Noël Coypel’s educational journey to Rome at the end of 1672 and the beginning of 1673

The aim of this article is to present the circumstances of Noël Coypel’s appointment as rector of the French Academy in Rome and to trace the route of his didactic journey from Paris to Rome with the Prix de Rome scholars entrusted to him. The paper is an attempt to answer the following questions: why a more difficult route through the Alps was chosen (and not, for example, a river and sea route), in what way was the journey educational, and what role did the documents given to Coypel play in securing the expedition. The article is based on an analysis of administrative records during the reign of Louis XIV, lists of superintendents and directors of the French Academy in Rome, accounts of royal buildings, and minutes of the Royal Academy of Painting and Sculpture in Paris. The paper uses the analytical method, the comparative method, the synthetic method, source criticism, argumentum ex silentio inference, and the geographical method when discussing the itinerary. Although the trip was purposeful and related to Coypel’s new position, he designed it in such a way as to not so much get to the destination quickly, but to show his students as much as possible. Coypel introduced the royal scholars to masterpieces of painting and sculpture at centers along a route through Dijon, Lyon, Chambéry, the Mont Cenis Pass, Turin, Milan, Bologna and Florence. The crossing of the Alps, though dangerous, was most often chosen because of the artistic reputation of the cities there. The trip was educational at the expense of comfort or safety. Coypel, as a guide and teacher (paidagōgós – παιδαγωγός) led his charges by overseeing their learning during and through the journey. Wandering to the Eternal City was part of a painter’s education (paideía – παιδεία) in the seventeenth century and was part of Coypel’s didactic work allowing young people to be inspired by direct exposure to masterpieces. The journey had an eminently didactic and artistic character, but also an initiatory one, as it gradually initiated and prepared the students for the experience of Rome, the center of artistic life at that time.

“Appropriate” Meanings and American Traits in Webster’s 1828 Dictionary

During the eighteenth century, many philosophers were attempting to determine the origin of language and to develop a universal theory of linguistics, but a debate at the Prussian Royal Academy questioned the endeavour by claiming that languages have different origins and that it is impossible to explain the progress of human thought by studying them because national languages influence the way their speakers see the world. In answer to that, Webster proposes that all modern languages have a common divine origin and that the universal truth could be accessed by studying etymology. He claims that words have an “absolute” significance, which, due to the development of the different languages, assumed meanings that are “appropriate” to each individual language. This article proposes that nationalism in the American Dictionary of the English Language is not represented by a substantial number of Americanisms, but by giving “appropriate” meaning that evidences how “absolute” significances evolved and came to characterize the United States. The article provides evidence to support that Webster’s lexicographic contribution is constituted by the new organization he gives to the entries and by definitions that show how old terms came to represent new concepts when compared to those in Samuel Johnson’s dictionary.

Belt v Lawes and the Meaning of Authorship

The 1882 Belt v. Lawes libel trial centered around aesthetic questions, of precisely the kind that judges usually seek to avoid. The occasion for the dispute was an article in Vanity Fair by Charles Lawes, asserting that Richard Belt, a sculptor and member of the Royal Academy of Arts, relied on his assistants to do his work. At trial, Lawes proposed an artistic skills test of sorts, suggesting that Belt verify his abilities by executing a sculpture in the courtroom. This evidentiary drama, and the aesthetically freighted-arguments mustered by the parties at trial, make it a fruitful historical episode to study conceptions of authorship and the artistic process, the development of modern copyright doctrine, and the status of expert artistic testimony in the law.