message forwarded by listowner, David Wilson-Okamura
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 11:59:05 -0600 (CST)
From: RANDI C ELDEVIK [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I really can't agree that Aeneas is callous and uncaring about Creusa's
demise. Look at the pertinent passage: his emotional reaction is
intense! It has
I'm sorry not to have read Christine's article: it's an omission I will
make good soon. Meanwhile, like Matthew, I warm to the idea that Creusa
has a responsible role in what Neven rightly calls a military situation.
This is the role assigned to the second officer in a Roman
military century, the
message forwarded by listowner, David Wilson-Okamura
From: ddavis-henry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 22:08:52 -0500
Creusa's separation from her family towards the end of book II is tough for
me to accept and to teach. I readily understand why her elimination from
the storyline is
I think the key part here is Creusa's comment- Who was once called your
wife... Remember that this passage comes after Venus has revealed the
destruction of the city to Aeneas (it is not the greeks doing it, but the
gods). It seems to me it is at this point that fate takes over Aeneas' life:
At 12:25 PM 1/13/00 -0500, Christine Perkell wrote:
Since Aeneas is carrying his father, who in turn holds the household
gods, and is holding his son by the hand, you can hardly argue that
Aeneas entrusts Creusa with everything important to him! Quite the
opposite! He is in physical contact
1.
We may choose between various vantage points: do we want to read Aeneas'
words on Creusa's disappearance as modern readers? Or as Romans? Or as
Dido and the Carthaginians (to whom these words are directed)? Or some
combination of all this? It is important, I believe, to define where we
want to
