Per Krafft the Younger andBelisarius – One of the Foremost Swedish Examples of Neoclassical Painting in the French Style

Daniel Prytz Curator, 18th-Century Painting, Drawings and Prints

Art Bulletin of Nationalmuseum Volumes 24–25 Foreword

Dr. Susanna Pettersson Director General Associate Professor

Art Bulletin of Nationalmuseum, Stockholm, (An Unpublished Drawing on Panel by Salvator (In the Breach of Decorum: Painting between is published with generous support from the Rosa Depicting a Landscape with a Philosopher Altar and Gallery, Fig. 9, p. 163). Friends of the Nationalmuseum. and Astrological Symbols, Fig. 6, p. 22). © Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY 2.0 © The Capitoline Museums, Rome. Archivio (In the Breach of Decorum: Painting between Nationalmuseum collaborates with Svenska Fotografico dei Musei Capitolini, Roma, Sovrinten- Altar and Gallery, Fig. 13, p. 167). Dagbladet, Bank of America Merrill Lynch, denza Capitolina ai Beni Culturali. © The John & Mable Ringling Museum of Art, Grand Hôtel Stockholm, The Wineagency and (A Drawing for Pietro da Cortona’s Rape of the Sarasota. Bequest of John Ringling, 1936. Nationalmusei Vänner. Sabine Women, Fig. 2, p. 28). (In the Breach of Decorum: Painting between © Bibliothèque Nationale , Paris. Altar and Gallery, Fig. 19, p. 173). Cover Illustration (The Entry of Queen Christina into Paris in 1656, © Uppsala auktionskammare, Uppsala Étienne Bouhot (1780–1862), View of the Pavillon by François Chauveau, Fig. 2, p. 32). (Acquisitions 2017: Exposé, Fig 4, p. 178). de Bellechasse on rue Saint-Dominique in Paris, © Finnish National Gallery/ Sinebrychoff Art 1823. Oil on canvas, 55.5 x 47 cm. Purchase: the Museum, Helsinki. Photo: Jaakko Lukumaa Graphic Design Hedda and N. D. Qvist Fund. Nationalmuseum, (Self-Portraits and Artists’ Portraits as Portraits of BIGG NM 7434. Friends – A Selection of Paintings and Drawings, Fig. 2, p. 72). Layout Publisher © IKEA. Agneta Bervokk Susanna Pettersson, Director General. (Spika and Tajt – Alternative Furniture for a Young Generation, Fig. 5, p. 88). Translation and Language Editing Editors © Moderna museet, Stockholm Clare Barnes, Gabriella Berggren, and Martin Ludvig Florén, Magnus Olausson and Martin Olin. (Henry B. Goodwin – A Visual Artist with the Naylor. Camera as His Tool, Fig. 2, p. 90). Editorial Committee © The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles. Digital Publishing Ludvig Florén, Carina Fryklund, Eva Lena image courtesy of the Getty’s Open Content Ludvig Florén, Magnus Olausson, and Martin Karlsson, Audrey Lebioda, Ingrid Lindell, Program. Olin (Editors) and Ingrid Lindell (Publications Magnus Olausson, Martin Olin, Cilla Robach (Per Krafft the Younger and Belisarius – One of Manager). and Lidia Westerberg Olofsson. the Foremost Swedish Examples of Neoclassical Painting in the French Style, Figs. 3–4, pp. 113–114). Art Bulletin of Nationalmuseum is published Photographers © Albert Bonniers Förlag, Stockholm annually and contains articles on the history and Nationalmuseum Photographic Studio/ (Nils Kreuger’s Drafts for the Covers of Bland theory of art relating to the collections of the Linn Ahlgren, Erik Cornelius, Anna Danielsson, Franska Bönder (1889) by August Strindberg and Nationalmuseum. Cecilia Heisser, Per-Åke Persson and Hans Ord och Bild (1897), Fig. 2, p. 137). Thorwid. © Bukowskis auktioner, Stockholm Nationalmuseum (Nils Kreuger’s Drafts for the Covers of Bland Box 16176 Picture Editors Franska Bönder (1889) by August Strindberg and SE–103 24 Stockholm, Ludvig Florén and Rikard Nordström. Ord och Bild (1897), Fig. 3, p. 138; Acquisitions www.nationalmuseum.se 2017: Exposé, Fig, 3, p. 178). Photo Credits © Pia Ulin. © Nationalmuseum, the authors and the owners of © Le Gallerie degli Uffizi, Palazzo Pitti, Florence. (The Nationalmuseum’s New Restaurant – An the reproduced works. Gabinetto Fotografico delle Gallerie degli Uffizi. Artistic Collaboration, Figs. 1, 2, 4, and 5, pp. 149, (An Unpublished Drawing on Panel by Salvator 150, 152 and 153). ISSN 2001-9238 Rosa Depicting a Landscape with a Philosopher © Wikimedia Commons/ Public Domain and Astrological Symbols, Fig. 3, p. 19). (Per Krafft the Younger and Belisarius – One of © Teylers Museum, Haarlem. the Foremost Swedish Examples of Neoclassical (An Unpublished Drawing on Panel by Salvator Painting in the French Style, Fig 3, p. 112 and ArtRosa Depicting Bulletin a Landscape with a Philosopher of NationalmuseumIn the Breach of Decorum: Painting between Stockholm and Astrological Symbols, Fig. 5, p. 21). Altar and Gallery, Figs. 1–8, 10–12, and 14–18, © The State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg. pp. 155–172). Photo by Pavel Demidov. © Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY 3.0 Volumes 24–25

