Classics and the Western Canon discussion
Virgil - Aeneid
>
Aeneid, Book 4
In Book 3, post 28, Zadinose wrote: "Unless Virgil and the Romans of his day took a radically different approach to fate from the earlier classical writers, they would have believed in fate as absolute. If there is any such thing as free will (and there might not be), then it is just an element of fate which leads to the same inevitable conclusion."
[I couldn't address this until Book 4]
You're probably right. Yet ... that's now how it seems to me from my reading. And ... I don't know ... it just doesn't make logical sense to me the the Fate would be absolute. As I said previously, from The Iliad, and The Odyssey, and here in the Aenead, it does seem that there are SOME points were Fate seems set.
And yet from the literature it doesn't seem to be absolute across the board:
(1) There would seem to be no logical reason to make supplication to the gods if EVERYTHING is fated absolutely...And what would be the point of curses? And why might curses be effective...if everythng was preset. [Yes, I suppose pushed to the limit one could argue that the supplicants were fated to appeal to the gods, that the cursers were fated to call upon the gods to follow through on the curses.]
(2) Zeus. In The Iliad, the story line was that Zeus COULD have changed the fate of his son Sarpedon (sp?) and only refrained because Hera convinced him that it would have terrible repercussions.
(3) The Aeneid. For me...though perhaps I'm just seeing what I want to see...I see in the first three books so many examples of sentences in which fate and man's efforts are linked. For instance, Fitzgerald III: 553: "Now then: at sea again, as the wind takes you / Toward the Sicialian shore [...] Steer for the coast ..." And it just so seems to me that the steering is necessary--- fate alone won't get them there...
Achilles wouldn't have got the glory he ultimately did had he not chosen to withdraw from the fighting.
In the literature itself, it seems to me that althouh there may be a few fixed points of fate...the paths between those points are determined by the individuals...and even as the pronouncements of the seers are ambiguous...and perhaps somewhat elastic...I think even those particular points of fate conceivable glow brighter or dimmer based on the actions of the individuals themselves.
(4) And then there's Book 4. In Book 4, as I read Fitzgerald, anyway, there seems to be the strong suggestion that Aeneas is not controlled by Fate....there's the implication that Aeneas is---if not yet 'Invictus'/master of his fate---capable of rejecting his pre-designated fate.
There's that longish speak by Zeus to Mercury. Zeus is going to send Mercury to Aeneas with a message.
Zeus says that the way Aeneas has been behaving, well, "No son like this did his enchanting mother promise us.....He wa to be the ruler of Italy."
I just found that fascinating. Not "He is supposed to be or he's going to be or even---at this particular point---it is his fate to be." Zeus says "he was to be" which implies that something has changed. Seemingly some action or inaction on the part of Aeneas has come between Aeneas and his fate....that unless something changes that fate is past tense..."was"
That whole passage is so cool.
Zeus continues, noting all that has been promised to Aeneas:
"IF glories to be won by deeds like these
Cannot arouse him" [so it's possible that Aeneas can't be properly motivated]
"IF he will not strive for his own honor..." [so Aeneas doesn't HAVE TO strive for his own honor]
And then Zeus ASKS>>> "Does he begrudge his son, Ascanius, the high strongholds of Rome?"
This doesn't seem to be a rhetorical question. Zeus actually seems to not know IF Aeneas can be motivated throuh his son. It doesn't seem to be a set fate.
Zeus then suggests that Aeneas has a certain amount of autonomy:
"What has he in mind?"
"What hope, to make him stay
Amid a hostile race, and lose from view Ausonian progenty, Lavinan lands?
This read to me as though Zeus sees Aeneas (through his own mind, his own hopes) as capable of possibly losing the Lavinian lands the fate wanted him to reach.
And then, at least in Fitzgerald, Zeus does NOT order Aeneas to leave Carthage. Zeus does not send a command.
"The man should sail:
[Yes, he "should" sail IF he is to fulfill his fate}\
"The man should said: that is the whole point.
Let this be what you him, as from me."
But maybe I just see it this way because I don't like the idea of absolute fate. So I look at it from an angle.
In any case...I must leave it there as I am leaving for awhile and won't have my computer to visit. Hope to be back sometime in September.
[I couldn't address this until Book 4]
You're probably right. Yet ... that's now how it seems to me from my reading. And ... I don't know ... it just doesn't make logical sense to me the the Fate would be absolute. As I said previously, from The Iliad, and The Odyssey, and here in the Aenead, it does seem that there are SOME points were Fate seems set.
And yet from the literature it doesn't seem to be absolute across the board:
(1) There would seem to be no logical reason to make supplication to the gods if EVERYTHING is fated absolutely...And what would be the point of curses? And why might curses be effective...if everythng was preset. [Yes, I suppose pushed to the limit one could argue that the supplicants were fated to appeal to the gods, that the cursers were fated to call upon the gods to follow through on the curses.]
(2) Zeus. In The Iliad, the story line was that Zeus COULD have changed the fate of his son Sarpedon (sp?) and only refrained because Hera convinced him that it would have terrible repercussions.
(3) The Aeneid. For me...though perhaps I'm just seeing what I want to see...I see in the first three books so many examples of sentences in which fate and man's efforts are linked. For instance, Fitzgerald III: 553: "Now then: at sea again, as the wind takes you / Toward the Sicialian shore [...] Steer for the coast ..." And it just so seems to me that the steering is necessary--- fate alone won't get them there...
Achilles wouldn't have got the glory he ultimately did had he not chosen to withdraw from the fighting.
In the literature itself, it seems to me that althouh there may be a few fixed points of fate...the paths between those points are determined by the individuals...and even as the pronouncements of the seers are ambiguous...and perhaps somewhat elastic...I think even those particular points of fate conceivable glow brighter or dimmer based on the actions of the individuals themselves.
(4) And then there's Book 4. In Book 4, as I read Fitzgerald, anyway, there seems to be the strong suggestion that Aeneas is not controlled by Fate....there's the implication that Aeneas is---if not yet 'Invictus'/master of his fate---capable of rejecting his pre-designated fate.
There's that longish speak by Zeus to Mercury. Zeus is going to send Mercury to Aeneas with a message.
Zeus says that the way Aeneas has been behaving, well, "No son like this did his enchanting mother promise us.....He wa to be the ruler of Italy."
I just found that fascinating. Not "He is supposed to be or he's going to be or even---at this particular point---it is his fate to be." Zeus says "he was to be" which implies that something has changed. Seemingly some action or inaction on the part of Aeneas has come between Aeneas and his fate....that unless something changes that fate is past tense..."was"
That whole passage is so cool.
Zeus continues, noting all that has been promised to Aeneas:
"IF glories to be won by deeds like these
Cannot arouse him" [so it's possible that Aeneas can't be properly motivated]
"IF he will not strive for his own honor..." [so Aeneas doesn't HAVE TO strive for his own honor]
And then Zeus ASKS>>> "Does he begrudge his son, Ascanius, the high strongholds of Rome?"
This doesn't seem to be a rhetorical question. Zeus actually seems to not know IF Aeneas can be motivated throuh his son. It doesn't seem to be a set fate.
Zeus then suggests that Aeneas has a certain amount of autonomy:
"What has he in mind?"
"What hope, to make him stay
Amid a hostile race, and lose from view Ausonian progenty, Lavinan lands?
This read to me as though Zeus sees Aeneas (through his own mind, his own hopes) as capable of possibly losing the Lavinian lands the fate wanted him to reach.
And then, at least in Fitzgerald, Zeus does NOT order Aeneas to leave Carthage. Zeus does not send a command.
"The man should sail:
[Yes, he "should" sail IF he is to fulfill his fate}\
"The man should said: that is the whole point.
Let this be what you him, as from me."
But maybe I just see it this way because I don't like the idea of absolute fate. So I look at it from an angle.
In any case...I must leave it there as I am leaving for awhile and won't have my computer to visit. Hope to be back sometime in September.
Thomas wrote: "The story is complete in itself but questions remain: Should Aeneas be held responsible for Dido's suffering? Dido is passionately in love with Aeneas, but do we know for sure that Aeneas loves Dido? If he is in love, does he simply harden his heart in order to fulfill his destiny? Will he remember her?."I do not think that Aeneas is responsible for Dido's suffering, as he himself had not even been the one to set out to make her love him, that was the work of the gods themselves who had made Dido become so passionately in love with him. So it was not as if he had mercilessly set out to seduce her and then left her high and dry.
And be it the hand of fate, or Dido's own choice, or a little but of both I do not feel that Aeneas can be held responsible for the choices and actions Dido makes, even if it was due to her love for him.
While I was always unclear on the true extent of his own love for her, and if in fact he shared the same love for Dido that she bestowed upon him, I do not believe he had any ill will towards her, and I do think he regretted being made to part from her, but he reorganized his duty, and was given stern warning from the gods, and so he had to follow his destiny.
Patrice wrote: Well, he didn't have to lead her on! Think of it today.A desperately lonely widow meets a handsome, intelligent man. she offers him everything. He knows he can't stay. Yet he takes everything she has to give. Nope! Not nice. If you have no intention of sticking around the "pious" thing to do is to say "no thank you", not interested. He used her.."
On the other hand he does have to be reminded by the gods of his destiny and told rather forcefully and under threat that it is time for him to leave. And so if indeed he did genuinely love her, it is possible that he had let slip from his mind what is greater fate was and more or less got caught up in the moment. I do not think that there was anything permeated in his involvement wit her, and while maybe a part of him always knew he could not stay, I think at the same time he had let himself forget that which still awaited him. So I do not think all during his involvement with her he was truly thinking or planning on his having to leave her.
In the earlier threads someone had brought up a comparison between Dido and Calypso in the Odyssey, and if the gods had not in fact finally intervened Aeneas may not have got the will to actually leave Dido completely on his own accord but may have been lulled into simply staying there, or at the very least he may have taken him a considerable longer period of time before he finally realized, he had other more important things to do and could not simply stay there indefinitely, so it was not all together his choice to leave.
I have to confess I could never quite bring myself to truly feel sympathetic towards Dido, but rather I became a bit angry with her. That she would throw everything away including her own life for the sake of a man (I suppose I am not much of a romantic at heart). When she is first presented she seems like such a strong woman and independent for the period in which she lived in. She was queen within her own right, and so it is rather disappointing when she is reduced to teenage like melodramatic behavior over lost love.
While granted it might not be entirely her fault, considering the love she felt was not a natural love, as well she did not fall in love with him on her own accord, but was bewitched by the gods into loving him. But still I never had a great deal of patience for the whole tragic love and unrequited love thing.
