The panel presents a view of a dining room of an inn. A group of men sit at a round table. They are distinguished by their luxurious dress and hats and by the elegant beer pokals and goblets which fill the table. The wooden beams of the floor and ceiling are rendered in a linear manner akin to a woodcut impression, and the miniature-like background landscape viewed through open arches has an expressive, spontaneous quality. A female servant brings in food from the top left. In the foreground, a dog gnaws a bone on the left, and the ceremonial host dressed in blue and white serves wine from a pitcher on the right. At the bottom and sides are coats of arms and inscription identifying the individuals. The colors for the arms and inscriptions that include light blue, pink, yellow, reddish-purple, light green, and orange are familiar from other works by the artist. The concentration of deeper pot-metal color on the shields and inscriptions acts as a frame around the main scene; compositional balance is achieved by red used for the dedicatory inscription at the bottom and for the two magistrates’ names at the top.

The Vincent sale of 1890 describes the panel as a fragment, and retaining the names and numerical position of only eight of the judges and the usher (Waibel). They are transcribed as: Jochli Alther 4, Hensli Müller 5, Andareas 6 lindenman, Jacob Egger 9, Jacob Lener 10, Gebhart Rütiger 11, Tebis Suser 12, hans Giger13, Jacob Reul. . .Waibel (Rahn, 1890, p. 218, no. 229). The monogram NW (Niklaus Wirt) is also noted. At some later time, the panel was given five modern arms with corresponding inscriptions, resulting in the full complement of fourteen arms and figures. Paul Boesch lists the names on the restored armorials but adds that he has no evidence that they were valid replacements for the lost segments: 1) Jörg Schriber Amma; 2) Melken / Büttiger; 3) Uli Mues; 7) Baltz Studer; and 8) Heini /Arnoult. For him, the top of the panel containing the arch as well as the figures playing the lute and bagpipe in the spandrels “appeared to be newer additions” (Boesch, 1949, pp. 16–17, no. 38). The upper portion of the panel showing seven of the magistrates is problematic. Although the painting style is consistent with that for the lower half, the figures do not align well with the vessels depicted on the table. Such inconsistences are suggestive of stopgaps and infills. A more easily recognizable stop gap showing a section of the table with one member of the court and a man pouring wine can be seen on the right. The figures are out of proportion with the adjacent figures, although they are adroitly juxtaposed with the legs of the original server in the panel. The crown of the seated man’s hat is tall, unlike that worn by anyone else. Comparison of the stopgap to the arms suggests that the original disposition of the panel showed only the usher/host, not an additional magistrate in this area.

This lively scene of banqueting members of a law court, called a Gerichtsscheibe, is a characteristic type of Swiss society panel of the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. In a broad view of Swiss glazing history, Boesch included this panel as a typical example of the genre commemorating all active members of a law court, guild, or other civic association (Heberle, 1891, p. 30, no. 209; Boesch, 1955, p. 104, without identifying the LACMA ownership). Boesch notes different types of Gerichtsscheiben found in both rectangular and circular form, including the law court in session, the law court in convivial setting, and personifications. Personifications, although fewer in number, inspired a panel from Zurich, dated 1589, attributed to Niklaus Bluntschli. In a round format, ten shields surround a personification of Justice (London, Victoria & Albert Museum C.63-1919; VAM_16).

More common is representation of the court in session, such as the rectangular panel of the Law Court of Niederbussnang, 1591 (TG_91; artist Wolfgang Breny, Thurgau History Museum, Frauenfeld). Niederbussnang’s panel shows the plaintiffs before a table surrounded by members of the court; one member keeps notes of the proceedings. The bird’s eye-perspective of the room, looking down on the proceedings, is similar to that employed for the Goldach panel. See also a panel dated 1597 of the Law Court of Tablat (a region east of the city of St. Gallen). Featuring eleven coats of arms, the Tablat scene show two plaintiffs who have inspired a lively debate among five of the members while others either take notes or observe (Historisches Museum St. Gallen; Egli, 1927, pp. 41–45, no. 93, fig. 15).

Some honorific compositions, such an example from Zurich dated to 1546, constructed paired representations in roundel form: one shows Zurich’s court in session and the other, an equally honored association enjoying a festive meal (Schweizerisches Nationalmuseum, Zurich, LM 20093 and 20094; Schneider, 1970, p. 90, nos. 238 and 239; Boesch, 1955, fig. 23).

Goldach is a town on the Bodensee, close to the German border; the German city of Constance is about 35 kilometers to the west. It selected the format of the festive meal. The mood of companionship and gaiety, itself the essence of the Swiss Gesellschaftsscheibe (association panel), is conveyed by the animated figures who dine and speak. Between 1958 and 1968, Heinrich Stäubli made a replica for Goldach’s Rathaus, but with completely different arms (HS_1070). The man serving wine has the role of Weibel (usher) who welcomes the members (Sibyl Kummer-Rothenhäusler, note to author). His official role is confirmed by his wearing Goldach’s heraldic colors of gold and blue. Details in the foreground, such as the dog gnawing a bone beside a bowl of bones and the tin pitcher of beer add humor and naturalness to the event. The position of the dog gnawing on the bone is a frequent feature; see for example, the design by the Schaffhausen glass painter, Felix Lindtmayer the Younger, about 1550 (Berlin KGM library, Schmitz, 1913, p. 227, fig. 329). Since Niklaus Wirt acted biannually as judge of the law court of Wil from 1576 to 1584 and was also an active member of the Wil town council (Schweizerisches Künstler-Lexikon, vol. 3, p. 510; Schneider, 1970, p. 491), he probably had a personal or even judicial reason to produce this panel for the Goldach court.

Cited in:
Loewenthal sale, 1931, p. 37, no. 172, pl. 37.
Boesch, 1949, p. 16, no. 38.
Hayward, 1989, p. 71.
Raguin, 2024, vol. 1, pp. 158–61.