Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros131-2Apprentissages, États et sociétés...The painter’s apprentice in fifte...

Apprentissages, États et sociétés dans l’Europe moderne

The painter’s apprentice in fifteenth and sixteenth century Antwerp. An analysis of the archival sources

Natasja Peeters
p. 221-227

Résumé

This paper examines the apprentice of painters in Antwerp during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries from a normative and quantitative perspective, based on archival sources. First, we analyse the statutes of the guild of Saint Luke, which are partly preserved and published, with regard to the rules, regulations, and entry fees for the apprentices. Second, we conduct extensive quantitative research on the official membership lists of the Antwerp guild of Saint Luke, to shed light on the number and mobility of apprentices, and the accessibility of the painter profession.

Haut de page

Notes de l’auteur

We are especially grateful for the fruitful discussions with Patrick Wallis, Michel-Guy Leproux, and Philippe Lorenz. We also wish to thank Dr. Inge Schoups, FelixArchief/stadsarchief Antwerpen, for the information on the current situation of the archival documents pertaining the Ledgers of the guild of Saint-Luke.

Texte intégral

1This contribution studies the painter’s apprentice in Antwerp during the fifteenth and the sixteenth century from a normative and quantitative point of view, based on archival sources. Some 42% of the apprentices belonged to the figurative painters’ “métier”. They were a large group, but not the only one, as the guild of Saint Luke regrouped a great many different “métiers” (and their masters and apprentices) in the course of its history.

  • 1 Peeters – Dambruyne 2007, p. IX-XXIV; Peeters – Martens 2007, p. 33-49.

2First, we analyze the statutes of the guild of Saint Luke, which are partly preserved and published, with regard to the rules and regulations, and entry fees for the apprentices. The statutes of the guild represent three hierarchic layers: masters, apprentices (and master’s sons), and last the free and unfree journeymen.1 There were also servants and valets who helped the deans with the administration and did all sorts of odd jobs.

3Second, extensive past quantitative research of the membership lists of the Antwerp guild of Saint Luke (among others by the author), sheds light on the number and mobility of apprentices, and the accessibility of the profession —at least, those that were inscribed as a member in the official lists of the guild of Saint Luke. The lists are preserved from the year 1453 onwards. A separate category for apprentices was created from 1469 onwards. It will also be interesting to study the master’s son as a particular category: from 1543 onwards, they were also inscribed in the membership lists, while no mention is made of the journeymen in the membership lists. By analyzing these lists of free master painters and their apprentices, we can also make some hypothesis on the number of workshops, their size and structure, as food for thought and future research.

  • 2 SAA, CH 140, Charter, Sint-Lucasgilde, 26/8/1382; SAA, Fonds Gilden & Ambachten, GA 4573, Register (...)
  • 3 The archives were formerly housed in the Royal Academy of Fine Arts in Antwerp and transferred to (...)

4The guild of Saint Luke of Antwerp became a field of interest in the course of the nineteenth century. While tracking down the dawn of the “Golden age” of Antwerp, searching for the roots of Antwerp painting became a priority. The many and varied archival sources that were preserved became a rich mine of information for amateur sleuths. For Antwerp, the founding charter of 1382, and copies of the statutes are preserved in the City archives of Antwerp, albeit with lacunae. Some documents only exist in transcription, the original having gone lost. They were published by J.B. Van der Straelen in 1855.2 The lists of the members of the guild cover the years 1453 to 1720. The original Liggeren the registers of the Antwerp Saint Luke’s guild, are preserved in the archives of the Royal Academy of Fine Arts of Antwerp, and they were published in two volumes by P. Rombouts and T. Van Lerius between 1864 and 1876.3 A large number of notes (for which they received help from F.J. van den Branden) puts flesh on the artists.

5In what follows we shall study the Antwerp guild of Saint-Luke from a painter’s apprentice’s point of view. We shall not go into the artistic side of the training during the apprenticeship in this contribution, but we hope to research this topic for a future paper.

