How do we move away from being a civilization that produces art that causes comments like, “my five year old could make this,” back to being one that creates beauty and inspires deep questions? We must reject modernity and embrace tradition. To embrace tradition, we must first learn about it..
Let’s study art history together.
The Coronation of Napoleon
Artist
Jacques-Louis David
Year
1805–07 (exhibited 1808)
Medium
Oil on canvas
Dimensions
6.21 m × 9.79 m (20 ft 4 in × 32 ft 1 in)
Location
Louvre, Paris
The Coronation of Napoleon depicts one of the most famous scenes in not only the history of France, but in the history of the world. Bonaparte is widely considered the greatest military general of all time, and his rise to power in France set the stage for many of the geopolitical changes experienced by Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries.
Napoleon is actually such a historically bewildering character that there is a growing number of conspiracy theorists who doubt his actual existence. There is even a documentary – available online, linked below – delving into his actual (non) existence.
Of course, the existence of a painting of his coronation, a painting which existed prior to his fall, goes a long way to make the argument for his actual existence. So the painting is quite important. For more on the painting, we’ll look to wiki:
The work was commissioned by Napoleon orally in September 1804, and Jacques-Louis David started work on it on 21 December 1805 in the former chapel of the College of Cluny, near the Sorbonne, which served as a workshop. Assisted by his student Georges Rouget, he put the finishing touches in January 1808.
From 7 February to 22 March 1808, the work was exhibited at the Salon annual painting display in 1808, and it was presented to the Salon decennial prize competition in 1810. The painting remained the property of David until 1819, when it was transferred to the Royal Museums, where it was stored in the reserves until 1837. Then, it was installed in the Chamber Sacre of the museum of the historical Palace of Versailles on the orders of King Louis-Philippe. In 1889, the painting was transferred to the Louvre from Versailles.
David was commissioned by American entrepreneurs to paint a full size replica, in 1808, immediately after the release of the original. He began work that year, painting it from memory, but didn’t finish until 1822, during his exile in Brussels. The replica was eventually returned to France in 1947, to the original’s place in the Palace of Versailles.
The composition is organized around several axes, and incorporates the rules of neoclassicism. One axis is that which passes through the cross and has a vertical orientation. A diagonal line runs from the pope to the empress. All eyes are turned towards Napoleon, who is the center of the composition. Napoleon, Pius, and Josephine are illustrated in profile upon the steps towards the altar. The Emblem of the Holy See is hung above the attendants to the left while La Pietà de Notre-Dame de Paris is partially seen at the rightmost edge of the canvass.
Characters
The characters in the painting
Napoleon I (1769–1821), is standing, dressed in coronation robes similar to those of Roman emperors. Others are merely passive spectators. In the actual painting it is possible to see the outline of what was originally painted: Napoleon holding the crown above his own head, as if placing it on himself.
Joséphine de Beauharnais (1763–1814), is kneeling in a submissive position, as called for in the French Civil Code. She received the crown from the hands of her husband, not the pope. Her robe is decorated with silk, according to a contemporary cartoon by Jean-Francois Bony.
Maria Letizia Ramolino (1750–1836), mother of Napoleon, was placed in the stands by the painter. She occupies a place more important than the pope. Actually, she did not attend the ceremony to protest the friction of Napoleon with his brothers Lucien and Joseph. Maria Letizia asked the painter to give Lucien a place of honour. In 1808, when Napoleon discovered the canvas completed in the workshop of David, he was enthralled, and expressed his gratitude to the painter who had managed to convey to posterity the tribute paid to the affection he had towards a woman who shared with him the burden of his office.
Louis Bonaparte (1778–1846), who at the beginning of the empire received the title of grand constable, King of Holland, in 1806. He married Hortense de Beauharnais, the daughter of Josephine.
Joseph Bonaparte (1768–1844), who, after the coronation, received the title of Prince Imperial. Afterwards, he was King of Naples in 1806 and Spain in 1808.
