CONSTANTINO BRUMIDI
MICHELANGELO
OF THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL

CONSTANTINO
BRUMIDI

MICHELANGELO OF THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL
By Myrtle Cheney Murdock

... So long has Brumidi devoted
his heart and strength to this
Capitol that his love and reverence
for it is not surpassed by even that
of Michelangelo for St. Peter’s.

SENATOR JUSTIN S. MORRILL, FEB. 24, 1880

Monumental Press, Inc.
WASHINGTON · 1950
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
COPYRIGHT, 1950, BY MYRTLE CHENEY MURDOCK, WASHINGTON, D. C.
TO MY SON
LT. DAVID N. MURDOCK

Musician, Athlete, Infantryman
killed in action at Palermo, Italy
August 11, 1943

Preface

IT SHOULD be made clear by way of an introduction to this appraisal of Constantino Brumidi that the author is neither an artist nor an art critic. I am simply the wife of a Western Congressman who has been stirred by the patriotism of the Italian refugee-artist, Brumidi; by his exquisite decorations on the walls and ceilings of our Capitol Building of the United States; by his persistent effort in the face of blinding criticism; and finally by the lack, of recognition characterized by his unmarked burial place.

I have asked myself these questions many times: “How can countless exquisite frescoes and paintings adorn our Capitol Building and yet the American people have little or no knowledge of their existence?” “Can an artist spend twenty-five years decorating this Capitol Building and then remain as unknown as his frescoes?” “How could a Government such as ours, that has rewarded so many for so much, forget the artist, Brumidi, and let him lie unhonored and unknown for seventy years in an unmarked grave?”

These questions I cannot answer. I can only record for you authenticated Brumidi facts as they have unfolded themselves to me during the fourteen years I have been inspired by the artist’s frescoes—all the time waiting for a poet or an artist to tell this story.

However, I do know that great service and sacrifice in our Democracy often are not rewarded until long years have slipped away. I know, too, that unjust criticism and ridicule can so befog the patriotic works of a good man that even half a century is often not long enough for those works to emerge with all their significant meaning.

I know, also, that when the early refugees to our shores negotiated immediately for citizenship it indicated sincere appreciation for America. This was true of Constantino Brumidi. He landed in New York on September 18, 1852; he filed his original intention to become a citizen of the United States on November 9, 1852; and he was admitted and sworn on November 12, 1857. Indeed, he was so fired with love of liberty that no amount of work and determined effort was too great for him to expend for his adopted country.

He worked on the Capitol Building of the United States throughout the terms of six presidents: Franklin Pierce; James Buchanan; Abraham Lincoln; Andrew Johnson; Ulysses S. Grant; and Rutherford B. Hayes. He made frescoed ceilings and wall murals in six Committee Rooms—five in the Senate extension and one in the House extension. He is responsible for the complete design and execution of the President’s Room in the Senate Annex, the Senate Reception Room and a large mural in the House of Representatives itself, the latter bearing his signature.

At the age of sixty he finished the almost unbelievable task of painting in the very top of the Dome of the Capitol Building 4,664 square feet of concave fresco—huge colorful figures that appear life-size 180 feet below. Brumidi was evidently in sympathy with the words of Lincoln, voiced when a critic put this question to our great President, “Do you intend to continue building on the Capitol Dome during this war?” Lincoln replied, “If the world sees this Capitol going on they will know that we intend the Union shall go on.”

And even before the Civil War Brumidi sketched the fifteen scenes of American history for a frieze to encircle the Rotunda, some 58 feet above the floor. He had prayed to live long enough to paint this frieze, but when the signal finally came from Capitol authorities to begin this last cherished fresco he was an old man of seventy-two. Brumidi had lost his physical strength but not his will to work toward the completion of his dream.

The young wife he had married at the height of his American financial success had long since gone with a younger man; his lonely years and his poverty weighed heavily upon him; criticism and ridicule had undoubtedly taken their toll but the old artist persistently stayed with that last assignment.

Even when he slipped on his painting platform, the day of his almost fatal accident, and hung by his bare hands 58 feet above the stone floor of the Rotunda, until workmen could reach him from the top of the Dome and from the floor below—even then it must have been sheer will power that closed those old artist hands tight enough to hold his body weight from the floor below.

But he never came back to finish his frieze. He died “at his parlor studio with his work about him,” amid the loneliness and poverty which he feared. He was buried by a few friends and forgotten.

That burial place was lost to our National Government for a period of seventy years but the 81st Congress of the United States, without debate, has voted to erect a monument, a simple marker, at the recently found burial site of the Capitol artist. This National recognition, though belated, is sincere appreciation for the Brumidi frescoes in the Capitol Building of the United States that proclaim for all time the artist’s genius, his love of liberty, and his reverence for America.

There is continually being uncovered other evidence of appreciation for the artist Brumidi—recognition that has lain buried in the hearts and homes of numerous American families and churches since the year 1880. Many Brumidi canvases outside the Capitol Building of the United States have been found: portraits of friends; working sketches in color for the artist’s huge frescoes; and magnificent murals for church altars. Some of these treasures are being offered to the Government of the United States with the thought that a collection of Brumidiana may ultimately be on exhibit at some central spot accessible to the American people.

What the critics termed “gaudy colored plaster” ninety years ago can, by the miracle of modern printing, be reproduced for us today with all the original color preserved. Could the artist have foreseen the exquisite Brumidi reproductions in this book the burden of his last lonely years would have been lightened.

M. C. M.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Vital research, extending over a period of years, necessarily touches many people. At the culmination of any valued study an author suddenly finds himself indebted to countless individuals. Fashioning a mosaic from the life of Constantino Brumidi in spite of many missing pieces has been no exception. I find myself humble before my corps of helpers.

After a dozen years of assembling the Brumidi life story it suddenly became urgent that the material should be in printed form. At the same time it also became apparent that publishing a Brumidi volume featuring the artist’s Capital frescoes in color might never be realized, due to the initial cost of such a book. At a crucial moment, two Foundations, who wish to remain anonymous, became interested in the Capitol artist and were anxious to help the project. Their timely grants influenced beyond measure the final decision that such a publication could be attempted. I acknowledge this valued assistance with deepest gratitude.

Years before this publication was conceived I began collecting reproductions of the Brumidi Capitol frescoes. The book itself makes use of this collection together with many color reproductions by the same nationally known photographer, Theodor Horydczak. The Brumidi frontispiece by Brady was made by Mary Evans of the L. C. Handy Studios.

Also before there was any thought of a publication the Architect of the Capitol, the Hon. David Lynn, made available to me the Brumidi files for study. The interest and courtesy of Mr. Lynn and his assistants always spurred my efforts. The Sergeant at Arms of the Senate, the Hon. Joseph C. Duke, and the Sergeant at Arms of the House, the Hon. Joseph H. Callahan, have at all times shown their concern for the Brumidi project by making available to the author the services of their offices.

I have needed and greatly valued the sincere interest of the Capitol Guides and their leader, Harry Nash, who has been a Brumidi enthusiast during his thirty-five years’ work as a guide in the Capitol Building of the United States.

The Congressional services of the Library of Congress have shown great enthusiasm for the Brumidi research by tracing willingly every suggested clue and in addition often have launched forth on what seemed completely hidden trails and emerged with valuable materials. I am remembering at the moment the late George H. Milne of the Congressional Reading Room whose appreciative feeling for Brumidi and his art helped to bolster my early enthusiasm. The National Archives is another such human service in our governmental set-up. It was personal appreciation for Brumidi on the part of a group of employees of the National Archives that led to the finding of so many public documents vital to this study.

