Thursday, 29 August 2013
...aaaaand it's done.
Enough said, really. I've just handed up the final copy of my Stage 2 Classical Studies Special Study, rather much earlier than expected. Many thanks to all involved in drafting and editing various bits of it (I'm looking at you, Emily and Mr Stewart)! I'll be off now to bask in my sense of accomplishment.
So I've been away for a while...
I haven't updated this blog in quite a while. Sorry. I'd like to say it's because I've been so busy working on my Special Study, and to some extent that's actually quite true! I've received a draft back from Mr Stewart (I'll try and post a scan of it up sometime soon), and I've since made all the changes he's suggested and managed to cut out an extra 100-ish words in the process. This brings my final word count down to 1987, which is not only a pretty neat number but is below the magic 2000 word limit... which is very exciting news indeed. With that, I think that most of my work is about done, and I've returned all the books I borrowed from the Barr Smith as a gesture symbolic of this. If I'm permitted to, I might post my final copy up here in the near future... :D
Monday, 5 August 2013
I DID A THING!!1!
I cut 350 words from my entire draft!! Just thought you all ought to know.
I'm still 59 words over the limit, and I have no idea where I'm going to cut those words from. I'm pretty happy with what I've done so far though; some bits are better and some (such as my ridiculous first paragraph) are probably a bit worse and less thorough as a result, but something was always going to have to give out if I was ever going to get this thing to an appropriate length.
Also, here's my third paragraph and conclusion as they stand so far:
I'm still 59 words over the limit, and I have no idea where I'm going to cut those words from. I'm pretty happy with what I've done so far though; some bits are better and some (such as my ridiculous first paragraph) are probably a bit worse and less thorough as a result, but something was always going to have to give out if I was ever going to get this thing to an appropriate length.
Also, here's my third paragraph and conclusion as they stand so far:
If historians can agree that the Aeneid was not solely presented to the Roman people as a propaganda
text, they are forced to question the way in which it truly was interpreted, and the answer to this
question emerges in the text’s discussion of Roman morals, conduct and
attitudes to war and battle: it was seen as a sacred text of near biblical merit.
It is worthwhile, at this point, to briefly recount the poem’s narrative.
Aeneas, a Trojan, is forced to leave his homeland and is sent on a divine
mission to found a new Trojan race in Italy. Along the way he meets, falls in
love with and later abandons the Carthaginian queen Dido (who commits suicide
as a result), sees the future of his city prophesized, and must overcome a
rampaging Latin army in order to found his new homeland. Some argue that the
figure of Dido is a reference to the Egyptian queen Cleopatra and her seduction
of Mark Antony, and that Aeneas’s ability to desert her reflects his commitment
to his nation; William Anderson, in his book The Art of the Aeneid, points out that, “on any reasonable moral
balance, the choice between his beloved Dido and the destiny of his family and
people is obvious”[1]. It is more likely,
however, that the intent of this segment of the poem is to portray Aeneas as a
mortal character, subject to mortal emotions and mortal conditions. As Dido,
“doubles over her sword, the blood foaming over the blade”[2], Virgil,
“focuses on the defeated victims of Roman destiny”[3]; he
portrays Aeneas him as a figure who feels fear, emotional pain and anger, and thereby
as a figure to which Romans can relate. His humanity makes it all the more
remarkable that, at the same time, he is presented as the ultimate noble Roman.
Aeneas makes all the correct libations to the gods and always maintains correct
conduct in battle, and he was often referred to among literary scholars as ‘pietas [4]Aeneas’ as a result of his pious
perfection. A conversation Virgil narrates between Juno and Jupiter, where they
discuss the future of Aeneas’s people and the Latins’ fate, however,
demonstrates that the Aeneid is more
than a discussion of its central character; it recounts the foundation of the
entire Roman race. Juno pleads with Jupiter, “illud te... cum iam conubiis
pacem felicibus (esto)
component, cum iam leges et foedera iungent,
ne vetus
indigenas nomen mutare Latinos
neu Troas fieri iubeas Teucrosque vocari
aut vocem
mutare viros aut vertere vestem”[5].
Virgil recounts the creation of the Roman race as being a blend of pious
Trojans and more pagan Latins, two nations that unite to form a godly, strong
and patriotic people. His work gives Romans true heritage, linking them to two
powerful races of people and one morally perfect, yet still distinctly mortal, individual.
