#Tu Marcellus eris

[domitiaa]

Heu, miserande puer, si qua fata aspera rumpas, tu Marcellus eris!

[mysterious-secret-garden]

Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres - Virgil reading from the Aeneid, 1864.

Versions >> 1 | 2 | 3 | 4

[canis-majoris]

[illustratus]

Virgil reading the Aeneid before Augustus, Livia and Octavia (known in French as Tu Marcellus Eris)

by Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres

It depicts the moment when Virgil, reciting his work to the Emperor Augustus, his wife Livia and his sister Octavia, mentions the name of Octavia's dead son, Marcellus, causing Octavia to faint. Augustus' advisors, Marcus Agrippa and Gaius Maecenas, can be seen watching in the background. The painting is based on an anecdote, recorded in the late fourth-century vita of Virgil by Aelius Donatus, in which the poet read the passage in Book VI in praise of Octavia's late son Marcellus, and Octavia fainted with grief. This anecdote has also been depicted in works by other artists, including Jean-Joseph Taillasson, Antonio Zucchi, Jean-Baptiste Wicar, Jean-Bruno Gassies and Angelica Kaufmann.

[carloskaplan]

Ingres: Tu Marcellus eris

[jewfrogs]

ur an aeneas apologist????? no!!! he’s bland!! he’s extremely bland!!! like!!! to me he’s the epitome of augustus’ propaganda literally just Be Machine Have Almost No Thoughts Serve Country!!!

can i not like my bland little man in peace... must he have “traits” to be “interesting”, can i not simply enjoy his speeches and feel things about him....

but i do have to respectfully disagree because aeneas is a really interesting character to me! there’s a lot that interests me on a meta- and intertextual level about how aeneas is an epic hero who is being written purposefully as an epic hero (as a homeric figure, several centuries after homer’s epics, in a radically different context), and how aeneas is both achilles and odysseus at once in terms of both aspects of his character and the roles he plays in the text (the aeneid is haunted by the epics that come before it and it knows it), and how those often conflicting roles balance.

even without all that, considering aeneas on his own merit, i think there’s still a lot there! aeneas is an incredibly tragic figure to me because he is so bound by his own sense of duty, so desperate to fulfill the gods��� wishes and found a new troy that he will never live to see. aeneas is not a machine, aeneas has grief and feelings and wishes of his own, but those don’t matter because he’s an epic hero and his story is already written (by the gods and by vergil) and he knows that. he knows that his life is not his own but rome’s. there’s a reason that “tu marcellus eris” is one of my favorite lines in latin literature! it’s about fate, it’s about how great things are doomed to die, it’s about how marcellus is still unhappy even after death. you can serve your country your entire life, you can achieve greatness, you can be the perfect roman man, but you will never find peace because you were not made for it. frankly i think that fucks!!!!!

[life-imitates-art-far-more]

Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres (1780-1867) "Tu Marcellus Eris” (1811) Oil on canvas Neoclassical Located in the Musée des Augustins, Toulouse, France The painting depicts Virgil, on the left, holding an unrolled manuscript of his work "Aenid," the Emperor Augustus and his sister Octavia face him. Octavia faints when the poet pronounces the words “Tu Marcellus eris," reminding her of her assassinated son, while sitting next to them we see Livia, wife of Augustus and suspected of having a hand in the death of Marcellus.

[jean-auguste-dominique-ingres]

Virgil Reading the Aeneid to Augustus (Study for "Tu Marcellus Eris"), Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres, 1850, Harvard Art Museums: Drawings

Harvard Art Museums/Fogg Museum, Bequest of Grenville L. Winthrop Size: 38.5 x 33 cm (15 3/16 x 13 in.) Medium: Watercolor and white gouache over graphite and black crayon, partially varnished with gum, on tracing paper, patched with tracing paper and reworked, laid down

https://www.harvardartmuseums.org/collections/object/298017

[harvard-art-museums-drawings]

Virgil Reading the Aeneid to Augustus (Study for "Tu Marcellus Eris"), Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres, 1850, Harvard Art Museums: Drawings

Harvard Art Museums/Fogg Museum, Bequest of Grenville L. Winthrop Size: 38.5 x 33 cm (15 3/16 x 13 in.) Medium: Watercolor and white gouache over graphite and black crayon, partially varnished with gum, on tracing paper, patched with tracing paper and reworked, laid down

https://www.harvardartmuseums.org/collections/object/298017

[catilinas]

this is Funney and also Extra funney because like. tu marcellus eris

[tripsofia]

Old English school

In passing from the literary iconoclasm of the ‘Old- English ’ school I would venture to add that no man is a more humble admirer than I am of the vast learning and the marvellous powers of research belonging to the author of the Norman Conquest. Nor can any man more deeply deplore another disaster which our literature has sustained in the premature loss of the author of A Short History of England: one who in his brief time has shown such historical imagination and such literary power, that it is impossible to mention him without a pang of regret. Si, qua fata aspera rump as, Tu Marcellus eris.

