[In the following essay, Springer notes allusions to Aratus in Virgil's third Eclogue.]

In Vergil's third Eclogue the herdsman Menalcas has forgotten the name of one of the two figures carved on the drinking cups which he proposes to wager in an amoebaean singing contest with another herdsman, Damoetas. Menalcas can only remember the name of Conon, a third-century astronomer at the court of Ptolemy Philadelphus. So he asks Damoetas:

… quis fuit alter,
descripsit radio totum qui gentibus orbem,
tempora quae messor, quae curvos arator haberet.

(vv. 40-2)

Damoetas ignores the question, and instead describes his own cups, made by the same craftsman.

Students of Vergil have long attempted to come to Menalcas' rescue. Servius suggests Aratus, Ptolemy, or Eudoxus.¹ Junius Philargyrius chooses either Eudoxus or Aratus, although he admits that some say that it is Hesiod.² “Probus” calls the issue incertum. According to him Archimedes, Eudoxus, Aratus, and Hesiod are all possibilities.³ The Scholia Veronensia provide us with the fullest range of choices: Eudoxus, Aratus, Archimedes, Hipparchus, Euctemon, Hesiod, or Euclid.⁴

More recent scholars have fared no better in solving the problem to the satisfaction of all. To be sure, the field has been narrowed a little. Ptolemy, Hipparchus, Euctemon, Hesiod, and Euclid are no longer seriously considered, but Nigidius Figulus has been introduced as yet another possibility. Marcos Mayer (following L. Hermann's lead) has argued that the Roman Neo-Pythagorean would create a nice balance with the Greek Pythagorean Conon.⁵ Like the ancient commentators many scholars do not limit themselves to a single name. R. D. Williams suggests rather vaguely that it is “perhaps Eudoxus,” and adds that “another possibility is Archimedes.”⁶ R. Coleman writes with more assurance: “The reference is either to Conon's friend Archimedes, whose name is unmetrical, or more likely to the fourth-century astronomer Eudoxus.”⁷ Some scholars do not commit themselves. Edward Coleiro simply calls the figure “the unnamed philosopher.”⁸ Like Mayer, others opt for a single choice. D. Wormel, for instance, prefers Archimedes.⁹ Surprisingly, modern scholars seem to have come close to finding unanimity only in their common omission to mention Aratus, the Greek Stoic poet who versified Eudoxus' Phaenomena, as a possibility.¹⁰ As we have seen, Aratus was nominated already by Servius and I would like to argue here that it was he whom Menalcas meant.

Readers of the eclogue have consistently overlooked the best piece of evidence for electing Aratus.¹¹ It is the pun on his name in line 42: … quae curvos arator haberet. Vergil plays on the name of Aratus while creating a special irony by placing the word arator in the mouth of Menalcas. If he only realized it, Menalcas has answered his own question.

Punning is an important part of the poetry of the Eclogues and the third Eclogue contains another clear example of a pun on a poet's name in line 100 where Vergil refers to his friend and fellow poet Aemilius Macer: Heu, heu, quam pingui macer est mihi taurus in ervo.¹² Vergil also alludes to the poetry of Macer in line 93, where he makes a reference to Macer's Theriaca and De herbis.¹³ Vergil obviously intends his readers to catch the pun on Macer's name and confirms the identification of macer and Macer by means of a reference to his poetry.¹⁴

In support of my identification of Menalcas' alter, I would point out two allusions to Aratus' Phaenomena in the third Eclogue, both uttered by Damoetas. Lest we think the pun on Aratus' name unintentional, Vergil reassures us by echoing the famous opening lines of Aratus' poem. The first two lines of Damoetas' song are supposed, I think, to help answer Menalcas' question:

Ab Iove principium, Musae: Iovis omnia plena;
ille colit terras, illi mea carmina curae.

(vv. 60-1)¹⁵

Damoetas is giving the baffled Menalcas a hint. It appears now that far from ignoring Menalcas, Damoetas did hear his question and knows the answer. He chooses not to answer directly in order to flaunt his own superiority and to mock the forgetful herdsman's dilemma.

Damoetas makes another reference to Aratus' poem in the riddle at the very end of his song:

Dic quibus in terris (et eris mihi magnus Apollo)
tris pateat caeli spatium non amplius ulnas.

