ALPHONSE MUCHA AND AMERICA’S SECOND CITY:
THE COSMOPOLITAN ART NOUVEAU AND CZECHOSLOVAK
SELF-DETERMINATION
Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in Modern and Contemporary Art History
By
Lauren Woolf
Department of Art History, Theory, and Criticism
The School of the Art Institute of Chicago
Spring 2024
Thesis Committee:
Primary Advisor and First Reader:
Annie Bourneuf, Ph.D, Professor
Department of Art History, Theory, and Criticism, SAIC
Second Reader:
Bess Williamson, Ph.D, Professor and Program Director of MA in Modern & Contemporary Art
History
Department of Art History, Theory, and Criticism, SAIC
Woolf 1
Table of Contents
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………....2
Acknowledgments…………………………………………………………………………………3
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..4
Chapter 1: The Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion……………………………………………….11
Chapter 2: Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia………………………………………27
Chapter 3: The Slav Epic………………………………………………………………………...46
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………….62
Figures……………………………………………………………………………………………68
Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………..93
Woolf 2
Abstract
Bolstered by an international reputation for commercial design characterized by flowing
lines and lush color palettes, the Moravian Art Nouveau artist, Alphonse Mucha (1860-1939),
first arrived to Chicago in 1906. There, he found connection with the large Czech immigrant
community, employment with the Art Institute of Chicago, and established ties to the Slavophilic
patron, Charles Crane. Mucha mingled with the elite, created graphics for Czech entrepreneurs,
taught, and took commissions. Simultaneously, he pushed for the cause at the center of his work:
Czechoslovak independence from Austro-Hungarian rule.
As a whole, this thesis considers how the city of Chicago affects Alphonse Mucha’s
nationalist imagery in an age of self-determination. Three case studies between 1892 and 1931
illustrate Mucha’s evolving vision of Czechoslovak and broader Slavic representation: interior
decoration of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion at the Paris 1900 Exposition Universelle,
Portrait Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia (1908), and the Slav Epic (1910-1926). Supported
by cosmopolitan and transnational frameworks, visual analysis, and historical context, this
research explores how interpersonal networks superseded formal borders to offer Mucha key
opportunities in cultivating support for the eventual First Republic of Czechoslovakia
(1918-1938).
Woolf 3
Acknowledgements
To begin, I would like to thank my advisor, Annie Bourneuf, for all her support in the
process of writing this thesis. I can not overstate how much I appreciate your expertise, reading
recommendations, and feedback as I navigated the complexities of these stories. Thank you for
working with me in moments of trepidation and excitement. To my second reader, Bess
Williamson, your knowledge of design history, and much more, has been invaluable in shaping
the scope of this thesis. To my third reader, Magdalena Moskalewicz, I am so grateful for your
commentary in the project’s early stages.
I would also like to thank those who made my research possible. I am deeply grateful to
Dr. Alice Němcová at the National Gallery, Prague, for taking the time to show me Portrait of
Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia. To Izzy Westcott, JT de la Torre, Jill Bugajski, and Leslie
Wilson at the Art Institute of Chicago’s Research Center, thank you for your support during the
Residential Research Fellowship. Thank you to Tanya Chebotarev at Columbia University’s
Bakhmeteff Archive for sending scans from the Crane Papers, as well as to Tom Crane for
granting permission to use them. Further gratitude goes to the Newberry Library, Palette and
Chisel Club, Prague’s Museum of Decorative Arts, the town hall of Hrušovany nad Jevišovkou,
and all others that made source access a reality.
To my family and friends that have been with me through all three years of this program:
my appreciation knows no bounds. Thank you to my roommate for living with a graduate student
during all the highs and lows, as well as friends who understood my ever changing schedule. To
my grandparents: your memories are a blessing to have. Most of all, to my mom and dad: your
care is core to who I am and this thesis is a testament to that.
Woolf 4
Introduction
On the grounds of Prague’s Vyšehrad Castle, next to the neo-gothic Basilica of St. Peter
and St. Paul, lies a fenced-in burial ground called Vyšehrad Cemetery (See fig. 1). Established in
1869, the graveyard is densely packed with highly decorated headstones, statuary, a painted
arcade, and plentiful greenery. Acting as a collective site of remembrance for national figures,
the names of vaunted Czech heroes and scholars appear throughout the sprawling memorials,
including the likes of composer Antonín Dvořák (1841-1904) and poet Jan Neruda (1834-1891).1
Approximately 4,500 miles away from Vyšehrad Cemetery, Chicago’s Bohemian National
Cemetery (See fig. 2), established in 1877, serves a similar role for the city’s Czech community,
offering a culturally singular space for burial and specific customs in the American Midwest.2
Bohemian National certainly features less notable names than Vyšehrad, but the two sites are
connected through elements of Czech pride and ethnic recognition, further highlighted by the
role of a singular figure.
Within Vyšehrad Cemetery is the Slavín Tomb (See fig. 3), a pantheon-like burial space
designated for the best of the Czechs, with fifty-five people interred in total. Completed in 1893
and designed by Antonín Wiehl, the monument features Josef Mauder’s grandiose angel statue
guarding an oversized sarcophagus. Behind it, a wall of plaques features further names, one of
them being Alfons Mucha (1860-1939) (See figs. 4 and 5).3 Mucha is the link between Prague,
broader Czechia, and the United States, born in a pivotal age of occupation and passing away
after the fall of the First Republic of Czechoslovakia. In his almost 79 years of life, Mucha rose
to fame as a prominent artist of the Art Nouveau movement, traveling extensively throughout
1
“The Vyšehrad Cemetery,” Vyšehrad National Cultural Monument, Vyšehradská Kapitula, accessed April 11, 2024,
https://www.praha-vysehrad.cz/en/stranky/145/buildings-and-places/the-vysehrad-cemetery.
2
“About Bohemian National Cemetery,” Bohemian National Cemetery, Bohemian National Cemetery, accessed
April 11, 2024, https://www.bnca1877.org/about.
3
“Czech National Slavín Tomb,” Slavín, Slavín, accessed April 11, 2024, https://slavin.cz/slavin/.
Woolf 5
Europe and the United States, whilst simultaneously monitoring the evolving state of his
homeland.
Originating out of the central Czech region of Moravia, from a small town called
Ivančice, Mucha was deeply connected to his cultural identity, observing the influence of
Austrian administration and concurrent events. Even prior to the Habsburg’s final fall, ethnically
driven unrest had been rampant for decades prior, crystallizing in cases like the unsuccessful
Prague Uprising of 1848.4 Discontent with the longtime overseer pushed the cause of
self-determination on both political and social fronts, including aesthetics. The fully realized
Republic of Czechoslovakia became independent on October 28, 1918, following the collapse of
imperial rule and was composed of three key regions: Bohemia to the West, Moravia-Silesia in
the center, and Slovakia to the East (See fig. 6). The new republic was primarily made up of the
Czech and Slovak ethnic groups, who spoke different languages, but benefited from working
together towards prosperity and political stability. Collectively, they ushered in a cultural Golden
Age. 5
Taking inspiration from Wilson’s League of Nations and one part of the 14 Points plan,
Czechoslovakia formed out of the idea that those under Austro-Hungarian rule should be allowed
an opportunity for self-determination.6 However, the absolute logic of this declaration proved
flawed within the heterogenous, German-influenced cultural landscape.7 Driven by the desire for
recognition of individual, distinct ethnicities, nationalism as related to collective identity altered.
In Benedict Anderson’s Imagined Communities, the political scientist lays out the start of this
4
Stanley Z. Pech, “Czech Political Parties in 1848,” Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne Des Slavistes
15, no. 4 (1973): 467-470, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40866630.
5
Bohemia, Moravia, and part of Silesia had previously been under Austrian control, with the remaining parts under
Hungarian management.
6
President Wilson's Message to Congress, January 8, 1918; Records of the United States Senate; Record Group 46;
Records of the United States Senate; National Archives.
7
Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso,
1983), 45.
Woolf 6
phenomenon beginning in the later 18th century, fueled by the interaction between various
forces, not singular influences.8 Anderson posits, “...Nationalism has to be understood by
aligning it, not with self-consciously held political ideologies, but with the large cultural systems
that preceded it, out of which- as well as against which- it came into being.”9 Caroline Jones, in
The Global Work of Art, frames aesthetics within Anderson’s ideas: “Art objects are not fixed
bearers of meanings that can be shipped around and translated so that locals “get” some universal
message… The moment a work is inserted into a world’s fair or international biennial it becomes
a matter of understanding how it is thereby produced as always already translated in order to
speak of difference itself.”10 Thus, in appreciating the nationalist concept as influential on many
levels beyond the literal formation of nation-states, Mucha’s career and persistent patriotism is
best understood by way of transnationalism11 and cosmopolitanism12, which privilege
interpersonal networks, as opposed to the ruling systems themselves.
Within these theoretical lenses, literature about Alphonse Mucha can be generally
separated into the biographies penned by his son, Mucha Foundation resources, texts about the
Art Nouveau, and museum exhibition catalogs. The numerous books written and co-authored by
Jiří Mucha are considered a sort of catalyst in the resurgence of Mucha’s reputation, with the first
one, titled Alphonse Mucha, published in 1965 in Czech and in 1967 in English. The tone of
these books is simultaneously sentimental, as Jiří refers to the artist as ‘father,’ and strictly
chronological. Resources from the Mucha Foundation take on a similar approach, championing
Mucha as a protagonist. Meanwhile, texts about the Art Nouveau center his distinct style above
8
Anderson, Imagined Communities, 4.
Anderson, Imagined Communities, 4.
10
Caroline A. Jones, The Global Work of Art: World’s Fairs, Biennials, and the Aesthetics of Experience (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 2017), 87.
11
Patricia Clavin, “Defining Transnationalism,” Contemporary European History 14, no. 4 (2005): 422,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/20081278.
12
Gerard Delanty, “The Cosmopolitan Imagination,” Revista CIDOB d’Afers Internacionals, no. 82/83 (2008):
217–30, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40586351.
9
Woolf 7
biography, focusing on his contributions to poster culture. Where the biographies accept the
interpersonal nature of Mucha’s career, weaving in transnational and cosmopolitan commentary,
generalist art histories favor a formalist lens. Exhibition catalogs combine aspects of both
formats.
Beyond art historical texts, Mucha’s legacy aligns with the beliefs of Pan-Slavism, a
more generalist cultural movement that championed the beauty and power of the Slavic peoples
as a united front. Texts about Pan-Slavism from the years around World War I, World War II, the
interwar period, and the early Cold War generally exist in political science, economics, and
history spaces. For example, in 1961, Hans Kohn argued that Pan-Slavism existed more as an
external category to non-Slavic writers, shaping Western perception of a movement sympathetic
to Eastern and Central Europe.13 Meanwhile, in 2004, Norman M. Naimark argued that
Pan-Slavism had a habit of crumbling when trying to achieve tangible effect, especially in the
face of stronger national forces, like the Russians.14 Agreement about Pan-Slavism’s ongoing
legacy is not always consistent, but it offers a space in which to frame Mucha’s cultural, patriotic
endeavors. In the almost 79 years of his lifetime, his practice and perspective honed to an
awareness of oppression’s effects and the impact of global connection. The corresponding
literature reflects that.
As an artist, Mucha’s success from a relatively young age fostered an expansive aesthetic
legacy. This portfolio spans a wide geography across Europe and the United States, shifting in
style to accommodate the designated public or private audience. The strategic handling of
symbolism allowed Mucha to weave in patriotic support for the Czech cause, as it became a
13
Hans Kohn, “The Impact of Pan-Slavism on Central Europe,” The Review of Politics 23, no. 3 (1961): 326,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1405438.
14
Norman M. Naimark, “Stalin and Europe in the Postwar Period, 1945–53: Issues and Problems.” Journal of
Modern European History / Zeitschrift Für Moderne Europäische Geschichte / Revue d’histoire Européenne
Contemporaine 2, no. 1 (2004): 32, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26265788.
Woolf 8
persistent core to his varied pursuits in posters, design, portraiture, and murals. Working within
the narrative of an approximately six decade career, this research emphasizes one specific urban
center: Chicago. Though popular literature on the Moravian artist often falls back to his time in
Paris, exiting the European artistic hub offers new opportunities to consider how the United
States played a role in the evolution of a post-imperial Eastern and Central Europe.
Thus, this project argues that the Midwestern city of Chicago is essential to
understanding Alphonse Mucha’s artistic growth and his contributions to Czechoslovak aesthetic
identity via its large immigrant community, plentiful professional opportunities, available
patronage, and lingering symbolic presence throughout Slavic-focused imagery. After all, by
1920, Chicago had a Czech population numbering around 200,000, with communities
particularly focused in Pilsen and the Northwest side.15 Acting through a microhistorical lens,
three case studies trace the timeline of the Midwestern city’s direct or indirect influences on the
artist’s patriotic imagination, as he remained anchored in advocacy for Slavic identities.
The first case study explores Mucha’s participation in Paris’s 1900 Exposition
Universelle through his contributions to the interior decoration of the Bosnia and Herzegovina
Pavilion. Navigating his relationship with his first major patron, Count Khuen-Belasi, the chapter
follows Mucha’s early movements from Moravia to Munich to Paris in order to understand his
transition to a larger stage outside of his homeland. Furthermore, it identifies his ongoing
connections to fellow Czech and Slavic artists in foreign settings, underscoring a reliance on
cultural comfort from the beginning. Following his rise to stardom in 1894, the Bosnia and
Herzegovina Pavilion demonstrates the complicated relationship between the Czech patriot and
the Austro-Hungarian Empire, as he sought to promote his name, whilst depicting another group
15
“Chicago’s Pilsen Neighborhood,” The Czech and Slovak Genealogy Society of Illinois, Czech and Slovak
Genealogy Society of Illinois, accessed April 12, 2024, https://csagsi.org/.
Woolf 9
of oppressed Slavic people. On an aesthetic level, the Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion prefaces
artistic language that would become consistent in his practice: the allegorical representation of
collective identities in the form feminine deity figures. Paris remains an important starting point,
and a transnational one at that, but focusing on a lesser known example keeps the spotlight on
Mucha’s efforts as an outward looking, contemporarily situated painter.
Moving forward to 1904, the second case study enters American soil, analyzing Mucha’s
social relationship to the United States and foreign high society, especially when he arrived to
Chicago in 1906. In particular, it examines Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia
(1908), an allegorical portrait of an American, Chicago-born, heiress who happened to be the
daughter of the artist’s prominent patron, Charles R. Crane. Utilizing Josephine’s visage as an
evolving image, the chapter puts the portrait into conversation with Mucha’s evolving methods
of representation, calling back to the modes used in the Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion’s
interior. Beyond the social and economic implications of the painting, its presence in newly
independent Czechoslovak visual vocabularies, such as currency and public monuments, is
essential in illustrating the transferable nature of feminized symbolism, regardless of original
identity, as Czechoslovak self-determination moved forward.
The last case study operates between Czech regions and the United States, addressing the
creation of Mucha’s nationalist masterwork, the monumental Slav Epic cycle, between 1910 and
1926. Composed of twenty large murals funded by Charles Crane, and later donated to the city
Prague, the scenes depict moments of Czech and, more general, Slavic histories and
mythologies, unhindered by authoritative censorship. Funded by a patron from Chicago, five
pieces of the Slav Epic came to the city for display at the Art Institute, heralding praise rooted in
bourgeois art circles and an extensive Czech audience. The Slav Epic represents what Mucha
Woolf 10
originally sought to do at the Exposition Universelle: offer representation to his people to
promote cultural pride and belonging. More essentially, the cycle could not have been completed
without Chicago’s resources.
As a whole, this thesis identifies specific periods in Alphonse Mucha’s career to create a
more holistic sense of his personal and artistic motivations as linked. Accepting the fluidity of
borders and impermanent nature of ruling forces, these cases embrace the power of modern
networking, utilizing one geographic point as an anchor to the artist’s movement.
Woolf 11
Chapter 1: The Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion
In viewing Alphonse Mucha’s career as a cosmopolitan success story, the most obvious
starting point is Paris, but to begin outside of Czech regions overlooks early works and
benefactors that shaped the way Mucha navigated patronage relationships. The definitive
biographies were penned by his own son, Jiří (1915-1991), who refers to the artist as ‘father’
throughout.16 This distinctly personal lens suggests potential bias, but these books act as
reconstruction of a legacy almost fifty years after the artist’s death in 1939. Importantly, Jiří
offers thorough insight into these early years of Mucha’s career, especially those beyond Paris, in
Moravia, an oft overlooked era of development.
As a project framed via cosmopolitanism and transnationalism, it is arguably important to
identify Mucha’s first major travels outside, what would become, Czechoslovakia. After
rejection by the Prague Academy of Art, Mucha remained in Ivančice through his late teen years
into young adulthood. However, in autumn of 1881 at the age of twenty-one, he departed for
Vienna, the center of the Habsburg Empire, having been hired for a painter position in the theater
company of Kautsky-Brioschi-Burghardt. The role had him working on large-scale scenery and
curtains, a methodology that would inform many of his later installations and masterpieces.
Mucha arrived in Vienna during an age of splendor and wealth, the Ringstrasse acting as a
landscape of culture, art, and Viennese pride under the rule of Franz Josef I.17 However,
perceived social stability did not prevent the unpredictable, as the Ringtheater, a customer of
Kautsky-Brioschi-Burghardt, burned down in December of 1881, causing Mucha to lose his
position.18 The tragedy prompted a return to his homeland.
16
Jiří Mucha, Alphonse Maria Mucha (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1989), 27.
Mucha, Alphonse Maria Mucha, 23.
18
Mucha, Alphonse Maria Mucha, 27.
17
Woolf 12
Arriving in the town of Mikulov, Moravia (See figs. 7 and 8), not far from Ivančice,
Mucha took on a slew of local commissions, finding a market for his craft. These early
commissions focused on portraiture and decorative works, allowing Mucha to ease into the
community. With a growing reputation, Mucha was contacted by the estate manager of Count
Khuen-Belasi, who owned land in the nearby village of Hrušovany and made his fortune in sugar
refineries. The Count became Mucha’s first major benefactor, hiring him to take on or assist with
several major decorative projects in the area of Hrušovany.19 Some of these early works survive,
with one of them being the frescoes of Hrušovany nad Jevišovkou’s town hall. Completed in
1882, the extensively decorated interior has been under restoration since 2017, gradually
uncovering some of the Czech artist’s earliest adult work (See figs. 9 and 10).20 Though the
motifs present throughout the repurposed ballrooms and social spaces are far from Art Nouveau
in the formal sense, rather referencing common theatrical decoration and Baroque adjacent
stylization, they do foreshadow Mucha’s mature understanding of color palettes, adapted scale,
and composition. Furthermore, they anchor the artist’s place in Moravian society from the start
of his professional success. Mucha remained in Mikulov until 1883.
Following the completion of murals in more public spaces, Count Khuen-Belasi took the
young artist further under his wing when he officially moved from Mikulov to live in
Khuen-Belasi’s new castle in the forests of Hrušovany. Mucha, now living in luxury, proceeded
to decorate the interior of Emmahof with murals, working in an entirely private dwelling for the
first time. Following his stay in Emmahof, the Count sent Mucha to live with his brother, Egon,
in the family’s medieval castle residence in Gandegg, Tyrol.21 Though these years in the 1880s
19
Mucha, Alphonse Maria Mucha, 26-27.
“A New Alphonse Mucha Trail Planned Across South Moravia,” Mucha Foundation, accessed February 25, 2024,
http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/about/news/item/a-new-alphonse-mucha-trail-planned-across-south-moravia.
