1. Death of Sardanapalus as a Political Statement on the Bourbon Restoration
!
Despite that fact that the Death of Sardanapalus portrays an ancient Near
Eastern subject, it was not disconnected from the issues facing France at the time.
Delacroix was born at the end of the French Revolution and lived through the reign of
Napoleon I and the highly unpopular Bourbon Restoration. During the Bourbon1
Restoration, depictions of monarchs were loaded with political meaning. At the Salon of
1827, the Death of Sardanapalus premiered to outrage for its scandalous style and
topic. The subject matter of an Oriental monarch served as a subtle insult to the French
monarchy while simultaneously masking any offense. Delacroix’s deviations from the
source texts reinforce the political message. After painting this work, Delacroix shifted
from large political canvases to smaller works based on his travels, Classical myth, and
theater. At first, an Oriental painting depicting a historic monarch seems removed from
Fraser, Elisabeth. “French Historical Studies 26.2 (2003): 315-349. pg 318.1

2. Post-Revolutionary France. The Death of Sardanapalus, despite depicting an exotic
subject that seems distant from French social order, acts as a social commentary on the
Bourbon Restoration.2
The Death of Sardanapalus depicts the elaborate suicide of the fabled last king
of Assyria. Sardanapalus was not a single historical figure, rather a combination of
Ashurbanipal, who ruled from 668-627 BCE, Shamash-shum-ukin, and the final king of
Assyria, Sin-shar-ishkun. Much of what is known concerning Sardanapalus comes from3
the writings of Diodorus of Sicily, a Greek historian, active between 60 and 30 BCE.4
Diodorus was said to have gained his knowledge from Persica of Ctesias, a doctor to
the Persian king, Artaxerxes Mnemon, who lived from 405 to 359 BCE. A few ancient5
Greek statues of Sardanapalus exist, and they show him as a standing man draped in
cloth, similar to Dionysus; they are both portrayed as effeminate. Sardanapalus was6
known for his extravagant lifestyle as described by Diodorus. He “exceeded all his
predecessors in sloth and luxury.” He displayed effeminate tendencies, such as7
wearing women’s clothing and makeup, making his own clothing, and speaking with a
Spector, Jack. Delacroix: The Death of Sardanapalus. The Viking Press: New York,2
1974. pg 18.
"Sardanapalus." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online Academic3
Edition. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2013.
Encyclopædia Britannica.4
Lord Byron. “Sardanapalus: A Tragedy.” The Works of Lord Byron Poetry, Volume V.5
Ed. Ernest Hartley Coleridge. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2007. 3-114. pg. 3.
Image6
Diodorus. The Historical Library of Diodorus the Sicilian: In Fifteen Books. Trans. G.7
Booth. London: W.M. Dowall, 1814. pg. 119.

3. woman’s voice. In addition, he was extremely indulgent in his manner of feasting and8
his sexual relations with both sexes. “Being thus corrupt in his morals he not only came9
to a miserable end himself, but utterly overturned the Assyrian monarchy.”10
According to Diodorus, there was a prophecy concerning the Assyrian capital that
“Nineveh could never be taken by force, til the river became the city’s enemy.” Trusting11
in this prediction, Sardanapalus felt confident that Nineveh would never fall and
barricaded himself in the city to prepare for his enemies’ attack. Three years into the
siege, the Euphrates River overflowed and destroyed part of the city’s walls, fulfilling the
prophecy. Sardanapalus then prepared to face the inevitable in as an elaborate style12
as he had lived. He order a large pile of wood to be prepared in his apartment and all
his gold, silver, clothing, eunuchs, and concubines brought in so he could mount the pile
and burn himself along with all his worldly possessions. It is truly an impressive story,13
and it would later inspire Lord Byron to write his Sardanapalus: A Tragedy in 1821.
Byron first encountered and became interested in Diodorus’s story of
Sardanapalus when he was a schoolboy. When writing his interpretation of14
Sardanapalus, he stayed fairly true to the text of Diodorus. The stage directions
describe Sardanapalus as dressed effeminately, and there are mentions of great
Diodorus, pg. 119.8
Diodorus, pg. 119.9
Diodorus, pg. 119.10
Diodorus, pg. 122.11
Farwell, Beatrice. “Sources for Delacroix's Death of Sardanapalus.” The Art Bulletin12
40.1 (1958): 66-70. pg. 67.
Diodorus, pg. 123.13
Ernest Hartley Coleridge, pg. 3.14

