Chapter Nine

The Restoration Period and the

Rejection of Classicism in France

Napoleon's Russian campaign of 1812 marked the begin­ intending to rule by decree, Paris rose against him. A three­
ning of the end of his regime. In a matter of months, his day long revolution Ouly 27-29, 1830) forced his abdication.
Grand Army was reduced from some 453,000 soldiers to
10,000. The Emperor's prestige plummeted, and the nations
he had conquered began to revolt. Even inside France, Government Patronage and the Rejection of Classicism
there was growing resistance to his rule. In the so-called
Battle of Leipzig of 1813, the Grand Army was wiped out In the field of art, the Restoration government's first order
by an allied force of several hostile nations. By 1814 this of business was to restore important monuments of the
force had invaded France. The French had had enough; monarchy and to revive the glory of the Bourbon dynasty.
Napoleon was deposed and exiled to the island of Elba . Former royal buildings, such as the palace at Versailles and
Although he attempted a comeback in 1815, it lasted only the medieval abbey of St Denis (the traditional burial ground
one hundred days and ended with another exile, to the of the French kings), were reclaimed and repaired. Royal
remote island of St Helena, in the South Atlantic Ocean . statues that had been destroyed during the revolution (see
Meanwhile, Louis XVIII, the younger brother of Louis page 108) were made anew. Among them was the huge
XVI, had been calling himself King of France since 1795, equestrian statue of Henry IV, first of the Bourbon kings,
even as he wandered around Europe as an exile. In 1814 he on the Pont Neuf, or "New Bridge," in Par-is (FIG. 9-1).
hastened back to France to fill the power vacuum left by Designed by the sculptor Franc;ois Lemot (1772-1833), it
Napoleon's defeat and departure. He ruled until his death in was a re-creation (based on prints and drawings) of a late
1824 and was succeeded by his younger brother Charles X Renaissance statue that had been erected in 1614 and
(ruled 1824-30). Both governed as constitutional monarchs, destroyed in 1792. The figure of Napoleon, which only a
sharing the power with a bi-cameral (i.e., tW'o-chambered) few years earlier had crowned the Vendome Column (see
parliament. In the course of their successive regimes, called FIG. 5-3), was melted down to provide the bronze for this
the Restoration period, the government became increasingly sculpture. Thus the memory of Napoleon was forcibly
conservative, even reactionary. liberal opposition grew erased and replaced by Bourbon propaganda .
steadily. When Charles dissolved the Chamber of Deputies, Among the major new monumental initiatives of Louis
XVIII was the Chapelle Expiatoire, or Expiatory Chapel
(FIG. 9-2). This was to be the symbolic site of expiation or
Theodore Gericault, Charging Chasseur, 1812. (Detail of FIC. 9-7.) atonement for the French people's sin of having guillotined

Govermnel1t Patronage al1d the Rejection oj Classicism 203

 their king and queen. The chapel was built on the grounds
of a small cemetery where Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette
had been buried after their execution in 1793. (Their bod­
ies had since been exhumed for official reburial in the royal
abbey of St Denis.) It was designed by Pierre-Franc;ois­
Leonard Fontaine (1762-1853), who had made a smooth
political transition from his former post as First Imperial
Architect to his new one as Royal Architect.
A centralized, domed structure with an attached clois­
ter, the Expiatory Chapel combines various styles, including
Greco-Roman, Etruscan, Renaissance, and medieval, and
may be seen as an early example of eclectic historicism .
Indeed, the chapel shows the first signs of a trend, typi­
cal of the Restoration period, to move away from Classicism
(associated with revolutionary and Napoleonic times) and
towards a mixture of styles from a pre-revolutionary past.
Two sculptures inside the chapel also reflect this trend.
One is titled The Apotheosis ofLouis XVI, the other Nlarie-Antoinette
Seeking Solace with Religion (FIG. 9-3). The latter was the work
of Jean-Pierre Cortot (1787-1843), one of the most suc­
cessful sculptors of the period. The statue takes its cue from
a line in the Queen's last letter, to her husband's sister Elisa­
beth, which is quoted on its pedestal: "1 die in the apostolic
Roman Catholic religion." Marie Antoinette is kneeling, anx­
iously reaching out towards the allegorical female image of
Religion. Compared to David's drawing of Marie Antoinette
on her way to the guillotine (see FIG. 4-2), the queen looks
young and pretty in a summer dress sprinkled with fleurs­
de-Iys (stylized lily flowers that were the emblem of the royal
Bourbon dynasty). She still wears the ermine stole, symbol
of royalty, but her lost crown lies by her side.
Compared with Marie AntOinette, whose writhing pose
speaks of her anxiety, Religion, dressed in a long Classical
9- I Fran~ois Lemot, Equestrian statue of Henry IV, ISIS. Bronze,
approximate height 42' (12.S m). Pont Neuf, Paris.
garment, stands calm, tall, and erect. By juxtaposing human

9-2 Pierre-Fran~ois-Leonard
Fontaine, Chapelle Expiatoire
(Expiatory Chapel), ISI6-21.
Place Louis XVI, Paris.

204 The Restoratiol1 Period al1d the Rejectiol1 of Classicism il1 Fral1ce
 The Academy

An ordinance issued in 1816 by Louis XVIII restored the

pre-revolutionary Royal Academy of Painting and Sculp­
ture (see page 33) . The Academy had been abolished in
1793, when its functions had been taken over by the so­
called Arts Commune, presided over by David. Two years
later, the arts had become part of a "National Institute" of
arts and sciences. The fine arts (classified as painting, sculp­
ture, architecture, and music) constituted the fourth class
of the Institute.
The King's ordinance of 1816 did not only restore the
Royal Academy, it also restructured it. The new Academie
des Beaux-Arts (Academy of Fine Arts) had forty-two mem­
bers, including fourteen painters, six sculptors, eight
architects, four engravers, and eight musicians. Although
David, who for so many years had dominated the arts in
France, was not a member (he had gone into political exile
in Brussels), the Academy was dominated by his students,
including Gros, who had taken over his teaching atelier,
Gerard, and Ingres.
The Academy controlled the fine arts in France in sev­
eral ways . In 1819 art teaching became centered on the
newly founded Ecole des Beaux-Arts (School of Fine Arts),
a merger of the schools of architecture, painting, and sculp­
ture. Even though the school had its own administration,

9-4 Paulin Guerin, Portrait oj Louis XVIII, Salon of 1819. Oil on can­
9-3 Jean-Pierre Cortot, Marie-Antoinette Seeking Solace with vas, 8'10" x 6'8" (2.69 x 2.03 m). Musee National du Chateau de
Religion, c.1825 . Marble , slightly over life-size. Chapelle Expiatoire , Paris. Versailles , Versailles .

