To what extent did the Italian Renaissance change Europe?

Wealthy and powerful families were able to financially support artists through commission

Question: To what extent did the Italian Renaissance change Europe?
Position1 of 4›: The Italian Renaissance initiated an economic boom
Argument1 of 2›: Wealthy and powerful families were able to financially support artists through commission

Wealthy families, like the Medici family of Florence, paid artists for their services. This form of commission was known as patronage. The people who paid the artists were known as patrons, and these patrons allowed artists like Leonardo da Vinco, Michaelangelo, and Cossa to live fulfilling lives.

The argument

A wealthy family could show its prominence by commissioning artwork. This form of exchange was known as patronage. Arguably most famously, the Medici family of Florence were the patrons of many artists. They paid for such pieces as Sandro Botticelli’s The Birth of Venus, Michelangelo’s Tomb of Lorenzo Medici, and Donatello’s bronze David. Through these commissions, many artists gained fame and recognition, which led to more projects and the ability to make a living through art. Patrons considered artists skilled workers, comparable to blacksmiths, artisans, and other valuable manual laborers of the time. As these artists gained fame and developed new artistic techniques, they could charge patrons more for their works. By and large, the bigger the work, the more expensive it was for the patron. The Catholic Church commissioned many pieces of art – such as frescos, statues, and the paintings within buildings (i.e., Michelangelo’s ceiling in the Sistine Chapel). If they needed to raise money to support the artists, the church would tax Christians throughout Europe. The Italian Renaissance, time and again, has shown that the wealthy and powerful financially supported artists through commissioned works.

Premises

[P1]Wealthy families like the Medici, and the Catholic Church, displayed their prominence by commissioning artworks through patronage. [P2] These commissions let artists earn a living, gain fame and charge ever higher prices for their work as skilled labourers. [P3] The Church even taxed Christians across Europe to fund such art, circulating wealth widely. [C] Therefore, the patronage of artists shows how the Italian Renaissance initiated an economic boom.

Counter-arguments

While some artists gained money and fame from families that commissioned their work, most artists during the Italian Renaissance did not see financial stability from their trade. Instead, most of these artists held other forms of primary work, while only exercising their creative thoughts as a hobby on the side. To consider the likes of Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, and Donatello, as standard is short-sighted. For every one of these men, countless others never gained financial support and fame.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Accurate, but patronage was not a Renaissance innovation — courts, churches and guilds had commissioned work throughout the Middle Ages. What changed was the scale, the competition between families and the status accorded to the individual artist, and the premise does not separate the new from the continuous. [Rejecting P2] The named artists are outliers presented as a pattern. Most work was produced in workshops by contracted assistants on fixed terms, with materials specified and often supplied by the patron, and the great majority of painters and sculptors never reached the standing that allowed them to raise their prices. Generalising from Leonardo, Michelangelo and Donatello is exactly what the counter-argument objects to. [Rejecting P3] This step undercuts the conclusion. Taxing Christians across Europe to fund building and decoration in Italy moves wealth toward Rome and Florence; it does not create it, and the resentment it generated is part of what precipitated the Reformation. An economic boom would need evidence of growth in output, trade or population, and what the premises describe is the redistribution of existing wealth toward luxury commissions.