Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T00:01:53.318Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

EMENDATIONS IN COLUMELLA, DE RE RVSTICA BOOK 10

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2022

Boris Kayachev*
Affiliation:
Wolfson College, Oxford

Abstract

Columella's poem on horticulture, which forms Book 10 of his prose treatise De re rustica, has predominantly been edited by experts in agricultural writings rather than in Latin poetry, leaving many textual problems unsolved or even unrecognized. This article discusses a number of passages and proposes some thirty emendations.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I should like to thank CQ's editor Bruce Gibson and the anonymous reviewer for their valuable comments and suggestions.

References

1 Rodgers, R.H., L. Iuni Moderati Columellae Res rustica (Oxford, 2010)Google Scholar. See especially the review by D. Butterfield, Gnomon 85 (2013), 561–4, concluding: ‘Never have both the Res rusticae and the Liber de arboribus enjoyed so provocative and imaginative an editor nor been presented in such elegant form; once the dust has settled, and the pendulum inevitably swung back from such a radical edition, it is indubitable that the scholar-farmer of Gades will owe a formidable debt to this scholar-farmer of Vermont.’ Cf. also the review by Stackelberg, K.T. von, ‘Columella’, CR 62 (2012), 513–14Google Scholar.

2 Cf. N. Horsfall, review of F. Boldrer, L. Iuni Moderati Columellae rei rusticae liber decimus (Pisa, 1996), RFIC 126 (1998), 320–6, at 321: ‘Apart from a few suggestions made by Housman to Postgate, Col.'s poem has never received the serious attention of a good textual critic.’ Note also that Rodgers ignores some attractive conjectures by earlier scholars, for instance the proposals by Courtney, E., ‘Notes on the minor Latin poets’, Mnemosyne 39 (1986), 401–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 402–3 to read spinis minitantibus for spinisque minantibus [R: imitantibus SA] at line 240, or et for sed at line 361, which at the very least should appear in the apparatus criticus.

3 Here and below, I take Rodgers's text as my starting point. I have also taken into account the following editions and commentaries (even if I may not always cite them individually): V. Lundström, L. Iuni Moderati Columellae Rei rusticae liber decimus (Uppsala, 1942); E.S. Foster and E.H. Heffner, Lucius Junius Moderatus Columella, On Agriculture X–XII; On Trees (Cambridge, MA, 1955); E. de Saint-Denis, Columelle: De l'agriculture, livre X (Paris, 1969); W. Richter, Lucius Iunius Moderatus Columella, zwölf Bücher über Landwirtschaft; Buch eines Unbekannten über Baumzüchtung, vol. 2 (Munich, 1982); Boldrer (n. 2); D.J. White, ‘Columella Res rustica 10: a study and commentary’ (Diss., University of Florida, 2013).

4 Rodgers's punctuation may seem to presuppose this interpretation.

5 To illustrate the point, in no way exhaustively, we may consider other instances of atque in line-initial position in the tenth book of Columella's De re rustica: at line 2 atque joins two direct objects of the same verb, at line 211 two subjects; at line 55 atque links two consecutive instructions (expectetur [52] and ne parcite [58]); at lines 123, 312 and 371, atque connects two coordinate clauses.

6 An easy alternative would be haec (→ etatque).

7 See e.g. J.G. Schneider, Scriptorum rei rusticae veterum latinorum, vol. 2 (Leipzig, 1794), 474 (I have been unable to identify the original place of publication). Cf. OLD s.v. umidus 1: ‘(of ground, etc.) Wet, moist’; note that Columella uses this adjective several times to describe the appropriate kind of soil, in terms reminiscent of the present passage (e.g. itaque pinguissimum locum et modice umidum poscit, 2.10.17; loco modice umido, non uliginoso, 3.6.3; pingui solo et modice umido, 5.6.6).