Art Bulletin of Nationalmuseum Volumes 24–25, 2017–2018 ACQUISITIONS/PER KRAFFT THE YOUNGER AND BELISARIUS

Per Krafft the Younger andBelisarius – One of the Foremost Swedish Examples of Neoclassical Painting in the French Style

Daniel Prytz Curator, 18th-Century Painting, Drawings and Prints

In 1796, at the age of 19, Per Krafft the Younger (1777–1863) received a travel stipend from the Royal Swedish Academy of Fine Arts. This was partly due to the unexpected death of Jonas Åkerström (1759–1795), aged just 36, whilst in Rome on a stipend the previous year. Krafft left for Paris, where he spent several years as the only Swede studying under Jacques- Louis David (1748–1825).1 David had a great number of students and his teaching, which was conducted in the Louvre at this period, emphasised painting and drawing techniques, modelling and nature studies, always with Antiquity as the ideal.2 Belisarius was a successful Byzantine general (c. 505–565), whose achievements included defeating the Ostrogoths in Italy. Falsely accused of conspiring against Emperor Justinian I (c. 482–565), Belisarius was punished by being blinded, after which he had to survive by begging at the gates of Constantinople.3 Depictions of the loyal soldier’s fall into undeserved disfavour with an ungrateful leader became popular during the second half of the 18th century, partly thanks to Jean-François Marmontel’s (1723–1799) novel, Bélisaire from 1767.4 Marmontel was one of Denis Diderot’s (1713–1784) encyclopaedists and one of the leaders among that era’s enlightened French intelligentsia. In 1772, he succeeded Charles Pinot Duclos (1704–1772) as the historiographe du Roi, “the king’s historio- grapher”, a position previously held by Fig. 1 Per Krafft the Younger (1777–1863),Belisarius , 1799. Oil on canvas, 125 x 94 cm. Voltaire. Marmontel often wrote moral Purchase: the Hedda and N. D. Qvist Fund. Nationalmuseum, NM 7468.

