Schwetzingen - Schlösser-Magazin

Nomination 

for Inscription on the 

UNESCO 

World Heritage List 

Texts 

Schwetzingen 

A Prince Elector’s Summer Residence

Editor: Wirtschaftsministerium Baden-Württemberg; 

Finanzministerium Baden-Württemberg; 

Stadt Schwetzingen 

All rights reserved (© 2009). 

Project Management 

and Contact: Staatliche Schlösser und Gärten Baden-Württemberg, 

Schlossraum 22, 76646 Bruchsal 

andreas.falz@ssg.bwl.de 

Informations: www.welterbeantrag-schwetzingen.de 

Redaction: Andreas Förderer, Petra Schaffrodt, Petra Pechacek 

Translation: Susanne Stopfel, Katherine Vanovitch, Michael Senior 

(List of Monuments) 

End-papers: Zeyher/Roemer 1809 

Jacket image: Bernd Hausner, Regierungspräsidium 

Stuttgart, Landesamt für Denkmalpflege 

Michael Amm, Stuttgarter Luftbild Elsässer 

Verso: Gesamtplan, Verdyck & Gugenhan, Landschaftsarchitekten 

Layout: Struve & Partner, Atelier für Grafik-Design, 

Sickingenstraße 1a, 69126 Heidelberg 

hs@struveundpartner.de

Nomination 

for Inscription on the 

UNESCO 

World Heritage List 

Texts 


A Prince Elector’s Summer Residence

Contents 

I. Introduction 7 

II. Schwetzingen – Elector Carl Theodor’s Summer Residence 

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

b) Schwetzingen – Summer Capital of the Electoral Palatinate 

(Ralf Richard Wagner) 14 

c) Musical Life at the Court of Elector Carl Theodor from 1743 to 1778 

(Bärbel Pelker) 21 

III. Architectural Features 

a) The Palace Theatre – the Ideal of an Eighteenth-Century Theatre 

and Opera House (Monika Scholl, Peter Thoma) 27 

b) The Bathhouse – Synthesis of the Arts and Refuge of Elector Carl Theodor 

(Ralf Richard Wagner) 32 

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

(Susan Richter) 42 

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

Cultural Dialogue (Udo Simon) 51 

e) “… Beyond this lake, finally, there still stands a dilapidated Temple to Mercury, 

possibly the most excellent feature of this garden.” 

(Monika Scholl, Peter Thoma) 59 

IV. Palace Gardens: Role and Significance 

a) The Iconography of the Schwetzingen Palace Gardens 

(Michael Hesse, Hartmut Troll, Ralf Richard Wagner) 67 

b) The Collection and Cultivation of Exotic Plants 

(Jochen Martz, Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, Rainer Stripf) 79 

c) The Cultural Landscape of Schwetzingen (Svenja Schrickel, Hartmut Troll) 90 

d) The 19th and 20th Centuries: Preserving the Palace Gardens as a 

Historic Monument (Hubert Wolfgang Wertz) 98

V. Science and Technology 

Contents 

a) On the Excavations in the Schwetzingen Palace Gardens. 

Elector Carl Theodor as a Trailblazer for Archaeological Research 

and Conservation (Andreas Hensen) 109 

b) The Urban Prospect of the Old Palace as a Retrospective Monument 

to Dynastic Authority (Achim Wendt) 114 

c) The Waterworks and Carl Theodor’s Scientific Experiments – 

Technical Monuments of the Highest Order (Kai Budde) 127 

VI. Schwetzingen – Historical Context 

a) The Prince Electors and their Schwetzingen Estate 135 

1. A Summarized Political History (Stefan Mörz) 

2. History of the Town of Schwetzingen (Joachim Kresin) 

3. The Genesis of the Palace Square (Joachim Kresin) 

b) History of the Palace 151 

1. The Origins of the Castle und the Palace (Peter Knoch, Robert Erb) 

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) 

c) History of the Palace Garden 180 

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

d) The Summer Residence – Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Responses 198 

1. Schwetzingen and its Status as Reflected in Travel Accounts, Images 

and Literature (Susan Richter) 

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

(Peter Stieber) 

VII. Appendices 

a) Biographies (Manuel Bechtold, Susan Richter, Ralf Richard Wagner, 

Hubert Wolfgang Werz, Joachim Kresin) 211 

1. Rulers (in chronological order) 

2. Artists (in alphabetical order) 

b) Chronology (Tanja Fischer) 231 

c) List of Monuments in Schwetzingen (Annegret Kalvelage, Melanie Mertens) 234 

d) Bibliography (Stefan Moebus, Wolfgang Schröck-Schmidt) 253 

e) Overall Map 270

SCHWETZINGEN, 

BLICK VON SÜDEN 

Voltaire (François-Marie 

Arouet), 1768. 

„ “ 

gest. von Barthélemy de La Rocque 

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 fills my soul.

I. Introduction 

In the eighteenth century a magnificent 

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 artificially 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: 

Part II considers the role of the summer 

residence, in particular the tribute it paid 

under Elector Carl Theodor to the performing 

arts, and especially to music. Part III and 

Part IV focus primarily on the structural 

and spatial design of the residence. They 

place the most significant buildings 

within their cultural history and provide 

a detailed description of aspects crucial to 

understanding the palace garden: its function, 

its design, its relationship to its surroundings 

and the continuity underlying its care. 

Part V takes a closer look both at references 

to the historical importance already being 

attached to the complex when it was the 

“summer capital of the Palatinate” and at the 

scientific principles reflected in the extensions 

carried out under Carl Theodor. The historical 

background essential to appreciating the 

garden, the palace and the village in context 

will be found in Part VI, along with an outline 

of the political situation in which the summer 

residence evolved and subsequent perceptions 

of the residence. This is followed in Part VII 

by guidance for the reader’s rapid orientation. 

The concluding Part provides a quick 

overview of the basic facts: short biographies 

of the rulers and the artists active at 

Schwetzingen, a chronology of major events, a 

summarized description of the properties and 

objects inscribed on the list of monuments 

and a bibliography of publications on the 

town, palace and garden. 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 firs 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 – 

Elector Carl Theodor’s 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 flocked 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 first 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. 

As neither Carl Philipp nor any of his 

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. 

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 greatgrandmother 

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-year-old 

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 

I. 

Fig. 1: The territories of the 

Palatine Wittelsbachs in the 

18th century (From: Pfalzatlas 

bzw. Mörz 1991). 

9

II. 

10 

Fig. 2: Elector Carl Theodor 

(1724-1799), painting by 

Johann Georg Ziesenis, 1758 

(Heidelberg, Kurpfälzisches 

Museum). 


present, the Elector-Archbishop Clemens 

August of Cologne (1700-1761) married the 

couple, the newly erected opera-house was 

used for the first time. 

When Carl Philip died the night before 

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

Theodor became Elector – and at first 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. 

However, when the war actions moved to 

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

became more and more unpopular with 

the courtiers and, first 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 sufficient 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 fireworks, 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, fireworks, 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 

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. 


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, 

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 

II. 

Fig. 3: Mannheim, copperplate 

by J. A. Baertels, 1758 (From: 

Walter, Stadtgeschichte 

Mannheim, Mannheim 1907, 

vol. 1). 

11

II. 

12 


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 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 first 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 well-dressed, educated 

and carefully scrutinized by court-officials 

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 

scientific associations was established: The 

Academy of Sciences (1763), to which was 

later added a meteorological branch with 

the first-ever world-wide system of weatherobservation-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 reflecting 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 refine 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 lower-rhenish 

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 first 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 officials fled, 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) 


II. 

13

II. 

Fig. 1: ‘Kleine Pfalzkarte’ (Small 

Map of the Palatinate), etching 

by Egidius Verhelst after Christian 

Mayer, 1773 (Heidelberg, 

Kurpfälzisches Museum). 

14 


b) 

Schwetzingen – Summer Capital 

of the Electoral Palatinate 

Does anyone in the 21st century still use the 

expression summer residence? Surprisingly, 

to this day there are summer residences, 

where respective heads of government 

regularly spend the summer months and 

from which they also govern. One European 

absolute monarchy, the Vatican, uses Castel 

Gandolfo as a summer residence. The Pope, 

whoever he may be, publishes government 

proclamations there and receives cardinals 

and statesmen. For the French Presidency, 

former incumbent François Félix Faure (in 

office 1895-1899) developed Rambouillet 

into a “résidence de campagne” in 1896. It 

still serves as the summer seat of the French 

President, who does real politics there. 

Right into the 20th century, upper-class 

British Prime Ministers used their own 

stately home as their summer residence. 

Beginning with the first Labour Prime 

Minister Ramsay MacDonald (in office 1924 

and 1929-1935), the rural retreat of Chequers 

became the official summer residence of the 

British government. 1 Queen Elizabeth II, who 

formally still rules over the United Kingdom, 

spends 12 weeks of every summer at Balmoral 

Castle in Scotland. In this way she also makes 

an appearance as the Queen of Scotland and 

signs Acts of Parliament into law there. But 

the best known modern summer residence 

is presumably Camp David, which serves the 

President of the United States of America. 

Summer residences in the 18th century 

The expression “summer residence” does not 

seem to have been in general usage in the 

German language in the 18th century, since 

it is not listed in Zedler’s Universallexikon 2 . 

Instead, we will examine related concepts 

such as “court”. 

“Court is the term for where the prince is 

found”, Zedler explains 3 . Meanwhile, we find a 

definition for “residence” in Moser’s Hofrecht: 

“The residence is the proper, permanent home 

of the regent in the place that is the true seat 

of court and the colleges. This is the regent’s 

true home, and in the determination of 

ceremony and the establishment of its rules, 

it is proper to observe the usual practice of a 

residence; whereas at recreational and rural 

seats, much is left aside or allowed to slip.” 4 

In his Zeremonialwissenschaft, Rohr writes: 

“Occasionally Great Lords take a special liking 

to certain places in the country, and not only 

erect splendid palaces and pretty rural and 

recreational mansions for their plaisir at 

those selfsame places, but also order their 

high ministers and most distinguished court 

and military officials to likewise build their 

own there, in part that they may have them 

close at any time when they may require 

their counsel, or their other services, and in 

1 Kindly suggested by Prof. Michael Hesse, Universität Heidelberg. 

Chequers is an Elizabethan country manor near Princes 

Risborough in Buckinghamshire. It was given to the British 

nation in 1917 by Lord Lee of Fareham. 

2 Zedler’s Universallexikon is the best-known 18th-century 

German reference work, comparable with the Encyclopédie 

française, the first modern lexicon. 

3 Johann Heinrich Zedler: Grosses vollständiges Universal- 

Lexicon aller Wissenschaften und Künste. Halle, Leipzig 1732 

ff, volume XIII, 1735, p. 405. 

4 Friedrich Carl von Moser: Teutsches Hof-Recht. Franckfurt, 

Leipzig 1754, volume II, p. 252.

part also that thereby the places, which they 

wish to be built up, are peopled and provided 

with nourishment and custom. … When they 

are at their country manors, a great part of 

ceremony is set aside, and a freer style of life 

is chosen.” 5 

More recently, historians have tended to 

assume that the expressions “court” and 

“residence” are interchangeable. “Court” can be 

characterized by three elements: 

1. the presence of an aristocratic courtly 

society, 

2. the expression of grandeur and material 

splendour, 

3. the refinement and exemplary conduct 

court society compared with social groups 

not present at court. 6 

The residence is the place where the court is 

located regularly for extended periods and 

which then serves as the seat of government. 

Hence, residences also have properties that 

enable them at any given time to fulfil the 

requirements expected of the exercise and 

exhibition of power. 

An important criterion of exercising power 

is access to communication. A ruler at his 

residence must be able to receive messages 

from anywhere swiftly and reliably and 

communicate his decisions equally quickly 

to as many places and people in his realm 

as possible. Residences must, therefore, be 

located conveniently for transport, such as by 

important roads or rivers. 7 

The Electoral summer residence at 


This important aspect also applies to the 

summer residence at Schwetzingen. During 

the reign of Prince-Elector Carl Theodor von 

der Pfalz (*1724; reigned 1743-1799), the road 

to the Palatinate capital Mannheim, the 

5 Julius Bernhard von Rohr: Einleitung zur Ceremoniel-Wissenschaft 

der Grossen Herren. Berlin 1733. Edited by Monika 

Schlechte. Leipzig 1990, p. 83 f. 

6 Aloys Winterling: Der Hof der Kurfürsten von Köln 1688-1794. 

Eine Fallstudie zur Bedeutung “absolutistischer” Hofhaltung. 

Bonn 1986, p. 2. 

7 Egon Johannes Greipl: Macht und Pracht. Die Geschichte der 

Residenzen in Franken, Schwaben und Altbayern. Regensburg 

1991, p. 9. 


principle seat of residence, was developed 

into a highway, and a stage-post for changing 

horses was installed in Rheinau, today a 

suburb of Mannheim. This causeway is the 

continuation of the northern transverse axis 

through the circular parterre in the palace 

gardens at Schwetzingen. The road to the 

Palatinate’s old capital at Heidelberg, which 

had been built in the 17th century during 

the reign of Elector Carl Ludwig (*1617; 

reigned 1649-1680), was upgraded in the 18th 

century and mulberry trees were planted 

alongside to support the silk industry. This 

axis between the Königstuhl, an elevation 

outside Heidelberg, and the Kalmit, a 

peak in the highlands of the Pfälzer Wald, 

provided a key fundamental constant for 

court astronomer Johann Christian Mayer 

(*1719; †1783) as he surveyed the Palatinate. 

It was honoured in both of Mayer’s Palatine 

maps, which are among the most exact in 

the 18th century. Parts of this axis still form 

Carl-Theodor-Strasse and Kurfürstenstrasse 

in Schwetzingen and also the bed of the 

former railway link between Heidelberg and 

Schwetzingen. Finally, the axis survives as a 

path for ramblers and in the form of a runway 

used by the US armed forces. 

Following an extended visit by Elector 

Carl Theodor to his possessions on the 

Lower Rhine, the Duchies of Jülich and 

Berg with their residence at Düsseldorf, the 

Palatine rulers established a permanent 

residence. It was not until the court’s return 

from Düsseldorf in September 1747 that 

Mannheim was chosen for this role. The 

event found expression in an extension of the 

Mannheim palace and of the palace gardens at 

Schwetzingen, and the printing of a Palatine 

court calendar. 8 

8 Stefan Mörz: Haupt- und Residenzstadt – Carl Theodor, sein 

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

II. 

15

II. 

16 


The Palace Square 

The village of Schwetzingen also underwent 

planned development befitting the Elector’s 

summer residence. Under the guidance of 

the director of works, Galli da Bibiena (*1668; 

†1748), a manifest was proclaimed on 16 July 

1748, according to which anyone “intending 

to build in this district shall enquire with 

Mister da Bibiena after where to build, and 

implement and perfect the proposed building 

in accordance with the prescribed line and the 

elaborated plan.” 9 The construction of twostorey 

stone houses was designed to grant the 

village of Schwetzingen the appearance of a 

baroque residence city. 

Bibiena based the dimensions of the new 

palace square on those of the cour d’honneur. 

The square is exactly as wide and twice as 

long as the court of honour. Its west side 

opens entirely onto the palace, while its 

eastern side is closed except for the width of 

the former mulberry avenue. A visitor arriving 

from Heidelberg steps out of the narrow 

avenue (now Carl-Theodor-Strasse) onto the 

wide square, at the far end of which is the 

palace. The latter, then, is both the visual focus 

(point de vue) and the portal to the palace 

gardens concealed beyond. The situation 

in Schwetzingen is quite the opposite of 

that in Versailles or the fan arrangement in 

Karlsruhe, where the roads determining the 

layout of the town originate with the palace 

and thereby underline its dominant position. 

In Schwetzingen it is the palace that provides 

the endpoint for the road from Heidelberg. 10 

The pronounced formal simplicity of the 

square’s architecture does not indicate a 

lack of artistic imagination; rather, it is an 

intentional device which serves to emphasize 

the rural character of the summer residence. 

The Schlossplatz is a magnificent example 

of a unified square design from the mid-18th 

century. It forms a part of the urban plan for 

the Elector’s summer residence, which follows 

9 Generallandesarchiv (GLA) Karlsruhe 221/47 of 16 July 1748. 

10 Wiltrud Heber and Anneliese Seeliger-Zeiss: Der Schwetzinger 

Schlossplatz und seine Bauten: Veröffentlichungen zur 

Heidelberger Altstadt. Heidelberg 1974, p. 2. 

an axis towards the palace and the park. As 

an “ante-room” to the cour d’honneur, the 

square is indispensable and absolutely must 

be preserved as it is to uphold the historical 

appearance of the palace complex. 11 Despite 

changes in following centuries (conversions 

and additions to buildings, replacement of 

the mulberry trees by lime and chestnut), the 

square’s character largely reflects its condition 

in the time of Carl Theodor. 

The character of Schwetzingen as a residence 

is also reflected in the Marstall 12 , the 

Gesandtenhaus 13 and the Pagenhaus 14 . 

Becoming the Palatine’s Summer Capital 

Schwetzingen had already been regularly used 

as a summer residence during the reign of 

Elector Carl Philipp (*1661; reigned 1718- 

1742). The Elector only arrived in his Palatine 

lands after briefly presiding in Neuburg 

on the Danube over his domain there. Carl 

Philipp then set up home in Schwetzingen, 

before settling into his capital at Heidelberg. 

When the residence was officially relocated 

to Mannheim in 1720, Schwetzingen served 

as the residence almost all year round, as the 

palace at Mannheim was not ready for use 

until 1731. Up until then the Palatine court 

only had the use of a provisional and cramped 

interim residence in the Palais Oppenheim 

on Mannheim’s market square. As a result, 

the periods spent in Schwetzingen were 

generously extended. 15 

Following the final designation of Mannheim 

as both capital and residence of the 

11 Heber p. 5. 

12 The “Stables” were built in 1750 as barracks for the Generalissimus 

of the Palatine army, Prince Friedrich Michael von Pfalz- 

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

Elector Carl Theodor purchased them in 1759 and used them as 

a stable and coach house. Following the addition of shops, they 

function today as a department store. 

13 The “Legation” in Zeyherstrasse is now a district court. 

Originally a private house for Privy Counsellor von Jungwirth, 

who was the Elector’s doctor, it was bought by Elector Carl 

Philipp in 1732. It was used as accommodation for foreign 

ambassadors and was provided with a business apartment for 

Oberbaudirektor Nicolas de Pigage. 

14 Pages were sons of nobility receiving their training at court. 

The “Page House” in Zeyherstrasse is now part of the tax 

authority. 

15 Hans Schmidt: Kurfürst Karl Philipp von der Pfalz als 

Reichsfürst. Mannheim 1963.

Palatine Electorate in 1748, during the reign 

of Elector Carl Theodor, the Palatine court 

would leave Mannheim in the spring in 

order to spend the summer in Schwetzingen. 

There is clear evidence of this in the missives 

of the Saxon envoy. Saxony’s ambassador 

Count Andreas Riaucour regularly reported 

on the migration of the Palatine court to 

the country at Schwetzingen, as he did on 

30 April 1771: “Mgr. L’Electeur part demain 

pour Schwezingen avec les personnes qui 

ont été nommées pour l’accompagner à celle 

Campagne, ou il restera pendant l’été jusqu’a 

l’arriere saison”. 16 Or on 23 April 1772: “Leur 

A.S.E. sont arrivées a cette compagne hier 

martin 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”. 17 Schwetzingen even 

has its own court regulations worked out for 

the aristocracy, as Riaucour reports: “La cour 

d’ici a fait imprimer et publier un Reglement 

pour la Noblesse d’ici par rapport aux jours de 

cour et des tables pendant la Campagne d’Eté 

à Schwezingen de l’equel j’ai l’honneur de 

joindre ici un Exemplairem mais la Noblesse 

n’en est pas tops content.” 18 

The date of the move depended on the 

weather, but continually took place around 

the end of April and October respectively. At 

the very latest, the court needed to be back in 

Mannheim for the Elector’s name day on 4 

November, the day of St. Charles Borromeo, 

as this was when the gala commenced with 

great ceremony. Once, due to a “vent de Nord”, 

as Riaucour recounts, one May the Elector 

even retraced his steps to Mannheim, which 

presumably was easier to heat than the 

summer residence at Schwetzingen. 19 

An enormous logistical effort was required to 

move the residence to the countryside for half 

16 Sächsisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden. Loc 2626 Vol XXIV of 

23 April 1771. 

17 Sächsisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden. Loc 2627 Vol XXV of 

23 April 1772. 

18 Sächsisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden. Loc 2626 Vol XXIII of 

1 May 1770. 

19 Sächsisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden. Loc 2627 Vol XXV of 

12 May 1772. 


the year (May to October). Food and firewood 

were brought in as corvée, since even items 

for everyday usage were not stored at the 

summer residence, but had to be delivered 

from Mannheim or those villages and offices 

charged with its supply. The baggage train 

from Mannheim carried linen, furniture, 

crockery and people in great quantities to 

Schwetzingen. The English music critic 

Charles Burney reports: “The number of those 

who follow the Elector to Schwetzingen of a 

summer approaches fifteen hundred, all living 

in this tiny place at the Prince’s expense”. 20 

These 1,500 people descending onto the 

market village of Schwetzingen in one fell 

swoop cannot be verified by other sources, 

but is presumably realistic. The year 1776 saw 

639 people recorded in the court calendar, 

all of whom were in the employ of the 

Palatine court. 21 Most household servants 

were married. However, their families were 

not entitled to live at the palace and would 

have had to find accommodation in town. 

It can safely be assumed that their families 

would not wish to spend half the year apart 

on a regular basis, and would therefore 

20 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, reprint Wilhelmshaven 

1980, p. 228. 

21 Stefan Mörz p. 82. 

II. 

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

II. 

18 


join the flow to the summer residence at 

Schwetzingen. 

The 70 to 80 aristocratic courtiers in turn 

had their own servants to look after them, 

who naturally also required accommodation 

in Schwetzingen. This explains the high 

count of 1,500 people regularly migrating to 

Schwetzingen for the summer. The palace’s 

fairly modest buildings lacked space for the 

entirety of court society as well as servants 

and officials. For the period of their stay in 

Schwetzingen, court servants were paid the 

cost of board and lodging if they stayed in 

burgher houses in town. 

Those that were only required occasionally 

in Schwetzingen were paid travel money. 

Thus not all members of the court orchestra 

were present in Schwetzingen all the time, 

but were only summoned there for certain 

performances. Government offices also 

retained their seat in Mannheim. But since 

the Elector as an absolute ruler needed to 

have all documents placed before him, state 

officials were constantly forced to commute 

to Schwetzingen, since the business of 

government could not be left on hold during 

the six-month stay at the residence. This all 

ensured busy traffic along the sturdy highway 

to Mannheim. 

Accommodation registers from the years 1758 

and 1762 have been preserved. 22 In 1758 234 

courtiers could not be accommodated in the 

palace itself and were paid 4,442 guilders 

from the court treasury to cover the cost 

of their lodgings. The list also mentions at 

which houses the courtiers stayed. The people 

of Schwetzingen obviously profited from 

the presence of court society in many ways. 

Not only could they rent out rooms and sell 

wares, but also participate culturally. Thus 

Burney reports: “The Elector has concerts at 

his palace every evening, if there is nothing 

playing at his theatre. When this occurs, not 

only his subjects but also any strangers have 

free Entrée. ... To anyone walking through 

the streets of Schwetzingen of a summer, it 

22 GLA Karlsruhe, Pfalz Generalia 77/8506. 

must seem as if it were purely a colony of 

musicians, practising their profession at all 

times; for in one house he would hear a fine 

violinist, there in another is a flute, and here 

a most excellent oboist, there a bassoon, a 

clarinet, a violoncello or a concert of all the 

instruments together.” 23 

Summer Residences in France? 

The French philosopher Voltaire (*1694; 

†1778) wrote of his stay in Schwetzingen in 

1753: “Je suis actuellement dans la maison 

de plaisance de Mgr l’Èlecteur palatin.” 24 The 

“maison de plaisance” would be translated 

into German as a “Lustschloss”. Krause takes 

the expression “maison de plaisance” to mean 

a country house defined by its use, i.e. the 

kind of pleasures one might enjoy in the 

country, but not as not the hereditary seat 

of the family, a working estate or a hunting 

lodge. It is seen as a satellite in physical 

proximity to the principal residence. 25 

In France during the period of the “Ancien 

régime”, there was no official summer 

residence. Versailles established itself as the 

permanent seat of the court under Louis XIV. 

So that he could withdraw from Versailles 

and the court, small satellite châteaux were 

built for the French king and selected guests, 

initially the Trianon-de-porcellaine which 

was later replaced by the Trianon-de-marbre, 

the Petit Trianon and Marly. But there 

were still the great French royal palaces 

at Fontainebleau, St Germain-en-Lay and 

Compiègne, all of which provided enough 

space to accommodate the entire court. 

However, these palaces were only used 

temporarily by the French royal court, for 

example for an outing or during a hunt. 26 

23 Charles Burney, p. 228 f. 

24 Henry Anthony Stavan: Kurfürst Karl Theodor und Voltaire. 

Mannheim 1978, p. 8. 

25 Katharina Krause: Die Maison de plaisance – Landhäuser in der 

Île-de-France (1660-1730), München 1996, p. 8 ff. 

26 The spacious royal châteaux also had an assembly room, where 

governing was done and the court was usually present in its 

entirety, including the ministers. However, one cannot observe 

the same continuity and regularity as for the German summer 

residence, including unbroken accommodation for many 

months.

This is clear from the memoires of the 

Duke of Saint-Simon, and from the letters 

of Liselotte von der Pfalz and Madame de 

Sévigné. 27 

In the 18th century the French court still did 

not cultivate this regular habit of moving 

the residence lock, stock and barrel to a 

summer seat. Much as French fashion, art 

and architecture dominated West European 

culture, summer residences were a German 

phenomenon. 28 

The Imperial Court 

Only within the boundaries of the Holy 

Roman Empire of the German Nation is there 

evidence for summer residences that meet 

the criteria identified above. Here, it was the 

traditions of the Hapsburg Imperial Court in 

Vienna that were followed. Recent research 

was able to prove that the cultural hegemony 

of France was accepted and strictly emulated, 

but ceremony was always oriented towards 

the Imperial Court, where the old Spanish- 

Burgundian ceremonies held sway. 29 

During the reign of Emperor Karl VI 

(1711-1740), for example, the residence was 

constantly changing. Between the end of 

April and mid-May, the Imperial Court moved 

from the Hofburg in Vienna to Laxenburg, 

set in a waterscape outside town. At the end 

of June, following another brief sojourn in 

the Hofburg, the court moved again to spend 

the hot summer months at the Favorita on 

the Wieden. It was not until mid-October that 

the court returned to Vienna again, where it 

remained for the entire winter. 

The two palaces which the Emperor occupied 

with some of his court in the spring and 

summer are fully-fledged residences. The only 

matter of significance is that, under Karl VI, 

all ceremonial events without exception were 

27 Sigrid von Massenbach (ed.): Die Memoiren des Herzogs von 

Saint-Simon 1691-1723. Frankfurt am Main1990. Helmuth 

Kiesel: Briefe der Liselotte von der Pfalz. Frankfurt am Main 

1981. Theodora von der Mühll: Madame de Sévigné: Briefe. 

Baden-Baden 1979. 

28 The other countries of Europe have not been included in this 

exposé. 

29 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. 


performed as exactly as they would have been 

in the Hofburg. Imperial lords were invested 

with fiefs and state receptions were held, such 

as for Peter the Great, the Tsar of Russia. This 

in itself qualifies them as summer residences, 

distinguishing them from hunting lodges and 

any occasional visits a foreign prince may 

have paid to any other palace. 30 

Schwetzingen as a Typical Summer Residence 

This definition also applies to Schwetzingen. 

Carl Theodor consistently held ministerial 

conferences at Schwetzingen and received 

eminent guests, such as the bishops of Speyer 

(August Philipp, Count of Limburg-Styrum), 

Hildesheim (Friedrich Wilhelm of Westphalia) 

and Augsburg (Joseph, Landgrave of Hesse- 

Darmstadt), Princess Christine of Saxony, 

Princess-Elector Maria Antonia of Saxony, 

Duke Carl of Courland, 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 Radziwiłł princes as well as 

relatives from Zweibrück and Bavaria. 

Even during the summer months in 

Schwetzingen, the Privy Conference, which 

was the assembly of Palatine ministers chaired 

by the Elector, met almost daily. Unless the 

conference was in recess, between mid-July 

and mid-August, ministers had to remain in 

Schwetzingen at all times or commute there 

from Mannheim. 31 Even during the holidays, 

the cabinet secretary was permanently on 

hand in Schwetzingen to take care of the dayto-day 

running of government affairs together 

with Carl Theodor. 

This characteristic feature of a residence 

finds expression in the form of an assembly 

or conference room. Since Schwetzingen 

Palace was rather modest and actually lacked 

space on the “belle étage” where the Electoral 

couple lived, the conference room also served 

30 Andreas Pécar: Die Ökonomie der Ehre. Der höfische Adel am 

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

31 Kindly mentioned by Stefan Mörz, head of the town archives 

in Ludwigshafen. 

II. 

19

II. 

20 


as an antechamber and games room. 32 The 

conference table, like all tables in the 18th 

century, consisted of two trestles and a top, 

which was covered with tapestry silk. This 

mobile furniture cold be quickly disassembled 

and replaced by games tables, so that the 

room could be used as a games room by 

court society in the evenings. The inventory 

officially lists the room as a conference 

room – a facility which would have been 

expendable in a palace that did not serve as a 

residence. 

Following the war and turmoil of the 17th 

century, almost all the European rulers were 

keen to construct further palaces in addition 

to their principal residence, not only to lend 

greater splendour to their rule with the aid of 

prestigious architecture, but also to include 

the broader surroundings into the projection 

of their princely status. And so the residence 

became a landscape, following the example of 

the “villeggiatura” in Renaissance Italy. 

We can conclude that from 1718 to 1778 

Schwetzingen was the place where the 

Palatine Elector’s court regularly spent the 

summer. By rights, Schwetzingen could 

be described as the summer capital of the 

Palatine Electorate. Capitals are national 

symbols. They can showcase the power of 

a state and become focal points for public 

culture. Above all, they are the results of 

historical development manifested in their 

architecture, just as Schwetzingen proudly 

represents a 60-year period in the 18th 

century 33 . 

(Ralf Richard Wagner) 

32 Indeed, in its present role as part of the palace museum it is 

furnished as a multi-functional room. The wall coverings are 

of red and gold silk moiré and prestigious portraits of Carl 

Theodor and Elisabeth Augusta hang on the walls with the 

official crest of the Palatinate. 

33 Bernd Roeck: Staat ohne Hauptstadt. Städtische Zentren im 

Alten Reich der Frühen Neuzeit. In: Hans-Michael Körner; 

Katharina Weigand (ed.): Hauptstadt. Historische Perspektiven 

eines deutschen Themas. München 1995, pp. 59-72.

c) 

Musical Life at the Court of 

Elector Carl Theodor from 1743 

to 1778 

With generous patronage from Elector Carl 

Theodor, who was a great music-lover, an 

abundance of first-rate musical activity, 

hardly equalled in all Europe, unfolded at 

the Palatine court. Christian Friedrich Daniel 

Schubart described the court as the “Germans’ 

musical Athens” 1 , and its orchestra was held 

by contemporaries to be the best in Europe. 

Its legendary reputation was founded on its 

size, discipline, great technical skill, modern 

organizational methods with rewards for good 

performance, and the fact that no other court 

orchestra of the day boasted more individuals 

who were at once composers and virtuosi. 

The Structure of Musical Life at the Court 2 

Church music 

Thanks to the “Palatinate’s Court and Official 

Diary”, extant from 1748, a fairly clear and 

constant structure can be discerned for church 

music. It was governed by the calendar of 

high days and holy days 3 . On all Sundays 

and holidays, it seems, the sermon would be 

followed by the “Musical High Mass”, and 

in the evenings, before and after the holy 

blessing, the “Lauretan Litany was also sung 

through to music” 4 . As illustrated, for example, 

1 Christian Friedrich Daniel Schubart: Deutsche Chronik, 53. 

Stück, 29. 9. 1774, p. 423. 

2 For further details: Bärbel Pelker: Zur Struktur des Musiklebens 

am Hof Carl Theodors in Mannheim, in: Mozart und 

Mannheim. Kongressbericht Mannheim 1991 (= Quellen 

und Studien zur Geschichte der Mannheimer Hofkapelle 2), 

edited by Ludwig Finscher, Bärbel Pelker and Jochen Reutter. 

Frankfurt am Main 1994, pp. 29-40. 

3 Further literature on the Court Diaries: Eduard Schmitt: 

Die Kurpfälzische Kirchenmusik im 18. Jahrhundert. Diss. 

Heidelberg 1958; Jochen Reutter: Die Kirchenmusik am 

Mannheimer Hof, in: Die Mannheimer Hofkapelle im Zeitalter 

Carl Theodors, edited by Ludwig Finscher. Mannheim 1992, pp. 

97-112; Johannes Theil: ... unter Abfeuerung der Kanonen. Gottesdienste, 

Kirchenfeste und Kirchenmusik in der Mannheimer 

Hofkapelle nach dem Kurpfälzischen Hof- und Staatskalender. 

Norderstedt 2008. 

4 Chur-Pfältzischer Hoff- und Staats-Calender, 1749, “Anmerckungen”, 

fol. A 2r. References such as “musically sung” and 

“Musical High Mass” presumably – not least in the light of the 

known repertoire – mean the performance of church compositions 

in concert form, calling for the participation of both 

departments of court music: the singers and the instrumentalists. 


by the liturgical compositions of Carlo Grua 

and Ignaz Holzbauer, it was a kind of local 

custom to say Mass without the Benedictus 

and play the organ instead. On high days, such 

as the birthdays and name days of the Elector 

and his Lady Consort, High Mass took a 

particularly solemn form, and according to the 

description in the Court Diary a Te Deum was 

sung after the Elevation rather than playing 

the organ. Another feature of these high days 

was to accompany the Gloria, the Te Deum 

and the final blessing with canon firing from 

the ramparts of the fortress. 

An interesting hierarchy can be established 

for certain holidays. Apart from holy worship 

on the occasions mentioned above, Easter 

Week was the most important and also the 

most comprehensive liturgical event, and 

members of court were expected to dress 

in mourning for it. The ceremonial details 

were painstakingly set out every year in the 

Court Diary for all to note. One of the musical 

highlights was without any doubt the Good 

Friday oratorio, which was performed at 

about eight or nine o’clock in the evening 

with a large number of performers (solo 

singers, choir and orchestra). The tremendous 

significance of this performance is born out 

II. 

Fig. 1: Elector Carl Theodor 

with flute traverse (Photo: 

Reiss-Engelhorn-Museen, 

Mannheim). 

21

II. 

22 


both by the specially printed libretti and the 

fact that the title and composer have been 

preserved in all the relevant archive materials 

that have survived 5 , items that usually went 

unmentioned when church music was 

performed 6 . 

Three church holidays were distinguished by 

the fact that, in addition to the musical Mass, 

Evensong took the form of a second musical 

service: Epiphany on 6 January, Easter Sunday 

and Christmas Day. The calendar year was 

brought to an end by a solemn Thanksgiving, 

and the ceremonial Te Deum would be sung 

in the presence of the entire court. 

Secular Music 

Structuring the annual theatre and concert 

programme at the Elector’s court was far more 

difficult, especially as numerous visits by 

high-ranking personages, and the consequent 

effort invested in parading all the official 

magnificence of court, made it impossible 

to maintain an even rhythm. According 

to the court diaries, the basic skeleton for 

the calendar was formed by their lordships 

birthdays and name days and the Carnival 

period. From 1748 to 1762 there were eight 

official court festivals. There were the grand 

galas to honour the Elector and his wife, and 

also less splendid name days and birthdays 

for Prince Friedrich Michael von Zweibrücken 

(1724–1767) and his wife, Princess Maria 

Franziska, with a smaller gala held at court 

and either a ballet pantomime or a French 

play. From 1763 the festivities were cut 

back, and ultimately by 1769 the only major 

spectacles accompanied the name days of the 

Elector and his wife on 4 and 19 November. 

5 Riaucour-Akte 1748–1778 (Dresden, Hauptstaatsarchiv, Loc. 

2622–2628, 31 vols.), Traitteur-Akte (München, Bayerisches 

Hauptstaatsarchiv, Abt. III, Geheimes Hausarchiv, Korr. Akt 882 

V b) and Tagebuch des Freiherrn von Beckers 1770, 1775, 1776, 

1777 (München, Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv, Kasten blau 

1/57 and Kasten blau 433/7 ½). 

6 List of oratorios performed in, inter alia: Friedrich Walter: 

Geschichte des Theaters und der Musik am Kurpfälzischen 

Hofe, Leipzig 1898, pp. 365-367; Karl Böhmer: Das Oratorium 

Gioas, re di Giuda in den Vertonungen von Johannes Ritschel 

(Mannheim 1763) and Pompeo Sales (Koblenz 1781), in: 

Mannheim – Ein Paradies der Tonkünstler? Kongressbericht 

Mannheim 1999 (= Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte der 

Mannheimer Hofkapelle 8), edited by Ludwig Finscher, Bärbel 

Pelker, Rüdiger Thomsen-Fürst. Frankfurt am Main 2002, pp. 

227-251, esp. p. 250. 

Protocol on these days called for a “great gala 

at court” 7 . After the festive church service 

described earlier, an open table was kept. 

Until 1756 a major opera would be performed 

on the same day at around five in the evening. 

From 1757 the first day ended with a “Grand 

Apartement”, and the opera then became 

the central event of the second day. This 

arrangement gave rise to an additional, fourth 

day of celebrations, and the tone would be set 

on the following days by the “Gala Academy” 

(a big court concert lasting up to four hours) 

and the “Gala Comedy” (a French play 

combined with a ballet), a pattern upheld until 

1771. However, when the court galas were 

confined to the two name days, the festivities 

became even more intense, with the inclusion 

of a second opera. 

The Carnival period provided the second 

constant feature in musical life at the court. 

To begin with, the weekly programme, which 

usually began on 6 January, included: the 

“Grand Apartement”, two masque balls, a play 

and the opera on Sunday (although when the 

festivities reached their peak, the opera would 

be postponed as an exception until Monday, 

flanked by masque balls). Until 1752 the 

birthday opera for the Electress (17 January) 

was simultaneously the Carnival opera that 

year; from 1753 the festive opera performed 

on the Elector’s name day (4 November) was 

designated the Carnival opera for the following 

year. No year went by without the regular 

masque ball and opera, but they were joined 

from 1753 by the first “Musical Academy”, 

which was then retained as an annual feature. 

In the latter half of the fifties, the “Grand 

Apartement” was dropped, and from 1772 the 

play also went by the board. The definitive 

Carnival reglement was published every year 

in the “Mannheimer Zeitung” and circulated 

around the court and to the general public on 

little printed hand-outs 8 . 

7 Chur-Pfältzischer Hoff- und Staats-Calender, 1749, unpaginated. 

8 Illustration of two printed programmes with the “Reglement du 

Carneval”, in: Pelker: Zur Struktur des Musiklebens, p. 36. Count 

Riaucour (Riaucour-Akte, 1748–1778) and the Ministers of the 

Electorate regularly published announcements of the Carnival 

amusements, and these have been preserved from 1754 (München, 

Bayerisches Staatsarchiv, Gesandtschaft Wien, Gesandtschaft Berlin).

The Two-Season Structure: Winter and 

summer 

When the second court theatre opened at 

Schwetzingen in summer 1753, the annual 

pattern of musical life at the court was 

radically restructured 9 . Up until this point, 

it had been the custom to launch the theatre 

season with a new opera to mark the birthday 

of the Elector’s wife on 17 January. With a 

second opera house available, musical life 

started to be divided into two seasons: winter 

in Mannheim from November to early May, 

and summer in Schwetzingen from early May 

until the end of October. 

The Winter Season in Mannheim 

The winter season bore all the traces of 

splendour and magnificence that the court 

liked to demonstrate in public. The supreme 

highlight was a new, grandiose opera which, 

until 1752, would remain the only opera of 

the winter season. Visitors attending the 

lavish name day celebrations for the Elector 

and Electress described above would arrive in 

Mannheim towards the end of October and 

usually remain until the end of the Carnival 

period, and this enabled them to obtain seats 

for the opera as early as possible. The upper 

circle of the opera house in the western wing 

of Mannheim Palace was open to members of 

the public 10 . The festive opera was famous for 

its exceedingly sumptuous sets and costumes: 

as the libretti show, there were at least eight 

backdrops, and after each Act there would be 

a ballet with its own independent plot, its own 

printed programme, „specially composed music 

and separate stage sets. These stately spectacles 

would involve more than a hundred performers. 

9 This conclusion is based above all both on the surviving libretti, 

which state on the title page what occasion to be marked 

by the festive opera, and on the envoys’’ reports, which are the 

most reliable source of dates and operatic performances in 

Schwetzingen; apart from the Riaucour file, the envoys’ reports 

by ministers of the Palatinate are relevant to the years 1748 to 

1778 (München, Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv, Gesandtschaft 

Berlin 136-156, Gesandtschaft Wien 649-706, Gesandtschaft 

London 235-249). For a list of productions, cf.: Bärbel Pelker: 

Theateraufführungen und musikalische Akademien, in: Die 

Mannheimer Hofkapelle im Zeitalter Carl Theodors, pp. 

219-259. 

10 Description of a performance in the Fourier Diary, which was 

lost after the Second World War, in: Walter: Geschichte des 

Theaters und der Musik am Kurpfälzischen Hofe, pp. 103-104. 


The turbulent history of the Palatine court 

opera began with the première of the first 

festive opera Meride by Carlo Grua on 18 

January 1742. Under Carl Theodor’s rule, the 

town of his residence became an operatic 

hub of European calibre. As at almost every 

other princely court (e.g. Berlin, Dresden, 

Vienna, Madrid, Naples, Lisbon, Copenhagen), 

Italian opera was admittedly based principally 

on Metastasian libretti – at least to begin 

with, in the 1750s – with works by Johann 

Adolf Hasse (Demofoonte), Niccolò Jommelli 

(Artaserse, L‘Ifigenia [in Aulide], Il Demetrio), 

Baldassare Galuppi (Antigona, L‘Olimpiade) 

and Ignaz Holzbauer (La clemenza di 

Tito, Nitteti, Ippolito ed Aricia). However, 

a renewal was also taking place there, 

encouraged notably by Holzbauer, and there 

were attempts to implement the reforms 

suggested by Francesco Algarotti, whereby all 

the elements in an opera should relate to the 

dramatic narrative. By the time the reformed 

opera “Sofonisba” by Tommaso Trajetta was 

first performed in 1762, Mannheim had 

asserted its significant role in the symphony 

of European court opera. 

The wave of reform was consolidated by 

first performances of other works, such as 

“L’Ifigenia in Tauride” (1764) and “Alessandro 

nell’Indie” (1766) by Gian Francesco de Majo 

and “Temistocle” (1772) by Johann Christian 

Bach. The decisive turning-point in the 

courtly repertoire came in 1775, when an 

opera written in German, Anton Schweiter’s 

“Alceste”, was sung in Schwetzingen. With this 

first full-scale opera in a courtly setting, Carl 

Theodor was testifying unmistakably to his 

preference for the German language. 

With the first performance on 5 January 

1777 of Günther von Schwarzburg by 

Ignaz Holzbauer, resoundingly cheered by 

contemporaries as Germany’s first national 

opera, the Palatine court – briefly, at least – 

sealed its reputation as a home of operatic 

reform. 

II. 

23

II. 

Fig. 2: Ignaz Holzbauer: Günther 

von Schwarzburg, score in 

the author’s own hand with the 

new layer of composition set in 

sealing wax (Photo: Hohenlohe- 

Zentralarchiv, Neuenstein). 

24 


The Summer Season in Schwetzingen 

Unlike the winter season, the summer 

sojourn in Schwetzingen was characterized 

by a diversity of productions and a private 

atmosphere 11 . This atmosphere and the 

Elector’s routine in his summer residence 

during those years are described by Schubart 

in the ardent tone that was his personal 

hallmark: “The Prince-Elector of the Palatinate 

lives in his Schwezingen paradise, in the 

bosom of his faithful subjects, as contented 

as only a prince can be whose conscience 

tells him that he is living in tune with his 

noble vocation. He is visited from time to 

time by great princes. Recently the Elector 

of Trier was here, and, as we have already 

said, the philosophical Prince Ludwig of 

Würtemberg himself. On such occasions 

the amusements are not loud, but tasteful 

and well chosen. There is perhaps nobody 

better able to make use of his time than 

this noble prince. Walking in his enchanted 

garden, reading the best literature in diverse 

languages, conversing with people of taste, 

fine morals and erudition, and every evening 

music in the bath house, or a concert, or an 

opera, Italian, French, and – the Heavens be 

praised! German, too; that is more or less the 

simple circle which contains the hours of this 

11 For a detailed account of musical life and the operas performed: 

Hofoper in Schwetzingen. Musik–Bühnenkunst–Architektur, 

edited by Silke Leopold and Bärbel Pelker. Heidelberg 

2004. 

wise and goodly prince” 12 . Charles Burney, 

who visited the summer residence in August 

1772, also saw Schwetzingen as a “colony 

of musicians”: “To any one walking through 

the streets of Schwetzingen, during summer, 

this place must seem to be inhabited only by 

a colony of musicians, who are constantly 

exercising their profession: at one house a 

fine player on the violin is heard; at another, 

a German flute; here an excellent hautbois; 

there a bassoon, a clarinet, a violoncello, or a 

concert of several instruments together. Music 

seems to be the chief and most constant of 

his Electoral highness’s amusements; and the 

operas, and concerts, to which all his subjects 

have admission, forms the judgment, and 

establishes a taste for music, throughout the 

electorate.” 13 

During the Schwetzingen months, there 

were no official occasions to be marked by 

fixed annual festivities in the court calendar. 