Syed reflects on all this in writing, “at an early age, [Roman] students
committed [the Aeneid] to memory...
the heroic stories they contained were seen as planting the seeds of morality
in people’s minds at an early impressionable age, [and] this moral foundation
was laid not by philosophical reasoning, but by the force of emotion”[6]. She
continues, “the classic... [has the capacity to] serve as a unifying cultural
icon for culturally diverse audiences”[7]; at
the time the Aeneid was written, Rome
was the largest empire in the ancient world, encompassing an unprecedentedly
large number of diverse cultures. The teaching and widespread reading of the Aeneid taught all of these people Roman
values and morality, and gave them a collective, unifying Roman identity,
something that was never present in, for example, Ancient Greek culture. Augustus’s
commission of the Aeneid may have
merely created a propaganda document in the short term, but one that evolved in
the long term into an iconic, sacred document that defined the Roman self, Rome’s
identity and its heritage.
There is little doubt that the Aeneid was commissioned and written with the intention of it being
a propaganda document for Caesar Augustus. Its text is littered with elements
of propaganda, and the way the entire poem extolls the virtues of the Roman
Empire demonstrates its status as a piece of writing with an underhand purpose.
Propaganda, however, is always written for the short term. The Aeneid may well have been effective
propaganda for Caesar Augustus, but its long-term use as an educational text, a
piece of literary art and a document which defined the identity of the Roman
people transcended its initial purpose. It is fair to say, then, that the Aeneid acted as propaganda for Caesar Augustus
to some extent. It transcended this purpose, however, to become part of the
fabric of Roman culture, and its status as a document that defines the identity
of the Roman people is still enduring today.
The best thing about these is that they're probably the two shortest bits. Mr Stewart, please note footnote no. 4...
[4] NOT A FOOTNOTE but something I need to ask about. I
want to insert an appendix explaining the concept of pietas. Is this possible?
[5] Virgil, op. cit. English translation: “I beg of you... when now they
join in peace with the Trojans, when they join in laws and in marriage, do not
make the Latins change their names nor take up Trojan customs nor change their
clothes.”
Sunday, 4 August 2013
Yet another paragraph...
I've only made detail changes to my first body paragraph, and, in doing so, have failed to cut any words from it. This is a bit irritating given that I'm already 400 words over the maximum count. However, moving right along, this is my second body paragraph. It presents a more subjective point of view, and is written a bit differently to the first one, so any feedback would be much appreciated!!
To claim that the Aeneid
therefore acted as propaganda above all else, however, is a deeply flawed
allegation. To start with the most obvious issue with this suggestion, the
number of verses Virgil devotes to his propaganda material makes up a tiny
percentage of the entire text. Augustus may have, “wanted an epic poem with
himself as the hero”[1],
but the Aeneid is much more like an
epic poem with Augustus as a prominent footnote. More importantly, the poem’s
use was hardly restricted to propaganda at the time it was written; indeed, it
was a vital asset for Roman teachers and schools. In her book Vergil’s Aeneid and the Roman Self,
Yasmin Syed, professor of classics at the University of Berkley, writes,
“reciting the Aeneid was a central...
experience in a Roman boy’s education... [and] the existence of commentaries on
Vergil’s (sic.) poetry illustrate how important his works were at this stage of
Roman education”[2]; she goes on to point out
that, “[these commentaries] discuss issues of correct language usage, which was
among the most important goals of the grammarian’s instruction”[3].
Virgil’s Aeneid was clearly a vital
part of Roman rhetorical education, and while this might not preclude it from
being a piece of propaganda material, it certainly indicates that it acted as
something much more important in Roman culture. Interestingly, Quinn goes as
far as to suggest that the text’s literary merit actually does preclude it from being a piece of propaganda material,
highlighting that while, “the occasional status of the Aeneid [as a poem written to celebrate Augustus’s triumph in the
Battle of Actium] is an essential, fundamental aspect of the poem”[4],
it is, “fundamentally dishonest... to misunderstand the basis of the poem’s
artistic integrity. If we call the poem a propaganda poem, we must add that the
overtones of covert, surreptitious action which the word ‘propaganda’ invokes
are inappropriate”[5]. The book’s importance as
an educational tool, he suggests, is in the beauty of its language, “its
imagery, its sensitive, telling pathos... its magnificence as verbal poetry”[6],
not in its content at all. This very style of language would have made the text
important as something else to the Roman people: a piece of literary art. This
was a text that represented the ultimate in Roman linguistic talent and the
beauty of the Roman language, and told a fundamentally Roman story in a
beautiful and complex way. Its appreciation and widespread use as an
educational tool suggests that the Romans were a well-adjusted and
discriminating audience, and reflects their penchant for work with literary
merit. There were many poets, such as Varius Rufus, or other authors, such as
Julius Caesar himself, who provided the Roman education system with perfectly
acceptable pieces of propaganda material which educators could use to teach their
children about Rome’s fame and glory, but the Aeneid stood above these as being a far more sophisticated and
complex work. Clearly, the Aeneid’s use
extended far beyond the reach of simple propaganda.