Painters’ apprentices in normative sources for Antwerp, fifteenth and sixteenth centuries

6Most of the artists in fifteenth and sixteenth century Antwerp were artisans and considered as such too. Many belonged to a corporation: the guild of Saint Luke. Right from the beginning, painters’ apprentices are mentioned in the normative sources; most of the rules and fees applying to them were codified in the fifteenth century, remaining virtually unchanged until well into the seventeenth century.

  • 4 Van der Straelen 1855, p. 2-3.

7Indeed, the earliest preserved source, the founding charter of 1382 of what shall become known as the guild of Saint Luke already mentions apprentices.4 The charter states that those who had learned the craft elsewhere could become masters by paying 4 guilders. Furthermore, those who had learnt the craft with an Antwerp master were offered 2 guilders discount on the entry fee upon becoming a master. An apprentice paid 2 guilders entry money and 2 guilders upon getting his masters’ title. Masters’ sons could enter freely. No specific information is given on the length of the apprenticeship or the maximum number of apprentices per time in a workshop. Nothing is said about the nature of the apprenticeship, whether a contract was obligatory, and if and how the guild exercised control over these procedures. The guild’s position was probably that this was specific and at the discretion of the master and the parents or the wards of the apprentice. Too many rules would kill the transaction. We suppose that the conditions of apprenticeship where settled in a separate written notary’s contract or even talked through in an oral contract between the apprentice (or rather his parents/wards) and the master. For Antwerp, few notary’s contracts of this nature have been found; they are certainly not separately nor systematically preserved, as is the case for other towns, such as Venice.

  • 5 Ibid., p. 4-6.

8On November 26, 1434, the trade organization grouping artists became officially a corporation.5 They are one of the larger métiers, and the increasing membership reflects and comes with a growing importance and social weight. Together with the tailleurs d’image, the painters demanded revisions of certain points as to the original founding charter dating from fifty years earlier. And so, masters and apprentices both also had to pay (on top of what was already stated in 1382), 6 “denieren grooten Brabants” “keersgeld” of apprenticeship fees to the guild. The candles were used in their chapel of the Church of Our Lady; the existence of their own chapel was yet another sign that the artists had moved up in the world. Moreover, again more supple provisions were made for kin, so that the legal masters’ sons owed 2 “gelten” Rhine wine, while the bastard sons had to pay 1 Rhinish florin to enter the corporation.

  • 6 Ibid., p. 6-11.

9Eight years later already, a third bill is written on the July 22, 1442.6 In twenty well-structured articles, the rules of what is from now on proudly called the guild “of Saint Luke” are listed. That this ‘codification’ (with a stress on quality control) took place in the 1450s is no coincidence. The guild was booming: the commercial impact of the luxury crafts and arts sector on the economic importance of Antwerp grew each year. This is clear from the increasing membership numbers, and the above-mentioned chapel used part of the increased membership fees to cover for its costs. As to apprentices, there appears for the first time (and in the first article) the length of the training: four years. Masters’ sons are mentioned as well, entering at a discount with 2 “schellingen”, while for bastard sons there is again a higher fee of 1 Rhinish florin.

  • 7 Ibid., p. 13-18.
  • 8 Ibid., p. 30.
  • 9 Rombouts – Van Lerius 1864-1876 (1961), vol. I, p. 20. The membership lists sometimes give, beside (...)

10A next phase takes us to 1470, when the statutes are revised again due to shortage of money in the till.7 The considerable expenses for the chapel in the Church of Our Lady, and those for the guildhall have drained the coffers. Thus, it is stated that 1 florin extra will have to be paid in order to become a master. In the years after, the statutes were revised,8 but they keep silent as to apprentices. This means that the rules of 1442 remained applicable, which seems logical as the city and the guild would not have wanted to discourage apprentices to enter the guild but demanded a higher fee once they wanted to become a titled master. Interestingly, the Liggeren of the year 1470 add information as to the fees: the deans mention an increase of 2 golden guilders for masters and 3 Brabantine guilders for apprentices, information that seems to contradict what is written in the official rules.9

  • 10 Van der Straelen 1855, p. 30-35.
  • 11 Ibid., p. 31.

11In 1494, supplementary regulations concerning apprentices were added to the existing statutes.10 Indeed, the lavish decoration of the chapel was draining the funds, and the fees increased again.11 The candle money increased by 4 “denieren grooten Brabants”; still, it remained affordable.