8 OLD s.v. uuidus: ‘Wet, soaked, dripping’. The adjective only occurs once elsewhere in Columella, in reference to climate (ubi caeli status uuidus uentosusque est, 7.3.3; I wonder if we should not read pluuius: cf. ubi aeli status neque praegelidus neque nimium pluuius est, 5.6.20).

9 See Boldrer (n. 2), 137.

10 For the idea, cf. Hor. Epod. 2.17–18 cum decorum mitibus pomis caput | Autumnus agris extulit (no doubt a model behind our passage), Prop. 4.2.17 insitor hic soluit pomosa uota corona.

11 For quassare used in reference to a wreath, cf. especially Lucr. 4.587 pinea semiferi capitis uelamina quassans and Verg. Ecl. 10.25 florentis ferulas et grandia lilia quassans; note, however, that the verb is unparalleled with tempora (though it is frequent with caput), and that the gesture appears to imply a negative emotion (see OLD s.v. quasso 1b), a connotation that would be unwelcome in the present passage.

12 Note that at line 257 the correct reading cingi only survives (or is restored?) in the recentiores (R), whereas the medieval manuscripts (SA) read the nonsensical piumgi (corrected to pingi by the second hand in MS S); this may lend support to the case for the corruption of cingens to quassans at line 43. For the idiom, which is very common, cf. further e.g. Catull. 61.6 cinge tempora floribus, Verg. G. 1.28 cingens materna tempora myrto, Aen. 5.71 cingite tempora ramis, Hor. Carm. 3.25.20 cingentem uiridi tempora pampino; the metonymy pomis for pomosacorona (Prop. 4.2.17 quoted in n. 10 above) may be somewhat bolder than the usual metonymies such as myrto for ‘myrtle wreath’, but is hardly objectionable.

13 See Boldrer (n. 2), 142.

14 The resulting case of ‘syllabic homophony’ (see Korpanty, J., ‘Syllabische Homophonie in lateinischer Dichtung und Prosa’, Hermes 125 [1997], 330–46Google Scholar; Lesiak, K., ‘Homofonia sylabiczna w klasycznej epice rzymskiej’, Scripta Classica 10 [2013], 1932Google Scholar) is not objectionable per se: cf. e.g. Lucr. 1.66 primum Graius homo mortales tollere contra, Ov. Met. 6.372 summo modo gurgite nare, Luc. 1.184 ingentesque animo motus, Stat. Silv. 5.1.118 tenor idem animo moresque modesti; for this to become a case of cacemphaton, the junction must produce an obscenity, as in Verg. Aen. 2.27 Dori ca castra (cf. Korpanty [this note], 332; N. Adkin, ‘More yukky Virgil: Aeneid 2,410–15’, Hermes 134 [2006], 398–406, at 402 n. 35).

15 For colles (‘slopes’) as part of a mons, cf. e.g. Culex 46–7 pastor et excelsi montis iuga summa petiuit, | lurida qua patulos uelabant gramina colles, Stat. Theb. 2.498–500 gemini procul urbe malignis | faucibus urguentur colles, quos umbra superni | montis et incuruis claudunt iuga frondea siluis, Theb. 9.678–80 cum lapsa per auras | uertice Dircaei uelox Latonia montis | astitit; agnoscunt colles.

16 Some take one ablative absolute as dependent on the other (e.g. Boldrer [n. 2], 169: ‘da un argine fatto di zolle ammassate uno spiazzo si elevi’), but more often they are construed as coordinate (e.g. White [n. 3], 76: ‘let a space be made, standing out, with a pile placed in front, with the clods heaped up’); the latter is the right approach, but the asyndeton is harsh.

