Collectors and Collecting Renaissance Era Patrons, Artists and Spaces

Christina Chaplin

In the art market commissioning game, the patrons (often referred to as principals in game theory) were the party with the request for work who contracted a second party (the artist a.k.a. the agent) because of the artist's or architect's extensive knowledge of the venue through which the patron hoped to gain benefit.  It seems that the patrons were commonly men, and sometimes women, who could afford the financial cost of the commissioning and were willing to take on the financial and social risks associated with failure. 

Yet we may wonder why anyone would take on overwhelming financial and even social risks, without a guarantee of success.  It is also worthy here to note that even if success was acquired, it would not necessarily represent a monetary compensation.  Therefore the benefits to the patrons are measured subjectively.  Each patron must have weighed the social status benefits of the commission against their own fortunes and made the choice to risk it all based merely on a hope that the benefits available to the agents would be incentive enough for quality work, and the cost of humiliation would be enough to prevent incomplete assignments.  Who would take such risks and why? 

The answer seems to lie in the nature of the elite status of the times and a desire for ever expanding power and prestige.  Patrons in Renaissance Italy were both private patrons such as individual aristocrats like Cosimo de'Medici, Popes like Pope Clement VII, and even merchants such as Giovanni Tornabuoni, and also corporate patrons such as governmental bodies and religious orders like the Dominican order.  Often it could be seen that individual patrons would commission works as private patrons, but still represent the order or family to which they belonged.  These individuals and groups of great wealth were desirous of ever increasing power through perceived social status, financial stability, and magnificence.  They were willing to go to great lengths to find venues which would, in a sense, advertise these qualities to the public.  So, much like corporations today who all reach out to the same ends, they attempted to use the very best of means to compete with each other for the limited positions of distinction. 

Each needed to prove that he was not like the others, but instead better in one way or another.  The initial costs of such a thrust begin where all projects of great effort must begin, with financial outlay.  Patrons would weigh the cost of construction or creation against perceived benefits.  If the project was successful, then the benefits would outweigh the cost which would hopefully be merely monetary.  If the project were to fail, then there were be the risk of incurring social costs with implications of bad taste, poor financial stability, or even religious rejection.  These social costs could have additional financial costs should the reputation of the aristocrat be spoiled, cutting them off from necessary alliances or lines of credit within society. 

On the other hand, the benefits sought by patrons were numerous.  By utilizing the art to convey messages about oneself, one's family, one's piety, one's status, one's wealth,  or one's history, the patron could hope to gain recognition and acceptance from the audiences as contemporary, future, and Heavenly.  If one could convey the right subtle messages, in the appropriate decorum of the time, he could hope to increase his social standing among peers, form important alliances, and increase the availability of credit lines to himself and his family.  If the monument were to be a lasting beacon it could serve to launch that individual or group into future fame and rememberance, a desire of many elite of the time.  And if the monument were pious enough, crafted well enough to inspire a contemporary or future audience, the patron could hope to shorten his stay in purgatory by pleasing the heavenly audience. 

While art and architecture were the main avenues described in our reading for displaying messages, there were not by any means the only ways.  The principals of the game could also hope to show wealth through other types of conspicuous consumption such as grand processions and funerals with an emphasis on final resting places, residential and personal décor such as tapestries, furniture, and clothing, or even the varieties of food they could be seen buying or eating.  Like the first Medici Popes, the final resting place of a patron could signal his importance, wealth, power, etc.  If the place were to be an estate or plot unavailable to others, this alone would signal his prestige without the additional need for decoration, exaltation, and the like.  In this mode, each form of conspicuous consumption employed a variety of strategies for conveying messages to audiences, with the messages in art and architecture being the most "readable" due to their lasting nature and visual forms. 