I wish to acknowledge especially the services of the National Gallery of Art and the National Collection of Fine Arts. These two galleries have had a continuing interest in the unfolding Brumidi story. The officials of the National Gallery of Art not only have been willing consultants concerning the materials for an art book but have commissioned their fresco expert to climb to the top of the Capitol Dome to examine minutely the 4,664 square feet of Brumidi painting. When the expert pronounced the Canopy “real fresco,” the National Gallery sincerely shared my own joy at this verification. A special debt of gratitude goes to the Director of the National Collection of Fine Arts, Thomas M. Beggs, for his splendid introduction to this Brumidi memorial volume.

Because of Brumidi’s twenty-five years’ service within the Capitol Building of the United States, the nation’s Public Printer, the Hon. John J. Deviny, of the Government Printing Office, delegated Frank H. Mortimer, Director of Typography and Design, to make available to the author consultation and advice upon the many problems connected with the publication of an art book. Mr. Mortimer and Mr. Warren W. Ferris of the Division of Typography and Design have carried their help far beyond the limit of duty. Their feeling for the subject matter of the book that makes known the forgotten Capitol artist, and their desire to show forth his work with the best possible arrangement and design, are partly responsible for the dignified beauty of this volume.

Many individuals throughout the Capital City have helped materially by their Brumidi enthusiasm, their sincere good wishes and by their active interest in locating Brumidiana outside the Capitol Building. Mildred Thompson, the great-grandniece of Mrs. Brumidi, the former Lola Germon, has carried on consistent research of her own into the Germon family which has verified many dates and other facts concerning the Capitol artist. James H. Rowe, grandnephew of Lola Germon Brumidi, has performed an outstanding service to the author by making available to her the working sketches for the Rotunda Frieze. His desire to make known his treasure by sending the priceless scroll across the continent is deeply appreciated, although the sketches arrived almost too late to have even one of the fifteen included on the last page of the book’s supplement.

Washington clubs and organizations have displayed their love for the Capitol Building of the United States by supporting in every possible way the author’s over-all plan to make known the forgotten Capitol artist. Native Washingtonians together with recent arrivals have been eager to visit the Capitol Building and to be shown the Brumidi frescoes. These same Brumidi friends have also helped to promote the marking of the artist’s lonely grave in Glenwood Cemetery.

Members of the Washington Press have been especially understanding and helpful. Editors, correspondents and reporters alike have combined to tell the American people about this Capitol artist and his great love for American liberty. This sincere spirit of cooperation and feeling for Brumidi is acknowledged appreciatively.

Congressman Murdock has consistently encouraged the Brumidi research through the years. His continued patient interest has helped immeasurably. To him and to Martha Wing go my last measure of gratitude for their persistent combing of the manuscript for minute error.

It is a warm and friendly feeling of indebtedness that I have toward those who have made appraisals in writing for this volume: Mr. Beggs adds new appreciation for the Italian artist; Architect Lynn sees Brumidi an integral part of the Capitol Building; and Virgil Perry pays tribute to the author and to the book in a manner to make us proud. All of this courtesy, however, is above and beyond friendship. It is a vital part of the Memorial to Constantino Brumidi.

Myrtle Cheney Murdock

Washington, D. C., October, 1950

Table of Contents

Illustrations

[* Indicates real fresco.]

Introduction

ENSHRINED in the domed Rotunda of the United States Capitol, as in the Roman Pantheon from which it is descended, are the noblest hopes of a mighty Nation. Yet less fearful of incurring the wrath of an unpropitiated power than the ancients who raised a statue in their sacred temple to “The Unknown God,” the American people have neglected and all but forgotten patriotic mural painting. Long overdue also is grateful tribute to its one-time protagonist, Constantino Brumidi. The story of Brumidi’s life in this country and his labors to express allegorically its principles of government and record visually the events and personalities which achieved its establishment should be instructive reading for many and particularly for those concerned with the direction of American painting. By it they may be led to the realization of a vital force that should be an important factor in national life, an unknown power needed now in support of the heritage we are called upon to defend.

The early settler in North America had little opportunity for monumental painting. The austerity of religious belief dominating many new world settlements, infused as they were with the spirit of the Reformation, afforded meager encouragement to its development. American artists, following Benjamin West to England, leaned heavily upon British custom and precedent. West’s pupils—Charles Willson Peale, Gilbert Stuart and Joseph Wright—became makers of likenesses, and liberty-loving John Trumbull pursued historical painting to produce four of the eight great framed pictures of the Rotunda of the Capitol. Contrasted with Brumidi’s paintings, these mark the difference between the easel picture, a loosely related, detachable embellishment, and mural decoration designed in scale and color especially to enhance architecture.

The easel picture, the favored form of painting in the United States, is a symbol not only of the American artist’s independence of expression and freedom of enterprise but also of his dependence upon his own resources and private patronage. Easily transported, it is adaptable for exhibit in distant galleries, for sale to successive owners, and is more easily reproduced. In the 19th century it was largely the means of living for the professional fine artist. George Catlin found admission charges to his exhibits remunerative. Others turned to engravings of their subjects for profit. In the 20th century the framed picture has become the delight of the amateur. American enjoyment of freedom of thought and action is lived in the solitude of private studios. Yet too rarely do these common privileges and fortunate blessings become the subject matter of the canvases. These canvases exist solely for the enjoyment of the individual.

Mural painting, however, in comparison to easel picture painting, is made for the edification of large numbers of people and demands the formal presentation of themes affecting all. The work of Brumidi, though in a foreign style long past the crest of its vigor in service to the Church, was found more suited to the requirements of monumental architecture than that of native painters of the middle of the 19th century.

The monumental mural is usually better if executed in fresco, the medium which Brumidi used. This process of painting directly on the wall is called “fresco secco” if the wall is allowed to harden and become almost dry and the pigment bound to it by means of a glue size, casein or egg yolk. This is much inferior to the true or “buono fresco” employed by Brumidi in the dome which is painting on freshly laid plaster with pigment suspended in pure water. Because the mortar sets in six or eight hours the painting must be done in sections no larger than can be completed at one time. In true fresco a finished study is generally required. Frequently this assumes the form of a full-size detailed drawing known as a cartoon. The outline of this is transferred to the damp plaster wall by pouncing dry color through a perforated tracing or “pattern,” or the cartoon on very light tough paper may be held against the surface and contours pressed into the damp wall with a stylus.

Figures are modeled within the drawn lines. Terre verte is employed in underpainting flesh, the rosier tones being superimposed later. Accessories are painted in washes of varying depths and appropriate colors further deepened or lightened until the desired three-dimensional effect is gained. In the Sistine Chapel, Michelangelo used color glazes with such economy that the panels and single figures of his great ceiling decorations truly appear as water color paintings. Brumidi depended upon a heavier use of pigment and built up his lights opaquely.

If the day’s allotted portion is not satisfactorily finished while the wall is still absorbent, it must be removed and worked again. As the moisture leaves, the mortar sets and the wall hardens, its colors becoming lighter and more sparkling as the white lime and crystalline sand shine through. Carbon dioxide, ever present in the air, gradually combines with calcium hydroxide of the lime plaster resulting in a carbonate not unlike marble itself and very durable. Thus, the decoration is truly a part of the architecture and, being inseparable from it, is far more satisfactory than canvases from the most able painters to be attached to wall or ceiling.

In the face of the current challenge to the American way of life our painters should be given space in our Federal and State buildings for decorations reaffirming the faith that made our Nation great. More artists at present should be engaged in depicting the virtues of our system of government in the interest of the development of appreciative citizenship upon which it so justly depends.

Today, due to the rapidly declining private fortunes of the industrialist-connoisseur class, the artist is facing a vacuity in art patronage. Establish in its place a small but steadily sustained federal program of mural painting, and a revival is possible here in the United States not unlike that experienced in England when the social satire of Hogarth’s brush was followed under royal patronage by one of the most productive and prosperous periods of British painting.

This penetrating study of the life and works of Constantino Brumidi by Dr. Murdock should arouse in public-spirited readers a desire to honor the fresco artist for his accomplishment, an understanding of which is of fundamental importance in a movement to further a strong national program of mural art of an inspiring type. It is appropriate that this history be addressed to laymen by one alert to the problems of the hour and sensitive to the need of general public awareness of the power of painting.

Thomas M. Beggs, Director
NATIONAL COLLECTION OF FINE ARTS
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

Constantino Brumidi, Italian Refugee

IT WAS late afternoon. The House of Representatives Chamber in the Capitol Building of the United States was deserted, save for one lone figure that stood motionless before the freshly painted mural on the south wall. Everything about this man in long black cape and close fitting beret betokened pride and triumph in achievement—the tense erectness of the body, the tilt of the head, the glow of the cheek and even the angle at which he held his pallet and brush. Suddenly, with strength and determination he said aloud, “I’ll do it,” then he rushed back to the picture, bent possessively over the lower right hand corner and began painting with quick, deft movements. When the lonely figure finally left the Chamber he seemed so satisfied with his work that he never once looked back.

Eighty years later as I stood before that mural on the south wall of our House of Representatives Chamber—that portrayal of a crisis in American history, representing Washington at Yorktown, I beheld for the first time the words in the lower right hand corner, left by that proud painter back in 1857, “C. Brumidi, artist. Citizen of the U. S.” Suddenly I asked myself, “Who is this C. Brumidi who has so much pride in his adopted country as to paint a portion of its Revolutionary history on the wall of the House of Representatives Chamber, and who glories so much in the citizenship of his adopted country that he emblazons that sentiment forever before the Congress of the United States?” I had no thought at that moment that those words inscribed on the wall of the Capitol Building of the United States by Constantino Brumidi could well be considered his epitaph, for he had no other, expressed in words. And of course I was unaware of the bitter criticism that followed his every effort. But I am ahead of my story.

So much did I want to see what this lover of America had done for his adopted country by way of decorating our Capitol Building, that I searched out every frescoed wall and ceiling, every painted panel, lunette, or medallion in committee rooms, corridors and Rotunda that were attributed to the Italian artist. As the number of those paintings mounted in my tabulations and as the beauty of his decorations sank into my consciousness, I decided he must have spent a lifetime in America for surely it would take a lifetime for such accomplishment. Then I learned that Brumidi came from Italy to America when he was almost fifty years old!

From meager biographical data the following additional facts came quickly to light: Brumidi was born in Italy in 1805, grew up in Rome, was admitted to the Academy of Arts in that city when only thirteen years old, and at the age of about thirty-five “restored some paintings in the Sacred Palaces to the full satisfaction of Pope Gregory XVIth.”

About all that is known of the artist’s next twenty years is that he became involved in “the French occupation of Rome in the year 1849 for the suppression of Republican institutions,” and when his friend, Pope Pius IX, was banished from Rome Brumidi was thrown into prison for fourteen months. As Captain of the Papal Guard Brumidi had refused to obey certain orders against his friends which resulted in the enmity of Cardinal Antonelli, Minister of State. Pope Pius IX was finally restored to the Vatican but he was unable to save Brumidi except on condition that the artist would flee the country and never return. Finally, to save his own life, Brumidi was forced to leave Italy. He reached America in 1852.

While the above facts concerning Brumidi were much the same in the few available references in the Library of Congress, stories of Brumidi’s life in America and of his services to the United States seemed to vary with the enthusiasm or bias of the narrator. Certain conflicting statements centered about the merit and authenticity of his paintings; the genuineness of his American patriotism; the amount of money paid him for the paintings in the Capitol Building; the loyalty of the artist’s family; the appreciation of the American people; and the poverty of the artist at the time of his death. For the most part, however, little has been written and less has been publicly known about the artist who spent his last twenty-five years in devoted effort toward beautifying the Capitol Building of the United States.

The most sympathetic appraisals of Brumidi’s art and his years in America have been done by Charles E. Fairman, Smith D. Fry, George C. Hazelton, Randolph Keim, and S. D. Wyeth. Mr. Wyeth wrote a small pamphlet of six pages in 1866 on “Brumidi’s Allegorical Painting within the Canopy of the Rotunda.” That was the year after Brumidi had finished the huge canopy fresco in the Dome of the Capitol Building. The author was so intent upon the allegorical interpretation of the figures in the Dome canopy that he almost forgot the artist and his art. He did, however, refer to Brumidi in this manner, “Brumidi has been mainly engaged for years in ornamenting various portions of the walls of the Capitol, and his name will ever be associated with the history and beauty of our world renowned National building.”

THE EYE OF THE DOME

The focal point of this Rotunda panorama is the huge Brumidi fresco covering The Eye of the Dome. At this perspective the six allegorical groupings about the circumference of the fresco are partly hidden from view. A portion of Brumidi’s unfinished frieze, painted in imitation sculpture, shows below the windows. Two white balconies encircle the dome, one between the windows and the frieze, and the other at the very top. A hidden stairway winds its way between the two iron shells of the Dome, a vertical distance of 180 feet from the rotunda floor.

Since the Rotunda scaffolding, from which Brumidi worked on the Dome canopy, was removed in January 1866 and the magnificent fresco was then lighted and displayed for the first time to the public, we have every reason to believe that Wyeth’s six pages of allegorical explanations of that huge fresco, printed the same year, were direct from Brumidi’s own carefully planned allegories.

The tiny book entitled, “Keim’s Capitol Interior and Diagrams” was published in 1874. Since its stated purpose was “to furnish the visitor to the Capitol with complete and reliable plans and diagrams, with reference to and accurate descriptions of all objects of interest within the building,” it made no effort to evaluate the Brumidi paintings but it did give a comprehensive record throughout as to the location of Brumidi’s work. Most of the Brumidi frescoes, oils, and decorative portions can still be identified by the Keim references but some are evidently gone forever, while others undoubtedly are merely covered by the wall board or artificial ceiling panels of later renovations.

In George C. Hazelton’s book, “The National Capitol,” printed in 1897, and dealing with “The Architecture, Art and History of the National Capitol,” we find Brumidi a bit more appreciatively treated. Said Hazelton, “No higher compliment could be paid to his genius than the expression of a group of artists who were decorating the new building for the Congressional Library. When they visited the Capitol to study the frescoes of the Italian, they said, ‘We have nothing equal to this in the Library. There is no one who can do such work today.’” Then Hazelton continued, “Brumidi’s work so identifies him with the Capitol Building that he may almost now be called the Michelangelo of the Capitol.”

