The United States Capitol is a building that symbolizes the qualities of the American
Nation while simultaneously assuming numerous material functions. It is a veritable
manifestation of e pluribus unum: popularly elected representatives from each of the fifty
states assemble to construct legislation based on the needs of those citizens who support them. It
is also a building where the powers of the Executive Branch are monitored and checked, so that
one person might not dictate a sovereign will to many. The building also fulfills a social role;
it is a place where foreign dignitaries are received, where deceased national heroes
lie in state, and where ordinary tourists are attracted by the thousands.
If these type of material concerns were paramount, they theoretically could take place in any
building with four walls, a roof, and a sign that says "U.S. Capitol" on the front door. However,
the aesthetic nature of the building seems of equal if not greater importance. As Charles
Sumner stated on the Senate Floor in July 1866:
Sumner continued his address by stating that, since the construction of the building was of such a
high artistic quality that "[i]t should not receive in the way of ornamentation anything which is
not a work of art." (168). The fact that the purpose of the speech was to block Miss Vinnie
Ream's comission as sculptor for the full-length statue of Abraham Lincoln, rather than to extoll
the virtues of national art and architecture, signifies that the question of exactly what kind of art
should be displayed inside the Capitol has been a source of debate over the years.
One of the largest collections of art displayed in the Capitol is in the form of portraiture, and
there are many variables to consider when studying it. Perhaps the most unavoidable is that the
majority of the works are located in areas restricted to the general public. Unlike the grand
historical paintings of the Rotunda, available for public consumption and
inspiration, only members of Congress are ever meant to see the portraits on a regular basis. In
addition, the occasional movement of different pieces from room to room over time suggests
that particular individuals from our political heritage-- and the national ideals they embodied in
their lifetime-- are chosen to be associated with the function of that particular room. The
evocation of mythic figures in these rooms is highly significant; decisions
regarding which image of the figures to display presents a further layer of meaning. These issues
seem to be addressed with each portrait that hangs in the building, which leads to the conclusion
that
their final placement conveys a rather deliberate symbolic code to the viewer.
A comparison with other paintings in the Capitol may illuminate this. The historical paintings
which make up the group in the Rotunda, and a few other notable works such as The First
Reading of the Emancipation Proclamation, commemorate single moments in time which
most
citizens and lawmakers agree to be both highly important and highly admirable. These scenes,
whether they be a decisive battle in a War for Independence, the travel to new lands, or the
dedication of a Document of Liberty, all commemorate the crossing of a threshold in the
country's development. It is this crossing alone which is celebrated in the painting, and its
qualifying historical context is therefore diminished. These moments become essentially
disconnected from the amoral course of history, and are transformed into wholly benevolent
events which impart a sense of pride in the acheivements they represent.
At first glance, the portraiture in the Capitol's collection would not seem to be as free from the
deflating realities of history.
The average portrait found in the Capitol initially looks like little more than a realistic
rendering of a person's likeness; the immediate reaction upon viewing the painting is
likely to be a recollection (if possible!) of the career of the figure in question, as well as
his overall historical significance. While it might be relatively easy to detach the context from an
idealized
moment of national identity, it is not quite so with people. Unlike The Signing of the
Declaration of Independence, an instant free of conflict in American memory, a sizeable
amount
of the individuals enshrined throughout the building lived long enough to occasionally
stray from the path of wisdom. Despite the faults and foibles of these men, the portraits which
are displayed capture them at particular moments in their careers
when
they symbolized ideals which-- like the scenes in the Rotunda-- are both highly important and
highly admirable. In this manner, the portraits inspire, guide, even admonish the country's
currently elected legislators with patriotic values.
The collection of portraits found within the United States Capitol constitutes an artistic and
symbolic representation of national ideals, whose individual locations emphasize the function of
the rooms they occupy.
The greatest concentration of portraiture is in the main corridor of the Senate wing. This hallway runs from the Small Senate
Rotunda to the perpendicular east-west corridor, which leads into the Senate Chamber. The
portraits which hang here align themselves roughly into two groups: those which were purchased
by the Joint Committee on the Library, and those which were graciously received as gifts. The
Joint Committee is the official body empowered to acquire fine art for the Capitol.
Among the purchased paintings found in this corridor, none were expressly commissioned by the
United States Government. Most of the works were bought in the late nineteenth century, the
period in which Constantino Brumidi was decorating the building with his memorable frescoes.