111 Art Bulletin of Nationalmuseum Volumes 24–25, 2017–2018 ACQUISITIONS/PER KRAFFT THE YOUNGER AND BELISARIUS

(1770–1837) and paintings by Nicolas- René Jollain (1732–1804), Louis-Jean- Jacques Durameau (1733–1796), François- André Vincent (1746–1817) and Jean- François-Pierre Peyron (1744–1814), as well as busts by Jean-Antoine Houdon (1741–1828) and Jean-Baptiste Stouf (1742–1826).10 The influence of David is obvious in Krafft’sBelisarius (Fig. 1), which should be counted among the foremost Swedish works in the style of French Neoclas- sicism. It was painted in 1799 and sent to Stockholm, along with the compositions Phrygian Lyre Player in Meditation, Paris, Love and a few portraits, to be exhibited at the Royal Academy of Fine Arts in 1801.11 Recently extensive overpaint has been removed from the work. In all certainty this was added when the painting was relined, possibly in the early 1920’s. The reason for the overpaint is unknown, but perhaps it reflects the taste for an even more pared down neoclassicism. The later additions of the ”classical” buildings in the background have, for example, a somewhat 1920’s feel and their removal reveals a beautifully lit, almost arcadian, landscape Fig. 2 Jacques Louis David (1748–1825), Belisarius Begging for Alms, 1781. Oil on canvas, 288 x 312 cm. Palais Beaux-Arts, Lille, 436. which adds depth to the composition. Belisarius’ cape is also now revealed to be of a pinkish and lilac hue, rather than reddish brown. The focus falls firmly on the finely executed figures which almost appear to stand in relief against the background. All this put the present work works, but Bélisaire also has a political close to liberals, such as Marmontel, but in close affinity to works executed during dimension.5 The author manipulated the was soon to become a declared republican the same period by Gérard. This becomes story in relation to the classical sources and revolutionary, chose this subject in his even more apparent when one takes into he based it upon, specifically to use it as reception piece for the Académie Royale account other specific details such as the criticism of a regime characterised by a de Peinture et de Sculpture, exhibited at very close similarities between Krafft’s weak monarch who was under the influ- the Salon in 1781 (Fig. 2).8 It depicts depiction of Belisarius’ companion and ence of a disingenuous aristocracy.6 The how one of the soldiers previously under Psyche in Gérard’s famous painting subject also provided the opportunity to Belisarius’ command discovers, to his Psyche Receiving Cupid’s First Kiss, allegorically target more general criticism distress, the destitute former general. exhibited at the Salon in Paris in 1798 at tyrannical princes, even if it was used Compositionally, the soldier, functions and today in the Louvre (inv no. 4739). by varying political factions – “liberals, as the viewer’s “guide” to the painting’s Krafft emphasises the pathos of moderate conservatives and conservatives theme.9 Other renowned examples of Belisarius through a tangible and all- masquerading as moderates” – and could works using the same subject at this period pervasive atmosphere of gravitas. thus have a range of content.7 It is not include a painting by another of David’s An especially important detail, also surprising that David, who at this time was students, François-Pascal-Simon Gérard common in other depicitions of the

Art Bulletin of Nationalmuseum Volumes 24–25, 2017–2018 112 ACQUISITIONS/PER KRAFFT THE YOUNGER AND BELISARIUS subject, is the boy guide’s use of the old general’s helmet to collect the alms he receives which serves to remind the viewer of his former glory and how far he had fallen from grace. Here, the artist’s inter- pretation is close to that of Marmontel who, in his vivid descriptions, emphasised the pitiful but soberly imposing figure of Belisarius using the perspectives of dif- ferent observers, in particular how this affected the soldiers who had been under the general’s command.12 However, Krafft differs from several of his predecessors in that he removes the soldier and entirely focuses on the two central figures. He locates them very close in the foreground, in what is reminiscent of a half-length portrait in three-quarter view; no longer is there a specific figure that provides a com- pass, pointing out the moral and political implications of the subject. Instead, this meeting is directly between the viewer and the unfortunate general. In terms of form, this depiction of the subject is close to that of a work by Benjamin West (1738–1820) from 1802 and a lesser known Belisarius by David, painted in Rome just before the artist left the city for Paris in 1780.13 However, the spirit of Krafft’s painting is most reminiscent of two other works: Gérard’s painting of the subject (Fig. 3) and Stouf’s bust (Fig. 4). Gerard’s atmospheric work also focuses solely on the general and the guide, depicted full-length and walking, against a precisely reproduced sunset in the background. Here, the former is carrying the latter who, by the artist’s invention, has been bitten by a snake. As in Fig. 3 François Gérard (1770–1837), Belisarius, 1797. Oil on canvas, 91.8 x 72.5 cm. The J. Paul Getty Krafft’s painting, the helmet also functions Museum, Los Angeles, 2005.10. as a symbol of the general’s unjust fall into disrepute. As Tony Halliday and Jennifer Marie Langworthy have stated, Gerard’s interpretation of the subject can be said to represent a step in a different direction to that of David; it has a more generally contemplative and emotional dimension, a desire to arouse a deeper sense of com- passion in the viewer, which was probably also influential for Krafft. This universal feeling could still be applied to specific

