Aeneid I

I’m part way through the selected reading for the week, and I’m already impressed.  Virgil definitely has his own language, but I can probably thank Robert Fagles for much of that.  Still, I am enjoying this slightly more than reading about Odysseus (Ulysses).  Perhaps my favorite step up from Odysseus is that I notice less lamenting.  Sure both have much to complain about, but Aeneas keeps much of his inside him.  On page 54, we have insight as to how he keeps “his anguish buried in his heart.”  Even when he’s telling part of his sad tale to his mother, Venus, he doesn’t sound nearly as pathetic (page 60).

I will lighten up on my criticism of Odysseus’ behavior.  His only real mission was to get back home to Ithaca, whereas Aeneas had a mission set by Fate to bring his people to Italy and found a home there.  Plus more gods seemed to be against him.

Some things I found interesting stem from Virgil’s desire to use this text to etiological effect.  Rome has already been established, but he is trying to redefine the origin story, and also explain why some things were the way they were in his time.  It’s fascinating to find that the gods are constantly talking about Aeneas’ duty to Rome, and its foundation.  He has the opportunity to make it seem like Rome was always destined for greatness, and even goes so far as saying it will last eternally (56, “empire without end”).  In a way, he was correct.  Rome has gone down in history offering successive civilization ideals and definition.

As a side note, I also find it interesting that on page 62, Virgil writes that the Carthaginians are working on building a temple to Juno.  This is definitely through their Peace of the Gods, and how Romans are always trying to work their pantheon around others.  Carthage was part of the Semitic Phoenician peoples.  They had their own distinct pantheon, and would likely have been worshipping Astarte/Ishtar.

Moving back to Virgil’s attempts in explaining things, it also allows him to foreshadow.  Not only did the gods know of the coming of Roman rule, but they also seemed biased toward them.  As we know, Carthage was basically an antithesis to Rome.  One was founded and led by a woman (Dido), and the other by Aeneas.  Based off of the curse on page 149, she sets in motion the endless strife that existed between her people and theirs.  This was an interesting way to establish the foundation of animosity between the two nations.  We can go even earlier in the story, however, to page 69.  Here we see Venus scheming to get Cupid involved in deceiving the Carthaginians.  She indicates that these Tyrians are treacherous and fork-tongued, but before this, we have no context as to what she is talking about, and why she would think of them in such a way.

There are some things I notice that parallel Homer.  He uses backstory to draw us in.  What I mean is, he sets the story up after tragedy has already befallen our protagonist and his men.  A short ways into the books we get to see what actually happened, and it is our desire to fill in the blanks that keeps us interested.  A small difference one might mention is the fact that Poseidon essentially hates Odysseus, but he has admiration and pity on his Trojans.

I believe I’ve made it clear where I stand so far in the reading.  Aeneas is more steadfast than Odysseus.  He maintains his strong demeanor more, in my opinion.  Plus, this whole story revolves around his virtue (manliness) and his dedication to Rome.

Questions

Were there parts of the reading where you lost track of who was in charge of the dialogue?

In what ways does Dido represent Carthage and being the opposite of Aeneas/Rome?

Do you like the personality of Odysseus or Aeneas more?  Why?