Beginning with the Renaissance the Church is no longer the only primary patron of the arts.
Private families, governments and other secular (non-religious) groups begin to hire artists
with greater frequency. What effect do you think this new diversity in patrons had on the arts
in the 15th-18th centuries? Include some specific examples of works commissioned by these
new patrons.
Nowadays when people look at a piece of art, the main focus is often on the artist who made the artwork. In the renaissance period, the person, or group of people paying for the pieces of art (the patrons) were considered to be the primary force behind a work’s creation. In the history of art, artists did not just create a work of art for the sake of art, patrons were the ones behind the creation of art and architecture and they dictated the cost, size, location, and subject matter of works of art. (Ewbank & Graham, n.d). Initially, the church was the sole patron of art, but the the15th-18th century ushered in a new diversity in patrons as private families, governments, councils, and other non-religious groups began to hire artists with greater frequency. I strongly believe that the diversity of patrons also brought about diversity in the type of art produced. Before that, the church as the only primary patron meant that the subject matter of the majority of the art creations was biblical or aligned to the church. The upper class became avid patrons of artists, sculptors, musicians, and intellectuals. For the noble and wealthy families, artistic patronage was a means of achieving and maintaining social status and political power in a society where there was a strict social hierarchy. This also meant better pay to the artists because competition for a product always attracts more in terms of value. Some specific examples of works commissioned by these new patrons are Ghiberti’s St. Matthew and van der Weyden’sDeposition which were both public works of art that were commissioned by groups of patrons.
Comments
Leave a comment