Renaissance Reception of Classical Poetry in Fracastoro’s Morbus Gallicus DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Katrina Victoria Vaananen, M.A. Graduate Program in Greek and Latin The Ohio State University 2017 Dissertation Committee: Fritz Graf, Advisor Julia Nelson-Hawkins Frank Coulson Copyrighted by Katrina Victoria Vaananen 2017 Abstract The main aim of this dissertation is to study Fracastoro’s allusive technique: particularly his reception of classical authors. I will identify and assess the evidence for Fracastoro’s reception of these classical authors through a close reading of the Morbus Gallicus and its classical intertexts, and by an examination of that poetry identify and uncover the motifs, themes, diction, and poetic agendas that Fracastoro recognized, engaged, and leveraged – in effect, how he read his predecessors as he produced his own work. The manner in which Fracastoro uses his classical antecedents reveals a greater complexity in Fracastoro’s allusive technique than previous scholars have noticed. This project, at its core, is about coming to a better and more complete understanding of Fracastoro as a poet. Most previous examinations of Fracastoro’s work (and engagement with his antecedents) tend to create a dichotomy between Fracastoro’s works as a man of science and as a man of letters, often implying the primacy of his role as a scientist. In this project, I seek to draw attention to his work – and talent – as a poet. To that end, my discussion starts with Fracastoro’s reception of the authors where a far more reasonable premise would be that Fracastoro was looking at them with a purely poetic eye; the first half of the project deals with the ties to Vergil, Ovid, and Catullus. ii The influence of Vergil’s Georgics on the basic narrative structure of Syphilis sive Morbus Gallicus is presented practically as a given by several scholars – but a close reading of the passages from Vergil that made a clear imprint on Fracastoro strongly suggest that it was the violent pastoralist approach that spans all of Vergil’s poems that made the most significant impact on Fracastoro – indeed, it infuses the way that Fracastoro communicates the symptoms, causes, and cures for the disease. The second half of the project then moves on to Lucretius, whose influence on Fracastoro has primarily been seen as scientific; scholarly debate has centered on whether or not Lucretius’ philosophy (Epicurean materialism) underlies Fracastoro’s scientific theories. While addressing scholarship and issues surrounding a scientific reading of Lucretius, I will demonstrate how and to what end Fracastoro also read Lucretius as a poet. From this, I am able to demonstrate a poetic agenda that makes deft use of his classical predecessors, and taps into motifs, elements, themes, and poetic agendas that we have barely scratched the surface of in modern scholarship, but is still distinctly and completely Fracastoro’s own, not dominated by or a mere imitation or parody of any of the classical authors he uses. iii For Thing 1 and Thing 2 iv Acknowledgments A project such as this never comes together without the support – but also the challenges, critiques, debates, and feedback – of many other brilliant teachers, colleagues, and friends. I was fortunate to have the guidance, support, and direction of three great scholars on this project – Dr. Fritz Graf, with his pithy, incisive, and though-provoking guidance throughout; Dr. Julia Nelson-Hawkins, who first introduced me to the wonderful works of Girolamo Fracastoro and his world, and with whose encouragement, now almost five years ago, I began exploring the ideas and theories that are the foundation of this project; and Dr. Frank Coulson, whose excellent (and amazingly unerring) bibliographic recommendations were vital. I would also like to thank Dr. Richard Fletcher for what seemed to be a small and offhand bit of advice he gave early in this project – in the end, it proved invaluable. Finally, last – but certainly not least – I would like to salute some of my current and former peers in the Department of Classics, particularly Dr. Mark Wright, for his (and their) endless willingness to serve as sounding boards, critics, and inspiration. v Vita 2004 ...............................................................B.A. Political Science, James Madison University 2008 ...............................................................M.A.L.S. Liberal Studies, Georgetown University 2010 ...............................................................M.A. Classical Languages, The University of Georgia 2010 to present ..............................................Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Classics, The Ohio State University Fields of Study Major Field: Greek and Latin vi Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................................... ii Dedication………………………….…………………………………………………………………......….iv Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................................... v Vita .................................................................................................................................................................vi Fields of Study ...............................................................................................................................................vi Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... vii Introduction: Fracastoro the Physician-Poet.................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Fracastoro and Vergil .................................................................................................................. 14 Chapter 2: Ovid, Catullus, and the Morbus Gallicus ..................................................................................... 49 Chapter 3: A Poetic Solution for a Scientific Problem .................................................................................. 92 Chapter 4: The Morbus Gallicus and De Rerum Natura 6 .......................................................................... 131 Conclusion: Fracastoro’s Method: a Physician, a Philosopher, and a Poet Walk into an Epic ................... 165 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................................ 184 Appendix: Violent Bucolics ........................................................................................................................ 195 vii Introduction: Fracastoro the Physician-Poet Girolamo Fracastoro is best known as a well-regarded Renaissance physician. He was a native of Verona who lived from about 1483-1553.1 In truth, he was a polymath whose life and accomplishments fit in well with the modern expression ‘a renaissance man.’ In his own lifetime he was an esteemed mind of the arts and sciences; in addition to his medical pursuits he was known as a philosopher, astronomer, and mathematician.2 Importantly for this dissertation, he was also a poet. Fracastoro’s published writings were in Latin,3 and his two most famous works bookend his publications – the hexameter poem Hieronymi Fracastorii Syphilidis, sive Morbi Gallici, Libri Tres, Ad Petrum Bembum (“Girolamo Fracastoro’s Syphilis, or the French Disease, in Three Books, to Pietro Bembo ” published 1530) and the prose treatise De Contagione (“On Contagion” published 1546.)4 It is his hexameter poem, hereafter referred to as the Morbus Gallicus, which is the subject of my present study. This opus begins with a detailed description of the causes and effects of a disease; the second book deals with cures (ending with a katabasis for the mercury cure), and the final book 1 Mund-Dopchie, 2014, 1027; Fantazzi, 2014, 1090. 2 Fantazzi, 2014, 1090. 3 Fantazzi, 2014, 1090. 4 Fantazzi, 2014, 1090. Pietro Bembo (1470-1547) was an influential literary figure and the apostolic secretary for Pope Leo X. Fantazzi, 2014, 927-926. 1 presents us with an aition for the disease and the quasi-magical New World cure from the guaiacum tree. All three books are rich with connections to classical authors. The main aim of this project is to identify and assess the evidence for Fracastoro’s reception of classical authors through a close reading of the Morbus Gallicus and its classical intertexts, and by an examination of that poetry to understand the motifs, themes, diction, and poetic agendas that Fracastoro recognized, engaged with, and leveraged to his advantage.5 In effect, I will be ferreting out how he read his predecessors as he developed his own work, which was produced, as we will see, by a complex allusive technique – frequently engaging with multiple authors at once. The manner in which Fracastoro uses his classical antecedents demonstrates a striking complexity and layering of allusions, and these points of contact, when taken together, illuminate the intricacy of Fracastoro's poetic art, to which recent commentators have not always done justice. Defying Classification Fracastoro’s Morbus Gallicus can be (and often is) classified as didactic – his basic premise is the search for the reasons behind the