Thank you for helping clear that up! I will definitely be looking into the works you recommended in the break between semesters (I'm hopelessly Hermione; when in doubt, go to the library). Haven't read the Syme book, but I've certainly heard of the theory, when people try to prove that fascism was inherent to Italian culture and things like that.
My main problem with the Aeneid was the treatment of women in it, and I think that reflects Augustus more than anything else in the work. I've always thought of his reign as being focused on getting back to a more "conservative" Rome; he viewed Julius Caesar as great for the public's sake, but personally thought that excess brought him down. Same goes for Antony, and like any good Roman Augustus believed that it was outside influence that brought him down. Namely, of course, Cleopatra. When I first read the Aeneid, that's what I saw in Dido. A temptation that would bring Aeneas down if he let her influence him, that would corrupt Rome before it had even been built. I've never thought of that as Vergil's intent, necessarily, but something placed there at the behest of the emperor. Or, at the very least, indicative of Roman sentiment following Antony's demise and defeat. Octavian was all about propaganda and he had to be, because Rome hadn't wanted an empire under Caesar and had no reason to want one after his death; the transition from republic to empire would have had to include strong-arming his dissenters and feeding the public a grand vision of his "Pax Romana". I can see how the correlation between fascism and Octavian is made so often (but only because I think that most of those theories come out of a misapprehension of what fascism truly is).
Now, of course, I have a slightly different opinion on the treatment of women in literature, because I know that literature has to be read with a bit of historical perspective. But its hard to tell people that and get them to agree.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2002-11-14 08:22 am (UTC)My main problem with the Aeneid was the treatment of women in it, and I think that reflects Augustus more than anything else in the work. I've always thought of his reign as being focused on getting back to a more "conservative" Rome; he viewed Julius Caesar as great for the public's sake, but personally thought that excess brought him down. Same goes for Antony, and like any good Roman Augustus believed that it was outside influence that brought him down. Namely, of course, Cleopatra. When I first read the Aeneid, that's what I saw in Dido. A temptation that would bring Aeneas down if he let her influence him, that would corrupt Rome before it had even been built. I've never thought of that as Vergil's intent, necessarily, but something placed there at the behest of the emperor. Or, at the very least, indicative of Roman sentiment following Antony's demise and defeat. Octavian was all about propaganda and he had to be, because Rome hadn't wanted an empire under Caesar and had no reason to want one after his death; the transition from republic to empire would have had to include strong-arming his dissenters and feeding the public a grand vision of his "Pax Romana". I can see how the correlation between fascism and Octavian is made so often (but only because I think that most of those theories come out of a misapprehension of what fascism truly is).
Now, of course, I have a slightly different opinion on the treatment of women in literature, because I know that literature has to be read with a bit of historical perspective. But its hard to tell people that and get them to agree.