anxiety and the stabilizing force of religion, Cortot has

heightened the sculpture's emotional effect. The contrast
also reflects the two different realities of the figures-one
real and specific, the other allegorical and timeless.
The figure of Religion is Neoclassical, stylistically speak­
ing, while Marie Antoinette harks back to the Baroque style
of the preceding two centuries. The style par excellence of the
age of absolutism, the Baroque was favored for portraying
royalty. The official portraits of the restored Bourbon mon­
archs similarly revived the Baroque style. The Portrait of Louis
XVIII (FIC. 9-4), by Paulin Guerin (1783-1855), shown at the
Salon of 1819, is a deliberate restatement of Rigaud's Portrait
of Louis XIV (see FIC. 1-1). By having himself portrayed in the
pose, robes, and setting of that famous King's earlier portrait,
Louis XVIII intended to emphasize both the historical legit­
imacy of his rule and the renewed glory that it would bring
to France. Ironically, to the visitors to the Salon of 1819, the
painting may well have appeared as a pathetic attempt to
recapture a glorious past that was forever gone. Guerin's gouty,
overweight Louis XVlII, with his vacuous gesture and insipid
smile, fails to inspire the same sense of awe as Rigaud's Louis
XlV. Weighed down by his interminable ermine-lined cape,
he seems burdened, rather than bolstered, by the past.

The Academy 205

the Academy selected its faculty, controlled the entrance
exam, and organized student contests, including the impor­
Paris Salons
tant Rome Prize competition (see page 34) . The Academy
also controlled the French Academy in Rome . It appointed
the director of the Rome program and judged the envois, From the French Revolution through the
works that the students holding the Rome Prize were required Restoration Period

to send back home. Finally, the Academy was heavily involved

Year Number Opening
in the organization of the Salons. Academicians often served of Entries Date
on, or influenced the formation of, Salon juries, thus affect­
1789 350 August 25
ing the resulting exhibitions in a decisive way.
One unavoidable change that occurred in the Acad­ 1791 794 September 8
emy in the nineteenth century was the "graying" of its 1793 1043 August 10
membership. While in the eighteenth century the mem­ 1795 735 October 2
bers were mostly youthful (David, for example, became a
1796 641 October 6
full member of the Academy at the age of thirty-five),
1798 536 July 19
nineteenth-century Academicians tended to be past mid­
dle age. This was because Academicians served for life, 1799 488 August 18
and they themselves elected new members. Thus it was, 1800 541 September 2
quite literally, an "old boys" club (no women were ever full 1801 490 September 2
members!), comfortable in its traditions and suspicious of 1802 569 September 2
change. The graying of the Academy made it difficult for
1804 701 September 22
young, innovative artists to be admitted to the Salon. No
wonder that, between 1816 and the revolution of 1848 1805 705 September 15

(when the jury system was temporarily abandoned), there 1808 802 October 14
was growing dissatisfaction among young artists with the 1810 1123 November 5
official management of the fine arts in France. 1812 1298 November 1
1814 1369 November 1
1817 1097 April 24
The Salons of the Restoration Period
1819 1702 August 25
During the Restoration, Salons continued to be held every 1822 1802 April 24
two years, though on occasion a year was missed (see Paris 1824 2180 August 25
Salons, right). Housed in the Louvre, as before, the early
1827-8 1834 November 4
Restoration Salons resembled those of the Napoleonic
period, except that paintings glorifying Napoleon were From: Patricia Mainardi, The End of the Salon: Art and the State in
replaced by paintings extolling the virtues of the Bour­ the Early Third Republic. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1993
bons. Moreover, religious paintings, already on the rise
during Napoleon's rule, increased in numbers.
As during Napoleon's reign, the monumental canvases or
grandes machines ("big contraptions") that dominated the Salon
were largely the result of government commissions. Most artists began to show new and different works at the Salon.
were painted by well-established older artists, many of whom Initially, their impact was only slight but, by 1824, dis­
were members of the Academy. Yet, in the course of the cerning visitors were clearly aware of a change in the Salon.
Restoration period, young artists increasingly began to sub­ New names, such as those of Horace Vernet and Eugene
mit large canvases independently, since they realized that Delacroix, were suddenly on everyone's lips and the term
smaller works failed to attract the attention of newspaper "Romantic/' selectively used in France for more than a
critics and the general public. A painting by Fran<;ois-Joseph decade, became a household word overnight.
Heim (1787- 1865), Charles X Distributing Prizes after the Salon
of 1824 (FIC. 9-5), illustrates this point. The tall walls of the
Louvre are plastered with paintings; the grandes machines occupy Madame de Stael and the Introduction of Romantic
the middle range . Smaller works, hung above, below, or Ideas into France
between them, are completely overpowered by them.
The early Restoration Salons continued to be domi­ In 1810, just when Napoleon's power was at its zenith, a
nated by followers of David, who carried on in the master's book had appeared in France that bore the innocuous title
Classical tradition. Starting in 1819, however, several young Germany. Its author was Germaine de StaeI (1766-1817), a

206 The Restoration Period and the Rejection oj Classicism in France

9-5 Fran~ois-Joseph Heim, Charles X Distributing Prizes aJter the Salon oj J 824, 1825. Oil o n canvas, 5'8" x 8'5" ( 1.73 x 2.56 m ). Musee du Louvre, Pari s.

fifty-four-year-old \voman who had made a reputation for grow and revive itself. It expresses our religion, it
herself with several popular novels . Although banned by recalls our history; its origin is old, but not
Napoleon , who had no use for Germany or for de Stael , the ancient.
book became an international best-seller. It was widely read
in France as well, thanks to a brisk market in illegal copies. The focus on France's medieval past and the return to
The product of a five-month trip to Germany, the book Christianity that de Stael advocated fell in line with the
was meant to acquaint De Stael's readers with German cul­ agenda of the Restoration regime. Both Louis XVIII and
ture and ideas, most notably with the new Romantic movement, Charles X traced their roots back to the Middle Ages , to
which she officially launched in France and on the broader prove their hallowed royal pedigrees. Both kings saw the
European scene. Intrigued by Goethe's and Schlegel's ideas Roman Catholic Church as a crucial buttress to the prin­
that Europe was divided into a Romantic , Germanic, Chris­ ciple of divine right. Charles X, in particular, bolstered the
tian north and a Classical, Mediterranean, pagan south, church by encouraging the foundation of new missionary
Madame de Stael questioned France's cultural place. Sand­ orders and religious lay societies.
wiched between Germany and the Mediterranean, the
country was in a peculiar position . Its upper class, follow­
ing de Stael , had always favored Classicism , but it had never Stendhal
become popular with the middle and lower classes because
it was not native to France . The country had a scant Clas­ If her medievalism and sympathy for religion appealed to
sical past, but a rich medieval history. Therefore, de Stael the politically conservative element in France , Madame
proclaimed, Classicism had gone as far as it could in France, de Stael's emphasis on the populist character of Romanti­
but Romanticism still had a way to go: cism and its emotional focus excited several young artists,
writers , and intellectuals . Her enthusiastic effusions about
Romantic literature is the only one that is still the "soulfulness" of modern German poetry were echoed
susceptible to being perfected because , as it has its in the work of Henri Beyle ( 1783-1842 ), a French writer
roots in our own soil, it is the only one that can who used the German pen name Stendhal.

