Long-Term Professional Bonds in Quattrocento Florence
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Quidditas Volume 13 Article 4 1992 The Artist as Entrepreneur: Long-Term Professional Bonds in Quattrocento Florence Yael Even University of Missouri-St. Louis Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/rmmra Part of the Comparative Literature Commons, History Commons, Philosophy Commons, and the Renaissance Studies Commons Recommended Citation Even, Yael (1992) "The Artist as Entrepreneur: Long-Term Professional Bonds in Quattrocento Florence," Quidditas: Vol. 13 , Article 4. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/rmmra/vol13/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Quidditas by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. All woodcuts are from the first printing of Giorgio Vasari's Le vite de'piu eccellenti pittori scultori e architettori (Florence: Giunti, 1568) Used by permission of the Harold B. Lee Library Brigham Young University The Artist as Entrepreneur: Long-Term Professional Bonds in Qyattrocento Florence* Yael Even University of Missouri-St. Louis number of comparatively recent publications on collaboration in O!iattrocento art attest to the renewed interest in reassessing the A nature of professional exchange among artists. 1 These studies continue to shed more light on the prevalence and extent of collaborative artistic undertakings in Florence during this period. Originating in archival research, the studies reject the romanticized, traditional view of Early Renaissance painters, sculptors, and architects as solitary geniuses, suggesting instead that these creative talents operated as entrepreneurs who collaborated to establish profitable careers. Although these publications are pivotal to our understanding of fifteenth-century practices and procedures, they follow earlier essays and books that focus on a few specific cooperative enterprises rather than on the whole issue of cooperation. For example, Harriet McNeal Caplow's "Sculptors' Partnership in Michelozzo's Florence" and R. W. Lightbown's Donatello and Michelozzo both offer an exhaustive review of the partnership that bound together two prominent sculptors. 2 In addition, Doris Carl's 'This study originated, in part, from a revision of my dissertation, "Artistic Collaboration in F1orentine Workshops: <2.hiattrocento" (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1984). This paper is dedicated to James H. Beck. 1See, for example, James H. Beck, "Jacopo della <2.hiercia and Donatello: Networking in the O!,lattrocento," Source 6.4 (1987): 6ff.; Yael M. Even, "The Sacristy Portals: Cooperation at the Florentine Cathedral," Source 6.3 (1987): 7ff.; and Yael Even, "Paolo Uccello's John Hawkwood: Reflections of a Collaboration between Agnola Gaddi and Giuliano Pesello," Source 4.4 (1985): 6ff. 2Harriet McNeal Caplow, "Sculptors' Partnership in Michelozzo's F1orence," Studies in the Renaissance 21 (1974): 121, 145ff. R. W . Lightbown, Donatello and Miche!ozzo: An 48 The Artist as Entrepreneur "Zur Goldschmiedefamilie Dei" provides a detailed documentary survey of Miliano di Domenico Dei's rapport with Antonio del Pollaiuolo and other minor goldsmiths.3 Informative as they are, these works are as lim ited as U. Procacci's much earlier "Di Jacopo di Antonio e delle compag nie di pittori del Corso degli Adimari nel XV secolo," which centers on the associations among painters of ceremonial banners.4 In contrast, the present article evaluates long-term professional bonds as an economic, social, and artistic phenomenon. It concerns itself with the conditions that spawned these interrelationships, with the advantages of alliances, and with the restrictions these alliances imposed on the creative process. In the final analysis, knowing that the artists of this period acted as ordinary entrepreneurs increases our appreciation of their achievements. Indeed, the knowledge that they were not divorced from the confines of their society helps us recognize their greatness. In the world of C29attrocento architects, sculptors, and painters, the quest for financial well-being was as urgent as the pursuit of recognition and fame.s Like self-employed manufacturers, many of these artists pro tected themselves from the vicissitudes of the market by joining hands with fellow artisans. Yet, as great and ambitious innovators, they longed to work independently and outdo potential competitors.6 These conflicting currents are epitomized in the complex relationship between Ghiberti and _Brunelleschi, who, despite their lifelong rivalry, were forced to cooperate with one another.7 While pursuing their separate courses in Florence, each of them embarked on a different major enterprise. Ghiberti took charge of