I agree with much of J O'H's comments, though I'd have preferred 'conditionally' to 'loosely' argued. I did mark some propositions with an IF. I was not asking 'Why might we take an anti-Augustan view?' as 'What if we did take that view?' 1. On a prelim. point, it may not be strange to think that some people make the inference from the impressiveness of a text or work of art to the its (at least partial) truth - thinking along the lines of Keats' 'Beauty is truth'. 2. Without question, people may change their minds about religious and political ideas, causes and leaders: my biggest IF certainly comes at this point. I admit that I was starting from Gibbon's 1770 version of anti-Augustanism - a seminal text of American independence?!? V was, in G's view as I recall it, speaking steadfastly to and for a persisting (defeated and resentful, but still there) Republican majority. 3. G's line of thought implies a Republican, non-messianic reading of the Fourth Eclogue and then, via the implication that any monarchic usurpation was polluting sacrilege, a rejection not just of the regime but of Rome. 4. Other anti-Augustans may certainly vary G's premise, though they must stay 'anti' in some significant sense. They may see the Fourth Eclogue as as much more ironical than it overtly seems, or as a youthful hope abandoned in the light of bitter Augustan experience. Again, they may interpret anti-Augustanism less in terms of being in the camp of the defeated and resentful and more in terms of general, disappointment and disillusion. 5. On any view (maybe I shouldnt' say that) the Fourth Eclogue is a strong religious statement about a better world - overtly at least. It is linked to Rome and to the Republic by prominent mention of Pollio's consular office. 6. The variations on G's theme may not make that much difference, at least so long as they deny V any way of reaffirming or reformulating the optimism of the Prophecy. If V was generally disillusioned then his disillusion applies to the optimism of the Prophecy and its evident belief that Rome had a historic mission beyond that of what he later called the peritura regna. However one refashions the idea of his rejection of or disillusion with the regime it keeps on turning into rejection of or disillusion not just with the regime but with Rome, the real Rome, itself. Then it is somewhat hard to resist the idea that V calls on us to re-found Rome, when we have found a way to make its violated ideals real, at a distance of space and time. 7. Ovason's 'Secret Architecture' seems quite persuasive on the subject of the V associations with the reverse side of the United States Seal, and of the one-dollar bill. The two Latin phrases 'Annuit coeptis' and 'novus ordo seclorum' are both allusions to V, the second to the Prophecy, which suggests that V was taken very seriously. V himself might have been interested in the use of his words in the context of an occult-seeming, quasi-Egyptian pyramid/eye symbol. - Martin Hughes
On Fri, 23 Aug 2002, Jim O'Hara wrote: > Some of this is interesting, but it seem rather loosely argued, > depending as it does on a number of questionable premises: that a > prophecy can be "so impressive that it must somehow be true;" that a > poet or any human being must have consistent and unchanging attitudes > towards other (also putatively consistent and unchanging) human beings; > that "(proto-)Augustan" and "(proto-)Anti-Augustan" are the only two > possibilities (see the first "fallacy" listed at > http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm ); that the child of Ecl 4 > with his heroic father somehow represents the Republic, which is thought > be going through a "resurgence" (in 40 BCE? or 39 or 37 or 35 when the > book is published?), etc. The broadest way of describing the problem > is that you're first deciding what you think the poem should be saying, > then looking in the poem to find it, rather than starting with what's in > the poem; this can be roughly compared with reading an English > translation of a passage, then looking at the Latin to try to find those > English meanings in the passage. The worst pro-Augustan and > anti-Augustan readings do this; the best Augustan or non-Augustan or > ambivalent readings react to the details of the poem, in their > historical and literaary context to be sure, but without using context > or expectations as a "trot" to avoid confronting the words of the poem. > > The part about Washington DC is fascinating. > > M W Hughes wrote: > > > > Excuse reference to holiday reading, found on my first visit to > > Washington DC - but this is a thought suggested by David Ovason's 'Secret > > Architecture of Our Nation's Capital'. Ovason believes that the city was > > founded partly with an eye to achieving, at last, the beginning of the > > fulfilment of the 'Ultima Cumaei/iam redit et Virgo' prophecy. The