17 The participle praeposito is usually taken in the spatial sense ‘put in front’, but I fail to understand what purpose a mound of rubble put in front of the bed can serve (such a dam could be used to trap water, but that would be exactly the opposite of the effect intended here). It seems preferable to take the verb in the rarer temporal sense ‘to put down first, by way of preparation’ (cf. Lucr. 6.998–9 ubi haec confirmata atque locata | omnia constiterint nobis praeposta parata, with OLD s.v. praepono 2: ‘To lay down in advance’); cf. de Saint-Denis (n. 3), 59: ‘Columelle dit aggere praeposito, parce que c'est un travail, antérieur aux binage, semis et arrosage’. But even if I am wrong about the technicalities, -que still improves the syntax.

18 OLD s.v. nubo 1 recognizes reflective usage, but only cites the present context for it.

19 In Rodgers (n. 1), 408. On denubere, see Lyne, R.O.A.M., ‘The constraints of metre and the Ciris: a brief note’, Latomus 28 (1969), 1065–7Google Scholar, at 1066.

20 Richter (n. 3), 434–5, citing in support Verg. Aen. 9.620 sinite arma uiris et cedite ferro.

21 Cf. e.g. Verg. Aen. 8.274 cingite fronde comas, Prop. 3.17.30 cinget Bassaricas Lydia mitra comas, Ov. Am. 1.7.36 cinge comam lauro.

22 OLD s.v. fingo 4: ‘To modify the form or arrangement of; (esp.) to tidy, arrange, groom (the hair)’; cf. e.g. Prop. 3.10.14 et nitidas presso pollice finge comas, Tib. 1.2.94 et manibus canas fingere uelle comas, Ov. Med. 29 finguntque comas, Ars am. 1.306 quid totiens positas fingis, inepta, comas?

23 OLD classes our context under dissero 2, which in fact is poorly attested in the general sense ‘to arrange, distribute’ (cf. TLL 5.1.1459.29–37, noting that ‘satis dubia auctoritas huius notionis’), but it may conceivably belong with dissero 1, in the wider sense ‘to scatter’ or ‘to separate’, which would suit my interpretation even better.

24 Cf. especially Manilius 5.147–9 tortos in fluctum ponere crines | aut uinclis reuocare comas et uertice denso | fingere, which explicitly refers to two different hairstyles: loose tresses of curly hair (referred to with crines) or a tight knot (for which comas and fingere are used). Cf. also Luc. 5.142–4 tum torta priores | stringit uitta comas, crinesque in terga solutos | candida Phocaica complectitur infula lauro, where the coiffure combines two different elements: tightly dressed hair over the brows (stringitcomas) and relatively free-flowing locks at the neck (crinesquesolutos).

25 For incluta, cf. Anth. Lat. 835.1 incluta Torquatae dedit hic cognomina genti, further e.g. Verg. Aen. 8.48 Ascanius clari condet cognominis Albam; for hospita ‘foreign’, cf. Manilius 1.6 hospita sacra ferens nulli memorata priorum (cf. TLL 6.3.3031.1–4).

26 Pace Boldrer (n. 2), 236, who comments on reserat: ‘Verbo specifico del parto (vd. Sept. Poet. 22 M. si tibi virgo [Lucina] favens reseret cita claustra puerperii), che regge qui probabilmente come oggetto pontum ἀπὸ κοινοῦ con implet; cfr. per tale nesso (in contesto diverso) Lucan. 2,682 [Pompeius curis animum angit] ut reseret pelagus.’

27 OLD s.v. resero 1: ‘To put into the ground a second time, resow, replant; to sow or plant (land) over again, reseed’; cf. e.g. Varro, Ling. 9.39 ager restibilis, qui restituitur ac reseritur quotquot annis; note that Columella uses this rare verb in the prose part of the treatise: si reserere uelimus [sc. uineta], 3.11.2.

28 Foster and Heffner (n. 3), 25, echoed by Boldrer (n. 2), 73 (‘indaga’); White (n. 3), 79.

29 OLD s.v. moueo 17: ‘To set on foot, undertake, initiate (an activity)’? In any case, this is probably not the sense we want.