  • 12 Martens – Peeters 2006, p. 211-222.

12In the early sixteenth century, the power of the guild of Saint Luke continued to increase as the luxury market had shifted from Bruges to Antwerp. One of the best examples of Antwerp’s success story of the 1520s is the rise of painters (the so-called “Antwerpse maniëristen”) working in an international style that became a commercial hit on the local, regional and international market. Workshops were thriving, and immigrant journeymen tried their fortune.12 But clouds were forming on the horizon: in the early 1520s, there is a drop in the inscriptions of masters and apprentices in the Liggeren (see further) which points to a commercial crisis. Indeed, the town welcomed many trained but not yet independent artists (i.e. journeymen) who were willing to work —sometimes for little. Some of them came from the neighbouring villages, but many arrived from further afield. They were attracted by the demand of highly skilled labour emanating from the workshops. Indeed, the rules follow the trend and in 1528 masters were held to pay candle money for their journeymen! It appears that journeymen were more sought after than apprentices, as pupils were more a long-term investment, while a good journeyman can be put to work immediately on Antwerp’s quality products, such as paintings that demand a high level of talent and skill. This implies that there was little tension (or competition) between apprentices and journeymen, but probably all the more so between masters and journeymen.

  • 13 Rombouts – Van Lerius 1864-1876 (1961), vol. I, p. 108.
  • 14 Van der Straelen 1855, p. 39-42.
  • 15 Ibid., p. 39-42, quote on p. 40.
  • 16 Van der Straelen 1855, p. 39-42

13In 1526, the Liggeren mention the fact that members were being urged to pay up, and that many lagged behind with paying their fees.13 The guild was by then desperately trying to fill the coffers. In 1535, the situation becomes critical. The guild mentions a decrease in inscriptions, which is confirmed by the Liggeren (see further).14 It was difficult to make ends meet due to the expenses for various feasts and rhetorical gathering, rent, upkeep but also: “midts de veranderinge ende verargeringhe des tyts” (due to the changings and worsening of the times). They added: “Want oock negheene gulde noch in dese […] zoe luttel en hadde van incomene” (because no guild had such little income).15 On the February 8, 1535, after more than sixty years (i.e. since 1470), it was decided to increase the entry fee to a total of 8 golden florins (at 28 “stuivers”) for incoming masters; for apprentices it was increased to a total of 2 golden florins. Interestingly, these were discounted from the entry fee once the apprentice applied for his masters’ title, which left only 6 golden florins to pay.16 For masters’ sons, the fee was only a mere 20 “stuivers”, thus giving priority to locals, and facilitating family businesses —and creating dynasties for that matter.

  • 17 Rombouts – Van Lerius 1864-1876 (1961), vol. I, p. 132 and 135 are examples of this. In the lists (...)

14The rule does not seem to have been immediately followed, as the Liggeren mention so-called “half fees” for certain members for several years to come. Some apprentices were exempted from paying the full dues in the years after, as mention is made of the half-fee entry money being collected from the “aalmoezeniers” or Almoners, a recurrent practice.17

  • 18 Formerly AKASKA, Oud archief 243 (4), Bussenboek der Sint-Lucasgilde, Inschrijvingsboek van de bro (...)

15In 1538 the Poor relief box (“Armenbus”) was created by a group of enterprising artists, providing (a meagre) relief for ill members and their spouses.18 It seems to have been for masters only, as no apprentices or journeymen seem to have been listed. Furthermore, the money handed out was so little that it seems to have been more of a symbolic gesture than that it helped survive in times of illness and destitution.

  • 19 Peeters 2009, p. 136-163; Peeters 2017, p. 189-201. Martens – Peeters 2006, p. 211-222.
  • 20 Van der Straelen 1855, p. 56.

