2016
DOI: 10.1017/arh.2016.4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Dynamic of Design: ‘Source’ Buildings and Contract Making in England in the Later Middle Ages

Abstract: Art historians usually find little evidence for the nature of communication between patrons and architects in the Middle Ages. Scholarly opinion has often placed the burden of new design with masons, but over the course of the later twentieth century this claim has been revised and nuanced. This paper uses the evidence of wills and contracts in order to answer two questions: what techniques did medieval patrons use to describe their wishes to their masons; and how prescriptive were their requirements? Its conc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 15 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…104 These were not insignificant associations for the city's government to foster: contemporary iconographies could show even kings visiting building sites, while architectural patronage was a "good work" that would speed the donor's soul through purgatory and the church building was of course a central and remarkable element of religious praxis. 105 In London, where the moral or spiritual authority, and the economic potency, of the city's government was no less important, the closest equivalent was the building of new quays or similar non-ecclesiastical projects, which carried a quite different set of associations. 106 This is not to argue that London's elite were not able to access the political advantages that came through the oversight of church construction, but it was a somewhat different, probably broader elite and a somewhat different and perhaps more powerful set of advantages.…”
Section: The Politics Of Architecturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…104 These were not insignificant associations for the city's government to foster: contemporary iconographies could show even kings visiting building sites, while architectural patronage was a "good work" that would speed the donor's soul through purgatory and the church building was of course a central and remarkable element of religious praxis. 105 In London, where the moral or spiritual authority, and the economic potency, of the city's government was no less important, the closest equivalent was the building of new quays or similar non-ecclesiastical projects, which carried a quite different set of associations. 106 This is not to argue that London's elite were not able to access the political advantages that came through the oversight of church construction, but it was a somewhat different, probably broader elite and a somewhat different and perhaps more powerful set of advantages.…”
Section: The Politics Of Architecturementioning
confidence: 99%