Country House on Attersee Gustav Klimt Buy Art Prints Now
from Amazon

* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.


by
Tom Gurney BSc (Hons) is an art history expert with over 20 years experience
Published on August 21, 2026 / Updated on October 23, 2026
Email: tomgurney1@gmail.com / Phone: +44 7429 011000

About Country House on Attersee: Forester's House in Weißenbach I

The painting widely called Country House on Attersee is Gustav Klimt's Forester's House in Weissenbach on the Attersee I. It is the 1914 square landscape now shown at the Upper Belvedere as a permanent loan from a private collection. The museum records it under loan inventory Lg 1889, with the German title Forsthaus in Weißenbach I (Landhaus am Attersee).[1]

Klimt presents the complete lodge beyond a broad flower meadow. Dark shrubs fill the lower corners, pushing the eye towards a lighter middle. A long roof, covered in small shingle marks, extends across the upper half. Wild vine climbs the right façade and partly overtakes its windows, while the rising flank of the Schoberstein closes the distance behind the building.[1][2]

This is not an anonymous rural fantasy. The forester's house stood at the entrance to the Weißenbach valley at the southern end of Lake Attersee, and the building survives. Klimt lodged there during the summers from 1914 to 1916, painting two independent views in 1914.[1][2] Yet the canvas is not simply a record of where he stayed. Its force comes from the way meadow, bushes, shingles, vine and hillside make a specific working house appear inseparable from the ground around it.

The Belvedere dates the oil on canvas to 1914. It measures 110 × 110 centimetres and carries the signature GUSTAV KLIMT at the lower left.[1] The loan inventory and the museum's former inventory 8983 belong to different moments in the history of this same object; they do not identify two versions.

At a Glance

  • ArtistGustav Klimt
  • Current German titleForsthaus in Weißenbach I (Landhaus am Attersee)
  • Current English titleForester's House in Weissenbach on the Attersee I
  • Historical title layersLandhaus am Attersee, Country House on the Attersee, Country House by the Attersee, Summer Landscape
  • Date1914
  • SignatureGUSTAV KLIMT, lower left
  • Dimensions110 × 110 centimetres
  • MediumOil on canvas
  • Current inventoryLg 1889
  • Former Austrian Gallery inventory8983
  • OwnershipPrivate collection; permanent loan to the Belvedere since 2018
  • Current accessUpper Belvedere, confirmed on 10 August 2026[1]

Why One House Has Several Titles

The current holder title identifies both building and version: Forester's House in Weissenbach on the Attersee I. Historical records often called the painting Landhaus am Attersee, meaning country house on the Attersee. The Austrian Gallery also used Landhaus am Attersee (Sommerlandschaft)—Country House on the Attersee (Summer Landscape)—while the 2003 auction title was simply Landhaus am Attersee.[1][3][4]

These are titles for one canvas. “Country House” is not evidence that the building was an invented villa, and “Summer Landscape” does not turn it into an unidentified seasonal scene. The numeral I distinguishes it from Klimt's second 1914 painting of the same lodge.

The inventory history requires similar care. Before restitution, the Österreichische Galerie registered the work as inventory 8983. It was removed from the federal inventory after its return to Jenny Steiner's heirs in 2001. When a private owner placed it on permanent loan to the Belvedere in 2018, it received the loan number Lg 1889.[1][4] The new number records a changed legal and institutional status, not a replacement canvas.

The House beyond the Meadow

The forester's house sits relatively high within the square. Klimt gives the lower area to meadow and low growth, so the viewer must look across a dense near field before reaching the building. There is no clear path from the bottom edge to the door. The lodge is visible in its full horizontal extent, yet it is not immediately accessible.

That distance makes the flowers do more than decorate a foreground. Small touches of light and saturated colour accumulate across the grass. Greens vary from bright yellow-green to deeper, cooler tones. Pale, red, pink, blue and violet marks interrupt them. The effect is abundant without becoming a reliable botanical chart: the retained object sources identify a flowering meadow, not every species within it.[1][2]

The building provides a slower horizontal rhythm behind this activity. Its roof runs almost from side to side. Wall, windows and vine establish a middle register between the near meadow and the rising land above. Rather than occupying the centre as an isolated architectural subject, the lodge becomes the hinge joining these fields.

Its completeness matters. Klimt has not chosen only a decorative corner or a close view of a window. The long structure is recognisable as a working rural building, with roof, chimney, wall openings and changing surfaces. At the same time, shrubs cut into its lower edge and vegetation covers parts of its façade. Wholeness does not produce separation.

