This is a collage of two paintings depicting Napoleon crossing the Alps, more specifically the Great St Bernard Pass, in May 1800. The painting on the left was commissioned in the immediate aftermath of the expedition to Italy and painted by the famous Neoclassical painter Jacques-Louis David in 1801-05. It is an idealized equestrian portrait of Napoleon, wearing a colourful uniform and striking a powerful pose on a strong steed. He is presented as a fearless and fierce military commander, leading his armies through hardships to glory. The image evokes the implicit tradition of ancient equestrian portraits (cf. Alexander the Great) and includes the explicit references to Hannibal and Charlemagne at the bottom. The painting on the right was actually inspired by the painting on the left, but the style and intention are completely different. It still depicts Napoleon crossing the Alps, but it was painted in a Realist style by Paul Delaroche in 1850. Napoleon is grim and tired from the harsh cold, wearing an ordinary gray coat, and riding a mule, rather than a horse. While the second image is a more realistic portrayal of the crossing of the Alps, both contrasting paintings are very telling sources for the role of propaganda and media in history.
Hi Izidor! Thanks for this collage. I just wonder what your take on “great men” and their role in history is. Do they deservedly take so much attention in the books and on the pictures?
Thank you Iurii! You are completely right. Thomas Carlyle’s great man theory influenced historiography ever since antiquity; really, it still influences it today. Thus, some individuals have been given overwhelming attention from the historians. Napoleon has even given a name to the period, i.e. the Napoleonic era. However, I think that Karl Marx said it best in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon (III, the nephew of the above-mentioned Napoleon) in 1852: “Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past.”
I love this quote; it is brilliant as well as your commentary on it! However, I am tempted to ask — why should we study history if we cannot or “do not make it as we please”?
Thank you Yuri. I think this is a major challenge of historiography, i.e. analysing deeds and feats of people through the context of “circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past.” Furthermore, if I may use one of my favourite sociological concepts from Robert K. Merton, recognizing “unintended consequences” is one of the greatest pleasures in studying history.