21
Mucha, Alphonse Maria Mucha, 27.
20
Woolf 13
may seem negligible in the larger scope of Mucha’s career, they inform a core tenet of the artist’s
lifelong practice: an appreciation for historical aesthetics and dedication to his homeland.
Enabled by a noble class enamored with the idea of being patron to developing talents, Mucha’s
cosmopolitan networking took root in Moravia before anywhere else.
In 1885, at the prompting of Egon Khuen-Belasi, Mucha relocated to Munich, receiving
his formal education at the Academy of the Arts, working with a particular emphasis on
figurative work. Personally, Mucha developed a close camaraderie with other Czech and Slavic
artists in Munich, like Karel Vitězslav Mašek, Ludek Marold, and Boris Pasternak, creating their
own student club, Škréta spolek (See figs. 11 and 12).22 Again, Mucha looked back to his origins
in shaping his future. After the disaster of his Viennese venture in 1881, Mucha’s sojourn in
Munich became just one of multiple periods spent far away from Moravia and Bohemia, a
stepping stone in the progression of transnational connections. After completing his schooling in
Munich, Mucha briefly returned to Hrušovany, residing once more at Emmahof to paint murals.
However, his stay was comparatively brief, as his benefactor prompted him to choose his next
destination for growth.23
In the fall of 1887, once again with the support of Count Khuen-Belasi, Mucha arrived in
Paris. There, he enrolled in the respected Académie Julian, where he encountered the divided
local artistic landscape- split between the Salon and the Impressionists- and learned French.
Once again, he sought comfort in his Czech brethren. As Jiří Mucha writes:
Whether because they are a small nation or because they have an innate instinct for
self-preservation, Czechs living abroad cling to each other like limpets. This helps them
to carry on, but finally isolates them until they become like so many mummies. In father,
who had by now spent ten years abroad, or at least among Germans, this solidarity with
the Czech element developed almost into a vice.24
22
Mucha, 29-33.
Mucha, 33.
24
Mucha, 36.
23
Woolf 14
This yearning for Czech understanding never faded, returning in force when the artist came to
the United States. In a sense, Mucha’s mode of transnationalism was partially driven by a desire
for comfort.
In addition to the Académie Julian, Mucha sought instruction at the Académie Colarossi
in 1888, but his continuing education stopped when the Count abruptly ended his patronage in
1889. The letter informing Mucha read, “‘I take the liberty of informing your honour’...’that His
Grace the Count deems it fitting that he should discontinue his financial assistance to your
honour.’”25 The reason behind the decision remains unresolved, with theories speculating that the
Count wanted the almost thirty year old Mucha to stand on his own feet.
Having lived with relative ease, the lack of a patron initially left Mucha penniless,
resulting in a period of poverty and freelance work. This is not to say these years were
unproductive, rather driven by Mucha’s aspirations to attain financial stability via illustration.
Additionally, he developed a nuanced social circle in Paris’s art scene, maintaining friendships
with his Eastern European peers, as well as the likes of Paul Gaugin, Whistler, and other artists
from Scandinavia, Poland, Spain, and France (See fig. 13). Furthermore, he returned to the
Académie Colarossi as an instructor. His style had begun to gain traction in the modern
metropolis, attracting students who saw his excellent draftsmanship. 26 This talent for rendering
would remain core to the artist’s long term success, making teaching a central part of his career
well into old age. Often seen as a lull in the many decades of Mucha’s career, 1889-1894
represents a sort of settlement in Mucha’s style, international residency, and personal relations.
The real turn in Mucha’s career occurred around Christmas of 1894, a tale which has
been often mythologized. In short, a last minute request from the stage darling, Sarah Bernhardt,
25
26
Mucha, 43.
Jiří Mucha, Alphonse Mucha: Master of Art Nouveau (Hamlyn Publishing Group, 1966), 53-63.
Woolf 15
came through on December 26th, St. Stephen’s Day. The actress requested a publicity poster for
her production of the play, Gismonda. Mucha, at the time employed by the Lemercier printing
house to complete a separate project, was one of the few artists working during the holiday.
When the printing house’s manager, Maurice de Brunoff, came to him in a panic, Mucha agreed
to try his hand at the lithographic design. Mucha quickly rendered a proposal with unusually long
and narrow dimensions and a more subtle color palette. Bernhardt was the true star of the
composition, just as she was on stage. With the actress’s approval, the print was produced and
posted on the streets of Paris by January 1st, 1895, where the public praised it widely (See fig.
14).27
Mucha signed a six year, comprehensive contract with Bernhardt to design her
advertisem*nts, sets, and costumes. In just under a week, Mucha shot to stardom and, more
importantly, sustained success.28 Other commissions came flooding in and Mucha developed a
relationship with the printing house, Champenois, who offered him an exclusive agreement for a
very high monthly salary, with the expectation that the artist would meet the printer’s demands.
As his son writes, “The enslaving contract forced him to produce such an enormous amount of
work that his style won through by force of sheer quantity, if by nothing else.”29 Champenois
applied Mucha’s graphics to accessible mediums, like calendars and decorative panels, and
licensed his work to other firms in Europe and North America. The saturation of Mucha’s
aesthetic sensibilities was wide reaching, extending beyond defined borders to create unity via
distribution (See fig. 15). The artist had his first solo exhibition at the Salon des Cent in 1897.30
His style was considered distinctly contemporary based on its looser forms, unblended linework,
27
Mucha, Alphonse Mucha: Master of Art Nouveau, 67-76.
Mucha, Alphonse Mucha: Master of Art Nouveau, 67-76.
29
Mucha, Alphonse Mucha: Master of Art Nouveau, 79.
30
Mucha, Alphonse Mucha: Master of Art Nouveau, 81-82.
28
Woolf 16
accessibility, and reworking of layered cultural elements, diverging from Salon realism and
exclusivity.
This whirlwind between 1894 and 1900 culminated in Mucha’s recruitment to contribute
to Paris’s Exposition Universelle in 1900. Though known as a lithographer and illustrator, Mucha
considered himself a painter, specifically a history painter. Having received his education across
multiple schools in Munich and Paris,31 he had a finely tuned understanding of painting,
especially in regards to the human figure, that complimented more commercial design
sensibilities. Mucha’s reputation made him an ideal candidate to the Austro-Hungarian Empire,
which commissioned him to decorate the Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion.
However, his prowess and popularity were not the only factors that made him a fitting
choice. His Czech ethnicity is equally relevant in analyzing his contribution to the world’s fair. A
citizen of the Austro-Hungarian Empire by birth, Mucha had a unique cultural understanding of
the effects of forced hom*ogenization and false harmony. As a member of one oppressed group
under imperial administration, the artist had a great deal of concern for Czech representation, a
passion that he transferred to Slavic cultures more broadly. Thus, his participation in the
Exposition Universelle via the Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion is poignant as a moment that
would bring him recognition across borders, whilst drawing out his nationalistic concerns
regarding future independence. The mythos of Bosnia and Herzegovina echoed his own
background, making this large scale venture one with personal investment.
Mucha walked a balancing act as he sought to incorporate respectful imagery, while
abiding by Austro-Hungarian expectations. Mucha’s decoration of the Bosnia and Herzegovina
Pavilion at the Paris 1900 Exposition Universelle foreshadows his later work towards the Czech
31
“Alphonse Mucha Timeline,” Mucha Foundation, Mucha Foundation, accessed December 8, 2023,
http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/timeline.
Woolf 17
nationalist cause through its harmony with vernacular architecture, use of allegory, and localized
symbols. Bypassing geographic boundaries as the defining element of cultural exchange, Mucha
found commonality with the subjects of his imagery, a factor that shaped his emphasis on
glorified Slavic representation within the region and outside of it.
The 1900 Exposition Universelle was the fifth event of its kind to occur within Paris over
a span of approximately 45 years. Prior to 1900, the most recent fair had occurred in 1889, a
momentous occasion celebrating the French Revolution’s hundredth anniversary and the second
international exhibition to be administered under republican rule in France, prompting
monumental constructions, like the Eiffel Tower. Growth in scale continued through the planning
of the 1900 exposition, the process for which began in 1892. The 1900 event further coincided
with another international gathering: the 1900 Summer Olympics in Paris. Thus, organizers
anticipated an entirely new level of spectatorship. Running from April to November of that year,
the fair ended up yielding no financial benefit for the city, as a smaller audience than expected
came due to the cost of admission. However, the 1900 Exposition Universelle embraced the
theme of technological progress, while moving away from ideas of universal communities or
utopianism.32
By separating from idealist philosophies and welcoming a more varied audience, the
national representatives present at the 1900 Exposition Universelle did their utmost to tout the
value of their individual cultures and governmental models, including monarchism and
colonialism. The Austro-Hungarian Empire under Habsburg rule was no different. Encompassing
a vast array of cultural groups, including the aforementioned Czechs, the sprawling imperial
force presented three individual pavilions to represent the whole: Austria, Hungary, and Bosnia
32
Pauline Tholozany, “The Expositions Universelles in Nineteenth Century Paris,” Paris: Capital of the 19th
Century, Brown University Library Center for Digital Scholarship, accessed December 8, 2023.
https://library.brown.edu/cds/paris/worldfairs.html#de1900.
Woolf 18
and Herzegovina (See fig. 16). The first two choices, Austria and Hungary, make clear sense, as
these two regions of the empire administered the whole. Thus, they held substantial sway and
power. However, Bosnia and Herzegovina was a strategic decision.
Rebecca Houze, a professor of Art History at Northern Illinois University, specifically
delineates the distinction between each site. All three structures sat alongside each other on the
Rue des Nations. Furthest to the West was the Austrian pavilion, followed by Bosnia and
Herzegovina in the middle, and Hungary to the East. Based on recommended guidelines from the
fair’s commissioner-general, Alfred Picard, the completed designs drew upon the most
recognizable styles from each area.33 Thus, Austria, designed by the imperial state architect
Ludwig Baumann, embraced the Baroque-Revival style.34 Designed by Zoltán Bálint and Lajos
Jámb, the Hungary Pavilion, utilized a sense of eclecticism, incorporating Romanesque, Gothic,
and Renaissance elements.35 Each site was run completely independent of one another, with
separate Austrian and Hungarian ministries (E.g.- Austrian Ministry of Trade, Royal Hungarian
Ministry of Trade, etc.) at the head.
Bosnia and Herzegovina, in comparison, was not given the same self-advocacy of the two
strongest powers in the empire, instead being managed by centralized Austrian forces. “As
Austria struggled politically to contain its sprawling empire - which included not only Hungarian
regions, but also territories in Bohemia, Moravia, Galicia, Northern Italy, and the Balkan lands the empire wanted to project an image of unity, rather than difference.”36 Despite this messaging,
the separation of each pavilion’s development alluded to the ongoing fragmentation of the
33
Rebecca Houze, “National Internationalism: Reactions to Austrian and Hungarian Decorative Arts at the 1900
Paris Exposition Universelle,” Studies in the Decorative Arts 12, no. 1 (2004): 60-61,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40663098.
34
Houze, 60-61.
35
Houze, 62.
36
Houze, 57.
Woolf 19
Austro-Hungarian Empire, under which more than eleven nationalities expressed their
discontent.
The Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion was one such project imagined around that sense
of forced unity. Only twenty-two years before the 1900 Exposition Universelle, the territory had
been taken under Habsburg protection following the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78.37 The
occupation of the territory offered relatively little in the way of natural resources, rather
presenting a strategic advance into the Balkans for the Austro-Hungarian Empire. However, the
area presented long standing issues regarding demographic distribution caused by disputes
between religious authorities. Historian Fabio Giomi explains:
Having wavered for centuries between the spiritual authority of Rome and
Constantinople, and ultimately conquered by the Ottomans in 1463, the people of Bosnia
were distributed across four main religious groups. According to the region’s first
population census, conducted by the freshly instated authorities after occupation, the vast
majority of the population (approximately 43%, or 571,250 people) were Orthodox
Christians, followed by Muslims (38%, or 448,613 people), then Catholics (19%, or
209,391 people) and finally other smaller groups, in particular Jews. Thus, no religious
group made up an absolute majority within the province’s population.38
With no hom*ogeneity in the way of organized religion, Habsburg powers viewed the
administration of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a civilizing mission or, more aptly put, a colonial
project. In the context of the fair, they were far from the only ones to utilize exhibition spaces for
these means, as orientalism and exoticism allowed other presenters to rework local aesthetics, as
in the case of the Dutch East Indies pavilion and many others.39
37
Fabio Giomi, “At the Margins of the Habsburg Civilizing Mission,” in Making Muslim Women European:
Voluntary Associations, Gender, and Islam in Post-Ottoman Bosnia and Yugoslavia (1878-1941), 26, Central
European University Press, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7829/j.ctv2kg15g8.8.
38
Giomi, 27.
39
Isabelle Flour, “Orientalism and the Reality Effect: Angkor at the Universal Expositions, 1867–1937,” Getty
Research Journal, no. 6 (2014): 64, https://doi.org/10.1086/675791.
Woolf 20
In that spirit, Austria-Hungary took inspiration from the established colony of India,
studying how British forces dealt with the Muslim population there.40 In examining pre-existing
models of colonial rule that pushed further East, specific forms of Orientalism and broader
exoticism flourished during the Austrian administration of Bosnia and Herzegovina. “A
dichotomy started to develop between “good Orientals” – the Christian and Muslim Slavs of
Bosnia-Herzegovina living in the Orient “close to home” – and “bad Orientals,” i.e. the Muslim
Turks.”41 Thus, Austria presented itself as a “Benevolent guardian”42 in regards to Bosnia and
Herzegovina, accepting their pre-existing Muslim traditions, while simultaneously ushering them
into modernity. Furthermore, this colonial mission underscored the multi-faceted identities of the
Austro-Hungarian Empire.
The friction-filled relationship between the conquering administrative government and
the lands it occupied contextualizes the completed Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion, a site rife
with discomfort for the subjugated and targeted messaging in the case of the commissioner.
Where the Austrian pavilion represented the glory days of Viennese architecture and the
Hungarian pavilion sought to encompass key moments of a hard-fought history, the Bosnia and
Herzegovina Pavilion, designed by Karel Pánek (1860-?), specifically incorporated vernacular
styles referring to Islamic and Slavonic influences. While Pánek took care of the exterior, Mucha
addressed the interior. Pánek, like Mucha, came from a Czech background, a shared identity
worth taking note of.
In the late 19th century, Czech professionals found a great deal of work in the occupied
protectorate, utilizing an overlapping understanding of Slavic language to partake of potential
40
Jitka Malečková, “Civilizing the Slavic Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina,” in “The Turk" in the Czech Imagination
(1870s-1923), 120, Brill, 2021, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1163/j.ctv1sr6hs7.8.
41
Malečková, 121.
42
Houze, 62.
Woolf 21
profits and networking. Though pan-Slavic sentiments may have been sincere in the Czech
populations within Bosnia-Herzegovina, these transplants also glorified their contributions to the
newly incorporated region, touting the modernization of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a
Czech-supported effort. As one of the more economically developed areas of the
Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Czech people faced oppression, whilst benefiting in certain cases
from their affiliation43 with the ruling Austrian government.44 Mucha, a dedicated advocate for
Czech and Slavic self-determination, and Pánek fit this template well, stepping in to represent the
Bosnian cause as outsiders to the culture themselves.
Where Mucha had his origins in the Eastern region of Moravia, Pánek was from the
Western region of Bohemia, but had been working out of Sarajevo in Bosnia and Herzegovina
prior to the 1900 Exposition Universelle. Familiar with local architecture, Pánek created a
structure with white exterior walls and sloping, red, tiered roofs (See fig. 17). In comparison to
representations of Austria and Hungary at the fair, the Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion was
lighter and less weighed down by overembellishment. The chosen features of the structure were
strategic and politically coded.
The substantial part was comprised of a massive tower resembling the fortification
character of old Bosnian settlements in troubled times of fights with the Turks and robber
gangs. The rest of the pavilion, however, was a testament to better times of rural houses
with covered terraces and balconies with greenery. The wood elements on the facade
provided opportunity to demonstrate a masterful example of the Bosnian carving.45
The interior layout of the building featured a grand central hall with high ceilings and two floors
of side rooms connected to the hall via corridors. These secondary spaces followed regional and
historical themes, representing a harem, contemporary Bosnian dwelling, and important
43
Ondřej Slačálek, “The Paradoxical Czech Memory of the Habsburg Monarchy: Satisfied Helots or Crippled
Citizens?” Slavic Review 78, no. 4 (2019): 912–20, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26892446.
44
Malečková, 124-126.
45
Filip Wittlich, “World Exhibitions of the 19th Century,” in Alphonse Mucha: The Pavilion of Bosnia and
Herzegovina at the Exposition Universelle 1900, 41-42, Prague: Museum of Decorative Arts, 2016.
Woolf 22
archaeology of the region.46 The programming which took place inside the pavilion furthered the
collaged representation of a little known country, offering realistic recreations of Muslim living
spaces, and presenting craft products of metal, ceramics, and leather. Artisans from the region
worked in the pavilion during the exhibition (See figs. 18 and 19).47 In short, the design
communicated narratively, presenting a juxtaposition of tumultuous pasts in contrast to idealized
motifs and promising futures. Storytelling played a key role in emphasizing change overtime,
especially under occupation. The oversight of Austro-Hungarian forces did not repress tradition,
rather uplifting the best parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, while moving past issues that were
perceived as outdated, such as Slavic misery. Mucha’s interior decoration was expected to
strengthen such messaging.
In preparation for the development of such representative imagery, Mucha received a
permanent train ticket that allowed him to traverse the entirety of the Austro-Hungarian Empire
for research purposes. With such resources, the artist made his way to the Balkans multiple times
throughout 1898, collecting research on his subject matter. Visiting the countryside, as well as
Sarajevo and Zagreb, Mucha found inspiration in the landscape, natural features, traditional
dress, hom*ogeneity of local culture, and folk art of Balkan regions.48 He recorded his journey in
photography (See fig. 20), documenting scenes of rural life. Through this immersion and his own
upbringing in Moravia, the artist perceived the project as an opportunity to share and popularize
Slavic histories. In a first draft of his proposed designs presented to authorities in Vienna, Mucha
pushed for the presentation of the Slavic suffering and hardship in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
which was not approved to move forward because of the dictated positivist lens surrounding
46
Jana Brabcová-Orliková, “Alphonse Mucha. Paris and the Pavilion of Bosnia and Herzegovina,” in Alphonse
Mucha: The Pavilion of Bosnia and Herzegovina at the Exposition Universelle 1900, 60, Prague: Museum of
Decorative Arts, 2016.
47
Wittlich, 42.
48
Brabcová-Orliková, 59.
Woolf 23
Austrian presentation methods. His second round of drafts stepped back from such downtrodden
narratives, only depicting uplifting elements of distinct historical periods and religious sects,
including Orthodoxy, Christianity, and Islam.49 However, the originally somber tone of his
imagery did feature once in a frieze positioned closest to the ceiling. This generally more
uplifting proposal makes sense as tied to the colonial mission of the pavilion as a whole.
Working in a Paris studio close to the fairgrounds, Mucha completed the commissioned
murals and lithographic print designs for the pavilion alongside hired assistants. In terms of
chosen mediums, Mucha’s choice was unconventional. These meters long panels are composed
of watercolor applied to canvas, supplemented with tempera paint to selectively increase opacity.