Signaling was the method of prominently displaying and object or piece of information which would appreciate the value of the patron.  Much like a college degree signals quality in a potential employee, the signature of Michelangelo could signal a huge monetary output and thus the vast wealth of the principal.  In Carafa's chapel in the church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva in Rome, his inclusion of St. Thomas Aquinas was a signal to his fellow Dominican brotherhood of his piety, knowledge, and dedication to their cause.  A commission could achieve a greater value as a signal if it could effectively distinguish its patron.  "Being distinguished" was a primary goal for many of the Italian Renaissance.  Through portrayals of magnificence and strong signals, patrons could differentiate themselves from their peers.  Magnificence is not merely based on the amount of money spent, but also upon the ways in which the expenses were utilized to represent virtuous spending for the public good and increased prestige of the patron himself.  Strong signals, in this sense, gave the audience the impression that the patron was of rare quality through the costs of the signal (which would constrain other patrons), the signal's appropriateness in the informal rules of decorum, or an erudite quality which excluded some of the audience to give a feel of prestige to the work. 

Similarly, sign-posting was about giving pieces of information to appreciate the value of the patron, but differs  from signaling in the efforts of sign-posting to include only specific information while discarding other, less desirable, facts.  Sign-posting was used in this way by the artist Leone Leoni.  Being of a less desirable profession, Leoni left the source of his fortune out of the façade he commissioned for his home while he included his ties to the emperor of the time and reference his learning. 

The final strategy of stretching is a fairly straightforward one in which the patron would have a quality or point of history exaggerated in order to increase his prestige.  Stretching was the most risky of these three strategies as it is the only one to use potentially false information to portray status.  Should a patron be caught stretching himself too far in one direction or another, it would be unseemly in the eyes of his audience and he could potentially be shunned or discredited for his exaggerations.  Like the commission of Francesco Gonzaga, it was safer to merely imply a sort of victory than to show the winning of a battle unwon.

Dalanda Jalloh

The reading is very telling about the manner in which art, status, patrons, artists, and audiences were connected in Renaissance Italy. From the reading it becomes clear that many factors were considered when a patron pursued an artist to create a piece of art. Patrons had desires of improving status for themselves and their families, as well as enriching the city in which they lived, while promoting worship and a better afterlife for themselves. This desire could not be fulfilled without the proper artist, who was usually an elite artist who only interacted with the elite patrons---money alone could not afford the artist's services. The mechanisms by which this art was constructed and subsequently the way status was portrayed varied greatly. Different art forms were constructed. In addition, different methods of distinction were employed by patrons to set themselves apart from those of lesser status.

1. Private Patrons: Merchants and humanists, aristocrats, rulers, even a few artists.

Corporate Patrons: City governments, religious orders, and brotherhoods or confraternities

Relationship: Private and corporate patrons overlapped at times, especially since individuals sometimes represented the interests of the groups to which they belong.

Significance: The patron (along with the artist) needed to be able to predict how the audience would receive the artwork produced. The patron was the principal in the principal-agent relationship. This principal is responsible for knowing what he or she wants commissioned. An individual patron acted as a representative of a family, brotherhood, or guild. He or she played a significant role as an agent for many audiences including his clan, fellow citizens, and the heavenly one.

2. Stakes: Better afterlife if patrons drew pictures that inspired or aided worship; they could also impress the elites of the cities or regions by creating displays that would please those elite and thus increase their status, and establish an honorable reputation (for example putting coat of arms on the back of vestments which could be seen well by all the people). Also, in his treatise On the Art of Building, the humanist Leon Battista Alberti wrote that "we build great works so as to appear great in the eyes of our descendants; equally we decorate our property as much to distinguish family and country as for any personal display".

Benefits: Exquisite homes, the opportunity to serve God, honor the city, obtain goodwill from local rulers, celebrate/commemorate the family/guild of the artist, and commemorate the artist himself.