Some effort was made – at least during the 

first season of the palace theatre – to regulate 

the rhythm of events. Compliance, however, 

was doomed to failure, if only because of 

the constant comings and goings of princely 

guests and the special events this invariably 

entailed. Rather than “Opera seria”, there 

were now comical operas of various shades. 

Establishing the second venue consequently 

enriched the repertoire of courtly opera, 

introducing a new genre that was primarily at 

home in Schwetzingen. 

For the “divertissement” of courtly society, 

once the envoys’ reports had been heard, 

Schwetzingen offered stage plays and ballet, 

and also those Musical Academies that in 

Mannheim were held in the “Rittersaal” and 

in Schwetzingen in the “Salle de jeu”, which 

has survived in its original form and is now 

known as the “Mozart Room”. Apparently no 

programmes were printed for the Musical 

Academies, and so the best information 

available is to be gleaned from, for example, 

the letter that Leopold Mozart wrote to his 

12 Christian Friedrich Daniel Schubart: Deutsche Chronik, 50. 

Stück, 19. 9. 1774, pp. 395-396. 

13 Charles Burney: The Present State of Music in Germany, The 

Netherlands and United Provinces, vol. 1, London 1773, p. 96f.

friend Lorenz Hagenauer in Salzburg in 

19 July 1763 14 , when his children came to 

Schwetzingen for a guest performance. We 

can be fairly sure that the court concerts 

lasted three to four hours, and that, as 

was the custom elsewhere, symphonies 

alternated freely with solo concertos and 

operatic arias. Foreign virtuosi who, like the 

Mozarts, brought with them the right kind 

of recommendation from an aristocrat of 

the highest rank, or who had been expressly 

invited by the Electoral couple, were given an 

opportunity to demonstrate their outstanding 

skills 15 . 

Carl Theodor had a particular predilection for 

chamber music. He expressed it, in a way, by 

building the bath house so idyllically located 

in the palace park, and by creating a new 

post, the director of cabinet music, first held 

by Konzertmeister Carlo Giuseppe Toeschi. 

The Elector enjoyed spending an afternoon 

in the bath house talking philosophy to 

scholars of bourgeois and aristocratic origin 

alike, and the records show that much of their 

talk centred on the theory and aesthetics of 

music. The bath house was to some extent a 

metaphor, a place of intellectual renewal. In 

the middle room, Elector Carl Theodor would 

play music himself, along with selected court 

musicians or virtuosi who happened to be 

travelling through. It is no surprise, then, 

that so many flute quartets have survived, 

for this is the genre of music that symbolizes 

intellectual pursuit par excellence. From 

1773, these contemplative afternoons in 

the bath house were an integral feature of 

the diverse programme of amusements in 

Schwetzingen 16 . 

(Bärbel Pelker) 

14 Mozart. Briefe und Aufzeichnungen, Gesamtausgabe, gesammelt 

von W. A. Bauer und O. E. Deutsch. Kassel-Basel 1962, vol. 

1, pp. 78-81, esp. p. 79. 

15 It was by no means easy to enter this society, as demonstrated 

by the fact that the young Luigi Boccherini, for example, was 

turned away from Schwetzingen in 1761 by Minister Heinrich 

von Beckers (München, Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv, Sign.: 

Gesandtschaft Wien 665). 

16 For a detailed account of musical life in Schwetzingen, see: 

Bärbel Pelker: Sommer in der Campagne – Impressionen aus 

Schwetzingen, in: Hofoper in Schwetzingen, pp. 9-38. 


II. 

25

II. 

26 


RUINE DES MERCURTEMPELS 

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 flower garden – the 

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


a) 

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 five 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. 

Building History 

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 specific 

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 first 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 fitted out with latticed 

boxes on the ground floor, and open galleries 

on the two floors 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. 

III. 

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 (From: 

Leopold/Pelker 2004, p. 258). 

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 

confirmed 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 

(From: Leopold/Pelker 2004, 

p. 264/265). 

27

III. 

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 floor construction 

have confirmed a double layer 

of floorboards in the pit. The 

latticed boxes, the central boxes 

on the narrow galleries and the 

painted decoration have all 

been confirmed as part of the 

earliest layout by recent studies 

(From: Leopold/Pelker 2004, p. 

268/269). 

28 


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 floor 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 fire 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, magnificent 

court theatre, the electoral “opera house”, 

and this facilitated the outfitting 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 first 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 

fires 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 floor 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”, 

reflected 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 floor, 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 floor of the orchestra pit made the 

floor a sounding-board; hollow spaces behind 

wooden walls and beneath floors, 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 Stage 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 

III. 

Fig. 4: The house, condition 

of 2006. (Photo: RPS, LDA, 

Hausner). 

29

III. 

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 flyloft and the borders are 

visible too (From: Leopold/ 

Pelker 2004, p. 156). 

30 


Schwetzingen to Munich. Like the theatre, 

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 Description of the Baroque 

Stage Machinery 

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

deep, had five 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 

flies and counterweights. The below stage 

also featured trapdoors and adjustable stage 

lighting. 

Six shafts were mounted in the flyloft 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 flying 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 crosssection; 

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 flyloft, surrounded 

by machinery and ropes. 

The few pieces of the stage that have been 

preserved are in the care of the Mannheim 

office 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 office 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) 


III. 

31

III. 

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 


32 


b) 

The Bathhouse – Synthesis 

of the Arts and Refuge of Elector 

Carl Theodor 


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 “filial 

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 first 

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 first to show 

the finished 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 finie, 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 probably completed. 

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.

Influences 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 4 , 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 

4 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 

III. 

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 bath house from 

the south behind the wild pig 

sculpture by Barthélemy Guibal 

(Photo: RPS, LDA, Hausner). 

33

III. 

34 

Fig. 4: The bathhouse from the 

east (Photo: Förderer). 

Fig. 5: Anton Graff, longitudinal 

section of the bathhouse, 

1799 (From: Badische Heimat, 

2002/1, p. 171). 


the pavilions was converted into a bathhouse. 5 

Marly-le-Roi is considered the prototype 

of pavilions, and in southern Germany in 

particular many imitations were built. 6 In the 

18th century Palladian influence 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 

filial palace became famous under the aegis of 

Queen Marie Antoinette. With its cubic shape 

5 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.” 

6 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. 

and the sophisticated layout of its fronts, by 

means of colossal pilasters or columns, it recalls 

Palladian ideal buildings. At the same time its 

fine 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 influenced 

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 defined by them. 7 It 

developed as a result of certain attitudes of 

17th- and 18th-century society, which valued 

time spent in the country. 8 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 Schöpflin (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 

7 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. 

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

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

et de son bon naturel...”. 9 By temperament 

the Elector Palatine was quiet and often 

melancholy. The 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.” 10 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 difficult 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 

9 Stefan Mörz, Aufgeklärter Absolutismus in der Kurpfalz 

während der Mannheimer Regierungszeit des Kurfürsten Karl 

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

10 Mörz 1991, p. 19. 


diffidently, a flute 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 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.” 11 

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 

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

Patrioten, gesammelte Schriften und Schicksal, Stuttgart 1839, 

pp. 150 f. 

III. 

Fig. 6: Bathhouse vestibule/Oval 

Hall (Photo: LAD Esslingen, 

2006). 

35

III. 

36 


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 with hornbeam hedges and decorated 

with four sandstone busts. 12 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 flight 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 find 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 first 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 first reflected in English 

interiors. The wall apses with statues in 

niches, were brilliantly used by the English 

architect Robert Adam in the first half of the 

18th century, both with and without a set of 

12 The busts are sandstone copies by the sculptor Franz Conrad 

Linck after casts from the Chamber of Antiques at Mannheim. 

columns in front. 13 His models were drawings 

by Andrea Palladio of the Baths of Diocletian 

in Rome. In 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 identified Ledoux as the spiritus 

rector, who first 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 findings, 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 14 and a Cupid by the court 

sculptor, Peter Anton von Verschaffelt. 15 The 

northern portico has reworked plaster casts 

modeled on the Apollino Tribuna 16 and 

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

Kenwood. 

14 The statue of the satyr accompanied by a small goat, is first 

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. 

15 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. 

16 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 

Uffizi in Florence, hence the name, “Apollino Tribuna”.

Idolino. 17 Both porticoes are deliberately simple 

in appearance; early Classicist doctrine held 

that the inherent 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 personifications 

of the times of day. Surmounting them are 

medallions depicting the seasons. Beneath 

them, griffins support marble consoles. The 

mezzanine within the tambour is decorated 

with stucco reliefs by Giuseppe Pozzi (1732- 

1811) depicting cherubs and garlands of 

flowers. The oval 18 painting on the ceiling is 

entirely flat, 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”. 19 

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 

17 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 

first it was displayed in the Uffizi; today it is in the Archaeological 

Museum in Florence. 

18 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”). 

19 The biography of Nicolas Guibal in the appendices contains a 

detailed description. 


“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. 

The Chinese Room has oak wainscoting with 

four inset panels covered with imported 

Chinese wallpaper. The paper depicts small 

figures of craftsmen and peasants going about 

their business against a landscape background. 

Flanking the chimneypiece were consoles made 

by the Frankenthal porcelain manufactory 

supporting figures in the fashionable Chinese 

style. The consoles and figures 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 flanked 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. 20 

They fill 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 fireplace 

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 

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

III. 

37

III. 

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). 

38 


official 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” 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 

flowers, 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 floor. 

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 overflow pipe also 

served as plug. The water was heated in the 

bathhouse kitchen and conducted to the 

bathhouse via subterranean pipes. 21 

The surprising elements of the bathroom are 

the reversion to antique motifs, and its intimate 

character. 

Grounds 

The unadorned bathhouse exterior reflects 

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.” 22 The 

21 The lead pipes and copper kettles remained in place until 

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

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

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 

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 identified: 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”. 23 In a plan of La Malgrange Emmanuel 

Héré writes, under Caption No. 35: “Bassin 

de Rocaille avec un grand nombre d’Oiseaux 

23 Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirks Mannheim. 

Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933, p. 266. 

III. 

Fig. 9: Bathroom in the bathhouse 

(Photo: LAD Esslingen, 

2006). 

Fig. 10: Chiswick House 

(England, near London), c.1725 

(Photo: postcard). 

39

III. 

40 

Fig. 11: Petit Trianon (France, 

Versailles), Ange-Jacques 

Gabriel, 1763-1768 (From: Le 

guide du Patrimoine: Ile de 

France, Paris 1992, S. 711). 

Fig. 12: Schwetzingen, bathhouse 

garden: water-spouting 

birds (Photo: Förderer). 


remplissant un demi dôme de treillage, jettant 

de l’Eau en abondance sur un Hibou.” 24 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 eagle-owl in the basin below. An old 

depiction 

24 Julia Rau-Gräfin von der Schulenburg, Emmanuel Héré. 

Premier Architect von Stanislas Leszczynski in Lothringen 

(1705-1763), Berlin 1973. 

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 flying 

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 

flows 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 artificial 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. 25 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 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 

25 The author does not know whether or not the painting 

survived a recent fire in Lunéville. 


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. 


III. 

Fig. 13: Versailles, the so-called 

maze (destroyed): waterspouting 

birds (From: S. Pincas, 

Versailles, Paris 1995, p. 182). 

Fig. 14: View towards the 

diorama (Photo: Förderer). 

41

III. 

42 

Fig. 1: Mosque and courtyard, 

aerial view (Photo: LAD 



c) 

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 

significance, 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. 

Approaching from the east, however, the 

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

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

esp. p. 56. 

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 first 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 first 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 

financial situation. Older research has 

assumed 

2 Wiltrud Heber, Die Arbeiten des Nicolas de Pigage in den ehemals 

kurpfälzischen Residenzen Mannheim und 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 first 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 

magnificent 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, fig. 

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 

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. 

III. 

Fig. 2: Johann Bernhard Fischer 

von Erlach, view of the holy 

places of Mecca (Entwurf einer 

historischen Architektur, Vol. 

3, 1721). 

43

III. 

Fig. 3: View through the 

entrance pavilion and courtyard 

towards the main building 

(Photo: Förderer). 

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). 

44 


and description by Fischer von Erlach is 

striking. 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 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 fitting of lanterns can be seen. 

Without referring to Fischer von Erlach’s 

depiction of Mecca specifically, 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 

significance 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 

10 Keller 1978, p. 91. 

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.

uilding is clearly not meant to be the focal 

point and chief 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 

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, fig. 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, fig. 154. 

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

Marczoch 1989, fig. 156. 


mosque building, not part of the system 

of covered walks but clearly connected to 

them. Chronologically, 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 

III. 

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). 

45

III. 

Fig. 7: Interior detail of a 

corner pavilion at Schwetzingen 


46 


and Württemberg; Pigage himself travelled 

to Württemberg. 20 The similarities 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 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. 

20 Stefan Moebus, “Ein Künstleraustausch zwischen Württemberg 

und Kurpfalz”, in: Schwäbische Heimat, No. 1999/3, pp. 329- 

340. 

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. 

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 influences. 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 

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 identified 

for the mosque building. The elements 

derived from Ottoman architecture were 

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.

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 reflected 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 

influenced as much by Fischer von Erlach 

as it was by Chambers, whose contribution 

has been stressed much more frequently by 

researchers. 

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. 


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 

baffled 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 

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. 

III. 

Fig. 8: Hohenheim mosque. 

Drawing by David Dillenius, 

1780. 

Fig. 9: Hohenheim mosque. 

Drawing by David Dillenius, 

1780 (From: Martin 1933, p. 

292). 

47

III. 

Fig. 10: Johann Bernhard 

Fischer von Erlach, ground 

plan of the Karlskirche, Vienna 

(Entwurf einer historischen 

Architektur, Vol. 3, 1721). 

48 


Schwetzingen mosque and cloister were well 

beyond the usual idea of garden houses and 

follies. As Gaier wrote, the mosque appears to 

represent nothing but itself. 33 Pigage built two 

structures, reflecting 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 

reflects 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 

identification”, 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 

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. 

“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 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 

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

a. M. 1981, p. 110. 

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 first 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. 

Einfluß 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.

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 

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 reflected 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 

five quotations from the Koran. Inscriptions 

on or in buildings, from the 16th through 

the 18th century, always serve to explain the 

38 Henri de Boulainvilliers, Das Leben des Mahomeds mit 

historischen Anmerkungen über die Mahomedanische Religion 

und die Gewohnheiten der Muselmänner, Lemgo 1747. 

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. 


function, use or dedication of the building. 42 

The first verse of the first 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 

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 

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

Deutschland, Tübingen, n.d., p. 9 f. 

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

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

III. 

Fig. 11: Johann Bernhard 

Fischer von Erlach, Sultan 

Ahmed Mosque in Istanbul 

(Entwurf einer historischen 

Architektur, Vol. 3, 1721). 

49

III. 

50 

Fig. 12: Detail of the cloister 

ceiling (Photo: Förderer). 


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. 

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 fine 

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 

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. 

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, reflecting the significance 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 finite 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 (Ed.), Schwetzingen und seine 

Gartenanlagen. Mit acht von Jury und Schnell gestochenen 

Ansichten und dem Plane des Gartens, Mannheim 1824, p. 113.

d) 

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 

identifiable 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 influences; 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- 

1 Only the consonants and long vowels appear in written Arabic. 

Short vowels are sometimes indicated by special marks. Some 

consonants are only identified 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. 


1729). It was published 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 

mosque front and the eight plaques bearing 

the word allâh are specifically 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. 

III. 

Fig. 1: Arabic text of the saying 

“Without hope nothing will succeed” 

from Rostgaard’s Arabum 

philosophia popularis, ed. 1764 

by Johan Christian Kall. 

51

III. 

52 


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 first 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 specifically 

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 first 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 first 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 insufficient.

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 infinitum 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 testifies 

to a sketchy knowledge of Arabic grammar. 


The literal translation of the first 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.”) 

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

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). 

III. 

53

III. 

54 


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. 

CCCCLVII, with a translation, “Si (non esset) 

spes, irritum esset opus.” 14 

“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 

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 identifiable as al-’amal “work”. Cp. Fig. 1 p. 

55 and Fig. 2 p. 59. 

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 

association of talk and silver is in the Bible in 

Psalms 12:7 and Proverbs 10:20. 17 

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. 

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, Geflügelte 

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.

“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, diligence and sloth, duties 

and luxuries, munificence, the renunciation 

of wealth, contentment &c. Discourse and 

silence is another topic; the proverbs refer to 

eloquence, fitting and convincing speech, the 


merits and meaning of silence and so on. 18 

There are several types of sayings: 

a) those presenting one specific 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 apophthegms (adages). 

Usually a piece of experience or advice 

is put into abstract form. Amthâl of this 

category are often ascribed to sages 

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. 

III. 

Fig. 2: Inscription from the 

mosque tambour (Photo: 

Förderer). 

55

III. 

56 

Fig. 3: Mosque, detail of the 

west front (Photo: Förderer). 


or philosophers and frequently have 

their exact equivalents in the sayings of 

European civilizations; they offer little 

information about Islam or Arab culture 

specifically. 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 17th-century 

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 reasondriven 

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 influential 

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 first-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 capable of wit, acumen 

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.

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 Significance 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 

inscriptions and minarets of a mosque. 28 

25 Cp. Fück 1955, p. 101. The first 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. 

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. 


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 fierce 

opposition – much more than the building 

of a mosque without minarets. However, 

the number of minarets is not fixed; 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 identified 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 specifically identified 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, 

Fig. 4: Mosque interior 


III. 

57

III. 

Fig. 5: Mosque courtyard, back 

front of the entrance pavilion 


58 


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. 

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 

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. 



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

31 Heber 1986, pp. 651-652. 

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 

specifically 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 specific 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 overrefinement 

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.

e) 

“… Beyond this lake, finally, there 

still stands a dilapidated Temple 

to Mercury, possibly the most 

excellent feature of this garden.” 

In 1795, an anonymous visitor, writing in 

the Tübingen Garden Diary, pronounced this 

verdict on the building known as the Temple 

of Mercury in the landscaped section of the 

Schwetzingen Palace Gardens 1 , the summer 

residence of Elector Palatine, Carl Theodor. 

Contemporaries were already impressed by 

the ruins with all their symptoms of decay: 

crumbling stones, deep crevices in the 

weathered façade, the dome half caving in 

over supporting arches that were likewise 

never destined for completion. 

Structural History 

Few sources remain on the Temple of 

Mercury 2 . It was constructed on a site 

dedicated in plans drawn up for the gardens 

in the 1760s, as a “théatre des fleurs”, but 

no more information is provided. The “Etat 

géneral” of 1784 merely lists “le monument 

commencé” as Item no. 41. 

The earliest conclusions of any greater depth 

can be derived from a lengthy memo by 

Pigage dated 18 June 1787, the most detailed 

source document on this structure. 3 Pigage 

wrote this note to the Elector because he 

wished to resume work on this “monument” 

begun ten years earlier. The theme and the 

significance have already, he points out, 

been decided, and they might equally be 

implemented in another form. Construction 

should now proceed on the foundations, 

already 20 feet deep. Although the form of 

the structure was to be amended, the motif 

of the original project would be conveyed. 

1 Taschenkalender auf das Jahr 1795 für Natur- und Gartenfreunde 

p. 121 ff., Tübingen, quoted in Kurt Martin: Die Kunstdenkmäler 

des Amtsbezirks Mannheim, Stadt Schwetzingen. 

Karlsruhe 1933. pp. 313-314. 

2 Wiltrud Heber: Die Arbeiten des Nicolas de Pigage in den ehemals 


2 vols. Worms 1986. 

3 Generallandesarchiv GLA 213/112, 18.6.1787, Pigage Promemoria. 


Pigage requests permission to develop the 

“monument” upon which the Elector has 

resolved, in a modified design, notably as 

ruins. We learn nothing more about the first 

or second project or about this motif. 

It is striking that Pigage refers to what 

became known as the Temple of Mercury as a 

“monument”, which can signify a memorial, a 

visual feature, a monument, but also a grave. 

The “monument” is about putting an idea into 

practice. 4 

Two years before this memo, Hirschfeld was 

already reporting in his “Theory of Garden 

Art”, published in 1785 5 : “… From the mosque 

one looks straight towards an Egyptian 

section, where the works are still proceeding, 

and which, like its Turkish counterpart, 

appears to have fallen from the heavens. It 

is a mound, whereon a new monument is 

being built to King Sesostris. The monument 

may well, as a deceit, be nothing but a few 

ruins almost entirely worn down by time. 

Except that here everything is new, complete 

and decorative; time has altered nothing. 

Entombment and mummies are to stand in 

the vaults within the mound, and the dead, 

they say, shall be brought thither by Charon. 

Lake Moeris is to be dug around the hill. …” 

When Hirschfeld visited Schwetzingen, he 

probably witnessed a building site and the 20foot 

foundations described in Pigage’s memo. 

In 1791, the so-called “monument” is indicated 

for the first time as “Mercurii tempel” on 

the list of commissions to be settled with 

court sculptor Linck. The Protocollum 

Commissionale 6 of 1795 mentions the temple 

with the associated garden area, and that same 

year we find it on the list of structures under 

Pigage’s management. 

4 Pigage refers to the Temple of Minerva as a “temple”, but 

otherwise he uses the term “bâtiment” for his works. 

5 Reproduced in Martin p. 313, fn. 2, Hirschfeld: Theorie der 

Gartenkunst, vol. 5, p. 344 ff. 

6 GLA 221/46. 

III. 

59

III. 

Fig. 1: Wilhelm Schweitzer, 

survey before 1933, ground 

floor plan (From: Martin 1933, 

p. 314, Fig. 301). 

60 


Architectural Design 

The Temple of Mercury was built of solid 

masonry as an artificial ruin over a hexagonal 

ground plan with four accessible vaulted 

storeys. Sandstone and tuff are used for 

the facing, but also for structural purposes, 

although in parts unseen brickwork provides 

the structural core. The materials have been 

layered into a composite system. The lowest 

storey is concealed within a landscaped hill 

and can only be seen and entered from the 

south. Three doorways lead into the ground 

floor, and every side containing an entrance 

looks the same, with no principal façade. 

Findings on site confirm what Leger describes 

in his guide to the gardens of 1828. The 

exterior of the tuff ruins were originally of 

a dark reddish brown. The relief in weatherresistant 

stucco is reminiscent of marble 

carving. The space on the ground floor took 

its atmosphere from a yellowy droplet plaster. 

Traces of plaster and wrought nails are all 

that remain of the original coffering beneath 

the tambour. Some of the brightly glazed 

earthenware petals fixed with wire to the 

moulding have been preserved. The dome 

was protected from the elements outside by 

a coat of render. Rainwater was guided away 

with great efficiency, and yet out of sight, by 

an intricate system of channels in the form of 

deep cracks in the wall, ledges and canopies. 

Nicolas de Pigage lent the ruins an extremely 

idiosyncratic plan and cubature. The three 

identical concave access walls deprive 

the building of an orientation. The upper 

storeys that rise in a cylinder reinforce 

the impression that the structure keeps 

turning away. Irregular, apparently arbitrary 

cracking, fracturing, crumbling and deep 

wells of erosion dissolve the contours of the 

structure and make it difficult for visitors 

to grasp its true shape. On closer analysis, 

one can tell that the entire building respects 

a sophisticated pattern of measurements, 

each module a fathom. Each section develops 

geometrically from the last, conserving a 

proportionate relationship. 

Above all, however, the masterful skills 

of Nicolas de Pigage are demonstrated by 

the split round temple of the crown. The 

dome’s shape is only that of a horseshoe 

so the tensile ring around its base, the key 

element in a dome-supporting structure, is 

missing. Nevertheless, the dome remains 

essentially unchanged until today. Extensive 

investigations have revealed the solution 

contrived by Nicolas de Pigage. Wroughtiron 

posts were embedded within five of 

the belvedere’s six pillars, and together 

with crosspieces made of iron profiles these 

ensured resistance to any bending in the bed 

joints of the masonry. These vertical iron rods 

are linked at a height of 15.40 m to the first 

of the open circular beams which, below the 

cornice, to some extent bind the three-quarter 

circle at the base of the dome. A second open 

ring at a height of 16.45 m follows a groove in 

the moulding. It is both clasped to the pillars 

and locked into an impost at each end. If the 

anchor were to be placed under strain, the 

conical, concentrically formed posts would 

be pulled taught. In this manner, the beams 

and imposts create a stable open girdle able to 

absorb the forces in the dome. What we find 

in the Temple of Mercury is a predecessor of 

pre-stressed structural design.

Mythology 

The building owes its name, Temple of 

Mercury, to the wall relief of weatherproof 

marble stucco. It was probably carved by the 

court sculptor Conrad Linck. Still extant are 

three scenes over the archways, one of them, 

with a figure of Mercury, having been lost. 

Each depicts the youthful Mercury as the 

main protagonist; his attributes – the helmet, 

winged boots and staff – leave no doubt as to 

his identity. On the higher storey, the façade 

sports bulls’ skulls and draped cloth. 

The episodes with Mercury relate to Ovid’s 

Metamorphoses. 7 Two scenes are fashioned 

after the iconographic typologies that had 

developed in illustrations of Ovid up to that 

time, and which were common and familiar 

in the 18th century: 8 The relief on the east 

side shows Mercury shackling Prometheus to 

the Caucasus. According to legend, the latter 

had stolen fire from the gods for his mortal 

creatures, whereupon Zeus ordered that he 

should be chained to the cliffs and that an 

eagle should gnaw at his ever-regenerating 

liver until such day as Heracles would free 

him. The Schwetzingen relief draws on the 

less frequent version, with Mercury laying the 

chains rather than Vulcan. 

On the north side we see Mercury releasing 

Io in the shape of a cow. The legend tells how 

Zeus hid his lover Io, a king’s daughter, from 

his wife Hera by turning Io into a cow. As Io 

was unhappy with her lot, Mercury was sent 

to free her. He played the pipes to send the 

guardian Argos to sleep before killing him. Io, 

still in the form of a cow, was pursued by Hera 

across the Ionian Sea to Egypt, where she was 

later revered as the goddess Isis. 

The third relief to the west has not been 

7 Cf. Benjamin Hederich: Gründliches mythologisches Lexikon. 

Leipzig 1770 (1st ed. Leipzig 1724). 

8 Crispin van de Passe: Metamorphoseon Ovidiarum. (Cologne) 

1602. Introductory Notes by Stephen Orgel. The Philosophy of 

Images. New York 1979. 

P. Ovidius Naso: Metamorphosen. Epos in 15 Büchern. Translated 

and edited by Hermann Breitenbach with an Introduction 

by L. P. Wilkinson. Stuttgart 2005. 

A. Pigler: Barockthemen. Eine Auswahl von Verzeichnissen 

zur Ikonographie des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts. vol. 2. 2nd 

extended ed. Budapest 1974. 

Jane Davidson Reich, Chris Rohmann: The Oxford Guide to 

Classical Mythology in the Arts, 1300 – 1990. New York 1993. 


satisfactorily interpreted, for neither its 

mythological nor its literary allusions are 

properly understood. 9 We see Mercury 

standing at the centre of the scene, apparently 

directing the group on the right of the 

tableau – a seated woman, a standing woman 

and a ram – towards the god and goddess 

who reign supreme, Zeus and Hera, on the 

left. Usually, however, the ram was regarded 

by the Ancients as a beast to be sacrificed to 

Mercury, and rarely to Hera and Zeus. We can 

only assume that the third scene also observes 

an iconographic typology and that it would 

have been recognized by Carl Theodor’s 

contemporaries. 

9 According to Heber, we can see Mercury leading Persephone/ 

Proserpina out of Hades back into the realm of mortals, with 

Zeus and Hera recognizable. Martin argues that the third relief 

scene should be interpreted as an allegory: Hermes right arm 

is outstretched, indicating the two gods Zeus and Hera, as if he 

wished to draw the attention of a seated and a standing women 

to the divine couple. The girls, he says, are ready to sacrifice 

a ram. Hermes is the go-between between gods and mortals. 

Leger, on the other hand, reads the scene as follows: Mercury is 

depicted in his role as messenger between gods and humans; 

we seem him presenting a petition from the two women to the 

deities. 

III. 

Fig. 2: Section through the cornice 

of the dome structure on 

the first floor of the belvedere 

showing the position of the tie 

beams and vertical member 

(Photo: Vermögen und Bau 

Baden-Württemberg). 

61

III. 

Fig. 3: Conrad Linck: Mercury 

chains Prometheus to a rock in 

the Caucasus. Relief over the 

north-east door (From: Martin 

1933, p. 317, Fig. 304). 

62 


Typology 

The “monument” is not a replica of an 

ancient structure. Nor can it be identified 

with an Ancient cult of Mercury. Only in 

some respects does it reflect the typology of 

a Roman tomb tower: in 1971 Gamer was the 

first to point out a certain concordance with 

the so-called Conocchia dating from the third 

quarter of the first century A.D. at Capua 

Vetere. 10 The “Cenotaph of the Julii” in Glanum 

would be another example. Notwithstanding 

certain formal similarities, the differences are 

evident. 11 Formally speaking, there is little to 

associate it with tower-like ruins in the garden 

architecture of the period, such as in Machern, 

Louisenlund or Désert de Retz. 

The Temple of Mercury pleads to be 

experienced from the inside. The high central 

room of the lower storey recalls the numerous 

grotto études of the time, artistically yet 

eerily stage-managed. 12 By contrast, the open 

domed hall on the ground floor with its once 

pale yellow droplet plaster conveys the sense 

of what used to be called a “garden room”. 

The crowning tambour with its belvedere 

function was designed as a monopteros, 

10 Jörg Gamer: Schloss und Park der kurpfälzischen Sommerresidenz 

zu Schwetzingen im 18. Jahrhundert. Kunstgeschichtliche 

Gesellschaft zu Berlin. Sitzungsberichte NF 19. 1970/71, pp. 

11-17. 

11 Cf. also the “Cenotaph of the Julii” in Glanum/St. Rémy: This is 

a catafalque. 

12 Cf. James Stevens Curl: The Art and Architecture of 

Freemasonry. An Introductory Study. London 1991. Jan A. M. 

Snoek: Schwetzingen: More than just a Masonic Garden. In: 

Symbolism in 18th Century Gardens. Den Haag 2006. 

rather like Schwetzingen’s Temple of Apollo. 

It is perhaps reminiscent of Bramante’s 

“Tempietto” in Rome. 

Masonic Connotations 

In the light of 18th-century Masonic 

philosophy, the Temple of Mercury may also 

have reminded educated contemporaries 

of the reconstruction of Ezekiel’s Temple 

published by Hafenreffer in Tübingen in 

1613. 13 Hafenreffer was held in widespread 

esteem for his attempt to picture Solomon’s 

first temple in Jerusalem based on its 

descriptions in the Bible. His scientific 

contribution had lost nothing of its 

relevance in the 18th century. In the present 

context, the Temple of Mercury makes a 

formal reference to the Temple of Solomon 

collapsing in Jerusalem. 14 It was one of the 

most magnificent buildings of its age and of 

particular significance to Freemasons. 

The reference to an Ancient Roman tomb 

structure is a reminder of the death of Hiram 

Abiff, who built the Temple of Solomon. 

His grave, according to tradition, was in the 

temple itself, for he was buried among the 

holiest of men. In this sense, the Temple of 

Mercury is Solomon’s crumbling temple. 

Besides, in the mystical Christian context 

of 18th-century Freemasonry, Hiram could 

be equated with Christ. As it fell prey to 

destruction, the temple would thus symbolize 

Christ dying on the cross – played out 

allegorically in the relief around the door 

with the dying Prometheus. By adopting this 

reading, one might construe the other relief 

scenes more or less as follows: the princess Io 

is granted a new life and – as Ovid describes 

– will rule as the goddess Isis in Egypt, an 

allusion to the Resurrection of Christ. The 

third scene could refer to the central role of 

the resurrected Christ as defined in the Gospel 

13 Cf. James Stevens Curl: The Art and Architecture of 

Freemasonry. An Introductory Study. London 1991. p. 85, and 

Paul von Naredi-Rainer: Salomos Tempel und das Abendland. 

Monumentale Folgen historischer Irrtümer. Köln 1994. 

14 Cf. Jan A. M. Snoek: Schwetzingen: More than just a Masonic 

Garden. In: Symbolism in 18th Century Gardens. Den Haag 

2006.

of St John: “No man cometh unto the Father, 

but by me.” 15 

It would conform to the philosophical 

paradigm of the period to formulate 

additional connotations, with hermetic and 

Rosicrucian references by no means unlikely. 16 

The Temple as Utopia 

The Temple of Mercury is located in the 

last area of the gardens to be laid out in 

accordance with the principles of the jardin 

anglo-chinois. 17 Changing views of nature in 

the 18th century find their expression here. 

Picturesque views with scenes of an ideal 

landscape apparently come true, prompt 

associations in the visitor with an Arcadian 

condition. Paintings of idealized landscapes 

produced by artists at the time seem to have 

materialized here. Versatile mini-structures 

full of fantasy complement this artistic stage 

set with their picturesque and atmospheric 

imagery brimming with poetry. 18 One example 

is the series of watercolours by Carl Kuntz 

with landscape motifs from the gardens of 

Schwetzingen, the Temple of Mercury among 

them. 

As a “fabrique”, the Temple of Mercury falls 

somewhere between an architectural model 

and reality. As the design did not formally 

adhere to any traditional typology, it was first 

and foremost an unconventional decorative 

structure. In addition, the interior spaces 

enticed visitors indoors, and so the Temple 

of Mercury offered people of the day an 

unprecedented architectural experience in a 

novel architectural idiom. 19 

Beyond their enticing design, the “fabriques” 

were intended as symbols whose significance 

15 John 14, 6: “I am the way, the truth and the life. No man 

cometh unto the Father, but by me.” 

16 Helmut Reinalter (ed): Aufklärung und Geheimgesellschaften. 

Zur politischen Funktion und Sozialstruktur der Freimaurerlogen 

im 18. Jahrhundert. Ancien Régime, Aufklärung und 

Revolution vol. 16. München 1989. 

17 Cf. Monique Mosser: Paradoxe Architekturen oder kleiner 

Traktat über die fabriques. In: Monique Mosser and Georges 

Teyssot: Die Gartenkunst des Abendlandes. Von der Renaissance 

bis zur Gegenwart. Stuttgart 1993. pp. 259-276. 

18 John Dixon Hunt: „Ut Pictura Poesis“: der Garten und das 

Pittoreske in England 1710 – 1750. In: ibid. pp. 227–238. 

19 Jean-Marie Morel: Théorie des Jardins Analyse der fabriques. 

Paris 1776. 


was woven into multiple connotative layers. 

Close ties with literature, citations and broad 

references to specialized fields of knowledge 

make them an intellectual delight for the 

well educated. They testify to a past era and a 

fanciful world. Visitors to the garden seem to 

wander through a very personal encyclopaedia 

compiled by its owner, with pages open at a 

wide range of themes and allusions. In some 

respects, the Temple of Mercury also pays 

testimony to contemporary interest in the 

young science of archaeology 20 by recalling a 

tomb tower that had survived from ancient 

times. 

The Temple of Mercury is a graphic reminder 

to visitors of their own transience and finite 

existence. This is particularly evident if we 

compare it to the mosque opposite, which 

was built at the same time. The artistic 

presentation of decay suggests that nature has 

already reconquered much of what appears 

to have once been a highly cultivated work of 

human inspiration. 

20 Günter Hartmann: Die Ruine im Landschaftsgarten. Worms 

1981. 

III. 

Fig. 4: Louis Augustin Lamy, 

The Roman Monuments on the 

Antiques Plateau near St. Rémy, 

copper engraving 1777 (From: 

Droste, Die Provence, 1995, p. 

143). 

63

III. 


survey before 1933, north-east 

elevation (excluding cellar) 

(From: Martin 1933, p. 315, 

Fig. 302). 

Fig. 6: Giuseppe or Lorenzo 

Quaglio, set design with Temple 

of Mercury theme, backdrop, 

ink and watercolour (From: 

Leopold/Pelker, Hofoper in 

Schwetzingen, Heidelberg 2004, 

p. 191). 

64 


Quite apart from this, towards the end of the 

18th century there were close links between 

the garden and the theatre. Gardens were seen 

as a place for dreams and illusions, but also 

as a realization of the dream. This layered 

perspective is likewise reflected in painting: 

artists such as Jean Baptiste Oudry and 

François Boucher make it skilfully unclear in 

their garden scenes whether we are looking 

at a stage erected in a garden or an area of 

garden decorated for the stage. 

It is hardly surprising that these links between 

garden and theatre were encountered all 

over the summer residence of Schwetzingen. 

After all, Carl Theodor was one of the great 

theatre-loving princes of his day. Magnificent 

performances took place in the natural 

theatre. The stage of the court theatre could 

open up to the garden at the rear, and so 

the theatre reached into the garden and the 

garden into the theatre. Themes from the 

garden were borrowed for the sets. A number 

of small watercolours depicting the garden 

architecture at Schwetzingen, including the 

Temple of Mercury, have been attributed to 

the stage painter Giuseppe Quaglio. These 

sketches are likely to have been used for 

backdrops. 

(Monika Scholl, Peter Thoma)


III. 

65

III. 

66 


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 artificial, 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 flamboyance that 

creates its curious artificial 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.


a) 

The Iconography of the 

Schwetzingen Palace Gardens 

The palace gardens at Schwetzingen are 

significant in many respects as a work of art 

in themselves. The late Baroque garden was 

inspired by the Régence, its shapes carefully 

balanced and the parts subjected to decorative 

but strict coordination. 1 The style is Classical, 

with none of the exotic furbishing so typical 

of the day. The landscaped extensions 

were carried out when this genre was in its 

early phase in Southern Germany, and in 

their own way they pioneered it. Friedrich 

Ludwig Sckell’s first work, his meadow 

valley, was to have a historical impact on 

further developments. There is evidence that 

this theme influenced Lenné’s designs for 

Sanssouci. 2 

In Schwetzingen, then, two different views 

of gardens and the place of nature are 

artistically interwoven, merging to express 

the typological ideal for a princely residence 

in the 18 th century. Within the space of a 

generation, a relatively homogenous work 

was to emerge, and leading garden designers 

of the age were involved, not only in its 

creation but, at the turn of the next century, in 

initiating conservatory measures. It is to this 

fact that the garden owes some of its great 

authenticity. 

The gardens boast a collection of sculptures 

from the latter half of the 18 th century rarely 

equalled in its range by other European 

gardens. It consists of some 280 decorative 

specimens of plastic art. These include statues, 

groups, busts and ornate vases of varying size 

and versatile technique: gilded lead, chiselled 

lead castings, bronze, marble, sandstone, iron 

castings, driven iron sheeting, not to forget 

the sandstone benches and tables. Among 

1 Wiltrud Heber: Die Arbeiten des Nicolas de Pigage in den ehemals 

kurpfälzischen Residenzen Mannheim und Schwetzingen. 

Manuskripte zur Kunstwissenschaft, vol. 10., 2 vols. Worms 

1986. 

2 Adrian von Butlar: Der Landschaftsgarten. Gartenkunst des 

Klassizismus und der Romantik. Köln 1989. p. 210. 

the highlights of the features adorning the 

Schwetzingen gardens, however, are the 

seven small pieces of architecture known as 

the “fabriques”, complex masonry buildings 

which appeared within a period of about 20 

years. Together, the sculpture and architecture 

reflect a universe of explicitly Enlightenment 

thinking, thus representing one of the major 

social currents of the 18 th century. 3 Against 

a backcloth of Baroque utopias such as the 

return of the Golden Age, largely allegorical 

in character, basic concepts such as Nature, 

Tolerance and Reason gradually found form in 

the gardens, notably in the park architecture 

and the associated iconographic programmes. 

Readings of Antiquity in the Park Buildings 

All Classicistical architecture is founded on a 

response to Antiquity. Traditional European 

building derives its forms, types and design 

principles from Ancient prototypes or else 

sees itself as developing these further. Since 

the Renaissance, architects had felt a duty to 

respect Antique models by imitating them, 

and they saw themselves as part of a great 

tradition that had temporariliy been disrupted 

by the Middle Ages. The new quality to the 

neo-classicism that began to emerge after 

the middle of the 18 th century is not so much 

its reference to Antiquity as such, as its 

perception of Antiquity as part of the flow 

of history and its critical reappropriation 

of ancient and recent architecture with that 

awareness of historical distance. 

Even before the mid-18 th century, Germain 

Boffrand and Jacques-François Blondel 

had attacked the Rococo decoration that 

undermined fundamental tectonic structures 

3 The influence here of Freemasonry and other exotic bodies of 

thought have recently been studied in this context. These ideas 

also found their supporters at the court of the Elector Palatine, 

and there is evidence that some of his close associates were 

active Freemasons. Currents of Enlightenment philosophy can 

be expressed in multiple layers of symbol. Indications of this 

intellectual background may be motifs such as the compass, 

angle or shining star, but equally architectural quotations – 

like the mosque minaret – or structural features such as the 

pervasive vaulting of the temples (allusion to “cryptic content”). 

The research has not yet consolidated the evidence of Masonic 

references, but notwithstanding any future findings, the 

Schwetzingen palace gardens offer an excellent iconography 

of Enlightenment thinking still in an outstanding state of 

preservation. 

IV. 

67

IV. 

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 

finds; 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). 

68 


as a violation of “régularité” and “noble 

simplicité”. 4 From the middle of the century, 

Rococo came under fire in France as a 

symptom of decadence that flew in the face 

of both nature and reason. It was countered 

by exemplary Grand Siècle buildings and 

above all the classical architecture that was 

increasingly being systematically investigated 

and brought to the attention of contemporary 

readers in beautifully illustrated publications. 

The avant-garde designs of French students 

dispatched to Rome were already testing the 

permutations for freely combining classical 

forms. Towards 1760 this “goût grec” was 

responsible for introducing a style that was 

not so much “Greek” as demonstratively 

emulating Antiquity, the Early Classicism 

4 Svend Eriksen: Early Neo-Classicism in France. The creation 

of the Louis seize style in architectural decoration, furniture 

and ormulu, gold and silver, and Sèvres porcelain in the mideighteenth 

century. London 1974, pp. 25-48; Michael Häberle: 

Pariser Architektur zwischen 1750 und 1800. Zur Entstehung 

des Elementarismus. Tübingen 1995, pp. 42-47. 

of Louis XVI. In Schwetzingen, it is already 

reflected in Peter Anton von Verschaffelt’s 

obelisks on the circle’s transverse axis (1766- 

1769). 

Elector Carl Theodor’s summer residence at 

Schwetzingen shows that it is fully abreast 

of the times with its deliberate tribute to 

an allegedly informal rural lifestyle in close 

affinity to nature. All this is pervaded by the 

yearning for an Arcadian place. The park 

buildings with their monumental postures 

create an Enlightenment programme to 

cleanse and improve the human soul and to 

foster confidence in reason and the forward 

march of civilization. 5 For drawing on the 

aesthetics of association, the architecture of 

5 Jan A. M. Snoek, Monika Scholl, Andréa Kroon (eds.): Symbolism 

in 18 th Century Gardens. The Influence of Intellectual 

and Esoteric Currents, such as Freemasonry, Den Haag 2006. 

The authors see the Schwetzingen gardens as implementing 

a coherent Masonic programme. Snoek’s method is, however, 

problematic in his optical interpretation of Petri’s garden 

design and Pigage’s overall design for the bath house.

Antiquity is a trove of model motifs, forms 

and typologies. But it is more: the image of 

a landscape that played its part in Classical 

history and culture emerges on the site of 

Schwetzingen itself. 

One of the earliest buildings in the 

Schwetzingen gardens is the Apollo precinct, 

facing in two directions, with a temple for 

which planning began in 1762. 6 Entering 

by the terraced substructure to the west, 

the visitor ascends through an apparently 

confused jumble of murky passages which 

appear to have been hewn into the rock, 

towards a platform bathed in light with an 

idealized classical monopteros, the god of 

Order and Reason. The round temple also 

crowns the backcloth that can be seen further 

east between the hedges of the natural theatre. 

