Emanuel Štěpán Petr, a Czech Cavaillé-Coll

Dr Michał Szostak written on 2020/09/25 Citation:

Szostak Michał, "Emanuel Štěpán Petr, a Czech Cavaillé-Coll", in: "The Organ”, No 394, Nov.2020-Jan.2021, Musical Opinion Ltd, London, ISSN 0030-4883, pp. 26-41.

I

Sometimes, life is unpredictable. Restrictions, which reduce our big plans, can open new perspectives and allow us to focus on the areas which could be hidden for us in regular circumstances. This happens to me this year. Due to the travel restrictions caused by the pandemic I needed to cancel my North America concert tour and I started to look for another performance possibilities in closer distance with lover risk of cancellation. Using this strategy, I found some interesting romantic organs in Prague, Czech Republic. Step by step I discovered the unique works of Emanuel Štěpán Petr, a genial organ builder who had been developed Czech organ industry in many dimensions. I had the privilege to play this August two recitals on Petr organs in Prague: at the church of St. Ludmila and at the church of St.

Ignatius de Loyola. Referring to Petr’s achievements and his role in Czech organ world, it is no exaggeration if we call him a “Czech Cavaillé-Coll”.

R

O

B

E

E

Romantic tendencies in organ building in Western Europe are very well described in the literature¹. The situation regarding the subject of our interest in Eastern Europe was slightly different, and the main factor determining this state was far-reaching social and economic changes on the basis of national conflicts, great wars and political changes. Despite these turbulences, the culture of the Eastern European nations evolved in line with the trends present in Western Europe, albeit with a delay of dozen(s) years, and with adaptations to local historical circumstances and cultural factors.

It should also be mentioned that the borders of the Eastern European countries known to us today were significantly different in the 19th century, and even many countries – due to partitions by superpowers (Prussia, Austria-Hungary, Russia) – had not been formally existed at that time. If we are talking about e.g. the Czech Republic, Slovakia or Poland in the 19th century, we must rather mean the nations with the roots that appeared on the map of Europe after World War I, or as a result of geo-political changes after World War II, and even after the collapse of communism in this area in the 1990s.

Romantic tendencies in organ building in Eastern Europe were similar to the situation in Western Europe: changes in tonal palette of the instruments from Baroque aesthetics (increase in importance of 8’ stops, decrease of high aliquots and mixtures, new harmonic stops), changes in action (from mechanical into pneumatic-tubular with Barker levers), changes in windchests (dominance of cone valve type), free-standing consoles. We can find a general factor in the sound quality of romantic organs in Eastern Europe – it was the influence of

1 Szostak Michał, “Romantic tendencies in 19th-century organ building in Europe”, in: “The Organ”, No 385,

2

German romantic sound aesthetics and technical solutions (fixed combinations, crescendo roller).

On the romantic wave, we should mention some important Czech organ builders being active on the Czech Lands mainly: Karl Schiffner (1836-1894), Jan Tuček (1842-1913), Karel Eisenhut (1843-1898), Jindřich Schiffner (1853-1938), Josef Melzer (1871-1958), the Rieger brothers, family Paštiků and also Emanuel Štěpán Petr who is the main person of this article.

P

’

B

F

Emanuel Štěpán Petr was born on 25. December 1853 in Opočno (a small city in the middle of way between Prague and Wrocław/Poland, previously Breslau/Prussia) as a son of the local cantor, Jan Petr, and his wife, Alţběta Šumpikova². He developed his skills by František Jirásek in Dobruška (close to Opočno) and with the Prague organ builders, mentioned above, Eisenhut and J. Schiffner. He travelled abroad and worked, among others, in Breslau and probably for some time in Paris at one of the most famous French organ builders of the 19th century, Aristide Cavaillé-Coll (1811-1899)³.

