Spare a thought for Lucilius, writing conversational Latin hexameters 80 years before Horace, but fragmentary and thus neglected, even by Emily G. I’m being facetious, but Roman sermo didn’t spring forth fully-formed in 35, and Horace himself makes that perfectly clear by explicitly referencing Lucilius and implicitly too,
You're quite right of course, just as Wyatt is indebted to Chaucer or (perhaps a better analogy) Jonson to Wyatt. In early modernity it's always interesting to see who translators and imitators pick as the Lucilius equivalent. I don't think Gowers really neglects Lucilius but I think you're right that she lays less emphasis on his role than I remember from the previous critical generation -- I remember spending weeks on him back in the 90s!
Yes, “neglected” was far too strong. The comment was motivated by some work I’ve finally realised on Serm. 1.7, which benefits from some wonderful analysis by Emily and John Henderson. Both of them, though, ignore/dismiss the very obvious imitation of Lucilius’ trial poem in Book 2, and to me it’s clear that alluding to L as intensively as H does in 1.7 carries its own significance—especially, and this is the fascinating thing for me, in a poem that seems to ask to be dismissed as a makeweight. Of course, Horace is entirely implicated in the suppression of his predecessor.
Yep, SIFC reasonably imminently. I’ll find a way to share a copy when it’s out. Like too much of what I write, I should say, it’s basically, “Hey, guys, somebody years ago (Servius Auctus, a papal bull, in this case G.C. Fiske) made a point nobody registered, but I think there’s something in it.” Incredible I’ve had any career at all, really.
I like the way you move from word-by-word analysis to broader cultural trends, illuminating both.
Did the earlier French progress in these forms of verse have to do with closer Italian ties (including the invasions)? I know Montaigne's father fought in Italy, for example, and of course there's the Petrarch connection. I visited his hideaway in Fontaine-de-Vaucluse in 2024, and found it an inspiring site, well worth a visit.
Your grammatico-arcano deep dives hurt my head, but they're the ones i like the most. I can't bridge the jump of 'qui fit' to his own life and poem, but i dearly want to be convinced
You mention that “Virgil’s collection of pastoral poems …. had only recently come out.” The sentence made me come back to something I’ve always been slightly curious about — how in fact did publication work right around then, which is when almost all the Latin I’ve read dates from? Were there publishers? Did “come out” mean distribution of written copies, or did it mostly mean public readings, or —?
Please don’t feel obliged to answer if it wouldn’t be fun to do so! It’s just idle curiosity. I imagine what was going on there then was different from the mss traditions I’m a little more familiar with.
Great question. I'm not an expert on this but yes there were publishers in the form of booksellers -- quite a few Roman authors describe their relationship with booksellers and the process of buying books / having your books sold. Obviously the copying of papyrus scrolls was v. labour intensive but the work was done by specialised slaves so aside from the expense of housing and feeding them, there were essentially no labour costs for specialist book merchants and some of them made a lot of money. Public recitations / readings were definitely an important part of publicising a new work as well -- we have quite a few extant anecdotes about authors reading extracts from things they were working on. And of course in the case of collections of verse in many cases individual poems might have been commissioned for (and performed/read/presented at) specific occasions and then later incorporated into a book, as for instance re: Eclogue IV (a wedding poem) and surely quite a lot of the Odes.
Thank you so much! What a wonderful answer. It's been one of those things that's mildly bugged me forever.
I knew that people had personal libraries, but half-guessed that texts circulated by being loaned out to be copied household-to-household, and that most readers would only know the texts via public readings.
This is much more interesting. I had no idea that a robust economic system existed around books, and that authors engaged with it in a strikingly modern-seeming way. Fascinating.
Yes there are some v. memorable bits in Horace where he compares his books being thumbed over at the booksellers to being prostituted! It does sound very modern. I don't I'm afraid know anything about how widespread the trade was though or whether it was largely confined to Rome.
Wow — I love that. (And am mildly horrified by it :) .) But do you know, it has never once occured to me that at the time these guys were writing, contemporary readers could simply step into a bookstore and browse the books when they came out, deciding what to buy or not to buy. That is somehow astounding.
Yes it really is. And you can also see why these passages are such popular sources of imitation in the 16th/17th century, because they transfer so easily.