In “Fry’s Patriotic Story of the Capitol,” a booklet published in 1912, the author refers repeatedly to Brumidi in such an intimate way as to lead the reader to believe that Smith D. Fry must have known Brumidi personally and must have loved the artist genuinely. Since Mr. Fry graduated from law school the year the artist died it is not impossible that the two were personally acquainted. In the following Fry quotation there is evidence to support this view and the human touch to the biographical sketch may have come direct from the artist himself. Mr. Fry wrote,

“When about forty years of age, Brumidi threw away his brush and his great career, declaring that he would never paint another stroke until he had found liberty. Because of an indignity suffered by a member of his family he became a revolutionary soldier and fought in vain for liberty. When almost fifty years old he was banished from Italy and came to America. Here he found liberty and became an intensely patriotic citizen.”

Mr. Fry then gives a direct quotation from the artist himself. This is unique, being the only direct quotation from Brumidi passed on in this manner. Said Mr. Fry, “When Brumidi’s merit was disclosed (in America) fame and fortune sought him. Thousands of dollars were his for the taking. He refused all allurements in these words, ‘I have no longer any desire for fame or fortune. My one ambition and my daily prayer is that I may live long enough to make beautiful the Capitol of the one country on earth in which there is liberty.’”

Charles E. Fairman, art curator of the Capitol for thirty-two years, compiled during that time valuable records on the “Art and Artists of the Capitol of the United States of America.” Mr. Fairman was born in 1854 about the time Brumidi began his decorations of the Capitol Building. Although Mr. Fairman did not begin his own work at the Capitol Building until 1911 it is entirely possible that as a young man he had occasion to watch Brumidi at work. While Mr. Fairman maintains an impersonal attitude in his treatment of Brumidi, his record is invaluable as proof of the authenticity of certain Brumidi frescoes and paintings.

The whole colossal piece of research so carefully assembled by Mr. Fairman and printed in 1927 contained the best summary of documentary material available on Constantino Brumidi. Since Mr. Fairman’s book covered all art and artists in any manner having connection with the Capitol Building the parts devoted to Brumidi and his murals occupy a not too prominent division of the book. However, Mr. Fairman’s combined references to Constantino Brumidi are of great service to one making a more extended study of the Capitol muralist.

The Daily Evening Telegraph of Philadelphia announced Brumidi’s death in its issue of February 19, 1880. On the following day this same paper carried a lengthy article purporting to be an evaluation of the Brumidi frescoes. So scathing and crude was the criticism by this anonymous writer, even before the old artist had been buried, that one senses instinctively that this same type of critical carping had no doubt been stalking Brumidi from other sources during a period of years. The following quotation is a glaring example of this unjust criticism:

“...Of Brumidi, the frescoer of the Capitol at Washington, whose death was announced yesterday, it may be said, ‘He was most industrious.’ If hard work always represents a value given and received, the industrious Brumidi could be put down as having fairly earned the large sums which must have been paid him out of the public treasury. But, if the quality of his work is considered, we doubt whether those who are at all competent to judge with regard to the matter will differ among themselves as to the fact that his employment for a long term of years, in the face of repeated and emphatic protests from people who knew what good decoration was, was most scandalous.

“...He was permitted to paint on the interior of the dome a composition which, both in design and execution, is about as abominable as anything of that kind well could be. Now that he is dead and out of the way, let us hope that something like a serious effort will be made to have his place filled by an artist who is an artist, and who has some claims to consideration other than that of being skilled in the fresco process.”

On that same day, Friday, February 20, 1880, another reporter, this time for the Washington Post in the Capital City, told of the death and life of Brumidi with a show of sympathetic appreciation. A portion of this article follows:

DEATH OF A GREAT ARTIST

“Constantino Brumidi, the artist, died yesterday morning at his residence, 921 G Street, at 6:30 o’clock. For months past he has been failing, but until within two weeks has been able to work every day in his studio, and was dressed and sat up each day until the one preceding his death. For a fortnight he has been failing rapidly. The last twenty-four hours before his death he was unconscious, but at the last moment he recognized those around him. The funeral will be attended from the house on Saturday. Mr. Brumidi leaves no family in this city except an adopted son, who bears his name and has adopted his father’s profession.

“Almost until the last hour he continued his work on the frescoes in the dome of the Capitol, though compelled to sit instead of standing, his hand and eye were as true and strong as ever, and the work from that point on shows no loss in spirit or excellence of execution. For months the little scaffold that clings to the wall in mid air under the dome of the Capitol has been deserted, and curious strangers, looking at the neglected cartoons hanging over the railings have been told that Brumidi would never come back to finish his frescoes. It was the dream of his life that he should come back. He wanted with his own hand to lead that historic procession round the dome till the encircling frieze should be complete. Of late, as growing infirmities have pressed upon him, he has gradually abandoned the hope and occupied himself in enlarging his original cartoons to working size, so that any artist might complete the work by simply following copy.—He lies in the pleasant parlor studio of his house, in death as in life, with his work about him. Half-finished designs are sketched on the walls, and busts and statuettes fill the corners; canvas and palette are on the easel.”

In the Senate of the United States on February 24, 1880, four days after the burial of Brumidi, two speeches were made in reference to the artist, one by Senator Voorhees of Indiana, and another by Senator Morrill of Vermont. Senator Voorhees eulogized Brumidi in this manner:

“May I not be pardoned some brief mention of the wonderful genius, so long, so gently, and so beautifully associated with this Capitol? He died poor, without money enough to bury his worn-out body, but how rich the inheritance he has left to the present and succeeding ages! During more than a quarter of a century he hovered along these walls from the basement to the Dome, leaving creations of imperishable beauty wherever his touch has been. Wherever he paused by a panel, or was seen suspended to a ceiling, there soon appeared the brilliant conceptions of his fertile and cultivated mind. We can form no correct idea of the extent, the variety, and the perfection of his taste and skill as an artist without sometimes forgetting our pressing cares, as we look in detail over his field of labor.”

Senator Morrill spoke of the artist in these words of friendship and understanding:

“Covering as he has done so much space with his fresco paintings—so difficult and so durable—it is wonderful that so great a part should be fairly excellent and so little that

BRUMIDI STAIRWAY

So long has the name Brumidi been associated with the lovely cherubs about the Capitol Building that even this bronze staircase has come to be called a “Brumidi Stairway.” Two such Brumidi stairways lead from the House Chamber and two from the Senate Chamber. Hazelton wrote in 1897, “Brumidi made the attractive designs of the eagle, deer, and cherubs for all the railings upon paper; they were modeled by Baudin and cast in Philadelphia.” Mr. Baudin wrote from Philadelphia to Captain Meigs in 1857, “...I am waiting for the drawings for the stair rail....”

competent critics esteem otherwise. If he has not attempted the ambitious role of the old masters on the walls and ceilings of churches, it may be at least said that his hand has rarely touched anything which it has not decorated. Even after that accident by which his life hung many minutes fearfully imperiled under the Dome of the Capitol, his latest work there, unfinished though it be, shows that his hand had not lost its cunning, and his acquaintance with American history and skill in its portrayal has, perhaps, never been more happily displayed.

“Those who have, without any special intimacy, barely seen this poor and quiet old man as he slowly passed and repassed to his daily tasks or who have but for a moment listened to his speech in broken English, and never heard his glib tongue when he met those with whom he could converse in his native language, will hardly comprehend his merits as a severe student in the art to which he had devoted his whole life, still less will they be inclined to credit the rapid and correct drawing of which he was undoubtedly a master; but the evidences of his rare genius and of swift work are too conspicuous to be denied. We have only to look around to behold them all.

“Brumidi was a diligent reader of Dante, of Gibbon, of Bancroft, and many other works from which he derived his historical and classical aid and his great desire was that he might live to complete his last great work. So long had he devoted his heart and strength to this Capitol that his love and reverence for it was not surpassed by even that of Michael Angelo for St. Peter’s.”

Brumidi Art in the United States Capitol

BRUMIDI’S art in the Capitol Building is not all accessible to the casual visitor. The large mural already mentioned which the old master executed on the wall of the House of Representatives Chamber can be viewed by visitors only from the galleries of the House, unless some special dispensation takes the visitor to the Floor of the House of Representatives for a close-up study. The beautiful frescoes on the walls and ceilings of six committee rooms, one in the House extension and five in the Senate extension, can be seen only by special permission or by attendance at certain committee hearings.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ROOM

The frescoes in the House of Representatives Committee room, originally occupied at the time of execution by the Committee on Agriculture, were finished in 1855. This room displays two large crescent-shaped wall frescoes, referred to as “lunettes” by Brumidi—“The Calling of Cincinnatus from the Plow”, and “The Calling of Putnam from the Plow to the Revolution.” Two portrait heads in imitation sculpture adorn the other two walls of this room. Beneath the marble-like medallion head of Washington is a choice panel showing an American harvest scene of early date, while beneath the medallion head of Jefferson on the opposite wall is what was then a modern threshing scene, a golden field of grain being harvested by the new McCormick Reaper. The ceiling is light and gay and exquisite with designs representing Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter. The blues and golds and inimitable flesh tints of the entire room seem not to have faded one whit during the ninety years they have spread cheer and beauty about an otherwise sombre corner of the House extension of the Capitol.

In spite of all the beauty Brumidi painted into the old Capitol Building the Congressional Journal for those Brumidi years records occasional reference on the Floor of the House, criticizing the Italian artist and his work. In 1858 Congressman Lovejoy ridiculed in the House Chamber that “brilliant interpretation of the seasons” by Brumidi in his first frescoed ceiling decorated for the use of the House Agriculture Committee. Said Mr. Lovejoy in his Congressional speech,

“Overhead we have pictures of Bacchus, Ceres, and so on, surrounded with cupids, cherubs, etc., to the end of heathen mythology. All this we have; but not a single specimen of the valuable breeds of cattle, horses, sheep, etc., which are now found in this country. In another panel, we have a company of harvesters with the sickle, which is well enough, only a quarter of a century too late. But worst of all, there is not a single picture to represent maize. A panel ought to have been given to this single production. It should have been represented in its different stages; as it emerges, weak and diminutive, from the ground, as it sways in its dark luxuriance of June and July; and then as it waves its tasseled crest, like the plumes of an armed host; and last as it stands in its rich golden maturity.”

We find Brumidi’s art defended, however, on the Floor of the House of Representatives about two years later, on June 15, 1860, by Mr. Curtis of Pennsylvania. Said Mr. Curtis,

“If you go into these committee rooms, and these galleries, of which we have heard so much, and take any honorable and fair-minded artist with you, he will himself do justice to the specimens of art that will be before him, and admit its distinguished worth. What, sir, can be more beautiful than the fresco work in the room of the Agricultural Committee?”

Hanging on the side of a bookcase today, in this House Committee Room, where Brumidi began his Capitol decorations, is a framed bit of verse put on display evidently by an admirer of the artist. This attempt to give poetic expression to the worth of Brumidi and his art was written by Horace C. Carlisle, a present employee of the Architect’s office of the Capitol. Seven such pieces of verse on Brumidi and his art, written by Mr. Carlisle, were placed in the Congressional Record by Congressman Sheppard of California, on April 7, 1944. The verses themselves are irregular but one line in the frame beneath Brumidi’s first American fresco is an immortal prophecy. Said Mr. Carlisle, concerning Brumidi and that first fresco in the Capitol Building:

“Above the rebuke of the scorner he climbed to glory height there.”

In 1874 Brumidi himself referred to his first American fresco in a statement, “Relative to his employment at the Capitol,” which is now preserved in the Architect’s office. Said Brumidi, in part,

“The Committee Room on Agriculture in the south wing of the Capitol was painted in 1855 as the first specimen of real fresco introduced in America.

“In this connection can be mentioned a curious mistake common in this country, and that is the calling all and every decoration in oil, turpentine or glue that is put upon dry walls, real fresco.

“Fresco derives its name from fresh mortar, and is the immediate and rapid application of mineral colors diluted in water, to the fresh mortar just put upon the wall, thereby the colors are absorbed by the mortar during its freshness, and repeating this process in sections day by day, till the entire picture will be completed.

“This superior method is much admired in the celebrated works of the old masters, and is proper for historical subjects or classical ornamentations, like the Loggia of Raphael at the Vatican.”

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CHAMBER

A most revealing side light on the Cornwallis-Washington mural on the south wall of the House of Representatives Chamber, earlier referred to, is brought forth by an anonymous letter written on December 14,

SPRING

One of four pleasing groups on the ceiling of the Old House Agriculture Committee Room is this Brumidi conception of spring. The four seasons on this ceiling make up Brumidi’s first fresco in the Capitol Building—painted in 1855. What appear to be sculptured figures and attached moldings surrounding the center panel in this picture are actually painted decorative borders on a flat surface. It was probably the tender hues of spring on this ceiling that led Congressman Curtis to say in 1860, “What, sir, can be more beautiful than the fresco work in the room of the Agriculture Committee?”

1857, to Captain Montgomery C. Meigs, Superintendent of Construction, two days before the House met in its new “Hall of the House of Representatives.” The letter protesting this contract follows:

“Dear Sir:

It will be news to you, I dare say, to learn that there is a party organizing to effect your removal from the Superintendent of the Capitol extension and I take leave to say to you that the wall painting, ‘The Surrender of Cornwallis,’ is considered inappropriate and the execution execrable, in view of all of which I suggest to you to have the painting wiped out.

Your friend and supporter,
Officious”

Since Captain Meigs could not reply directly to “Officious” he gave vent to his feelings by penning a note on the above letter. This note gives among other things an idea of the speed with which Brumidi was able to work under pressure. The note follows:

“One of many indications. The picture is as good as could be painted in six weeks. It serves to show what the effect of painting on the panels will be which is all I intended. It cost little and I have not the least objections to a better painting being by Congress put over it, but it is the best that could be done at the time and no more time was at my immediate disposal.

M. C. M.”

In 1859 a Congressional Committee voiced a criticism which undoubtedly refers also to the Cornwallis-Washington painting in the House Chamber. They said,

“Far greater sobriety should be given to these Halls in their general effect, so as to render them less distracting to the eye. Few are aware how disturbing to thought the display of gaudy, inharmonious colors can be made. This very quality renders such combination of colors unsuited to halls of deliberation where calm thought and unimpassioned reason are supposed to reside.”