113 Art Bulletin of Nationalmuseum Volumes 24–25, 2017–2018 ACQUISITIONS/PER KRAFFT THE YOUNGER AND BELISARIUS

inspiration from Gérard’s work, while the sense of a realistic portrait that radiates from Belisarius’ face is strongly reminis- cent of Stouf’s bust; it has the same sunken cheeks, profile and furrowed brow. In 1799, when Krafft painted his Belisarius, the subject had had a firmly cemented position in French art for three decades, both before and after the Revolution. At this time, few other choices of subject could have been more typical of French Neo- classicism.17 However, as in the case of Gérard, when considering the form and content of Krafft’s work it is important to remember the turbulent years that followed the Revolution. David was close to Robespierre and, after the latter’s exe- cution in 1794, the artist was imprisoned for having de facto responsibility for what could be described as the visual pro- paganda of the reign of terror. Naturally, the experience of these varying political and artistic successes and setbacks left an impression on David’s art, which was gradually modified. Krafft enrolled as a student at David’s studio in 1796, not long after David had been released from prison and had restarted his teaching activities.18 Of course, the artistic role models and teachings that Krafft now absorbed were in some ways different to those that were Fig. 4 Jean-Baptiste Stouf (1742–1826), Belisarius, c. 1785–1791. Marble, 60 x 55 x 30 cm. The J. Paul Getty fashionable just a few years before, even Museum, Los Angeles, 2005.19. though they basically sprang from the same subjects and the same artist’s [or artists’] Neoclassicism.19 As a subject, Belisarius no longer necessarily entailed the same specific political allusions as those of Marmontel or, as in David’s painting from 1781, politically righteous phenomena in Gerard’s era, but in this There are two versions of Gérard’s work, and disconcerted, possibly dissident, case – perhaps paradoxically – the vulne- one that was exhibited at the Salon in indignation. Instead, what appears is a rable émigrés who were forced to flee the 1795 and one from 1797, which was pos- pared-down form and meditative content country during the revolution.14 Gerard’s sibly created for use when transferring as in the works of Gérard and Krafft.20 To picture of Belisarius’ troubled wandering the painting to an engraving.15 The latter some extent, there was a recurrence and the injured youth he is forced to carry painting probably remained in Gérard’s of the subject’s more depoliticised use, not only emphasises suffering, but also studio until 1807 and it is possible that including as an exemplum virtutis, an rootlessness. This interpretation shows Krafft saw the work there. Incidentally, example of virtue for “courage, steadfast- how versatile and useful this subject was Gérard’s studio was located in the Louvre, ness, and magnanimity”.21 in art and may also explain its prolonged just like David’s.16 In terms of colour and The then curator of the Swedish popularity. light, Krafft also appears to have taken his Royal Museum and member of the

Art Bulletin of Nationalmuseum Volumes 24–25, 2017–2018 114 ACQUISITIONS/PER KRAFFT THE YOUNGER AND BELISARIUS

Royal Swedish Academy of Fine Arts, Carl Fredrik Fredenheim (1748–1803), lamented that there was neither “light nor shadow” in Krafft’s painting when he saw it in 1801, which could perhaps reveal some unfamiliarity with the direction taken by Neoclassical painting in Paris in the late .22 Despite this, according to Fredenheim’s notes, out of the works that Krafft exhibited, it was Belisarius that the young king, Gustav IV (1778–1837) wished to “keep”.23 If we consider Krafft’s painting in the light of the subject’s adap- table and varied use, so well exemplified by the interpretations of Marmontel, David and Gérard, it is perhaps not surprising that the king fell for it. After all, he was the son of a king who had staged a coup d’état and then been assassinated. Gustav IV Adolf was surrounded by advisers whose loyalty was open to question for multiple reasons. He sympathised strongly with the émigrés of the ; that he was later deposed in a coup d’état and forced to live his life as a sufferingémigré can both be seen as a coincidence and a case of premonition. However, it could just as well have been the more funda- mentally virtuous aspects of the subject that appealed. It is an open question as to whether this variety of potential inter- pretations was why the king subsequently changed his mind and did not acquire the work.24 With great inspiration, Krafft’s work captures qualities that are both transient and eternal, and undoubtedly has traces of the changeable and sometimes complex content that the subject of Belisarius offers and which, in various ways, was taken up in the visual arts in the years following Fig. 5 Per Krafft the Younger (1777–1863),Belisarius , 1799. Oil on canvas, 125 x 94 cm. Purchase: the Hedda and N. D. Qvist Fund. Nationalmuseum, NM 7468. Before the removal of extensive overpaint. the publication of Marmontel’s novel. However, his work is principally a shining example of the more universal weight that the subject [re]gains in the years around 1800 and which, in turn, allows more opportunities for personal interpretation by its beholder.