Being 25 year old, Petr started to work independently in 1878⁴ and in 1881 he established his own workshop in Prague. In next few years he became one of the two largest organ factories in Prague, next to the Schiffner company. In his workshop, he had been training a number of craftsmen, who, becoming later his employees, worked together increasing the company's reputation.

Petr undoubtedly had great talent but, in addition, he was also very ambitious and entrepreneurial. He didn't hesitate to go into tough competition disputes, he patented a number of inventions, not only within the Habsburg monarchy, but also in Germany, France and England. He participated in a number of exhibitions, from which he brought various awards (e.g. state diploma at Zemské jubilejní výstavě, Czech: the Provincial Jubilee Exhibition in Prague, 1891). He was appointed an expert on the Imperial-Royal Land Court in Prague and was also active publicly as a long-time member of the General Committee Unity of Cyril and the Directorate of the Christian Academy⁵.

Emanuel Štěpán Petr died in Prague on 26th February, 1930 at the age of 77. In the same year, the company was taken over by two of his collaborators, Jan Frýdl and Matěj Pomahač, but they started to work under their own names⁶. Petr’s grave is located at the Olšanské Cemetery in Prague (grave No. IV, 9, 340). In 2016, a commemorative plaque was unveiled on the building in Opočno, where Petr was born.

2 According to Petr’s baptismal certificate. See: Šon Jiří, “Emanuel Štěpán Petr v kontextu českého varhanářství”, bachelor work at Janáčkova Akademie Múzických Umění v Brně, 2011, p. 16.

3 According to verbal relation of Vít Čespír, a Czech organ builder. See: Šon Jiří, “Emanuel Štěpán Petr v kontextu českého varhanářství”, bachelor work at Janáčkova Akademie Múzických Umění v Brně, 2011, p. 16.

4 Horák Tomáš, “Varhany a varhanáři Jičínska”, Regionální muzeum a galerie v Jičíně, 2008, p. 122. See: Šon Jiří, “Emanuel Štěpán Petr v kontextu českého varhanářství”, bachelor work at Janáčkova Akademie Múzických Umění v Brně, 2011, p. 16.

5 Šon Jiří, “Emanuel Štěpán Petr v kontextu českého varhanářství”, bachelor work at Janáčkova Akademie Múzických Umění v Brně, 2011, p. 17.

6 Horák Tomáš, “Varhany a varhanáři Jičínska”, Regionální muzeum a galerie v Jičíně, 2008, p. 122. Šon Jiří,

“Emanuel Štěpán Petr v kontextu českého varhanářství”, bachelor work at Janáčkova Akademie Múzických

Picture 1. Emanuel Štěpán Petr.

Picture 2. Petr’s grave at the Olšanské Cemetery in Prague (No. IV, 9, 340).

O

P

In more than 50 years of his activity (between 1878 and 1930), Petr worked at 351 organs!⁷ He built new instruments but also redesigned old mechanical organs. His new instruments consisted from one manual with a few registers to up three manuals with a pedal and dozens registers. His first organs were designed with a purely mechanical key and stop actions, then through mechanical instruments with Barker levers, up to the latest instruments with purely pneumatic action. In addition to the works on the Czech lands, Petr built several dozen organs on the lands of Poland, Romania, Russia and also overseas.

Among the most important works of Petr’s workshop, there were the instruments in the following churches: of St. Ludmila in Prague-Vinohrady (1898, III/46, Op. 117), of St. Cyril and Methodius in Prague-Karlín (1898, III/61, it was a rebuilt of Josef Prediger instrument, now in a state of disrepair), of St. Mořice in Kroměříž (1910, III/46, Op. 165, afterwards rebuilt with many changes, now in not original state), of St. Ignatius in Prague on Charles Square (1912, III/50, Op. 200), of St. Prokop in Prague-Ţiţkov (1912, III/42, Op. 201)⁸.

