Art patronage

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term art patronage describes the contractual relationship between an artist and his client, in which the patron creates the financial and social conditions for the implementation of the work of art. Usually, the term art patronage is used for the art sponsorship of the late Middle Ages and the early modern period .

Most of the clients were wealthy prelates , princes , merchants or private individuals, but also groups of people such as religious orders , committees , guilds or brotherhoods . The art patronage took place in the field of fine and applied arts. Painting and sculpture , architecture and handicrafts as well as music , theater and literature were promoted and, to a certain extent, also controlled by this system. A close relationship between artist and client on a personal level was not unusual in a continuous long-term art patronage.

Types of art funding

It is only possible to a limited extent to differentiate between the individual types of art funding, because they are not defined uniformly. The patronage is closely related to the art patronage and is sometimes even interchangeably used. As with patronage (in contrast to sponsorship ), art patronage does not pursue any specific commercial interests. The reasons for the patronage of art on the part of the client have not always been the same. Prestige , legitimacy , representation of wealth, political criteria, and personal preferences, however, are the most common motives. Features that distinguish the art patron from the patron are the sometimes very close relationship with the artist and the mutual dependence. According to Ulrich Oevermann , patronage focuses on the preservation and continuation of the cultural heritage, while the patron of art is concerned with exerting and consolidating his own influence. According to this, patrons would promote art for the benefit of the common good, while art patronage tended to follow the motive of self-marketing. Opposing voices claim that the ideal of selfless and altruistic patronage corresponds as little to reality as it does to art patronage.

research

Art funding only appeared as a research subject in sociology since the early 1980s . The background to art patronage and its effects on artistic production is also an area of ​​research in the arts . The studies in this area paint a detailed picture, but for the most part focus on individual case studies. Art patronage is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. It changed over the centuries, adapted to social conditions and has different regional characteristics.

Art theoretical reflection

Art funding is related to the social status of art and the profession of the artist. For many centuries painters and sculptors were ordinary craftsmen. The physical exertion associated with this work was only underestimated. Since the ancient times meant art primarily commissioned art . The artistic achievement was precisely determined beforehand, it was not associated with education and creativity, or with intellectual work. The gradual increase in the importance of art can only be observed with the beginning of the Italian Renaissance. Art patronage contributed to this by granting their protégés artistic freedom, giving them responsibility and increasing their reputation in society. At court , the art patronage encouraged an active culture of reception and the sometimes intimate proximity of the artist to the potentate strengthened the image of an extraordinary profession. Since the end of the 16th century, thanks in part to the theoretical treatises “De pictura” (1435/1436) by Leon Battista Alberti and “Le vite” (1550–1568) by Giorgio Vasari, a distinction has been made between art and craft .

Requirements for patronage

The forms of art patronage vary greatly. In the early modern period , especially in the 17th century, artists often got to work by being discovered by influential people, for example by a legate , first housed in a monastery and then doing their first assignments. Through the works, they gained reputation and got to know “other potential clients” among the prelate's circle of friends . Princes and other sponsors decided on a particular artist out of personal interest, in recognition of his virtues or for political reasons, whereby the origin of an artist was often decisive.

Commissioned works

From the middle of the 13th century, artists worked at princely courts where there was a need for representation. The court painters were given the official title pictor regis and were elevated to the status of familiaris et fidelis or valet or valet de chambre , which was associated with special privileges. Also in the middle of the 13th century, a magister regis , the first court builder , was installed in France .

Relationship between artist and client

The relationship between artist and sponsor could be very different. It happened that the artist was accommodated directly at the court or in the palace of his client and worked exclusively for him, but sometimes the patrons also commissioned individual works. The closest type of relationship is the servitù particolare , in which the artists enjoyed high esteem as members of the princely famiglia and were well paid. However, they often had to pay for security and prosperity with their freedom, which was restricted by the strict rules at court. There were princes who included a clause in their contracts with court artists that said they were not allowed to work for private individuals outside the court. However, the majority of the artists were allowed to work for other clients, for example rich citizens or other potentates , with the prince's legitimation . In the case of a servitù particolare, the relationship between artist and patron was often particularly close and characterized by mutual dependence. Some testimonials report extremely confidential relationships. According to an anecdote , for example , Charles V Titian himself picked up his fallen brush from the floor. Should the sponsor die or should there be a political change, the relationship could be damaging for the artist, as he could hardly win other patrons for himself. Through their connection to rulers, the artists could be accused of belonging to the political allegiance, which could even result in the death penalty. Giacomo Andrea da Ferrara, an employee of Leonardo's , was publicly executed as a party member after he had not fled quickly enough when the French troops marched into Milan in 1499 . To prevent financial losses, it became customary in Rome in the 17th century for artists to paint in advance and to exhibit the paintings in their workshop and sell them to private individuals.