Untraditional considering the scale of the project, it helped Mucha maintain the authenticity of
his style, allowing for light pigmentation and transparency throughout the compositions to
increase harmony and general softness amongst organic shapes. In the same way that his
lithography for the site, like the Menu for the Bosnian Pavilion Restaurant (1900) (See fig. 21),
utilized washes of pastel inks and well defined color blocking, so too did the murals favor
flowing elements and well outlined vignettes with varied palettes. Washes of color characterize
Mucha’s work for the Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion at the 1900 Exposition Universelle,
reflective of his personal method and broader Art Nouveau tastes.
Aside from commonality with his commercial methods, Mucha pointedly applied
allegory to represent the relatively unknown nation. Pulling on a long history of personification
for collective representation, he used the feminine body to encompass such meaning in an
idealistic, distinctly beautified fashion, a regular element of the Art Nouveau style and its
predecessors. Jan Thompson cites Jiří Mucha writes: “A woman, for him, was not a body, but
beauty incorporated in matter and acting through matter. That is why all his female figures,
49
Brabcová-Orliková, 60-68.
Woolf 24
however solid, are not really of this world…”50 This dismissal of female personhood in favor of
grandiose meaning is clear in one of the pavilion’s murals titled, Bosnia Offers Her Products to
the World Exhibition 1900 (See fig. 22), which was positioned above a panorama of Sarajevo
painted by a different artist.
In this image, Bosnia takes on the form of a woman or goddess surrounded by the
Bosnian people and their goods. Aside from her general youth and beauty, her status is
emphasized by the backing of an oversized, patterned halo, which encompasses the entirety of
her frame, surrounding her with rings of vibrant color. Furthermore, the inclusion of such
divinely inspired features calls back to the imagery that brought him fame, as seen in Zodiaque
(“La Plume”) (1896-97) (See fig. 23) and La Samaritaine (1897) (See fig. 24). Whether the
subject of the image was recognizable, as in the case of Sarah Bernhardt, or not, the presence of
a halo emphasized their importance and immediately centered them as the focal point.
With dark braided hair, a calm facial expression, pale complexion, and open arms,
Bosnia’s form is gentle and welcoming to her people. Seated in an oversized wooden throne in
the direct center of the frieze, the figure wears a long ivory dress with draped sleeves, underneath
which is a white lace underlayer. Around her neck sits a thick gold choker adorned with
numerous medallions. Her head is covered by a lightly colored veil decorated with the same
coin-like embellishments and flowers. Around her spill out swaths of lively oleanders and
roses.51 Such a depiction could be falsely characterized as simple, especially compared to other,
more realistic, history paintings, like those of Jacque Louis David. However, Bosnia is rooted in
her connection to the people, her attire echoing regional costume. For example, a secondary
female figure to the right of Bosnia wears a similar vest top decorated with embroidery and a
50
Jiří Mucha, “The Role of Woman in the Iconography of Art Nouveau,” Art Journal 31, no. 2 (1971): 162,
https://doi.org/10.2307/775570.
51
Brabcová-Orliková, 72.
Woolf 25
voluminous headcovering. The division between the allegory and the population is strategically
slim, tying the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina to their regional mythos. A mixed gender
crowd gathers around her seat on either side of the composition, presenting agricultural products,
like wine and fruit, as well as livestock, like goats. In this lively, rural scene, Mucha favors
illustrative symbolism to represent a collective whole within the Habsburg empire, idealizing
regional specificities to enlighten an international audience about the Slavic concerns of ethnic
identity, occupation of the land, and historical development. Locality in symbolism created a
focused narrative during an event that favored internationalism.
Aside from allegorical embodiment of the colony Austria sought to benevolently present,
Mucha presented the Bosnian and Herzegovinian narrative in broader strokes, favoring the
approach of general time periods, pinpointed moments, and generalized traits. Other friezes
throughout the pavilion include The Roman Period, the Arrival of the Slavs, the Prehistoric
Period and Christianity,Orthodoxy, Islam, The Coronation Procession, The Punishment of the
Bogomils. Both feature the same varied color scheme as Bosnia Offers Her Products to the World
Exhibition 1900. In a space with high levels of activity, these panels sat above it all, exalting
whatever they depicted via strategic use of repetitive patterning, strong line work, and overall
cohesiveness. Thus, his completed decoration of the pavilion recognizes the goal of the site by
accepting the need for positive endorsem*nt of Habsburg rule, whilst bringing to light
underrepresented and little known histories. In staying true to the style that brought him fame,
Mucha levied his citizenship, craft, and reputation towards a greater goal.
Through the use of vernacular architecture and landscapes, allegory, and localized
symbols, Mucha’s work communicated effectively to the subjects it depicted and to an outsider
audience. The Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion, though an imperial commission, prefaces
Woolf 26
efforts entrenched in self-determination, shaping the way Slavic glorification would manifest
through a great deal of Mucha’s extensive portfolio. Thus, the site has an opportunity to move
beyond its original messaging, rather acting as a prologue to independent imagery, unburdened
from colonial enterprises.
Woolf 27
Chapter 2: Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia
Alphonse Mucha first came to the United States in 1904, arriving in New York after
departing from Paris.52 His decision to leave more familiar European landscapes rode on an
expectation of existing reputation overseas, which proved to be accurate. Jiří Mucha cites his
father’s correspondence to describe the artist’s impression:
And a great surprise awaited me on the first street corner. Among the posters I saw my
own life-size portrait- perfectly dreadful, needless to say- in crude colours on a red
background, announcing: “The New York Daily News brings a symbolic composition of
A. Mucha in four colours on the front page of its Sunday issue.” There you are! The
entire town was flood with these things and, as I was told, also Philadelphia, Boston, and
other towns…53
Based on this renown, he entered elite and exclusive circles through portrait painting. In these
spaces, Mucha made many acquaintances, including Baroness Rothschild, Mrs.Cornelius
Vanderbilt, and, importantly, Mrs.Marshall-Field, who is credited with his future employment at
the Art Institute of Chicago.54 Records indicate that he quite liked the ‘American woman’ for her
character and beauty.55
Upon traveling to Europe for a short stint, Mucha married Maruška Chytilová (See fig.
25), who happened to be twenty years his junior.56 In 1906, Mucha returned to American soil
accompanied by his bride, arriving in Chicago, as he was set to begin lecturing at the Art
Institute on October 15.57 His connection to the school and museum was sustained throughout his
residency, as he took part in the 1908 Scammon Lectures with presentations about line,
52
Jiří Mucha, Alphonse Maria Mucha (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1989), 201.
Mucha, 206.
54
Mucha, 206.
55
"AMERICAN SHOP GIRLS MORE BEAUTIFUL THAN THE FAMOUS MODELS OF PARIS SAYS
ALPHONSE MUCHA, ARTIST," Chicago Daily Tribune (1872-1922), Aug 23, 1908.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/american-shop-girls-more-beautiful-than-famous/docview/173488
661/se-2.
56
Jiří Mucha, Alphonse Maria Mucha (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1989), 209-219.
57
Mucha, 225.
53
Woolf 28
proportion, and other elements central to his signature Art Nouveau style.58 He was honored by
the Palette and Chisel Club in 1906 with a festively themed party called ‘Bohemian Night’ (See
fig. 26)59 and supposedly occupied a studio at the Fine Arts Building.60
Aside from professional growth, the Mucha couple anchored themselves in culturally
comfortable environments, living as guests of a Czech family in Pilsen, the Černys, for the
duration of that first two month lecture series.61 A.V. Černy, the patriarch, ran a conservatory of
music and the Černy children proved to be talented, especially Zdeňka. In 1913, long after his
stay, Mucha designed a poster for the Chicago-born Czech cello prodigy in preparation for her
European tour, though it never came to pass as a result of World War I (See fig. 27).62 Other
proof of Mucha’s proximity to Chicago’s Czech community include advertisem*nts for Josef
Triner’s wine elixir and Angelica bitter tonic in 1907(See fig. 28).63 Josef Triner’s surname,
which favors a German sound over Czech, may call back to the longstanding Germanic
occupation of the region from which he immigrated, overriding Czech linguistic identity.
Though such pursuits may point towards a departure from Mucha’s original intentions of
private portraiture, commissions interspersed illustration and teaching. Portrait of Josephine
Crane Bradley as Slavia (See fig. 29), which Jiří recalls as “The only successful attempt to make
a portrait in his personal style,”64 is a key work within Mucha’s nationalist portfolio. It is an oil
58
“The Scammon Lectures for 1908,” Bulletin of the Art Institute of Chicago (1907-1951) 1, no. 3 (1908): 42–42.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4116206.
59
Mucha was ethnically Moravian, but in the American setting ‘Bohemian’ was the most widely used adjective to
describe the Czech nationality. Furthermore, by 1906, the term had garnered the descriptive, artistic meaning now
more commonly known. Thus, there is a double meaning: representation of Mucha’s heritage and reference to his
style. Meanwhile, American usage of Bohemian offered broader characterization, connecting him to the Czech
people.
60
Multiple secondary sources from the Consulate of the Czech Embassy in Chicago and interviews with his
descendants mention use of a studio in the Fine Arts Building.
61
Jiří Mucha, Alphonse Maria Mucha (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1989), 226.
62
Katherine Wagner Seineke, “Mucha’s Chicago Posters.” Chicago History (Spring 1972): 26-30,
https://issuu.com/chicagohistorymuseum/docs/redacted-1972spr-chm-chicagohistory.
63
“Alphonse Mucha for Jos. Triner’s Angelica Bitter Tonic,” Soülis Auctions, accessed April 10, 2024,
https://soulisauctions.com/Cat/LP31090-alphonse-mucha-for-jos-triners-angelica-bitter-tonic.
64
Jiří Mucha, Alphonse Maria Mucha (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1989), 222.
Woolf 29
and tempera painting on canvas measuring 154 centimeters tall and 92.5 centimeters wide (60.63
by 36.42 inches). Currently held in the collections of the National Gallery, Prague, the image was
created in 1908, depicting one daughter of the artist’s major patron, Charles Crane (See fig. 30).
The portrait of (Mary) Josephine (1886-1952) was commissioned to coincide with her July 8,
1908 wedding in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin to Harold C. Bradley (See fig. 31).65 In regards to the
high society event, the Chicago Daily Tribune reported on July 2, 1908:
The engagement was a recent announcement and created much interest, because the
bride, who is deaf and mute, has become more widely known for her scholastic
attainments. More recently she entered the agricultural department of the University of
Wisconsin to become versed in farm operating, her father having given her a fine farm at
Lake Geneva. It was while a student at the university that she met Prof. Bradley, who is
assistant professor of physiology.66
Aside from Josephine’s portrait, Crane returned to Mucha for commemorative familial paintings.
In 1910, the artist created a non-allegorical portrait of Crane’s married daughter, Frances Crane
Leatherbee, with her young son for the astronomical fee of $10,000,67 although the painting was
never completed. Frances was equally, if not more so, connected to the newly independent state
than Josephine, marrying Jan Masaryk, son of Czechoslovak President Tomáš Masaryk, in
1924.68
Returning to Josephine’s more symbolic depiction, the painting leans on artistic
personification, utilizing the real life sitter to evoke a larger, intangible idea. In this case,
Josephine takes up the mantle of regional goddess. Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as
65
Dana Hull, Portrait of Josephine (Crane) Bradley, 1908, black and white photographic print, 13 x 15.5 in,
Madison, Wisconsin Historical Society, https://www.wisconsinhistory.org/Records/Image/IM99983.
66
"NEWS OF THE SOCIETY WORLD: PLANS ANNOUNCED FOR LAKE FOREST'S ANNUAL DAY FAIR
JULY 15. TEITERS MAKE BRIEF VISIT. MISS MARY CRANE AND PROF. H. C. BRADLOY WED NEXT
WEDNESDAY," Chicago Daily Tribune (1872-1922), Jul 02, 1908,
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/news-society-world/docview/173412698/se-2.
67
"Mucha Completes $10,000 Oil Portrait," Chicago Daily Tribune (1872-1922), Feb 26, 1910,
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/mucha-completes-10-000-oil-portrait/docview/173493990/se-2.
68
"JAN MASARYK WEDS MRS. F.C. LEATHERBEE: CZECHOSLOVAKIAN MINISTER TO GREAT
BRITAIN MARRIES DAUGHTER OF EX-MINISTER CRANE." New York Times (1923-), Dec 29, 1924.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/jan-masaryk-weds-mrs-f-c-leatherbee/docview/103302238/se-2.
Woolf 30
Slavia passed through the possession of Charles Crane to his daughter to the University of
Wisconsin, eventually making its way to the Czech national gallery as a donation.
Documentation from the Archive of the National Gallery marks negotiation for the acquisition
occurring between 1948 and 1949, with contact initiated in February of 1948 and concluding
with a thank you letter from the Ministry of Education, Science and Arts in December 1949.69
The portrait traveled from the United States to Soviet territory at the start of the Cold War and
did not change hands even as Czechoslovakia peacefully split into the Czech Republic and
Slovakia in 1992.70 The large portrait remains in what is now Czechia, but walks a balancing act
between the sentimental, in relation to the Crane line, and the nationalistic, as connected to the
development of an early Czechoslovak aesthetic. Slavia, or Josephine, steadfastly resides in the
region she was meant to represent, now a reminder of early transnational unity.
Working along the lines of traditional personification, Mucha’s rendering of Josephine is
idealistic and pretty. Approximately twenty-two years old at the time of her marriage, the portrait
shows a glowing feminine youth, embodiment of the collective image of Slavism. Josephine’s
father was a noted Slavophile and the choice to represent his daughter in such a way carries
immense weight. Crane's appreciation for the Slavic cause directly aligned with the movement of
Pan-slavism. First created around 1848 following a year of major turmoil, Pan-slavism addressed
a patriotic void in a region controlled by Austro-Hungarian forces, generalizing and
romanticizing the cultural landscape to create a collective voice that was impactful within the
region and outside of it. In presenting themselves as an equally worthwhile group, the philosophy
counteracted the idea that Slavs were inferior to Germanic forces and aesthetics. Though the
69
Alphonse Mucha, Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia, 1908, Oil and tempera on canvas, 154 x 92.5
cm, Prague, National Gallery, https://sbirky.ngprague.cz/en/dielo/CZE:NG.O_3978.
70
Milica Z. Bookman, “War and Peace: The Divergent Breakups of Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia.” Journal of
Peace Research 31, no. 2 (1994): 175–87. http://www.jstor.org/stable/425031.
Woolf 31
movement as a whole encompassed much of Central and Eastern Europe, it found particular
grounding in what would become Czechoslovakia, as Johann Gottfried Herder, arguable founder
of Pan-slavism, viewed the Czechs as peace-loving in comparison to their German counterparts.
Furthermore, Herder worked against border-defined identity, arguing “...national identity could
not be forged by political leadership, but was inherent in the people (Volk) and their shared
culture.”71 Thus, leading cultural figures advocated for representation within Pan-slavism
through the use of Czech language and visual representation of localized heroes and folktales. In
particular, the artist, Josef Mánes (1820-71), utilized history painting and imagined Slavic
aesthetics, including illustrations of dress, to reconstruct a unified idea of an autonomous race
(See fig. 32). Fact and history played a part, but vivid reinterpretation and fantasies of the past
supplemented the gaps left by cultural erasure under occupation.72 In that sense, interest from
outsiders could be cultivated through the grandiose and visually impactful nature of Pan-slavism,
as in Mánes’ work, drawing new advocates for a suppressed cause in the modern age.
Charles Crane is just one of the many Western high society men that the likes of Mucha
and Masaryk pandered to. However, Crane’s general politics looked to support other
international movements with equal fervor, becoming a Russophile73 and crusader for Arab
causes74 alongside Pan-slavism. A common thread in regards to Crane’s advocacy is a sense of
exoticism, viewing the subjects of his interest as an ‘other,’ even as he put money towards the
development of their various arts and culture spheres. Furthermore, his activism remained largely
71
Erin Dusza, “Pan-Slavism in Alphonse Mucha’s Slav Epic,” Nineteenth Century Art Worldwide 13, no. 1 (Spring
2014), accessed February 4 2024,
https://www.19thc-artworldwide.org/spring14/dusza-on-pan-slavism-in-alphonse-mucha-s-slav-epic.
72
Dusza, “Pan-Slavism in Alphonse Mucha’s Slav Epic.”
73
Adriel Kasonata, “Why It’s Time to Revive Charles R. Crane’s Legacy in the Age of Trump,” Russian
International Affairs Council, published January 25 2019,
https://russiancouncil.ru/en/analytics-and-comments/columns/culture-and-international-relations/why-it-s-time-to-re
vive-charles-r-crane-s-legacy-in-the-age-of-trump/.
74
F. W. Brecher, “Charles R. Crane’s Crusade for the Arabs, 1919-39,” Middle Eastern Studies 24, no. 1 (1988):
42–55. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4283221.
Woolf 32
within the upper and ruling classes of each evolving nation, working and developing
relationships with the ruling circles while offering a form of philanthropy that trickled
downward. Crane’s interactions with representatives from Slavic, Russian, and Arab groups
cultivated a romanticized impression of a cultural whole. However, it, also, fueled divisive
opinions of populations, splitting residents into the Christian and Muslim good, with the Jewish
people perceived negatively.75 In essence, Crane’s diplomatic pursuits are representative of
common American tactics, inserting foreign perspectives on democracy without full
consideration of context. Crane took the positive aspects and built upon them via independent
wealth, while consistently identifying and looking down upon the separate minority. Christian
and folkloric symbols were worthy of praise, an approach represented in Portrait of Josephine
Crane Bradley as Slavia.
Being Moravian himself, Mucha worked to tie together representation of the portrait’s
subject with cultural symbolism that served his and Crane’s interests simultaneously. At the time
of the painting’s creation, notions of pan-Slavism circulated throughout subjugated Eastern and
Central Europe and filtered out West, taking root in American academic circles, as seen in the
University of Chicago’s Slavic Languages and Literature Department. In a primary source from
the period, Louis Levine, in a 1914 article for Political Science Quarterly, well summarizes the
understanding of Pan-slavism during those tumultuous years leading up to 1918:
There was one point, however, at which the interests of all those Slavic peoples met.
They all found themselves in the subjection of other nations who despised them. To
German, Magyar, and even Turk, the Slav seemed an inferior being who had achieved
nothing in politics or in the arts of life. The re- action against this was a desire on the part
of the Slavs to assert the value, not of this or that particular Slav people, but of the Slav
race as a whole.76
75
Brecher: 42.
Louis Levine, “Pan-Slavism and European Politics.” Political Science Quarterly 29, no. 4 (1914): 668.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2142012.
76
Woolf 33
Writing in the context of Hungarian ethnic development, Rebecca Houze clarifies Levine’s use
of the term “race” as applied to these populations more broadly:
Ethnographers described people in terms of “nationality,""tribe," or “race.” These
qualities were signified by differences in language, material culture, artistic expression,
religious practice, and social organization… Generally less concerned with things like the
measurement and classification of physical features… But the cultural and physical
characteristics of race were not always clearly separated in the Kronprinzenwerk.77
By working together under an umbrella categorization, Serbs, Bulgarians, Czechs, Croatians,
Slovenians, and Slovaks joined in successfully representing their cultural value. Pan-Slavic
symbols, like Slavia, did not seek to flatten cultural individuality, but find commonality. Just as
fluid applications of racial categorization enabled a level of perceived universalism, so too did
Slavia’s wide appeal across the geographic region. The Slavic people had been glorified, but not
divided, by the deity.
Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia handles a particular iteration of Slavic
pride, as presented by a Czech artist. Like many Art Nouveau portraits, especially those
depicting women, it is richly colored and decorated. With a palette of pinks, blues, gold, white,
green, and creamy browns, Mucha emphasizes vaguely neoclassical, floral, and curvilinear
motifs, pulling out common elements from the rest of his portfolio.
