The Didactic Tradition in Virgil's Georgics

In a recent book L. P. Wilkinson has said, 'The chief obstacle to appreciation of the Georgics has been its ostensible genre: it was deceptive and has abundantly deceived. This is no more a didactic poem than Ovid's Ars Amatoria: it simply masquerades as such.' Throughout the Georgics, however, Vergil explicitly identifies his work as a didactic poem, both by use of didactic convention and through many specific references to the works of earlier didactic poets. Why, then, does Wilkinson reject Vergil's own definition of his work? What is it that makes readers of the Georgics so reluctant to classify it as a didactic poem? Part of the problem, I believe, has to do with the genre itself. Since this literary type is not popular with modern readers, its methods and objectives are not well understood. I will therefore begin this essay with a discussion of didactic convention and of the assumptions that underlie its use. The linguistic structure of didactic poetry provides the poet with an unusual degree of authority and autonomy but it also involves him in certain difficulties. The seriousness of these difficulties is already apparent in Lucretius' De Rerum Natura, a work which profoundly influenced Vergil's development as a poet. In the second part of the paper I will examine Vergil's use of didactic language in the Georgics, placing particular emphasis on the poet's narrative or rhetorical stance. There I hope to show that Vergil makes new demands on this literary genre, for he uses didactic convention as ameans for examining and calling into question the fundamental assumptions on which all didactic poetry is based.

Before I begin the main part of the paper I should clarify my use of the term 'didactic poem'. For the purposes of this essay a didactic poem is one which ostensibly teaches its hearer to carry out some sort of intellectual or physical activity. Didactic poetry in this sense is distinct from most other literary types in that it appears to include directions for its use by the reader. Most literary works are content simply to be read by a more or less attentive audience. Didactic poems, on the other hand, are constantly exhorting their readers to go out and do something: to plough a field, to look at the stars, to raise a prize stallion, or to pursue the good life as defined by Epicurus. Thus the attention of the reader is directed beyond the text toward some activity in which he is to become involved. While some types of poetry maintain a pristine aloofness from everyday concerns, didactic works involve themselves with mundane matters such as farming and seem to derive their meaning {7} and value from this involvement. In works of this sort poetic language is apparently subservient to non-poetic doctrine: the poem is merely the vehicle through which certain useful precepts are conveyed.

The seeming transparency and accessibility of its language have constituted a major impediment to the understanding of didactic poetry. The poet invites his readers to evaluate his work on the basis of non-poetic criteria and many accept the invitation with alacrity. The Works and Days and the Georgics, for example, have sometimes been interpreted as practical treatises on farming. This way of reading the two poems involves several difficulties. In the first place, the technical information provided in these works is not sufficiently detailed to be of real help to anyone ignorant of farming. Secondly, both works include a great deal of material which is irrelevant to the purposes of the farmer, such as Hesiod's account of the Ages of Man and Vergil's description ofcontemporary political crisis at the end of Georgics I. Finally, in the case of theGeorgics, the poet gives information which is clearly inaccurate and even detrimental to efficient farming, notably the bougonia, the practice ofgenerating bees out of the putrefying carcass of a cow, which is described twice in the second half of the fourth Georgic. Confronted with such problems, the reader is forced to conclude either that Hesiod and Vergil failed intheir respective attempts to compose useful guides to agriculture or that their primary objectives in writing are to be sought elsewhere.