7 Myška Rudolf, “Varhany v Praze. Tiskárny Havlíčkův Brod”, 2005, p. 229. Šon Jiří, “Emanuel Štěpán Petr v kontextu českého varhanářství”, bachelor work at Janáčkova Akademie Múzických Umění v Brně, 2011, p. 16.

8 Tomší Lubomír, Lukeš Jan, Tomíček Jan and Uhlíř Václav, “Historické varhany v Čechách”, Nakladatelství Libri, 2000, p. 196. See: Šon Jiří, “Emanuel Štěpán Petr v kontextu českého varhanářství”, bachelor work at

4

Today, if we want to experience the excellence of Petr’s best achievements, we can only base on his two original organs located in Prague: carefully restored one at the church of St.

Ludmila and reconstructed one at the church of St. Ignatius de Loyola. These two instruments are described in detail below.

St. Ludmila, Prague, 1898, Op. 117

The magnificent neo-Gothic church of St. Ludmila is located at the Náměstí Míru (Peace Square) in Vinohrady district of Prague. The organ was completed in 1898, i.e. five years after the completion of the church. It is the first instrument built in this church and it preserved in the original form to this day. The ceremonial approval of the Petr organ opus No.

117 took place on October 3, 1898. The instrument is located on the loft above the main entrance to the church in a richly carved oak case also in neo-Gothic style corresponding to the rest of the interior with high respect. It is very possible that the organ case design was created by the architect of the church, Josef Mocker (1835-1899). The façade still consists the original tin pipes that escaped the requisition of precious metals during the World War I. On three keyboards (C–f³) and a pedalboard (C–d¹) there are a total of 46 registers managed by fully mechanical action with Barker levers from the detached console located in the front of the façade. The organist looks at the main altar and can use also six fixed combinations (Piano, Mezzoforte, Forte Pleno I, Pleno II, Tutti) and a Crescendo roller.

Referring to Barker lever system and early solutions of Cavaillé-Coll, Petr did not build III/I and III/P couplers. The III. Manual can be reached from the I. Manual and Pedal only using couplers II/I and II/Pedal when III/II coupler is on.

When electricity appeared to the loft, organ received electric motor and in 1930 the tremolo for III. Manual was added. From the end of the 80s of the 20th century, the organ of St.

Ludmila has been listed as a protected cultural monument of the Czech Republic.

In this shape, the organ had been served until 1990s. In the years 1990-1994, the organ was partially restored by the Rieger company from Krnov; in 2013-2014 the next partial restoration (the bellows and parts of the pipes) was undertaken by the Organa company from Kutna Hora. The main goal was always to preserve the original construction of the organ structure and its layout. Due to lack of funds the repair was afterwards suspended. Money were raised from the public collections, the actions undertaken by the civic association for organ repair (founded in 2000), the fund for the restoration of movable cultural monuments of the Czech Ministry of Culture and finally from the generous donation of a patron. The long- awaited complete restoration works were undertaken from Easter 2016 until fall 2018 by the Kánský-Brachtl company. During the very respectful restoration, the organ specification was kept without any changes in reference to Petr’s project and all additional non-original elements (like tremolo for III. Manual added in 1930 or the electricity switch inside the console) was removed to keep the pure originality of this musical treasure. Thanks to the restoration – it is in the most original condition and in a great shape. Its beautiful and powerful sound is a clear example of an ideal romantic instrument and the proof of Petr's mastery.

I. Manual (C-f³ = 54 t.) 1. Principal 16' 2. Principal 8' 3. Fléta harm. 8' 4. Kryt 8' 5. Roh lesní 8'

II. Manual (C-f³ = 54 t.) 15. Bordun 16' 16. Principal 8' 17. Fléta 8' 18. Kvintadena 8' 19. Gamba 8'

III. Manual (swell box) (C-f³ = 54 t.) 27. Kryt jemný 16' 28. Principal housl. 8' 29. Fléta jemná 8' 30. Aeolina 8' 31. Vox coelestis 8'