In this stylistic consistency, it comes to light that the portrait commissioned by Crane is
not entirely original in its composition. Rather, in 1907, Mucha created a commercial
advertisem*nt poster for the Mutual Insurance Bank of Slavia, titled Slavia (See fig. 33). A less
well-known product of Mucha’s lithography, the much smaller print, measuring 13 ⅜ by 22 ⅞
inches78, is reworked and scaled up to incorporate a more personal iteration of the goddess in a
77
Rebecca Houze, “A Hungarian Treasure Chest” in Constructing Race on the Borders of Europe: Ethnography,
Anthropology, and Visual Culture, ed. Marsha Morton and Barbara Larson (London: Bloomsbury, 2023), 155.
78
“Slavia. 1907,” Poster Auctions International, Inc., accessed February 4 2024,
https://auctions.posterauctions.com/lots/view/1-29UG3Y/slavia-1907.
Woolf 34
comparatively traditional medium: oil and tempera paint. Many of the elements between the
1907 poster and the 1908 painting remain largely the same- from the choice of foliage to the
sitter’s position to the cut of her clothing. These parallels demonstrate what remains central to
promoting the Czechoslovak cause adapted across drastically different mediums. Visual language
offers a sense of consistency when the map of Europe continued to change, thus the insurance
advertisem*nt or the Crane portrait offer an idea of what would translate to Mucha’s
Czechoslovak and American-based Slavophilic audiences. Repetition of imagery could be read
as an opportunity to diminish the significance of Crane’s contributions in regards to this
commemorative project, but it can also be read as an evolution, asking who represents the greater
Slavic people from 1907 onward. Furthermore, Mucha’s reuse of his own artwork is not
uncommon, rather a theme in the many decades of his career. Thus, it remains worthwhile to
look at Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia as a separate representation of the
nationalist allegory at an intersection of nationalism and cosmopolitan networking. A part of the
Czech canon for decades, emphasizing Josephine on the same level as Slavia clarifies the work’s
political geography, exploring personification as a simultaneous act of commemoration and
representation, whilst promoting a sense of specificity.79 This analysis acknowledges the personal
and national scales, as they work hand in hand.
In the large wedding portrait, Josephine sits at the center of the composition, legs crossed
over one another. Blonde hair with underlying reddish hues is arranged in two braids on either
side of her head, atop which she wears a crown of foliage composed of heart shaped leaves from
the small-leaved linden, or lime tree. The choice of such flora is targeted and intentional, as the
lime tree remains the national tree of Czechia and Slovakia into the present day. Her face is
79
Anne Dymond, “Embodying the Nation: Art, Fashion, and Allegorical Women at the 1900 Exposition
Universelle,” RACAR: Revue d’art Canadienne / Canadian Art Review 36, no. 2 (2011): 1–14,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/42630841.
Woolf 35
further framed by sun-shaped gold earrings, while her attire is a white, draped dress with puffed
sleeves.The edges of the sleeves and hem of the garment are adorned with rings of blue and
white floral embroidery and the neckline splits at the center to reveal a narrow strip of bare skin
almost reaching the waist. The neckline of the gown is held together via tassel-adorned ties
decorated with the same geometric sun symbols found in the aforementioned jewelry. Ribbons of
pink and white weave through her hair, falling across her body in streaming, fluid paths. Though
muted in tone, the ribbons directly echo the colors of the Czech flag when it was under rule by
Austria-Hungary: red and white. Josephine’s left hand plays with these strands, her fingers
woven amongst them to draw the eye along their path. Aside from attire, Josephine’s complexion
is pale and smooth, unmarked by the passage of time, while her blue-eyed gaze is direct, languid,
and unending, looking out past the viewer at something more eternal. Her features as a whole
come across almost contemporarily, functioning equally well to reach an audience in 1908 or the
present year. More importantly, aside from the relative modernity of her appearance, Josephine
does appear Slavic with her light eyes and complexion, blending with regional expectations,
despite having no blood ties.
Taking up the majority of the image, Josephine interacts with a number of symbolic props
that represent power, prestige, and Slavic culture. On her lap rests a golden-hilted sword with
swirling decoration. Interestingly, Mucha takes artistic license in positioning the weapon. The
hilt sits horizontally on Josephine’s lap, while the entire blade is visible past her knee, twisted
vertically upward. Evidently, the given perspective is realistically impossible, as the sword
would cut into her body, but such a layout offers Mucha the opportunity to display both the
embellished handle and the metaphorical protection of Slavic nations simultaneously. In contrast
to the inherent violence of the weapon, two small birds with white chests and red throats,
Woolf 36
specifically sparrows, perch on her knee to represent peace. In combination, the birds and the
sword communicate an idea that peace is the end goal of Slavic peoples, but there is no hesitation
to fight for progress.
Where her left hand tangles amongst the hair accessories, Josephine’s other arm is raised.
In her right hand is a silver ring, through which a point of light shines to create a delicately
rendered rainbow circle within. The choice of a circle, alongside the divinely imagined sitter, is
strategic on Mucha’s part, as a circle never starts or, more importantly, ends. Such an infinite
shape reflects the perpetuity of the Slavic people, persisting through occupation, oppression,
conflict, and other change. Thus, the rounded nature of much of the decoration throughout
Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia takes on higher meaning, working toward the
cultivation of Slavic representation eternally. Though the seat Josephine occupies is largely
obscured by her figure, the imagery associated with the throne-like chair carries on an idea of
persistence found elsewhere in the composition. The visible armrests each have a stylized
peaco*ck on the end, symbolizing both immortality and survival according to curators at the
National Gallery, while drawing on vernacular wooden furniture styles in the curved back.
Mucha tightens the connection between Slavic identities and aspirations for independence with
each added piece.
Beyond attire, Josephine sits in front of a dreamlike, cloud dappled blue sky. In the lower
right corner, a falcon sits on a gnarled branch, poised with its wings outstretched as if ready to
hunt. In more generalized iconography, the bird might be read as a representation of power or
protection, which remains relevant in this context. However, narrowing into regional meaning,
the falcon is actually a direct reference to the nationalist Czech athletics organization, Sokol,
formally established in 1862, of which it was the logo (See fig. 34). The Sokol gymnasiums had
Woolf 37
a purpose that was two fold, promoting exercise and wellness alongside patriotism and the goal
of democracy.80 Thus, the inclusion of Sokol’s falcon imagery further specifies Josephine in one
geographic context. The ground beneath her feet features loosely painted grass and charmingly
domed mushrooms of the boletus variety, which are common in Czech culture. Both the sky and
ground take on impressionistic qualities with relaxed, unblended brushstrokes, setting them apart
from the central figure and decorative elements without making them illegible. The variety of
paint application throughout one portrait points to Mucha’s skill with the medium, but,
furthermore, it points to an understanding of composition, balance, and rendered meaning.
Connected to prosperity as much to nature, Josephine as Slavia embodies a collective cultural
vision that is multi-faceted in its equal appreciation for manmade and earthmade achievements.
The setting is equally as important in creating the cohesive imagery Mucha is known for.
In the upper half of the composition, Mucha utilizes a more stylized background, framing the
sitter with an oversized halo form that encompasses the entirety of the torso, much like the
Bosnia mural. With rings of gold, the space of the halo is filled in with folk-inspired, geometric
pastel plant motifs. The upper right and left corners extend this detail, filled with sprawling,
simplified vine patterns taken from the same lime tree referenced in Josephine’s crown. More
structured patterning continues to the border Mucha composes around the central portrait.
Encompassing all four sides of the canvas, the wide border is divided from the main image by a
line of gold, behind which is a free flowing, asymmetrical range of pink carnations and white
daisies set against a lilac background. This gilded line is made of raised plaster, upon which gold
is applied to add glittering dimension and luster to the overall piece. The negative space between
golden accents is filled in with a warm golden beige, making for a hom*ogenous impression when
80
“History of Sokol,” Sokol Museum and Library, Sokol Museum, accessed February 3 2024,
https://sokolmuseum.org/history-of-sokol/#.
Woolf 38
seen from a distance. The halo element and the trim are particularly significant to note, as they
are common parts of Mucha’s more popular lithographs, as seen in Zodiac (1896) and La
Samaritaine (1897). Though they may be considered jarring in other movements, the use of line
and blocking defines the space of the composition, creating simultaneous harmony and
intentional division. Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia is further cemented as a
complete work by the grandiose, geometric gold frame, which is original to the work from its
creation in 1908. Either side of the frame is topped with star-like forms. In essence, every single
element of the painting is so cohesive as to create a regal portrait of the real life Chicago-born
sitter, as well as the Slavic cultural image that she symbolizes.
Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia is a compelling part of understanding
Mucha’s work as an artist, alongside his contributions to the Czechoslovak independence cause.
As the artist handled affairs outside his homeland, Czech unrest was on the rise by December
1908, as Czech Socialists took to the streets of Prague to protest rule under the Habsburg.
Simultaneously, a celebration of the six decade reign of Emperor Francis Joseph I took place in
Vienna. This sharp contrast in sentiment towards the Austro-Hungarian Empire foreshadowed
the emphasis on self-determination pushed by Czechoslovak forces only ten years later in 1918.
Vienna was disconnected from the regions it administered, basking in expansionist glory, while
oppressed groups simmered with a desire for independence.81
Exemplifying the overarching beauty, harmonious composition, and rich colors of
Mucha’s portfolio, Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia takes on great meaning as a
direct overlap between the artist’s connection to his sojourn in the United States, Chicago
specifically, and the representation of his ethnic identity. Featuring an American subject
81
T. Mills Kelly, “Taking It to the Streets: Czech National Socialists in 1908,” Austrian History Yearbook 29, no. 1
(1998): 93–112. doi:10.1017/S0067237800014818.
Woolf 39
personifying a Slavic mythological symbol, the initial identity of Josephine Crane-Bradly
becomes secondary to the embodiment of Slavia. Aside from her American origin generally,
Josephine and her father, Charles Crane, lacked any Czech ancestry, deriving an interest in
Mucha’s cause through interactions with Thomas Masaryk, who he invited to lecture at the
University of Chicago in 190282, as opposed to first hand experience or blood ties. Portrait of
Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia distills the power of transnational networks in the
development of an independent Czechoslovak state. Rendered for commemorative purpose in
1908, the symbol remained tied to the Slavia Insurance Company and Mucha featured it at
smaller scale on the 100 crown bill of the Czechoslovak currency (See figs. 35 and 36).
The recycling of imagery is not uncommon in Mucha’s practice, often taking painted
portraits and translating them to the infinitely more reproducible mediums, like the lithograph.
Thus, the transfer of Crane-Bradley’s image to currency is not unexpected. On the 100 crown
bill, her likeness shifts according to the limitations of scale and dictated use. Featured on one
side of the bill in the rightmost third, the broad array of elements described are largely the same.
First and foremost, the female figure remains the central focus, sitting in her peaco*ck
embellished chair, sword in her lap, and framed by a halo of floral patterning. Additionally, the
regional garment and braided, beribboned hairstyle are unaltered. She still holds that silver ring
in her right hand, though the beaming lightsource has faded in favor of letting the background
through.
Mucha’s adaptation of Crane-Bradley’s likeness to currency departs from the original
iteration. In a decision likely made out of necessity, the exterior flowering border disappears, as
does the ground at the subject’s feet, cropping the image for clarity at scale. The decorative edge
82
“Charles Crane,” Mucha Foundation, Mucha Foundation, accessed May 29, 2024.
https://www.muchafoundation.org/en/about/charles-crane.
Woolf 40
has been replaced by a simpler, lined frame, integrating the existing motif into the whole design.
Interestingly, though, the sun-shaped spires that adorn the golden frame in the National Gallery’s
collection are replicated, at least in essence. Along a banner reading, “Sto Korun” (“One
Hundred Crowns”), two beaming suns with stoic faces sit atop narrow columns, evenly placed on
either side of the human figure. Beyond reformatting, Mucha is selective in choosing which
symbolic elements are removed. For example, in regards to the background and setting, he
replaces the wintery landscape in the 1908 portrait with denser foliage across the bottom for a
more symmetrical composition. Additionally, all animal life exits the composition. The imposing
falcon in the lower right hand corner is not present, nor are the little birds originally perched on
her knee. The exclusion of the bird of prey is especially interesting, as Mucha tried to help
establish an aesthetic for the new Czechoslovak Republic. Such a mission might have been
bolstered by traditional, transnational visual language, localized by Czech organizations, to
denote prowess or stability. Instead, the sword and ring take over as manifestations of a
collective Slavic power in the post-imperial, post-war age.
The key exception in the painting’s application to currency is the alteration of the
subject's face. In the 1908 portrait, Josephine stairs staunchly and stoically forward, face framed
by a crown of golden hair. Though youthful, her countenance is far from coy. In comparison,
Mucha has reworked the facial features on the 1920 bill. In the most obvious departure, the
figure’s hair has been made dark, capitalizing on the contrast essential to effective intaglio
printing. Foliage weaves through the braided mane, replacing the bushy crown seen in
Crane-Bradley’s characterization. Further, this iteration of the mythical Slavia tilts her head back,
gazing down at the viewer in what could be a playful or judgmental expression. Full lips, defined
eyebrows, dark eyes and a straight nose make up her features, shaping an alluring regional
Woolf 41
beauty in this reworked figure of Josephine Crane-Bradley. In truth, many of these decisions
could have been fueled by the limitations of currency printing. However, the line between
practicality and communicated symbolism is thin when the resulting product reaches such a wide
audience: the population of the First Czechoslovak Republic. The 1920 currency belongs to the
self-determined Slovak people above all else.
Beyond the currency, Mucha spins the thread further with Slavia, and Crane-Bradley, in
creating key images for Czechoslovakia. In 1931, twenty-three years after the initial commission
was completed, Mucha again featured Slavia, this time in the form of stained glass (See figs. 37
and 38). In 1928, twenty years after Czechoslovakia gained independence, Gothic reconstructive
work finished on Prague’s Saint Vitus Cathedral in 1929, corresponding to the Millennium
Jubilee of Bohemia’s patron saint, Wenceslas. Lauded as a representative artist for the
Czechoslovak people and an internationally recognized figure, it is no surprise that Mucha was
commissioned to create a window for the holy site.83 In this case, the sponsor for Mucha’s
window was the same client for which he created the original iteration of an Art Nouveau Slavia
in 1907, the Slavie Mutual Assurance Co. and Bank. Mucha initially generated a never produced
design in 1928, followed by the executed design proposed in 1930. Located in the northern nave
of the structure in the Hora Chapel, Mucha’s window was installed in 1931, featuring a selection
of biblical figures and their corresponding vignettes. With Mucha at the helm for imagery, Jan
Veselỳ carried out the practical creation of the window.
In the lower thirds of the richly adorned, neo-gothic panel, scenes of the lives of a young
Saint Wenceslas and Saint Ludmila sit at the center, surrounded by images of Saints Cyril and
83
“Stained-glass Window designed by Mucha at St. Vitus Cathedral, Prague,” Mucha Foundation, Mucha
Foundation, accessed November 22, 2023, http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/gallery/browse-works/object/199.
Woolf 42
Methodius.84 Like his other nationalistic work, Mucha’s selection of figures was careful,
incorporating imagery that called directly back to the nation-state’s empowerment, as well as his
own knowledge derived from devout Catholicism. Aside from Wenceslas, Cyril and Methodius
spread Christianity amongst Slavic populations, while Ludmila was grandmother to the
Bohemian patron. The artist’s chosen motifs are certainly regionally relevant, but the role of
religion in Pan-Slavism is not overarching, especially considering the long running Protestant
and Orthodox communities that had significant roots.85 In this case, Mucha’s personal affinity to
Catholicism shapes his composition over broader movement guidelines. The separate images,
complex in composition, bleed together with a consistently vibrant palette. Mucha transfers his
firm understanding of color play to light-responsive glass, rendering a harmonious rainbow with
darker tones of blue on the edge and glowing golden hues in the center.
As in many other church windows, modern and otherwise, Mucha positions Jesus at the
pinnacle, arms spread in open gesture. However, Saint Wenceslas does not sit below Christ,
rather Slavia, a mythologized symbol, does. Of course, her placement could simply be read as a
sign of the window’s sponsor, Slavia Bank, as personification was a common trope in
nationalistic, financial advertising (E.g.- Uncle Sam selling Liberty Bonds86). In tracing the path
from 1907 to 1931, though, Slavia gains vast significance outside of advertising. What began,
arguably, with Josephine Crane-Bradley is now in compositional alignment with Jesus Christ.
Where Christ represents Christianity internationally, Slavia embodies a localized sense of
self-determination and culture. In the context of the window, the goddess is contained to three
fleur-shaped portions of the larger whole. Mucha’s 1931 iteration of Slavia is vibrant, having
84
Marie Kostílkova, “Hora Chapel” in The Windows of St. Vitus Cathedral (Prague: Prague Castle Administration,
2000), 38.
85
Hans Kohn, “The Impact of Pan-Slavism on Central Europe,” The Review of Politics 23, no. 3 (1961): 330,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1405438.
86
Invest Your Money with Uncle Sam! Join the Crowd-Buy a Liberty Bond, 1917, lithograph, 67 x 100 cm, Library
of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/00652856/.
Woolf 43
returned to a pale complexion with hair that comes across as red-toned once more. However,
closer inspection of the figure as a whole reveals more fluid, somewhat fantastical application of
color, as pigments bleed together in a far less controlled fashion than the 1908 oil and tempera
painting or Mucha’s broader catalog of lithography.
In terms of elements, Slavia retains her lime leaf crown, silver eternity ring, sword, red
and white ribbons, and peaco*ck chair. She loses her once dually braided hair in favor of a single
braided rope, her gown has a more conservative neckline, gold jewelry at her throat and ears has
been removed, and any sign of birds (sparrow or falcon) have disappeared. In terms of facial
expression, St. Vitus Cathedral’s Slavia takes on a similarly contemplative countenance as the
twenty-two year old heiress, looking past gawking worshippers towards something greater. The
simultaneous presence of Jesus Christ and Slavia on the stained glass canvas is worth examining
outside formal corporate sponsorship, especially in regards to the power of cultural and religious
personification in a nation that was barely ten years old.
Slavia’s appearance in a Catholic sanctuary brings to light a broader theme in Mucha’s
portfolio: the use of icon inspired visual language. As mentioned previously, the halo acts as a
common tool to divide space in the artist’s Art Nouveau compositions, but, beyond its practical
purpose in accordance with the lithographic medium, it echoes widely understood visual cues
that transcend Czechoslovak culture specifically. Mucha’s spirituality bled through into secular,
nationalistic, and allegorical imagery. Regardless of the presented figure and their corresponding
context, the integration of a halo denotes significance and, oftentimes, power. In application to
advertisem*nts for Sarah Bernhardt’s Paris productions, divine symbols raise her to the status of
stage icon. In application to Slavia, Christian visual language indicates the deep importance of
collective regional identity and representation.
Woolf 44
Outside of religious connotations, Mucha’s ongoing use of the adapted Slavia figure calls
back to bigger questions of the feminine figure as allegory. The Art Nouveau is continually
questioned for its use of women as objects, putting meaning above larger personhood. This again
returns to the clarifying quote “A woman, for him, was not a body, but beauty incorporated in
matter and acting through matter. That is why all his female figures, however solid, are not really
of this world. They are symbols, unattainable dreams…”87 Though representative of a real life
sitter, Josephine Crane-Bradley’s portrait certainly contends with factors of idealism and higher
meaning over individuality. While pruning Josephine Crane-Bradley as Slavia, the artist repeats
his own detailing to reorient the personally commissioned portrait for nationalistic purposes.
