Oath Of The Horatii Essay

Most children that attended grade school can remember reciting the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of every school day, but few actually know the origin of it. In August 1892 a socialist, Minister Francis Bellamy wrote the Pledge hoping it would be utilized by citizens in any country. Since then it has had parts added to it and the way it was practiced has been changed, now placing a right hand over the heart and facing towards the flag of the United States. Little did he know the impact it would have on America in the late 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century. Now that America is so influenced with different races and religions people believe the Pledge has crossed the line in the first Amendment of the Constitution of

To truly understand what is relevant about this story of the Horatii and this painting of David in relation to the French Revolution, it is important to make a distinction between the things that are relevant for this research and what is not. The renaissance of the Antiquity sort of means the same as the downfall of the Ancien Regime. Neoclassicism is connected to reality and the values of the Antiquity, wherein the Ancien Regime is connect to the beauty and plentifulness of the rococo style. That rococo style is something most monarchies could identify with.(Kunstkennis.nl)

Throughout the ages art has been subject to selective destruction and spoliation. It has been taken by conquering peoples as spoils of war, put to material re-use, and been subject to iconoclasm. Iconoclasm has been used as a means of not only purposeful forgetting, but, also the preservation of memory as a warning to others motivated diversely by ideology, religion, and politics. One artifact subject to iconoclasm is the painted portrait of Septimius Severus and his family in which one face was scraped out leaving the other three members untouched for political reasons and a demonstration of power. Another artifact affected by iconoclasm is a famous Byzantine icon, the Virgin Hodegetria, which was taken to be the Virgin and Christ Child by western Europe for religious purposes. “Breaking” the image in this figurative manner gave little to no meaning to the original icon and stole its value in history. Another “victim” of iconoclasm is a panel that once belonged to an arch of Marcus Aurelius that now adorns the arch of Constantine (Elsner, p. 212). These three artifacts have all been purposefully altered in diverse ways for different reasons, however, the fact remains that they have all faced damnatio memoriae, spolia, and/or iconoclasm.

This essay aims to investigate two different time periods in the history of art. It will scrutinize the influence that the respective societal contexts had on the different artists, which in turn, caused them to arrange the formal elements in a specific way. I will be examining an Egyptian sculpture of the god Isis nursing Horus, her son, as well as the Vladimir Virgin icon, which dates from the Byzantine era. Experts vary on the precise ‘lifetime’ of the Ancient Egyptian civilization, but according to Mason (2007:10) it existed from 3100 BCE up to 30 BCE. The Byzantine era, which

The Swing is a typical Rococo painting with loose brushwork, soft colors and an amorphous organic composition which celebrates the beauty of love and sophistication of the ruling class while, The Oath of the Horatii displays war and anger and eschews the Rococo style with its geometric organization and its strong impression of

For the most part as Americans we are glad because we are made to believe this country is a democracy.But when we say the Pledge of Allegiance, “And to the Republic, for which it stands”, the word “Republic” stands out. Not only does this stand for what we are today, but it also goes to prove our form of government. This is not the only reason the United States can not be considered a democracy, but also due to the intentions of the founding fathers and the fatal flaws the nation has such as the electoral college, and racial discrimination.

All Americans are familiar with the Pledge of Allegiance, even if they cannot always recite it perfectly, but probably relatively few know that the original Pledge did not include the words “under God.” The original Pledge of Allegiance, published in the September 8, 1892, issue of the Youth’s Companion, ran thus: I pledge allegiance to my flag, and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and justice for all. (Djupe 329) In 1923, at the first National Flag Conference in Washington, DC, it was argued that immigrants might be confused by the words “my Flag,” and it was proposed that the words be changed to “the Flag of the United States.”

Seventy-three years ago, Congress put the United States in a difficult situation. It concerned the Pledge of Allegiance. They decided to add the phrase “Under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance which started a great amount of controversy among people. Some people argument that since “under God” was never a part of the original Pledge of Allegiance and many US citizens don't believe in a god at all. Any pledge they may make 'under god' would be irrational and irrelevant. But the rest have a different idea about the problem. They believe the U.S. is a nation founded by religious persons and Americans are joined by great ties to multiple religions, so there should be no separation of church and state. They want to keep the “Under God” in the pledge. Gwen Wilde, a student at Tufts University, explains this issue in her essay, “Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Revised”. She says “the addition of the words ‘under God’ is inappropriate, and they are needlessly

While the pledge of allegiance is meant to enlist pride in students, people should have the right not to deal with this kind of patriotic ordeals. When we pledge “allegiance,” we are promising to be loyal and honest to our nation, the United States, and while these important ideas are beneficial, we should not be forced to pledge loyalty to a nation. The Declaration of Independence clearly says that people have the "right and duty" to go against an unfair as well as a corrupt government. While this should only be thought of when things go out of control done many do not approve of the government, and they should feel comfortable saying so. As things are, right now students and anyone for the matter should not be required to say the pledge of allegiance. There is, in some areas, pressure to "give in" and say it just because everyone one else is already doing so. People should be all for the educations of the nations students and the importance of voting in election polls to practice democracy, and student s should be well informed about the issues that the nation is

According to Dictionary.com “The right to choose a religion (or no religion) without interference by the government, freedom of religion is guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution.” This means the government cannot force a person to believe in a certain religion; however the government is allowed to have a religion. The Pledge of Allegiance is honoring America and shows the core values of the nation. The words ‘under God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance while it may be endorsing Christianity, it is not violating the First Amendment.

A controversial issue that’s been talked about for a while is the importance of the pledge of allegiance in the United Sates.

Both those painting depict import political and moral scene. I like restrained aura of “Oath of Horatii”. I really like figures of 3 classical beautiful women seating to the right. Composition of this painting is very stable and organized. Three male figures to the left and three female figures to the right, and father figure in the middle like a breaking point. Colors are clear, bright, clothes

David was a supporter of the French Revolution and this may be his political influence on the painting even though Napoleon was a son of the Revolution as well.

This painting is divided into three equal parts by the arches in the background and the characters correspond to each of these arches (TV12). The father is in the middle portion of the painting. The lines of perspective created by the tiled floor, draws our attention to the swords that the father is holding and the vanishing point lies just behind the handles of the sword. Our angle of vision is such that we are looking directly at the main figures groups, particularly the father. A single light source from the left of the picture illuminates the characters and also focuses our attention to the father holding the sword. This creates a ‘theatrical’ effect. The background is simple and stark so our attention is focussed on the figure groups in the painting. The painting has a wide tonal range that makes the composition logical and balanced. The colours used in this

ten feet tall. The painting was done by Jacques-Louis David, who was the leading Neoclassical painter in France during the eighteenth century. David rejected the Rococo style that was popular of that time, which was characterized by fantasy and playfulness. David was interested in painting images with antiquity. The Oath of the Horatii has elements of classical Greek and Roman art and architecture. Oath of the Horatii was a political painting that David had comprised to stimulate the publics attention (Fred S. Kleiner 680).