We may add a few words about various names which under the influence of a most mistaken literalism are being wantonly transformed. Persons who are anxious to appear well informed seem almost ashamed to spell familiar names as their grandfathers did. What is the meaning of ‘Vergil’? As every one knows, the best MSS. in the last lines of the fourth Georgic spell Vergilium; and accordingly some scholars think fit so to alter the poet’s name. Be it so. But ‘ Vergil’ is not Latin, any more than ‘Homer’ is Greek. Virgil is a familiar word, rooted deep in English literature and thought. To uproot it, and the like of it, would be to turn the English language into a quagmire. We shall be asked next to write ‘ Omer.’ If all our familiar names are to be recast, as new manuscripts or autographs turn up, none of these venerable names will remain to us.

Omeros and Durante

We shall have to talk of the epic poets, Omeros and Durante. Again, if autographs are conclusive, we shall have to write of Marie, Quean of Scots, and Lady Jane Duddley; of the statesmen, Cecyll and Walsyngham; of ‘Lord Nelson and Bronte,’ of the great Maryborough, of the poet Noel-Byron, of Sir Kenelme Digby, Sir Philip Sidnei, and Arbella Seymaure; of Bloody ‘ Marye,’ and Robert Duddley turkey sightseeing, Earl of Leycester. All of these queer forms are the actual names signed by these personages in extant autographs. The next step will be to write about these personages in the contemporary style; and archaic orthography will pass from proper names to the entire text.

The objection to insisting on strict contemporary orthography is this: the spelling of the family name was continu-ally changing, and to write it in a dozen ways is to break the tradition of the family. If we call Burleigh ‘ Cecyll,’ as he wrote it himself, we lose the tradition of the family of the late Prime Minister. If we call the author of the Arcadia Sidnei, as he wrote it himself, we detach him from the Sidneys. The Percys, Howards, Harcourts, Douglas, Wyatts, Lindsays, and Montgomerys of our feudal history will appear as the Perses, Hawards, Harecourts, Dowglas, Wiats, Lyndesays, and Monggomberrys. If we read Chevy Chase in the pure palaeography, we shall find how the ‘ Doughete dogglas’ spoke to the ‘ lord perse ’/ and how there died in the fray, Wetharryngton, ser hewe the monggomberry, ser dauy Iwdale, and ser charts a murre.

And then how the purists do drag us up and down with their orthographic edicts ! Just as the Old-English school is restoring the diphthong on every side, the classical reformers are purging it out like an unclean thing. We need not care much whether we write of Caesar ox ‘Caesar.’ But just as we have learned to write Caesar and Vergil’s Aeneid, in place of our old friends, we are taught to write Bceda and selfred for ‘Bede’ and ‘Alfred.’ The ‘Old- English ’ school revel in diphthongs, even in the Latin names; your classical purist would expire if he were called upon to write ‘Caesar’ or ‘Pompey.’ Farewell to the delightful gossipy style of the last century about ‘Tully,’ and ‘ Maro,’ and ‘ Livy ’! They knew quite as much about them at heart as we do to-day with all our Medicean manuscripts and our ‘sic. Cod. Vat.’

[mysterious-secret-garden]

Jean Auguste-Dominique Ingres - 'Tu Marcellus eris' (You will be Marcellus), 1832.

[travelsinn]

Old English school

In passing from the literary iconoclasm of the ‘Old- English ’ school I would venture to add that no man is a more humble admirer than I am of the vast learning and the marvellous powers of research belonging to the author of the Norman Conquest. Nor can any man more deeply deplore another disaster which our literature has sustained in the premature loss of the author of A Short History of England: one who in his brief time has shown such historical imagination and such literary power, that it is impossible to mention him without a pang of regret. Si, qua fata aspera rump as, Tu Marcellus eris.