designing and casting the north and east bronze doors of the Baptistery (1403-52) for the Arte di Calimala (Guild of the Cloth Refiners), while Brunelleschi supervised the design and construction of the cathedral Artistic Partnership and Its Patrons in the Early Renaissance, 2 vols. (London: Harvey Miller, 1980). For other publications on the subject from the same years, see Collaboration in Italian Renaissance Art, ed. Wendy Stedman Sheard and John T. Paoletti (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1978) as well as John T. Paoletti, The Siena Baptristry Font: A Study ofan Early Renaissance Collaborative Program, r4r6-r434 (New York: Garland, 1979). JDoris Carl, "Zur Goldschmiedefamilie Dei mit neuen Dokumenten zu Antonio Pollaiuolo und Andrea Verrocchio," Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 26.2 (1982): 129ff. 4U. Procacci, "DiJacopo di Antonio e delle compagnie di pittori del Corso degli Adimari nel XV secolo," R ivista d'arte 34 (1960): 3ff. sBruce Cole, The Renaissance Artist at Work: From Pisano to Titian (New York: Harper & Row, 1983), 13-56. 6Yael Even, "Lorenzo Ghiberti's Qyest for Professional Autonomy," Konsthistorisk Tidskrift 58.1 (1989): df. ?Yael Even, "Lorenzo Ghiberti and Filippo Brunelleschi Reconsidered: Forced Alliances between Lifelong Adversaries," Fides et Historia 22.2 (1990): 38-46. Yae!Even 49 dome (1420-46) for the Opera del Duomo (Cathedral Board of Works). At the same time, eager to participate in other prestigious projects which were, however, conceived as joint undertakings-the two consented to work side by side on a provisional basis. Thus, at the request of the Opera del Duomo, Ghiberti and Brunelleschi jointly planned the model for the dome (1418-1420) and the Shrine of Saint Zenobius (1432). Cooperation between giants of the stature of Brunelleschi and Ghiberti was a common modus operandi, as well as a modus vivendi, in Florence, manifesting itself in a wide range of cooperative undertakings and embodying an amazing variety of creative forces. Within a society and an economic system that fostered competition, the most extraordinary of these cooperations were permanent associations. Partnerships of this type prevailed throughout the early 1400s, when Medicean patronage was still in its infancy. Since artists and artisans could not rely on regular employment for their livelihood, they had to depend on each other. Only with the advent of influential benefactors, such as Lorenzo the Magnificent in the 1470s and Pope Sixtus IV during the 1480s, could they allow themselves the luxury of working independently or maintaining sporadic, temporary alliances. The formation oflong-term professional bonds was often prompted by the high costs of maintaining a fully equipped studio. In addition to annual rent payments of three to fifteen florins for an average bottega, or shop,8 every artist had to acquire an entratura (sometimes referred to as uso) or a license to practice his or her craft, for a yearly rate of approxi mately five to twenty-five florins. 9 Dues to the guild in the amount of six florins and expenses for furniture, tools, and the proper work force added to the artist's burden. Stonemasons, and goldsmiths in particular, contended with addi tional financial worries. Sculptors of marble were, at times, obliged to take full responsibility for the excavation and transportation of stone blocks; they were also held accountable for the delivery of their products to their final destinations. Donatello and Michelozzo, who designed three monumental tombs (1425-28), had to supplement their equipment by purchasing a mule for ten florins and two boats for seven florins. rn Metalsmiths were forced to buy, mount, and dismount furnaces of various 8See, fo r example, M arco del Buono's expenses for different shop rentals in Ellen Callmann, Apollonio di Giovanni (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974), 5. 9Procacci, "DiJacopo di Antonio," 18, 44 nn. 60 and 65. 10See, for example, Rufus Graves M ather, "New Documents on Michelozzo," A rt Bulletin 24 (1942): 228. See also Bonnie A. Bennett and David G . Wilkins, Donatello (Mt. Kisco, N .Y.: M oyer Bell, 1984), 54. DONATO SCYL'l'ORE Yael Even SI sizes for the manufacture of silver and bronze objects. They also had to provide themselves with adequate sources of water power and with spa cious courtyards for storing and constructing huge molds. II On occasion, the expense of casting an extraordinarily large sculpture in metal could precipitate heavy monetary losses. Ghiberti's willingness to forfeit his compensation for the bronze statue of Saint John the Baptist (1412-14, Orsanmichele, Florence) in case of failure was a calculated risk on his part. 12 This act convinced the Arte di Calimala to grant