Which scholar argues that the gods manipulate mortals, leaving women powerless and Turnus hopeless?

Which scholar argues that the gods manipulate mortals, leaving women powerless and Turnus hopeless?

• A. Isabel Paintin
• B. Galinsky
• C. Richard Rutherford
• D. Bob Cowan

Answer: (C)

The main idea here is how divine power shapes human action in the Aeneid, and what that means for characters who are not gods. Richard Rutherford’s view is that the gods direct mortals in ways that limit real human agency, so outcomes feel preordained rather than earned by effort. When he reads the epic this way, women often come across as instruments within the gods’ plans rather than agents with their own independent power—Dido’s fate, for example, seems to be steered by Venus and the broader divine agenda rather than by Dido’s own choices. At the same time, Turnus appears to be set on a path toward defeat because the gods have a larger destiny in mind for Rome, leaving him with little real leverage against that cosmic plan. This perspective helps explain why the narrative can come off as portraying a world where mortals are pawns in a divine scheme, which in turn underscores why women seem powerless and why Turnus’s prospects look hopeless. Other scholars might focus on different aspects—mythic fate, political ideology, or stylistic devices—but Rutherford specifically links divine manipulation to the limited agency of these characters, making his interpretation the best fit for that question.

The main idea here is how divine power shapes human action in the Aeneid, and what that means for characters who are not gods. Richard Rutherford’s view is that the gods direct mortals in ways that limit real human agency, so outcomes feel preordained rather than earned by effort. When he reads the epic this way, women often come across as instruments within the gods’ plans rather than agents with their own independent power—Dido’s fate, for example, seems to be steered by Venus and the broader divine agenda rather than by Dido’s own choices. At the same time, Turnus appears to be set on a path toward defeat because the gods have a larger destiny in mind for Rome, leaving him with little real leverage against that cosmic plan.

This perspective helps explain why the narrative can come off as portraying a world where mortals are pawns in a divine scheme, which in turn underscores why women seem powerless and why Turnus’s prospects look hopeless. Other scholars might focus on different aspects—mythic fate, political ideology, or stylistic devices—but Rutherford specifically links divine manipulation to the limited agency of these characters, making his interpretation the best fit for that question.