[2] Y. Syed, Vergil's Aeneid and the Roman Self: Subject and Nation
in Literary Discourse, Univesity of Michigan Press, Michigan, 2005, P. 14-15.
Sunday, 28 July 2013
"Ben's Behemoth" mk2...
This is my first body paragraph, which I've ground to a bit of a creative halt on - mostly because it's way too long, and I'm struggling to cut it down more than I have done. Readers should, however, note all the times I've included both Latin and English text from the Aeneid, which I've really only done to show off; the translations are my own, because I feel it gives the essay a bit more integrity if I've supplied my own interpretation of Virgil's text. I don't know whether this is allowed, so I can cut these bits out and replace them with Fagles's translation if it proves necessary (which I am afraid it probably will). Anyway, please have a look at what I've done. Assuming you're interested. :D
For an historian today,
establishing the Aeneid as a propaganda text is not a particularly
difficult task; its text is littered with indications that Virgil was writing
less about his own mythological subject and more about the near-mythological
achievements of Caesar Augustus and his father. Indeed, as early as line 286 in
the epic, Virgil writes, “nascetur pulchra Troianus origine Caesar,
imperium
oceano, famam qui terminet astris”[1]
(From that noble blood will rise a Trojan Caesar, with his empire bound by
the ocean, and his glory held by the stars). Virgil is narrating a
discussion between Jupiter and his wife, Juno, and in any other text it would
seem remarkable that Jupiter, king of the immortals, might give such great
praise to an individual Roman emperor. Later in the text, the poet continues, “hic
Caesar et omnis Iuli
progenies... hic est, tibi quem promitti saepius
audis,
Augustus Caesar, diui genus, aurea condet
saecula qui rursus Latio
regnata per arua
Saturno quondam”[2]
(Here is Caesar and Iulius’s whole line... here he is, you have heard his
coming promised, Caesar Augustus, son of a god, he will bring back the golden
age through the Latin fields where Saturn once ruled), this coming during a
dialogue between Aeneas and his dead father, Anchises. Robert Fagles’s
translation has Virgil going on with, “[he will] expand his empire... to a land
beyond the stars... not even Hercules himself could cross such a vast expanse
of earth”[3].
Probably Virgil’s longest account of the Caesars’ heroism, however, comes
during the epic’s eighth book, where he explains the mysterious depictions on
Aeneas’s shield. These are, in fact, drawings of Caesar’s triumph over Mark
Antony and Cleopatra during Rome’s civil war; Fagles has Virgil writing, “on
one flank, Caesar Augustus leading Italy into battle, the Senate and People
too... and the great gods themselves... and opposing them comes Antony leading
on... that outrage, that Egyptian wife!”[4].
Caesar’s return is marked with “roads [resounding] with joy, revelry, clapping
hands”[5],
and “the vanquished people move in a long slow file... their arms as motley as
their tongues”[6]
. This passage is both a glorification of Augustus’s final battle, and an
attempt to mock his enemies. It is, in fact, the very definition of propaganda.
Of course, the appearance of this kind of passage is unsurprising when one
considers the type of man Augustus was; he is said to have said to said to a
political advisor, “non ego Titanas canerem... bellaque resque tui memorarem
Caesaris”[7]
([if I was to write an epic poem] I would not talk of mythology... I would
recall the wars and matters of Caesar to you”), and it is alleged that, when attempting
to commission a poet to write his work, he would, “give a list of battles...
above all Actium... this would have been the subject, one to be treated as a
series of glorious feats of arms, with the why’s and wherefore’s pushed into
the background”[8].