Stel1 dhal 207

 As an art critic during the Restoration period, Stend­ enthusiastically engaged in modern times. In the course
hal became an advocate for a new and modern art that was of the Restoration period, yet a third path emerged, that
"to have a soul" and was to express "some human emotion of Oriental ism. Orientalism , the fascination with cultural
or spiritual impulse in a vivid manner intelligible to the domains beyond the confines of Western culture, perhaps
general public." In his lengthy review of the Salon of 1824, best suited the Romantic longing for emotion exceeding
he announced the end of the school of David, which he the traditional norms set by reason and morality.
found incapable of producing an art that touched the com­ Interest in the Orient, vaguely defined as the Near East
mon heartstrings . "The school of David can only paint and north Africa, but, more broadly, as all the world that
bodies; it is decidedly inept at painting souls." was not the Occident, i.e ., Western, increased as a result of
Stendhal referred to the new art he was calling for as Napoleon's Egyptian campaign and the subsequent publi­
"Romantic," but to him that term did not mean a return to cation of prints and books on Egypt. Paintings such as Cros's
a Christian , medieval past . Instead, he felt that Romanti­ Bonaparte Visiting the Plague House at Jaffa (see FIC .
cism needed to be engaged with the present if it was, 5-19) and others representing incidents from the Egyptian
indeed, to be a true alternative to Classicism . "Romanti­ campaign further piqued curiosity about the Arab world,
cism ," he wrote , "in all the arts is what represents the men which to nineteenth-century Europeans appeared exotic
of today and not the men of those remote, heroic times, both in custom and costume. The Orient, racially, religiously,
which probably never existed anyway." Modern painters, and culturally "other" than the West, came to be perceived
he felt, should renounce the naked body, which had no as a place of excessive passion, violence, and cruelty-imag­
place in modern life , and they should paint pictures that ined characteristics that would soon provide the justification
would appeal to the greatest number of people. for European imperialism in the region . In 1807 the British
made an attempt to occupy Egypt, but failed. This did not
prevent them from continuing to meddle in the region until
Orientalism well into the twentieth century. By the end of the Restora­
tion period, the French invaded Algiers, in north Africa ,
De Stael and Stendhallaid out two paths for French Roman­ and eventually colonized a considerable part of north Africa.
tic artists. One was to return to the medieval and In the field of art, Orientalism is seen most prominently
post-medieval past of northern Europe, the other to become in painting, sculpture , and photography. It is marked by

9- 6 Horace Vernet, The Battle of MOl1tmirail, 1822 (Salon of 1824). Oil on canvas, 5' 10" x 9'7" ( 1.78 x 2. 9 m), National Call ery, London .

208 The Restoratiol1 Period al1d the Rejectiol1 oj Cla ss icism ill FraH cc
a preoccupation with non-Western subject matter, espe­
cially scenes from the Arab world, and by an emphasis on
exoticism, sensuality, and violence . In architecture and the
decorative arts, Orientalism manifests itself in the often
eclectic adoption of motifs derived from Islamic art.

Horace Vernet

To Stendhal , the most outstanding representative of the

"new art" was Horace Vernet ( 1789-1863 ). A painter's son ,
Vernet had intended to follow in his father's footsteps,
painting hunting and war scenes. But his ambition to paint
heroic Napoleonic battle paintings was cut short when
the Restoration regime took over. In t 822 two of his paint­
ings, one representing a revolutionary battle, the other a
scene of the defense of Paris against the allied troops in
18 t 4, were refused by the Salon jury for fear of political
repercussions. Vernet promptly exhibited both paintings
in his studio, where they drew such crowds that the jurors
realized that they had made these works quite the rage by
rejecting them. At the following Salon of 1824, Vernet
was allowed to exhibit all of the nearly forty works he sub­
mitted . Even his Napoleonic battle scenes were accepted,
as long as Napoleon himself did not feature in them.
One of these , titled The Battle of Montmirail (FIC . 9-6 ), to
Stendhal epitomized Romantic painting, not only because 9 -7 Theodore Gericault, Charging Chasseur, 18 12 . O il o n canvas,
it dealt with a contemporary theme but also because of 11 '5" x 8'9" ( 349 x 2.66 m ) Musee du Lo uv re , Pari s.
the "amount of pleasure" it gave to the spectator. While
that comment at first may seem strange, it points to a major
paradigm shift that had taken place in the early decades the profound exploration of the tragedies of mode rn life .
of the nineteenth century. No longer was art expected to Stendhal's choice was, nonetheless, understandable . While
educate and edify the viewer by means of moralizing sub­ Vernet exhibited nearly forty paintings at the Salon of
jects and noble , idealized forms . Instead, it was to affect 1824, Cericault's work was notably absent. The artist had
the spectator at a visceral level through subjects that evoked died several months before the Salon opened, at the age
strong emotions, and through striking colors and forms of just thirty-two. In his tragically short life he had exhib­
that appealed powerfully to the senses . ited only three works-at the Salons of 1812 , 1814, and
The Battle of Montmirail depicts war in all its chaos and 1819-hardly enough to make a broad impact in Paris.
savagery. Unlike Napoleonic battle paintings such as Cros's Gericault's childhood coincided with the rise of Napoleon,
TheBattle of Eylau (see FIC. 5-21) , it does not glorify a sin­ and his adolescence with the great battles of the Empire­
gle hero. Instead, it shows masses of soldiers fighting , Marengo, Austerlitz, Jena. As a student in the famed atelier
struggling, and dying. Vernet's journalistic approach lends of Pierre-Narcisse Cuerin (1774-1833 ), he may have aspired
to his work a sense of immediacy and truth that is distinct to paint war scenes , following the example of Cros, his
from Cros's carefully constructed propaganda image. arti stic role model. His love of horses , both in the flesh
and as artistic subjects, would have made him especially
suited to that task. As it was , Cericault reached arti stic
Theodore Gericault maturity just as the Empire crumbled. His first two mili­
tary paintings were also his last. Both were exhibited at
If we were asked today which artist best answered Stend­ the Salon of 1814, which opened only months after Paris
hal's call for a new, Romantic art, our choice would probably fell to the allied troops. One, a painting that he had already
not be Vernet but his good friend Theodore Cericault exhibited once before, in 1812, represented a cavalry offi­
( 1791-1824). If Vernet approached modern scenes like a cer of the regiment of the chasseurs (see FI C. 9-7); the other,
journalist, representing them with painstaking accuracy fresh off the easel , a wounded cuirassier (see FIC . 9-9). The
and in minute detail , Cericault's engagement with the pres­ contrast between the two paintings, one bursting with
ent was more philosophical. His goal appears to have been energy, the other sunken in defeat, cannot have been lost

