Nola Walston
For a book to be as influential and widely read as Harry Potter, there must be universal themes that it includes, such as love, death, and the relationship between good and evil to name some. Many of these can be traced back from Harry Potter to antiquity. Vergil’s Aeneid was one of the most popular and widely read children’s novels in Ancient Rome and used to teach children their role in the world and skills to be an adult (Lerer, 28). Harry Potter, though less directly a part of curriculum, does something similar, where due to its popularity it has great influence in how children should learn and be in the world. Panoussi says, “Scholars are in general agreement that the series [Harry Potter] constitutes a modern epic, displaying all the major characteristics of a hero’s quest that champions good against evil” and many have compared the two works, The Aeneid and Harry Potter, as they have such rich connections (Panoussi, 42). This makes reading both works important for children of either time as they reflect and teach us about our society. While J. K. Rowling, the author of Harry Potter, has come to deep criticism recently for personal views, for this essay we must look at the text separately, as its own entity. Just as Vergil’s personal life doesn’t play into our interpretation of his works, so can we analyze Harry Potter apart from its author.
One of the biggest similarities between the two works is their categorization of good and evil traits. In Harry Potter we clearly have the labels of “Gryffindor” and “Slytherin” as, in the plainest words, the good and bad Hogwarts school houses respectively. However, we also see this contrast between the Trojans in the Aeneid and their historical rivals, the Cartheginians. The two good/evil systems in each text hold very similar traits and narrative spots, while they also have a deeper layer of comparison, showing that there is nuance and complexity in most humans, good or evil.
Right from the start, we can see that both Gryffindors and Trojans are aligned as the good guys. They form the group that the protagonist is a part of, and both groups value family, bravery, chivalry and peace. The stories follow Harry and Aeneas, pitting them against their enemies. In Harry Potter this is more direct, with specific rivals such as Draco Malfoy from Slytherin, but in the Aeneid it is more a reflection of history and the great tragedy of the Punic Wars. Aeneas’ many fights in Italy later establish his role as the hero as well, and we can see that both protagonists win their battles in the end. Broadly, just as Harry and the Gryffindors behind him are fighting to save the world, the Slytherins are there to stop, challenge, or antagonize him, thus solidifying his values along the way. On the other side, Aeneas and his Trojans are striving for a new safe world for themselves, and must push past obstacles such as landfall in Carthage and many Italian battles.
True Gryffindors, according to the Sorting Hat—who sorts the new students into their houses at Hogwarts—are “brave at heart,” with “daring, nerve, and chivalry” (Rowling, Sorcerer’s, 118). There are many clear examples of characters upholding these qualities. First, Harry’s acceptance of death requires immense courage. At the end of the series, he takes a final walk down to the forest where Voldemort (his mortal enemy) is waiting; he is constantly tempted to turn back, and yet pushes on, even if it means his own death (Rowling, Deathly, 696). This brave, self sacrificial love is a theme throughout the series, also seen with Harry’s friends. He puts the whole world in danger just because he believes his godfather Sirius is being held captive by Voldemort in the Order of the Phoenix. This dedication to friends and family is a hallmark of Gryffindor and is clearly lacking in the Slytherin mentality. One of the most direct ways to see Gryffindor traits proven is based on when the Sword of Gryffindor presents itself to a “worthy” wielder. When Neville, another of Harry’s friends, draws the sword out of the Sorting Hat in the final battle, he has just defied Voldemort’s direct orders of silence and obedience by running forward in front of the ranks of Death Eaters and talking back to him (Rowling, Deathly, 731). The sword presents itself to him which proves Neville is a true Gryffindor because of his bravery.
The Trojans portray similar values in their quest for a new land in the Aeneid. In the Underworld, Aeneas’ father Anchises asks “Does fear keep us from our home in Italy?” (Bartsch, 6.807-808). Reflecting back to this at the end, after they have found and fought and overcome their fear for a home in Italy, we can see their bravery. Later in that scene Anchises also describes what it is to be a Roman (or Trojan): “to rule the world with law, impose your ways on peace, grant the conquered clemency, and crush the proud in war” (Bartsch, 6.851-853). In something closer to the Sorting Hat’s terms: Romans are just, chivalrous, and brave. Aeneas must be a strong and steadfast leader for his men, which holds a sort of honor, courage and selflessness, especially if he is hurting and doubtful on the inside, like in the storm at the beginning (Bartsch, 1.198-209). He is very dedicated to his family, as Harry is to his friends, pushing on to Italy so that his son may have a future. Aeneas is also constantly described as “pious” throughout the story and this expectation of virtue maps on to Gryffindor morals and chivalry as well. Overall, we can see the similarities between the good guys in both of these influential works and the similar values they uphold.