In didactic poetry the explicit subject often serves as a metaphor for the much larger theme which is the poet's main concern. In Georgics I. 169-170, for example, Vergil begins his instructions for making a plough by telling how 'an elm tree, while still in the woods, is overcome, bent with great force into a plough-beam and takes on the form of a curved plough'. In line 172 the former elm tree acquires ears (aures), teeth (dentalia), and a back (dorso) and becomes a potent symbol for man's capacity to reshape nature in his own image, an idea which is of central importance in the Georgics. In some didactic poems there is also a metaphorical relationship between the explicit subject and the poetic text. Such a relationship clearly exists in the De Rermn Natura, for Lucretius repeatedly compares the atoms or first-beginnings of things (primordia rerum) with the letters of the alphabet (elementa) which, in various combinations, form the words of theLatin language (I.196-7, 823-7, 912-14; II.688-94, 1013-18). In works of this type meaning is not less dependent than elsewhere on the resources of poetic language but more so, for didactic poetry employs neither plot nor setting, nor does it have characters in the usual sense of the term. Didactic poetry is the most 'empty' of all literary genres in that it designates itself as the work of an author who speaks directly to his reader. The relationship between {8} the two is based on the language of the poem and on the process of reading. On one level, then, the portrait of the conscientious farmer or astronomer or student of Epicureanism is a metaphor for the good reader of a given text.

The conventions of any literary genre reflect the nature of the contract between the author and his audience in that particular genre. The author ofdidactic poetry is a teacher who imparts his knowledge and skill to his readers. He is therefore superior to his audience and initially stands at adistance from them. He emphasizes his superiority by addressing them in the imperative and by admonishing them to pav attention. The readers of didactic poetry are characterized as individuals who stand in need of help or guidance. In composing the work the author will provide answers to their questions. Thus the Georgics begins with a series of questions to which Vergil will respond in the course of the poem. In adopting this role the poet runs certain risks. On the one hand, the readers may feel that they are being patronized, that the poet is flaunting his knowledge and has no real concern for them. On the other hand, they may question his authority or doubt the importance of what he is saying. Finally, they may simply become bored and stop reading the poem. Didactic poets deal with such difficulties in a variety of ways. In the first place, the ostensible audience of a didactic poem is frequently not identical with its actual audience. Hesiod's Works and Days is addressed to Perses but is clearlv intended for more than one reader. The Georgics is ostensibly designed for ignaros agrestis, 'ignorant rustics' (G.I.41), but is directed toward such highly literate individuals as Octavian and Maecenas and not to the Italian peasant. In this wav the actual readers are not directly criticized but arepermitted to feel that the learning process is taking place at one remove from themselves. In order to demonstrate his genuine concern for the welfare of others the didactic poet depicts the wretched condition of humanity and manifests his desire to remedy the situation. Lucretius takes this process one crucial step further in that he expresses anguish over human suffering and identifies himself with individuals who are afflicted with various miseries. This technique, which provides a brilliantly effective solution to one problem, simultaneously exacerbates another, for Lucretius' pity threatens to undermine his authority as a didactic poet. If Lucretius is as detached from human suffering as he claims the ideal Epicurean ought to be, how is it that he is still capable of feeling such unhappiness? In a later part of this essay I hope to show that the problem posed by Lucretius' rhetorical stance forms the basis for the narrative technique employed in the Georgics.

The authority of the didactic poet is demonstrated in a variety of ways. He may invoke a god, usually Zeus/Jupiter, or, as in the case of Lucretius, a godlike human being, and assert that he is following the {9} guidance of that divinity. In order to prove that he has command of his subject he indicates his direct involvement in the recommended task andgives reasons why a particular course of action must be taken. He includes enough detail to justify his claim to superiority but not so much that his reader will become bored. The need to counteract boredom is one of the reasons for the diversity ofdidactic poetry, the frequent changes of subject, pace and tone. What Vergil says about crop rotation, 'change lightens the toil' (alternis facilis labor, G.I.79), is also true of his reader's task. The poet emphasizes the importance of the activity by depicting the increasinglychaotic conditions that will ensue if his advice is not followed. He also describes the material and spiritual advantages that will be enjoyed by those who follow his precepts conscientiously. Didactic poets are not extravagant in their promises: they do not hold out great wealth or immortal fame as rewards for diligence. They stress the difficulty of work and the need for such unheroic virtues as prudence and perseverance. Unlike encomiastic poetry, which focuses on the attainment of a particular goal, didactic poetry emphasizes the process through which it is reached. What didactic poets do in fact offer is the possibility of an orderly life whose course is as regular as those of the seasons and stars, an existence from which confusion and uncertainty have been eliminated.