30 For the construction, cf. e.g. Ov. Am. 2.2.63–4 non ad miscenda coimus | toxica, Met. 3.702 electus facienda ad sacra Cithaeron, 4.75 ad oscula danda pateres, Manilius 1.10 uiresque facis ad tanta canenda, 3.45 certas det in arte uias ad fata uidenda, Sil. Pun. 8.120 properans ad uisa pianda, 16.670–1 currere sortem | hanc sinite ad ueterum delenda opprobria cladum. On neuter plural adjectives with nouns of different gender, cf. E.J. Kenney, Lucretius De rerum natura Book III (Cambridge, 20142), 96; id., The Ploughman's Lunch – Moretum: A Poem Ascribed to Virgil (Bristol, 1984), 29.

31 While it is true that one could easily expect ‘Graecizing’ hiatus in such a line (cf. e.g. Verg. Ecl. 6.44 litus ‘Hyla, Hyla’ omne sonaret, which likewise involves repetition), hiatus produced by unelided short vowels is vanishingly rare and would require very strong arguments to be acceptable; see especially Trappes-Lomax, J.M., ‘Hiatus in Vergil and in Horace's Odes’, PCPhS 50 (2004), 141–58Google Scholar, though contrast my treatment of Ciris 326 in B. Kayachev, Ciris: A Poem from the Appendix Vergiliana (Swansea, 2020), 145.

32 It is true that Dionysus is invoked repeatedly with Εὐοῖ ὦ Ἰόβακχ’ ὦ ἰὲ Παιάν in Philodamus’ Paean, but it is a poem in which Dionysus is deliberately assimilated to Apollo.

33 For the former, cf. Pind. fr. 52d.31 (= 62) ἰὴ ἰή, ὢ ἰὲ Παιάν, Maced. 32 ἰὴ ἰέ, ὢ ἰὲ Παιάν; for the latter, cf. Soph. OT 154 ἰήιε Δάλιε Παιάν.

34 OLD s.v. sub 8: ‘(in a temporal sense) Immediately before, at the approach of’; cf. e.g. Ov. Her. 19.195 sub aurora, iam dormitante lucerna. For nox suprema referring to the time just before sunrise, cf. further Cic. Aratea 34.81–2 tum sese Orion toto iam corpore condit | extrema prope nocte (rendering Arat. Phaen. 309–10 ὁ δὲ δύεται ἠῶθι πρὸ | ἀθρόος Ὠρίων), German. Arat. 310–11 signum erit exoriens nobis tum nocte suprema | Scorpios (rendering Arat. Phaen. 304 Σκορπίος ἀντέλλων εἴη πυμάτης ἐπὶ νυκτός).

35 For aut ubi following on a cum clause, cf. e.g. Lucr. 5.1067–8 at catulos blande cum lingua lambere temptant | aut ubi eos lactant

36 OLD s.v. protendo 1: ‘To stretch out before one, cause to reach out, extend’; cf. Luc. 10.236–7 donec in autumnum declinet Phoebus et umbras | extendat Meroe. The transmitted praetexit could perhaps make sense with ablative umbra (‘veils with its shade’), but it still would require a direct object, which it is not easy to supply.

37 White (n. 3), 83; Boldrer (n. 2), 81.

38 OLD s.v. premo 13: ‘To press from above, press on (as with a load), weigh down, burden’; cf. e.g. Tib. 1.3.40 presserat externa nauita merce ratem, Verg. G. 1.303 ceu pressae cum iam portum tetigere carinae, Ov. Met. 11.334–5 iuuenco | spicula crabronum pressa ceruice gerenti.

39 I also wonder whether we should not swap gerulus and plenos.

40 OLD s.v. haurio 7a: ‘(of fire, also of other destructive agents) To consume, devour’. Note also the future perfect form hauserit ‘will have burnt down’.

41 Cf. e.g. Ov. Met. 10.126–7 solisque uapore | concaua litorei feruebant bracchia Cancri, Fast. 6.727 sol abit a Geminis, et Cancri signa rubescunt, German. Arat. 6 qua Sol ardentem Cancrum rapidissimus ambit.