Since the works were already extant at the time of purchase, and the Joint Committee was well
apprised of what it was buying, acquisition of the works displayed in this area would seem to
represent a careful assemblage of beloved legislators. The portraits of John Adams, Henry Clay,
John C. Calhoun, and Daniel Webster were purchased in 1881-- the latter three from
photographer
Matthew Brady for a total of four thousand dollars (Fairman 321). All of these men dedicated
their entire adult lives to the developing nation, and symbolize honorable, though variegated,
ideals of
statesmanship.
Over the span of some sixty years in political affairs, John Adams was ever a bastion of conservatism. Unfortunately, such a prolonged
public lifetime resulted in a decidedly mixed bag of achievements: He was an ardent supporter of
the Revolutionary cause, but defended the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre. He
enjoyed the great honor of succeeding Washington in the fledgling Executive Branch, but the
historic tenure was marred by his endorsement of the Alien and Sedition Acts. While he was one
of
the driving forces behind the Declaration of Independence, he regularly found himself in
opposition to his more radical colleagues-- like his old nemesis Thomas Jefferson. Adams
may enjoy the legendary prestige of being one of the original American patriots, but in his
day he often espoused beliefs that set him against the majority.
The image of Adams which was chosen by the Joint Committee is that of an older man,
who can an look back over his long career and remember protesting the Stamp Act, convening
the Continental Congresses, undertaking diplomatic missions all over Europe, enjoying two
terms as vice-president and one as president. This is a venerated though not ancient patriot,
whose tireless and unending service to his country towers above the sum of his less popular
decisions. The somber quality of the oils seems befitting a dour New Englander, yet his face
does not seem to reflect the same level of gravity as many of the other portraits nearby. This
comfortable expression might further evoke John Adams the patrician, who with generations
of political Adamses to follow him was a Founding Father in a way George Washington never
was.
Clay, Calhoun, and Webster were the men who made up the "Great Triumvirate" which
dominated American politics in its second generation. From the time of the Twelfth Congress,
when young War Hawk representatives Clay and Calhoun stirred up the War of 1812, to the
Union-saving Compromise of 1850, these three men orchestrated some of the most significant
legislation of their time. Henry Clay, "the Great
Compromiser", represented the state of Kentucky in both houses of Congress and was
Secretary of State under John Quincy Adams. He actually retired from politics on several
different occasions, only to return in his country's time of need; for this reason he evokes
the Roman myth of Cincinnatus, who left his plow to fight for the Republic. The unperturbed
expression on his face in this portrait might indicate self-confidence in the knowledge of his
many
historic accomplishments, such as the Compromises in 1820 and 1850. The piece idealizes the
coarse, whiskey-drinking, gambling side of his otherwise brilliant personality, and so its overall
effect seems to be that of quiet and modest dignity.
John C. Calhoun has the dubious honor of being
remembered as the most passionate defender of slavery and antebellum Southern culture; for this
reason one might question his inclusion in any area of a building dedicated to Liberty. However,
his position as Secretary of War under James Monroe, his two terms as vice president, and most
of all
his decades
as Representative and Senator from South Carolina, might present some mitigating
circumstances-- especially in a corridor traveled by men and women likely to ascribe the
prospect of enjoying such a career to the stuff dreams are made of. Calhoun was a fervent
nationalist in his early years, and exhibited the same defiance to his opponents then as he did
later on as the philosophical core of the States' Rights movement. Contrary to popular belief,
Calhoun was never one of the stereotypical southern cavaliers that inundated Charleston high
society
(Peterson 26); his
portrait more accurately depicts an almost puritanical figure, whose countenance is one of
gravity rather than frivolity. Like Henry Clay, Calhoun degenerated into a frail and wizened
man in Congress, and despite the strength of his convictions was too weak to read his final
address before the Senate in 1850 (460). The Calhoun in this painting is old, but still at the top
of his
game; in this context it is significant that his the only three-quarter-length portrait in the hallway,
and one of the few who is standing.
In contrast to Calhoun's dignified presence is the portrait of Daniel Webster. This extremely dark piece by John Neagle presents a rather bland
image of "the Yankee Demosthenes"; the only element that attracts the viewer is the waxen,
sallow face. This is not the best image of Webster to be found in the building, yet his stature is
such that there would be no way to exclude him from this corridor and still present a complete
historical perspective of American politics.
