Latin Essay #4 and [Hopefully] Final

If anybody has any editing remarks or suggestions feel free to comment.

In his poetry Virgil writes using predominantly concepts that are immediately obvious physically as opposed to abstract concepts. He does this in two ways; the first of which is the way that he describes an idea by using concrete terms, representing a physical scenario for an abstract idea. He also very often replaces an abstract with a personification, as did most Romans. The second way in which Virgil writes in concretes is fundamental to the Latin vocabulary. The literal meanings of these words confuse the modern English reader, until one imagines the physical description of the word. Only then can an abstract meaning be discovered.

Virgil will take an abstract idea, a concept that generally involves a complex interaction, and instead of outright naming it he describes it circuitously. He lays out a scene in which the emotion, ideal, principle, etcetera is implied but never explicitly stated. By laying out this concrete he makes the idea immediately, perceptually, obvious without leaving it to the reader to explicitly understand the abstract concepts involved. As in the beginning of his Ecloga I, lines seven through ten, Tityrus says, “illius aram saepe tener nostris ab ovilibus imbuet agnus. ille meas errare boves, ut cernis, et ipsum ludere quae vellem calamo permisit agresti”. He doesn't name sacrifice claiming it is unfortunate. Instead, he conjures the pitiful image of a tener agnus nostris ab ovilibus, and note that the poor little lamb isn't “sacrificed” as such; he very physically wets/dampens the altar. Virgil doesn't say that this sad scene is nonetheless necessary, he makes no moral arguments. He simply points out that it is illius aram, for that god's altar; and as every good Roman was aware, fealty to the gods is of the utmost importance. Similarly, he doesn't state that by offering such fealty Tityrus is now well-off. He doesn't use a complex term like “well-off”, which demands a prerequisite understanding of what constitutes being well and whole definition of morality. He evokes an example saying that Tityrus's chattel are able to roam and that he is free to play what he wishes. This visual scene of wellness is then attributed to illius, which reinforces the idea of a necessity to the sacrifice but does so through images instead of philosophical arguments.

Another good example of Virgil's veracity for using sensory description instead of abstract terminology is when he discusses the habits of bees in the Georgicon four, lines 198 to 199. He describes the bees mating habits, “nec corpora segens in Venerem soluvunt”. Whereas we might say bees don't “make love” with all its underlying meaning and nuances, Virgil hits straight for a most sensual description of the act of making love. Also notice that he doesn't say “love” because love is a highly involved emotion it isn't obvious enough. He refers, instead, to Venus, a shining epitome of love, which everyone can readily recognize and understand.

This demonstrates an interesting characteristic in Roman literature for using gods as the ultimate physical example of what they represent and care for. So that Mars, for example, isn't just some superhuman who delights in massacre and is in charge of ensuring its continuance. He is destruction as his very essence, and destruction is Mars. In this odd way Romans encapsulate an unwieldy idea, or group of ideas, into a single physical entity so that they can hold the whole of it in their minds at once, without necessarily using abstract terminology. The most pronounced instance of this that I recall is in the first Georgicon line 297. Virgil writes, “at rubicunda Ceres medio succiditur aestu”. First of all when he means to say that the period of summer has ended and the winter season begun he says that summer has literally been cut down, destroyed, almost at the hands of winter. As though the two seasons were in actuality fighting for dominance and winter happened to win out. Next he uses the image of the literal harvest being too long in the sun in place of the concept of the end of summer.

The next method I've identified in which Virgil makes a perceptual experience out of his poetry is by the Latin language itself. He uses verbs which by their very meaning denote a concrete, tactile, portrayal of a concept. Take the verb tendere for instance, it literally means to stretch out, to extend or reach. Yet in book five of the Aeneid line twenty-seven he uses it to convey an abstract idea, saying, “frustra cerno te tendere contra”. In this situation Virgil conveys a spiritual straining, a force of effort, by saying that the helmsman is stretching or reaching out against some obstacle, namely the sea.

Latin also evokes a perceptual understanding of certain actions by modifying a direct verb with what would be a preposition in English to denote a more abstract form of that same basic action. For example, perfacere in Virgil's text, “en, perfecta tibi bello discordia tristi” from the seventh book, line 545, of the Aeneid. The simple root of this verb is facere [to do or make] but by modifying it with per- [through] we get to do through, or to do/make in succession. In English this would means something like to accomplish. Now, it takes a special effort in English to fully understand “to accomplish”. You must recognize that it is referring to goals and that goals may not be done in one action, one can't physically do it. It takes a coordinated series of actions to accomplish. This is exactly what the Latin is laying out in very concrete terminology for the reader, it is literally saying that a goal has been done through.

Finally, Latin can use verbs to stand for more highly abstract phrases simply by convention. This is seen by the common use of adeo in Virgil. I found three examples simply by scanning a few selections in the Georgics [1.287, 3.242, and 4.197]. Adeo literally means I come, a simple concrete action easily done and immediately understood by readers. But when used at the beginning of a verbal demonstration it signifies the introduction of an argument. The speaker has physically come to a point. Even though Latin has a specific term for “thus”, Virgil [and indeed, many other Latin authors] use the more concrete “adeo” instead.

Virgil is purposefully putting his work on the most perceptual level possible, making every situation and idea a sensory experience for the reader. He does so by employing concretes to replace abstract ideas. First, by using physical scenarios to describe a highly complex concept. And, next, by replacing actual concepts with godly personification. Though such metaphorical inversions are common in poetry, Virgil exclusively creates a concrete from an abstract, not the other way around. Virgil also writes concretely by using perceptual verb constructions in his Latin. Now, to say whether Virgil creates this sensory experience out of personal inclination or from a rampant worldview among classical Romans would require a more holistic account of the Latin language.