In this setting, Apollo appears as the god of 

Arts, the chief Muse on the summit of Mount 

Helicon, where Pegasus stamped his hoof to 

create the Fountain of Hippocrene, whose 

wondrous waters are passed on to humans by 

the naiads and cascades of Schwetzingen. 

The terraces crowned by the temple 

presumably drew general inspiration from 

the Late Republican Sanctuary of Fortuna 

in Palestrina (Praeneste), which had been an 

influence in the design of villa gardens in 

and around Rome since the 16 th century. 7 In 

Carl Theodor’s day, round temples with no 

cella could not be studied directly in ancient 

monuments. Vitruvius does, however, provide 

a description of the monopteros, and in 

Claude Perrault’s edition there is a detailed 

commentary with a visual reconstruction in 

the form of a temple to Apollo. 8 The base, 

6 Heber 1986, pp. 485-503; Carl Ludwig Fuchs, Claus Reisinger: 

Schloß und Garten zu Schwetzingen. Worms 2001, pp. 

117-127; Ralf Wagner: Arkadien auch in Schwetzingen? In: 

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

Musik, Bühnenkunst, Architektur. Heidelberg 2004, pp. 39-54; 

Ralf Wagner: Das Badhaus des Kurfürsten Carl Theodor von 

der Pfalz in der Sommerresidenz Schwetzingen, Phil. Diss., 

Heidelberg 2006, pp. 68-87. 

7 Jörg Gamer: Schloß und Park der kurpfälzischen Sommerresidenz 

Schwetzingen im 18. Jahrhundert, in: Kunstgeschichtliche 

Gesellschaft zu Berlin. Sitzungsberichte, Neue Folge, vol. 19, 

1970/71, pp. 11-17. 

8 Vitruvius IV.8,1; Claude Perrault : Les dix livres d’architecture 

de Vitruve. Paris 2 1684, pp. 139-144; on the monopteros cf. 

Ingrid Weibezahn: Geschichte und Funktion des Monopteros. 

Untersuchungen zu einem Gebäudetyp des Spätbarock und des 

Klassizismus. Hildesheim 1975. 


which has four sections each with three 

columns, follows instead Andrea Palladio’s 

illustration for Daniele Barbaro’s edition 

of Vitruvius. 9 In modern architecture, the 

monopteros has been taken as evidence of a 

Vitruvian training. 10 One well-known example 

of a monopteros in a garden is the rotunda 

built around 1720 by John Vanbrugh for the 

park at Stowe. 11 With its prominent position 

on the artificial rock, the round temple at 

Schwetzingen could also have been prompted 

9 Daniele Barbaro: I dieci libri dell’architettura di M. Vitruvio. 

Venice 1556, IV.8,1; Weibezahn 1975, p. 9. 

10 Hans Christoph Dittscheid: Vitruvs Wiedergeburt inmitten 

der Natur. Zur Rolle der Architektur in Sckells Konzept des 

Landschaftsgartens, in: Die Gartenkunst. vol. 14, 2002, pp. 

311-325. 

11 Weibezahn 1975, Kat.-Nr. 24. 

IV. 

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). 

69

IV. 

Fig. 4: Obelisk, north half of the 

circular parterre’s transverse 

axis, Peter Anton von Verschaffelt, 

1762-69 (Photo: Scholl). 

70 


by the similar Temple of Vesta in Tibur 

(Tivoli) which, although it has a cella, is in a 

ruinous state. 

The bath house begun in 1768 to a design 

by Nicolas de Pigage was a carefully shielded 

retreat with its own garden, where Carl 

Theodor was able to pursue his own interests 

with informal privacy. 12 The maison de 

plaisance, with an oval hall at its centre, 

living rooms and a bathing area, adopted 

Palladian villa architecture, notably Vincenzo 

Scamozzi’s La Rocca Pisani near Lonigo (1576) 

and Lord Burlington’s Chiswick House near 

London (1726), the manifesto of the English 

Palladian style. This kind of Classicism was 

new in the south-west of Germany. There is 

a glimpse of associations with Antiquity, too, 

when the “Etrennes Palatines” for 1769 note 

that the new bathing facility “dans le goût 

des Anciens” will be known as the “Thermes 

Théodoriques”. 13 

12 Wagner 2006, p. 59ff. 

13 Etrennes Palatines Pour l’Annee 1769, quoted in Wagner 2006, 

p. 104. 

Pigage demonstrates his originality, even by 

European standards, by drawing on Antique 

forms for the two porticos. 14 For the first time 

on an exterior façade, they fuse the structural 

philosophy of a templum in antis with that 

of an exedra in a Roman therma sectioned 

off by columns. Originally designed to be 

open at the top, they were roofed over during 

construction. 15 Pigage was probably inspired, 

not by direct studies of Ancient buildings, 

but by allusions to the Ancients in the very 

latest interiors of English stately homes, 

such as the Painted Room in Spencer House, 

London (James Stuart, 1758) or the Library at 

Kenwood, Hampstead (Robert Adam, 1759). 

The anglophile Elector may well have wielded 

his influence here. 16 The English models, in 

turn, take their reading of the Ancients from 

Palladio. 17 The finishing of the two intradas 

with the sculptural moulds in the niches lends 

a further touch of Antiquity: to the north the 

Apollino and Idolino, and in the southern 

anteroom the satyr with the little goat and 

Verschaffelt’s neo-Classical Cupid. 

Pigage’s Temple to Minerva, which according 

to the “Etrennes Palatines” for 1769 was 

already completed that year, ranks, alongside 

the advanced buildings in the Garden Realm 

of Dessau-Wörlitz, among the earliest creations 

of Early Classicism in Germany. Minerva, 

goddess of Wisdom, is also portrayed here as 

the goddess of peaceful arts and sciences, in 

particular the art of garden design. 18 

14 Wagner 2006, pp. 206-214. 

15 Hartmann Manfred Schärf: Die Dächer des Badhauses im 

Schwetzinger Schlossgarten, in: Badische Heimat. vol. 82, 2002, 

pp.158-173, here: pp. 164-165. 

16 Wagner 2006, pp. 215-219. 

17 e.g. via the anteroom floor plan for the so-called Temple 

to Minerva Medica in the “Quattro libri” and above all via 

Palladio’s reconstructions of Roman thermae (Andrea Palladio: 

I quattro libri dell’architettura. Venedig 1570, IV, pp. 40-41; 

Andrea Palladio: Les Thermes des Romains dessinées par 

André Palladio & publ. de nouveau d’après l’esquisses du Lord 

Comte de Burlington, impr. à Londre en 1732/avec quelques 

observations par Octave Bertotti Scamozzi. Vicenza 1797). 

18 Heber 1986, pp. 557-568; Fuchs/Reisinger 2001, pp. 128-132; 

Monika Scholl: Arion und Minerva – Schnäppchen für Schwetzingen? 

Zur Bedeutung der Schwetzinger Gartenausstattung, 

in: Snoek/Scholl/Kroon 2006, pp. 125-148, pp. 138-143; Wagner 

2006, pp. 44-51.

The four-column Corinthian façade – 

reflecting Minerva’s peaceful, civil functions 

– responds to an Ancient Roman prototype, 

the entrance to the Porticus Octaviae. 19 But 

despite the classical feel to the white temple 

with its canonical Corinthian elements, this 

is a unique solution in the history of the type. 

Designed for frontal effect, the temple has 

a wider mean intercolumniation, offering a 

view of the rear cella wall with the statue of 

Minerva by Gabriel de Grupello reworked as 

a devotional image. Pigage’s garden structure 

may owe its genesis to the traditional 

peripteral temple of Antiquity, but the 

components have been inversed: the cella is 

transformed into a spatial shell which opens 

up to the natural world around it, and the 

columns continue their pattern within. 20 By 

ripping open the interior, it echoes Palladio’s 

reconstructions of “Corinthian halls”. 21 The 

cella is furnished with marble banks which, 

like the “seats” in Dessau-Wörlitz, not only 

provide a resting-place for visitors to the park, 

but are also an imaginary place for the wise to 

gather. The temple, then, is a cellar vault ruled 

by Pan and expressing the irrational, and a 

monument to reason which imposes order 

and underlies human civilization. 

The Temple of Forest Botany, conceived 

in 1777, inaugurated in 1778, but only 

completed in 1780, rounds off the Arboretum 

Theodoricum, a real-life encyclopaedia of 

woody plants and the earliest section of the 

landscaped garden. 22 The rough-cast outer 

skin of this cylindrical plinthed structure 

resembles oak bark. Open steps with sphinxes 

guarding their strings lead to the door. In 

the rotunda, the round hole in the middle of 

the floor leads to the dark cellar vault. The 

temple programme is devoted to fertility, 

19 Heber 1986, p. 567. 

20 The fully circular columns may derive from Marc-Antoine 

Laugier: Essai sur l’architecture, [1753] Paris 2 1755, pp. 9-12; 

cf. Michael Hesse: Klassizismus als Auflösung des klassischen 

Architekturkonzeptes, in: Modernität und Tradition. Festschrift 

für Max Imdahl zum 60. Geburtstag. edited by Gottfried 

Boehm, Karlheinz Stierle, Gundolf Winter. München 1985, pp. 

105-124. 

21 Palladio 1570, II, pp. 38-40. 

22 Heber 1986, pp. 569-581; Fuchs/Reisinger 2001, pp. 156-160. 


growth influenced by the year and the Zodiac, 

and the process of ripening and dying away. 

The four large fields of relief on the inner 

walls symbolize the four seasons, each in 

conjunction with an Ancient Greek tripod. 

And yet this historically reflective depiction 

of the natural rhythm is linked to the modern 

natural sciences: medallions portraying the 

Ancient authorities Theophrastus and Pliny 

face those of contemporary researchers Joseph 

Pitton de Tournefort and Carl von Linné 

(Linnaeus). Linné’s revolutionary treatise on 

the plant system replaced the lost attribute 

of fertility goddess Ceres, whose devotional 

statue stands in a niche opposite the entrance. 

The rotunda, the dome with stepping at 

the base, the portal frame crowned by a 

triangular gable 23 and the coffered dome with 

its central opaion admit association with a 

Roman pantheon, for all the formal reduction 

and abstraction. This prototype would have 

been all the more obvious if the Ionic portico 

originally proposed had been implemented: 

the six capitals had already been paid for in 

early 1778. 24 

In summer 1779, on the northern edge of the 

Schwetzingen gardens, work began on the 

tuff ruins designed by Pigage which from 

1828 began to be known as the Roman Water 

23 After Sebastiano Serlio: Tutte l’opere d’architettura et 

prospettiva. Venice 1618, I, p. 16v. 

24 Heber 186, p. 569. 

IV. 

Fig. 5: Temple of Minerva, 

southern angloise, Nicolas de 

Pigage, 1767 – 1773 (Photo: 

Förderer). 

71

IV. 

Fig. 6: Roman Water tower 

(Photo: Landesmedienzentrum 


72 


Tower. 25 From a gate like a triumphal arch, 

with a waterfall in its middle arcade, the 

remains of an aqueduct spread out in three 

directions, terminating in the east in a square 

of obelisks. To a visitor, they might suggest 

the Campagna Romana. Water is presented 

as a life-giving element. The ruins show how 

nature is eternal and all works of human 

hand must eventually disintegrate. One might 

recall the legend of Neptune, ponder upon the 

other-worldliness of the Ancients or consider 

how they have been reinterpreted through 

archaeology and art history. Or, yielding to 

one’s own mood among these sentimental 

ruins, one might experience a moment of 

self-discovery. 

Apart from exploring Antiquity through 

the media available, such as vedute, Pigage 

may have been encouraged to design these 

ruins by his own intensive studies during his 

Italian journey of 1767/68: the combination 

of gateway arch and aqueduct can be found 

in Rome at the Porta Maggiore, the Antoninus 

Aqueduct and (perhaps the easier comparison) 

the Acqua Vergine, all of which were drawn 

by Piranesi in his “Antichità romane”. 26 The 

open floor of the tower itself could have been 

inspired by medieval fortifications such as 

those on the Ponte Salario. Formally speaking, 

however, it evidently draws on Palladian 

bridgeheads such as those at Wilton House 

(1726-37), Stowe (1739) and Prior Park, Bath 

(1755). 

Pigage was to build another ruin of the 

same material as his water tower. He began 

planning it in 1784 and the work was done 

in 1787/88. Initially he referred to it as a 

“monument”, and from 1791 it was attributed 

to Mercury. 27 The base of large sandstone 

blocks has the look of an older predecessor, 

suggesting that its creation was a process. The 

tower-like temple itself – Mercury is indicated 

in the relief scenes over the entrances in the 

25 Thomas Alfried Leger: Führer durch den Schwetzinger Garten. 

Edited by Karl von Graimberg. Mannheim 1828, p. 364; Heber 

1986, pp. 582-594; Fuchs/Reisinger 2001, pp. 161-164. 

26 Luigi Ficacci: Giovanni Battista Piranesi. Gesamtkatalog der 

Kupferstiche. Köln 2000, p. 181, 167, 188. 

27 Heber 1986, pp. 654-670; Fuchs/Reisinger 2001, pp. 177-183; 

Dittscheid 2002, pp. 320-322.

three identical façades – has a main floor on 

a hexagonal plan, an attica and above this a 

lantern. Its interpretation is controversial. 

Does this decaying building once dedicated 

to a three-headed Mercury mean that secret 

dogmas have been conquered by reason? 28 

Or is this hidden Masonic iconography in a 

programmatic reference to the fallen Temple 

of Solomon? 29 What is clear is the Ancient 

prototype: “La conocchia”, the Roman tower 

tomb near Capua Vetere popularized by 

Piranesi’s vedute. 30 

Ruins were built for many gardens in the 

advancing 18 th century. 31 In the park at 

Schwetzingen, however, the material and 

the way it has been processed create an 

unusual impression. They are reminiscent of 

a popular technique for the three-dimensional 

visualization of Ancient buildings in the 18 th 

and early 19 th centuries: phelloplastics, or 

cork models. 32 Carl Theodor’s contemporaries 

were not only interested in the original 

condition of Ancient buildings, but also in 

their present, picturesque manifestations 

with all their traces of decay. Cork models 

of Roman monuments were sold in series or 

as individual items to the wealthy travellers 

who came to Italy and to the courts of 

Europe. Cork, which had already been used 

for buildings in Nativity scenes in Southern 

Italy, was ideal for capturing the atmosphere 

of gutted travertine, porous tuff or weatherbeaten 

marble. Model reconstructions of 

buildings in their ideal form, on the other 

hand, call for plaster or wood. In a cork model, 

the decorative features were reproduced in 

terracotta or coloured plaster, and lichen 

or moss would be stuck on to resemble 

vegetation. “Everything down to the least 

joint, the smallest stone, the tiniest little 

28 Fuchs/Reisinger 2001, pp. 180-182. 

29 Snoek 2006, pp. 179-182, esp. p. 181. 

30 Ficacci 2000, p. 757. 

31 Günter Hartmann: Die Ruine im Landschaftsgarten. Worms 

1981. 

32 Werner Helmberger, Valentin Kockel: Rom über die Alpen 

tragen. Fürsten sammeln antike Architektur. Die Aschaffenburger 

Korkmodelle. Landshut 1993; Zänker 1989; Michael Hesse: 

Klassizismus als Auflösung des klassischen Architekturkonzeptes, 

in: Modernität und Tradition. Festschrift für Max Imdahl 

zum 60. Geburtstag. München 1985, pp. 105-124. 


lawn or mound of debris is measured and 

represented, and the cork gives it quite the 

dilapidated, venerable appearance of a ruinous 

building, with the collapsing columns and 

the masonry ground down by time.” 33 Among 

the park ruins of the day, it is only those in 

Schwetzingen, with their coarse brown walls 

of tuff, variegated sandstone cornices and 

marble stucco picture tiles, that recall these 

phelloplastic sentimental aesthetics. One 

cannot help concluding that Pigage translated 

the qualities of the cork models back into the 

monumental form. 

Both these ruins in Schwetzingen therefore 

create the impression that they have been 

“gnawed by time” 34 and truly are monuments 

of respectable old age. They are suggestions of 

authentic Antiquity in the sense that Friedrich 

Ludwig von Sckell meant when summarizing 

his theory of the landscaped garden: the 

observer should “[…] be able with a degree of 

certainty to surmise quickly from the vestiges 

of such buildings what their vocation had 

once been and how they had essentially been 

constructed. Even the fallen pieces should lie 

there where, beyond all doubt, they surely 

must have fallen, and gaps must show where 

they formerly belonged. […] Such fragments 

must, therefore, not be scattered at random, 

nor should they on any account be borrowed 

from other ruins (such as cornices, columns, 

capitals and the like), as people would all too 

soon discover that such heterogeneous parts 

can never have belonged to the ruin built 

here.” 35 As an apparently authentic setting 

for an historical event of Classical Antiquity, 

the open space by the Water Tower was 

accordingly marked by the obelisk. It was 

intended to commemorate an Ancient battle, 

after tombs thought to be of Germanic and 

Roman origin were found during earthworks 

in 1777. 36 In 1768, similar finds had prompted 

the erection of the memorial stone by 

33 Fragment of a message from Gotha, in: Miscellaneen artistischen 

Inhalts, vol. 1. Edited by Johann Friedrich Meusel. Erfurt 

1779, p. 59 (quoted in Helmberger/Kockel 1993, p. 11). 

34 Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell: Beiträge zur bildenden Gartenkunst. 

München 1825, p. 36. 

35 Sckell 1825, p. 37. 

36 Leger 1828, p. 367. 

IV. 

73

IV. 

74 


Verschaffelt in the southern large bosquet. 37 

Appearance and association were to evoke 

the image in the Schwetzingen gardens of 

a landscape of Classical, Roman character 

and in addition to this – combining fact and 

fiction – to convey the image of a place rich in 

the history of Antiquity, although not in the 

sense of a precise programme, like Baroque 

allegories of the state and aristocratic rule; 

far more as a potential range of associations 

addressing the natural cycles, the arts and 

sciences, the venerable Ancients and the 

path to wisdom and tolerance, along with the 

happy Arcadia and Golden Age celebrated 

in the courtly celebrations of 1775. The park 

buildings are a critical reflection in response 

to the canonical forms and typologies of 

Antiquity. The models for this were still to 

be found in the tract by Vitruvius and in 

monuments in and around Rome. In keeping 

with the Early Classical analysis, models were 

also sought in the architecture of Palladio and 

Palladianism, considered to be especially close 

to the Ancients. In most cases, however, the 

Ancient originals were not studied directly. 

The basis for Schwetzingen’s park buildings, 

rather, is the view of Classical Antiquity 

presented through the media of tracts, 

engravings and, possibly, cork models. 

The Mythological Programme 

One basic theme of the Schwetzingen gardens 

is the Golden Age of the Palatine under the 

aegis of its peace-loving Elector Carl Theodor. 

The motif seems to have been an important 

feature in the previous garden, too, reflected 

in the impressive quantity of Italian plants. 

The orangery, a culture fostered since the 

Renaissance, embodies the utopia of this 

lost deal in a general sense. The key plants 

of the Baroque orangery are citrus fruits. 

Their foliage is evergreen, and they bear their 

blossom and fruit at the same time. This 

particular botanical property made them a 

symbol for the immortality of the reigning 

dynasty. Moreover, they were equated with 

the golden apples of the Hesperides in 

37 Fuchs/Reisinger 2001, pp. 133-135. 

the legend of Hercules. Elevated to be the 

attribute of this virtuous hero, and transferred 

to the prince, oranges symbolized the return 

of the Golden Age. 

On the palace garden terrace, the four 

sandstone vases by court sculptor Peter 

Anton von Verschaffelt, with symbols of the 

four Ages of the World derived from Ovid’s 

Metamorphoses, provide the headline for the 

garden programme. 38 The vase depicting the 

Golden Age represents paradisical abundance 

and eternal youth. In his fourth bucolic 

Eclogue, Vergil holds out the prospect that 

it will return as the Fifth Age. The sun god 

Apollo will then become the ruler of the 

world. And this age – the iconographic vase 

overture betrays – is incarnate in the garden 

cosmos and has been heralded by the reign of 

the Elector. 

The circular form of the parterre, an idealized 

geometry, expresses this utopian promise, 

reinforcing the suggested theme. The parterre 

is a tribute to the arts. In the middle is a 

round basin with, as its central figure, Arion 

playing the lyre on the back of a dolphin, 

surrounded by three male and one female 

cherubs playing with herons and swans. Arion 

was a Greek singer and poet who, according 

to the legend, was saved from drowning by 

Apollo’s dolphin. 39 It is not a Greek god or a 

Classical hero who is taking centre stage here 

in the garden, but music – for Elector Carl 

Theodor the most important of the arts. 

In the four broderie beds around the Arion 

fountain, there are four white marble vases 

with relief attributed to Francesco Carabelli, 

glorifying the fine arts and architecture. 

At the end of the parterre, the fountain 

38 Eva Hofmann: Peter Anton von Verschaffelt. Hofbildhauer des 

Kurfürsten Carl Theodor in Mannheim. Mannheim 1982, p. 

220 ff. 

39 On a trip to Sicily, he earned so much money that the sailors 

who were to take him back to Greece grew envious of his 

wealth. They wanted to rob him and throw his body into the 

sea, but they fulfilled his last wish, which was to sing one last 

time. After this, Arion apparently cast himself into the sea. A 

dolphin enchanted by his singing took Arion on his back and 

carried him to the shore and safety (Michael Grant, John Hazel: 

Lexikon der antiken Mythen und Gestalten. München 1994, p. 

70).

with the colossal stags spouting water by 

Verschaffelt marks the transition to the next 

section of the axis. The fountain features 

had originally been bigger. 40 There was a 

reflecting pool behind it, but in 1803 this was 

filled in. 41 Today’s lawn parterre traces the 

contours of that pool. The figures that once 

surrounded it depict the four elements. The 

main axis continues along a long, lower-lying 

tapis vert, with the main path running along 

the sides, flanked by lime trees. Along the 

edges of the lawn there are pedestals with 

golden balls, another allusion to the Golden 

Age. The axis now ends at the lake, which was 

originally a rectangular basin terminating 

the garden. Only in 1823 were the basin 

walls replaced by a natural embankment. 42 

The colossal figures of Rhine and Danube 

that stand in the lake today were once on the 

basin walls. They symbolize the biggest rivers 

within Carl Theodor’s realm. They were to be 

complemented on the other side of the lake 

by Moselle and Meuse, but when the court 

moved away to Munich this never happened. 

In this way, the mythological programme of 

the Schwetzingen gardens – the Golden Age – 

is placed within the sphere of Carl Theodor’s 

governance and his political intentions. 

The thematic rationale of the Schwetzingen 

gardens – the Golden Age with its everlasting 

spring and summer – is the common thread 

that binds all the sections together. 43 Statues 

of Spring and Summer stand on the western 

transverse avenue of the orangery garden, 

which runs from the lion steps to the gate 

of the Arboretum. This is the path that a 

visitor should take after crossing the northern 

bosquet. The statues of Autumn and Winter 

are opposite them in the eastern avenue. 

In the cosmological cycles that constituted 

the Baroque programme, it was a standard 

feature to combine elements of Greek natural 

40 Eva Hofmann: p. 227 f. 

41 Kurt Martin: Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirkes Mannheim. 

Stadt Schwetzingen. Karlsruhe 1933, p. 180. 

42 Kurt Martin: p. 188. 

43 Ovid: Metamorphosen. München 1994, p. 11: “Eternal spring 

reigned, and gentle west winds stroked flowers that sprouted 

unsown with their soft airs. Soon unploughed earth bore 

wheat.” 


philosophy in sets of the ideal number four. 44 

The natural theatre 45 in the northern 

bosquet with its architecture and decorative 

sculpture constitutes a great homage to the 

theatrical arts. The auditorium is furnished 

with six sphinxes. 46 Verschaffelt characterizes 

them himself as “… répresentant la musique, la 

danse, la comédie, la tragédie et les deux autres 

comme on les représente ordinairement”. 47 

The artist has not allocated clear-cut symbols 

to the sphinxes that would tag them as a Muse 

or an ordinary sphinx. Just two sphinxes have 

attributes: one has her paw on a pile of books, 

and the other has hers on the Elector’s hat, 

which has a sceptre lying next to it. Sphinxes 

have a range of meanings and functions, 

amongst them as guardians of holy places but 

also of wisdom. The wisdom consigned to 

books, and the theatre, which is to be seen as 

a moral, educational institution, are protected 

by the Elector, symbolized here by his insignia. 

The sphinxes also watch over the holy grove of 

Apollo. One example of an Ancient connexion 

between sphinxes and an Apollonian shrine is 

44 “For the Ancients argued as follows. As it is in nature, so must 

it be in art; but in many cases nature is fallen into four (…) There 

are four continents, four elements, four essential qualities, 

four winds, four states of the body, four dispositions of the 

soul, and so forth...” (Anonymous Carthusian, 12 th century). 

45 Heber 1986, p. 485 ff. Hofmann 1982, p. 234 ff. 

46 There is a preliminary ink drawing by Verschaffelt in the 

Reiß-Engelhorn-Museum in Mannheim, 28.9 cm by 17.9 cm, 

Inv. no. LBW 1974/48. On a rectangular plinth, a sphinx to the 

right sits erect. On her head she is wearing a scarf tied in a 

knot over her chest. On the back of the sheet there is a sketch 

of a memorial tomb. See the exhibition catalogue: Peter Anton 

von Verschaffelt; op. cit., illustration on p. 62. 

47 HStA München MF Fürstensachen 832 ⅓ of 27 June 1779. 

IV. 

Fig. 7: Two stag groups 

terminating the circular 

parterre to the west, Peter 

Anton von Verschaffelt, 1766-69 

(Photo: Scholl). 

75

IV. 

76 

Fig. 8: Natural theatre with 

sphinxes (Photo: Wetzel). 


the archaic Temple to Apollo in Delphi, which 

dates back to about 525 B.C. 

At the Temple of Apollo in Schwetzingen, the 

god is depicted as Musagetes, protector and 

guide to the Muses. The latters’ home is Mount 

Helicon in Boeotia, hence the temple’s rocky 

plinth. That is where the winged horse Pegasus 

struck open Hypocrene, the horse spring, 

with his hoof. 48 It is the source of poetry, 

inspiration, which flows down the waterfall to 

the Schwetzingen stage. Apollo, the Musagetes 

between the hedges, forms the impressive 

backcloth to the natural theatre, but he is also 

depicted as the sun god. This is reinforced 

by the sun symbols on the terrace and at the 

apex of the dome. The sun represents wisdom, 

judiciousness and order. To experience the 

sun, one must first go through the night and 

the darkness in order to attain wisdom and 

order. Pigage has created this as “livable” 

mythology. We pass through the dark cave of 

human ignorance, overcome the chaos and 

ascend to wisdom, order and the light of the 

sun. Schwetzingen’s Temple of Apollo depicts 

scenes of an allegorical expedition from the 

murkiness of chaotic natural forces via stations 

of moral cleansing to the light of ideal virtue 

and perfected humanity. 49 

In Schwetzingen, the sun in its corona is 

no longer used as the Apollonian emblem 

of autocracy that it had been under Louis 

XIV, but as the sign of illumination and 

resurrection (lux in tenebris). The sun must 

be interpreted as the light of Enlightenment, 

and the gardens of Schwetzingen as the 

embodiment of reason. 

Along with Minerva, Apollo is the role model 

for the Schwetzingen gardens. A shrine 

has been built to each. In this respect, a 

celebration to mark the Elector’s recovery, 

48 Michael Grant, John Hazel, p. 57 ff. 

49 Mozart may have used the Temple of Apollo in Schwetzingen 

as a model for Sarastro’s Sun Temple in his opera “The Magic 

Flute”. He visited the Palatine summer residence for the last 

time on his way home from the Emperor’s coronation in 

Frankfurt. Mozart wrote to his wife Konstanze, who was born 

in Mannheim: “Mannheim, 23 Octbr. 1790. Dearest, best wife 

of my heart! – Tomorrow we shall walk to Schwetzingen to see 

the garden.” (Mozart. Briefe und Aufzeichnungen. Gesamtausgabe. 

Vol. IV 1787-1857. Published by Internationale Stiftung 

Mozarteum Salzburg. Kassel 1991, p. 119).

to which all his subjects were invited, is 

particularly informative. The specially 

composed opera “L’arcadia conservata” 

presented the entire territory to its people as 

an Arcadia. 

Even in such concrete form, the programmatic 

substance of this unique performance is 

reflected in the iconography of the garden. 

Looking from the bath house, the Elector’s 

private sphere, in the direction of the 

perspective, we see an Elysian river landscape 

which exemplified Paradise. The landscape 

painting shows the union of two rivers on 

a plain framed by distant mountain ridges. 

The scene reflects the natural environs of 

Mannheim, which in turn does, indeed, lie 

on the extended line of perspective. This is, 

therefore, a real and geographically precise 

view of the situation of Mannheim, where 

the Neckar enters the Rhine, at a time before 

the town and residence were founded. 

Paradise, then, is right in the Palatinate. On 

a second level of significance, one might say 

that the new prime residence was founded 

in an Elysium, built on paradisical soil, 

which lends it a legitimacy and nobility. 

In the spirit of Jörg Gamer – “The palace 

garden in Schwetzingen is undoubtedly the 

biggest artistic and intellectual achievement 

that Elector Carl Theodor left to his former 

territory” 50 – the third thought that might be 

added is that the gardens themselves are a 

very personal monument to the Palatinate as 

an Arcadian realm. 

In the furnishing of the gardens, individual 

monuments played an important role from 

the outset in setting a credible stage for an 

iconography with an Ancient and Arcadian 

touch, until ultimately the garden as a whole 

was resignified as a monument. 

Once the decision had been taken for a 

functionally “obsolete” palace (1753), with all 

its apparent backwardness it became, in the 

context of a huge project of modernization 

and expansion, a symbolic vehicle and 

50 Jörg Gamer: Bemerkungen zum Garten der kurfürstlich 

pfälzischen Sommerresidenz Schwetzingen. In: Ausstellungskatalog: 

Kurfürst Carl Theodor zu Pfalz, der Erbauer von Schloß 

Benrath. Düsseldorf 1979, p. 25. 


IV. 

Fig. 9: Temple of Apollo (Photo: 

RPS, LDA, Hausner). 

77

IV. 

78 


“archaeological corpus” that played its part in 

official pomp and circumstance. Excavations 

in the garden, given an Ancient slant and 

rendered visible by in situ monuments, were 

testimonies to a long history, instruments 

of genealogical anchoring which seemed to 

ensure the authenticity of the iconographic 

programme. The monument in the southern 

bosquet corresponds with the monument to 

the art of gardening. As a provisional crown 

to the garden creation in 1771, they were both 

given programmatic inscriptions, an absolute 

exception but illustrating their pivotal role. 

In 1778 Carl Theodor moved to Munich, and 

the use and iconographic priorities for the 

gardens shifted. 

Although the estate had lost its function as 

the summer residence, the gardens were not 

merely preserved, but actually completed, and 

probably on a larger scale that was probably 

intended originally. The mosque and the 

Temple of Mercury date from this period. The 

mosque was exceedingly monumentalized 

in the planning phase. With the two last 

buildings, Carl Theodor departed from the 

canonical idiom of highly Classical forms 

that had been practised up until then. 

The mythological aspects were strongly 

emphasized, as if – now they were finally a 

thing of the past – the residence and with 

it the Palatinate were retrospectively to be 

bathed in additional glory. 

This reading of the “Golden Age of the 

Palatinate”, now turned backwards, gave rise to 

a consistent strategy of preservation that was 

unique at the time and has continued until 

today, pre-empting modern-day approaches 

and seeking to preserve the pleasure garden 

in its totality for posterity as a “Palatine 

monument” 51 , as Nicolas de Pigage called it in 

1795 in the “Protocollum Commissionale”. 

(Michael Hesse, Hartmut Troll, Ralf Richard 

Wagner) 

51 PROTOCOLLUM COMMISSIONALE über das Schwetzinger 

Hofbau- und Gartenwesen samt beylagen von 1795, Generallandesarchiv 

Karlsruhe (GLA) 221 No. 46, p. 40.

) 

The Collection and Cultivation of 

Exotic Plants 

The Schwetzingen Orangeries 

The Old Orangery 

In 1681, half the lemon and orange trees in 

the garden of the Friedrichsburg at Mannheim 

were transferred to Schwetzingen. By this 

time, if not before, there must have been a 

considerable collection of orangery plants, all 

housed in appropriate buildings. There was a 

growing demand for space to accommodate 

court festivities, and this was far from met 

by rebuilding the palace destroyed in 1689 

during the Palatine War of Succession, 

extending it along the “Cour d’honneur” and 

adding the extension by the garden in the 

early 18th century. Further construction was 

required. 

An orangery with a large ballroom was to 

alleviate the problem. That, at least, was 

what Elector Carl Philipp decided when, in 

1716, he succeeded Johann Wilhelm, whose 

principal residence had been Düsseldorf. Carl 

Philipp brought the court back to Heidelberg, 

and later he needed Schwetzingen to cater 

for the overspill until his new residence in 

Mannheim, under construction from 1720, 

was ready for occupancy. 

When work began on the orangery in 1718, 

nobody could predict that it would take a 

good ten years to complete. Progress was 

delayed by a lack of funding. The skeleton of 

this structure, designed as a pendant to the 

new garden front of the palace, was not ready 

until 1722, and the space between – intended 

as an orangery garden – began to acquire its 

contours. Alessandro Galli da Bibiena, “primus 

architectus” at the Palatine court since 1719, 

was designated architect. 

When the plants from the celebrated orangery 

in Düsseldorf were likewise brought to 

Schwetzingen in 1724, the gardeners hoped 

in vain that work would proceed at a faster 

pace. The tubs had to spend the winter in the 


half-finished orangery. Even the glasshouse 

intended for the breeding and particular 

cultivation of citrus fruits was delayed. The 

passage between the palace and the orangery 

along the southern perimeter of the site was 

completed in 1725, but that also failed to 

satisfy the need for space. Court gardener 

Johann Betting was probably justified 

in calling for a second passage along the 

northern edge. Betting had, after all, been 

transferred from Düsseldorf to Schwetzingen 

in 1722 in order to establish a sizeable 

stock of citrus. But only in the orangery did 

construction continue. The records indicate 

that it was finished in 1728. 

Elector Carl Theodor, who succeeded Carl 

Philipp in 1742, finally permitted partial 

demolition of the old orangery to press ahead 

with new plans for the garden, which in 1748 

provided for a new orangery in the form of 

the northern quarter-circle pavilion. Once 

the southern quarter-circle pavilion had been 

completed in 1755, the old orangery was laid 

to rest for once and for all. 

Detailed records of the orangery’s inventory 

date from 1724, when the plants from 

Düsseldorf were moved to Schwetzingen. 447 

orange trees and 313 other potted plants were 

transported down the Rhine by barge as far as 

Ketsch, an enterprise that cost 750 guilders. In 

1726 there was a need for “100 new orangerie 

boxes” for re-potting purposes. On 4 March 

1728 comes notification of a requirement for 

100 “orange boxes, but only of the small type”. 

Johann Friedrich von Uffenbach paints 

a picture of the orangery garden, for he 

visited Schwetzingen on a jaunt through the 

Palatinate on 9 September 1731. He describes 

the garden as “neatly laid out and most 

pleasant after the latest fashion, although 

not at all big. Its most excellent feature is, it 

would seem, the number of Italian plants and 

trees, for the garden is thickly planted with 

them like a small forest. Many specimens, 

set in their special boxes, are well worth 

the sight, on account of their considerable 

size, and between them statues larger than 

IV. 

79

IV. 

80 

Fig. 1: Northern quarter-circle 

pavilion (Photo: Pechacek). 


life, beautifully made and entirely gilt, cut a 

splendid figure. In the middle of the garden 

is a large basin of water, from the midst of 

which, between a disorderly mass of boulders, 

there rises a jet to a height of 40 foot, the 

water works being driven by a special mill 

and pump.” 

In 1733 Giuseppe Marsano delivered 12 

orange trees at a price of 50 guilders each, 

but the condition of the potted plants was 

deteriorating. This was, admittedly, due in 

part to the lack of material required “for the 

conservation of the orangerie”, although head 

court gardener Betting was also blamed for 

failing in his duty. In 1742, therefore, Jean 

Baptiste Mourian offered “his most humble 

services and science”, as “he possessed the 

particular art, not only perfectly to restore the 

musty oranges, but also throughout the year 

and even in winter to produce all manner of 

flowers and shrubs with their natural taste 

and smell, of which he has provided diverse 

examples in Munich and Carlsruhe.” 

Mourian was first appointed court gardener 

in Mannheim and then, after the death of 

head gardener Johann Betting in 1747, he was 

awarded the position at Schwetzingen. On 20 

June 1747 Mourian listed the Schwetzingen 

inventory, naming – among other things – 866 

orange trees, 65 “trellis oranges”, 226 “grenades” 

(pomegranates) and another 34 species. 

We can glean some information about the 

state of the Schwetzingen orangery prior to 

1747 from Nikolaus Betting, the son of head 

gardener Johann Betting. He portrays the 

little palace garden so praised and admired by 

other landowners and horticultural experts 

as an “orange square”. He writes of a “regular 

grove of bitter oranges and lemons, trees and 

hedges ... the like of which is rarely found 

even in the princely gardens of Colorno and 

all’Imperiale in Italy.” He singles out the sweet 

fruits of the “pommes de Sina” and the sour 

“lemons and limes”, noting that these fruits 

had their uses in making confectionery. “The 

Elector’s greenhouse boasted many Levantine 

coffee trees which bore such an abundance 

of coffee beans as were needed for the 

consumption of the most elevated personages 

in the most genteel of societies.” 

The Quarter-Circle Pavilions 

Work on the northern quarter-circle pavilion, 

to plans by chief architect Alessandro Galli da 

Bibiena, began in 1748. Guillaume d’Hauberat, 

who succeeded Bibiena that same year, quickly 

forged ahead with the project, aided by his 

master-builder Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti, and 

as a result the building was finished by spring 

1750. Whereas the first section of the orangery 

was so placed as to permit future extensions 

of the Schwetzingen palace garden from east 

to west and from north to south, the location 

of the second depended on the position 

and size of a proposed new palace building. 

Once this project had been discarded, court 

gardener Johann Ludwig Petri, who had been 

at Schwetzingen since 1752, agreed with 

Rabaliatti that the second orangery building 

should take its place south of the palace in a 

symmetrical arrangement with the first. 1 As 

the windows along the main facade had to 

face north-west, a few more windows were set 

in the rear wall to improve the lighting. 2 

Unlike the northern pavilion, with its simply 

furbished rooms used mainly to house 

1 GLA 221/19 “4 May 1755 appointment of the orangery wing”. 

2 GLA 221/19 “16 July 1755 Petri believes six to eight windows to 

be necessary at the back of the first pavilion for ventilation in 

winter”.

pot plants during the winter, the southern 

pavilion had by 1755 acquired two lavishly 

decorated festive halls, one for dining and one 

for gambling. These rooms were linked to the 

palace by the gallery to the old orangery. 

A note was written on 27 November 1756 to 

say that the stock of the orangery would have 

to be reduced as there was a “great superfluity” 

of trees – at the time there were almost 900 

orange trees and 21 other species. All these 

plants were ranged in the round parterre of 

the palace garden. 

The New Orangery 

The additional need for space where the tubs 

could overwinter, and also for more space to 

display them during the summer months, 

prompted Elector Carl Theodor to ask his 

chief architect Nicolas de Pigage in 1761 to 

design and build another orangery. Two “glass 

houses” were to be combined with it to cater 

for the growing desire for more hothouse 

vegetables. This project was to be undertaken 

below the northern bosquets. Construction 

proceeded apace, and the orangery – built 

to purpose – was already available for use 

in the winter of 1762/63. The orangery trees 

had already been removed from the circular 

parterre in the summer of 1762 and taken 

to the new orangery garden, where the canal 

completed that spring as a reservoir had 

improved watering techniques tremendously. 

In summer 1764, paths were set down across 

the orangery square and lawn was laid in 

the compartments. The construction of two 

wooden bridges at the short ends of the 

canal was delayed until 1776. A year later 

the orangery island was adorned with stone 

vases by Johann Matthäus van den Branden. 

It is not precisely clear when the eastern 

glasshouse was built, but the idea of building 

a pendant to the west of the orangery is 

mentioned frequently. By 1794, there was 

already an abundance of material about the 

design of this building, but the work was 

postponed with the request that “thought be 

given to completing this building when times 

and conditions are better”. 


When the new orangery entered service, all 

the Elector’s orangeries were reorganized as 

a consequence. In 1762, the best plants in the 

Mannheim Orangery were taken to Benrath, 

and the poorer ones came to Schwetzingen to 

be sold. Finally, in 1774, all the orangery tubs 

from Düsseldorf were shipped to Ketsch and 

transported from there to Schwetzingen. 

When Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell was 

appointed court gardener in 1792, he also 

assumed responsibility for the Schwetzingen 

orangery. Although he relinquished 200 tubs, 

they still amounted in total to the proud sum 

of 1,050. That same year the “Protocollum 

Commissionale” contained stipulations as to 

the care and maintenance of the orangery. 

Sckell seems to have attached importance to 

a detailed description of the labour-intensive 

operations: to plant out 140 to 150 trees a 

year required the efforts of 8 men over 4 to 6 

weeks. To water the plants in one day called 

for 24 men. Taking the tubs out and putting 

them back took 5 days each, with 36 men 

and 12 horses on the job. Leaf mould had to 

be brought in from the clearings after being 

“specially treated” for three years. 

Cuts in the garden budget in 1800 meant 

savings in orangery operations, too. The tub 

collection was reduced to 600 trees. Around 

1820 Johann Michael Zeyher reports in his 

“Description of the Gardens at Schwetzingen”: 

“To the right the handsome orangery square 

spreads out before one’s eyes; during the 

IV. 

Fig. 2: New orangery and 

orangery parterre (Photo: 

Wetzel). 

81

IV. 

82 

Fig. 3: New orangery from the 

south (Photo: Pechacek). 


summer it is home to six hundred and thirty 

orange, bay, grenade, myrtle and other trees.” 

He goes on to say: “The regular rows of 

orange, lemon, bay and grenade trees may 

not be aesthetically pleasing, and they tire the 

eye; but one is compensated for this by the 

sweetest of smells that fill the air all about; 

and even the eye discovers things of beauty; 

the lemon blossoms prettily, the golden 

orange glows beneath dark green, and the 

flaring grenade sends a thousand rays from 

the branches.” 

John Claudius Loudon, the most esteemed 

garden writer of the 19 th century, who visited 

Schwetzingen in 1828, reports in his widely 

read “Enyclopedia of Gardening”: “In the 

spacious orangery here, there are 465 large 

orange trees, between 200 and 300 years old; 

myrtles having trunks six inches in diameter, 

pomegranates, sweet bays, common laurels, 

laurustinus, and arbutus trained like orange 

trees.” He notes, moreover, that there is a 

“very large collection of greenhouse plants at 

Schwezingen, including 140 species of Erica”. 3 

An “Alphabetical Seed Store”, established by 

Zeyher in 1828 in the orangery glasshouse, 

suggests that the building was acquiring a new 

function, and that the forced cultivation of 

vegetables were consequently on the retreat. 

3 Loudon, John Claudius: An encyclopedia of gardening, New Ed. 

London 1850, pp. 143-146. 

Postcards from the 1890s and early 20 th 

century show tubs on display again in the 

circular parterre and the mosque courtyard. 

Only a few of the old pomegranates, bays 

and palms survived the frosty nights of 

February 1945, largely unprotected, after the 

roof and windows of the eastern orangery 

wing suffered partial war damage. Changes 

in the use, and with that the spatial order, of 

the orangery building and its surroundings 

had begun around 1900. The middle section 

became home to a school of horticulture 

and cookery, “offering young girls in the 

countryside abundant opportunities to 

learn how to look after a garden”. This 

establishment closed down after the First 

World War. The provisional buildings put up 

here for the palace nursery in the early 20 th 

century survived, on the other hand, until 

1975. They proved as alien in this otherwise 

homogenous landscape as the orangery 

garden itself, now relegated to a propagation 

patch. Only when a new nursery was built on 

its original site in the former kitchen garden 

in the south-east corner of the Schwetzingen 

gardens did the spatial situation regain its 

basic structure of 1767. 

From 1996, after long years of neglect, the 

orangery building was subjected to a thorough 

restoration, salvaging as much as possible 

of the original fabric. Since then, the east 

wing of the orangery and the adjoining glass 

house have again provided a place for the 

considerable inventory of tubs to overwinter 

as historically intended, while in the west 

wing the original garden statues have found a 

safe haven in a lapidarium, shielded from the 

wind and weather.

The Schwetzingen Orchards and Kitchen 

Gardens 

Edible produce had long since been an 

important feature of the palace gardens in 

Schwetzingen, as an adequate supply of fresh 

fruit and vegetables had to be provided during 

the summer sojourn of the Elector’s court. 

