Jacques-Louis David

Jacques-Louis David (French:�[.aklwi david]

; 30 August 1748 � 29 December 1825) was a Frenchpainter in the Neoclassical style,
considered to be the preeminent painter of the era. In the1780s, his cerebral brand
of history painting marked a change in taste away from Rococo frivolitytoward
classical austerity and severity and heightened feeling,[1] harmonizing with the
moralclimate of the final years of the Ancien R�gime.
Jacques-Louis David

Self-portrait, 1794 (Mus�e du Louvre)

33rd President of the National Convention

In office5 January 1794�� 20 January 1794
Preceded by Georges Auguste Couthon
Succeeded by Marc Guillaume Alexis Vadier
Personal details
Born 30 August 1748Paris, Kingdom of France
Died 29 December 1825 (aged�77)Brussels, United Kingdom of the Netherlands
Political party The Mountain
Alma mater Coll�ge des Quatre-Nations, University of Paris
Awards Prix de Rome
Commander of the Legion of Honour

Signature

David later became an active supporter of the French Revolution and friend of
MaximilienRobespierre (1758�1794), and was effectively a dictator of the arts under
the French Republic.Imprisoned after Robespierre's fall from power, he aligned
himself with yet another politicalregime upon his release: that of Napoleon, the
First Consul of France. At this time he developedhis Empire style, notable for its
use of warm Venetian colours. After Napoleon's fall from Imperialpower and the
Bourbon revival, David exiled himself to Brussels, then in the United Kingdom ofthe
Netherlands, where he remained until his death. David had many pupils, making him
thestrongest influence in French art of the early 19th century, especially academic
Salon painting.
Early life
Portrait of David as a youth, c. 1765,by his tutor Joseph-Marie Vien
Jacques-Louis David was born into a prosperous French family in Paris on 30 August
1748. Whenhe was about nine his father was killed in a duel and his mother left him
with his well-offarchitect uncles. They saw to it that he received an excellent
education at the Coll�ge desQuatre-Nations, University of Paris, but he was never a
good student�he had a facial tumor thatimpeded his speech, and he was always
preoccupied with drawing. He covered his notebookswith drawings, and he once said,
"I was always hiding behind the instructor's chair, drawing forthe duration of the
class". Soon, he desired to be a painter, but his uncles and mother wantedhim to be
an architect. He overcame the opposition, and went to learn from Fran�ois
Boucher(1703�1770), the leading painter of the time, who was also a distant
relative. Boucher was aRococo painter, but tastes were changing, and the fashion
for Rococo was giving way to a moreclassical style. Boucher decided that instead of
taking over David's tutelage, he would send Davidto his friend, Joseph-Marie Vien
(1716�1809), a painter who embraced the classical reaction toRococo. There, David
attended the Royal Academy, based in what is now the Louvre.
Mademoiselle Guimard asTerpsichore, 1774�1775, anearly work
Each year the Academy awarded an outstanding student the prestigious Prix de Rome,
whichfunded a 3- to 5-year stay in Rome. Since artists were now revisiting
classical styles, the tripprovided its winners the opportunity to study the remains
of classical antiquity and the works ofthe Italian Renaissance masters at first
hand. Called pensionnaire they were housed in the FrenchAcademy's Rome outpost,
which from the years 1737 to 1793 was the Palazzo Mancini in the Viadel Corso.
David made three consecutive attempts to win the annual prize, (with Minerva
FightingMars, Diana and Apollo Killing Niobe's Children and The Death of Seneca)
with each failureallegedly contributing to his lifelong grudge against the
institution. After his second loss in 1772,David went on a hunger strike, which
lasted two and a half days before the faculty encouragedhim to continue painting.
Confident he now had the support and backing needed to win theprize, he resumed his
studies with great zeal�only to fail to win the Prix de Rome again thefollowing
year. Finally, in 1774, David was awarded the Prix de Rome on the strength of
hispainting of Erasistratus Discovering the Cause of Antiochus' Disease, a subject
set by the judges. InOctober 1775 he made the journey to Italy with his mentor,
Joseph-Marie Vien, who had justbeen appointed director of the French Academy at
Rome.[2]
While in Italy, David mostly studied the works of 17th-century masters such as
Poussin,Caravaggio, and the Carracci.[2] Although he declared, "the Antique will
not seduce me, it lacksanimation, it does not move",[2] David filled twelve
sketchbooks with drawings that he and hisstudio used as model books for the rest of
his life. He was introduced to the painter RaphaelMengs (1728�1779), who opposed
the Rococo tendency to sweeten and trivialize ancientsubjects, advocating instead
the rigorous study of classical sources and close adherence toancient models.
Mengs' principled, historicizing approach to the representation of
classicalsubjects profoundly influenced David's pre-revolutionary painting, such as
The Vestal Virgin,probably from the 1780s. Mengs also introduced David to the
theoretical writings on ancientsculpture by Johann Joachim Winckelmann (1717�1768),
the German scholar held to be thefounder of modern art history.[3] As part of the
Prix de Rome, David toured the newly excavatedruins of Pompeii in 1779, which
deepened his belief that the persistence of classical culture wasan index of its
eternal conceptual and formal power. During the trip David also assiduouslystudied
the High Renaissance painters, Raphael making a profound and lasting impression
onthe young French artist.
Early work
Equestrian portrait ofStanislaw Kostka Potocki(1781)
Although David's fellow students at the academy found him difficult to get along
with, theyrecognized his genius. David's stay at the French Academy in Rome was
extended by a year. InJuly 1780, he returned to Paris.[2] There, he found people
ready to use their influence for him, andhe was made an official member of the
Royal Academy. He sent the Academy two paintings, andboth were included in the
Salon of 1781, a high honor. He was praised by his famouscontemporary painters, but
the administration of the Royal Academy was very hostile to thisyoung upstart.
After the Salon, the King granted David lodging in the Louvre, an ancient andmuch
desired privilege of great artists. When the contractor of the King's buildings, M.
P�coul,was arranging with David, he asked the artist to marry his daughter,
Marguerite Charlotte. Thismarriage brought him money and eventually four children.
David had about 50 of his own pupilsand was commissioned by the government to paint
"Horace defended by his Father", but he soondecided, "Only in Rome can I paint
Romans." His father-in-law provided the money he needed forthe trip, and David
headed for Rome with his wife and three of his students, one of whom, Jean-Germain
Drouais (1763�1788), was the Prix de Rome winner of that year.
Oath of the Horatii (1784)
In Rome, David painted his famous Oath of the Horatii, 1784. In this piece, the
artist referencesEnlightenment values while alluding to Rousseau's social contract.
The republican ideal of thegeneral became the central focus of the painting with
all three sons positioned in compliancewith the father. The Oath between the
characters can be read as an act of unification of men tothe binding of the state.
[4] The issue of gender roles also becomes apparent in this piece, as thewomen in
Horatii greatly contrast the group of brothers. David depicts the father with his
back tothe women, shutting them out of the oath. They also appear to be smaller in
scale and physicallyisolated from the male figures.[5] The masculine virility and
