The Atlas Collection
Travel posters
For places worth remembering. Modern prints inspired by favourite coastlines, towns and landmarks.
New destinations added regularly
Posters from the places you love
Over 2,700 curated artists
Browse all artists
Curated by Artists
Museum Quality Prints
Crafted to Last
Designed for Interiors
Style It Your Way
Popular prints available framed or on canvas
Timeless Art For Beautifully Designed Homes
Why Choose Us ?
What customers say
Over 5000
Happy Art Lovers
From Our Journal
A Burial at Ornans: Courbet Makes Ordinary Life Monumental
Gustave Courbet transformed nineteenth-century French painting by depicting a small-town funeral on a canvas over six metres wide. By granting ordinary provincial citizens the monumental scale reserved for history painting, Courbet redefined the scope of artistic subjects. Courbet and the Return to Ornans Gustave Courbet was born in 1819 in Ornans, a provincial town near Besançon and the Swiss border. His father, a former peasant, was a prosperous landowner and vintner. Courbet moved to Paris in 1839 to study painting. By the late 1840s, he became a prominent figure in the bohemian cafés of the Left Bank. There he met writer Charles Baudelaire, socialist journalist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, and art critic Champfleury. Under Proudhon's influence, Courbet adopted socialist views, while Champfleury directed his attention toward Realism. Champfleury collected popular prints, broadsides, and children's art, urging Courbet to paint the rural life of his home region. In the autumn of 1849, Courbet returned to Ornans to paint A Burial at Ornans. He worked in his family attic, inside a small studio barely wider than the canvas itself. The completed oil painting measures approximately ten feet high by twenty-two feet wide, extending over six metres in length. Rather than painting classical legends or historical battles, Courbet selected a local, everyday event. He rendered every figure at life-size scale, applying the monumental format of traditional academic history painting to ordinary provincial citizens who would otherwise leave no official record in history. The Structure of the Provincial Ceremony The painting portrays a funeral gathering in a bleak landscape featuring overcast skies, barren cliffs, and the Roche du Mont. Over fifty local residents attended the service and posed for Courbet. The artist arranged forty-six identified citizens across the canvas in a wavering horizontal line, viewing them at eye level. This wall of figures blocks deep perspective, creating a simple composition. In the centre foreground, an open grave pit cuts directly into the viewer's space, accompanied by a skull that marks human mortality. Courbet grouped his subjects strictly according to local social roles and gender. On the left, four pallbearers in wide-brimmed hats carry the coffin, turning their heads away from the smell of decay. Beside them stand a verger carrying a cross, two servers, and the priest Bonnet reading the Prayer for the Dead. Two scarlet-clad beadles follow: the long-nosed shoemaker Clément and the wine-grower Muselier. A gravedigger kneels in shirt sleeves near the pit. To the right stand local patricians, including Courbet's father Régis, the plump mayor, and deputy Justice of the Peace Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. Separated from the men, the local women complete the gathering on the right side of the canvas. Among them are Courbet's sisters: Juliette crying into a handkerchief, Zoé covering her face, and Zélie lost in thought. On the far right edge, Courbet's mother holds a small child by the hand. Two veterans of the 1793 revolution stand near the grave in Jacobin attire. On the far left edge stands Courbet's grandfather, Jean-Antoine Oudot, a republican veteran who died in 1848. Though Oudot's death may have prompted the work, Courbet depicted him alive as a witness to his own funeral. Enterrement à Ornans (détail de deux femmes). Public domain; source: Wikimedia Commons. Technique and Artistic Departure Courbet abandoned the idealised formulas of academic art and traditional history painting. He omitted Baroque dramatic effects, emotional theatricality, and classical pyramidal compositions such as those used in Benjamin West's The Death of General Wolfe. Instead, he used a democratic compositional structure without a central heroic figure. Every element carries equal weight, making