The Library Annex

This urge to action, do the gods instil it, / Or is each man’s desire a god to him

While reading this action-packed blockbuster, one theme stood out among all the carnage and nobility. For other epic poems and myths, this theme also stands out without subtlety – the interference of the gods.

As Aeneas, born of Venus and his human father, escapes Troy with other refugee Trojans, he embarks on a destiny reminiscent of an Old Testament blueprint; this mythical Moses off to spawn the Italian and Roman peoples as Virgil’s contemporaries knew them.

Virgil begins “I sing of war and a man at war”. Some might consider this opening line redundant. Can war exist without men at war? But Virgil isolates War from “a man at war”. Why? I surmise that singing of “war” means singing of the gods who determine the outcomes and fates of war as they relate to human existence. The second part is Aeneas’ role in that war. Virgil isolates the concepts of the gods’ role in world events such as war and of using players such as Aeneas in those events.

Virgil weaves this tale without giving much responsibility or agency at all to the human players. Juno and Jupiter battle over the fate of Aeneas’ Trojan refugees by interfering in relationships, agreements and natural occurrences. Their interference might compel some readers to question the supposed greatness of Aeneas if everything that happens to him results from the gods rather than his own volition. As this arc continues through the story, Virgil tastefully prevents the gods from interfering with the very last decision before Aeneas. I will not spoil that decision, or dictate the twists as it confronts him.

Consider the polytheism of Virgil’s day and the monotheism of Dante’s Divine Comedy of which he takes part. In the Aenead, Jove explains in Book IX, “‘To them all / King Jupiter is the same king. And the Fates / Will find their way.’” If we take this as objectively true, that one God rules all men, regardless of their subjective beliefs, then how can that God take sides? Could this then indicate that people’s actions are truly their own for which they take responsibility? Perhaps Virgil delicately questions how the concept of polytheism removes the precious gift of human agency – the free will alignment with the divine will and the suffering and redemption for one’s choices Dante would later traverse.

As Dante bridged thinkers such as Virgil to the early foundations of Renaissance enlightenment, I couldn’t help but think about how characters of Renaissance writers might compare to someone like Aeneas. What would he and Hamlet talk about? Two characters – one wholly bent to an external conflict between ancient Roman gods and the other bent under the weight of an inner conflict. One blessed with a destiny which would manifest itself through no will of his own and the other cursed to reconcile his own character with his life circumstances without the aid of gods.

I say without risk of hyperbole, few books or stories can meet the standard set by Virgil regarding epic action and an intensely barbaric romanticism – a story thousands of years old and I have no confidence that any Hollywood producer can do it justice. Yet under this entertainment value lies a subtle pondering of the polytheistic nature of Roman life and the human role in the world. Does the concept of any manifest destiny or Crusade for a Promised Land render humanity great or does it actually subvert the precious commodity of human agency and will? Who are we without that agency?