We may add a few words about various names which under the influence of a most mistaken literalism are being wantonly transformed. Persons who are anxious to appear well informed seem almost ashamed to spell familiar names as their grandfathers did. What is the meaning of ‘Vergil’? As every one knows, the best MSS. in the last lines of the fourth Georgic spell Vergilium; and accordingly some scholars think fit so to alter the poet’s name. Be it so. But ‘ Vergil’ is not Latin, any more than ‘Homer’ is Greek. Virgil is a familiar word, rooted deep in English literature and thought. To uproot it, and the like of it, would be to turn the English language into a quagmire. We shall be asked next to write ‘ Omer.’ If all our familiar names are to be recast, as new manuscripts or autographs turn up, none of these venerable names will remain to us.

Omeros and Durante

We shall have to talk of the epic poets, Omeros and Durante. Again, if autographs are conclusive, we shall have to write of Marie, Quean of Scots, and Lady Jane Duddley; of the statesmen, Cecyll and Walsyngham; of ‘Lord Nelson and Bronte,’ of the great Maryborough, of the poet Noel-Byron, of Sir Kenelme Digby, Sir Philip Sidnei, and Arbella Seymaure; of Bloody ‘ Marye,’ and Robert Duddley turkey sightseeing, Earl of Leycester. All of these queer forms are the actual names signed by these personages in extant autographs. The next step will be to write about these personages in the contemporary style; and archaic orthography will pass from proper names to the entire text.

The objection to insisting on strict contemporary orthography is this: the spelling of the family name was continu-ally changing, and to write it in a dozen ways is to break the tradition of the family. If we call Burleigh ‘ Cecyll,’ as he wrote it himself, we lose the tradition of the family of the late Prime Minister. If we call the author of the Arcadia Sidnei, as he wrote it himself, we detach him from the Sidneys. The Percys, Howards, Harcourts, Douglas, Wyatts, Lindsays, and Montgomerys of our feudal history will appear as the Perses, Hawards, Harecourts, Dowglas, Wiats, Lyndesays, and Monggomberrys. If we read Chevy Chase in the pure palaeography, we shall find how the ‘ Doughete dogglas’ spoke to the ‘ lord perse ’/ and how there died in the fray, Wetharryngton, ser hewe the monggomberry, ser dauy Iwdale, and ser charts a murre.

And then how the purists do drag us up and down with their orthographic edicts ! Just as the Old-English school is restoring the diphthong on every side, the classical reformers are purging it out like an unclean thing. We need not care much whether we write of Caesar ox ‘Caesar.’ But just as we have learned to write Caesar and Vergil’s Aeneid, in place of our old friends, we are taught to write Bceda and selfred for ‘Bede’ and ‘Alfred.’ The ‘Old- English ’ school revel in diphthongs, even in the Latin names; your classical purist would expire if he were called upon to write ‘Caesar’ or ‘Pompey.’ Farewell to the delightful gossipy style of the last century about ‘Tully,’ and ‘ Maro,’ and ‘ Livy ’! They knew quite as much about them at heart as we do to-day with all our Medicean manuscripts and our ‘sic. Cod. Vat.’

[bookinghotelbg]

Old English school

In passing from the literary iconoclasm of the ‘Old- English ’ school I would venture to add that no man is a more humble admirer than I am of the vast learning and the marvellous powers of research belonging to the author of the Norman Conquest. Nor can any man more deeply deplore another disaster which our literature has sustained in the premature loss of the author of A Short History of England: one who in his brief time has shown such historical imagination and such literary power, that it is impossible to mention him without a pang of regret. Si, qua fata aspera rump as, Tu Marcellus eris.

We may add a few words about various names which under the influence of a most mistaken literalism are being wantonly transformed. Persons who are anxious to appear well informed seem almost ashamed to spell familiar names as their grandfathers did. What is the meaning of ‘Vergil’? As every one knows, the best MSS. in the last lines of the fourth Georgic spell Vergilium; and accordingly some scholars think fit so to alter the poet’s name. Be it so. But ‘ Vergil’ is not Latin, any more than ‘Homer’ is Greek. Virgil is a familiar word, rooted deep in English literature and thought. To uproot it, and the like of it, would be to turn the English language into a quagmire. We shall be asked next to write ‘ Omer.’ If all our familiar names are to be recast, as new manuscripts or autographs turn up, none of these venerable names will remain to us.

Omeros and Durante

We shall have to talk of the epic poets, Omeros and Durante. Again, if autographs are conclusive, we shall have to write of Marie, Quean of Scots, and Lady Jane Duddley; of the statesmen, Cecyll and Walsyngham; of ‘Lord Nelson and Bronte,’ of the great Maryborough, of the poet Noel-Byron, of Sir Kenelme Digby, Sir Philip Sidnei, and Arbella Seymaure; of Bloody ‘ Marye,’ and Robert Duddley turkey sightseeing, Earl of Leycester. All of these queer forms are the actual names signed by these personages in extant autographs. The next step will be to write about these personages in the contemporary style; and archaic orthography will pass from proper names to the entire text.

