Book VI Reflection

The army in Book VI, still remains completely obedient under all circumstances, but there seems to be a change within them. They seem stronger and more passionate than they were in the very beginning, which is most likely because of their position in the way. They still, however, flee when they are outnumbered or at a disadvantage in battle. They do not fight until the death, as they seem to value their lives more than their honor to their country. This is understandable, because it makes much more sense than sacrificing yourself when you know your death will not mean anything. The Romans still, in both situations win a battle afterwards that somewhat makes up for their defeats. When they have calvary on their side, they fight well, but without it they are utterly helpless.
Caesar in this book still holds up his image of a wonderful leader, but I now think I see his flaw. He trusts very easily and wants to settle things peacefully as often as he can. I don't necessarily know if this is considered a flaw, as it is probably pretty wise, but often, he sees people turn on him due to his trust in them. Next, I'm a little confused by Caesar's character as I'm not sure if he's in it for the glory of battle, protecting Rome, or the property and wealth he gains from triumph. Maybe he looked to present himself this way? Aloof and mysterious, but still very commanding. I've also noticed that Caesar's character seems a little different in this book than book I, because he seems much more ready and eager for battle than he did then, but then again he does stop to give the whole history spiel. Maybe it's a steady progressions throughout all of the books that I've just missed. Furthermore, he's taking prisoners and hostages much more readily and demanding than he was before, and I'm not quite sure why that is.
There are no significant speeches in this book; however, there are a couple little ones. For example, the one given by Labienus, about readying for battle. It seems that when there are more speeches in a chapter, there is less action, and vice versa. There is little need for words in war, other than commands and preparing for battle, so in reflection, this topic was probably not the smartest idea. I'm not really feeling it anymore anyway, as I'm much more interested in the other two, but maybe I'll find a really great speech in Book VII and be drawn back to it.

Book I Reflection

I'm not getting the totally ruthless impression of the Roman army that I was given in the introduction; however, I can see that they are wonderful fighters and are incredibly loyal to their leader. Their advantage seems to be in battle strategy, but up until now they lack a real passion for the fight. This is most obvious when the Roman men hear rumors about the German troops and how intense they are, and many look for excuses to leave or ways to avoid the fight. Caesar's words, nevertheless, rally them, and they seem ready to fight once again. Another observation I've made about the army is that they are very good at taking orders. They listen to and do what they are told in every circumstance, and this seems to benefit them. They have two pretty big victories in this book, and a few small defeats, but nothing of extreme significance (like a turning point in the war) has occurred quite yet.
Caesar is a very inspiring character up to this point. I've noticed that he seems to look to resolve things by negotiation rather than war most of the time. This makes him look very wise, but it also makes me question whether this is completely truthful. He looks for the peaceful way out, and only when he cannot find it, does he start to strategically plan for war. Another observation I've made about Caesar is that none of the other leaders we have encountered have matched him in strategy, wisdom, or leadership skill itself. Some are weak, some are cruel, and some are presented as evil, although not necessarily bad leaders. This could be a subtle way of making him look better, as if no other leader rules quite as well, he looks much better than them. Another thing I've noticed about Caesar is that he has a very steady head and is not influenced by the enemy trying to provoke him. This, along with the fact that he is a wonderful supporter and rallyer (I know I just made that word up), is a very important leadership skill. He hasn't demonstrated any major flaws yet, and it makes him seem almost too good to be true.
I think the major speech in this book is the one that Caesar himself makes, so I'm going to focus on that one. (For my project, I think the best approach might be to chose a speech from each book and analyze each one individually and then together). It's a really inspiring speech, and demonstrates his leadership and orator abilities quite well. I'm sure he cannot remember the exact words he said to his troops, nor their exact reaction; however, this speech seems pretty reliable to me after all I've heard about his public speaking ability. Turning a crowd around like that is a pretty amazing ordeal, and making them ready for battle, when only moments ago, they were terrified, and it makes me want to analyze the speech more in depth.