discipline displayed by the men's rigidand confident stances is also severely
contrasted to the slouching, swooning female softnesscreated in the other half of
the composition.[6] Here we see the clear division of male-femaleattributes that
confined the sexes to specific roles under Rousseau's popularized doctrine
of"separate spheres".
These revolutionary ideals are also apparent in the Distribution of Eagles. While
Oath of theHoratii and The Tennis Court Oath stress the importance of masculine
self-sacrifice for one'scountry and patriotism, the Distribution of Eagles would
ask for self-sacrifice for one's Emperor(Napoleon) and the importance of
battlefield glory.
The Death of Socrates (1787)
In 1787, David did not become the Director of the French Academy in Rome, which was
aposition he wanted dearly. The Count in charge of the appointments said David was
too young,but said he would support him in 6 to 12 years. This situation would be
one of many that wouldcause him to lash out at the Academy in years to come.
For the Salon of 1787, David exhibited his famous Death of Socrates. "Condemned to
death,Socrates, strong, calm and at peace, discusses the immortality of the soul.
Surrounded by Crito,his grieving friends and students, he is teaching,
philosophizing, and in fact, thanking the God ofHealth, Asclepius, for the hemlock
brew which will ensure a peaceful death... The wife of Socratescan be seen grieving
alone outside the chamber, dismissed for her weakness. Plato is depicted asan old
man seated at the end of the bed." Critics compared the Socrates with
Michelangelo'sSistine Ceiling and Raphael's Stanze, and one, after ten visits to
the Salon, described it as "inevery sense perfect". Denis Diderot said it looked
like he copied it from some ancient bas-relief.The painting was very much in tune
with the political climate at the time. For this painting, Davidwas not honored by
a royal "works of encouragement".
The Lictors Bring to Brutus the Bodiesof His Sons (1789)
For his next painting, David created The Lictors Bring to Brutus the Bodies of His
Sons. The workhad tremendous appeal for the time. Before the opening of the Salon,
the French Revolution hadbegun. The National Assembly had been established, and the
Bastille had fallen. The royal courtdid not want propaganda agitating the people,
so all paintings had to be checked before beinghung. David's portrait of Lavoisier,
who was a chemist and physicist as well as an active memberof the Jacobin party,
was banned by the authorities for such reasons.[7] When the newspapersreported that
the government had not allowed the showing of The Lictors Bring to Brutus theBodies
of His Sons, the people were outraged, and the royals were forced to give in. The
paintingwas hung in the exhibition, protected by art students. The painting depicts
Lucius Junius Brutus,the Roman leader, grieving for his sons. Brutus's sons had
attempted to overthrow thegovernment and restore the monarchy, so the father
ordered their death to maintain therepublic. Brutus was the heroic defender of the
republic, sacrificing his own family for the goodof the republic. On the right, the
mother holds her two daughters, and the nurse is seen on thefar right, in anguish.
Brutus sits on the left, alone, brooding, seemingly dismissing the deadbodies of
his sons. Knowing what he did was best for his country, but the tense posture of
hisfeet and toes reveals his inner turmoil. The whole painting was a Republican
symbol, andobviously had immense meaning during these times in France. It
exemplified civic virtue, a valuehighly regarded during the Revolution.
The French Revolution
In the beginning, David was a supporter of the Revolution, a friend of Robespierre,
and amember of the Jacobin Club. While others were leaving the country for new and
greateropportunities, David stayed behind to help destroy the old order; he was a
regicide who voted inthe National Convention for the Execution of Louis XVI. It is
uncertain why he did this, as therewere many more opportunities for him under the
King than the new order; some people suggestDavid's love for the classical made him
embrace everything about that period, including arepublican government.
Others believed that they found the key to the artist's revolutionary career in his
personality.Undoubtedly, David's artistic sensibility, mercurial temperament,
volatile emotions, ardententhusiasm, and fierce independence might have been
expected to help turn him against theestablished order but they did not fully
explain his devotion to the republican regime. Nor didthe vague statements of those
who insisted upon his "powerful ambition...and unusual energy ofwill" actually
account for his revolutionary connections. Those who knew him maintained
that"generous ardor", high-minded idealism and well-meaning though sometimes
fanaticalenthusiasm, rather than opportunism and jealousy, motivated his activities
during this period.
Soon, David turned his critical sights on the Royal Academy of Painting and
Sculpture. This attackwas probably caused primarily by the hypocrisy of the
organization and their personalopposition to his work, as seen in previous episodes
in David's life. The Royal Academy wascontrolled by royalists, who opposed David's
attempts at reform; so the National Assembly finallyordered it to make changes to
conform to the new constitution.
David then began work on something that would later hound him: propaganda for the
newrepublic. David's painting of Brutus was shown during the play Brutus by
Voltaire.
In 1789, Jacques-Louis David attempted to leave his artistic mark on the historical
beginnings ofthe French Revolution with his painting of The Oath of the Tennis
Court. David undertook thistask not out of personal political conviction but rather
because he was commissioned to do so.The painting was meant to commemorate the
event of the same name but was never completed.A meeting of the Estates General was
convened in May to address reforms of the monarchy.Dissent arose over whether the
three estates would meet separately, as had been tradition, or asone body. The
King's acquiescence in the demands of the upper orders led to the deputies of
theThird Estate renaming themselves as the National Assembly on 17 June. They were
locked out ofthe meeting hall three days later when they attempted to meet, and
forced to reconvene to theroyal indoor tennis court. Presided over by Jean-Sylvain
Bailly, they made a 'solemn oath never toseparate' until a national constitution
had been created. In 1789 this event was seen as a symbolof the national unity
against the ancien regime. Rejecting the current conditions, the oathsignified a
new transition in human history and ideology.[8] David was enlisted by the Society
ofFriends of the Constitution, the body that would eventually form the Jacobins, to
enshrine thissymbolic event.[9]
This instance is notable in more ways than one because it eventually led David to
finally becomeinvolved in politics as he joined the Jacobins. The picture was meant
to be massive in scale; thefigures in the foreground were to be life-sized
portraits of the counterparts, including Jean-Sylvain Bailly, the President of the
Constituent Assembly. Seeking additional funding, Davidturned to the Society of
Friends of the Constitution. The funding for the project was to comefrom over three
thousand subscribers hoping to receive a print of the image. However, when
thefunding was insufficient, the state ended up financing the project.[2]
David set out in 1790 to transform the contemporary event into a major historical
picture whichwould appear at the Salon of 1791 as a large pen-and-ink drawing. As
in the Oath of the Horatii,David represents the unity of men in the service of a
