have no record of his personal

reaction to the war or to the

soldiers, who despoiled the

Capitol. Senator Solomon

Foot, Chairman of Public

Buildings, found a way to keep

Brumidi working by paying

him out of the contingent fund

of the Senate, and he authorized him to “repair damage to

the fresco throughout the

North wing of the Capitol.”2

Assisting him were Peruchi,

Odense, and Long.

In April 1862, jurisdiction

over the construction of the

Capitol moved from the War

Department to the Interior Department (at Walter’s instigation) and construction resumed under Walter’s direction, with the Commissioner

of Public Buildings as disbursing agent. Brumidi’s dealings were thus directly with Walter until the architect resigned in 1865. Meigs, however, continued his interest in

the Capitol and wrote a strong letter of recommendation

for Brumidi to Secretary of the Interior Caleb B. Smith,

defending Brumidi’s employment in preference to American painters because of his experience and skill in mural

decoration.3 Although the issue was raised, no one was

able to disprove that Brumidi’s qualifications to paint the

canopy were superior.

On August 18, 1862, Walter wrote to Brumidi, asking

him to furnish a design for “a picture 65 feet in diameter,

painted in fresco, on the concave canopy over the eye of

the New Dome of the U.S. Capitol.”4 Walter encouraged

Constantino Brumidi’s

masterpiece is The Apotheosis of Washington on

the 4,664-square-foot canopy

over the eye of the dome, 180

feet above the floor of the Rotunda (fig. 9–1). Brumidi met

the challenge of designing the

centerpiece of the nation’s Capitol and of creating a scene that

could be read clearly from the

floor but would also be effective

when viewed from the balcony

immediately below. Brumidi’s

commission to paint the canopy

was complicated by changes of

those in authority and by politics. His battle with governmental red tape must have seemed endless, and, in fact, the

final payment was made to his heirs after his death.

After his dismissal in 1859, Meigs returned briefly to

the Capitol in 1861 to resume charge of the decoration, and he re-hired Emmerich Carstens as foreman of

ornamental painting.1 Even though work on the Capitol was suspended in May 1861 because of the outbreak

of the Civil War, Brumidi was able to continue his

mural work, even during the period from May to October, when troops camped in the Capitol (fig. 9–2). We

125

CHAPTER 9

Painting 

The Apotheosis of Washington

Fig. 9–2. Union troops on the East Front of the

Capitol with the dome under construction, May

1861. Brumidi worked at the Capitol throughout the

Civil War.

Fig. 9–1. Central group of The Apotheosis of Washington.

The first president rises to the heavens, flanked by Liberty and

Victor y/Fame, encircled with maidens, and with a rainbow

beneath his feet. Rotunda.
Brumidi to study the drawings in his office of the

Rotunda, as redesigned in 1859 with a canopy over the

eye of the dome (fig. 9–3). This suggests that Brumidi’s

design for the canopy was not yet fully developed and

that he added the watercolor image of his final canopy

design over a tentative sketch on Walter’s drawing at

this time. Walter may have envisioned an apotheosis of

Washington similar to the Apotheosis of St. Genevieve

at the Panthéon in Paris. On September 8, Brumidi described the final design to Walter: “The six groups

around the border represent as you will see, War, Science, Marine, Commerce, Manufactures, and Agriculture. The leading figures will mesure [sic] some 16 feet.

In the centre is an Apotheosis of Washington, surrounded by allegorical figures, and the 13 original Sister

States.”5 (The allegorical groups are shown at the end of

this chapter; the title of the group “Manufactures” was

changed to “Mechanics.”)

The concept of apotheosis, the raising of a person to

the rank of a god or the glorification of the person as

ideal, would have been familiar to Brumidi from classical

art as well as from the numerous earlier paintings or

prints depicting the apotheosis of the first president, who

was honored as a national icon. For example, Rembrandt

Peale’s painting showing Washington perched on a cloud

and being crowned with a wreath by a winged cupid, engraved in 1800, may have been known to Brumidi.

Other artists were still painting Washington’s apotheosis

at mid-century.6 Earlier, Brumidi had made oil sketches

for two other versions of The Apotheosis of Washington

(see chapter 10).

