A critique of Catherine Millard's interpretation of the artistic embellishment of the Supreme Court building.

In what follows we'll juxtapose Millard's commentary on specific artistic embellishments with passages from a booklet produced by the office of the Curator of the Supreme Court Building, and our own observations acquired from independent visits to the Court in the past several years.

Justice the Guardian of Liberty:

Here's Millard's commentary on the sculpture above the east entrance to the Supreme Court Building:

The sculpture over the east portico of the building is entitled: JUSTICE THE GUARDIAN OF LIBERTY. Moses is the central figure holding the two tablets of THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, one in either hand, stark reminder of the origin and basis of our legal system.

Contrast Millard's commentary with the official description of the sculpture provided by the artists himself, Herman MacNeil:

Law as an element of civilization was normally and naturally derived or inherited in this country from former civilizations. The "Eastern Pediment" of the Supreme Court Building suggests therefore the treatment of such fundamental laws and precepts as are derived from the East. Moses, Confucius and Solon are chosen as representing three great civilizations and form the central group of this Pediment. Flanking this central group - left - is the symbolical figure bearing the means of enforcing the law. On the right a group tempering justice with mercy, allegorically treated. The "Youth" is brought into both these groups to suggest the "Carrying on " of civilization through the knowledge imbued of right and wrong. The next two figures with shields; left - The settlement of disputes between states through enlightened judgment. Right - Maritime and other large functions of the Supreme Court in protection of the United States. The last figures; Left - Study and pondering of judgments; Right - A tribute to the fundamental and supreme character of this Court. Finale - The fable of the Tortoise and the Hare (Descriptions of the Friezes in the Courtroom of the Supreme Court of the United States and of the East and West Pediments of the Building Exterior, p. 9).

In other words, MacNeil says nothing to suggest that the 10 Commandments are "the origin and basis of our legal system." Rather, Moses is put on par with Solon and Confucius as simply an important lawgiver of the East. Additionally, Millard omits all mention of Confucius and Solon, the allegorical representation of legal themes, and the pagan story of the Tortoise and the Hare. Apparently, she doesn't want her readers to know about the non-Biblical aspects of the sculpture. Not an impressive beginning to her treatment of the Supreme Court art.

The Oak Doors

Here is Millard's commentary on the oak doors that separate the courtroom from the central hallway on the main floor of the Supreme Court:

One gains access to the inner courtroom through an attractive doorway. Each door has beautifully engraved upon its dowel the Ten Commandments of Almighty God (Exodus 20).

Well, not exactly. As we note elsewhere, what's engraved here is not the 10 Commandments, but a depiction of tablets with Roman numerals on them. The Commandments themselves don't appear. This is a quibble, but it's an important quibble--we've sometimes heard people argue that the Commandments themselves are written out on the doors. It's possible that people got that impression from this passage, and we want to set the record straight.

The Courtroom Friezes

Here is Millard's commentary on the friezes on the walls of the Supreme Court Chamber:

The inner courtroom of the Supreme Court shows four marble bas-relief panels beneath the ceiling on each of the four walls. Each has a particular story to tell. The panel directly above the bench where the Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices are seated, depicts "The Power of Government" and "The Majesty of the Law." Between these two allegorical figures, THE TEN COMMANDMENTS stand out in a position of prominence. The seated figure representing "The Power of Government" has his elbow squarely resting upon God's Ten Commandments, showing from whence our power is derived.

Nope. Every source we've consulted (including sources that quote extensively from the frieze architect Adolph Weinman) say that the tablet in the middle of this sculpture represents "ancient laws," not the 10 Commandments. Millard simply reads into the sculpture what she wants to find. Her footnote on this point is to another one of her own books, not to any outside authority that agrees with her reading.

Millard continues with the following:

The curators of the Supreme Court have taken the liberty of rewriting its own artistic themes, which are engraved in solid marble. By omitting any mention of the Ten Commandments, prominently featured as a focal point above the Chief Justices' head (in their rewritten caption) the entire message and importance of this sculpture is by-passed. These sculptured panels are the workmanship of master American sculptor, Adolf A. Weinman. This world renowned sculptor is also noted for his sculpture of Thomas Jefferson presenting his Declaration of Independence to the committee appointed to evaluate it, which is found above the main entranceway to the Jefferson Memorial in our nation's capital.

We'd appreciate some evidence that the Curator's office has rewritten the history of this sculpture. She does not quote Weinman himself or any other authority to establish that the tablet in question is the 10 Commandments. Conversely, every other source we've consulted disagrees with her. Additionally, as we'll demonstrate below, it is Millard that omits important information about the sculpture.

Millard now considers another courtroom frieze:

On the wall opposite the bench is Adolph Weinman's sculpture entitled: "The Struggle Between Good and Evil with Good Prevailing." The sculptor has portrayed the figures on the left representing Security, Harmony, Peace, Charity and Defense of Virtue, who triumph over Corruption Slander, Deceit and Despotic Power, depicted on the right with two serpents. The sculptor had personified God's good versus Satan's evil, with his characters, who could well be taken out of Galatians 5:22-23. It depicts a clash between God's virtues and laws, or the fruit of the Holy Spirit, and the evil works of Satan.

Note Millard's claim: the figures "security," "harmony," "peace," "charity," and "defense of virtue" could "well be taken out of Galatians 5:22-23." Well, here's the list of virtues described in Galatians 5:22-23: "love," "joy," "peace," "longsuffering," "gentleness," "goodness," "faith," "meekness," and "temperance." Only one figure in Weinman's sculpture corresponds to the list in Galatians: "peace." In Elizabethan English "charity" is used almost synonymously with "love," but by the 1930s "charity" takes on a quite different meaning. Still, we'll be generous and simply assume that "charity" and "love" are the same. This leaves "security," "harmony," and "defense of virtue" as unparalleled in Galatians. Moreover, if Weinman was trying to copy Galatians, he did a bad job of it, because "joy," "longsuffering," "gentleness," "goodness," "faith," "meekness," and "temperance" don't make an appearance.

It's beyond us how Millard can see a correspondence between Weinman's sculpture and Galatians 5: 22-23. It looks to us that Millard is simply so caught up with her thesis that she can see anything in a sculpture that she wants to see. This is propaganda, not unbiased scholarship.

Finally, we note that Millard omits important details that tend to disprove her thesis. In particular she doesn't mention the East and West friezes of the courtroom where Moses is depicted as simply one of 18 historic lawgivers. According to Weinman, Moses was no more important than Solon, Confucius, or Napoleon. Millard can't mention this because it's incovenient. This does not prevent her, however, from turning around and, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, accusing the Curator's office of rewriting the history of the Supreme Court. Our conclusion is that she applies different standards to others than she applies to herself.