Completed Continental European before 1800 14 Does this painting show Octavius discovering Cleopatra with the body of Antony?

A Visitation to a Lazar-House
Topic: Subject or sitter

I wonder whether this actually shows Octavius discovering Cleopatra with the body of Antony.

The collection comments:

'The picture was at one stage called "Visitation of an emperor (?) to a room in which sick people are tended" which seems more accurate than a lazar-house setting.

In Plutarch's life of Mark Antony, which might be the most likely source used by this painter, Octavian visits Cleopatra only after Mark Antony has been buried. We would have to infer that the painter has conflated two scenes, an earlier one in which Cleopatra rescues the injured, and subsequently dead, Mark Antony, and a later one in which Octavian visits Cleopatra.

The passage in Plutarch is as follows (from Plutarch, Life of Mark Antony, in: Plutarch's lives of Themistocles, Pericles, Aristides, Alcibiades, and Coriolanus, Demosthenes, and Cicero, Cæsar and Antony, in the translation called Dryden's, corrected and revised by Arthur Hugh Clough, New York, P. F. Collier & Son, ca. 1909, pp. 399–400):

"Many kings and great commanders made petition to Caesar for the body of Antony, to give him his funeral rites; but he would not take away his corpse from Cleopatra, by whose hands he was buried with royal splendor and magnificence, it being granted to her to employ what she pleased on his funeral. In this extremity of grief and sorrow, and having inflamed and ulcerated her breasts with beating them, she fell into a high fever, and was very glad of the occasion, hoping, under this pretext, to abstain from food, and so to die in quiet without interference. She had her own physician, Olympus, to whom she told the truth, and asked his advice and help to put an end to herself, as Olympus himself has told us, in a narrative which he wrote of these events. But Caesar, suspecting her purpose, took to menacing language about her children, and excited her fears for them, before which engines her purpose shook and gave way, so that she suffered those about her to give her what meat or medicine they pleased.

"Some few days after, Caesar himself came to make her a visit and comfort her. She lay then upon her pallet-bed in undress, and, on his entering in, sprang up from off her bed, having nothing on but the one garment next her body, and flung herself at his feet, her hair and face looking wild and disfigured, her voice quivering, and her eyes sunk in her head. The marks of the blows she had given herself were visible about her bosom, and altogether her whole person seemed no less afflicted than her soul. But, for all this, her old charm, and the boldness of her youthful beauty had not wholly left her, and, in spite of her present condition, still sparkled from within, and let itself appear in all the movements of her countenance. Caesar, desiring her to repose herself, sat down by her; and, on this opportunity, she said something to justify her actions, attributing what she had done to the necessity she was under, and to her fear of Antony; and when Caesar, on each point, made his objections, and she found herself confuted, she broke off at once into language of entreaty and deprecation, as if she desired nothing more than to prolong her life. And at last, having by her a list of her treasure, she gave it into his hands; and when Seleucus, one of her stewards, who was by, pointed out that various articles were omitted, and charged her with secreting them, she flew up and caught him by the hair, and struck him several blows on the face. Caesar smiling and withholding her, "Is it not very hard, Caesar," said she, "when you do me the honor to visit me in this condition I am in, that I should be accused by one of my own servants of laying by some women's toys, not meant to adorn, be sure, my unhappy self, but that I might have some little present by me to make your Octavia and your Livia, that by their intercession I might hope to find you in some measure disposed to mercy?" Caesar was pleased to hear her talk thus, being now assured that she was desirous to live. And, therefore, letting her know that the things she had laid by she might dispose of as she pleased, and his usage of her should be honorable above her expectation, he went away, well satisfied that he had overreached her, but, in fact, was himself deceived." (end of quotation from Plutarch)

The man on the right, writing in a book, could be intended to portray Seleucus the steward making an inventory of Cleopatra's valuables, as referred to by Plutarch in the passage quoted above.'

Completed, Outcome

This discussion is now closed. The subject of this painting has been identified as the Emperor Nero’s prevention of the suicide of Pompeia Paulina, following the suicide of her husband, Seneca the Younger.

Thank you to everyone who participated in this discussion. To those viewing it for the first time, please see below for all the comments that led to this conclusion.

13 comments

Michael Trapp,

No, this is the joint suicide of Seneca and his wife Paulina, as described by Tacitus in Annals 15.60-64. The Emperor Nero is intervening to prevent the death of Paulina; the man at the desk with the writing materials is Seneca's secretary, who has been recording the philosophical thoughts he dictated as he died.

1 attachment
Al Brown,

One reason that made me think of the Cleopatra episode was the prominent bust upper right - in this case, it would be of Julius Caesar

Michael Trapp,

Yes, it isn't immediately clear who the bust represents: he seems to have laurel wreath, which might suggest an Emperor; but the head turned to one side and the (?) upturned gaze could indicate a poet or philosopher.

Al Brown,

Would it be possible to see a high-resolution image of this work? It might reveal details which could help further identify the subject. Thanks

Thank your Michael, both for hitting what must be bull's-eye as regards subject, and the text that proves it: grim, but Roman virtue in spades. My Latin didn't get as far as Tacitus but he's clearly worth the detour in English too...

Wellcome Collection,

Please see a higher-resolution file attached.

The description in Art UK and NIRP appears to be somewhat garbled. Much of the description describes not the Wellcome Library picture but one sold at Sotheby's, thought to be by the same artist.

1 attachment
Al Brown,

The suggestion of Seneca and Paulina seems very likely but a couple of things still trouble me. The pallor of the corpse suggests that person has died a while back rather than the, almost, joint suicides of Seneca and Paulina. And the physique and physiognomy of the corpse doesn't suggest the 70-year old philosopher, at least not as he's generally represented. For that matter, the putative Paulina seems a little young and is presented with unusual voluptuousness,

Susan Davis,

Whoever the lady is she has the brawny legs of a man, a very long arm and is lying in a very awkward pose. Voluptuous perhaps, but not feminine.

I don't see these reservations dislodging the Seneca/Paulina identification. Tacitus makes the point about Seneca's age and withered physical condition at the time; the two wailing figures beside him indicate he has just died (though not in the bath, as per Tacitus); the imperial figure makes a commanding gesture towards the younger Paulina figure -certainly female if not delicately feminine- that she be saved, with an attendant (doctor?) already binding a bleeding point in her leg and others ministering. Its not a chronological documentary record of events but an allusive conflation evoking the whole in a robust rather than refined baroque style. And, not least, it clearly isn't is an imperial visit to a leper house, as per current title.

Kieran Owens,

It would appear from the Wellcome Collection's own website that they have accepted Michael Trapp's accurate 2017 identification of the subject of this painting as being Emperor Nero ordering the stopping of the suicide of Seneca's wife Pompeia Paulina. How is it that, over the intervening two years, ArtUK have not agreed with this and have not updated the title of the painting on their website?

http://catalogue.wellcomelibrary.org/search/o47415i

I suggest that this is simply a communication slip in which a collection has (without having to be prompted) altered a description as result an Art UK discussion but not said so here. Good for them, but it serves to make the point that if Art UK does not hear of such a change, here or otherwise, it won't necessarily be quickly spotted. Perhaps the matter can now close without further inquisition?

The collection has accepted the correctly identified subject of this painting and it has been changed on Art UK. This discussion can now be satisfactorily closed. A new discussion might be opened regarding the artist's identity however.