Enfilade

London and the Emergence of a European Art Market, c. 1780-1820
The National Gallery, London, 21-22 June 2013

Proposals due by 15 February 2013

The French Revolution and the ensuing Napoleonic Wars with occupations of Italy, Spain and the Low Countries, instigated a sweeping redistribution of art. At the same time, the Papacy’s loss of temporal power undermined the enforcement of export laws in the Papal States. This convergence of events ensured that large volumes of paintings—often entire collections, from European monasteries, churches, and private palaces—were widely dispersed via auction and private treaty sales in a true diaspora of art. Current scholarship posits that amidst these large-scale market transformations London emerged as the new hub of the international art trade, replacing Paris. The well-known example of the move of the Orléans collection to London, where it was sold through various private treaty transactions and a series of auctions between 1798 and 1802, is often considered a pars pro toto for the British assumption of power on the international art market.

While some studies have begun to address the velocity and scale of this redistribution, little has been done to analyze the dynamic networks of agents who provided the infrastructure for the circulation of art works and sales information throughout Europe. Economist Neil de Marchi recently pointed out that the financial market linking crucial centers such as Amsterdam, London, and Paris has been studied in depth, but comparable research into the “mechanism of the painting trade and the extent to which it was integrated across those centers has barely begun.” This conference aspires to tackle this issue by convening scholars and experts from a range of disciplines to discuss broad research questions such as: Did the long-term effects of the political turmoil in France alter the existing personal and professional networks of dealers and connoisseurs? What would have been the motivations to ship art works to foreign market places? How integrated was the European art market around 1800, or were there still relatively independent local markets? Was there an implied hierarchy of metropolitan markets or were conditions too volatile and fluid for fixed patterns to emerge?

Given the vast amount of historical evidence now available to scholars, we have the capacity to address these micro and macro developments in innovative ways. Over the last two years the National Gallery, London, and the Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles, have collaborated on a project to research, transcribe, and index auction catalogues published in Great Britain between 1780 and 1800. By January 2013, almost 100,000 new sales records from c. 1,200 catalogues will be published online, via the Getty Provenance Index® databases. This will add significantly and strategically to the already extant data-pool of approximately half a million records from British, French, German, Dutch, Belgian, and Scandinavian Sales, spanning the period of c. 1780 to 1820.

One of the main objectives of this international conference is to work towards a methodological synergy of art historical case studies and data-driven socioeconomic analysis in order to understand better the mechanisms of the international art trade at this pivotal period as well as the long-term implications for the history of collecting, the establishment of museums, and the formation of the discipline of art history.

Topics for consideration include, but are not limited to:

• A R T W O R K S  Cross-border traffic of objects (cultural transfers, customs regulations, arbitrage, etc.) and its effect on the formation of private and public collections.

• A G E N T S  Market integration throughout Europe (national/transnational dealer networks, centre and periphery, impact of revolution and war, etc.)

• I N F O R M A T I O N  Auction catalogues as economic tool and literary genre (classification systems, lot sequence, transparency, connoisseurship, etc.)

• V A L U E S  Idea of art as an investment (different national canons and currencies, growth of investment-minded collectors, ascendancy of the banker as a key player, price manipulation, etc.)

Please send proposals for papers (to last 30 minutes) of no more than 250 words by 15 February 2013 to either/both:

Susanna Avery-Quash
Research Curator in the History of Collecting and Display
The National Gallery, London
susanna.avery-quash@ng-london.org.uk

Christian Huemer        
Managing Editor, Project for the Study of Collecting and Provenance
The Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles
chuemer@getty.edu

Brill’s series seems to define the early modern period as ca. 1450/1500 to ca. 1700. Still, for those of you working at the turn of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, this might be relevant. . .

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

The Discourses of Anger in the Early Modern Period
Edited by Karl A.E. Enenkel and Anita Traninger

Proposals due by 1 March 2013

Intersections is a peer-reviewed series on interdisciplinary topics in Early Modern Studies published by Brill (Leiden/Boston). Contributions may come from any of the disciplines within the humanities, such as history, art history, literary history, book history, church history, social history, cultural history, and history of ideas. Each volume  focuses on a single theme and consists of essays that explore new perspectives on the subject of study. The series aims to open up new areas of research on early modern culture and to address issues of interest to a wide range of disciplines.

We are inviting proposals for contributions to a volume on discourses of anger in the Early Modern Period to be published in the series Intersections. The volume will be edited by Karl A.E. Enenkel (Münster University) and Anita Traninger (Freie Universität Berlin).

Emotion, the perceived counterpoint to reason, has received intense attention in the humanities and the social sciences in recent decades. Anger, however, has traditionally been conceived as pertaining to both reason and passion, since it involves complex mechanisms of rational judgment of social situations but is at the same time characterized by untamed/violent emotional repercussions. Aristotle held that anger was the morally justified seeking of revenge following the incurrence of a slight. Being thus conceived of as a social emotion, anger has since been construed as being composed of sadness and hope, as involving social and moral categories, and as mediating between the past and the future.

