Category: Art History Foundations: 1400-1940

Through the 17th and 19th century, Europe and the United States were in a time of revolution and unrest. The Rococo, Neoclassicism, Romanticism, and Realism were movements all responding to the instability of their environment at the time. Neoclassicism and Romanticism in particular had a polar difference in reaction to their climate. 

Neoclassicism was more action focused. The art primarily was propaganda and was trying to sway you to take a firm stand either with or against the monarchy. Jacques-Louis David, a revolutionary and close to the Jacobins, used art to glorify the revolutionists in their sacrifice for freedom. In The Death of Marat, David portrays his friend as an intellect, dying with pen in hand, aligning itself with enlightenment ideals. Writing of course what we assume are texts speaking out and slandering the monarchy. The audience hence obtains the impression that while working selflessly for a heroic cause, the monarchy exemplifies its overreach and ruthless power to suppress radicalists. Which is the goal for radicals like David who want there to be an uproar and sway public opinion in favor of the revolution.

Romantics, on the other hand, were less concerned with Neoclassicism’s rational clarity and instead embraced ambiguity, emotion, and raw reactions to the lack of stability during that period. Henry Fuseli’s The Nightmare shows these values well. The symbolism of the horse, representing sleep, and the demonic creature on the lady’s chest, representing nightmares, is the clearer part of the painting. Whether this sleep is eternal or temporary is more subjective, however. This is exactly the type of reflection Fuseli wants us to have; he wants us to reflect on the weight of the chaos of their society.

The contrast in these two movements is stark when you compare what type of sleep each character is in. One is clear depiction of a real murder; the other is a fantasy-like subjective sleep. The difference between these two portrayals of sleep reveals how Neoclassicism focuses on concrete events and collective ideals, whereas Romanticism explores personal uncertainties and emotions.

The High Renaissance is known for its prioritized values in harmony, balance, and ideal beauty, but later movements broke from these ideals. Mannerism and Baroque responded to changing times with very different values, intellect and ambiguity, and emotion and accessibility. These differences are clear when comparing how each depicts a tabletop game.

Mannerism held strong themes of intellect, poise, ambiguity, and elegance, attributes typically associated with elite, high-ranking social groups. The movement’s elegance can be attributed to the economic, social, and political shifts of the 16th century. These themes likely reflect the rising social status of artists and the changing tastes of powerful patrons. While Mannerism was very similar to the High Renaissance in its emphasis on elegance, it differed in its lack of balance. This imbalance stemmed partly from the tension of the time, especially the growing religious conflict between Catholics and Protestants. That uneasiness is often thought to have inspired the elongated and stylized forms seen in many Mannerist artworks.

Tension between Catholics and Protestants later escalated, resulting in two distinct artistic responses during the Baroque period. The Catholics, aiming to reconnect people to the Church, commissioned grand, awe-inspiring artworks that resembled High Renaissance ideals. In contrast, the Protestants, who sought to reform both Church and religion to make them more accessible to the common man, favored theatrical, dramatic, emotional genre scenes. Both sides of the Baroque period used naturalistic figures, diagonal compositions, high-contrast lighting, and theatrical scenes to evoke emotion as a way to persuade people to adopt their faith.

The Chess Game by Sofonisba Anguissola is a great example of the Mannerist values of elegance and sophistication in the elite. The people themselves represent this high-class group, from the garments they wear to their rigid poses. The choice of game they play is associated with great intellect, education, and discipline. We also don’t know what the outcome of the game will be unless you actually study the pieces on the board. This shows the prioritized values of ambiguity and insider knowledge.

The piece is expressive, dynamic, and emotional. Its naturalistic faces and dramatic poses make the figures feel relatable, echoing some traits of the High Renaissance. But unlike the ambiguity of Mannerism, this work presents a clear unjust narrative of cheating at a tabletop game. It invites the viewer to take sides. Its accessibility lies in how easily anyone can engage with it, without needing insider knowledge of symbolism. This clarity made it effective propaganda for drawing in a wide audience and persuading them toward Protestantism.

Both Mannerism and Baroque show how art evolved beyond High Renaissance ideals, responding to its time while still retaining elements like elegance or naturalism. Comparing a depiction of a specific genre, like tabletop games, offers a controlled way to see how each movement redefined its values in accordance to their unique cultural and religious climates. 

The Art Story. “High Renaissance.” The Art Story, www.theartstory.org/movement/
     high-renaissance/. Accessed 12 May 2025.

Camara, Esperança, Dr. “Baroque Art, an Introduction.” Kahan Academy,
     www.khanacademy.org/humanities/renaissance-reformation/baroque-art1/
     beginners-guide-baroque1/a/baroque-art-in-europe-an-introduction?modal=1.
     Accessed 12 May 2025.

Kilroy-Ewbank, Lauren, Dr, and Heather Graham, Dr. “Mannerism, an Introduction.”
     Khan Academy, www.khanacademy.org/humanities/renaissance-reformation/
     high-ren-florence-rome/pontormo/a/mannerism-an-introduction. Accessed 12
     May 2025.

Vijayanagara architecture blends Hindu and Islamic styles, as seen in the Queen’s Bathhouse. It reflects how the Sangama brothers, Harihara I and Bukka, shaped a distinct identity for their newly founded kingdom in response to outside Islamic influence.
There’s some debate about whether the brothers came from the Kakatiya Kingdom or the Hoysala Empire (which eventually merged into the Vijayanagara Empire). Regardless, both these civilizations were Hindu-based and eventually overtaken by Muslim rule. In response to the Muslim invasion, the two brothers founded Vijayanagara. The rulers promoted the Hindu religion with festivals held in the capital and by building religious structures. The empire’s deep roots in Hinduism help explain architectural details such as the repeated lotus brackets on buildings, a Hindu symbol representing purity and divine beauty.

However, a question arises from the appearance of Islamic architecture, such as the pointed arches. Why would the Vijayanagara adopt these Islamic visual traits if they were resisting Muslim reign?

One of the most likely reasons is that the empire wasn’t cut off from the rest of the world. In fact, “…kings encouraged overseas trade from coastal ports that transported local goods for the international market…” (Pai). Not only did people visit for business, but also for tourism. The kingdom was lively, and as visitors described, it was “…a prosperous and well-planned city with irrigation technology, bustling bazaars, a large standing army, and sumptuous palaces,” (Pai) even comparing it to Rome. So of course, this was a hotspot for cultural exchange, including Islamic culture. Although they were resisting Islamic rule, it would be difficult not to subconsciously pick up on some of their familiar visual traditions. Elements like pointed arches and symmetrical architecture symbolize elegance, sophistication, and divinity. It’s logical that the kings would display these values in the Queen’s Bath, a place of royal leisure.

Alternatively, the choice to adopt a mixed Islamic and Hindu visual identity could very well have been intentional. On one hand, they were establishing Hinduism and resisting Islamic rule culturally. At the same time, they embedded Islamic architectural elements in the literal stone foundations of Vijayanagara’s most prestigious buildings, perhaps as a strategy to assert power. If they mimic the Islamic identity whose reign encompassed much of South India, then they could imply they had just as much power. Vijayanagara was trying to meet neighboring Islamic empires as an equal, so conveying that same strength through architectural language made sense for the City of Victory. This architectural blending of the two cultures reveals how imagery was used to define the “Self” in contrast to a perceived Islamic “Other,” reflecting the broader concept of imperialism as a cultural and political contest.