42 OLD s.v. uro 2: ‘To expose to the action of fire, heat by fire, roast, scorch, etc.’ Cf. Anth. Lat. 623.2 Cancer sole perustus (with OLD s.v. peruro 3: ‘(of the sun, etc.) To affect excessively with heat, scorch, burn’).

43 Note that MS A reads in fact euruca; note also that uruca is the form transmitted in the prose part of the treatise (11.3.63 and 64).

44 For the corruption, cf. Ov. Met. 9.280 impleratque uterum generoso semine, where some manuscripts read germine, and Juvencus, Evang. 4.17 nondum de germine cretis, where some manuscripts read semine.

45 One could perhaps consider writing haec (sc. uruca) at the beginning of line 334, but super in this position seems to require a preceding accusative.

46 For taetrum, cf. Lucr. 4.685 a taetro resilire ueneno, Prop. 2.24.27 taetra uenena libens, Dirae 23 taetra uenena; for triste, I can only cite Prudent. Ham. 335 qui sub adumbrata dulcedine triste uenenum, where triste ‘bitter’ (OLD s.v. tristis 8) is intended to produce contrast with dulcedine.

47 See e.g. Boldrer (n. 2), 323: ‘Iolco […] qui designa, con ardita metonimia, l'eroe stesso, l'unico presente al furto assieme a Medea’.

48 Lucarini, C., ‘Ad Columellam’, Mnemosyne 67 (2014), 648–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 657.

49 Although Iolcius seems otherwise unparalleled in Latin (Iolciacus is the usual adjective), Ἰώλκιος is amply attested in both literary and epigraphical sources.

50 Pace Boldrer (n. 2), 324: ‘La preparazione di mazzi di erbe, già indicata per altri ortaggi al v. 315 nexos deferte maniplos, è qui riproposta in forma variata con un uso singolare di cingo, corrispondente, in questo nesso con fascis, all'espressione più comune in fascem ligare (cfr. Colum. 6,3,3 vicia in fascem ligata).’

51 See e.g. White (n. 3), 86: ‘to tie bundles with garlic and the cut leek’.

52 OLD s.v. iungo 5: ‘To make by joining or combining’; cf. especially Sen. Dial. 10.18.5 pontes nauibus iungit.

53 Pace Boldrer (n. 2), 337: ‘Espressivo l'uso di aperio che allude alla maturazione dei frutti, in particolare al formarsi di fenditure nella buccia caratteristiche dei fichi (vd. al v. 418 scissa Libyssa), riecheggiando Hor. carm. saec. 13 rite maturos aperire partus / lenis, Ilithyia; diversamente de Saint-Denis [(n. 3), 72] pensa a frutti visibili tra il fogliame.’

54 The reference is usually taken to be to mulberries, but they begin to ripen in June, which is too early, whereas blackberries ripen in July–August.

55 See esp. Ov. Fast. 4.939–40 est Canis, Icarium dicunt, quo sidere moto | tosta sitit tellus praecipiturque seges, Pers. 3.5–6 siccas insana Canicula messes | iam dudum coquit; cf. Tib. 1.4.42 et Canis arenti torreat arua siti, 1.7.21 arentes cum findit Sirius agros, Verg. G. 2.353 hiulca siti findit Canis aestifer arua, Aen. 3.141 sterilis exurere Sirius agros, Stat. Silv. 3.1.53–4 ictusque Hyperione multo | acer anhelantis incendit Sirius agros.

56 For triticeosfetus, cf. Ov. Fast. 1.693 triticeos fetus. I have also considered writing arbuteos, but strawberry-tree fuits ripen in late autumn or in winter (cf. e.g. Lucr. 5.940–1 et quae nunc hiberno tempore cernis | arbuta puniceo fieri matura colore).