Salary

The salary at the court consisted mainly of material goods. In contrast to material benefits, monetary salaries were less standardized. As court craftsmen, artists received a daily, weekly or hourly wage. Only a few were fortunate enough to receive a fixed annual salary. The annual salaries of the cathedral builders, for example, were mostly project-related, but there were also court artists whose annual salary was converted into a lifelong commission. The advantage was that the artist could continue to count on a steady income despite being unable to work and even in old age. A lifelong commission was not the reward for the work, but rather for the willingness to serve and the virtue of a court artist. The salary was set at the prince's discretion, which explains the large differences in salary. Often the works of art were paid for additionally. Contributions in kind should ensure that the artist has been provided with "adequate accommodation". There were court artists who were given their own houses, but many were housed in the palace. In order to be able to represent the court in a dignified manner, some contracts stipulate the regular allocation of clothing. Meals and the right to see a doctor at the patron's expense could also be part of these agreements. In order not to miss the connection with the artistic zeitgeist, it became necessary to send the artists on educational trips. The “princely travel grants” created incentives for such trips. Another form of remuneration is the mobilization of artists , which was associated with a number of privileges.

marriage agency

From the 14th century, court artists were also commissioned to make portraits of princesses and princes, which were supposed to serve to initiate weddings. The first tradition of a marriage brokerage via a court painter comes from France. When the dukes made a bride for the underage Charles VI. they sent the court painter to Bavaria, Austria and Lorraine to have the potential candidates portrayed. Charles VI the portraits were shown and prompted him to decide to marry Elisabeth of Bavaria . The wedding took place in 1385.

Art patronage as an alternative to the painters' guild

The first painters' guilds appeared in Italy towards the end of the Duecento . The associations of craftsmen served for protection and mutual support. The artists were trained in the workshops of the guilds and then, under certain conditions, had the opportunity to work under a patron and to live at his court. Court painters enjoyed some privileges over the artists of the painters' guilds . They were not subject to compulsory guilds nor did they have to pay taxes. The possibility of an ennoblement in the case of art patronage shows that artists at court were given a high priority. The contrary ideas at court and in the city, ie in the guild, also meant that the art of the guild painters was considered artes mechanicae , but that art at court was counted among the artes liberales even earlier . Due to the competitive situation with other court states, new, innovative trends quickly developed at the courts, for example the so-called Florentine style, whereas the municipal clients placed more value on the Decorum and demanded a more traditional implementation of their commissions. Not only the artistic framework, but also the social relationships differed greatly from one another. Lorenzo Ghiberti, for example, wanted to escape the political disputes and the risk of epidemics in the city and took a job as court painter. Other artists wanted to escape the restrictive guild system or hoped for better wages.

Women in art patronage

Even if the majority of the clients and artists in the Middle Ages and in the early modern period were male, there are some clients who have been neglected by research but who are worth mentioning. Alfonsina Orsini de 'Medici's art patronage, for example, is considered to be particularly outstanding because, like Caterina de' Medici , she sponsored large architectural projects in particular, participated in their planning and was not limited to religious commissions appropriate to the Decorum .

Court artists were often exposed to the envy and resentment of other courtiers . Women artists in particular often had to endure defamation that was supposed to damage their reputation and endanger their position. As a protégée and friend of Marie Antoinette , the painter Élisabeth Vigée-Lebrun drew the suspicion of other aspirants. In diatribes she was accused of allowing herself to be held out at the expense of the state by the “Finance Minister Calonne , who was dismissed in 1787 ”.

The replacement of art patronage

The changes brought about by the French Revolution also led to an innovation in art patronage and the art market . The courtyards lost their importance and the art trade and exhibition system had already begun to develop in the 17th century. (The temporary and regionally narrow markets in Europe towards the end of the 15th century, especially in the Netherlands , are early exceptions.) In the middle of the 18th century, the idea of ​​freedom and autonomy prevailed in art and enabled a critical look at the instrumentalization and control associated with art patronage. Working at a court was soon no longer seen as a privilege. The painter Angelika Kauffmann, for example, turned down the offer in 1782 to become a court artist in Naples at the court of Ferdinand IV and Queen Maria Karoline because she expressly preferred to work freely and independently. In addition to the private art sponsors and the associations for the promotion of art, the state now also assumed responsibility for the development of art and culture. This also includes the establishment of art academies . The extensive reception of art in the media and an educated middle class have made art patronage superfluous.