Theodore Gericault 209

 9 -8 Peter Paul Rubens,
Hippopotamtls and Crocodile H .mt,
c. \ 6 \5- \6. Oil on canvas,
8'2" x 12'7" (248 x 3. 2 \ m ).
Al te Pinak othek, Munich .

on the visitors to the Salon . Gericault's paintings painfully daring than Charging Chasseur. From the point of view of
illustrated the changed fate of France in the course of a content, however, the painting is novel in that it monu­
few years. mentalizes the lIanti-hero ." Gericault's cuirassier is a loser,
Charging Chasseur (FIC. 9-7) represents a cavalry officer limping stealthily from the battlefield . Such a scene would
on a rearing horse, ready to attack . David's Napoleon Cross­ have been unthinkable in war paintings done for Napoleon,
ing the Alps at the Saint-Bemard Pass (see FIG. 5- to) had presented which were required to present war in a glorious light. Yet,
an earlier example of this motif. Yet, unlike David , who Wounded Cuirassier is not a propaganda painting: it is a paint­
shows the rider in profile , Gericault, in a dramatic tour de ing "from one Frenchman to another." The soldier's
force , represents the horse diagonally from the rear. (It is abandonment of the battlefield in an attempt to save his
as if the horse is jumping away from an invisible attacker, life expresses a commonly shared feeling of lassitude with
whom the rider turns around to strike with his sword .) war. The painting may be seen as a metaphor for France's
Gericault has created a powerful sense of space quite dif­ recent capitulation to allied troops and its unwillingness
ferent from the more relief-like effect in David's painting. to have more blood shed for France.
Even Gros had not attempted such dramatic foreshorten­ Gericault's next and last submission to the Salon, The
ing effects, which were beyond the limits of the Classical Raft of t/:Je Medusa (FIG. 9- t 0), is his best-known work , with
aesthetic. One has to go back to seventeenth-century good reason. A five-year interval separates Tl:Je Raft from
Baroque paintings, such as Rubens's Hippopotamus and Croc­ Gericault's two military paintings. In the intervening years,
odile Hunt ( FIG. 9-8) , to find a similar interest in spatial the artist had traveled to Italy, where he had improved his
dynamics. Gericault's brushwork recalls Rubens as well, skills in drawing the human figure and creating monu­
showing a freedom that is quite distinct from the smooth mental , multi-figure compositions. At the same time, he
paint surfaces that characterize the works of David and had remained interested in representing contemporary
his followers . life. In the drawings and paintings he did in Italy, scenes
Wounded Cuirassier Leaving the Field of Battle (FIG. 9-9) may of daily life in Rome alternated with timeless episodes from
have been conceived as a pendant (one of a matching pair Classical mythology, reflecting some ambivalence toward
of paintings) to Charging Chasseur, even though it is larger. the contemporary and the ClassicaL Signs of this ambiva­
It represents a member of Napoleon's feared IIsteel ham­ lence still linger in The Raft of the Medusa . Even though it
ll
mer cavalry, staggering down a slope. Using his saber as depicts a contemporary event, it is centered on the male
a crutch, and grabbing on to his frightened horse, he looks nude, the chief subject of Classical art.
back over his shoulder to make sure he is not followed . The Raft of the Medusa was inspired by an incident dur­
From a technical point of view, Wounded Cuirassier is less ing the summer of t 8 t 6, when the Medusa , a French frigate

210 Th e Restoration Period and the Rejectiol1 oj Classicism il1 Fran ce

9-9 Theodore Gericault, Wounded Cuirassier Leaving the Field oj Battle, Salon of 1814. Oil on canvas, II '7" x 9'8" ( 3.53 x 2.94 m ).
Musee du Louvre , Paris.

Theodore Gericmdt 211

9- 10 Theodore Gericault, The Raft of tl1e Medusa, 1819. Oil on canvas, 16'1" x 23 '6" (4.9 x 7.16 m). Musee du Louvre, Paris .

transporting colonists and soldiers to Senegal, ran aground the raft had been produced by minor artists, a current event
near the west coast of Africa . When it became necessary such as this had never been the subject of a monumental
to abandon ship, it appeared that the lifeboats had room painting. Of course, under Napoleon, artists had painted
for only half of the approximately four hundred people contemporary battle scenes in heroic dimensions. But those
on board. To accommodate the others, the ship's carpenter paintings commemorated episodes that glorified the ruler
assembled a raft using some of the wood from the ship. who had made them happen . The Medusa affair was nei­
The colonists and the low-rank soldiers were herded onto ther an important historical event nor a propaganda
the raft, which was so overloaded that it was half sub­ opportunity. On the contrary, it was an isolated episode
merged under the water. Although the men in the lifeboats involving the commonest of people-farmers, soldiers,
had promised to tow the raft ashore, they soon cut the and sailors.
cables, preferring to save themselves. The rudderless raft Gericault's treatment was original as well. Faced with
was left at the mercy of the waves. the task of turning journalism into art, he steered a care­
Within a week, all but fifteen passengers had died. The ful course between realism and idealism. He went to great
survivors were eventually rescued by a search boat. On lengths to learn all the details of the event, only to ignore
their return to Paris in the fall, one survivor wrote an them selectively as he transformed the scene into one that
account of the events, which leaked to the press . A huge transcends the timely and specific (for more on the gen­
scandal ensued, because it became obvious that the Medusa esis of the painting, see The Making of The Raft of the
disaster was caused by the incompetence of a captain who Medusa, page 2 t 3). The Raft of the Medusa represents the fif­
owed his appointment not to his nautical skills but to nepo­ teen survivors at the moment when they see the ship that
tism in the highest ranks of government. The newly restored is coming to their rescue. Set obliquely to the picture plane,
Bourbons were facing growing opposition . For their crit­ the raft fills the width of the canvas, creating a sense of
ics, the raft of the Medusa became a symbol of France, a close-up. Of the men on the raft, some react with enthu­
country adrift for lack of a competent leader. siasm, raising themselves up to wave their shirts to attract
Gericault's decision to base a painting on the Medusa the ship. Others are too weak or dejected to move. The
affair was unusual at the time . Although printed images of figures on the raft are caught in a diagonal upward sweep,