a village dog in the foreground as prominent as the mayor or priest. Courbet derived his simple arrangement from popular art forms, including song sheets, broadsides, and almanacs. The painting relies on a restrained palette dominated by black, white, and dirty grays, fractured by the bright red robes of the beadles. Courbet applied pigment using a palette knife to quickly place and unify large daubs of paint across the surface. This technique created a roughly wrought texture that departed from traditional academic illusionism. Traditional contemporaries viewed these direct methods as crude and unrefined, describing Courbet as a primitive who committed brutalities against established technique. Courbet maintained that painting is a concrete art that must deal only with real, existing things visible on the retina. Salon Reception and Scandal When exhibited at the Paris Salon of 1850-51, A Burial at Ornans caused immediate outrage among traditional viewers and critics. The public objected to the coarse depiction of provincial figures. Courbet documented unkempt hair, bulbous noses, grotesquely wrinkled faces, and the red faces of the beadles without idealisation. Critics accused him of pursuing a cult of ugliness and producing an undignified, godless caricature. The core of the controversy was Courbet's decision to treat a village genre scene with the monumental scale reserved for state events and heroic narratives. The painting also carried political implications under the Second Republic. Critics viewed the unvarnished depiction of the provincial bourgeoisie as a political threat, recognizing the voting power of rural populations. Conservative reviewers labelled the work as overly socialist. Courbet defended his approach in 1851, stating that he was a Realist because Realist meant a sincere lover of the honest truth. He rejected academic depictions of invisible subjects, famously noting that he had never seen angels and would only paint one if shown an angel. The Pavilion of Realism In 1855, the academic jury for the Exposition Universelle rejected two paintings submitted by Courbet: A Burial at Ornans and The Stone Breakers. The jury deemed the works too large and politically coarse. In response, Courbet withdrew all his accepted works and constructed a private exhibition building outside the official grounds. Calling his space the Pavilion of Realism, Courbet staged the first independent one-man exhibition in art history. Inside, he presented his works alongside a written manifesto defining his philosophy of Realism. Courbet's rejection of academic theatricality influenced younger artists, including future Impressionists like Claude Monet and Auguste Renoir, who observed his bold palette and heavy pigment application. In 1857, the art critic Champfleury defended A Burial at Ornans, writing that while it represents a small-town funeral, it reproduces the funerals of all small towns. By capturing the unadorned realities of daily existence in rural France, Courbet established a new path for modern painting.
Persephone and the Flower Gathering
Zeus fathers Zagreus with Persephone and enthrones him as his successor, but the Titans lure the child from his guarded cave and tear him apart. Athena rescues his heart, and Zagreus returns to life in the Orphic account, where Dionysus is another name for him. The Birth of Zagreus Zeus secretly united with Persephone before she was taken to the Underworld by her uncle Hades. He sometimes approached her in the form of a serpent, while another account gives him the form of Hades. Persephone gave birth to Zagreus, whom the Orphic tradition also calls Dionysus. Zeus intended the boy to succeed him and enthroned him while he was still young. Zeus placed Zagreus in the Idaean Cave under the protection of Rhea’s sons. These guardians were the Cretan Curetes, or, in another account, the Corybantes. They leaped around his cradle and struck their weapons together, as they had done for Zeus at Dicte. Zeus’s enemies, the Titans, whitened themselves with gypsum so that they could not be recognised. They waited until the guardians slept, then lured Zagreus away with toys. These included a cone, a bull-roarer, golden apples, a mirror, a knuckle-bone, and a tuft of wool. When the Titans attacked, Zagreus changed his shape in an effort to escape. He became Zeus wearing a goat-skin coat, Cronus making rain, a lion, a horse, a horned serpent, a tiger, and finally a bull. The