John Trumbull the Revolutionary War Artist & the Neoclassic Art Movement
Today in the 21st century oftentimes people do not reflect on our early national history. With the deluge of social media and entertainment outlets out there nowadays; people seem to take an apathetic attitude in regard to our nation’s founding after the Revolutionary War in which America won its independence in 1776. Artists such as John Trumbull and Emanuel Leutz have captured history on canvas. These great works of art paint an immortal picture of the patriotism of early Americans fighting for their freedom from the British, as well the post war in which our young nation was just beginning to grasp what they’d accomplished. This culminated into a climax with 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence.
The art period at this time was Neoclassicism which is defined according to the Oxford Dictionary as. “The revival of a classical style or treatment in art, literature, architecture, or music”. It is inspired and rooted in artistic style that originated in Rome in the mid-18th century. To juxtapose this, consider the Roman artwork by Jacques-Louis David, The Oath of Horatii which was created on 1784; now compare that to John Trumbulls, Declaration of Independence which was created in 1817 then the similarities become evident. The subjects seem to move from the left to the right. The brushwork is similar and contrasts with traditionally with academic practices. While artists were given some liberal leeway in the past, it seems this early historical art had tried to remain historically accurate. For example, in Trumbull’s painting he only drew 42 out of the 56 signers because of likeness could not be obtained for all the signers. Further evidence of Trumbull’s patriotism and attention to detail can be seen in a letter he wrote to Thomas Jefferson on December 26, 1816: “…I hope it will be thought that the declaration of Independence with portraits of those eminent Patriots & Statesmen…will be appropriate Ornaments for the Halls of the Senate & the House of Representatives.”[1]
James Cooper wrote in Modern Age Quarterly regarding his critique of modern art in which he described his culture at times is “ugly, pornographic, [and] anti-religious”.[2] In it he describes a decline in the last 25 years due to liberalism and modernism at eroding culture of the past. Beauty was important to Cooper and he felt it was being lost in modern art. He points towards Frederick Hart who was commissioned to do a sculpture above the entrance to the Washington National Cathedral, describing it as “the most important and beautiful work of public art since Daniel Chester French’s Abraham Lincoln…”[3] The public art modern art scene was in a sense moving away from beauty and culminating with the Piss Christ photographs it was clear the art world was going in the wrong direction. Cultural decline happened further post-9/11 in which art conservatives further abandoned or ignored beautiful art pieces and now sought out postmodern minimalist and neo-Dada works.[4] The eventually led to the removal of classics due to perceptions about these old art masters connections to an oppressive Western characters as being “racist, homophobic and misogynist, oppressing woman, non-whites, homosexuals, and the poor”[5] This led to a rejection of this classical art style in modern times. Thomas Jefferson and John Trumbull understood the qualities and aesthetics of beauty, and it was during a visit to Paris they saw Roman temples and art pieces such as Jacques Louis David’s Oath of Horatii (1784).[6] Perhaps this is where artists such as Trumbull fostered their appreciation of classical art style in which became known as neoclassicism. It is clear that this period of time around the
Revolutionary war that the neoclassic period was influenced by classical art style and its attention to beauty and aesthetics.
John Trumbull is conventionally thought of today as a “flaming revolutionist”, similar to Thomas Paine and Philip Freneau.[7] To gain a greater understanding of this artist one must look towards his younger years prior to the Revolutionary War. In 1774 he gained legal training by serving under the tutelage of John Adams. Here he was given a metaphorical front-row seat to the preparations of his adopted country for opposing Great Britain.[8] Indeed he seems at times to be a pacifist who does not advocate violence. He was witness to the Boston Tea Party which happened as a result of the Boston Port Bill and was seen as an act of tyranny. Consequently, Trumbull wrote in one of his poems, “Ours be manly firmness of the sage…”[9] He had hoped violence would not happen but instead wisdom would prevail. He abhorred violence and sought havens through America in which to find sanctuary from violent Revolutionists.[10] John Trumbull was also a poet who wrote M’Fingal. It was because of such work he became known as a revolutionary[11], Trumbull would eventually become even more famous by working closely with Thomas Jefferson. Trumbull’s most famous work is The Declaration of Independence which hangs in the United States Capitol Rotunda and a smaller version at Yale University Art Gallery.
John Trumbull’s The Declaration of Independence depicts the signing of the draft of the DOI by the founding fathers of our nation post-Revolutionary War. It could be assumed by the previous characterization of Trumbull that his unique position in history placed him at the forefront of this important event. President James Madison had commissioned Trumbull to create four paintings of important events from the American Revolution.[12] Later on Trumbull fostered a friendship with Thomas Jefferson and it was at this time that his paintings became to be considered for ornamentation of the nation’s Capital. Thomas Jefferson once wrote in a letter to Trumbull, “I hope they will do it, and honor themselves, their country, and yourself by preserving these monuments of our revolutionary achievements”.[13] Arguments can be made whether the Declaration of Independence painting was the highest form of art, but it was clear artists at the time were influenced by classical art styles.