patriotic ideal. The outstretched arms whichare prominent in both works betray
David's deeply held belief that acts of republican virtue akinto those of the
Romans were being played out in France. In what was essentially an act ofintellect
and reason, David creates an air of drama in this work. The very power of the
peopleappears to be "blowing" through the scene with the stormy weather, in a sense
alluding to thestorm that would be the revolution.
Symbolism in this work of art closely represents the revolutionary events taking
place at the time.The figure in the middle is raising his right arm making the oath
that they will never disband untilthey have reached their goal of creating a
"constitution of the realm fixed upon solidfoundations".[10] The importance of this
symbol is highlighted by the fact that the crowd's armsare angled to his hand
forming a triangular shape. Additionally, the open space in the top halfcontrasted
to the commotion in the lower half serves to emphasize the magnitude of the
TennisCourt Oath.
Drawing by Jacques-Louis David ofthe Tennis Court Oath. David laterbecame a deputy
in the NationalConvention in 1792
In his attempt to depict political events of the Revolution in "real time", David
was venturingdown a new and untrodden path in the art world. However, Thomas Crow
argues that this path"proved to be less a way forward than a cul-de-sac for history
painting".[9] Essentially, the historyof the demise of David's The Tennis Court
Oath illustrates the difficulty of creating works of artthat portray current and
controversial political occurrences. Political circumstances in Franceproved too
volatile to allow the completion of the painting. The unity that was to be
symbolizedin The Tennis Court Oath no longer existed in radicalized 1792. The
National Assembly had splitbetween conservatives and radical Jacobins, both vying
for political power. By 1792 there was nolonger consensus that all the
revolutionaries at the tennis court were "heroes". A sizeablenumber of the heroes
of 1789 had become the villains of 1792. In this unstable political climateDavid's
work remained unfinished. With only a few nude figures sketched onto the
massivecanvas, David abandoned The Oath of the Tennis Court. To have completed it
would have beenpolitically unsound. After this incident, when David attempted to
make a political statement inhis paintings, he returned to the less politically
charged use of metaphor to convey his message.
When Voltaire died in 1778, the church denied him a church burial, and his body was
interrednear a monastery. A year later, Voltaire's old friends began a campaign to
have his body buriedin the Panth�on, as church property had been confiscated by the
French Government. In 1791,David was appointed to head the organizing committee for
the ceremony, a parade through thestreets of Paris to the Panth�on. Despite rain
and opposition from conservatives due to theamount of money spent, the procession
went ahead. Up to 100,000 people watched the "Fatherof the Revolution" being
carried to his resting place. This was the first of many large festivalsorganized
by David for the republic. He went on to organize festivals for martyrs that
diedfighting royalists. These funerals echoed the religious festivals of the pagan
Greeks and Romansand are seen by many as Saturnalian.
Republican costume designed byDavid. Engraving by Denon.
David incorporated many revolutionary symbols into these theatrical performances
andorchestrated ceremonial rituals, in effect radicalizing the applied arts
themselves. The mostpopular symbol for which David was responsible as propaganda
minister was drawn fromclassical Greek images; changing and transforming them with
contemporary politics. In anelaborate festival held on the anniversary of the
revolt that brought the monarchy to its knees,David's Hercules figure was revealed
in a procession following the Goddess of Liberty (Marianne).Liberty, the symbol of
Enlightenment ideals was here being overturned by the Hercules symbol;that of
strength and passion for the protection of the Republic against disunity
andfactionalism.[11] In his speech during the procession, David "explicitly
emphasized the oppositionbetween people and monarchy; Hercules was chosen, after
all, to make this opposition moreevident".[12] The ideals that David linked to his
Hercules single-handedly transformed the figurefrom a sign of the old regime into a
powerful new symbol of revolution. "David turned him intothe representation of a
collective, popular power. He took one of the favorite signs of monarchyand
reproduced, elevated, and monumentalized it into the sign of its opposite."[13]
Hercules, theimage, became to the revolutionaries, something to rally around.
In June 1791, the King made an ill-fated attempt to flee the country, but was
apprehended shortof his goal on the Austrian Netherlands border and was forced to
return under guard to Paris.Louis XVI had made secret requests to Emperor Leopold
II of Austria, Marie-Antoinette's brother,to restore him to his throne. This was
granted and Austria threatened France if the royal couplewere hurt. In reaction,
the people arrested the King. This led to an Invasion after the trials andexecution
of Louis and Marie-Antoinette. The Bourbon monarchy was destroyed by the
Frenchpeople in 1792�it would be restored after Napoleon, then destroyed again with
the Restorationof the House of Bonaparte. When the new National Convention held its
first meeting, David wassitting with his friends Jean-Paul Marat and Robespierre.
In the convention, David soon earnedthe nickname "ferocious terrorist".
Robespierre's agents discovered a secret vault containing theKing's correspondence
which proved he was trying to overthrow the government, anddemanded his execution.
The National Convention held the trial of Louis XVI; David voted for thedeath of
the King, causing his wife, Marguerite Charlotte, a royalist, to divorce him.
When Louis XVI was executed on 21 January 1793, another man had already died as
well�LouisMichel le Peletier de Saint-Fargeau. Le Peletier was killed on the
preceding day by a royalbodyguard in revenge for having voted for the death of the
King. David was called upon toorganize a funeral, and he painted Le Peletier
Assassinated. In it, the assassin's sword was seenhanging by a single strand of
horsehair above Le Peletier's body, a concept inspired by theproverbial ancient
tale of the sword of Damocles, which illustrated the insecurity of power
andposition. This underscored the courage displayed by Le Peletier and his
companions in routingan oppressive king. The sword pierces a piece of paper on
which is written "I vote the death ofthe tyrant", and as a tribute at the bottom
right of the picture David placed the inscription "Davidto Le Peletier. 20 January
1793". The painting was later destroyed by Le Peletier's royalistdaughter, and is
known by only a drawing, an engraving, and contemporary accounts.Nevertheless, this
work was important in David's career because it was the first completedpainting of
the French Revolution, made in less than three months, and a work through which
heinitiated the regeneration process that would continue with The Death of Marat,
David'smasterpiece.
The Death of Marat (1793)
On 13 July 1793, David's friend Marat was assassinated by Charlotte Corday with a
knife she hadhidden in her clothing. She gained entrance to Marat's house on the
pretense of presenting hima list of people who should be executed as enemies of
France. Marat thanked her and said thatthey would be guillotined next week upon
which Corday immediately fatally stabbed him. Shewas guillotined shortly
thereafter. Corday was of an opposing political party, whose name can beseen in the