On this basis, many poets, including Propertius, Horace, and initially Virgil
himself, rejected Augustus’s task. Quinn writes that “a true poet is reluctant
to accept a task unless he can see in it the accomplishment of some creative
act”[9],
and it is a reflection of this attitude that Virgil’s propaganda, although particularly
blatant when it does appear, is sparse and well-spaced throughout the poem.
This does nothing to negate the deeper undertones of the poem; its central
theme of the conflict between Aeneas and the epic’s various antagonists do
possess a Homeric quality, but it is fair to argue that it, too, was produced
for the purposes of propaganda. In his descriptions of the conflict between the
Trojans and the Latins, Virgil does not present a fight with good opposing evil,
but rather presents a conflict simply between Rome and something else. Whereas
in an Homeric epic the audience finds themselves supporting an individual
character, Virgil persuades the Aeneid’s readers to support the Trojans,
the men who will come to found Rome, against all else. His approach to evading
Augustus’s direct wish that he discuss little more than the Caesars’ triumphs
is a creative one, and one that invites comparisons between Augustus’s battles
and Aeneas’s throughout the course of the text. All of this is powerful
evidence, then, that the Aeneid was not just written as a propaganda
text but was most likely interpreted as one by the Roman people.
Tuesday, 16 July 2013
To whom it may concern...
...this is my introduction so far. After a bit of editing my entire draft is now only 636 words over the limit, but I'll need to be a bit harder on myself if I want to scrape below 2000... this introduction itself is so long that I think it functions better if split into two paragraphs, but I'm pretty confident that's not allowed for the purposes of this essay. Either way, here it is! :D
Question: To what extent did the Aeneid act as a propaganda text for Caesar Augustus?
“Augustus... wanted, in
short, an epic poem with himself as the hero”[1].
So writes Kenneth Quinn,
author of The Aeneid: A Critical Description, of the purpose of the Aeneid’s
conception. Indeed, there is no doubt as to why the poem was written: Octavian,
son of Julius Caesar and later known as Caesar Augustus, having just ended
Rome’s civil wars by defeating his political rivals at the Battle of Actium,
was, “looking for a poet who could put his achievements in their proper light”[2],
and wanted himself immortalized in a worthy piece of literature. The resulting
work, written by Publius Vergilius Maro (known by most as Virgil), has
transcended this purpose to become a text that is seen today as one of the most
important pieces of classical literature, and which some even believe is the
greatest ever work of Western literature. This question, however, asks an
historian to examine the text’s use at the time it was written. Octavian commissioned
it to “[justify] a cause”.[3]
He hoped to use the Aeneid to not just glorify, but excuse, his own
actions in essentially fighting his own people during Rome’s civil war. At times,
this intention is strongly reflected in the writing of The Aeneid. While
telling the tale of Aeneas, the Trojan exile who founded the city of Alba Longa
and is described as the father of Rome, Virgil takes multiple opportunities to
insert digressions extolling the achievements and the glory of his emperor, Augustus.
To look at the text solely as propaganda on this basis, however, requires the
reader to disregard all of the intricacies and the literary merit that makes the
epic not only a great classical text, but also an educational tool, from which Roman
“pupils learned the rudiments of reading and writing”[4].
It was also looked upon as a piece of literary art that transcended its roots
as a propaganda text and reflected Rome as a prosperous, artistic nation.
Perhaps most important, however, was the text’s establishment of Roman
identity. Virgil provided a text that traced the origins of Roman blood back to
their source, and created an archetypal Roman figure who embodied all that was
good about Roman culture. In this sense, it is fair to look upon The Aeneid
as a form of religious text. Its length and quality elevated it far above most
Roman literature, and its discussion of morality, life and death, and its heroes’
nobility, “intertwines collective determinants of identity with determinants of
identity on the level of the subject”[5]:
it determined how a Roman should act, and how the whole of Rome should act, in matters
of bravery, valour, courage and nobility. Augustus may have wanted little more
than a text with himself as the hero, but he had inadvertently created a text
that was to define Roman identity for the life of the empire. It is fair to
say, then, that the Aeneid served as a propaganda text for Caesar
Augustus to some extent, but its greatest role was as a religious or spiritual
document, one that defined the way Romans ought to behave and the way they
ought to be.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)