The didactic poet sees himself as one who would bring order to a troubled world. Didactic poets share the belief that contemporary society is corrupt and that its greatest evils are caused by strife. On the other hand, their conceptions of strife and of its causes vary with their particular interests. Thus Hesiod, who is primarly concerned with relationships between human beings, distinguishes two sorts of strife, one being the perverse ambition that leads to injustice, the other a healthy competitiveness that fosters constructive endeavor (W&D 11-26). The evil strife is exemplified through the unfair dealings of individuals with each other, particularly through Perses' seizure of the poet's land and the activities of the basileas dorophagous, 'bribe-devouring lords' (38-9). The increasing prevalence of strife throughout the course of human history is demonstrated in the account of the Ages of Man (W&D 109-201). In the Works and Days the practice of agriculture is seen as a remedy for strife and is identified with justice. The man who labors diligently to cultivate his own land will live at peace with other men.

In the Phaenomena of Aratus the theme of strife receives less attention and is used in a different way, for the poem deals mainly with man's relation to the physical world. In the Works and Days nature is largely inanimate and serves as a setting for human activities. In the Aratean universe, however, even normally inanimate entities such as stars and mountains are depicted as living beings whose similarity to man is {10} repeatedly emphasized. The workings of nature are communicated to man through signs (semata) which, if correctly interpreted, may enable him to avoid hardship and danger. By paying careful attention to astronomical phenomena and to weather signs man can bring his life into harmony with the orderly forces of nature. The present disharmony between man and nature had its origin in human misdoings, as the poet demonstrates in a revised account of the Ages of Man (96-136). According to Aratus, Justice lived on earth until the time of the Bronze Race, whose violence so offended her that she fled to the heavens and became the constellation Virgo. Justice has separated herself from the human race but can still be seen by those who are willing to look.

In the De Rerum Natura the two earlier treatments of strife are brought together. Human beings view the physical world as hostile because they do not recognize that they are part of it nor do they understand its laws. Their fear of the gods and of death causes them to pursue vain ambitions and to make war on each other. What is revolutionary in Lucretius' version of the theme is the emphasis he places on the self-destructive aspect of strife: the battles that men believe they must wage against each other and against nature have their source in the struggles of the human mind against groundless fears. It is perhaps for this reason that the idea of loneliness and the depiction of the individual struggling for existence are so much more prominent in the De Rerum Natura than in earlier didactic poems.

In addition to their common beliefs about the effects of strife in contemporary society,Hesiod, Aratus, and Lucretius share several assumptions about its role in human history. All three poets look to an earlier age in which there was order and unity, both in the relationships between individual men and in that between man and nature. Through man's inherent perversity or through the wrath of Zeus the world fell apart: men became alienated from each other and from nature. The human race lost sight of the fundamental principles that govern the universe and human existence became increasingly dominated by confusion and violence. It is the task of thedidactic poet to reveal these laws of nature and interpret them to his audience, who, by following the recommended course of action, may diminish the distance which separates them from each other and from nature. The didactic view of history is innately ambivalent, for, on the one hand, civilization had its origin in man's estrangement from the universe and its development has been accompanied by the increasing prevalence of strife but, on the other hand, civilization has brought with it the skills through which strife may be overcome.

The three poets discussed above all place particular value on the types of knowledge that can be taught and on the hard work through which {11} this knowledge is put to use. They differ, however, in their views of whatconstitutes hard work. The Works and Days describes manual labor which often involves bodily discomfort. The Phaenomena also depicts a type of physical activity but one which is not particularly taxing. In the De Kenan Natura, by contrast, Lucretius advocates a withdrawal from most types of physical activity, particularly those involved in thevain pursuit of political and military achievement. Instead, the emphasis is on the psychological processes that motivate physical action and on the intellectual labors of Epicurus and of the poet. Thus the idea of ponos or labor is intellectualized and adapted to suit the particular concerns of the poets and their respective audiences. This process is partially reversed in the Georgics. In the first Georgic Vergil makes it clear that his present work represents a return to the Works and Days of Hesiod. His intention is indicated not only in the frequent use of Hesiodic material in Georgics I but also in the austerity and bleakness of outlook which characterize that part of thework. While the Georgics as a whole deals with manual labor, the first book, which is concerned with the cultivation of field crops, emphasizes the difficultyand unpleasantness of such work. The tasks described there require physical stamina — the elm tree which is to form the main body of the plough must be 'overcome, bent with great force', magna vi flexa domatur (G.I.169). No concessions are made to refined sensibilities: implicit in Georgics I.79-81 is a half-humorous reproof to those readers who thought they could become farmers without getting their hands dirty:

arida tantum ne saturare fimo pingui pudeat sola neue effetos cinerem immundum iactare per agros. (G.I. 79-81)

Only do not be ashamed to give the dry soil its fill of rich dung and scatter filthy ash over the exhausted fields.

The work requires constant attention and must be carried out even at night and on holidays. The potential for failure is ever-present in the form of infertile soil, weeds, insects, storms and other forces which may undo the efforts of the farmer.

The character of work is defined in G.I. 145-46: labor omnia vicit/ improbus et duris urgens in rebus egestas, 'importunate work has conquered all, and driving need in hard circumstances.' These words are part of the Theodicy, an aetiological myth describing the origin of work. In the Theodicy, as in the myth of the Ages ofMan, civilization is seen to arise from the estrangement of man from nature. This separa {12} tion was brought about by Jupiter, who caused nature to become hostile to man thereby forcing him to extract through skill and hard work the livelihood which nature had formerly provided of its own accord. In Georgics I, however, the end of the Golden Age is depicted not as the result of human misdeeds nor as a punishment but as part of the plan of Jupiter, who 'did not wish the way to be easy' (G.I.122). In the Theodicy, then, strife is not the cause of man's alienation from nature but its result. While other didactic poets designate various forms of work as means for eliminating strife, Vergil suggests that work and strife are inseparable.

Although Hesiodic elements are prominent in Georgics I, this part of the poem also shows the influence of Aratus, for the main emphasis is on man's relation to nature. In the first part of Georgics I this relationship is frequently characterized as a battle, with the farmer depicted as a soldier struggling to control and subdue the enemy- Initially the military references are solely metaphorical and play on the traditional antithesis between war and agriculture. At the end of the book, however, they take on a more ominous significance. In the Georgics, as in the Phaenomena, plants, animals, and forces of nature are often treated as intelligent beings with emotions and desires of their own. The influence of Aratus is particularly notable in Georgics I. 35 Iff., where Vergil describes weather signs and astronomical phenomena and gives the meanings of the various signa. The passage concludes with a discussion of the sun, which is first depicted as aweather omen but is then seen to predict human misfortunes as well as meteorological events. The darkening of the sun at Caesar's death is the first in a series of prodigies signifying the increasingly chaotic condition of the world. While Aratus' semata help man to avoid future dangers, the catalogue of signa in Georgics I.463ff. indicates that it may already be too late for the human race to rescue itself from ultimate destruction. In the Phaenomena the communication between man and nature through semata enables man to bring his life into harmony with nature. At the end of Georgics I, however,Vergil suggests that the self-destructive violence of the human race is being imparted to nature. The military language which had previously been used metaphorically of man's struggle against nature is here applied literally to contemporary warand civil strife. The farmer is not merely like a soldier: he is a soldier who has gone off to war and abandoned his fields (G.I.506-8).

While Hesiod and Aratus invoke the divine power of Zeus, Vergil calls upon the gods of Rome and prays that they will allow Octavian to rescue mankind (G.I.498-504). Octavian, who had been addressed as a future divinity in the proem to Georgics I (24-42), is portrayed as a godlike mediator whose role in the Georgics is parallel to that of Epicurus {13} in the De Rerum Natura. In the Georgia, however, the situation is complicated by the fact that the man who is invoked as a bringer of peace is identified with war. Moreover, the poet expresses no certainty that his prayer will be answered. In the last lines of Georgics I contemporary human society is compared with a charioteer who has lost control of his horses and is carried along helplessly behind them.

