Paris, INHA, Centre André Chastel, June 19 - 21, 2014

“CIVIC ARTISTS AND COURT ARTISTS (1300-1600). Case Studies and
Conceptual Ideas about the Status, Tasks and the Working Conditions of
Artists and Artisans” / “DER STÄDTISCHE KÜNSTLER UND DER HOFKÜNSTLER
(1300-1600). Das Individuum im Spannungsfeld zwischen Theorie und
Praxis.“

Deadline for submissions: 15 July, 2013

Conference location: Paris, Centre André Chastel, INHA
Conference date: 19 - 21 June 2014
Conference languages: English, French, German.
Conference organizers: Prof. Dr. Philippe Lorentz, Paris-Sorbonne &
EPHE / Prof. Dr. Dagmar Eichberger, Universität Trier, FB III
Kunstgeschichte & ERC TAK/ SHARK.

CIVIC ARTISTS AND COURT ARTISTS (1300-1600). CASE STUDIES AND
CONCEPTUAL IDEAS ABOUT THE STATUS, TASKS AND WORKING CONDITIONS OF
ARTIST AND ARTISANS.

This conference aims at investigating the role of the Early Modern
artist/ artisan in different social environments, especially the court
and the city, the princely household and the guild system. Many
artists/ artisans attracted commissions from both camps such as Jean
Fouquet, Rogier van der Weyden, Albrecht Dürer, Hans Plock, Jacques
Jordaens and Bernard van Orley, to name only a few. Some artists held
an honorary title and were thus only loosely attached to the court.
The proposed conference will equally address historiographical
questions such as to the changing perception and evaluation of the
artistic milieu under discussion. At this point in time, it seems
pertinent to take a critical look at the central hypothesis in Martin
Warnke’s 1985/1996 monograph “Hofkünstler. Zur Vorgeschichte des
modernen Künstlers “/ “The Court Artist. On the Ancestry of the Modern
Artist ” [1993]. This study argues that early modern artists could only
develop fresh ideas and new modes of expression in the context of the
court due to the privileges they enjoyed from the 13th/14th centuries
onwards. The corporate guild system is understood as a body exerting
restrictive measures that stifled artistic creativity and artistic
freedom. In the light of research undertaken over the last 30 years,
the question arises whether it is still appropriate to divide the world
of artistic production into two distinct parts: the court environment
and the civic environment.

The following points are relevant for discussion, further suggestions
are welcome:
+ By which parameters do we define the role of the court artists ?
Which media were represented by court artists and which terminology was
developed in order to describe their professional profile (e.g.:
jeweler, painter, illuminator, ‘tapissier’, embroiderer, sculptor,
architect, ‘gardejoyaux’, ‘varlet de chamber’, etc.)?
+ How did artists/ artisans negotiate their position within the courtly
household? What mattered to them most (e.g.: annual/daily pay, freedom
from guild regulations, free choice of residence)?
+ Why did some cities such as Brussels, Leuven or Nuremberg temporarily
appoint an official painter or architect and what was their primary
role and/or function?
+ Does the status of the artist have an impact onto the individual
works of art? Is it possible to distinguish art works that were made
for the court from those that were produced within the guild system? Is
the notion of “court art” linked to the status of the artist or is it
an independent construct based on ideas of patronage?
+ Did court artists have more artistic freedom than guild members? Did
court artists have more room to experiment and introduce new topics and
styles?
+ How was the interrelationship between social status and creative
output interpreted in art historical discourse (Warnke, Antal, etc.)
and in how far do these hypotheses stand up to archival research?
+ What do we know about the itinerant artist, moving from one city to
another or from one court to another? Which mechanisms were in place to
guarantee new employment far away from home (e.g.: letters of
recommendation, trial piece, etc.)?

The time frame covered by this project is the late Medieval and Early
Modern period ranging from c. 1300 to 1600. The conference concentrates
on the former Holy Roman Empire, France and the Netherlands, but may
also extend to other geographical areas.

PROPOSAL FOR PAPERS WILL BE ACCEPTED until 15 July 2013:
Please send your proposal to both organizers:
[log in to unmask] and [log in to unmask]

Submissions should consist of a concise proposal suitable for a
30-minutes presentation (max. 1-2 pages), and a short CV with the
applicant’s affiliation as well as list of up to five publications.
The organizers will apply for funding to cover travel costs and
accommodation. The organizers envisage publishing the best
contributions in an edited volume. This conference forms part of the
Trier research initiative TAK-SHARC, a research project under the
leadership of Prof. Dr. Dr. Andreas Tacke.

Prof. Dr. Dagmar Eichberger: [log in to unmask]
Prof. Dr. Philippe Lorentz: [log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~