Constantino Brumidi, Michelangelo of the United States Capitol

by Myrtle Cheney Murdock

PRESIDENT’S ROOM

The decoration of the President’s Room in the Senate Annex is thought by many to be Brumidi’s best work in the Capitol Building. Since the President’s Room in the Capitol was to be set aside for the use of the President of the United States at any time duty called the President to the Capitol Building, it may well be supposed that Brumidi wanted that room to be as beautiful as an artist could make it. He is said to have spent more than five years on this room alone, but five years seem not half long enough to create such beauty as is here displayed.

Five colorful ceiling-to-floor panels adorn the walls and in the center of each hangs a portrait elegantly framed. The five members of Washington’s first Cabinet are thus honored—Thomas Jefferson of Virginia, Secretary of State; Edmund Randolph of Virginia, Attorney General; Henry Knox of Massachusetts, Secretary of War; Alexander Hamilton of New York, Secretary of the Treasury; and Samuel Osgood of Massachusetts, Postmaster General. I say these portraits hang in the panels. If you stood at the door looking hurriedly about the walls, as most visitors must do at the President’s Room, you would think the frames as real as the portraits. In truth, though, the beautifully carved frames are painted on the walls as are the portraits. Mr. Fairman calls these paintings, “Portraits of Distinction,” and so they are.

But it is the frescoed ceiling in the President’s Room that showers new light and color and added beauty about the portraits on the walls. Four symbolic groups on this ceiling look down from their large medallion gold leaf frames—four life-size Madonnas, symbolizing Religion, Legislation, Liberty, and Executive Authority—Madonnas of great beauty and rare coloring. Then at each corner of this frescoed ceiling among the symbolism and the cherubs are four life-size portraits, full length, each chosen as representative of a force in civilization. Columbus memorializes discovery; Vespucius, exploration; Brewster, religion; and Franklin, history.

The portrait of George Washington, evidently done with Rembrandt Peale’s Washington in mind, has a position all its own high above the portrait of Thomas Jefferson. A portion of the Annual Report of Captain Meigs, dated October 27, 1859, fixed the completion of the Brumidi frescoes in the President’s Room. Said that report, “The painting of the President’s Room in the North wing will be completed by the next meeting of Congress.”

Even during the years that Brumidi created the beauty of the President’s Room cruel words were hurled against his art. In 1858 a convention of self-styled American artists assembled and drew up an estimate of their own worth which they titled: “Memorial of the Artists of the United States.” This petition of grievance presented to the Congress of the United States carried the names of 127 individuals, chiefly from New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and Baltimore with only eight from the Capital City. Among the signatures were found the names of Rembrandt Peale, W. D. Washington and Johannes A. Oertel, the latter being the draughtsman who

SINGING CHERUBS

These three cherubs occupy a position beneath the portrait of William Brewster on the ceiling of the President’s Room comparable to that of the cherub detail beneath the portrait of Benjamin Franklin on the same ceiling. Since Brewster, as the religious leader of the Pilgrims and elder of the Plymouth colony, typifies “Religion” in Brumidi’s over all design in the President’s Room, the singing cherubs with their director, violinist, dove attendant, and music script must be singing hosannas of peace and devotion. (Cherubs in chapter tailpieces are from this ceiling.)

challenged Brumidi’s right, in 1858, to paint the ceiling fresco in the District of Columbia Committee Room of the Senate.

It is illuminating to know that 88 of the 127 names listed as artists in the above Memorial do not even appear in the National Encyclopedia of American Biography while among those that do appear, less than a dozen are recognized today as artists of note.

The Artists’ Memorial began with these words, “Your memorialists appear before your honorable bodies to solicit for American art that consideration and encouragement to which they conceive it to be entitled at the hands of the general government.” Then the Memorial asked that Congress “establish an Art Commission composed of those designated by the united voice of American artists as competent to the office, who shall be accepted as the exponents of the authority and influence of American art, who shall be the channels for the distribution of all appropriations to be made by Congress for art purposes, and who shall secure to artists an intelligent and unbiased adjudication upon the designs they may present for the embellishment of our National buildings.”