While Georgics I is Hesiodic in its austerity, Georgics II is lyrical and exuberant in its evocation of almost infinite possibility. It begins with a joyful invocation to Bacchus and celebrates thediversity and fecundity of nature and its limitless capacity to transform itself into new shapes. The vocabulary of Georgics II is extremely rich, for the poet includes extensive catalogues naming the various types of trees and vines and the regions from which they come. Here he continues to stress the need for constant work but places lessemphasis on its difficulty and on the possibility of failure. While Georgics I is centered on tasks requiring physical strength, Georgics II mentions plants that are delicate and can be damaged by excessive force. In contrast to the Theodicy of Georgics I, which demonstrates that nature no longer gives freely to man,Georgics II includes references to plants that grow sua sponte ('of their own accord') and have no need of human cultivation. In Georgics II the poet also indicates that forces of nature generally regarded as destructive may sometimes produce positive effects. Winds and frosts are usually harmful to plants but in Georgics II.262-3 they help to make the soil friable so that vines may be planted. It is as though some traces of the Golden Age have survived to the present day. In an earlier part of this essay I showed that Hesiod, Aratus, and Lucretius are each concerned with the possibility of bringing order to human existence. All three poets assume that order is inherently good. Vergil too is concerned with order but his attitude toward it is moreambiguous than those of his predecessors. In the Georgics the ordering process is identified with the activities of the farmer and with all the skills which constitute human civilization. Contrasted with this process are various forces which, if uncontrolled, will bring about chaos and destruction. In Georgics I and II these forces are embodied in natural phenomena, the soil that is too sterile or too fertile, the rain that comes at the wrong time or in the wrong quantity, and the crops whose growth must be controlled and guided by the farmer. In Georgics I the poet emphasizes the negative consequences which will ensue if such forces are left to themselves. In Georgics II, however, he suggests that the excessively vigorous application of human skill can also be harmful. Thus all productive endeavor is the result of the successful interaction of the two: if there is too much freedom or too much control the project will fail. The ordering process expressed through the application of skill {14} is rational but essentially static: it cannot of itself do or create anything. The forces of nature, on the other hand, are dynamic and productive but totally lacking in purpose or direction. In Georgics I and II Vergil describes the interdependence of the two elements in physical terms as it affects man's relation to nature. In Georgics III and IV, however, the two elements take on psychological significance, for the livestock and bees which are the ostensible subjects ofthese books are metaphors for various facets of the human character.

I now want to return to a matter which I mentioned earlier, that of the poet's narrative or rhetorical stance. In the first part of this essay I described the role of the didactic poet in relation to his readers and the sorts of difficulties it engenders. There I said that Lucretius attempts to counterbalance the aloofness and superiority of the didactic poet with pity for the sufferings of mankind but thereby jeopardizes his authority as a didactic poet. I would now like to suggest that the unresolved problem posed by Lucretian narrative technique is adopted by Vergil as a central organizing principle for the Georgics. The operation of this principle is seen most clearly in the ambivalence of the poet's narrative stance but it also affects other aspects of the work, as I will demonstrate in the conclusion to this essay.

In some parts of the Georgics Vergil adopts the traditional role of the didactic poet and addresses his readers as students. In such passages the poet maintains that there is a natural order in the universe, that phenomena are governed by certain laws.

continuo has leges aeternaque foedera certis imposuit natura locis, quo tempore primum Deucalion vacuum lapides iactavit in orbem, unde homines nati, durum genus. (G.I.60-63)

Nature has imposed these laws and eternal covenants on various lands ever since Deucalion tossed stones into an empty world, from which men were born, a hard race.

