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.
Mind if I help you cut down this behemoth?
ReplyDeleteFirstly, while a bit of background information is good, the following bit seems rather irrelevant to the question as a whole"
"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."
that gives you 65 words.
Change, "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."
to, "He hoped to use the Aeneid to glorify and excuse his own actions in his fight against his own people during Rome’s civil war."
Gives you six words.
Change, "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, "While telling the tale of Aeneas, Virgil takes multiple opportunities to insert digressions extolling the achievements and glory of Augustus."
gives you 21 words. Personally, I feel that if you are going to call him the emperor, you should do so in the opening part of your introduction. If you have the words for it, you could call Aeneas the 'father of Rome', but seeing as you need the words I would advise against it.
Change, "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]."
to, "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 a great classical and educational text.
Gives you 16 words. also, you're missing a comma in front of your quote, if you can't bear to part from it.
Change,"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."
to, "It was also viewed as literary art that transcended its propaganda roots, reflecting Rome as a prosperous, artistic nation. Perhaps most important, however, was its establishment of Roman identity, tracing the origins of Roman blood, and creating an archetypal Roman figure who embodied all that was good about Roman culture."
Saves you 19 words.
Do you really need this quote: “intertwines collective determinants of identity with determinants of identity on the level of the subject”[5], in your introduction? It's lengthy, and seems more appropriate for your paragraph.
Change, "it determined how a Roman should act, and how the whole of Rome should act"
to, "it determined how the Romans should act".
Gives you 13 words. By telling the Romans how to act, it follows that Rome should also act in that matter. It's unnecessary repetition.
(rest of it because apparently 800 words is too much for one comment)
ReplyDeleteTogether, the previous two paragraphs could be fixed, more radically, by, changing,"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."
to "and its discussion of morality, life and death, and its heroes’ nobility, determined how the Romans should act in these matters.
Pretty big rearrangement, but altogether, it saves you 29 words.
In total, my changes save you 155 words.
On the whole, I think you talk too much about your ideas in the introduction, which chews up your word count, as it is stuff you have to repeat in your paragraph anyway, so essentially what you write here has double the impact on your wordcount. Be briefer, and save the details for your paragraph. Also, Found it a bit hard to work out which section was about which paragraph, but that may be because I don't know the topic well. Overall, you show a clear understanding on the topic, so congratulations! If you want the word document with the changes tracked, I can get that to you.
Those are all very valid changes. I quite like some of the quotes I had towards the end, but you're entirely right in saying that they could be better used later on in the essay... so I'll try and do that! Here's your edited version, with a couple of extra very small alterations by me...
ReplyDelete“Augustus... wanted, in short, an epic poem with himself as the hero” .
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” , and wanted himself immortalized in a worthy piece of literature. The emperor, then, commissioned it to, “[justify] a cause” ; he hoped to use the Aeneid to glorify and excuse his fight against his own people during Rome’s civil war. At times, this intention is strongly reflected in the poem’s writing. While telling the tale of Aeneas, Virgil takes multiple opportunities to insert digressions extolling the achievements and glory of 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 make the epic a great classical and educational text. It was viewed as literary art that transcended its propaganda roots, reflecting Rome as a prosperous, artistic nation. Perhaps most important, however, was its establishment of Roman identity, tracing the origins of Roman blood, and creating 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, determined how the Romans should act in these matters. 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.
(yeah footnotes don't work in comments. damn. *i tried*)
much better in my opinion :) also more readable. Good job!
ReplyDeleteVery good!! Thankyouuu :D
ReplyDeleteA great job of drafting between the two of you, and that is the purpose of the blog! To work collaboratively on the outcome, but still maintain the authenticity of the author. The new introduction reads very well.
ReplyDelete