Costs/limitations: Availability of desirable artists, materials, and display locations, prestigious locations were always highly sought after yet not readily available. Also, financial outlay and the risk that the artwork produced by the artist is received negatively by audiences. Another constraint are the unspoken rules of decorum-patrons could not place any art from just anywhere they wanted, nor could they attempt to construct any type of art form merely because they had the financial means of doing so. Chapel decorations had to identify and thus celebrate the holy figure to which the altar was dedicated. Chance of bankruptcy from the sheer cost of building these magnificent structures, some chapels only had one altarpiece, chance of unwanted envy or public rage from others,

3. The ability for social mobility provided incentive to the Patrons Payoff. Those with the money could greatly enhance their reputation. The opportunity to do repeat business with an agent; possibility of obtaining goodwill from local rulers;

4. Food, drink, narcotics, shelter, services ornaments, apparel, weapons, accoutrements, palaces and coaches are all types of conspicuous consumption. Some patrons spent large amounts of money on gardens, tapestries, and works in precious materials. In addition, they spent a lot on expensive banquets, processions, and spectacles. All of this conspicuous consumption was done as an attempt to distinguish the elite from the non-elite and those of lesser status in the region. Impressive homes, servants, and horses were also a trademark of the elite.

5.Signaling: An object, which portrays the value of someone or something and is a reliable indicator of quality. Works of art were used to display favorable characteristics of patrons. Usually they conveyed wealth, status, and piety of a specific patron. Some examples consisted of signs found outside of merchant shops in Renaissance Italy, stamping or providing a certificate quality silk cloth from the Silk Guild in Milan, or the presence of a stone canopy or arch at tombs. The key to signaling was differential costs, which ensured that a work of art was not something cheap.

Stretching: Can be described as the exaggeration or misrepresentation of important characteristics to convey an image intended to shower the patron in a favorable light. For example, during the Italian Renaissance, patrons and audiences create embellishments in art. Another example was when artist Francesco Gonzaga used art to show that a major battle against the French was a significant victory, despite many of his contemporaries revealing that the results were mixed at best.

Sign posting: An actor reveals specific, truthful, and important characteristics while simultaneously omitting other information; it can be characterized by selective revelation. For example, non-aristocratic patrons would not reveal the way in which they earned their wealth when the intended audience included nobles, as a means to not lose any credibility.

6. Audiences consisted of nobles, elite, women, non-elite, other artists, God, and future people in later centuries. Those who were there social equals, inferiors, and superiors.

7.  To be distinguished from those of lesser status patrons needed to employ both the strategy of displaying magnificence and the use of signaling status.  Houses, furniture, exquisite clothing, palaces, weddings, parties, receptions of distinguished guests, banquets, different architecture, etc needed to be extravagant and not easily imitated by others. The magnificence must not just portray the ability to spend and thus vast wealth, it should reveal the nobility in those expenditures. Signaling allowed the patrons to display to the masses that they possessed certain favorable characteristics. Both of these would enable the patrons to be well distinguished. 

Charles Saunders

The art market in the Italian Renaissance was relatively unique in that the major players involved created, consumed, and enjoyed art through many different variables than purely financial consideration. Material wealth was less important in Italy than social status, prestige, and relationships---indeed, a significant portion of financial transactions, especially for the high socioeconomic strata, revolved around lines of credit, which in turn was based on reputation. Art and art patronage became a very important vehicle for outward representation of one's status and rank in society, and the public image conveyed by conspicuous works of art had very real ramifications through all aspects of economic, social, and political life.
                Through an economic lens, this "game" is significant as all key players (patrons, artists, and audience) can be defined as both an agent and a principle depending in which direction the relationship is viewed. Corporate patrons, such as city governments, religious orders, or "confraternities" (namely organizations) combined with private patrons represented by families, aristocrats, rulers, or merchants to achieve multifaceted goals of contribution to the public good and increased personal prominence. These definitions often overlapped, as private patrons often represented corporate interests, and at times private individuals served as intermediaries between artists and larger organizations. The audience played a key factor as well; comprised of contemporary, future, and heavenly components, the audience ultimately determined the worth and final judgment for a commissioned work of art.

In general, the patron served as the more traditional form of the principal, as they possessed the means and dictated the ultimate goal or purpose of the art, the focus of its representation, and the selection of constraints. The artist, or agent, contributed the unique ability to combine the capability for aesthetic art creation with the skill to navigate the constraints imposed on them. In other analyses, the principal can also be seen as an agent with the audience acting as principal, as the intended audience dictated in large part the content of the work, and their final judgment ultimately rendered any value which the patron originally sought.