note Marat holds in David's subsequent painting, The Death of Marat. Marat, amember
of the National Convention and a journalist, had a skin disease that caused him to
itchhorribly. The only relief he could get was in his bath over which he improvised
a desk to write hislist of suspect counter-revolutionaries who were to be quickly
tried and, if convicted, guillotined.David once again organized a spectacular
funeral, and Marat was buried in the Panth�on. Marat'sbody was to be placed upon a
Roman bed, his wound displayed and his right arm extendedholding the pen which he
had used to defend the Republic and its people. This concept was tobe complicated
by the fact that the corpse had begun to putrefy. Marat's body had to
beperiodically sprinkled with water and vinegar as the public crowded to see his
corpse prior to thefuneral on 15 and 16 July. The stench became so bad however that
the funeral had to be broughtforward to the evening of 16 July.[14]
The Death of Marat, perhaps David's most famous painting, has been called the Piet�
of therevolution. Upon presenting the painting to the convention, he said
"Citizens, the people wereagain calling for their friend; their desolate voice was
heard: David, take up your brushes...,avenge Marat... I heard the voice of the
people. I obeyed." David had to work quickly, but theresult was a simple and
powerful image.
The Death of Marat, 1793, became the leading image of the Terror and immortalized
both Maratand David in the world of the revolution. This piece stands today as "a
moving testimony to whatcan be achieved when an artist's political convictions are
directly manifested in his work".[15] Apolitical martyr was instantly created as
David portrayed Marat with all the marks of the realmurder, in a fashion which
greatly resembles that of Christ or his disciples.[16] The subjectalthough
realistically depicted remains lifeless in a rather supernatural composition. With
thesurrogate tombstone placed in front of him and the almost holy light cast upon
the whole scene;alluding to an out of this world existence. "Atheists though they
were, David and Marat, like somany other fervent social reformers of the modern
world, seem to have created a new kind ofreligion."[17] At the very center of these
beliefs, there stood the republic.
Marie Antoinette on the Wayto the Guillotine, 16 October1793. Sketched from awindow
in the rue Sainte-Honor� while the cart wentpast.
After the King's execution, war broke out between the new Republic and virtually
every majorpower in Europe. David, as a member of the Committee of General
Security, contributed directlyto the Reign of Terror.[18] David organized his last
festival: the festival of the Supreme Being.Robespierre had realized what a
tremendous propaganda tool these festivals were, and hedecided to create a new
religion, mixing moral ideas with the Republic and based on the ideas ofRousseau.
This process had already begun by confiscating church lands and requiring priests
totake an oath to the state. The festivals, called f�tes, would be the method of
indoctrination. Onthe appointed day, 20 Prairial by the revolutionary calendar,
Robespierre spoke, descended steps,and with a torch presented to him by David,
incinerated a cardboard image symbolizing atheism,revealing an image of wisdom
underneath.
Soon, the war began to go well; French troops marched across the southern half of
theNetherlands (which would later become Belgium), and the emergency that had
placed theCommittee of Public Safety in control was no more. Then plotters seized
Robespierre at theNational Convention and he was later guillotined, in effect
ending the Reign of Terror. AsRobespierre was arrested, David yelled to his friend
"if you drink hemlock, I shall drink it withyou."[19] After this, he supposedly
fell ill, and did not attend the evening session because of"stomach pain", which
saved him from being guillotined along with Robespierre. David wasarrested and
placed in prison twice, first from 2 August to 28 December 1794 and then from 29May
to 3 August 1795. Most of the time he served his sentence in the not uncomfortable
Palaisdu Luxembourg in Paris.[2] There he painted his own portrait, showing him
much younger thanhe actually was, as well as that of his jailer.
Post-revolution
The Intervention of the Sabine Women(1799)
After David's wife visited him in jail, he conceived the idea of telling the story
of The rape of theSabine women. The Sabine Women Enforcing Peace by Running between
the Combatants, alsocalled The Intervention of the Sabine Women is said to have
been painted to honor his wife, withthe theme being love prevailing over conflict.
The painting was also seen as a plea for the peopleto reunite after the bloodshed
of the revolution.[20]
David conceived a new style for this painting, one which he called the "Pure Greek
Style", asopposed to the "Roman style" of his earlier historical paintings. The new
style was influencedheavily by the work of art historian Johann Joachim
Winckelmann. In David's words, "the mostprominent general characteristics of the
Greek masterpieces are a noble simplicity and silentgreatness in pose as well as in
expression."[21] Instead of the muscularity and angularity of thefigures of his
past works, these were smoother, more feminine, and painterly.
The Emperor Napoleon in HisStudy at the Tuileries (1812)National Gallery of
Art,Washington, D.C.
This work also brought him to the attention of Napoleon. The story for the painting
is as follows:"The Romans have abducted the daughters of their neighbors, the
Sabines. To avenge thisabduction, the Sabines attacked Rome, although not
immediately�since Hersilia, the daughterof Tatius, the leader of the Sabines, had
been married to Romulus, the Roman leader, and thenhad two children by him in the
interim. Here we see Hersilia between her father and husband asshe adjures the
warriors on both sides not to take wives away from their husbands or mothersaway
from their children. The other Sabine Women join in her exhortations." During this
time, themartyrs of the Revolution were taken from the Pantheon and buried in
common ground, andrevolutionary statues were destroyed. When David was finally
released to the country, France hadchanged. His wife managed to get him released
from prison, and he wrote letters to his formerwife, and told her he never ceased
loving her. He remarried her in 1796. Finally, wholly restoredto his position, he
retreated to his studio, took pupils and for the most part, retired from politics.
In August 1796, David and many other artists signed a petition orchestrated by
Quatrem�re deQuincy which questioned the wisdom of the planned seizure of works of
art from Rome. TheDirector Barras believed that David was "tricked" into signing,
although one of David's studentsrecalled that in 1798 his master lamented the fact
that masterpieces had been imported fromItaly.
Napoleon
Napoleon at the Saint-Bernard Pass(1801)
David's close association with the Committee of Public Safety during the Terror
resulted in hissigning of the death warrant for Alexandre de Beauharnais, a minor
noble. Beauharnais's widow,Jos�phine, went on to marry Napoleon Bonaparte and
became his empress; David himselfdepicted their coronation in the Coronation of
Napoleon and Josephine, 2�December 1804.
Historical painter encouraged by thegovernment, 1814 caricature, BodleianLibrary.
David had been an admirer of Napoleon from their first meeting, struck by
Bonaparte's classicalfeatures. Requesting a sitting from the busy and impatient
general, David was able to sketchNapoleon in 1797. David recorded the face of the
conqueror of Italy, but the full composition ofNapoleon holding the peace treaty
with Austria remains unfinished. This was likely a decision byNapoleon himself