Pedal (C-d¹ = 27 t.) 37. Principal 16' 38. Subbas 16' 39. Violone 16' 40. Salicetbas 16' 41. Kvinta 10²/3'

7. Kvinta 5¹/3' 8. Oktáva 4' 9. Fléta harm. 4' 10. Roh lesní 4' 11. Kornet IV 4' 12. Mixtura IV-VI 2²/3' 13. Cimbal III 2' 14. Trompéta 8' II/I (Barker)

21. Oktáva 4' 22. Fléta 4' 23. Houslovka 4' 24. Oktáva 2' 25. Mixtura IV 2²/3' 26. Klarinet 8' III/II (Barker)

33. Fléta jemná 4' 34. Pikola 2' 35. Mixtura II 2²/3' 36. Vox humana 8'

43. Kryt 8' 44. Violončel 8' 45. Salicet 8' 46. Pozoun 16' I/P

II/P

1 free combination

6 fixed combinations: Piano, Mezzoforte, Forte, Pleno I, Pleno II, Tutti Crescendo roller

Table 1. Specification of the Petr organ (1898, Op. 117) in the church of St. Ludmila, Prague.

Source: Own elaboration.

Picture 3. The façade of the church of St. Ludmila, Prague.

Source: Michał Szostak.

6

Picture 4. The vault of the church of St. Ludmila, Prague.

Picture 5. The view from the organ loft at the church of St. Ludmila, Prague.

Source: Michał Szostak.

Picture 6. The façade of the Pert organ at the church of St. Ludmila, Prague.

8

Picture 7. The plaque of Petr. St. Ludmila, Prague.

Source: Michał Szostak.

Picture 8. The console of Petr organ at the church of St. Ludmila, Prague.

Picture 9. The console of Petr organ at the church of St. Ludmila, Prague.

Source: Michał Szostak.

Picture 10. Michał Szostak before the recital at the Petr organ, St. Ludmila, Prague.

10

Picture 11. Michał Szostak before the recital at the Petr organ, St. Ludmila, Prague.

Source: Michał Szostak.

Picture 12. Michał Szostak at the Petr organ, St. Ludmila, Prague.

Picture 13. During the recital at the Petr organ, St. Ludmila, Prague.

Source: Michał Szostak.

Picture 14. After the recital at the Petr organ, St. Ludmila, Prague.

12

Picture 15. Interior of the church of St. Ludmila, Prague during the recital.

Source: Michał Szostak.

Picture 16. The façade of Petr organ at the church of St. Ludmila, Prague.

Picture 17. Barker levers of the organ of the church of St. Ludmila, Prague.

Source: Michał Szostak.

14

St. Ignatius, Prague, 1912, Op. 200

The organ of St. Ignatius has a different history than St. Ludmila’s because the church itself was built much earlier, in 17th century. The original Baroque organ, of which a beautifully decorated case has been preserved to this day, was built in 1698 by German organ builder Johann Matthias Gruber. Less than a year later, however, he left his unfinished work, and Caspar Arnold won the contract for the completion of the organ in 1700; finally, the instrument consisted 19 registers, two manuals and a pedal.

In 1912, it was decided to undertake the complete romantic reconstruction of the original Baroque organ. The contract was won by Petr, who built a three-manual instrument with 50 stops controlled by a fully pneumatic action under opus No. 200 into the Baroque case which needed to be expanded for that purpose (additional case is today white-painted and can be seen on the back of the original Baroque case). Over time, the organ ceased service until it completely fell silent in 1988, and afterwards it was totally dismantled due to the problems with statics of the loft.

From the end of the 1990s, there was a long expert discussion about whether to restore the original Petr instrument and, if yes, in what form. Finally, the proposal to reverently restore the romantic Petr instrument won, but under the condition that the original pneumatic action will be replaced by tracker action with Barker lever system known from other Petr’s works.

The contract was signed in 2013 with the previously mentioned Kánský-Brachtl company.