city > > is particularly associated, he says, with the constellation of Virgo, so > > offers, I suppose, a new locus, less corrupted than any in the Old World, > > for the final return of Astraea. This would link American independence > > with the anti-Augustan and indeed Republican readings of V that Gibbon and > > others were developing in the later eighteenth century. > > 1. I don't comment on Ovason's main claims, which may be fanciful. Ovason > > got me thinking again about the inner logic of anti-Augustan readings of > > V. Perhaps I too am being fanciful, but it strikes me that if one > > thinks that the Prophecy is so impressive that it must somehow be true and > > also attributes an anti-Augustan spirit to V then one must be drawn to > > some sort of belief in a New (latterly 'Third') Rome, a belief that might > > develop strong religious overtones. > > 2. The term 'anti-Augustan' is not quite fitting for the > > Eclogues/Bucolics, since when they were written the future Augustus was no > > more than the younger Caesar, one dynast among others. But if V was > > consistent, and if he was anti-Augustan later, then the poem and prophecy > > must be Republican, indeed a continuation by V and Pollio of Cicero's > > doomed quest to lock this dangerous young genius into the Republican > > cause, though without Cicero's efforts to dump Antony. But V would have > > been all too well aware of what had happened to Cicero and would have > > given scope for his poem to be understood and his prophecy validated, in > > somewhat occult terms, even if its short-term promises came to seem vain. > > 3. The next implication would be the Child of the Prophecy must be > > an allegorical figure, representing the Republic resurgent after war and > > tyranny, rather than, as so many have supposed, a real indvidual about to > > take the role of Messiah. At that rate the poem implicitly calls on > > the dynasts not to do what between them they were about to do, ie stop the > > resurgence of the Republic in its tracks. Augustus' actual behaviour, on > > this showing sending Astraea back into occlusion and exile, would amount > > to sacrilege. > > 4. Rome would then be desecrated in the same manner as Troy had > > been desecrated by Laomedon's treachery. Rome could be no more than > > one of the peritura regna. > > 5. So the Prophecy instructs those who are moved by it, and understand its > > occult meaning, that there is to be a New Rome founded, at a distance of > > space and time, as a new Republic, destined for heroic deeds and marking a > > benign evolution in the whole natural order. > > 6. Correspondingly, the message to the real Rome of V's own time is not > > one of complete historical uselessness, but certainly of eventual failure, > > even doom. > > 7. In sum, what I'm suggesting is that if we say that V always held to > > the religious views of the Fourth Eclogue and was always a Republican > > opposed to Caesarian/Augustan monarchy, we must see him as rejecting, on > > quite deep religious grounds, not just the Roman regime but Rome > > itself. His only hope would indeed have lain in some sort of refoundation, > > providing a new locus for Astraea's return. Is this a reductio ad > > absurdum of anti-Augustan readings of V? > > I certainly found the un-British heat and sun of Washington, secret > > architecture or no secret architecture, impressive. Perhaps they got to my > > brain. > > - Martin Hughes > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To leave the Mantovano mailing list at any time, do NOT hit reply. > > Instead, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message > > "unsubscribe mantovano" in the body (omitting the quotation marks). You > > can also unsubscribe at http://virgil.org/mantovano/mantovano.htm#unsub > > -- > Jim O'Hara > Paddison Professor of Latin > Director of Graduate Studies > 206B Howell Hall > phone: (919) 962-7649 > fax: (919) 962-4036 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www: http://www.unc.edu/~oharaj > surface mail: > James J. O'Hara > Department of Classics > CB# 3145, 101 Howell Hall > The University of North Carolina > Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3145 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > To leave the Mantovano mailing list at any time, do NOT hit reply. > Instead, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message > "unsubscribe mantovano" in the body (omitting the quotation marks). You > can also unsubscribe at http://virgil.org/mantovano/mantovano.htm#unsub > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- To leave the Mantovano mailing list at any time, do NOT hit reply. Instead, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message "unsubscribe mantovano" in the body (omitting the quotation marks). You can also unsubscribe at http://virgil.org/mantovano/mantovano.htm#unsub
