Aeneas was very devoted and made it his duty to provide for his people. One thing readers don’t really recognize throughout the books is that Aeneas did those things because he had to. His people put in him in that position because they knew he would be the best for that job. It’s as if he was forced to have to step up and deliver and defend. Aeneas knew that people were looking up to him and that’s when he made it his responsibility to become devoted. He was chosen to keep the hope of Troy alive and he then became a leader and formed his legacy as an amazing hero that went through hardships and still overcame it all.
He constantly showed devotion to the crew members on the journey, he tries to motivate he crew with speeches to keep the men’s spirits high and to keep them motivated to move along with him. He was the definition of a true leader that would do nothing until he gets what he wanted all along. The dedication and devotion of his personal life he put into the journey is a true testament to his character.
…show more content…
He presented it throughout different sequences, obstacles, and journeys which he had to persevere through. Aeneas is on the main character from the book who really displayed devotion, duty, and honor while going hard for city. He was truly a leader and honorable man who should always be known for great character and for his three big points.
It takes a man of great character to do what Aeneas did for not only his family but hometown. He showed true leadership skills to survive the city of troy and lay down a new foundation. He was chosen to move the Roman Empire to Italy. Aeneas was willing and able to make all this happen while keeping himself grounded. Which shows truly what kind of man he was and for that he should always be remembered as such. A man of duty, devotion, and honor a stand-up guy with great character and an even better
In the story The Odyssey, Odysseus showed many traits. I believe the most important trait he showed was loyalty. He showed it in multiple situations. Odysseus showed loyalty when dealing with the sirens, the louts eaters, and the cyclops.
A very obvious example of loyalty is, Penelope. She is faithful to Odysseus for over 20 years and does not give up for long time. Even when the suitors came to her house and ate her food and overstayed their welcome she did not budge and still stayed faithful to Odysseus for the whole time he was gone. She told the suitors that when she finished her tapestry she would choose who she wants to marry, but every night she would undo a piece of the tapestry just so it would take longer and it would give Odysseus more time to come back just so she would not have to choose one of the suitors.
Loyalty, as defined in the Odyssey seems to be the constant devotion to someone, the hopefully longing of their return and victory. Homer seems to value loyalty over many of the other human traits, as Eumaeus gets not only Homer’s famous “you” but his own book as well. The swineherd is not the only character that Homer uses to show loyalty, Penelope and Telemachus show unyielding faithfulness to Odysseus throughout the epic poem; as do many other characters even gods. Homer demonstrates the value he places on loyalty through the use of these characters with their devotion to Odysseus. Through the use of these characters Homer shows the value of loyalty by their loyalty to Odysseus.
Aeneas’s voyage up to his journey to the Underworld has not been easy to say the least. He had to wat...
Aeneas also went to fight in the Trojan War. He also was a national hero. He was a great warrior. Both Odysseus and Aeneas were trying to head home.
The “tragic hero” with Sophocles and Euripides has several elements that are in common, whereas the character is essentially good, usually has some relation to royalty, however they have some type of flaw or commit some act, going against their better judgment or character, causing something tragic to happen to them or by them. I will explain different examples of the tragic hero in Sophocles and Euripides characters, but Virgil’s characterization of Aeneas I would not say is not completely accurate in comparison to the previous representations of the tragic hero, however I would say that Virgil’s depiction of the tragic hero embodies many of the traits and happenings, however evolution has altered how and for what exact reasons Aeneas is not just like the other tragic heroes of the past. In Sophocles’ Antigone I believe a notable tragic hero is Creon. He is fundamentally good as he is determined to put his kingdom before his personal feelings, but he is also flawed and for Creon his flaw is hubris. What makes him a tragic hero is that though he is doing what he believes to be ri...
...umped the individual in Rome. A Greek soldier may have loyalty to his polis, but that was the only sustained state he had. There was no “Greece,” therefore outside of a few occasions, no centralized state to be loyal to. Even though the Iliad does portray a united Greek nation, the rift between Achilles and Agamemnon shows why they had trouble as a nation to unify. On the other hand the Aeneid shows that the father of the Romans, Aeneas, succeeded because he knew his duty. He did the things he did because he knew he would found a people that would eventually be the most powerful people on earth. It was not just the glory Aeneas won in battle in the poem that was important, but the glory of the people that would spring from him that was important. Personal glory is trumped by collective glory. That is the difference between the two people and the two poems.