However, it, also, corresponds to a mode of European nationalism that used personification to
render widely understood meaning.
In the case of France, Marianne takes up a similar mantle to Slavia’s. Originating around
the time of the French Revolution, Marianne is representative of the French people and values of
liberty, equality, and fraternity. Her name is speculated to derive from a common 18th century
feminine moniker, offering familiarity to a French populace that sought escape from monarchist
rule.88 Like Slavia, Marianne correlates to events driven by self-determination and a search for
symbols that redefined cultural landscapes. Furthermore, Mucha would have been very familiar
with her.
Marianne did not have a consistent model and her visage shifted with contemporary
tastes, taking on the appearance of celebrities like Brigette Bardot and Catherine Deneuve by the
late 1960s.89 However, the imagery creates the same results as the reworked Josephine
87
Jan Thompson, “The Role of Woman in the Iconography of Art Nouveau.” Art Journal 31, no. 2 (1971): 162,
https://doi.org/10.2307/775570.
88
Reema Jadeja-Reed, “The Many Faces of Marianne,” Law and Liberty, published March 10, 2023,
https://lawliberty.org/the-many-faces-of-marianne/.
89
Mary Blume, “The French Icon Marianne á la Mode,” International Herald Tribune, published July 16, 2004,
https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/16/style/the-french-icon-marianne-la-mode.html.
Woolf 45
Crane-Bradley portrait: an image that condenses the desire for self-declaration. Personification of
a unified national or regional front is an exercise in collective imagination, bringing to life vivid
renderings of practices, dress customs, and symbols suppressed by the Austrian occupier. Slavia,
or Josephine, is an active representation of how a single visual metaphor operates in oppression
and independence, moving with the patriotic Czechoslovak cause, just as Mucha did. The
ethnicity of the sitter, Czechoslovak or American, is far less relevant than the cultural power of
addressing a new national audience. Slavia was chosen by the region to have such gravitas, a
significant shift from imposed aesthetics and censorship. Chicago acted as a hot bed to grow this
successfully allegorical image, which would transcend original purpose to join a nationally
recognized Czechoslovak visual vocabulary.
Woolf 46
Chapter 3: The Slav Epic
In 1910, Mucha’s sojourn in the United States concluded with his family’s return to the
Czech regions of his birth. Mucha arrived in Bohemia, the region to the East of his Moravian
homeland, with a number of successes under his belt and a commission by the city of Prague to
help decorate the Lord Mayor’s Hall within the new Obecní Dům (Municipal House) (See fig.
39).90 On a personal front, the artist and his wife had their first child, Jaroslava, who was born in
Manhattan, New York on March 15, 1909. The tangible record of their daughter’s connection to
the United States remains in the New York City Municipal Archives, her place of birth being the
couple’s residence on 56th Street. Unlike other documentation that labels the artist as Bohemian
for the sake of popular recognition, Jaroslava’s birth certificate records Mucha as being from
Moravia and her mother, Maruška, whose name had been anglicized to Mary, as being from
Bulgaria.91 The specificity of their respective ethnic identities remains when self-dictated for
official documentation and corresponds to complicated perceptions of whiteness amidst high
levels of immigration to the United States.92
Forty-eight years old at the time of Jaroslava’s birth, Mucha had, also, finally achieved
the central goal of his networking abroad: gaining sponsorship for the great historical narrative
painting series, the Slav Epic. The Slav Epic initially stemmed from Mucha’s travel throughout
the Balkans in the lead up to the 1900 Exposition Universelle, taking inspiration from his
unfiltered interactions with fellow Slavic cultures. Furthermore, Austro-Hungarian censorship
within the Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion’s decoration drove the Czech artist to create a more
90
“Mayor’s Hall,” Municipal House, Obecní Dům accessed March 12, 2024,
https://www.obecnidum.cz/en/municipal-house/halls/mayor-s-hall/.
91
The City of New York Department of Health, certificate of birth number 15008 (15 March 1909), Jaroslava
Mucha, Historical Vital Records, The New York City Municipal Archive, accessed March 12 2024,
https://a860-historicalvitalrecords.nyc.gov/view/2191753.
92
Matthew Frye Jacobsen, Whiteness of a Different Color: European Immigrants and the Alchemy of Race
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999).
Woolf 47
authentic depiction of Slavic histories, mythologies, and beliefs. He would not get to return to
this idea, however, until eleven years later, when he could resettle in, what would become,
Czechoslovakia with hefty monetary backing.
Mucha’s earliest imaginings of what the Slav Epic could be remain relevant to the final
product. Circa 1900, the cycle was meant to consist of twenty oversized canvases with motifs
taken from significant moments in Czech and Slavic histories, focusing on central themes of the
shared struggle for freedom, self-determination, and independence.93 Though the cycle is not
clearly categorized, its contents encompass three areas: the historical, religious, and mythological
or allegorical. The actual series, completed between 1910 and 1926 in egg tempera paint on
canvas, would remain true to this vision, with ten of the compositions representing Czech scenes
and ten representing more universal Slavic scenes. Generally speaking, the canvases measure
approximately six by eight meters each, with certain pieces of the cycle varying in scale.
Early development, separate from the Exposition Universelle, was informed by further
travel throughout Slavic regions, as the artist became reimmersed in his own identity through
study trips to the Balkans, Bulgaria, Poland, Russia, and Greece. On these expeditions, he
interacted with Slavic communities and archives, recording observations in notes, sketches, and
photographs.94 The project pulled back from the extremely linear, idealistic Art Nouveau style
that had made Mucha a notable poster designer, instead returning to realism and the traditional
genre of history painting, inspired by the longevity of frescoes. This is not to say that Mucha’s
skillfulness with tonal harmony or lush figural arrangements fell to the wayside, but, rather, it
was repurposed towards patriotic ends. In reflecting on the cultivation of the artist’s maturity, the
Slav Epic better reflects Mucha's talent for handling large scale surfaces, as seen in his early
93
94
The National Art Center, Tokyo, Alfons Mucha (Kyoto: Nissha Printing, 2017), 212.
The National Art Center, Tokyo, 213.
Woolf 48
work as a theater painter, the Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion, and the ceiling murals in
Prague’s Municipal House.
Where the Bosnia and Herzegovina Pavilion played with a version of historicized
imagery, the Municipal House was one of the first projects in which Mucha was employed within
his homeland to depict their own narratives. A comparatively well-off region within the
Austro-Hungarian Empire, Bohemia and Moravia had been effectively industrialized, thus the
Municipal House was meant to show the majesty of Czech architectural, technological, and
artistic achievement (See fig. 40). In the Lord Mayor’s Hall, Mucha presented imagery laden
with much the same symbolism seen in Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia. For
example, the central, circular ceiling mural features an eagle or falcon, calling back to the Sokol
organization’s logo (See fig. 41). Additionally, Mucha continued to use beautifully rendered
bodies as representative of collective identity, utilizing traditional garments of Czechs past and
meaningful props, like the silver circle of an infinite Slavic future. Importantly, though, Mucha,
also, incorporated famous figures, like Jan Hus, that would show up again in the Slav Epic.95
Overlapping with the Municipal House’s commission, Mucha’s lifework was long cultivated,
spurred on by a persistent sense of nationalistic pride. However, unlike the Lord Mayor’s Hall,
which was publicly funded, the Slav Epic required private backing, even though its final owner
was meant to be the city of Prague.
Support came from Charles Crane, who found shared passion for Mucha’s Czechoslovak
cause. Though they met in New York, Chicago became a hub for the two men to grow their
connection, especially as Mucha created Josephine’s allegorical portrait and lectured through the
Art Institute of Chicago. The relationship between Crane and Mucha echoes the dynamic of the
artist’s first patron, Count Khuen-Belasi. Crane took on the role of traditional patron with gusto,
95
The National Art Center, Tokyo, 213.
Woolf 49
offering Mucha total financial backing, legal support, and encouragement for his creative growth.
Specifically, on November 5, 1910, a representative of Charles Crane, J.U.D. Tonder, and
representatives of the municipality of Prague cemented an agreement to donate the Slav Epic to
the city of Prague, with the stipulation that a specific facility would be built to house it.96 Upon
the completed agreement, ownership of the Slav Epic was gradually transferred to their destined
holder as Mucha completed individual pieces.
Guaranteed backing allowed the artist to rent out living quarters and studio space in
Zbiroh Castle, a 12th century residence in Western Bohemia (See fig. 42). Jaroslav Pácha, the
castle’s owner circa 2011, told a reporter for Radio Prague International, that Mucha’s decision
to take up residency at Zbiroh Castle began out of coincidence when he visited a friend and
discovered the well-lit hall perfect for large canvases. The Mucha family lived in Zbiroh Castle
for nineteen years and they became close with the owners, the Colloredo Mannsfield family.97
Furthermore, Zbiroh Castle acted as a site of negotiation. For example, on May 30, 1914, official
notice of transferred rights was recorded in the form of a translated document by Prague’s
representatives at Zbiroh Castle. The three pieces included in that specific exchange were
designated parts four, five, and six of the cycle: Abolition of Serfdom in Russia in 1861 (See fig.
43), The Defense of the Vulnerable Sziget against the Turks during the Reign of Nicholas Kringl
in the year 1655 (See fig. 44), and The School of the Mahr Brothers, Eibenschitz, in the year
1594, and the printing of the Kralitzer Bible (See fig. 45). Mucha’s interpersonal network and
patriotism allowed him to help shape official terms, thus the aforementioned pieces stayed with
him at Zbiroh for three years longer, in order to “...Secure a harmony of color schemes of these
96
Translation of Agreement with Alphonse Mucha, May 30, 1914, Bakhmeteff Archive of Russian and East
European Culture, Columbia University.
97
Christian Falvey, “The history and mysteries of Zbiroh Chateau,” Radio Prague International, published April 9,
2011, https://english.radio.cz/history-and-mysteries-zbiroh-chateau-8564513.
Woolf 50
and the other paintings of the aforesaid cycle.”98 Almost working along the lines of a
gesamtkunstwerk ideology, the Slav Epic developed as a whole, canvases positioned side by side
in Zbiroh Castle’s grand hall.99
Settled in a facility that could handle oversized artworks, Crane, his solicitors, and Mucha
maintained relatively frequent correspondence between the United States, Paris, and Bohemia.
They discussed varied topics, including the arrival of funds, inadvertent impacts of World War I,
personal matters, and ongoing negotiations with the city of Prague. For example, in a celebratory
letter composed in English on March 16th, 1915, the artist wrote: “I am happy to announce the
birth of a sturdy boy into our family on March 12th… More than two months ago I wrote you of
the expected event, but I fear this letter, like others, has gone astray. I had taken the liberty of
asking you to be God-father to the new little citizen…”100 A decision made out of professional
appreciation and/or genuine friendship, the ties between artist and patron lasted until their deaths.
The cultivation of personal connection between an American politician and industrial heir and
Moravian artist is both a mark of a traditional patronage model, as well as the advantage of
cosmopolitan networking.
The Slav Epic functioned as a massive undertaking for the middle-aged artist, whilst
simultaneously allowing him to establish roots amongst his Czech brethren, artistically and
socially. Comfortably positioned in Western Bohemia, Mucha continued his pursuits amidst
major global conflict, even as World War I made receiving international bank deposits
98
Translation of Agreement with Alphonse Mucha, May 30, 1914, Bakhmeteff Archive of Russian and East
European Culture, Columbia University, 1-2.
99
In addition to the painting process itself, this approach echoed Richard Wagner’s notion of a nationalistic
“German” mythology, which combined varied symbols in a highly impactful way to make them relevant to notions
of collective identity.
100
Alphonse Mucha to Charles R. Crane, March 16, 1915, Bakhmeteff Archive of Russian and East European
Culture, Columbia University.
Woolf 51
difficult.101 By the end of the war in 1918, eight years into the Slav Epic’s development, Mucha
saw what he had desired for most of his life: an independent Czechoslovak nation-state. The new
republic put a number of new projects on the artist’s plate, as he stepped in to lead the
development of aesthetic components for currency, postal stamps, and more. However, the Slav
Epic took on a new significance, as Czech and Slavic social advocacy shifted in a new age. In
this specific case, the impact of the Slav Epic actually lessened in the context of Prague, as
pieces did not go on public display until 1919 when the Czechoslovak state was a reality.
It is entirely possible that the reception to Mucha’s undertaking would have been
stunning before Habsburg rule finally crumbled in 1918, especially if the first three paintings,
completed by 1912, had been made available to the public before 1914. Then, they would have
been declarations of a dream. That delay drastically changed the project’s role in an evolving
Europe, as all twenty pieces were meant to belong to a Czechoslovak public, which had suddenly
become officially recognized.102 Though somewhat tepid, the first exhibition of Mucha’s Slav
Epic in 1919 is worth taking note of, as it took place in the First Republic of Czechoslovakia,
existing in harmony with its surroundings, not in defiance of the political state. The venue for
such a premier, Prague’s Klementinum (See fig. 46), was anchored in Czech historical
development as a site of early Jesuit learning and extensive libraries, thus the presentation of
regional history paintings worked quite well alongside the background of the space.103
Photographs from the exhibit show five canvases lined up in a room with Baroque detailing and
high ceilings. Today, that part of the Klementinum remains a site for reflection as the main
reading room for the National Library of the Czech Republic (See fig. 47).
101
Roger H. Williams to Alphonse Mucha, October 9, 1914, Bakhmeteff Archive of Russian and East European
Culture, Columbia University.
102
The National Art Center, Tokyo, 213.
103
The National Art Center, Tokyo, 213.
Woolf 52
By 1928, the entire series had been completed and was donated back to Czechoslovakia
on the tenth anniversary of their independence. Its full presentation took place at the First Trade
Fair Palace, built between 1925 and 1928, which became part of the National Gallery, Prague in
1976.104 In preparation for the exchange between the artist, Crane, and the city, Mucha himself
wrote the introduction to the catalog. A translation of that text reveals Mucha’s awareness of the
unnamed cosmopolitanism of the project:
Already in 1900, in Paris, I resolved to dedicate the latter half of my life to work
that would help create and strengthen our sense of national awareness. I believe every
nation’s evolution can be successfully continued only if it grows organically and
continuously from the nation’s own roots and in order to maintain this continuity the
knowledge of the nation’s historical past is indispensable. A painting affects the viewer, I
dare say, aggressively by entering through an open window straight into the soul. It is up
to the viewer to deal with it according to his own will. One can go past the work without
letting it into his conscience or be drawn in by the artwork’s appearance to stop in front
of it and perhaps search for its meaning and contents and finally, maybe, find that seed of
either beauty or truth that had led to its coming to existence.
I consider the accomplishment of this- now completed- work, to be my holy duty;
therefore I have no merit to it. It could not have been a paid task either which would have
limited me, even if only from the outside. Yet, I was aware that accomplishing such a
grand task without any material support would have been impossible. Hence, in 1910, I
confided my concerns and intentions to a noble and remarkably precious soul, a friend of
the Slavs and especially of us, Czechoslovaks, who would often willingly become
involved whenever something similar was at the risk of stagnation. The noble soul is the
American industrialist and great philanthropist, Charles R. Crane. He readily accepted my
proposal to support my intention by paying for the costs associated with the work and to
present the completed work as a gift to the city of Prague. (In those days, as it is known,
Prague was the only representative of Czech Slavism in our country.) Cordial thanks to
him for his rare insight and his help. And so it happened that today, I can present my
completed work to Prague and thus to the general public. In all of the paintings, I avoided
anything that could remind of austere disputes and of any blood spilled in these.
The aim of my work was never to destroy, but always to construct- to build
bridges, for we must always be nourished by hope that all of humanity will come together
more easily if people get to know each other. I will be happy if I am given the
opportunity to contribute my humble forces to support this knowledge- at least and so far,
here, within our Slavic family.105
104
“Trade Fair Palace,” National Gallery, Prague, accessed March 17, 2024,
https://www.ngprague.cz/en/about/buildings/trade-fair-palace.
105
Alphonse Mucha, “Introduction” in The Slav Epic Almanac (The Association of Art Critics and Theoreticians,
The Czech Section of AICA, 2013), 6.
Woolf 53
Layered with proud declarations, the syntax of the text recalls the comparatively privileged
position of Czech regions, touting Prague’s role as a site of innovation only made secondary by
Vienna. Mucha even mentions a departure from overly stiff historical compositions, representing
a separation from past and present enactments of the genre. In addition to providing a sense of
the artist’s written voice, this statement inadvertently draws on terminology commonly used in
transnational frameworks: bridges. Mucha outrightly states his determination to reach beyond the
limits of borders, instead privileging human connection above all else.
In cementing the effects of Mucha’s cosmopolitan outlook, turning back to the interim
between 1919 and 1928 reveals the role of the United States in promoting the Slav Epic via
urban centers and Czech immigrant communities. In 1920, part of the series took pride of place
on either side of the grand stairwell in the Art Institute of Chicago’s Michigan Avenue building
(See fig. 48). Running from June 17th to July 19th, the exhibit was titled “Historical Paintings of
the Slavic Nations by Alphonse Mucha,” and included five completed canvases: The Celebration
of Svantovít. When Gods Are at War, Salvation Is in the Arts (between the 8th and 10th centuries
AD) (1912) (See fig. 49), The Abolition of Serfdom in Russia. To Work in Freedom Is the
Foundation of a State (1861) (1914) (See fig. 43), Master Jan Hus Preaching at the Bethlehem
Chapel. The Magic of the Word: Truth Prevails (1412) (1916) (See fig. 50), Jan Milíč of
Kroměříž. The Magic of the Word: A Brothel Converted into a Convent (14th century) (1916)
(See fig. 51), and The Meeting at Křížky. The Magic of Words: Sub utraque (1419) (1916) (See
fig. 52).106
The lead up to their exhibition fostered a great deal of excitement, as demonstrated
through splashy headlines, like “Paintings Given to Prague Shown at Art Institute” published on
106
The Art Institute of Chicago, Historical Paintings of the Slavic Nations (Art Institute of Chicago, 1920),
https://www.artic.edu/exhibitions/5031/5-mural-paintings-illustrating-the-history-of-the-slavs-by-alphonse-mucha/.
Woolf 54
May 30th107 and “$500,000 Paintings to Be Given to Prague on Exhibition Here” published on
June 15th108, both featured in the Chicago Daily Tribune. Alongside this general press, Crane and
Mucha jointly promoted the project during its stay in the Midwest. In its society pages, the
Tribune reported on a tea held at the Cordon Club, “The presence of Mr.Crane and Mr.Mucha
here together brings to attention the great mural paintings which the Prague artist has completed
at Mr.Crane’s commission. The murals each represent one significant point in the history of the
Slavs and Mr.Crane has arranged to make a gift of the entire group to the Slavic people…”109
Though not explicitly referential to the Art Institute exhibit, its timing in April 1920 coincides
with the lead up to the show.
The images brought to American soil encompassed a wide sweep of Slavic history, going
as far back as the 8th-10th centuries AD and concluding in the 19th century. These scenes
embody the stylistic and compositional sense applied throughout all twenty paintings. For
example, The Abolition of Serfdom in Russia. To Work in Freedom Is the Foundation of a State
(1861) presents a major historical event when Emperor Alexander II enacted liberal reform to
emancipate about one third of the Russian population, about 23 million serfs, from feudal
structures. The emancipation was swift and all encompassing, also redistributing the ownership
of land to a newly established class.110 Mucha’s decision to depict such a scene was informed by
a research trip to Russia in 1913. Though the chosen scene, which features a Russian landmark,
107
Louise James Bargelt, "ART: PAINTINGS GIVEN TO PRAGUE SHOWN AT ART INSTITUTE." Chicago
Daily Tribune (1872-1922), May 30, 1920,
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/art/docview/174676528/se-2.