The historical vegetable and flower gardens 

were enclosed by a wall, and the western half 

was divided into thirds, distinguished by the 

orientation of the beds. There was probably 

a fountain in the middle to supply irrigation 

water. In the eastern half, greenhouses leaned 

against the northern enclosure wall, and there 

were also earth houses and manure hotbeds. 

The plants grown in Schwetzingen included 

many rare varieties of utilitarian value. John 

Claudius Loudon, who – as we saw above – 

visited Schwetzingen in 1828, observed in a 

few brief but appreciative words: “There is a 

good kitchen-garden.” 4 And the “Protocollum 

Commissionale” records in the same regard 

that there was a “collection of the most 

precious botanical plants procured with much 

effort and expense from other lands and 

other nurseries and admired by those with a 

knowledge of art, many of them very rare, and 

hardly to be obtained any more elsewhere”. 

Schwetzingen even grew pineapples on 

a major scale, a difficult proposition that 

called for particular gardening skills. The 

“Protocollum Commissionale” recommended 

continuing this activity, despite the huge cost, 

because “the pineapple, as a fine, rare and 

tasty fruit obtained initially at great expense 

should not be allowed to perish”. 

The “Protocollum Commissionale” of 1795 

offers a glimpse of the great range of fruits 

growing in the Schwetzingen orchard: “the 

Dutch tree and vegetable garden with such tall 

French and Dutch varieties of apple planted 

in the quad, and surrounded by a wall, which 

like all the other gardens is covered with 

different species of peach, apricot, cherry pp & 

trellis trees, then diverse varieties of grape”. 

4 Loudon, John Claudius: An encyclopedia of gardening, New Ed. 

London 1850, pp. 143-146. 


Schwetzingen Asparagus 

Asparagus was grown in the court garden 

at Schwetzingen from 1668 at the latest, 

as recorded that same year in the deed of 

appointment for gardener Heinrich Kämpf. 5 

This document, a kind of job description 

detailing all the tasks that he was expected 

to perform, instructs the gardener to grow 

“cauliflowers, artichokes, asparagus, colimbi, 

cucumbers, small melons”. Favoured 

by the sandy soil, the asparagus crop at 

Schwetzingen acquired a reputation far and 

wide, and it lasted a long time. 

Late in 1755, when the second wing of the 

orangery had been finished, two new kitchen 

gardens were laid out and enclosed by a wall. 6 

Evidently the palace gardeners were also 

engaged during the winter months in bringing 

on hothouse plants, notably asparagus and 

melon. 7 At the end of the 18 th century, the 

asparagus crops were considered so valuable 

that the “Protocollum Commissionale” of 

1795 provides, in spite of the savings, that 

“the Virginian asparagus be planted again 

in the big Kitchen Garden and thereby the 

cultivation of asparagus be not diminished”. 

In the early 20 th century the Grand Duchy’s 

court gardener Unselt conducted wide-ranging 

experiments to improve the quality and yield 

of the asparagus. He recorded the successful 

results of his ambitious field tests in two 

publications. 8 

5 GLAK 67/942 pp. 1250-1256 (Registry of Palatinate Servants), 

certificate of appoitnment dated 22 May 1668. 

6 GLA 221/19, 6 December 1755: The two new kitchen gardens 

enclosed by a wall. 

7 GLA 221/19, 5 Nov. 1755: horse dung is needed to lay the 

beds for asparagus and melons, obtained from the Stables in 

Mannheim. 

8 Gustav A. Unselt: Der Spargel und seine Kultur. Schwetzingen 

1918; Gustav A. Unselt: Die Steigerung der Spargelerträge. 

Flugschriften des Verbandes der Deutschen Gemüsezüchter. 

1917. 

IV. 

83

IV. 

84 


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 

scientific purposes and with a collector’s 

passion, were famous in their day. Work on 

the first 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.” 9 

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 five-volume book about 

garden art, Theorie der Gartenkunst (1779-1785). 

He is referring to the Arborium Theodoricum, 

the first 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. 

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 an arboretum, 

a kind of educational garden with a variety of 

trees and shrubs, exogenous as well as native. 

Pigage described it as “a living dictionary of 

garden trees and shrubs” and called it the 

“Arborium Theodoricum” 10 in honour of the 

9 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. 

10 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. 

Elector. With regard to the new gardening 

philosophy (“dans le style de la nature”), he 

referred to this part of the garden as “sauvage”. 11 

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. 

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 

first work, the “Arborium Theodoricum”, was 

taking shape. 

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

„The merit of a natural garden is not in its 

great size, but in its inherent artistic value, 

its beautiful shapes and images” 12 , 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 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.” 13 

Imports and Experts 

The main focus of the new was on its 

theoretical and scientific 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 first exotic specimens were 

delivered from England, France and the 

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

Bilder”, in: Fürstliche Gartenlust – Historische Schlossgärten in 

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

13 Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell, Beiträge zur bildenden Gartenkunst 

für angehende Gartenkünstler und Gartenliebhaber, 

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


Netherlands to Schwetzingen, in the shape 

of young plants or seeds. Many interests and 

areas of research could create the scientific 

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 

classification 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 five hundred trees and shrubs, 

foreign as well as native, for the garden artist 

to use in decorating his garden and creating 

picturesque combinations.” 14 Sckell drew up 

long lists of “native and foreign trees and 

shrubs that can be used in most gardens” 15 

based on different sets of criteria. Even 

today they are still used for the re-planting of 

historic gardens. 

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 

14 Sckell 1825, p. 109. 

15 Sckell 1825, p. 238. 

IV. 

Fig. 4: View of the Arborium 

Theodoricum (Photo: R. Stripf). 

85

IV. 

86 

Fig. 5: Temple of Botany 

(Photo: R. Stripf). 


(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 scientific 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 artificial 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 scientific 

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 classification 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 

first 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”, 16 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 scientific 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 

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 fine and varied collection of foreign 

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

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

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

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 officials 

themselves about types of trees, this request 

should be granted in full.)“ 17 

The Zeyher Arboretum 

After the difficult 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 

scientific 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” 18 . 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, 

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

Heber 1986, p. 476. 

18 Johann Michael Zeyher, Verzeichniss der Gewaechse in dem 

Grossherzoglichen Garten zu Schwetzingen. Mannheim 1819, 

p. 4. 


the complete presentation of varieties and 

species from a botanical point of view. The 

arboretum was intended to give an overview 

of the “flora palatina” “for the forester to 

find everything of value to him, that these 

parts will produce... The newly acquired, and 

sometimes very rare, kinds of wood have 

been industriously propagated, and used for 

bartering purposes” 19 . From 1806 onwards, 

Zeyher published a number of inventories 

of the plants grown at Schwetzingen. 20 The 

inventory of woody plants published in 1809, 

lists 827 varieties. 21 In his 1819 inventory, 

Zeyher mentions a total of 9,500 varieties. 22 

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 

19 Zeyher 1819, p. 4. 

20 Johann Michael Zeyher, Verzeichniss sämmtlicher Bäume 

und Sträucher in den Grossherzoglich-Badischen Gärten zu 

Carlsruhe, Schwezingen und Mannheim, Mannheim 1806. 

21 after Wertz 2004, p. 27. 

22 Zeyher 1819, p. 5. 

IV. 

Fig. 6: Relief portrait of the 

scientist Carl von Linné in the 

Temple of Botany (Photo: 

R. Stripf). 

87

IV. 

88 

Fig. 7: Entrance gate of 

Zeyher’s arboretum (Photo: R. 

Stripf). 

Fig. 8: Autumn at Zeyher’s 

arboretum (Photo: R. Stripf). 


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.” 23 

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.” 24 

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 

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 25 . Besides the above-mentioned 

woody plants, dating from the early years 

of the arboreta, a number of other fine trees 

23 Johann Michael Zeyher, probably 1825. In: Repr. Freiburg 1983, 

pp. 146 f. 

24 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 Treibhauspflanzen des Schwezinger Gartens”). Rpt. 

Freiburg 1983. 

25 e.g. Jost Fitschen, Gehölzflora, Wiebelsheim 2002.

are on display. There are some magnificent 

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. 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. 26 

As well as measures to preserve the character 

of the plant collections for scientific 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 

identified with labels giving their botanical 

and common names, their family and place of 

origin. They are also listed and described in a 

guidebook. 27 

(Jochen Martz, Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, 

Rainer Stripf) 

26 after Wertz 2004, p. 27. 

27 Rainer Stripf, Die Arboreten des Schwetzinger Schlossgartens, 

München/Berlin 2004. 


IV. 

Fig. 9: Tree “Taxodium 

distichum” (Photo: R. Stripf). 

89

IV. 

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. 

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. 

90 


c) 

The Cultural Landscape of 


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 unwood-ed 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. 1 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. 2 The only major interruptions 

of this development were the Thirty Years’ 

War (1618-1648) and the Palatine War of 

Succession (1688-1697). 

The “fort” 3 (i.e. fortified manor) of 

Schwetzingen first appears in a written 

document of 1350; it was probably Elector 

Ludwig V., who turned it into a hunting lodge 

in the course of the 16th century. 4 According 

to contemporary depictions, 5 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 

1 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. 

2 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. 

3 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 5. 

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

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

733. 

5 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 23, fig. 15 und 16.

space, today occupied by the palace square, 

separated both settlements. 6 During the Thirty 

Years’ War, Schwetzingen was sacked; towards 

the end of the war the castle was probably 

burned down. 7 

After the war Elector Carl Ludwig I. had the 

ruined castle converted into a palace with a 

garden 8 , and a tree-lined avenue, the “Neuer 

Weg”, was built to connect the new structure 

with Heidelberg Castle via Plankstadt. 9 Later, a 

pheasant-house was added to the new palace. 10 

Early in the Palatine War of Succession, the 

village and palace were burned to the ground, 

along with the Palatine capital of Heidelberg 

itself. 11 

Notwithstanding the destruction of his 

capital, the ruling Elector remained interested 

in Schwetzingen as his official residence 

during the hunting season.12 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.13 A new eastern boundary was 

created for the grounds, in the shape of a 

moat fed by the Leimbach stream.14 In 

1718, Elector Carl Phillip moved his official 

residence to Schwetzingen, provisionally at 

first, 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 

6 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 400. 

7 Martin 1933, p. 7. 

8 Cp. Wilfried Schweinfurth, “Schwetzingen – Residenzstadt 

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

229-242. 

Schweinfurth 2001, p. 231. 

9 Schweinfurth 2001, p. 234. 

Cp. Martin 1933, p. 41. Here, however, a path leading from 

Oftersheim to Schwetzingen is called ‚Neuer Weg’. 

10 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 89 

11 Martin 1933, p. 7. 

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

during the rebuilding of Heidelberg was already being 

considered at this time. 

13 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 89. 

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


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 trees15 leading 

towards Königstuhl in one direction (see 

Fig. 2), a wide lane cut into the woodland 

of Ketscher Wald16 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 

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

Garten”, in: Fürstliche Gartenlust. Historische Schlossgärten in 

Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart 2002, p. 23. 

16 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 43. 

IV. 

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. 

91

IV. 

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. 

92 


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. 17 

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. 18 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-filled moat. 19 

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. 20 

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

18 Cp. Schweinfurth 2001, pp. 232 ff. 

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

20 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 41. 

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. 21 

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 

to Mannheim. 22 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 officials. 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). 23 

21 Martin 1933, p. 43. 

22 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. 

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

The long-planned lane cut into the Ketscher 

Wald forest now came into being as well. 24 

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. 25 

It featured a system of axes radiating from the 

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 26 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 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. 27 

Sources indicate that Bibiena envisioned 

a standardized front of townhouses lining 

both the marketplace and the central axis. 

The 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. 

24 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 43. 

25 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. 

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

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

Straße. 

27 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 400. 


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” 28 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 

refined 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 

28 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 401. 

IV. 

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, reflected the 

alterations of Carl Theodor’s 

time and the town planning by 

Bibiena, which was in keeping 

with Absolutist ideas. 

93

IV. 

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. 

94 


lead to a stretch of carefully tamed woodland 

(see Fig. 4) 29 . 

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 

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). 30 

The important existing roads to Oftersheim 

and Mannheim had been improved and 

made up; the road to Mannheim had been 

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

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

straightened in parts. 31 By the 1760s, parts 

of the planned building along the central 

axis and the marketplace were completed 32 , 

(see Fig. 6) among them the stables 33 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 34 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. 35 

The layout of the palace remained basically 

that of the early 18th century. Functional 

deficits had been compensated for by the 

addition of extensions and small additional 

structures, while some existing outhouses 

had been demolished. 36 The Leimbach still 

marked the town’s eastern boundary, but its 

course had been adapted to the new extension 

housing the kitchens 37 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 

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 

31 Cp. Martin 1933, pp. 44 ff. 

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

33 Martin 1933, p. 427. 

34 Schwetzingen had been granted market rights in 1759. 

35 Cp. Schweinfurth 2001, pp. 236 ff. 

36 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. 

37 Cp. Martin 1933, p. 71 ff.

oad, where the new crossing had been shaped 

into a circus. 38 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). 39 

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 first direct railway from Mannheim 

to Karlsruhe via Schwetzingen was opened 

in 1870, the town received its first 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. 40 The 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. 

38 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 first exact survey of the Rhine valley (Fig. 5); the 

cartographical result was the “Basis novae Chartae Palatinae” 

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

39 Cp. Wertz 2002, p. 25. 

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

Amtsstadt Schwetzingen und das Straßenbahnprojekt 

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


Unlike the former electoral capital of 

Mannheim, Schwetzingen escaped destruction 

during WWII. Later extensions were built 

on the existing road network. In 1974, two 

large-scale 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. 

IV. 

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

IV. 

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 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 41 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 42 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 confines 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 

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. 

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

the square. 

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

waterworks and the guardhouses from the late 18th century 

survive.

The interplay between the summer 

residence and its landscaped surroundings 

at Schwetzingen was not, however, confined 

– as these concluding observations will 

elaborate – to interventions in the form of 

those axial paths that wove a tight web across 

baronial territory 43 in the Baroque manner, 

or of appropriating great swathes of land to 

lay out the prince’s garden or imposing an 

urban design that would set an enduring 

stamp on the spatial order. A very particular 

relationship emerged – and has continued 

until today – between use of the land and 

use of the garden, and then as now it was 

characterised by inequalities. 

In the 18th century, when large areas of 

land were still managed under a three-field 

crop rotation system, and forests were used 

intensively for the collection of leaf litter, 

the landscape was dominated by plant 

communities of low productivity. Against 

this backdrop, aristocratic gardens played a 

role as first movers in cultivating the land 

(and not merely as paradise-like islands of 

abundance). The creation of kitchen gardens 

and the experimental planting of special crops 

that took place there was in part inspired by a 

desire to improve agrarian production – which 

in Schwetzingen, naturally, was particularly 

the case with asparagus. The “Arborium 

Theodoricum” and the model vineyard 

there were still tended in the “Protocollum 

Commissionale”, despite scant resources, 

not least because they served the purpose of 

“instruction of their own foresters in types of 

wood”. 44 

Another example is the expansion of the 

orchard on the express orders of Grand 

Duke Carl Friedrich, so that “from this rich 

store trees may be given to subjects at the 

cheapest prices to plant in the streets, the 

freemen’s commons and their gardens”. 45 If 

the garden in those days was a laboratory of 

43 Cornelia Jöchner: Die Ordnung der Dinge: Barockgarten 

und politischer Raum. In: ICOMOS, Hefte des Deutschen 

Nationalkommitees. München 1997, p. 177f. 

44 “Protocollum commissionale” of 30.6.1795 and 9.9.1795. In: 

Heber 1986, p. 476. 

45 Martin 1933, p. 182; this fruit nursery already contained about 

200,000 trees in the early 19 th century. 


modernisation, today it harbours relics of an 

anthropogenic landscape and has become 

a refuge of conservation, including for the 

techniques of the gardener’s craft. Meadows 

such as the Feldherrnwiese, where hay can be 

harvested twice a year, have almost ceased to 

exist on in landscapes that have been formed 

by human hand. 

(Svenja Schrickel/Hartmut Troll) 

IV. 

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

IV. 

98 


d) 

The 19th and 20th Centuries: 

Preserving the Palace Gardens 

as a Historic Monument 

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 Gartendenkmalpflege) 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 first landscaped areas created 

by Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell, was finally 

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. 1 The move constituted a 

major change in the history of the Palatinate, 

and the Elector rarely had the time to visit his 

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 simplified 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 findings 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. 2 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-inchief 

of buildings and gardens, Nicolas de 

Pigage; the court gardener, Friedrich Ludwig 

Sckell; the chief gardener in charge of the 

1 M. Henker, “Die jülisch-bergische Frage in der wittelsbachischen 

Hausunion von 1724”, in: Zs. f. bayerische Landesgeschichte 

37, 1974, pp. 871-877. 



Theodor, Stuttgart 1991, pp. 238, 250 f.

kitchen gardens, Johann van Wynder; and the 

steward in charge of the buildings, Theodor 

Zeller. The resulting report, the “Protocollum 

commissionale” 3 , was largely written by Sckell; 

it contains a wealth of 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” 4 . 

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 “Parkpflegewerk”. 

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 

findings used for further action. Bauer 

intended his “Parkpflegewerk” – in effect, a 

management plan – to grow into an unbroken 

record of a garden’s development over time. 

3 Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe (GLA), 221/46 of 30.06.1795, 

Sheet 1. 

4 GLA, 221/46 of 02. 07.1795, Sheet 11. 


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 

formal gardens, where they still survive, 5 

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 fine 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.” 6 

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. 7 

The certificate of appointment specifies 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 modified and in 

the end, approved by all. Starting out with 

the circular parterre, Sckell was primarily 

5 Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell, Beiträge zur bildenden Gartenkunst, 

2nd improved edition, München 1823, p. 202. 

6 Sckell, 1823, pp. 204-205. 

7 GLA, 221/111. 

IV. 

99

IV. 

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, 

Schwetzingen). 

100 


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 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 firs, 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 8 . 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 

first 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 kinds of trees.” 9 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.” 10 This principle serves as a reminder 

that the care of wooded areas always involves 

taking decisions from an artist’s point of 

8 GLA, 221/46 of 01.07.1795, Sheet 5. 

9 GLA, 221/46 of 02.07.1795, Sheet 8. 

10 GLA, 221/46 of 02.07.1795, Sheet 9.

view, and that for that reason, it must take 

first 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. 11 

Sckell does not fail to point out the 

importance of the Schwetzingen nurseries. At 

first 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. 12 

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 first 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. 

11 GLA, 221/46 of 04.07.1795, Sheet 19. 

12 GLA, 221/46 of 02.07.1795, Sheet 12. 


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.” 13 A requirement that has lost none of 

its relevance today. 

13 GLA, 221/103, letter by Sckell dated 17th April 1804. 

IV. 

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. 

(Photo: Landesmedienzentrum, 

Karlsruhe). 

101

IV. 

102 


Early 19th-Century Development of the 

Landscaped Areas incorporating Large 

Dendrological Collections 

Sckell’s successor in the Schwetzingen garden, 

since 1803 belonging to the Grand Duchy 

of Baden 14 , 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 scientific 

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 fashionable 

delight in active botany and dendrology and 

his gardenesque alterations to the landscaped 

sections. In his guidebook to the palace 

gardens of Schwetzingen 15 he describes the 

superb development of individual trees in the 

English garden, but also on the avenues and 

bosquets, no longer so formally constrained. 

One side effect of this, however, was that 

the borders of the central parterre running 

alongside the lime avenues had to be given up 

due to the pressure of spreading crowns. The 

shrubberies in the boulingrins could not be 

preserved either, and china roses were planted 

as a substitute. 

In spite of this, in his guidebook 16 of 1829 

Thomas Alfried Leger called Zeyher an 

untiring guardian and conscientious keeper 

of the whole, faithful to Sckell’s “fortunate 

conceit”. He also drew attention to his 

particular achievement: 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 

14 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. 

15 Zeyher/G. Roemer, Beschreibung der Gartenanlagen zu 

Schwetzingen, Mannheim 1809. 

16 Thomas Alfried Leger, Führer durch den Schwetzinger Garten, 


that served as a transition to the landscaped 

garden; it was completed in the winter of 

1823/24. 17 When Zeyher had two large lawn 

beds laid out in the court of honour in 1835, 

he was following a contemporary tendency to 

make existing gardens look more natural, but 

he made at best only minor alterations to the 

general layout of the Schwetzingen grounds – 

and when he did, he professed to be adhering 

strictly to Sckell’s instructions. 18 

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” 19 , 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 insufficient; 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.“ 20 

An official inspection on 11th August 1875, 

made a point of calling the nursery that had 

been established on the orangery parterre 

17 GLA, 56/3976, Sheet 212.0 f. 

18 Martin 1993, p. 181. 

19 GLA, 56/661, Dienst-Visitationen in den Großherzoglichen 

Hofgärten, report dated 17.07.1874. 

20 Anon., “Unerfreuliches Baumverjüngen”, in: Die Gartenkunst, 

12/1937, p. 120.

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 

officially 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 financial means permit it.“ 21 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.“ 22 

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. 23 According to 

Schoch, the large scheme of lasting value had 

been successfully preserved and enhanced 

at Schwetzingen, without sacrificing the old 

forms. A comparison of depictions showing 

the garden at the beginning and the end of the 

21 GLA, 56/661, inspection of 01.06.1882. 

22 GLA, 56/661, inspection of 07.03.1899. 

23 G. Schoch, “Klassische Stätten der Gartenkunst – Der 

Schloßgarten zu Schwetzingen und Ludwig von Skell”, in: Die 

Gartenkunst, 2/1900, pp. 21-28. 


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, Schwetzingen is described 

as the most well-preserved garden of the late 

Classical period. 24 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. 25 

After WWI, a discussion about the value of 

old gardens as historic monuments set in. 26 

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. 

24 Wilhelm Schubert, “Geometrische und räumliche Gärten”, in: 

Die Gartenkunst, 5/1910, p. 73. 

25 Ludwig F. Fuchs, “Vier alte Gartenanlagen – Schwetzingen, 

Schönbusch und die Hofgärten Veitshöchheim und Würzburg”, 

in: Die Gartenkunst, 10/1913, pp. 143-149. 

26 W. v. Engelhardt, “Gartenanlage und Denkmalpflege”, in: Die 

Gartenkunst, 2/1922, pp. 13-15. 

IV. 

103

IV. 

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). 

104 


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.” 27 

Unselt was also a talented organisator who 

managed, in the difficult years after WWI, to 

finance a modest degree of garden upkeep by 

the sale of produce – fruit and vegetables, fish, 

wood, grass, leaves, ice to supply the cellars of 

breweries and mud from the ponds to fertilize 

fields. 

27 Gustav A. Unselt, “Vortrag über den Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen”, 

unpublished manuscript, Sandhofen, 5th February 

1922. 

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.“ 28 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. 29 The efforts at reconstruction were 

largely approved – it was noted that “a visit 

to the splendid garden has become a great 

pleasure again.“ 30 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. 31 

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 

providing 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 

28 Anonym, “Inland-Rundschau”, in: Die Gartenwelt, 4/1924, p. 32. 

29 Anonym, “Neue Gefahr für Schwetzingen”, in: Die Gartenwelt, 

5/1927, p. 76. 

30 Anonym, “Inland-Rundschau”, in: Die Gartenwelt, 18/1928, p. 

251. 

31 Diebolder, “Gartenbauhochschule in Schwetzingen”, in: Die 

Gartenwelt, 28/1928, p. 388. And: Diebolder, “Schlosspark 

Schwetzingen”, in: Die Gartenwelt, 35/1928, pp. 479-480.

of scientific, 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.“ 32 Hallbaum propagated this 

programme in lectures he gave for various 

institutions at Mannheim and Schwetzingen. 33 

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 

official, but to make sure it was given to a 

garden expert instead. 34 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. 35 The first 

measures were the replacement of withered 

chestnuts in the western allée en terrasse 

32 Franz Hallbaum, “Schwetzingen – Ein Arbeitsprogramm für 

seine künstlerische Erhaltung”, in: Die Gartenkunst ‘7/1928, pp. 

102-105. 

33 Anon., “Erhaltung des Schwetzinger Schlossgartens”, in: Die 

Gartenkunst, 12/1928, p.192. 

34 Hans Gerlach, “Der Schwetzinger Schloßgarten – Ein trauriges 

Kapitel zur Instandhaltung historischer Gärten”, in: Möllers 

Deutsche Gärtnerzeitung, 16/1930, p. 188. 

35 Karl Heicke, “Vorschläge für eine Verbesserung des Bestehenden 

im Schwetzinger Schlossgarten”, in: Die Gartenkunst, 

12/1937, pp. 249-256. 


and the experimental trimming of limes in 

the Dreibrückentorallee; however, with the 

outbreak of WWII, the work came to a halt. 

The “Parkpflegewerk” 

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. 36 Christian 

Bauer, state garden director at Munich, 

was another advocate of the Schwetzingen 

garden in the 1950s. It was he who initiated 

the compilation of the “Parkpflegewerk” (a 

detailed management plan drawn up for the 

individual garden), which was completed 

in 1970, one of the first of its kind. 37 In the 

preface, Bauer explains that historic gardens 

rank with a country’s most precious cultural 

36 Josef Bußjäger, “Wie können die 200jährigen Linden im 

Schwetzinger Schlosspark erhalten werden?”, in: Garten + 

Landschaft, 5/1958, pp. 122-123. 

37 Christian Bauer/Walter Schwenecke, Parkpflegewerk für den 

Schwetzinger Schlossgarten, unpublished, Karlsruhe, October 

1970. 

IV. 

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). 

105

IV. 

106 


and artistic treasures, and that their value for 

the present is inestimable. The Schwetzingen 

garden with its magnificent 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” that wrote European 

history. 38 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 Parkpflegewerk. 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 

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 39 

or the replacing of the withered lime trees 

38 Bauer/Schwenecke 1970, S.1. 

39 Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Wiederherstellung und Unterhaltung 

von Parterreanlagen, dargestellt am Beispiel des Schwetzinger 

Parterres”, in: Gartendenkmalpflege, Stuttgart 1985, pp.174-204. 

in the circular parterre, 40 are documented in 

detail in the later parts of the Parkpflegewerk 

dating from 2005. They are a fine 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. 41 

It upholds the legacy, all the more remarkable 

for its unbroken continuity, of preserving the 

historic gardens of Schwetzingen, a tradition 

which has its roots in the “Protocollum 

commissionale” of 1795. 

(Hubert Wolfgang Wertz) 

40 Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, “Maßnahmen im ‘Zirkel’ des 

Schwetzinger Schlossgartens”, in: Die Gartenkunst des Barock, 

conference of the German ICOMOS committee and the State 

Office for Monument Preservation (Bayerisches Landesamt 

für Denkmalpflege), 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. 

41 Uta Schmitt, Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, Fortschreibung des Parkpflegewerks 

für den Schwetzinger Schlossgarten, unpublished, 

Bruchsal 2005.


IV. 

107

DIE MOSCHEE 

108 

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.


a) 

On the Excavations in the 

Schwetzingen Palace Gardens. 

Elector Carl Theodor as a 

Trailblazer for Archaeological 

Research and Conservation 

I. During the westward expansion of the 

Schwetzingen palace gardens in 1765, an 

archaeological find was discovered in the 

area of the southern bosquet. 1 In the course 

of levelling an extended natural elevation, 

skeletons and burial urns came to light. These 

were uncovered under the direction of the 

“Palatinate’s Academy of Sciences” and in the 

presence of the fascinated Elector himself. 

The objects retrieved included skeletons 

and cremation burials as well as further 

grave goods. This was initially thought to 

be a battlefield site from a struggle between 

Romans and Germanic tribes and a burial site 

for the fallen. Three years after its discovery, 

the site was marked by a memorial created 

by sculptor Peter Anton von Verschaffelt: 

From a base rises a truncated pillar, which is 

adorned with various weapons as well as pots 

with lids in the style of an ancient tropaion. 

Some of these sculptures are rather accurate 

representations of the original finds, such as 

lances, a shield boss and burial urns. On two 

sides the stump is hung with drapes bearing 

Latin inscriptions in antique style. 

Fronto: 

Martis et Mortis / Romanor. et Teutonum / 

Area / Inventis Armis / Urnis et Ossibus / 

Instrumentisque aliis / An. MDCCLXV 

detecta. 

“A field of war and of death 

of Romans and Germans, was, by weapons 

found, 

urns and bones and other implements in 1765 

discovered.” 

1 Ruckert 2007, 49 f; Stupperich 2008, 20 f. 

Verso: 

Pacis Artibus / Vitae Suae Deliciis / Aecuato 

VII Pedum Solo / Vindicavit / Car. Theodorus 

El. / et M(onumentum). H(oc). P(onere). 

C(uravit). MDCCLXVIII. 

“To the arts of peace, which are the joys 

of his life, Carl Theodor, Prince Elector, 

has dedicated these seven feet of soil removed, 

and had this monument placed. 1768.” 

The discovery of this supposed battlefield 

was thereby seized as an opportunity to 

underscore Carl Theodor’s definition of his 

own role as a prince of peace. At the same 

time, the conflict between Romans and 

Germans (Teutons) symbolizes the struggle 

between civilization and barbarity. A formally 

similar monument to garden art was erected 

close by three years later. 2 Its inscription 

expresses the idea of a fundamental plan 

that tames and shapes nature with the 

peaceful resources of science and art, thereby 

2 Fuchs/Reisinger 2001, 134 f. 

V. 

Fig. 1: The memorial stone 

marking the spot of the 1765 

excavations with depictions of 

Neckar Suebi weapons. Peter 

Anton von Verschaffelt, 1771. 

(Photo: Landesmedienzentrum 


109

V. 

Fig: 2: Metal goods from 

Neckar Suebi graves at the 

1765 dig. The large pot (urn), 

shield boss and lance heads 

are pictured on the memorial 

sculpture. (Photo: Reiss-Engelhorn-Museen, 

Mannheim). 

110 


corresponding to the dedication on the 

other memorial. The archaeological find was 

published and discussed by Johann Casimir 

Häffelin in a Latin “Treatise on the Roman 

Graves found in lands at Schwetzingen, with 

an appendix regarding ancient Solicinium, 

Schwetzingen today”. In contrast to the 

battlefield interpretation expressed on 

the monument, Häffelin saw the site as a 

graveyard for the Roman and Germanic 

residents of the ancient settlement of 

“Solicinium”. 3 

Based on this documentation and the finds, 

current research allows us to distinguish 

structures from two separate time periods. 

While the cremation urns were correctly 

identified as contemporary with the Romans, 

they cannot be ascribed to soldiers or settlers 

from Italy and its provinces, but rather to the 

Neckar “Suebi”, an Elbe-Germanic tribe, that 

settled around 40 AD with Roman toleration 

in the area of the lower Neckar and on the 

right bank of the Rhine as a kind of “advance 

defence”. This necropolis was later disturbed 

by rows of Frankish graves from the 6 th /7 th 

century. 4 

3 Häffelin 1778. cf. fn 5. 

4 Ament 1996, 28 ff. Bernhard/Lenz-Bernhard 1991, 304. Schlegel 

2000, 217 f on catalogue no. 30. 

The numerous grave goods include glass 

containers and iron swords, spear points and 

shield decorations. Häffelin mentions more 

than 60 ceramic urns which – as they were 

considered worthless – were not preserved. 

Merely a bronze bucket, which served as 

a grave container, was kept and served as 

the model for the tall pots represented in 

the monument. The finds ended up in the 

Elector’s antiquarium and, to the extent that 

they survived the turmoil of two world wars, 

can today be found in the archaeological 

collection of Mannheim’s “Reiss Engelhorn” 

museums. 

Once again archaeological remains were 

found in the palace gardens, when the Roman 

aqueduct ruin was being built in April 1777. 

Once again it fell to Häffelin to examine the 

discoveries and this time he was certain that 

this was indeed evidence of a battle between 

Romans and Germanic tribesmen. This was 

purportedly the battle where, according to the 

reports of historian Ammianus Marcellinus 

(Rerum gestarum XXVII 10,8), Valentinian I 

beat the Alamanns in 368 at Solicinium, the 

supposed precursor of Schwetzingen. 5 Carl 

Theodor also had this find commemorated 

by a monument, which Joseph Anton Pozzi 

designed in the form of an obelisk erected in 

the middle of the aqueduct. Today, this find 

too has been recognized as a graveyard from 

the Merovingian period. The “untidy mess” of 

skeletons and weapons are not so much relics 

of a battle; rather, the chaos described resulted 

from a more recent disturbance of the soil at 

the site. 6 Both discoveries are owed to chance 

and yet were not unwelcome to the owner, 

and so the sites were directly integrated into 

the underlying strategy for the gardens as a 

whole. 

II. Carl Theodor’s particular interest in 

prehistoric and ancient remnants went 

far above and beyond the enthusiasm for 

antiques prevalent at European courts at the 

time. His involvement is rooted in a deep 

5 Häffelin 1777, 88. 

6 Ament 1996, 30. Stupperich 2008, 21.

affection for Antiquity instilled in him by his 

Jesuit schooling and his great openness to 

innovative scientific approaches. 7 During his 

reign the Elector implemented a number of 

policies that provided unusually conducive 

circumstances for archaeological and 

historical studies. On 29 August 1749 Carl 

Theodor prescribed that any “antiquities and 

other monumenta” found in his lands were to 

be handed in to Palatine district officials and 

then delivered to the palace in Mannheim in 

return for compensation. This decree marked 

the beginning of official archaeological 

research in the Palatinate, and also formed 

a precedent in the history of German 

conservation efforts. 8 The discoveries were 

incorporated into the Antiquarium Electorale, 

the Elector’s collection of antiques established 

in 1753. 9 This requirement was not designed 

to swell his lordship’s collection of treasures 

and satisfy the owner’s needs for a prestigious 

show, in line with the tastes of the time. The 

predominant idea was to secure endangered 

monuments and finds of local significance 

and place them in the service of education and 

science. 10 Most of this interest was focussed 

on stone monuments from Roman times in 

the form of inscriptions and imagery. 

III. The foundation of the “Academia 

Electoralis Scientiarum et Elegantiorum 

Literarum Theodoro-Palatina” placed the 

exploration of Palatine regional history on 

an institutional basis. Carl Theodor created 

the “Palatine Academy of Sciences” in 1763 

following a suggestion and with the support 

of the respected Strasbourg historian Johann 

Daniel Schöpflin (1694-1771). 11 The latter was 

named honorary president and his life-long 

collaborator Andreas Lamey (1726-1802) 

was appointed “secretarius perpetuus”. The 

Academy was divided into two classes, history 

and natural science. A primary aim of the 

first was the formation of a “Palatinatus 

7 Stupperich 2007. 

8 Jensen/Beinhauer 2007. Decree cited in Braun 1999, 347. 

9 Stupperich 1999. 

10 Braun 1999, 347. Heres 1975. 

11 Fuchs 1963, 90 ff. 


Illustratus”, a history of the Palatinate region 

following the example of Schöpflin’s much 

admired “Alsatia Illustrata” of 1751. 12 In 

addition to studying the development of the 

Palatine county, the exploration of Roman 

relics in the area was a second overriding 

theme. The mission was to develop interest in 

antiquarian and archaeological matters, to see 

ancient monuments as historical sources and, 

according to Lamey, to explain “...that stones 

and coins must often take the place of limited 

or even totally absent lore”. 13 In the course 

of four excursions between 1764 and 1768 

through the Palatinate and its minor fiefs, as 

well as neighbouring regions, the members 

of the academy took stock of existing 

monuments, recorded inscriptions and other 

stone memorials and acquired antiques for 

the collection. 14 

In order to systematically capture local 

topographical and historical features and 

ancient remnants, in 1771 the academy 

designed a questionnaire which was sent to all 

municipalities. 15 This inventory can be seen 

as a kind of precursor of the surveying work 

carried out by the conservation agencies in 

Germany’s various states today. 

Apart from the two excavations at the palace 

gardens in Schwetzingen, the academy 

conducted two other successful investigations 

into Roman era monuments just 11 and 12 

kilometres away. In June 1766 Roman stone 

buildings had been discovered in the course 

of roadworks at Schriesheim, which were 

carefully uncovered, drawn and published 

by members of the academy. Schöpflin led 

the dig personally and in turn presented the 

results in a report filed at the academy. 16 He 

interpreted the site as a family grave in the 

style of a “columbarium”, familiar at the time 

12 A. Lamey, cited in Gropengießer 1973, 11. Stupperich 2007, 

16 f. 

13 Braun 1999, 348. Günther 2007, 43 f. Stupperich 1999, 342. 

14 Braun 1999, 349. The results were intended to form the 

working basis of a Palatinatus Illustratus, but this was never 

completed. 

15 Schöpflin 1770. 

16 Heukemes 1986. Finds indicate a date in the 2 nd century AD. 

The cellar meanwhile has been integrated into Schriesheim’s 

town hall. The monument survives, although it has recently 

been moved 150 metres. 

V. 

111

V. 

112 


from Rome and Pompeii. Roman authors 

themselves used this Latin expression for 

“dovecote” to describe burial buildings with 

wall niches for storing urns. The following 

year the Elector had a monument erected at 

the site, which was designed by Schöpflin 

himself, showing a pillar crowned with an 

urn and bearing a Latin inscription. Younger 

re-excavations have shown that it was not a 

funerary building, but rather a simple cellar 

beneath the western risalto from the main 

building of a country manor (villa rustica). 17 

Shortly after publication of Schöpflin’s 

report, Häffelin himself had raised doubts 

concerning the interpretation as a burial site 

and recognized the profane character of the 

cellar. 18 A few months later and not far away, 

remains of a Roman building were found 

between Schriesheim and Ladenburg at the 

“Rosenhof” and identified as “a kind of sauna”. 

Häffelin’s illustrated report compared the 

excavated rooms, equipped with underfloor 

heating (hypocaustum), to similar known 

buildings such as the Roman “thermae” and 

smaller bath buildings in the Rhine region. 

Schöpflin was significantly involved in 

this interpretation of the find. 19 Today we 

do indeed understand it to be a small bath 

building, which was integrated into the east 

wing of the main corpus of a “villa rustica”. 

The same year as the discovery, a protective 

shelter was erected above the find on the 

Elector’s orders, bearing an inscription in his 

name. However, this was destroyed by French 

troops during the Napoleonic Wars in 1799. 

This is the first recorded example, at least in 

German-speaking countries, of presenting and 

protecting an earth-bound site in this way! 20 

The reports regarding the survey and 

acquisition of monuments and the results 

of excursions, excavations and scientific 

studies by members were published in 

17 Häffelin 1775. 

18 Braun 1999, 351. Häffelin 1775. 

19 The shelter was recorded in an engraving by lieutenant 

engineer Ferdinand Denis (1736-1805), reproduced in Koschik 

2002, 20, Fig. 1. This measure was the model for the erection of 

a large roof over the Roman spas at Badenweiler by Margrave 

Karl Friedrich von Baden in 1784. Filgis 2009. 

20 Günther 2007, 42. 

Latin in the “Acta” of the academy. Their 

contents found an audience around Europe 

thanks to Schöpflin and Lamey’s excellent 

journalistic connections. 21 They also partook 

in exchanges with other scholars, such as 

Count Hohenlohe’s archivist Christian Ernst 

Hansselmann, who was the first to explore 

the entire length of the Upper Germanic and 

Rhaetic “Limes” and advocate its preservation 

from destruction and decay. 22 

In addition to its co-founder Schöpflin and 

first secretary Lamey, the highly efficient 

archaeological and historical study of the 

region is in large part due to Johann Casimir 

Freiherr von Häffelin. He had come to 

Mannheim as a court chaplain in the year 

of the academy’s foundation. 23 The Elector 

recognised Häffelin’s scientific gifts and had 

him travel to Italy with a working group, 

where he was tasked, among other things, 

with buying Roman antiques and visiting 

collections and archaeological sites such as 

Pompeii and Herculaneum. He met Johann 

Joachim Winckelmann, whose recently 

completed magnum opus “History of the Art 

of Antiquity” (1764) laid the foundations for 

a scientific approach to archaeology. In 1768 

Häffelin was named a full member of the 

academy and director of the coin collection. 

His contributions in the academy files are 

concerned with archaeological objects, 

especially in nearby Roman finds. Thus 

Häffelin’s research marked the beginnings of 

archaeological study of the Roman provinces, 

which was not to become an independent 

academic discipline until after the Second 

World War. 

IV. From today’s perspective, the excavation, 

assessment and documentation of these finds 

from early history, discovered by chance in the 

Schwetzingen palace gardens, are remarkable 

for two reasons. The structures uncovered 

were interpreted as evidence of Roman 

events based on contemporary antiquarian 

21 Ruckert 2007, 53. 

22 Fendler 1980. 

23 Ruckert 2007, 49. Schnapp 1993, 275 ff.

knowledge and integrated directly into the 

garden’s programme. The antiquity which the 

park’s design intended to invoke could thus be 

juxtaposed “in situ” with authentic relics and 

placed into a meaningful relationship with the 

conceptual principles underlying the gardens, 

with the aid of explanatory inscriptions. 

At the same time, the history of the discovery 

and exploration of both sites is an example of 

the working methods adopted by the Palatine 

“Academy of Sciences” in its infancy. The 

historical section of this ambitious institution 

acted upon Carl Theodor’s desire to encourage 

the study of regional history with a special 

emphasis on the Roman Era. 

During this process, the narrow framework of 

scholarly examination and collecting, as it had 

developed since the days of humanism, was 

soon abandoned. Step by step, instruments 

were developed which were to pioneer 

archaeological research into the Roman 

provinces and the scientific preservation of 

historical monuments. In particular, the call to 

surrender finds in 1749, the questionnaires of 

1771 and the erection of a protective shelter in 

1766 mark the Palatine court as a trailblazer 

in the history of European conservation 

efforts. 24 By founding the Palatine “Academy”, 

Carl Theodor also created a framework for 

- the systematic record and inventory of 

monuments 

- thorough excavations 

- the scientific assessment of excavated finds 

- an insistence on publishing research results 

- the didactic communication of conclusions. 

All these principles were brought to bear 

on the treatment of the archaeological 

finds in the Schwetzingen palace gardens. 

One should remember that first attempts 

at comprehensive conservation efforts 

in Europe are not evident until after the 

Napoleonic Wars and standards for retrieving 

and describing finds as well as a scientific 

methodology still needed to be developed. 

This makes it all the more evident that, during 

the decades of Carl Theodor’s reign, the 

24 Ruckert 2007, 49. Schnapp 1993, 275 ff 


Palatinate was a harbinger of archaeological 

research and monument preservation in 

Europe. 

(Andreas Hensen) 

V. 

113

V. 

Fig. 1: The palace and the cour 

d’honneur from the east (Photo: 

RPS, LDA, Hausner). 

114 


b) 

The Urban Prospect of the Old 

Palace as a Retrospective 

Monument to Dynastic Authority 

So far, unlike the celebrated park, the nucleus 

around which the ensemble crystallizes 

has not received much attention. Given the 

quality leap from the rendered baroque to the 

significant park architecture, that is easy to 

understand, but one wonders why this should 

be the case for the – literally – outstanding 

urban prospect that is the “Corps de logis”. 1 

One need look no further than the façade 

to discover, on closer inspection, a lengthy 

structural history. It may prove to be not 

so much valuable architecture in terms 

of art history, as a style mix reflecting the 

imponderables and contingencies of the 

financial strain that haunted its turbulent past. 

Adolf Zeller regarded such conglomerates as 

“hideous surrogate architecture”, and Georg 

Dehio testified to their “gloomy character”. 2 

1 The text therefore concentrates on the display front of the 

Schwetzingen “Corps de logis”, i.e. the side that faced the town. 

Its complex composition and design promise more far-reaching 

conclusions about its construction history and iconographic 

intentions than the homogenous baroque side facing the park. 

2 Adolf Zeller: Das Heidelberger Schloß. Werden, Zerfall 

und Zukunft. Karlsruhe 1905; Georg Dehio: Handbuch der 

deutschen Kunstdenkmäler, BD. IV Südwestdeutschland. Berlin 

1911. 

That is presumably one reason why the few 

more probing descriptions there have been of 

the structural history of Schwetzingen’s palace 

have confined themselves to distinguishing 

between its phases of construction, 3 without 

exploring the possibility of independent 

architectural qualities or conscious 

motivations behind the design. It does not, 

however, seem very plausible that the central 

vanishing point of a palace whose primary 

function was ultimately to serve as a summer 

residence for one of the greatest dynasties 

of the old German Empire would have no 

aesthetic qualities of note whatsoever. Surely 

the impracticability of meeting customary 

standards of official hospitality – the corps 

de logis had neither a grand stairway and 

prestigious apartment suite, nor splendid 

ballrooms – would have cried out for a 

replacement? Was the “old crate” really 

kept on, as the park and town were lavishly 

developed under Elector Carl Theodor, simply 

on pragmatic grounds such as meagre funds 

or shifting priorities? A priori, of course, 

there is no objection to turning the question 

on its head. Might the maintenance of this 

idiosyncratic architecture have been inspired 

by other paradigms of perception or deliberate 

conservation strategies at the time 4 and hence 

have their own claim to be an appropriate 

factor in a new context? 