after considering the current political situation. He may have considered
thepublicity the portrait would bring about to be ill-timed. Bonaparte had high
esteem for David,and asked him to accompany him to Egypt in 1798, but David
refused, seemingly unwilling togive up the material comfort, safety, and peace of
mind he had obtained through the years.Draftsman and engraver Dominique Vivant
Denon went to Egypt instead, providing mostlydocumentary and archaeological work.
[22]
After Napoleon's successful coup d'�tat in 1799, as First Consul he commissioned
David tocommemorate his daring crossing of the Alps. The crossing of the St.
Bernard Pass had allowedthe French to surprise the Austrian army and win victory at
the Battle of Marengo on 14 June1800. Although Napoleon had crossed the Alps on a
mule, he requested that he be portrayed"calm upon a fiery steed". David complied
with Napoleon Crossing the Saint-Bernard. After theproclamation of the Empire in
1804, David became the official court painter of the regime.During this period he
took students, one of whom was the Belgian painter Pieter van Hanselaere.
The Coronation of Napoleon (1806)
One of the works David was commissioned for was The Coronation of Napoleon (1805-
1807).David was permitted to watch the event. He had plans of Notre Dame delivered
and participantsin the coronation came to his studio to pose individually, though
never the Emperor (the onlytime David obtained a sitting from Napoleon had been in
1797). David did manage to get aprivate sitting with the Empress Jos�phine and
Napoleon's sister, Caroline Murat, through theintervention of erstwhile art patron
Marshal Joachim Murat, the Emperor's brother-in-law. For hisbackground, David had
the choir of Notre Dame act as his fill-in characters. Pope Pius VII cameto sit for
the painting, and actually blessed David. Napoleon came to see the painter, stared
atthe canvas for an hour and said "David, I salute you." David had to redo several
parts of thepainting because of Napoleon's various whims, and for this painting, he
received twenty-fourthousand Francs.
David was made a Chevalier de la L�gion d'honneur in 1803. He was promoted to an
Officier in1808. And, in 1815, he was promoted to a Commandant (now Commandeur) de
la L�giond'honneur.
Exile and death
David during his exile, in 1817, paintedby his pupil Fran�ois-Joseph Navez
The Sisters Z�na�de and CharlotteBonaparte (1821)
On the Bourbons returning to power, David figured in the list of proscribed
formerrevolutionaries and Bonapartists�for having voted execution for the deposed
King Louis XVI;and for participating in the death of Louis XVII. Mistreated and
starved, the imprisoned Louis XVIIwas forced into a false confession of incest with
his mother, Queen Marie-Antoinette. This wasuntrue, as the son was separated from
his mother early and was not allowed communication withher; nevertheless, the
allegation helped earn her the guillotine. The newly restored Bourbon King,Louis
XVIII, however, granted amnesty to David and even offered him the position of
courtpainter. David refused, preferring self-exile in Brussels. There, he trained
and influenced Brusselsartists like Fran�ois-Joseph Navez and Ignace Brice, painted
Cupid and Psyche and quietly livedthe remainder of his life with his wife (whom he
had remarried). In that time, he painted smaller-scale mythological scenes, and
portraits of citizens of Brussels and Napoleonic �migr�s, such asthe Baron Gerard.
David created his last great work, Mars Being Disarmed by Venus and the Three
Graces, from 1822to 1824. In December 1823, he wrote: "This is the last picture I
want to paint, but I want tosurpass myself in it. I will put the date of my
seventy-five years on it and afterwards I will neveragain pick up my brush." The
finished painting�evoking painted porcelain because of its limpidcoloration�was
exhibited first in Brussels, then in Paris, where his former students flocked
toview it.
Mars Being Disarmed by Venus and theThree Graces, David's last great work(1824)
The exhibition was profitable�13,000 francs, after deducting operating costs, thus,
more than10,000 people visited and viewed the painting. In his later years, David
remained in full commandof his artistic faculties, even after a stroke in the
spring of 1825 disfigured his face and slurred hisspeech. In June 1825, he resolved
to embark on an improved version of his The Anger of Achilles(also known as the
Sacrifice of Iphigenie); the earlier version was completed in 1819 and is now inthe
collection of the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth, Texas. David remarked to his
friends whovisited his studio "this [painting] is what is killing me" such was his
determination to completethe work, but by October it must have already been well
advanced, as his former pupil Groswrote to congratulate him, having heard reports
of the painting's merits. By the time David died,the painting had been completed
and the commissioner Ambroise Firmin-Didot brought it backto Paris to include it in
the exhibition "Pour les grecs" that he had organised and which openedin Paris in
April 1826.
David's Deathmask (1825)
When David was leaving a theater, a carriage struck him, and he later died, on 29
December1825. At his death, some portraits were auctioned in Paris, they sold for
little; the famous Deathof Marat was exhibited in a secluded room, to avoid
outraging public sensibilities. Disallowedreturn to France for burial, for having
been a regicide of King Louis XVI, the body of the painterJacques-Louis David was
buried in Brussels and moved in 1882 to Brussels Cemetery, while somesay his heart
was buried with his wife at P�re Lachaise Cemetery, Paris.
Freemasonry
The theme of the oath found in several works like The Oath of the Tennis Court, The
Distributionof the Eagles, and Leonidas at Thermopylae, was perhaps inspired by the
rituals of Freemasonry.In 1989 during the "David against David" conference Albert
Boime was able to prove, on thebasis of a document dated in 1787, the painter's
membership in the "La Moderation" MasonicLodge.[23][24]
Medical analysis of David's face
Jacques-Louis David's facial abnormalities were traditionally reported to be a
consequence of adeep facial sword wound after a fencing incident. These left him
with a noticeable asymmetryduring facial expression and resulted in his difficulty
in eating or speaking (he could notpronounce some consonants such as the letter
'r'). A sword scar wound on the left side of hisface is present in his self-
portrait and sculptures and corresponds to some of the buccalbranches of the facial
nerve. An injury to this nerve and its branches are likely to have resulted inthe
difficulties with his left facial movement.
Furthermore, as a result of this injury, he suffered from a growth on his face that
biographers andart historians have defined as a benign tumor. These, however, may
have been a granuloma, oreven a post-traumatic neuroma.[25] As historian Simon
Schama has pointed out, witty banter andpublic speaking ability were key aspects of
the social culture of 18th-century France. In light ofthese cultural keystones,
David's tumor would have been a heavy obstacle in his social life.[26]David was
sometimes referred to as "David of the Tumor".[27]
Portraiture
In addition to his history paintings, David completed a number of privately
commissionedportraits. Warren Roberts, among others, has pointed out the contrast
between David's "publicstyle" of painting, as shown in his history paintings, and
his "private style", as shown in hisportraits.[28] His portraits were characterized
by a sense of truth and realism. He focused ondefining his subjects' features and
characters without idealizing them.[29] This is different fromthe style seen in his
