor – walls of polished limestone, brass 

railings, tiles in two colours – and machinery 

by Wehrle, Emmendingen; Schwetzingen’s 

fi rst multi-storey building, built for the Welde 

brewery (which had developed from a small 

brewery founded in 1752) from plans by Emil 

Reichert and closed down in 1971 (entirety of 

items) § 2 

Herzogstraße 28 (Flstnr. 319/11) 

Formerly the Capitol cinema and a residential 

building. Plastered; residential wing set back 

behind a fenced garden. Building dominated 


by the front of the former cinema, combining 

elements of a Greek temple (portico, Ionian 

columns) with Expressionist detail. Matching 

Expressionist/ Classicist interior with coffered 

ceiling featuring Expressionist star shapes, 

pilastered hall &c.; fence and residential 

building with Expressionist elements as well, 

acute-angled bay and small angled shapes 

surmounting the ground fl oor windows, fi ne 

period interior, built 1926 from plans by a 

government offi cial, Regierungsbaumeister 

Hodel of Mannheim, for J. Helffrich (entirety 


Hildastraße 1 (Flstnr. 133) 

School (Hildaschule). Sandstone and clinker, 

three storeys, hipped roof, central projection 

with curved neo-Baroque gable; planning 

for the new school started in 1898, building 

(plans by Hermann Bender) completed in 

1900, in 1912-1915, two extensions to the side 

wings and gymnasium added § 2 

Hildastraße (Flstnr. 132/8) 

Grave of Johann Peter Hebel (1760-1826), 

Hebel monument. The only grave remaining 

in the former cemetery; sandstone monument 

with portrait medallion of the poet, put up 

in 1858 “by his friends and admirers”, design 

by two government offi cials, Münzrat Kachel 

Heidelberger Straße 1 


VI. 

197

VI. 

198 

Karlsruher Straße 1 



and Oberbaurat Fischer, half-length portrait a 

galvanoplastic copy by sculptor Fechtig after 

an original by Xaver Reich § 2 

Invalidengasse 6 (Flstnr. 191/1) 

Residential building, formerly a synagogue. 

Two storeys, saddleback roof, half-timbered 

upper storey, used 1864–1899 by the Jewish 

community of Schwetzingen as their second 

synagogue § 2 

Karlsruher Straße 1 (Flstnr. 391) 



Residential building, today a law school. Solid 

construction, two storeys, plastered, gabled 

mansard roof, sandstone base and casements, 

balcony on corbels, frontals and pilasters on 

the fi rst fl oor, eaves moulding, gateway with 

coat of arms at the side marked “LR 1870“ 

§ 2 

Karlsruher Straße 2a, (Flstnr. 4349) 

see Schlossplatz 10, entirety of items palace 

and palace gardens, palace administrator’s 

house 


Residential building with outhouses and 

coach house, today forestry offi ce. Two 

storeys, eaves facing the street, saddleback 

roof, gateway, square stone blocks with sandstone 

dressings, an outbuilding at the side, 

built 1903 for a contractor, Louis Schwarz, 

coach house belonging to an earlier building, 

rubble masonry, saddleback roof, sandstone 

casements and door jambs, original Baroque 

door, mid-18th century § 2 


Residential building. Two storeys, eaves facing 

the street, plastered, saddleback roof, gateway 

at the side, built 1812 § 2 



the street, plastered, saddleback roof, auricled 

casements, a Baroque house originally 

belonging to Mayor Montanas, built 1768 

§ 2 



storey, eaves facing the street, high saddleback 

roof, segmental arch surmounting the 

mid-front gateway, wooden gate, sandstone 

casements with segmental arches, sill course, 

ornate eaves moulding, built 1815 § 2 


Farm; house and barn. Solid construction, one 

storey, eaves facing the street, gabled mansard 

roof, gateway with sandstone frame, c.1800 

(entirety of items) § 2 


Farm; house and barn. One storey, eaves 

facing the street, saddleback roof, Baroque 

cornice, gateway at the side, c.1800 § 2 



storey, gable facing the street, plastered, halfhipped 

roof, sandstone casements, built 1771 

§ 2

Ketscher Straße 2 (Flstnr. 3880/1) 

Transformer station. Tower and transformer 

building on a base of rusticated sandstone 

blocks, balustrade, arcade of round arches; 

built by a railway company (Oberrheinische 

Eisenbahngesellschaft A.G.) under the 

direction of Karl Jung, 1913 § 2 

Kronenstraße 5, 7 (Flstnr. 166) 

Residential/commercial building. One storey, 

eaves facing the street, saddleback roof, 

round entry arch and original wooden doors, 

sandstone doorframes, marked 1773 § 2 

Luisenstraße 41 (Flstnr. 3676/12) 


the street, plastered, saddleback roof with 

dormers, gateway at one side, sandstone base 

and jambs, c.1900 § 2 

Mannheimer Straße 19 (Flstnr. 248) 

Residential/commercial building. One storey, 

eaves facing the street, plastered, mansard 

roof, round entry arch, modern shop, keystone 

marked 1767 § 2 

Mannheimer Straße 21 (Flstnr. 247/1) 


eaves facing the street, plastered, saddleback 

roof, ground fl oor converted into a shop, last 

quarter of the 18th century § 2 


School (Friedrichschule). Two storeys, nine 

axes, gabled central projection of fi ve axes; 

built in 1842/43 on the site of the Lutheran 

church as a Reformed school in a “Weinbrenner” 

style; plans by Johann Friedrich Dyckerhoff 

§ 2 


Protestant parish church. Parts of the Reformed 

church built 1758 survive in the nave; 

extension westwards 1884/88 from plans by 

Hermann Behaghel, neo-Baroque front and 

bell tower; in 1912/13 extension eastwards 


and addition of neo-Baroque side entrances at 

the front § 2 


Inn with extension (hall), “Zum Wilden 

Mann”. Two storeys, plastered, hipped 

mansard roof, built 1834, beer garden facing 

Wildemannstraße with iron railings, divided 

off c.1900; extension: brick, 1920s (entirety of 

items) § 2 


Residential building. Solid construction, two 


roof with dormers, elaborate sandstone front, 

belt course, keystone-like decorative elements 

surmounting the ground fl oor windows, 

gateway on one side, after 1935 § 2 


Farm. Residential building: one storey, eaves 

facing the street, plastered, saddleback roof, 

sandstone base and jambs, gateway on the 

side; stable, shed, tobacco barn marked on the 

keystone, “Erbaut 1896 Karl Hoffmann”, later 

extension, sandstone cobblestones under the 

arch and in the courtyard, late 19th century 



Farm. Residential building: brick, one storey, 

eaves facing the street, saddleback roof with 

dormers, central transverse gable, gateway 

to one side, sandstone jambs and casements, 

various outbuildings, tobacco barn with gate 

on Gutenbergstraße, late 19th century (entirety 


Mannheimer Straße 110-122 (Flstnr. 1693/5 

- 1693/11) 

Apartment building. Solid construction, two 

storeys, eaves facing the street, transverse gables, 

sandstone base, entrances with sandstone 

jambs and skylights arranged in pairs, original 

doors, loggias and gardens at back, early 1930s 


VI. 

199

VI. 

200 


Marstallstraße 2 (Flstnr. 503/1) 

Villa. Solid construction, two storeys, 

plastered, complex roof shape; sandstone 

dressings, corner turret with onion dome, 

roofed entrance and loggia, elaborate neo- 

Romanesque front reminiscent of sacral 

buildings, c.1900 § 2 


Residential building. Solid construction, 

two storeys, partly plastered; ground fl oor 

sandstone masonry, neo-Romanesque layout, 

modelled on church and castle architecture, 

front door to one side with ornate arch, 

wrought-iron gate and decorative tiles, arched 

stained-glass window; fi rst fl oor gemel and 

triplet windows; sets of arched windows in 

the gable, sandstone verge with a mascaron 

at each end, the dog on the arch refers to the 

builder, the archducal district veterinary, Karl 

Schneider, who had a veterinary practice on 

the ground fl oor; interior: original staircase, 

wooden fl oors, doors and tiled stoves; built 

1905 § 2 


Residential building with workshop on 

ground fl oor. Solid construction, two storeys, 

eaves facing the street, plastered; gate, several 

outhouses in the courtyard; wooden staircase, 

windows and doors largely original, cobbled 

gateway with wrought-iron gate and cast-iron 

columns, built c.1900 for a tobacco company, 

Rohtabake Otto Wittig (entirety of items) 

§ 2 

Marstallstraße 9-15 

see Bahnhofsanlage 2-16: Former Franciscan 

monastery 


Residential building. Solid construction, three 


roof with lucarne and dormers, gateway 

to one side; granite base and sandstone 

ground fl oor, arched windows with profi led 

sandstone jambs, abutment moulding with 

Vitruvian scroll; bel étage: brick with sandstone 

dressings, profi led casements, frontals, 

balcony mid-front, eaves frieze with elaborate 

painting, built 1898 from plans by Friedrich 

Fackel, for a master butcher’s family, Leopold 

Kimling Kinder § 2 

Mühlenstraße 1, 3 (Flstnr. 40/2, 40/3) 

Semi-detached residential building. Solid 

construction, one storey, eaves facing the 

street, plastered, saddleback roof with dormers, 

a gateway on each side, sandstone base 

and casements, late 19th century (entirety of 

items) § 2 

Mühlenstraße 7 (Flstnr. 39) 

Residential building. Solid construction, 

one storey, eaves facing the street, plastered, 

saddleback roof with dormers, gateway on the 

side, sandstone base and casements, late 19th 

century § 2 

ENTIRETY OF ITEMS: ‘SCHLOSSPLATZ’ 

(PALACE SQUARE); § 28 

Schlossplatz (Flstnr. 97/18, 97/19, 97/20) 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 1 (Flstnr. 259), Carl-Theodor-Straße 

2 (Flstnr. 385), Karlsruher Straße 

1 (Flstnr. 391), Schlossplatz 1 (Flstnr. 229), 

Schlossplatz 2 (Flstnr. 262), Schlossplatz 3 

(Flstnr. 261), Schlossplatz 4 (Flstnr. 260), 

Schlossplatz 5 (Flstnr. 386), Schlossplatz 6 

(Flstnr. 387), Schlossplatz 7 (Flstnr. 388), 

Schlossplatz 8 (Flstnr. 389), Schlossplatz 8a 

(Flstnr. 389/2), Schlossplatz 9 (Flstnr. 390) 

Baroque square laid out as a near-square 

market place by Alessandro Galli da Bibiena in 

1748, lined with wide-fronted, mostly Baroque 

“model houses”; origin of the Schwetzingen- 

Heidelberg avenue (Basis Palatina), which is 

emphasized here by double rows of chestnut 

trees


Residential/commercial building. L-shaped, 

two storeys, half-hipped mansard roof, built 

1748 by a master well builder, Thomas Breuer, 

sold 1805 to Jakob Gulden; at fi rst an inn, 

later the printing works and offi ce of the 

local newspaper, Schwetzinger Zeitung, today 

offi ces; terminates the north side of the palace 

square towards the east 


Inn, “Zum grünen Baum”. L-shaped, two 

storeys, plastered, half-hipped roof, arched 

gateway, sandstone casements, c.1748, built 

by Master Tailor Jakob Kilby; in 1759, Joseph 

Bianchy opened the inn “Zum grünen Baum” 


Hotel and inn, “Zum Erbprinz”. Solid construction, 

corner house, two storeys, plastered, 

hipped roof, built 1826 

Schlossplatz 1 (Flstnr. 229) 

Inn, “Ritter”, with additional hall. Solid 

construction, two storeys, gable facing the 

square, half-hipped roof, sandstone casements; 

one-storey hall with hipped roof, arched windows, 

pilasters; access emphasized by central 

projection and triangular gable, wide cornice; 

core building 1789, altered several times, hall 

built 1825 


Conference centre “Palais Hirsch”, formerly 

Palais Seedorf. Two storeys, eight axes, hipped 

roof, arched portal framed by pilasters and 

ornate consoles and surmounted by cartouche, 

probably by court sculptor Paul Egell, relief 

of a stag, lettering, “Gasthaus zum goldenen 

Hirsch” and intials “JB”, profi led sandstone 

casement, corners emphasized by rusticized 

quoins, built 1749, probably from plans by 

Alessandro Galli da Bibiena as a townhouse 

for the Elector’s Jesuit tutor and confessor, 

Father Franz Josef Seedorf; after 1782, the 

property of Count von Oberndorff and from 

1817 of an innkeeper, Johannes Bless; conver- 


sion into an inn, “Zum Goldenen Hirsch”, and 

various alterations; from 1833 owned by the 

Köfel family; in 1882, extended by three axes, 

in 2000 renovated 


Residential/commercial building, coffee house. 

Solid construction, two storeys, plastered, 

saddleback roof with lucarne, sandstone 

dressings, built 1896 by Isaak Lorch 


Residential building, formerly Palais Rabaliatti. 

Two storeys, seven axes, mansard roof, 

central axis emphasized by basket-arch portal 

surmounted by a balcony with iron railing, 

supported by two volute corbels and the 

portal’s keystone, another volute; windows 

with sandstone casements and segmental 

arches, storeys separated by a simple 

moulding, corners emphasized by pilasters, 

wing at the back, one side gate; interior: 

stone staircase; built 1755 by the electoral 

architect Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti, in 1782, 

after Rabaliatti’s death, bought by Count von 

Bretzenheim, from 1802 property of court 

offi cial Zeller, from 1803 property of the state 

of Baden and seat of the local government 

authority, later residential use 

Schlossplatz 2 (photo: 

Kalvelage). 

VI. 

201

VI. 

202 

Schlossplatz 3 (photo: 

Kalvelage). 



Residential building, part of the former barracks 

of the electoral bodyguard. Two storeys, 

fi ve axes, centre emphasized by a balcony 

supported by corbels, transverse gable; the 

building constitutes the corner pavilion of 

the entire complex, and thus projects slightly; 

built 1756 from plans by Rabaliatti and Major 

of the Artillery L’Angé, housed the court 

pharmacy in the early 19th century 


Residential/commercial building, part of the 

former barracks of the electoral bodyguard, 

one of three buildings of the middle section, 

two storeys, gateway mid-front, narrow 

cornice, corner emphasized by pilaster, built 

1756 from plans by Rabaliatti and Major of 

the Artillery L’Angé 


Residential/commercial building, part of the 

former barracks of the electoral bodyguard, 

central building of the middle section, two 

storeys, gateway mid-front surmounted by 

balcony, building framed by pilasters, built 

1756 from plans by Rabaliatti and Major of 

the Artillery L’Angé 


Residential building, part of the former 

barracks of the electoral bodyguard, middle 

section, two storeys, plain moulding, gateway 

on the left, balcony added later, built 1756 

from plans by Rabaliatti and Major of the 

Artillery L’Angé 

Schlossplatz 8a (Flstnr. 389/2) 

Residential/commercial building, café, 

part of the former barracks of the electoral 

bodyguard, two storeys, fi ve axes, mid-front 

balcony; the building projects slightly, constituting 

the corner pavilion of the complex; 

built 1756 from plans by Rabaliatti and Major 

of the Artillery L’Angé 


Old people’s home, “Haus Abendruhe”. Solid 

construction, two storeys, eaves facing the 

street, gabled mansard roof, gateway at one 

side, sandstone dressinges, keystone of the 

arch marked 1760, built for the landlord of the 

“Ochsen” inn, Renkert 

ENTIRETY OF ITEMS: ‘SCHLOSS MIT 

GARTEN’ (PALACE AND GARDENS); § 12 


Palace and palace gardens; palace with interior 

decoration, furniture and outbuildings, palace 

gardens with garden and water features, Upper 

and Lower Waterworks, garden buildings 

and sculptures (entirety of items) 

Schlossstraße/Zeyherstraße (Flstnr. 5825) 

Statue of St. Nepomuk, copy of the original 

(now in the Stadtmuseum), sandstone 

sculpture on curved pedestal with inscription 

§ 2 

Schlossstraße 1 (Flstnr. 226, 4349/10) 

Formerly a stately townhouse and a wine 

cellar, today tax offi ce; solid construction, 

two storeys, mansard roof, built 2nd half of

the 18th century; one-storey outhouse at the 

back facing Zeyherstraße (former wine cellar), 

hipped roof, large vaulted cellar, arch with 

original doors marked 1758, both buildings 

renovated 1974/75 § 2 

Schlossstraße 2 (Flstnr. 230) 

Formerly a Catholic presbytery, today seat of 

the Caritas organization; solid construction, 

two storeys, plastered, hipped roof, built 

c.1760 § 2 

Schlossstraße 3 (Flstnr. 225) 

Hotel Adler-Post; solid construction, two 

storeys, plastered, core 1st half of the 19th 

century, rebuilt 1970/74 § 2 

Schlossstraße 10 (Flstnr. 234, 235) 

Catholic church of St. Pankratius; oriented, 

plastered, sandstone dressings, nave of six 

axes, choir, extensions at the side of the choir 

(chapel, vestry), in the west a gallery and organ, 

arched portals at the sides, tripartite west front 

with rectangular portal and steps fl anked 

by arched windows, high base, belt course, 

triangular gable supported by Ionic pilasters 

and surmounted by a statue of the Immaculate 

Conception (copy), hipped saddleback roof, 

tower with onion roof with a lantern inserted; 

several building phases: 1739 consacration of 

the new church, built from plans by Sigismund 

Zeller and retaining the tower of the previous 

building; due to structural problems a new 

tower was built in 1756 (plans by Franz 

Wilhelm Rabaliatti); in 1765, extension of the 

nave westwards and raising of the ceiling, 

alterations to the west front and addition of 

two galleries; one gallery removed 1931/32; 

furniture; remains of medieval predecessor 

buildings, possibly dating back to Carolingian 

times, are likely to have survived both inside 

the church and in the vicinity. § 28 

Wildemannstraße 1 (Flstnr. 120) 

Three-winged farm; two-storey plastered 

buildings, built 1771 § 2 



Formerly the “Rothackersches Haus”, the 

original seat and administration of the 

brewery “Zum Zähringer Löwen”; L-shaped, 

two storeys, hipped roof, walled-in plot; built 

c.1860/70, early 20th century alterations, fi rst 

fl oor facing Invalidengasse rebuilt after a fi re 

in 1924, numerous Art nouveau stained-glass 

windows, original doors dating from the 

various building phases § 2 


Residential building, part of a former farm; 

one storey, gable facing the street, saddleback 

roof, oak half-timbering, ground fl oor plastered, 

vaulted cellar underneath the former 

stables, at the back marked 1711, 1716; owner 

Matheis Schäfer, from 1815 Heinrich Ultzhöfer 

§ 2 


Residential building; one storey, gable facing 

the street, plastered, saddleback roof, 18th 

century § 2 

VI. 

Schlossstraße 10: Catholic 

church of St. Pankratius 


203

VI. 

204 


Zähringer Straße 2 (Flstnr. 4349) 

see Schlossplatz 10, entirety of items: Palace 

and palace gardens, guardhouse 

Zähringer Straße 23 (Flstnr. 4301) 

Residential building with outbuildings and 

front garden; plastered, half-hipped roof 

with transverse gable and dormer, rusticated 

sandstone base, sandstone dressings, front 

garden with original iron fence, half-timbered 

outbuildings, c.1900 (entirety of items) 

§ 2 

Zähringer Straße 29, 31 (Flstnr. 4295/1, 4294) 

Semi-detached residential building, No. 31 

with outbuilding and front garden, one-storey, 

plastered, half-hipped roof with plain tiles, 

sandstone dressings and base, carved supports 

at the verandah, half-timbered gable with 

balcony; No. 29 one-storey, plastered, half-hipped 

roof, sandstone dressings, front garden, 

c.1900 (entirety of items) § 2 

Zähringer Straße 49 (Flstnr. 4280/5) 

Villa; asymmetrical, tower-like corner 

building, corner bay with fl at roof, mansard 

roof with glazed tiles, original front door and 

windows, garden with garden house, built 

1902 by architect Mannhard of Heidelberg for 

Mathilde Rastetter § 2 

Zeyherstraße (Flstnr. 4349/10) 


and palace gardens, Upper Waterworks, pump 

room, water tower, today the tax offi ce, built 

1762/64 from plans by Pigage; water tower 

dated 1772 at the south gate, the pumping 

machinery has been preserved 

Zeyherstraße ( Flstnr. 221, 4349/11S) 

Channel for stream, two sandstone bridges 

spanning the Leimbach § 2 

Zeyherstraße 1a (Flstnr. 223) 

Tax offi ce; solid construction, two storeys, 

eaves facing the street, basket-arch gateway, 

2nd half of the 18th century, originally 

probably part of a manor and connected with 

the property Zeyherstr. 3 § 2 

Zeyherstraße 2 (Flstnr. 219) 


the street, plastered, saddleback roof, core 

from 1781 § 2 


Residential/commercial building. Hall, Restaurant 

"Blaues Loch"; two storeys, eaves facing 

the street, plastered, hipped roof, architecturally 

connected with the property Zeyherstraße 

1, built 1781, hall extension 19th century 

§ 2 



and palace gardens. Courthouse, formerly the 

so-called Ambassadors’ House; two storeys, 

plastered, gabled central projection, built 

1722/23 probably with the cooperation of 

Ph. Markus Weixes of Heidelberg. Nicolas de 

Pigage (1796) and Johann Peter Hebel (1826) 

died here. Onetime residence of the garden 

director, Johann Michael Zeyher 

Staatswalddistrikt I 

Star avenue, a circular system of paths 

probably laid out 1757 or 1758; included by 

Pigage in his plans for the extension of the palace 

gardens, 1761; mentioned in documents 

of 1762 as “Wäldlein Java oder die Sternallee” 

§ 2


VI. 

205

TEMPEL DER WALD=BOTANIC 

Christian Daniel Schubart, 

1791. 

„ “ 


One might believe oneself to have been transported by magic to an island where everything is 

sound, where water-nymphs, sylphs, goblins and salamanders blend the tunes of water, air, earth 

and fi re, until the most beautiful symphony emerges.

VII. Bibliography (Stefan Moebus) 

Alvensleben 1971 – Udo von Alvensleben, 

Schloss und Park Schwetzingen (= Große Baudenkmäler, 

Heft 133), Berlin 1971. 

Anonymus o. J. – Anonymus, Heidelberg, 

Mannheim und Schwetzingen, für Reisende. Mit 

einer topographischen Karte, Heidelberg o. J. 

Anonymus 1787 – Anonymus, Kurpfälzische 

Merkwürdigkeiten der Städte Mannheim, Heidelberg, 

Frankenthal, Schwetzingen etc. aus 

dem Jahre 1787, Reprint Mannheim 1978. 

Anonymus 1830 – Anonymus, Beschreibung 

der Gartenanlagen zu Schwetzingen, Mannheim 

1830. 

Anonymus 1907 – Anonymus, “Karl Theodors 

Aufenthalt in der Pfalz 1785”, in: Mannheimer 

Geschichtsblätter, VIII. Jahrgang, 1907, Sp. 82- 

87. 

Anonymus 1912 – Anonymus 1912, “Ein Besuch 

des Schwetzinger Schlossgartens im Jahre 

1785”, in: Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, XIII. 

Jahrgang, 1912, Nr. 6, Sp. 138-139. 

Anonymus 1926 – Anonymus, “Verschaffelts 

Amor”, in: Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, XX- 

VII. Jahrgang, 1926, nr. 12, Sp. 259. 

Ausst.-Kat. Mannheim 1950 – Ferdinand Kobell, 

Franz Kobell und Wilhelm Kobell. Gemälde, 

Aquarelle und Handzeichnungen (Mannheim, 

Städtische Museen, Schlossmuseum, 29. 4.-4. 

6. 1950), Mannheim 1950. 

Ausst.-Kat. Mannheim 1976 – Peter Anton 

Verschaffelt. Zeichnungen im Reiss-Museum 

(Mannheim, Hofgebäude des Zeughauses vom 

1. 7.-8. 8. 1976), Mannheim 1976. 

Ausst.-Kat. Heidelberg 1979 – Carl Theodor 

und Elisabeth Auguste – Höfi sche Kunst und 

Kultur in der Kurpfalz (Heidelberg, Kurpfälzisches 

Museum, 27. 10.-18. 11. 1979), hg. von 

Jörn Bahns, Heidelberg 1979. 

Ausst.-Kat. Düsseldorf 1979 – Kurfürst Carl 

Theodor zu Pfalz, der Erbauer von Schloss Benrath 

(Düsseldorf, Stadtgeschichtliches Museum, 

13. 12. 1979 - Januar 1980), hg. von Jörn 

Bahns, Düsseldorf 1979. Same catalogue as 

Ausst.-Kat. Heidelberg 1979. 

Ausst.-Kat. Düsseldorf 1996 – Schloss Benrath 

und sein Baumeister Nicolas de Pigage (Düsseldorf, 

Stadtmuseum in Schloss Benrath, 1. 9.-3. 

11. 1996), Michaela Kalusok/Kirsten Diederichs 

(Red.), Düsseldorf 1996. 

Ausst.-Kat. Düsseldorf/Mannheim 1996 – Nicolas 

de Pigage (1723-1796). Architekt des Kurfürsten 

Carl Theodor (Düsseldorf, Stadtmuseum 

in Schloss Benrath, 1. 9.-3. 11. 1996 und 

Mannheim, Reiss-Museum, 25. 11. 1996-23. 2. 

1997), Michaela Kalusok/Kirsten Diederichs 

(Red.), Düsseldorf/Köln 1996. Same catalogue 

as Ausst.-Kat. Düsseldorf 1996. 

Ausst.-Kat. Schwetzingen 1996 – Was bleibt. 

Markgrafenschätze aus vier Jahrhunderten 

für die badischen Schlösser bewahrt (Schwetzingen, 

Schloss, 21. 3.-28. 4. 1996), Oberfi nanzdirektion 

Karlsruhe (Hg.), Stuttgart 1996. 

Ausst.-Kat. Schwetzingen 1999 – Der Süden im 

Norden: Orangerien – ein fürstliches Vergnügen 

(Schwetzingen, Schloss, 1999), Staatliche 

Schlösser und Gärten Baden-Württemberg 

(Hg.), Regensburg 1999. 

Ausst.-Kat. Schwetzingen 1999 – Die Lust am 

Jagen. Jagdsitten und Jagdfeste am kurpfälzischen 

Hof im 18. Jahrhundert (Schwetzingen, 

Schloss, 4. 9.-10. 10. 1999), Staatliche Schlösser 

und Gärten Baden-Württemberg (Hg.), Ubstadt-Weiher 

1999. 

Ausst.-Kat. Schwetzingen 1999 – Johann Michael 

Zeyher und die ersten Beschreibungen des 

Schwetzinger Schlossgartens: Biographie und 

Bibliographie (Schwetzingen, Karl-Wörn-Haus- 

Schwetzinger Sammlungen 1999), bearb. von 

Susanne Bährle u. Heinz E. Veitenheimer, Heidelberg 

1999. 

VII. 

207


208 

VII. Bibliography 

Ausst.-Kat. Mannheim 1999 – Lebenslust und 

Frömmigkeit. Kurfürst Carl Theodor (1724- 

1799) zwischen barock und Aufklärung (Mannheim, 

Reiss-Museum 1999), hg. von Alfried 

Wieczorek, Hansjörg probst u. Wieland Koenig, 

Regensburg 1999. 

Bachmann 1951 – Erich Bachmann, “Anfänge 

des Landschaftsgartens in Deutschland”, in: 

Zeitschrift für Kunstwissenschaft, Nr. 5, 1951, S. 

203-228. 

Badische Heimat = Zeitschrift für Landes- und 

Volkskunde, Natur- Umwelt- und Denkmalschutz. 

Hrsg. vom Landesverein badische Heimat 

e. V., Karlsruhe/Freiburg. 

Baupfl egekatalog 2006 – Baupfl egekatalog 

Schlossgarten Schwetzingen, Hans-Dieter Proske, 

Vermögen und Bau Baden-Württemberg 

(Amt Mannheim), unpublished, Schwetzingen 

2006. 

Becker 1934 – Albert Becker, “Um die Geburt 

des Pfälzer Kurprinzen 28. Juni 1761”, in: 

Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, XXXV. Jahrgang, 

1934, Heft 10-12, Sp. 171-179. 

Becker 1952 – Albert Becker, “Ein Zweibrücker 

Schöpfer des Schwetzinger Schlossgartens”, 

in: Pfälzer Heimat, 3. Jahrgang, 1952, Heft 2, S. 

33-35. 

Beisel 1920 – Edmund Beisel, Ritter Peter Anton 

Verschaffelt als Architekt, Berlin 1920. 

Beringer 1902 – Joseph August, Peter Anton 

von Verschaffelt. Sein Leben und sein Werk, aus 

den Quellen dargestellt (= Studien zur deutschen 

Kunstgeschichte, 40), Straßburg 1902. 

Beringer 1904 – Joseph August Beringer, “Johann 

Matthaeus van den Branden”, in: Mannheimer 

Geschichtsblätter, V. Jahrgang, 1904, Nr. 

2, Sp. 35-40 u. Nr. 3, Sp. 58-67. 

Beringer 1907 – Joseph August, Kurpfälzische 

Kunst und Kultur im Achtzehnten Jahrhundert, 


Beringer 1907 – Joseph August, “Kurpfälzische 

Kunst und Künstler im 18. Jahrhundert”, in: 

Baden, seine Kunst und Kultur, Bd. 2, 1907. 

Beringer 1908 – Joseph August Beringer, “Konrad 

Linck, ein Speyerer Bildhauer in Kurpfälzischen 

Diensten”, in: Pfälzisches Museum, 25. 

Jahrgang, 1908, S. 165-173. 

Bernhardt 1922 – Reinhold Bernhardt, Nicolas 

Guibal 1725-1784, Diss. Erlangen 1922. 

Betz 1997 – Frank-Uwe Betz, Schwetzingen. 

Stadt und Leute, Stuttgart 1997. 

Biedermann 1999 – Margret Biedermann, Ferdinand 

Kobell 1740-1799, Das malerische und 

zeichnerische Werk, München 1973. 

Biedermann 1999 – Margret Biedermann, “Die 

Malerfamilie Kobell”, in: Lebenslust und Frömmigkeit 

1999, Bd. 1, S. 261-266. 

Bischof – Heinz Bischof, “Musik im Schloss. 

Die ‚churpfälzische Tonschule’ in Mannheim 

und Schwetzingen”, in: Badische Heimat, 59. 

Jahrgang, 1979, Heft 3, S. 383-398. 

Blank/Heuss 1979 – Hermann Blank/Wilhelm 

Heuss, Schwetzingen – eine Geschichte der 

Stadt und ihrer Häuser, 2 Bde., Schwetzingen 

1979. 

Brähler 2004 – Barbara Brähler, “Der Schwetzinger 

Schlossgarten. Gartenkunst im harmonischen 

Widerstreit zwischen absolutistischem 

Repräsentationsbedürfnis und utopischem 

Denken”, in: Badische Heimat, 84. Jahrgang, 

2004, Heft 1, S. 58-66. 

Braun 1950 – Edmund Wilhelm Braun, “Die 

Apotheose des Kurfürsten Karl Theodor von 

der Pfalz und seiner Gemahlin”, in: Die Weltkunst, 

20. Jahrgang, 1950, Nr. 50, S. 3-4.

Budde 1999 – Kai Budde, “Die naturwissenschaftlichen 

Interessen des Kurfürsten”, in: 

Lebenslust und Frömmigkeit 1999, Bd.1, S. 359- 

372. 

Budde 2000 – Kai Budde, Wirtschaft, Wissenschaft 

und Technik im Zeitalter der Aufklärung. 

Mannheim und die Kurpfalz unter Carl Theodor, 

Neustadt 2000. 

Bührle 1988 – Sabine Bührle, “Die Alleen im 

Barock: Anmerkungen zur Entwicklung, Bedeutung 

und Erhaltung”, in: Das Gartenamt, 

Nr. 37, 1988, S. 75-80. 

Chezy 1816 – Helmina von Chezy (Hg.), Gemälde 

von Heidelberg, Mannheim, Schwetzingen 

dem Odenwalde und dem Neckarthale, 

Wegweiser für Reisende und Freunde dieser Gegenden, 

Heidelberg 1816. 

Choux 1959 – Charles Choux, “Les origines 

familiales de l’architecte lunévillois Nicolas 

de Pigage”, in: Annales de l’Est, t. 10/1, 1959, S. 

23-32. 

Christ 1917 – Gustav Christ, “Die fi nanzielle 

Krisis des Mannheimer Theaters nach der Verlegung 

der Residenz nach München”, in: Mannheimer 

Geschichtsblätter, XVIII. Jahrgang, 

1917, Nr. 5/6, Sp. 57-64. 

Clark 2003 – Ronald Clark, Garten Reiseführer. 

320 private und 935 öffentliche Gärten und 

Parks in Deutschland, hg. von der Deutschen 

Gesellschaft für Gartenkunst und Landschaftskultur, 

München 2003. 

Clifford 1964 – Derek Clifford, L’Histoire de 

l’art des jardins, Paris 1964. 

Dotterweich 1991 – Helmut Dotterweich, Das 

Erbe der Wittelsbacher. Vermächtnis einer europäischen 

Dynastie, München 1991. 


Du Colombier 1922 – Pierre Du Colombier, 

“Un œuvre d’art français en Allemagne: les jardins 

de Schwetzingen”, in: La Renaissance de 

l’art français, No. 5, 1922, S. 487-495. 

Du Colombier 1956 – Pierre Du Colombier, 

L’architecture française en Allemagne au XVIIIe 

siècle, Paris 1956. 

Ebersold 1985 – Günther Ebersold, Rokoko, Reform 

und Revolution, Ein politisches Lebensbild 

des Kurfürsten Karl Theodor, Bern/Frankfurt 

a.M./New York 1985. 

Ein Arkadien der Musik, 50 Jahre Schwetzinger 

Festspiele 1952-2002, hg. von Bernhard Hermann 

u. Peter Stieber, Stuttgart/Weimar 2002. 

Emmerling 1966 – Ernst Emmerling, “Betrachtungen 

zur pfälzischen Malerei des 18. Jahrhunderts: 

1. Ferdinand Kobell”, in: Pfälzer Heimat, 

Nr. 17, 1966, S. 142-144. 

Emmerling 1958 – Ernst Emmerling, “Der Maler 

Franz Anton von Leydensdorff”, in: Pfälzer 

Heimat, Nr. 9, 1958, S. 121-125. 

Engelmann 1830 – Joseph Engelmann, Wegweiser 

durch den Schwetzinger Garten. Mit 

zwölf Ansichten, gezeichnet und gestochen von 

Rordorf, Heidelberg 1830. 

Falz 1993 – Andreas Falz, “Schloss und Schlossgarten 

Schwetzingen im Spannungsfeld zwischen 

Denkmal- und Naturschutz”, in: Badische 

Heimat, 73. Jahrgang, 1993, Heft 1, S. 41-49. 

Feger 1983 – Robert Feger, “Leben und Wirken 

des badischen Gartenbaumeisters Johann Michael 

Zeyher”, Nachwort im Reprint: Beschreibung 

der Gartenanlagen zu Schwetzingen, Freiburg 

1983. 

Fehrle-Burger 1973 – Lili Fehrle-Burger, “Die 

barocke Opernwelt im Schwetzinger Schlossgarten”, 

in: Badische Heimat, 53. Jahrgang, 

1973. 


209


210 


Fehrle-Burger 1977 – Lili Fehrle-Burger, Die 

Welt der Oper in den Schlossgärten von Heidelberg 

und Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1977. 

Fehrle-Burger 1979 – Lili Fehrle-Burger, “Der 

Winter als väterlicher Beschützer. Ein Meisterwerk 

des Schwetzinger Schlossparks”, in: 

Badische Heimat, 59. Jahrgang, 1979, Heft 3, S. 

373-375. 

Fehrle-Burger 1979 – Lili Fehrle-Burger, “Voltaire 

und Goethe vor dem Hintergrund des 

Schwetzinger Schlossparks”, in: Badische Heimat, 

59. Jahrgang, 1979, Heft 3, S. 329-352. 

Ferdinand Kobell 1950 – Ferdinand Kobell, 

Franz Kobell und Wilhelm Kobell. Gemälde, 

Aquarelle und Handzeichnungen (Mannheim, 

Städtische Museen, Schlossmuseum, 29. 4.-4. 

6. 1950), Mannheim 1950. 

Finscher/Pelker/Reutter 1994 – Ludwig Finscher/Bärbel 

Pelker/Jochen Reutter (Hrsg.), 

Mozart und Mannheim. (= Kongressbericht 

Mannheim 1991, Quellen und Studien zur 

Geschichte der Mannheimer Hofkapelle 2), 

Frankfurt a. M. u. a. 1994. 

Fischer 2002 – Richard Fischer, Schwetzingen. 

Schloss und Garten, Heidelberg 2002. 

Fränkel 1933 – Hugo Fränkel, Der Schwetzinger 

Schlossgarten, ein Raumkunstwerk, 

Mannheim 1933. 

Freund 1923 – Karl Freund, “Die Theater an 

den churpfälzischen Höfen von Heidelberg, 

Mannheim und Schwetzingen (1500-1800)”, in: 

Zentralblatt der Bauverwaltung, 43. Jahrgang, 

1923, Nr. 101/102, S. 601-619. 

Freund 1924 – Karl Freund, Churpfälzische 

Schloss- und Hoftheater (Heidelberg, Mannheim 

und Schwetzingen) in der Geschichte des 

Theaterbaus, der Bühnentechnik, Dekoration, 

Beleuchtung und des Kostüms in Italien, Frankreich, 

England und Deutschland, Diss. Karlsruhe 

1924. 

Fuchs 1975 – Carl Ludwig Fuchs, Die Innenraumgestaltung 

und Möblierung des Schwetzinger 

Lustschlosses im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert, 

Diss. Heidelberg 1975. 

Fuchs/Reisinger 2001 – Carl Ludwig Fuchs/ 

Klaus Reisinger, Schoß und Garten zu Schwetzingen, 

Worms 2001. 

Fuchs 1977 – Peter Fuchs, “Kurfürst Karl 

Theodor von Pfalzbayern (1724-1799)”, in: Pfälzer 

Lebensbilder. Nr. 3, 1977, S. 65-105. 

Fuchs 1966 – Peter Fuchs, “Wissenschaftspfl ege 

in der Pfalz unter Kurfürst Karl Theodor”, 

in: Pfälzer Heimat, Nr. 17, 1966, S. 19-26. 

Fürstliche Gartenlust 2002 – Fürstliche Gartenlust. 

Historische Schlossgärten in Baden-Württemberg. 

Geschichte, Natur, Architektur, hg. vom 

Staatsanzeiger-Verlag in Zusammenarbeit mit 

den Staatlichen Schlössern und Gärten Baden- 

Württemberg, Stuttgart 2002. 

Gaier 2002 – Martin Gaier, “Die Moschee im 

Schwetzinger Schlossgarten”, in: Okzident und 

Orient, hg. von Semra Ögel (= Akten des Kolloquiums 

“Okzident und Orient”, Berlin, 23. u. 

24. Juni 2001), Istanbul 2002, S. 47-71. 

Gamer 1970 – Jörg Gamer, “Schloss und Park 

der kurpfälzischen Sommer-Residenz zu 

Schwetzingen im 18. Jahrhundert”, in: Kunstgeschichtliche 

Gesellschaft zu Berlin, Sitzungsberichte, 

N.F. 19, 1970/71, S. 11-17. 

Gamer 1976 – Jörg Gamer, “Die Rekonstruktion 

des Schwetzinger Parterres, ein Beispiel”, in: 

Garten und Landschaft, Heft 3, 1976, 

S. 136 ff. 

Gamer 1977 – Jörg Gamer, “Historische Gärten 

– heute”, in: Beton im Gartenbau, Norbert Fritz 

(Red.), Heidelberg 1977. 

Gamer 1979 – Jörg Gamer, “Bemerkungen zum 

Garten der kurfürstlich pfälzischen Sommer-

esidenz Schwetzingen”, in: Kurfürst Carl Theodor 

zu Pfalz, der Erbauer von Schloss Benrath, 

Düsseldorf 1979, 20-25. 

Gamer 1986 – Jörg Gamer, “Allee und Boskett 

als Gartenelemente”, in: Denkmalpfl ege und 

historische Gartenanlagen (= Ludwigsburger 

Fachseminar der Deutschen Gesellschaft für 

Gartenkunst und Landschaftskultur e.V.), 1986. 

Gärten der Goethe-Zeit 1993 – Gärten der Goethe-Zeit, 

hg. von Harri Günther, Leipzig 1993. 

Gartenlust – Lustgarten. Die schönsten historischen 

Gärten in Deutschland, hg. vom Facharbeitskreis 

Schlösser und Gärten in Deutschland, 

Regensburg 2003. 

Glockner 1986 – Gerhard Glockner, “Das 

Schwetzinger Schloss und die baulichen Anlagen 

im Schlossgarten”, in: Badische Heimat, 66. 


Glockner 1993 – Gerhard Glockner, Rokokotheater 

Schwetzingen, Geschichte und Beschreibung 

des Theaters der ehemals Kurfürstlichen 

Sommerresidenz Schwetzingen, Schwetzingen 

1993. 

Goldschmit-Jentner 1954 – Rudolf Karl Goldschmit-Jentner, 

“Das Schwetzinger Rokoko- 

Theater und seine Festspiele”, in: Baden, Nr. 6, 

1954, S. 4-6. 

Göller 1928 – Leopold Göller, “Kurpfälzische 

Künstler der Barockzeit”, in: Neues Archiv für 

die Geschichte der Stadt Heidelberg, Bd. 13, 

1928, S. 61-120. 

Gondela 1821 – Simon Heinrich Gondela, Malerischer 

Wegweiser im Schwetzinger garten, 

mit 12 Kupfern, Heidelberg 1821. 

Göricke 1979 – Joachim Göricke, “Formen 

fürstlicher Selbstdarstellung an den kurpfälzischen 

Schlössern Heidelberg, Mannheim und 

Schwetzingen”, in: Badische Heimat, 59. Jahrgang, 

1979, Heft 3, S. 353-364. 


Gothein 1914 – Marie Luise Gothein, Geschichte 

der Gartenkunst, 2 Bde., Jena 1914. 

Götz 1984 – Hans Götz, Gartendirektor Johann 

Michael Zeyher (= Schriften des Stadtarchivs 

Schwetzingen, Nr. 20), Schwetzingen 1984. 

Graimberg 1828 – Karl von Graimberg (Hg.), 

Ansichten des Schwetzinger Gartens, o. O. 1828. 

Gropp 1930 – Heinrich Gropp, Das Schwetzinger 

Schloss zu Anfang des 18. Jahrhunderts, 

Diss. eng. Karlsruhe, Leipzig 1930. 

