<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf8'?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.1 20151215//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/archiving/1.1/JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article dtd-version="1.1" article-type="book-review">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id>TMR</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>The Medieval Review</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">1096-746X</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Indiana University</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">14.10.07</article-id>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>14.10.07, Hourihane, ed., Patronage (Evan A. Gatti)</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Gatti</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
          <aff>Elon University</aff>
          <address>
            <email>egatti@elon.edu</email>
          </address>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date publication-format="epub" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2014">
        <year>2014</year>
      </pub-date>
      <product product-type="book">
        <person-group>
          <name>
            <surname>Hourihane, Colum</surname>
            <given-names/>
          </name>
        </person-group>
        <source>Patronage: Power &amp; Agency in Medieval Art, The Index of Christian Art Occasional Papers, 15</source>
        <year iso-8601-date="2013">2013</year>
        <publisher-loc>University Park, PA</publisher-loc>
        <publisher-name>The Pennsylvania State University Press</publisher-name>
        <page-range>Pp. xxiv, 368</page-range>
        <price>$35.00 (hardback)</price>
        <isbn>9780983753742 (hardback)</isbn>
      </product>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright 2014 Trustees of Indiana University. Indiana University provides the information contained in this file for non-commercial, personal, or research use only. All other use, including but not limited to commercial or scholarly reproductions, redistribution, publication or transmission, whether by electronic means or otherwise, without prior written permission of the copyright holder is strictly prohibited.</copyright-statement>
      </permissions>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <p> While a collection of essays that takes patronage, power, and agency as its subject
               might seem out of step with more contemporary turns in the study of medieval art, <italic>Patronage: Power &amp; Agency in Medieval Art</italic>, edited by Colum
               Hourihane, suggests the opposite is true. The collection includes fifteen essays
               derived from papers presented at a conference sponsored by the Index of Christian Art
               at Princeton University in 2012. The collection offers a broad look at patronage
               studies in medieval period. The works of art discussed range in date from the late
               antique period through the fifteenth century, and the primary areas of geographical
               focus are central Europe and England. A few of the essays also discuss examples of
               Italian or Byzantine art. As many of the contributors to the volume note, ideas about
               what defines acts of patronage, including a discussion of the variety of possible
               terms used to define what we summarily call "patronage" and the variety of ways that
               what we call patronage is enacted across time and place have remained under
               theorized. As noted in Hourihane's introduction, recent work in art history has
               looked at patronage head-on, especially as the term relates to specific institutions
               and processes that bring depth to our awareness of the concept, its practice in the
               Middle Ages, and in contemporary writing about medieval art. </p>
    <p> Each of the essays included in this volume takes up the challenge of the term to
               better understand patronage as a network of actions and relationships in which time,
               space, identity, and materiality all play a major role. The collection reflects the
               broader conclusions of the conference as Hourihane describes it: "The baseline, after
               two intense days of focusing on the subject, was that every work should speak for
               itself. Looking at patronage and trying to make the work fit into our pre-defined
               categories may lead us astray" (xx). The essays included in the volume demonstrate
               this caution, offering a careful study of patronage as a category in the past--where
               a variety of contexts defined an act of patronage--as well as an assessment of how we
               understand patronage in the present, especially in cases where our assumptions about
               a patron have limited the places we look for meaning. </p>
    <p> The volume opens with an excellent essay by Jill Caskey, offering an extension of
               Caskey's work on the problematics of agency in medieval art and turning instead to
               its <italic>potentialities</italic>. A broad look at acts of patronage, the essay
               begins with Constantine's ambitions for the Holy Sepulchre and moves to a discussion
               of a series of eleventh-century bronze doors linked to the patronage activities of
               the Pantaleone family. Each commission illuminates the variety of possible contexts
               for the commission, and, from their making to their maintenance, the doors reference
               the many roles a donor can play within those contexts. Caskey's essay emphasizes
               patronage as a network of acts among a cast of characters, as Caskey calls them,
               encouraging us to consider the sometimes subtle mechanisms by which a patron might be
               remembered. </p>
    <p> Julian Luxford turns our attention to medieval English monasticism, which Luxford
               argues is "fertile territory for patronage studies," noting in particular its
               potential to be "historically grounded" because of its "wholesale extirpation in the
               1530s and 1540s" (31). More to the point, Luxford's study of monastic patronage asks
               us to conceptualize patronage as a collective idea, but one that is still unique to
               the contexts in which it is performed. Luxford argues we should consider patronage as
               part of the larger networks of gift-giving, and, for the monastic context in
               particular, include God as an integral part of that framework since monastic
               patronage is often, ultimately, a plea for salvation. In his conclusion, Luxford
               warns scholars interested in patronage to carefully define how they understand the
               term and "the premises on which their studies proceed" (53), arguing, "If the
               assumptions are tacit, then the concepts may appear flabby or unstimulating" (53).