The sisters of Napoleon. In the replica, the dress of Napoleon’s favorite sister is pink. This is the only change in the replica, despite it having been painted from memory.
Pope Pius VII (1742–1823), was content to bless the coronation. He is surrounded by clerics, appointed by Napoleon since the Concordat. In order not to jeopardize the new balance between church and state, the Pope accepted to attend the coronation. The original sketches (as was typical in those days) showed the (key) subjects – including the Pope – minus their clothing, which was added in the actual painting. The Pope was originally pictured with his hands crossed in his lap, but Napoleon, supposedly claiming that the Pope was not present to do nothing, instructed that the painting should depict him anointing the proceedings.
Halet Efendi, an Ottoman ambassador, was also present. He is shown below in the detailed picture.
Dom Raphaël de Monachis, Greek-Egyptian monk and member of the Institut d’Égypte, is depicted among the clergymen, standing to the right of the Bishop, with a beard and a red hood.
The female robe bearer in front, right behind Josephine, on the right side from the viewer’s point of view, is Elisabeth-Hélène-Pierre de Montmorency-Laval, mother of politician Sosthènes II de La Rochefoucauld. She was a court lady of Josephine.
In popular culture
The 2023 Ridley Scott film Napoleon recreated the painting in the scene depicting the coronation of Napoleon. The scene in the film included a shot of Jacques-Louis David drawing a sketch of the coronation for the painting.
I don’t know that the painting alone proves that Napoleon actually existed, but it is a strong argument. The commissioning of paintings, and replicas of paintings, leave a paper trail.
Though it happens rarely, sometimes the lives of real men take on an almost mythological nature – even while the subject remains alive.
I will say regarding the painting that I am a big fan of the neoclassical style. I fully support bringing that style back for permanent use in official government paintings. That style of art won’t ever be out of style. Classical is classical for a reason. Two recent non-traditional and very high profile government paintings (shown below) will likely look like oddities in the future – or perhaps signs of long term national decline.
The first of those looks like the King is bathing in blood, or it is perhaps implying that the King is a resident of hell, surrounded by fire. Even if by some chance that it’s true of him, why would you advertise that to the public via his official portrait?
The second is just odd, as an official portrait – though at least President Obama sitting among foliage isn’t overtly sinister. It might have been fine in another less official context (like sitting on Pres. Obama’s mantel.) The problem with it as an official portrait is that it looks like a rejection of the institution for which he was the elected representative (or perhaps a coded message regarding allegiance to the Bush family?) It doesn’t fit in well with the portraits that came before, or those that follow, such that it may likely look increasingly ludicrous over time. I doubt he wanted to send a message to the future saying, “I was ludicrous.” He should have remembered that classical is timeless.
Official portraits bathed in blood, or sitting in a hedge, will age like disco, bellbottom jeans, and harvest gold refrigerators.
I enjoyed this post. I agree with your comments about the dubious choices made by the artists in these two contemporary portraits. I do prefer a traditional depiction with some room for artistic expression or we would just resort to photography.
I think there’s room for variety in another setting (even if I think the variety is ugly) but it seems really out of place to go non-traditional for the official portrait of a head of state.
Thanks! I think President Obama’s bush portrait radicalized me on this topic, Lol. Then the King Charles portrait took that to another level. Now I’m writing blog posts about art – something i never intended to be doing.
I enjoyed this post. I agree with your comments about the dubious choices made by the artists in these two contemporary portraits. I do prefer a traditional depiction with some room for artistic expression or we would just resort to photography.
I think there’s room for variety in another setting (even if I think the variety is ugly) but it seems really out of place to go non-traditional for the official portrait of a head of state.
Beautiful! I love the classical and more traditional art.
Thanks! I think President Obama’s bush portrait radicalized me on this topic, Lol. Then the King Charles portrait took that to another level. Now I’m writing blog posts about art – something i never intended to be doing.
Napoleons are as real as the crumbs down your shirt—just visit a bakery and prepare to meet history layered in custard and puff pastry!
That sounds delicious, actually.