On the other hand, in order to be seen as good guys, Gryffindors and Trojans must have something to be defined against. In Harry Potter, this group takes the form of the rival house of Slytherin, and in the Aeneid the first dichotomy between two groups is in contrast to the Carthaginians, who are backed by Juno, a major antagonist. Both Trojans and Roman readers define themselves against the “other” (Carthaginians) to form their own identity (Syed, 137). This identity can be specifically ethnic, purely based on where you are from and what group you are a part of. In Harry Potter, characters come in with a clean slate and get placed in a group, which adds a little more agency, but still fosters the definition of self against the “other.” Hagrid, Harry’s friend and teacher, says, “There’s not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn’t in Slytherin” (Rowling, Sorcerer’s, 80). Therefore, when Harry chooses Gryffindor over Slytherin, he is already defining himself against them, and showing the readers what the “right” or good group is.
Just like with Gryffindor, the Sorting Hat proclaims some major defining traits of Slytherin, many of which have more easily negative connotations. “Power-hungry Slytherin loved those of great ambition,” and “Those cunning folk use any means to achieve their ends” define the ideals of the house (Rowling, Goblet, 177, Sorcerer’s, 118). We can see these traits displayed and furthered by many core Slytherin characters. Draco Malfoy is immediately defined in contrast with Harry and they stay “arch enemies” throughout the series. In their scheduled duel in the first book, Draco sets up Harry and tattles to Filch to try and doublecross him to get him into trouble, branding him as untrustworthy, cowardly and scheming (Rowling, Sorcerer’s, 157). In the sixth book, he is cowardly and cunning in his attempts to murder Dumbledore. Later too he aligns himself with the Death Eaters (Voldemort’s supporters) who uphold notions of exclusivity and oppression (Imady). Voldemort, a Slytherin, shows these traits too, being cunning in his immortality plans, ruthless in murder, and merciless to anyone around him. He is one of the most selfish characters of the series, willing to kill anyone for his own immortality and beliefs. He is the ultimate “bad” and he is associated directly with Slytherin, being not only the founder’s heir but also following in his footsteps in eradicating Muggleborns (wizards who don’t come from a magical family).
In the Aeneid, there are similar traits that are villainized or at least defined against the Trojans. Some earlier Phoenecian stereotypes stuck around to Vergil’s time that were influenced by their role as merchants and seafarers, and got associated with the Carthaginians. Traits like “grubbing after profit, acquisitiveness, and cunning” shows the craftiness that they could be prone to and could be easily amplified by Roman literature, especially with the aftermath of the violent Punic Wars hanging over Vergil (Gruen, 5). In Roman times “punica fides, cunning and cruelty” were “hallmarks of the Punic character” (Syed, 145). Here “Punic” and “Carthaginian” are synonymous. Punica fides refers to the idea of breaking your word, or generally not being trustworthy, which many Slytherin characters would choose if it served their ambition. Dido, one of the only named characters in Carthage, is an example of the negative insinuations, or at least the wily side. She is ambitious, and was able to found her own city with some cunning plans to gain land by tricking her neighboring king (Bartsch, 1.368). While discussing and deciding to enter into a relationship with Aeneas, Dido and her sister Anna both display these subtle traits of Cartheginians, portraying punica fides and cunningness respectively (Syed, 163). Dido also portrays some unpleasantness when Aeneas betrays her and delivers a lengthy and brutal curse of warfare on him and all his descendants (Bartsch, 4.622-629). In Vergil’s time, “Carthaginian behavior evidently constituted a benchmark for condemnation” (Gruen, 12). This is the same with Slytherin, where they are seen as the baseline for condemnation, with many similar traits in play in both works.
This is a very black and white reading, with no deviation between heroes and villains. Though Syed claims there are more negative stereotypes of Carthaginians in the Aeneid, according to Gruen, Phoenecians are actually portrayed much more complexly and positively. There still are negative associations, such as how deceptions “may have more to do with Phoenicians as men of commerce than as exemplars of an ethnic character. And the noble lie, in any case, possesses a mixed, not a strictly negative, connotation” (Gruen, 5). This quote is saying that it’s less about a group, and that the Carthaginians may not have been as vilified as we would initially believe.