Brumidi estimated the cost of designing and executing

the work at $50,000. His design was approved by Walter

and Commissioner of Public Buildings B. B. French, on

the condition that he reduce the fee to $40,000. By the

end of December Brumidi agreed to their terms.7 Commissioner French had sent Brumidi’s design, presumably his

large oil sketch (see fig. 10–5), to Secretary Smith for approval. French then authorized Brumidi’s employment on

January 3, 1863, although an appropriation was still pending, so that he could begin work as soon as possible. He

was convinced that there was “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.” He wanted Brumidi to use the existing scaffolding and hoped he could

start by December 1863.8 However, although the Statue of

Freedom was erected then, only the exterior of the dome

was constructed. The canopy could not be constructed

until all the interior ironwork was finished, and therefore

Brumidi was not actually able to begin painting until 1865.

A letter from Walter to Brumidi of March 11, 1863,

following the congressional appropriation to complete

the dome, served as the artist’s contract to paint the

fresco for $40,000, to be paid in monthly installments of

$2,000—almost as much as he normally earned in an entire year (fig. 9–4). The contract price was double the

total wages of $19,483.51 he had earned at the Capitol

between 1855 and 1864. Even considering that Brumidi

paid for supplies and any assistants out of this amount, he

himself earned an enormous sum. However, he apparently did not manage his income well, perhaps having

made bad investments, for when payments were halted in

August 1865, with the final $10,000 reserved pending

final approval of his work, he needed to borrow money

from Walter and others.9

Before he could fulfill his contract Brumidi suffered a

series of bureaucratic frustrations and delays caused by

the incomplete state of the dome construction. To help

126

Fig. 9–3. Detail of Walter’s cross-section of the dome,

1859. Brumidi’s watercolor rendering of his final design for the

Apotheosis was painted into Walter’s drawing. Architect of the

Capitol.
painting in the backgrounds, he would most likely have

used his team of Peruchi, Odense, and Long. In any case,

throughout the huge fresco the style and technique appear to be Brumidi’s.

The Capitol’s designers had always intended to commemorate the nation’s first president in the center of the

building. Brumidi permanently put an image of Washington in this place of honor, after Horatio Greenough’s

monumental Zeus-like, toga-clad statue of George Washington (fig. 9–5), commissioned for the center of the

Rotunda, had been moved from the Rotunda to the

Capitol grounds in 1844. Brumidi seems to have consciously created a variation on Greenough’s pose of a

seated figure with the right arm outstretched and the left

hand holding a sword. But he clothed Washington in his

military uniform and gave him a lavender lap robe to create the effect of classical drapery (fig. 9–6). He flanked

Washington with figures representing Liberty, holding

the fasces, and a combination of Victor y and Fame

sounding a trumpet, which may allude to Antonio

Capellano’s relief over the entrance to the Rotunda (fig.

9–7). The thirteen encircling figures, each with a star

above her head, may symbolize specific states by regions;

those near Liberty, with cotton boll wreaths, clearly suggest the South.15

Brumidi was painting the canopy during a tumultuous period in the nation’s histor y—a single

month, April 1865, saw both the surrender of General

Lee and the assassination of President Lincoln. At this

time, he had finished the center group and was working on the scene below, “War” (fig. 9–8). Brumidi

may have expressed his own political feelings by using

Brumidi in preparing the full-size cartoons, Walter ordered a wooden structure simulating the canopy built for

the artist; it was completed by the end of March 1863.10

This enabled him to judge the effect of the curved surface

on the perspective and foreshortening of the figures. On

May 2, 1863, the new Secretary of the Interior, J. P.

Usher, questioned the contract with Brumidi and demanded a full report. Walter sent him copies of all the

previous correspondence, supporting the project so

strongly that he said he would resign if it were stopped.

Despite Walter’s reply, Usher ordered the work stopped

on May 7. Finally, in July, Usher was convinced that the

fresco was part of the original dome design approved by

Congress and agreed that Brumidi could resume work.

The artist received his first monthly payment in August.