The House of Representatives referred the Artists’ Memorial to a select committee of five. This Committee brought out Report No. 198, March 3, 1859. That Report not only sanctioned the establishment of the suggested Art Commission to protect the “embellishment of National buildings” but it voiced criticism by the Congressmen making up the select Committee of five. Brumidi’s name was not mentioned in the Report but there is no mistaking the artist to whom they referred. Said the Committee in this Report:

“A plain coat or two of whitewash is better, in the opinion of this committee, for a temporary finish than the tawdry and exuberant ornamentation with which many of the rooms and passages are being crowded.... An eagle and the National flag may be discovered occasionally amidst the confusion of scroll work and mythological figures presented to the eye; but the presence of conventional gods and goddesses, with meaningless scrolls and arabesques, albeit they may be wrapped in the red, white and blue, will never suggest to the American, as he wanders among the halls and committee rooms, any idea to touch his heart or to inspire his patriotism.... Should he seek an explanation from those who are manufacturing the cumbrous levities which everywhere appear through the building he will be eminently fortunate should he find among them one who speaks the English language.”

The real fight of the petitioners was evidently against the employment of a foreign artist. However, this was not expressed openly in the Memorial but the select committee of

DISCOVERY

The theme of Brumidi’s ceiling fresco in the President’s Room, as portrayed by Christopher Columbus, is that of “Discovery.” This subject is intensified by use of the globe and map in the cherub detail above the portrait. At upper left is a segment of the medallion, “Executive Authority,” and at the right a portion of another medallion, “Liberty.” The four small decorative medallions at the portrait corners are State seals. At the upper left is Vermont; at upper right, Kentucky; lower left, Arkansas, and lower right, Michigan.

five from the House of Representatives made the open accusation. Said they in their Report, “The Committee have not been informed that American artists have been engaged upon the embellishment of the Capitol, but they have been made painfully conscious that the work has been prosecuted by foreign workmen under the immediate supervision of a foreigner. As a consequence the Committee find nothing in the design and execution of the ornamental work of the Capitol, thus far, which represents our own country, or the genius and taste of her artists.”

This unjust criticism of Brumidi found expression in the New York Daily Tribune for May 17, 1858, through that paper’s Washington correspondent. The New York attack on the artist, however, was answered in the Tribune for May 31, 1858, by Guglielmo Gajani, a friend of Brumidi’s. Extracts of this defense of Brumidi follow:

To the Editor of the New York Tribune:

I have lately been at Washington and derived much pleasure from visiting the National Capital and its splendid buildings and works of art. I admired them and was much pleased with the frescoes and decorations of my fellow citizen Signor Constantino Brumidi. But on my return to New York my attention was directed to a correspondence of the Tribune (May 17) and to other attacks made against that artist and his works at the Capitol.

I knew him in Rome, where he was much esteemed and has left excellent specimens of his artistic skill. I can hardly believe that ten years of exile could have so entirely destroyed his capacity or impaired my judgment. Had the attack been confined to the ground that artists or workmen of foreign birth who are satisfied with a small compensation should be excluded from the Capitol in order to have the work done exclusively by natives well paid, I would have nothing to say for I keep off entirely from your administrative questions and politics. But on the ground of art and taste a Roman might be allowed to express an opinion quite different from that of your own correspondent and his friends.

Fresco painting represents in art what improvisation is in poetry. The artist must execute his work upon a fresh wall, tracing the outlines by a steel point and using mineral colors which are instantly absorbed and do not show their effect until the wall dries. The artist, therefore, must work with great rapidity and has no opportunity for corrections. It does not require a greater capacity than the ordinary painting with oil or water colors on a dry wall, but the artist must have a peculiar disposition, and this the Italian possesses to a greater degree than others.

Michelangelo had never practiced fresco painting when Bramante procured him the commission to paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel with a view to ruin his reputation. Michelangelo called from Florence his former schoolmate, Granacci, and other fresco painters, to teach him the art. He was much perplexed at the beginning but afterward declared it the best style of painting. I believe that your best painters, by exerting themselves and gaining experience, might have succeeded in doing the work accomplished by Brumidi, but it would have required a long time and an enormous expenditure.