               While not often so explicitly expressed, Luxford's caveat is shared by most of the
               other contributors to the collection. </p>
    <p> On par with the first essay by Caskey, Elizabeth Carson Pastan, whom Hourihane
               credits with the idea for the two-day conference and who penned a foreword for the
               collection, offers a critique of traditional patronage studies, inviting us to
               re-think what we know about patronage in the study of medieval art. Appropriately,
               Pastan's analysis centers on one of the most-studied medieval artworks, the Bayeux
               Embroidery. Pastan's essay reimagines the production of the embroidery as a material
               object--made in a monastic house--that could be viewed by diverse secular and sacred
               communities. Pastan's conclusion requires that we imagine the Bayeux embroidery as a
               nimble document that offers a kind of ambivalence in both its commemoration of war
               dead and its celebration of a new Norman master. Rather than a propagandistic victory
               document, Pastan envisions the bishop-patron Odo as only one of those being
               memorialized in the work. He may be a named patron, and a brother monastic, but he
               should not be seen as the singular author/client. Rather, Pastan proposes that we
               consider the work's patronage in relation to a process of patronage that was more
               collective in character than previously assumed. And by focusing on the work's
               reception as well as the production, which she argues using archival information
               about the display of the Embroidery during the Easter liturgy at Bayeux Cathedral,
               Pastan overturns previous readings focused squarely on the Embroidery's secular
               character. Pastan's plea for contextualized study informed by careful
               reconsiderations of patronage as a bounded but fluid construct is a central theme
               across the volume. Patronage is not a thing understood by itself, but an ideal shaped
               by its contexts across time and place, understood as both microcosm and
               macrocosm.</p>
    <p> The essay by Sheila Bonde and Clark Maines focuses our attention on the foundation,
               completion, elaboration, and decoration of the church at Bourgfontaine as a
               representation of Valois kingship, but in a context appropriate for the Carthusian
               order. Acts of patronage are again seen as a network of responses intersecting with
               expectations, restrictions, and potentialities. In a manner similar to Pastan, Bonde
               and Maines reconstruct specific acts of patronage by the Valois at Bourgfontaine.