In November, after Brumidi had been paid $10,000 for

the preparation of the cartoons, Usher stopped further

payments until Brumidi could begin the fresco.11 Walter

was afraid that the artist would “lose his spirit” and

would be “too old to paint the picture before the place

[was] ready for him.” He also feared that the work might

be stopped because Congress was getting impatient to see

the Rotunda finished and the scaffolding removed.12

Finally, on December 3, 1864, after a year of waiting,

the canopy was ready, and payments to Brumidi were resumed, including one for $1,000 for work on the cartoons during October 1863.13 The speed of Brumidi’s

work, once he was allowed to begin painting, is remarkable, for he spent no more than eleven months filling the

4,664-square-foot surface of the canopy. Brumidi was assisted with the mortaring by government employee

Joseph Beckert.14 For preparing his materials and perhaps

127

PAINTING THE APOTHEOSIS OF WASHINGTON

Fig. 9–4. Check cashed by Brumidi. The $2,000 check was the

first installment of the $40,000 contract for painting the fresco.

Architect of the Capitol.
128

Fig. 9–6. Central group of Washington with Liberty and

Victory/Fame. Washington is placed near the center of the Rotunda, looking toward the entrance on the east. Rotunda.

Fig. 9–7. Antonio Capellano, Fame and Peace Crowning

George Washington. This 1827 relief may have inspired Brumidi to

flank his Washington with winged allegorical figures, one of whom

bears the trumpet of fame and palm of victory. East central portico.

Fig. 9–5. Horatio Greenough’s George Washington on the

Capitol grounds. In the canopy, Brumidi paid tribute to the

familiar monument while varying the pose and costume. The

statue is now in the National Museum of American History,

Smithsonian Institution.
the features of the Confederate leaders on

the evil figures being vanquished by Freedom: Jefferson Davis as Discord, with two

lighted torches, and Alexander H. Stephens

as Anger, being struck by a thunder bolt

and biting his finger. It is possible to imagine other faces as portraits as well; Brumidi

was certainly familiar with the Renaissance

tradition of depicting historic or allegorical

figures with the features of the artist’s notable contemporaries.16

By May the painter was starting on the scene

to the left of “War,” entitled “Science.” At the

end of the month, Walter resigned, and completion of Brumidi’s contract was overseen by

Walter’s longtime assistant Edward Clark, who

was appointed in his place in August 1865 (fig.

9–9). The artist was forced to stop work in July

because the appropriation was exhausted. The

new secretary of the interior, James Harlan, resumed payments to Brumidi only after inspecting the fresco in July. 

Brumidi had to make an unexpected change

in the fresco; only days after his appointment

on August 30, 1865, Clark received a letter from Meigs,

insisting that Brumidi remove the portrait of him in his

blue uniform included in the Commerce group; Brumidi

129

PAINTING THE APOTHEOSIS OF WASHINGTON

Fig. 9–8. Figures trampled by Freedom in

“War,” the first lower group painted. After finishing the central figures, Brumidi moved to this

scene. Rotunda.

Fig. 9–9. Edward Clark. Brumidi painted this portrait

sometime after Clark was appointed the Architect of the Capitol in

1865, based on a photograph preserved in the Lola Germon

Brumidi Family Album. Architect of the Capitol.
complied, but the patch of mortar in the shape of Meigs’s

scraped-out head and shoulders is still visible (figs. 9–10

and 9–11).17 Meigs, proud of his integrity and his reputation for honesty in handling the construction funds, may

have been disturbed by being depicted with Mercury

thrusting a bag of money towards him. Ironically, Bru130

Fig. 9–10. Location of Montgomery C. Meigs’s scraped-out

image. Meigs insisted that Brumidi remove his portrait, which

was between the two remaining figures, from the “Commerce”

group. Rotunda.

Fig. 9–11. Photograph of Montgomery C. Meigs. This image of the engineer in uniform was evidently the basis

of Brumidi’s depiction in the canopy. 

Fig. 9–12. Thomas U. Walter as Samuel F. B. Morse. In the

Renaissance tradition, the white-bearded figure in the “Science”

group represents the inventor of the telegraph but has the features

of Walter. Rotunda.

