Geo. 3.108-109

[falmouth]

iamque humiles iamque elati sublime uidentur
aera per uacuum ferri atque adsurgere in auras.
(Geo. 3.108-109)

I see an unexpected wordplay in Geo. 3.109 although I'm not sure that
it's not just chimerical. I wonder if anyone else sees the same?

[Andrew Becker]

The possible punning hint of bronze, iron, and gold?

[au...@gellius.demon.co.uk]

If so, then 'sees' is the word: Vergil wrote AERIS, meaning what the Victorians spelt aèris, but creating a visual pun with æris. How many other such visual plays without phonetic backing can we think of in ancient writers? And would the pun be there for any purpose except its own sake?

Leofranc Holford-Strevens

[falmouth]

Andrew - yes, exactly that - and indeed the suggestion seems to be the
appearance of such from the ground (i.e. another reprise on the end of
the Saturnian Age theme).

For the grouping compare in particular Lucr. 5.1240

"Quod super est, ae[s at]que aurum ferrumque repertumst"

Which introduces Lucretius discussion of technology, through the
discovery of gold, bronze, iron and then *horseback / chariot riding*
as here, with Geo. 3.113-5.

But the point which really interests me is the relationship between
Geo. 3.109 and [Gallus].63

"Quam bene, cum ferrum nondum prodiret in auras.” Geo. 3.109
"aera per uacuum ferri atque adsurgere in auras" [Gallus].63

I.e. “… cum ferrum … in auras” ([Gallus] 63) compared with “…[ua]cuum
ferri … in auras” (Geo. 3.119), where [Gallus] is actually talking
about the end of the Saturnian Age with the appearance of iron (and,
indeed, himself punning on 'aura' / 'aurum' cf. "aurea Saturni saecla
fuere senis” (76)).

Wouldn't one conclude that it is *Vergil* signalling his borrowing by
alluding to the original context of the [Gallan] passage?

On Jun 4, 5:01 pm, Andrew Becker <andrew.bec...@vt.edu> wrote:
> The possible punning hint of bronze, iron, and gold?
>

> On 6/4/09 11:31 AM, "falmouth" <adrianj...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > iamque humiles iamque elati sublime uidentur
> > aera per uacuum ferri atque adsurgere in auras.
> > (Geo. 3.108-109)
>
> > I see an unexpected wordplay in Geo. 3.109 although I'm not sure that

> > it's not just chimerical. I wonder if anyone else sees the same?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[falmouth]

Leofranc,

I don't think I'd be unduly worried about a purely visual effect.
Something like Aratus' lepte acrostic is purely visual. A clear
Vergilian example is the anagrammatic "Latium / maluit" at Aen.
8.322-3

composuit legesque dedit, Latiumque uocari
maluit, his quoniam latuisset tutus in oris.

In any event, could one not just about pick up aes/aeris ~ aer aurally
despite the "ae" v "a / e"?

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[falmouth]

A particularly ambitious suggestion of an effect which could only be
appreciated visually is Morgan's (1999) suggestion that it is no
coincidence that Geo. 4.400 exactly renders Od. 4.400, which could
only be appreciated (as he suggests) by the appearance of a
stichometric marking (although I'd have to say I'm far from sold on
that one...).

[falmouth]

Leofranc,

One thing that maybe you can help me with is whether, when one has a
postponed preposition, it is less usual to have [substantive]
[preposition] [adjective] rather than [adjective] [preposition]
[substantive] - e.g. sola sub rupe rather than aera per vacuum (the
phrase seems to come from Pindar who has eremias di'aitheros and is
picked up at Hor. Odes 1.3 with "vacuum... aera" in that order). Is
V.'s construction dictated by metre?

[Leofranc Holford-Strevens]

I don't know there are statistics on the matter, but I don't think the
presence of an interposed preposition affects the choice of word-order,
which is complicated by the fact that the default order was in transit
between the Early Latin norm of adjective first to the Late Latin norm of
noun first. Metre on the one hand, and the precise emphasis intended on the
other, must have operated; in _sola sub rupe_ we have something isolated,
namely a rock, in _aera per vacuum_ the air, that empty substance.

Leofranc Holford-Strevens
67 St Bernard's Road
Oxford
usque adeone
OX2 6EJ scire MEVM nihil est, nisi ME scire hoc sciat
alter?

tel. +44 (0) 1865 552808 (home)/353865 (work) fax +44 (0) 1865 512237

[falmouth]

Thanks, Leofranc.

On [Gallus].63, if one were to entertain the possibility that this
precedes V., it would also have influenced both

"_Quam bene_ Saturno vivebant rege"
Tib. 1.3.35 (NB the general context is similar - Tib. away bemoans the
age of Jupiter, with the onset of war)

and

"Iamque nocens _ferrum_, ferroque nocentius _aurum_
_prodierant_"
Ov. Met. 1.141-2

(here, of course, the contrary is possible, but given Ovid in
particular, one has to explain away the coincidence with Geo. 3 (i.e.
if [Gallus] got "ferrum... aurum" from here, it is superfluous to also
look to Geo. 3, but some relationship with the Geo. 3 line seems
undeniable).

On Jun 4, 11:14 pm, "Leofranc Holford-Strevens"

[falmouth]

Another point on [Gallus]' depiction of the age of Saturn:

(1) With "et sua cuique *satis*" (64) (perhaps also with "casta
*satis*" (70)), [Gallus] seems to be making an etymological comment
"*sat*is" ~ "*Sat*urnus", of a not dissimilar kind e.g. to Vergil's

Irim de caelo misit *Saturnia* Iuno
Iliacam ad classem uentosque aspirat eunti,
multa mouens necdum antiquum *saturata* dolorem.

Aen. 5.606-8 - cf. Lyne "Words and the Poet" 173-7, noting also Cic.
N.D. 2.64 "Saturnius autem est appellatus quod saturaretur annis"; cf.
also O'Hara "Vergil's Best Reader?" in "Oxford Readings in Ovid" ed.
Knox at 105-6 ("both Ovid and Vergil seem to allude to the derivation
that links 'Saturnian Juno' to words like 'satis' enough'" with exx.).
This first point, however, could, I'd accept, be dismissed as simply
an attempt at an alliterative effect.

(2) But, another etymology seems also to be suggested by "*Severat*
ille prius, deinde coquebat olus." (66) - i.e. Saturnus ~ sata, an
etymology which goes back to Varro "sicut idem opinatur Varro, quod
pertineat Saturnus ad semina, quae in terram, de qua oriuntur, iterum
recidunt." (Augustine, De Civitate Dei 6.8).

(3) With those two suggestions in mind, perhaps one would also allow
that "o *tempora* dulcia... Saturni *saecla*" (75-6) is a third
etymologising attempt, this time via Greek 'Chronos'?

This sort of etymologising is, of course, very familiar in e.g. Vergil
and Ovid, but is it something that one would expect a Renaissance poet
to (re)produce?

[Leofranc Holford-Strevens]

A Renaissance poet was very likely to play on Kronos and Chronos, since the
equation of the two was firmly established, and had indeed the authority of
Cicero, De natura deorum 2. 64.

Leofranc Holford-Strevens
67 St Bernard's Road
Oxford
usque adeone
OX2 6EJ scire MEVM nihil est, nisi ME scire hoc sciat
alter?

tel. +44 (0) 1865 552808 (home)/353865 (work) fax +44 (0) 1865 512237
----- Original Message -----

From: "falmouth" <adria...@googlemail.com>
To: "Mantovano" <mant...@googlegroups.com>