Homer and Virgil: Bastions of Conservatism

Why Conservatives should oppose the plan to remove the Iliad and Aeneid from Mods?

Since the mid-19th Century Oxford has insisted that undergraduates read Homer and Virgil as part of Honour Moderations, the first part of the Classics course. Demanding as they are, especially for newcomers to the ancient languages, these authors have rightly been seen as the foundations of the classical traditions. But now this could be a thing of the past, thanks to plans reflecting the drive seen across academia towards dumbing-down, political correctness and a general moroseness towards Britain’s illustrious heritage.

Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit, or, “perhaps one day it will be a pleasure to remember even this,” is the long-awaited moment in Aeneid Book 1 when the melancholy hero, Aeneas, finally finds it within himself to be a leader and to make a rousing speech to inspire his men. He chooses no subject matter other than delayed gratification, the hope which inspires us towards work and discipline in a responsible and prudent society. Whilst Keynesians create artificial incentives to “spend, spend, spend” through precariously low interest rates, the Conservative doctrine is to work hard now and enjoy yourself later – a doctrine with which Virgil would be in firm agreement.

Virgil also believed strongly in co-operation. The industrious Tyrians build their grand, new city with a spirit of collaboration which Virgil likens to that of bees, pulling together as they strike out from the shadow of the despotic, overweening and authoritarian kingdoms of the east. This is the spirit with which we, under our patriotic Conservative government, can make good our own ambitions to forge a new civilisation from old dreams as we take our leave of our own high-handed overlords in Brussels. Perhaps, like Aeneas marvelling at the accomplishments of that strange and proud civilisation, others, seeing us, will say, o fortunati, quorum iam moenia surgunt, “blessed are ye whose walls are already rising!”.

Homer, too, should be inspiration to Conservatives, rather than the basis of chagrin. I believe that whereas the Aeneid embodies the values of the traditionalist, High Tory wing of the party championed by Disraeli, Churchill and Macmillan, the Iliad provides material for the individualistic, free-market side of our party, led into government by Peel, Canning and Thatcher. Both the 1980s and the 19th Century were known for being periods of great social change created by new economic opportunity, given the soubriquet, “get rich quick”. Nowhere is the emotive charge of material possessions greater, however, than in the Iliad. When, therefore, an overweening ruler steals the possessions of the hero Achilles, Achilles’ sentiment ἐκ χειρῶν γέρας εἵλετο καί μ᾽ ἀπάτησε, “he took the prize from my hands and tricked me,” is one echoed by many a Thatcherite or libertarian in relation to their experience of excessive taxation.

The Thatcher quotation which the Iliad brings so much to mind is not quite as apophthegmatic as it is often quoted. “There is no such thing as society; there are individual men and women, and there are families”. And that civil, Conservative rounding off of the famous line (a context which Thatcher herself was so indignant to see sundered from her immortal words) represents a temperament of rugged individualism to be found also in the Iliad. There, familial relations are a spur to action: such is the importance which the Trojan hero Deiphobus gives to the Aeneas’ relation to a fallen Trojan warrior, when the war tragically takes a turn for the worse for Ilium, γαμβρῷ ἀμυνέμεναι, εἴ πέρ τί σε κῆδος ἱκάνει, “fight for your brother-in-law, if grief for him touches you at all”. In conclusion: hard work and patriotic ambition, individualism and family values - in what other works will a true Conservative find such material for a university education?

Ben Goodrick (Whip) is a 1st year reading Classics at Trinity College