The objection to insisting on strict contemporary orthography is this: the spelling of the family name was continu-ally changing, and to write it in a dozen ways is to break the tradition of the family. If we call Burleigh ‘ Cecyll,’ as he wrote it himself, we lose the tradition of the family of the late Prime Minister. If we call the author of the Arcadia Sidnei, as he wrote it himself, we detach him from the Sidneys. The Percys, Howards, Harcourts, Douglas, Wyatts, Lindsays, and Montgomerys of our feudal history will appear as the Perses, Hawards, Harecourts, Dowglas, Wiats, Lyndesays, and Monggomberrys. If we read Chevy Chase in the pure palaeography, we shall find how the ‘ Doughete dogglas’ spoke to the ‘ lord perse ’/ and how there died in the fray, Wetharryngton, ser hewe the monggomberry, ser dauy Iwdale, and ser charts a murre.

And then how the purists do drag us up and down with their orthographic edicts ! Just as the Old-English school is restoring the diphthong on every side, the classical reformers are purging it out like an unclean thing. We need not care much whether we write of Caesar ox ‘Caesar.’ But just as we have learned to write Caesar and Vergil’s Aeneid, in place of our old friends, we are taught to write Bceda and selfred for ‘Bede’ and ‘Alfred.’ The ‘Old- English ’ school revel in diphthongs, even in the Latin names; your classical purist would expire if he were called upon to write ‘Caesar’ or ‘Pompey.’ Farewell to the delightful gossipy style of the last century about ‘Tully,’ and ‘ Maro,’ and ‘ Livy ’! They knew quite as much about them at heart as we do to-day with all our Medicean manuscripts and our ‘sic. Cod. Vat.’

[huytas]

Old English school

In passing from the literary iconoclasm of the ‘Old- English ’ school I would venture to add that no man is a more humble admirer than I am of the vast learning and the marvellous powers of research belonging to the author of the Norman Conquest. Nor can any man more deeply deplore another disaster which our literature has sustained in the premature loss of the author of A Short History of England: one who in his brief time has shown such historical imagination and such literary power, that it is impossible to mention him without a pang of regret. Si, qua fata aspera rump as, Tu Marcellus eris.

We may add a few words about various names which under the influence of a most mistaken literalism are being wantonly transformed. Persons who are anxious to appear well informed seem almost ashamed to spell familiar names as their grandfathers did. What is the meaning of ‘Vergil’? As every one knows, the best MSS. in the last lines of the fourth Georgic spell Vergilium; and accordingly some scholars think fit so to alter the poet’s name. Be it so. But ‘ Vergil’ is not Latin, any more than ‘Homer’ is Greek. Virgil is a familiar word, rooted deep in English literature and thought. To uproot it, and the like of it, would be to turn the English language into a quagmire. We shall be asked next to write ‘ Omer.’ If all our familiar names are to be recast, as new manuscripts or autographs turn up, none of these venerable names will remain to us.

Omeros and Durante

We shall have to talk of the epic poets, Omeros and Durante. Again, if autographs are conclusive, we shall have to write of Marie, Quean of Scots, and Lady Jane Duddley; of the statesmen, Cecyll and Walsyngham; of ‘Lord Nelson and Bronte,’ of the great Maryborough, of the poet Noel-Byron, of Sir Kenelme Digby, Sir Philip Sidnei, and Arbella Seymaure; of Bloody ‘ Marye,’ and Robert Duddley turkey sightseeing, Earl of Leycester. All of these queer forms are the actual names signed by these personages in extant autographs. The next step will be to write about these personages in the contemporary style; and archaic orthography will pass from proper names to the entire text.

The objection to insisting on strict contemporary orthography is this: the spelling of the family name was continu-ally changing, and to write it in a dozen ways is to break the tradition of the family. If we call Burleigh ‘ Cecyll,’ as he wrote it himself, we lose the tradition of the family of the late Prime Minister. If we call the author of the Arcadia Sidnei, as he wrote it himself, we detach him from the Sidneys. The Percys, Howards, Harcourts, Douglas, Wyatts, Lindsays, and Montgomerys of our feudal history will appear as the Perses, Hawards, Harecourts, Dowglas, Wiats, Lyndesays, and Monggomberrys. If we read Chevy Chase in the pure palaeography, we shall find how the ‘ Doughete dogglas’ spoke to the ‘ lord perse ’/ and how there died in the fray, Wetharryngton, ser hewe the monggomberry, ser dauy Iwdale, and ser charts a murre.