               Rather than simply imagine them, however, they literally reanimate them in a digital
               composite image. Focusing on a wall painting that included a donor with model, known
               today only through an engraving, the authors reconstruct the painted counter-facade
               of the church, encouraging us to <italic>see</italic> St. Louis, Charles, and Philip
               VI as they present the church building to a now-lost recipient. Bonde and Maines
               argue that each figure replicates the role of another in an effort to align them
               across time, in a newly expanded space, which acts as a metaphor for both an extended
               family and the monastic house. Imagined contexts such as this one appear across the
               volume, often in the closing paragraphs of the essays. When one reads through the
               entire collection, these intellectual reconstructions work together to offer an
               active portrait of patronage. This is no small feat for a collection of such
               disparate foci and helps the volume hold together as a unified conversation. </p>
    <p> Claudine Lautier's essay also looks at architectural patronage, this time with a
               focus on the stained glass window cycle at Chartres. While this might be a relatively
               traditional focus for patronage studies, Lautier applies this focus to an
               often-ignored aspect of the stained glass window cycle at Chartres: those
               commissioned by the canons of the cathedral. Looking at these types of donors as a
               group, Lautier draws conclusions about the function of these windows as a whole
               concluding that they are "focused on the Eucharist, and are meant to claim the
               doctrine of transubstantiation" (118). In setting these apart for study, Lautier
               argues, they can be considered "on par with the lay donors, such as noblemen and
               guild craftsman" (118). </p>
    <p> Anne Derbes also looks at a work of art, the Padua Baptistery, whose
               iconography--and maybe more importantly the study of that iconography by contemporary
               scholars--is shaped by our expectations for the patron rather than the life of the
               patron herself. Even though we have a will documenting otherwise, the painted cycle
               in the Padua Baptistery is often attributed to Fina Buzzaccarini in name only, with
               scholars ascribing the intellectual activity to her husband (from whom she lived and
               operated separately). Derbes reevaluates the evidence by which we might judge Fina's
               agency in the commission, strengthening the attribution to Fina by using iconographic
               details that recognize the program as exceptional. Derbes argues the painting
               emphasizes the pains and fears associated with motherhood through the inclusion of an
               apocalyptic woman clothed in the sun and two images of "anguished mothers [who]
               respond to a crisis that threatens their sons' safety" (148). Following other
               contributors, Derbes' concluding remarks re-imagine the context for the project,
               positing a scenario for Fina in which even during the last weeks of her life she was
               an active art patron attempting to secure her personal salvation, as well as the
               proper station for her memory and her progeny, including her daughters, her son, her
               sister (a Benedictine), and the women of Carrara who made up her immediate household. </p>
    <p> Benjamin Zweig offers another study focused on networks of patronage, this time with
               an emphasis on the different roles one might occupy within networks oscillating
               between the categories of patron-<italic>donateur</italic>, patron-<italic>concepteur</italic> (both developed by Beat Brenk), and to which Zweig adds
                  patron-<italic>recepteur</italic>. Using visual examples of the suicide of Saul,
               Zweig argues that the first extant example in the <italic>San Paolo Bible</italic>
               follows a Carolingian emphasis on sacral kingship where the suicide of Saul should be
               seen as an act of punishment for Saul's pride. The iconography thus serves as a foil
               for a celebration of David's humility presented several folios later. Seeing Saul as
               part of a Davidic narrative allows Zweig to explain a second example in the
               twelfth-century <italic>Ingeborg Psalter</italic>. Each of these cases, and four
               later examples attributed to the patronage networks of Blanche of Castile and Louis
               IX, use images of Saul's suicide to articulate both an ideal and its <italic>adversus</italic>. More importantly for a volume on patronage, each of these examples
               demonstrates how a single iconographic concept might function within an expanded
               network of patrons: <italic>donateur</italic>, <italic>concepteur</italic>, and <italic>recepteur</italic>. The motif demonstrates that ideals of kingship are not
               static declarations but fluid presentations defined for varied audiences amid complex
               but specific historical circumstances.</p>
    <p> Nigel Morgan's essay complicates the idea that text and speech scrolls, things one
               might assume offer a fairly direct way to study patronage, instead offer up
               complexities unique to their iconography and their media. Using examples from
               fifteenth-century English art, Morgan explores the differences between text scrolls
               in manuscripts, often intended for personal use, and glass and brasses, commissioned
               with seemingly more public functions in mind. Within these examples further issues
               divide one from another; clerical versus lay patrons, the relationship between the
               patron and the devotee, or even the function of the image as a marker of the living
               or the dead. While not a study that foregrounds the complexity of patronage as a
               concept at its outset, Morgan's study demonstrates complexity through its focus on an
               iconography often overlooked as something simple or didactic. </p>
    <p> A welcome addition to the geographical coverage of the collection, Robin Cormack's
               essay asks how patronage studies might play out differently (or not) as applied to
               Byzantine contexts. Cormack's essay ends with the statement that patronage studies in
               Byzantine art is a "virgin field" (204) and while the last paragraphs of the essay
               include more questions than conclusions, the essay begins with a list of new
               resources that might make richer studies on the patronage of Byzantine art possible.
