Virgil At Odds

.

. n the underworld when a clear prophecy honoring Augustus is relayed to him. Anchises declares this is the man, this one, Of whom so often you have heard the promise, Caesar Augustus, son of the deified, Who shall bring once again an Age of Gold To Latium (665-669). Virgil is symbolically honoring the Julio-Claudian line as it was called, or the descendants of Iulius. In acknowledging Augustus to be progeny of Aeneas, Virgil is again able to extol the emperor while skirting unashamed eminence.As was a budding tradition at the time, the emperors of post-Republic Rome were to be deified and worshipped as a god. Virgil stops short of this, but tells of a link in ancestry to the son of a God. The poet then prompts Anchises to sing more praise of Augustus, perhaps to overshadow the neglect to deify Augustus straightly.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The truth is, even Alcides2 Never traversed so much of the earth. (679-680).He does not blatantly model his hero after the emperor however, and leaves nothing in the writing acknowledging this, it must be inferred. This takes the weight of his moral problem off of the author’s shoulders and places the problem of solving it onto those of the reader.

In grappling with the issue of civil war, Virgil is able to symbolize the dilemma of the victor. A fine description of just how symbolism is brought has Quinn quoting R.D. Williams. Symbolism is the poet’s way of suggesting different levels of significance at which his words may be taken, while allegory is the cruder method of equating.(55) Everyone in Rome knew or at least expected the Aeneid to glorify Augustus, but Virgil will simply not come out and say it.

Both Augustus and Aeneas were not fighting hated enemies; they were fighting other Italians. Both their causes were seen as just, hence the ends justify the means. This is a sensible route to take when trying to defend civil war. Virgil fulfills the expectation to produce a patriotic work, and ennobles Augustus and his victory at Actium, but provides a subtle and humane comment on the price paid, the fact that civil war was needed to attain stability, and the blood spilled was that of their own. He will not clean the hands of the victors, despite his support of their cause (Highet 61).Marc Antony was not a hated man. He was the emperor of the entire eastern half of the Roman Empire.

He lost popularity by allying himself with Cleopatra it is true but nonetheless he had legions of supporters. That brought a need for Virgil to show Augustus as a unifier, not so much for Augustus’ sake, but for the populace of the Empire. The poet sought to soften some of the bitterness of the conflict.By having Aeneas leave Dido despite the fact that he loves her, Virgil displays honor to duty above all, a classic element of Stoicism(the reigning philosophy of the Roman Republic/Empire). Perhaps he is likening the hero to Julius Caesar, who left Cleopatra when Rome called. That likeness at the same time leads us to frown upon Marc Antony and his failure to abandon the Egyptian queen. However, Dido is greatly pitied and is not painted as an enemy in the story. The hero encounters the slain queen in the Underworld and speaks to her I swear by heaven’s stars, by the high gods, By any certainty below the earth, I left your land against my will, my queen.

The gods’ commands drove me to do their will. (Book VI 242-244). This loose attribution to the civil war just won by Augustus neatly places the sentiments of Romans to the plight of Marc Antony and his supporters. It likewise shows Virgil’s reluctance to chastise them as ‘the enemy.’ The poet will not precisely identify Aeneas with any one man. As far as the hero’s exploits, refer to his manipulation of symbolism and see that he refuses to simply re-tell reality with the names changed.

Virgil’s whole strategy was basically to leave inference to the reader, and never let any social pressures present at the time rear their heads in his work. His use of symbolism for the most part distorts any hope of a crystal-clear parallel. This stylizing of a lack of clarity could have roots in the poet’s past personal experiences with an Emperor.

It was Caesar, after all, who appropriated the lavish villa of Virgil’s family many years before. This event undoubtedly instilled a sense of uncertainty in the poet concerning the autocrat.Virgil did not, however, bear any malice either. Be it out of his own Stoic influence or admiration for Augustus the man. Those background circumstances aside, the Aeneid is nothing short of an epic drenched in Roman and Italian pride.

Rome saw itself as the light in a dark world. It was held that their civilization was the greatest since Athens in its heyday, and the poets conformed.The Iliad and Odyssey are oral tales that were handed down, arguably more the creation of legend than that of Homer. They could be deemed products of an entire society. The Aeneid was contrarily a singular voice, of one man alone. It was the product of an individual; free in a relative sense of the word.

It lacked social constraints but still respected the ideals behind those very constraints. Bibliography Camps, W.A. An Introduction to Virgil’s Aeneid.London England: Oxford University Press, 1969. Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean.

New York City, New York: Oxford University Press, 1996. Highet, Gilbert. The Speeches in Virgil’s Aeneid.Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1972.

Quinn, Kenneth. Virgil’s Aeneid: A Critical Description. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1968. Peter Clemente English 109, Sheehan. 12.8.2000 Virgil At Odds Bibliography Camps, W.

A.An Introduction to Virgil’s Aeneid. London England: Oxford University Press, 1969.

Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean. New York City, New York: Oxford University Press, 1996. Highet, Gilbert.

The Speeches in Virgil’s Aeneid.Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1972. Quinn, Kenneth. Virgil’s Aeneid: A Critical Description.

Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1968.