ornament in ivory, centred on a
palmette;
Alois Riegl's
Stilfragen (1893) traced the evolution and transmission of such motifs. Classical art-criticism and the relatively few medieval writings on
aesthetics did not greatly develop a concept of style in art, or analysis of it, and though
Renaissance and Baroque writers on art are greatly concerned with what modern scholars would call "style", they did not develop a coherent theory of it, at least outside architecture: Artistic styles shift with cultural conditions; a self-evident truth to any modern art historian, but an extraordinary idea in this period [Early Renaissance and earlier]. Nor is it clear that any such idea was articulated in antiquity...
Pliny was attentive to changes in ways of art-making, but he presented such changes as driven by technology and wealth. Vasari, too, attributes the strangeness and, in his view the deficiencies, of earlier art to lack of technological know-how and cultural sophistication.
Giorgio Vasari (1511-1574) set out a hugely influential but much-questioned account of the development of style in Italian painting (mainly) from
Giotto to his own
Mannerist period. He stressed the development of a
Florentine style based on or line-based drawing, rather than on
Venetian colour. With other Renaissance theorists like
Leon Battista Alberti he continued classical debates over the best balance in art between the
realistic depiction of nature and idealization of it; this debate would continue until the 19th century and the advent of
Modernism. The theorist of
Neoclassicism,
Johann Joachim Winckelmann, analysed the stylistic changes in Greek classical art in 1764, comparing them closely to the changes in
Renaissance art, and "
Georg Hegel codified the notion that each historical period will have a typical style", casting a very long shadow over the study of style. Hegel is often attributed with the invention of the
German word
Zeitgeist, but he never actually used the word, although in
Lectures on the Philosophy of History, he uses the phrase
der Geist seiner Zeit (the spirit of his time), writing that "no man can surpass his own time, for the spirit of his time is also his own spirit." Constructing schemes of the period styles of historic art and architecture became a major concern of 19th-century scholars in the new and initially mostly German-speaking field of
art history, with important writers on the broad theory of style including
Carl Friedrich von Rumohr,
Gottfried Semper, and
Alois Riegl in his
Stilfragen of 1893, with
Heinrich Wölfflin and
Paul Frankl continuing the debate in the 20th century.
Paul Jacobsthal and
Josef Strzygowski are among the art historians who followed Riegl in proposing grand schemes tracing the transmission of elements of styles across great ranges in time and space. This type of art history is also known as
formalism, or the study of forms or shapes in art. Semper, Wölfflin, and Frankl, and later Ackerman, had backgrounds in the history of architecture, and like many other terms for period-styles,
"Romanesque" and "Gothic" were initially coined to describe
architectural styles, where major changes between styles can be clearer and more easy to define, not least because style in architecture is easier to replicate by following a set of rules than style in figurative art such as painting. Terms originated to describe architectural periods were often subsequently applied to other areas of the visual arts, and then more widely still to music, literature and general culture. In architecture, stylistic change often follows, and is made possible by, the discovery or adoption of new techniques or materials, such as the Gothic
rib vault or modern construction with metal and
reinforced concrete. A major area of debate in both art history and archaeology has been the extent to which stylistic change in other fields like painting or pottery is also a response to new technical possibilities, or whether new developments have their own impetus to develop (the of Riegl), or to change in response to social and economic factors affecting
patronage and the conditions of the artist, as current thinking tends to emphasize, using less rigid versions of
Marxist art-history. Although style was well-established as a central component of the historical analysis of art, seeing it as the over-riding factor in art history had fallen out of fashion by World War II, as other ways of looking at art started to develop, and a reaction against the emphasis on style arose; for
Svetlana Alpers, "the normal invocation of style in art history is a depressing affair indeed". According to
James Elkins "In the later 20th century criticisms of style were aimed at further reducing the Hegelian elements of the concept while retaining it in a form that could be more easily controlled".
Meyer Schapiro,
James Ackerman,
Ernst Gombrich and
George Kubler (
The Shape of Time: Remarks on the History of Things, 1962) have made notable contributions to the debate, which has also drawn on wider developments in
critical theory. In 2010
Jas Elsner put it more strongly: "For nearly the whole of the 20th century, style art history has been the indisputable king of the discipline, but since the revolutions of the seventies and eighties the king has been dead", though his article explores ways in which "style art history" remains alive, and his comment would hardly apply to archaeology. The use of terms such as
Counter-Maniera appears to be in decline, as impatience with such "style labels" grows among art historians. In 2000
Marcia B. Hall, a leading art-historian of 16th-century Italian painting and mentee of
Sydney Joseph Freedberg (1914–1997), who invented the term, was criticised by a reviewer of her
After Raphael: Painting in Central Italy in the Sixteenth Century for her "fundamental flaw" in continuing to use this and other terms, despite an apologetic "Note on style labels" at the beginning of the book and a promise to keep their use to a minimum. 's very individual technique and style,
Le Chahut, 1889–90 A rare recent attempt to create a theory to explain the process driving changes in artistic style, rather than just theories of how to describe and categorize them, comes from the
behavioural psychologist Colin Martindale, who has proposed an evolutionary theory based on
Darwinian principles. However, this cannot be said to have gained much support among art historians. ==Individual style==