212 The Restoration Period and the Rejection of Classicism ill hal1ce
 The Making of The Raft of the Medusa

The Raft of the Medusa was Gericault's first (and, as it turned 9.2-1 Theodore Gericault, Mutiny on the RaJt, 1818 .
out, his only) major figure composition, and it involved Pen drawing, 16'/3 x 23'/ 4" (41.5 x 59 cm) .
extensive preparations. The artist made numerous preliminary Amsterdam Historisch Museum , Amsterdam.
sketches, in which he searched for the episode in the real-life
drama that offered the greatest possiblity for a meaningful
work. These show that he hesitated between scenes of
fighting or mutiny on the raft (FIG. 9.2-1), of cannibalism, and 9 .2-2 Theodore Gericault, Study oj Arm and Two Feet,
of final rescue . His choice of the episode of the sighting of 1818- 19. Oil on canvas, 20 x 25 Y '6" (52 x 64 cm) . Musee Fabre,
the rescue ship was no doubt based on his desire to Montpellier.
maximize the emotional breadth and drama of the painting .
In addition to compositional studies, Gericault made
numerous drawings for individual figures on the raft, using
some of the survivors and friends, as well as professionals, as
models. He also, at this time, made several oil sketches of
severed heads and limbs. It has long been assumed that
Gericault painted these grim studies in a morgue, in an effort
to bring more verisimilitude to his representation of dead
and dying people on the raft. But no direct correspondence
between the sketches and The Raft can be found . Moreover,
the heads and limbs all seem carefully posed, in the way that
a still life painter would pose his objects. In a study of two
severed heads, a female and a male head are juxtaposed on
white sheets almost in the way one would see a married
couple lying in bed; and in Study of Arm and Two Feet (FIG .
9.2-2) an arm tenderly embraces one of the feet as if in a
homo-erotic encounter. These macabre "stililifes" seem to
defy the traditional subject categories since they confuse the
boundaries between still life and narrative figure painting .

Theodore Giricault 213

beginning, in the lower left, with the tragic figure of the exchange for two-thirds of the box office proceeds . For
father mourning his dead son, and culminating, in the six-and-a-haJf months, the painting was shown in the
upper right, with the African who has raised himself on a "Egyptian Hall" in Piccadilly, where its sensational subject
wine barrel to alert the crew of the distant ship. The diag­ drew large crowds. It was then shipped to Dublin in Ire­
onal marks not only a physical and emotional crescendo, land and exhibited for another six weeks.
but also an existential journey from death to life and a All this time Cericault stayed in London, where he
moral revival from despair to hope . became fascinated with the city's street life. In addition to
When we compare Cericault's Raft of the A1edusa with painting the famous Derby horse race at nearby Epsom, j
one of the popular images of the event (FIG. 9-11), we he produced an album of prints on London themes, for
notice immediately that the artist has drastically reduced which he felt there might be a market both in Britain and
the size of the raft (Cericault's raft could never have accom­ in France. Choosing the new print medium of lithogra­
modated 150 people) in order to achieve the dramatic phy (see Lithography, page 215) , he made twelve prints,
diagonal massing of the figures . We also notice that Ceri­ which he published in 1821 as Various Subjects Drawn Jrom
cault has shown several survivors completely nude. In so LIfe and on Stone. Pity the Sorrows of a Poor Old Man (FIG. 9-12)
doing he has given them a timeless quality not unlike the is one of these. It shows an old beggar seated outside a
historical, mythological, and allegorical figures in Neo­ bakery shop, trying to assuage his hunger with the smells
classical works. However, much as we are tempted to see of freshly baked bread. These works differ greatly from
them as allegories-of life, of death, or suffering-we are Cericault's large-scale Salon paintings. Meant for a mid­
prevented from doing so by the intrusion of realistic details: dle-class public , they depict genre subjects, which had
the white cotton socks of the dead young man, for exam­ always appealed to that class. Yet, just as The Raft of the
ple, or his father's sailor pants. Medusa brings something new to history painting, so these
T/1e Raft of the Medusa was exhibited at the Salon of 1819, lithographs bring something to genre painting. Compared
where it had a mixed reception . Most critics did not know with the works of Hogarth or Chardin in the eighteenth
what to make of a work so unlike traditional Salon paint­ century, they neither tell a story nor sentimentalize their
ings . Moreover, many were loth to praise it because they subjects. Instead, they depict their subjects with an uncom­
realized that the painting had a subversive political mes­ promising realism that foreshadows the Realist movement
sage. Reluctant to roll up and store a work in which he of the mid-nineteenth century. These prints show Stend­
had invested so much time, money, and energy, Cericault hal's "men of today" in the ordinary circumstances of daily
decided to take it to Britain . Here he hoped to follow the life. Moreover, by fOCUSing on the miserable lives of the
example of Benjamin West (The Death of General Wolfe; see urban poor, Cericault has elicited, in Stendhal's words,
FIG. 3-18) and John Singleton Copley (The Death of the Earl "some human emotion or spiritual impulse in a vivid man­
of Cl1atham; see FIG.3-19) by showing his painting to the ner intelligible to the general public."
public for a fee . In London he found a professional exhi­ The realism of Cericault's lithographs is also seen in
bition organizer who agreed to show the painting in several late works, done between December 1821 and

9-11 Anonymous, RaJt oj the

Medusa , 1818 . Lithograph .
Bibliotheque Nationale , De parte ment
des Estampes et de la Photographie,
Paris.

214 The RestoratioJ1 Period aJ1d the Rejection oj Classicism in France

 9- 12 Theodore
Gericault, Pity the
Sorrows oj a Poor Old
Man , 18 21 . Lithog raph ,
12 / 16 x 14%"
(3 1.5 x 37. 5 e m ).
British Museum , Lo ndo n .

the artist's death in 1824. Most important among them

are five portraits of monomaniacs, the only ones remain­
Lithography ing of an original series of ten . The series was owned at
one time by Dr Etienne-Jean Georget , a Parisian psy­
chiatrist, but it was probably commissioned by his colleague
In 1799 a German inventor by the name of Aloys
Senefelder (1771-1834) patented a new printing Jean-Etienne-Dominique Esquirol , who first diagnosed
process . Soon to be called lithography (from the Greek and treated monomania . Psychiatry was a new field in
word for stone), it was based on the phenomenon that the early nineteenth century, when , for the first time ,
grease repels water.
madness was seen as a mental illness and the insane as
Lithography is a comple x process . Basically, to
make a lithograph, an artist draws with a greasy ink or human beings who should be treated with compassion .
crayon on the smoothly polished surface of a porous Based on the ideas of Kaspar Lavater (see pages 83 and
stone . The artist next applies a greasy painter's ink to 248 ), many psychiatrists believed that there was a direct
the stone with a roller. The ink will adhere to the
correlation between mental illness and physiognomy, so
drawn lines but not to the wet surface of the stone. A
piece of paper is placed on the stone and carefully that the study of the patient's facial structure played an
rubbed down. The image drawn on the stone will be important role in the diagnosis and classification of men­
printed accurately in reverse on the paper. By re­ tal diseases.
inking the stone, the printing can be repeated
numerous times, allowing the artist to "pull" multiple
Gericault's portraits of monomaniacs may be related
prints from the stone. to this theory. According to Georget's annotations, the
Although originally applied to the printing of sheet men and women shown in the portraits suffered from dif­
music, lithography soon became the domain of fine
ferent types of delusions . Man Suffering from Delusions of
artists. The technique was refined to enable artists to
draw on paper and transfer their drawings to the stone,
Military Rank (FIC. 9-13) is perhaps the most striking of
to make better impressions with the help of a newly the five . An old man with sunken cheeks and gray stub­
developed lithographic press, and to print in more than ble wears a hat with a red tassel, vaguely resembling a
one color. By the end of the nineteenth century, it was
Napoleonic military hat . A blanket is draped over one
possible to print large, poster-size lithographs in a wide
range of colors. shoulder, and around his neck he wears a large pierced
coin as if it were a medal of honor. Besides the strange
outfit, his facial expression also hints at the sitter's delu-