Titans seized him by the horns and feet, tore him apart, and ate his flesh. Another account says that they boiled the pieces in a cauldron. The Orphic story attributes the attack to Hera’s jealousy and says that she ordered the Titans to seize the child. The accounts also differ about what followed. Athena is said to have rescued Zagreus’s heart and given it to Semele to swallow, allowing the child to be born again. In another Orphic version, Persephone and, in some accounts, Demeter cared for Dionysus after his return to life. From the remains that were rescued and collected, Dionysus rose again. Source note: Primary text: Hesiod, Theogony. Corpus check: The Greek Myths; Greek religion. The Birth of Persephone Zeus fathered Persephone with Demeter, and Demeter gave birth to the maiden. She was also known as Kore, meaning Girl or Maiden, and as Cora and Phersephone. Her name appeared in the Attic form Pherrephatta. Persephone was the daughter of Zeus and Demeter, and she was a grain goddess like her mother. Demeter ruled the earth, harvest, and fertility, while Persephone grew up among flowers and fertile fields. Hades desired Persephone as his bride and queen. He went to Zeus, his brother, and asked for her hand in marriage. Zeus knew that Hades would care for her, but he feared Demeter’s anger and sorrow. He neither granted nor refused permission. Encouraged by this answer, Hades went to the place where Persephone gathered flowers. He seized her as she picked them, and a great chasm opened in the earth. Hades placed her under his arm, and his horses carried them into the dark world below. Demeter did not realise at once that Persephone had vanished. After many hours, she understood that her daughter was gone, and she began to search for her. She rejected Zeus, avoided the council of the gods, and wandered in grief and anger. On the tenth day, Hecate told her that Persephone had been abducted, but she did not know by whom. Helios then told Demeter that Hades had taken her. While Demeter searched and mourned, nothing grew. Seeds failed to sprout, people starved, and the gods received none of their customary offerings. Demeter found Persephone in the Underworld, but Persephone had eaten pomegranate seeds there. Zeus therefore arranged that she would marry Hades and live with him as queen of the Underworld for part of each year. The stories gave either four or six months for this stay. Persephone spent the rest of the year in the upper world with Demeter, and she and Hades acted together when she ruled among the dead. The Birth of Persephone. Original MythSource illustration created for this story; not a historical artwork. Source note: Primary text: Hesiod, Theogony. Corpus check: Greek Myths & Tales. The Flower Gathering and Abduction Persephone gathered flowers with the Oceanids in a peaceful meadow. Gaia had prepared a beautiful bloom at Hades’ request, and its appearance drew Persephone towards it. As she bent to pluck the flower, the earth opened beneath her. Hades rose from the depths in a golden chariot drawn by horses. He seized Persephone despite her cries, held her beneath one arm, and carried her into the dark world below. Hades drove the chariot back into the earth and took Persephone into the land of the dead. There she became his queen. Hades had first asked Zeus for permission to marry her. Zeus knew that Hades would care for his daughter, but he feared Demeter’s anger and regretted losing Persephone to a world from which no mortal returned. He therefore said that he could neither grant nor deny his consent. Hades treated this answer as permission and carried out the abduction. Demeter heard Persephone’s cry. She realised that her daughter had vanished and refused to accept the loss. She shunned Zeus, left the assembly of the gods, and began searching across the whole world. She wandered over land and sea, driven by grief and anger. She fasted, wore her hair untied, and carried flaming torches as she travelled. In one telling, Demeter met different people in different lands, stayed in different places, and received news of Persephone from different informants. In another, the chasm opened near the Kyane spring beside Syracuse. Other tellings placed the meadow and the descent at Enna, Colonus, Hermione, Crete, Pisa, Lerna, Pheneus, Nysa, or Eleusis. Demeter continued her search for her vanished daughter. Source note: Primary text: Hesiod, Theogony. Corpus check: Greek Myths & Tales.
