This chapter develops the connection between the Aeneid and the imperial projects of the 15th and 16th centuries. It was easy for the colonizers to cast themselves in the role of Aeneas and the conquering Trojans, and this approach accorded well with the demands of the schools, which tended then, as now, to eschew moral complexity. But then as now, again, more mature readers in different environments were able to see that Virgil presented both what is lost as well as what is gained in conquest, so that as early as Bartolomé de Las Casas, some Europeans were able, like Virgil, to see imperialism from the other side. Some of them, like Alonso de Ercilla and Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, are still known to specialists and to educated people in their own countries; and others, like William Shakespeare, are known wherever Western culture has penetrated. All of them, however, turned the model text of the colonizers against them, focusing on the ‘other voices’ in the Aeneid in a series of protests that became more insistent as the Virgilian imitations moved from epic to drama to lyric. This line of argument suggests, in turn, that Virgil's place in the ideology of the Ancien Régime is also more complicated than traditional historiography suggests.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.