Web Gallery

Week 6: Thursday, February 24

Europe in 1770

Anyone familiar with a map of Europe today will recognize many similarities with the Europe of 1770. France, Spain, and Portugal more or less occupied the same territories in 1770 as they do today. Nevertheless, much has changed. Central Europe has witnessed, perhaps, the greatest changes. In 1770, Germany did not exist as a state. Instead, it was a region filled with over 300 different states. Only the most important have received labels—Prussia, Bavaria, Saxony, and Hanover. At this time, Italy was also not united, divided as it was into about ten different states. Scandinavia has also witnessed some change. In 1770, Norway had not yet broken away from Denmark, and Finland had not yet escaped the grasp of Sweden. Since 1770, the Hapsburg territories have disintegrated into a multitude of small states. The Ottoman Empire, now Turkey, has receded almost completely from the European continent. Poland is somewhat smaller. Russia has also retreated eastward, leaving behind a collection of medium-sized states. Many of these changes are due to the forces exerted by nationalism.

Jacques-Louis David, "Andromache Mourning Hector" (1783): Remember the Iliad? Those of you who are freshmen have no excuse for forgetting how Hector met his doom at the hands of Achilles. So what does this painting tell the viewer about Hector's sacrifice? What idea or sentiment did David wish to convey with this painting?

Jacques-Louis David, "Oath of the Horatii" (1784) : This painting represents a story that appears in Titus Livy's History of Rome. Around 670 BC, according to Livy, Rome found itself in a quarrel with Alba. For various reasons, neither state wished to fight a full-blown war and suffer the consequent losses. The Albans and Romans agreed to stage a fight between a set of triplets from each army—winner take all. If the Roman triplets, the Horatii (plural for Horatius), won, then Rome would vanquish Alba. If the Alban triplets, the Curiatii, won, then Alba won conquer Rome. Ironically enough, it so happened that the three Horatii brothers had a sister who was engaged to one of the Curiatii triplets. In this scene, we see the three Horatii making an oath before their father to conquer or die. In the meantime, the Horatii's mother and sister lament. If the Horatii win, the sister's fiance will die. If the Horatii lose, the sister will lose all three of her brothers. In the end, two of the Horatii were mortally wounded, but the third triumphed against his Alban adversaries, and Rome became master of Alba. As he rode in triumph back to Rome, the one remaining Horatius saw his sister mourning the death of her fiance. Enraged by her behavior, he exclaimed: "Take your girl's love and give it to your lover in hell. What is Rome to such as you, or your brothers, living or dead? So perish all Roman women who mourn for an enemy!" Speaking thus, he drove his sword into her heart. What does this story and this painting have to do with our story about nationalism? What kind of nation did David seem to wish for?

Jacques-Louis David, "Lictors Bringing Brutus the Bodies of His Sons" (1789): According to Livy, Lucius Junius Brutus played a pivotal role in the destruction of the Roman monarchy in 507 BC. Elected as one of two consuls in the new Roman republic, he was responsible for supervising the execution of the laws. Unfortunately, several aristocratic families, including the Vitellii and the Aquilii, conspired to bring back the monarchy. Brutus' wife was a member of the Vitellii, and somehow, her brothers enticed Brutus' sons, Titus and Tiberius, to join the plot. At the last minute, a slave informed on the conspiracy and all the participants were arrested. Brutus' sons were convicted of treason to the republic and sentenced to death. Under Brutus' supervision, the lictors stripped, flogged, and beheaded the plotters. Titus and Tiberius received their punishment just like everyone else. Here the lictors return the bodies of Brutus' sons. Brutus sits in the shadows in the left foreground while his wife and daughters lament this tragedy. Did David think Brutus did the right thing? What message did David seek to convey through this painting? What do all of these paintings by David have in common?

William Hogarth, "O the Roast Beef of Old England: The Gate of Calais" (1749): Please take the time to read Linda Colley's discussion of this etching. To what extent do you agree with Colley's assessment of this work?

Benjamin West, "The Death of General Wolfe" (1770): General James Wolfe commanded the British army that defeated a French force on the plains of Abraham and captured Quebec—an achievement that effectively expelled the French from the North American continent. This painting shows him after he received a fatal wound on the battlefield. This painting is not an accurate recreation of his death—indeed, only one or two aides were present at his death. Historical accuracy, however, was not Benjamin West's aim. Apparently, several people in the painting paid West (or West demanded payment from them) to put them on the canvas so they could obtain free advertising. Nevertheless, what message did West seek to convey in this painting? What accounts for the great array of people? What do they represent? What did West wish to say about Wolfe? In what way does this painting resemble Davids' works on this page?