Große Kreisstadt 1993 – Große Kreisstadt 

Schwetzingen. Eine Dokumentation anlässlich 

der Erhebung Schwetzingens zur großen Kreisstadt 

(1. April 1993), hg. vom K. F. Schimper 

Verlag, Schwetzingen 1993. 

Grote 2002 – Udo Grote, “Die Statuen der Jahreszeiten 

und der Schlossgarten von Schwetzingen”, 

in: Westfalen und Italien, hg. von Udo 

Grote, Petersberg 2002, S. 125-152. 

Grotkamp 1979 – Barbara Grotkamp, “Die Bildnisse 

Carl Theodors und Elisabeth Augustes”, 

in: Kurfürst Carl Theodor zu Pfalz, der Erbauer 

von Schloss Benrath, Düsseldorf 1979, S. 45-54. 

Hallbaum 1928 – Franz Hallbaum, “Schwetzingen 

– Ein Arbeitsprogramm für seine 

künstlerische Erhaltung”, in: Die Gartenkunst, 

1928, S. 102-105. 

Hallbaum 1927 – Franz Hallbaum, Der Landschaftsgarten 

– Sein Entstehen und seine Einführung 

in Deutschland durch Friedrich Ludwig 

von Sckell 1750-1823, München 1927. 

Hänlein 1933 – Theodor Hänlein, “Carl Theodor 

auf der Rückreise von Rom 1774/75”, in: 

Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, XXXIV. Jahrgang, 

1933, Heft 8-10, Sp. 146-157. 


211


212 


Hänlein 1933 – Theodor Hänlein, “Carl Theodors 

erster Aufenthalt in Rom 1774/75”, in: 

Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, XXXIV. Jahrgang, 

1933, Nr. 1/2, Sp. 17-26 u. Nr. 3, Sp. 41- 

58. 

Hartmann 1981 – Günther Hartmann, Die 

Ruine im Landschaftsgarten. Ihre Bedeutung 

für den frühen Historismus und die Landschaftsmalerei 

der Romantik (= Quellen und 

Forschungen zur Gartenkunst, Bd. 3), Worms 

1981. 

Hasenkamp 2002 – Uta Hasenkamp, “’Allein 

diese alte symmetrische Gartenkunst [...] hat 

doch auch ihre Vorzüge’. Der formale Garten 

im Werk von Friedrich Ludwig Sckell am Beispiel 

der Gärten Nymphenburg und Schwetzingen”, 

in: Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell (1750- 

1823), hg. von Iris Lauterbach, Worms 2002, S. 

244-252. 

Hauck 1900 – Karl Hauck, “Karl Theodor Kurfürst 

von Pfalz-Bayern”, in: Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, 

I. Jahrgang, 1900, Nr. 1, Sp. 3-9 

u. Nr. 2, Sp. 27-33. 

Heber/Seeliger-Zeiss 1974 – Wiltrud Heber/Anneliese 

Seeliger-Zeiss, Der Schwetzinger Schlossplatz 

und seine bauten (= Veröffentlichungen 

zur Heidelberger Altstadt, Nr. 9), hg. von Peter 

Anselm Riedl u. Jürgen Julier, Heidelberg 1974. 

Heber 1986 – Wiltrud Heber, Die Arbeiten des 

Nicolas de Pigage in den ehemals kurpfälzischen 

Residenzen Mannheim und Schwetzingen 

(= Manuskripte zur Kunstwissenschaft, Bd. 10), 

2 Bde., Worms 1986. 

Heber 1995 – Wiltrud Heber, “Treillagearchitekturen 

im Schwetzinger Schlossgarten”, in: 

Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, N. F., Bd. 2, 

1995, S. 185-263. 

Heber 1996 – Wiltrud Heber, “Pigages Leben 

und Werk”, in: Nicolas de Pigage (1723-1796). 

Architekt des Kurfürsten Carl Theodor, Michaela 

Kalusok/Kirsten Diederichs (Red.), Düsseldorf/Köln 

1996, S. 16-80. 

Heicke 1937 – Karl Heicke, Um die Zukunft des 

Schwetzinger Schlossgartens, Gutachten vom 

29. Mai 1937. 

Hepp 1999 – Frieder Hepp, “’Der Fürsten Jagd- 

Lust’ – Zur kurpfälzischen Jagd”, in: Lebenslust 

und Frömmigkeit 1999, Bd. 1, S. 141-150. 

Hess 1988 – Christel Hess, “Absolutismus und 

Aufklärung in der Kurpfalz”, in: Zeitschrift für 

die Geschichte des Oberrheins, Bd. 136, 1988, S. 

213-245. 

Heuser 1899 – Emil Heuser, “Die Vereinigung 

von Pfalz und Bayern im Jahre 1777”, in: Pfälzer 

Museum, XVI. Jahrgang, 1899, Nr. 10, Sp. 

149-151. 

Hiegel 1958 – Henri Hiegel, “Les artistes lorrains 

dans les cours d’Allemagne au XVIII e siècle”, 

in: Pays Lorrain, 1958, S. 49-54. 

Hierl-Linzer 1998 – Anna Hierl-Linzer, “Die 

Schwetzinger Jagden. Ein Gemäldezyklus aus 

der Zeit Carl Philipps von der Pfalz”, in: Die 

Weltkunst, Nr. 68, 1998, S. 1627-1630. 

Hierl-Linzer 1998 – Anna Hierl-Linzer, “Die 

Schwetzinger Jagdgemälde”, in: Jahrbuch der 

Staatlichen Kunstsammlungen in Baden-Württemberg, 

Bd. 35, 1998, S. 105-123. 

Himmelheber 2001 – Georg Himmelheber, 

“Der linkshändige Apoll. Zu einer ungeliebten 

Skulptur Verschaffelts”, in: Die Schönheit des 

Sichtbaren und Hörbaren, hg. von Matthias 

Bunge, Wolnzach 2001, S. 53-60. 

Hoffmann 1922 – Wilhelm W. Hoffmann, 

Die Bauten des kurpfälzischen Hofbaumeisters 

Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti in den Residenzen 

Mannheim – Schwetzingen – Heidelberg, Diss. 

Darmstadt 1922.


“Die Pläne Franz Wilhelm Rabaliattis zur 

Schwetzinger Residenz”, in: Neues Archiv für 

die Geschichte der Stadt Heidelberg und der 

rheinischen Pfalz, Bd. 11, 1924. Sonderabdruck: 



Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti. Kurpfälzischer Hofbaumeister 

– Meister und Werke des Rheinisch- 

Fränkischen Barocks, hg. von Karl Koetschau 

und Karl Lohmeyer, Heidelberg 1934. 

Hofmann 1982 – Eva Hofmann, Peter Anton 

von Verschaffelt, Hofbildhauer des Kurfürsten 

Carl Theodor in Mannheim, Diss. Heidelberg 

1982. 

Hofmann 1984 – Eva Hofmann, “Die Büste der 

Kurfürstin Elisabeth Auguste als Minerva”, in: 

Stimme der Pfalz, 35. Jahrgang, 1984, Nr. 3, S. 

5-7. 

Homering 1991 – Liselotte Homering, “Als 

die Künste ‚gleich wohlthaetigen Feen um die 

Wette stritten...’ Theater, Musik, Literatur- und 

Sprachpfl ege in Mannheim zur Zeit Carl Theodors”, 

in: Mannheimer Hefte, Heft 2, 1991, S. 

99-116. 

Homering 1999 – Lieselotte Homering, “Zwischen 

absolutistischem Machtanspruch und 

bürgerlicher Aufgeklärtheit – Kurfürst Carl 

Theodor und das Theater”, in: Lebenslust und 

Frömmigkeit, Bd. 1, S. 305-321. 

Hübner 1997 – Heike Hübner, “Das Bild Karl 

Theodors, Kurfürst von Pfalz-Bayern, in der 

kurpfälzischen Geschichtsschreibung des 19. 

und 20. Jahrhunderts”, in: Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, 

N. F. 4, 1997, S. 325-381. 

Hunt 1996 – John Dixon Hunt, L’art du jardin 

et son histoire, Paris 1996. 

Huth 1988 – Hans Huth, Schloss und Schlossgarten 

Schwetzingen (= Große Baudenkmäler, 

Bd. 295), München 41988. 


Hyams 1971 – Edward Hyams: A history of 

gardens and gardening, London 1971. 

Jacob 1935 – Gustav Jacob, “Der Kurpfälzische 

Hofbildhauer Franz Konrad Linck (1730- 

1793)”, in: Zeitschrift des Deutschen Vereins für 

Kunstwissenschaft, Bd. 2, 1935, Nr. 6, S. 326- 

350. 

Jarosch 1992 – Walter Jarosch, “Franz Konrad 

Linck – Kurpfälzischer Hofbildhauer in Frankenthal 

und Mannheim (1730-1793)”, in: Frankenthal 

einst und jetzt, Nr. 2, 1992, S. 34-40. 

Jobst 1989 – Ernst Jobst, Gutachten über die 

künftige Behandlung der Bosketts im Schlossgarten 

Schwetzingen, München 1989. 

Jung/Schröder 1898 – H. R. Jung/W. Schröder, 

Das Heidelberger Schloss und der Schlossgarten 

zu Schwetzingen, Berlin 1898. 

Kappenstein 2004 – Bernd Kappenstein, 

“Schwetzingen – Stadtplanung im Spannungsfeld 

von Bewahrung und Moderne”, in: Badische 

Heimat, 84. Jahrgang, 2004, Heft 3, 

S. 439-443. 

Kau 1957 – Jacob Kau, “Die Familie Pigage. Ein 

Beitrag zur Genealogie des Benrather Schlossbauers”, 

in: Die Heimat, 1957, S. 197-203. 

Kauffmann 1922 – Otto Kauffmann, “Die Familie 

des Schwetzinger Hofgärtners Petri”, in: 

Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, XXIII. Jahrgang, 

1922, Heft 4, Sp. 85 ff. 

Kerner 1979 – Johannes Kerner, “Der große 

Pan von Schwetzingen oder Die Versöhnung 

mit der Natur”, in: Badische Heimat, 59. Jahrgang, 

1979, Heft 3, S. 365-371. 

Kistner 1930 – Adolf Kistner, Die Pfl ege der 

Naturwissenschaften in Mannheim zur Zeit Karl 

Theodors, Geschichte der Kurpfälzischen Akademie 

der Wissenschaften in Mannheim 1., 



213


214 


Kleeberg 1923 – Otto Kleeberg, Das kurpfälzische 

Komödienhaus zu Schwetzingen. Ein 

Beitrag zur Geschichte des Theaterbaues und 

seiner maschinellen Einrichtungen, Diss. Darmstadt 

1923. 

Knaus 1963 – Otto Knaus, Künstler am Hofe 

Carl Theodors, Die Gestalter des Schwetzinger 

Schlossgartens, Schwetzingen 1963. 

Kollnig 1986 – Karl Kollnig, Kurpfalz. Ereignisse 

und Gestalten, Heidelberg 1986. 

