4 SOCIAL SCIENTIST (price) of a painting, but only after it has been dubbed as a priceless 'original'. Pre-Capitalist Tradition In pre-capitalist societies, all works of art were bound up in an organisation of production which involved collective labour. In the medieval period these institutions were known as guilds (in Europe) or karkhanas (in India). The men working within the confines of this organisation of artistic production were included in (he general term artisans or karigar. The relations of production demanded a particular form of patronage. The works were executed on the basis of specific comissions or under direct supervision. This is borne out by the numerous accounts of the workings of artists' guilds in Europe or of the workings of the royal karkhanas of the Mughals. In assessing the value of a work of art the emphasis fell more on the ingredients used than on the skills of execution. Often colours, brushes and special ingredients were provided by the patrons to ensure the price of the paintings (so that ultramarine blue and gold came to be regarded as identifying characteristics of European painting in the fifteenth century).1 The emergence of an open art-market in Europe resulted in the disruption of the guild system. It coincided with technological innovations in the ingredients of the aitisfs materials. The result was to be seen in the shift in the demands of the patrons. Now the artist's skill rather than a combination of particularly costly ingredients (like gold or silver) was thought to set the price of the painting. Moreover, the artist was released from the restrictions of the guild, and personal bondage to the patron, fiee to sell his labour. He now dropped his suffix 'painter' (as in the care of Michelangelo) which had previously secured his place in society. He now faced the market only with his skill, symbolised in his signature.2 It was from this period (Italian Renaissance of the fifteenth century) that historically the artist came to be regarded as a superior individual engaged in some 'supra human special task\3 New Patrons With the emergence of industrial capitalism and the breaking down of the previous relations of artistic production, appeared a new set of patrons who controlled public trusts and institutions. They also controlled the art-market. The artist now faced a precarious economic situation often hostile to his creative power. Paradoxically the myth of the artist's genius developed when he was feeling most insecure. Concepts of "great art' developed, contrasted with 'minor9 or 'lesser' art, and, dependent upon this was the evaluation process which invested the 'original' with its mystiques.4 The process of evaluating an art object was modified in two ways,