historical paintings, in which he idealizes his figures' features and bodies
toalign with Greek and Roman ideals of beauty.[30] He puts a great deal of detail
into his portraits,defining smaller features like hands and fabric. The
compositions of his portraits remain simplewith blank backgrounds that allow the
viewer to focus on the details of the subject.
The portrait he did of his wife (1813) is an example of his typical portrait style.
[28] Thebackground is dark and simple without any clues as to the setting, which
forces the viewer tofocus entirely on her. Her features are un-idealized and
truthful to her appearance.[28] There is agreat amount of detail that can be seen
in his attention to portraying the satin material of thedress she wears, the
drapery of the scarf around her, and her hands which rest in her lap.
Emmanuel Joseph Siey�s,1817
In the painting of Brutus (1789), the man and his wife are separated, both morally
and physically.Paintings like these, depicting the great strength of patriotic
sacrifice, made David a popular heroof the revolution.[28]
In the Portrait of Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier and his wife (1788), the man and his
wife are tiedtogether in an intimate pose. She leans on his shoulder while he
pauses from his work to look upat her. David casts them in a soft light, not in the
sharp contrast of Brutus or of the Horatii. Alsoof interest�Lavoisier was a tax
collector, as well as a famous chemist. Though he spent some ofhis money trying to
clean up swamps and eradicate malaria, he was nonetheless sent to theguillotine
during the Reign of Terror as an enemy of the people. David, then a powerful
memberof the National Assembly, stood idly by and watched.[31]
Other portraits include paintings of his sister-in-law and her husband, Madame and
MonsieurSeriziat. The picture of Monsieur Seriziat depicts a man of wealth, sitting
comfortably with hishorse-riding equipment. The picture of the Madame shows her
wearing an unadorned whitedress, holding her young child's hand as they lean
against a bed. David painted these portraits ofMadame and Monsieur Seriziat out of
gratitude for letting him stay with them after he was injail.[32]
Towards the end of David's life, he painted a portrait of his old friend Abb�
Siey�s. Both had beeninvolved in the Revolution, both had survived the purging of
political radicals that followed thereign of terror.
Shift in attitude
The shift in David's perspective played an important role in the paintings of
David's later life,including this one of Siey�s.[33] During the height of The
Terror, David was an ardent supporter ofradicals such as Robespierre and Marat, and
twice offered up his life in their defense. Heorganized revolutionary festivals and
painted portraits of martyrs of the revolution, such asLepeletier, who was
assassinated for voting for the death of the king. David was an impassionedspeaker
at times in the National Assembly. In speaking to the Assembly about the young
boynamed Bara, another martyr of the revolution, David said, "O Bara! O Viala! The
blood that youhave spread still smokes; it rises toward Heaven and cries for
vengeance."[34]
After Robespierre was sent to the guillotine, however, David was imprisoned and
changed theattitude of his rhetoric. During his imprisonment he wrote many letters,
pleading his innocence.In one he wrote, "I am prevented from returning to my
atelier, which, alas, I should never haveleft. I believed that in accepting the
most honorable position, but very difficult to fill, that oflegislator, that a
righteous heart would suffice, but I lacked the second quality,understanding."[35]
Later, while explaining his developing "Grecian style" for paintings such as The
Intervention of theSabine Women, David further commented on a shift in attitude:
"In all human activity the violentand transitory develops first; repose and
profundity appear last. The recognition of these latterqualities requires time;
only great masters have them, while their pupils have access only toviolent
passions."[36]
Legacy
Seventy-five years after hisdeath, David is painted by thepainter Emmanuel Van
DenB�ssche, (Mus�e de laR�volution fran�aise)
Jacques-Louis David was, in his time, regarded as the leading painter in France,
and arguably allof Western Europe; many of the painters honored by the restored
Bourbons following the FrenchRevolution had been David's pupils.[37] David's
student Antoine-Jean Gros for example, wasmade a Baron and honored by Napoleon
Bonaparte's court.[37] Another pupil of David's, JeanAuguste Dominique Ingres
became the most important artist of the restored Royal Academy andthe figurehead of
the Neoclassical school of art, engaging the increasingly popular Romanticschool of
art that was beginning to challenge Neoclassicism.[37] David invested in the
formationof young artists for the Rome Prize, which was also a way to pursue his
old rivalry with othercontemporary painters such as Joseph-Beno�t Suv�e, who had
also started teaching classes.[29] Tobe one of David's students was considered
prestigious and earned his students a lifetimereputation.[38] He called on the more
advanced students, such as J�r�me-Martin Langlois, to helphim paint his large
canvases. Musician and artist Therese Emilie Henriette Winkel; and painterJean
Baptiste Vermay also studied with David.[39][40]
Despite David's reputation, he was more fiercely criticized right after his death
than at any pointduring his life. His style came under the most serious criticism
for being static, rigid, and uniformthroughout all his work. David's art was also
attacked for being cold and lacking warmth.[41]David, however, made his career
precisely by challenging what he saw as the earlier rigidity andconformity of the
French Royal Academy's approach to art.[42] David's later works also reflect
hisgrowth in the development of the Empire style, notable for its dynamism and warm
colors. It islikely that much of the criticism of David following his death came
from David's opponents;during his lifetime David made a great many enemies with his
competitive and arrogantpersonality as well as his role in the Terror.[38] David
sent many people to the guillotine andpersonally signed the death warrants for King
Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette. One significantepisode in David's political career
that earned him a great deal of contempt was the execution ofEmilie Chalgrin. A
fellow painter Carle Vernet had approached David, who was on the Committeeof Public
Safety, requesting him to intervene on behalf of his sister, Chalgrin. She had
beenaccused of crimes against the Republic, most notably possessing stolen items.
[43] David refusedto intervene in her favor, and she was executed. Vernet blamed
David for her death, and theepisode followed him for the rest of his life and
after.
In the last 50 years David has enjoyed a revival in popular favor and in 1948 his
two-hundredthbirthday was celebrated with an exhibition at the Mus�e de l'Orangerie
in Paris and at Versaillesshowing his life's works.[44] Following World War II,
Jacques-Louis David was increasinglyregarded as a symbol of French national pride
and identity, as well as a vital force in thedevelopment of European and French art
in the modern era.[45] The birth of Romanticism istraditionally credited to the
paintings of eighteenth-century French artists such as Jacques-LouisDavid.[46]
There are streets named after David in the French cities of Carcassonne and
Montpellier.
Jean-Nicolas Laugier after Jacques-Louis David, Leonidas atThermoplyae, published
1826, engraving
Filmography
Danton (Andrzej Wajda, France, 1982) � Historical drama. Many scenes include David
as a silentcharacter watching and drawing. The film focuses on the period of the
Terror.
Gallery