Fig. 9–13. Photograph of Thomas

U. Walter. This photograph closely

resembles Brumidi’s portrait of Morse.

Library of Congress.
midi had overcome the difficulties of the concave surface,

he continued: 

The coloring is not as brilliant as I expected it would

be but it is evident that its atmospheric effect would

not have been so good if the coloring had been

stronger.—Upon the whole I am well pleased with

the picture;—it is far better than the great painting

by Gross [sic] in the eye of the Dome of the Pantheon at Paris, for which he was created a Baron, and

received 100.000 francs. The latter picture is 170

feet above the floor, while that of the Capitol is ten

feet higher and contains one third more surface. I

studied this picture well when I was in Paris, and

from it I derived the idea of the one we have in the

Capitol. Our picture wants more light in the daytime. I intended to have 36 large reflectors around it

so as to throw a flood of light on it from the outside

upper windows; if these are introduced I think the

chiaroscuro will be perfect.23

The reflecting mirrors were eventually installed, so

Brumidi’s masterpiece was well lighted both day and

night (fig. 9–14).

In 1866, a booklet was published containing a description of the canopy and its symbolism by S. D. Wyeth and

a photograph of Brumidi’s oil sketch copyrighted by the

artist. The booklet was sold in the Capitol for an unknown period and provides the only detailed explanation

of the identification of the figures; because of its date, it

can be assumed the descriptions came directly from the

artist. Wyeth also quoted an anonymous art critic:

“whether considered as regards the conceptions of the

artist, the perfection of coloring and drawing, the faultless grouping, or the peculiar characteristics that adapt it

to the concave surface on which it is painted, and to the

great distance from which it must be viewed, the picture

is a master piece of art.”24

The bureaucratic obstacles did not end for Brumidi

even after the completion and favorable reception of the

fresco. First came the question of who was to approve

the work. After many letters back and forth over a twomonth period between architect Edward Clark, the secretary of the interior, and the Joint Committee on the

Library (which was in charge of the art in the Capitol),

and a supporting letter from Walter, Brumidi was finally

paid $9,500, with $500 “retained until picture is properly toned and blended,” for a total of $39,500.25 Finally, thirteen years later, in February 1879, $700 was

appropriated for blending the joints and building a scaffold, but the structure was never erected. After Brumidi’s death in 1880, Congress gave Brumidi’s children

the remaining $500 owed to him.

midi’s tribute to Meigs’s rival, Walter, is preserved in the

features used for Samuel F. B. Morse (fig. 9–12 and

9–13).

By September 1865, Brumidi had completed all but

the last scene, “Marine,” and he was being pressured by

Clark to complete the painting of the canopy. The artist,

however, wanted to review his work after the plaster was

completely dry. Realizing that he was going to need to

“cover the connections of the pieces of plaster . . . giving

more union to the colors at the said junctions, for obtain

[sic] the artistic effect . . . ,” he thought it best to wait

until the spring, when the weather was less damp, for this

last step. He also asked for the gas lights to be turned on,

so that he could the judge the fresco in the light in which

it would be seen.18 He therefore requested that the scaffold be left in place. Walter, who was still involved in the

project after his resignation, went up into the dome to

see the picture and complimented Brumidi: “I think it

will be perfect when seen from below.”19

Despite the artist’s pleas the scaffolding was taken

down in early January. His masterpiece received high

praise; B. B. French commented, “That picture, as a work

of art, surpasses any one in the world, of the kind.”20 The

National Intelligencer published a strongly positive review of it on January 17: “The general effect is inspiring,

while the details bear close inspection and command admiration. It is almost a difficulty to realize that some of

the sitting or reclining figures are not things of life . . . we

do not hesitate to say that both in design and execution it

is worthy of the Capitol and the nation.”21

Meigs, now a general, came to see the canopy, and he

wrote to the artist:

I find the drawing and coloring most agreeable and

beautiful. The perspective is so well managed that I

doubt whether anyone not well acquainted with the

construction of such edifices as the Dome could determine by the mere use of his eyes the form and position of the surface which is painted. The figures appear to take their places in space with the illusion of a

diorama. I am glad the country at length possesses a

Cupola on whose vault is painted a fresco picture

after the manner of the great edifices of the old

world. I regret that the joinings of the plaster still

show too plainly in the clear graduated tints of the

sky the progress of each days work, but these, I trust,

will disappear as the picture dries more completely.