The Dark Shrubs at the Corners

Two dark masses press into the foreground from the lower left and lower right. The Belvedere describes them as framing the composition.[1] They do not form a symmetrical pair. Their contours and densities differ, and the brighter meadow extends between and beyond them.

This arrangement gives the lower edge a strong enclosure. The viewer does not stand before an uninterrupted lawn. The dark growth creates a shallow visual threshold, after which the flowered field opens. Because neither shrub becomes a central specimen, their role is relational: they intensify the lightness and colour of the meadow.

They also keep the square from dividing into simple horizontal stripes. Branches and leaves project inward. Their greens connect with the vine and hillside above, allowing darkness at the bottom to answer vegetation around the roof. The building remains the central recognisable object, but the corners prevent it from floating above a passive foreground.

No symbolic identity is necessary. The shrubs do not securely signify concealment, danger or a private boundary. Their visible work is already exact: they narrow entry into the picture, weight its corners and make the field between them appear more luminous.

A Roof Made from Repeated Marks

The long shingled roof is one of the painting's most sustained patterns. Numerous small, varied touches describe its surface. From a distance they join into a coherent slope; at closer range they retain their separateness. The roof therefore reads as both construction and painted field.

Its broken light echoes the meadow below. Flowers create scattered points across green ground; shingles create smaller repeated units across the darker roof. The two surfaces are not identical, yet the eye can move between them through this shared fragmentation. Klimt binds cultivated building and cultivated land through comparable densities of mark.

The chimney interrupts the roof's long movement and helps preserve scale. Windows and shutters below supply further signs of occupation, but no person appears. The house is maintained and usable, not abandoned. Its stillness comes from the omission of inhabitants, not from visible ruin.

Colour also prevents the roof from becoming a single dark cap. Lighter strokes catch across the shingles, and their tones recur in the soft rising ground behind the building.[2] That recurrence makes the roof participate in the larger site. It remains materially a roof while visually exchanging colour with meadow and hillside.

Vine, Windows and a Façade under Growth

Wild vine covers much of the right façade.[2] It does not erase the wall completely. Windows and coloured shutters remain visible at intervals, allowing the viewer to understand the structure behind the growth. The tension comes from partial obstruction: architecture persists, but vegetation controls its clarity.

The vine changes the scale of marks along the wall. Broad areas of façade meet clusters of leaves and smaller colour touches. Some windows appear embedded within growth rather than cut cleanly into an empty plane. The building's right side consequently feels denser and more interwoven than a plain elevation would.

This should not be described as literal dissolution. Roof, wall and openings remain distinguishable. Nor does overgrowth prove neglect. A living vine on an occupied building can be cultivated, accidental or both; the painting does not settle that history. Klimt's visual decision is to let the plant cross boundaries that architecture would normally keep firm.

The façade differs from the flower field in front of it. Meadow marks spread across an open horizontal zone. Vine marks cling to a vertical surface and gather around openings. Their shared colours create continuity, while their different orientations preserve the physical distinction between land and wall.

The Schoberstein behind the Lodge

The rising flank of the Schoberstein occupies the background and stops the gaze behind the building.[2] It is not presented as a distant peak isolated against a vast sky. Instead, the slope rises close to the roof and contributes another green, uneven field.

This closeness changes the lodge's setting. The house does not sit in an open lake panorama. Ground continues upward behind it, enclosing the structure within the Weißenbach valley. The upper vegetation and hillside answer the flowered foreground, placing the roof between two forms of growth.

The retained specialist source identifies the mountain flank, but not an exact compass bearing or measurable standing point for Klimt.[2] The painting should therefore not be used to reconstruct a precise line of sight. Its geographic value lies in locating the lodge within rising terrain at the valley entrance.

Little sky is available to release the composition. The square is filled from bottom to top by shrub, meadow, house and slope. This produces fullness without the corridor recession of Klimt's avenue picture or the water doubling of his Schloss Kammer IV. Here, spatial depth is carried through stacked ground and overlapping growth.

The Road Klimt Left Out

A narrow country road passed directly beside the forester's house into the Weißenbach valley and towards Bad Ischl. The specialist Klimt Database notes that Klimt omitted it.[2] This is important evidence that the painting was selected and organised, not a mechanically complete transcription of the site.

Removing the road allows meadow and vegetation to meet the lodge without an engineered strip cutting between them. It also suppresses an obvious channel of traffic. The building appears secluded even though its real position connected it to movement through the valley.