115 Art Bulletin of Nationalmuseum Volumes 24–25, 2017–2018 ACQUISITIONS/PER KRAFFT THE YOUNGER AND BELISARIUS

Notes: Belisarius as Beggar & NMH 8/1981, Johan Tobias of Revolutionary France. Hong Kong 2006 (1995), 1. Evald E:son Uggla, Per Krafft d. y. och samtida Sergel (1740–1814), Belisarius as Beggar. Writing on “The Return of the Exile”, pp. 189–217, 343, note 58. svenskt porträttmåleri, Sveriges Allmänna an old label glued to the upper right corner of the 16. http://www.getty.edu/art/collection/objects/ Konstförenings publikation 36, thesis, Uppsala stretcher bar of Krafft’s painting says “Per Krafft 225120/baron-francois-pascal-simon-gerard- University, Stockholm 1928, pp. 17–18, 34–36, [the Younger] Copy 1800 of (probably) Gerard’s belisarius-french-1797/ E:son Uggla assumes that 38–40, 321, cat. no. 409, fig. 18. painting ‘The Blind Belisarius’”. Later writing on Gérard, Krafft, as well as David, probably used the 2. Ibid. the label states: “According to Nationalmuseum same model for Belisarius in their paintings. E:son 3. Ibid. The 1801 catalogue of the Royal Swedish original by P.K. the Y.” Uggla 1928, p. 39, 204, note 61. Academy of Fine Arts describes Krafft’s painting in 11. Evald E:son Uggla, Minnesutställning över Per 17. Fried 1980, pp. 145–160. Boime 1980, pp. 81–101. the following manner: “Finally, this brave, Oriental Krafft d.y. 1777–1863,Nationalmusei exhibition 18. Dorothy Johnson, “Jacques-Louis David: Emperor Justinian, General and defender of the catalogue no. 25 Stockholm 1927, pp. 5–8, 13–14, Artist and Teacher. An Introduction”, included Realm, was through jealous men’s and enemies’ cat. no. 10 (entitled The Begging Belisarius). E:son in Johnson, Dorothy (ed.), Jacques-Louis David: plotters, by the same Emperor sentenced to lose Uggla preferred Krafft’s portraiture, writing: “The New Perspectives. Cranbury, NJ, 2006, pp. 35–44. both his eyes, and sent to the begging staff.” portraits from this time are considerably superior Philippe Bordes, “Jacques-Louis David et ses 4. Michael Fried, Absorption and Theatricality: to the Antique compositions, of which Belisarius is élèves: les stratégies de l’atelier”, in Perspective, Painting and Beholder in the Age of Diderot, one example”. no. 1, 2014, p. 113. http://journals.openedition.org/ University of California Press, 1980, pp. 145–151. 12. Fried 1980, pp. 151–152. Boime 1980, pp. 83–84. perspective/4387 Albert Boime, Marmontel’s Belisaire and the Pre- Marmontel 1994 (1767). 19. Ibid. Revolutionary Progressivism of David, included in 13. West’s painting is now at the Detroit Institute 20. Halliday 2000, pp. 54–55. Langworthy 2012, Art History, vol. 3, no. 1, March 1980, pp. 81–101. of Arts, accession number 13.11. Masterworks from p. 196. Crow 2006 (1995), pp. 189–217. Jean-François Marmontel, Bélisaire, the Musée des Beaux-Arts, Lille 1992, pp. 139–140, 21. Fried 1980, pp. 147, 150. Société des Textes Français Modernes, édition eta- note 5. 22. E:son Uggla 1928, p. 204, note 63: “Krafft’s little blié, présentée et annotée par Robert Granderoute, 14. E:son Uggla 1928, pp. 29–30, 40, 204, note 61, portrait of himself is more satisfying than his three Paris 1994 (1767), pp. XXV–XLI. 257, cat. no. 4. One of Krafft’s earliest, and best, large paintings with neither light nor shadow”, 5. Marmontel 1994 (1767), pp. I–V, XXV–XLI. Fried portraits actually depicts a famous French émigré, quote from Carl Fredrik Fredenheim’s journal, 14 1980, p. 147. Boime 1980, pp. 82–84. François-Emmanuel Guignard, comte de Saint- August 1800. 