And then how the purists do drag us up and down with their orthographic edicts ! Just as the Old-English school is restoring the diphthong on every side, the classical reformers are purging it out like an unclean thing. We need not care much whether we write of Caesar ox ‘Caesar.’ But just as we have learned to write Caesar and Vergil’s Aeneid, in place of our old friends, we are taught to write Bceda and selfred for ‘Bede’ and ‘Alfred.’ The ‘Old- English ’ school revel in diphthongs, even in the Latin names; your classical purist would expire if he were called upon to write ‘Caesar’ or ‘Pompey.’ Farewell to the delightful gossipy style of the last century about ‘Tully,’ and ‘ Maro,’ and ‘ Livy ’! They knew quite as much about them at heart as we do to-day with all our Medicean manuscripts and our ‘sic. Cod. Vat.’

[travelinbulgaria]

Old English school

In passing from the literary iconoclasm of the ‘Old- English ’ school I would venture to add that no man is a more humble admirer than I am of the vast learning and the marvellous powers of research belonging to the author of the Norman Conquest. Nor can any man more deeply deplore another disaster which our literature has sustained in the premature loss of the author of A Short History of England: one who in his brief time has shown such historical imagination and such literary power, that it is impossible to mention him without a pang of regret. Si, qua fata aspera rump as, Tu Marcellus eris.

We may add a few words about various names which under the influence of a most mistaken literalism are being wantonly transformed. Persons who are anxious to appear well informed seem almost ashamed to spell familiar names as their grandfathers did. What is the meaning of ‘Vergil’? As every one knows, the best MSS. in the last lines of the fourth Georgic spell Vergilium; and accordingly some scholars think fit so to alter the poet’s name. Be it so. But ‘ Vergil’ is not Latin, any more than ‘Homer’ is Greek. Virgil is a familiar word, rooted deep in English literature and thought. To uproot it, and the like of it, would be to turn the English language into a quagmire. We shall be asked next to write ‘ Omer.’ If all our familiar names are to be recast, as new manuscripts or autographs turn up, none of these venerable names will remain to us.

Omeros and Durante

We shall have to talk of the epic poets, Omeros and Durante. Again, if autographs are conclusive, we shall have to write of Marie, Quean of Scots, and Lady Jane Duddley; of the statesmen, Cecyll and Walsyngham; of ‘Lord Nelson and Bronte,’ of the great Maryborough, of the poet Noel-Byron, of Sir Kenelme Digby, Sir Philip Sidnei, and Arbella Seymaure; of Bloody ‘ Marye,’ and Robert Duddley turkey sightseeing, Earl of Leycester. All of these queer forms are the actual names signed by these personages in extant autographs. The next step will be to write about these personages in the contemporary style; and archaic orthography will pass from proper names to the entire text.

The objection to insisting on strict contemporary orthography is this: the spelling of the family name was continu-ally changing, and to write it in a dozen ways is to break the tradition of the family. If we call Burleigh ‘ Cecyll,’ as he wrote it himself, we lose the tradition of the family of the late Prime Minister. If we call the author of the Arcadia Sidnei, as he wrote it himself, we detach him from the Sidneys. The Percys, Howards, Harcourts, Douglas, Wyatts, Lindsays, and Montgomerys of our feudal history will appear as the Perses, Hawards, Harecourts, Dowglas, Wiats, Lyndesays, and Monggomberrys. If we read Chevy Chase in the pure palaeography, we shall find how the ‘ Doughete dogglas’ spoke to the ‘ lord perse ’/ and how there died in the fray, Wetharryngton, ser hewe the monggomberry, ser dauy Iwdale, and ser charts a murre.

And then how the purists do drag us up and down with their orthographic edicts ! Just as the Old-English school is restoring the diphthong on every side, the classical reformers are purging it out like an unclean thing. We need not care much whether we write of Caesar ox ‘Caesar.’ But just as we have learned to write Caesar and Vergil’s Aeneid, in place of our old friends, we are taught to write Bceda and selfred for ‘Bede’ and ‘Alfred.’ The ‘Old- English ’ school revel in diphthongs, even in the Latin names; your classical purist would expire if he were called upon to write ‘Caesar’ or ‘Pompey.’ Farewell to the delightful gossipy style of the last century about ‘Tully,’ and ‘ Maro,’ and ‘ Livy ’! They knew quite as much about them at heart as we do to-day with all our Medicean manuscripts and our ‘sic. Cod. Vat.’