Prominent art patronages (selection)

The sometimes very personal relationships between artist and patron produced groundbreaking, famous works. Some of the most important dual biographies are listed below. However, both artists and sponsors often had several contract relationships.

Artist patron
Apelles (~ 370 BC - late 4th century BC) Alexander the Great
Giotto di Bondone (1266-1337) Pope Benedict XII. ; King Robert of Naples
Hieronymus Bosch (1450–1516) Philip the Handsome
Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) First a member of a painters' guild, then worked a. a. for Lorenzo de Medici ; Ludovico Sforza ; Cesare Borgia
Albrecht Dürer (1471-1528) Maintained his own workshop and worked for Emperor Maximilian at times
Michelangelo Buonarroti (1475–1564) Pope Julius II ; Pope Clement ; Pope Paul III
Raffael da Urbino (1483–1520) Pope Julius II ; Pope Leo X.
Baccio Bandinelli (1488-1560) Cosimo I , Eleonora of Toledo
Titian (~ 1489–1576) Initially had his own workshop, then took orders from Charles V meet.
Agnolo Bronzino (1503–1572) Eleonora of Toledo
Giorgio Vasari (1511–1574) Alessandro de 'Medici ; Painter of the Order of the Olivetans ; Cosimo I de 'Medici
Roelant Savery (~ 1577–1639) Emperor Rudolph II
Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640) Nicolaas Rockox; Maria de 'Medici ; Louis XIII
Gian Lorenzo Bernini (1598–1680) Pope Urban VIII
Diego Rodríguez Velázques (1599-1660) King Philip IV
Balthasar Neumann (1687–1753) Johann Philipp Franz von Schönborn
Leo von Klenze (1784–1864) Ludwig I of Bavaria

literature

  • Götz Adriani (ed.): The artists of the emperors. From Dürer to Tizian, from Rubens to Velázques from the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna . Exhibition catalog of the Museum Frieder Burda, Baden-Baden: DuMont 2009. ISBN 978-3-8321-9200-6
  • Eckhard Braun: Principles of Public Art Promotion in Germany (Edition Umbruch Volume 30) , Kulturpolitische Gesellschaft e. V., Bonn, Klartext Verlag, Essen 2013 (Umbruch Edition No. 30), ISBN 978-3-8375-0995-3 .
  • Francis Haskell : painter and client . Art and Society in the Italian Baroque. Cologne 1996; Cat. Baroque in the Vatican, 1572-1676. Bonn: DuMont, 2005. ISBN 3-7701-3757-4
  • Hermsen, Thomas: Art funding between passion and commerce. From civil patron to sponsor of modernity. Frankfurt / Main; New York: Campus Verlag, 1997. ISBN 3-593-35833-6
  • Jancke, Gabriele: Autobiography as social practice: relationship concepts in self-testimonies of the 15th and 16th centuries in the German-speaking area. Cologne: Böhlau, 2002. [Berlin, Freie Univ., Diss., 1999]. ISBN 3412132012
  • Arne Karsten : artists and cardinals. On the patronage of Roman cardinal nephews in the 17th century. Cologne: Böhlau, 2003. [Berlin, Humboldt-Univ., Diss., 2001]. ISBN 3-412-11302-6
  • North, Michael (Ed.): Art Markets in Europe 1400-1800. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999. ISBN 1-84014-630-3
  • Oevermann, Ulrich; Sussmann, Johannes; Tauber, Christine (ed.): The art of the mighty and the power of art. Investigations into patronage and art patronage. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2007. ISBN 3-05-004223-0
  • Bernd Roeck : Art patronage in the early modern period. Studies on the art market, artists and their clients in Italy and the Holy Roman Empire (15th – 17th centuries). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1999. ISBN 3-525-01370-1
  • Strunck, Christina (ed.): The women of the Medici family. Politics, patronage, role models (1512, 1743). Petersberg: Imhof, 2011. ISBN 978-3-86568-687-9
  • Wagner, Bernd: Fürstenhof and civil society. On the origin, development and legitimation of cultural policy. Essen: Klartext-Verlag, 2009. ISBN 978-3-8375-0224-4
  • Martin Warnke : court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist . Cologne: DuMont, 1985. ISBN 3-7701-3847-3
  • Wölfle, Sylvia: The art patronage of the Fuggers 1560-1618. Augsburg: Wißner, 2009. ISBN 978-3-89639-682-2
  • Zeitz, Lisa: "Titian, dear friend ...". Titian and Federico Gonzaga. Art patronage in Mantua in the 16th century. Petersberg: Imhof, 2000. [Munich, Univ., Diss., 1999]. ISBN 3-932526-73-2