During these works, among other things, the original console was fully restored and all the original flue pipes from 1912 were used.

Thanks to the excellent restoration works of the Kánský-Brachtl company, Petr's organ in the church of St. Ignatius belongs to the best romantic instruments not only in Prague, but also in the whole Czech Republic.

I. Manual (C-g³ = 56 t.) 1. Principál 16’

2. Principál 8’

3. Kryt hrubý 8’

4. Flétna harmonická 8’

5. Corno 8’

6. Viola alta 8’

7. Salicionál 8’

8. Grand doublett 5 1/3’

9. Oktáva 4’

10. Flétna 4’

11. Fugara 4’

12. Cymbál III 2’

13. Mixtura IV 2 2/3’

14. Tromba 8’

II/I (Barker) II/I 16’(Barker) II/I 4’ (Barker) III/I (Barker) III/I 16’ (Barker)

II. Manual (C-g³ = 56 t.) 15. Bourdon 16’

16. Principál 8’

17. Kryt 8’

18. Kvintadena 8’

19. Flétna koncertní 8’

20. Gamba 8’

21. Dolce 8’

22. Vox angelika 8’

(Dolce + own tremolo) 23. Oktáva 4’

24. Flétna 4’

25. Houslovka 4’

26. Mixtura III-IV 2 2/3’

27. Klarinet 8’

III/II (Barker) III/II 4’ (Barker) III/II 16’ (Barker)

III. Manual (swell box) (C-g⁴ = 68 t.) 28. Salicet (from c⁰) 16’

29. Principál 8’

30. Kryt jemný 8’

31. Flétna rourková 8’

32. Aeolina 8’

33. Vox coelestis 8’

34. Oktáva 4’

35. Flétna rourková 4’

36. Pikola 2’

37. Doublett II 2 2/3’

38. Oboe 8’

39. Cor anglais 8’

40. Vox humana 8’

(Cor anglais + own tremolo)

III 4’ (Barker)

Pedal (C-f¹ = 30 t.) 41. Grand Bourdon 32’

42. Principálbas 16’

43. Subbas 16’

44. Violonbas 16’

45. Bourdonbas 16’

46. Salicetbas 16’

47. Kvintbas 10 2/3’

48. Principál 8’

49. Bourdon 8’

50. Violoncello 8’

51. Pozoun 16’

52. Fagot 16’

I/P (mechanic) II/P (mechanic) III/P (mechanic)

Table 2. Specification of the Petr organ (1912, Op. 200) in the church of St. Ignatius, Prague.

Picture 18. Church of St. Ignatius de Loyola, Prague.

Picture 19. The original Baroque façade containing the Petr organ. Church of St. Ignatius de Loyola, Prague.

16

Picture 20. The organ loft at the church of St. Ignatius de Loyola, Prague.

Source: Michał Szostak.

Picture 21. The main altar of the church of St. Ignatius de Loyola, Prague.

Picture 22. The console of the Petr organ at the church of St. Ignatius de Loyola, Prague.

18

Picture 23. The view on the organ loft at the church of St. Ignatius de Loyola, Prague.

C

P

’

O

On the base of above descripted two large organs as well as the literature, we can draw some facts which are characteristic to Petr’s instruments. These characteristics will be divided into main groups: sound specification, technical structure, intonation, case, console, maintenance and service.