Much of the art market can be explained through incentives, costs, and constraints, within the traditional economic mindset of maximization of value subject to a constraint. The interests of the artist and patron were generally aligned, fortunately circumventing the potential issues raised given the difficulty in monitoring the artist once a contract had been assigned. Artists made their living through their reputation; they bore the majority of the risk in the artistic endeavor and their effort was ensured through fear of rejection of work, humiliation through negative feedback, and a desire for repeat commissions from affluent patrons, as well as a fear of reduced compensation for a substandard finished product. Price was extraordinarily subjective, as the value of their art was generally dependent on its reception and reputation, and as a result the place of instruction and personal relationships played a large role in inflating prices.

Patrons also bore considerable cost in commissioning works of art, and the large possible benefits of public recognition and status carried with them considerable social and financial risk. Risk sources necessary for consideration included the possibility of financial loss due to faulty work, risk of negative reception and thus reduced benefit, delays, changes in ownership or patronage, confusing iconography or design, or a finished product that was low in quality. Relationships associated with commissioning art, and the art's content played a large role in the political status of the patrons, and could confer large benefits or loss, such as Lorenzo de 'Medici ultimately securing a cardinalship for his thirteen-year old son based on a favor in patronage to Carafa. High social risks came from avoidance of accepted societal norms, and opportunity costs and wealth constraints made true valuation of potential artistic investments difficult to measure. Yet often the signals of wealth and status gained through these endeavors far outweighed the high potential risk.

Some of the more significant avenues for the ostentatious displays were religious chapels and altarpieces, which although conferred high status due to the contemporary spiritual emphasis also produced a high constraint as these location were severely limited. Others included paintings, which clearly captured iconography and content that could convey connection and curry favor, and architecture, which although more expensive, also provided the dual benefit of the beautification of the city, as this display of public generosity helped mitigate some of the social risk of personal glorification. Audiences consisted of the heavenly, which was satisfied through religious displays and helped to reduce the time the patron spent in purgatory, the contemporary, which ultimately decided the fate of the commission and secured the status of the patron, and the future, which ensured the legacy and honor of the patron continued throughout history.

                Status through displays of magnificence was of primary concern to patrons of art in Renaissance Italy. Displays of art from wealthy patrons are examples of signaling, a method that suggested that patrons were of higher social quality purely through their ability to commission extravagant and expensive works of art. Often times this was reliable, as the many constraints placed on prestigious commissions often ensured that only those with means and political influence could obtain them. Sign-posting and stretching were significant in the planning and design of the commissioned art, as patrons, in true Machiavellian fashion, often highlighted specific and favorable information while omitting others in an effort to increase personal image, and "stretched" or exaggerated other favorable qualities to the extent that social norms allowed. In this way patrons were able to "self-fashion" their public image.  This desire for magnificence also increased the appeal of the host city, as works of art served to glorify the surrounding state as well as increase personal status, thus becoming more palatable to audiences. It can be argued that personal preference for art was almost insignificant, and art commissioning had a primary role in creating and influencing power shifts in Renaissance Italy.

Lipei Yu

H Hunt Bradley III

Daniel Chazen

1) The patrons were those that typically purchased artwork, satisfying their need for what Nelson and Zeckhauser term "self-promotion" and "value"  (Nelson 1).  Patrons could be either individual or corporate.  Individual patrons included those acting not only for themself, but also as a representative of a "family, brotherhood or guild"  (Nelson 18).  Merchants, aristocrats and rulers were amongst the private patrons.  Corporate patrons were made up of city governments, religious orders, as well as brotherhoods.  The interaction between patron and artist has been compared to a game in which "the payoff for each player depends on the behavior of the other"  (Nelson 17).  For example, there is a relationship between the principal and the agent, with the principal paying for requested work to be completed by the agent in return for compensation.  But it was not that simple.  There were several needs and relationships at issue.  A desire for honor or negotiating with clergy was often a requirement of families and institutions.  Sometimes, the patron also acted as an agent for his family and fellow citizens.  As Nelson writes, many "individuals and groups influenced the strategies of the patron and the artist" (Nelson 18).  Both patron and artist used contracts and negotiations to facilitate the transaction.  Renaissance patrons specified such criteria as material, dimension, budget, and even had an impact on the viewing conditions of a work, such as framing and lighting.  It was clearly the patron who played the central role in commissioning the work.