Introduction Reflection

I'm not a fan of introductions. Never have been, never will be, and this one was no different. I have, nevertheless, found some topics that I might be interested in researching. The first is the Roman Army and the justifications of their actions, the second is fact vs. propaganda within Caesar's writing, and the third is major speeches that main characters make, as Caesar was an excellent orator, and it will be interesting to see how he writes these speeches within his own work.
My first topic, I chose because after reading about it on page XX of the introduction, I found the Roman army particularly intriguing. They are described as an organized, ruthless killing machine, and I've always found this idea interesting. I'd be interested to examine how they justify their aggression and how their morals are shaped because of what they do in war. In the process, I would examine the army as a whole, as individuals, and also look at the leadership, so I could get a full understanding of how and why they are the way they are. Furthermore, I would look at their actions and how they feel about what they do, and also why they do it. Lastly, I would figure out in what ways the army reflects and shapes Caesar himself, and vice versa.
My second topic, I found in the section titled Caesar's Writings. Caesar is writing his own success story here, and the idea that some of the information might be made up or exaggerated must be considered. If I chose this topic, I could look at the reasons that Caesar writes in third person instead of first. He was there, so why not narrate yourself? Also, I would find some places where fact and fiction might overlap, or the truth is not totally clear. Then, I could look at how writing in first person, and boasting within the book could effect the reading of the book itself and change the reader's perspective (as opposed to it being written the other way).
My last topic came to me on page XXIV of the introduction where the author mentions that many famous writers in that time would compose dramatic speeches for main characters in important times. This idea caught me because I had known that Caesar was an orator, and it might be interesting to see how the speeches he writes within his book compare to those he wrote for himself. Also, to see what public speaking techniques he commonly uses and to find any flaws or weak moments within these speeches. I could look at their significance to the writing and how they characterize the orator, and also how and if they influence any other characters.
Overall, I think these are a good three topics to work with, where I can find a lot to say and write about all of them. I'm not quite as excited for this project as I was for the Aeneid one, but maybe with time, I'll get there.

Reflection on lines 295-332

In these lines, we are in the Underworld. Aeneas sees the River Styx and Charon, the being who takes the souls across the river. the oracle tells Aeneas the function of the river, but also, the reason so many souls remain on the wrong side.
Vocab:
- caeno
- squalore
- umeris
- iuvenis
- gurgite
- invicti
- solio
- erebi
- iniquam
Grammar:
- caeno - abl. of specification
- vastaque voragine - abl. of specification or description
- terribili squalore - abl. of specification or description
- cui - dative of referece
- mento - abl. of place where
-nodo - abl. of means or manner
- 309-312 - a double simile
- cursum - acc. with transition
- 315- anaphora and asyndeton
329 - anastrophe

Reflection on lines 675-705

In these lines, Anna is saying her last words to her dying sister. She's completely heartbroken that her sister has abandoned her and the city. Juno pities Dido and her horrific death, and sends Iris down to cut Dido lose from her mortal body to send her to the underworld.
Vocab:
- araeque
- comitemne
- struxi
- siccabat
- halitus
- obitus
- vertice
- damnaverat
- isto
Grammar:
- vocavisses, tulisset - optative subjunctives
- te posita - abl. abs.
- ut abluam - purpose clause
- cubito - abl. of means
- reperta luce - abl. abs.- illi - dat. of reference
- adverso sole - abl. abs

Reflection on lines 345-361 and 659-674

In the first part of these lines, Aeneas is finishing the last part of his speech to Dido. Although he is trying to defend himself, his words are hurtful and unreassuring to Dido. He makes it clear that he is leaving and does not show any sign of distress or anger at the situation, except towards her complaining.

In the second part of these lines, Dido makes her last speech before she kills herself. Rumour makes her way through the city, telling the broken-hearted citizens of the tragedy. Then, Anna runs through the city, trying to get to her dying sister.

Vocab:
-  capessere
- arces
- detinet
- quaerere
- iniuria
- cari
- sparsasque
- moriamur
- conlapsam
Grammar:
-patris Anchisae - genitive with imago
- pitis cari - objective genitive
- regno, arvis - abl. of separation
- Hauriat, ferat - jessive or volitive sub.
- ferro - abl. or means or place where
- femineo ulutatu - hiatus

Precis for "Virgils, from Dante to Milton"

          Colin Burrow, in his article "Virgils, from Dante to Milton" states that Virgil's ideas and words are embedded in some of the greatest literary works of all time. He says that over time, many of Virgil's ideas have been read the same way and used for it as well. Burrow explicitly states Dante and Milton as two authors who really took Virgil's work and expanded it to make it their own. He looks to target mainly an audience who has read either Virgil's works (specifically the Aeneid), Dante's works, or Milton's works (specifically Paradise Lost), because this is the group of people that would get the most out of this article.
          I thought this article, although interesting, was very dense. I had a really hard time getting through it and understanding it to the fullest. It makes me want to read both Dante and Milton's writing, because I feel like I could get so much more out of them after reading both the Aeneid and Burrow's article. This was a rough article to end my Virgil précis assignment with, especially because it did not really pertain to what I'm researching in the epic; however, it did open up new doors and introduce me to new texts that I might like after enjoying the Aeneid.