Through training human beings may come to perceive these natural laws and to take advantage of them by applying skill or ars. For those who observe natural phenomena and recognize their significance, the workings of the universe will seem as comprehensible as an orderly and coherent language. In speaking of the sun as a weather sign the poet says:

denique, quid Vesper serus vehat, unde serenas ventus agat nubes, quid cogitet umidus Auster, {15} sol tibi signa dabk. solem quis dicere falsum audeat? (G.I.461-4)

Finally, what the late evening brings, the quarter from which the wind drives rainless clouds, what the damp south wind is plotting, the sun will give you signs. Who would dare say the sun is false?

The reader who follows the poet's precepts conscientiously will unite his own life with the orderly processes of nature.

redit agricolis labor actus in orbem, atque in se sua per vestigia volvitur annus. (G.II.401-2)

The farmers' toil returns, moving in a circle, as the year rolls back upon itself across its own footsteps.

From the vantage point of this narrator the events depicted in the Georgics are part of an eternal cycle of days and seasons. The death of an individual is seen in impersonal terms as partof an unending process of growth and decay, for destruction is a precondition of creation. The life of individual plants and animals is limited but the life of the world continues. This narrator speaks in a detached way and seems not to be affected by the events he is describing. In Georgics IV.299-302, for example, the gruesome killing of a calf is recounted with a narrative aloofness worthy of a Lucretian god. The world described by this narrator is constantly transforming itself but its fundamental character remains unchanged. There can be no finality, for each and every ending or death becomes the basis for a new birth. Thus in Georgics IV the death of the calf brings about the rebirth of the bees.

The attitude of the didactic narrator is contrasted with another point of view which is antithetical to the first in a number of respects. The second attitude had its origin in certain passages of the De Rerum Natura in which Lucretius temporarily abandons his didactic role in order to share in the emotions and sufferings of other human beings. In the Georgics the second attitude is identified with the individual creature who is aware that his own life is finite. For the individual as he contemplates his own death the particular events of everyday life take on an absolute importance. The farmer whose crops have been destroyed is not consoled by the fact that other crops may flourish (G.I. 155-9), nor does the animal which has been exiled on account of sickness or old age feel gratified by the youthful strength of other creatures (G.III. 66-71, 95-100). The contrast between the two attitudes is particularly {16} apparent in G.III.66-71. In lines 66-68 Vergil speaks from the point of view of the animal:

optima quaeque dies miseris mortalibus aevi prima fugit; subeunt morbi tristisque senectus et labor, et durae rapit inclementia mortis. (G.III.66-68)

The best days of life are first to flee for wretched mortals; on creep disease and doleful age and suffering, and stern death's mercilessness snatches all away.

In the lines immediately following these the poet shifts to the point of view of the breeder:

semper erunt quarum mutari corpora malis: semper enimrefice ac, ne post amissa requires, ante veni et subolem armento sortire quotannis. (G.III.69-71)

Always there will be those whose bodies you prefer to change; always keep renewing your stock and, lest you deplore your losses afterwards, forestall them by picking a young stock for the herd each year.

The animal is concerned with his own approaching death. For the breeder, however, individual animals are mere interchangeable 'bodies'. The breeder must not be distracted by the desires and fears of the individualbut must concentrate his attention on the preservation of the whole species of which the individual is only one representative. The lives of particular creatures are finite but the work of the breeder is unending, as Vergil emphasizes by repeating the word semper ('always').

The attitude of the second narrator is most fullyexpressed in Georgics III, for in discussing the breeding and training of horses, cattle and other livestock, Vergil repeatedly singles out particular animals and treats them as individuals. Although they are emotionally susceptible to sexual passion and physically vulnerable to sickness and death, these animals are also capable of heroism. In Georgics III.219ff. Vergil describes the contest of two bulls over a heifer, a scene which reappears as a simile in the account of Aeneas' battle with Turnus in Aeneid XII. From the point of view of the didactic narrator, however, the unpredictable behavior of individualistic creatures is a chaotic force which must be brought under control. If this narrator views natural phenomena as an orderly and coherent language, the second narrator perceives them as incomprehensible noises which are capable of causing both delight and {17} anguish. For the individual, any conception of natural order is a cruel fiction. All the accomplishments of human civilization are illusory in the face of the overwhelming presence of death. To redefine death as the beginning of new life does not alter its true character: for the individual, death is the end of the world.