That choice should not be made to carry more meaning than the evidence supports. Omission does not prove an anti-modern declaration, a response to the First World War or a claim that the location was untouched. Nor does it show that Klimt imagined the whole setting without observation. It demonstrates that he altered visible circumstances to strengthen the relation he wanted among flowers, house and rising land.

The result is not pure wilderness. A forester's lodge, meadow, shutters, shingles and vine all register human work. Klimt removes one conspicuous sign of passage while retaining cultivated nature and useful architecture. The painting's seclusion is constructed, not absolute.

What the Surface Can—and Cannot—Tell Us

The exact recorded medium is oil on canvas.[1][3] The surface presents small dabs in the flower field, darker outlining, repeated shingle touches and layered colour across the vine and slope. These visible differences can be analysed without assigning named pigments or reconstructing a sequence of application.

No current object-specific infrared report, X-ray study or pigment analysis has been located in the retained sources. The canvas should not acquire technical findings established for other Klimt landscapes. Its coloured highlights are not evidence of gold leaf or another metal.

No exact preparatory drawing, transfer grid or working photograph has been securely associated with Forester's House I in the cited records. That absence is a limit of the published record, not proof that Klimt never sketched or photographed the site. The second painted view is likewise not a study for this canvas; it is an independent work.

Visible analysis remains most reliable when it follows the complete square: dark corners, active meadow, long roof, vine-covered façade and rising ground. The painting supplies ample evidence about organisation without revealing every step by which Klimt achieved it.

Forester's House I and II

Klimt painted two canvases of the Weißenbach lodge in 1914.[2] Version I shows the complete building beyond a flower meadow. Version II, now in the Neue Galerie New York's Estée Lauder Collection, moves closer to the façade and garden. Differently coloured windows, curtains and plant pots interrupt the close view of the façade.[2]

The difference is not a before-and-after state. Each is a finished oil painting with its own selection. Version I establishes the lodge across a wider site, relating its long roof to field and hillside. Version II makes details of garden, patio and windows more immediate.

Neither should be confused with Farmhouse in Upper Austria. That is another building and another composition. The Schloss Kammer paintings and Water Castle concern a different architectural complex at another part of the lake. Repeated squares and Attersee geography do not make these works interchangeable.

Klimt at the Forester's House

Klimt stayed in the Weißenbach forester's lodge during the summers from 1914 through 1916.[2] That fact explains his close knowledge of the motif and why a functional building became the subject of two canvases. More household biography is not needed to understand this painting.

The lodge was a temporary summer residence, not Klimt's permanent home or a property portrait commissioned by its owner. No retained source identifies a commission for the landscape. Nor does the absence of painted people turn the canvas into a coded account of Klimt's private relationships.

The biographical fact and the pictorial fact can therefore remain distinct. Klimt lived in the building; in the painting, he reorganised its setting by giving meadow, vine and hillside as much visual authority as the lodge itself.

A Probable Exhibition in 1915

In May 1915, the Wirtschaftsverband bildender Künstler Österreichs mounted an exhibition in Vienna. The catalogue recorded an unidentified flower garden and a forester's house among Klimt's works. Current specialist research considers the latter probably Forester's House in Weissenbach on the Attersee I.[2]

“Probably” must remain. A generic catalogue phrase is consistent with the painting but does not supply an inventory number, image or fully distinguishing title. The event is a credible early exhibition identification, not an absolute documentary match.

Later presentations are secure. The painting appeared in Munich and Vienna in 1964, at the Guggenheim Museum and in London in 1965, and in Madrid in 1995.[3] Older catalogues assigned varying dates to the canvas. Those dating variations belong to its scholarly history; they do not describe revised painted states.

Jenny Steiner and the 1938 Record

Jenny Steiner owned the landscape in Vienna.[1][3][4] In the asset declaration signed by her legal representative on 29 July 1938, a Klimt oil on canvas appeared as “House with Garden.” Federal provenance research accepts its identity with Landhaus am Attersee even though the recorded dimensions differ.[4]

The mismatch should be visible rather than silently corrected. The title is generic and the measurement imperfect, but the official investigation considered the surrounding evidence sufficient to identify the painting. This is a reasoned provenance conclusion, not a claim that every line of the 1938 list matches the current catalogue.

Steiner was persecuted under National Socialism. Records cited by the Advisory Board establish the seizure of her assets, including her art collection, and the intention to use them towards the imposed Reich Flight Tax.[4] Her ownership did not end through a normal voluntary decision in an unrestricted market.