Jupiter et Antiope (1768), an early work showing the influence of Greuze[47]

Diana and Apollo Piercing Niobe's Children with their Arrows (1772), Dallas Museum
of Art
Antiochus and Stratonica (1774), �cole nationale sup�rieure des Beaux-Arts

Patroclus, study (1780), Mus�e Thomas-Henry

Hector's body (1778)

Portrait of Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier and his wife (1788), Metropolitan Museum of

Art, New York

Paris and Helen (1788), Mus�e du Louvre, Paris (detail)

Portrait of Anne-Marie-Louise Th�lusson, Comtesse de Sorcy (1790), Neue Pinakothek,

Munich

Portrait of Pierre S�riziat, (1795), Louvre Museum

Portrait of Madame de Verninac (1798�1799), born Henriette Delacroix, elder sister

of Eug�neDelacroix, Mus�e du Louvre, Paris

Madame R�camier (1800), Mus�e du Louvre, Paris

Suzanne Le Peletier de Saint-Fargeau (1804), The J. Paul Getty Museum

Portrait of Pope Pius VII (1805), Mus�e du Louvre, Paris

Marguerite-Charlotte David (1813), National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.

�tienne-Maurice G�rard (1816), Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

The Comtesse Vilain XIIII and Her Daughter (1816), National Gallery, London

Portrait of the Comte de Turenne (1816), Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen

Cupid and Psyche (1817), Cleveland Museum of Art

The Farewell of Telemachus and Eucharis (1818), J. Paul Getty Museum

The Anger of Achilles (1819), Kimbell Art Museum

See also
Napoleon legacy and memory
Neoclassicism in France

References
Matthew Collings. "Feelings". This Is Civilisation. Season 1. Episode 2. 2007.
Lee, Simon. "David, Jacques-Louis." Grove Art Online. Oxford Art Online. 14
November 2014.<http://www.oxfordartonline.com/subscriber/article/grove/art/
T021541>.
Alex Potts, Flesh and the Ideal: Winckelmann and the Origins of Art History (New
Haven: Yale UniversityPress, 2000).
Boime 1987, p.�394.
Boime 1987, p.�399.
Boime 1987, p.�398.
Honour 1977, p.�72.
Roberts, Warren (2000). Jaques-Louis David and Jean-Louis Prieur revolutionary
artists�: the public, thepopulace, and images of the French revolution. New York:
State university of New York press. p.�229.ISBN�0791442888.

Crow 2007.
Bordes 2005, p.�??.
Hunt 2004, p.�97.
Hunt 2004, p.�99.
Hunt 2004, p.�103.
Schama 1989, p.�83.
Boime 1987, p.�454.
Rosenblum 1969, p.�83.
Janson & Rosenblum 1984, p.�30.
Boime 1987, p.�442.
Carlyle, p. 384.
Roberts 1992, pp.�90�112.
Roberts 1992, pp.�90�115.
Bordes 2005, pp.�26-28.
Albert, Boime (1993). "Les th�mes du serment, David et la Franc-ma�onnerie". In
Michel, R�gis (ed.).David contre David (in French). Paris: Documentation Fran�aise.
p.�83. ISBN�9782110026132.

Pierrat, Emmanuel; Kupferman, Laurent (2013). Le Paris des francs-ma�ons (in

French). Paris: Cherchemidi. ISBN�978-2749129518.

Ashrafian, H. Jacques-Louis David and his post-traumatic facial pathology. J R Soc

Med 2007;100:341-342.
Schama, Simon. The Power of Art: Jacques-Louis
David.https://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/powerofart/david.shtml
Roberts 1992, pp.�1�30.
Roberts 1992, pp.�42�45.
Bordes 2005.
Wilson, Elizabeth Barkley. "Jacques-Louis David." Smithsonian 29, no. 5 (August
1998): 80. AcademicSearch Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed 18 November 2017).
Roberts 1992, pp.�43�45.
Lajer-Burcharth, Ewa. �Necklines: The Art of Jacques-Louis David After the Terror.�
New Haven: YaleUniversity Press, 1999.
Roberts 1992, pp.�90�150.
Roberts 1992, pp.�88�92.
Roberts 1992, pp.�90�94.
Roberts 1992, pp.�100�112.
Lee, Simon. David. p.�321.

Lee, Simon. David. pp.�321�322.

"Winckel, Therese aus dem - Sophie Drinker Institut". www.sophie-drinker-

institut.de. Retrieved 14 February 2022.
"Cultural Anthropology". Abstractsin Anthropology. 69 (3): 440�589. October 2014.
doi:10.1177/000134551406900302. ISSN�0001-3455.S2CID�220318250.
Lee, Simon. David. p.�322.

Roberts 1992, p.�14.

Lee, Simon. David. p.�151.

Lee, Simon. David. p.�326.

Lee, Simon. David. p.�328.

Lee Palmer, Allison. Historical Dictionary of Romantic Art and Architecture.

p.�304.