It is a fact that in France, in England, in Belgium, in Italy and everywhere public buildings have been decorated by competent artists, you meet the same style and symbols, allegories and classical memories occasionally adopted by Signor Brumidi. Before condemning him you must find fault with all the best painters who preceded him, and especially with Michelangelo and Raphael who

RELIGION

Four Brumidi Madonnas on the frescoed ceiling of the President’s Room are of great interest to visitors. The most lasting impression, however, is made by “Religion.” The story is often repeated that Brumidi painted “Religion” with an “all-seeing eye of God” which will follow any individual from place to place inside the room. The “connections of the pieces of plaster” which help to identify real fresco are easily discernible in this medallion background. The color beauty of “Religion” is illustrated by “Legislation” in this book’s color section.

THE CHERUB OF JUSTICE

Well balanced scales and a sword seem to be necessary attributes of Brumidi’s conception of “Executive Authority” in the President’s Room. The Cherub of Justice and the many other cherubs used so generously in the artist’s Capitol frescoes are favorites with art enthusiasts. All designs and deceptive moldings shown above are painted in oil on dry plaster. The corner of a tall elaborate mirror frame shows at the right.

THE WINGED CHERUB

Resting midst bundles of papers, bills, and Congressional debates, the Winged Cherub suggests another Brumidi theme, “Legislation,” on the walls of the President’s Room. The signature “C. Brumidi, 1860,” can be identified on the packet of State papers at the feet of this cherub. The two cherubs on these pages fill decorative niches high on the walls on either side of a huge, ceiling-to-floor, gold-framed mirror.

introduced that style of fresco in the Vatican itself.... It is absurd, therefore, to despise the works of Signor Brumidi because “they look foreign and betray the Italian element,” that is to say, because they are classical in the subject and artistic in the execution.

I confess that my national feelings were a little wounded when I saw vituperated to some extent in Washington an artist much esteemed in Rome. Music and the fine arts are all that remain of our former greatness, and we are naturally jealous of this glory. Besides, I am convinced that Signor Brumidi is a good artist and an excellent fresco painter. He has studied long in Rome, even from his boyhood, and visited for instruction all the most important schools of art in Italy. Baron Camucini was his master in painting, and the great Thorwaldsen taught him sculpture. In both arts Signor Brumidi has left several specimens of his skill in Rome. For instance, he was employed during eleven years in making frescoes and decorations of the villa and of the palace of Prince Torlonia in Rome. These works are admired by visitors. Should an American admire the works of Signor Brumidi at home and despise them when he finds them at Washington?

Signor Brumidi was also employed by the Government in Rome, together with other distinguished artists, to prepare the chronology of the Popes, in the new Basilica of St. Paul, and was allowed to finish his work after the revolution, notwithstanding that he was persecuted for the part which he took in that movement. The Republican Government of Rome honored Signor Brumidi with an important commission as he was much esteemed for his talent and personal qualities. I am glad, myself, that he has already executed some works at the Capitol. They speak for themselves to those who have taste for the fine arts.

Guglielmo Gajani

In the Architect’s Report for 1859 we find this reference to the detrimental influence of the Artist’s Memorial:

“The action of Congress in restricting the expenditure for painting and sculpture to the completion of the painting of rooms in the North Wing already partly done ... and to such paintings and sculpture as shall have been approved, first, by a committee of three American artists, to be appointed by the President and then by the Library Committee of Congress, has prevented the commencement of any new works.”

It seems certain, however, that Brumidi was not often continuously employed on any one picture. As shown by his vouchers, if work was held up in one direction he could easily employ himself in another. For example, he began work in the Senate Library in 1858 and the Architect of the Capitol records

ALEXANDER HAMILTON

This portrait of Alexander Hamilton is one of the five color representations of Washington’s Cabinet, painted by Brumidi on the walls of the President’s Room. The color and design of the frame and panel are equally as beautiful as those surrounding the portrait of Jefferson in the color section of this book. The portrait of George Washington high above those of his Cabinet evidently was done with that of Rembrandt Peale in mind. All others are thought to be Brumidi’s own conceptions.

the finish of the Senate Library ceiling in 1875. But during those years the 4,664 square feet of fresco in the Canopy of the Dome was finished as well as the President’s Room and many committee room frescoes and hall decorations in the Senate Annex. References in Reports and letters usually give the finishing date of the fresco while the beginning date is seldom mentioned.