Th eodore Gericault 215

 Theodore
9- 13
Gericault, Man SuJJering
Jrom Deluslolls oj Military
Rank, 1819-22. Oil on can­
vas , 32 x 26" (825 x 66
cm). Collection Oskar
Reinhart "Am Romerholz ,"
Winterthur, Switzerland.

of

sional state. The shifty eyes, avoiding the viewer, and the fall of Napoleon, it may reflect the sense of impotence of
fiercely pursed lips show the impossibility of communi­ the post-Napoleonic generation, which felt itself to be
cating with this person, whose mind seems to have wandered excluded from its predecessor's military glory.
off into an unknown realm . The contrast between the illu­
minated left half of the face and the deeply shaded right
half seems to suggest that, although we can study the Eugene Delacroix
appearance of those who suffer this mental illness, our
understanding is limited as we can never truly penetrate While Vernet and Gericault were engaged with reality
the dark recesses of their minds. Theirs is a mysterious and the present, Eugene Delacroix (t 798- t 863) preferred
world set apart from our own. the past, the fictional, and the exotic. The artist made his
Esquirol considered monomania as a reflection of the debut at the Salon of t 822 with Dante and Virgil (FIC . 9­
socio-political conditions of the time, just as he saw the 14). Inspired by the Divine Comedy, an epic poem by Dante
insane asylum as a mirror of contemporary culture . In this Alighieri (t 265- t 321), it shows the author and his guide,
context, Man Suffering from Delusions of Military Rank seems the Roman poet Virgil, traveling through hell and pur­
particularly significant. Painted some five years after the gatory. In this scene, the two poets are ferried across a

216 The Restoratiol1 Period al1d the Rejectiol1 oj Classicism il1 Fral1ce
9-14 Eugene Delacroix, Dante and Virgil, 1822. Oil on canvas, 6'2" x 7' 11" (1.88 x 2.41 mJ. Musee du Louvre, Paris.

lake in which damned souls are punished by eternal drown­ that part of the imagination which the moderns [i .e., post­
ing. The spectacle of the souls (represented, as custom Classical artists] excite in so many ways." He sought his
dictates, by naked human figures) desperately clinging to subjects in the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and beyond,
the boat and vainly struggling to climb on board, arouses preferring to approach these periods through the eyes of
a mixture of horror and disdain in the three figures inside the poet. He turned to historical writers such as Dante,
the vessel. While the boatman rows furiously across the Cervantes, Milton, and Shakespeare, as well as modern
lake, both Dante and Virgil have risen and silently watch authors of historical drama and fiction such as Goethe,
the gruesome spectacle. Byron (see page 220), and Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832) .
Although Delacroix was, no doubt, inspired by Geri­ While Dante and Virgil was generally praised, Delacroix's
cault's Raft oj the Medusa in his use of nude male bodies as next major work, Scenes Jrom the Massacres at (hios (FIC. 9­
vehicles of pathos and suffering, he departed from that 15), became one of the most contested paintings of the
work in a decisive manner. By choosing a subject from lit­ 1824 Salon . It was criticized both for its formal qualities
erary history, he asserted that the present offered few and for its emphasis on agony and suffering. One of
subjects of interest to him. Delacroix felt that nineteenth­ Delacroix's rare paintings on a contemporary theme, Scenes
century France was bland and ugly. He complained about Jrom the Massacres at (hios showed an episode in the war
the "wretchedness of the modern costume," and the lack waged by the Greeks in 1821 to gain independence from
of poetry in modern life. To him, art and poetry "Iive[d] the Ottoman Empire . In the second year of this war,
on fiction," by which he meant that they must have an ele­ Ottoman Turks raided the island of Chios and burned most
ment of fantasy. The present, which stood right before of its villages. Reportedly, some thirty thousand islanders
the artist's eyes, did not offer enough space for imagination. were killed and thousands more were deported and enslaved.
In contrast to David and his followers, Delacroix felt (The Greeks, one year earlier, had massacred a compara­
that Classical literature and Classical art failed "to awaken ble number of Turks in Tripolis, an event that went largely

Eugene Delacroix 217

 J

.J

9-15 Eugene Delacroix, Scenes Jrom the Massacres at Chios, 1824 . Oil on canvas , 13'8" x II '7" (4 . 17 x 3.54 m ). Musee du Lo uvre, Paris .

unnoticed in the West.) like many artists and intellectu­ His painting shows a group of Greek prisoners huddled
als in western Europe, Delacroix had a passionate interest under the watchful eye of a Turkish soldier. An Ottoman
in the Greek War of Independence, which resonated with officer, mounted on a white stallion, abducts a half-naked
early nineteenth-century ideals of freedom and national­ woman, while another tries to hold him back. The pris­
ism. The Chios massacre left him shocked and outraged. oners form a random group of young and old, naked and