Kollnig 1993 – Karl Kollnig, Die Kurfürsten von 

der Pfalz, Heidelberg 1993. 

Kölmel 1959 – Karl Kölmel, “Das Rokoko-Theater 

zu Schwetzingen”, in: Bühnentechnische 

Rundschau, Nr. 53, 1959, 4. Heft, Sp. 11-13. 

Koob 1969 – August Koob, Die kurpfälzischen 

Höfe in drei Jahrhunderten, Schwetzingen 

1969. 

Koob 1977 – August Koob, Schwetzinger Geschichtstruhe, 

Schwetzingen 2. Ed. 1977. 

Krafft 1809 – Jean Charles Krafft, Plans des 

plus beaux jardins pittoresques de France, 

d’Angleterre et d’Allemagne, Paris 1809. Reprint: 

Worms 1993. 

Krämer 1973 – Gerhard Krämer, Die römischbarocke 

Stilkomponente im Werk Peter Anton 

von Verschaffelts, Heidelberg 1973. 

Kunst und Kultur 1979 – Kunst und Kultur der 

Carl Theodorzeit 1742-1799, Ein Literaturverzeichnis, 


Kurfürst Carl Theodor 1979 – Kurfürst Carl 

Theodor zu Pfalz, der Erbauer von Schloss Benrath 

(Ausst.-Kat. Düsseldorf, Stadtgeschichtliches 

Museum, 13. 12. 1979 - Januar 1980), hg. 

von Jörn Bahns, 2 Bde., Düsseldorf 1979. 

Lankheit 1988 – Klaus Lankheit, Der kurpfälzische 

Hofbildhauer Paul Egell 1691-1752, 

2 Bde., München 1988. 

Larsen 1962 – Jens Peter Larsen, “Zur Bedeutung 

der ‚Mannheimer Schule’”, in: Festschrift 

Karl Gustav Fellerer, hg. von Heinrich Hüschen, 

Regensburg 1962, S. 303-309. 

Laun 1996 – Rainer Laun, “Fünf Pläne zum 

Schwetzinger Residenztheater”, in: Mannheimer 

Geschichtsblätter, N. F., Bd. 3, 1996, S. 469- 

476. 

Lauterbach 2002 – Iris Lauterbach (Hg.), Friedrich 

Ludwig von Sckell. Gartenkünstler und 

Stadtplaner, Worms 2002. 

Lebenslust und Frömmigkeit 1999 – Lebenslust 

und Frömmigkeit. Kurfürst Carl Theodor (1724- 

1799) zwischen Barock und Aufklärung (Ausst.- 

Kat. Mannheim, Reiss-Museum 1999), 2 Bde., 

Alfried Wieczorek/Hansjörg Probst/Wieland 

Koenig (Hg.), Regensburg 1999. 

Leger 1829 – Thomas Alfried Leger, Führer 

durch den Schwetzinger Garten, hg. von Karl 

von Graimberg, Mannheim 1829. 

Leopold/Pelker 2004 – Silke Leopold/Bärbel 

Pelker (Hg.), Hofoper in Schwetzingen. Musik, 

Bühnenkunst, Architektur, Heidelberg 2004. 

Lessing 1923 – Waldemar Lessing, Wilhelm 

von Kobell, München 1923. 

Letoquin/Bosser – Alain Letoquin/Jacques Bosser, 

Jardins du monde, Paris 2004. 

Lipowsky 1828 – Felix Josef Lipowsky, Karl 

Theodor, Churfürst von Pfalz-Bayern, Herzog zu 

Jülich und Berg ... Wie es wahr ist, oder dessen 

Leben und Thaten. Aus öffentlichen Verhandlungen 

und historischen Quellen, Sulzbach 

1828.

Lohmeyer 1915/1920 – Karl Lohmeyer, Die 

pfälzischen Torbauten Nicolaus von Pigage’s 

und verwandte Bauwerke, Heidelberg 1915/20. 

Lohmeyer 1925 – Karl Lohmeyer, “Ein neuentdecktes 

Portrait des Architekten Nicolas de Pigage”, 

in: Oberrheinische Kunst, Vierteljahresberichte 

der Oberrheinischen Museen, Jahrgang 

I, 1925/26, S. 32-34. 

Lohmeyer 1934 – Karl Lohmeyer, “Der verloren 

geglaubte Plan Balthasar Neumanns zur 

Schwetzinger Residenz”, in: Zeitschrift für die 

Geschichte des Oberrheins, N. F. 47, 1934, S. 

128-134. 

Lust am Jagen 1999 – Die Lust am Jagen. Jagdsitten 

und Jagdfeste am kurpfälzischen Hof im 

18. Jahrhundert (Schwetzingen, Schloss, 4. 9.- 

10. 10. 1999), Staatliche Schlösser und Gärten 

Baden-Württemberg (Hg.), Ubstadt-Weiher 

1999. 

Lüttich 1921 – Rudolf Lüttich, Schlossgarten 

und Barockbau. Eine Schwetzinger Studie, 

Schwetzingen 1921. 

Mackellar Goulty 1993 – Sheena Mackellar 

Goulty, Heritage Gardens: Care, Conservation 

and Restoration, London/New York 1993. 

Maier 1903 – A. F. Maier, “Ein Schwetzinger 

Schäferspiel vom Jahre 1760”, in: Mannheimer 

Geschichtsblätter, IV. Jahrgang, 1903, Nr. 8 u. 9, 

S. 195-200. 

Maier-Solgk/Greuter 1997 – Frank Maier-Solgk/ 

Andreas Greuter, Landschaftsgärten in Deutschland, 

Stuttgart 1997. 

Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter = Monatsschrift 

für die Geschichte, Altertums- und Volkskunde 

Mannheims und der Pfalz, Mannheim 1900- 

1940. 


Martin 1930 – Kurt Martin, “Nicolas Guibals 

Deckengemälde für das Badhaus in Schwetzingen”, 

in: Oberrheinische Kunst, Vierteljahresberichte 

der Oberrheinischen Museen, Jahrgang 

IV, 1930, S. 176-179. 

Martin 1933 – Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler 

des Amtsbezirks Mannheim: Stadt Schwetzingen 

(= Die Kunstdenkmäler Badens, Bd. 10, 

2. Abteilung), Karlsruhe 1933. 

Martin 1949 – Kurt Martin, “Nicolas de Pigage. 

Der Gestalter des Schwetzinger Parks”, in: Baden, 

Nr. 1, 1949, S. 52-54. 

Martin 1950 – Kurt Martin, “Architektur, die 

nicht gebaut wurde. Entwürfe für das neue 

Schloss in Schwetzingen”, in: Merian, Heft 

2/11, 1950, S. 79-81. 

Martin 1965 – Kurt Martin, Schloss und Garten 

Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1965. 

Mechling 1897 – Otto Mechling, Führer durch 

den Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen mit kurzen 

geschichtlichen Bemerkungen, Schwetzingen 

1897. 

Medicus 1782 – Friedrich Kasimir Medicus, 

Beiträge zur schönen Gartenkunst, Mannheim 

1782. 

Merten 1987 – Klaus Merten, Schlösser in Baden-Württemberg: 

Residenzen und Landsitze in 

Schwaben, Franken und am Oberrhein, München 

1987. 

Moebus 1999 – Stefan Andreas Moebus, “Ein 

Künstleraustausch im 18. Jahrhundert zwischen 

Württemberg und Kurpfalz (Nicolas 

Guibal, Adolf Friedrich Harper und Nicolas de 

Pigage)”, in: Schwäbische Heimat, 50. Jahrgang, 

1999, Heft 3, S. 329-340. 

Möhrle 1938 – Hans Möhrle, Das Schwetzinger 

Schloss-Theater, Mannheim 1938. 


215


216 


Moritz 1899 – Heinrich Moritz, “Zur Konrad 

Linck’schen Porzellangruppe auf die Wiedergenesung 

Karl Theodors 1774”, in: Pfälzer Museum, 

XVI. Jahrgang, 1899, Nr. 10, S. 151. 

Mörz 1991 – Stefan Mörz, Aufgeklärter Absolutismus 

in der Kurpfalz während der Mannheimer 

Regierungszeit des Kurfürsten Karl Theodor 

1742-1777 (= Veröffentlichungen der Kommission 

für geschichtliche Landeskunde in Baden-Württemberg, 

Reihe B, Bd. 120), Stuttgart 

1991. 

Mörz 1997 – Stefan Mörz, Die letzte Kurfürstin. 

Elisabeth Augusta von der Pfalz, die Gemahlin 

Karl Theodors, Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln 1997. 

Mörz 1998 – Stefan Mörz, Haupt- und Residenzstadt. 

Carl Theodor, sein Hof und Mannheim 

(= Kleine Schriften des Stadtarchivs 

Mannheim, Bd. 12), Mannheim 1998. 

Mosser/Teyssot 1993 – Monique Mosser/ 

Georges Teyssot, Die Gartenkunst des Abendlandes. 

Von der Renaissance bis zur Gegenwart, 


Mugdan 1959 – Klaus Mugdan, “Kunst und 

Künstler des 18. Jahrhunderts in der Pfalz”, in: 

Pfälzer Heimat, 10. Jahrgang, 1959, Heft 2, S. 

43-48. 

Nicolas de Pigage 1996 – Nicolas de Pigage 

(1723-1796). Architekt des Kurfürsten Carl 

Theodor (= Ausst.-Kat., Düsseldorf, Stadtmuseum 

in Schloss Benrath, 1. 9.-3. 11. 1996 und 

Mannheim, Reiss-Museum, 25. 11. 1996-23. 

2. 1997), Michaela Kalusok/Kirsten Diederichs 

(Red.), Düsseldorf/Köln 1996. 

Opel 1981 – Rolf Dieter Opel, Wolfgang Amadeus 

Mozart in Schwetzingen und Mannheim, 

Heidelberg 1981; 3. Ed. 1995. 

Parkpfl egewerk 1970 – Parkpfl egewerk für den 

Schwetzinger Schlossgarten, Christian Bauer/Walter 

Schwenecke, Oberfi nanzdirektion 

Karlsruhe, unpublished, Karlsruhe 1970. 

Parkpfl egewerk Fortschreibung 2005 – Parkpfl 

egewerk zur Instandsetzung und Unterhaltung 

des Gartens der kurfürstlichen Sommerresidenz 

Schwetzingen, Uta Schmitt/Hubert 

Wolfgang Wertz, Vermögen und Bau Baden- 

Württemberg (Betriebsleitung, Referat Staatliche 

Schlösser und Gärten), unpublished, 

Bruchsal 2005. 

Pechacek 2002 – Petra Pechacek, “Mit Spaten, 

Korb und Gießkanne ... – Historische 

Arbeitsgeräte zur Pfl ege und Erhaltung des 

Schwetzinger Schlossgartens”, in: Fürstliche 

Gartenlust. Historische Schlossgärten in Baden- 

Württemberg, Stuttgart 2002, S. 77-87. 