16Better times were ahead. The 1540s and 1550s are known as the boom years of the Antwerp luxury market, and paintings become more and more important commodities as countless inventories, which we have studied elsewhere, show.19 Interestingly, this is also reflected in the statutes. The majority of the rules and articles deal with the quality of the raw material, and the fashioning of, as well as the know how behind the products. But they remain silent about apprentices, for whom probably nothing much has really changed. In February 1561, the entry fee for masters is increased to 25 guilders (at 20 “stuivers”). Nothing changed for the apprentices.20 In the course of the sixteenth century, nothing more was said about painters’ apprentices in the statutes of the guild.

  • 21 Ibid., p. 60 and p. 66.

17The rules for painters are among the most summary of all the professions regrouped by the guild of Saint Luke. The rules for the embroiderers (1586), and the coffer makers (1575) are much more explicit.21 For them, the rules are quite extensive and they specify various aspects of the profession, such as working procedures and raw materials used, and the putting to work of other workshop staff, working hours and break time, painters’ rules remain silent as to the do’s and don’ts for workshop personnel. Does this mean that the painters preferred to remain flexible, and that a certain liberty was involved in painters’ workshop procedures? Or was the training and work of a painter’s apprentice so specialized that it was difficult to put it into a set of fixed rules contrary to e.g. a coffer-maker? It is interesting to note that the professions involving standardized products seem to have many very detailed rules as opposed to crafts producing complex and complicated and often individualized products involving a large experience, training and knowledge. Perhaps it was more difficult to summarize and mold all this into a clear set of statutes. Although more research is necessary, this is certainly food for thought.

18Nothing is said about the master-piece, anywhere for painters in Antwerp during the fifteenth and sixteenth century contrary to other artistic professions, where the fashioning of an example is part of the entry specifications.

19But if these normative sources inform us about many aspects, we have to turn to other sources for information such as the size of Antwerp’s painters’ workshops (and the number of apprentices) and professional mobility for a painter starting his career.

The Liggeren and the apprentices

  • 22 The project Painting in Antwerp before iconoclasm (ca 1480-1566): A socio-economic Approach, was d (...)
  • 23 The fifteenth century has not yet been quantified. The lists do not have masters’ enrollments for (...)

20A partial quantification of the Liggeren, the membership lists of the Antwerp guild of Saint Luke was done in Groningen between 2000-2003, during the project “Antwerp painting before iconoclasm”.22 We have to be sensitive to the heuristic problems of lacunae, which we have discussed elsewhere.23 All in all, the Liggeren seem to be reasonably complete. Information of the years 1501-1579 was put in a database and analyzed. In all, we repertoried a total 2.089 masters and 1.007 apprentices for all the different professions pertaining to the guild. The quantification allows us to answer questions about size of workshops and professional mobility. It also allows us to say whether the inscriptions follow the rules and whether they follow the trends.

21Our study from 2000-2003 has shown that there were two periods where there was a surplus of painter’s apprentices: 1505-12 and 1520-24. Between 1521-1527 the enrollment numbers decrease. After that they follow the evolution of the masters. Between 1546 and 1558 inscriptions for masters in general, boom, and this echoes the economic situation. Painters’ apprentices’ enrollment follows the general trend. After that year, they fell dramatically as Antwerp and the Southern Netherlands are plunged in a general crisis that exploded into the Iconoclasm. The precarious times mentioned in the statutes are confirmed by the trends in the numbers. After the 1560s —contrary to other professions—, the inscriptions of the master painters lag. And for the second half of the sixteenth century, there are fewer apprentices. Although no definite answer can be given, we think that the bulk of the ever-growing production of Antwerp high-quality painting was done by masters and by a phalanx of journeymen as the second half of the sixteenth century progressed.

  • 24 Martens – Peeters, 2006, p. 211-222.

22The question rises whether journeymen painters were firmly pushing open the doors to painters’ workshops at that time. In our opinion they were indeed, although there is only evidence by extrapolation.24 Moreover, we surmise many of these journeymen to have migrated to Antwerp from neighbouring towns or from further afield, in the hope of starting a career there.

  • 25 Peeters 2012, p. 103-117.

