Blurred Lines: Cosmology and Propaganda in Virgil’s Aeneid

Introduction

The Roman world was characterized by warfare and imperium. Those vying for leadership positions used any means necessary to establish their authority. A popular method of winning influence was literature: combining myth and reality, literature acted as a method of spreading ideas. Those who crafted these stories had the power to influence entire cultures. Virgil’s Aeneid is no different: commissioned by then-Emperor Augustus, it can be seen as a propagandistic weapon with ideological intent. Virgil reaches back into Rome’s past, connecting Augustus with the mythological and historical events that led to the empires’ contemporary successes, portraying him as the proper leader of the Roman world. 

Opening this essay is an exploration of Virgil’s literary style, homing in on the imagery used in drawing readers into his work. Section two examines the significance of tradition in the Roman world focusing on how Virgil used the powerful valences associated with religion to strengthen Augustus’ public standing. Finally, considering that Augustus funded Virgil’s livelihood, section three explores the Aeneid as a vehicle for Augustian ideology.

From Imagination to Reality

The Aeneid is characterized by descriptive imagery. To lure his readers into an emotive experience, Virgil makes use of a literary device known as ekphrasis: Hornblower and Spawforth (1999, p. 515) defined ekphrasis as a representation of a physical object, while Vella (2004, p. 6) saw it as a sub-genre in which the author pauses mid-narrative to offer a detailed description of the scene. In transitioning from the main narrative to an ekphrasis of Aeneas’ shield, Virgil merges Rome’s past, present, and future (Girona Martinez, n.d., p. 12). Handpicking events from Rome’s mythological and historical past, Virgil seems to be justifying the steps that must be taken to hold. In placing his triumph at the center of the shield, Virgil connects Rome’s contemporary successes with Augustus, painting him as the rightful leader of the Roman world.

Seeing as his livelihood was funded emperor, it’s reasonable to assume Virgil chose his words carefully: Aeneas’ shield seems to function as a symbol of Augustus’ virtus (Latin, ‘virtue’, ‘manliness’, ‘courage’). Harrison (1997) puts forward that the scenes on the shield are presented in chronological order, noting that many events from the same historical period are left out; what Virgil doesn’t say is just as loud as what he does. On the outside of the shield are six scenes that follow one clear theme: Roman people escaping from the brink of disaster (Vir. Aen. 8.629-666; Harrison, 1997). Through detailing Rome’s tumultuous past, Virgil justifies the behaviours necessary to bring about imperium. At the centre of the shield is Augustus campaigning against enemies of the state, Mark Antony and Cleopatra (Vir. Aen. 8.671-713). Placing the Battle of Actium at the climax of the shield’s ekphrasis, with all other scenes building toward it, Virgil represents Augustus as vital in securing the fate of the Roman empire. 

From City to Empire

Leaders of the ancient world were aware of the power underlying written words. Seeing as Augustus funded Virgil’s livelihood, we would do well to reflect on the purposes it may have served. Casali (2006, p. 202) speculates that in depicting Vulcan as detached in crafting the shield and its scenes, Virgil is alluding to his emotional distance from the political undertones in the text. He shows what was required of a political poet: shaping myth into ideological weapons, repressing his opinion in the service of power. The Battle of Actium (Vir. Aen. 8.671-713) is the height of The Aeneid’s propagandistic effort. Penwill (2005, p. 45) maintains that Actium represents Augustus as the embodiment of the mos maiorum (Latin, ‘ancestral custom’). Girona Martinez (n.d.) touched on these ideological undertones when he said, “the climax of the poem, this great representation of the [Roman] cosmos and the imperium is composed by a poet that is paid for his living” (p. 6). While he may not have agreed with his work, Virgil repainted Augustus as the champion of Roman values, in turn swaying the masses to rally behind Augustian ideology.

Central to Augustus’ reign was the unification of the empire. As the Roman state expanded into Italy, schisms formed. Augustus takes advantage of Virgil’s literary prowess to reframe Rome’s historical past: he repaints the drastic acts of Rome’s imperial past as essential to its continued survival, justifying the empires’ wild behaviour. For example, the rape of the Sabine woman is repainted as essential for the state’s continuation (Vir. Aen. 8.635-641). Girona Martinez (n.d., p. 6) proposed that by repainting the Latin War as a civil conflict, Virgil might have hoped to persuade readers that Italy was always united, in turn being more sympathetic to his ideology. Cairns (1989, p. 128) suggests Virgil’s ‘Italianisation’ of Aeneas and the Trojans served as a means of unifying previously warring Italian factions under the roof of Augustian ideology. Here we see Augustus the politician: unifying Italy would foster a Roman nationalism that is backed by the inclusion of once warring cities under the guise of political independence (Girona Martinez p. 9). The Shield of Aeneas builds a nationalistic identity that unifies the empire, placing Augustus as essential to Rome’s continued success. 

