© Copyright 2017 Alberto A. Requejo COLUMELLA’S GEORGICS: FORM, METHOD, INTERTEXTUALITY, IDEOLOGY Alberto A. Requejo A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2017 Reading Committee: Stephen E. Hinds, Chair James J. Clauss Alain M. Gowing Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Department of Classics University of Washington Abstract COLUMELLA’S GEORGICS: FORM, METHOD, INTERTEXTUALITY, IDEOLOGY Alberto A. Requejo Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Stephen E. Hinds Department of Classics This dissertation consists of a study of Columella’s georgic poem in the conteXt of the technical treatise on agriculture of which it is an integral part. I consider four aspects in order to arrive at an interpretation of this work: form, method, interteXtuality, and ideology. The form both of the technical books and of the poem is taken into consideration in this analysis. The same principle applies to the other aspects under scrutiny. These aspects are also considered in relation to each other. With respect to form we have concluded that the poem follows a ring–composition scheme around the farming calendar. The form of the technical books follows the dictates of the subjects under consideration, with the eXception of horticulture which is left to be presented almost at the end and framed between the book on apiculture (9) and the two complementary books on the duties of the vilicus and vilica (11 & 12). With respect to method we argue that the principle of usus et experientia (trial and error) constitutes the foundation of the discipline of agriculture and animal farming according to Columella; and that the aim of any agricultural activity or animal husbandry task is invariably the acquisition of profit. I study the interteXtual relationships of the poem with respect to other authors and consider the technical books, as well as other books on agriculture or kindred subjects, as part of the bank not only of words or eXpressions, but of themes through which different teXts connect with each other. Last, I consider the ideological content of Columella’s treatise as it pertains to the traditional Roman ethics associated with agriculture, especially in what it concerns the continuity of the class division maintained by the equestrian order. I invite an analysis of Columella’s ideological assumptions in contrast to those of his Neronian literary contemporaries. I state that reading Columella’s work is necessary in order to have a better understanding of the literary, cultural, political and scientific developments of the Neronian period. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 10 CHAPTER I: COLUMELLA AND THE TRADITION OF AGRICULTURAL TREATISES 13 I. Columella’s work on agriculture and poetry 13 II. Historical framework 17 III. Building on the tradition of agricultural writing in Rome 20 IV. Columella, tribunus militum and an inscription at Tarentum 24 V. Vir rusticus vs. vir urbanus 27 VI. Form: rhetorical allusion and Catonian brevitas 32 VII. From form to method: the principles behind agriculture as scientia 35 VIII. Systematizing res rusticae 37 IX. Practicalities of agriculture as scientia: analogy 38 X. Classification of trees 40 XI. Peripatetic distinctions 41 XII. Ars imitating nature 47 XIII. Determinants in the choice of genre of the prose treatise 52 XIV. Specialization 54 XV. The science of agricolatio 55 CHAPTER II: POETIC EXPRESSION OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS 60 I. Virgil’s breach 60 II. Distinctions 65 III. A roadmap 67 IV. Silvinus’ postulatio 72 V. Tenuis admodum et paene viduata corpore materia 76 VI. From technical narrative to didactic poetry 82 VII. On method 87 VIII. Dapes inemptae 92 IX. Quaestus by the statue of Vertumnus 95 X. Inemptae dapes: historical exempla 107 XI. Abstinentia: a moral or a (pre–)capitalist principle? 109 XII. Pressure of the aratrum, pressure of the caltha 116 XIII. Tasks after summer solstice 119 XIV. Seasonal vows 121 XV. Beatum illum vendacem non emacem esse oportet 123 v CHAPTER III: PROBLEMS OF INTERPRETATION: INDICES, IDEOLOGY AND ANCIENT SOURCES 128 I. Reading the manual 128 II. AnXiety of influence 132 III. The function of book 11 vis–à–vis the poem: ethical and technical 134 IV. A technical incongruence or epigonism refuted 139 V. Defending the hortus (physical and figurative): Priapus in book 10 140 VI. Framing the audience: Gallio et al. 143 VII. Order differentiation through moral principles: frugalitas priscorum 145 VIII. The reality of res rusticae: turdi 147 IX. Defining ideology and social order with respect to the hortus 149 X. A practical sententia of a pre–capitalist ideology 152 XI. Deep structure: sources of georgic wisdom 155 XII. Risk management: Serere ne dubites 157 XIII. The price of delay: ἄτη 158 XIV. A personal note (under the inspiration of Hesiod) 160 XV. Hesiod and the dark side of profit 162 XVI. From the Instructions of Ninurta to Columella via Mago the Carthaginian 170 XVII. Conclusion: from Columella the husbandman and businessman to Columella the poet 174 CHAPTER IV: STRUCTURE, INTERTEXTUALITY 178 I. Defining the georgic genre (Prose and poetic sources) 178 II. Echoes of Callimachean bindings 180 III. Columella’s approach to the georgic genre 184 IV. A poetic program re–instated 186 V. Structure of the poem 187 VI. Formal analysis: Columella the garden didascalos 188 VII. Entering the hortus 190 VIII. Autumnal cycle: part I 203 IX. Winter preparations: two ages of man and iron tools 208 X. Cosmic aition: Deucalion 211 XI. Labor improbus 215 XII. Winter labors and their instruments: marrae 219 XIII. Spring 223 XIV. Autumnal cycle: part II 225 XV. Bucolic interteXtuality 228 XVI. Transitions and endings 231 CONCLUSION 234 BIBLIOGRAPHY 240 vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am deeply indebted to the Department of Classics at the University of Washington, Seattle, for its support throughout my graduate studies. I am especially thankful to Professor Stephen Hinds, my dissertation adviser, who from the beginning guided and encouraged me through graduate eXaminations, research, and dissertation writing. I am also very thankful to Professors James Clauss and Alain Gowing, my dissertation readers, who have read drafts and final copies, and made suggestions and corrections that have shaped my thinking on Columella, Neronian literature, and the whole discipline of Classics. All errors in this dissertation, however, are my own. I am very thankful to the other members of my graduate committee, Professors Stroup and Hollmann, who have given me great insights in my studies, teaching, and research. I would like to thank Professor Joel Walker who attended my defense as G.S.R. and gave me invaluable feedback on central topics of my research. I am very grateful to the Faculty of Classics at the University of Washington and, especially, to Professors Connors, Blondell, Levaniouk, Bliquez, Kamen, and Levin–Richardson, who guided me through teaching tasks, graduate eXams and provided very aluable suggestions throughout my research. I thank the friendly librarians at the Biblioteca del Real Monasterio del Escorial for making available for research manuscript e R.1.7 and other manuscripts. I thank my fellow graduate students who gave me unwavering support, as well as my friends and fellows in Seattle who took time to read some of the draft chapters and attend my dissertation defense, as well as my parents and siblings. I especially want to thank Professor Michael von Albrecht who also encouraged me to take up Columella for the reason that he is an author as equally eXperienced in agriculture as in rhetorical art, and who shows why we should question: Quid sunt verba sine rebus? Quid res sine verbis? vii DEDICATION Parentibus meis viii INTRODUCTION In this dissertation we propose a study of book 10 of Columella’s Res Rustica within the conteXt of the whole treatise. The reason to take this route is Columella’s own statement, in the preface to book 10, to the effect that the poem can only be understood in the conteXt of the technical books, and that it should not undermine in any way the content or scientific rigor of the latter. The analysis proposed is formed, so to speak, of two vectors. One is the relation of the poem to the technical treatise. The other points towards the structure of the poem itself, something which will be addressed in detail in chapter 4. The second task should be self– evident. The first one will present more challenges because, with the intersection of the prose and poetry parts, there will be multiple elements of critical inquiry from which to choose. In order for this choice to become as focused as possible we will concentrate on four aspects that affect both parts more or less equally. These are: form, method, interteXtuality, and ideology. By form we mean the relationship between the parts and the whole. We will consider aspects of internal organization within the technical treatise; we will pay special attention to the form of the poem; and we will consider the decisions involved in, and the structural result of, including a georgic poem within the technical work. Under the rubric of method we will identify the most significant parameters used by Columella with respect to technical and scientific approach and, especially, we will identify the underlying motive or motives for his use of certain methodologies and concepts. The neXt aspect under consideration will be interteXtuality. InterteXtuality has to be understood in two ways. First we should study the interteXtual relationships of the poem, in a strict sense, with the work of other poets, including that of Hesiod. It also needs to be considered in a broader sense: the interteXtuality of the poem with respect to the technical parts of the work and to other technical treatises. Within the first kind, the concept of interteXtuality will be considered paying attention to specific allusions to words, eXpressions and, especially themes.