LIBERTÉ, LÉGALITÉ, SOUVERAINETÉ: CHANGING MEANINGS OF AN ALLEGORY IN LE BARBIER’S REPRESENTATIONS OF THE DÉCLARATION DES DROITS DE L’HOMME ET DU CITOYEN

This article analyzes three visual works representing the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man attributed to Le Barbier: two paintings and one engraving. The article makes the hypothesis that one painting was executed shortly after the Declaration in August 1789, while the other was made after the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Potestas 2024-01, Vol.24 (24), p.51-88
1. Verfasser: Poulsen, Frank Ejby
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This article analyzes three visual works representing the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man attributed to Le Barbier: two paintings and one engraving. The article makes the hypothesis that one painting was executed shortly after the Declaration in August 1789, while the other was made after the engraving, dated November 5, 1790. Treating visual works as texts and combining methods in art history and intellectual history, the article’s main argument is that the two paintings express different narratives and thereby different views on sovereignty. Identifying the right allegory as a genius figure of liberty, the first painting presents her annunciating the Supreme Being’s natural rights to monarchical France. The engraving erroneously claims the allegory to be the Law, while the setting is changed and the scepter points to the Supreme Being, thereby giving legitimate sovereignty to the National Assembly. This change marks an early representation of Republican France. This article analyzes three visual works representing the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man attributed to Le Barbier: two paintings and one engraving. The article makes the hypothesis that one painting was executed shortly after the Declaration in August 1789, while the other was made after the engraving, dated November 5, 1790. Treating visual works as texts and combining methods in art history and intellectual history, the article’s main argument is that the two paintings express different narratives and thereby different views on sovereignty. Identifying the right allegory as a genius figure of liberty, the first painting presents her annunciating the Supreme Being’s natural rights to monarchical France. The engraving erroneously claims the allegory to be the Law, while the setting is changed and the scepter points to the Supreme Being, thereby giving legitimate sovereignty to the National Assembly. This change marks an early representation of Republican France.
ISSN:1888-9867
2340-499X
DOI:10.6035/potestas.7824