3 First Heinrich Gropp: Das Schwetzinger Schloß zu Anfang des 

18. Jahrhunderts. Dissertation TH Karlsruhe. Leipzig 1930; 

Kurt Martin (compil.): Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirks 

Mannheim, Stadt Schwetzingen. Die Kunstdenkmäler Badens 

10, 2. Abt. Karlsruhe 1933. 

4 Klaus Graf: Stil als Erinnerung, in: Norbert Nussbaum, Claudia 

Euskirchen, Stephan Hoppe (eds.): Wege zur Renaissance. 

Beobachtungen zu den Anfängen neuzeitlicher Kunstauffassung 

im Rheinland und den Nachbargebieten um 1500. Köln 

2003, pp. 19-29; Klaus Graf: Retrospektive Tendenzen in der 

bildenden Kunst (vornehmlich des 14.-16. Jahrhunderts) Auswahlbibliografie, 

2002; recently for art history Matthias Müller: 

Das Schloss als Bild des Fürsten. Herrschaftliche Metaphorik 

in der Residenzenarchitektur des Alten Reichs. Göttingen 

2003; cf. also Michael Schmidt: Reverentia und Magnificentia. 

Historizität in der Architektur Süddeutschlands, Österreichs 

und Böhmens vom 14. bis 17. Jahrhundert. Regensburg 1999; 

Stefan Hoppe: Die Architektur des Heidelberger Schlosses in 

der ersten Hälfte des 16. Jahrhunderts. Neue Datierungen und 

Interpretationen, in: Schloss Heidelberg und die Pfalzgrafschaft 

bei Rhein bis zur Reformationszeit. Dauerausstellung der 

Staatl. Schlösser und Gärten Bad.-Württ., Ed.: Volker Rödel. Regensburg 

2002, pp. 183-189; Stefan Hoppe: Wie wird die Burg 

zum Schloss? Architektonische Innovation um 1470, in: Heiko 

Laß (ed.): Von der Burg zum Schloss. Landesherrlicher und 

adeliger Profanbau in Thüringen im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert. 

Bucha b. Jena 2001, pp. 95-116.

The “litmus test” is to analyse the fabric. 

Peter Knoch provides an updated overview 

of the construction history, which makes 

any additional description here superfluous. 5 

Findings and features will only be singled 

out for discussion if they were key to either 

the genesis of the corps de logis and/or any 

retrospective stage-management in the façade 

around the “Cour d’honneur”. It has long 

been recognized that the two dominant tower 

risaltos were not cast from the same mould, 

and that there are significant differences in 

their rustication. The rough opus rusticum of 

the south tower marks the oldest surviving 

section, always regarded as the “keep” of the 

medieval “fort” first mentioned in 1350. The 

pointed cushion bossage of the north wing 

dates back to the extensions carried out under 

Count Palatine Ludwig V (r. 1508-1544). 6 

This legacy was integrated into the baroque 

reconstruction (1699-1715) after the great fire 

in the War of Succession (1689), and it is still 

a striking element today. 

I. The factors that determined the 

presentation of the baroque “Corps de logis” 

can now be related with greater precision to 

the ground plan. The older tower meets the 

south-east corner of a moated castle with 

almost square ring-work. 7 Excavations have 

shown that in structural terms this was not 

the fort recorded in 1350, which was assumed 

to have originated earlier. 8 The pottery from 

the construction layers on the inside 

5 More far-reaching progress on the “pre-baroque” construction 

history was achieved by archaeological investigations during 

structural safety measures in 2006. For a detailed description 

of finds, structural interpretations, periodization and dating, 

see the final report, A. Wendt, 2008, Archiv des Staatlichen 

Vermögens- und Hochbauamtes Mannheim, Bauleitung 


6 Still fundamental on this and surviving literature, Gropp: 

Schwetzinger Schloß. 

7 Cf. Peter Knoch’s contribution in this volume. New is the 

evidence of large sections of the east and north walls in the excavations 

of 2006. Sections of the base course were occasionally 

sighted from building works in the south in 1980. In the west 

the base is exposed in the cellars of the western annex of 1715. 

Apart from a foundation documented in the cour d’honneur in 

2006, nothing is known as yet about the internal divisions. 

8 The proposed dates were hitherto either close to the first record 

in 1350 or associated with the Stauffen period because of the 

bossage. 


are only from the decades around 1400. 9 It 

coincides so closely with the Count Palatinate 

taking ownership 10 that it is presumably a 

manifestation of that event, in the form of 

substantial new building – that would be 

a decisive consideration in preserving the 

“keep”. 

Above the base course, of cut stone all round, 

the otherwise towerless ring-work was only 

bossed across its eastern surface, where it 

joined the “keep”, which means that even then 

it had been formulated as a show front. 11 The 

9 Dendrochronological data from the pile structure in the 

foundations yield tpq 1305 without sapwood and forest edge; 

see final report, Wendt 2008. 

10 The precise sequence of events is unknown. The cession was 

presumably related to Ruprecht I’s relationship to Else von 

Schoenenburg, who was still recorded as the owner in 1350. In 

the will of Elector Ludwig III, by 1426 the castle had long since 

belonged to the Count Palatine. On the written sources see: 

Martin: Schwetzingen. 

11 The other sides were made above the ground floor of rendered 

rough stone. 

V. 

Fig. 2: Schwetzingen, corps 

de logis. East front elevation 

and ground plan, provisional 

chronological map (Photo: 

Wendt, Dolmazon, BDK 2007). 

NORD 

NORD 

SCHLOSS SCHWETZINGEN 

CORPS DE SCHLOSS LOGIS SCHWETZINGEN 

Baualtersplan CORPS DE LOGIS 

Entwurf Stand: 01. Baualtersplan 

01. 07 

Entwurf Stand: 01. 01. 07 

MA 2 1.H.15.Jh. 

MA 2 1.H.15.Jh. 

FNZ 1 1527d - 1541a 

FNZ 1 1527d - 1541a 

FNZ 2 1699 - 1702 

FNZ 2 1699 - 1702 

FNZ 3 1711 - 1715 

FNZ 3 1711 - 1715 

0 m 10 m 

0 m 10 m 

Fig. 3: Schwetzingen, corps de 

logis. Suggested reconstruction 

of the east front of the former 

moated castle c. 1530/40 

(Photo: Schöneweis, BDK 2008). 

115

V. 

116 


performative character of this architecture is 

a hallmark of the tower, which is too delicate 

in volume to have served any military purpose 

and if only because of its date must be seen 

as a derivative of a medieval keep. 12 The 

martial metaphor of the bossage wall seems 

no less anachronistic. Apart from quoins 

for highlighting, rustic façades remained 

the exception for a long time in secular 

building along the Upper Rhine after 1300 13 

and – perhaps as a reference to the town walls 

of Nuremberg – they were conspicuously 

associated with official Imperial buildings in 

the “free towns” of the Empire or with elites 

close to the king. Apart from the “Zunfthaus 

zur Katz” in Constance (1424) 14 , the monastic 

fortifications built by the Count Palatine in 

Maulbronn in 1440 15 are the best parallels. In 

this respect, Ulrich Knapp spoke poignantly 

of a “bossage renaissance” 16 . The “late dating” 

makes it easier to link this relatively lavish 

vocabulary of stately self-assertion to the 

aspirations of the Count Palatine than to 

the idea that lowly barons made this their 

seat in the 13 th /14 th century. As an initial 

manifestation of the Count’s acquisition 

of property, the structure also provides a 

plausible explanation for the emblematic 

preservation of the “keep” in the next phase 

of construction. Why would a symbol of alien 

power have been passed down, especially if it 

had no utilitarian value? 

II. From 1526/27 Count Palatine Ludwig 

V had his castle extended and radically 

restructured. As far as the archaeology shows, 

12 This trend was already discernible in the main tower of 

Bödigheim Castle, built in 1294 and held to be one of the latest 

“genuine bossage keeps” in the wider region. See Steinmetz: 

Burgen im Odenwald, p. 126 ff. 

13 Matthias Untermann: Das städtische Wohnhaus, in: Sönke 

Lorenz, Thomas Zotz (eds.): Spätmittelalter am Oberrhein. 

Teil 2, Alltag, Handwerk und Handel,1350-1525, p. 337, and by 

the same author: Handbuch der mittelalterlichen Architektur 

(Darmstadt 2009), p. 274. 

14 Barbara Kollia-Crowell, Robert Crowell: Das Zunfthaus zur Katz 

in Konstanz, in: Südwestdeutsche Beiträge zur historischen 

Bauforschung 1, 1992, pp. 127-150. 

15 Dietrich Lutz: Die Maulbronner Klosterbefestigung, in: 

Landesdenkmalamt Baden-Württemberg (publ.): Maulbronn – 

zur 850-jährigen Geschichte des Zisterzienserklosters. Stuttgart 

1997, pp. 345-368. 

16 Ulrich Knapp: Das Kloster Maulbronn. Geschichte und 

Baugeschichte. Stuttgart 1997, p. 146. 

most of the old complex was demolished 

down to the block base, but the eastern show 

front with its “keep” and opus rusticum were 

kept. The built area was expanded to the 

north to include the new four-storey palace 

(hereinafter the “Ludwigsbau”), where the 

base course of the old ring-work provided 

a foundation for the south wall. Opposite 

this, over the southern half of the previous 

layout, a functional tract was built to the 

same height, and an open space – the future 

“Cour d’honneur” – was cleared between the 

two. The substantial newbuild within was 

offset on the outside by rigorously retaining 

the traditional design features. The bossage 

was continued on the gable wall of the new 

palace, and the tower jutting out in front 

of the façade was mirrored by a double. In 

return, the older “keep” was raised to bring 

it into line with the height of the new wing. 

In addition, the archaeology shows that there 

was a polygonal stair tower placed wall-high 

against the line of the building. Together with 

its pendant before the south wall, the tower 

motif was thus quadrupled and, by analogy to 

the discrepancy in wing width, their mass was 

distributed differently. 17 Optically, the bipolar 

grouping of these vertical eye-catchers offset 

the variations in cubature 18 , so that seen from 

afar a well-balanced backdrop emerged, fused 

into a single façade by the sprawling “opus 

rusticum”. 19 

This trend towards homogenization is an 

advance indication of the exhibition of 

rational principles in Renaissance readings. 20 

There are other features that demonstrate a 

comparatively innovative view of architecture. 

17 The new finding makes definitive sense of a memory reported 

by Liselotte von der Pfalz of “two spiral stairways or coils”, 

which the archaeology attributes to the construction phase 

under Ludwig V; Elisabeth Charlotte von Orléans: Briefe aus 

den Jahren 1716-1718, vol. 3, Serie CXXII. Stuttgart 1874, 

23.10.1718, Nr. 961. 

18 The key is the southern polygon tower, which once stood free 

in the moat and so, despite its angled position, conveyed the 

optical impression that it was the southern end of the eastern 

display front. 

19 It was customary at the time to mark individual buildings with 

quoins, as at Heidelberg Castle. 

20 Hubertus Günther: Die ersten Schritte in die Neuzeit. Gedanken 

zum Beginn der Renaissance nördlich der Alpen, in: Nussbaum, 

Euskirchen: Wege zur Renaissance, pp. 31-87.

In contrast to the military tenor of the 

tower motifs and the bossage, there is a 

complete renunciation of practical defence 

installations, 21 which by definition marks the 

transition to a purely recreational pleasure 

palace. 22 The civilian transformation of the 

old “fort” finds its symbolic counterpoint on 

the outer walls in the deliberately retained 

anachronism of multiple towers (a metaphor 

for “the prince’s fortified town” 23 ). The tower 

vocabulary has, however, acquired sublimated 

form in bay windows and spiral steps, and 

so has been practically suborned to meet the 

needs of internal organization. Because it is 

spatially linked to the palace, the oriel offers 

a fan-like panorama from the lord’s halls 

and apartments. A memory of Schwetzingen 

later recorded by Liselotte von der Pfalz 

describes the vanishing point from a cabinet 

room: “... at the very top …, had such a fine 

view and with a perfect view of the castle in 

Heydelberg …” 24 These well managed views 

have recently been acquiring recognition as 

one of the most important developments in 

palatial architecture in the first half of the 

16 th century. 25 The same applies to another 

hallmark, which derives from the position 

of the relocated stair tower: protruding half 

across the moat towards the courtyard, it was 

activated as an exterior design feature, like the 

vertical access afforded by wooden “galleries 

or balconies” which, according to Elisabeth 

21 The basement/ground floor had windows throughout instead 

of the slits or embrasures common in contemporary palaces. 

On the ground floor of the old “keep”, the window was even 

destroyed for this purpose. On the defence capability of Early 

Modern palaces, see Ulrich Schütte: Das Schloss als Wehranlage. 

Befestigte Schlossbauten der Frühen Neuzeit. Darmstadt 

1994. 

22 The analogous description as a “pleasure pavilion and palace” 

from 1613 testifies to this. Zeyer: Beschreibung der Gartenanlagen 

zu Schwetzingen. Mannheim 1815, p. 6. In the Empire 

as a whole, palaces were only just beginning to be converted 

for purely recreational use; cf. the exemplary study by Heiko 

Laß: Jagd- und Lustschlösser des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts in 

Thüringen. Petersberg 2006. 

23 Cf. also the parallels with the depiction of towns and castles 

on, for example, tableware from Nuremberg: Christine Kratzke: 

Wehrbauten “en miniature” aus dem Spätmittelalter und der 

frühen Neuzeit im mikroarchitektonischen Kontext, in: Burgen 

und Schlösser in Sachsen-Anhalt 17, 2008, pp. 430-495. 

24 Elisabeth Charlotte von Orléans: Briefe, as fn 21. As the 

surviving stair tower does not offer a view of Heidelberg, this 

must have taken place in the newly discovered tower, which 

served (among other things) to provide vertical access to the 

cabinet in the bay window directly adjoining it. 

25 Hoppe: Architektonische Innovation, p. 105ff; in: Neue 

Datierungen und Interpretationen, 185f. 


Charlotte, lined the courtyard façades. 26 On a 

pragmatic level, these covered walkways take 

an older form of communication and adapt it 

to the confined conditions of the castle yard 27 , 

but in the palace architecture they also herald 

an important Renaissance theme. 28 

To sum up, there is a peculiar dualism to the 

Early Modern palace outlined above, for the 

innovative conception goes hand in glove 

with apparently anachronistic metaphors. 

The scholarship now regards this as a 

phenomenon of early Renaissance responses, 

which are rooted north of the Alps in an 

independent discourse. 29 In the relatively 

brief period of transition from Late Gothic 

to Renaissance, strategies for appropriating 

forms are being acknowledged which draw 

on an indigenous past. This perspective 

enables us to understand elements once 

considered conservative, such as a “Late 

Gothic” abundance of towers or the ostensibly 

“Romanesque weightiness” of block-based 

geometries as deliberate re-enactments of 

history. 

In this spirit, the “Late Gothic” input at 

Heidelberg Castle, once evaluated as negative, 

is now being ascribed an innovative role 

in Renaissance readings. 30 There is an 

appropriate place here for the construction 

undertaken at Schwetzingen by Ludwig V, 

hitherto ignored in the literature. It adapted 

the medieval tower as an emblem of 

power, the martial metaphor of bossage 

and the austere language of “Ancient” 

26 Elisabeth Charlotte: Briefe, 23.10.1718, Nr. 961. This can be 

deduced on the existing fabric from the closed vaulting of the 

ground floor and the position of the tower in relation to the 

courtyard wall with consoles from the pre-baroque construction 

phases renewed in several phases across two upper floors. 

Hence the need to correct the customary allocation to the 

period after 1658 under Elector Carl Ludwig. 

27 Cf. the form of wooden passages along yard and servants’ 

buildings in the region, e.g. Bensheim c. mid-15 th c., Ladenburg 

c. 1544; Heinrich Winter: Das Bürgerhaus zwischen Rhein, 

Main und Neckar. Tübingen 1964, p. 17ff., 256 ff. 

28 Thomas Biller, G. Ulrich Großmann: Burg und Schloss. Der 

Adelssitz im deutschsprachigen Raum. Regensburg 2002, p. 

158 ff. 

29 Fundamentally the collection of essays Nussbaum, Euskirchen, 

Hoppe (eds.): Wege zur Renaissance. 

30 Hoppe: Innovationen und Datierungen. 

V. 

117

V. 

118 


forms. 31 In the palatial architecture of the 

Wittelsbach dynasty, the surface design of 

the “Ludwigsbau” pre-empts Ottheinrich’s 

well-known “Neuburg Galleries” (from 1527) 32 

and the culmination of this thread in the 

gallery of Heidelberg’s “Glass Hall”. The list 

of correlations could continue. The axial 

sight line towards Heidelberg Castle, which 

was to underlie all subsequent plans for 

Schwetzingen, is paradigmatic in establishing 

the court of the Count Palatine as both a 

functional and an intellectual horizon. The 

central point of reference for the palace built 

around 1520/25 is the so-called “Library”, 

which as a monumental bay window before 

the west front was the first attempt to 

orchestrate a belvedere-like panorama across 

the Elector’s core territories. 33 One would 

not be wrong to see the tower oriels built at 

Schwetzingen soon afterwards as a deliberate 

counterpart. With both these new structures, 

Ludwig V was letting his residence reach out 

into the landscape, where additional hunting 

lodges and recreational mansions created a 

ring of satellites 34 that were to orbit around 

Schwetzingen as the centre of their universe. 

The qualities described open up new 

perspectives of meaning which would 

appear to dispense with the verdict 

cemented by Dehio’s authority. The selfconfidence 

of classically trained “aesthetic 

fundamentalism” 35 was not conducive 

31 E.g. the idiosyncratically pseudo-Romanesque rectangular rips 

in the ground floor vaulting of the Ludwigbau. See Hoppe: 

Romanik als Antike und die baulichen Folgen. Mutmaßungen 

zu einem in Vergessenheit geratenen Diskurs. In: Nussbaum, Euskirchen, 

Hoppe (eds.): Wege zur Renaissance. Beobachtungen 

zu den Anfängen neuzeitlicher Kunstauffassung im Rheinland 

und den Nachbargebieten um 1500. Köln 2003, pp. 88-131. 

32 The genetic links with the stair tower set in the foundations 

are borne out by the planning around 1525, as the demolition 

of the old castle must have taken some time and the ground 

floor inscription is dated 1527 (the reading 1521 which used to 

be customary has been discredited now that the dendro-dating 

shows the piling was no earlier than 1523). 

33 Stephan Hoppe has elaborated the (also literally) outstanding 

role of the palace, which is no longer evident because of its 

situation behind the western rampart. See Hoppe: fn 4. 

34 c. 1537 Schloss Weinheim, c. 1550 the hunting lodge at 

“Wolfsbrunnen” et al. 

35 The concept developed by Stefan Breuer in his analysis of the 

conceptual history behind the Stefan George Circle can in my 

view be applied equally to the prevalent angle of perception 

in modern art history between 1890 and 1960. Stefan Breuer: 

Ästhetischer Fundamentalismus. Stefan George und der 

deutsche Antimodernismus. Darmstadt 1995. 

to understanding these creations on 

the threshold to the Modern era. 36 That 

association with “surrogate architecture” that 

congealed into a topos seems, in the light of 

retrospective displays of autocratic power, to 

have been transformed into its very opposite, 

an idea which ultimately sits quite easily 

with the role played by the Wittelsbachs in 

contemporary art production and humanist 

discourse. 37 

This significance, not adequately recognized 

before the archaeological investigations, 

justifies allocating pivotal status to the 

phase under Ludwig V in unravelling the 

construction history of the “Corps de logis” 

at Schwetzingen, as does its lasting impact 

on the baroque design. Above all, however, 

it deserves recognition when replying to the 

earlier question about the role architecture 

can play as a vehicle of significance in 

retrospective strategies. There is nothing 

inherently unusual about comparable 

constructions on history which lend nobility 

and legitimacy to a cause. However, with 

the direct reference to Heidelberg the issue 

acquires a paradigmatic character. The density, 

quality and durability of historicizing selfassertion 

have always been seen as a specific 

aspect of prestigious official building under 

36 In construction history, that is already demonstrated by the 

allocation, based on an uncritical transposition of written 

sources, of large parts of what we can see to reconstruction 

after the Thirty Years’ War. 

37 At the historical level, the reading begins to change with: 

Johann Kolb: Heidelberg. Entstehung einer Landesherrlichen 

Residenz im 14. Jahrhundert. Residenzen-Kommission der 

Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen (publ.): Residenzenforschung 

8. Sigmaringen 1999; Rödel (ed.): Der Griff 

nach der Krone. Its sustainability is marked by the meanings 

attributed in the new overview by Werner Rösener: Leben am 

Hof. Königs- und Fürstenhöfe im Mittelalter, Ostfildern 2008; 

on the shift in perspective from an art history angle: Anneliese 

Seeliger-Zeiss: Die Pfalzgrafschaft als Kunstlandschaft, in: Der 

Griff nach der Krone, pp. 127-154; Hans Hubach: Parnassus 

Palatinus: Studies of the Arts at the Palatinate Court, 1400-1700, 

Activities and Research Reports June 1998-May 1999, publ. 

by National Gallery of Art in the Visual Arts. Washington, 

D.C.1999, pp. 84-88; Hans Hubach: Tapisserien im Heidelberger 

Schloss 1400-1700. Grundzüge einer Sammlung der Pfälzer 

Kurfürsten. In: Tapisserien. Wandteppiche aus den Staatlichen 

Schlössern Baden-Württembergs. Weinheim 2002, p. 98ff; 

Hans Hubach: Johann von Dalberg und das naturalistische 

Astwerk in der zeitgenössischen Kunst von Heidelberg und 

Ladenburg, in: Gerold Bönnen, Burkard Keilmann (eds.): Der 

Wormser Bischof Dalberg (1482-1502) und seine Zeit. Quellen 

und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Geschichte. Mainz 

2005, pp. 207-232.; Stephan Hoppe: Neue Datierungen und 

Interpretationen, in: Architektonische Innovation.

the Wittelsbachs. The spectrum ranges from 

the “Brunnenhalle”, with columns plundered 

from the Carolinian palace at Ingelheim 

(c. 1530), via the statuary on the famous 

frontage of the “Friedrichsbau” (1610), to the 

historicization of entire castle ruins after the 

residence was transferred to Munich (1778), 

and no further elucidation is needed here. 

It would be oversimplifying things to suggest 

there is any one-dimensional explanation 

for the extreme importance of retrospection 

at the Palatinate court, be it the reciprocal 

explosion of historical awareness in the 

Humanist era or the customary reading 

of the tower symbol as a metaphor for 

“power”. The synthesis between retrospective 

quotations of medieval resistance (Heidelberg: 

“Dicker Turm”, “Torturm”, over-dimensioned 

moats, stone block walls; Schwetzingen: 

integration of the former keep, multiple 

towers in the façade design, opus rusticum) 

and prospective sublimations in belvederelike 

architecture (library, bell tower; bay 

windows at Schwetzingen) and the creation of 

recreational retreats (Schwetzingen) assumes 

a more complex plane of understanding, 

recently exemplified in the metaphor of 

the palace as a “visualization of the prince” 

which alludes primarily to “dignity”, i.e. 

the venerable status of the dynasty and the 

virtue of the incumbent. 38 In this respect, the 

integration of the “keep” as an indispensable 

core element of the prince’s seat demonstrates 

the virtues of “Fortitudo” and “Justitia” – that 

is, firm authority and the legitimation of 

inherited property rights. 39 The view from 

the tower rooms symbolizes “Sapientia” and 

“Prudentia” – the watchful vigilance and 

supervision of the prince. 40 These metaphors 

are not so fundamentally different from the 

normative concept of the “signa dignitatis”, 

which was to inform the general attitude to 

baroque state architecture. This is exemplified 

by the formulation in a work on the law of the 

38 Müller: Herrschaftliche Metaphorik, cf. esp. summary p. 389, 

392. 

39 ibid. p. 390. 

40 ibid. p. 392. 


German court, “Teutsches Hofrecht”, published 

in 1754: “In the Residence the Prince 

appears…in the glory of innate or acquired 

dignity”. 41 

III. If Ludwig V’s summer palace at 

Schwetzingen was largely borrowed, after the 

fire of 1689, for the baroque reconstruction, 

there is no longer any need to attribute this 

solely to poverty. Taking the building on board 

– and literally “making a virtue of necessity” 

– seems to have been appropriate, not only on 

pragmatic grounds, but programmatic ones, 

too. That does not mean that the old fabric 

would not at some point have been replaced 

by a baroque palace more fitting to the age 

had finances and priorities allowed. It is well 

established that Johann Wilhelm was at the 

same time investing huge sums of money 

in the hunting lodge at Bensberg (drawings 

from 1698, building commenced 1703) 42 and 

that he was planning to build a monumental 

residence – also near Düsseldorf. 43 Once 

he shifted his focus to the Lower Rhine, 

Schwetzingen had only to respond to its 

altered circumstances as a hunting lodge and 

summer base in the “burnt-out” ancestral 

territory of the County Palatine. 

Unlike the chronology of revitalization, the 

objectives underlying the re-design of the 

ruins are not known. Once again we are 

obliged to rely on an analysis of the building 

stock. The basic coordinates for the planning 

and implementation are captured in the 

files: a status report on the Palatine palaces 

compiled in 1698 describes the gutted ruins 

as “the exterior main walls still in good 

condition. The middle floors however caved in 

down to the lowest vaulting…” 44 Instructions 

41 Friedrich Carl Moser: Teutsches Hofrecht, p. 274, quoted in 

Müller: Herrschaftliche Metaphorik p. 386. 

42 On Bensberg: Barbara Precht von Taboritzki: Das neue Schloss 

Bensberg in Bergisch-Gladbach. Rheinische Kunststätten 14. 

Köln 1996. 

43 Recently under the heading: Das Heidelberger Luftschloss, 

Thomas und Carmen Flum: Der Wiederaufbau Heidelbergs 

nach der Zerstörung im kurpfälzischen Erbfolgekrieg, in: 

Frieder Hepp, Hans-Martin Mumm: Heidelberg im Barock. 

Heidelberg 2009. 

44 Quoted in Gropp: Schwetzinger Schloß, p. 22. 

V. 

119

V. 

Fig. 4: Re-used stones from the 

stair tower in the foundations 

of the straight stairs (Photo: 

Knoch, Erb). 

120 

Fig. 5: Vertical joint (Photo: 

Knoch, Erb). 


to master-builder Antonio Petrini in Würzburg 

date from the same period: “…to there inspect 

the walls … and send an estimate …of when 

the palace can be rebuilt in the old manner”. 45 

Petrini died, however, in 1701. Provisionally 

competing with this, an alternative proposal 

45 ibid. p. 24, and elsewhere “To build the palace again as it was 

before”, ibid. p. 30. 

was submitted without further enunciation 

by Flémal, which included covering over 

the inner courtyard, “because without this 

the same is of very narrow confine”. 46 Quite 

possibly this already laid the basis for the 

enlargement strategy implemented in the cour 

d’honneur wing in 1711. We cannot tell to 

what extent the existing building combined 

ideas from the various planning options. 

The findings demonstrate that the solution 

chosen was cheap 47 , because it dispensed 

with building over the former castle yard, and 

hence with the prestigious stairway expected 

at the time. Although much of the previous 

stock was retained, the building managed 

to look like a contemporary baroque palace, 

but this did call for broad changes to its 

appearance. 

To begin with, a fundamental decision was 

taken to drain the moat, and in 1699 it was 

duly filled with “rubble” on the prince’s 

orders. 48 Archaeological findings have 

confirmed this, and at the same time they 

have provided the first deeper insights into 

the new resolution of the façade: the sediment 

in the moat was sealed over in the north-west 

by building debris from the demolition of 

the stair tower. This rubble was also used 

in the foundations for the baroque stairway 

risalto, which replaced the old vertical access 

with a new one in the same place. 49 Together 

with the demolition of the ring-work along 

the castle yard, the risalto mirroring the old 

south wing was the decisive change leading 

to the creation of a new cour d’honneur. The 

archaeological investigation has revealed that 

46 ibid. p. 34, with a detailed description of the cost-related tussles 

over planning according to the building records 29ff; on Flémal 

recently: Heidelberg im Barock, p. 151f. 

47 On this and for an overall account of the reconstruction in 

1699-1715 see the contribution by Peter Knoch in this volume. 

From now on reference will only be made at the appropriate 

point to specific corrections resulting from recent assessments 

of the excavations. 

48 Source documents from the building records listed severally 

in Gropp p. 28, 34. Unlike Knoch, who assumes without documentary 

evidence that the moat was refilled for the renovations 

under Elector Carl Ludwig. This is also belied by indications 

in the building records that the bridge over the moat was to 

be repaired, and also several references to the two stair towers, 

Gropp, p. 2 ff. 

49 The allocation following Gropp to the phase under Carl Ludwig 

is based on a misreading of the written sources.

a notably more complex technical effort was 

invested in regularizing the façades: when 

the ring-work was taken down, the old blocks 

of bossage were “laid” on their sides so that 

the course could then be pieced back together 

in exactly the same way in the lower section 

of the stairway risalto on the side facing the 

field. The result is a symmetry between the 

two wings which is mirrored right down 

to the relief on the wall, and it dominates 

the palace prospect. 50 This assumes that the 

two tower oriels were to be kept 51 , and that 

in turn meant that the Late Gothic interiors 

of the bay windows could be conserved. 52 

The emphasis here on ancient elements 

sets up an impressive contrast with the 

skilful modernization of the building: the 

arrangement of the old cubatures along three 

sides made it relatively simple to adapt the 

baroque scheme of the cour d’honneur. 53 The 

fact that the high verticals have been retained 

for the wings is less common, and the 

resulting ancient “tower” effect of the main 

prospect is totally original. 

This meant that the dynastic emblems of the 

Count Palatine’s old castle were conserved 

within the display front and, indeed, optically 

reinforced by harmonizing the symmetry. 

This intended historicization does, however, 

apparently incorporate a further layer of 

biographical self-reassurance which – as we 

shall see below – was to exert an enduring 

impact on the construction of memory. At the 

main entrance to the palace there still stand 

two stelae displaying the arms of Elector 

Johann Wilhelm von Pfalz-Neuburg and his 

lady consort Anna Maria Luisa Medici, under 

whose reign Schloss Schwetzingen was reborn 

50 One orthodox approach to regularizing was to build a 

connecting transverse slab between the two wings as a simple 

rendered block (so-called west tract of the central section 

before extensions in 1715) overformed by a regulated system 

of window bays that contributes substantially to a more 

homogenous appearance. 

51 An alternative would have been to pull down the forebuildings 

flush to the wall and dispose of the bossage. 

52 This could also have been simply “smoothed over” or turned 

baroque by knocking off the ornamentation. 

53 Similar solutions, for example, in the baroquization of moated 

castles on the Rhine, e.g. Schloss Noervenich. A comparative 

regional story which marries with Johann Wilhelm’s local 

focus. 


out of the ruins of the War of Orléans. There 

is abundant biographical material to show 

that the last Medici with her great knowledge 

of the arts acquired a decisive influence over 

the Elector and art at the court. 54 Less is 

known, although the assumption is logical, 

about her influence on the building work. The 

Electress is associated with the preferment 

of Italian court architects such as Matteo 

Alberti. She expressly wanted the palace at 

Bensberg to be a “country seat in the Italian 

mould” 55 . Her influence correspondingly 

also led to borrowings from Italian themes, 

including those at the Villa Medici itself. 56 

There is, therefore, no reason why she 

should not have brought her views to bear at 

Schwetzingen. The proximity – in time and in 

evident genealogy – has never been analyzed, 

and yet there are striking concordances 

in the prospects: the west wing of 1715 at 

Schwetzingen, for example, seeming to be a 

54 The relevant exhibitions to mark past jubilees have strengthened 

this impression. Anna Maria Luisa de’Medici elettrice 

palatina. Atti delle celebracioni, 2005-2008, Palazzo vecchio, 

Firence/a cura di Anita Valentini. Firenze 2009; Bettina 

Baumgräbel (ed.): Himmlisch – herrlich – höfisch: Peter Paul 

Rubens, Johann Wilhelm von der Pfalz, Anna Maria Loisa 

Medici; Katalog zur Ausstellung im Kunst-Palast Düsseldorf 

2008-2009. Leipzig 2008; La principessa saggia: L’eridata di 

Anna Maria Medici, Elettrice Palatina, Firence, Palazzo Pitti, 

Galleria Palatina 2006-2007. Livorno 2006; basic biography: 

Carl Vossen: Anna Maria, die letzte Medici, Kurfürstin zu 

Düsseldorf. Düsseldorf undated; Anna Maria Medici: Kurfürstin 

von der Pfalz. Stadtmuseum Düsseldorf 17. Düsseldorf 1988; 

Hermine Kühn-Steinhausen: Anna Maria Luisa de’ Medici, 

elletrice palatina. Firenze 1967. 

55 Precht von Taboritzki: Bensberg: p. 13. 

56 ibid. p. 13f. 

V. 

Fig. 6: Main entrance to the 

palace with two stelae displaying 

the arms of Elector Johann 

Wilhelm von Pfalz-Neuburg and 

his lady consort Anna Maria 

Luisa Medici (Photo: Wendt, 

BDK 2009). 

121

V. 

122 

Fig. 7: Schloss Bensberg, cour 

d’honneur (Photo: Luidger 

2006). 


smaller derivative of the Bensberg cubatures. 

It makes sense, then, to attribute the curious 

impact of the palace façade, and those 

strong associations with Renaissance villas 

in Tuscany 57 , to principles posited by Anna 

Maria Luisa von Medici. 58 On inspection 

of the existing fabric, the metaphoric layer 

alluding to the “long-established ancestry” 

of the Counts Palatine can be married to the 

reference to the princess’s Italian origins – a 

congenial reflection in the monument of the 

alliance announced in the entrance heraldry. 

In 1710-15, when work began on developing 

the palace into a fully functional baroque 

ensemble with a large “Cour d’honneur”, 

wings and apartment suites, the old stock was 

left untouched on the outside, apart from the 

“migration” of the two heraldic stelae to the 

newly advancing entrance. With the finances 

finally consolidated, more could presumably 

have been spent on at last overbuilding the 

“Cour d’honneur” with an appropriate flight 

of steps, if that was what ceremonial visits 

57 See e.g. the Report by Michael Niedermeier in the Application. 

Cf. also the notorious love of the Electress for her home, which 

led to the orchestration of Italian atmospheres in her everyday 

environment. 

58 In this respect much can also be learned from the favoured 

status, confirmed by the sources, of the old palace of Benrath 

within the landscape of Düsseldorf residences. Similar 

associations are aroused by the tower superstructures that 

dominate the corpus after Jan van Nikkelen’s paintings of 1715. 

Kühn-Steinhausen: Luisa d’ Medici, p. 85, illustration with 

documentary evidence from the correspondence. 

required. 59 The basic decision to keep the 

small court of honour may well have been 

motivated by the arched passage which 

continues the sight line from the principal 

route of access through to the garden: a 

stairway would have blocked out this axiality 

which is such a constituent feature in the 

overall design of Schwetzingen. Another 

decision was to keep the built frame low – in 

contradistinction to, for example, the high 

wings of the “Cour d’honneur” at Bensberg. 

Carl Philipp was to adopt the strategy 

without modifying it and merely accentuate 

the endpoints of the contemporary axis by 

adding new buildings. 60 Its culmination was 

the rounded form of the park orangery, which 

emphasizes the transitional character of the 

arched passage through the central building. 

This enabled the park to assert a growing 

power over the palace. At the other end, 

the bipolar frame constituted by the risalto 

architecture of the corps de logis seemed to 

create a monumental portal for the garden. 

IV. The decision by the young Count Palatine 

Carl Theodor to develop Schwetzingen as 

his second residence and generously expand 

the gardens inevitably prompted thoughts 

that the palace ought to be adapted to this 

new scale. For the first time, that idea was 

now tackled, and the old buildings were to 

make way for the representational aspirations 

befitting a prince of the age. There were plans 

for a magnificent replacement, and work 

actually commenced on the foundations. In 

1753 they were halted again. Nobody knows 

why the project was discarded. 61 The old 

buildings stayed where they were again. 

59 The residence begun at Mannheim five years later demonstrates 

the financial leeway. 

60 Orangery 1718/26; recent dendro-dating shows that the main 

entrance was upgraded by extending the guard houses in 

1729. This disproves the date allocated on the basis of building 

records, where an intention to renovate expressed by Pigage is 

over-interpreted. 

61 Cf. Max Schmeichel: Nicolaus de Pigages Schwetzinger Entwürfe 

und Bauten. Darmstadt 1925, p. 15 ff. The chronological 

overlap with the Lower Rhine palaces at Benrath (from 1755) 

and Jägerhof (by 1762) reveals conceivable competition – 

notwithstanding the preference for developing the garden.

But postponement does not necessarily mean 

the end of the story. We cannot tell why the 

buildings now so thoroughly out-of-date were 

not pulled down at the soonest available 

opportunity. We do know, however, that 

perceptions of the palace park underwent 

a paradigmatic shift from around 1760 as 

the stylistic transition accelerated and after 

1778 when the residence was transferred to 

Munich. 62 We cannot assume that perspectives 

on the pragmatic benefits and the iconology 

of the corps de logis were unaffected. As the 

spatial conditions imposed major restrictions 

on the options for converting or adapting 

the building for living purposes and the 

ceremony of state, apart from an ephemeral 

modernization of the interior decorations 

(wall coverings, furniture and the like), 

questions no doubt arose about other realistic 

options. They were cogently answered, the 

response to the needs of court being the 

quarter-circle pavilions with their ballrooms 

and dining rooms, and the response to more 

private concerns being the bath house as a 

favoured retreat with living accommodation 

for the Elector within the park. The palace 

corpus as a vehicle of architectural meaning 

could not be moved if it was not to be 

demolished. It would have been relatively 

easy, of course, to adapt it to the times by 

overforming the façades. In fact, it is a matter 

of considerable amazement that not even 

this simple option was pursued, given that 

far more substantial sums were being spent 

in the garden on monumental follies such 

as the mosque. No less is true of the “Cour 

d’honneur” as a prospect, which was not 

even touched when the urban centre with its 

market square was created in direct reference 

to it. The conservation was so far-reaching 

that the colour scheme handed down since 

the Renaissance (chalk white walls with red 

to underscore the ashlar structure) was used 

again in renovations – in obviously harsh 

contrast to the soft tones of the peach-blossom 

62 See the contributions to this volume by Michael Hesse, Ralf 

Wagner, Hartmut Troll and Michael Niedermeier. 


pavilions. 63 In the light of all this, we would 

not be wrong to assume that the iconology of 

the old palace building was still valid or had 

been revived, despite the next wave of change 

in patterns of interpretation. 

This is harder to assess during the postbaroque 

“transition” around 1750 than ex 

post. The key may be supplied by the great 

importance attributed to conservation in 

official ceremony, which broke through 

on the back of Classicism, with its 

new understanding of Antiquity. 64 The 

biographical springboard for the Elector’s 

invigorated interest in the peculiar anciennité 

of the obsolete corpus is marked by his 

move to Munich in 1778. Personally, Carl 

Theodor would have preferred his residence 

to be in the dynastic Palatine territories. 65 

In retrospect, he must have remembered 

his years in Schwetzingen, where he had 

implemented his vision of an “Arcadian 

ancestral home in the Golden Age” in the form 

of an allegorical programme, as a happy time 

in the Palatinate. 66 Nicolas de Pigage, who 

was responsible for putting his master’s ideas 

into practice, confirmed that ideal universe in 

1795 when he characterized the gardens as a 

“Monument to the Palatine Electorate”. 

The practical benefits of the palace as a 

ceremonial framework and of the Elector’s 

living quarters had always been meagre. In 

private respects, they were further reduced 

by the bathhouse in 1768 and when the 

Electress removed to Oggersheim, so that 

after 1778 they were marginal. The structural 

shell remained as a projection wall. On this 

level, the old palace is to be seen as another 

metaphorically charged corpus among the 

memoria inscribed in the garden. The set 

pieces in the park landscape are multi-layered 

63 Findings from comprehensive studies on the colour of the 

outer façades during 2003-2008. Report by Peter Knoch in the 

Building Department archives at Schwetzingen. 

64 See the contribution by Hensen in this volume. 

65 Caroline Gigl: Carl Theodor und Bayern, in: Lebenslust und 

Frömmigkeit – Kurfürst Carl Theodor (1724-1799) zwischen 

Barock und Aufklärung, vol. 1. Regensburg 1999, pp. 389-394. 

66 See the contributions by Hartmut Troll and Michael Niedermeier 

in the Texts and Application. 

V. 

123

V. 

124 


and conceal many planes of reference 

with historical connotations. The point of 

departure is a reading of Antiquity that was 

initially allegorical and later informed by 

academic Classicism. The planners’ aim was 

to create a Roman-like sphere with elements 

quite freely borrowed from Vitruvian models 

and Ancient ruins. For an observer with a 

Classical training, the two-towered cubature 

of the palace corpus at the main entrance to 

the park would have conjured up associations 

with Roman city gates or triumphal arches. 

Depending on the visitor’s educational 

background, the façade may also have evoked 

a risalto villa in Rome. As the old heraldic 

stelae of Pfalz-Neuburg and Medici were not 

updated – and the guardhouse alterations 

under Carl Philipp or the development of the 

market square under Carl Theodor would 

have provided suitable opportunities – an 

attentive visitor might equally read this as 

an allusion to a rural villa in Tuscany. The 

contemporary penchant for informal rural 

life may have encouraged that standpoint. An 

observer familiar with the local lord would 

have related Carl Theodor’s passion for things 

Italian to his dynastic link with the Medici. 

From this angle too, there is an affinity to 

the heart of the Ancient Roman Empire, a 

relationship which would have provided 

retrospective justification for the alliance 

between the Golden Age of Antiquity and the 

Golden Age of the Palatinate. 

Beyond the access through the palace to the 

park was concealed a border landscape on 

the limes of the Roman Empire, patriotically 

redefined as the dynastic core of the 

Electoral Palatinate. This potential anchor 

had already been a key factor in the choice 

of Schwetzingen as a summer residence by 

Carl Theodor. 67 “Near Schwetzingen”, not 

only had Elector Friedrich I once prevented 

the demise of the County Palatine at the 

Battle of Seckenheim in 1462 against 

67 See on this and the following observations Hartmut Troll 

and Michael Niedermeier together with the corresponding 

references. 

a coalition of enemy forces, but it was 

believed that “Hadrian’s Valley” lay here. 

Unexpected endorsement for this scholarly 

construction of the “genius loci” was provided 

by archaeological remains discovered 

during earthworks while implementing 

Pigage’s designs for the garden in 1765 and 

exposed in the presence of the fascinated 

prince. 68 It was tempting to interpret the 

buried skeletons and funeral pyres as a 

“field of war and death for Romans and 

Germans”. Carl Theodor had the find marked 

with a memorial stone of programmatic 

significance: facing an allegory of the art 

of garden landscaping, the image of eternal 

struggle between civilization and barbarity is 

activated for his self-presentation as a prince 

of peace. 69 In 1777 the display of Ancient 

local history acquired further contours when 

Germanic burial chambers were unearthed 

during construction of the Roman aqueduct. 

Schwetzingen was promptly identified 

with a Battle of Solicinium, which tradition 

maintained had taken place in the area 

around the Neckar Valley, a possible bridge, 

via the mysterious repetitions of history, to 

the Battle of Seckenheim “in the plains at 

Schwetzingen”. The “field of war” transmuted 

by the local prince into a peaceful Arcadia 

lies between these two indigenous poles 

of Ancient and Palatine history, confirmed 

as authentic by the physical and written 

sources. Weaving these elements together, 

the translation of the office of Palatine 

Elector from the Roman palatin via the 

Carolingian comes palatinus to the Rhineland 

Count, granted its credentials by Palatine 

historiography, drops an authentic anchor 

in the Holy Roman Empire of the German 

Nation. 70 From the garden of the Palatine 

68 For full details on this and the following observations see the 

contribution by Andreas Hensen in this volume, together with 

references. 

69 Fuchs, Reisinger: Schwetzingen, p. 133ff. 

70 By way of the local historiography in well-read works like 

Marquardt Freher’s, this was a common idea in the 18 th century. 

In these reflections, the place is a depository of the historical 

claim to the rank of first secular prince of the Empire, Elector’s 

privileges and the status of vicarius imperii, and founds the 

family tradition of providing Emperors and kings.

Apollo 71 , the sight line conspires to signal 

the historical “Parnassus Palatinus” in 

Heidelberg. 72 

At the entrance to Schwetzingen Park, the 

ancient masonry of the castle initiates that 

same bridge from the Golden Ages of Palatine 

history to the transcendent ancient genius 

loci. A perception typical of the era, with roots 

in the aesthetics of association, would draw 

on this visual expression of Antiquity with 

analogies in Roman or Italian architecture, 

which derives authenticity from genealogical 

knowledge about the reconstruction of the 

palace ruins in the alliance with the Medici. 