The next work to be acquired was of Charles
Sumner, in 1886. Seated against a dark background, Sumner's fair facial complexion and
white vest draw the viewer's attention inward, perhaps implying that nobler qualities could be
found in his heart than in his outward appearance. A handful of books upon a table at the left
side of the painting could be an illusion to his prolific career as a essayist and public speaker;
indeed, the 1969 edition of his "Complete Works" consists of some 20 volumes. Sumner is
principally remembered for his strident advocacy of African-American emancipation and civil
rights issues in general. He is also the only man to ever be physically assaulted for his beliefs in
the halls of the Senate; his infamous beating was dealt by the cane of Preston Brooks,
Congressman from South Carolina, after Sumner's equally infamous "Crime Against Kansas"
speech in 1856. This portrait's physical placement within the corridor is such that it sits almost
directly across from that of Daniel Webster (Fairman 321). As both were longtime Senators
from Massachusetts, passionate Federalists, and arguably the most electrifying orators to ever
grace the Senate Floor, the two men form a nucleus amidst the other great men
presiding over the hallway.
Overall, it is Sumner's kind of courage and conviction that truly exemplifies the figures depicted
here. Just about all of them stood up for personal, if not wholly patriotic,
morals at one time or another while in Congress. Adams defended the Constitution against
powerful Antifederalists; Webster made his famous reply to Robert Hayne over the Nullification
Crisis of the 1830s; Clay went to bat for the Union and his "American System" so many times it
would be difficult to count them all. Calhoun stuck to what he believed in too, even though he
was moving the opposite direction as most of his colleagues.
We need not even mention the accomplishments of Patrick Henry or Abraham Lincoln along with the aforementioned Senators' deeds
of merit. One of the first Americans to defy the British Empire, Henry served as member of the
House of Burgesses as well as governor of Virginia. He was also involved in more than a few
unpopular issues, such as his favorable treatment of British loyalists after the Revolution, but any
likeness of him is liable to conjure up "give me
Liberty or give me Death" before the other qualifying remarks can be made about his
character.
The piece is able to accomplish this for a couple of reasons. First of all, only a couple of
accurate pictures exist of Henry (Fairman 348), and the image presented here is in fact modeled
after one them-- a Thomas Sully portrait (Art in the Unites States Capitol, 120).
Secondly, and perhaps disappointingly, pretty much the only thing taught about Patrick Henry
are those seven unforgettable words.
The portrait of Abraham Lincoln seems a little out of
place in this corridor: one might expect to find his likeness in the Senate Majority Leader's room,
which represents more of a "first-string" collection of national heroes. However, as president
during the country's greatest internal crisis, Lincoln reflected the ideals of faith, courage, and
perserverance as well or better than any of the others who are enshrined in this area. The portrait
was done by Freeman Thorp in the 1870s, and was acquired by the Joint Committee on the
Library in 1920. The painting is slightly more stylized than some of works discussed so far.
With
the advent of photography in Lincoln's era, the need for painters to capture
realistic images of their subjects for the sake of posterity diminished (Simon 19). There is an
abundance of Lincoln photographs, and for this reason Thorp seems to have taken a bit more
artistic license.
The painting has a two-dimensional, "primitive" feel. The contrast between the deep lines on his
cheeks and the simple fleshtones on his brow produces an almost cartoon-ish visage. This folk-
art approach seems to be appropriate for the Rail-Splitter, in contrast to the some of more
serious portraits like Webster's or Calhoun's. Since a crucial element of the Lincoln mythos is
his lack of aristocratic pretensions (Wechter 245-6), the folksy quality of the work profoundly
enhances his personal character. In spite of the artistic nonconformity, all the necessary elements
of the Lincoln icon are still here: the familiar beard, the black suit, even the wart on the right side
of his face. The artist has combined trademark components of The Lincoln Image with
an unconventional approach to create a satisfying portrait.
The last in the group of purchased paintings found here is that of William B. Allison. It "was claimed" (Fairman 322) that Allison had the longest
uninterrupted career in the Senate, and as he was contemplating a run for his seventh term of
office at the time of his death in 1908 this is quite plausible. He was one of the first to join the
Republican Party in the 1860s, and his skill at coalition-building and deal-making helped make
the party a robust political institution. He was the Chairman of the Senate Appropriations
Committee for twenty-seven years, and his pro-business philosophy endeared him to
representatives of the Money Power both in and out of Congress. The painting by William A.