Take Dido; whereas earlier we saw her cunning and ambition, which aligned with Slytherin and Phoenician/Cartheginian stereotypes, now we can look at her positive portrayal, especially as she is one of the most likable, “compelling,” and “admirable” characters from this epic (Gruen, 13). She welcomes and honors her guests, despite not being known for hospitality (Bartsch, 1.735). One could question how much Zeus’ will influenced her, but Dido wasn’t hard to convince (Bartsch, 1.297-304). While we do see Dido’s curse and her broken vow later, there is a much more nuanced view of the Carthaginians and their Queen than just of untrustworthy tricksters or outright villains.
While there is more emphasis on Slytherin traits if one is a part of that house, the same complexity can be seen in Harry Potter. The clearest example, just as with Dido, is Snape, one of the professors. A truly conflicted and morally gray character, he possesses many Slytherin characteristics—cunning, intelligence, untrustworthiness—but Harry also realizes that for all Snape has done he is “the bravest man” he knew (Rowling, Deathly, 758). This juxtaposition aligns with another Slytherin who exhibits “good” characteristics: Regulus Black. Though in his betrayal of Voldemort he is exhibiting punica fides and breaking his word, later, as he tries to get Voldemort’s locket, he is extremely brave and self sacrificial, taking the fall so Kreacher, his house-elf servant, can live (Rowling, Deathly, 195-196). Peter Petigrew shows the opposite side, that even though he is in Gryffindor, he comes off as cowardly, and portrays many more Slytherin traits, particularly betraying his friends and following Voldemort.
Drawing attention to the fact that there are many earlier stories with positive portrayals of Cartheginians—for example, one where a trade goes off well on both sides and is performed in the exact “reverse of punica fides”—we can compare them to similar inconsistencies in Harry Potter (Gruen, 3). Dumbledore seems to come to a similar conclusion as Harry, when he comments to Snape that perhaps Hogwarts sorts students into houses too soon, in reference to Snape’s bravery (Rowling, Deathly, 680).
Another interesting subversion of these categories is that both Harry and Aeneas display un-protagonist characteristics. When Aeneas kills his rival, Turnus, he doesn’t follow his father’s advice of granting the conquered clemency (Bartsch, 12.940-952). Aeneas also falls victim to punica fides as he betrays Dido for his destiny. Harry, on the other hand, is almost sorted into Slytherin because of a “thirst to prove” himself, “and Slytherin will help [him] on the way to greatness” (Rowling, Sorcerer’s, 121). These show that neither is a flat character, but they are capable of taking on these “bad” traits and moving beyond stereotypes; therefore, it is more powerful when they ultimately hold true to their virtues.
These two works are very similarly structured and deal with ideas of what traits or actions are considered good or bad, as well as how they appear in each respective society. For the Roman audience, this was punica fides and other Cartheginian stereotypes versus Roman bravery and leadership; for Harry Potter’s audience today, the same traits of bravery and chivalry are honored and the same cunning traits are condemned. However, both works subvert expectations and go deeper into the duplexity of human nature, teaching children how to make their own judgements about people, irrespective of their associated group. With the clear popularity of both works, we can see not only the inherited values and structure of virtue but also the lesson of looking beyond the assumptions and stereotypes, encouraging young readers to think for themselves. Reading these two classics together can add deeper layers of meaning and understanding. In these ways, Harry Potter could indeed be considered the Aeneid of today.
Works Cited
Bartsch, Shadi, translator. Vergil: The Aeneid. New York, Random House, 2021.
Gruen, Eric S. “Punica Fides.” Rethinking the Other in Antiquity. Princeton University Press, 2010.
Imady, Nusaiba. “Slytherin Safety: The Rhetoric of Antiassimilation in the Wizarding World.” In Open at the Close: Literary Essays on Harry Potter, edited by Cecilia Konchar Farr, 201-211. Jackson, University Press of Mississippi, 2022.
Lerer, Seth. Children’s Literature: A Reader’s History, from Aesop to Harry Potter. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2008.
Panoussi, Vassiliki. “Harry’s Underworld Journey: Reading Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows through Vergil’s Aeneid.” The Lion and the Unicorn 43, no. 1 (January), 2019, 42–68.
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. New York, Scholastic, 1997.
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. New York, Scholastic, 2000.
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. New York, Scholastic, 2003.
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. New York, Scholastic, 2007.
Syed, Yasmin. 2005. Vergil’s Aeneid and the Roman Self: Subject and Nation in Literary Discourse. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