Even though anger is characterized as a just reaction to social misdemeanor, it has not been acknowledged universally as a socially beneficial reaction. The Stoics insisted that it was necessary to suppress it at the first showing of angry symptoms in order to achieve freedom from the disturbance of emotions which forms the basis of the good life; Christianity, where Stoic views were adopted very early on, found it difficult to reconcile the idea of anger as the just reaction of a virtuous man with its ideals of passivity.

In the Early Modern period, this already ambiguous conception was complicated by a changing intellectual framework. The Early Modern period sees long-term shifts between traditional systems of thought: a mounting criticism of Aristotelianism, a forceful contestation of Scholasticism, the factioning of religious belief and the emergence of  contesting theologies along with moral canons, the rediscovery and transformative appropriation of Stoic and Sceptic doctrines, to name but a few. We are interested in how the notion of anger is informed by these developments.

Despite the recent surge in research on the history of emotions, there is no comprehensive, interdisciplinary account of notions of anger in the early modern period. There is a host of studies on ‘ancient anger’, and the Middle Ages have also received due attention, but the early modern period has been neglected in this regard, despite a wealth of sources and despite the fact that wide-spread speculation about the emotions in general emerged in Early Modern times.

Thus in our volume, we ask contributors to discuss the fate of anger with a view to the tensions between these developments. Contributors to the volume are invited to trace the framing of anger in various discourses in the Early Modern period, including theology, philosophy, literature, medicine, law, political theory, and the arts, as well as
to account for changes in the discourses of anger in this era. We would like to see discussions of anger as a contested field, one that is goverened and defined in various ways by various discourses which may nevertheless converge in literary and non-literary texts, images, religious practice, scholarly debates, etc. (more…)

From Le Blog de l’ApAhAu:

Le Système de Law: Représentations, discours et fantasmes du XVIIIe siècle à nos jours
Université de Montpellier 3, IRCL, 4-5 October 2012

Proposals due by 15 July 2013

Dans les périodes de bulles et de crises financières, John Law et son système sont volontiers évoqués dans le discours médiatique en tant que paradigme et exemple historique de l’une des premières crises financières d’origine spéculative. Les références ou allusions qui y sont faites n’examinent cependant pas les spécificités d’une bulle qui ne fut pas uniquement française mais concerna également l’Angleterre et la Hollande, les pays d’Europe les plus engagés dans l’émergence d’un capitalisme financier au XVIIIe siècle.

A partir des pistes ouvertes par Paul Harsin qui donne une édition des oeuvres complètes de John Law en 1934 (ainsi qu’une première édition des écrits de Dutot, proche collaborateur de Law) et de l’ouvrage d’Edgar Faure (La Banqueroute de Law, 17 juillet 1720, Paris, Gallimard, 1977), historiens et historiens de l’économie ont délimité les différentes étapes et analysé l’enchaînement des faits qui conduisirent à une banqueroute de la première banque royale et à l’instauration d’une durable méfiance à l’égard de la finance et de la forme fiduciaire de l’argent. Si ces recherches ont permis d’établir une chronologie et de faire la lumière sur de nombreux aspects du Système (comme l’ont fait par exemple les recherches récentes de l’historien Antoin Murphy sur des écrits inédits de Nicolas Dutot), peu d’analyses ont pris en compte l’événement dans sa transversalité et sa globalité. Les spécialistes de littérature ont également bien identifié les allusions aux événements de 1720, de manière ponctuelle sous la forme de représentations plus ou moins allégorisées (comme dans les Lettres Persanes de Montesquieu) ou de manière plus diffuse en tant qu’effets sur la représentation de l’argent et des transactions par exemple (voir Martial Poirson, Spectacle et économie à l’âge classique, Garnier, 2011). En 2006, deux articles portant sur les représentations de la banqueroute de Law ont été publiés par des spécialistes de littérature qui s’emploient chacun à élaborer une lecture croisée des événements de l’histoire économique et des fictions qui leur sont contemporaines : Yves Citton procède à une relecture d’un texte de Jean-François Melon, un proche collaborateur de John Law, Mamhoud le Gasnévide, qui raconte sous une forme allégorique les événements financiers survenus sous la Régence (« Les comptes merveilleux de la finance : confiance et fiction chez Jean-François Melon », Fééries n°2, 2005-2006) ; Erik Leborgne s’attache à dégager les fantasmes sous-tendant les représentations de l’argent et de la spéculation dans des textes contemporains des événements (« Le Régent et le système de Law vus par Melon, Montesquieu, Prévost et Lesage »,Féeries n°3, 2006). Se situant dans le prolongement de ces travaux, le présent projet entend renforcer l’interdisciplinarité des approches du phénomène et faire le point sur ce qui peut être considéré comme un événement traumatique et structurant de la France moderne, en suggérant trois orientations non limitatives : (more…)