The painting was offered at the Dorotheum in Vienna on 5 March 1940 as lot 223.[3] Provenance research places this sale within the disposal of Steiner's confiscated property for the benefit of the German Reich.[4][5] It should not be described as her voluntary consignment.

Emma Danzinger later possessed the canvas, but the interval between the Dorotheum sale and her ownership is not securely documented. The federal decision explicitly states that its dossier could not determine whether she bought it at the March 1940 auction or acquired it later.[4] That gap cannot be repaired by assumption.

The Belvedere records Danzinger by at least 1963; Sotheby's states that the painting was on loan to the Austrian Gallery from that year.[1][3] These later facts establish custody, not the missing acquisition event. Keeping the gap open is part of an accurate provenance.

Bequest, Restitution and Return as a Loan

The Belvedere's current object history records a 1994 legacy from Emma Danzinger, while Sotheby's 2003 catalogue gives 1993.[1][3] The difference can reflect estate and institutional recording rather than two bequests. The museum's 1994 date is the current holder baseline.

On 10 October 2000, Austria's Art Restitution Advisory Board recommended that former inventory 8983 be returned to Jenny Steiner's heirs.[4] The decision treated the Nazi confiscation as the decisive wrongful act and concluded that the later federal acquisition did not remove the case from the restitution law's purpose.

The return was completed in 2001, and the painting was removed from the Austrian Gallery's inventory.[1] Sotheby's offered it in New York as lot 25A in November 2003, after which it remained privately owned.[1][3] The auction is a historical transaction, not a basis for a current valuation.

In 2018 the canvas re-entered the Belvedere as a permanent loan from a private collection, receiving loan inventory Lg 1889.[1] A permanent loan does not identify the owner and does not transfer title to the museum. It describes an ongoing custodial arrangement under which the privately owned work can again be publicly presented.

Current Display

On 10 August 2026, the Belvedere's live record placed Forester's House in Weissenbach on the Attersee I in the Upper Belvedere.[1] It was also included in the museum's 2025 exhibition Gustav Klimt: Pigment & Pixel.[1]

Display can change because of loans, conservation or rehanging. Visitors travelling specifically to see loan inventory Lg 1889 should consult the current collection record shortly before visiting. Its physical presence at the museum does not make it federal property.

Why the Painting Matters

Forester's House I preserves a real building while refusing to isolate it. The complete lodge is visible, but dark corner shrubs govern entry, flowers command the near field, vine occupies the wall and mountain ground closes behind the roof. Every architectural feature meets another form of growth.

The omitted road reveals how carefully this apparent abundance was selected. Klimt did not simply copy everything before him. He removed a channel of traffic so that the house could sit within a continuous sequence of meadow, wall and hillside. That intervention creates seclusion without erasing the building's practical identity.

Its later history adds another kind of specificity. The current loan number follows an earlier state inventory, a Nazi confiscation, a forced dispersal, a provenance gap, a federal restitution and renewed private ownership. Seeing it at the Belvedere today depends on a loan, not on forgetting that chain.

Frequently Asked Questions

References

  1. Österreichische Galerie Belvedere, “Forsthaus in Weißenbach I (Landhaus am Attersee),” current object record, loan inventory Lg 1889, title, date, medium, dimensions, signature, location and provenance. View source. Accessed August 2026.
  2. Gustav Klimt Database, “The Final Years: 1914–1918,” the two Weißenbach views and their distinct compositions, lodge location, Schoberstein, road omission and probable 1915 exhibition identification. View source. Accessed 23 October 2026.
  3. Sotheby's, “Gustav Klimt, Landhaus am Attersee, lot 25A,” object data, signature, Jenny Steiner provenance, 5 March 1940 Dorotheum sale, Danzinger loan, restitution, exhibitions and 2003 offering. View source. Accessed August 2026.
  4. Austrian Art Restitution Advisory Board, “Jenny Steiner,” decision of 10 October 2000 concerning Landhaus am Attersee, former inventory 8983, asset-list identification, confiscation and restitution recommendation. View source. Accessed August 2026.
  5. Lexicon of Austrian Provenance Research, “Steiner, Jenny,” persecution, Dorotheum dispersals, later Danzinger possession, bequest and restitution context. View source. Accessed August 2026.

Discussion

Country House on Attersee: Forester's House in Weißenbach I rewards close attention to source context, object identity and careful reproduction boundaries.