Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-txr5j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-08T02:36:53.232Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Theocritean Criticism and the Interpretation of the Fourth Idyll

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2014

Charles Segal
Charles Segal*
Affiliation:
Brown University and Intercollegiate Center for Classical Studies in Rome
Get access

Extract

If the critical re-evaluation of classical authors in recent years has brought nothing else, it has given us a humbling awareness of how difficult it is to arrive at a fully satisfactory reading of ancient pastoral poetry. The poet of the Eclogues, seen less and less as merely a painter of dreamy landscapes or a contriver of political allegories, has emerged increasingly as a self-conscious artist whose conventional, but highly symbolic and allusive language embraces questions of man's relation to art and imagination, to passion and work, to the potential for order and violence in his own being. Is it valid to look at Theocritus in similar terms? Is there more in the Idylls than keenly etched portraits of shepherds among verdant hills singing of love in dulcet hexameters and in an atmosphere of easeful sensuousness? Or should we merely enjoy the surface felicities and depart sated and content, like Horace's well-fed guest? The rhythms and resonances of Theocritus will continue to give pleasure as long as Greek is read. Yet recent work in both ancient and later pastoral suggests that the Idylls will sustain and reward a critical reading which looks beneath this charming surface.

Type
Research Article
Information
Ramus , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , 1972 , pp. 1 - 25
Copyright
Copyright © Aureal Publications 1972

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

1. See, for instance, Putnam, M.C.J., Virgil’s Pastoral Art (Princeton 1970) 8ffGoogle Scholar. and passim; Leach, Eleanor Winsor, “Nature and Art and Vergil’s Second Eclogue,” AJP 87 (1966) 427–45Google Scholar; and, with a more historical orientation, Brooks Otis, , Virgil (Oxford 1963Google Scholar) chap. 4, especially 128ff.

2. See Rosenmeyer, Thomas G., The Green Cabinet (Berkeley and Los Angeles 1969) 52–3, 249ff.Google Scholar

3. See, for instance, Legrand, Ph.-E., Étude sur Théocrite, “Bibl. des Écoles françaises d’Athenes et de Rome,” 79 (Paris 1898) 92–103;Google ScholarLesky, Albin, A History of Greek Literature 2, transl. Willis, and de Heer, (London 1966) 725Google Scholar on the significance of έκπνεω in Idyll VII. 51.

4. Rossi, L.E., “Vittoria e sconfitta nell’ agone bucolico letterario,” GIF n.s. 2 (1970) 24.Google Scholar

5. See Segal, C., “Vergil’s Caelatum Opus: An Interpretation of the Third Eclogue,” AJP 88 (1967) 286–92.Google Scholar

6. Quinn, Kènneth, The Catullan Revolution (Melbourne 1959) 32–43.Google ScholarPubMed

7. Rosenmeyer (above, note 2); Lawall, Gilbert, Theocritus’ Coan Pastorals, A Poetry Book (Cambridge, Mass. 1967).Google Scholar

8. Legrand (above, note 3) 411.

9. Gow, A.S.F., Theocritus 2 (Cambridge 1952Google Scholar) II.76. Similarly Fritzsche, H. and Hiller, E., Theokrits Gedichte 3 (Leipzig 1881Google Scholar) II (’… in sich abgeschlossene Scenen des landlichen Lebens in poetischer Form’); Rostagni, Augusto, Poeti alessandrini (Torino 1916) 99Google Scholar (‘la realtà rude e volgarissima dei campi’); Cholmeley, R.J., The Idylls of Theocritus (London 1919) 220Google Scholar (“realistic sketches of the rougher side of Greek country life’); Bignone, Ettore, Teocrito (Bari 1934) 217Google Scholar; and, with some qualifications, Ott, Ulrich, Die Kunst des Gegensatzes in Theokrits Hirtengedichten, “Spudasmata” 22 (Hildesheim 1969) 49Google Scholar–50, 56.