Reaser was bought less that a year after the Senator's death, which "was somewhat of a departure
from the customary practice" (Fairman 322) up to that point. His lengthy service
notwithstanding, the hasty move to memorialize Allison may be a result of his popularity among
his Republican colleagues.
The three portraits which were gifts-- Justin S. Morrill, Joseph T. Robinson, and Charles L.
McNary-- have not been branded into the national memory quite so deeply as the eminent
legislators
they share wall space with. They are nevertheless linked to important moments in American
history,
although they might only seem relevant in the context of their location in a Senate corridor. Justin S. Morrill was a powerful man in his day, having
acted as Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee during a twelve year service in the House
of Representatives and Chairman of the Finance Committee in his thirty-two year tenure in the
Senate. He was the author of an important tariff in 1860, and is also the father of the Land Grant
College Act. He can thus be remembered for the merits of national economic interest,
educational
progress, and a distinguished forty-four years in Congress. Within the walls of the Capitol,
Morrill might be more fondly remembered as the man who, as chair of
the Committee on Public Grounds, wrote legislation providing for fountains, terraces, and
gardens around the Capitol, the main building of the Library of Congress, and the conversion of
the Old House Chamber to the National Statuary Hall.
The portrait of Joseph T. Robinson was executed in
1934 but not given to the Joint Committee until 1937. The longtime progressive from Arkansas
fought for railroad and child labor regulation, women's suffrage, and helped create the Tennessee
Valley Authority. He ran as Al Smith's vice president in 1928, but became a loyal FDR supporter
after this defeat. His ten years as a Representative and twenty-three as Senator won him the
respect political longevity carries in Congress; in 1923 he was elected Democratic majority
leader and held the post until his death. He is one of the few southwesterners to be included
here.
Charles L. McNary is the final member of these
lesser-known Senators, yet he may well be one of the most respected in terms of specific
Senate interests. McNary was a longtime representative from Oregon, a leader of the Republican
minority throughout the New Deal era. He was a friend of labor and an ardent conservationist.
However, those who have served in the Senate are surely most proud of him as the man who
stopped Franklin Delano Roosevelt from packing the Supreme Court in 1937. Since the Court
was preventing him from enacting certain New Deal programs, FDR (with the aid of his
legislative pointman, Senator Robinson) declared that he was going
to appoint six new members to the bench who would tip the judicial scales in his
direction. The Constitution dictates that the number of Justices be nine, and Roosevelt's action
was thus clearly illegal. More central to the issue, however, is the fact that the powers of
confirmation for any presidential appointee, including Supreme Court Justices, is an express
privilege of the Senate. McNary's efforts to stop this unconstitutional action was a classic
example of a check on Executive Branch, and more significantly a triumphant reinforcement of
Senate authority.
In this fashion the images of Congressional ancestors constitute a manifold ideal of national
service. While looking at the men in these portraits the viewer is conscious of the need to uphold
Federal and Senate power, while nevertheless standing for individual liberties. One is also
reminded of the qualities of literacy, dignity, and rhetorical persuasion while traveling through
this corridor. This pantheon of patriots is more than a collection of graven images; it is also a
symbolic taxonomy of admirable and inspiring characteristics that should be fostered in any
successful legislator.
These ideals are most deliberately exemplified in the Senate reception room. When this room was painted by Constantino Brumidi
in 1880s, he left five spaces for medallion portraits of "great men yet to come" (Art in the
United States Capitol, 34). On one wall of this ornately decorated room is a fresco of
George
Washington conferring with Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. As the reception room
would ordinarily be the one place guests of state might get a chance to spend time in, the
presentation of a seated Washington mediating between the two youthful geniuses might likely
give the impression of America as a source wisdom and brilliance.
