Later Alterations

As many other public buildings Holl had erected in Augsburg, the Neue Bau suffered from fundamental alterations, undertaken in the centuries following its creation, which resulted in a considerable loss of the building’s original substance. Due to a lack of historical documentation, it is now difficult to reconstruct the history after the building’s completion. Nevertheless, a critical reading of plans and cityscape representations from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries can help. It is, therefore, useful to compare Wolfgang Kilian’s plan of Augsburg (1626; fig. 21) and Heinrich Jonas Ostertag’s engraving of the Perlachplatz (1711; fig. 22) with an engraving by Georg Balthasar Probst from the year 1743, entitled as “View of the so-called Mahler-Gasse on the Perlach towards the Cathedral of Augsburg” (Prospect der so

1910, p. 61. Pfister indicated that a Schuh of Augsburg, the length unit of the local measurement, is measured between circa 279.5 and 278 mm; Pfister (as note 135), p. 85.

145 The function of the mezzanine is not specified in the chronicle.

146 Meyer (as note 144).

genandten Mahler-Gasse von dem Perlach gegen der Dom Kirche zu Augspurg; fig.

23).¹⁴⁷ While Ostertag still shows the original situation, the latter representation proves that the overall external appearance of the Neue Bau had undergone considerable alterations in the first half of the eighteenth century. Probst’s engraving reveals that before 1743 the mezzanine windows on the ground story must have been enlarged. A particular change had been undertaken in the bays next to the southeastern corner, where the round arched mezzanine openings had been replaced by high rectangular mullioned windows. At that time, the ground story had been divided in two independent floors.¹⁴⁸ This change might have been necessary for gaining additional space for the shops and for getting more light in the corner rooms. For this reason, the voussoirs of the rusticated arches at the corner bays were destroyed, while the banded rustication on other arcades was not directly touched on the window frame like it is shown by the two above-mentioned elevations. Furthermore, the mirrored window parapet under the mezzanine marked the division of the different floors in the ground story.¹⁴⁹ The dados of the pedestals underneath the Ionic pilasters were also mirrored. These are the points different from the drafts¹⁵⁰ and an engraving by Simon Grimm (fl. 1654–1680s) in 1678 (fig. 24).¹⁵¹ Grimm’s engraving is probably the

147 Wolfgang Kilian (1581–1613), Augusta Vindelicorum (City plan of Augsburg), 1626, engraving, Augsburg, Städtische Kunstsammlungen, inv. G 12071-75; Heinrich Jonas Ostertag (fl. first half of eighteenth century), View of Augsburg showing City Hall and Perlachplatz (Curia Reipublicae Augustanae), 1711, engraving, 550 x 800 mm, Augsburg, Städtische Kunstsammlungen, inv.

G 12093; Georg Balthasar Probst (1737–1801), 1743, engraving, 340 x 260 mm, Augsburg, Städtische Kunstsammlungen, inv. G 774.

148 Julius Baum already pointed out correctly that the division of the ground story into two full floors must have been undertaken as early as in the first half of the eighteenth century, while other scholars, Knorre and Dequet, sustained that it happened during the restoration campaign of 1876; Baum (as note 142), p. 79; Knorre (as note 142), p. 54; Dequet (as note 142), p. 344.

149 The parapets under the mezzanine windows are similar to the respective details represented in a historical photograph of the Neue Bau taken around 1900. It is unknown, whether this part altered in the first half of the eighteenth century was adopted in the renovation of 1876.

150 In elevation II, the dado on the pedestals of double corner pilasters is also mirrored. However, the pedestals of the other single Ionic pilasters are simply shaped without mirrors. It should be taken into account that Probst might have added the mirrored pedestals in his engraving of 1743 in order to give the Neue Bau a more unified and noble appearance.

151 Grimm was an engraver of Augsburg. His representation, which was first published in Augusta Vindelicorum of 1678 under the title Augsburger Rathaus mit Perlachturm und dem Neuen Bau (The

oldest representation of the Neue Bau.

The most significant alteration of the building occurred during a renovation campaign undertaken in 1876 (fig. 25).¹⁵² At that time, the Neue Bau was transformed into a four-storied building; the original stories were divided into two floors, while at the outside their original height and the pilaster order were maintained.

In the ground story, the round-arched mezzanine windows were replaced by larger rectangular openings and the original rusticated arcade was removed. Only a narrow part of the banded rustication on both sides of the Tuscan pilasters, which overlapped the pilasters, remained. It is likely that the form of these large new windows followed the example of the bays next to the southeastern corner, which had been altered in the first half of the eighteenth century, as Probst’s engraving reveals (fig. 23). As in the engraving, the windows in the upper floor of the ground story were erected on flat and mirrored pedestals. The opening in the ground level was thus changed into an enlarged store window for commercial purposes. Both floors of the ground story were separated by a thin cornice.

The long rectangular eared windows of the upper story with their triangular pediments were also removed in 1876. The intervals between the Ionic pilasters were filled with two vertical rectangular windows, which were as wide as the original windows. The lower framed windows sat on a pedestal and were headed with a projecting cornice, while the upper windows were unsightly cutting into the three-fasciad architrave. Flanking the upper corners of the windows, two consoles were added at the level of the Ionic capitals for visually supporting the entablature.