10. Lawall, , “Theocritus’ Fourth Idyll: Animal Loves and Human Loves,” RFIC 94 (1966) 42–50Google Scholar = Coan Pastorals (above, note 7) 42–51. References to this study are to the article in RFIC. For criticism of Lawall’s thesis see Ott (above, note 9) pp. 44–5, note 124 and my review in CJ 63 (1967–68) 228.

11. Van Sickle, John B., “The Fourth Pastoral Poems of Virgil and Theocritus,” Atti e Memorie dell’ Arcadia, ser. 3, vol. 5, fasc. 1 (Rome 1969) 1–20;Google Scholar also “Poetica teocritea,” QUCC9 (1970) 67–82Google Scholar.

12. Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals,” 7.

13. Lawall, RFIC (above, note 10) p. 44, note 1, citing Aetia I, frag. 1 23–4 (Pfeiffer), to which add Callimachus, Epigram 27. Further support for this view might be found in the allusion to the τΠττιξ in IV. 16, which also occurs in this passage of the Aetia (lines 29–35).

14. Rosenmeyer (above, note 2) 279.

15. Ibid., 280.

16. Ibid, 279.

17. Ibid., 278.

18. Ibid, 96–7; also 47–8.

19. For the importance of antithesis as a literary device of the Idylls generally see Legrand (above, note 3) 407–12 and Ott (above, note 9) 7–9 with the further literature there cited in notes 12 and 14.

20. For the different temperaments see Legrand (above, note 3) 175–6; Bignone (above, note 9) 23Iff.

21. IV.8 and Gow (above, note 9) ad loc.

22. Cf. Theocritus’ image of Heracles as a great eater of bread in Id. XXIV. 137–8.

23. Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 10.

24. On the cicada see Rosenmeyer (above, note 2) 134–5 with notes 14–15 on p. 313; also Dihle, A., “The Poem on the Cicada,” HSCP 71 (1966) 112Google Scholar with note 17; Steier, , s.v. “Tettlx,” RE A 9 (1934) 1114–5Google Scholar, 1117. For a pastoral context see Virg., E. 5.77.

25. Id. IV. 15–16 echoes the love-plaint of a human figure, Simaetha in 11.89–90, as Legrand (above, note 3) 353 long ago noted.

26 See the good observations of Bignone (above, note 9) 231–2 on Corydon’s feeling for the benignity and richness of nature.

27. See Legrand (above, note 3) 363. Corydon’s one use of κακόϛ (line 47)comes when his professional capacities are engaged, but even here he speaks with a half-playful exaggeration. See below, note 62.

28. Legrand, Bucoliques Grecs, I, Thiocrite (Paris 1925Google Scholar) ad loc, points out that the verb πατάσσω (“Strike’) is rather inappropriate for the thorn and hence is an intentional echo of Corydon’s word in 49.

29. On the striking quality of the word see Gow ad loc.

30. These “eighty cakes” constitute the only real hyperbaton which the otherwise plain-speaking Corydon indulges in (cf. his very slight hyperbaton in 30). Compare Battus’ hyperbaton in line 5: Battus waxes rhetorical on parting and doom, Corydon on feasting. Note also Battus’ hyperbata in two similar situations, both times to emphasize disaster: κακάϛ … νίκαϛ(“evil … victory,” 27) and σκληρώ … δαιμονοϛ (“hard … fate,” 46).

31. For a different view see Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 16.

32. Ott (above, note 9)47 suggests that the reference to shoes also contains a malicious jibe at the inferior status of the goatherd.

33. Brooke, Anne, “Theocritus’ Idyll 11: A study in Pastoral,” Arethusa 4 (1971) 80Google Scholar.

34. For an approach to the Idylls in general along these lines see Lawall, Coan Pastorals (above, note 7) chap. 1, especially 13, and also 101,105–8; Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 14–15.

35. Bignone (above, note 9) 232 finds in Corydon “quasi un presentimento del poeta e del musico che e in Teocrito,” “un aspetto delta sua ricca anima che sal’ideale e it reale, il dolce e l’amaro delle cose …”

36. Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 11 ff. and “Poetica” (above, note 11) 74–5.