In addition to this impressive group portrait, the five medallions-- John C. Calhoun, Henry Clay,
Daniel Webster, Robert M. LaFollette, Jr., and Robert A. Taft-- have come to be known as "the
Famous Five" since they were unveiled in 1959. In describing the legislation authorizing the
portraits, one author wrote that S.R. 145
In an instance of uncanny historical coincidence, John F. Kennedy was the chairman of the
committee charged with selecting the individuals. He wrote in his foreword to Holmes
Alexander's book that each of the Senators "made a distinct historic impression during the period
of his public service, and each has become a part of America's broad constitutional heritage." In
fact, Kennedy focused on Taft's stance against the questionable justice of the Nuremburg Trials
in one of his Profiles in Courage (Alexander 203). Regardless of their individual
fortitude, they
as a group present an admirable and well-balanced set of ideals which visitors to the room might
take home with them as further icons of American excellence
Of Clay, Calhoun, and Webster, little remains
to be uncovered that is not found in their portraits in the main corridor. However, a marked
difference between the images in the two rooms is that those in the reception room depict much
younger men,
and thus have the effect of appearing more virile and powerful to guests than they might
otherwise. Calhoun still has some black in his trademark coif, and his expression is far more self-
confident and defiant than the older likeness. While Clay's serene youthfulness is essentially
nondescript, Webster's image is that of a vibrant, red-cheeked, firebrand orator. This is the
unabashed Federalist who "sprang from the granite" (Peterson 38) of his native New Hampshire
in 1813, still wearing eighteenth century fashions. As a group this triad constitutes the
paramount ideals and concerns of the nation before the Civil War: a strong Federal presence in
domestic and foreign affairs, balanced with a respect for the individual state. All three
maintained strong ties with their constituencies while serving long periods in Congress, and were
at their most dynamic in moments of crisis. These are the all-stars of the Senate's political
heritage.
The other two members of the Famous Five represent a more recent duo who often reinforced the
other three's ideals, but also introduced vital concerns of the modern era. "Battlin' Bob" LaFollette was not even a particularly effective Senator,
although he served for nineteen years until his death in 1925. He was, however, a dramatic
iconoclast during this and his early tenure in the House of Representatives; more importantly he
became one of the greatest populists of his era during years as governor of Wisconsin. Like
the previously mentioned three, he was a riveting and energetic public speaker who swayed his
audience as much through the power of his oratory as through the actual content of his oration.
He was a steadfast friend of the farmer, and a sworn enemy of the Money Power. LaFollette was
an exemplary representative of the Midwest, as was Ohio Senator Robert Taft. While Taft is most controversially remembered for the Taft-Hartley
Labor Management Relations Act, he was also an early proponent of welfare legislation. In
addition, the facts of his courageous struggle with terminal cancer, and the memory of his death
in 1956, add another heroic dimension to his character.
A third notable collection of portraits is located in room S-210, the private office of the Senate Majority Leader. As befitting the
privilege of rank, some of the best work in terms of quality and subject matter is found here. As
with the other rooms, their symbolic nature as a group evokes ideals that the occupant or
passer-by would do well to emulate. However, their individual characteristics should addressed
first.
The portrait of Washington is by Gilbert Stuart,
the
premier American portrait artist of his era. It is a version of the classic "Athanaeuem bust", the
most popular likeness Stuart painted of him (Lee 19). There is not much to say about this image,
save that it is the Washington most associated with his role as our Founding Father. The painting
might actually elicit further discussion, in the present context, were it not located in this room. It
is here because, without Washington, there would simply be no symbolic foundation to build
upon.
The painting of Thomas Jefferson is an 1856 work by
Thomas Sully, arguably the greatest of the second generation of American portraitists. One of
the first paintings to be purchased by the Joint Committee on the Library, it was offered in a set
with a portrait of General Dearborn and the same Andrew
Jackson that is in the Majority Leader's office. Only the Jefferson was bought at the time,
and when the Jackson piece was acquired in 1922 it was at a sum four times greater than the
asking price in 1874 (Fairman 348). This fact surely alludes to its importance in this grouping.
The Jackson is also by Sully, but it presents a deep contrast to the Jefferson. While the Jefferson
portrait is one of the lightest in the entire building, the Jackson image is a composition of rich,
somber hues. The canvasses are almost the exact same size, but Old Hickory seems to tower
over
the erudite Sage of Monticello; this may be due the proportionally small size of Jefferson's head
or the almost pyramidical structure of Jackson's body. Jackson has an imposing overall effect
here, but upon second reflection the shoulders seem to be sagging under a great burden; this and
his mature countenance convey the image's more subtle qualities. This is not Andrew
Jackson the General, whose majestically virile statue stands among the select few in the Rotunda.