4. wealth. A majority of the play focuses on the war and his romantic relationships. The15
play ends with Sardanapalus and his mistress, Myrhha, throwing themselves on the pile
of gold and clothing and lighting it. Overall, the account is not significantly different from
that of Diodorus, with the exception of the language, which is highly Byronic. George
Gordon Byron, better known as Lord Byron, was an English nobleman who became a
famous Romantic poet. His written works inspired many visual artists of the time,16
including Delacroix, who was also a Romantic who greatly admired Byron. When17
Delacroix painted Greece on the Ruins of the Missolonghi, it was not only because he
was sympathetic to the plight of the Greeks, but also because Byron had died there.18 19
These writings of Byron and Diodorus primarily share a consistent story, and for
the most part, there is cohesion between these two sources and Delacroix’s visual
rendering of the scene. The pyre is comprised of wood, gold, and cloth, just as stated in
the texts. However, Byron removes the slaves and concubines from the room, leaving
only Sardanapalus and Myrhha. The fact that Delacroix included the slaves that Byron20
excluded shows that he must have been looking at the work of Diodorus. Delacroix21
also excludes Myrhha, who, according to Diodorus, was the one to light the pyre, but in
the painting, all the women are dead. Neither source text mentions these killings, so
Byron, pg. 20.15
"George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron". Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia16
Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2013.
Spector, pg. 59.17
Encyclopædia Britannica.18
Image19
Farwell, pg. 68.20
Farwell, pg. 68.21

5. they may have been an aspect of Delacroix’s artistic interpretation. It is also possible22
that Delacroix was inspired by a production of Sardanapalus: A Tragedy in London. All23
of these sources combined in the mind of Delacroix when he painted his Death of
Sardanapalus.
In the painting, precious objects shown convey the lavish lifestyle described. The
pyre surrounds an elaborate golden bed with carved elephants, colorful inlay, and
draped in rich red fabric. Upon the bed sits Sardanapalus, dressed in white robes and
gold jewelry, gazing over the scene with a look of tranquil passivity. Surrounding him24
are his female slaves and horses being slaughtered by his male slaves. Despite the
amount of stabbing taking place in the painting, there is no blood shown; the bright red
color of the bedding and tassels seeming to stand in its place. The background is a25
swirling black, that perhaps represents smoke, with a large architectural element in the
back right.
In February 1828, Delacroix premiered the Death of Sardanapalus at the Salon
that had begun in November 1827. The reaction to the painting was immediate and26
negative. La Rochefoucauld, the director of the Salon, wrote a letter protesting the
placement of Delacroix’s work in which he stated, “The public has rightly complained of
the distinction accorded these two paintings.” He goes on that say, “I admit that I27
Farwell, pg. 68.22
Farwell, pg. 69.23
Image24
Spector, pg. 27.25
Fraser, pg. 316.26
Fraser, pg. 316.27

6. consider it my duty not to encourage such a manner whose imitation would be so
dangerous.” There are a few aspects of this Delacroix work that La Rochefoucauld28
could consider to be dangerous. At the time the painting was displayed, the conflict
between the proponents of Neoclassical and Romantic art was reaching its peak, yet
the painting was also not well received by the Romantics. It was criticized for both its29
subject matter and for its style, which was thought to be disorganized and chaotic.30
While most of Delacroix’s early works had been purchased by the state, the Death of
Sardanapalus was not. His Massacre of Chios, which had hung in the state museum for
years, was taken down after the Death of Sardanapalus premiered. In contrast to31
Delacroix’s rejection at the salon, there was the great success of Eugène Devéria’s Birth
of Henry IV. Elizabeth Fraser first uses the connection between Birth of Henry IV32 33
and Death of Sardanapalus to show that subject matter and not style made Delacroix’s
piece objectionable. Both works were painted in the Romantic style, yet Delacroix was
shunned while Devéria was lauded. The main distinction between the two paintings
seems to be subject matter. One painting portrayed the birth of a king and the other a
death.
In the political climate of the time, no depiction of a monarch could be neutral. At
the time of the Salon of 1827, Charles X was ruling as part of the Bourbon
Fraser, pg. 316.28
Spector, pg. 75.29
Spector, pg. 81.30
Spector, pg. 85.31
Fraser, pg. 318.32
Image33