37. See, contra, Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 10: “The climax of the first two sections of the poem thus touches a motif which is the key to the implicit and perennial subject of pastoral, art itself. All the questions of property, responsibility, place are hints and preparation for the poetic question.” “Poetica” (above, note 11) 75 is more cautious.

38. For the text and interpretation of the phrase see Gow (above, note 9) ad loc. Conceivably the τε could be regarded as postponed, so that the phrase could be translated, “And Zakynthus is a lovely city,” as Staiger, Emil, Theokrit, Die echten Gedichte (Zurich. 1970) 82Google Scholar takes it (“Schön ist Zakynthos …”).

39. Note also the mention of the polis in Id. V.78 and VII.2. Ott (above, note 9) 54–5 remarks that in Id. IV and V the rustics “nicht einsame Bewohner abgeschiedener Gegenden sind, die sich nur mit Hüten und Musik beschäftigen, sondern dass sie im Umkreis von Städten zuhause sind …

40. The expression (“they shouted greatly’) has Homeric echoes (cf. ll. 3.81; Od. 6.117): cf Fritzsche-Hiller (above, note 9) ad loc.

41. Lawall, RFIC (above, note 10) 46 suggests that “Battus is the unnamed goatherd of the earlier poem.”

42. Bignone (above, note 9) 233–4: “Batto amό e perdette il suo amore: quella sventura ha lasciato nel suo spirito un solco indelebile diamaroe diaspro,” whereas Corydon “sa e comprende; e perciό non si stupisce nè si ribella."

43. See the useful strictures of Van Sickle, “Poetica” (above, note 11) 75–6 and the same author’s “Studies of Dialectical Methodology in the Virgilian Tradition,” MLN 85 (1970) 889–96.Google Scholar

44. Critics have been hard, perhaps too one-sidedly so, on Corydon’s proverbs: Lawall, RFIC (above, note 10) 46–7; Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 11; Rosenmeyer (above, note 2) 28–9.

45. On this progression in the attitude toward the animals see Lawall, RFIC (above, note 10) 47.

46. On this movement from distant things to the present see Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 12–13. The beginning of Id. X is again relevant here.

47. See Legrand (above, note 3) 176, who stresses the continuing self-centeredness and Schadenfreude of Battus here.

48. See Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 13. In the other places where this “sstth!” occurs it still does not break into the verse so abruptly: V.3 and 100 and cf. VI. 2 9 and V.89 with Gow’s note on the last passage. The imitator of Theocritus in the spurious Id. VIII.69, however, has completely lost the dramatic touch of this exclamation, as is nicely observed by Rossi, L.E., Mondo pastorale e poesia bucolica di maniera: L ’idillio ottavo del corpus teocriteo (Florence 1971) 5ffGoogle Scholar. = Studi ital. di Filologia Classica (1971) 5ff.Google Scholar

49. For this figure in a highly self-conscious and “literary” context see Ps.-Theocr. XIX5–8. Legrand (above, note 3) 176 suggests, with some justification, that even the experience of the thorn doesn’t really affect Battus: “L’aventure lui fournit simplement une occasion de s’admirer lui-même.”

50. On the importance of the hill or mountain in the poem see Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 12.

51. Such symmetry is a marked feature of other bucolic Idylls as well: cf. I. 1–3 and 146–8, V. 1 and 145, XI. 7 and 81. The significance of such internal echoes has been well stressed by Lawall, Coan Pastorals (above, note 7) passim and Rossi (above, note 4) 21–4.

52. On the importance of 8e(\a.u><; see Van Sickle,“Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) p. 17, note 21.