108
"$500,000 Paintings to be Given to Prague on Exhibition here," Chicago Daily Tribune (1872-1922), Jun 15,
1920,
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/500-000-paintings-be-given-prague-on-exhibition/docview/174631
659/se-2.
109
"Charles R. Cranes here for a Day; Tea for them at Cordon," Chicago Daily Tribune (1872-1922), Apr 20, 1920,
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/charles-r-cranes-here-day-tea-them-at-cordon/docview/174601971/
se-2.
110
Serge A. Zenkovsky, “The Emancipation of the Serfs in Retrospect,” The Russian Review 20, no. 4 (1961): 280,
https://doi.org/10.2307/126692.
Woolf 55
celebrates progress, Mucha discovered the reach of poverty and relatively little social
advancement in a Slavic nation that had been glorified by the West.111 Looking backward showed
a clear timeline of development, while the present was inconsistent in its results. Interestingly,
the decision to show Russian scenes goes against Pan-Slavic ideologies that separate themselves
from the Russophilic lens, but this canvas may correspond to Crane’s interests or a broader
acknowledgement of regional histories.
In representing the scale and monumentality of the long awaited change, Mucha utilizes
a balance of vernacular architectural landscape and vast crowds of people. Set in a mist of clouds
and fog, the colorful, onion domed towers of St. Basil’s Cathedral and roofline of the Kremlin
rise, immediately placing the painting in Moscow. In the foreground, a massive gathering of
travelers, presumably from rural regions, move about, carrying baggage and guiding livestock.
The figures wear layered attire of, generally, muted colors, the men wearing hats and the women
headscarves. Their dress corresponds to the cold weather made obvious by the snow covered
ground. They wait to hear the announcement of new freedoms. This crowd extends to the
background, growing smaller and smaller as they become distant to the viewer, representing the
number of people affected by the decree and the physical layout of Red Square.112 Like much of
his prior work, Mucha shows a deft hand in organizing space and fashioning a color palette. A
scene that might have been chaotic, maintains the spirit of the event and its corresponding
geography, whilst keeping a steady hand on compositional space so as to not overwhelm the eye.
The aesthetic and temporal scope shown at the Art Institute of Chicago is broadly
representative of what the completed project would become in terms of organization. Favoring
111
“‘The Slav Epic’ No 19: The Abolition of Serfdom in Russia. To Work in Freedom Is The Foundation of a State
(1861) (1914),” Mucha Foundation, Mucha Foundation, accessed March 17, 2024,
http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/gallery/themes/theme/slav-epic/object/228.
112
Alphonse Mucha, The Slav Epic Almanac (The Association of Art Critics and Theoreticians, The Czech Section
of AICA, 2013), 16.
Woolf 56
chronology, Mucha’s compositions offer a long reflection into the annals of Slavic memory, now
unencumbered by Austro-Hungarian expectations. Though each piece was numbered as it was
produced, the group was later reordered based on the completed timeline, starting with the
earliest scene (The Slavs in Their Original Homeland. Between the Turanian Whip and the Sword
of the Goths (between the 3rd and 6th centuries AD) (1912)). Significantly, the final piece of the
cycle number twenty, commemorates the independent Czechoslovak nation state, titled
Apotheosis: Slavs for Humanity. Four Stages of Slav History in Four Colours (1918) (1926).
According to the Mucha Foundation, the Art Institute’s show attracted upwards of 50,000
visitors in just a single week of its presentation.113 The size of this audience corresponded to two
elements: Mucha’s time spent in Chicago a little over a decade prior and the massive Czech
population living in the area. The informational text within the Art Institute’s catalog
summarizes, with some historical inconsistencies, Mucha’s career trajectory, putting particular
emphasis on the United States. For example, the second paragraph of the introductory text reads:
Mr. Mucha came to America in 1905 and in the next few years met with great success as
a teacher of advanced pupils at the Art Institute of Chicago and at the New York School
of Applied Design for Women. In 1908, he delivered the Scammon lectures in Fullerton
Hall and in the following years a series of lectures on composition. These lectures and his
teaching gave him a secure place in the hearts and memories of those who were
associated with the Institute at that time. During his visit in Chicago an exhibition of
Mr.Mucha’s decorative designs and mural panels was held in the Institute…114
In essence, the exhibition of his Slav Epic was a fond return to familiar ground, in terms of the
organization and the city itself. Especially following the end of World War I, the resurgence of
global, cosmopolitan artistic networks in peacetime allowed for message-driven endeavors. In
this case, the narrative prompted consideration of Slavic identity, portrayed in a particularly
113
“Alphonse Mucha Timeline,” Mucha Foundation, Mucha Foundation, accessed March 17, 2024,
http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/timeline.
114
The Art Institute of Chicago, Historical Paintings of the Slavic Nations (Art Institute of Chicago, 1920), 2,
https://www.artic.edu/exhibitions/5031/5-mural-paintings-illustrating-the-history-of-the-slavs-by-alphonse-mucha/.
Woolf 57
grandiose fashion. History painting, as utilized by Mucha, had a new role when put to work for
the Slav Epic, embodying representations of self-determination and new nationhood.
When the exhibition of the five grand canvases concluded, apparently extended from the
original July end date into November of 1920, Chicago mourned the disappearance of the murals
from the grand staircase. On December 3, 1920, the Chicago Daily Tribune published an article
titled “Mucha’s Paintings Gone; Art Institute Walls are Bare Now.”115 Just as the early publicity
had done, the text heralded Mucha’s talent as a historical and decorative painter, but, more
importantly, it asked a selfish question.
Prague is a long cry from Chicago, but the need for mural decorations is as urgent here as
ever it was in the city of Prague. Why should not incidents of America and of Chicago
face each other across the wide stairway of the Art Institute? Mucha has made two or
three possible sketches which might be followed in the development of such a scheme.
The cost would probably reach $50,000.116
Having made such an impact, an American audience looked to co-opt Mucha’s model of national
commemoration, filling the void left by the Slav Epic with similarly structured narrative work.
Even more specifically, they sought to mimic the simultaneous locality and universality of the
Slav Epic cycle, centering Chicago and America in demonstrating a sense of identity and
gravitas. Based on the article, Mucha endorsed such a development, but it seems little came to be
of the proposals.
Once the five canvases left the Midwest in 1920, they never returned, rather remaining in
America to end up in the other major metropolis central to Mucha’s cosmopolitan networking:
New York. Presented under the same exhibition title, the canvases took up temporary residence
at the Brooklyn Museum from January through December of 1921. Their arrival on the East
115
J. E, "MUCHA'S PAINTINGS GONE, ART INSTITUTE WALLS ARE BARE NOW," Chicago Daily Tribune (1872-1922),
Dec 03, 1920,
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/muchas-paintings-gone-art-institute-walls-are/docview/174744992/se-2.
116
J. E, "MUCHA'S PAINTINGS GONE, ART INSTITUTE WALLS ARE BARE NOW."
Woolf 58
Coast was reported upon with the same sort of anticipation seen in Chicago presses. On January
16th, the New York Times published an article titled “ Alphonse Mucha’s Mural Decorations,”117
with the exhibition further mentioned in general art announcements on January 9th.118 The
January 16th review, penned by a ‘Miss. Carey,’119 reveals an understanding of personal cultural
identity in relation to a general public, offering a new level of accessible specificity in the wake
of World War I and Czechoslovak independence. The reporter writes:
Mr.Mucha is a native of the Czechoslovak country of Moravia and the fire and force of
his race are not obliterated by the cool gray tonality and the decorative flatness of his
work. The ardent spirit of a powerful emotional inheritance is made more potent by the
chill and austerity of its envelope… No painters of Anglo-Saxon origin could use
symbolism in the way it is used in the Czechoslovak decorations.120
Where self-dictated documentation offered Mucha and his wife the means to represent
themselves accurately in 1909, by 1921 his reputation featured a new aspect of more reliable
cultural accuracy. However, exoticization of the Eastern European ‘other’ remained, highlighting
his foreign nature to the American public, even though the lens was positive.
Mucha further contributed to the Brooklyn Museum’s presentation by playing a key role
in the marketing of his work. Characteristic of his well-known Art Nouveau methods and
overarching sensibilities within the Slav Epic, the corresponding poster is striking in its sparing
color palette and line-driven rendering (See fig. 53). The only three ink colors utilized are richly
saturated shades of green and red, alongside limited use of black. Unlike the more vibrant color
lithography of his early successes, Mucha capitalizes on negative space, allowing the warm
117
"THE WORLD OF ART: ALPHONSE MUCHA'S MURAL DECORATIONS," New York Times (1857-1922),
Jan 16, 1921, https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/world-art/docview/98487993/se-2.
118
"ART: EXHIBITIONS OF PAINTINGS LECTURES AT THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART. LAST DATE FOR
THE INDEPENDENTS. JEWISH ART FROM POLAND. THE NEW HOME OF THE ART CENTRE, INC. A GROUP OF
FOREIGN AND AMERICAN PICTURES. ZORN'S ETCHINGS," New York Times (1857-1922), Jan 09, 1921,
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/art/docview/98344648/se-2.
119
Gertrude M. Young, “ALPHONSE MUCHA, THE CZECHO-SLOVAC PAINTER,” The Brooklyn Museum
Quarterly 8, no. 2 (1921): 60, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26459452.
120
"THE WORLD OF ART: ALPHONSE MUCHA'S MURAL DECORATIONS.”
Woolf 59
cream color of the paper to fill in where detail pulls back. The main subject of the Brooklyn
Museum advertisem*nt is a Slavic girl in a floral headdress, culturally traditional garments, and
heavy jewelry. With long flowing hair, large eyes, and small lips, her gaze confronts the viewer.
This personification is contained within a mushroom-like shape, narrow through the stem, and
domed at the top, red lining accented by green background and text. The typography is iconically
Art Nouveau, utilizing curving shapes and embellishment to spell out, “Mucha Exhibition,
Brooklyn Museum, Jan. Feb. 1921.” The densely packed shape is surrounded by wide empty
margins, a stylistic and practical decision.121 In comparison to the advertisem*nts created during
the Paris years, the work with an American-centric audience looks comparatively more
contemporary in its relative simplicity within the context of Mucha’s broader catalog.
However, the evolution of Mucha’s Art Nouveau tendencies does not eliminate the
consistency of his chosen symbols. Much like Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia and
the Municipal House commission, the young woman holds a large ring in her left hand, this time
adorned with thorns and ringed by a border of stars, a gesture towards the eternal nature of
Slavism.122 The vibrant red flora sitting atop her plentiful hair further recalls the lime tree leaves
woven through Slavia’s braids and the large flowers crowning Bosnia. Twenty-one years after
the Paris Exposition Universelle and fourteen years after the completion of Josephine’s
commemorative portrait, the Moravian artist continued to employ the same visual cues to denote
imagery of personified Slavic significance, drawing upon the language of religious icons to
solidify an image of collective understanding. Though exiting the Midwest, Mucha’s
121
The Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs: Art & Architecture Collection, The New
York Public Library, "Mucha Exhibition Brooklyn Museum" New York Public Library Digital Collections, Accessed
March 22, 2024, https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47df-f61f-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99.
122
“Design for the poster for the Mucha Exhibition at the Brooklyn Museum, New York, January-February 1921
(1920),” Mucha Foundation, accessed March 22, 2024,
http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/gallery/browse-works/object/175.
Woolf 60
advertisem*nt for his New York show embodies the way he used a lexicon of props to
communicate across borders, through transnational networks and immigrant communities.
In the April 1921 edition of The Brooklyn Museum Quarterly, Gertude M. Young wrote a
lush description of Mucha’s achievements. In reference to Master Jan Hus Preaching at the
Bethlehem Chapel. The Magic of the Word: Truth Prevails (1412), visual analysis emphasizes the
sheer impact of the Slav Epic shown in appropriately oversized spaces. “Here the sense of
crowds in sombre, vaulted spaces, stirred by some one thrilling emotion, is most suggestively
rendered. The dramatic element is felt rather than seen and the whole canvas is flat with the
flatness requisite for some vast interior.”123 The Brooklyn Museum’s presentation of “Historical
Paintings of the Slavic Nations by Alphonse Mucha” attracted a total audience of approximately
600,000 visitors over its duration and received great praise.124
In attracting a multiregional American audience, Mucha retooled the initially lukewarm
Czech response. Thus, in 1928 when the entire Slav Epic cycle was donated to the city of Prague,
as had been agreed upon in 1910, the mention of Mucha’s transnational interpersonal
connections was intrinsic, even as the donation itself localized the tenth anniversary of
Czechoslovak independence. The artist’s ability to simultaneously show specificity and
universality becomes clear in the final piece of the entire series, canvas twenty, titled Apotheosis:
Slavs for Humanity. Four Stages of Slav History in Four Colours (1918) (1926) (See fig. 54).
Apotheosis, with its rainbow palette, is made up of several collaged scenes, each pulled from a
seminal moment in Slavic history arranged in chronological order from the bottom up. Across
the center of the composition, a band of yellow glows behind Czech and Slovak soldiers
123
Gertrude M. Young, “ALPHONSE MUCHA, THE CZECHO-SLOVAC PAINTER,” 58.
“Design for the poster for the Mucha Exhibition at the Brooklyn Museum, New York, January-February 1921
(1920),” Mucha Foundation.
124
Woolf 61
returning from World War I. To the right, a group of flags wave, the American stars and stripes
featured prominently.
Outside the conflict itself, the American flag calls back to the Cleveland Agreement and
the Pittsburgh Agreement, which supported formation of the Czechoslovak nation-state by
formalizing relations between the Czech and Slovak peoples. Completed on American soil in
1915, the Cleveland Agreement helped form the Czecho-Slovak National Committee, who
would negotiate in Paris and lobby before congress to declare independence. Three years later,
the Pittsburgh Agreement, signed by President Masaryk on May 31, 1918, solidified the terms of
the earlier document, which advocated for a democratic government, recognition of regional
languages, and free elections.125 Additional allies to Czechoslovakia stand alongside the
independent nation.126 Apotheosis acknowledges the role of transnational networks that led to the
creation of modern states. Developed over a span of twenty-six years, the Slav Epic is an all
encompassing ode to independence and representation. However, Mucha’s dedication to his
cause never existed in a vacuum, thus his historial masterwork remains equally as cosmopolitan
as any mass-distributed lithograph, putting down strong roots in the context of Chicago.
125
“Cleveland Agreement of 1915,” Encyclopedia of Cleveland History, Case Western Reserve University, accessed
May 28, 2024, https://case.edu/ech/articles/c/cleveland-agreement-1915.
126
“‘The Slav Epic cycle’ No. 20: Apotheosis: Slavs for Humanity. Four Stages of Slav History in Four Colours
(1918).” Mucha Foundation. Accessed February 11, 2024.
http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/gallery/browse-works/object_type/paintings/object/231#:~:text=Each%20repre
sents%20a%20successive%20period,enemy%20and%20the%20repeated%20attacks.
Woolf 62
Conclusion
Only eight years after completing his contribution to the Saint Vitus Cathedral, Alphonse Mucha
passed away on July 14, 1939, just before his 79th birthday.127 The cause of his death, much like
his motivations in life, is linked to the Czechoslovak state. Only independent for twenty years,
the First Republic of Czechoslovakia was chipped away, as Sudetenland, the nation’s
significantly German northern and western border regions, was offered as appeasem*nt to Hitler
under the Munich Agreement on September 30, 1938.128 Hungary took control of the remaining
portions of southernmost Slovakia and Carpathian Ruthenia beginning in 1938.129 Not even a
year later, on March 14, 1939, the new Slovak State was declared as a client of the Nazi party.130
The following day, March 15, 1939, Hitler pressured the president of Czechoslovakia, Emil
Hácha, to sign away independence, leading the remaining regions to be occupied, renamed as the
Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. Hácha remained State President as a figurehead and little
else.131 By 1944 all of these regions were officially under Nazi control. A golden age ended in
cultural turmoil, crisis, and resumed oppression.
Mucha did not die in Czechoslovakia. He died in the Protectorate of Bohemia and
Moravia. His cause of death, though officially pneumonia, occurred after arrest and interrogation
by Nazi occupiers for his involvement as a Czechoslovak nationalist and leading Freemason.132
127
Alphonse Mucha, ed. Agnes Husslein-Arco, Jean Louis Gaillemin, Michael Hilaire, and Christiane Lange
(Vienna: Belvedere Museum, 2009), 338.
128
“Text of Munich Agreement: Between Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy, Concluded in Munich on
September 29, 1938,” World Affairs 101, no. 4 (1938): 249–51, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20663184.
129
Leslie M. Waters,“Adjudicating Loyalty: Identity Politics and Civil Administration in the Hungarian-Slovak
Borderlands, 1938–1940,” Contemporary European History 24, no. 3 (2015): 351–74.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/26294063.
130
John S. Conway, “The Churches, the Slovak State and the Jews 1939-1945,” The Slavonic and East European
Review 52, no. 126 (1974): 85–112, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4206836.
131
J. A. Boucek, “Post Munich Czechoslovakia: A Few Historical Notes,” Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue
Canadienne Des Slavistes 17, no. 1 (1975): 63, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40866831.
132
Mucha was initiated in 1898 at the Paris Lodge of Freemasons, maintaining membership until his death. In 1922,
following Czechoslovakia’s founding in 1918, he was elected Sovereign Grand Commander of the Czech Supreme
Council of Freemasons. Mucha went on to publish a book on Freemasonry in 1925.
Woolf 63
He passed away as a celebrated artist and advocate, interred amongst other patriots and
innovators in the Slavin Tomb at Prague’s Vyšehrad Cemetery. Mucha left behind a wife and two
adult children, all of whom survived World War II. Furthermore, a great deal of his massive
portfolio outlived him, supported by the mass production of posters and other means of
preservation or storage.133
Commemorated by his Czech brethren, Mucha was not forgotten on American soil, his
passing written about in New York134 and Chicago. On July 18, 1939, the Chicago Daily Tribune
published an obituary titled, “Alphonse Mucha, 79, Famed Mural Painter, Is Dead.” The text
read:
Alphonse Mucha, famed as the creator of many murals depicting the history of the Slavic
race, died last night at the age of 79. Born in Moravia, he went to Paris at an early age
where he joined the modern style school of those days and won instant fame. Ardently
patriotic, Mucha returned to Prague when Czecho-Slovakia was created and became a
sort of painter laureate in the new state. He designed the first Czecho-Slovak banknotes
and recently began work on a gigantic mural portraying Bohemia’s history. The German
occupation interrupted this labor of love and the shock it produced is said to have
contributed to his death. Several of his murals, which had hung in the Chicago Art
Institute, were brought here in 1920.135
Though the timeline within the commemoration is slightly askew, the American newspaper
effectively encompassed the breadth of his nationalistic efforts, pinpointing the heartbreak of
recent events and reminding the public of the artist’s connection to Chicago.
Only five months prior, on February 15, 1939, Charles Crane, Mucha’s Chicago-born
patron, died of influenza in Palm Springs, California at the age of 80. However, unlike Mucha
who died after Nazi interrogation, Crane spent the latter years of his life involved with Arab
133
Jiří Mucha, Alphonse Maria Mucha (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1989), 293.