Silver wrote: "I have to confess I could never quite bring myself to truly feel sympathetic towards Dido..."True, but who hasn't been here?
"And then to any Power above, mindful, evenhanded,
who watches over lovers bound by unequal passion,
Dido says her prayers."
That has to be worth at least a niggling bit of sympathy.
Patrice wrote: "I think there is a new attitude toward love nowadays. I'm sure I'm much older than you Silver! I agree with you David, anyone who has really loved has to understand the pain of loss."
I have just always had this very innate strong survivors instinct. I tell my friends I am like a cat, whatever happens in the end I will land on my feet. I have always been a fighter, I do not accept surrender and I am not good at being emphatic with those who just want to give into their pain and sorrow.
Silver wrote: "On the other hand he does have to be reminded by the gods of his destiny and told rather forcefully and under threat that it is time for him to leave. ..."Following the chain of events back to a first cause, it seems that it is King Iarbus who gets the ball rolling. Aeneas' duty to fulfill his destiny is the overarching impetus, but Iarbus first complains to Jove that Dido has broken her vow... which reminds Jove that Aeneas needs to get moving again.
It might be interesting to compare Dido to Penelope in this respect. It must be more difficult to keep a vow of loyalty to a spouse who has died, but we know that Penelope at least suspects that Odysseus is dead, and yet she keeps her vow. Dido does not. Virgil goes further than that though, and shows her burning with passion, completely out of control. This at least cannot be blamed on the gods. She must bear some personal responsibility for her emotions.
Does Virgil's portrayal of Dido say anything about his opinion of women in general, or is it just Carthaginian women -- or just Cleopatra? It seems odd that in a strongly patriarchal society he should choose a woman to lead in the first place... but it makes more sense, from the patriarchal point of view, that she should fall as dramatically and tragically as she does.
Patrice wrote: "Every time I read this book it changes. The first time I read it my heart broke for Dido. I thought of Aeneas peacefully sleeping the night before he abandons her and of the love she gave him and..."The way Aeneas waits until the ships are ready and everything is assembled before he confronts her made me think that in a different time he might have just sent her a text. And the text would have said something like, "It's not you. It's me."
Thomas wrote: "Dido does not. Virgil goes further than that though, and shows her burning with passion, completely out of control. This at least cannot be blamed on the gods. She must bear some personal responsibility for her emotions...."
But she was struck by an arrow of Eros, so is she truly in complete control of her own emotions and her own passion?
Perhaps not. Maybe she's just a puppet.
I probably should say a lot, but for now:1) Once again, Aeneas is off the hook in terms of responsibility for his own actions. He can run away from a fight if it's fate + gods, and he can hit and run with a queen if it's fate + gods commanding. Ultimately Aeneas is not very morally culpable, but from another angle Virgil does his very best to insulate his hero from any blame in situations which might otherwise merit blame.
2) While we're on the topic of tragic love, and later authors building on the foundation of Homer, our next group read should definitely be Chaucer's Troilus and Cressida. That book was fantastic, did not seem derivative other than the setting and character names, and it absolutely expresses the horror that is love!
3) Book 4 of the Aeneid is the book I've loved best, and as I've said before it's the point at which the work came to life for me. I liked Dido's rage, and her refusal to be reasoned with. I liked, also, that though Aeneas nominally lets Aeneas off the hook, he also allows us to see Aeneas' betrayal through Dido's eyes, so we can condemn him to some extent on a human level, even if the blame doesn't "stick." There's something real and human in this tragedy. Meanwhile, Aeneas hasn't merely broken a heart, he's ruined a kingdom. His hostess and savior cannot reasonably continue to rule after his departure, she will be personally ruined and if she were not to commit suicide she would see her city torn asunder by jealous neighbors. The stakes were very high in this relationship.
4) I almost forgot... probably should reread this, but my favorite element was the description of Rumor and her destructive power.
Zadignose wrote: "His hostess and savior cannot reasonably continue to rule after his departure, she will be personally ruined and if she were not to commit suicide she would see her city torn asunder by jealous neighbors. The stakes were very high in this relationship..."
Depending on how responsibility we see Dido as being for her own actions and feelings, considering the involvement of the gods in these events, she herself is culpable for the endangering of her own kingdom by succumbing to her passion and going against the vow she knew she had made and choose to allow herself to become involved with Aeneas, even without knowing he was destined to leave her, she knew what she was putting as risk in doing this, and she knew what the opinions of her people would be for such a move.
In some ways this reminds me of Helen, as a queen Dido has certain duties and responsibilities to her people and the kingdom of which she forsakes and jeopardizes to act upon her own selfish inclinations.
Zadignose wrote:4) I almost forgot... probably should reread this, but my favorite element was the description of Rumor and her destructive power.
I agree, I myself quite enjoyed the portrayal of Rumor throughout the Aeneid. It reminds me a lot of Dream within the Iliad, the way in which it is personified and yet at the same time, seems to be something that is not quite a god, and yet still an entity of sorts in its own write. And in a way rumors do very much begging to develop a life of their own.
Patrice wrote: "I don't think that Virgil thinks that Aeneas is blame worthy at all. Cleopatra had just seduced and destroyed two great Roman leaders. She tried to make Augustus the third. He was steely in her ..."I agree. Well, as you said, we still sympathize Dido for losing Aeneas. But for me, a man like Aeneas who prioritize duty over pleasure, or even love, is heroic. It is what a leader should do.
Apologies at the outset for such a long post...When Vergil wrote book IV, he intended to model it after a Greek tragedy. The speech of Anna, Dido's sister (her attempt to convince Dido to yield to her love of Aeneas), is based directly on the nurse in Euripides' play "Hippolytus." There, the nurse of Phaedra, stepmother to Hippolytus, urges Phaedra to give in to her unseemly passion for her stepson -- a passion that was instilled in her by Aphrodite as punishment for Hippolytus' rejection of her divinity. The close correspondence between the two characters is unmistakeable.
In an earlier post I had mentioned how the speech of Venus to Aeneas in Book I (where she explains at length the background of Dido) has been called a "Euripidean Prologue," since it follows very closely the technique found in Euripides' plays where a character addresses the audience in a prologue (the first speech of the play) that identifies relevant background information and sometimes also events that are to come in the play itself.
As for Dido, the crux of her tragic downfall in Book IV lies in the violation of her vow to remain eternally faithful to her former husband Sychaeus. One can attempt to attribute her ruin to Venus and also Juno, who engineered the "marriage" that took place, but this reading can't dispense with the fact that Dido, of her own free will, chose to enter into a sexual relationship with Aeneas.
Dido's downfall is so compelling because she is a woman of remarkable nobility. Vergil takes pains to characterize her in Book I as a woman who is beautiful, intelligent, courageous, generous, and focused on her executive role as a leader of the Carthaginians. Aristotle points out in the Poetics that a tragic hero must of necessity be a person of elevated stature -- this is Dido.
As for the "marriage," it is one of the poem's brilliantly ambiguous episodes. When I teach this book, I enjoy asking students: "What happened in the cave?" They then look around and wait for someone to answer. Then after a little more fidgeting, someone will usually blurt out "They had sex!" To which I add, "of course they did!" Vergil doesn't need to tell us this directly -- he is far too tasteful and intelligent to do that -- but it can be reasonably inferred from the context.
There is a line at the end of the scene in the cave where Vergil writes: "She [Dido] calls it a marriage, and by that name she concealed her fault." [Latin = culpam]. Her fault, of course, was that she lost her honor by negating the vow to remain faithful to Sychaeus.
As mentioned above, Vergil was a sympathetic student of Euripides; in developing Aeneas' role in Book IV he draws on the portrayal of Jason in the play "Medea." In that play Jason comes across as a kind of cad, a man who cavalierly abandons Medea, his barbarian wife (who also knows witchcraft). When Medea confronts him, he uses sophistic logic and a very unsympathetic argument for the basis of his actions.
Aeneas expressly asserts that he never married Dido. And yet Vergil makes it clear that they enjoyed a sexual relationship following the cave scene. He also makes it clear (I don't have the line numbers handy) that Aeneas has a deep and genuine love for Dido.
Book IV I think really shows Vergil at his best. This episode is utterly unlike anything that is found in Homer and involves a high level of artistic genius on the author's part. Both Dido and Aeneas suffer as a result of the relationship, each for their own reasons. While powerful arguments can be made in defense of Aeneas' departure, it is difficult to deny that he ends up looking rather unheroic in Book IV. In fact, he is practically invisible in much of the intensely dramatic action.
Patrice wrote: "Good to see you Max! No apologies for a long post, I'm grateful for it.I'm thinking...if Aeneas is NOT to be seen as heroic and Aeneas is Augustus, is this where the subversiveness comes in? Is..."
I'm not sure that Aeneas' flaws make him less heroic necessarily. In a Homeric setting they might, but there is a kind of psychological depth to Aeneas that Homer's heroes don't have. Aeneas does succumb to the charms of Dido, but when the time comes he is able, with a little nudge, to break off his dalliance and get back to work. Does this complexity make him more attractive as a heroic figure, or less?
Patrice wrote: "I'm thinking...if Aeneas is NOT to be seen as heroic and Aeneas is Augustus, is this where the subversiveness comes in? Is this Virgil criticizing his patron?"I agree with others' views that the episode makes Aeneas all too human. I don't think he is a cad in Book 4, but his flaw in this episode is to allow the relationship to divert him from his destiny. He is passive, off-track, and not in control as he was in Book 1. Of course he eventually moves on, but only after two warnings from Mercury.
Circe and Calypso were "nymphs with benefits," so to speak. The relationships Odysseus enjoyed with each of them are on a completely different level and do not involve the moral complexity of Aeneas' relationship with Dido. Neither female character is a tragic victim of Odysseus.
Does the portrayal of Aeneas in Book 4 undercut Vergil's view of Augustus? This is a difficult one. I do not read it as such. But your question opens up a critical issue that has generated a great deal of scholarship over the past several decades. Does the poem ultimately offer a critique of the Roman (read: Augustan) project, rather than a resounding affirmation of it? I think I had posted earlier that the Aeneid can be read as an anti-war poem. At a minimum, Vergil seems in places -- and certainly here -- to suggest that the founding of Rome was not something that was accomplished without a lot of innocent, often helpless people getting dead. Dido is certainly a central victim in a poem that includes many tragic victims.
This, in my view, is what "Vergilian" means -- a seriously comprehensive understanding of the world that takes into account the inevitable suffering that must be endured by human beings. I just finished reading Crime and Punishment while on vacation and the end of the novel finally gets around to the point of how suffering is an inescapable necessity for human beings to arrive at a deeper and more meaningful understanding of what it means to be human.
We tend to focus on the human relationships-is Aeneas a jerk for abandoning Dido, etc. But there is anther dimension: humans as pawns of the gods rather than as independent moral agents. The "marriage trap" in the cave and the storm that leads Dido and Aeneas to seek shelter there is the result of a conspiracy between Venus and Juno. Jove has another agenda, and sends Mercury to interrupt what Venus and Juno have set into motion. Jove of course, out ranks them and wins the day.
Eric wrote: "We tend to focus on the human relationships-is Aeneas a jerk for abandoning Dido, etc. But there is anther dimension: humans as pawns of the gods rather than as independent moral agents. The "mar..."Early on in Book 1, Dido is called "unlucky" and "ignorant of destiny." Then at the end of Book 4, after she has killed herself, Virgil writes:
There was no fate or justice in her death.
Her madness brought a wretched, early end 4.696 (Ruden)
So what are we to make of her "fate"? In one sense it was engineered by the gods, but in another sense she takes her fate into her own hands. It is her decision to die, not the gods'. Even so, Virgil says this is not fate.
Still on the subject of Dido, what do we make of Virgil's use of apostrophe -- where the narrator breaks off and speaks directly to a character in the story -- at around 408:What did you feel then, Dido, when you saw?
How did you sob when all that shoreline seethed?
You looked out from your tower, and the sea
was an industrious uproar and commotion.
Reprobate Love, wrencher of mortal hearts!
What is the point of Virgil's doing this?
Vergil was of course a pre-Christian writer. Yet he was called by Tertullian (2nd, 3rd cen. Christian father) an "anima naturaliter Christiana," a "soul Christian by nature." In his famous Fourth Eclogue, Vergil wrote of the birth of a child who would restore a Saturnian golden age of peace and harmony. This was widely read throughout the Middle Ages as a prefiguring by a pagan poet of the birth of Christ.Throughout the Middle Ages, Vergil was perceived as endowed with magical power; indeed, his very name was understood to be of significance in this connection. In Latin, "virga" means "wand." (Sometimes his name is spelled "Virgil," though we know from ancient testimonia that his nomen was "Vergilius" and the correct spelling is therefore Vergil.)
It is Vergil's deep sympathy for the underdog, for the losers in this world that makes his poetry so remarkable and so unlike any other work in the classical tradition, whether Greek or Latin -- except perhaps for Euripides (I am thinking of Trojan Women). Even as he glorifies the magnificence of the Roman achievement, of those qualities of steadfast bravery and dutiful loyalty that the Romans embodied, he evokes a powerful sense of compassion for those who have been dealt a bad hand. This is the essence of the almost mystical and untranslatable words "sunt lacrimae rerum et mentem mortalia tangunt" in Book 1, line 462: "There are tears for misfortunes (i.e., there is compassion for human suffering), and mortal woes touch the heart." This line is often called the most famous in the entire poem.
Regarding Dido, sympathetic as she clearly is, she succumbs to what is called "furor" in Latin: unrestrained emotional fury, the madness or insanity that overcomes all rationality. Juno is a victim of this same emotional tyranny, and other characters in the poem are as well. It was her mistake to break the vow she made to Sychaeus and this is the crux of her tragic downfall. Yet she also gives in to an overwhelmingly destructive emotion that robs her of any rational capacity. It is this disposition -- calm, clear-thinking reason -- that Aeneas maintains, a frame of mind that is a prerequisite to the forward movement of his destined mission.
The role of "furor" in the poem -- an emotion that Aeneas himself gives way to in the battle scene in Book 2 after Hector tells him to leave Troy -- is one that is central to the poem as a whole.
Patrice wrote: "So interesting. I knew that the people of the middle ages looked to Vergil as a kind of forerunner of the christians. But that is looking backward, just as we are. Like Fate, it's after the fact...."So is Aeneas supposed to be Christ-like? A messiah, or savior type? That is interesting if Aeneas is also a model for Augustus, because Augustus was also considered a son of a god.
Both Aeneas and Christ sacrifice themselves for a higher good, but I think that's where the similarity ends. The state of Rome, even in its most peaceful and prosperous era, was a far cry from the Christian kingdom of heaven. Maybe later Christians took Vergil for their own in the same way they took Plato and Aristotle, taking the bits that served them well and leaving the rest unexplained.
But I think you're absolutely right that Virgil is paying homage to Athenian tragedy in Book 4. I think it's why this episode is the most memorable for casual readers of the Aeneid.
Patrice wrote: "Actually, now that i think of it, that image of him with his father on his back...is it so different from Christ bearing his cross?"Now that's an interesting pairing of images. My dad might have a problem with it though. He'd probably say it should have been the other way around. ;)
I'm really curious now what the Romans themselves had to say about it. Was augustus considered a son of god or was that extrapolated from the aeneid?
My understanding is that was in fact the case. Julius Caesar was deified, and as the adopted son of Julius, Augustus took the title "son of god" (divi filius).
Patrice wrote: "Silver wrote: "I have to confess I could never quite bring myself to truly feel sympathetic towards Dido, but rather I became a bit angry with her. That she would throw everything away including he..." ... ... ... I just re read this and it occurs to me that you have a good point. This is no teen ager. She was a wily queen who behaves like one (a teen ager). I wonder, might this be Virgil showing us how incredible Aeneas is? Isn't that the effect? He is not just a man's man but women lose their minds over him, he's so irresistable! I don't think it is about Aeneas as an "irresistable" man, it is maybe more to show that Carthaginians have to blame themselves for their fate, when they blame Rome.
An issue that I struggled with at first, when reading Homer, was that such epics are fundamentally strange; it's tempting to "rationalize" these epics, by imagining that most supernatural intervention is metaphorical, that gods who personify rivers or volcanoes, etc., can be reinterpreted as natural forces. But it's not the case. We shouldn't forget the simple fact that Dido had NO CHOICE in her behavior, even though she suffers for the consequence. Love is the most terrible and irresistible force. It's not our modern concept of love. It's the absolutely overwhelming force of a god. We should blame Dido as little or as much as we would if she were literally poisoned to death by a viper, rather than poisoned by Cupid's love charms.
Dido's curse is worth noting: Then let a bold and warlike people drive him
Out of his realm and tear his Iulus from him.
Make him a suppliant, let him see the death
Of blameless friends. Humiliating peace terms
Will bring no happy old age in his kingdom...
My curse is war for Trojans and their children. 4.615-629
Now why couldn't Aeneas just have stayed in Carthage, built his new Troy with a nice lady who really adores him, and live happily ever after?
Aeneas says that he doesn't have a choice either:
If I had power over my decisions,
I would have stayed at Troy...
From Jove himself a heavenly emissary
(On both our heads, I swear it) brought me orders
Down through the air...
Don't goad me -- and yourself -- with these complaints.
Italy is against my will. 4.340
So they both must suffer-- Dido from the madness of love, and Aeneas from the travail of destiny. Instead of love, one will have death and the other will have war. Tragic stuff.
Patrice wrote: "Well, he didn't have to lead her on! Think of it today.A desperately lonely widow meets a handsome, intelligent man. she offers him everything. He knows he can't stay. Yet he takes everything she has to give. Nope! Not nice. If you have no intention of sticking around the "pious" thing to do is to say "no thank you", not interested. He used her.
But is it that simple? Did he intend to leave all the while? If Jove hadn't sent Mercury to remind him that he had a mission and had to go, wouldn't he have stayed? It was pretty cool, being the virtual king (even though not legally married to the queen), building walls, actively engaged in the activities of the city.
I think it's at least an even chance that in the absence of any divine intervention he would have settled down, forgotten the Italy he had never seen, and created his new Troy there in Carthage.
Silver wrote: "I have to confess I could never quite bring myself to truly feel sympathetic towards Dido, but rather I became a bit angry with her. That she would throw everything away including her own life for ..."I suspect that that's based on the cultural assumption prevalent at the time Virgil wrote. The only women who could "make it" without men were the Amazons, and what respectable woman would want to be an Amazon?
Zadignose wrote: "I almost forgot... probably should reread this, but my favorite element was the description of Rumor and her destructive power. "I agree. I marked that passage with three marginal lines, which for me is unusual; one or two usually suffice. But I agree, I did love that passage, and then when Rumor came back to Dido to tell her of Aeneas's leaving.
While some things change, has the role of rumor in society changed even a whit in the 2,000+ years since Virgil wrote??
When the hunt was used as the environment to get Dido and Aeneas together in the cave, I toyed for a while with whether this was the first time in literature that love and conquest was put in the context of the chase or the hunt. We talk about sexual pursuit very much in those terms today; one person will hunt for love, or chase another, but was that a usual way of thinking of it in Virgil's day? Or am I stretching too far?
Everyman wrote: "...It was pretty cool, being the virtual king (even though not legally married to the queen)..."Is it necessarily true that they are not "legally married?" This is a legit question. Different cultures have very different ideas about marriage. E.g. in some Nordic Sagas I've seen that a couple can simply state publicly that they are married, and thus they are married, and in at least one case (I think it was Njal's Saga) a man divorces his wife simply by saying in front of witnesses "I divorce you," with the explicit purpose of getting with another woman. That was the legal standard.
Zadignose wrote: "Everyman wrote: "...It was pretty cool, being the virtual king (even though not legally married to the queen)..."Is it necessarily true that they are not "legally married?" This is a legit question..."
Yes, it's legitimate. But as Patrice points out, Virgil says that they aren't married.
Interesting, at least in the Fitzgerald translation, he says that it was a "fault" on Dido's part.
In the Williams translation (on Perseus) around line 170 he translates:
"Dido took no heed
of honor and good-name; nor did she mean
her loves to hide; but called the lawlessness
a marriage, and with phrases veiled her shame."
That seems to me to imply that it wasn't a true marriage, but that Dido just pretended it was in order to justify sleeping with Aeneas.
And later, still Williams,
"O, by these flowing tears,
by thine own plighted word (for nothing more
my weakness left to miserable me),
by our poor marriage of imperfect vow,"
It appears that she viewed it as equivalent to a marriage but also recognized that in reality it wasn't.
Patrice wrote: "Perhaps this is another cautionary tale. Honor your vows and comittments, value the sanctity of marriage. Don't fool yourself with rationalizations meant to get what you want."Well said.
You'll be happy to hear that there is another cave in Book 6. It's quite different than the one in Book 4, however.
Patrice wrote: "It just occurs to me that Anchises had to die before Aeneas got to Carthage. I can't imagine Book IV proceeding as it does with Anchises on the scene."Yes, Virgil is good at killing off the characters (remember Creuesa?) who would interfere with the development of the plot.
Everyman wrote: "Patrice wrote: "Perhaps this is another cautionary tale. Honor your vows and comittments, value the sanctity of marriage. Don't fool yourself with rationalizations meant to get what you want."Well said..."
Isn't it sometimes as difficult to distinguish between "rationalization" and "reason," much as between "reason" and "emotion", as we increase our understanding of how the brain functions?
We speak of the moral sanctity of one's word, a theme that runs through literature and through history. Yet who does not know of the necessity, whether governing, parenting, or otherwise functioning, of the oft need to revise, to restate, to re-envision, to re-create? (Especially in a world with twitter and email trails of documentation.)
Didn't Dido almost have to pledge loyalty to her dead husband? For all such may have been derived of love, of piety, of grief -- as queen, she had practical considerations, such as protection from unwanted alliances, served by her stance. (Think of recent depictions of Queen Elizabeth I.)
Still, as queen, as human, was it unnatural that she seek close human support by her side? Did she not have responsibilities for the creation of succession in a world where such often occurred in families?
Who has not occasioned a young widow space for her grief? Yet, have many not also later encouraged her that "life is not over"?
Is it possible that Dido's tragic fault was neither her breaking of her vow nor her passion, insomuch as her failure (according to Virgil) to keep on building her city? Is the ultimate struggle always not to succumb to madness?
(A silly parallel, perhaps, but I keep thinking of the description in The Clinton Tapes: Wrestling History With the President by Taylor Branch of the decisions to go to war in Bosnia.)
Lily wrote: "For art of the dramatic end of this chapter:Death of Dido "
That's the first depiction I've ever seen of a Roman goddess (presumably) with wings. And is she cutting Dido's hair??
Everyman wrote: "That's the first depiction I've ever seen of a Roman goddess (presumably) with wings. And is she cutting Dido's hair??"Yes! That's how I recognized her:
"So Iris, glistening dew, comes skimming down from the sky
on gilded wings, trailing showers of iridescence shimmering
into the sun, and hovering over Dido's head, declares:
'So commanded, I take this lock as sacred gift
to the God of Death, and I release you from your body.'
"With that, she cut the lock with her hand and all at once
the warmth slipped away, the life dissolved in the winds."
Lines 870ff Book 4, Fagles translation
The lines immediately proceeding indicate Juno's charge to Iris. There is a story there about Proserpina that I don't recall in its detail.
Among the links I posted last night is one of a Greek vase showing Hera (Juno) and Iris. Iris has wings there, too.
http://dejamdriver.tumblr.com/
This has several other images as well -- it doesn't indicate the source for the vase, but am not going to take the time to go looking for that just now. I did see those details yesterday (okay, early this morning).
Lily wrote: "Everyman wrote: "That's the first depiction I've ever seen of a Roman goddess (presumably) with wings. And is she cutting Dido's hair??"Yes! That's how I recognized her:
"So Iris, glistening de..."
Ah. I had forgotten that. Good memory!
Everyman wrote: " ...Good memory! ..."More that the lines just struck me as SO poignant somehow.
And what a pretty, thoughtful ritual at death that was otherwise so tragic.
(Someone here recently ordered a bottle of champagne and glasses to be brought as his family and friends gathered. I want to remember that gesture.)
At 4Patrice wrote: I thought that Dido's sister played the role of the snake in Adam and Eve. Dido had taken a vow not to get involved with another man. Her sister tempted her, rationalized with her, fed her "furor". So against her better judgement, against her "Piety" Dido succumbed to her passion...and we know how that turned out. And how it turned out was her Fate. Because Fate means...what actually happened!
Yes!
Yes!
At 6Patrice wrote: "Well, he didn't have to lead her on! Think of it today.
A desperately lonely widow meets a handsome, intelligent man. she offers him everything. He knows he can't stay. Yet he takes everything she has to give. Nope! Not nice. If you have no intention of sticking around the "pious" thing to do is to say "no thank you", not interested. He used her.
OTH, her own better nature told her not to break her vow. He couldn't have used her without her consent.
."
I agree. Aeneas behaved badly. OTH, Dido will be punished because she did swear to stay true to Sychaeus.
A desperately lonely widow meets a handsome, intelligent man. she offers him everything. He knows he can't stay. Yet he takes everything she has to give. Nope! Not nice. If you have no intention of sticking around the "pious" thing to do is to say "no thank you", not interested. He used her.
OTH, her own better nature told her not to break her vow. He couldn't have used her without her consent.
."
I agree. Aeneas behaved badly. OTH, Dido will be punished because she did swear to stay true to Sychaeus.
At 7 Silver wrote: " it is possible that he had let slip from his mind what is greater fate ..."
I agree with you on that. And much as I was disgusted with Aeneas, I also, in the end, reluctantly, had great sympathy for him. He KNEW that he had done wrong...but he also knew that Ascanius was the higher priority...and that he would have to sacrifice Dido for the sake of Ascanius. Like those Altars/rocks in Book 1. Always there must be sacrifices.