Its origins lie in the acquisition of the place by 

the Count Palatine, manifest in the defensive 

fort (“Veste”) of Friedrich the Victorious. 73 

The reference is all the more uncommonly 

persuasive because of the central role played 

in Palatine history by this warrior ancestor 

crowned by so much success. After the loss of 

the royal crown, Friedrich I led the county to 

a height of power never since equalled. 74 That 

accounted for his pivotal status in dynastic 

memoria, even if the ancestral locus was lost 

with the destruction of Heidelberg in the war 

of succession. 75 The stout towers and bossage 

of the palace in the “plains of Schwetzingen” 

where he won his legendary victory were an 

insistent memorial substitute. That might 

also explain the extremely conspicuous 

presentation of the strange figure of mockery 

displayed as a spoil on the jamb of the gate to 

the park, which is dated as originating in that 

period. 76 In terms of the way Carl Theodor 

71 Der Pfälzer Apoll. Kurfürst Carl Theodor und die Antike an 

Rhein und Neckar. Ruhpolding, Mainz 2007. 

72 Cf. Wilhelm Kühlmann, Hermann Wiegand (eds.): Parnassus 

Palatinus. Humanistische Dichtung in Heidelberg und der alten 

Kurpfalz. Lateinisch – Deutsch. Heidelberg 1988. 

73 As in the retrospective text of the garden guide by Zeyher and 

Roemer of 1815, p. 4. 

74 Meinrad Schaab: Geschichte der Kurpfalz, vol. 1: Mittelalter. 

Stuttgart 1988, p. 170 ff. 

75 The famous trophies from the Battle of Seckenheim were 

destroyed by fire in the Heilig-Geist-Kirche, the burial chapel in 

the Franciscan Monastery was lost. 

76 Rudolf Sillib: Schloß und Garten Schwetzingen. Heidelberg 1907, 

p. 3. Whether Carl Theodor thought the bottom pointed at Seckenheim 

expressed Götz von Berlichingen’s notorious gesture towards 

his enemies would require further research. Johann Wolfgang von 

Goethe first published his play named after the hero in 1773 and 

made him “famous at a stroke”. Richard Friedenthal: Goethe. Sein 

Leben und seine Zeit. München 1963, p. 150. 


understood his role as a ruler and sought 

to project it, the connection with Friedrich 

the Victorious offers two useful associative 

tools: the fortress structure juxtaposed 1 st the 

belligerent virtues of his medieval ancestor 

against the virtues symbolized in the garden 

of the prince of peace, who 2 nd by uniting 

Bavarian with the Palatinate fulfilled the 

historical mission of the Wittelsbach dynasty 

on a congenial note. In the context of this 

almost Olympian retrospection, the martial 

appearance obtained a new meaning that 

served dynastic memoria and a patriotic 

narrative of history, at the same time 

permitting an antiquified, civilized translation 

befitting the times into the programmatic 

metaphor of the garden beyond. Unlike the 

artificial ruins, the ancient walls had the 

advantage of genuine presence with authentic 

patina. Here, lost history was inscribed before 

the visitor’s very eyes. 

The spectrum of recruitable associations 

supplies convincing reasons for a 

conservatory ideal which discovered fresh 

value in the building precisely because of its 

ancient appearance. Fertile soil was found 

in a novel approach to conservation first 

encountered in the treatment of findings in 

the park and the protective structures over 

Roman ruins in Schriesheim, pre-empting 

modern views of archaeology and the 

V. 

Fig. 8: Schloss Schwetzingen, 

corps de logis, eastern end. Late 

Gothic caricature at the garden 

portal (Photo: Landesmedienzentrum 


125

V. 

126 


preservation of monuments. 77 Carl Theodor 

witnessed the beginning of an understanding 

which was able to grasp history as an 

“aggregate state” and no longer perceived the 

past simply as something over and done with, 

but as a pattern of layers. 78 

V. Conclusions: The various threads of 

Palatine history surrounding Schloss 

Schwetzingen are woven into the urban 

prospect of the corps de logis and visibly 

preserved. The façade retains and reflects 

the “keep” with the rustica surfaces of the 

first Palatine fortress, deliberately absorbing 

it into the new construction from 1526/27. 

The architectural significance of the former 

“pleasure palace” in Renaissance responses in 

South-West Germany has only been accessed 

again today following recent research into the 

architecture of Count Palatine Ludwig V. The 

central construction phase established the 

dominant height and dual-pole cubature to 

which the urban development and Heidelberg 

perspective would later refer. If the 18thcentury 

conservation was partly determined 

by necessity and historical contingency, 

the pithy form with its minor harmonizing 

adaptations was highly accessible to 

retrospective strategies for visualizing 

the past and asserting identity. Here was 

room for the idealized stage-management 

of dynastic history so characteristic of the 

Palatine Wittelsbachs, which after 1693 could 

not continue on the ancestral Parnassus 

Palatinus. Among the princely elite from 

whom emanated German kings, there was 

no baroque palace of residence where 

retrospective conservation strategies could 

be described and read in the display façade 

with such deliberate conception and pervasive 

coherence. This is where the last of the Counts 

Palatine found a suitable imaginary canvas 

for his patriotic narrative of history which, 

77 See Andreas Hensen’s contribution in this volume. 

78 The synchronicity of things not synchronous first finds 

expression in the image of “layers of time” that was coined in 

the 18 th century. Fundamental on this is Reinhart Koselleck: 

Zeitschichten. Studien zur Historik (Frankfurt 2003), p. 10f., 

19ff. esp. p. 237f. 

after passing beneath the old palace, unfolds 

conspiratorially in the Arcadia of the park. In 

this reading, the palace as an archaeological 79 

relic ultimately sets a memorial to itself, a 

“Monument to the Palatine Electorate”. After 

repeated changes in the circumstances of 

perception, it has become that again today – 

“I am a Monument” 80 . 

(Achim Wendt) 

79 One indication of the innovative quality of models used to 

interpret geology and archaeology in the late 18 th century is 

the (general) analogy with Kant’s experimental concept of the 

“archaeology of nature”. 

80 Carl Theodor’s perception of a habitable archaeological corpus 

with a bold display of historical narrative is not far removed 

from the “decorated shed” of post-modern architectural theory: 

“I am a Monument”. Robert Venturi: Learning from Las Vegas. 

Berlin 1979, p. 184.

c) 

The Waterworks and Carl 

Theodor’s Scientific 

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 

scientific 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 magnificent 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 artificial 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 

da Bibiena (1687-1748) 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 

1 Rainer Slotta, Technische Denkmäler in der Bundesrepublik 

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


travellers returned, a detailed model of the 

planned Schwetzingen waterworks 2 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 unfiltered 

water tended to clog up the pipes, and the 

rotting organic particles contained in it, 

caused unpleasant smells in the park. A more 

efficient pump drawing water from a deep 

well was required. An installation consisting 

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

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

V. 

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). 

127

V. 

128 


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 finished. 

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 flows 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 floor 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 

Elector 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 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. 

Lightning Conductor 

Hemmer’s fields 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 

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

1776. 

6 Adolf Kistner, Die Pflege der Naturwissenschaften in 

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

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

experiments using metal concave mirrors were conducted at 

Mannheim Palace.

tip. The lightning conductors were put up 

on buildings more or less under Hemmer’s 

personal supervision. 

Hemmer mounted the first of them on 15th 

April 1776, on the roof of Trippstadt Castle. On 

17th July 1776, it was the turn of Schwetzingen 

Palace8, 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 fitted 

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 “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 flagpole. From the roof truss, the 

unusually solid substructure of the platform 

becomes evident; it looks rather excessive for 

a mere flagpole. But then the massive beams 

8 Kistner 1930, p. 82. 

9 Kistner 1930, p. 97. 


V. 

Fig. 3: Lightning conductor 

on the palace’s northwest 

pavilion (central block) (Photo: 

Förderer). 

Fig. 4: View from the Roman 

water tower towards the 

aqueduct and the Lower 

Waterworks (Photo: Förderer). 

Fig. 5: 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). 

129

V. 

Fig. 6: Detail: water wheels in 

the Lower Waterworks (Photo: 

LAD Esslingen, 2006). 

130 

Fig. 7: Bone mill (bowls 

and pestles) in the Lower 

Waterworks (Photo: LAD 



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 secondbeating 

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 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 

Deparcieux (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 

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 befinden. 

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

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

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 fortifications 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.

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 first put up in one of the 

rooms at Schwetzingen Palace, that was 

briefly used as an astronomy cabinet, but went 

missing in the 20th century. 

The quadrant was the first 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. 

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 

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. 


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 sufficiently 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 floor 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 

the first international scientific collaboration, 

would allow a determination of the solar 

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

Der Süden im Norden. Orangerien – ein fürstliches Vergnügen. 

(Ed. Oberfinanzdirektion Karlsruhe Staatliche Schlösser und 

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

Regensburg 1999, p. 67. 

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

and 1762. 

V. 

Fig. 8: Transit of Venus in 2004 

(Photo: private). 

131

V. 

132 


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 

Baden-Baden. That the Palatinate was quite 

interested in a new survey of its territories 

22 Maurice Daumas, Scientific 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 

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 flawlessly 

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, 

although it was intersected by the railway in 

later years. 

Later writers have confirmed 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 findings 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 confirmata, 

27 Theodor Traitteur, Über die Größe und Bevölkerung der 

Rheinischen Pfalz, Mannheim 1789, p. 22. 

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.

ecentissimisque 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 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 findings 

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. 


V. 

Fig. 9: Small map of the 

Palatinate, Egidius Verhelst 

after Christian Mayer, 1773 

(Kurpfälzisches Museum 

Heidelberg). 

133

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 flocked to this German Versailles, St. Cloud, 

Aranjuez or whatever it may please you to call this strange place.“


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 office 

the development of which is “among the 

most difficult 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 officers to represent their 

master in the provinces. Thus, in the East 

Frankish Kingdom, later to become Germany, 

the offices 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 office 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 confirmed 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 influence 

along both banks of the Upper Rhine down to 

the Swiss border. However, a series of rather 

unfortunate conflicts 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 first 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 conflicts 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 

VI. 

135

VI. 

136 


letters confer such a vivid picture of the Sun 

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 figures 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. 

3 Cosmo Alessandro Collini, Mon séjour auprès de Voltaire, Paris 

1807, p. 105. 

Although the elector could rely on a rather big 

income from his lands – a French diplomat 

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, sufficient 

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 

counter-reformation”. 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 conflict 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 beautified 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 

refined 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 influence 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 

influenced 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 fight 

“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” statutebooks 

and confused judicial system and 

replace them with just and rational creations. 

The young Elector, Carl Theodor, intelligent 

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. 


and well-read, proved quite accessible to 

modern ideas. This mirrored a European trend 

– the increasing influence of enlightened 

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 

officials 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 fish-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 

confidence, was appointed stadholder of the 

Palatinate with far-reaching competences. The 

Mannheimers were deeply shocked by their 

master‘s departure. One night, returning from 

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. 

VI. 

137

VI. 

138 


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 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, first 

and foremost for the porcelain manufacture, 

which now had to compete with its Bavarian 

counterpart. 

The late 1780s also saw violent local 

upheavals, obviously influenced 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 finally 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 first, 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 

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. 

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. 

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. History of the Town of Schwetzingen 

Prehistory and Early History up to the First 

Written Reference 

The Codex Laureshamensis, the 12th-century 

collection of documents of the abbey of 

Lorsch10 , contains the first written reference 

to Schwetzingen, there called Suezzingen, in 

the Gift of Adana dated 21st December 766. 11 

The name is derived from a personal name, 

Suezzo, and translates as “part of Suezzo’s 

place”. However, archaeological finds 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. 12 Grave finds 

from Merovingian times (500-700 AD) point 

to two settlements, confirmed by entries 

in the Lorsch Codex, dated 805 and 807. 13 

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 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. 

10 World heritage site since 1991. 

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

ehemaligen Fürstabtei Lorsch, Lorsch 1968, p. 278. 

12 Karl Wörn, Schwetzingen zur Jahrtausendwende; Geschichte – 

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

13 Minst 1968, pp. 283 f. 


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, 

first acquired property of their own “in villa 

Swezingen” 14 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, first 

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. 15 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. 16 

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

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

1, Innsbruck 1894, p. 69. 

15 Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirks Mannheim 

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

16 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. 

VI. 

Fig. 1: Document from the 

monastery of Lorsch. The first 

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 


139

VI. 

140 


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. 17 

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. 18 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. 19 

17 Martin 1933, pp. 418-420. 

18 Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe 221/Schwetzingen Nr. 447. 

19 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 first designed 

to focus attention on the palace alone, thus 

reinforcing the separation of the Oberdorf and 

Unterdorf parts of the small town. 20 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-in-chief of building) Alessandro Galli 

da Bibiena (1687-1748) constructed his “New 

Town” with its market square and the four 

square blocks of buildings adjoining it to the 

east. 21 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 unified whole. 22 

At first, the new town centre was to provide 

homes for those inhabitants, who had lost 

20 Martin 1933, pp. 400 f. 

21 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen U 54. 

22 Martin 1933, p. 402.

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 

builders enjoyed years of tax exemption. 23 

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”. 24 

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 flocked 

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. 25 The population, now 

urban rather than rural, increased from 443 

inhabitants in 1727 to 1538 in 1777. 26 When 

the court moved to Munich in the winter of 

1777/1778, building waned, the visitors and 

court officials stayed away, and industry and 

23 Eugen Seyfried, Heimatgeschichte des Bezirks Schwetzingen, 

Schwetzingen 1925, p. 147. 

24 Martin 1933, p. 422. 

25 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen U 2. 

26 Die Stadt- und die Landkreise Heidelberg und Mannheim, 

official description, ed. Staatliche Archivverwaltung Baden- 

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


commerce fell into decline. Schwetzingen 

reverted from the splendours of a summer 

residence to the insignificance of a provincial 

town. 

VI. 

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). 

141

VI. 

Fig. 3: 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). 

142 


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 – although 

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 confidence 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. 27 

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 first time in 1668, 28 

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 firms 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. 

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. 29 

27 Revolution im Südwesten: Stätten der Demokratiebewegung 

1848/49 in Baden-Württemberg, ed. Arbeitsgemeinschaft 

hauptamtlicher Archivare im Städtetag Baden-Württemberg, 

Karlsruhe 1997, pp. 562-566. 

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

29 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen A 7; K 102.

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. 30 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 as early as 1946, the Schwetzinger 

Festspiele (Schwetzingen music festival) 

took place for the first 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. 

30 Jörg Schadt, “Das Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen im Dienst an 

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

p. 16. 


Other municipal tasks could only be solved by 

specific administrative unions. But conditions 

improved, and in consequence, the population 

increased; on 30th March 1993, Schwetzingen 

attained the status of a “Große Kreisstadt”. 31 

Today Schwetzingen is a pleasant modern 

city with the flair 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) 

31 Wörn 2000, pp. 54-78. 

VI. 

Fig. 4: Aerial photograph, 1965. 

Carl-Theodor-Straße, the town’s 

main axis, and the square 

blocks lining it are clearly 

visible (Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen, 

Fotosammlung). 

143

VI. 

Fig. 1: Excerpt from a map, 

c. 1700. The vignette shows 

the “new road” leading from 

Heidelberg straight towards 

the palace at Schwetzingen 

(Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe, 

H Oftersheim/3). 

144 


3. The Genesis of the Palace Square 

Development until 1720 

The land between the two medieval 

settlements, Oberdorf to the south and 

Unterdorf to the north, and the area occupied 

by the palace to the west were for centuries 

devoted primarily to agricultural use and 

contained very few buildings. The “New 

Road”, which Elector Carl Ludwig started 

building in 1658 as a direct link from the 

“Dicker Turm” (Squat Tower) at his castle in 

Heidelberg to his residence in Schwetzingen 32 , 

crossed this land, joining Oftersheimer 

Weg (now Schlossstrasse) where the home 

of the Schwartz family once stood. 33 The 

only buildings on Oftersheimer Weg to face 

the palace were the aforesaid home of the 

Schwartz family, the property belonging to 

butcher Johann Michael Renkert and the 

old Catholic school between the two. The 

Schwetzingen “Schatzungsregister”, begun just 

after 1705, reveals that the Reform Church 

had also owned a building there. It burned 

32 Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe (GLA) 221/Schwetzingen no. 

441 and no. 447. 

33 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen B5. “Item a burnt-out house plot the 

school to one side the new road to the other. This plot with the 

newly built house has been sold to Ludwig Schwartz”. 

down in the Palatinate War of Succession 

(1688-1697) and was not rebuilt. 34 The school 

survived the ravages of war, but it was in 

such poor condition by the dawn of the 18th 

century that Burgrave Franz Joseph Count 

von Wieser, director of the Elector’s works, 

applied to the Court Chamber in 1718 for 

it to be demolished “because it obstructs 

the view from the palace, adding little to its 

embellishment, and is also too close to the 

road”. Soon after he became Elector, Carl 

Philipp decided that the old school should 

be torn down but rebuilt on the same site. 

During its construction von Wieser intervened 

to argue that the land in front of the palace 

should remain empty. We do not know what 

ultimately prompted the Elector to pull down 

the partially constructed school despite the 

costs he had incurred. 35 Quite possibly, his 

need to receive visitors in ceremonial style 

and promote Schwetzingen to the status of 

a summer residence resulted in a change of 

plan and he wished to use the land made 

available by this demolition to widen the New 

Road into a 56-foot avenue. Now planted with 

white mulberries to assist the production 

of silk 36 , the mulberry avenue built around 

1720 became a straight axis leading from the 

“Königstuhl”, an elevation near Heidelberg, 

to the court of honour at the palace in 

Schwetzingen. The sight line continued in 

virtual form to the “Kalmit”, the highest peak 

in the southern hills of the Palatinate Forest. It 

was to be the defining feature in the layout of 

the summer residence. 

34 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen B5. “A burnt-out house, up in the 

village, Hans Ritter to one side, the new road to the other”. 

35 Hermann Blank, Wilhelm Heuss: Schwetzingen – eine 

Geschichte der Stadt und ihrer Häuser. Schwetzingen 1979, 

vol. 2, p. 50. The school, completed up to the roof structure, 

was pulled down and in rebuilt in 1719 as the oldest section of 

today’s Hotel Adler-Post on Schlossstraße 3. The school garden 

stayed where it was until 1748. 

36 GLA 221/Schwetzingen no. 37. In 1733 Bauintendant Johann 

Baptist Graf von Celini reports repairs to the neglected 

mulberry avenue.

The New Town is Born 

The timing of Elector Carl Theodor’s decision 

to layout a “new town”, with a market 

square and four adjoining quarters, along 

this axis is associated with the construction 

of the northern quarter-circle pavilion as a 

new orangery. However, before this project 

could be implemented to drawings by 

Oberbaudirektor Alessandro Galli da Bibiena, 

the old works department stables and “5 

houses with adhering barns and stables 

of poor Schwetzingen subjects” had to be 

demolished 37 . Similar instructions were now 

issued for other sites. Bibiena suggested to the 

Elector on 4 May 1748 that his disappopriated 

subjects might be settled without cost on 

commons along the mulberry avenue, which 

could be had for free by exchanging his 

lordship’s mill field. Three days later the 

Elector gave his consent and ordered that 

the houses should be pulled down and his 

subjects paid compensation of altogether 

1,340 guilders and moved as soon as possible 

to the new plots. After some negotiation, 

his subjects were willing to “make houses 

of solid stone along the avenue at their own 

expense, equal in appearance and for its 

embellishment”. They did, however, point out 

that as simple rural people they had no ability 

to build urban houses or, indeed, palaces. 38 

Bibiena accommodated these concerns by 

marking houses, yards, stables and even 

gardens on the plans, “because in the country 

these are an unavoidable necessity”. 39 Plain 

features were used in the design of the houses. 

After all, the architecture was to reflect life in 

the country, where the Elector retired in the 

summer months. 

Satisfied with his planning, he informed the 

Elector that over time the construction would 

result in a fine big market-place that could 

lend the palace an exceedingly handsome 

“prospect”. 40 Alessandro Galli da Bibiena had 

succeeded, like the set designer and theatre 

37 GLA Karlsruhe 221/Schwetzingen no. 47. Report of 5 April 

1748. 

38 GLA Karlsruhe 221/Schwetzingen no. 21. 

39 Blank, Heuss 1979, vol. 1, p. 120. 



director of a perfect stage play, in fusing the 

court of honour and the market-place into 

a single whole. The new avenue provided 

additional space for this piazza. By aligning 

the buildings on the square with the slightly 

receding wings of the court of honour, he 

generated a perspective which focussed 

directly on the palace, and with it the centre 

of power. 

VI. 

Fig. 2: Bibiena’s plan, 1748. 

The disappropriated subjects 

were allocated plots along the 

mulberry avenue (Generallandesarchiv 

Karlsruhe 221/ 

Schwetzingen Nr. 21). 

Fig. 3: Drawing by Blank 

around 1930. Schwetzingen 

New Town with the market 

square and the four adjoining 

blocks were built to a plan 

conceived by Oberbaudirektor 

Bibiena in 1748. This plan 

served government official 

Hermann Blank as a basis for 

his reconstruction (Stadtarchiv 

Schwetzingen, Nachlass Blank 

Nr. 63). 

145

VI. 

146 


Bibiena reinforced this effect by making the 

new market-place twice as long as the court 

of honour was deep. At the same time, his 

new creation linked Oberdorf to Unterdorf, 

for they had hitherto been separated by 

the mulberry avenue. The once divisive 

axis determined the orientation of the new 

layout. 41 

On 16 July 1748 Carl Theodor instructed 

his director-in-chief to draw up a plan of the 

new construction site so that others willing 

to build, primarily from Mannheim and 

Frankenthal, could settle there. 42 Bibiena did 

as he was asked and extended the plots along 

the mulberry avenue to include four quarters 

further east. He was not destined, however, 

ever to see his creation, Schwetzingen 

New Town, as he died on 5 August 1748. A 

rescript of 8 August 1748 43 , “by which, in the 

proximity of Schwetzingen’s mulberry avenue, 

a new market and 4 blocks are to be laid out 

on this and the other side of said avenue 

and built upon by those who so desire”, sets 

out how claims for compensation following 

the confiscation of land are to be settled. 44 

Court architect Guillaume d’Hauberat, who 

succeeded Bibiena, and the building director 

Count von Piosasque were now to allocate the 

building plots. 

The first five settlers to build houses in the 

new town according to Bibiena’s plan were 

the disappropriated townsmen Thomas 

Breuer, Hans Jakob Kilby, Friedrich Müller, 

Michael Eder and Dietrich Wissmayer. They 

were each given twelve logs of oak and 

pine at the state’s expense for construction 

purposes and were exempted for eight years 

from paying tax. 45 Well-builder Thomas 

Breuer put up the corner house at Carl- 

Theodor-Strasse 1, which completed the 

41 Martin 1933, p. 42; Glanz 1991, pp. 72-73. 

42 GLA Karlsruhe 221/Schwetzingen no. 21. There had already 

been three applications from residents of Mannheim in August 

1748, but their applications were withdrawn because the 

matter of tax xemption had not yet been clarified. 


44 Blank, Heuss 1979, vol. 1, p. 126: Nine morgens of top-quality 

arable land had to be appropriated from aristocratic and 

clerical estates and private owners for the market square alone. 


palace square to the north-east. He added 

the mark still visible today, which shows a 

stylized fountain, his own initials and the 

year 1748. When the Breuer family sold their 

house to Jakob Gulden in 1805, it continued 

life for the most part as a restaurant. 46 After 

1924 Albert Moch opened a printing shop 

here and founded the publishing house that 

produced the “Schwetzinger Zeitung”, the local 

newspaper. 47 The building at Carl-Theodor- 

Strasse 2 opposite, an almost symmetrical 

pendant, was likewise built in 1748/1749 by 

the young master tailor Hans Jakob Kilby. In 

1759 he sold his property to a merchant from 

Weinheim called Joseph Bianchi, who opened 

an inn on the premises that same year under 

the sign of the green tree. 48 

Between 1758 and 1762 the two buildings 

that adjoin the market-place to the east were 

used in the summer months to accommodate 

musicians in the court orchestra. Well-builder 

Breuer provided rooms for the soprano 

castrato Mariano Lena, while the tenor Pietro 

Sarselli boarded opposite at the inn “Zum 

grünen Baum”. 49 


47 Frank-Uwe Betz: Schwetzinger Stadtwanderungen. Führungen 

zu Leben und Leiden in der kurfürstlichen Residenz. 


48 Of the other three subjects who lost their property, shoemaker 

Friedrich Müller chose the plot next to well-builder Breuer, 

while Michael Eder opted for the plot opposite next to Hans 

Jakob Kilby. Dietrich Wissmayer was the first to build on the 

new Mannheimer Strasse. 

49 Silke Leopold, Bärbel Pelker: Hofoper in Schwetzingen. Musik, 

Bühnenkunst, Architektur. Heidelberg 2004, p. 21. Musicians 

were also given quarters in the two adjoining buildings to the 

east, cellist Innozenz Danzi with Friedrich Müller (Carl- 

Theodor-Strasse 3) and violinist Johannes Georg Danner with 

Katharina Eder (Carl-Theodor-Strasse 4).

Development North of the Market-Place 

For building to proceed around the new 

market-place, the single-storey half-timbered 

building belonging to Ludwig Schwartz 

first had to be demolished. The house and 

garden were sold to the Elector’s estate 

for 800 guilders and pulled down in 

September 1748. Now the Jesuits’ Garden, 

combined with the Schwartz plot, was 

enclosed by a wall along the north of the 

market-place down to the road now known 

as SchlossstrasseSchlossstraße. Within 

this Jesuits’ Garden, Elector Carl Theodor 

had a garden house built to plans by 

Oberbaudirektor Alessandro Galli da Bibiena 

for the use of his tutor, confessor and adviser, 

the Jesuit priest Franz Joseph Seedorf. Pater 

Seedorf held a powerful position at the court 

as the “eminence grise” who counselled 

the Elector in matters of state and fostered 

important contacts. This was one reason why 

the building, which was begun in September 

1748 and finished in 1749, was paid for by 

the palace construction fund. 50 It was the first 

house on the north side of the palace square, 

set back within a garden and separated by a 

wall. The Elector wished to have his fatherly 

friend close to the residence, but at the same 

time shielded him from his neighbours. This 

detachment is expressed in the elegant design 

of the palais façade and the ornate floral 

portal attributed to court sculptor Paul Egell. 

After Pater Seedorf died in 1758, the garden 

house began to serve as a guest house, until 

it was acquired in 1782 by Count Franz 

Albert Leopold Fortunat of Oberndorff. 51 

From 1778, when Carl Theodor moved away 

to Munich, he was the Elector’s governor in 

the Palatinate. At the end of November 1817 

the town councillor, butcher and innkeeper 

Johann Bless purchased the property from the 

Oberndorff family for about 6025 guilders, 

running it from that time under the sign of 

the golden stag. 52 The relief depicting the 

stag resting above the entrance portal with 

50 GLA Karlsruhe 221/Schwetzingen no. 47. The carpentry alone 

cost 595 guilders. 


52 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen B50. 


the inscription “Zum goldenen Hirsch” and 

his initials JB still testifies to the pride the 

innkeeper took in his acquisition. He had 

been quick to recognize that the spacious 

garden would lend itself to development. 

In 1818 the conversion to hostelry and his 

agricultural activities already called for a barn 

and housing for his animals. This is the site 

of the house built by Isaak Lorch in 1896, 

now the “coffee-house” at Schlossplatz 3. Not 

satisfied with this, in 1821 he had a two-storey 

residence worth 3,200 guilders built on a 

premium site at the corner of Schlossplatz 

and Schlossstrasse, now the “Brauhaus zum 

Ritter” at Schlossplatz 1. Heavily in debt, Bless 

still managed to build the ballroom 53 between 

the “Ritter” and the “Hirsch” in 1825, before 

being forced to sell off his remaining land 

to the Schwetzingen Casino Company. The 

inn’s heyday as one of the finest buildings 

on the square began when it was sold to the 

Köfel family. 54 It was the second generation 

of Köfels who extended the house in 1882, 

adding two storeys with three window bays. 

Like early preservationists, they laid the basis 

for the square’s appearance today, respecting 

the architectural forms of the 18th century. 

53 He had to sell his new house to the Jewish merchant Lazarus 

Raphael Traumann in 1823 and the ballroom likewise in 1826. 

From 1832 Traumann ran the inn “Zum Ritter” in the house. 

54 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen B315, B316, B353, B408. The 

development of the land around the Stag inn can be followed 

in the land registry and fire insurance records. 

VI. 

Fig. 4: Blank’s reconstruction, 

c. 1930. Pater Seedorf’s garden 

house as originally built. 

In 1826 it was extended to 

include a single-storey shed, 

and in 1882 a two-storey annex 

(Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen, 

Nachlass Blank Nr. 9). 

147

VI. 

148 


Once the garden house for Pater Seedorf and 

its enclosing wall had been finished, only 

one plot was left on the north side of the 

market-place. Nobody expressed an interest 

in building there until the townsman Franz 

Wilhelm Ritter asked to be granted the 

vacant corner. Keller Windecker raised the 

following objections: “Because the corner 

lies directly within the prospect of the 

Elector’s palace, and should consequently be 

built with greater splendour than the other 

houses on this square, Ritter will not be able 

to achieve it.” Ritter was therefore allocated 

a site on the mulberry avenue. 55 A plan of 

the palace square produced around 1755 

shows that the Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti, a 

master-builder at the Elector’s court whose 

accomplishments included the two quartercircle 

pavilions, had by this time developed 

the corner. In his own inimitable style, he 

created an elegant patrician residence with 

an elaborate portal and a side wing facing 

Pater Seedorf’s garden. Rabaliatti died on 24 

March 1782 and his heirs sold the property 

for 4,700 guilders to Imperial Count Carl 

August von Bretzenheim. 56 In December 1801 

Theodor Zeller, a counsellor in the Court 

Chamber, bought it for the princely sum of 

7,000 guilders. 57 When the Palatinate passed 

to Baden, and Schwetzingen was granted the 

status of a District capital, this building served 

from 1821 to 1924 as an administrative office 

for the District Council of Schwetzingen. It 

was privatized in 1931. 58 


56 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen B42. Imperial Count von 

Bretzenheim (1769-1823) was the illegitimate son of Elector 

Carl Theodor and the dancer Josepha Seyffert. 


58 Grundbuchamt Schwetzingen. 

Development South of the Market-Place 

Whereas building made early progress along 

the north of the market square, with the 

garden house for Pater Seedorf begun in 

1748, the development of the opposite end 

was held up for years by the resistance of 

Johann Michael Renkert, the landlord of the 

“Ox”. To complete the new market square, 

he was asked to pull down his property, 

which protruded some way in, and rebuild it 

somewhere else. In 1749 an agreement was 

reached that his new home could stay where 

it was, as long as the house in the yard, the 

barn and the stables were demolished. The 

land where the barn stood was of particular 

interest, as Count von Piosasque and the new 

director of gardens and water works, Nicolas 

de Pigage, were keen to locate Schwetzingen’s 

new town hall here. The drawings also 

indicated that the town hall and the adjacent 

home of innkeeper Renkert would be enclosed 

by a wall, just like across the square. Johann 

Michael Renkert refused on grounds of cost, 

and so the Court Chamber agreed to bear the 

expense. 59 Ultimately, however, the idea of 

locating a new town hall on this site seems to 

have been discarded for lack of funds. 

New barracks for the Elector’s Mounted 

Lifeguard were to round off the southern 

development. Planning was entrusted to the 

engineer and artillery major L’Angé, who had 

built the stables for Count Palatine Friedrich 

Michael von Pfalz-Zweibrücken on the 

mulberry avenue in 1750. In December 1752 

he presented an estimate of 7,000 guilders 

for a single-storey building 235 feet long 

with two corner pavilions to house 2 officers, 

40 soldiers and 48 horses. On 7 February 

1753 Counsellor Sartorius of the Court 

Chamber presented a convincing argument 

for raising the barracks to two storeys. As 

the location was so conveniently close to the 

palace, Sartorius suggested billeting not only 

troops, but also court domestics, musicians 

and outsiders. In his opinion, this would cut 

back the great expense of accommodation. 60 


60 GLA Karlsruhe 221/Schwetzingen no. 33.

The foundations for the new two-storey 

barracks were laid that same year. To expedite 

construction, negotiations with innkeeper 

Renkert had to be resumed, as a section of the 

Guards’ barracks would have to stand on his 

land. The Court Chamber had the buildings 

and garden valued in order to establish a sum 

of compensation, but Renkert demanded four 

times as much. 61 Counsellor Sartorius finally 

had the obstructive buildings removed, and 

the Guards’ barracks were duly completed 

and occupied in 1756. Here Mannheim’s 

court apothecary Baader established the first 

permanent court dispenser at Schwetzingen 

in 1764. 62 When the Palatine court moved 

to Munich and the estate passed to the 

Grand Duchy of Baden, the Guards’ barracks 

lost their purpose. In 1833, the year of the 

town census in Schwetzingen, the complex 

was privatized and subdivided into five 

homes: Schlossplatz 5, 6, 7, 8 and 8a. 63 In 

1841 the town purchased the two houses 

at Schlossplatz 8 and 8a, intending to turn 

them into a school house. 64 But the idea 

was discarded and a suitable site was found 

on the square Kleine Planken to build the 

Friedrichschule in 1842. 

The keeper of the “Ox” received 1,800 guilders 

in damages along with the plot at Schlossplatz 

9, where in 1760 he built the grand house 

that still stands there. The old single-storey 

inn remained for a while and was happily 

used by well-known personages, above all the 

musicians from the Mannheim School. When 

the famous composer Christoph Willibald 

Gluck came to Schwetzingen in September 

1774, he met up with members of the court 

orchestra here prior to his audience with the 

Elector. 65 Friedrich von Schiller also took a 

room here on his journey to Mannheim for 

the première of “The Robbers” on 12 January 



63 Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen B52, B53. 


65 Eugen Stollreither: Rokoko und Revolution, Lebenserinnerungen 

des Johann Christian von Mannlich. Berlin 1913, p. 304. 


1782. He nearly arrived too late for his play 

after flirting with a waitress. 66 

The inn with its long history was not replaced 

until 1826, when the present building 

appeared 67 and in 1838 its new owner Joseph 

Schrieder hung a new sign to the Crown 

Prince: “Zum Erbprinzen”. 68 

66 August Koob: Schwetzinger Geschichtstruhe. Schwetzingen 

1970, p. 135. 



VI. 

Fig. 5: Market square, c. 1755. 

Innkeeper Renkert’s property 

juts out into the square, hindering 

construction of the Guards’ 

barracks (Generallandesarchiv 

Karlsruhe G Schwetzingen/35). 

149

VI. 

Fig. 6: Market square, 1853. The 

indenture of the Schwetzingen 

Butchers’ Guild shows the 

buildings on the south and 

north sides with a view towards 

the palace (Reproduction by 

Stadtarchiv Schwetzingen). 

150 


Fair Trading Under the Trees 

To inject some life into the newly built market 

square, the parish applied on 8 June 1748 to 

hold one cattle market and one annual fair. 

The Elector gave his consent for 1749, under 

the condition that the parish would develop 

the new market square and assume the costs 

for it. 69 On 29 May 1749 the council and the 

court submitted an application to have the 

permanent market rights transferred and for 

the town to be granted a market charter, but 

Elector Carl Theodor strung out the process 

until 1759. 70 He seemed to be using the 

application as a bargaining chip to press for 

the sluggish market square development to 

be speeded up. Indeed, developing the “new 

market” imposed a considerable financial 

burden on the community. 



On 5 January 1752 the council and court 

asked the Jesuit tenants to help fill the 

low-lying square with an estimated 40,000 

cartloads of sand and soil. In 1766 channels 

were still being laid to drain off the water. 

Following Mannheim’s example, in 1767 the 

tree-lined avenues were bound by planking, 

with oak boards fastened to stone posts: hence 

the colloquial name for the square, “Grosse 

Planken”. 71 Whether there were already 

chestnuts on the square has not yet been 

confirmed. Gardens director Friedrich Ludwig 

von Sckell reported on 13 November 1801 

that the planks formed two parallelograms, 

each planted with four rows of “marron” (i.e. 

chestnut) trees, but that many were damaged. 

He advised removing the two middle rows, 

planting the other two with 48 trees and 

protecting them with planks. 72 The protection 

was essential because parts of the square 

were used in 1816 as a horse track for the 

Schwetzingen Dragoons. 73 

(Joachim Kresin) 

71 The section of Mannheimer Strasse outside the Lutheran town 

church is similarly known as “Kleine Planken”. 


73 GLA Karlsruhe 221/Schwetzingen no. 371.

) 

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 

inflicted first 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 inflicted 

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). 

VI. 

151

VI. 

152 


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 financial situation, 

fifteen 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 fivefold. 

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 first design proposal and the 

modified 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, saffroncoloured 

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 

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.

Origins 

A “fort” at “Sweczinge” is mentioned for the 

first time in 1350. That was the year when 

Elector Ruprecht I acquired the usufruct from 

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 

fortified 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 first 

building phase. (Cp. 16, Findings N°1, Building 

phase I) 

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. 


Palatine Ownership and the Conversion into 

a Hunting Lodge 

In 1427, the estate finally came into Palatine 

ownership under Elector Ludwig III, 

surnamed “the Bearded”. 19 Beyond this fact 

hardly any material survives from the 15th 

century – apparently few changes were made 

to the building (cp. Building phase II). 

Social changes, the growing influence of 

Renaissance thought and attitudes, as well 

as the invention of gunpowder and firearms, 

prepared the ground for major alterations of 

the entire estate, that were first 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 first 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 sacrificed 

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, 

19 Sillib 1907, p. 2; Martin 1933, p. 6. 

20 Blank 1979, p. 46. 

VI. 

153

VI. 

154 


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 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 

specifically 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 fine stock of deer 

in its forests, which extend for two miles.“ 23 

Evidently the hunting-mad couple were quite 

satisfied 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 

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. 

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 magnificent 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. 

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 

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 

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.

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 finally 

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 official 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. 

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 


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 five years 

later that she retired to Kassel. 31 

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. 

31 Kayser 1733, p. 210. 


In 1657, the palace at Schwetzingen was 

sufficiently restored for Luise von Degenfeld 

to take up residence there, removed from the 

seat of power at Heidelberg, but in a manner 

befitting 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 

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. 

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. 

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. 

VI. 

155

VI. 

156 


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 five 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 

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 first time in 1689, destroying 

Heidelberg Castle and ravaging the 

surroundings. Schwetzingen did not escape 

either. On 22nd March 1698, a treasury 

official, Johann Thomas Urspringer, wrote: 

“The outer walls of the palace at Schwetzingen 

are standing firm, 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 

37 Johann Peter Wachter (dates unknown), appointed architectural 

clerk at Heidelberg in 1665, later an electoral master builder 

and treasury official. 

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. 

40 Martin 1933, p. 24, n. 1.; Gropp 1930, p. 22, n. 46; Sillib 1907, p. 

7. 

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 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 

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. 

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.

oofed 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 

rooms 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 finally 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 flawed 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. 

47 Gropp 1930, D. Anhang, pp. 145-156. 

48 Martin 1933, pp. 90 ff. 


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 

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. 

49 According to the dendrochronological analysis, the timber was 

cut 1747/48, confirming 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. 

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. 

VI. 

157

VI. 

158 


There was a lot of building going on at 

Schwetzingen in those years. Pigage, 

promoted to Oberbaudirektor (director-inchief 

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 justified 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 

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. 

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. 

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 floor, 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 first floor 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. 

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 first 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 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. 


VI. 

159

VI. 

160 


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 

floor, 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 

boundaries or the course of the Leimbach 

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). 

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

locks. The 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 floor 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 defined. The exact location and look of 

the gate and the details of the courtyard to the 

west are unclear. Of the rooms only a barrelvaulted 

room survives in the southwestern 

corner, on the ground floor of the former 

donjon, that very probably dates from that 

period (Findings 6). 


VI. 

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. 

Fig. 2: Findings 2 – Southern 

view of the central block with a 

projecting extension. Behind it, 

the top floor of the octagonal 

stair tower (Photos: Knoch/Erb). 

161

VI. 

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. 

162 

Fig. 5: Findings 5 – Remains 

of the medieval curtain wall 

beneath the first courses of 

the Renaissance stair tower 

(Photos: Knoch/Erb). 

VI. Schwetzingen – Historical Context

Friedrich V and the Conversion of the 

‘château fort’ into a ‘château de plaisir’ 

during the First Half of the 16th Century 

The progress in weapons technology in 

the course of the 15th and 16th centuries, 

rendered medieval fortifications 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 floor-level windows was built (cp. Fig. 

2; Findings 2a; Findings 8). From the shape of 

60 Excavation findings made during work on the foundations, 

2006 . 


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 floor 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 been 

to create a counterpart to the donjon, and a 

certain symmetry. Several features of the 

VI. 

163

VI. 

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 (Photos: Knoch/Erb). 

164 


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 quarterround 

moulding. The former north-west 

corner, dating from the mid-16th century, 

is still visible in the shape of quoins from 

ground floor to roof (Fig. 10; Findings 10). To 

the left of them, two of the original floor-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-fortified 

strength, has become a Renaissance conceit 

(Fig. 6, original south corner; the shape of the 

blocks changes between the second and third 

floor). 

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. 8: Findings 8 – Inscription on the southern extension.± 

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. 


VI. 

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 (All photos: Knoch/ 

Erb). 

165

VI. 

166 


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 61 (cp. Fig. 16; Findings 18). 

Rusticated blocks with corners shaped into 

45° degree angles are numerous. 

61 During underpinning work done in 2006, the relevant exterior 

areas were exposed down to the natural soil. 

A recessed double arcade adjoins the staircase 

(cp. Fig. 13; Findings 15), connecting it with 

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 floor west of the courtyard, appear to 

have been part of the building done by Carl 

Ludwig (cp. Fig. 15; Findings 17).


VI. 

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 (Photos 

13, 14, 15: Knoch/Erb). 

Fig. 16: East front of the 

central block (Photo: RPS, LDA, 

Hausner, 2006). 

167

VI. 

168 


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 recognition. 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 

findings 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 first 

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 first step towards the 

18th-century summer residence. Even the top 

floors 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, flanked by two massive 

towers at the corners, now ran parallel to the 

main front (this was the main result of the

uilding 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 nortwest 

tower after 1778. 

(Peter Knoch/Robert Erb) 


VI. 

Fig. 17: Aerial view of the 

palace. 

Fig. 18: West front of the 

palace. 

169

VI. 

Fig. 19: Castle grouns. 

The blue marked areas display 

the immense increase of the 

building during the reign of 

Carl Theodor. 

170 

VI. Schwetzingen – Historical Context

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): fine stuccoed 

ceilings on the first floor 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 influencing 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 influence 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 first 

floors became Carl Theodor’s apartments 

(Rooms 103-107), while the southern rooms 

on the ground and first floors 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 (enfilades) 

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 floor 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 longawaited 

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”. 62 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 

62 Christian Friedrich Daniel Schubart 1777. From: Dietrich 

Rentsch, Schloss und Garten Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1987, 

p. 44. 

VI. 

Fig. 1: Room on the first floor 

of the central block, historical 

photograph dating from the 

early 20th century (Staatliche 

Schlösser und Gärten Baden- 

Württemberg, Bruchsal). 

171

VI. 

Fig. 2: Room on the second floor 

of the central block, present 

appearance (Photo: LAD 


172 


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 Rococo styles, with geometric 

inlays. The court furniture maker Jacob Kieser, 

who created the bathhouse furniture, was 

considered the leading craftsman in pre- 

Classicist Schwetzingen. 

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 first 

floor. The lodgings of his wife, Luise Karoline 

Countess of Hochberg, were on the second 

floor 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 firm 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 first-floor rooms, 

and they left the interior decoration largely as 

they found it. The somewhat austere Consulat 

furniture of the second floor 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 unified 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, 

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 hardfought 

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 first floor 

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 fine 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 unified 

whole. Once this was the setting for the gay 

festive life of the electoral court 63 , 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 

63 Rentsch 1987, p. 3. 


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, 64 will be displayed again in suitably 

renovated rooms on the third floor. 

(Wolfgang Wiese) 

64 Anna Hierl-Linzer, “Die Schwetzinger Jagdgemälde”, in: 

Jahrbuch der Staatlichen Kunstsammlungen in Baden- 

Württemberg, Vol. 35, München 1998, pp. 105-123. 

VI. 

Fig. 3: Bathhouse, Elector 

Carl Theodor’s study (From: 

Carl Ludwig Fuchs/Claus 

Reisinger, Schloß und Garten 

zu Schwetzingen, Worms 2001, 

p. 153). 

173

VI. 

174 


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. 65 

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 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 quartercircle 

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 first 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. 66 On the other hand, the property 

needed to be maintained. Even from Carl 

Theodor’s time documents tell of constant 

65 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. 