Pelker 1999 – Bärbel Pelker, “’...es lässt sich 

eine schöne Musik machen ...’. Die Mannheimer 

Hofmusik im Zeitalter Carl Theodors”, in: 

Lebenslust und Frömmigkeit 1999, Bd.1, S. 293- 

304. 

Peter Anton Verschaffelt 1976 – Peter Anton 

Verschaffelt. Zeichnungen im Reiss-Museum (= 

Ausst.-Kat. Mannheim, Hofgebäude des Zeughauses 

vom 1. 7.-8. 8. 1976), Mannheim 1976. 

Pfl icht 1976 – Stephan Pfl icht, Kurfürst Karl 

Theodor und seine Bedeutung für die Entwicklung 

des deutschen Theaters, Reichling 1976. 

Rall 1993 – Hans Rall, Kurfürst Karl Theodor. 

Regierender Herr in sieben Ländern (= Forschungen 

zur Geschichte Mannheims und der 

Pfalz, N. F. 8), Mannheim 1993. 

Reisinger 1987 – Claus Reisinger, Der Schlossgarten 

zu Schwetzingen, 1987. 

Richter/Wagner 1999 – Susan Charlotte Richter/Ralf 

Richard Wagner 1999, “Geburt und 

Taufe Karl Theodors. Eine Betrachtung zum 

275. Geburtstag des Kurfürsten 1999”, in: 

Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, N. F. Bd. 6, 

1999, S. 297-304.

Richter 2004 – Susan Charlotte Richter, 

“Schwetzingen im Spiegel der Dichtkunst”, in: 

Badische Heimat, 84. Jahrgang, 2004, Heft 1, S. 

46-57. 

Riedmüller/Lang o. J. – Birgit Riedmüller/ 

Thomas Lang (Red.), Staatliche Schlösser und 

Gärten Baden-Württemberg. Daten, Fakten, Hintergründe 

(Zum Anlass des zehnjährigen Bestehens 

der Staatlichen Schlösser und Gärten 

Baden-Württemberg), Stuttgart o. J. 

Roemer 1975 – Ernst Roemer, 1200 Jahre 

Schwetzingen. Schwetzingen, 2. Ed. 1975. 

Rokokotheater 1974 – Das Rokokotheater in 

Schwetzingen, hg. von der Oberfi nanzdirektion 

Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe/Heidelberg 1974. 

Roland 1960 – Berthold Roland, “Landschaftszeichnungen 

von Ferdinand Kobell”, in: Mitteilungen 

des Historischen Vereins der Pfalz, Nr. 

58, 1960, S. 326-332. 

Rordorf 1830 – Le Guide du Jardin de Schwetzingen. 

Avec douze vues dessinées et gravées 

par Rordorf, Heidelberg 1830. 

Saudan/Saudan-Skira 1989 – Michel Saudan/ 

Sylvia Saudan-Skira, “Les jardins de Schwetzingen, 

une ‘Arcadie retrouvée’”, in: L’œil, 1989, 

S. 34-39. 

Saudan/Saudan-Skira 1998 – Michel Saudan/ 

Sylvia Saudan-Skira, Orangerien. Paläste aus 

Glas vom 17. bis zum 19. Jahrhundert, Köln 

1998. 

Schaab 1992 – Meinrad Schaab, Geschichte der 

Kurpfalz, Bd. 2, Neuzeit, Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln 

1992. 

Schärf 2002 – Hartmann Manfred Schärf, 

“Die Dächer des Badhauses im Schwetzinger 

Schlossgarten”, in: Badische Heimat, 82. Jahrgang, 

März 2002, Heft 1, S. 158-173. 


Schmechel 1929 – Max Schmechel, Nicolaus 

von Pigage’s Schwetzinger Entwürfe und Bauten, 

Diss. Darmstadt 1929. 

Schmid 1979 – Hermann Schmid, “Das Franziskaner-Rekollekten-Hospiz 

in Schwetzingen 

1767-1802”, in: Badische Heimat, 59. Jahrgang, 

1979, Heft 3, S. 399-407. 

Schmidt 1934 – Irene Schmidt, Der Schwetzinger 

Schlossgarten Karl Theodors von der 

Pfalz, Diss. phil. Bonn 1934. 

Schnabel 1924 – Franz Schnabel, “Die kulturelle 

Bedeutung der Carl-Theodor-Zeit”, in: 

Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, XXV. Jahrgang, 

1924, Nr. 12, Sp. 236-352. 

Schoch 1900 – Gottlieb Schoch, “Der Schlossgarten 

von Schwetzingen und Ludwig von 

Sckell”, in: Die Gartenkunst, Bd. 2, 1900, S. 21 ff. 

Schöpel 1965 – Brigitte Schöpel, “Naturtheater. 

Studien zum Theater unter freiem Himmel in 

Südwestdeutschland”, in: Volksleben 9, Tübingen 

1965. 

Schürenberg 1936 – Lisa Schürenberg, “Eine 

alte Ansicht des Schlosses in Schwetzingen”, 

in: Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, Bd. 5, 1936, 

S. 250-252. 

Schwab o. J. – Franz Schwab (Hg.), Führer 

durch die Anlagen und Erklärer der Kunstwerke 

im Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen, 4. Aufl age, 

ergänzt u. berichtigt von Carl Schwab, Schwetzingen 

o. J. 

Schwab 1840 – Franz Schwab, Beschreibung 

der Gartenanlagen zu Schwetzingen, Schwetzingen 

1840. 

Schwarz 1872 – Otto Schwarz, Der Bezirk 

Schwetzingen und die Kriegsjahre 1870/71, 



217


218 


Schwarz 1880 – Otto Schwarz, Practisch-planmäßiger 

Wegweiser zu allen Sehenswürdigkeiten 

im Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen, Nebst 

einer sachlich-geschichtlichen Beschreibung 

und der Biographie der Künstler, Heidelberg 

1880. 

Schwarz 1887 – Otto Schwarz, Practisch-planmäßiger 

Wegweiser zu allen Sehenswürdigkeiten 

im Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen, zugleich 

Katalog aller Sehenswürdigkeiten (Mit 

Plan und 12 Illustrationen), Heidelberg 1887. 

Schweizer 1964 – Dorothee Schweizer, Die Graphik 

von Ferdinand Kobell, Diss. phil. Tübingen 

1964. 

Schwenecke 1987 – Walter Schwenecke, “15 

Jahre Parkpfl egewerk für den Schwetzinger 

Schlossgarten – eine Zwischenbilanz”, in: Das 

Gartenamt, Heft 36, 1987, S. 7 ff. 

Sckell 1825 – Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell, Beiträge 

zu bildenden Gartenkunst für angehende 

Gartenkünstler und Gartenliebhaber, München 

1825. 

Seyfried 1925 – Eugen Seyfried, Heimatgeschichte 

des Bezirks Schwetzingen, Ketsch 1925. 

Sillib 1907 – Rudolf Sillib, Schloss und Garten 

in Schwetzingen, Heidelberg 1907. 

Sperber 1984 – Hans Sperber, Chronik der 

Stadt Schwetzingen von 766 bis 1982, Schriften 

des Stadtarchivs Schwetzingen, Nr. 21, Schwetzingen 

1984. 

Stavan 1978 – Henry Anthony Stavan, Kurfürst 

Karl Theodor und Voltaire (= Schriften 

der Gesellschaft der Freunde Mannheims und 

der ehemaligen Kurpfalz, Heft 14), Mannheim 

1978. 

Stavan 1979 – Henry Anthony Stavan, “Voltaire 

und Kurfürst Karl Theodor, Freundschaft 

oder Opportunismus?”, in: Voltaire und 

Deutschland, hg. von Peter Brockmeier/Roland 

Desné/Jürgen Voss, Stuttgart 1979, S. 3-12. 

Steger 1986 – Werner Steger, “Musik im 

Schwetzingen Carl Theodors”, in: Badische Heimat, 


Stengel 1997 – Stefan Freiherr von Stengel, 

Kurfürst Karl Theodor in Rom. Tagebuch seiner 

zweiten Romreise 1783, hg. von Günter Ebersold 

(= Schriften der Gesellschaft der Freunde 

Mannheims und der ehemaligen Kurpfalz, 

Heft 24), Mannheim 1997. 

Stief 1977 – Werner Stief, “Mozart in Schwetzingen 

– ‚Sternallee’ und ‚Rotes Haus’”, in: Das 

Mannheimer Mozart-Buch (= Taschenbücher 

zur Musikwissenschaft, Bd. 47), hg. von Roland 

Würtz, Wilhelmshaven 1977, S. 263-273. 

Stöckle 1890 – Joseph Stöckle, Grundriss einer 

Geschichte der Stadt, des Schlosses und des 

Gartens von Schwetzingen, Schwetzingen 1890. 

Stratmann 1982 – Rosemarie Stratmann, “Möbel 

aus der Werkstatt des kurpfälzischen Hofebenisten 

Jakob Kieser”, in: Jahrbuch der Staatlichen 

Kunstsammlungen Baden-Württemberg, 

Bd. 19, 1982, S. 45-68. 

Stripf 2004 – Rainer Stripf, Die Arboreten des 

Schwetzinger Schlossgartens, hg. von den Staatlichen 

Schlössern und Gärten Baden-Württemberg, 


Strobel 1977 – Engelbert Strobel, “Johann Michael 

Zeyher. Schwetzinger Gartendirektor 

und Freund Hebels”, in: Badische Heimat, 57. 


Süden im Norden 1999 – Der Süden im Norden: 

Orangerien – ein fürstliches Vergnügen 

(Schwetzingen, Schloss, 1999), Staatliche 

Schlösser und Gärten Baden-Württemberg 

(Hg.), Regensburg 1999.

Szymczyk-Eggert 1993 – Elisabeth Szymczyk- 

Eggert, “…sogar wäre es mir lieb, wenn Ihr 

Schwetzingen besuchtet”, in: Gärten der Goethe–Zeit 

1993, S. 148-159. 

Throm 1974 – Ernst Throm, Das Rokokotheater 

in Schwetzingen, hg. von der Oberfi nanzdirektion 

Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe 1974. 

Tschira 1939 – Arnold Tschira, Orangerien und 

Gewächshäuser. Ihre geschichtliche Entwicklung 

in Deutschland (= Kunstwissenschaftliche Studien, 

Bd. XXIV), Berlin 1939. 

Uhlig 1981 – Wolfgang Uhlig, Nicolas Guibal. 

Hofmaler des Herzogs Carl Eugen von 

Württemberg, ein Beitrag zur Kunstgeschichte 

des ausgehenden 18. Jahrhunderts, Diss. Stuttgart 

1981. 

Voegele/Mohr 2004 – Wolfgang Voegele/Konstanze 

Mohr, “Stadterneuerung als Impuls für 

die Entwicklung der Innenstadt von Schwetzingen”, 

in: Badische Heimat, 84. Jahrgang, 

2004, Heft 1, S. 6-12. 