"Obituary." New York Times (1923-), July, 1939,
https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/obituary/docview/54898932/se-2.
135
"ALPHONSE MUCHA, 79, FAMED MURAL PAINTER, IS DEAD," Chicago Daily Tribune (1923-1963), July
18, 1939,
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/alphonse-mucha-79-famed-mural-painter-is-dead/docview/175637
085/se-2.
134
Woolf 64
affairs in the Middle East and deepening his already anti-Semitic views to become a Nazi
sympathizer. F.W Brecher writes, “With the advent of Hitlerian Germany, Crane, in what was to
be a final burst of energy, worked in Europe and the Near East to organize a purposeful effort by
the Vatican, the Arabs, and Germany to counter the 'Jewish menace' to the Christian and Islamic
world.”136 Crane went so far as to meet Hitler in Berlin on October 6, 1933, praising the
Reichschancellor. His preserved correspondence reveals further use of Nazi terminology, such as
‘the Jewish problem.’137 An advocate for certain subjugated groups, Crane’s hatred for Jewish
populations complicates the legacy of domestic and international philanthropy.
The diplomat, Slavophile, and industrial heir was eulogized across multiple major news
sources, including the Chicago Daily Tribune, The New York Times138, and The Washington
Post.139 His hometown paper noted, “His two daughters, Mrs. Frances Crane of Wood’s Hole,
Mass., and Mrs. Harold Bradley of Madison, Wis., left yesterday for California. His son, John, is
in Italy. Another son, Richard T. Crane III, died last October.”140 Though the Moravian artist is
not mentioned in this final public documentation, the subjects of two portraits he worked on are.
Both daughters had connections with the now fallen Czechoslovak state, Frances as the ex-wife
of Jan Masaryk and Josephine as the allegorized Slavia. Czechoslovakia remains unspoken, but
present.
136
F. W. Brecher, “Charles R. Crane’s Crusade for the Arabs, 1919-39,” Middle Eastern Studies 24, no. 1 (1988): 42,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4283221.
137
Brecher, 46.
138
"CHARLES R. CRANE, EX-ENVOY, 80, DIES: NAMED MINISTER TO CHINA BY TAFT, BUT
RECALLED, HE WAS SENT THERE BY WILSON ALSO ON RUSSIAN MISSION RETIRED HEAD OF
CHICAGO FIRM MAKING BATHROOM FIXTURES GAVE MUCH TO CHARITY SUPPORTER OF TAFT
KNOX FORCED RECALL MADE RUSSIAN SURVEY," New York Times (1923-), Feb 16, 1939,
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/charles-r-crane-ex-envoy-80-dies/docview/102990659/se-2.
139
"Charles R. Crane, Ex-Envoy, Dies," The Washington Post (1923-1954), Feb 16, 1939,
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/charles-r-crane-ex-envoy-dies/docview/151216798/se-2.
140
"CHARLES R. CRANE DIES; DIPLOMAT, MANUFACTURER: 3 DAY ILLNESS IN CALIFORNIA FATAL
TO CHICAGOAN," Chicago Daily Tribune (1923-1963), Feb 16, 1939,
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/charles-r-crane-dies-diplomat-manufacturer/docview/175229543/s
e-2.
Woolf 65
The Chicago Daily Tribune’s contributions to Mucha’s recorded history mark his
achievements from the earliest days in 1906 to the end of his life. This form of recognition
corresponds to his continued impact on the Midwestern metropolis. However, in returning to the
core of this research, it is important to ask the inverse question: how did Chicago affect Mucha’s
push for Czechoslovak self-determination and independence via aesthetics? In essence, the city
answered Mucha’s call for professional development, cultural community, and patronage.
Chicago had the best of both worlds: a respected artistic community and a well-established
Czech immigrant presence. Its likelihood to become a productive space for the visiting Moravian
artist was high, written into its very make up.
Beyond comforts found in Pilsen or employment at the Art Institute, Chicago fostered
aesthetic growth. Even before his first arrival to America in 1904, Mucha’s practice evolved to
address a need for individual Slavic representation in the face of imperial censorship at the 1900
Exposition Universelle. Bosnia, displayed in the Parisian pavilion, foreshadows the creation of
other feminine deities, underscoring collective identity in an age of crumbling empire and
desired independence. Exiting the European continent, Mucha’s application of parallel methods
in the Midwest carries through the thread of embodied, allegorical representation. Portrait of
Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia functions two fold as a sentimental wedding portrait and as
part of a growing Czechoslovak visual vocabulary. An American visage, with roots in Chicago,
coincides with the call for self-determination, giving a literal face to the regional cause.
Furthermore, the portrait’s commissioner, Charles Crane, originated in the same urban
American geography, opening doors for Czech politicians and artists globally. Borders mean less
than the connections spurred by interpersonal networks, especially in an age of shifting maps.
Crane’s support never waned, stabilizing Mucha’s ability to accomplish his greatest nationalistic
Woolf 66
masterwork, the Slav Epic. Even after successful Czechoslovak independence in 1918, the five
pieces displayed at the Art Institute of Chicago found great acclaim. The potential of Pan-Slavic
artistry did not wane with independence, but altered, now representing memories in the road to
success instead of a call for recognition. Across all three case studies between 1900 and 1920,
motifs overlap, illustrating the symbols and compositional tools applied to shape meaningful,
localized imagery. These elements are constant throughout France, Czechoslovakia, and
Chicago. Additionally, recognition of those same works carries through to the present, acting as
reminders of earlier nationalism, intertwined with the more known Art Nouveau.
Though initially suppressed by the disintegration of Czech independence during fascist
occupation, followed by decades as a Soviet satellite state, Mucha’s legacy thrives eighty-five
years after his unfortunate death on a local and international scale, cultivated by the efforts of his
son and biographer, Jiří. Beyond an art historical record, his descendants carried on artistic
practices. His daughter, Jaroslava, became a painter, learning at her father’s side by assisting with
the Slav Epic. Presently, Jiří’s daughter, Jarmila Plocková, designs jewelry after her grandfather’s
imagery.141 Alphonse Mucha remains a painter laureate of sorts for the contemporary Czech
state, a signifier of artistic innovation and talent, much like Van Gogh is for the Dutch. Prague
functions as a center for Mucha glorification, hosting the Mucha Museum, numerous temporary
exhibitions, the Klementinum, Obecní Dům, and other sites. Illustrations adorn tourist souvenirs
and commercial advertisem*nts. Alphonse Mucha has become synonymous with current,
independent Czech visual identity, moving serendipitously with the land he advocated for.
Mucha the patriot and maker rises when Slavic recognition is successful.
141
“Dynasty of Mucha,” Muchova Plockova Art & Design, Mucha JP Prague, accessed April 10, 2024,
https://www.muchaplockova.com/cs/rodinna-historie.
Woolf 67
After the Soviet Union officially fell in 1991, Czechoslovakia once again had its own fate
to determine. The Czech and Slovak regions that had come together for economic stability in
1918 parted ways, going through the Velvet Divorce in 1992 to become the Czech Republic and
Slovakia (See fig. 55).142 Self-determination had new life and so did Mucha’s role in his
homeland. Though this role might be diluted down to the digestible, marketable beauty of his
style, it is simultaneously essential to address the motivations behind mass consumability. Czech
independence and representation sprouted through aesthetic appeal, growing far beyond the
region itself to reach an audience of immigrants, wealthy patrons, and world leaders. Mucha’s
vines, as seen in Slavia and Bosnia alike, sprawled out in Chicago, allowing a return to the Czech
homeland he had originally left to advocate for in the first place.
142
Milan Svec, “Czechoslovakia’s Velvet Divorce,” Current History 91, no. 568 (1992): 376–80,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/45316719.
Woolf 68
Figures
Left: Fig. 1 Vyšehrad Cemetery, Date Unknown. Prague, Czechia.
Right: Fig. 2 Gate of Bohemian National Cemetery, Date Unknown. Chicago, Illinois.
Left: Fig 3 Lauren Woolf. Slavín Tomb, 2024. Prague, Czechia.
Right: Fig. 4 Lauren Woolf. Name Placard featuring Alfons Mucha, 2024. Prague, Czechia.
Woolf 69
Fig. 5 Alphonse Mucha. Self-portrait in a
Russian shirt ‘rubashka’in the studio, Rue de
la Grande Chaumiére, Paris, Early 1890s.
Reproduced from original glass plate
negative. Mucha Trust.
Fig. 6 Map of the First Republic of Czechoslovakia, c. 1919.
Woolf 70
Left: Fig. 7 Lauren Woolf. Historic Square of Mikulov, 2024. Mikulov, Czechia.
Right: Fig. 8 Lauren Woolf. Memorial to Alphonse Mucha, 2024. Mikulov, Czechia.
Left and Right: Figs. 9 and 10 Lauren Woolf. Uncovered Mucha Ceiling Frescoes in Hrušovany
nad Jevišovkou’s Town Hall, 2024. Hrušovany nad Jevišovkou, Czechia.
Woolf 71
Left: Fig. 11 Karel Václav Mašek, Czech Painter as a student at the Munich Academy of Art,
1886. Reproduced from original glass plate negative. Mucha Trust.
Right: Fig 12 Students at the Munich Academy of Art, 1886. Photograph. Mucha Trust.
Fig. 13 Paul Gauguin posing in Mucha’s
studio, Rue de la Grande Chaumière, Paris,
1893. Photograph. Mucha Trust.
Woolf 72
Left: Fig. 14 Alphonse Mucha. Sarah Bernhardt as Gismonda, 1894. Color lithograph, 85 x 28 ⅝
in. Wichita, Wichita Art Museum.
Right: Fig. 15 Alphonse Mucha. Médée, 1898. Color lithograph, 205.7 x 73.7 cm. London,
Victoria and Albert Museum.
Woolf 73
Fig. 16 Karel Pánek. The Bosnia-Herzegovina Pavilion, Paris World's Fair, 1900. Photograph.
Providence, Brown University Library.
Fig. 17 Alphonse Mucha. Bosnia & Herzegovina Pavilion- illustration featured in ‘Le Figaro
Illustré’ (1 March 1900), 1900. Reproduction from Le Figaro Illustré after watercolor original.
Mucha Trust.
Woolf 74
Left: Fig. 18 Interior of the Bosnian Pavilion after Opening, 1900. Paris, Musée du Petit Palais.
Right: Fig. 19 Paris Exposition: Bosnia-Herzegovinian Pavilion, Paris, France, 1900, 1900.
Lantern slide 3.25x4in, 3.25 x 4 in. Brooklyn Museum, Goodyear.
Fig. 20 Alphonse Mucha. Bosnian people in ceremonial costumes-from research trip to the
Balkans, 1899. Original vintage print. Mucha Trust.
Woolf 75
Fig. 21 Alphonse Mucha. Menu for the Bosnian Pavilion Restaurant at the Paris Exhibition
1900, 1900. Colour Lithograph. Mucha Trust.
Fig. 22 Alphonse Mucha. Bosnia Offers Her Products to the World Exhibition 1900, 1900.
Watercolor and tempera on canvas. Prague, The Museum of Decorative Arts.
Woolf 76
Left: Fig. 23 Alphonse Mucha. Zodiacque (“La Plume”), 1896-97. Color lithograph from
multiple stones on tan wove paper, 63 x 47 cm. Chicago, Art Institute of Chicago.
Right: Fig. 24 Alphonse Mucha. La Samaritaine, 1897. Color lithograph from multiple stones on
paper, 175.2 x 59.7 cm. Chicago, Art Institute of Chicago.
Woolf 77
Fig. 25 Alphonse Mucha. Maruška Chytilová V
Muchove Studiu, 1903. Gelatin silver print.
Fig. 26 Palette and Chisel Club. Ephemera from the “Bohemian Night” hosted in Alphonse
Mucha’s honor, 1906.
Woolf 78
Fig. 27 Alphonse Mucha. Zdeňka Černý The
greatest Bohemian violoncellist, 1913. Color
lithograph. Washington D.C., Library of Congress.
Fig. 28 Alphonse Mucha. Jos. Triner’s
Angelica Bitter Tonic, 1907. Lithograph,
21.25 x 19.25 in.
Woolf 79
Fig. 29 Alphonse Mucha. Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia, 1908. Oil and tempera
on canvas, 154 x 92.5 cm. Prague, National Gallery.
Woolf 80
Fig. 30 Crane, Charles Richard, undated.
Photographic print, 21.4 x 16.6 cm. Chicago,
University of Chicago Archives, Archival
Photographic Files.
Fig. 31 Dana Hull. Portrait of Josephine
(Crane) Bradley, 1908. Black and white
photographic print, 13 x 15.5 in.
Madison, Wisconsin Historical Society.
Woolf 81
Fig. 32 Josef Mánes. A
Village Church, first half of
the 1850s. Oil on canvas,
21 x 24 cm. Prague,
National Gallery.
Fig. 33 Alphonse Mucha, Slavia, 1907. Color
Lithograph.
Woolf 82
Fig. 34 Sokol Museum and Library. Sokol
logo with the seal of Czechoslovakia.
Figs. 35 and 36 Alphonse Mucha. 100 Korun, 1920.
Woolf 83
G
Figs. 37 and 38 Alphonse Mucha. Window in St. Vitus Cathedral, 1931. Stained Glass. Prague.
Woolf 84
Fig. 39 Interior of the Lord Mayor’s Hall, Date Unknown. Prague, Obecní Dům.
Fig. 40 Lauren Woolf. Exterior of the Obecní Dům, 2024. Prague, Czechia.
Woolf 85
Fig. 41 Lauren Woolf. Detail of the Lord Mayor’s Hall (Ceiling Mural,“Slavonic Concord”),
2024. Prague, Czechia.
Fig. 42 Mucha, Maruška, and Jaroslava in the Grounds of Zbiroh Castle, approximately 1910.
Photograph. Mucha Trust.
Woolf 86
Fig. 43 Alphonse Mucha. ‘The Slav Epic cycle’ No. 19: The Abolition of Serfdom in Russia. To
Work in Freedom is the Foundation of a State (1861), 1914. Egg tempera on canvas, 610 x 810
cm. Moravský Krumlov.
Fig. 44 Alphonse Mucha. ‘The Slav Epic cycle’ No. 14: The Sacrifice in Szigetvár by Nikola
Zrinski. The Shield of Christendom (1566), 1914. Egg tempera on canvas, 610 x 810 cm.
Moravský Krumlov.
Woolf 87
Fig. 45 Alphonse Mucha. ‘The Slav Epic cycle’ No. 15: The Brethren School in Ivančice, the
Printing of the Czech Bible. God Gave Us the Gift of Language (1578), 1914. Egg tempera on
canvas, 610 x 810 cm. Moravský Krumlov.
Fig. 46 Mucha with the Slav Epic canvases exhibited in the Klementinum, Prague, 1919.
Reproduced from original glass plate negative. Mucha Trust.
Woolf 88
Fig. 47 Lauren Woolf. Main Reading Room of the Czech National Library, 2024. Prague,
Czechia.
Fig. 48 The Grand Staircase
featuring monumental works
from the History of the Slavs by
Alphonse Mucha, 1920.
Photograph. Chicago, Art
Institute of Chicago.
Woolf 89
Fig. 49 Alphonse Mucha. ‘The Slav Epic cycle’ No. 2: The Celebration of Svantovít. When the
Gods are at War, Salvation is in the Arts (between the 8th and 10th centuries AD), 1912. Egg
tempera on canvas, 610 x 810 cm. Moravský Krumlov.
Fig. 50 Alphonse Mucha. ‘The Slav Epic cycle’ No. 9: Master Jan Hus Preaching at the
Bethlehem Chapel. The Magic of the Word: Truth Prevails (1412), 1916. Egg tempera on canvas,
610 x 810 cm. Moravský Krumlov.
Woolf 90
Fig. 51 Alphonse Mucha. ‘The Slav Epic
cycle’ No. 7: Jan Milíč of Kroměříž. The
Magic of the Word: A Brothel Converted into
a Convent (14th century), 1916. Egg tempera
on canvas, 620 x 405 cm. Moravský
Krumlov.
Fig. 52 Alphonse Mucha. ‘The Slav Epic
cycle’ No. 10: The Meeting at Křížky. The
Magic of Words: Sub utraque (1419), 1916.
Egg tempera on canvas, 620 x 405 cm.
Moravský Krumlov.
Woolf 91
Fig. 53 Alphonse Mucha. Mucha Exhibition
Brooklyn Museum, 1921. Poster. New York,
New York Public Library.
Fig. 54 Alphonse Mucha. ‘The Slav
Epic cycle’ No. 20: Apotheosis: Slavs
for Humanity. Four Stages of Slav
History in Four Colours (1918),
1926. Egg tempera on canvas, 480 x
405 cm. Moravský Krumlov.
Woolf 92
Fig. 55 Map of the Czech Republic and Slovakia split after the Velvet Divorce, c. 1992.
Woolf 93
Bibliography
“About Bohemian National Cemetery.” Bohemian National Cemetery. Bohemian National
Cemetery, accessed April 11, 2024. https://www.bnca1877.org/about.
"ALPHONSE MUCHA, 79, FAMED MURAL PAINTER, IS DEAD." Chicago Daily Tribune
(1923-1963), 1939 Jul 18, 1939/07/18/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/alphonse-mucha-79-famed-mural-painte
r-is-dead/docview/175637085/se-2.
Alphonse Mucha. Ed. Agnes Husslein-Arco, Jean Louis Gaillemin, Michael Hilaire, and
Christiane Lange. Vienna: Belvedere Museum, 2009.
“Alphonse Mucha Timeline.” Mucha Foundation. Mucha Foundation, accessed December 8,
2023. http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/timeline.
Alphonse Mucha to Charles R. Crane, March 16, 1915. Bakhmeteff Archive of Russian and East
European Culture. New York, Columbia University.
"AMERICAN SHOP GIRLS MORE BEAUTIFUL THAN THE FAMOUS MODELS OF
PARIS SAYS ALPHONSE MUCHA, ARTIST." Chicago Daily Tribune (1872-1922),
1908 Aug 23, 1908/08/23/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/american-shop-girls-more-beautiful-tha
n-famous/docview/173488661/se-2.
Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of
Nationalism. Verso, revised 2016.
Andrén, Mats. “Longing for Borders.” In Thinking Europe: A History of the European Idea since
1800, 46:46–77. Berghahn Books, 2023. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv36cj83p.7.
“A New Alphonse Mucha Trail Planned Across South Moravia.” Mucha Foundation. Mucha
Woolf 94
Foundation, accessed February 25, 2024.
http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/about/news/item/a-new-alphonse-mucha-trail-planne
d-across-south-moravia.
"ART: EXHIBITIONS OF PAINTINGS LECTURES AT THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM
OF ART. LAST DATE FOR THE INDEPENDENTS. JEWISH ART FROM POLAND.
THE NEW HOME OF THE ART CENTRE, INC. A GROUP OF FOREIGN AND
AMERICAN PICTURES. ZORN'S ETCHINGS." New York Times (1857-1922), 1921
Jan 09, 1921/01/09/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/art/docview/98344648/se-2.
Bargelt, Louise James. "ART: PAINTINGS GIVEN TO PRAGUE SHOWN AT ART
INSTITUTE." Chicago Daily Tribune (1872-1922), 1920 May 30, 1920/05/30/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/art/docview/174676528/se-2.
Blume, Mary. “The French Icon Marianne á la Mode.” International Herald Tribune, published
July 16, 2004.
https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/16/style/the-french-icon-marianne-la-mode.html.