23What about masters’ sons? We have information about them from 1543 onwards as they were inscribed separately in the Liggeren. Between 1543 and 1579 masters’ sons represent 23.7% of the masters’ inscriptions, and 29.7% of the painters’ specifically. After 1551 the numbers decrease. The existence of several highly successful painters’ dynasties presents an interesting feature —we mention the Francken dynasty— but on the whole, the painters’ trade seemed to have been relatively open to all who showed talent and enterprise. It was also such a specialized trade that keeping it within families was not always a good strategy —when talent was spread thinly, the name (or “label”) suffered, as was the case with the Francken-family in the 1640s.25 New blood often meant new talent, new influences and fresh subject matter, and thus a renewal which was important for a trade that could only prosper by the sophisticated quality of its products.

  • 26 But there remain some 72% of the apprentices “in limbo”! I thank the participants of the conferenc (...)

24Only 20.3% of the apprentices in general obtained the masters’ title: professional mobility of apprentices is obviously in sync with the degree of difficulty of becoming a (successful) painter. In fact, 80.7% of the apprentices in general did not make it. This comprises the 30% mortality, those who migrated, changed profession, stopped… and those who remained journeyman. For the painters specifically, 27.3% of the apprentices obtained their master’s title. This means that the success rate is a little higher for the beginning painter’s apprentice. Perhaps the investment is larger? Perhaps the time it takes to complete the training urges one to finish what one starts? Perhaps the choice of this profession is more a matter of reflection and deliberate choice (and the determination to succeed too)?26

25How long did it take, based on our study of the membership lists, to become a master? As we said above, the statutes mention a training period of four years. But it is doubtful whether the average boy was able to paint sophisticated subjects (such as altarpieces) after just four years. And reality points out that the training took much longer. For most of the 152 masters studied in the project “Painting in Antwerp before iconoclasm (ca 1480-1566): A socio-economic Approach” (that we could follow from apprentice’s inscription to master’s title), it took between five and fifteen years before they obtained their master’ title. This means that after their customary four years of training, they remained “in service” from one up to eleven years! As the sixteenth century progressed, the trend shows that there was a slight increase of about nine to eleven years. For the 94 painters in our sample, gaining the master’s status took longer as the sixteenth century progressed: from about eight to ten years.

26Above all, this shows that artists (and painters specifically) took a long time before entering their profession as an independent master, a career move that involved a long preparation and involved certain risks, whether one was a masters’ son or a non-related apprentice. Although the minimum age for an apprenticeship seems to have varied (there does not seem to have been a legal minimum age), for many, their master’s title may have coincided with the then legal age of majority of twenty-five.

27When did workshops get their first apprentice? Between 1500 and 1579, we have information about 252 masters in general on the interval between their masters’ title, and the inscription of a first apprentice. This grows from an average of three to thirteen years as the century progressed. This means that a growing number of masters worked alone and did not put their know-how to the profit of apprentices, even less so as the century advanced. For 126 painters for whom we have this information, the same trend exists: the interval between their masters’ title and the inscription of a first apprentice evolved from two to fifteen years. This needs to be seen in correlation with the decreasing number of apprentices as the century progresses, when the economic troubles become more pressing.

28Between 1500 and 1579, some 73.15% of the workshops in general comprised only the master (and family help), and perhaps also unregistered help. Some 16.65% had one apprentice. Only two workshops boasted seven apprentices, which is the maximum of registered pupils found in the Liggeren for this period. For the painters, the numbers are similar: some 67.68% of the workshops there comprised only the master (and family help). Some 18.79% had one apprentice. One workshop had seven painter’s apprentices! Over the period under concern, the trend is an increase in single-master workshops, and a decrease in the number of workshops with apprentices. The painters follow the general trend. Workshops with pupils were thus not so common as one may have thought, and workshops with many pupils were even quite rare.

29The large workshops with which Antwerp is often associated, may well be a fable. Teaching and passing on one’s skills in Antwerp was less prevalent than perhaps working with foreign or alien journeymen, who were already fully trained and matured and could be relied upon to increase the production of high-quality products provided they worked by the rules and were properly registered. It has not been possible to study a correlation between wealth and apprentices, i.e. if only well to do masters trained (many) apprentices. And we know that in Antwerp turning out high end quality paintings was what mattered. Commerce ruled!