7. Restoration. This followed the fall of the Bourbon monarchy in the French Revolution34
and came after the rise and fall of Napoleon I. The Bourbon Restoration began in 1814,
with the rule of Louis XVIII, who ruled for ten years until his death in 1824 He had no35
heirs, thus his brother, Charles X, took the throne. The Bourbons attempted to portray36
themselves as a strong family, but this was thwarted by their lack of fertility. This led to
attacks on Louis XVIII and Charles X as impotent, a trait associated with the femininity
of Sardanapalus. These attacks were cemented by the fact that Louis XVIII famously37
took years to consummate his marriage. However, the main detractions concerning
Louis XVIII revolved around his indulgence and feasting which led to gout. Political38
cartoons of the time portrayed him as corpulent. Again, this overindulgence is39
consistent with reports of Sardanapalus. The fertility problems in the Bourbon family
made Eugène Devéria’s Birth of Heny IV even more significant as it was one of the few
successful births during the restoration. While Louis XVIII had been fairly moderate as a
ruler, Charles X would establish a more absolutist rule.
The major aspect of the painting found in neither the ancient source nor Byron’s
play is the killing. Neither source tells of any murders taking place before the fire was
set. The killing may have been found in a still unknown ancient source. Proposed
sources are ancient Etruscan sarcophagi and a written text describing a massacre at a
Fraser, pg. 318.34
Fraser, pg. 333.35
Fraser, pg. 345.36
Fraser, pg. 345.37
Fraser, pg. 341.38
Image39

8. Scythian burial. It is also possible that the combination of sensuality and violence40
appealed to Delacroix on a personal level. However, there is a third option: Delacroix41
was inspired by current events and the work of his friend, painter Charles-Emile
Champmartin. Delacroix met Champmartin in 1815 through mutual friends, fellow
artists, Pierre-Narcisse Guérin and Théodore Géricault. They worked together on their42
submissions for the Salon of 1824, Delacroix’s Massacre of Chios and Champmartin’s
Massacre of the Innocents. In 1827, Champmartin would journey to Turkey and the43
Near East, which he recounted to his friends in France, including Delacroix. The44
stories and images he brought home greatly inspired Delacroix in taking his own trip to
the East.
While Champmartin was in Turkey, a major event took place: Sultan Mahmut II
ordered the massacre of his elite fighting force, the Janissaries. In 1826, several45
Janissaries plotted a rebellion against the Sultan. In retaliation, Sultan Mahmut II
ordered the death of all the Janissaries. This led to a climax in which the Janissaries46
were cornered and massacred. Champmartin turned this event into his painting,
Massacre of the Janissaries. Barring the discovery of a convincing ancient source text,47
Lambertson, John. “Delacroix's ‘Sardanapalus,’ Champmartin's ‘Janissaries,’ and40
Liberalism in the Late Restoration.” Oxford Art Journal 25.2 (2002): 65-85. pg. 67.
Spector, pg. 91.41
Lambertson, pg. 63.42
Lambertson, pg. 63.43
Lambertson, pg. 72.44
Lambertson, pg. 74.45
Lambertson, pg. 74.46
Image47