Mr. Curtis of Pennsylvania rose again in the House of Representatives on June 15, 1860, in defense of Brumidi’s art but with special reference to the House fresco. Said he,

“I have heard with some regret appeals made to the prejudices of the country in regard to the specimens of art taste displayed about this Capitol; and I have been surprised that no one connected with this Branch of service has risen upon the Floor to do justice to those who have devoted their lives and energies to the embellishment of our public buildings. What is more splendid than the fresco in some of the halls and passages around the Senate Chamber and especially the emblem of Religion in the President’s

THE PRESIDENT’S ROOM

With its richness of design, its beauty and delicacy of color, the President’s Room represents Brumidi’s supreme effort “to make beautiful the Capitol” of the United States. Facing the portrait of Hamilton we see reflected in the giant golden mirror the portrait of Samuel Osgood. Reflected also are the ceiling frescoes of Vespucius and Religion and the treasured mahogany table at which Abraham Lincoln and many other Presidents have signed legislative bills. The mahogany clock at one time had hands of gold until a souvenir hunter carried them home. Today all sightseers get no further than a railing at the doorway.

Room? And in this Hall, where do you find room to criticize the combination of colors which you see around you? It is easy to invent a popular criticism and find fault; but I would like to see some of these gentlemen who are so conversant with matters of taste and art as to speak with the assurance of masters, bring forward some design, some specimen from their superior genius that they would themselves insert in place of that which they see around them.”

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.

CAPITOL DOME

The huge fresco on the canopy of the Dome of the Capitol Building is signed “C. Brumidi, 1865.” In the Annual Report dated November 1, 1863, of Thomas Walter, Architect of the Capitol (1851-1865), we find this reference to the Dome canopy:

“The cartoons for the picture on the canopy over the eye of the inner dome are being prepared, and its execution will be commenced as soon as the iron work which is to receive it can be put in place.”

Certain letters in the National Archives between Brumidi and United States officials shed interesting light on the 1862 negotiations relative to the Dome Canopy. Extracts from these letters follow:

From Tho. U. Walter, “architect of extension and new Dome,” to Constantino Brumidi, August 18, 1862: “It is intended to have a picture 65 ft. in diameter painted in fresco on the concave canopy over the eye of the New Dome. I would thank you to furnish me with a design for the said picture at your earliest convenience.... You will also submit with the design an estimate of the cost of executing it in real fresco painted on the fresh mortar.”

From Constantino Brumidi to Tho. U. Walter, September 8, 1862. “...I herewith submit to you my design for the fresco picture to be painted on the Canopy of the New Dome of the United States Capitol. The six groups around the border represent, as you will see, War, Science, Navigation, Commerce, Manufacture and Agriculture. The leading figures will measure some 15 feet. In the center is an apotheosis of Washington surrounded by allegorical figures of eminent men of the times of Washington, which latter will be likenesses.

“As this picture will be seen at a height of 180 ft. the painting must be of the most decided character possible. It will cover 4664 sq. ft. and will be worth $50,000 to execute it including the necessary cartoons and every expense pertaining to the painting.”

From Tho. U. Walter to Constantino Brumidi, December 24, 1862. “Your letter of the 8th of September was duly received, together with your design for the proposed picture in fresco, for the canopy over the eye of the New Dome of the United States Capitol. The design meets my entire approval. It has also the approval of Major B. B. French, the Commissioner of Public Buildings. I sent it to the residence of the Hon. Caleb B. Smith, the Secretary of the Interior, where it has been for several weeks. Mr. Smith also expresses himself entirely satisfied with the design. I am therefore free to give it my official approval with but one condition and that is that you will consent to execute it at a greatly reduced cost.

“I am aware, as you have expressed to me in conversation that there is no picture in the world that will compare with this in magnitude and in difficulty of execution, being painted on a concave surface, and I am also aware that it covers about eight times more surface than Mr. Lentze’s picture which cost $20,000. But in view of the exigencies of the times I do not consider that we would be justified in expending so large a sum as $50,000.

“Should you execute this work it will be the great work of your life: it will therefore be worth on your part some sacrifice to accomplish so great an achievement....”

From Constantino Brumidi to Tho. U. Walter, December 27, 1862: “...I have come to the conclusion to expedite a settlement as to the price of the painting to be executed on the canopy over the eye of the Dome of the United States Capitol by reducing my offer to $40,000, which is lower, considering the subject, the curved form of the surface on which it is to be painted and the square feet of painting it contains than any real fresco picture ever painted....”

From Tho. U. Walter to B. B. French, “Distributing Agent of United States Capitol,” December 29, 1862: “...I consider the price ($40,000) exceedingly low in view of the fact that it contains 4664 square feet, that it is all to be painted on a curved surface, and that Mr. Brumidi is the only real fresco painter in this country capable of executing the work. The design is probably the grandest and most imposing that has ever been executed in the world and Mr. Brumidi has proved by his real frescoes in the Capitol extension (all of which were painted by his own hand) that he is fully equal to the task. The grandeur of this picture, the great distance at which it will be seen, and the peculiarity of its light will render it intensely imposing.”

From B. B. French to Tho. U. Walter, January 5, 1863: “...as there is confessedly no artist in the United States, capable of executing a real fresco painting as it should be done, especially so important a work as the one in contemplation, except Mr. Brumidi, and, as we know from experience his excellence in that art, I do not see how we can do otherwise than employ him....”

From Tho. U. Walter to Constantino Brumidi, March 11, 1863. “...I have the honor to inform you that your design for painting the Canopy over the eye of the aforesaid new Dome is adopted. And, inasmuch as Congress has made the appropriation for the completion of that work you are hereby authorized to proceed at once with the aforesaid canopy painting....”

Two letters, one from the Department of the Interior to the Capitol Dispensing Agent and the other from the Architect of the Capitol to the Department of the Interior should be quoted at this time as they verify amounts paid the artist and the length of time used in the actual painting of the Dome canopy.

From J. P. Usher, Secretary of Interior, dated Nov. 6, 1863.

“...$10,000, one fourth the entire cost of the work (for painting the canopy over the eye of the new dome of the Capitol in real fresco), has already been paid to Mr. Brumidi. I am of the opinion that the progress which has been made does not justify any further payments at present. You will therefore suspend any advances to Mr. Brumidi until further orders.”

From Thomas U. Walter, Architect U. S. Capitol, dated December 3, 1864.

“As the canopy for the picture over the eye of the new dome is ready for Mr. Brumidi and as he is now about to commence to work, I deem it proper to say that he has not received any payment on account of his contract since November 6, 1863, and that in the interim he has been occupied in perfecting the full-size cartoons, which are now ready for the work. I, therefore, respectfully recommend that payments to him be resumed in accordance with his contract and that they be continued as the work progresses until he shall have received the aggregate sum of $30,000, after which no further payments to be made until the work is completed and approved.”

In the Annual Report dated November 1, 1865, of Edward Clark, Architect of the Capitol (1865-1902), we find reference to the completion of the canopy:

“The picture over the eye of the Dome is all painted in, but the artist is unwilling to have the scaffolding removed until the plastering is thoroughly dry and the picture toned. As it will at times be viewed by gas light, he wishes to have the opportunity of trying it by this light before dismissing it from his hands.”

The following report by Edward Clark written in longhand to the Secretary of the Interior and dated November 1, 1866, is preserved in the National Archives:

“The fresco picture over the eye of the Dome has been exposed to view by taking away the scaffolding. It is not, however, finished as the artist intends to soften down the harshness at the joinings of the plastering. He was under the impression that these imperfections would disappear when the surface became dry. He holds himself in readiness to do the proper toning and blending whenever the scaffolding is in place for the painting of vault of the Rotunda.