2) The stakes were high in the commission of renaissance artwork.  Social, as well as financial benefits and costs, were both at issue.   Social benefits included prestige, honor and power.  Social costs included the possibility of the artwork being negatively received.  Financial benefits included signaling political connections, which often "led to economic benefits" (Nelson 50).   Financial costs were made up of expenditures for labor and materials.  However, financial costs brought its own benefit - the higher the cost, the more wealth that was conveyed.  The key goal of the patron who commissions a work is that the benefit exceeds the cost.  Yet, as Nelson writes, "commissions rarely bring direct financial gain to patrons" (Nelson 5).  The benefit sort by Renaissance patrons was therefore not necessarily financial, but varied depending on the circumstances.

3) The incentive for the patron's payoff included being distinguished as members of the elite, as opposed to lower status.  The payoff for the patron was distinction, prestige and image.  It was certainly a strong incentive for the patron as relative prestige and availability of disposable income served to define the "norms of behavior and appearance in their society," behavior that has been described as "self-fashioning (Nelson 5).  Another incentive for the patron was that he could use art to secure goodwill from the local rulers, as illustrated in Botticelli's Adornation of the Magi (Nelson 49).  Here is a photo of the painting:
4) Three common avenues for expenditure and conspicuous consumption:

--Architecture, such as public buildings, private chapels, tombs or country villas.

--Ceremonies, such as marriages, funerals and festivities.

--Artwork, including frescoes, portraits and decoration.

5) Signaling:  Clients need to "see signs of quality" before making purchases (Nelson 74).  There is a need to portray ("signal") something in a favorable and impressive way, for example a magnificent palace.  In Renaissance Italy, for example, shoppers were concerned about deception, which resulted in merchants signaling that their goods were genuine by offering a certificate.  (I guess similar in nature to a provenance for a piece of art.)  With regard to the Renaissance era, grand statues or palaces was a very likely and strong signal that the patron "fit the criteria of magnificence" (Nelson 76).  In other words, something grand importantly signaled a patron with status.

Stretching:  Basically what we sometimes refer to as an exaggeration or over-embellishment.  Stretching, which was common in the Italian Renaissance, was used to put the patron in a favorable light by overstating his success.  One example is how Gonzaga used art to portray a major battle against the French as a significant victory, while there were many that thought the "results were mixed at best" (Nelson 8).

Signposting:  This is the omission of significant and truthful information when indicating specific and important characteristics – in other words, not giving the full story.   An example of signposting was when sculptor Leone Leoni referenced his ties to learning and the emperor in the façade for his home, but failed to reveal that he made his name and fortune as an artist.

6) Audiences included: 

--People living in the future – thus providing a durable legacy for the patron. 

--Contemporaries – basically the target audience, such as fellow nobles and elites.

--For God – Heavenly, inspirational and uplifting to the soul.

7)  For the affluent and noble in the Renaissance era, a central part of the image they sort to portray was that of magnificence.  This was important as their image defined the "norms of behavior and appearance in their society."  It's importance was described by Pontano, who wrote that noble people are particularly intent "to realize the long lasting of their name and reputation..." (Nelson 5).   In the renaissance era, it was key to signal something of grandeur, as that in turn portrayed an individual of magnificence.  Amongst the attributes of magnificence is an association with greatness and a public display or indication of decorum.  Attributes of signaling included exclusiveness and appropriateness.  While signaling and magnificence were distinct concepts, they essentially worked hand in hand to achieve distinction for the patron.

Kwame Nana-Atoo

June Shin

1) Corporate patrons included city governments, religious orders, and brotherhoods. Private ones were merchants, humanists, aristocrats, rulers, and sometimes artists but only few are known. The goals of private patrons often overlapped those of corporate patrons because it was more than common that individual patrons were not only representing himself but also certain groups (family, brotherhood, clan, guild, etc.). All these patrons are the principals in the principal-agent relationship they form with artists. As principals, patrons played a significant role in the commissioning game because all commissions started with them. They were responsible for deciding the kind of art they wanted, its purpose, and sometimes even media to be used and details of the work. They also controlled the displaying of the artwork. 