22

Unfortunately, the joins between the giornate remained

clearly visible from below.

Walter also praised the work: “As to the merits of the

painting I have come to the conclusion that it is a decided

success.” After commenting on the skill with which Bru131

PAINTING THE APOTHEOSIS OF WASHINGTON
Brumidi’s crowning achievement remains the focal point

of the Rotunda and the apex of the interior of the Capitol.

Brumidi’s canopy rivals the grand illusionistic ceilings and

domes of the Renaissance and Baroque periods, such as

Correggio’s Assumption of the Virgin in the dome of Parma

cathedral, Luca Giordano’s Apotheosis of the Medici Dynasty

in Florence, or Rubens’s Apotheosis of James II. In these

works, figures at the perimeter appear anchored to the

ground while the saint or person being glorified rises on

clouds to heaven. Similarly, Brumidi created the illusion

that George Washington is rising through the clouds and

the golden sky, as if the Rotunda were open to the heavens

(fig. 9–15). In combining allusions to classical mythology

and Renaissance and Baroque effects with references to

American history and the technical achievements of his day,

he had created a unique synthesis.

Conservation completed in 1988 has made its full effect

visible again to millions of visitors each year (figs. 9–16

through 9–21).

132

Fig. 9–14. Early photograph from the balcony. This photograph of “Marine” shows how the space under the canopy perimeter

was left open, so that light could be reflected onto the fresco from the

windows in the dome. The balcony was enclosed when the Rotunda

was air conditioned in the 1940s. Brady-Handy Collection, 

Library of Congress.

Fig. 9–15. View of the canopy in the eye of the dome. Brumidi’s fresco gives the impression that the first president is rising to

the heavens. Rotunda.
133

PAINTING THE APOTHEOSIS OF WASHINGTON

Fig. 9–16. “War.” Armored Freedom, sword raised and cape

flying, with a helmet and striped shield reminiscent of those on the

Statue of Freedom, tramples Tyranny and Kingly Power, assisted

by a fierce eagle carrying arrows and a thunderbolt. Rotunda.
134

Fig. 9–17. “Agriculture.” Ceres, the goddess of agriculture, is

shown with a wreath of wheat and a cornucopia, seated on a

McCormick reaper. Young America in a liberty cap holds the reins

of the horses, while Flora gathers flowers in the foreground.

Rotunda.
135

PAINTING THE APOTHEOSIS OF WASHINGTON

Fig. 9–18. “Mechanics.” Vulcan, god of the forge, stands at his

anvil with his foot on a cannon, near a pile of cannon balls and

with a steam engine in the background. The man at the forge is

thought to represent Charles Thomas, who was in charge of the

ironwork of the dome. Rotunda.
136

Fig. 9–19. “Commerce.” Mercury, god of commerce, with his

winged cap and sandals and caduceus, hands a bag of gold to Robert

Morris, financier of the Revolutionary War, while men move a box on

a dolly. The anchor and sailors lead into the next scene. Brumidi

signed and dated the canopy on the box below Mercury. Rotunda.
137

PAINTING THE APOTHEOSIS OF WASHINGTON

Fig. 9–20. “Marine.” Neptune, god of the sea, holding his

trident and crowned with seaweed, rides in a shell chariot drawn

by sea horses. Venus, goddess of love born from the sea, helps lay the

transatlantic cable. In the background is a form of iron-clad ship

with smokestacks. Rotunda.
138

Fig. 9–21. “Science.” Minerva, goddess of wisdom and the arts of

civilization, with helmet and spear, points to an electric generator

creating power stored in batteries, next to a printing press, while

inventors Benjamin Franklin, Samuel F.B. Morse, and Robert Fulton

watch. At the left, a teacher demonstrates the use of dividers. Rotunda.
139

PAINTING THE APOTHEOSIS OF WASHINGTON

14. S. D. Wyeth, “Description of Brumidi’s Allegorical Painting,”

pamphlet excerpted from The Federal City (Washington: Gibson Brothers Printers, 1866), p. 116