From Cosmos to Imperium

Aeneas’ shield symbolises a Roman creation story linking the heavens with the earth. Virgil seems to have taken advantage of pietas (Latin, ‘religiosity, ’loyalty’)— cultural veneration of the gods —as a means of garnering support for Augustian ideology. Aeneas’ shield is crafted by Vulcan, who is described as a god of fire that holds “knowledge of the prophets and of the time that was to be” (Vir. Aen. 8.620-630). Hesiod associates the trickster-hero Prometheus with fire and foresight, the ability to see into the future (Hornblower and Spawforth, 1999, p. 1253). De Jong (2013) sheds light on this connection, noting that Vulcan appears as an oracle, envisioning Rome’s future and shaping it Aeneas’ shield. Weaving myth and reality, Virgil places Rome at the centre of the universe. Considering the respect for tradition that was characteristic of Roman society, hinting that Augustus was supported by the gods implied he was worthy of directing the future of the empire.

The religious traditions of ancient Rome identified emperors with the gods. Through apotheosis, previous emperors were elevated to divine status (Rüpke, 2007, p. 315), imbuing those who claimed their decadency with gravitas (Latin, ‘dignity’, ‘seriousness’). In choosing the moniker Magnus, Pompey identified himself with Alexander the Great (Miles, 1999, p. 8). In a similar vein, Augustus was linked to the goddess Venus through his father Julius Caesar (Kamm, 2006, p. 38). Grebe (2004, p. 46-47) notes that Virgil repeatedly elevates Augustus to divine status: in Jupiter’s prophecy (Vir. Aen. 1.286-296), Anchises’ vision of Rome’s destiny (6.781-805), and his ekphrasis of the shield (8.761-728). Considering the respect for tradition characteristic of Roman society, suggesting Augustus is supported by the gods lent him greater sway in directing the future of the empire.

Conclusion

Culminating in his account of Aeneas’ shield, Virgil’s Aeneid was a political weapon crafted with ideological intent. Virgil integrated past, present, and future, reaching into Rome’s mythico-historical past to connect Augustus with the foundation of Rome, painting him as critical to the future success of the empire. Wielding the power of myth, Virgil invokes Rome’s divine authorities to elevate Augustus to the status of a god, intent on winning public approval. The Aeneid underlines the power of the written word in shaping the world around us. Above all, Virgil reminds us that we would do well to view even the most convincing of stories with a sceptical lens.

References

Primary Sources

Virgil. 2003. The Aeneid. Translated by D. West. London: Penguin.

Secondary Sources

Cairns, F., 1989. Virgil’s Augustan Epic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

de Jong, I.J., 2015. Pluperfects and the Artist in Ekphrases: From the Shield of Achilles to the Shield of Aeneas (and Beyond). Mnemosyne, 68(6), pp. 889-916.

Feldherr, A., 2014, Viewing Myth and History on the Shield of Aeneas. Classical Antiquity, 33(2), p. 281-318.

Girona Martinez, J. (n.d.). ‘Analysis of the purpose and role of the Shield of Aeneas in the Aeneid’, Ancient History, Trinity Saint David University. Unpublished essay. Available at https://www.academia.edu.

Grebe, S., 2004. Augustus’ Divine Authority and Vergil’s “Aeneid”. Vergilius, pp. 35-62.

Harrison, S., 1997. The Survival and Supremacy of Rome: The Unity of the Shield of Aeneas. Journal of Roman Studies, 87, p. 70-76.

Herz, P., 2011. Emperors: Caring for the Empire and Their Successors. In Rüpke Jörg, ed. A Companion to Roman Religion. Chichester, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 304–316.

Hornblower, S. and Spawforth, A., 1999. The Oxford Classical Dictionary. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kamm, A., 2006. Julius Caesar: A Life. New York: Routledge

Miles, G.B., 1999. The Aeneid as foundation story. Reading Vergil’s Aeneid. An Interpretive Guide, Oklahoma, pp. 225-247.

Penwill, J.L., 2005. ‘Reading Aeneas’ Shield’. Iris 18, p. 37-47.

Vella, H.C.R., 2004. Vergil’s Aeneid VIII and the Shield of Aeneas: recurrent topics and cyclic structures. Studia Humaniora Tartuensia, (5), pp. 1-17.