9. it seems that Champmartin’s influence is the likely inspiration for the massacre shown in
the Death of Sardanapalus. John Lamberston established the connection between
these two works in 2002. Massacre of the Janissaries depicts the Pasha leading his
troops to burn the barracks containing the Janissaries. The figure of the Pasha is
highlighted by his bright white clothing and headdress, similar to those of Sardanapalus.
The Mosque seen in the background is a nod to the Sultan’s God-given authority.48
There are smoke and flames in the upper half of both paintings. Visually, the
compositions of the pieces seem to mirror each other, with Massacre of the Janissaries
rising from left to right and the Death of Sardanapalus from right to left. In both works it
appears that the victims, the Janissaries and slaves respectively, have resigned
themselves to their impending deaths. Champmartin gave Delacroix a prime example of
an Oriental leader observing the massacre of his people. The connection with the
crushing of the Janissary revolt led to the Death of Sardanapalus being even more
controversial.
Given the more absolutist rule of Charles X, the actions of Sultan Mahmut II
against the Janissaries were seen as an abuse of absolute power. A few of the specific
laws passed by Charles X played to his Royalist base on the right, but angered Liberals
on the left. Examples of this include the Indemnity Laws and the Law of Sacrilege, both
in 1825, and an effort to restrict the press in 1827. The Indemnity Laws returned land49
to the bourgeois, who had lost it in the aftermath of the French Revolution, while the
Law of Sacrilege heightened punishments for crimes against the church and cemented
Lambertson, pg. 75.48
Lambertson, pg. 80.49

10. the relationship between the church and state. The link between church and state was50
a reminder of the absolute power of the prerevolutionary monarchy. This sentiment was
reminiscent of the link between God and the Sultan as seen in Massacre of the
Janissaries. To liberals at the time, the attack on the Janissaries was seen as a clear51
abuse of royal power. Despite Liberals being sympathetic to criticism of despotism,52
both Delacroix’s and Champmartin’s paintings were considered too extreme and were
regarded to possess the potential to incite riot.
Given the subject matter of the Death of Sardanapalus, the nature of Orientalism
in the work must be considered. Delacroix, along with many Romantic artists, was
fascinated with the Near East for its exotic beauty. The opening of the East by53
Napoleon, during his conquest, made access easier, while political issues in Greece
brought the region into the limelight. Interest in these new places, however, did not54
equate to respect for the people who lived there, and inhabitants of these areas were
viewed as primitive and barbaric. Delacroix may have been implying a connection
between the barbarism of Charles X and the foreign Sardanapalus. While the Oriental55
nature of the work may have been meant as an insult to the king, it may have also
served to veil the true meaning of the painting. It could be more socially acceptable to
show a controversial subject matter when set in a foreign surroundings. For example,
Lambertson, pg. 80.50
Lambertson, pg. 81.51
Lambertson, pg. 81.52
Bernard, Camille. “Some Aspects of Delacroix's Orientalism.” The Bulletin of the53
Cleveland Museum of Art 58.4 (1971): 123-127. pg. 123.
Bernard, pg. 123.54
Lambertson, pg. 81.55

11. the sexual violence that takes place in the Death of Sardanapalus would have caused
far more outrage if it was afflicted upon French women. Likewise, showing a definitively
French king acting as Sardanapalus would be a more clear statement.
It should be noted that, while Delacroix never directly attributed a political
meaning to the painting, he could hardly have been oblivious to how the Death of
Sardanapalus would be perceived. However, he did relate the Death of Sardanapalus to
the more politically charged Massacre at Chios, 1822. In an 1828 letter, Delacroix56
wrote that “I have effectively finished my massacre No 2.” His Massacre at Chios57
depicts an attack by the Ottoman army on the Greek town. The French monarchy was
criticized for not assisting the Greeks in their fight against the Turks. He also covered
the theme of Greek independence in his painting Greece on the Ruins of the
Missolonghi. The theme of Greek independence could also link back to the oppression58
felt by the French. These paintings have fairly opaque political meanings and show that
Delacroix had no qualms pursuing these themes in his work.
Perhaps Delacroix’s most well-known work is also, by far, his most political. In
Liberty Leading the People, Delacroix takes his criticism of the monarchy further.59
Liberty Leading the People was painted in 1830 in honor of the July Revolution that
overthrew Charles X. However, a new king, Louis Philippe, was enthroned until his
overthrow in 1848. The painting shows a female personification of liberty leading the
French public. The female figure has also come to be interpreted as Marianne, a
Image56
Lambertson, pg. 81.57
Image58
Image59