66 In 1804, a number of second-floor 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). 

repairs. 67 During the entire 19th century, the 

respective owners were aware of the need 

to keep the buildings and grounds in good 

shape (Fig. 1). 68 For that reason, a slater was 

commissioned to inspect all roofs twice a 

year, and repair them where necessary. 69 A 

glazier was given the task of keeping the 

windows clean and intact. 70 Shutters, doors, 

mountings, floors, gutters 71 and 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. 72 Occasionally, large-scale renovation 

work became necessary, for example on the 

mosque 73 and the bathhouse 74 . 

As well as maintenance work, there were 

measures in connection with the letting 

of certain buildings, or finding new uses 

for them. In particular, this concerned the 

working quarters, the side wings, the quartercircle 

pavilions and the orangery. Rooms 

were let to private individuals for residential 

purposes, which, despite the rules of conduct, 

resulted in damage to the buildings. 75 

67 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)]. 

68 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 first 

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). 

69 Documented for the years 1813 (GLA 56/3901), 1850 (GLA 

56/3903) and 1901 (GLA 56/3904), among others. 

70 Documented in 1809 (GLA 56/3901) and elsewhere. 

71 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). 

72 GLA 56/3901 and 237/36923. 

73 Documented work on the mosque includes repainting and 

urgent repairs in 1821 (GLA 56/3901); unspecified repairs in 

1830 (GLA 56/3979); work on the badly damaged dome in 1868 

(GLA 56/3904). 

74 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). 

75 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).

A number of institutions were housed in the 

palace 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). 76 The middle section of the 

orangery was converted into a horticultural 

college (1899). 77 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. 78 

A similar fate was reserved for the quartercircle 

pavilions. The letting of rooms for 

events79 , and of the attics as drying rooms for 

tobacco and hops, 80 on the whole caused little 

damage. But the fitting-out of schoolrooms81 , 

a gymnasium82 and a synagogue, 83 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 fitted out in the northern pavilion (1816- 

24) 84 , against the opposition of the garden 

director, Johann Michael Zeyher (1770- 

1843), who rightly anticipated damage to the 

building85 , or for the stabling of 60 cavalry 

horses (south quarter-circle pavilion 1849) 

86 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 

76 GLA 221/76 and 54/3. 

77 GLA 56/3904 and 56/3920. The rooms were converted into 

apartments only 13 years later (GLA 56/3971). 

78 GLA 56/3964 and 56/3971. 

79 Cp. GLA 54/3. 

80 GLA 56/3973. 

81 From 1897 (GLA 56/3995 and 56/3972). 

82 From 1869 (GLA 56/3959). 

83 From 1897-1914 and again from 1918 (GLA 56/3971 and 

56/3972). 

84 GLA 56/3900. 

85 GLA 56/3900. 

86 At the same time, weapons and cannon were stored in the 

north pavilion (GLA 56/3903 and 237/36922). 


surrounding grounds (1870-1873; 1916- 

1918). 87 Some effort was made to protect 

the interior by 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 first 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 financial 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. 88 Very few objections based 

87 GLA 56/1204. 

88 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). 

VI. 

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). 

175

VI. 

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). 

176 


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.” 89 

(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 

Denkmalpflege, the authority in charge of 

historic monuments; it contained the results of 

his extensive research, many photographs and 

a large part of Schweitzer’s plans 90 . 

However, there are few documents regarding 

building measures undertaken in the first half 

of the 20th century. 91 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 

89 GLA 56/3905. 

90 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. 

91 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.

honour wings, a golden yellow, to emphasize 

the different ages of the buildings. 92 Hans 

Möhrle was in charge of a thorough renovation 

of the theatre in 1937 – the northern quartercircle 

pavilion was converted into a theatre 

lobby and palace restaurant. Some of the 

additions and furniture, imitating historic 

styles and of remarkably fine 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 finally 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 office 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 

“Baupflegekatalog”. 93 

All building and repair work done in the 

course of the 20th century was supervised by 

the State Department for the Conservation of 

Monuments (Staatliche Denkmalpflege), and 

reflects the ongoing international discussion 

on the treatment of historic buildings. 94 

Considering the sheer number of individual 

92 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 [...].“ 

93 Baupflegekatalog: 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. 

94 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. 


measures, only two examples taken from the 

palace and garden can be discussed in detail. 

VI. 


ground plan of the Temple of 

Apollo, c.1930 (From: Martin 

1933, p. 197). 

Fig. 5: Photo taken in 1937: The 

new palace restaurant in the 

north quarter-circle pavilion 

(From: Leopold/Pelker 2004, 

p. 349). 

177

VI. 

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 


178 


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 95 . When the house was renovated 

in 1999-2005, the work was prepared and 

accompanied by thorough historical and 

architectural research 96 . Improvements of 

the fire protection system were combined 

with measures to secure and clean the 

fragile interior. Wherever reliable findings 

were available, the original look could be 

reconstructed. For example, the worn velvet 

carpet in the historical house was replaced 

with a wooden floor of the type the findings 

have shown to have been used. Some 20thcentury 

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 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 floor, 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 

95 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. 

96 Monika Scholl, “Bretterbude? Neue Erkenntnisse zur Baugeschichte 

des Theaters”, in Leopold/Pelker 2004, pp. 251-302.

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 Baupflegekatalog; 

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) 


VI. 

179

VI. 

Fig. 1: Plan showing expropriations 

between 1748 and 1760 

(section); the new quarter-circle 

orangeries are superimposed on 

the old pleasure garden (Generallandesarchiv 

Karlsruhe). 

180 


c) 

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 first 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, flowers 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-filled moats surrounding 

the original fortified 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 filled 

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 first 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 

first water wheel on the site of today’s Upper 

Waterworks was constructed to supply it. 10 

4 Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe (GLA) Kopialbuch 942 

Heidelberg Urkunden-Abschrift Nro.363 (original dated 22nd 

May 1669). 



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.

In 1731, Johann Friedrich Armand von 

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 filled 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 magnificent 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. 


VI. 

Fig. 2: Johann Ludwig Petri, 

1753, plan of the garden (“Plan 

der Chur-fürstl.: lust gärtnerey 

Schwetzingen in der pfaltz”) 


Heidelberg). 

181

VI. 

Fig. 3: Nicolas de Pigage, 1762, 

design for the palace garden 

and hunting park (Bayerische 

Verwaltung der staatlichen 

Schlösser, Gärten und Seen). 

182 


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 briefly 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. 

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. 

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. 

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 financial 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 

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.). 


van Wynder 29 was taken on as chief court 

gardener and Johann Wilhelm Sckell 30 as court 

gardener. 

It was necessary to find 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 first 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. 

29 Theodor van Wynder, d. 1777, chief court gardener 1762-1777. 

30 Johann Wilhelm Sckell,1721 – 1792, court gardener. 

VI. 

Fig. 4: Nicolas de Pigage, 1767, 

execution plan for the enlarging 

of the garden, original lost 

(Photo also missing). 

183

VI. 

Fig. 5: Friedrich Ludwig Sckell, 

1783, plan of the garden 

(Bayerische Verwaltung der 

staatlichen Schlösser, Gärten 

und Seen). 

184 


The large-scale extensions necessitated a 

larger water supply, and the old water wheel 

built by Carl Philipp was insufficient 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 first 

features to be built, followed from 1765 by 

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 

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. 

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 

garden” occupying the wedge of ground 

between the southern quarter-circle pavilion 

and the vegetable garden, which appears in 

this plan for the first 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 

33 Peter Anton von Verschaffelt, 1710-1793, sculptor, worked for 

the Palatine court from 1752. 

34 Etrennes Palatines pour l’année 1769. Mannheim 1769, 

Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg, quoted after Heber 1986, pp. 

461-462.

hunting park. The dilapidated Upper 

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 significantly enlarged in 

1774, when stock from the dissolved nurseries 

of Mannheim and Heidelberg was moved to 


According to official 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 artificial 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 first 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 for 

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. 


the first 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 first 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 first 

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 stocktaking 

survives from the year 1795; not too 

far from Schwetzingen, the battles of the 

French revolutionary wars were being fought, 

37 GLA 221/45 of 1784; Heber 1986, pp. 469, 471. 

VI. 

Fig. 6: Schneeberger, 1806, 

garden plan (“Plan des 

Churfürstlichen badischen 

Hoffgarten zu Schwetzingen”) 

(Generallandesarchiv 

Karlsruhe). 

185

VI. 

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). 

186 


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 flowers 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 

him court garden supervisor for all of Bavaria. 

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. 

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 “allow 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 naturallooking 

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 flowerbeds, 

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 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 Schwetzingen, 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 

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. 

42 Johann Michael Zeyher/Johann Georg Rieger, Schwetzingen 

und seine Gartenanlagen, Mannheim 1826. 

43 Verzeichnis sämmtlicher Bäume, Glas- und Treibhauspflanzen 

des Schwezinger-Gartens, ed. Johann Michael Zeyher 1809.

“berceaux en treillage”, i.e. latticework arbour 

walks, to form a full circle. Parthenocissus 

quinquefolia was trained up the latticework. 

The circular 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 filled 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 flowerbeds. Decorative 

paths divided up the lawns. The framing 

flowerbeds 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 northsouth, 

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 filled the wedges between the 

intersection proper and its circular frame with 

bosquets of flowering 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 

theoreticians, 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 

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. 

VI. 

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). 

187

VI. 

188 


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 waterspouting 

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 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 

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. 

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. 

and 1767, and in Egidius Verhelst’s design in 

the Etrennes Palatines. It was never realized, 

however. The first design known to have 

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 confirms this: “On all sides of this central 

garden, there were once flowering 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 flowers 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 

flowers without hindrance, the guelder rose 

swelling with lushness, the berberis, privet 

and red and white whitethorn displaying their 

magnificence and filling 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 

first appears in Pigage’s execution plan of 

1767 (see Fig. 4). There are no exact dates for 

the construction of the northern angloise. 

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.

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 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 filled 

with flowering 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 “zig-zagging 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 fine 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 

56 GLA 213/110 of 24.7.1764, Heber 1986, p. 426. 

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. 


in the arbour allows a view of the Temple of 

Minerva (built 1767-1773, cp. Fig. 11). 64 It was 

first mentioned in the Etrennes Palatines of 

1769, but the earliest correct depiction of the 

area’s exact layout appears in Sckell’s overall 

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 

64 Heber 1986, p. 557. 

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. 

VI. 

Fig. 11: Carl Kuntz, c.1795, 

Temple of Minerva, coloured 

aquatint (Reiss-Engelhorn- 

Museen, Mannheim). 

189

VI. 

190 


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 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 reflecting 

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 

filled 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 waisthigh 

hedges divide the avenue into a wide 

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. 

central lane flanked 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 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 defined 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 finds 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” 

71 Iris Lauterbach, Der französische Garten am Ende des Ancien 

Régime, Worms 1987, S. 212.

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 bosquets and the rest of the garden, and 

a fine 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 

field 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 

72 GLA 213/110 of 24.7.1764, Heber 1992, p.14. 

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. 


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. 

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 flagged 

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 first 

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 reflected 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 

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. 

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. 

VI. 

191

VI. 

192 


Temple of Apollo, coloured 




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 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 first 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, 

78 Udo Grote, “Die Statuen der Jahreszeiten und der Schlossgarten 

von Schwetzingen”, in: Westfalen und Italien, ed. Udo Grote, 

Petersberg 2002, pp. 125-152. 

79 GLA 213/109 of 14.9.1762, Heber 1986, pp. 425, 485. 

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 door-ways 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 first 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 

first mentioned in 1775 and described as a 

“fontaine du mascaron”. 81 Like the naiads, 

the statue of Apollo in the temple and the 

sphinxes in the theatre auditorium, it is a 

work by Verschaffelt. 

B.8. From Menagerie to Arboretum 

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 

garden 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 

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. 

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 

Treibhauspflanzen des Schwezinger-Gartens.

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 first mention it 

in October 1770. 87 It is the centre of an enfilade 

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 flowers, 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 overflow from the 

natural theatre’s artificial 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 

87 GLA 221/ 440, “Specification” 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. 


B.10. The Seahorse Garden 

At the back of the southern quarter-circle 

pavilion is the seahorse garden. It first 

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 Grupello put up in Düsseldorf first, 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 flower 

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. 

91 Martin 1933, pp. 323-324. 

92 cp. GLA 221/46, Protocollum Commissionale 1795 and Fig. 4, 

Pigage 1767 and later plans. 

VI. 

Fig. 13: Friedrich Ludwig 

Sckell, undated plan of the 

seahorse garden (Mannheim, 

Reiss-Engelhorn-Museen). 

193

VI. 

194 


Temple of Botany, coloured 




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, and pheasants and 

later fallow deer were released. 95 

93 cp. plan in GLA 391/36120, a redrawing of a plan from 1782. 

94 GLA 221/ 440 of 23.1.1759. 

95 GLA 221/ 440. 

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 

of the kitchen gardens had espaliers; the 

vegetable garden featured additional freestanding 

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 

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. 

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.

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 

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 first 

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 

fitted into the vegetation and the terrain. 

This so-called belt walk is one of the core 

103 in GLA 77/3959 of 21.12.1774. 

104 GLA 221/45 of 1784, Heber 1986 pp. 469, 471. 

105 GLA 221/39 of 10.11.1774. 


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 

of Botany it shelters, is a reworked Ceres of 

Italian origin, thought to be by Francesco 

Carabelli. The temple is flanked 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 artificially 

widening the Leimbach stream. Adjoining the 

water tower to the east is a semicircular, halfruined 

row of arches, providing the backdrop 

106 Leger 1829, p. 364. 

107 GLA 62/1136 of 6.6.1779, Martin 1933, p. 361; Heber 1986, p. 

582. 

108 Heber 1986, p. 582. 

VI. 


Roman water tower, coloured 



195

VI. 

196 


for an obelisk, put up to commemorate the 

finds 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 first 

mentioned in 1774, and then it disappears 

from documentation for several years. 109 It 

was only in 1779 that work was resumed. 

At first only the cloister and pavilions and 

the surrounding garden were planned; the 

mosque appears in the building ledgers for 

the first time on 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 

109 GLA 221/39 of 18.8.1774, Heber 1986, p. 436. 

110 Heber 1986, pp. 596-597. 

111 GLA 221/46, Protocollum Commissionale 1795. 

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 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 

to a small island (cp. Fig. 6). The bridge could 

be swiveled to a position where it no longer 

112 William Chambers, 1723-1796, architect (garden buildings at 

Kew), author (wrote about Chinese gardens). 

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.

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 

first 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 filled 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 first 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 

fleurs.“ 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 

fine “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 

figures as “Le grand jardin anglois”. On the 

other hand, the landscape garden west of the 

great basin, listed for the first 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. 

The English Garden in the west of the 

grounds, permitted Sckell to plan in grand 

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. 


style. His first 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 final extent, an extent that has remained 

more or less unchanged to the present day. 

(Uta Schmitt) 

VI. 

Fig. 16: Nicolas Marie Joseph 

Chapuy, no date, Temple 

of Mercury and view of the 

pond and mosque, engraving 

(Mannheim, Reiss-Engelhorn- 

Museen). 

197

VI. 

198 


d) 

The Summer Residence – 

Nineteenth- and Twentieth- 

Century Responses 

1. Schwetzingen and its Status as Reflected 

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 Schubart2 , 

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 waternymphs, 

sylphs, goblins and salamanders 

blend the tunes of water, air, earth and fire 

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. 

until the most beautiful 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-confidence 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 first time described 

the individual merits of regions and cultural 

landscapes to a German audience. Trips to nottoo-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 identification 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 

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.

Neckar valleys” 6 , as the anonymous 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 culture-loving 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 the German 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 fine 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 five-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 five 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, 

6 Anon.: Wegweiser durch den Schwetzinger Garten. Mit zwölf 

Ansichten, Heidelberg 1830, p. 5. 

7 Clemens Alexander Wimmer, Geschichte der Gartentheorie, 

Darmstadt 1989, p. 436. 


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.“ 8 

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. 

VI. 

Fig. 1: Front page of the 

guidebook written by Garden 

Director Johann Michael Zeyher, 

c.1824 (original: Palace library 


Fig. 2: Notes about Schwetzingen 

in Leopold Mozart’s 

travelling journal (From: 

Leopold/Pelker 2004, p. 26). 

199

VI. 

Fig. 3: Bathhouse, view by 

“Jury”, c.1830, Verlag Franz 

Schwab (From: Leopold Pelker 

2004, p. 12). 

200 


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 destination. 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, all-encompassing 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 first guidebook and the 

first 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 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 “magnificent 

building in the Oriental taste with a beautiful 

dome and two slender turrets”; 13 it was 

described in detail, and every one of the 

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. 


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.

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 reflect the town’s image of 

itself in the course of the transition from a 

princely seat of power 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 

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. 


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 

Views from Abroad in the First Half of the 

19th Century 

John Claudius Loudon (1782-1843), who was 

probably Europe’s most influential writer on 

the subject of gardens during the 19th century, 

dedicates several pages to Schwetzingen in 

his “Encyclopedia of Gardening”. 18 Loudon 

offers a very detailed description of the 

complex, which he visited in person in 1828, 

and he incorporates an overall plan and two 

elevations: the “Temple of Mercury” and the 

“Roman Water Tower”. This is all the more 

striking in that his truly encyclopaedic opus 

was not only the most comprehensive work on 

the design and history of gardens published 

by then, but also the most widely read in the 

first half of the 19 th century. It was printed 

in copious editions from 1822 onwards and 

translated into both German and French. 

Loudon himself acknowledges three other 

authors who had expressed exceptionally 

positive views of Schwetzingen, quoting 

lengthy passages of their writing verbatim. 

The best known of these three was Jean 

Charles Krafft, of German extraction, whose 

“Plans des plus beaux jardins pittoresques 

de France d’Angleterre et de l’Allemagne”, 

published with elaborate graphics from 1809, 

also describes and illustrates Schwetzingen. 19 

Krafft reaches a flattering verdict: “This superb 

castle and garden form the most delightful 

spot in Germany” 20 , and he continues: 

“Situated between the Rhine and the Mein[!] 

it affords the eye, that delights in beauty, all 

that beauty can offer that is most enchanting, 

17 Hufschmied 1909, p. 55. 

18 Loudon, John Claudius: An encyclopedia of gardening. New 

Ed. London 1850, pp. 143-146. 

19 Jean Charles Krafft: Plans des plus beaux jardins pittoresques 

de France d’Angleterre et de l’Allemagne. Reprint of the 

original Paris edition in three languages of 1809-1810, Worms 

1993. 

20 ibid. p. 189. 

VI. 

201

VI. 

202 


and all that is calculated to captivate”. 21 

Loudon also refers to a travel book published 

anonymously in London in 1818: “An 

Autumn near the Rhine”. This author recalls 

in English: “We rode over from Mannheim 

to Schwetzingen, an ancient residence of the 

Electors Palatine with a garden considered the 

most splendid in Germany, and not exceeded 

by many in Europe”. 22 

The third writer quoted at length, William 

Beattie, far outperforms his predecessors in 

the wealth of detail he provides about the 

Schwetzingen estate, for example, its various 

fountains. He confesses to his particular 

surprise and delight at the impressive 

management of sight lines: “(….) suddenly 

opened upon us a beautiful landscape, 

enriched with every object that could attract 

and fix the attention. Every one was struck 

with the unexpected and mysterious change. 

On approaching a few steps nearer, it was 

found to be what we could scarcely believe, a 

deception [!] a mere fresco on a dead wall, but 

with the light so modified and regulated, as 

to give it all the appearance of reality. I never 

witnessed a more complete illusion”. 23 

These literary opinions on the Schwetzingen 

gardens are not noteworthy merely for 

what they tell us about the impact on 

international visitors, many of whom had a 

great understanding of such matters, or at 

least a degree of pertinent knowledge, but also 

because they testify to the admiration felt even 

by British observers for the formal baroque 

arrangements, in an age when this could by no 

means be taken for granted, given the stylistic 

predominance of the landscaped garden. 

Eminent Visitors 

As early as 1809, Zeyher stressed the 

importance he believed Schwetzingen to 

have attained as a an international travelling 

21 ibid. 

22 N. N. [Charles Edward Dodd]: An Autumn near the Rhine; or 

sketches of court, society, scenery etc, in some of the German 

states bordering on the Rhine. London 1818, p. 371. 

23 William Beattie: Journal of a residence in Germany, written 

during a professional attendance on Their Royal Highnesses 

the Duke and Duchess of Clarence, (Their Most Gracious 

Majesties) during their visits to the courts of that country in 

1822, 1825 & 1826. London 1831, vol. i. p. 134. 

destination: “No traveller of any distinction 

will cruise these waters without casting 

anchor at Schwetzingen; a multitude of 

princes, dignitaries and great men have 

flocked to this German Versailles 24 , St. Cloud, 

Aranjuez 25 or whatever it may please you 

to call this strange place.“ 26 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. 27 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 justified in proudly referring 

to the “world-famous palace garden, that has 

brought an immense, never-failing stream of 

visitors setting in with the first days of spring 

and not petering out until the late autumn”. 28 

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 

habit, having seen the inscriptions on the 

walls of the minaret staircase: “It goes without 

saying that names are scrawled everywhere; 

24 Inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage list since 1979. 

25 Inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage list since 2001. 

26 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. 

27 Otto Schwarz, Praktisch planmäßigen Wegweisers durch den 

Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen, Schwetzingen 1894, p. 34. 

28 Schwab n.d., p. 4.

I would not like to add my own to such a 

vulgar neighbourhood.“ 29 However, the details 

of most eminent visitors’ stays can be found 

in the visitors’ book of the Schwetzingen 

bathhouse, that was kept from 1793. 30 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.“ 31 

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”). 32 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. 33 The visitors’ 

books reflected the “rapt enthusiasm and 

admiration felt by many a visitor”. 34 

Images of Schwetzingen 

Long before the first detailed description of 

the Schwetzingen garden appeared in print, 

the first 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; figures of admiring 

visitors enliven the pictures. Aquatint plates 

were considered especially delicate, and 

the number of high-quality prints was very 

29 Hufschmied 1909, p. 56. 

30 Bathhouse visitors’ books from 1793 to 1810: GLA Karlsruhe, 

65/200 21 ff. 

31 Cp. Hufschmied 1909, p. 56. 

32 Visitors’ books GLA Karlsruhe, 65/20023. 

33 Visitors’ books GLA Karlsruhe 65/ 200 21/22. 

34 Schwarz 1894, p. 34. 


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. 35 

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.“ 36 

These views of the Schwetzingen gardens, 

published in their hundreds, helped 

considerably 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 first 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 flourishing tourism at 

the former electoral summer residence. 37 

35 Charles de Graimberg (ed.), Vues lythographiées de Schwetzingen, 

Heidelberg n.d. 

36 Schwab n.d., p. 10. 

37 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. 

VI. 

203

VI. 

204 

Fig. 4: Postcard, c.1892 

(original: Palace library 



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.“ 38 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 perspective: 

“Yet this symmetrical manner, described 

by Curtius and Strabo in writing about 

38 Erich Trunz (ed.), Goethes Werke. Hamburger Ausgabe, Vol. 10. 

München 1981, p. 448. 

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.“ 39 The reinterpretation of the 

non-modern as a tradition worthy of being 

preserved and charged with historical 

significance 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 

fifth volume of his massive theoretical work, 

Theorie der Gartenkunst. 40 

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 first version of the play, the so-called Thalia 

Fragment, the Queen deplores “this magnificent 

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 is, how kind, how 

intimate – this, I believe, is where Nature has 

39 Friedrich Ludwig Sckell, Beiträge zur bildenden Gartenkunst 

für angehende Gartenkünstler und Gartenliebhaber, München 

1825. Repr., Worms 1982, p. 3. 

40 Christian Cay Lorenz Hirschfeld, Theorie der Gartenkunst, 5 

vols., Leipzig 1779-1785. Here Vol. 5, pp. 344 ff.

fled from the persecution of Art. In unwatched 

liberty she dwells, noticed by few.” 41 

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 fluctuates between the 

French and English manner, displaying the 

worst aspects of both.“ 42 

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. 43 

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. 44 

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. 45 

A similar fairy-tale feeling surrounds the 

garden in the memories of the philosopher, 

Ernst Bloch. In 1959, he published his book 

Prinzip Hoffnung (The Principle of Hope, 

41 Gerhard Kluge, Gerhard (eds.), Schillers Werke. Nationalausgabe, 

Vol. VI. Weimar 1974, pp. 374 f. (Don Carlos, I,4). 

42 Entry for 8th June 1815. In: Die Tagebücher des Grafen August 

v. Platen. Ed. G. v. Laubmann/L. v. Scheffler., 2 vols., Stuttgart 

1896/1900. 

43 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. 

44 Joseph Freiherr von Eichendorff, Das Marmorbild, Leipzig n.d., 

pp. 135-190. 

45 Ivan Turgeniev, Visionen, Berlin 1864, p. 35. Re. Turgenev’s stay 

in Germany cp. Hartmut Müller, Literaturreisen. Der Neckar, 

Stuttgart 1994, pp. 303 ff. 


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 artificial, 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 flamboyance that 

creates its curious artificial 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.“ 46 

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. 47 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 

de plaissance de Mrg l’Électeur palatin. Il ne 

46 Ernst Bloch, Das Prinzip Hoffnung, Frankfurt a. M. 1973, p. 

452. 

47 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. 

VI. 

205

VI. 

Fig. 5: Advertising Poster from 

the 1950ies (original: Palace 

Library Schwetzingen). 

206 


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.“ 48 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 

first time – a high point in the history of the 

Schwetzingen theatre. 49 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 

48 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. 

49 Pelker 2004, pp. 31 f. 

by the most magnificent, exhilarating view 

imaginable.“ 50 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. 51 Once 

the archducal court of Baden had made sure 

that the theatre could be used once again, 

it was finally 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 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. 52 

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 

flower garden – the music must be played in 

a different way from the factories in the large 

cities.“ 53 


50 Pelker/Leopold 2004, appendix, p. 228. 

51 Zeyher/Rieger 1824, p. 173. 

52 Zeyher/Rieger 1824, p. 174. 

53 Schwetzinger Festspiele, Schloß Schwetzingen 1972-1986, 

Süddeutscher Rundfunk Stuttgart 1986, p. 102.

2. The Schwetzinger Festspiele: the Legacy 

of the Summer Residence 

In 1952, the radio channel Süddeutscher 

Rundfunk organized the first “Days of 

the Opera” at Schwetzingen Palace. Not 

unintentionally, the event coincided with the 

founding of the Land of Baden-Württemberg. 

The unification of three areas, defined 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” 54 , and the decision 

was made on the strength both of the summer 

residence’s long musical tradition, and the 

magnificent 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 

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 

filosofo di Campagna and Nicolo Piccini’s La 

buona figliuola. Not only well-known works 

were played; the Elector supported new 

compositions as well. The court director of 

54 Peter Kehm, 1952, in: Bernhard Hermann/Peter Stieber (eds.), 

Ein Arkadien der Musik. 50 Jahre Schwetzinger Festspiele 

1952-2002, Stuttgart/Weimar 2002, p. 12. 


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 figlio delle selve, Don Chisciotte, 

one opera serioridicola and the “festa teatrale 

per musica”, La nozze d’Arianna, were first 

performed at the palace’s Rococo theatre. 55 

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 first 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, 

55 Claus Helmut Drese, “Ein Arkadien der Musik. Oper in 

Schwetzingen einst und jetzt”, in: Hermann/Stieber 2002, pp. 

20-132. 

VI. 

Fig. 1: Photograph of a 

performance at the Schwetzinger 

Festspiele of 2004: Der gute 

Gott von Manhattan, Adriana 

Hölzky (Photo: Rittershaus). 

207

VI. 

Fig. 2: Flags at the Schwetzinger 

Festspiele. 

Fig. 3: Festival visitors in front 

of the north quarter-circle 

pavilion (Photos: Schwetzinger 

Festspiele). 

208 


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 official 

“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)


VI. 

209

III. 

210 


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 artificial, 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 flamboyance that 

creates its curious artificial 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.


a) 

Biographies 

(Manuel Bechtold, Susan Richter, Ralf 

Richard Wagner, Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, 

Joachim Kresin) 

1. 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 

2. Artists (in Alphabetical Order): 

Heinrich Charasky (1656-1710) 

Paul Egell (1691-1752) 

Alessandro Galli da Bibiena (1686-1748) 

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) 

VII. 

211

VII. 

212 


1. 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 first 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 finally 

in Rome and Naples. 2 Shortly after his return 

he was called to the imperial court at Vienna 

where he married his first 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 first 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 Mannheim, later to 

become very famous, was based on Johann 

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. 

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 finances 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 

Maria Luisa. On 5th November 1700, work 

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.

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. 

As a younger son, Carl Philipp was originally 

destined for the church. In 1675, he was 

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. 


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 old capitals, 

frequently with the intention of building 

11 Schmidt 1963, pp. 114 ff., n. 1. 

VII. 

Carl Philipp (1661-1742), 


213

VII. 

214 


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 Pfalz- 

Sulzbach, he became heir of the Palatinate 

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 confirms the date of birth, 

10th December 1724. 

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 conflict. 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 benefits for the state 

arising from it. Thus Carl Theodor wrote to 

his sister-in-law, Franziska Dorothea, that 

“the happiness of the most insignificant 

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 first 

scientifically 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 first German ruler to have 

his palaces outfitted 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 scientific 

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 reflects 

his wide-ranging intellectual interests. Of 

the 36,840 volumes 13,890 were historical 

in nature, 6,464 were scientific, 5,504 were 

belles lettres, and there were 5,400 theological 

tracts. 19 The library at Mannheim was among 

the first 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 first 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 satisfied 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 



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. 


the new building 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 

VII. 

Carl Theodor (1724-1799), 



Heidelberg). 

215

VII. 

Elisabeth Augusta (1721-1794), 

wife of Elector Carl Theodor 

216 


watched over by his third (morganatic) wife, 

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 befitting 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 befitting 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 influence waned – 

probably due to her failure to produce a child. 

When she finally 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. 

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.

In 1792/93, with the Palatinate west of the 

Rhine occupied by French revolutionary 

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 first 

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 first 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 

25 Mörz 1997, p. 184, n. 2. 

26 Rosemarie Stratmann-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. 


be an unusually gifted musician. During one 

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 

fortifications 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 office. 

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 floor 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 Stratmann-Döhler 1989, p. 40, n. 1. 

29 Stratmann-Döhler 1989, p. 247, n. 1. 

VII. 

217

VII. 

218 


2. 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 first 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 first 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. 


Alessandro Galli da Bibiena (1687-1748) 

Alessandro Galli da Bibiena was born on 2 

October 1686, the son of Ferdinando Galli da 

Bibiena in the Italian city of Parma. He was 

the scion of a famous family of artists, who 

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.

were involved in building sets and theatres 

around Europe. It figures that he would have 

acquired his skills, notably in architecture, 

from his father, whom he accompanied as 

an apprentice along with the whole family 

to Barcelona in 1708 and Vienna in 1712. 

Under the direction of theatre architect 

Balthasar Leonhard Dörflinger he won his 

first commission in his own right as a stage 

designer at “Innsbruck Theatre” no later than 

1716. After Dörflinger’s death, that very same 

year Elector Carl Philipp von Pfalz-Neuburg, 

the Imperial governor of Tyrol in Innsbruck 

at the time, gave him Dörflinger’s position 

as architect. Only a year later Bibiena was 

accompanying Elector Carl Philipp as a 

member of the court on a trip to the old 

Palatine residence at Heidelberg. Carl Philipp 

was to take over the reins of power after 

the death of his brother Johann Wilhelm. 

After an intermezzo of a year in Neuburg on 

the Danube, the entourage did not arrive in 

Heidelberg until 1718. On 4 February 1719, 

Bibiena, now highly regarded by the Elector, 

married the lady’s maid Charlotta Franziska 

Becher in the presence of the prince’s entire 

family and court in the palace chapel at 

Heidelberg. His marriage proposal describes 

him as the Elector’s architect and painter. 

Other sources identify him as “premier 

architecteur”. Together the couple had four 

sons and four daughters. 

With the acquisition of the Electoral privileges 

to which the Count Palatine was entitled, 

Carl Philipp became one of the noblest lords 

in the Empire. His representational needs 

and the relocation of the official residence 

from Heidelberg to a newly erected palace at 

Mannheim from 1720 gave rise to extensive 

construction in the region. The first evidence 

of Bibiena’s activities as an architect in the 

Palatinate stems from 1718 in Schwetzingen, 

where he contributed to his lord’s splendour 

by planning and overseeing the erection of 

the old orangery and ballroom by the “Arion” 

fountain during renewal of the palace grounds 

there. The only part of his work that survives 

today is the connecting building between the 


palace and the orangery, which he designed 

and implemented in 1724. This old orangery 

with its semi-circular wings served as a model 

for his design of the northern quarter-circle 

pavilion in the Schwetzingen palace gardens, 

which was constructed from 1748. At the 

same time Bibiena worked as a planner on 

the new town at Schwetzingen, which along 

with the expansion of the palace gardens 

represents a high point in the history of the 

summer residence. 

No doubt Bibiena was also involved in 

building the palace at Mannheim, although 

there is no specific evidence of this. However, 

two important works he carried out for the 

Jesuits are documented. From 1730 to 1734 

he erected the Jesuit College, and from 1733 

the adjacent Jesuit church, which was to 

become his principal architectural legacy. It 

is among the most significant baroque works 

in South-West Germany. In 1733 he designed 

the main façade of the shopping arcade on 

the parade ground that was destroyed in 

the Second World War, as well as the base 

of the “Grupello Group” in 1739. A host 

of private houses are based on his plans, 

including the “Dalberghaus” built in 1733, 

which today accommodates the town library. 

Furthermore, he designed the interiors for 

VII. 

Alessandro Galli da Bibiena 

(1687-1748) (Kurpfälzisches 

Museum Heidelberg). 

219

VII. 

220 


the “Augustinerinnenkirche” in 1735 and 

the parish church of St Sebastian in 1739. 

In his role as theatre architect he created 

the opera house at the palace in Mannheim 

between 1737 and 1742. For the opera house’s 

inauguration he directed the festive opera 

“Meride” on the occasion of the Wittelsbach 

double wedding on 17 January 1742. 

He was raised into the nobility for his services 

by Elector Carl Philipp on 13 October 1740. 

Six months later, on 6 April 1741, he was 

named director of works (Oberbaudirektor). 

Alessandro Galli da Bibiena passed away on 5 

August 1748. After his death, his collaborator 

Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti completed the Jesuit 

church in Mannheim as well as the northern 

pavilion, and it was he who then built the 

southern pavilion in the palace gardens 

at Schwetzingen from 1753. Guillaume 

d’Hauberat succeeded him as director of 

works. 38 

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 

Brussels, 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. 39 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 

38 Biographical information from: Alexandra Glanz: Alessandro 

Galli-Bibiena (1686-1748). Inventore delle Scene und Premier 

Architecteur am kurpfälzischen Hof in Mannheim. Berlin 1991. 


1963, pp. 19 ff. 

prince, whose portrait appears in a medallion 

on the base. 40 

For the residential palace built in Carl 

Philipp’s time, from 1720, Grupello created 

a magnificent bronze coat of arms that was 

mounted over the main gate. 41 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. 42 There are two more 

Minervas by Grupello at Schwetzingen, one an 

allegorical depiction of Minerva as Pictura, the 

other a warlike goddess. 43 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 

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. 44 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 

40 Udo Kultermann, Gabriel Grupello, Diss. Berlin 1968. 

41 Ludwig W. Böhm, Das Mannheimer Schloss, Karlsruhe 1994, p. 

10. 

42 Wiltrud Heber, Die Arbeiten des Nicolas des Pigage in den ehemals 


Part I, Worms 1986, pp. 557f. 


1989, p. 67. 

44 Zenker 1989, p. 65, n. 3. Cp. also Udo Kultermann, “Die 

Gartenskulpturen Grupellos”, in: Düsseldorfer Jahrbuch, Vol. 47, 

Düsseldorf 1955.

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 . 45 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 figures 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. 46 

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 

first 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 specifically 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.”47 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 

45 Biographical data taken from Thieme/Becker, Allgemeines Lexikon 

der bildenden Künstler von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart, 

Leipzig 1999, Vol. 15/16, p. 265. 

46 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. 

47 Johann Michael Zeyher and J.G. Rieger, Schwetzingen und 

seine Garten=Anlagen, Mannheim 1809, p. 82. 


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 final 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. 48 


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 first 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 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. 49 Works by Nicolas Guibal 

48 Recent excavations have allowed the reconstruction of an 

octagonal basin with a central fountain. 

49 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. 

VII. 

221

VII. 

222 


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. 50 The first 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 figuré de la Gallerie de 

Dusseldorf”. 


Ferdinand Kobell (1740-1799) 

The painter and etcher Ferdinand Kobell 

(07.06.1740 Mannheim – 01.02.1799 Munich) 

first 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 

50 Wolfgang Uhlig, Nicolas Guibal, Hofmaler des Herzogs Carl 

Eugen von Württemberg, Stuttgart 1981, p. 18. 

Wille. Inspired by his teachers, he studied 

Dutch landscape painting in particular. 

In 1771, Kobell was appointed cabinet 

landscape painter and received his first 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. 51 

In the early 1770s Lamine created, within 18 

months, the sculpture of Pan for the grounds 

at Schwetzingen; it was much praised by his 

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 


1963, pp. 117 f.

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![…]“ 52 

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. 53 

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. 


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 

52 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. 

53 Stefan Mörz, Die letzte Kurfürstin, Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln 1997, 

p. 204 f. 


academy in Vienna 54 where he may have met 

another of the academy’s students, Franz 

Ignaz Günther. Linck was influenced 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 first 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. 55 

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. 

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 

54 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. 

55 Werhahn calls Linck a “Meister der Kleinplastik”, i.e. a master 

of small sculpture (Werhahn 1999, p. 35). 

VII. 

223

VII. 

Johann Ludwig Petri 

(1714-1796) (Photo: Württembergische 

Landesbibliothek). 

224 


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 

griffins 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. 56 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. 


56 See also the entry on Peter Anton von Verschaffelt. 

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-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 definitive design for the layout 

and planting of the central parterre. The plan 

clearly reflects 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) 57 

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. 

57 Biographical data from Wiltrud Heber, “Pigages Leben und 

Werk”, in: Ausstellungskatalog Nicolas de Pigage 1723-1797. 

Architekt des Kurfürsten Carl Theodor. Zum 200. Todestag, Ed. 

Stadtmuseum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf 1997, p. 16-24.

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 

studying architecture at the Académie Royale 

d’Architecture. The mathematician, physicist 

and astronomer Abbé Charles Étienne Louis 

Camus, known chiefly 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 (directorin-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 Mannheim, 

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 

magnificent interior. Pigage’s plans to extend 

the garden to the south-west, which would 

have meant a very considerable enlargement, 

were abandoned for financial 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 

VII. 

Nicolas de Pigage 

(1723-1796) (Stadtmuseum 

Düsseldorf). 

225

VII. 

226 


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 floor 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. 58 

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 

58 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, 


botanists – Plinius, Linné, Tournefort and 

Theophrastus. The grotto-style interior of 

the bathroom in the Elector’s bathhouse was 

designed by him as well. 59 Particularly notable 

are the relief depictions of naiads created by 

Pozzi and modelled on Jean Goujon’s “Fontaine 

des Innocents” (1549). 60 


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. 61 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 first observatory 

(1772). 

In Heidelberg he designed the plans for the 

Mannheim Gate (1750, destroyed 1856) and 

the Jesuit seminary “Collegium Carolinum” 

(1753, today the administrative seat of the 

University of Heidelberg). 62 

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 


1963, pp. 87-92. See also Otto Knaus, Künstler am kurpfälzischen 

Hofe, Schwetzingen 1979, pp. 69-73. 



Vol. II, Worms 1986, p. 540. 

61 W. W. Hoffmann, Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti. Kurpfälzischer 

Hofbaumeister, Heidelberg, 1934, p. 4. 

62 Re. Rabaliatti’s work in Heidelberg cp. Karl Lohmeyer, Die 

Baumeister des Rheinisch-Fränkischen Barocks, Wien/Augsburg 

1928, pp. 175 f.

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. 63 

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 magnificent 

gates. 

Around 1755, Rabaliatti built himself a fine, 

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. 64 

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. 

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 

63 Hoffmann 1934, pp. 83 ff., n. 1. Cp. Claus Reisinger, Der 

Schlossgarten zu Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1987, pp. 17 f. 

64 Hoffmann 1934, pp. 73 f., see n. 1. Cp. Wiltrud Heber, Der 

Schwetzinger Schlossplatz und seine Bauten, Heidelberg 1974, 

pp. 8 f. 


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 finished. 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 final 

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 

VII. 

Friedrich Ludwig Sckell 

(1750-1823) (Photo: Stadtarchiv 


227

VII. 

228 


in 1808, and the non-hereditary 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 

first 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 

(fl. 1755-1788) 

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. 65 

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. 66 

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. 67 

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 


1963, pp. 93 ff. 

66 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. 



Theodor, Stuttgart 1991, p. 38. 

and urns are by his hand. 68 His last work is 

believed to be the artificially aged clay relief 

depicting a female personification of Water, 

on the Roman water tower. 69 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 first 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 

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. 

68 Heber 1986, p. 424, n. 2. 


1989, pp. 56 f.

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. 70 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. 

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. 71 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. 72 

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. 73 

The largest number of works by Verschaffelt 

is concentrated at Schwetzingen. The first 

contract with Verschaffelt is dated 29th 

August 1766, 74 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 

70 Bust of Voltaire “coiffe à la moderne” at Seattle (Art Museum); 

bust of Voltaire “à l’antique” at Paris (Louvre). 

71 The high altar was destroyed in 1794. 

72 The statue, 4m in height, was destroyed in 1796. 

73 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. 

74 Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv München, Allgemeines 

Staatsarchiv Fürstensachen 823 1/3 folio 40-43. 


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 bronze-plated clay, four 

urns representing the ages of the world, and 

a wall fountain. A statement by Pigage dated 

30th August 1773, 75 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 personification 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 specification dated 17th September 1777, 76 

the works are listed again, and Pigage also 

argues with Verschaffelt about a Cupid which, 

75 Kurt Martin, Die Kunstdenkmäler des Amtsbezirks Mannheim, 

Stadt Schwetzingen, Karlsruhe 1933, p. 342. 


Staatsarchiv Fürstensachen 823 1/3 folio 28-30. 

VII. 

Peter Anton von Verschaffelt 

(1710-1793) (Reiss-Engelhorn- 

Museen). 

229

VII. 

Johann Michael Zeyher 

(1770-1843) (Photo: Stadtarchiv 


230 


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 figure 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 final 

invoice presented to Pigage, dated 27th June 

1779 77 , 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”. 78 He died in 1793. 



Staatsarchiv Fürstensachen 823 1/3 folio 34 f. 

78 Eva Hofmann, Peter Anton von Verschaffelt. Hofbildhauer des 

Kurfürsten Carl Theodor in Mannheim, Mannheim 1982, p. 26. 

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 

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 

scientific 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. 


b) 

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 

fortified 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 first 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. 

VII. 

231

VII. 

232 


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). 

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 first 

performance of the opera Il figlio 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 

first 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 first 

guidebook of the garden. In 1823/24, the great 

basin is converted into a pond with a naturallooking 

shoreline. 

1833 

Schwetzingen is granted the town charter. 

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 first time by the radio 

channel Süddeutscher Rundfunk, to become a 

major annual event. 

1970 

Completion of the Parkpflegewerk (garden 

management plan) to provide a basis for the 

careful restoration of the palace garden, one of 

the first 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”). 

VII. 

233

VII. 

234 


c) 

List of Monuments in Schwetzingen 

(Annegret Kalvelage, Melanie Mertens) 

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. 

Anselm-Feuerbach-Straße 6 (Flstnr 0-6136- 

6137) 

Two-storey building with plastered walls 

and hipped roof, garage, wooden fence on a 

low plastered base wall topped with yellow 

sandstone slabs, constructed in 1950s and 

was originally part of the plot Schillerstr. 4 

(comprise single unit) § 2 

August-Neuhaus-Straße 1, 3 (Flstnr 0-1069/1, 

0-1069/2) 

Two-storey corner building with mansard 

roof and corner tower facing Nadlerstraße 

with shingled bays in first storey, one over 

a rectangular and one over a semi-circular 

floor plan, two transverse gables on August- 

Neuhaus-Straße, circa 1900 (comprise single 

unit) § 2 

August-Neuhaus-Straße 18 (Flstnr 0-1072/1) 

Corner building with corner tower and 

complex roof of varying styles and complex 

masonry in the style of the neo-renaissance, 

facings partially modernized, circa 1900 § 2 

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 fish-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, officially 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 Pflaumer/Heidelberg; 

in 1933, extension with guest room and 

verandah facing the Clementine-Bassermann- 

Straße by Pflaumer/Heidelberg, conversion of 

the top floor 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 fine

detail, inspired by late Baroque buildings, 

built 1903 § 2 

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 Dörfler 

(entirety of items) § 2 

Bahnhofanlage, at No. 32 (Flstnr 0-520) 

Memorial Well, granite well with a rear 

wall divided into five sections with bronze 

artworks of the princely couple (replica 

installed 1956), House of Baden coat-of-arms 

in the centre and a copper water spout in 

the form of the head of a fish, water basin 

surround comprising three steps, donated 

by the Society for the Support of Charities 

established in 1871, designed by Karl 

Hoffacker, Director of the Karlsruhe School of 

Arts and Crafts, executed by the company of 

Hassler & Schehl, officially inaugurated on 9th 

September, 1906 and moved to the southern 

edge of the site in 2004 § 2 

Bismarckstraße 1 (Flstnr. 416/1) 

Inn, “Badner Hof”. Solid construction, two 

storeys, plastered. Hipped roof with transverse 

gable, a fine 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 

Bruchhäuser Str. 3 (Flstnr 0-0951) 

Dwelling house, two-storey building with 

plaster walls and complex roof of varying 

styles, demarcated on the sides with a fence in 

crenellated form, stone bearing coat-of-arms 

dated 1907 § 2 

Bruchhäuser Str. 8a (Flstnr 0-0987/13) 

Conical brick tower with dividing elements 

and plastered sides, formerly tower for water 

tank, Intze type, named on the weather vane 

§ 2 

VII. 

