STATE SECRETARY FOR THE RUSSIAN PROTECTOR IN THINGS AND IN MORAVA, PRAGUE, inv. 1982, sig. 109-6/74

Page 42

English Translation

As the responsible official conservators, they are responsible for the success of the work. If from here the porting and completion of the repair (which is by far the majority of the work still to be done!) was proposed in Prague, it was essentially the following considerations: a) doubts about the ability of the local restorer Slan could not be raised. Landeskonservator Juraschek-Linz has himself explained that Slansky's restoration method is "a wall-free scientific! altitude". Whether own- berger-Wien or Slanski-Prague is the better restorer, it is difficult to decide. b) In principle, it did not seem particularly advisable to allow the work already begun by one restorer to continue by another, even if the repair measures had not yet progressed too far. (c) The completion of a proper repair in Prague could be assured: the Vienna O and Linzer Herren would have been asked to examine the measures already taken, to discuss their wishes with Professor Slansky and to define them in all details; they would also have been free to monitor the way the work progresses through occasional visits; in addition, the undersigned, who himself has been involved in the preservation of monuments since l929, would have joined the Ordinarius für Kuns geschichte at the German Charles University, Professor Dr. Swoboda, who oversees the work of Slážky and, for example, informed about 53978 serious concerns immediately after Vienna or Linz. d) The fact that the protectorate government was prepared to carry out the rather extensive repair of the pictures at its own expense did not seem to be insignificant. Nevertheless, the desire to carry on the restoration now in Vienna durdi could now be met. For - apart from the legal situation, the Austrian Herrenja the state supervisory authority responsible for the monastery of Hohenfurt and its property -