53. On ϕιλοίϕηϛ in the poem see ibid. 18 and “Poetica” (above, note 11) 76. Also Schmidt, E.A., “Φιλαλήζηϛ ZuTheokrit, Idyll IV,” Philologus 112 (1968) 131–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

54. Van Sickle’s interpretation of the contrast between the two rustics in terms of poetics leads him to underestimate the growth in Battus at the end. He speaks of “Corydon’s obvious growth” in “the acquisition of capacity to deal with love and poetry,” which he regards as climaxed in line 54, but passes over Battus very summarily (p. 18): “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 15–16.

55. The importance of the old man’s “milling” for the poem as a whole is perhaps also recognized in the punning title, Φιλαλήζηϛ, as interpreted by Schmidt (above, note 53).

56. Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 18.

57. Bignone (above, note 9) 235–6 nicely observes the fusion of rustic earthiness and universal vitality in the closing lines: “Un soffio di paganesimo campestro, che e di tutti i tempi e delta vita universale alita di questi versi…”

58. On Πρίσδειν see Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” (above, note 11) 18. The word is regularly used of the rustic singing match (Id. 1.24, V.23, VII.41, etc.).

59. For this fluid movement, achieved largely through repetitions, pronouns, and particles, see Legrand (above, note 3) 384. Question and answer, statement and denial contribute further to the sense of a continuous, rapid onward flow. Note also the repetitions of (“went off’) in 5 and 6, the combination of repetition of words and of sounds in 12–14 (, “The heifers … Poor things … yes, poor things’),"the repetitions of “Amaryllis” in 36 and 38 and of in 4l and 44.

60. So Van Sickle, “Fourth Pastorals” 10–11 and “Poetica” 74 (both above, note 11), and see also Ott (above, note 9) 43–4. Van Sickle proposes a more complex scheme based on “increments” of fourteen verses. This works well for the beginning and (to some extent) for the ending of the poem, but involves an arbitrary isolation of line 32 (cf. “Fourth Pastorals,” p. 11 with note 11) which I find unconvincing. For other forms of organization and symmetry see Legrand (above, note 3) p. 387, note 1. On the dangers of pushing this kind of analysis too far, as a number of critics in the nineteenth century did, see the salutary warnings of Legrand, 394, and the acerbic comments of Fritzsche-Hiller (above, note 9) p. 16 with note 36 on “Zahlenspielerei” and “mystische … Zahlenverhältnisse.”

61. From this point of view Van Sickle’s emphasis on the “incremental” movement of the poem (preceding note) is valuable, even if his units are not always convincing.

62. Hence we may contrast Corydon’s talk of “giving an evil end” to the cows (47) with his more generous “giving” earlier (2,18,36).

63. As Bignone (above, note 9) S puts it, “Anche 1’intensità tragica del dolore si placa nelia modulazione lirica della sua implorazione solitaria.”

64. See Rosenmeyer (above, note 2) 46ff., especially 52–4, 5–62.

65. See Legrand (above, note 3) 143–4, who wisely rejects Reitzenstein’s attempt to “unmask” Corydon as a disciple of the two poets in question. The incongruity is regarded by Gow, ad loc, (above, note 9) as a mere oversight, but taken more seriously by Rostagni (above, note 9) 101–2 and by Ott (above, note 9) pp. 53–4 with note 155 and p. 56. Glauke’s compositions included “drunken/trifles of the Muses” (Athenaeus 4.176 d).

66. Oed. Rex 1039–40; Ott (above, note 9) 50. The parallel was noted, without comment, by Fritzsche-Hiller (above, note 9) ad loc.

67. Thus Staiger (above, note 38) 19 describes the pastoral Idylls “kleine Gemaälder ausgesparter, von der Welt und ihrem ruhelosen Treiben vertchonter Räume, denen sich ein Geist zuwendet, der in der politischen Öffentlichkeit und In der höheren Gesellschaft kein antwortendes Gegenbild für seine innere Harmonie mehr kennt und eine seelische Heimat sich vielleicht sogar, dort wo er nicht realistisch verfährt, erfinden muss.”

68. I thank Professor John Van Sickle for his helpful and friendly discussion of this essay with me.