2) In the commissioning game, the principals, or the patrons, have to pay their agents, or the artists, so there is financial cost on their part (but this is only a small portion of the total cost in commissioning art). Social costs may incur when the commission work fails to produce the desired effects or even receives a bad response from the audience. This is called the "negative reception cost." The benefits of the patrons are social, political and even financial. The social benefit is that the commissioned work can elevate or secure the status of the patrons. When this major aim of the patrons is achieved, political and economic advantages are likely to follow due to the high esteem they hold in the community. Francesco Medici's marriage to the Holy Roman Emperor's sister is a good example for the political benefit. Socially and politically powerful patron may well then win a lucrative official position, which will bring him wealth.

As for the agents, or the artists, they receive money in exchange for the work they produce. Apart from this financial benefit, the artist can also achieve fame if his product is successful and praised, and this will attract more commissions in the future. However, if the patron rejects the artist's end product or it is ridiculed or hated by the audience, not only is the artist faced with financial loss, as the patron will refuse to pay all of the promised fee or pay him at all, but he also suffers from bad reputation as an artist. Bad reputation does a lot of damage, for potential patrons will now turn away and seek another artist.

3) The incentives for art patronage were fame, prestige, virtue and status. In some regions of Italy, social status was more flexible than in others. Also, the old elite class had been thrown out by the new government. This provided for the possibility of social mobility, which led people to claim their status through patronage of extravagant art projects. Moreover, because the pope was not succeeded by someone from his clan, respectable cardinals commissioned numerous religious works of art that showed his piety to God in hopes of getting elected as the next pope.

4) There are numerous avenues for conspicuous consumption: gardens, tapestries, metalwork, antiquities, clothing, banquets, processions, and spectacles. Three of the most talked about conspicuous commissions are paintings, architecture, and sculpture. All three were used to convey the patron's status, wealth, and power.

5) Like a degree from a prestigious college indicates the person's level of education and, by inference, overall quality, a work of art was to signal the patron's characteristics such as his wealth, status, and piety. Wealth was well demonstrated by such large expenditures as architectural structures, and religious works were used to convey one's devotion to God.

Sign-posting is basically selective signaling. It discloses specific information about the patron but passes over others that he does not want communicated. For example, the façade of Leone Leoni's home in Milan reveals his intellect but says nothing about how he acquired the wealth with which he was able to commission the work, because an artist, which he was, was considered a humble profession at the time.

Stretching is when some qualities are exaggerated as to render the patron as better than he really is. For example, Francesco Gonzaga commissioned paintings, coinage, medals and celebrations depicting his battle against the French, which was not exactly his victory but he wanted to make it appear as one.

Because sign-posting and stretching probably required considerable input of the patrons, employment of such devices in certain works sometimes reveals the relationship between the patron and the artist in production of the particular works of art.

6) There are three major types of audience: contemporary, divine, and future. Contemporary audiences included rulers, aristocrats, and laypeople, whom the patrons sought to "impress, influence, and inspire." The patrons also commissioned works that glorified God and showed his piety to Him in hopes of attaining divine salvation. The future was also a big concern as the patrons wished to leave long lasting legacies such as buildings and paintings. Tomb is a good example of this because it does nothing for the deceased but brings fame and status for the surviving members of the family as long as the tomb is preserved.

7) According to Burke, families commissioned such things as palaces and portraits to demonstrate "magnificence." For a patron to be magnificent, he should not only project his own greatness but also seek to create something that does civic good. For example, large and extravagant architecture can glorify the name of the patron's family and the whole community at the same time. Also, religious commissions like altarpieces could inspire the believers to be more pious. It was obvious that only those who could afford all these expenditures made them, and thus patronage of extravagant projects was an exclusive virtue of the rich. Therefore, a work of art could signal its patron's magnificence, which entailed his wealth, status, and decorum.

McKenzie Sullivan

Elena Cestero

Kelly Zona

Jacqueline Park

Tadd Phillips