 

30Apprentices are mentioned in the normative sources; most of the rules and fees applying to them were codified in the fifteenth century, remaining virtually unchanged until well into the seventeenth century. The rules and regulations for painters differ from those for e.g. coffer makers and other professions in that they remain vague, and thus flexible. This is the result of the nature of the painter’s profession: they fashion high quality individual products that are not very standardized. Even when making a copy, a painter still needs considerable amounts of talent and know how to make this product. In order to become a proficient painter, time and money was to be invested: professional mobility was rather slow. But even if it usually took over a decade to train a youngster, the rules remained vague on pedagogy, technical aspects, formation of ideas and intellectual training, as well as the actual creative process, and at the discretion of the master. It was a rather uncodified profession, leaving room for complex and differentiated ‘products’ using a variety of methods, subjects, and materials.

31Most of the masters did not invest in apprentices —but may have worked with other (un)registered workers, such as journeymen. In the case of highly skilled artisans or artists such as painters, we wonder whether it would have been economically sound to invest much time, effort and money in the training of apprentices, only to let them leave after they had fulfilled their apprenticeship (and thus at a moment that they started to become cost-effective). For these reasons, we assume that locally trained apprentices in Antwerp during the sixteenth century more often than not stayed on as the servant or the journeyman of their former teacher, unless they became free masters themselves. Only a fifth of them eventually reached mastership, and as the sixteenth century progressed, the numbers given above show that it became increasingly difficult to set up a shop of one’s own.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Archives

SAA = City Archives Antwerp

Primary sources

Rombouts – Van Lerius 1961 = P. Rombouts, T. van Lerius, Liggeren en andere historische archieven der Antwerpsche Sint-Lucasgilde, The Hague, F. Baggerman, 1864-1876 (anastatic reprint Amsterdam, N. Israel, 1961), 2 vols.

Van der Straelen 1855 = J.B. van der Straelen, Jaerboek der vermaerde en kunstrijke gilde van Sint-Lucas binnen de stad Antwerpen, Antwerp, Peeters-Van Genechten, 1855.

Secondary sources

Faries 2006 = M. Faries (ed.), Making and marketing: studies of the painting process in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Netherlandish workshops, Turnhout, 2006.

Martens – Peeters 2006 = M.P.J. Martens, N. Peeters, Artists by numbers. Quantifying artist’s trades in 16th century Antwerp, in Faries 2006, p. 211-222.

Peeters – Dambruyne 2007 = N. Peeters, J. Dambruyne, Artists of the twilight zone, some introductory remarks on journeymen in painter’s workshops in the Southern Netherlands c. 1540-c. 1650, in Peeters 2007, p. ix-xxiv.

Peeters – Martens 2007 = N. Peeters, M.P.J. Martens, Assistants in artists’ workshops in the Southern Netherlands (fifteenth and sixteenth centuries). Overview of the archive sources, in Peeters 2007, p. 33-49.

Peeters 2007 = N. Peeters (ed.), Invisible hands? The role and status of the painter’s journeyman in the low countries c. 1450-c. 1650, Louvain, 2007.

Peeters 2009 = N. Peeters, The guild of Saint Luke and the painter’s profession in Antwerp between c. 1560 and 1585: some social and economic insights, in Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek, Envisioning the artist in the Early Modern Netherlands, 51, 2009, p. 136-163.

Peeters 2012 = N. Peeters, From Nicolaas to Constantijn. The Francken family and their rich artistic heritage (c. 1550-1717), in K. Brosens, L. Kelchtermans, K. Van der Stighelen (eds.), Art production and kinship patterns in the early modern low countries, Turnhout, 2012, p. 103-117.

Peeters 2017 = N. Peeters, A guild’s eye view on art. Artists and the corporate world in Antwerp (ca. 1550-1600), in D. Eigberger, P. Lorenz et al. (eds.), The artist between court and city (1300-1600), Paderborn, 2017, p. 189-201.

Van de Velde 1973 = C. Van de Velde, The Grotesque initials in the first Ligger and in the Busboek of the Antwerp guild of Saint Luke, in Bulletin van de Koninklijke Musea voor Kunst en Geschiedenis, 45, 1973, p. 252-277.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Peeters – Dambruyne 2007, p. IX-XXIV; Peeters – Martens 2007, p. 33-49.