The Gleaners: Millet's Three Figures in a Field
In his 1857 oil painting The Gleaners, Jean-François Millet depicts three impoverished peasant women bent over a harvested field, collecting remaining scraps of wheat. The work combines detailed rural observation with direct commentary on social inequality in nineteenth-century France. Composition and Subject Description In The Gleaners, painted in 1857, Jean-François Millet places three peasant women squarely in the foreground of a wide, open field. The women perform the backbreaking and tedious work of collecting the scanty remains left behind after a wheat harvest. Their figures are heavy, shown with curved backs and anonymous faces as they scour the newly harvested ground. Each woman bends low to gather leftover grain, filling her apron with whatever slim pickings can be found. Millet used simplified, sculptural forms to depict these labourers, giving their physical posture a monumental quality that dominates the lower portion of the canvas. The background of the canvas creates a spatial contrast with the three central figures in the foreground. In the distance, along a flat horizon bordered by haystacks, cottages, trees, and small figures of workers, the main harvesters are busy loading up a plentiful crop onto wagons. A cool, golden light illuminates the entire countryside scene, exposing the vast gap between the abundant harvest gathered for the landowners and the sparse leftovers left for the poor. By placing the impoverished women in front against a broad sky, Millet ensured that their labour remains the primary focus of the viewer. The Practice and Social Context of Gleaning Gleaning was an established rural practice in France, historically permitted by landowning nobles for the lowest level of peasant society. After the primary crop was reaped and gathered, impoverished individuals were allowed onto the land to collect any remaining scraps of wheat. The task was time-consuming and physically demanding, yet essential for the survival of the poorest rural families. Millet documented this custom during a historical period when traditional countryside routines were beginning to be displaced by the growth of the Industrial Revolution. Prior to Millet's painting, gleaning had typically been represented in Western art through religious history, most notably the Old record story of Ruth. In those earlier artistic traditions, Ruth was depicted as a modest, virtuous woman, placing the practice within a framework of moral piety. Millet broke away from these traditional conventions by presenting gleaning with flagrant realism. Rather than offering a biblical narrative, he depicted the harsh physical reality of rural poverty, showing anonymous women engaged in tedious physical labour without idealised divine intervention. Millet Gleaners. Public domain; source: Wikimedia Commons. Millet and the Barbizon School Jean-François Millet was born in 1814 into a prosperous farming family in northern France. He initially pursued artistic training locally before moving to Paris in his early twenties to continue his education at the École des Beaux-Arts under the painter Paul Delaroche. During his early years in Paris, Millet worked primarily as a portrait painter. However, following the political upheavals of the 1848 French Revolution, he decided to leave the capital and relocated to the small village of Barbizon, situated near Fontainebleau Forest. In Barbizon, Millet became a central figure among a group of artists known as the Barbizon School, who specialised in detailed pictures of the countryside and forest environments. While many of his contemporaries focused strictly on scenery details, Millet brought his own rural background to bear on his subjects, identifying with the hard lot of the country poor. He concentrated on painting scenes of rural life, depicting agricultural workers with empathy and solemn grandeur that elevated working-class subjects to a monumental scale. Political Controversy and Public Reaction When Millet exhibited The Gleaners in Paris, the painting provoked strong disdain and suspicion among conservative thinkers and the French public. In the aftermath of the 1848 revolution, the prosperous middle class and landowning elites were alarmed by depictions that invested the poor with dignity and monumentality. Middle-class landowners were increasingly resisting the traditional granting of gleaning rights, fearing the rural poor and linking them to the newly emerging, politically active urban working class. Conservative critics viewed Millet's depiction of working-class poverty as a subversive political statement and a direct criticism of French social structures. They condemned what they perceived as an improper glorification of peasants and the working poor. During this period, prominent political writers such as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, alongside novelists including Émile Zola and Charles Dickens, were actively championing the working class, making Millet's artistic subjects deeply contentious among middle-class viewers. Despite this hostility from conservative quarters, other contemporary viewers and socialist commentators strongly defended Millet's work. Admirers praised his bold stance and artistic approach, viewing The Gleaners as a celebration of honest, hard-working lives rather than a political threat. They appreciated his empathy for agricultural labourers and his use of surprisingly varied colours to convey the dignity of peasant life. Style, Technique, and Modernity Measuring approximately 83.5 by 111 centimetres, The Gleaners demonstrates Millet's mastery of oil on canvas technique. The painter achieved a calm atmosphere across the surrounding countryside through a balanced composition and a refined palette of earthy tones, muted yellows, and soft blues. His preliminary drawings for the composition show a sculptural simplification of form, reducing complex figures to heavy, solid shapes that emphasise their intimacy with the land and the physical gravity of their pose. By portraying the reality of rural labour without academic polish, Millet represented a broader transition from traditional academic painting to Naturalism and Realism, paving the way towards modern art. Although his paintings retained a certain sentimentality compared to the uncompromising works of Gustave Courbet, Millet's realistic treatment of peasant life altered how working people were portrayed in art history. Today, The Gleaners is housed in the Musée d'Orsay in Paris, where it remains a central work of nineteenth-century French painting.