               Central to Cormack's study is the tension between acts of patronage as expressive of
               an individual or a community. Using examples ranging from mosaics of specific donors
               in Hagia Sophia, icons from Mt. Sinai, a donor with model painting from St.
               Demetrianos at Dali in Cyprus, and the foundation inscription from the Church of St.
               Michael at Polemitas in the Mani, Cormack demonstrates how commissions we might
               understand to be individualized and exceptional are regular and communal acts. At the
               same time, the communal values we see displayed in other acts of patronage, Cormack
               argues, might benefit from a more individualized discussion of their contexts.</p>
    <p> Corine Schleif offers perhaps the most rigorous critique of patronage studies in the
               volume suggesting that the terms we use require greater contextualization. Schleif
               argues we must go beyond "textual and visual short-hand" and approaches to acts of
               patronage as they relate to objects "we designate as art." Explicated through a
               series of case studies, Schleif calls for careful contextualization of the
               complexities that surround patronage in the past and in the present including a
               discussion of historiography that encourages readers to consider systems of power
               that define patronage in the past and patronage studies the present. Using examples
               that range from the apse at San Vitale in Ravenna, to the posthumous "donor" statues
               in in Nordhausen, Schleif calls our attention to shifts in strategies of patronage in
               both text and image that move from a kind of ambivalence, as Schleif calls it, to the
               cleverly constructed narratives of support and influence. </p>
    <p> Adelaide Bennett's essay opens with a question: "What kind of evidence do we have
               for female patronage of prayer books" (233)? The answer can be found in a series of
               examples that, Bennett argues, offer an expression of identity through text and
               representation and build "a semi-chronological survey of how and where women are
               represented in Books of Hours and Psalter-Hours that were made in or exported from
               the regions of Île-de-France, Picardy, Artois, Thérouanne, Champagne, and Lorraine"
               (234). In many of her examples Bennett suggests that the married status of the female
               patron shaped personal devotions and, in a context very different from that studied
               by Derbes, Bennett assumes the husband to be the financier (donor) or patron of the
               manuscript, also seeing this role extended in text and image as the "protector" of
               the wife. In this essay Bennett uses text and images to assess the roles women had as
               devotees, with a special emphasis on the iconography and prayers that shaped their
               experiences, their place in family, and the family's place in aristocratic circles. </p>
    <p> Stephen Perkinson's essay draws a line between the patron of a manuscript and the
               facets of patronage that might be investigated through a portrait included in a
               manuscript. Focusing on the frontispiece of the manuscript painted by Jean Bondol,
               which shows Jean de Vaudeter presenting a copy of a <italic>Bible
                  Historiale</italic> to Charles V, Perkinson explores the tension between
               representation and reception. Who has agency here and who does not? It was made for
               Charles V, but the inscription, the image, and the afterlives remember its scribe,
               Jean Vaudetur. Or should we see the portrait as the product of its artists, who,
               among others, includes Jean Bondol? In a discussion of portraiture as both realism
               and idealism, Perkinson asks who is benefitting from each of these pendulum points.
               Perkinson reminds us that portraits "established allegiances, made alliances visible,
               and reinforced social actions" (258), but they also "signal identity--methods of
               connecting an image to an individual that goes beyond physiognomic likeness" (258).
