Iliad v. Aeneid

Hello everyone,

I was wondering if anyone here could shed some light on this subject for me. I'm writing a response paper on the Iliad and the Aeneid and am a little confused about the last question. Here is the question from my syllabus:

Quote:

---

What cultural or political purposes might Homer’s epic have been put to when first recited? Likewise, what about Vergil’s epic-style poetry?

---

My basic understanding is that the Iliad ensured that the history of the Trojan war got to the "common people," but in in a way that glorified the Greek nation. And the Aeneid was written in order to prove prove a Roman connection to the Greek nation. If anyone can elaborate on either of these points, or point me to some resources that may help I would be forever grateful.

I think you are very likely on the right track. The first thing that comes to mind for me is that they were both quite similar to modern day propaganda. They would have been used to inform the populous, but they would also have skewed towards the political/social impressions of their authors. I'm not much of a buff when it comes to Epic poetry, but from a historical perspective it would be useful to take a look at the social, economic, and political climate during which these were written. Here's an interesting comparison that I read some time ago. It might not be much help, but perhaps it will offer a bit of direction. http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...ers.html?cat=9

I might also suggest simply asking your teacher for further clarification of the question. It seems a bit vague and poorly written to me, and I'll confess to my own confusion of what it is they're looking for. The best source of help is going to be there.

Good luck to you.

Meg

Just a point, the connection shown in the Aeneid is between the Roman and Trojan peoples.

Thank you for the link and the advice. Normally I would ask my teacher for help but this guy is a bit of a hard nose. So I am on my own for this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by colindunn

Thank you for the link and the advice. Normally I would ask my teacher for help but this guy is a bit of a hard nose. So I am on my own for this.

---

Then I don't imagine that he would be much help then:( I had a few of those. Look into the historical aspect of things. That is normally what always gives me the best grounding to answer such a question. You may also try just doing a search for "Historical Significance of Iliad and Aeneid". This may get you the information a bit easier and give you more direction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdOlG...aynext_from=PL

Extensive historical analysis, political, religious of Illiad. Extraordinarily subtle differences between Greek political/religious/cultural/polytheistic traditions, and judeo/christian heritage. these lectures explain. May I recommend Donald Kagan.

Homer's epic was verbal and not written down for many years, after the Greek alphabet was developed. I don't think that common people had anything to do with Homer's recitations. Life was pretty harsh then, and coomon people such as swine herdsmen etc. could have cared less about a bunch of Achaeans going over to Asia Minor for ten years or so. Homer's epic did preserve the memory of Achilles and other heroes, but I think the recitation of Homer gave the Greeks something to do of an evening in those drafty old castles.

Virgil's epic compilation was more political since it was about the founding of Rome. The myth of Rome being founded by Romulus and Remus in 753 BC was not consistent with when the Trojan War occurred, which was about 1286 BC.
Virgil wanted to glorify the founding of Rome, or the nearby territory, by Aeneas, the only survivor of the sack of Troy by the Achaeans. In particular, Virgil wanted to please the Emperor Augustus (formally Octavian), Caesar's heir. Again though, I don't see where the common people had anything to do with the epic. Roman citizens had a pretty tough time of it during the time of Christ's life, and most probably couldn't read.

One thing to add for the Aeneid, I think Virgil also wanted to praise Augustus (Octavian), kinda sucking up to him..

Homer's epic was verbal and not written down for many years, after the Greek alphabet was developed. I don't think that common people had anything to do with Homer's recitations. Life was pretty harsh then, and common people such as swine herdsmen etc. could have cared less about a bunch of Achaeans going over to Asia Minor for ten years or so. Homer's epic did preserve the memory of Achilles and other heroes, but I think the recitation of Homer gave the Greeks something to do of an evening in those drafty old castles.

Virgil's epic compilation was more political since it was about the founding of Rome. The myth of Rome being founded by Romulus and Remus in 753 BC was not consistent with when the Trojan War occurred, which was about 1286 BC.
Virgil wanted to glorify the founding of Rome, or the nearby territory, by Aeneas, the only survivor of the sack of Troy by the Achaeans. In particular, Virgil wanted to please the Emperor Augustus (formally Octavian), Caesar's heir. Again though, I don't see where the common people had anything to do with the epic. Roman citizens had a pretty tough time of it during the time of Christ's life, and most probably couldn't read.

I'm not as familiar with the Iliad, but the Aeneid was "published" in a time of great political strife in Rome. The Roman Republic had just fallen, Augustus had just risen to the throne, and there was still civil war raging. Yes, Virgil may have wanted to praise Augustus, but Virgil was possibly also trying to unite a very fragmented Rome and show it a time of former glory. There are also interesting debates on how Virgil depicts Julius Caesar. I would recommend rereading Book VI for more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wilde woman

I'm not as familiar with the Iliad, but the Aeneid was "published" in a time of great political strife in Rome. The Roman Republic had just fallen, Augustus had just risen to the throne, and there was still civil war raging. Yes, Virgil may have wanted to praise Augustus, but Virgil was possibly also trying to unite a very fragmented Rome and show it a time of former glory. There are also interesting debates on how Virgil depicts Julius Caesar. I would recommend rereading Book VI for more.

---

Pisistratus may have used the Illiad in a similar way. It was during his reign in Athens that the Illiad was put in written form.