218 The Restoration Period and the Rejection oj Classicism il1 France
 of poor materials. From the late eighteenth century, artists
no longer made their own paints but bought commercially
fabricated colors. By the early nineteenth century, the stan­
dards for commercial paints had sunk so low that many
paintings of the period were unfit to stand the test of time.
Today they look much darker than intended, and the paint
surface is frequently cracked.
To imagine what Massacres at Chios may originally have
looked like, or at least, what coloristic effects Delacroix
had in mind, it is useful to look at a preliminary watercolor
study (FIC . 9-16) . Here we see not only rich colors and
striking color contrasts (for example, the use of the three
primary colors, yellow, red, and blue, in the dress of the
mounted Turk) , but we also notice that Delacroix was in
the habit of "sketching" with colors. In other words, he did
not first draw the figures in pencil and then fill in the tints,
but conceived the entire image in terms of color patches .
The finished painting, too, was sketched in large flat
color masses, which were subsequently enlivened with small
touches of paint to suggest light and shade and surface par­
ticularities. A detail of the painting shOWing the old woman's
arm (FIC. 9-17) demonstrates Delacroix's technique. While
the arm itself is painted in a beige flesh tone, the shadow
9- 16 Eugene Delacroix, Study for Scenes from the Massacres at Chios,
1824. Watercolor and pencil on paper, 13 % x 11 1 Y16" (34 x 30 em ). cast on it is loosely painted in red, with an occasional touch
Ivlusee du Louvre, Departem e nt des Arts Craphiques , Paris. of its complementary, green . This is quite different from the
way a cast shadow was painted by, for example, Ingres. A
look at the sitter's arm in the Portrait ofMadame La Riviere (see
clothed . They cling to one another in despair, since they FIC. 5-34), for example, shows that Ingres, and the Classi­
suspect that they are about to be separated forever. cists in genera" showed light and shade by mixing white or
Like Gros's Plague House oj Jaffa and Gericault's RaJt oj the black with the basic flesh color of the arm.
Medusa (both of which the young Delacroix is known to Innovative as Delacroix's brushwork and use of color
have admired), Scenes from the Massacres at Chios shows a group may seem, it was not without precedent. Already in the
of victims, but there is an important difference. While Gros's
victims are redeemed by the heroism of their commander
9-17 Eugene Delacroix, Scenes from the Massacres at Chios. Detail
and while Gericault's painting, despite its horror, still car­ of FIG. 9-15.
ries a message of hope, Delacroix's painting is unapologetically
pessimistic. This shocking depiction of horror deterred
many critics. Even to Stendha" otherwise open to inno­
vation, the painting erred "on the side of excess."
Other critics objected, equally strongly, to the painting's
form. Scenes from the Massacres at Cbios seemed to lack unity
and focus, with figures randomly placed, without any organ­
izing principle to their grouping. Conservative critics also
objected to the painting's brushwork and color, although
some of the more open-minded ones, in fact , saw in them
Delacroix's most important innovation. Stendha" for exam­
ple, who "with the best will in the world/' could not admire
"Monsieur Delacroix and his Massacres at Chios" acknowl­
edged that Delacroix had "a feeling for color/' which, as he
said, "in this century of draftsmen is saying a lot."
When looking at the painting today, it is hard to take
Stendhal's remark seriously because Scenes from the Massacres
at Chios seems so dark and muddy. This may not always
have been the case, however. The painting, like many of
the period, has deteriorated over time, owing to the use

Eugene Delacroix 219

9-18 Eugene Delacroix, The Death of Sardanapalus, 1827-8. Oil on canvas, 13' x 16'3" (3.95 x 4 .95 m ). Musee du Louvre, Paris .

sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, artists such as Paolo (1821), perhaps a veiled political commentary on the British
Veronese in Italy and Rubens in Flanders had used similar monarchy, tells the story of an ancient Assyrian king whose
coloristic effects . In his own time, Delacroix's free brush­ decadent lifestyle and unwillingness to govern invite rebel­
work was attributed to his knowledge of the work of lion. To spite the rebels , who are about to overrun his
Constable, whose The Hay Wain (see FIC . 8-19) was exhib­ palace, the king orders its total destruction. According to
ited at the Salon of 1824. Delacroix's own "storyboard" for the picture (as published
Scenes from the Massacres at (hios may be seen as Delacroix's in the Salon catalogue) ;
first Orientalist work, both for its representation of Ottomans
(complete with turbans and SCimitars) riding fiery horses, The rebels besiege him in his palace .. .
and for its emphasis on savagery. To depict this imagined Reclined on a superb bed, above an immense
scene of mass execution and enslavement, Delacroix broke funeral pyre, Sardanapalus orders his eunuchs
with traditional rules of composition, paint application, and palace officers to slaughter his wives, his
and use of color, causing the artist Gros to refer to the pages, even his favorite horses and dogs; none of
work as the "massacre of painting." these objects which had served his pleasure was
Oriental ism found full expression in Delacroix's next to survive him ... Aischeh, a Bactrian woman,
major painting, The Death ofSardanapalus (FIC. 9-18), which did not wish to suffer a slave to kill her, and
was exhibited at the Salon of 1827-8 . This colossal work, hung herself from the columns supporting the
measuring some 13 feet by 16, was inspired by a recent vault ... Baleah [on the right], cupbearer of
play by the British Romantic poet George Gordon, Lord Sardanapalus, at last set fire to the funeral pyre
Byron (1788-1824). Byron's poetic drama Sardanapalus and threw himself upon it.

220 The Restoration Period and the Rejection of Classicism in Fran ce

 Delacroix's painting is composed along a sweeping diag­ owing to Napoleon's occupation of Italy, was crowded
onalline from upper left to lower right. At the top, a white-clad with Frenchmen. In t 8 t t he received a commission for
Sardanapalus reclines on an enormous red bed, decorated two paintings to decorate Napoleon's residence in Rome ,
with golden elephant heads. Morosely he watches as ser­ the Palazzo Quirinale. He had also received commissions
vants bring in his treasures-golden vessels, jewelry, clothing, for two paintings of female nudes from Napoleon's sister
horses, and women, to be destroyed or killed before his Caroline Murat, Queen of Naples . And he had built quite
eyes. If paintings could make a sound, this one would be a portrait clientele among French expatriates in Rome .
filled with screams, shouts, the neighing of horses, and the In Paris, however, Ingres was little known . The artist
clanging of metal pots; if they gave off scent, it would reek had been reluctant to send works to the Salon since his
of sweat, blood, and fire. Visually, the painting is a deliri­ Napoleon on his Imperial Throne and his portraits of the Riv­
ous mass of bodies, painted in hot, feverish colors, but the iere family (exhibited before his departure for Rome in
sensual pleasure one derives from it can only be sadistic. t 806) had been criticized as Gothic and perverse . He
To the contemporary viewer, The Death of Sardanapalus exhibited three small paintings at the Salon of t 8 t 4, but
exemplifies Romanticism in its Orientalist thematics and they attracted little notice. In 18 t 9 he submitted three fur­
sublime horror, as well as in its dynamic composition, free ther paintings, which met with a mixture of indifference
brushwork, and explosive colors . The painting seems an and hostility. Most of this hostility was directed at the
emphatic response to the call of Stendhal for an emo­ Grande Oda/isque (FIC. 9- t 9), one of the two nudes that lngres
tionally charged art. Yet, in the t 820s, this painting, in its had painted for Caroline Murat in t 8 t 4 . A picture of a
"Satanism," was too much even for this Romantic writer, nude, reclining harem woman (the French word odalisque
let alone for more conservative critics, who blamed Delacroix comes from the Turkish odalik) , it was a work of shocking
for an imagination gone awry. The critic Auguste Jal per­ originality. The Grande Odalisque was unprecedented in late
haps best expressed the mixture of attraction and repulsion eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century painting in that
Delacroix's contemporaries felt in front of this painting: it represented a nude outside a narrative context. Unlike
Girodet's Danae' (see FIC . 5-27) , which could be readily
Monsieur Delacroix ... has painted his Sardanapalus inserted into the mythological narrative of one of Zeus'
with all his heart; he has given himself to it with famous escapades, the Odalisque was nothing more nor less
passion, with feeling, and unfortunately, in the than a naked woman on display. To be sure, "display nudes,"
delirium of his creation, he has been carried away such as the so-called Venus of Urbino (see FIC. t 2-36) , by
beyond all limits . .. He wanted to compose TItian, had been produced before . But those paintings had
disorder, and he forgot that disorder itself has a logic; been executed for private patrons. Ingres's Grande Odal­
he wanted to appall us with the spectacle of the isque, by contrast was exhibited in the Salon, where her
barbaric pleasures on which the eyes of Sardanapalus nakedness was accessible to the public at large.
sated himself before closing for ever. But it is The shocking implications of lngres's choice of subject
impossible for a rational mind to extricate itself from matter (only prostitutes showed off their naked bodies)
the chaos amidst which this idea is confined. were mitigated by the artist's insistence, through the title
and the woman's paraphernalia, that his nude was not a
French woman but an "oriental" harem woman . For the
Ingres and the Transformation of Classicism visitors to the Salon, therefore, she was not "one of us ,"
but "the other," a woman belonging to an exotic world
The Classical tradition itself, however, did not remain where Western rules of decorum did not apply.
unchanged. During the Restoration period, its transfor­ Yet it was not only the content but also the form of
mation, which had already begun during the Empire (see lngres's painting that unsettled many visitors to the Salon.
page t t 6), went apace with the progress of Romanticism. For while it retained some aspects of Davidian Classicism,
And it is seen even in the work of an artist who was con­ most notably the emphasis on contour, it also marked a
sidered in his time to be the embodiment of academic departure from that style. No one could fail to notice that
painting, David's studentJean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres the luscious curvature of the back was achieved at the
(t 780- t 867). expense of an unnatural elongation of the spine (critics
The Salon of t 824 not only saw the triumph of the complained that at least three vertebrae had been added).
young Romantics, notably of Vernet and Delacroix; it also In addition, the smooth, sensuous contour of arms and
marked the first official recognition of Ingres. After exhibit­ legs was the result of the virtual elimination of joints. Ingres
ing Napoleon on his Imperial Throne (see FIC . 5- t 7) at the Salon had taken the Classicist idea of line as an artistic means
of t 806, the artist had left for Italy as a recipient of the to purify reality beyond the traditional boundaries . To the
Rome Prize. During his four-year residency in Rome, he Classicists, purification of reality had not meant departure
had dutifully sent back the obligatory envois to Paris. He from reality. To Ingres, however, his was a justifiable attempt
had also made important connections in Rome, which, to bring out the essence of the subject: if the mark of the