The dichotomy which I have described is evident not only in the narrative structure of the poem but also in the inconsistent treatment of the beginnings and endings of the four Georgics. In the last part of Georgics I Vergil describes the collapse of human and natural law- following the death of Caesar. The book ends on a note of absolute finality with the description of the runaway chariot, the death of an individual man. This sense of finality is seemingly denied by the opening lines of Georgics II. The book begins with the words, hactenus arvorum cultus et sidera caeli, 'up to now the cultivation of fields and the stars of heaven'. The word hactenus, 'up tonow', is a continuative expression which implies that there is no break, no lack of continuity between the arvorum cultus of Georgics I and the discussion of trees and vines in Georgics II. Yet in the preceding lines the poet had described a situation from which no continuation seemed possible. The same sort of incon- cinnity is seen in the transition between Georgics III and IV. Georgics III ends with an elaborate description of the devastation wrought by the Noric plague. The last lines of the book depict the death of an individual man whose limbs are devoured by the sacer ignis. Book IV begins with the words:

Protinus aerii mellis caelestia dona exsequar: hanc etiam, Maecenas, aspice partem. (G.IV.1-2)

Next I will discourse on heaven's gift, the honey from the sky. On this part, too, Maecenas, look kindly.

With the word protinus or 'next' the poet seems to ignore the fact that there can be no 'next' after the situation he has just described. Like protinus, the wordshanc etiam. . . aspice partem ('on this part, too . . . look kindly') suggest that other partes have preceded this one. These two sets of passages may be contrasted with the rather neat transition which connects Georgics II and III. The second book ends with a two- line passage in which the poet speaksof loosing the necks of the tired horses which have already covered a great distance. The equestrian metaphor anticipates the emergence of the poet as a victorious charioteer in the opening lines of Georgics III and the discussion of horses in the first half of that book.The last line of Georgics IV also suggests continuity, for it is nearly identical with the opening line of Eclogue I. {18} It is as though the Georgics and the Eclogues are part of the same cycle, with the end of one work returning to the beginning of the other. Thus Vergil's treatment of beginnings and endings underscores the contrast between the insistence on eternal and universal process which characterizes the first narrative attitude and the sense of finiteness and discontinuity implicit in the other.

While earlier didactic poets celebrate the efficacy of non-heroic virtues and actions Vergil counterbalances the attitude of the didactic narrator with that of the individual, thereby demonstrating the incapacity of didactic poetry to resolve the problems posed by individual suffering and death. Yet in the first half of Georgics IV Vergil seems to indicate that solutions may be found even for these problems. In fact the society of the bees, whose undifferentiated members are uniformly devoted to the preservation of the hive, has often been construed as an image of the ideal Roman state. With beekeeping Vergil turns to an activity which is much less physicallydemanding than those described elsewhere in the Georgics. The bees are delicate creatures and require sensitive handling. Unlike the large animals of Georgics III, the bees are untroubled by sexual desire, for they are born from leaves and sweet-smelling grasses (G.IV.200). Just as the society of the bees resolves the problems posed by sex, so the beekeeper is prepared, if necesary, to deal with death. If a whole hive of bees is destroyed it may be regenerated out of the body of a calf which has been killed in accordance with certain rules (G.IV. 281-314). The introduction to the bougonia in the middle of Georgics IV suggests that even death may be overcome through the application of human skill. On the other hand, the two accounts of the bougonia which frame the myths of Aristaeus and Orpheus provide a different perspective on the society of the bees. In these passages the bees are born not from leaves and sweet-smelling grasses but from the decaying body of an animal which has been savagely killed. Like his predecessors, Vergil believes that it is both possible and necessary to bring order to human existence: the bees reappear, Aristaeus goes on with his work. Yet Vergil brings his readers a new and troubling sort of knowledge, for he continually reminds them of the loss and failure that underlie the achievements of human civilization.

Indiana University

NOTES