Vergil´s Political Commentary

Leendert Weeda

• Publisher: De Gruyter Open Poland
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9783110456134
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Literature
• Subtopic: Ancient & Classical Literary Criticism
• Index: Literature

In the book titled Vergil's political commentary in Eclogues, Georgics and Aeneid, the author examines Vergil's political views by analyzing the whole of the poet's work. He introduces the notion of the functional model suggesting that the poet often used this instrument when making a political statement. New interpretations of a number of the Eclogues and passages of the Georgics and the Aeneid are suggested and the author concludes that Vergil's political engagement is visible in much of his work. During his whole career the poet was consistent in his views on several major political themes. These varied from, the distress caused by the violation of the countryside during and after the expropriations in the 40s B.C., to the horrors of the civil war and the violence of war in general, and the necessity of strong leadership. Vergil hoped and expected that Octavian would establish peace and order, and he supported a form of hereditary kingship for which he considered Octavian a suitable candidate. He held Cleopatra in high regard, and he appreciated a more meaningful role for women in society. Vergil wrote poetry that supported Augustus, but he had also the courage to criticize Octavian and his policies. He was a commentator with an independent mind and was not a member of Augustus' putative propaganda machine.

1 Introduction, Political Opinions, Propaganda

1.1 Introduction

Many fundamental changes took place in Rome in the second half of the first century B.C.. After the murder of Iulius Caesar in 44 B.C. the civil war entered a new phase and it was only after the battle of Actium in 31 B.C. that Octavian (63 B.C.-14 A.D.) could set about establishing his authority, by which order and tranquillity became possible². Until that year an armed struggle had been taking place, as Octavian had directed extensive military campaigns against his major opponent Mark Antony and others. In 27 B.C. Octavian became princeps and from that moment onwards occupied himself with the transition that eventually transformed the Republic into a monarchy. From 26 B.C. there was relative peace in Italia and the population could begin to repair the economy. However, the Golden Age as a period of peace and restoration did not commence immediately after Octavian’s victory at Actium and his assumption of power soon afterwards. The destruction of the countryside, the heavy taxes that had been levied to finance the war and the expropriations of the land of many landowners and small farmers alike, as part of the programme of resettlement of veterans, which had started during the civil war, had impoverished the population.

These events caused many leading families in the Republic to feel deep resentment towards Augustus and to resist the changes fiercely. For many others, relief that the war and the slaughtering were over took precedence over any objections they may have had that Augustus would most likely rule as rex. At that time kingship had a very negative connotation. The change was considerable for the senate, its members and for the elite in general. The senate was no longer the highest authority and while Augustus kept in close contact with the senate and consulted it regularly, important decisions in matters of foreign policy, military affairs or high-level appointments were taken within a small circle of confidants. The role of the senate was much reduced, and rejection of imperial decisions was impossible. There were three main areas of change which met with opposition by the senate. These were the reduction in membership of the senate, the extraordinary powers which Augustus took (or which the members of the senate assumed that he took) and the legislation which went against the privileges of the elite. However, the senate offered only firm opposition when they felt that their privileged positions were being eroded. Several members of the old patrician families had not survived the civil war or had disappeared. Those who were still alive reluctantly accepted the emperor’s increasing power; the alternative – yet another destructive war between rivals – was untenable, also for them. Augustus introduced homines novi from Italia and from the Latin speaking western provinces as members of the senate and many of the non-political classes without any real influence became the new political leaders (Yavetz, 1993, 24). Thus, he appointed officers in the legions and administrators in the provinces from the class of equites. He succeeded in gaining and keeping the loyalty of many senators – new and old – by appointing them to the most important posts in the provinces, such as governors and chief commanders in the army³.

This does not mean that there was no open opposition to Augustus⁴. Within several sections of Roman society there were signs of unrest, and ancient sources refer to several instances of political opposition. Tacitus dedicates a fairly long passage to this opposition in his Ann.1.9-1.10, and mentions the struggle with Sextus Pompeius, Lepidus and Mark Antony, and the insurrections of Licinius Varro Murena, Egnatius Rufus, and Iullus Antonius⁵. Suetonius reports in Aug.14-18 the uprisings of Lucius Antonius and the siege of Perusia, Sextus Pompeius and the Sicilian war, and the struggle with Marcus Lepidus and that with Mark Antony, the most dangerous of all, which ended at Actium. But this was not the end of Augustus’ troubles and some attempts at revolution and other uprisings continued, as we read in Aug.19.1. Not all these conspiracies were equally threatening, and they were certainly not as dangerous as the power struggle between 40 and 31 B.C.. Lepidus’ son (30 B.C.) had a grudge against Octavian after the experiences of his father. The case of Varro Murena and Fannius Caepio (23/22 B.C.) is a celebrated one as they had murderous intents. Nothing is known about Caepio and Varro Murena is most likely Licinius Varro Murena, the brother of Maecenas’ wife Terentia. It seems that they had a following of people in influential positions in their conspiracy against the princeps. Marcus Egnatius Rufus (19 B.C.) is rather unknown and his conspiracy was an amateurish revolt. There were two family plots against Augustus, namely the scandal in 2 B.C. of Iulia the Elder (the daughter of Augustus and Scribonia) and Iullus Antonius, M. Antony’s son, who were accused of conspiracy and of having an adulterous affair, but who presumably tried to influence future succession (Ruikes, 1966, 166-196). About ten years later (6-8 A.D.) there was a second scandal, that of the younger Iulia (Augustus’ granddaughter), followed by the conspiracy of L. Aemilius Paullus and Plautius Rufus. This again had more to do with family feuds and family quarrels about succession than with opposition against the Principate or the princeps⁶. Obviously, any of these conspiracies could have resulted in the death of Augustus and perhaps a return to the old struggle for power between various families and factions. If one considers the whole period of Augustus’ reign there was always some opposition which Augustus and his immediate circle managed to keep in check. It is a moot point, however, whether the opposition was made less serious by the success of Augustus’ supposed programme of propaganda.