See also

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ cf. Roeck, Bernd: Art patronage in the early modern period. Studies on the art market, artists and their clients in Italy and the Holy Roman Empire (15th - 17th centuries). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1999, p. 13.
  2. ↑ cf. Hermsen, Thomas: Art funding between passion and commerce. From civil patron to sponsor of modernity. Frankfurt / Main; New York: Campus Verlag, 1997, p. 27.
  3. ↑ a b cf. Oevermann, Ulrich: The art of the mighty and the power of art. Investigations into patronage and art patronage. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2007, p. 14.
  4. ↑ cf. Hermsen, Thomas: Art funding between passion and commerce. From civil patron to sponsor of modernity. Frankfurt / Main; New York: Campus Verlag, 1997, pp. 13-19.
  5. ↑ cf. Haskell, Francis: painter and client. Art and Society in the Italian Baroque. Cologne 1996; Cat. Baroque in the Vatican, 1572-1676. Bonn: DuMont, 2005. p. 9.
  6. ↑ cf. Hermsen, Thomas: Art funding between passion and commerce. From civil patron to sponsor of modernity. Frankfurt / Main; New York: Campus Verlag, 1997, p. 24.
  7. ↑ cf. Haskell, Francis: painter and client. Art and Society in the Italian Baroque. Cologne 1996; Cat. Baroque in the Vatican, 1572-1676. Bonn: DuMont, 2005. pp. 12-24.
  8. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, p. 11.
  9. ^ Haskell, Francis: painter and client. Art and Society in the Italian Baroque. Cologne 1996; Cat. Baroque in the Vatican, 1572-1676. Bonn: DuMont, 2005. p. 19.
  10. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, p. 175.
  11. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, pp. 146–151.
  12. ↑ cf. Haskell, Francis: painter and client. Art and Society in the Italian Baroque. Cologne 1996; Cat. Baroque in the Vatican, 1572-1676. Bonn: DuMont, 2005. p. 20.
  13. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, pp. 185f.
  14. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, pp. 302-321.
  15. ↑ cf. Haskell, Francis: painter and client. Art and Society in the Italian Baroque. Cologne 1996; Cat. Baroque in the Vatican, 1572-1676. Bonn: DuMont, 2005. p. 29f.
  16. ^ Warnke, Martin: Court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, pp. 159-188.
  17. ^ Warnke, Martin: Court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, p. 137f.
  18. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, p. 34.
  19. ↑ cf. Hermsen, Thomas: Art funding between passion and commerce. From civil patron to sponsor of modernity. Frankfurt / Main; New York: Campus Verlag, 1997, p. 29.
  20. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, p. 99.
  21. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, pp. 28 and 53ff.
  22. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, pp. 66 and 81-85.
  23. ↑ cf. Strunck, Christina: The women of the Medici family. Politics, patronage, role models (1512, 1743). Petersberg: Imhof, 2011. pp. 31-40.
  24. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, p. 155.
  25. ↑ see Baumgärtel, Bettina: Angelika Kauffmann (1741-1807). Conditions of female creativity in 18th century painting. Weinheim: Beltz, 1990. p. 109.
  26. ^ Walczak, Gerrit: Élisabeth Vigée-Lebrun. An artist in emigration 1789-1802. Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2004. p. 7.
  27. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, p. 308.
  28. ↑ cf. Hermsen, Thomas: Art funding between passion and commerce. From civil patron to sponsor of modernity. Frankfurt / Main; New York: Campus Verlag, 1997, p. 33.
  29. ↑ cf. Bettina Baumgärtel (Ed.): Angelika Kauffmann 1741-1807. Retrospective. Exhibition catalog of the Kunstmuseum Düsseldorf. Ostfildern-Ruit: Hatje, 1998, p. 33.
  30. ↑ cf. Warnke, Martin: court artist. On the prehistory of the modern artist. Cologne: DuMont, 1985, p. 309f.