Volk 1973 – Peter Volk, “Peter Anton Verschaffelt. 

Bildnisbüsten des Kurfürsten Karl Theodor 

von der Pfalz”, in: Pantheon, XXXI. Jahrgang, 

1973, Nr. 4, S. 412-419. 

Voss 1987 – Jürgen Voss, “Kurfürst Karl Theodor 

von der Pfalz”, in: Geschichte Baden-Württembergs, 

hg. von R. Rinker/W. Setzler, 1987, S. 

168-176. 

Wagner 2004 – Ralf Richard Wagner, “Das Goldene 

Zeitalter der Kurpfalz”, in: Badische Heimat, 


Walter 1898 – Friedrich Walter, Geschichte des 

Theaters und der Musik am kurpfälzischen Hof 

(= Forschungen zur Geschichte Mannheims 

und der Pfalz, 1), Leipzig 1898. 


Walter 1907 – Friedrich Walter, “Riaucours Gesandtschaftsberichte 

als Quelle zur Geschichte 

des Kurfürsten Karl Theodor”, in: Mannheimer 

Geschichtsblätter, VIII. Jahrgang, 1907, Sp. 213- 

219. 

Walter 1928 – Friedrich Walter, “Pigages Nachfolge. 

Aus Akten des General-Landes-Archivs 

mitgeteilt”, in: Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, 

XXIX. Jahrgang, 1928, Nr. 10, Sp. 203-208. 

Was bleibt. Markgrafenschätze aus vier Jahrhunderten 

für die badischen Schlösser bewahrt 

(Ausst.-Kat., Schwetzingen, Schloss, 21. 3.-28. 

4. 1996), Oberfi nanzdirektion Karlsruhe (Hg.), 


Wegner 1960 – Wolfgang Wegner, Kurfürst 

Carl Theodor von der Pfalz als Kunstsammler. 

Zur Entstehung und Gründungsgeschichte des 

Mannheimer Kupferstich- und Zeichnungskabinetts 

(= Schriften der Gesellschaft der Freunde 

Mannheims und der ehemaligen Kurpfalz, 

Heft 9), Mannheim 1960. 

Werhahn 1999 – Maria Christiane Werhahn, 

Der kurpfälzische Hofbildhauer Franz Konrad 

Linck (1730-1793). Modelleur der Porzellanmanufaktur 

Frankenthal, Bildhauer in Mannheim, 

Neuss 1999. 

Werner 1999 – Ferdinand Werner, “Der Garten 

der kurfürstlichen Sommerresidenz Schwetzingen”, 

in: Lebenslust und Frömmigkeit 1999, 

Bd. 1, S. 63-72. 

Werner 1979 – Johannes Werner, “Der große 

Pan von Schwetzingen oder die Versöhnung 

mit der Natur”, in: Badische Heimat, 59. Jahrgang, 

1979, Heft 3, S. 365-371. 


219


220 


Wertz 1982 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Parterre-Bepfl 

anzungen mit Frühjahrs- und Sommerblumen”, 

in: 2. Ludwigsburger Fachseminar 

Pfl anzenverwendung in historischen Anlagen, 

Referatesammlung, Deutsche Gesellschaft für 

Gartenkunst und Landschaftskultur – Landesgruppe 

Baden-Württemberg, Ludwigsburg 

1982. 

Wertz 1985 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Wiederherstellung 

und Unterhaltung von Parterreanlagen, 

dargestellt am Beispiel des Schwetzinger 

Parterres”, in: Gartendenkmalpfl ege, 


Wertz 1989 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Pfl anzenverwendung 

bei der Wiederherstellung der 

Schwetzinger Parterreanlagen”, in: Johannesberger 

Edition 3, Historische Pfl anzenverwendung, 

Fulda 1989. 

Wertz 1992 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Erfahrungen 

mit Gehölzen bei der Erhaltung und 

Instandsetzung der Anlagen Favorite 

bei Rastatt und Schwetzingen”, in: 3. 

Weihenstephaner Gartendenkmalpfl ege-Seminar, 

Referatesammlung, Weihenstephan 1992. 

Wertz 1993 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Il 

‘Parkpfl egewerk’ di Schwetzingen”, in: Il governo 

del paesaggio e del giardino, a cura di 

Domenico Luciani, Fondazione Benetton, Studi 

Ricerche, Treviso/Milano 1993, S. 141-153. 

Wertz 1996 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Erneuerung 

und Pfl ege von Alleen und Hecken 

– aktuelle Beispiele”, in: 7. Weihenstephaner 

Gartendenkmalpfl ege-Seminar, Referatesammlung, 

Weihenstephan 1996. 

Wertz 1997 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Maßnahmen 

im ‚Zirkel’ des Schwetzinger Schlossgartens”, 

in: Die Gartenkunst des Barock (= 

Tagung Schloss Seehof bei Bamberg 23.-26. 

September 1997, Hefte des Deutschen Nationalkomitees 

ICOMOS, Nr. 28), hg. von Florian 

Fiedler, 1999, S. 131-135. 

Wertz 2000 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, 

„Ogród Pałacowy w Schwetzingen – Po 250 Latach 

Wciąż Młody”, in: Studia i Materiały – Ogród 

Branickich w Białymstoku. Badana-Projekty-Realizacja 

1999/2000. OŚRODEK OCHRONY ZA- 

BYTKOWEGO KRAJOBRAZU, Warszawa 2000. 

Wertz 2001 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, 

“Das Naturtheater und der Türkische Garten – 

zwei Separatgärten des Schwetzinger Schlossgartens”, 

in: Hortus Vitae. Księga pamiątkowa dedykowana 

Andrzejowi Michałowskiemu. OŚRODEK 

OCHRONY ZABYTKOWEGO KRAJOBRAZU 

NARODOWA INSTYTUCJA KULTURY, Warszawa 

2001. 

Wertz 2004 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Der 

Schwetzinger Schlossgarten – Zur Wiederinstandsetzung 

der Gewässer”, in: 15. Weihenstephaner 

Gartendenkmalpfl ege-Seminar, Referatesammlung, 


Wertz 2005 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Vom 

Arionbrunnen zu den Wasser speienden Vögeln 

– Wasserkunst im Schlossgarten von 

Schwetzingen”, in: 16. Weihenstephaner Gartendenkmalpfl 

ege-Seminar, Referatesammlung, 


Wiese 1995 – Wolfgang Wiese, “Schloss 

Schwetzingen. Ein wiederhergestelltes Kulturdenkmal”, 

in: Das Schloss und seine Ausstattung 

als denkmalpfl egerische Aufgabe (= 

Tagung Wörlitz 5.-8. 10. 1994, Hefte des Deutschen 

Nationalkomitees ICOMOS, Nr. 16), hg. 

von Florian Fiedler, 1995, S. 27-31. 

Wimmer 1986 – Clemens Alexander Wimmer, 

“Broderie”, in: Das Gartenamt, Nr. 35, 1986. 

Wimmer 2001 – Clemens Alexander Wimmer, 

Bäume und Sträucher in historischen Gärten. 

Gehölzverwendung in Geschichte und Denkmalpfl 

ege, Dresden 2001.

Wimmer 1988/89 – Clemens Alexander Wimmer, 

Formschnitt der Bäume und Hecken im 

Schwetzinger Barockgarten, Gutachten für die 

Oberfi nanzdirektion Karlsruhe vertreten durch 

das Staatliche Liegenschaftsamt Heidelberg 

– Schlossverwaltung Schwetzingen, Berlin 

1988/89. 

Wirtschaft, Wissenschaft und Technik im Zeitalter 

der Aufklärung. Mannheim und die Kurpfalz 

unter Carl Theodor 1743-1799, hg. vom Landesmuseum 

für Technik und Arbeit, Mannheim, 

Red. Kai Budde, Ubstadt-Weiher 1993. 

Wörn 1968 – Karl Wörn, Schwetzingen – lebendige 

Stadt. Eine historisch – sozialkundliche 

Studie. Geschichte – Gemeinde – Kultur – Wirtschaft, 


Wörn 1993 – Karl Wörn, “Auf dem Weg zur 

Großen Kreisstadt. Aus Geschichte und Kultur 

Schwetzingens”, in: Badische Heimat, 73. Jahrgang, 

1993, Heft 1, S. 29-40. 

Wörn 2000 – Karl Wörn, Schwetzingen zur 

Jahrtausendwende. Geschichte – Kultur – Wirtschaft, 


Zenker 1936 – Oswald Zenker, Schwetzingen, 


Zeyher o. J. – Johann Michael Zeyher, Vues du 

Jardin de Schwezingen, Mannheim o. J. 

Zeyher 1806 – Johann Michael Zeyher, Verzeichniss 

sämmtlicher Bäume und Sträucher, in 

den Großherzoglich-Badischen Gärten zu Carlsruhe, 

Schwezingen und Mannheim, Mannheim 

1806. 

Zeyher/Roemer 1809 – Johann Michael Zeyher/G. 

Roemer, Beschreibung der Gartenanlagen 

zu Schwezingen. Mit acht Kupfern und 

einem Plane des Gartens, Mannheim 1809. 


Zeyher/Roemer 1815 – Johann Michael Zeyher/Roemer, 

Beschreibung der Gartenanlagen 

zu Schwetzingen. Mit 9 Kupfern u. einem Plane 

des Gartens. Neue verbesserte Aufl age der 

Ausgabe von 1809, Mannheim 1815. Reprint 


Zeyher 1819 – Johann Michael Zeyher, Verzeichnis 

der Gewaechse in dem Grossherzoglichen 

Garten zu Schwetzingen, Mannheim 

1819. 

Zeyher/Rieger 1825 – Johann Michael Zeyher/ 

J.G. Rieger, Schwezingen und seine Garten-Anlagen. 

Mit acht von Juri, Schnell und Veith gestochenen 

Ansichten und dem Plane des Gartens, 


Zobel-Klein 2004 – Dunja Zobel-Klein, “Gartenkunst 

und Landschaftsmalerei. Die Gartenserie 

von Carl Kuntz: ‚Six Vues du jardin de Schwetzingen’, 

1795”, in: Gespräche zur Gartenkunst 

und anderen Künsten, hrsg. von Bernd Modrow, 

Hanau 2004, S. 77-102. 

Zollner 1979 – Hans Leopold Zollner, “’Dann 

fl öge ich nach Schwetzingen’ – Gäste der kurpfälzischen 

Sommerresidenz im 18. Jahrhundert”, 

in: Badische Heimat, 59. Jahrgang, 1979, 

Heft 3, S. 377-382. 

Zollner 1975 – Hans Leopold Zollner, “Nicolas 

de Pigage. Sein Leben und Werk”, in: Badische 

Heimat, 56. Jahrgang, 1976, S. 115-127. 


221

222

II. - Schloss Schwetzingen

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?