Among Trumbull’s most famous artworks the Declaration of Independence, are such famous works: The Battle of Trenton, Battle at Bunker’s Hill, and Death of General Montgomery.[14] Time and again one can contrast these neoclassic paintings the pioneering artwork The Oath of Horatii and the characteristics are very prevalent. The attention to accurate details, three dimensional plane, horizon line, depth, characters portrayed in an idealized state, the grid, and blending and hiding of the paint pigments.
Attention to the details is important in neoclassic work, and contrasted against Jackson Pollock’s abstract expressionism paintings the focus is on obtaining an accurate portrayal of historical events rather than the paint pigments and the focus purely on placing it on canvas. Evidence of this attention of detail was shown when John Trumbull received a letter demanding to know why the Washington version of Declaration of Independence was missing the portraits of the Virginia delegation — Frances L. Lee, Thomas Nelson, and Carter Bauxton. Trumbull told the congressmen demanding to know that they were omitted because no portraits could be obtained of them and no one offered to procure them. Eventually material was provided and the delegation was added in, however in a different version of the painting which was provided to Yale University.[15] There also appears to be some ego involved in getting people included in this type of art-work, clearly people wanted to be represented accurately and prominently because of the historical significance and prestige that would accompany it. Picture keys had to accompany the artwork, these keys would be used to identify members of the painting. In 1818 the fourth version was created; the Durand Key and it was used to identify the 48 heads of the Yale Picture.[16]
Another important figure in John Trumbull’s life was Thomas Jefferson. According to classical education there were three castes mankind belong to; swordmen, wordmen, and workmen. The first two are privileged castes and the workmen are obliged to assist them by providing labor and to feed the other two castes appetite for leisure.[17] Jefferson belonged to the privileged class, while John Trumbull would fall under workmen because artists, builders, sculptors, and musicians were considered workmen. Jefferson would remunerate on the painting, while Trumbull was simply the creator of his various artworks. Regardless, it seems Trumbull had an insider’s position being that he was able to work so closely with Thomas Jefferson. Jacques-Louis David had be praised by Jefferson even going so far as to say, “[he did not] feel an interest in any pencil but that of David’s.”[18] He particularly enjoyed works such as The Oath of Horatii in which the “classical quality of ancient republican virtue”[19] was displayed. It is clear that John Trumbull was influenced by David and attempted to emulate him. Ironically Jefferson went on to disapprove of Trumbull’s licentia pictoris that were used to show American history. Jefferson had appreciation for artwork but seems to have taken issue with the Trumbull renderings. Jefferson felt that paintings should serve as models for future generations. It was important to have this virtue and any “inordinate passion” was a waste of time to reason and fact.[20]
Despite the apparent attention to detail John Trumbull took, what is apparent is that his depictions of history were controversial at the time. For example, in Hannah Spahn’s Thomas Jefferson, Time, and History she tells of the time that Thomas Jefferson is confronted by the grandson of Samuel Adams, Samuel Adams Wells. Young Wells strongly disapproved of the “factual inaccuracies in Trumbull’s Declaration of Independence.”[21] Ironically Jefferson would go to tell Wells that he had never seen this painting. Then again Jefferson excuses Trumbull’s licentia pictoris in Surrender of Lord Cornwallis despite well-known fact that Cornwallis did not appear at the surrender after being excused by General Washington.[22] It appears Jefferson’s opinion of Trumbull’s artwork had changed late in life. The takeaway here is that neoclassic art could be controversial and prominent people took offense if not depicted in an accurate manner. Spahn then provides a concise phrase that should provide a better understanding, “As openly mimetic works that did not pretend to relate what had actually happened, history paintings could not really “lie.””[23] And then “painting generally appeared as a medium that was more likely to achieve advantageous didactic effects: it was better equipped to make essential historical events accessible, through the sense of sight, to the moral sense.”[24] Therefore Trumbull was defended by Jefferson despite the liberties he took in his paintings, although inaccurate in depiction it could be excused.
In conclusion, prominent artists such as John Trumbull were influenced by neoclassic pioneers such as Jacques-Louis David. The influences David had on American History artists at the time is clearly on display in Trumbull’s artwork. Trumbull is considered a revolutionary and a staunch patriot nowadays. But clearly the artwork he made during his lifetime was drawn from an inspiration to record in perpetuity the important events surrounding our young nation. Accuracy and attention of detail was evident through his artwork, although as an artist he took liberties in events to give them a more dramatic effect. An example of this is shown in Trumbull’s Surrender of Lord Cornwallis. This was a falsehood because Cornwallis was excused by General Washington from appearing. This change was forgiven later on because the changes were important to politicians who wanted history to be shown in a certain way.