2 SAA, CH 140, Charter, Sint-Lucasgilde, 26/8/1382; SAA, Fonds Gilden & Ambachten, GA 4573, Register St-Lucasgilde in Antwerpen, 1442-1773. We have checked the original documents. They were published by J.B. Van der Straelen, Jaerboek der vermaerde en kunstrijke gilde van Sint-Lucas binnen de stad Antwerpen, Antwerp, 1855.

3 The archives were formerly housed in the Royal Academy of Fine Arts in Antwerp and transferred to the City Archives in Antwerp in November 2018 as this contribution is being written; Rombouts – Van Lerius 1864-1876 (1961), 2 vols. For the history of the manuscript see: Van de Velde 1973, p. 252-277.

4 Van der Straelen 1855, p. 2-3.

5 Ibid., p. 4-6.

6 Ibid., p. 6-11.

7 Ibid., p. 13-18.

8 Ibid., p. 30.

9 Rombouts – Van Lerius 1864-1876 (1961), vol. I, p. 20. The membership lists sometimes give, besides the names of the registered artists and artisans, additional information to the statutes and rules. We suppose that the rules counted and that the deans made a mistake.

10 Van der Straelen 1855, p. 30-35.

11 Ibid., p. 31.

12 Martens – Peeters 2006, p. 211-222.

13 Rombouts – Van Lerius 1864-1876 (1961), vol. I, p. 108.

14 Van der Straelen 1855, p. 39-42.

15 Ibid., p. 39-42, quote on p. 40.

16 Van der Straelen 1855, p. 39-42

17 Rombouts – Van Lerius 1864-1876 (1961), vol. I, p. 132 and 135 are examples of this. In the lists apprentices who paid the full entry-fee and those that paid a half fee are listed separately. On p. 135, and p. 168 for example, mention is made of the “Aalmoezeniers”.

18 Formerly AKASKA, Oud archief 243 (4), Bussenboek der Sint-Lucasgilde, Inschrijvingsboek van de broederschap van de Armenbus, 1538-1627, now transferred to the City Archives in Antwerp: FelixArchief/stadsarchief Antwerpen, 2574.

19 Peeters 2009, p. 136-163; Peeters 2017, p. 189-201. Martens – Peeters 2006, p. 211-222.

20 Van der Straelen 1855, p. 56.

21 Ibid., p. 60 and p. 66.

22 The project Painting in Antwerp before iconoclasm (ca 1480-1566): A socio-economic Approach, was directed by Prof. Dr. M. Faries and Prof. Dr. M.P.J. Martens, sponsored by N.W.O. and R.U.G., Institute for the History of Art and Architecture, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.

23 The fifteenth century has not yet been quantified. The lists do not have masters’ enrollments for 1562, 1563, 1565 and 1566, a heuristic problem that results in a distortion. Van de Velde 1973, p. 252-277.

24 Martens – Peeters, 2006, p. 211-222.

25 Peeters 2012, p. 103-117.

26 But there remain some 72% of the apprentices “in limbo”! I thank the participants of the conference “Pictor”, Rome, 2017 and Paris 2017, for the lively discussion about the 2/3-1/3 ratio of failure and success.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Natasja Peeters, « The painter’s apprentice in fifteenth and sixteenth century Antwerp. An analysis of the archival sources », Mélanges de l’École française de Rome - Italie et Méditerranée modernes et contemporaines, 131-2 | 2019, 221-227.

Référence électronique

Natasja Peeters, « The painter’s apprentice in fifteenth and sixteenth century Antwerp. An analysis of the archival sources », Mélanges de l’École française de Rome - Italie et Méditerranée modernes et contemporaines [En ligne], 131-2 | 2019, mis en ligne le 30 décembre 2019, consulté le 26 septembre 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/mefrim/6461 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/mefrim.6461

Haut de page

Auteur

Natasja Peeters

War Heritage Institute, Brussels/Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, natasja.peeters@warheritage.be

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

© École française de Rome

Haut de page
  • Logo École française de Rome
  • OpenEdition Journals
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search