Sloane, J. C., Wisdom, J. M., & William Hayes Ackland Memorial Art Center. 1978.
French NineteenthCentury Oil Sketches: David to Degas. Chapel Hill, N.C: The
University. p. 50

Sources
Boime, Albert (1987), Social History of Modern Art: Art in the Age of Revolution,
1750�1800volume 1, Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, ISBN�0-226-
06332-1

Bordes, Philippe (1988), David, Paris, FRA: Hazan, ISBN�2-85025-173-9

Bordes, Philippe (2005), Jacques-Louis David: From Empire to Exile, New Haven,
Connecticut: Yale University Press, ISBN�978-0300104479, retrieved 23 February 2020

Brookner, Anita, Jacques-Louis David, Chatto & Windus (1980)

Carlyle, Thomas (1860) [1837]. The French Revolution: A History. Vol.�II. New York:
Harper & Bros. OCLC�14208955.

Chodorow, Stanley, et al. The Mainstream of Civilization. New York: The Harcourt
Press (1994)pg. 594
Crow, Thomas E. (1995), Emulation: Making Artists for Revolutionary France
(1st�ed.), NewHaven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, ISBN�0-300-06093-9

Crow, Thomas E. (2007), "Patriotism and Virtue: David to the Young Ingres", in
Eisenman,Stephen F. (ed.), Nineteenth Century Art: A Critical History (3rd�ed.),
New York City, New York:Thames & Hudson, pp.�18�54, ISBN�978-0-500-28683-8

Del�cluze, E., Louis David, son �cole et son temps, Paris, (1855) re-edition Macula
(1983)
Dowd, David, Pageant-Master of the Republic, Lincoln, University of Nebraska Press,
(1948)
Honour, Hugh (1977), Neo-Classicism, New York City, New York: Penguin Books,
ISBN�0-14-013760-2

Humbert, Agn�s, Louis David, peintre et conventionnel: essai de critique marxiste,

Paris, Editionssociales internationales (1936)
Humbert, Agn�s, Louis David, collection des Ma�tres, 60 illustrations, Paris, Braun
(1940)
Hunt, Lynn (2004), Politics, Culture, and Class in the French Revolution, Los
Angeles, California:University of California Press, ISBN�0-520-24156-8

Janson, Horst Waldemar; Rosenblum, Robert (1984), 19th-Century Art, New York City,
NewYork: Harry Abrams, ISBN�0-13-622621-3
Johnson, Dorothy, Jacques-Louis David. New Perspectives, Newark (2006)
Lajer-Burcharth, Ewa, Necklines. The art of Jacques-Louis David after the Terror,
ed. YaleUniversity Press, New Haven London (1999)
Lee, Simon, David, Phaidon, London (1999). ISBN�0714838047
L�v�que, Jean-Jacques, Jacques-Louis David �dition Acr Paris (1989)
Leymarie, Jean, French Painting, the 19th century, Cleveland (1962)
Lindsay, Jack, Death of the Hero, London, Studio Books (1960)
Malvone, Laura, L'�v�nement politique en peinture. A propos du Marat de David in
M�langes del'�cole fran�aise de Rome, Italie et M�diterran�e 106, 1 (1994)
Michel, R. (ed), David contre David, actes du colloque au Louvre du 6-10 d�cembre
1989, Paris(1993)
Monneret, Sophie Monneret, David et le n�oclassicisme, ed. Terrail, Paris (1998)
No�l, Bernard, David, �d. Flammarion, Paris (1989)
Rosenblum, Robert (1969), Transformations in Late Eighteenth Century Art (1st
paperback�ed.),Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, ISBN�0-691-00302-
5

Roberts, Warren (1 February 1992), Jacques-Louis David, Revolutionary Artist: Art,

Politics, andthe French Revolution, The University of North Carolina Press, ISBN�0-
8078-4350-4

Rosenberg, Pierre, Prat, Louis-Antoine, Jacques-Louis David 1748-1825. Catalogue

raisonn� desdessins, 2 volumes, �d. Leonardo Arte, Milan (2002)
Rosenberg, Pierre, Peronnet, Benjamin, Un album in�dit de David in Revue de l'art,
n�142(2003�04), pp.�45�83 (complete the previous reference)
Sahut, Marie-Catherine & Michel, R�gis, David, l'art et le politique, coll.
"D�couvertesGallimard" (n� 46), s�rie Peinture. �ditions Gallimard et RMN Paris
(1988)
Sainte-Fare Garnot, N., Jacques-Louis David 1748-1825, Paris, Ed. Chaudun (2005)
Schama, Simon (1989). Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution. Penguin
Books.

Schnapper, Antoine, David t�moin de son temps, Office du Livre, Fribourg, (1980)
Th�voz, Michel, Le th��tre du crime. Essai sur la peinture de David, �d. de Minuit,
Paris (1989)
Vanden Berghe, Marc, Plesca, Ioana, Nouvelles perspectives sur la Mort de Marat:
entre mod�lej�suite et r�f�rences mythologiques, Bruxelles (2004) / New
Perspectives on David's Death ofMarat, Brussels (2004) - online on www.art-
chitecture.net/publications.php [1]
Vanden Berghe, Marc, Plesca, Ioana, Lepelletier de Saint-Fargeau sur son lit de
mort parJacques-Louis David: saint S�bastien r�volutionnaire, miroir multir�f�renc�
de Rome, Brussels(2005) - online on www.art-chitecture.net/publications.php [2]
Vaughan, William and Weston, Helen (eds),Jacques-Louis David's Marat, Cambridge
(2000)
The Death of Socrates. Retrieved29 June 2005. New York Med.
Jacques-Louis David, on An AbridgedHistory of Europe. Retrieved 29 June 2005
J.L. David Archived 6 August 2002 at theWayback Machine on CGFA. Retrieved 29 June
2005

Further reading
French painting 1774-1830: the Age of Revolution. New York; Detroit: The
Metropolitan Museum of Art;The Detroit Institute of Arts. 1975. (see index)

External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Jacques-Louis David.
A Closer Look at David's Consecration of Napoleon multimedia feature; Louvre museum
official website
The Intervention of the Sabines (Louvre museum)
Web Gallery of Art
www.jacqueslouisdavid.org 101 paintings by Jacques-Louis David
Jacques-Louis David at Olga's Gallery
Jacques-Louis David in the "History of Art"
smARThistory: Death of Socrates Archived 2 June 2007 at the WaybackMachine
Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute 2005 exhibition, Jacques-Louis David:
Empire to Exile Archived 16June 2018 at the Wayback Machine
The equestrian portrait of Stanislaw Kostka Potocki at the Wilanow Palace Museum

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jacques-

Louis_David&oldid=1134200237"