Annotated Bibliography
Cooper, James F. “The Problem With Modern Art; Or, Why Beautiful Art Matters”. Modern Age Quarterly 49. №4 (Fall 2007): 343–350
The author in Modern Age Quarterly is a conservative of artwork styles who argues that beauty has been lost in modern avant-garde artwork and instead has been dismissed in favor of modernism. Important for this article because it contrasts neoclassic and modernism art movements.
Cowie, Alexander. “John Trumbull as Revolutionist”. American Literature 3, no. 3 (1931): 287–95.
In American Literature, Cowie discusses John Trumbull, one of the preeminent Revolutionary War artists living at the time. In his introduction he describes how it was customary to describe Trumbull as a revolutionist and to associate his character as having all-encompassing love of country. Cowie’s article focuses on the life and background of John Trumbull and provides a historical perspective of the person and how his rhetoric and artwork helped shape early America. On page 289, Cowie describes how John Trumbull’s poetry was used to influence politics and how the Federalists attempted to use it to portray Democratic-Republicans as destabilizing to the government.
Hazleton, John H. ‘The Historical Value of Trumbull’s “declaration of Independence”’. The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 31, no. 1 (1907): 30–42.
In The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, John Hazleton looks closer at the famous John Trumbull painting “The Declaration of Independence”. Hazleton discusses Thomas Jefferson and how he felt in his rough draft. The artwork of John Trumbull is not focused on whether or not it was the highest form of art, but it’s celebrated because of its accurate portrayal of the signing. This document ties into my research because Hazleton provides background and context of the importance of artwork in Revolutionary War and the nation’s founding history.
Jaffe, Irma B. ‘Trumbull’s “the Declaration of Independence:” Keys and Dates’. American Art Journal 3, no. 2 (1971): 41–49.
This article is necessary in providing key dates when John Trumbull’s ‘Declaration of Independence’ was first painted and exhibited. Also in this article included is a letter from John Trumbull explaining why he could not obtain a portrait of three dead members of the Virginia delegation. Detailed information on the participants of the art piece are also included. This level of detail shows that John Trumbull took his craft seriously and wanted to depict accurately who attended the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
Kallen, H. M. “The Arts and Thomas Jefferson”. Ethics 53, no. 4 (1943): 269–283.
Analyzing and viewing artwork from Trumbull and Leutze is important but it’s also important to understand the culture in America. Particularly where Thomas Jefferson grew up, Kallen paints a vivid image of the State of Virgina and what people were like. Kallen discusses three groups of mankind: swordsmen, wordmen, and workmen. He gives a detailed account of what these men were like, and it is with this context I feel provides valuable background on early American artists. Those artists who immortalized history in their paintings, so that future generations could view and gain a greater appreciation of the nations founders.
Spahn, Hannah. “Thomas Jefferson, Time, and History” (University of Virginia Press, 2011): 155–156
Part of a much longer book about Thomas Jefferson’s history, in this book she talks about Jefferson’s appreciation of the artwork of John Trumbull. Important for this paper because she discusses how political pressure put on Jefferson because of historical inaccuracies in Trumbull’s artwork were defended by the former president despite his earlier reservations.
[1] John H. Hazleton, ‘The Historical Value of Trumbull’s “declaration of Independence,”’ The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 31 (1907): 33.
[2] James F. Cooper, “The Problem With Modern Art; Or, Why Beautiful Art Matters,” Modern Age Quarterly 49 (Fall 2007): 347
[3] Ibid., 344.
[4] Ibid., 345.
[5] Ibid., 346.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Alexander Cowie, “John Trumbull as Revolutionist,” American Literature 3 (1931): 287.
[8] Ibid., 290.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid., 295.
[12] Hazleton, “declaration of Independence,” 32.
[13] Hazleton, “declaration of Independence,” 33.
[14] Irma B. Jaffe, ‘Trumbull’s “The Declaration of Independence:” Keys and Dates,’ American Art Journal 3 (1971): 42.
[15] Ibid.
[16] Ibid., 49.
[17] H. M. Kallen, “The Arts and Thomas Jefferson,” Ethics 53 (1943): 269
[18] Ibid., 276.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Ibid., 277.
[21]Hannah Spahn, “Thomas Jefferson, Time, and History”, 155.
[22] Ibid.
[23] Ibid., 156.
[24] Ibid.