Spare a thought for Lucilius, writing conversational Latin hexameters 80 years before Horace, but fragmentary and thus neglected, even by Emily G. I’m being facetious, but Roman sermo didn’t spring forth fully-formed in 35, and Horace himself makes that perfectly clear by explicitly referencing Lucilius and implicitly too,
…cut off early… in his regular imitations of Lucilius. A beautiful blog as ever, for all that.
You're quite right of course, just as Wyatt is indebted to Chaucer or (perhaps a better analogy) Jonson to Wyatt. In early modernity it's always interesting to see who translators and imitators pick as the Lucilius equivalent. I don't think Gowers really neglects Lucilius but I think you're right that she lays less emphasis on his role than I remember from the previous critical generation -- I remember spending weeks on him back in the 90s!
Yes, “neglected” was far too strong. The comment was motivated by some work I’ve finally realised on Serm. 1.7, which benefits from some wonderful analysis by Emily and John Henderson. Both of them, though, ignore/dismiss the very obvious imitation of Lucilius’ trial poem in Book 2, and to me it’s clear that alluding to L as intensively as H does in 1.7 carries its own significance—especially, and this is the fascinating thing for me, in a poem that seems to ask to be dismissed as a makeweight. Of course, Horace is entirely implicated in the suppression of his predecessor.
How interesting. Looking forward to seeing the piece. Is it an article?
Yep, SIFC reasonably imminently. I’ll find a way to share a copy when it’s out. Like too much of what I write, I should say, it’s basically, “Hey, guys, somebody years ago (Servius Auctus, a papal bull, in this case G.C. Fiske) made a point nobody registered, but I think there’s something in it.” Incredible I’ve had any career at all, really.
I like the way you move from word-by-word analysis to broader cultural trends, illuminating both.
Did the earlier French progress in these forms of verse have to do with closer Italian ties (including the invasions)? I know Montaigne's father fought in Italy, for example, and of course there's the Petrarch connection. I visited his hideaway in Fontaine-de-Vaucluse in 2024, and found it an inspiring site, well worth a visit.
Yes I think so. Marot was certainly influenced by contemporary Italian poetry.
Your grammatico-arcano deep dives hurt my head, but they're the ones i like the most. I can't bridge the jump of 'qui fit' to his own life and poem, but i dearly want to be convinced
Thank you! Such an enjoyable read, as always.
You mention that “Virgil’s collection of pastoral poems …. had only recently come out.” The sentence made me come back to something I’ve always been slightly curious about — how in fact did publication work right around then, which is when almost all the Latin I’ve read dates from? Were there publishers? Did “come out” mean distribution of written copies, or did it mostly mean public readings, or —?
Please don’t feel obliged to answer if it wouldn’t be fun to do so! It’s just idle curiosity. I imagine what was going on there then was different from the mss traditions I’m a little more familiar with.
Great question. I'm not an expert on this but yes there were publishers in the form of booksellers -- quite a few Roman authors describe their relationship with booksellers and the process of buying books / having your books sold. Obviously the copying of papyrus scrolls was v. labour intensive but the work was done by specialised slaves so aside from the expense of housing and feeding them, there were essentially no labour costs for specialist book merchants and some of them made a lot of money. Public recitations / readings were definitely an important part of publicising a new work as well -- we have quite a few extant anecdotes about authors reading extracts from things they were working on. And of course in the case of collections of verse in many cases individual poems might have been commissioned for (and performed/read/presented at) specific occasions and then later incorporated into a book, as for instance re: Eclogue IV (a wedding poem) and surely quite a lot of the Odes.
Thank you so much! What a wonderful answer. It's been one of those things that's mildly bugged me forever.
I knew that people had personal libraries, but half-guessed that texts circulated by being loaned out to be copied household-to-household, and that most readers would only know the texts via public readings.
This is much more interesting. I had no idea that a robust economic system existed around books, and that authors engaged with it in a strikingly modern-seeming way. Fascinating.
Yes there are some v. memorable bits in Horace where he compares his books being thumbed over at the booksellers to being prostituted! It does sound very modern. I don't I'm afraid know anything about how widespread the trade was though or whether it was largely confined to Rome.
Wow — I love that. (And am mildly horrified by it :) .) But do you know, it has never once occured to me that at the time these guys were writing, contemporary readers could simply step into a bookstore and browse the books when they came out, deciding what to buy or not to buy. That is somehow astounding.
Yes it really is. And you can also see why these passages are such popular sources of imitation in the 16th/17th century, because they transfer so easily.