Ingres and the Transformation of Classicism 221

9- J 9 Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres, Gral1de Odalisque, J 8 J 4. Oil on canvas, 35/8 x 63/1 (9 J cm x J .62 m ). Musee du Lo uvre , Paris.

9-20 Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres, The Vow oj Louis XIII,

Salon of 1824. Oil on canvas , 13'9/1 x 8'8/1 (4.2 J x 2.65 m ) Montauban
Cathedral.

harem woman was her sensuality, then line and contour

could and should be used to express that . Or, as Ingres
himself is reported to have told his students: "Drawing
does not simply consist of reproducing the contours; draw­
ing does not simply consist of line; drawing is , above all,
expression, interior form , concept, modeling."
As in Ingres's earlier Portrait of Madame Riviere, the dar­
ing distortion of contour is counteracted by the almost
photographic verisimilitude of details and surface textures.
From the pearls in the Odalisque's hair to the peacock
feather fan in her hand, from the smooth texture of her
flesh to the rich shimmering of the background curtain,
all the details appear so real that one can nearly overlook
the picture's "incorrectnesses."
The criticism that was leveled at the Grande Odalisque in
1819 prevented Ingres from showing at the next few Salons.
It was not until 1824 that he found the courage to submit
his work again, this time showing seven paintings. Most
important among them was a large-scale painting destined
for the cathedral in his home town of Montauban (FIC. 9­
20 ). Commissioned by the Ministry of the Interior, it
represented an event in 1634, when Louis XIII, in a sacred
vow, consecrated France and his crown to the Virgin , on
the day commemorating her Assumption . It was a diffi­
cult subject to represent, since it required the combination
of a historical figure (Louis XIII) with a supernatural event­

222 The Restoratiol1 Period al1d the Rejectiol1 oj Classicism il1 FraHce
 painter Raphael. His Virgin with Child is an amalgam of
Raphael's two most popular Madonnas, the Sistine Madonna
in the Painting Gallery in Dresden (see FIC . 7- to) and the
so-called Madonna of Foligno in the Vatican (FIe. 9-2 t). But
Ingres has given the Virgin his own personal stamp. Her
face has been smoothed and streamlined, lending it a remote
sensuality. Indeed, as Stendhal remarked in his review of
the Salon : "The Madonna is beautiful enough , but it is a
physical kind of beauty, incompatible with the idea of divin­
ity. This is a psychological, not a technical defect."
To conservative critics, however, Ingres's painting
embodied a Classical tradition of perfect beauty that was
the more precious since it seemed under attack from the
side of such "heretics" as Vernet and Delacroix . little
wonder, then, that Ingres emerged triumphantly from
the Salon. Within a few months of its closure , he was
elected a member of the Academy and awarded a Legion
of Honor cross . Ingres's success in Paris had finally come .
His newly opened studio attracted more than a hundred
students .

Classicism and Romanticism

The Restoration period is commonly seen as a period that

marks the beginning of a split in art betwee n Classicism
and Romanticism, whereby the first represents the status
quo in art-the official style promoted by the Academy
and taught in the Ecole des Beaux-Arts-and the second
9-21 Raphael, The Madonna oj Foligno, 1511 - 12 . Oil on canvas trans­ the avant-garde. Classicism and Romanticism, in this view,
ferred from pane l, 10'6" x 6'4" ( 3.2 x 1.94 m ). Vatican Museum , Rom e. represent two contrary trends-one conservative and ortho­
dox , the other progressive and modern .
While there is truth in this model, it has , like all his­
the entrance of the Virgin into heaven. Ingres chose to torical models , its weakness . Ingres , the great protagonist
represent the scene as a vision, in which Louis XIII beholds of Classicism, is conservative only to a point. As a youth
the Virgin and Child seated on a cloud. That this is, indeed, he rebelled against David, and his mature works are quite
a revelation is shown by the two angels on the side who removed from the art of David and his followers , both in
part the curtains to "reveal" the Virgin to the king . subject matter and technique. By the same token , Delacroix,
The Vow of Louis XIII is, at first glance, a conservative who we see as the great protagonist of Romanticism , saw
painting that may be seen as a homage to-or an attempt himself as a Classicist, an artist working in the great tra­
to improve on-Ingres's favorite artist, the Renaissance ditions of the history of art.

Classicis1tI and Romanticis1tl 223