15. Ibid., p.112.

16. George Hazleton, The National Capitol (New York: J. F. Taylor

and Company, 1897), pp. 97-98, reports that Brumidi was accused of

portraying, on the left, John B. Floyd and Robert E. Lee, and to the

right, Jefferson Davis and Alexander H. Stephens, but states that he believes this unlikely. The white-bearded man looks like John Brown as 

the latter appears in historic photographs, but this may be only a 

coincidence.

17. September 3, 1865, MCM Pocket Diary, MCM Papers, LC.

18. CB to EC, September 19, 1865, AOC/CO. The situation was reported by Clark, Annual Report of Edward Clark, Architect of the Capitol

Extension, November 1, 1865, 39–1, House Ex. Doc. No. 1, p. 811.

19. TUW to CB, November 21, 1865, TUW/PA (AAA, reel 4142.)

20. Benjamin Brown French, Witness to the Young Republic: A Yankee’s Journals, 1828-1870, Donald B. Cole and John J. McDonough, eds. (Hanover,

N.H., and London: University Press of New England, 1989), pp. 497–498.

21. National Intelligencer, January 17, 1866, p. 2.

22. MCM to CB, January 19, 1866, NARA/RG 48, series 290. 

23. TUW to BBF from Germantown, February 17, 1866, TUW/ PA

(AAA, reel 4142.) In this letter TUW states that the photographs were

taken by Mr. Walker.

24. Wyeth, “Description of Brumidi’s Allegorical Painting,” pp.

112–115. 

25. June 9, 1866, Voucher no. 23, AOC/Voucher Book, Works of

Art, v. 1.

Notes to Chapter 9

1. Oath of Office, March 9, 1861, AOC/EXT.

2. CB to MCM, June 3, 1861, AOC/CO.

3. MCM to Caleb B. Smith, June 5, 1862, NARA/RG 48 series 291, box 4.

4. TUW to CB, Aug. 18, 1862, AOC/LC.

5. CB to TUW, Sept. 8, 1862, copy of original letter in TUW Papers,

LC. Clerk’s copy (with height miscopied as 15 feet) in AOC/LB. During the conservation of the frescoes, Minerva, one of the tallest figures,

was measured as over 15 feet in height.

6. Mark Edward Thistlethwaite, The Image of George Washington:

Studies in Mid-nineteenth-century American History Painting (New

York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1979), pp. 190–192 and Phoebe Lloyd

Jacobs, “John James Bancroft and the Apotheosis of Washington,” Winterthur Portfolio, 1977, pp. 115–135.

7. TUW to CB, Dec. 24, 1862, AOC/LB. CB to TUW Dec. 27,

1862, TUW Papers, LC.

8. BBF to TUW, January 3, 1863, TUW Papers, LC, and AOC/LB.

9. TUW to CB, March 11, 1863, AOC/LB; TUW to CB, September 5, 1865, TUW/PA (AAA reel 4142).

10. TUW to CB, Februar y 25, 1863, and March 30, 1863,

TUW/PA (AAA reel 4141).

11. J. P. Usher to BBF, May 2, 1863, NARA/RG 48, Series 295,

Register, pp. 26-27. BBF to Usher, May 4, 1863, AOC/LB. TUW to

Amanda Walter, May 4, 1863, TUW/PA (AAA, reel 4141). Usher to

BBF, July 7, 1863, AOC/CO, and TUW to CB, July 8, 1863, TUW/PA

(AAA, reel 4141). Usher to West, November 6, 1863, AOC/CO.

12. TUW to Charles Fowler, Dec. 21, 1863, AOC/TUW Letter

Book; TUW to Edward R. James, Feb. 12, 1864, and TUW to Fowler,

April 4, 1864, TUW/PA (AAA, reel 4141.)

13. TUW to Usher, Dec. 3, 1864, NARA/RG 48, series 291, box 2,

and AOC/ Voucher Book, Works of Art, v. 1.