Instead it is the politician who fought for the average citizen against the National Bank, and
fought for the Union in the Nullification Crisis of the 1830s. While these contributions might be
overlooked when viewing younger or more bellicose versions of Jackson, the image seen
by Senate leaders in this room brings them to the surface.
William Cogswell's portrait of Ulysses S. Grant
depicts its subject in a realistically informal pose, slightly slumped and with his coat unbuttoned.
The acquisition of a portrait in military dress is probably not a wholly metaphorical choice, since
the achievements of General Grant are quite a different thing from those of President Grant. The
warrior theme is emphasized by the smoky background, and a wispy red lower foreground that
could be fire. His expression is one of thoughtful, tranquil resolve, a man who knows the price
of war but is not afraid to pay it when necessary. This is not necessarily the man Henry Adams
dubbed pteraspis, an ageless and unthinking shark. It is definitely not the boy who was
nicknamed "Useless Grant" (Wechter 318); rather the grim yet serene determination of the piece
indicates that the viewer is looking at the man who came to be known as "Unconditional
Surrender" Grant.
As a set, the best qualities evoked by each of these images synthesize to form a coherent theme.
All of these men reflect the wisdom that comes of experience, yet it is the classic image of
Washington that best reflects the patriarchal nature of leadership. Washington's humble
acceptances and resignations of posts of immense national responsibility also link him to
the Cincinnatus myth, the ideal of national service. One of Washington's few
shortcomings, that being the "tortoise pace" (Wechter 115) of his thought processes, is offset by
Jackson's decisive and forceful character. Jackson's achievement as overwhelming winner of the
majority of the popular vote in three presidential campaigns (Wechter 200) may also remind the
viewer of where
power in government is supposed to originate-- the people. As the first American populist, he
occupies a vital niche in this collection. While both of these men had successful military careers,
the images found here are of them as civilians; however, the uniformed presence of General
Grant
provides the necessary martial balance. The final piece of the puzzle is Jefferson, whose
inclusion here might seem redundant if only his political contributions are considered. What he
specifically lends to this room is his reputation as the great humanist of his era, a quality that
seems too often overlooked by the professional politicians of the current age. All together, the
portraits in this office form a group not wholly unlike the Muses of Ancient Greece: each appeals
to the devotee based on their independent qualities, yet may combine to form a harmonious spirit
that is equally inspirational.
The works exhibited here from the House of Representatives' wing of the Capitol are fewer in
number, yet this is primarily due to the fact that a number of portraits has been omitted.
As tradition dictates, each Speaker of the House gets his portrait painted and hung within the
long Speaker's Lobby; there are well over a hundred portraits that have hung in this area since its
construction. The portraits were initially donated to the House Committee on the Library, but
since 1910 legal provisions have been made for their execution (Art in the United States
Capitol,
37). Most of them are quite straightforward, and beg little analysis; likewise, the
historical stature of the majority of the Speakers is small compared to most of the men
whose portraits hang in the Senate wing. Suffice it to say that this large group and its presence in
the Speaker's Lobby is symbolic of the honor and prestige as would betoken such an office.
There are, however, a few interesting portraits in other areas of the House Wing. The two most
accessible are those of the Lafayette and Washington,
which rest on the left and right sides, respectively, of the Speaker's Rostrum in the House
Chamber. These large, full-length portraits in the "grand manner"; each convey significant
themes, and each has a notable history of its own. In December of 1884 Lafayette addressed a
joint session of Congress assembled in the Old Hall of the House of Representatives, the first
foreigner to do so. Two weeks later Henry Clay read the following letter, sent from France to the
Speaker of the House:
The portrait was hung in the new House Chamber when it was completed in 1857. The portrait
depicts Lafayette as a younger man than he was in 1824, and significantly in the guise of a
statesman and not a general. He stands facing the West, his hat doffed in a respectful gesture to
the county across the ocean, whose independence he helped to secure. The painting conveys a
sense of strength in his robust figure, yet his civilized attire and pose emphasize the qualities of a
gentleman.
In February of 1832 a portrait of Washington was
commissioned as a companion piece to Scheffer's generous gift. John Vanderlyn was given a
total of $2,500 to execute the painting, with the specific instructions that the subject's head be "a
copy of Stuart's Washington" (Fairman 65). The fact that the artist was directed to reproduce
what is today the de facto official likeness of Washington's face indicates the awareness,
just over thirty years after his death, of the need to solidify a single specific image of the
Founding Father in the minds of citizens and legislators. In spite of the influence of the one
dollar bill, this appears to be an early example of the conscious attempt to construct iconic
images of heroic Americans.