I agree with you on that. And much as I was disgusted with Aeneas, I also, in the end, reluctantly, had great sympathy for him. He KNEW that he had done wrong...but he also knew that Ascanius was the higher priority...and that he would have to sacrifice Dido for the sake of Ascanius. Like those Altars/rocks in Book 1. Always there must be sacrifices.
AT 8 Patrice wrote: "I agree. He let his feelings run away with him. But that's what leads to tragedy, right? She goes with her feelings and so does he.
Aristotle said virtue isn't virtue unless you really want t..."
OMG, are you saying that Aeneas was acting virtuously when he deserted Dido?
Aristotle said virtue isn't virtue unless you really want t..."
OMG, are you saying that Aeneas was acting virtuously when he deserted Dido?
At 15 Thomas wrote:"Following the chain of events back to a first cause, it seems that it is King Iarbus who gets the ball rolling. Aeneas' duty to fulfill his destiny is the overarching impetus, but Iarbus first complains to Jove that Dido has broken her vow... which reminds Jove that Aeneas needs to get moving again. "
I think you're right about Iarbus being that first cause...in bringing Aeneas back to Jupiter's attention. And causes, (Book 1), are an important aspect.
I don't think though, at least from my translation, that Iarbus knew anything about Dido's vow. He was simply upset that Dido had rejected him and then taken Aeneas. I don't think Dido makes that vow until after she meets Aeneas and is trying to resist him.
I think you're right about Iarbus being that first cause...in bringing Aeneas back to Jupiter's attention. And causes, (Book 1), are an important aspect.
I don't think though, at least from my translation, that Iarbus knew anything about Dido's vow. He was simply upset that Dido had rejected him and then taken Aeneas. I don't think Dido makes that vow until after she meets Aeneas and is trying to resist him.
At 16 Thomas wrote: "Patrice wrote: "Every time I read this book it changes. The first time I read it my heart broke for Dido. I thought of Aeneas peacefully sleeping the night before he abandons her and of the love ..."
;)
;)
At 19 Zadignose wrote: "I liked Dido's rage, and her refusal to be reasoned with. I liked, also, that though Aeneas nominally lets Aeneas off the hook, he also allows us to see Aeneas' betrayal through Dido's eyes, so we can condemn him to some extent on a human level, even if the blame doesn't "stick." There's something real and human in this tragedy. Meanwhile, Aeneas hasn't merely broken a heart, he's ruined a kingdom. His hostess and savior cannot reasonably continue to rule after his departure, she will be personally ruined and if she were not to commit suicide she would see her city torn asunder by jealous neighbors. The stakes were very high in this relationship.
..."
Excellent points.
And I loved Dido's rage.
..."
Excellent points.
And I loved Dido's rage.
At 20 Silver wrote:" as a queen Dido has certain duties and responsibilities to her people and the kingdom of which she forsakes and jeopardizes to act upon her own selfish inclinations.
"
Yes, I agree that she acted selfishly and jeopardized her kingdom. But she really did try to resist, even making that vow to try to stop herself from falling.
And Anna pushed her towards Aeneas. And the gods, if gods there be, pushed her towards Aeneas.
But yes, regardless of Aeneas's own responsibility--and I think he had the lion's share...good thing he had that lion skin---she jepardized her city.
"
Yes, I agree that she acted selfishly and jeopardized her kingdom. But she really did try to resist, even making that vow to try to stop herself from falling.
And Anna pushed her towards Aeneas. And the gods, if gods there be, pushed her towards Aeneas.
But yes, regardless of Aeneas's own responsibility--and I think he had the lion's share...good thing he had that lion skin---she jepardized her city.
AT 22Patrice wrote: "But I have to think, that in the end, Aeneas is meant to be seen as heroic. Heroic with a cost, to himself and Dido, but not to Rome. Heavy weighs the crown and all that. ..."
Yes. Aeneas made the right choice...AFTER HE MADE A WRONG CHOICE THAT DESTROYED LIVES AND BROUGHT A CENTURIES LONG CURSE ON ROME.... A tragedy.
Yes. Aeneas made the right choice...AFTER HE MADE A WRONG CHOICE THAT DESTROYED LIVES AND BROUGHT A CENTURIES LONG CURSE ON ROME.... A tragedy.
In a lot of ways the book stands on its own, even though in the larger scheme it is a digression from Aeneas' main purpose, the founding of a new Troy. I think it does this because it conforms, for the most part, to the form of Athenian tragedy. As Aristotle blandly puts it, a tragedy is "complete and possesses magnitude." It has a cohesive beginning, middle, and end -- and in this case it is almost completely independent of the rest of the Aeneid. (Virgil even references Athenian tragedies -- Aeschylus and Euripides in particular.)
But the hallmark of tragedy is the fall of a great or noble person due to a "fatal flaw." In this case the flaw is Dido's passion for Aeneas. The book opens with the "unseen flame" that gnaws at Dido's love wound, and it ends with the pyre on which she kills herself.
The story is complete in itself but questions remain: Should Aeneas be held responsible for Dido's suffering? Dido is passionately in love with Aeneas, but do we know for sure that Aeneas loves Dido? If he is in love, does he simply harden his heart in order to fulfill his destiny? Will he remember her?
This is just touching the surface. There is so much to talk about here, from the form of the book to the emotional content to how it fits in with the rest of the poem. This is gorgeous and powerful stuff.