6. Fried 1980, p. 147. Boime 1980, p. 83. Priest (1735–1821). It was painted in Stockholm in 23. E:son Uggla 1928, pp. 38–40, 204, note 64: 7. Boime 1980, p. 82. 1795, when the artist was just 18 years old. “Of Kraft’s [sic] three paintings, the king keeps that 8. Fried 1980, pp. 154–160. Boime 1980, pp. 81–102. Nationalmuseum, Stockholm, inv. no. 2179. which depicts Belisaire”, quote from Carl Fredrik The work is now at the Musée des Beaux-Arts, The Belisarius by Gerard that was exhibited Fredenheim’s journal, 25 August 1800. Lille. Masterworks from the Musée des Beaux-Arts, at the Salon in 1795 later became part of the 24. Ibid. Lille, exh. cat., Musée des Beaux-Arts, Lille and Leuchtenberg Collection in St Petersburg. Its Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York 1992, inv. owner and location are now unknown. See, no. 436, cat. no. 28., pp. 139–140. There is also a among others: Tony Halliday, Facing the Public: smaller replica of the painting in the Louvre, inv. Portraiture in the Aftermath of the French no. 3694. It was painted in 1784 for the comte Revolution, Manchester 2000, pp. 54–55 & d’Angiviller (1730–1810), Director General of the Jenifer-Marie Langworthy, On Shifting Ground: Royal Palces, and partly executed by David’s The Revolutioary Career of François Gérard, diss, students François-Xavier Fabre (1766–1837) Grauate College of the University of Illinois at and Anne-Louis Girodet (1767–1824). See: Urbana Campaign, 2012, p. 10 & particularly chap- Ulf Cederlöf, Pontus Grate, & Birgitta Sandström, ter 4: “Retellings: ‘Gérard’s Marius and Belisarius’”, På klassisk mark: Målare i Rom på 1780-talet, pp. 176 (187)–210. François-Pascal-Simon Gérard, Nationalmuseum, Stockholm, exh. cat. no. 204, Belisarius (1797) & Jean-Baptiste Stouf, Belisarius Udevalla 1982, pp. 30–32, cat. no. 9. (1785–1791), J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, 9. Fried 1980, pp. 154–160. inv. no. 2005.10 & inv. no. 2005.19. During the 10. Fried 1980, pp. 152–154. Boime 1980, pp. 85–87. period that Krafft was in Paris, Stouf’s work was Masterworks from the Musée des Beaux-Arts, Lille owned by art collector Auguste-Louis-César- 1992, pp. 139–140, note 9. There are two versions Hippolyte-Théodore de Lespinasse de Langeac, of Gérard’s painting (1795 & 1797). The latter, like comte d’Arlet. http://www.getty.edu/art/ Stouf’s bust (ca. 1785–1791), is now at the J. Paul collection/objects/225120/baron-francois-pascal- Getty Museum, Los Angeles. Jollain’s painting simon-gerard-belisarius-french-1797/ &http:// (1767) has long been lost, but we know of it through www.getty.edu/art/collection/objects/225277/ Diderot’s description. Durameau’s painting (1775) jean-baptiste-stouf-belisarus-french-about-1785- is now at the Musée Ingres, Montauban; Vincent’s 1791/#8fb947da1d5e84c9e4f28e4fd82237a3f- painting (1776) in the Musée Fabre, Montpel- 31db0c lier; Peyron’s paining (1779) and Houdon’s bust 15. Léonore Merimée (1757–1836) was previously in Musée des Augustins, Tolouse. Other relevant believed to be the creator of this smaller version, works with the same subject in the collection of the a belief still presented in Langworthy 2012, pp. Nationalmuseum are the drawings NMH 12/2006, 188–189, 409, note 33, fig. 74. Crow, Thomas, Antoine-François Callet (1741–1823), The Blind Emulation: David, Drouais and Girodet in the Art

Art Bulletin of Nationalmuseum Volumes 24–25, 2017–2018 116