Despite the fact that all other elements of the painting were "to be left to the judgement of the
artist" (Fairman 65), Washington is in a typically conservative pose. With a hand resting lightly
upon a set of documents, red drapery suspended in the background, Vanderlyn incorporates most
of the stock accoutrements of an official state portrait (Quick 11). The cushion of the chair is
faintly embroidered with the seal of the United States. Out the window is a pastoral landscape, at
the right side of which part of a triumphal arch may be discerned.
A second full-length portrait of Washington is
located in the House reception room.
This is one of the many copies Gilbert Stuart made of his 1796 "Lansdowne" painting. The
original was commissioned by the wife of Pennsylvania Senator William Bingham and given to
the Marquis of Lansdowne. An ardent supporter of the Revolutionary while he was Earl of
Shelburne, Lansdowne's would have been one of the few prominent houses to display images of
American patriots in Britain after the Revolution. It was therefore critical that the painting
convey a very deep impression of dignity and power in its subject (Quick 22).
The rich crimson drapery, the rug, the column in the upper left background, all lend the sense of
dignity; they also function as traditional elements of grand manner portraiture that most
Europeans would be familiar with. The books and documents are similarly traditional
accessories as would befit a statesman; the small sword in Washington's left hand recalls the
military leader and the chief
executive. A clever emphasis of the powers of state can also be found in the ornately carved
table leg: the drapery has been lifted to reveal a fasces topped with the heads of eagles.
In a slight contrast to Vanderlyn's full-length Washington, this subject does not lean upon the
table for support. He instead stands firmly upright, while extending his right arm in a solemn
gesture. A telling similarity between the two works is revealed in the face, as Stuart copied his
own original likeness of Washington for use in this portrait as well. Stuart was in the habit of
making rapid copies of his original Washington to support himself (Lee 19), and so his insertion
of the image here may seem a trifle mechanical. However, given the destination of the painting
and the
attention paid to the subject's surroundings, it may be equally plausible that artist was
as aware as the Congressmen in 1832 of the value such an iconic representative could be for the
Nation. Regardless of the underwhelming originality found in either the pose or expression, they
seem appropriate "for a man whom the British were now meant to recognize as a statesman, just
as they formerly had been compelled to accept him as a general (Quick 23).
Not surprisingly, the Lansdowne painting which hangs in the House Reception Room used to be
located in the U.S. Embassy in Spain. In light of the previous discussion, its function there
seems obvious enough. it was recalled to the Capitol in 1951, and in its current location it once
again serves to inspire and intimidate guests of the United States Government.
The three remaining works of note in the House wing feature Charles Carroll of Carrolton,
Gunning Bedford, Jr., and Henry Clay. These paintings hung in the representatives' Old Hall in
the period between its abandonment for the larger chamber and its dedication as the National
Statuary Hall. They were then moved en masse to their current location, which faces the
east stairway of the House wing. The portrait of
Charles Carroll of Carrolton, last of the signers of
the Declaration of Independence, was once offered to the Joint Committee on the Library as a
Thomas Sully painting. The offer was refused, but was accepted at a later date when offered as
the work of Chester Harding. The painting was purchased at that time, but its artist was not
proven to be Harding until it was compared with an Asher B. Durand engraving known to be a
copy of the Harding portrait (Fairman 269).
Like some of the lesser known individuals in the main corridor of the Senate Wing, the portrait
of Gunning Bedford, Jr. was a gift. It was
bequeathed by Henrietta Bedford upon her death in 1871; fortunately the instructions left in her
will lend us a clue to the historical relevance of Mr. Bedford:
While there are no paintings of James Madison anywhere in the Capitol, the portrait of his
worthy roommate holds a sufficiently honorable position by its close proximity to John Neagle's
magnificent painting of Henry Clay. The sketches for
this nine foot tall "Father of the American System" was begun in 1842, after Clay had retired yet
again from public life. Momentum began building for the third of his five races for the
presidency over the next year, while the portrait itself was being done (Quick 142); its suitability
as a campaign poster is thus not surprising. Just in front of a heroic column, a voluminous
American flag drapes its folds about a globe showing the continent of South America. Clay was
one of the first and most aggressive supporters of Latin American independence from Spain, and
his outstretched hands suggest the benevolent metahpor of partnership between the
two continents of the New World.