12. personified symbol of France. There is no sense of illusion in the painting, and the
meaning is not veiled as it is in the Death of Sardanapalus; the subject of the painting
was common knowledge. Given that Delacroix made a celebratory painting to
commemorate the overthrow of Charles X, the Death of Sardanapalus could easily have
been an earlier criticism of the king.
The Death of Sardanapalus and Liberty Leading the People represent a turning
point in Delacroix’s work. His most influential early works, Massacre at Chios, 1824, and
Greece on the Missolonghi, 1826, were both politically linked to the Greek struggle for
independence. His third major painting was the Death of Sardanapalus, 1827, followed
by Liberty Leading the People, 1830. The highlighting of these paintings is not meant to
ignore his others works from the period, such as the Barque of Dante, yet these four
paintings are considerably larger than the others in physical scale and received more
attention when released. The measurements of these four works may be of significance.
They range from eight to twelve feet in size. His later paintings are substantially60
smaller and represent a change in subject matter. In 1832 Delacroix journeyed to
Morocco, and many of his subsequent paintings were based on his time there. These61
include his Women of Algiers, Jewish Wedding in Morocco and a host of other work
based on or inspired by his experiences. In addition to his Orientalist works, his later
subject matter included Classical myths, theater, and Biblical stories, but no overtly
political pieces.
Dequier, A and M. Bard. Eugène Delacroix, Passion and Inspiration. Musée du60
Louvre. Web.
Camille, pg. 124.61

13. Intentionally or not, after the Death of Sardanapalus and Liberty Leading the
People, Delacroix shifted away from portraying political subject matter on a large scale.
It could have been that after the fall of Charles X he lost his motivation to paint political
pieces. However, King Louis Philippe, who succeeded Charles X, was also highly
unpopular with the French people. His 1832 trip to Morocco, the gift of new exotic
subject matter, may have drawn his attention elsewhere. In his later life, he painted
murals, mainly for the government, which would not have yielded political pieces.
Perhaps the new acceptance by the state led to him being less likely to pursue these
subjects. For whatever reason, the Death of Sardanapalus was one of Delacroix’s last
large political pieces.
Delacroix’s Death of Sardanapalus exemplifies a number of trends in art and
society in France during the Bourbon Restoration. Its reception highlights the rivalry
between the Neoclassicists and the Romantics. The subject matter can be evaluated in
an Orientalist context or a Feminist one, not discussed in this paper. A deeper look
reveals a piece with a clear political statement of disapproval of the Bourbon monarchy
and parallels drawn between the kings of France and Sardanapalus. The connection to
Champmartin’s Massacre of the Janissaries adds another link to political events of the
time. Within Delacroix’s career, the Death of Sardanapalus marks a turning point in the
subject matter and scale of his work. At first glance, the exotic beauty and ancient
subject of the painting seem foreign, however, the Death of Sardanapalus, in both its
creation and reception, is very telling of the French society that produced it.

14. Works Cited
Bernard, Camille. “Some Aspects of Delacroix's Orientalism.” The Bulletin of the
Cleveland Museum of Art 58.4 (1971): 123-127.
Lord Byron. “Sardanapalus: A Tragedy.” The Works of Lord Byron Poetry, Volume V. Ed.
Ernest Hartley Coleridge. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2007. 3-114.
Dequier, A and M. Bard. Eugène Delacroix, Passion and Inspiration. Musée du Louvre.
Web.
Diodorus. The Historical Library of Diodorus the Sicilian: In Fifteen Books. Trans. G.
Booth. London: W.M. Dowall, 1814.
Farwell, Beatrice. “Sources for Delacroix's Death of Sardanapalus.” The Art Bulletin
40.1 (1958): 66-70.
Fraser, Elisabeth. “Delacroix's Sardanapalus: The Life and Death of the Royal Body.”
French Historical Studies 26.2 (2003): 315-349.
"George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron". Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia
Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2013.
Lambertson, John. “Delacroix's ‘Sardanapalus,’ Champmartin's ‘Janissaries,’ and
Liberalism in the Late Restoration.” Oxford Art Journal 25.2 (2002): 1-21.
"Sardanapalus." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online Academic
Edition. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2013.
Spector, Jack. Delacroix: The Death of Sardanapalus. The Viking Press: New York,
1974.