In general, however, the rule of Augustus was received favourably. At Rome and in the provinces there was peace and stability and as the economy became stronger, the crippling poverty of many sections of the population was relieved to some extent. For the first time after many years of armed conflicts, in which groups and individuals wrestled for power, a general feeling arose that the ruler – the princeps Augustus – was accessible and felt responsible for the well-being of the whole population. Common people welcomed in particular the end of the general conscription and they benefited most from the revival of the economy, which was most visible in the extensive programme of public building and infrastructure, such as roads, public offices and the many new tenement buildings, which Augustus erected. It took some time, however, for the Golden Age to arrive. War did not end with Actium and in the next decade there was still substantial unrest. It was not before June of the year 17 B.C. that Augustus felt confident to openly celebrate the new era, when he organized the ludi saeculares for which Horace wrote his Carmen Saeculare. In the meantime he succeeded in combining absolute power with the restoration of the old institutions of the Republic, which ensured that the changes could be recognised.

It is often said that there was a need to win the support of the leading classes and that convincing them and the public at large of his vision as to how to organise the state was a matter of the highest priority for Augustus. It is obvious that in this vision Augustus had assigned to himself the highest authority, and in 27 B.C. and again in 23 B.C. he received such a commission from the senate. Others would claim that he had assumed this position and therefore a propaganda programme to influence and to manipulate public opinion was a necessity, also after 27 B.C.. In the opinion of many scholars the objective of such a programme would have been to demonstrate the blessings of the new age. It is thought that for this purpose he used – apart from written propaganda – also several different means, such as the repair and aggrandizement of Rome, the building of new temples and public buildings and the commissioning of self-portraits ( Galinsky, 1996, 3-41).

In this book I will analyse all the extant work of Vergil, who was born during the civil war, and experienced its horrors. I chose to study his poetry not only because he experienced the transition from the Republic to the Principate and the concomitant political change, but also because he obviously is a – if not the – leading poet of his day, and because a substantial body of his poetry is still extant. In a sequel to this book the poetry of Horace will be analysed in the same manner. The two poets cover between them the most important poetic genres. Vergil left us a didactic poem, pastoral poetry and an epic; Horace satirical poems, odes with a wide range of subjects and letters in verse. Although two established poets are the subjects of this study and its planned sequel, it would be equally interesting to examine graffiti, or the work of unknown or anonymous poets, “folk-poets” or “street-poets”, who were not members of the Roman upper classes or intellectual circles. On the one hand these poets may have expressed very different views as they stood closer to the common people. On the other hand they may have been more eager to write propagandist texts as they were economically more dependent on the favours of the ruling class.

One can hypothesize that Vergil wrote political propaganda which went against his own political views or that he wrote texts without holding any political views at all. Or he may have worked by order of unscrupulous leaders. Consequently I will first examine whether Vergil expressed any political views, and whether he was consistent in some or most of his views. In addition, I will consider whether these views were critical or supportive of the leadership.

This book is divided into two main parts. The first (chapters 1 and 2) contains the theoretical cadre and the literary and socio-political context. In the second (chapters 3 till 5) I examine whether Vergil expressed political views in his poetry, and whether it is likely that he wrote propaganda⁷.

Chapter 1 is a short general introduction which deals first with an exposition of the method of study of the political content of Vergil’s poems (sections 1.2.1 and 1.2.2). Second, I present an explanation of the notion of references (section 1.2.3), in which a distinction is made between the concept of a literary frame (section 1.2.3.1) and a functional frame (section 1.2.3.2). At the end of chapter 1 (section 1.3) I give a short exposition of some general aspects of propaganda and of propaganda in antiquity. I present the context within which the poets wrote in the second chapter. I discuss briefly some aspects of Augustan poetry, and of the visual media such as statues, reliefs, portraits and paintings in Rome and Italia in the Late Republic and Early Empire in section 2.1. I also examine in this chapter the levels of literacy, the process of distribution and multiplication of poems, the likely audiences in the public and private sphere (section 2.2), and the position of poets in general and their dependency on patronage (section 2.3).

The second part of the book is concerned with Vergil’s poetry: chapter 3 is devoted to the Eclogues and the Georgics, and chapter 4 to the Aeneid. In chapter 5 I present Vergil’s political views, and I also discuss in this chapter whether he contributed to a putative propaganda programme.

I give at the end of the book an extensive bibliography and an index.

1.2 Did Vergil Express Political Views?

I have subjected Vergil’s texts to critical tests in order to understand their meaning with respect to the poet’s political views. As an aid to these tests I developed a model of research, which is nothing more than a structured way of classifying the poems. The model offers a structure for a close reading of the poet’s work enabling the reader to identify the political nature of a poem.

1.2.1 Methodological Features

When one examines the question whether Vergil wrote about political issues and whether his work was propagandistic, one moves within the triangle of three variables: poet, poem and reader. All three variables will be considered, but the emphasis will be on the poems and the audience. The poems hold the key to the poets’ political views and other beliefs. The other key variable is the potential audience within the context of the political and intellectual environment of t...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Half Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Preface And Acknowledgements
• 1 Introduction, Political Opinions, Pro
• 2 The Context
• 3 The Eclogues And The Georgics
• 4 The Aeneid: An Epic With A Commentary On Contemporary Affairs
• 5 Vergil’s Political Views. Was He His Master’s Voice?
• Bibliography
• Index
• BACK