The gesture to foreign policy on the right is balanced by Clay's leftward gaze over the various
symbols of domestic improvement. The anvil and plow symbolize the two primary elements of
national production, industry and agriculture. The ox may further enhance the agrarian ideal, but
the use of ox as a beast of burden adds the dimension of transportation. As the country grew
inland, the need for a system of highways and canals became increasingly more necessary; this
transportation network was a cornerstone of Clay's American System.
All of the portraits discussed here have, by virtue of their display inside the United States
Capitol, assumed a mantle of national responsibility. They are not charged with conveying the
turgid grandeur of defining American acheivements, as are the publicly-accessible Rotunda
paintings; but in the national memory great moments are necessarily conceived by great men,
and so the portraits must nevertheless reflect ideals which are complimentary to those larger
patriotic scenes. Since the portraits are of multifaceted and even contradictory human beings, the
images chosen for display must emphasize just the right personal qualities to their audience--
which happens to be the men and women of the contemporary Congress. The presentation of
honorable attributes in their various incarnations as American statesmen thus becomes a direct
attempt to associate both the figures and their values with the general theme of patriotic service.
As we have seen, their placement in areas occupied by certain individuals is a further attempt to
impart that theme upon the viewer. Their individual and composite symbolic nature is such that
they all contribute to the American Image, encapsulated in one giant architectural icon by the
Capitol itself.
". . .[the Capitol's physical] situation is grander than that of the Roman Capitol. . . It has beauty
of form and sublimity in proportion, even if it lacks originality in conception. In itself it is a work
of art. (Sumner 168)
". . .presents us with an official list of heroic figures, selected by the Senate of the United States
after serious contemplation and with the expert advice of some 13 dozen scholars" (Alexander
xii).
"SIR: I sent by the ship Cadmus Captain Francis Allyn (who had kindly promised to take it on to
Washington) a full-length portrait painted by me, which I pray you do me the honor to accept for
the Hall of the House of Representatives over which you preside.
As the friend and admirer of General Lafayette and of American liberty, I feel happy to
have it in my power to express in this way my grateful feelings for the national honors which the
free people of the United States are at this moment bestowing on the friend and companion of
your illustrious Washington, on the man who has been so gloriously received by you as the
"Nation's guest".
Accept, Sir, with the above testimony of my sentiments for your country and for my
venerable friend and sincere assurance of my profound respect.
"It is my will that my executor have the portrait of my father (one of the framers of the
Constitution of the United States and a room-mate of James Madison as Princeton College)
placed in the Capitol at Washington City near that of Madison as one of the framers of the
Constitution. . ." (Fairman 251)
Art in the United States Capitol. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976.
Alexander, Holmes. The Famous Five. New York: The Bookmailer, 1958.
Fairman, Charles E. Art and Artists of the Capitol of the United States of America. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1927.
Lee, Cuthbert. Early American Portrait Painters. New Haven: Yale UP, 1929.
Peterson, Merrill D. The Great Triumvirate: Webster, Clay, and Calhoun. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1987.
Simon, Robin. The Portrait in Britain and America. Oxford: Phaidon Press Ltd., 1987.
Sumner, Charles. "Art in the National Capitol." Charles Sumner: His Complete Works. vol. 14. New York: Negro Universities Press, 1969.
Quick, Michael. "Princely Images in the Wilderness: 1720-1775." American Portraiture in the Grand Manner: 1720-1920. ed. Jeanne D'Andrea & Phil Freshman. Los Angeles: L.A. County Museum of Art, 1981.
Wechter, Dixon. The Hero in America: A Chronicle of Hero-Worship. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1941.
Neal, Steve. McNary of Oregon: A Political Biography. Portland, OR: Press of the Oregon Historical Society, 1985.
Parker, William B. The Life and Public Services of Justin Smith Morrill. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1924.
Sage, Leland L. William Boyd Allison. Iowa City, IO: State Historical Society of Iowa, 1956.
The Reader's Guide to American History, ed. Eric Fohner & John A. Garraty. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1991.
The Dictionary of American Biography, ed. Allen Johnson et. al. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1927-1944.