“I would call attention to the necessity of ornamenting the ‘Belt’ between the second and third cornices of the Rotunda. The original intention was to enrich this member in basso-relievo, but it is deemed advisable to have it painted in fresco in imitation of basso-relievo. Mr. Brumidi has submitted a design for its embellishment in this manner consisting of a series of natural pictures arranged in a chronological order. It is hoped this subject may receive attention, and that his design may be adapted or modified or other designs invited for this decoration from artists of acknowledged merit.”

Brumidi was sixty years old at the completion of this Dome Canopy. He had made 4,664 square feet of fresco in eleven months’ time on the inner surface of the Capitol’s Dome. This Canopy is 65 feet in diameter, has a concavity of 21 feet and displays its heroic figures as life-size from the floor of the Rotunda, 180 feet below.

The artist called this painting on the Dome canopy “The Apotheosis of Washington.” The outstanding figure is that of our first President attended by Liberty and Victory. Circling the center of the canopy are thirteen female figures in draperies of pastel beauty, bearing a ribbon-like banner which displays our treasured motto, “E Pluribus Unum.” The colors increase in brilliance and depth toward the outer borders of the canopy, blending finally into the intense hues of the six heroic groups about the base.

In these groups we find Minerva, Goddess of Arts and Sciences, as the center of her allegorical group; Ceres, of Agriculture; Mercury, messenger of the Gods, symbolizing Commerce; Vulcan, the God of Mechanics; Neptune, God of the Marine, and Armed Liberty with shield and sword, symbolizing War.

S. D. Wyeth says, “The fresco of Brumidi (on the canopy of the Dome) arrests the gaze as though the sky had opened and it were permitted to look into the beyond.” Wyeth, later, in referring to the same Dome canopy described it in this way: “Clouds of gold, azure and rose seem hanging there spanned by a rainbow, and, floating among them, forms of exquisite beauty. Grand mythological figures, symbolizing Force and Progress, appear there too, titanic, majestic—almost appalling with their great significance.”

A letter from Architect Clark to Artist Brumidi, dated September 18, 1865, should be quoted in order to appreciate Brumidi’s reply one day later:

“I learned in an interview with the Honorable Secretary of the Interior, this morning, that he was very anxious to have the picture over the eye of the Dome finished if possible by the meeting of Congress.

“You informed me when I first saw the work in relation to your July bill, that it was your intention to get it done by that time, and I was surprised to hear from you on Saturday morning last, that this was not likely to be done. You stated that you were unwilling to have the scaffoldings taken away before you had the advantage of trying it by gas light. In this you are certainly right, and I have to inform you that arrangements can be made to give you light whenever you need it.

“Please reply as to when it is likely you will have the picture done.”

Brumidi’s reply in which he tells of the final touches to this huge fresco is still preserved. In this letter the old artist’s concern for the proper finishing and lighting of his masterpiece is uppermost in his thought. The letter follows:

Washington, Sept. 19, 1865

Mr. Clark, Architect of the
Capitol Extension
Dear Sir:

Your letter of yesterday was received and you will do a great favor to me in referring to the Honorable Secretary of Interior, that about my painting in the Canopy of the Dome, I am working at present the last group, and for the next week I have finish to put in color every figure upon the fresh mortar.

That remains to do for the completion of it will require only five or six weeks, but must do it in the proper time, when the mortar will be perfectly dry, and the colors do not have any more changement.

This last work will cover the connections of the pieces of plaster, put up in sections at every day, and giving more union to the colors at the said junctions for to obtain the artistic effect.

It is the general rule in doing this kind of work to avoid the damp atmosphere of the winter season, but I will do this last finish as soon as the weather will permit, early in the spring, as always I have done in every other painting in real fresco in the Capitol and everywhere.

Also would be inadvisable to show that large painting without the proper light, because the windows of the dome are in the rear part of the painting and must be placed the reflectors already calculated in the Capitol’s original plan.

I hope when the appropriation will be passed by the Congress the said reflectors, and the gas apparatus will be completed, and I will be ready for my part.

I am always at work but I ask only the bill of August last, and you can assure the Honorable Secretary of the Interior that I never will claim any other bill after this, till my work will be entirely completed.

With respect I am
Your Obedient Servant
C. Brumidi

Apparently negotiations with Brumidi for painting the Dome fresco began with the letter from Tho. U. Walter, “architect of extension and new Dome,” dated August 18, 1862. Brumidi was authorized to proceed on March 11, 1863. On December 3, 1864, Tho. U. Walter wrote that the canopy for the picture over the eye of the Dome was ready for the artist and that Mr. Brumidi was “about to commence to work.” On November 1, 1865, Edward Clark, Architect of the Capitol, reported that the picture over the eye of the Dome was all painted in but that Mr. Brumidi was unwilling to have the scaffolding removed until the plastering was thoroughly dry and the colors had no more “changement.”

On January 9, 1866, Edward Clark wrote the following letter to James Harlan, Secretary of the Interior:

“I have the honor to state that we are now making preparations to take down the scaffolding over the eye of the Dome to reveal Brumidi’s picture. It becomes necessary to have some canvas, or other strong material to place under the scaffolding to catch the dirt, etc., that would otherwise fall to the floor of the Rotunda which might cause inconvenience, perhaps accident.

“It is possible that some old sails might be borrowed from the Navy Yard for that purpose, and I therefore respectfully ask that you make a request to the Hon. Secretary of the Navy for the loan of such as may be necessary for this purpose which will be returned as soon as this work is done.”

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ROOMS

On the walls of the Senate Military Committee Room—now one of the Committee Rooms on Senate Appropriations—are to be found five large frescoes, lunettes in shape, depicting scenes from American history. These pictures are filled with action and American atmosphere and could have been painted only by a lover of American liberty. The artist gave these titles to his five American lunettes: “Boston Massacre,” “Battle of Lexington,” “Death of General Wooster,” “Storming of Stony Point,” and “Washington at Valley Forge.”

The frescoed ceiling in this Senate Committee Room is conventional in design with victors’ wreaths, shields and other emblems of war predominating. Here we have such outstanding color combinations as to lead many Brumidi enthusiasts to vote this ceiling the Capitol’s best. In this room also are six outstanding panels, rich in color and different in design, displaying American arms of different periods. Never were guns, pistols, sabers, tomahawks, and flintlock rifles displayed with so much beauty and elegance—and the sword across the shield in the center is said to be a copy of one owned by Washington. (Keim attributes these panels to another Capitol artist.)

The north room used by the Senate Committee on Appropriations was decorated for the old Senate Committee on Naval Affairs. The design is that of a Pompeian fresco with marine gods and goddesses scattered about the ceiling and with ancient porticoes and antique vessels adorning the walls. Nine panels in oil with symbolic womanly figures in flowing robes against dark blue backgrounds to represent various attributes of the Navy finish the wall decorations.

On February 24, 1880, Senator Voorhees of Indiana referred to the Brumidi decorations of these two rooms in these words:

“Almost every committee-room announces to the eye by historical or allegorical paintings in fresco the duties to which it is dedicated. Who ever passed through the room of the Committee on Military Affairs without feeling that the very genius of heroism had left there its immortal inspirations? Who would mistake in after ages the use to which the room for the Committee on Naval Affairs had been devoted? The painter has told the whole story in a silent but in an undying language.”

