Virgil and Roman Studies

J. W. Mackail

doi:10.2307/296020

Virgil and Roman Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 September 2012

J. W. Mackail

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

“Virgile,” Sainte-Beuve wrote between fifty and sixty years ago in words which have become classical, “depuis l'heure où il parut a été le poète de la Latinité toute entière.” The saying has long been noted as marking what may be called the reinstatement of Virgil as a poet, after a period in which he had suffered some partial eclipse under the ignorant and impatient attacks of the romantic school. But to us now it may bear a further and a larger significance. The position of Virgil as a poet stands at the present day in need of no defence, but it is only during the last generation that his importance has come to be realised as an interpreter and recorder of Roman history and of the Latin civilisation. Classical study has during that generation been revolutionised. Our knowledge and understanding of the ancient world have become not only immensely greater in amount, but different in kind; year by year, almost day by day, we are getting more into touch with that world as something alive and solid. The studies of this Society, defined by us as those dealing with the history, art, and archaeology of Rome, Italy, and the Roman Empire, bear directly on our appreciation of the most learned and most comprehensive of Roman or Italian poets; and conversely Virgil's poetry yields up to the new methods and new enthusiasm of historians, artists, and archaeologists material which is so far from being exhausted that we seem still only beginning to sort it out, co-ordinate it, and use it.

Type: Research Article
Information: The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 3 , November 1913 , pp. 1 - 24

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/296020 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © J. W. Mackail1913. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

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.)

References

^{page 2 note 1} Georg. iv, 511; and see Classical Review for February, 1890.

^{page 3 note 1} Aen. i, 85; and compare Aen. ii, 406–409.

^{page 3 note 2} Aen. ii, 460, foll.

^{page 3 note 3} Aen. xi, 786.

^{page 3 note 4} Aen. vii, 730.

^{page 3 note 5} Aen. vii, 741.

^{page 4 note 1} Georg. i, 437.

^{page 4 note 2} ibid, i, 138.

^{page 4 note 3} ibid, i, 38.

^{page 5 note 1} Georg. i, 499.

^{page 5 note 2} Aen. vii, 242.

^{page 5 note 3} vii, 647.

^{page 5 note 4} x, 198–206.

^{page 6 note 1} Aen. viii, 480.

^{page 6 note 2} Aen. vii, 209.

^{page 6 note 3} 9th April, 1913.

^{page 7 note 1} Aen. ix, 680.

^{page 7 note 2} Georg. ii, 451.

^{page 7 note 3} Aen. x, 708.

^{page 7 note 4} Georg. iv, 278.

^{page 7 note 5} ibid, iii, 373.

^{page 7 note 6} Aen. xi, 457.

^{page 7 note 7} Georg. iii, 474.

^{page 7 note 8} ibid, iii, 522.

^{page 7 note 9} ibid, ii, 374; iii, 532.

^{page 7 note 10} ibid, ii, 107–108.

^{page 7 note 11} ibid. iii, 196.

^{page 7 note 12} ibid. iv. 564.

^{page 8 note 1} Aen. vii, 629–631.

^{page 8 note 2} vii, 682–685.

^{page 8 note 3} vii, 710–717.

^{page 8 note 4} x, 183–184.

^{page 8 note 5} vii, 759.

^{page 8 note 6} vii, 750.

^{page 8 note 7} Georg. ii, 225; Aen. x, 565, 184.

^{page 8 note 8} Aen. vii, 800.

^{page 9 note 1} Aen. xii, 701–703.

^{page 9 note 2} vii, 563.

^{page 9 note 3} Georg. iv, 125; cf. Plutarch, Pomp. c. 24.

^{page 9 note 4} Georg. iii, 425.

^{page 9 note 5} Aen. iii, 78, foll.

^{page 9 note 6} Aen. iii, 192–200.

^{page 9 note 7} Aen. v, 193.

^{page 10 note 1} Georg. i, 56.

^{page 11 note 1} Georg. ii, 413, 468.

^{page 11 note 2} R.R. I, ii, 6.

^{page 11 note 3} R.R. II, i, 5.

^{page 11 note 4} Georg. iii, 339–345.

^{page 11 note 5} Georg. ii, 207–211.

^{page 12 note 1} Aen. x, 405–409.

^{page 12 note 2} Aen. xii, 521–522.

^{page 12 note 3} Georg. ii, 38.

^{page 13 note 1} Georg. ii, 502.

^{page 13 note 2} Aen. ix, 448–449.

^{page 14 note 1} Aen. i, 456–493.

^{page 14 note 2} i, 294.

^{page 14 note 3} viii, 626–728.

^{page 14 note 4} Horace, Od. iii, v, 2Google Scholar.

^{page 14 note 5} Aen. viii, 720.

^{page 14 note 6} Condebat of Dido, Aen. i, 447Google Scholar.

^{page 14 note 7} Aen. i, 505–506.

^{page 15 note 1} Servius on Aen. viii, 721.

^{page 15 note 2} Georg. iii, 12–39.

^{page 16 note 1} Georg. ii, 497.

^{page 16 note 2} Aen. x, 206.

^{page 18 note 1} Aen. vi, 43.

^{page 18 note 2} Aen. vi, 74: cf. Aen. iii, 443–452 for a fuller description.

^{page 19 note 1} 1.140.

^{page 20 note 1} Aen. vi, 564, 565.

^{page 20 note 2} Aen. vii, 177–191.

^{page 21 note 1} Aen. vi, 887–888.

^{page 21 note 2} Aen. vi, 255–257.

^{page 22 note 1} vii, 170.

^{page 22 note 2} N.H. xxxvi, 19.

^{page 24 note 1} iii, 2.

Article contents

Virgil and Roman Studies

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests