The Aeneid A Kind Of Propaganda, Cicero s Second Philippic

Relying on hostile evidence to recreate Marcus Antonius’ life from his youth until the Battle of Actium entrains several issues. This essay will discuss Virgil’s Latin epic ‘The Aeneid’, a kind of propaganda, Cicero’s ‘Second Philippic’ a piece written with personal and political intentions in mind, and Plutarch’s Rome in Crisis regarding Antony. One must treat these sources with caution, not least because of the inherent bias present in their writing. It is necessary to take into account the context, type of source and how the author has shaped material for their own personal or political gain. Limitations. Virgil shapes material for his own literary and historical purposes, therefore bias is present. ‘The Aeneid’ is in part acknowledges Augustus as being key to the ‘Golden Age’ after Caesar s assassination (2).The 19 year old grand-nephew/adopted son was Caesar s heir and eventually he defeated Cleo and Antony at Actium in 31 bc (3). In this Euphoria Virgil took to writing patriotic poems such as ‘The Aeneid’ (4). After a century of civil war, Augustus’ victory promises a return of order, prosperity and peace to Rome. Augustus ignored Virgil’s instruction to burn The Aeneid after his death in 19 BC. This indicates that Virgil wrote in favour of his patron, ruler of Rome and is hostile towards Antony due to this (5). Therefore, Augustus is a ‘bringer of peace’, consequently Mark Antony is associated with the violence of civil war. Virgil’s ‘Aeneid’ praises Augustus