Boisserie, Etienne. “Autumn 1918–Spring 1919: Six Months of Postwar Material and Political
Uncertainty in Slovakia.” The Hungarian Historical Review 9, no. 1 (2020): 26–50.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26984100.
Bookman, Milica Z. “War and Peace: The Divergent Breakups of Yugoslavia and
Czechoslovakia.” Journal of Peace Research 31, no. 2 (1994): 175–87.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/425031.
Boucek, J. A. “Post Munich Czechoslovakia: A Few Historical Notes.” Canadian Slavonic
Papers / Revue Canadienne Des Slavistes 17, no. 1 (1975): 44–64.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40866831.
Woolf 95
Brabcová-Orliková, Jana, Jasna Šamić, Petr Štembera, and Filip Wittlich. Alfons Mucha: The
Pavilion of Bosnia and Herzegovina at the Exposition Universelle 1900. Prague: Museum
of Decorative Arts, 2016.
Brecher, F.W. “Charles R. Crane’s Crusade for the Arabs, 1919-39.” Middle Eastern Studies 24,
no. 1 (1988): 42–55. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4283221.
Chapple, Amos. “When Mucha Painted Bosnia.” Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Radio Free
Europe/Radio Liberty, published September 1, 2020.
https://www.rferl.org/a/when-alfonse-mucha-painted-bosnia/30813702.html.
"Charles R. Cranes here for a Day; Tea for them at Cordon." Chicago Daily Tribune (1872-1922), 1920
Apr 20, 1920/04/20/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/charles-r-cranes-here-day-tea-them-at-cordon/do
cview/174601971/se-2.
“Charles Crane.” Mucha Foundation. Mucha Foundation, accessed May 29, 2024.
https://www.muchafoundation.org/en/about/charles-crane.
"CHARLES R. CRANE DIES; DIPLOMAT, MANUFACTURER: 3 DAY ILLNESS IN
CALIFORNIA FATAL TO CHICAGOAN." Chicago Daily Tribune (1923-1963), 1939
Feb 16, 1939/02/16/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/charles-r-crane-dies-diplomat-manufact
urer/docview/175229543/se-2.
"Charles R. Crane, Ex-Envoy, Dies." The Washington Post (1923-1954), 1939 Feb 16,
1939/02/16/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/charles-r-crane-ex-envoy-dies/docview/
151216798/se-2.
"CHARLES R. CRANE, EX-ENVOY, 80, DIES: NAMED MINISTER TO CHINA BY TAFT, BUT
Woolf 96
RECALLED, HE WAS SENT THERE BY WILSON ALSO ON RUSSIAN MISSION
RETIRED HEAD OF CHICAGO FIRM MAKING BATHROOM FIXTURES GAVE MUCH TO
CHARITY SUPPORTER OF TAFT KNOX FORCED RECALL MADE RUSSIAN SURVEY."
New York Times (1923-), 1939 Feb 16, 1939/02/16/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/charles-r-crane-ex-envoy-80-dies/docview/1029
90659/se-2.
“Chicago’s Pilsen Neighborhood.” The Czech and Slovak Genealogy Society of Illinois. Czech
and Slovak Genealogy Society of Illinois, accessed April 12, 2024. https://csagsi.org/.
Clavin, Patricia. “Defining Transnationalism.” Contemporary European History 14, no. 4
(2005): 421–39. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20081278.
“Cleveland Agreement of 1915.” Encyclopedia of Cleveland History. Case Western Reserve
University, accessed May 28, 2024.
https://case.edu/ech/articles/c/cleveland-agreement-1915.
Consulate General of the Czech Republic in Chicago. “Czechs and Chicago: Special University
of Chicago Edition.” Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic. August 29, 2016.
https://www.mzv.cz/file/2052106/Czechs_News__2016_Aug_29_Proof.pdf.
Conway, John S. “The Churches, the Slovak State and the Jews 1939-1945.” The Slavonic and
East European Review 52, no. 126 (1974): 85–112. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4206836.
“Czech National Slavín Tomb.” Slavín. Slavín, accessed April 11, 2024. https://slavin.cz/slavin/.
Delanty, Gerard. “The Cosmopolitan Imagination.” Revista CIDOB d’Afers Internacionals, no.
82/83 (2008): 217–30. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40586351.
“Design for the poster for the Mucha Exhibition at the Brooklyn Museum, New York,
January-February 1921 (1920).” Mucha Foundation. Mucha Foundation, accessed March
22, 2024. http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/gallery/browse-works/object/175.
Woolf 97
Dusza, Erin. “Pan-Slavism in Alphonse Mucha’s Slav Epic.” Nineteenth Century Art Worldwide
13, no. 1 (Spring 2014). Accessed February 4 2024.
https://www.19thc-artworldwide.org/spring14/dusza-on-pan-slavism-in-alphonse-muchas-slav-epic.
Dymond, Anne. “Embodying the Nation: Art, Fashion, and Allegorical Women at the 1900
Exposition Universelle.” RACAR: Revue d’art Canadienne / Canadian Art Review 36, no.
2 (2011): 1–14. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42630841.
“Dynasty of Mucha.” Muchova Plockova Art & Design. Mucha JP Prague, accessed April 10,
2024. https://www.muchaplockova.com/cs/rodinna-historie.
E, J. "MUCHA'S PAINTINGS GONE, ART INSTITUTE WALLS ARE BARE NOW." Chicago
Daily Tribune (1872-1922), 1920 Dec 03, 1920/12/03/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/muchas-paintings-gone-art-institute-wal
ls-are/docview/174744992/se-2.
Falvey, Christian. “The history and mysteries of Zbiroh Chateau,” Radio Prague International.
Radio Prage International, published April 9, 2011.
https://english.radio.cz/history-and-mysteries-zbiroh-chateau-8564513.
"$500,000 Paintings to be Given to Prague on Exhibition here." Chicago Daily Tribune
(1872-1922), 1920 Jun 15, 1920/06/15/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/500-000-paintings-be-given-prague-onexhibition/docview/174631659/se-2.
Flour, Isabelle. “Orientalism and the Reality Effect: Angkor at the Universal Expositions,
1867–1937.” Getty Research Journal, no. 6 (2014): 63–82.
https://doi.org/10.1086/675791.
Giomi, Fabio. “At the Margins of the Habsburg Civilizing Mission.” In Making Muslim Women
Woolf 98
European: Voluntary Associations, Gender, and Islam in Post-Ottoman Bosnia and
Yugoslavia (1878-1941), 25–66. Central European University Press, 2021.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7829/j.ctv2kg15g8.8.
Groys, Boris. Art Power. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 2013.
Groys, Boris. “Russia and the West: The Quest for Russian National Identity.” Studies in Soviet
Thought 43, no. 3 (1992): 185–98. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20099444.
“History of Sokol.” Sokol Museum and Library. Sokol Museum, accessed February 3 2024.
https://sokolmuseum.org/history-of-sokol/#.
Houze, Rebecca. “A Hungarian Treasure Chest.” In Constructing Race on the Borders of
Europe: Ethnography, Anthropology, and Visual Culture, ed. Marsha Morton and Barbara
Larson, 149-166. London: Bloomsbury, 2023.
Houze, Rebecca. “National Internationalism: Reactions to Austrian and Hungarian Decorative
Arts at the 1900 Paris Exposition Universelle.” Studies in the Decorative Arts 12, no. 1
(2004): 55–97. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40663098.
Hull, Dana. Portrait of Josephine (Crane) Bradley, 1908. Black and white photographic print,
13 x 15.5 in. Madison, Wisconsin Historical Society.
https://www.wisconsinhistory.org/Records/Image/IM99983.
Jacobsen, Matthew Frye. Whiteness of a Different Color: European Immigrants and the Alchemy
of Race Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999.
Jadeja-Reed, Reema. “The Many Faces of Marianne.” Law and Liberty. Law & Liberty,
published March 10, 2023. https://lawliberty.org/the-many-faces-of-marianne/.
"JAN MASARYK WEDS MRS. F.C. LEATHERBEE: CZECHOSLOVAKIAN MINISTER TO
Woolf 99
GREAT BRITAIN MARRIES DAUGHTER OF EX-MINISTER CRANE." New York
Times (1923-), 1924 Dec 29, 1924/12/29/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/jan-masaryk-weds-mrs-f-c-leatherbee/d
ocview/103302238/se-2.
Invest Your Money with Uncle Sam! Join the Crowd-Buy a Liberty Bond, 1917. Lithograph, 67 x
100 cm. Library of Congress. https://www.loc.gov/item/00652856/.
Jones, Caroline A. The Global Work of Art: World’s Fairs, Biennials, and the Aesthetics of
Experience. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2017.
Kasonata, Adriel. “Why It’s Time to Revive Charles R. Crane’s Legacy in the Age of Trump.”
Russian International Affairs Council, published January 25 2019.
https://russiancouncil.ru/en/analytics-and-comments/columns/culture-and-international-re
lations/why-it-s-time-to-revive-charles-r-crane-s-legacy-in-the-age-of-trump/.
Kelly, T. Mills. “Taking It to the Streets: Czech National Socialists in 1908.” Austrian History
Yearbook 29, no. 1 (1998): 93–112. doi:10.1017/S0067237800014818.
Kohlrausch, Martin. “Modernity in Eastern Europe – East European Modernism?” In Brokers of
Modernity: East Central Europe and the Rise of Modernist Architects, 1910-1950, 31–56.
Leuven University Press, 2019. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvcwnzhj.6.
Kohn, Hans. “The Impact of Pan-Slavism on Central Europe.” The Review of Politics 23, no. 3
(1961): 323–33. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1405438.
Kostílková, Marie. “Hora Chapel.” In The Windows of St. Vitus Cathedral, 38-39. Prague: Prague
Castle Administration, 2000.
Levine, Louis. “Pan-Slavism and European Politics.” Political Science Quarterly 29, no. 4
(1914): 664–86. https://doi.org/10.2307/2142012.
Woolf 100
Long, Christopher. “East Central Europe: National Identity and International Perspective.”
Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 61, no. 4 (2002): 519–29.
https://doi.org/10.2307/991872.
Malečková, Jitka. “Civilizing the Slavic Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina.” In “The Turk" in the
Czech Imagination (1870s-1923), 118–58. Brill, 2021.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1163/j.ctv1sr6hs7.8.
Mandell, Nikki. “Allies or Antagonists? Philanthropic Reformers and Business Reformers in the
Progressive Era.” The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 11, no. 1 (2012):
71–117. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23249058.
Maxwell, Alexander. “The 1848 Revolution and the Limits of Sorbian Czechoslovakism.” New
Zealand Slavonic Journal 46 (2012): 9–22. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24429431.
“Mayor’s Hall.” Municipal House. Obecní Dům, accessed March 12, 2024.
https://www.obecnidum.cz/en/municipal-house/halls/mayor-s-hall/.
Mucha, Alphonse and Jiří Mucha and Ann Bridges. Alphonse Mucha: The Complete Graphic
Works. New York: Harmony Books, 1980.
Mucha, Alphonse. The Slav Epic Almanac. The Association of Art Critics and Theoreticians,
The Czech Section of AICA, 2013.
Mucha, Alphonse. Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia, 1908. Oil and tempera on
canvas, 154 x 92.5 cm. Prague, National Gallery.
https://sbirky.ngprague.cz/en/dielo/CZE:NG.O_3978.
"Mucha Completes $10,000 Oil Portrait." Chicago Daily Tribune (1872-1922), 1910 Feb 26,
Woolf 101
1910/02/26/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/mucha-completes-10-000-oil-portrait/do
cview/173493990/se-2.
Mucha, Alphonse. Portrait of Josephine Crane Bradley as Slavia, 1908. Oil and tempera on
canvas, 154 x 92.5 cm. Prague, National Gallery.
https://sbirky.ngprague.cz/en/dielo/CZE:NG.O_3978.
Mucha, Jiří. Alphonse Maria Mucha. New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1989.
Mucha, Jiří. Alphonse Mucha: Master of Art Nouveau. Hamlyn Publishing Group, 1966.
Naimark, Norman M. “Stalin and Europe in the Postwar Period, 1945–53: Issues and Problems.”
Journal of Modern European History / Zeitschrift Für Moderne Europäische Geschichte /
Revue d’histoire Européenne Contemporaine 2, no. 1 (2004): 28–57.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26265788.
"NEWS OF THE SOCIETY WORLD: PLANS ANNOUNCED FOR LAKE FOREST'S
ANNUAL DAY FAIR JULY 15. TEITERS MAKE BRIEF VISIT. MISS MARY
CRANE AND PROF. H. C. BRADLOY WED NEXT WEDNESDAY." Chicago Daily
Tribune (1872-1922), 1908 Jul 02, 1908/07/02/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/news-society-world/docview/17341269
8/se-2.
"Obituary." New York Times (July 1939, 1939/07//).
https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/obituary/docview/54898932/se-2.
Parry, Albert. “Charles R. Crane, Friend of Russia.” The Russian Review 6, no. 2 (1947): 20–36.
https://doi.org/10.2307/125305.
Paruch, Waldemar. “Between Political Nation and Ethnic-Cultural Nation: Nations in Central
Woolf 102
Europe in the 20th Century.” Politeja, no. 57 (2018): 107–24.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26757162.
Pech, Stanley Z. “Czech Political Parties in 1848.” Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue
Canadienne Des Slavistes 15, no. 4 (1973): 462–87.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40866630.
Piotrowski, Piotr. “On the Spatial Turn.” Umeni/Art 56, issue 5 (2008): 378-383.
President Wilson's Message to Congress, January 8, 1918. Records of the United States Senate;
Record Group 46; Records of the United States Senate. National Archives.
Robertson, Craig. “Mechanisms of Exclusion: Historicizing the Archive and the Passport.” In
Archive Stories: facts, Fictions and the Writing of History, edited by Antoinette Burton,
68-86. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2005.
Roger H. Williams to Alphonse Mucha, October 9, 1914. Bakhmeteff Archive of Russian and
East European Culture. New York, Columbia University.
Roucek, Joseph S. “President Masaryk of Czechoslovakia.” Current History (1916-1940) 31, no.
6 (1930): 1109–12. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45336767.
Seineke, Katherine Wagner. “Mucha’s Chicago Posters.” Chicago History (Spring 1972): 26-30.
https://issuu.com/chicagohistorymuseum/docs/redacted-1972spr-chm-chicagohistory.
“Slavia. 1907.” Poster Auctions International, Inc. Accessed February 4 2024.
https://auctions.posterauctions.com/lots/view/1-29UG3Y/slavia-1907.
Soussloff, Catherine M. “The Birth of the Social History of Art.” In The Subject in Art:
Portraiture and the Birth of the Modern, 25-56. Durham and London: Duke University
Press, 2006.
Woolf 103
Slačálek, Ondřej. “The Paradoxical Czech Memory of the Habsburg Monarchy: Satisfied Helots
or Crippled Citizens?” Slavic Review 78, no. 4 (2019): 912–20.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26892446.
“Stained-glass Window designed by Mucha at St. Vitus Cathedral, Prague.” Mucha Foundation.
Mucha Foundation, accessed November 22, 2023.
http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/gallery/browse-works/object/199.
Svec, Milan. “Czechoslovakia’s Velvet Divorce.” Current History 91, no. 568 (1992): 376–80.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/45316719.
“Text of Munich Agreement: Between Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy, Concluded in
Munich on September 29, 1938.” World Affairs 101, no. 4 (1938): 249–51.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/20663184.
The Art Institute of Chicago. Historical Paintings of the Slavic Nations by Alphonse Mucha. .
Published 1920. Accessed October 17, 2023.
file:///C:/Users/Laura/Downloads/1cf1da85-e6a5-9775-b1d8-5e8f0ea1c403.pdf.
The City of New York Department of Health. Certificate of birth number 15008 (15 March
1909), Jaroslava Mucha. Historical Vital Records. The New York City Municipal
Archive, accessed March 12 2024.
https://a860-historicalvitalrecords.nyc.gov/view/2191753.
The Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs: Art & Architecture
Collection, The New York Public Library. "Mucha Exhibition Brooklyn Museum." New
York Public Library Digital Collections, accessed March 22, 2024,
https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47df-f61f-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99.
The National Art Center, Tokyo. Alfons Mucha. Kyoto: Nissha Printing, 2017.
Woolf 104
“The Scammon Lectures for 1908.” Bulletin of the Art Institute of Chicago (1907-1951) 1, no. 3
(1908): 42–42. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4116206.
“‘The Slav Epic cycle’ No. 20: Apotheosis: Slavs for Humanity. Four Stages of Slav History in
Four Colours (1918).” Mucha Foundation. Mucha Foundation, accessed February 11,
2024.
http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/gallery/browse-works/object_type/paintings/object/2
31#:~:text=Each%20represents%20a%20successive%20period,enemy%20and%20the%2
0repeated%20attacks.
“‘The Slav Epic’ No 19: The Abolition of Serfdom in Russia. To Work in Freedom Is The
Foundation of a State (1861) (1914).” Mucha Foundation. Mucha Foundation, accessed
March 17, 2024.
http://www.muchafoundation.org/en/gallery/themes/theme/slav-epic/object/228.
“The Vyšehrad Cemetery.” Vyšehrad National Cultural Monument. Vyšehradská Kapitula,
accessed April 11, 2024.
https://www.praha-vysehrad.cz/en/stranky/145/buildings-and-places/the-vysehrad-cemete
ry.
"THE WORLD OF ART: ALPHONSE MUCHA'S MURAL DECORATIONS." New York Times
(1857-1922), 1921 Jan 16, 1921/01/16/.
https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/world-art/docview/98487993/se-2.
Tholozany, Pauline. “The Expositions Universelles in Nineteenth Century Paris.” Paris: Capital
of the 19th Century. Brown University Library Center for Digital Scholarship. Accessed
November 29, 2023. https://library.brown.edu/cds/paris/worldfairs.html#de1900.
Thompson, Jan. “The Role of Woman in the Iconography of Art Nouveau.” Art Journal 31, no. 2
(1971): 158–67. https://doi.org/10.2307/775570.
Woolf 105
“Trade Fair Palace.” National Gallery, Prague, accessed March 17, 2024.
https://www.ngprague.cz/en/about/buildings/trade-fair-palace.
Translation of Agreement with Alphonse Mucha, May 30, 1914. Bakhmeteff Archive of Russian
and East European Culture. New York, Columbia University.
Vink, Matthew. “The Competition for Self-Determination in Czechoslovakia, 1918-1919.” New
Zealand Slavonic Journal 46 (2012): 41–69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24429433.
Walters, Leslie M. “Adjudicating Loyalty: Identity Politics and Civil Administration in the
Hungarian-Slovak Borderlands, 1938–1940.” Contemporary European History 24, no. 3
(2015): 351–74. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26294063.
Wein, Martin J. “‘Chosen Peoples, Holy Tongues’: Religion, Language, Nationalism and Politics
in Bohemia and Moravia in the Seventeenth to Twentieth Centuries.” Past & Present, no.
202 (2009): 37–81. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25580919.
Young, Gertrude M. “Alphonse Mucha, The Czecho-Slovac Painter.” The Brooklyn Museum
Quarterly 8, no. 2 (1921): 56–61. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26459452.
Zenkovsky, Serge A. “The Emancipation of the Serfs in Retrospect.” The Russian Review 20, no.
4 (1961): 280–93. https://doi.org/10.2307/126692.
Zückert, Martin. “National Concepts of Freedom and Government Pacification Policies: The
Case of Czechoslovakia in the Transitional Period after 1918.” Contemporary European
History 17, no. 3 (2008): 325–44. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20081412.
