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.


[1] ibid. P. 26.
[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.
[3] ibid. P. 15.
[4] K. Quinn, op. cit., P. 294.
[5] ibid.
[6] ibid. 

No comments:

Post a Comment