Out of the two heroes Gilgamesh was the one who was most aggressive and pursued the more ambitious goal, though it was one near impossible to achieve. Gilgamesh wanted to have a power that only the gods possessed. He wanted to be immortal. Aeneas never sought such an unachievable task, and was not as determined as Gilgamesh was. Aeneas only had to find a place where the defeated Trojans could settle and found a new city. Once in the story he even had to be reminded of his destiny by the Jupiter when he was distracted by his love for Dido.
To begin, both the leadership qualities and flaws of Aeneas and Odysseus must be examined in order to determine who the better leader is. Virgil presents Aeneas very differently than Homer presents Odysseus. They are both certainly heroes, but Aeneas seems more accessible and a stronger leader, due to the way Virgil presents him. Virgil illustrated Aeneas as a man that had to participate in many tests and tempering’s, and from that, his heroism was seen as flawless. The same goes along with Homers’ Odysseus, yet in a different, more astounding way.
At first, I thought Aeneas was a person who was weak because he took the easy way out by getting involved romantically with Dido. However, as I stated before, he changed my perspective about him when he decided that his duty towards the gods was more important that his love to Dido. He showed determination and strength to be able to leave someone he loved just to please the gods. On the other hand, I saw Dido as a strong and powerful queen that had gone through a lot with the death of her husband and wasn’t going to show weakness. By falling in love with Aeneas, she demonstrated her vulnerability. The fact that she was looking for love rather than respecting the oath she made to her husband, changed my views on her. After she committed suicide, I thought she wasn’t proud with the person she had become because she broke her oath and endangered her people simply by falling in love with a guy she just
...rvival. However, Aeneas becomes the Virgilian leader, his concern is always for the people and they are the most important thing to him. The reason that the endings of the books are so dissimilar and the Aenied is far less satisfying than the Odyssey is a result of this point. Odysseus' accomplished aim can be viewed within his lifetime, and listened to within a short time. His short-term goal of going to bed with Penelope, and sorting out the situation in his country is all seen within the borders of the story. Aeneas' ending merely means that his journey is at an end but the rest of the story lies with his people. The emphasis is on the people he is leading and not what he individually has accomplished.
Aristotle argues that friendship is a vital part of life. It serves not only as a means to bond individuals together, but also a necessity in achieving overall happiness. Aristotle comments on the various types of friendships that exist, and the role they each play in society. He explains three overarching types; utility, pleasure, and complete friendship. Yet, with family, friendship is different than it is with companionship. As Aristotle states in his piece, Nicomachean Ethics on friendship in families, “they all seem to depend on paternal friendship” (Aristotle, 1161b18). In The Aeneid, Aeneas and Anchises’ relationship, perfectly embodies this. The father son bond does not distinctly resemble one of the three types, rather it is a friendship in of itself; a paternal friendship.
What is a hero? We would like to think that a hero is someone who has achieved some fantastic goal or status, or maybe someone who has accomplished a great task. Heroes find themselves in situations of great pressure and act with nobility and grace. Though the main character of Virgil's Aeneid, Aeneas, is such a person, it is not by his own doing. He encounters situations in which death is near, in which love, hate, peace, and war come together to cause both good and evil. In these positions he conducts himself with honor, by going along with what the gods want. Only then goes on to pave the way for the Roman Empire. His deeds, actions, and leadership would never have come to be if it were not for the gods. The gods took special interest in Aeneas, causing him misfortune in some cases, giving him assistance in others. On the whole, the gods constantly provide perfect opportunities for Aeneas to display his heroism. Without them, Aeneas would not be the hero he is. This gift does not come without a price, though; he must endure the things heroes endure to become what they are. Despite his accomplishments and the glory associated with his life, Aeneas only achieves the status of hero through divine intervention, and this god-given position causes him just as much grief as it does splendor.
Aeneas is often referred to as 'pious Aeneas', and this is also how even he...
When discussing the fate of Aeneas, a thought provoking question is posed that is commonly debated. If Aeneas is commanded by fate, does he have free will? It is important to approach this question with a solid understand of fate. There are two common sides to the debate of whether Aeneas had free will or not. One view believes Aeneas had no choice but to follow his destiny because he was commanded by fate, and prophesied to found the race that will one day build Rome. The other side states Aeneas did indeed have free will, and even though his fate was set, room is available within his fate for events to change. One can argue Aeneas makes some of his own choices, but no particular detail of his life is untouched. Destiny determines that the Trojans will found a city in Italy, but it does not stipulate how that will happen. This is where room is left for free will. After much research and considering the views of many commentators and the proof they showed, the answer can simply be found by going back to the text of The Aeneid.