An 1858 newspaper tells that the following statement was posted that year in the Senate Committee Room on Naval Affairs for the “edification of visitors”:

“Senate Committee on Naval Affairs—The decorative paintings of this room are a specimen of the manner in which the ancient Greeks and Romans ornamented their splendid buildings, some of which are still extant in the precious monuments of Pompeii and the baths of Titus. America with the sea divinities are painted on the ceiling in real fresco. These mythological figures are delineated agreeably to the poetical descriptions we have received of them, and they are Neptune, the god of the seas, Amphitrite, his wife, Aeolus keeping the winds chained to the rocks, Venus the daughter of the Sea, Oceanus with crampfish claws on his head, Thetis, his wife, and Nereus, the father of the Nereids, drawn by Glacus, and the Tritons by marine horses or swans, or else mounted as sea-monsters.”

SENATE RECEPTION ROOM

Brumidi decorated also the reception room of the Senate where constituents may still call upon their Senators—and admire the ceiling frescoes of the old artist. This room has a vaulted ceiling with two arches. The circular arch has a frescoed center of children and clouds with allegorical groupings about the center designed to represent Prudence, Justice, Temperance and Strength portrayed as beautiful madonnas with pink cheeked children. Four allegorical scenes in the groined arch hold forth Liberty, Plenty, War, and Peace, in the purity of other madonna-like groupings.

The walls of the Senate Reception Room have many empty and unfinished panels but the “elaborate ornaments and gilded mouldings around them” lend their own beauty to this room. The outstanding Brumidi work in the Senate Reception Room is a large centerpiece in oil on the south wall showing George Washington in consultation with Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. At either side, according to Brumidi, are “decorative figures in light and shade (chiaroscuro).” The old voucher of 1873, signed by Brumidi, and indicating the sum paid for this mural in the Senate Reception Room, follows:

“For approximate estimate for painting portraits of Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton on the walls of the Senate Reception Room—$500.00.”

Two of the Brumidi letters written in 1871 not only date the frescoes in the Senate Reception Room and those in the Military Committee Room of the Senate already described, but also name a lump sum paid the artist for at least a part of this work. These two letters written to the Architect of the Capitol Building and dated 1871 follow:

“In reply to your request about the completion of the decorative figures in light and shade (chiaroscuro) at the three panels in the reception room of the Senate according to that already painted in the last year.

“Also for three more panels in the walls of the Senate Military Committee room in real fresco with three battles of the American Revolution, and many other small paintings above a door and at the ceiling, for the completion of the ibid room, for the sum of $5,300.”

C. Brumidi

New York City

“I read in the Herald the adjournment of the Congress and an extra session of the Senate will meet again for the tenth of May.

“I think that in this present temporary recess, will be the time to give orders to the plasterer to finish the panels in the Reception Room, as the oil work will require the wall to be perfectly dry, and of course three or four weeks. Every plasterer can do it smooth like the others already painted.

“I am in attendance of your answer about it, and some information of Senator Wilson’s decision on the subject, for the fresco of this room, to prepare some sketch and cartoons.

“I am at work in St. Stephen’s Church and I wish to proceed with it till you will call me for work in the Senate or if you think necessary an excursion to fix this preparatory work or directions to the plasterer.”

C. Brumidi

The 1871 letter quoted above, written from New York, is the only reference in a Brumidi letter of the Brumidi file in the Architect’s office to any painting of Brumidi’s outside of Washington. It seems to have been proven, though, beyond a doubt that The Crucifixion in St. Stephen’s Church in New York is one of at least four such sacred paintings. The picture of Saint Peter and Saint Paul was painted in the Philadelphia Cathedral; The Holy Trinity was done in the Cathedral at Mexico City, and The First Communion of Saint Aloysius was placed above the altar in the old Saint Aloysius Church in Washington.

A study of the Saint Aloysius mural brought to light a letter written by Brumidi in Italian to Father Sestini of Georgetown University back in 1855. Father Sestini is said to have been such a close friend of Brumidi’s that the artist included the Father in his fresco of St. Aloysius. This letter to Father Sestini, translated by Father Geib of Georgetown University, is reproduced in its entirety, it being the only communication found from Brumidi to a Father in the Catholic Church. The letter to Father Sestini follows:

November 11, 1855

“I was displeased at not having been in my studios when you came to talk to me about the painting to be done in Baltimore. Concerning this, I shall be interested to know whether the Church has a flat ceiling, since in that case the painting could be easily executed on canvas, and later on, be placed against the said ceiling; this being the only way I can actually do anything in the service of the Society (of Jesus), since my contracted engagements for the Capitol do not let me move away from Washington, having also to offer my assistance to other artists of decorative painting and fresco, who work under my direction.

“If, therefore, there would be room for a picture (frame), as large as might be its size to be placed in the said way, I could paint it in tempera and produce the same appearance of a fresco. This is all I can promise in the circumstances in which now I am, and you would not attribute the objections already expressed to a lack of good will. Meanwhile, I profess myself entirely obliged for the favors I have at all times received from the Society (of Jesus).

“I repeat myself respectfully your most obliged servant,

Constantino Brumidi”

A certain anonymous letter from the Brumidi file in the Architect’s office at the Capitol should be quoted at this time. It was written on April 8, 1857, addressed to Mr. Walter, Architect of the Capitol, and shows Brumidi the target for more criticism. This crude and biased letter is quoted in full:

MAIDENS OF THE NAVY

The unrolled map of ocean shoreline, the compass, and the telescope carried by the Maidens of the Navy, advance the naval theme in the old Senate Committee Room on Naval Affairs. Seven other such panels of exquisite design and color complete the wall decorations of this room. The simulated pillars with seaweed carvings and pearl ornaments are as deceptive as the sea shell cornucopias on the ledge at the pillars’ base. All are painted in oil on a flat surface of dry plaster.

“The protegé and a kind of informer of Cap’t. Meigs, an Italian painter, Brumidi, paid $6 daily by Government, did three pictures for the churches of New York and in Georgetown and for which he received a good pay in hours and during the time which he had no right to dispose of.... His friend is paid too for the thing that he does not understand nor he attends to, yet all this is allowed and tolerated. What do you say about it? Shall we make public notice in papers or will you attend to it?”

SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE ROOM

Brumidi painted four large, bronze-colored medallions on the walls of this room, each medallion recording the profile of a noted chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.

On the north wall is Henry Clay of Kentucky who served the Committee as chairman from 1834 to 1836. On the south wall is William S. Allen of Ohio, Committee chairman from 1845 to 1846. The east wall portrays Simon E. Cameron of Pennsylvania, who was chairman from 1871 to 1877, while on the west wall is Charles W. Sumner of Massachusetts, chairman from 1861 to 1871.

The voucher paying Brumidi for this work, dated June 21, 1874, reads as follows:

“For painting four medallion portraits in the Committee Room of Foreign Affairs, United States Senate, @ $50 each—$200.”

SENATE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COMMITTEE ROOMS

Two of these Senate Annex rooms, the District of Columbia Committee Rooms, have unusual frescoed ceilings—that of the larger room being equal in workmanship to that of the President’s Room. Since this large Committee Room was originally set apart as a Senate Library the groupings were chosen with that in mind, for there the artist has represented Geography, History, Physics, and Telegraph. In each group is the Brumidi Madonna and the artist’s distinctive cherubs. The walls of this room were never finished but the ceiling colors are as brilliant today as though painted yesterday.