Bahnhofsanlage 18 

(Photo: Kalvelage). 

235

VII. 

236 


Carl-Theodor-Straße 1 

- cf. Schloßplatz 

Dwelling House and business premises, 

two-storey L-shaped building, mansard halfhipped 

roof, built by Thomas Breuer, master 

of the wells, 1748, sold to Jakob Gulden 1805, 

usually used as an inn, later the print shops 

and publishing house of the Schwetzinger 

Zeitung, today business premises, completes 

the northerly construction of the Schloßplatz/ 

Palace Square towards the East 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 2 (Flstnr. 385) 


Inn “Zum Grünen Baum” (“The Green Tree”), 

corner house with half-hipped roof, entrance 

gate with a rounded arch, sandstone window 

encasements, circa 1748, built by Jakob Kilby, 

master tailor, 1759 transformed by Joseph 

Bianchy into the inn with the sign “Zum 

Grünen Baum” 


Residential/commercial building. Two storeys, 

plastered, eaves facing the street, saddleback 

roof with dormers, profiled eaves moulding, 

modern shop on the ground floor, 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 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 7, 7a (Flstnr. 376) 

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 floor, 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, 8b, 8c, 8d, 8e, 8f, 8g 

(Flstnr 0-504) 

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, first 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 fire; wing 

rebuilt in 1927 and central block converted to 

a department store, at the same time cellars 

and ground-floor shops were added and the 

exterior re-structured with pillars; alterations 

to the windows because of the conversion of 

the upper storeys into flats § 12



construction, two storeys, plastered, eaves 

facing the street. Saddleback roof, segmental 

window arches on the first floor, 19th-century 

shops on the ground floor; alterations c.1919 

include new door and shop windows designed 

by Moosbrugger und Pflaumer of Heidelberg, 

core building from the 18th century § 2 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 13 (Flstnr 0-372 

Two-storey dwelling house and inn – 

Zähringer Hof - with two wings and hipped 

roof, second half 18th century, outhouse 

dated 1770 (i) § 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 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 15 (Flstnr 0-371/2) 

Dwelling house and business premises, built 

1904 (dated) as a three-storey house with 

plaster facings and sandstone encasements 

in the neo-renaissance style, profiled window 

roofings and curved gables with fan-shaped 

mussels § 2 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 15a (Flstnr 0-371/1) 

Dwelling house and business premises, 

built 1913 by H. Körner for Mrs. Leonhard 

Schmeißner in neo-baroque style with art 

niveau influences, situated on a central 

intersection, three- and four-storeyed with 

corner bays and gabled risalit projecting onto 

Nadlerstraße, preserved embellished windows 

and decor preserved § 2 


Carl-Theodor-Straße 16 (Flstnr 0-506/2) 

Dwelling house and business premises, 

three-storey building with entrance gate of 

brick and mansard loft, brick facade with red 

sandstone encasements, painted balustrades 

and decorative balconies, built end of 19th 

century; it has still to be determined whether 

the rear building comprise part of the cultural 

monument § 2 



construction, three storeys, sandstone ground 

floor, upper storeys plastered with rich 

sandstone dressings, sculpted parapet fields, 

oriels and balconies on corbels, gable facing 

the Bahnhofanlage, half-timbered gable on 

one side, Art nouveau influences, built 1908, 

bomb damage in 1940, and subsequent 

alterations to the attic § 2 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 29 (Flstnr 0-363) 

Dwelling house and business premises, threestorey 

building with entrance gate of brick 

with a flat, angled ridge roof, brick facade 

with late classical sandstone encasements and 

decorative balcony: built end of 19th century; 

the rear building has changed little and 

comprises part of the overall unit. § 2 

Collinistraße 36, 38 (Flstnr. 4349/13) 

see Schlossplatz 10, entirety of items Schloss 

und Schlosspark, Lower Waterworks 

VII. 

Carl-Theodor-Straße 8 a-f 


237

VII. 

238 


Dreikönigstraße 2 (Flstnr. 237) 

Formerly a Catholic school. Two storeys, 


roof with dormers and plain tiles, entrance 

gate, sandstone casements and doorframe, 

corner pilasters, profiled 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 flats in 1997 § 2 


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”, verified by wall anchor, 

19th-century alterations to ground floor § 2 

Dreikönigstraße 6 (Flstnr. 239/1) 

Residential/commercial building, formerly an 

inn, “Rotes Haus”. Late Baroque, two storeys, 

ground floor solid, first floor 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 Pflug”. Sandstone, built 1774 § 2 



entrance gate mid-front, shops on the ground 

floor, auricled casements on the first floor, 

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-floor lounge, stuccoed ceilings on the 

first floor. 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 floor 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, first-floor stone front in a neo- 

Renaissance style, the modernized ground 

floor may have stone pilasters preserved 

behind the tiles § 2 




roof, converted ground floor (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 building 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 office, “Haus des Grandveneur”. 

Solid construction, two storeys, plastered, 

hipped roof, stately original staircase, built 

1760, probably from plans by Franz Wilhelm 

Rabaliatti § 2 

Forsthausstraße 12 

cf. Schloßplatz 10 

Building comprises part of the unit 

Schloßplatz 10 (Schloß/Palace) 

Forsthausstraße 14 (Flstnr. 426) 

Residential building, part of the former head 

hunter’s office. One storey, plastered, halfhipped 

roof, a polygonal extension at the side, 

built after 1750 § 2 

Friedrichsfelder Landstraße (Flstnr 0-8521) 

Tank barracks, today Tompkins Barracks, the 

area of the barracks is surrounded by a fence, 

some original walls around the area of the 


main entrance, guardrooms behind this area, 

gable with sgraffito “The Armoured” and date 

of construction 1938 on the gables, barrack 

rooms on an L-shaped floor plan, tank garage, 

central rectangular parade ground surrounded 

by barracks, kitchens, staff quarters, fire station 

and gymnasium (comprise single unit) § 2 

Friedrichsfelder Landstraße 29 (Flstnr 

0-338/3) 

Railway worker’s house, single-storey solid 

building with ridge roof, built at the opening 

of the Rheintal (Rhine Valley) railway section 

in 1870 § 2 

Friedrichstraße 2 (Flstnr. 483) 


plastered, eaves facing the street. Saddleback 

roof, first known owner in 1775, Heinrich 

Judith; originally an inn, “Reichskrone”, today 

a shop on the ground floor, 2nd half of the 

18th century § 2 



construction, one storey, eaves facing the 

street. Saddleback roof, entrance gate midfront, 

ground floor converted (shop). Wooden 

gate marked “HH 1886“ § 2 

VII. 

Forsthausstraße 7-9 


239

VII. 

240 

Hebelstraße 1-3 




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 

floorboards. c.1900 § 2 

Grenzhöfer Straße (Flstnr 0-1378/1) 

Railway worker’s house, plaster walls above 

a sandstone base surround, arched windows, 

corners accentuated by tiled walls, with 

outhouse, 1879 § 2 

Hans-Thoma-Straße 1 (Flstnr 0-6113) 

St. Maria Catholic Church on a corner 

plot surrounded by a hedge, longitudinal 

concrete construction with ridge roof, low, 

retracted choir with the one-storey flat-roofed 

extensions of the workday church to the north 

and the vestry to the south, independent 

bell tower, built 1956/58 to plans by Hans 

Rolli together with A. Schmitt and G. Sauer, 

archiepiscopal architects office Heidelberg, 

windows in choir and nave by R. P. 

Litzenburger, windows in the workday church 

by Rainer Dorwarth, tabernacle, chandelier 

and crucifix designed by Harry McLean, in 

1960 sculptor Oskar Steidle of Schwenningen 

created the relief depicting “The Coronation 

of Mary”, 1967 organ built by Master Scherpf, 

Speyer, and in 1990 the “The Stations of the 

Cross” sculpted by Wolfgang Kleiser (comprise 

single unit) § 2 

Hebelstraße 1, 3 (Flstnr 0-218) 

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 floor. 

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 floor; 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, halftimbered 

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 

VII. 

Heidelberger Straße 1 


241

VII. 

242 



Residential building and barn, parts of a 

former farm; “Haus Springer“: two storeys, 

half-hipped gable facing the street, ground 

floor and gable solid construction, halftimbered 

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, 9 (Flstnr. 268/3, 268/3) 

Brewery, building complex consisting of brewing 

house with administration building, gateway, 

ground floor brick, plastered, brick dressings, 

imitation sandstone cornices, strong contrasts 

provided by horizontal elements, reminiscences 

of “Neue Sachlichkeit” architecture; brewing 

house with fine interior décor – walls of polished 

limestone, brass railings, tiles in two colours 

– and machinery by Wehrle, Emmendingen; 

Schwetzingen’s first 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 


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 floor windows, fine 

period interior, built 1926 from plans by a 

government official, Regierungsbaumeister 

Hodel of Mannheim, for J. Helffrich (entirety 

of items) § 2 

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 4 (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 officials, Münzrat Kachel 

and Oberbaurat Fischer, half-length portrait a 

galvanoplastic copy by sculptor Fechtig after 

an original by Xaver Reich § 2 

Invalidengasse 6, 8 (Flstnr 0-191, 0-191/1) 

Farm building, former synagogue, two-storey 

building with ridge roof, timber-framed 

upper storey, used from 1864 until 1899 as a 

second synagogue by the Jewish community 

in Schwetzingen, part of the L-shaped barn 

extension has a cellar below it, rebuilt and 

modernized in the post-war period, the core of 

the building is 1st half 18th century (comprise 


Karlsruher Straße 1 


Hotel “Zum Erbprinz” (The Crown Prince), 

inn, two-storey solid construction with 

plastered walls, hipped roof, built 1826 

Karlsruher Straße 2 (Flstnr. 419) 

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 first floor, 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 office. 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 



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 

Kleine Planken, Mannheimer Straße 29 

(Flstnr 0-202) 

Friedrich School, two-storey, nine axes 

schoolhouse with five axes gabled, central 

projecting risalit, built in 1842/43 on the site 

of the old Lutheran Church as a reformed 

school after plans by Johann Friedrich 

Dyckerhoff, Inspector of Buildings, in the style 

of Friedrich Weinbrenner § 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 

Kronenstraße. 7 

- cf. Kronenstraße 5 

VII. 

Karlsruher Straße 1 


243

VII. 

244 


Kurfürstenstraße 17 (Flstnr 0-349) 

Villa, two-storey building with plastered walls 

above a sandstone base surround, flat hipped 

roof, sandstone groupings, terrace facing the 

front garden supported by sandstone columns, 

built outside the town on the far side of 

the railway and surrounded by a park for a 

factory owner from the Odenwald in 1873, 

later owned by the Herzig family, wig makers, 

maternity clinic during the post-war period 

and sold to the protestant church circa 1960 § 

2 

Kurfürstenstraße 19, 21 (Flstnr 0-349/1, 

0-349/2) 

Semi-detached dwelling houses, two-storey 

building with plastered walls and mansard 

roof, each outer axis has a small timberframed 

gable and a bay down to ground level, 

sandstone groupings, front garden demarcated 

by iron railings on a plastered base, original 

railings at no. 21 (comprise one unit) § 2 

Kurfürstenstraße 21 

- cf. Kurfürstenstraße 19 

Kurfürstenstraße 25 (Flstnr 0-1067/2) 

Dwelling house, two-storey with eaves parallel 

to the street, enclosed construction, wellpreserved 

internal decor, circa 1900 § 2 

Kurfürstenstraße 29, 31 (Flstnr 0-1072, 

0-1073/1) 

Semi-detached dwelling houses, two-storey 

building with plastered walls, complex roof in 

various styles, sandstone groupings, built circa 

1910, the gable of no. 29 contains a portrayal 

of St. Apollonia in the style of Cranach, 1955 § 

2 

Kurfürstenstraße 30 (Flstnr 0-950/3) 

Dwelling house, two-storey solid building, 

roofed in various styles, sandstone base 

surround, sandstone window encasements, 

timber-framed upper storey, corner extension 

to one side in the form of a tower, circa 1910, 

modern garage extension § 2 

Kurfürstenstraße 31 


Kurfürstenstraße 32, Schillerstraße 2 (Flstnr 

0-949/10, 0-950/8) 

Double villa, corner building with front 

garden, no. 32 still has the original art 

nouveau wooden fence on concrete base, 

large copper beech on the corner, plastered 

walls with sandstone groupings and timber 

frames, Schillerstraße 2 has a neo-romanesque 

vestibule, built 1910 for Georg Becker from his 

own plans (comprise single unit) § 2 


Villa with front garden, demarcated towards 

the street by the original, decorative iron 

railing, two-storey imposing building with 

plastered walls and sandstone groupings, 

side staircase in tower and sweeping gable 

with sandstone relief of a faun in the apex of 

the gable, asymmetric bay projecting over an 

arched lintel, the base sandstone rustication 

extended to the ground floor, originally built 

by the architect Georg Becker circa 1900 for the 

factory owner Leinenkugel a manufacture of 

chairs at Grenzhof (comprises a single unit) § 2 


Villa, corner building, front garden with 

original iron railing on a concrete base, 

plastered walls with a mansard roof and 

gable at right angles to the building facing 

Uhlandstraße, complex constructed bay on 

semi-circular floor plan to ground level on 

Kurfürstenstraße, complex decor, circa 1900 

(comprises single unit) § 2 

Lessingstraße 33, 35 (Flstnr 0-949/4, 0-949/5) 

Semi-detached dwelling houses with a fenced 

garden at no. 33 and driveway with gate on 

the side at no. 35, two-storey building with 

plastered walls, eaves parallel to street, ridge 

roof, rich sandstone groupings and timberframed 

upper storeys, tiered gable, variety of 

building forms in German neo-renaissance 

style (comprise one unit) § 2

Lessingstraße 35 

- cf. Lessingstraße 33 

Lessingstraße 37, 39 (Flstnr 0-949/6, 0-949/7) 

Semi-detached dwelling houses, one-storey 

building with plastered walls, eaves parallel 

to street and sandstone groupings, various 

architectural forms with corner tower, bays 

and large transverse gable, no. 39 still has the 

original grill at the side entrance (comprise 




Lessingstraße 40, 42 (Flstnr 0-946/9, 

0-946/10) 

Semi-detached dwelling houses, plastered 

walls with mansard roof , two storey corner 

projecting risalit with three-sided bay on first 

floor, much of the original architectural detail 

preserved, e.g. original window divisions 

at no.42, stained window in the bay of no. 

40, house doors, 1920s and 1930s (comprise 




Luisenstraße 41 (Flstnr. 3676/12) 


the street, plastered, saddleback roof with 

dormers, gateway at one side, sandstone base 

and jambs, c.1900 § 2 

Mannheimer Landstraße 4, 6 (Flstnr 

0-1780/4) 

Cemetery with cemetery wall, cemetery 

building, outhouse, avenue, monuments, 

single nave cut stone building with gabled 

belfry and columned entrance, built 1908 

in the style of art nouveau, neo-classical 

outbuildings, late 1920s, sandstone cemetery 

wall, Baumann tomb by H. Volz, tomb of 

Johann Michael Zeyher, C.F. Schimper tomb, 

memorial to the fallen of the 1870/71 war, 

monument by Otto Mindhoff dedicated to the 

victims of the First and Second World Wars, 


erected in 1970, memorial to those persecuted 

by the Nazi regime § 2 

Mannheimer Landstraße 6 

- cf. Mannheimer Landstraße 4 

Mannheimer Landstraße, fork to Brühl 

(Fölst.Nr. 0-8936) 

Shrine in niche, red sandstone, niche crowned 

by a crucifix above a shaft column with base, 

dated 1496 § 2 

Mannheimer Straße (Flstnr 0-1810) 

Israelite graveyard, on the north side of the 

extension to the Christian cemetery, opened 

1894 § 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 29 

- cf. Kleine Planken 

Mannheimer Straße 21 (Flstnr. 247/1) 


eaves facing the street, plastered, saddleback 

roof, ground floor converted into a shop, last 

quarter of the 18th century § 2 


School (Friedrichschule). Two storeys, 

nine axes, gabled central projection of five 

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 

VII. 

245

VII. 

246 



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 floor 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 


Mannheimer Straße 110, 112, 114, 116, 118, 

120, 122 (Flstnr 0-1693/5, 0-1693/6, 0-1693/7, 

0-1693/8, 0-1693/9, 0-1693/10, 0-1693/11) 

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 (entirety of items) § 2 

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 floor 

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; first floor 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 floor; interior: original staircase, 

wooden floors, doors and tiled stoves; built 

1905 § 2 


Residential building with workshop on 

ground floor. 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


Residential building. Solid construction, three 


roof with lucarne and dormers, gateway to 

one side; granite base and sandstone ground 

floor, arched windows with profiled sandstone 

jambs, abutment moulding with Vitruvian 

scroll; bel étage: brick with sandstone 

dressings, profiled 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 

Marstallstraße 16 (Flstnr 0-495/1) 

Dwelling house, two-storey building with 

plastered walls and sandstone groupings 

in late Gothic style, facade accentuated by 

balcony and transverse dormer P* 

Marstallstraße 28 (Flstnr 0-487) 

Dwelling house, two-storey house with 

entrance gate, dormer and balcony, decorative 

yellow brickwork facade, red sandstone 

encasements and timber frames with 

suspended transverse gable and pointed, 

helmeted dormers P* 

Marstallstraße 36 (Flstnr 0-557) 

Dwelling house with garden, small one-storey 

house with entrance gate under ridge roof 

with dormer, walls plastered, redbrick and 

sandstone groupings, suspended gable parallel 

to street P* 

Moltkestraße 2 (Flstnr 0-612) 

Südstadtschule (South Town School), former 

Hebel Secondary School, two-storey V-shaped 

high quality art nouveau building, the front 

side of the floor plan has a blunted end, 

plastered walls with hipped mansard roof, 

base and architectural groupings in cut stone, 

main facade with central projecting risalit 

and curved gable, facade on the southwest 

side with transverse gable and a rectangular 

relief (ancient Greek school) above the lintel 

of the main portal sculptured by the artist 

Fries/Heidelberg, central window of first floor 


framed by pilasters, Schwetzingen coat-ofarms 

and the coat-of-arms of Baden above the 

capitals, the figure of an eagle with outspread 

wings above the window, school clock in the 

gable, inside the school a fountain in the wall 

opposite the main staircase made of terrazzo 

with mosaic patterns, terrazzo floor and stairs, 

built 1909/11 to plans by town architect W. 

Wipfinger § 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 


Mühlenstraße 3 

- cf. Mühlenstraße 1 

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 

Nadlerstraße 1, 3 ,5 (Flstnr 0-349/3, 0-349/4, 

0-1065/1) 

Apartment block, two-storey with plastered 

walls and mansard roof above a high 

sandstone base surround, groupings 

consisting of plaster facings, three entrances 

with complex sandstone frames, slightly 

vaulted bays in nos. 1 and 2, wide transverse 

dormers, circa 1900 (comprise single unit) § 2 

Richard-Wagner-Straße 5 (Flstnr 0-1132/1) 

Dwelling house with front garden demarcated 

by a wooden fence on concrete base divided 

by concrete posts, two-storey plastered 

building parallel to street with sandstone 

groupings, accentuation via transverse dormer 

along a threefold axis with balcony on the first 

floor, much of the original detail preserved, 

circa 1910 (comprises single unit) § 2 

* The monument status of objects marked P will be determined following a thorough examination. This examination will be conducted 

in each case as soon as alterations to the object are being considered. 

VII. 

247

VII. 

248 


Scheffelstraße 3a, 3b (Flstnr 0-1039/3, 

0-1040) 

Double villa, two plastered buildings with 

gables parallel to street and mansard 

roofs, grey-yellow sandstone groupings, 

interconnecting roofs; 3a: much of the 

original detail preserved, semi-circular bay to 

ground level on the lower floor, front garden 

demarcated to street via art nouveau fencing 

on a concrete base, no. 3b: modernized, circa 

1900 (comprise a single unit) § 2 

Scheffelstraße 3b 

- cf. Scheffelstraße 3a 

Scheffelstraße 19 (Flstnr 0-1027/1) 

Dwelling house with front garden demarcated 

by a wooden fence on a concrete base 

and divided by concrete posts, two-storey 

plastered building with sandstone groupings, 

accentuation via dormer along a threefold 

axis with balcony on the first floor, much 

of the original detail preserved, circa 1910 


Schillerstraße 2 


Schillerstraße 3 (Flstnr 0-946/3) 

Dwelling house, plastered building with 

transverse gables and mansard roof, 

asymmetric bay constructed in timber on a 

reclining wall, picturesque appearance, circa 

1900 § 2 


Dwelling house with garden, one-storey 

plastered building parallel to street, 

mansard gable roof with double dormer, 

“Biberschwanz” (beaver tail) roof tiles, 

side entrance, original stained glass leaded 

windows, doors, hall floor, wooden staircase 

are well-preserved, wall with posts and steps 

to the lower lying garden, circa 1910 § 2 


Dwelling house in the form of an L-shaped 

farmhouse, single storey with ridge roof 

and timber-framed gable, garage entrance in 

side wing with overhanging roof, courtyard 

and front garden demarcated by wooden 

fence on concrete base, originally part of 

Anselm-Feuerbach-Straße 6, built in the 

popular German style of the 1930s using local 

materials (“Heimatschutzstil”) § 2 

Schimperstraße 5, 7 (Flstnr 0-4300, 04300/2) 

Semidetached dwelling houses, two-storey 

solid construction with timber-framed 

transverse gables and timbered details on 

upper storey, some original windows and in 

no. 5 original door (comprise a single unit) § 2 

Schimperstraße 7 

- cf. Schimperstraße 5 

ENTIRETY OF ITEMS: ‘SCHLOSSPLATZ’ 

(PALACE SQUARE); § 28 

Schloßplatz, Carl-Theodor-Straße 1, 2, 

Karlsruher Straße 1, Schloßplatz 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 

6, 7, 8, 8a, 9 (Flstnr 0-97/18, 0-97/19, 0-97/20, 

0-385, 0-389/2, 0-390-391) 

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 

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”, profiled 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; 

conversion 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 official Zeller, from 1803 

property of the state of Baden and seat of the 

local government authority, later residential use 



Residential building, part of the former 

barracks of the electoral bodyguard. Two 

storeys, five 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, 

VII. 

Schlossplatz 3 (Photo: 

Kalvelage). 

Schlossplatz 2 (Photo: 

Kalvelage). 

249

VII. 

250 


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, five 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 

Schloßplatz 10, Zeyherstraße 8, Collinistraße 

36, 38, Forsthausstraße 12, Karlsruher 

Straße 2a, Schloßstraße, Zähringerstraße 2, 

6, Zähringerstraße 4, Zeyherstraße (Flstnr 

0-4349, 0-4349/17) 

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 office; 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 flanked 

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; gravestones from 1608 and 1786 

and the gravestone of Imperial Count Peter 

Anton von Wolckenstein and Trosburg, 

baroque base with the earlier inscription 

of the original crucifix of the cemetery, 

monument to the fallen with Pieta, original 

Immaculate Conception under a canopy 

next to the vicarage, 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 

Schubertstraße 1 (Flstnr 0-5804/2) 

Railway worker’s house, one-storey solid 

construction with plastered walls, sandstone 

groupings, ridge roof, end of 19th century § 2 

Staatswalddistrikt 1 

“Landgerichtsstein”/District Court Marker § 2 

Sternallee (Flstnr 0-9287) 

Sternallee, area of paths within a circular 

layout, the site of the Sternallee was probably 

laid out in 1757 or 1758, included by Pigage in 

a project to extend the Schwetzingen palace 

gardens in 1761, 1762 “Wooded Area Java or 

the Stern-allee” mentioned in documents § 2 

Uhlandstraße 4 (Flstnr 0-1090/11, 0-1093/3) 

Dwelling house with demarcated front 

garden, two-storey brick building with 

overhanging flat roof, covered enwtrance, 

influenced by the Bauhaus style, 1920s 


Werkstraße (Flstnr 0-1377/1) 

Former railway repair works, entrance area 

with wall, factory gate, dwelling house for 

gateman with garden and gatehouse across 

from entrance, anno 1917; avenue from 

the entrance area along the length of the 


Werkstraße; avenue between administrative 

building and Hall I; locomotive firing 

shop, later inspection shop, anno 1920; 

former spring shop, suspension shop, anno 

1916; administrative building with former 

washhouse, canteen and store rooms, 

anno 1917, after being partially destroyed, 

extended1949; boiler room, anno 1917; Hall 

II former locomotive repair shop, anno 1918, 

post-1930 wagon repair shop; Hall I, former 

wagon repair shop, anno 1916; pump house 

for industrial water, anno 1917; former 

paint shop, anno 1917, post-1945 material 

stores; former oil depot, anno 1920; timber 

warehouse, anno 1917; remains of track harps 

to the south and north of Halls II and I; south 

of Hall II remains of turntable; remains of 

the 6 moving platforms in the yard; ramp 

east of Hall I; deep well east of Hall II; four 

underground bunkers along the boundary to 

Plankstadt (comprise a single unit) § 2 

VII. 

Wildemannstraße 1 (Flstnr 0-120) 

Three-sided farmyard, two-storey building 

with plastered walls, built 1771 § 2 Schlossstraße 10, Catholic 

parish church St. Pankratius 


251

VII. 

252 


Wildemannstraße 2 (Flstnr. 184) 

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, first 

floor facing Invalidengasse rebuilt after a fire 

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 

floor 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 

Zähringerstraße 2 (Flstnr. 4349) 

see Schlossplatz 10, entirety of items: Palace 

and palace gardens, guardhouse 

Zähringerstraße 4 

- cf. Schloßplatz 10 

Dwelling house 



market garden/nursery 

Zähringerstraße 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 

Zähringerstraße 29, 31 (Flstnr. 4295/1, 4294) 

Semi-detached residential building, No. 31 

with outbuilding and front garden, onestorey, 

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 


- cf. Zähringerstraße 29 

Zähringerstraße 49 (Flstnr. 4280/5) 

Villa; asymmetrical, tower-like corner 

building, corner bay with flat 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 



Dwelling house 

Zeyherstraße 


Zeyherstraße (Flstnr. 4349/10) 


and palace gardens, Upper Waterworks, pump 

room, water tower, today the tax office, 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 office; 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 

Zeyherstraße 8 


d) 

Bibliography 


(Stefan Moebus, Wolfgang Schröck-Schmidt) 

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, 

XXVII. 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. 

VII. 

253

VII. 

254 


Ausst.-Kat. Heidelberg 1979 – Carl Theodor 

und Elisabeth Auguste – Höfische 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. Dieser Katalog 

ist identisch mit 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/Köln 1996. 

Ausst.-Kat. 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. Dieser Katalog 

ist identisch mit 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), 

Oberfinanzdirektion 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. 

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. 

Ausst.-Kat. Stendal 2007 – Der Pfälzer Apoll. 

Kurfürst Carl Theodor und die Antike an 

Rhein und Neckar (Stendal, Winckelmann- 

Museum Stendal 2007), hg. von Max Kunze, 

Ruhpolding 2007. 

Bachmann 1951 – Erich Bachmann, „Anfänge 

des Landschaftsgartens in Deutschland“, in: 

Zeitschrift für Kunstwissenschaft, Nr. 5, 1951, 

S. 203-228. 

Baupflegekatalog 2006 – Baupflegekatalog 

Schlossgarten Schwetzingen, Hans-Dieter 

Proske, Vermögen und Bau Baden-Württemberg 

(Amt Mannheim), unveröffentlicht, 

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 Beringer, 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. 


Kurpfälzische Kunst und Kultur im Achtzehnten 

Jahrhundert, Freiburg 1907. 


„Kurpfälzische Kunst und Künstler im 18. 

Jahrhundert“, in: Baden, seine Kunst und 

Kultur, Bd. 2, 1907. 


„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, 


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 finanzielle 

Krisis des Mannheimer Theaters nach der 

Verlegung der Residenz nach München“, 

in: Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, XVIII. 

Jahrgang, 1917, Nr. 5/6, Sp. 57-64. 

VII. 

255

VII. 

256 


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, N o 5, 1922, S. 487-495. 

Du Colombier 1956 – Pierre Du Colombier, 

L’architecture française en Allemagne au 

XVIII e 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. 42. Ekkhart-Jahrbuch für das 

Badener Land, 1972, S. 36-60. 

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. 

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 1966 – Peter Fuchs, 

„Wissenschaftspflege in der Pfalz unter 

Kurfürst Karl Theodor“, in: Pfälzer Heimat, 

Nr. 17, 1966, S. 19-26. 

Fuchs 1977 – Peter Fuchs, „Kurfürst Karl 

Theodor von Pfalzbayern (1724-1799)“, in: 

Pfälzer Lebensbilder. Nr. 3, 1977, S. 65-105. 

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, 


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 

Sommerresidenz Schwetzingen“, in: Kurfürst 

Carl Theodor zu Pfalz, der Erbauer von Schloss 

Benrath, Düsseldorf 1979, S. 20-25. 

Gamer 1986 – Jörg Gamer, „Allee und Boskett 

als Gartenelemente“, in: Denkmalpflege 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 


Glockner 1993 – Gerhard Glockner, 

Rokokotheater Schwetzingen, Geschichte 

und Beschreibung des Theaters der ehemals 

Kurfürstlichen Sommerresidenz Schwetzingen, 


VII. 

257

VII. 

258 


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 


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. ing. 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. 

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: Heidelberg 1925. 


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. 

VII. 

259

VII. 

260 


Homering 1991 – Liselotte Homering, „Als 

die Künste ‚gleich wohlthaetigen Feen um die 

Wette stritten...’ Theater, Musik, Literatur- und 

Sprachpflege 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 4 1988. 

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 Pflege der 

Naturwissenschaften in Mannheim zur Zeit 

Karl Theodors, Geschichte der Kurpfälzischen 

Akademie der Wissenschaften in Mannheim 1., 


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. 

Kobell 1950 – Ferdinand Kobell, Franz Kobell 

und Wilhelm Kobell. Gemälde, Aquarelle und 

Handzeichnungen (Mannheim, Städtische 

Museen, Schlossmuseum, 29. 4.-4. 6. 1950), 


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 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-Theodor-Zeit 1742-1799, Ein 

Literaturverzeichnis, Heidelberg 1979. 

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. 

VII. 

261

VII. 

262 


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, 


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, Sp. 195-200. 

Maier-Solgk/Greuter 1997 – Frank Maier- 

Solgk/Andreas Greuter, Landschaftsgärten in 

Deutschland, Stuttgart 1997. 

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, 


Möhrle 1938 – Hans Möhrle, Das Schwetzinger 

Schloss-Theater, Mannheim 1938. 

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, Stuttgart 1993. 

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. 

Oestergaard 2006 - Jessen Oestergaard, 

Bildband Schwetzingen: Der Schlossgarten, 


Opel 1981 – Rolf Dieter Opel, Wolfgang 

Amadeus Mozart in Schwetzingen und 

Mannheim, Heidelberg 1981; 3 1995, 4 2006. 

Parkpflegewerk 1970 – Parkpflegewerk für den 

Schwetzinger Schlossgarten, Christian Bauer/ 

Walter Schwenecke, Oberfinanzdirektion 

Karlsruhe, unveröffentlicht, Karlsruhe 1970. 


Parkpflegewerk Fortschreibung 2005 – 

Parkpflegewerk 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), 

unveröffentlicht, Bruchsal 2005. 

Pechacek 2002 – Petra Pechacek, „Mit 

Spaten, Korb und Gießkanne ... – Historische 

Arbeitsgeräte zur Pflege 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. 

Pflicht 1976 – Stephan Pflicht, 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, o. O. 1987. 

Richter/Wagner 1999 – Susan Charlotte 

Richter/Ralf Richard Wagner, „Geburt und 

Taufe Karl Theodors. Eine Betrachtung zum 

275. Geburtstag des Kurfürsten 1999“, in: 

Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter, N. F. Bd. 6, 

1999, S. 297-304. 

VII. 

263

VII. 

264 


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. 

Rittershaus 2008 – Monika Rittershaus: 

Schwetzinger Festspiele 1996-2008, 


Roemer 1975 – Ernst Roemer, 1200 Jahre 

Schwetzingen. Schwetzingen, 2 1975. 

Rokokotheater 1974 – Das Rokokotheater in 

Schwetzingen, hg. von der Oberfinanzdirektion 

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 


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: Volks-leben 9, 

Tübingen 1965. 

Schröck-Schmidt/Birn 2008 – Wolfgang 

Schröck-Schmidt/Marco Birn, Schwetzingen: 

Historischer und Kunsthistorischer Führer 

durch die Stadt, Hockenheim 2008. 

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. Auflage, 

ergänzt u. berichtigt von Carl Schwab, 

Schwetzingen o. J.

Schwab 1840 – Franz Schwab, Beschreibung 

der Gartenanlagen zu Schwetzingen, 


Schwarz 1872 – Otto Schwarz, Der Bezirk 

Schwetzingen und die Kriegsjahre 1870/71, 


Schwarz 1880 – Otto Schwarz, Practischplanmäßiger 

Wegweiser zu allen 

Sehenswürdigkeiten im Schlossgarten 

zu Schwetzingen, Nebst einer sachlichgeschichtlichen 

Beschreibung und der 

Biografie der Künstler, Heidelberg 1880. 

Schwarz 1887 – Otto Schwarz, Practischplanmäßiger 

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 Parkpflegewerk 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. 


Sonder-Journal Schwetzingen 2009 – Sonder- 

Journal Schwetzingen: Schloss, Schlossgarten, 

Stadt (Hrsg.: Dr. Helmuth Bischoff/ 

Staatsanzeiger-Verlag/Staatliche Schlösser 

und Gärten Baden-Württemberg/Stadt 

Schwetzingen), Stuttgart 2009. 

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 


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. 

VII. 

265

VII. 

266 


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, München 2004. 

Strobel 1977 – Engelbert Strobel, „Johann 

Michael Zeyher. Schwetzinger Gartendirektor 

und Freund Hebels“, in: Badische Heimat, 


Süden im Norden 1999 – Der Süden im 

Norden: Orangerien – ein fürstliches Vergnügen 

(Schwetzingen, Schloss, 1999), Staatliche 

Schlösser und Gärten Baden-Württemberg 

(Hg.), Regensburg 1999. 

Symbolism 2006 – Symbolism in 18th Century 

Gardens. The Influence of Intellectual and 

Esoteric Currents, such as Freemasonry (Hrsg.: 

Jan A.M. Snoek/Monika Scholl/Andrea A. 

Kroon), Den Haag 2006. 

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 

Oberfinanz-direktion Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe 

1974. 

Troll/Förderer/Schmitt 2008 – Hartmut Troll/ 

Andreas Förderer/Uta Schmitt, Schlossgarten 

Schwetzingen, München 2008. 

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. 


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 2009 – Ralf Richard Wagner, In 

seinem Paradiese Schwetzingen … Das Badhaus 

des Kurfürsten Carl Theodor von der Pfalz, 

Ubstadt-Weiher 2009. 

Wagner 2004 – Ralf Richard Wagner, „Das 

Goldene Zeitalter der Kurpfalz“, in: Badische 


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), Oberfinanzdirektion 

Karlsruhe (Hg.), Stuttgart 1996. 

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, 


Wertz 1982 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, 

„Parterre-Bepflanzungen mit Frühjahrs- und 

Sommerblumen“, in: 2. Ludwigsburger 

Fachseminar Pflanzenverwendung in 

historischen Anlagen, Referatesammlung, 

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gartenkunst und 

Landschaftskultur – Landesgruppe Baden- 

Württemberg, Ludwigsburg 1982. 


„Wiederherstellung und Unterhaltung 

von Parterreanlagen, dargestellt am 

Beispiel des Schwetzinger Parterres“, in: 

Gartendenkmalpflege, Stuttgart 1985. 


Wertz 1989 – Hubert Wolfgang 

Wertz, „Pflanzenverwendung bei der 

Wiederherstellung der Schwetzinger 

Parterreanlagen“, in: Johannesberger Edition 3, 

Historische Pflanzenverwendung, Fulda 1989. 


„Erfahrungen mit Gehölzen bei der Erhaltung 

und Instandsetzung der Anlagen Favorite bei 

Rastatt und Schwetzingen“, in: 3. Weihenstephaner 

Gartendenkmalpflege-Seminar, 

Referatesammlung, Weihenstephan 1992. 

Wertz 1993 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, „Il 

‘Parkpflegewerk’ 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. 


„Erneuerung und Pflege von Alleen 

und Hecken – aktuelle Beispiele“, in: 7. 

Weihenstephaner Gartendenkmalpflege- 

Seminar, Referatesammlung, Weihenstephan 

1996. 


„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. 


„Ogród Pałacowy w Schwetzingen – Po 

250 Latach Wciąż Młody”, in: Studia i 

Materiały – Ogród Branickich w Białymstoku. 

Badana-Projekty-Realizacja 1999/2000. 

OŚRODEK OCHRONY ZABYTKOWEGO 

KRAJOBRAZU, Warszawa 2000. 

VII. 

267

VII. 

268 


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. 


„Der Schwetzinger Schlossgarten – Zur 

Wiederinstandsetzung der Gewässer“, in: 

15. Weihenstephaner Gartendenkmalpflege- 

Seminar, Referatesammlung, Weihenstephan 

2004. 

Wertz 2005 – Hubert Wolfgang Wertz, „Vom 

Arionbrunnen zu den Wasser speienden 

Vögeln – Wasserkunst im Schlossgarten 

von Schwetzingen“, in: 16. Weihenstephaner 

Gartendenkmalpflege-Seminar, 

Referatesammlung, Weihenstephan 2005. 

Wiese/Wagner/Schröck-Schmidt 2009 – 

Wolfgang Wiese, Ralf Richard Wagner, 

Wolfgang Schröck-Schmidt, Schloss 

Schwetzingen, München 2009. 

Wiese 1995 – Wolfgang Wiese, „Schloss 

Schwetzingen. Ein wiederhergestelltes 

Kulturdenkmal“, in: Das Schloss und seine 

Ausstattung als denkmalpflegerische 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 

Denkmalpflege, Dresden 2001. 

Wimmer 1988/89 – Clemens Alexander 

Wimmer, Formschnitt der Bäume und Hecken 

im Schwetzinger Barockgarten, Gutachten für 

die Oberfinanzdirektion 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, Schwetzingen 1968. 

Wörn 1993 – Karl Wörn, „Auf dem Weg zur 

Großen Kreisstadt. Aus Geschichte und Kultur 

Schwetzingens“, in: Badische Heimat, 


Wörn 2000 – Karl Wörn, Schwetzingen zur 

Jahrtausendwende. Geschichte – Kultur – 

Wirtschaft, Schwetzingen 5 2000. 

Zenker 1936 – Oswald Zenker, Schwetzingen, 

Schwetzingen 2 1936. 

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/G. Roemer, Beschreibung der 

Gartenanlagen zu Schwetzingen. Mit 9 

Kupfern u. einem Plane des Gartens. Neue 

verbesserte Auflage der Ausgabe von 1809, 

Mannheim 1815. Reprint Freiburg 1983. 

Zeyher 1819 – Johann Michael Zeyher, 

Verzeichnis der Gewæchse in dem 

Grossherzoglichen Garten zu Schwetzingen, 


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, Mannheim 1825. 

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 1975 – Hans Leopold Zollner, „Nicolas 

de Pigage. Sein Leben und Werk“, in: Badische 

Heimat, 56. Jahrgang, 1976, S. 115-127. 

Zollner 1979 – Hans Leopold Zollner, „’Dann 

flöge ich nach Schwetzingen’ – Gäste der 

kurpfälzischen Sommerresidenz im 18. 

Jahrhundert“, in: Badische Heimat, 59. 



VII. 

269

VII. 

270 

e) Overall Map 

(Verdyck & Gugenhan, 2009). 

Captions (italics denote a 

selection of sculptures and 

fountains): 

A THE TOWN 

1 Central Axis ‘Basis 

Palatina’ (Carl-Theodor- 

Straße) 

2 Stables 

3 Palace square 

4 Former barracks of the 

mounted guard 

5 Rabaliatti House 

6 Palais Hirsch 

7 St. Pankratius 

8 Ysenburg Palais 

B THE PALACE AND 

OUTBUILDINGS 

9 Court of honour 

10 Guardhouses 

11 Palace (central block) 

12 Kitchens 

13 Upper Waterworks and 

ice cellar 

14 South quarter-circle 

pavilion 

15 Seahorse garden 

16 Service yard and 

Greenhouses 

17 North quarter-circle 

pavilion 

18 Palace restaurant 

19 Palace theatre 

20 Ambassadors’ House 

21 Coachman’s house 

22 Court gardener’s house 

23 New Orangery 

24 Building materials 

storehouse 

25 Disabled soldiers’ barracks 

26 Orangery 

26 Dreibrückentor 

27 Lower Waterworks 

C CIRCULAR PARTERRE 

28 Ages of the World urns 

29 Parterres à l’angloise 

30 Arion fountain 

31 Parterres de broderie 

32 Obelisks 

33 Allées en arcades 

34 Arbour walks (berceaux 

en treillage) 

35 Stag fountain 

D ANGLOISES, BOSQUETS 

AND ORANGERY GARDEN 

36 Allées en terrasse 

37 Lime walks (galeries de 

verdure) 

38 Four elements 

39 Former mirror basin 

40 Avenue of balls 

41 Southern angloise 

42 Temple of Minerva 

43 Avenue of urns 

44 Lycian Apollo 

45 Northern angloise 

46 Galatea basin 

47 Birdbath 

48 Pan 

49 Southern bosquet 

50 Boulingrin 

51 Monument in honour of 

gardening 

52 Monument 

commemorating 

archaeological finds 

53 Northern bosquet 

54 Former Quincunx 

55 Orangery square 

56 Green arcades 

57 Four seasons 

E BATHHOUSE GARDEN 

58 Natural theatre 

59 Sphinxes 

60 Cascade 

61 Temple of Apollo 

62 Apollo canal 

63 View from the temple of 

Apollo 

64 Wild boar fountain 

65 Water bell 

66 Porcelain cabinet 

67 Bathhouse kitchen 

68 Bathhouse 

69 Water-spouting birds 

70 Pheasant yard 

71 Pavilion and grotto 

72 Diorama 

73 Arboretum 

F ARBORIUM 

THEODORICUM/ 

MEADOW VALE 

74 Meadow vale 

75 Roman water tower 

76 Obelisk 

77 Temple of Botany 

78 Basin, “Schwarzes Meerle” 

(“Little Black Sea”) 

G GREAT POND 

79 Great Pond 

80 Rhine and Danube 

81 Chinese bridge 

82 Tree nursery 

83 Belt Walk 

84 View to the village Brühl 

85 Central Axis ‘Basis 

Palatina’ 

86 View to the 

„Feldherrenwiese“ 

H TEMPLE OF MERCURY 

AND MOSQUE 

87 Temple of Mercury 

88 View from the Temple of 

Mercury 

89 Mosque pond 

90 Mosque with Turkish 

Garden 

91 Orchard 

92 Zähringen canal

92 

88 

87 

89 

90 

91 

16 

8 

86 

52 

15 

14 

50 

51 

61 

60 

64 68 

67 

55 23 

32 31 31 32 33 

57 56 57 

30 

32 31 31 32 33 

22 24 

29 

28 

11 

12 9 13 

4 

80 

2 

85 

79 

40 

49 

53 

58 

59 

65 66 

38 38 

57 56 57 

44 43 37 39 37 

48 

47 

36 

42 

41 38 35 38 

36 

45 

46 

33 

33 

34 

10 

3 

1 

80 

29 29 

29 

6 

5 

54 

34 

17 20 

7 

84 

18 

19 

81 

63 

62 

21 

83 

25 

69 

70 

73 

26 

82 

71 72 

74 

78 

77 

N 

76 

75 

27 

271

Schwetzingen - Schlösser-Magazin

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?