               As with other seemingly straightforward presentations of patronage, we are reminded
               that portraiture is part of larger networks and gift-giving strategies. Among these
               four candidates, agency is not an either/or proposition and in this context a focus
               on patronage rather than "a patron" allows for less discrete categorizations.</p>
    <p> Lucy Freeman Sandler opens her essay with a statement that seems to stand in
               opposition to the other essays included in the volume--that patronage in the Middle
               Ages was a narrow concept. What Sandler means, however, is that medieval use of the
               term "referred primarily to church dedications or the providers and recipients of
               ecclesiastical benefices" (275). Since the Renaissance we have seen this term
               expanded to art more broadly to include "more than payment for production; the term
               implies financial support on a grand scale, with an eye to some public, not just
               private, benefit" (275). With that expansion comes the complications Sandler explores
               using a group of manuscripts made for the Bohun family. Discrepancies between the
               manuscripts' texts and their images demonstrate the many different ways one might
               signal agency through manuscripts--here Psalters and Books of Hours--that have both
               private and public connotations, and invoke active and passive acts of commission and
               reception. Sandler contrasts two manuscripts made for Bohun women. The first, made
               for Mary de Bohun, represents what Sandler calls a "passive" patron. The manuscript
               was produced for Mary (she was a child at the time) by her mother-in-law, the
               family's clerical advisor, and an illuminator. Another manuscript made for Eleanor de
               Bohun demonstrates what Sandler identifies as an active account of female patronage.
               Sandler notes iconographic details in the miniature of the coronation of David that
               refer instead to the coronation mass of Richard II, a move Sandler states "proclaims
               Bohun fidelity to the concept of royal power sanctioned by God" (292). More
               compelling, for Sandler, however, is that this same manuscript includes prayers
               "voiced in a feminine gender", demonstrating Eleanor's learned and literate
               participation in the mass (292). These two examples demonstrate the breadth of
               possibilities for female patronage, but as Sandler concludes, they also require us to
               expand "our idea of medieval manuscript patronage...to include commissioning,
               conceiving, executing, receiving, and bequeathing--all activities we should consider
               essential to our construction of the history of the book" (293). </p>
    <p> The volume concludes with an important essay by Aden Kumler, who proposes "a thought
               experiment driven by the question: what would happen were we to think of patronage as
               the <italic>effects</italic>, rather than the cause of certain works of art" (304).
               Taking Michel Foucault's 1969 lecture and subsequent essay "Qu'est-ce qu'un auteur?"
               as a model, Kumler develops parameters for a "patron-function," which, like their
               model the author-function, are intended to emphasize the cultural constructions of
               the author/patron as a function of making/thinking/doing rather than individualized
               portraits of a single author/actor or patron. The essay articulates, following
               Foucault, a four-fold system to evaluate the patron-function as an effect, or a
               process of knowing. The first point emphasizes the patron-function as a thing "tied
               to the juridical and institutional systems" that define the patron-function in the
               "realms of discourse/works" not as single persons or single acts. The second point
               reminds us that these discourses are constructed differently, in different places,
               and at different times (307). Thirdly, and this is particularly important to the
               study of medieval art, the patron-function is not defined in a single moment, or, as
               Kumler states, by "the spontaneous attributions of a work to its initiator/ sponsor/
               commissioner/ funder/ donor or recipient" (307). As was demonstrated by a number of
               the essays in the volume, the patron-function is defined "through a series of precise
               and complex operations" (307). Kumler's fourth point is best stated in her own words:
               the patron-function, "does not refer, purely and simply, to a real individual, in so
               far as it gives rise simultaneously to a variety of egos and to series of subjective
               positions that individuals may come to occupy" (307). As with Foucault, Kumler shifts
               the emphasis away from an individual actor to the effects of a network of actions,
               across time, place, and space.</p>
    <p> With these cautions in mind we return to the value of a focused study on the acts,
               agency, and power of patronage. This volume was a welcome surprise to this reviewer,
               who like Hourihane, thought this topic had been explored adequately. It has not and
               this volume, complete with wonderfully legible full-color figures throughout, makes
               that clear. The lasting value of the volume of the collection arises from the
               compilation of these diverse narratives. Each author emphasizes the value of a
               contextualized study that begins with an investigation of the assumptions inherent in
               our borrowed terminologies for the process and products of patronage. No matter these
               individualized contexts, however, as a collection the volume remind us that as a
               process, patronage studies reflect networks of power and their effects in moments of
               artist production, reception, and preservation, as well as in our own acts of
               scholarship. </p>
    <p/>
  </body>
</article>