During the Second World War the Neue Bau suffered huge damage. The hipped roof with its ceiling and all wooden floors collapsed during the heavy bombardment

City Hall in Augsburg with the Perlachturm and Neue Bau), shows the Neue Bau from the west, presenting the building’s original façade. Baum has proven this; Baum (as note 142), p. 79.

152 Baum (as note 142), p. 79.

of Augsburg on 25 and 26 February 1944 (fig. 26).¹⁵³ The cornice and the upper part of the frieze on the entablature were damaged, too. Despite the great loss of the original architectural substance, a rebuilding in Renaissance forms had been decided after the war in order to create a historical counterpart to the City Hall and the Perlach tower (Perlachturm) in the immediate neighborhood. As the pre-war shape showed considerable differences compared to the building executed in the early seventeenth century, the fundamental question was to which state one should return.¹⁵⁴ As of 1946, the building was remodeled after the plan of the Austrian architect Raimund von Doblhoff (1914–93) by restoring the original two-storied construction of 1614, while the alterations of 1876 were removed (fig. 27).¹⁵⁵ After the post-war restoration the enlarged interior space was changed into shops and offices. The building’s original function was hence strongly altered. The rusticated arches and round arched mezzanine windows of the ground story were given back their original form following the remaining parts of the west side, which preserves its shape of the early seventeenth century.¹⁵⁶ The conspicuous windows with triangular pediments on the top story were reconstructed according to the two elevations of about 1614 (figs.

19-20) and Simon Grimm’s engraving of 1680 (fig. 24).¹⁵⁷

According to the photograph taken during the restoration after 1946 and published by Doblhoff in 1951, the reconstruction of the Neue Bau was executed from the right

153 Bernd Roeck, Geschichte Augsburgs, Munich 2005, p. 186.

154 Raimund von Doblhoff gave a short account of the reconstruction in his article “Zum Wiederaufbau einiger nichtöffentlicher historischer Bauten in Augsburg (Fuggerhaus, Neuer Bau, Fuggerei),” in:

Zeitschrift des Historischen Vereins für Schwaben 58, 1951, pp. 127-156, here pp. 141-143.

155 Hartwig Beseler and Niels Gutschow, Kriegsschicksale deutscher Architektur. Verlust – Schäden – Wiederaufbau. Eine Dokumentation für das Gebiet der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, vol. II: Süd, Wiesbaden 2000, p. 1337. For the process of the reconstruction, see Lutz (as note 132), pp. 136-139;

Gregor Nagler, “‘Das Wegwerfen ist ja ein Irrglaube.’ Raimund von Doblhoff und der Wiederaufbau der Fuggerei, der Fuggerhaeuser und des Neuen Baues in Augsburg,” in: Winfried Nerdinger (ed.), Raimund von Doblhoff (1914–1993). Architekt zwischen Rekonstruktion und Innovation, Berlin 2008, pp. 53-84, here 74-77.

156 It has to be acknowledged that the original form of the west side is only limited to the rusticated arch with Tuscan pilasters, the window frame of the mezzanine in the ground story and the Ionic double pilaster in the upper story. Roeck 2004 (as note 131), p. 109.

157 Knorre (as note 142), p. 54.

side to the left, that is from east to west.¹⁵⁸ One of the problematic points was the reconstruction of the openings in the ground story. In the above-mentioned elevations, their form is multifarious. As neither the eleveations nor the engravings by Grimm, Probst and Ostertag are exact enough, a restoration of the original details was not possible. Hence, the decision was taken to leave these openings in the form given in 1876.

After the reconstruction only the foundation, basement, pilaster orders, window pedestals on the top story and part of the upper cornice are original.¹⁵⁹ Most strikingly, the post-war reconstruction also added a feature to the building which is not based on any historical source. As the original buildings at the rear of the Neue Bau were irretrievably lost, it was decided to add one more bay at the north side, which meant doubling the surface of the shops (fig. 28). The reason for this remarkable change of the building’s appearance was not only to increase the space in order to satisfy the need of modern commercial use, while the original space inside was too small. There are also esthetic motives: It must be pointed out that Doblhoff had been strongly fascinated by the initial design of the Neue Bau, which had been planned as an Italian-style loggia for representative purposes following the examples of several northern Italian cities, such as in Brescia, Verona, Vicenza, Padua and Venice. The article he had published in 1951 about the post-war reconstruction of Augsburg expresses his great enthusiasm for Italian Renaissance architecture and the loggia in particular.¹⁶⁰ That one bay was added at the north side seems to be a reference to the Sansovino-Model (fig. 18). The Neue Bau was therefore transformed

158 Doblhoff (as note 154), Pl. 8b; Nagler (as note 155), p. 76.

159 Doblhoff (as note 154), p. 142.

160 Doblhoff praised Holl’s unique idea, which had been rejected by his contemporaries, and considered him as a prophet of this building type, which can be traced back to the basilica of ancient forum. Doblhoff (as note 154), pp. 141-142; Lutz (as note 132), p. 137. For the reconstruction of the modern Rathausplatz after the Second World War and diverse renovation projects for this area, see Lutz (as note 132), pp. 140-158.

from its original shallow architectural body to a more voluminous block, which was internally connected with the buildings at its rear (figs. 28-29).¹⁶¹ As a consequence, the façades became a pseudo-historical curtain, which capsules an enlarged modern inner space supported by an up-to-date ferroconcrete structure.

161 See the plan in Doblhoff (as note 154), p. 142.