VIRGIL: A micro-point on 'Serv. ad Ecl. 10.1'

[falmouth]

(Servius on Ecl. 10.1)

EXTREMVM NVNC ARETHUSA M. C. L. Gallus, ante omnes primus Aegypti
praefectus, fuit poeta eximius; nam et Euphorionem, ut supra <^VI 72>
diximus, transtulit in latinum sermonem, et amorum suorum de Cytheride
scripsit libros quattuor. hic primo in amicitiis Augusti Caesaris
fuit: postea cum venisset in suspicionem, quod contra eum coniuraret,
occisus est. fuit autem amicus Vergilii adeo, ut quartus georgicorum a
medio usque ad finem eius laudes teneret: quas postea iubente Augusto
in Aristaei fabulam commutavit. hic autem Gallus amavit Cytheridem
meretricem, libertam Volumnii, quae, eo spreto, Antonium euntem ad
Gallias est secuta: propter quod dolorem Galli uunc videtur consolari
Vergilius. nec nos debet movere quod, cum mutaverit partem quarti
georgicorum, hanc eclogam sic reliquit: nam licet consoletur in ea
Gallum, tamen altius intuenti vituperatio est; nam et in Gallo
inpatientia turpis amoris ostenditur, et aperte hic Antonius carpitur,
inimicus Augusti, quem contra Romanum morem Cytheris est in castra
comitata. ‘extremum laborem’ non quod mihi laboriosum est nam scribere
apud poetas ludus est, ut <^I 9> et ipsum ludere quae vellem, sed rem
tibi laboriosam, scilicet ut nympha, virginitate gaudens, praestes de
amoribus cantilenam. unde et ro- gat, dicens ‘concede', et verecunde
‘pauca' postulat et eam adiurat etiam ‘sic tibi cum fluctus
subterlabere Sicanos'. per Arethusam autem musam Siculam, id est
bucolicum Theocritium invocat carmen. sane ‘Arethusa' secundum
latinitatem in paenultima habet accentum, secundum rationem graecam in
tertia a fine, sicut Creusa et Kreousa.

1 GALLUS hic est Gaius Asinius Gallus orator, Asinii Pollionis filius,
qui ante omnes e. q. s. Daniel.

1. This is how Thilo-Hagen set out Servius on Eclogue 10. Gallus is
not mentioned in the text of Ecl. 10 until the second line. The
discussion of the actual lemma ‘Extremum laborem [etc.] does not start
until towards the end of this comment (‘‘extremum laborem’ non quid
mihi laboriosum etc.’). This suggests that all of this comment up to
‘‘extremum laborem’ non quid mihi laboriosum etc.’ did not originate
as a comment on Eclogue 10.1. Rather it originated as either an
introductory comment or, as I think much more likely, a comment on the
*title* to this Eclogue. The DServ. comment which appears in Thilo-
Hagen’s apparatus ‘GALLUS’ hic est Gaius Asinius Gallus orator makes
this even more clear – it preserves the actual lemma ‘GALLUS’. Various
titles to the tenth Eclogue are preserved in various texts – e.g.
Thilo-Hagen’s apparatus witnesses ‘egloga conquestio de agris ad
gallum’; ‘ecloga conquestio cum gallo de agris’ in the Servian texts.
But the obvious title suggested in particular by the DServ. comment is
simply ‘GALLUS’ (nominative).

2. ‘GALLUS’, simpliciter, is, indeed, the title to the Eclogue which
VSD 68 gives for Eclogue 10. The titles preserved there are, in order,
‘Tityrus, Alexis, Palaemon, Pollio, Daphnis, Varus or Silenus,
Corydon, Damon or pharmaceutria, Moeris, Gallus’.

3. The point can be confirmed by cross-referring to the Servian
comments which are given as Servius on Ecl. 4.1 and Servius on Ecl.
8.1

Servius on Ecl 4.1:

SICELIDES MVSAE P. M. C. Asinius Pollio, ductor Germanici exercitus,
cum post captam Salonam, Dalmatiae civitatem, primo meruisset lauream,
post etiam consulatum adeptus fuisset, eodem anno suscepit filium,
quem a capta civitate Saloninum vocavit, cui nunc Vergilius
genethliacon dicit. quem constat natum risisse statim: quod parentibus
omen est infelicitatis: nam ipsum puerum inter ipsa primordia perisse
manifestum est. ‘Sicelides' autem graecum est - nam latine Sicilienses
facit - , id est Theocritiae: nam Theocritus Syracusanus fuit, quem in
hoc opere Vergilius imitatur, ut diximus supra. PAVLO MAIORA CANAMVS
bene ‘paulo': nam licet haec ecloga discedat a bucolico carmine, tamen
inserit ei aliqua apta operi: ergo non ‘maiora’ sed ‘paulo maiora’

4. Here we have exactly the same phenomenon. The discussion of the
actual lemma does not begin until halfway through the note:
‘‘Sicelides’ autem graecum est’. Everything which goes before would
very naturally be taken as a note on a lemma ‘POLLIO’, i.e. the VSD
title for Eclogue 4.

Servius on Ecl. 8.1

PASTORVM MVSAM apud Theocritum est una ecloga, quae appellatur
‘pharmaceutria’ in qua inducitur mulier quaedam sacris quibusdam
pervertens mentem amatoris, a quo spernebatur: quam Vergilius
transtulit ad huius eclogae ultimam partem. prima enim eius pars
conquestionem solam habet amatoris decepti, quem nubendo alteri
antiqua sponsa fefellit. ‘musam' ergo cantilenam amorum, quos inter se
cecinerunt.

5. Again the same phenomenon, although perhaps quite so obviously. The
discussion of the actual lemma begins with ‘‘Musam’ ergo cantilenam
amorum’. Everything which precedes would very naturally be taken as a
note on a lemma ‘PHARMACEUTRIA’, i.e. (one of) the VSD titles for
Eclogue 8.

6. Is there any significance in any of this? The potential inference
is that (all or part of) each of these comments originated at a time
when the Eclogues were known by their individual titles – i.e. there
must have been a commentator who had a text of these Eclogues in front
of him which had the individual titles: this may have been as late as
Servius or Donatus, but there is some reason to suspect that the
individual titles reported in VSD are reasonably ancient – query
whether VSD is here simply repeating what Suetonius had said? Further,
if as seems likely each of those parts of the comments on Ecl. 4.1,
8.1, 10.1 which are really comments on the titles originated at the
same time, it would be a time when the commentator actually had some
familiarity with the text of Theocritus and, indeed, knew Theocritus
Idyll 2 by the title ‘Pharmaceutria’. The point of interest would be
that this might help throw back the information preserved in Serv. ad
Ecl. 10.1 re Gallus to a reasonably early stage in the commentary
tradition (something which one would suspect anyway – would Servius/
Donatus really have known for themselves that Gallus imitated
Euphorion or produced four books of Amores?), which would be of
particular interest re the comment about the end of the Georgics.





--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mantovano" group. To post, send email to mant...@virgil.org. To unsubscribe, send email to mantovano-...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit http://groups.google.com/group/mantovano?hl=en