Sound specification

The specification of sound of Petr instruments can be described in general as German romantic aesthetics with influences of French symphonic tendencies. Considering Petr’s large organs, we can see the domination of 8’ stops of all types in each section and quite a lot of 4’

stops. Each manual section was equipped with 16’ own stop of different type (principal, flute and string). Petr used also the harmonic flutes which is another exemplification of his familiarity with the French organ building school. Very sparing use of reeds was probably mainly caused by reducing the costs of the instrument but allow us to see this tendency as German root. In his opus magni, we can find only one reed in each section; he also used standardized reeds, i.e. Tromba 8’ in I. Manual, Klarinet 8’ in II. Manual, German-type Vox humana 8’ in III. Manual and Pozoun 16’ in Pedal. Petr used low-sounding aliquots only (5 1/3’ in manuals and 10 2/3’ in pedal). Higher aliquots (2 2/3’ and above) were placed as combined ranks of mixtures, not as a separate stops. Very interesting but showing the openness of Petr for then current trends, was adding mixtures to all manual sections. This solution was used by Cavaillé-Coll in very mature works only, after suggestions of contemporary organists⁹ and it increase the performance possibilities significantly. Petr’s pedal stops were built up to 8’ size only (no 4’ nor above). His windchests had the same wind pressure in the whole range of scales.

9 Szostak Michał, “Evolution of Cavaillé-Coll’s symphonic organs”, in: “The Organ”, No 384, May-July 2018,

20

Technical structure

Petr initially used in his organs a fully mechanical tracker action with cone valve windchests.

In next cases he started to add the Barker levers. Around 1904, Petr's company applied the production of pneumatic action with cone valve windchests only. The workshop produces all elements (i.e. air conducts, abstracts, Barker levers, membranes etc.) on its own.

His first works were equipped with typical scale for early romantic organs: 54 tones (C-f³) for keyboards and 27 tones (C-d¹) for pedalboards. Next instruments had larger scale: 56 tones (C-g³) for keyboards and 30 tones (C-f¹) for pedalboards. Petr did not build keyboards with wider scales than mentioned above.

Intonation

Petr's organs were characterized by the excellent intonation, both of the individual stops and their groups as well as the whole instrument in Tutti. High-quality intonation is mainly carried by its string registers (Salicionál, Gamba, Vox coelestis) and various types of flutes. Some characteristic curiosity in Petr’s organs can be e.g. the English horn, which was built as a string stop not as a reed one. The sound of the stops is generally gentle and smooth. The shape of volume for each stop is characteristic to German romantic tendencies.

Case

The Petr company built two types of organ cases. The first type was divided into three (in larger instruments especially) arcuate pipe fields separated by pilasters with typical classicist lines. The crown of the façade was mostly closed with richer carving. The second type was divided also into several parts, however with a pseudo-antic triangular portal or a pseudo- Gothic angled arch. Both types of cases were uniform and did not appear in the façade. At the reconstruction of an organ, generally the new organ was built into the old one’s case which was the matter of reducing costs probably¹⁰.

Console

At first glance, the Petr’s consoles refer to the aesthetic and technical patterns of early Cavaillé-Coll solutions. They were characterized by the precise craftsmanship¹¹ and they were made of soft wood mainly. Petr's workshop produced a uniform type of consoles, which was characterized by following features. Manubria, in the form of draw knobs (even for fully pneumatic action), were always located on both sides of keyboards. Couplers and fixed combinations in the mechanical action were in the form of small lever-pedals placed above the pedalboard (similar to Cavaillé-Coll); descriptions of these switches were put onto plates above the manuals, for better view of the organist. When pneumatic action was applied, the fixed combinations were usually placed in the form of small knobs below the lover keyboard.

The swell box shutter control was located in the right part of the console above the pedalboard in the form of a lever-pedal; it had only three options (full open, half open, close).

Maintenance

A certain problem with Petr organs was their service, repairs and maintenance. Due to their design, in which all elements were very squeezed without proper place and access, all

10 Šon Jiří, “Emanuel Štěpán Petr v kontextu českého varhanářství”, bachelor work at Janáčkova Akademie Múzických Umění v Brně, 2011, p. 29.

11 Tomší Lubomír, Lukeš Jan, Tomíček Jan and Uhlíř Václav, “Historické varhany v Čechách”, Nakladatelství Libri, 2000, p. 196. See: Šon Jiří, “Emanuel Štěpán Petr v kontextu českého varhanářství”, bachelor work at

technical works, except tuning, were impossible without putting all pipes out of the organ case. It is not an easy task when we speak about large romantic pipes of 8’ and 16’ sizes. We also know that Petr’s company was not very interested in service, repairs and maintenance works of their own instruments. Petr's instruments have been and still are the examples of a great technical and sound quality, it is therefore surprising that this kind of company was not able or was not interested to ensure the sufficient warranty and post-warranty service. We can only assume that the reason could probably be the will to keep the competition pressure and build new and new instruments, not losing time for small repairs nor service works.

C

Referring to the topic of this article, let’s compare achievements of Petr and Cavaillé-Coll.

Among similarities we can mention: 1) both came from rural areas from local or totally unknown in organ business families; 2) both started their professional activities in the most important cities of their countries (Prague, Paris); 3) both were very dynamic persons in their profession; 4) both companies, after the death of the main person, reduced their power significantly and closed activities very fast; 5) both introduced revolutionary solutions in their profession and were open for the best practices from other masters; 6) the quality of their instruments and the sound aesthetics were above other competitors level; 7) the design of consoles with draw knobs located on both sides of keyboards in the cascade style.

Speaking about differences we need to mention: 1) different sound aesthetics (Petr: German romantic school with some French influences; Cavaillé-Coll: his own symphonic school); 2) different technical solutions (Petr: German fixed combinations, Crescendo roller, Cavaillé- Coll: own invention of appels d’anches, windchests with 2-3 different wind pressures); 3) different role of the expression box (Petr: for lower dynamics levels: pianissimo- piano/mezzoforte on the pattern of German school; Cavaillé-Coll: for much wider scope of dynamics because of reach battery of reeds in Récit-expressif section: pianissimo- forte/fortissimo); 4) approach to the space in the organ case (Petr: no extra space for service and maintenance; Cavaillé-Coll: a lot of space).

As we can see on the example of Emanuel Štěpán Petr in Czech lands, Aristide Cavaillé-Coll in France and many other visionaries in their countries, the art of organ building is a constant development based on the mix of cultural trends, creativity and a inventions of shining stars of the craftsmanship.

The company of Emanuel Štěpán Petr, one of the finest romantic organ builders in this area of Europe, is a shining star on the Czech firmament. He represents the best skills and the newest trends in organ building art which were bring to his homeland from abroad. During the existence period of the company, Petr with his masters worked at approx. 351 instruments undertaking rebuilds, reconstructions and creating the new organs. We should be happy that his works, thanks to enormous effort of organ music lovers from Czech Republic, can be still used for liturgical and concert purposes and give to all of us a joy of experience the spirit of the past in 21st century.

R

Horák Tomáš, “Varhany a varhanáři Jičínska”, Regionální muzeum a galerie v Jičíně, 2008.

Myška Rudolf, “Varhany v Praze. Tiskárny Havlíčkův Brod”, 2005, p. 229. Šon Jiří,

“Emanuel Štěpán Petr v kontextu českého varhanářství”, bachelor work at Janáčkova Akademie Múzických Umění v Brně, 2011.

22

Šon Jiří, “Emanuel Štěpán Petr v kontextu českého varhanářství”, bachelor work at Janáčkova Akademie Múzických Umění v Brně, 2011.

Szostak Michał, “Evolution of Cavaillé-Coll’s symphonic organs”, in: “The Organ”, No 384, May-July 2018, Musical Opinion Ltd, London, ISSN 0030-4883, p. 8-23.

Szostak Michał, “Romantic tendencies in 19th-century organ building in Europe”, in: “The Organ”, No 385, Summer 2018, Musical Opinion Ltd, London, ISSN 0030-4883, pp. 10-27.

Tomší Lubomír, Lukeš Jan, Tomíček Jan and Uhlíř Václav, “Historické varhany v Čechách”, Nakladatelství Libri, 2000.