Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2020
Early modern ornament might profitably be considered as a set of systems, each with its own rules. It signaled wealth and status. It offered pleasure and prompted curiosity. It cut across the apparent divide between the vernacular and the classicizing. It was relational, understood in the context of a given subject but not necessarily subservient to it. The notion of ornament as essentially supplemental and the prejudice against ornamental excess are both children of the late eighteenth century. Both ideas depend on a post-Enlightenment conviction of the work of art as an autonomous, aesthetically self-sufficient object, an idea not fully formed in the early modern era.
I am grateful to Michel Jeanneret, Elizabeth Legge, Carl Knappett, and the members of an Ann Arbor reading group for their comments on an earlier version of this paper. I also wish to express my thanks to the two anonymous readers for Renaissance Quarterly. Unless otherwise stated, all translations are my own.