(vv. 104-5).

In a recent study J. S. Campbell suggested that the papyrus roll of Aratus' Phaenomena is the answer to the riddle, since it contains the expanse of heaven and spreads no more than three ulnae.¹⁶ If so, Damoetas is giving Menalcas one last clue to help him remember the name of Aratus. If Menalcas can answer the riddle Damoetas puts to him, he will have answered his own question as well. Even though Damoetas did not answer Menalcas immediately or directly, his song, which begins and ends with Aratus' Phaenomena, represents a delayed and indirect reply to quis fuit alter?

It is fitting that Aratus, a poet, not a philosopher or an astronomer, be featured prominently in an eclogue whose subject is poetry. After all, Aratus was very much a model for the “new poets” and the new poetry is at the heart of this poem. We find Pollio and the nova carmina positioned at the precise center of the amoebaean contest and it is likely that Vergil addressed this poem to Pollio and his literary circle.¹⁷ What could be more natural than for Vergil to pay tribute in this way to the poet by whom he himself was so obviously influenced?¹⁸

The third Eclogue is enigmatic in many ways. It shows us the riddling and playful side of the poet.¹⁹ Doubtless the poem was intended to test the ingenuity of its readers. Menalcas, of course, asks his question not only of Damoetas, but also of us. Vergil wants the clever reader to catch the pun on Aratus' name and enjoy the fun as Damoetas tantalizes the forgetful Menalcas by keeping the answer to his question just out of reach.²⁰ Unfortunately it seems that Vergil gave his readers too much credit here. Scholars have overlooked the obvious. To propose Nigidius Figulus, for example, because he seems neatly to counterbalance Conon, the Greek Pythagorean, is to miss the pun on Aratus' name, and more importantly, to miss one aspect of the banter between the herdsmen. There is nothing on the face of Menalcas' broad description of the astronomer's work (vv. 41-2) to disqualify any of the candidates who have been suggested over the years (except for Ptolemy, who lived many years too late). But Menalcas' vagueness does not give us license to introduce any Hellenistic astronomer or astrologer as a possibility. Menalcas may be vague, but Vergil is not, and in the third Eclogue he does his best to suggest Aratus' name to readers whom he assumes to be less obtuse than Menalcas.

Notes

1. G. Thilo, H. Hagen, ed., Servii Grammatici in Vergilii carmina commentarii, III, 1 (Leipzig, 1887), p. 36.

2. Thilo-Hagen, III, 2, p. 56.

3. Thilo-Hagen, III, 2, p. 330.

4. Thilo-Hagen, III, 2, pp. 394-5.

5. M. Mayer, “Quis fuit alter: En torno a Vergil ecl. 3. 40,” Durius 2 (1974), 397-411.

6. R. D. Williams, The Eclogues and Georgics (New York, 1979), p. 101.

7. R. Coleman, Vergil: Eclogues (Cambridge, 1977), p. 114.

8. D. Wormell, “The Riddles in Vergil's Third Eclogue,” CQ [Classical Quarterly] n.s. 10 (1960), 29-32.

9. Edward Coleiro, An Introduction to Vergil's Bucolics (Amsterdam, 1979), p. 125.

10. E. A. Schmidt is alone, as far as I have been able to discover, in arguing for Aratus in Poetische Reflexion: Vergils Bukolik (Muenchen, 1972), p. 295, but he overlooks the pun on Aratus' name.

11. L. Herrmann noted the pun in Les Masques et les Visages dans les Bucoliques de Virgile (Brussels, 1930), p. 149, but when he finally settled upon Nigidius Figulus in “Notules sur les Bucoliques virgiliennes,” LEC [Les Etudes Classiques] 16 (1948), 371, he retracted his views on the pun: “A présent, je crois plus séduisante une autre solution de ce petit problème.”

12. J. H. Savage, “The Art of the Third Eclogue of Vergil (55-111),” TAPA [Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association] 89 (1958), 142-158, has observed the paronomasia.

13. For the surviving fragments see W. Morel, Fragmenta poetarum Latinorum (Leipzig, 1927), 107-110. Ovid, too, mentions both a serpent and herba in his reference to Macer's poetry in Tristia 4.10.44.

14. Although Savage does not offer it seriously, he suggests a kind of reverse pun in lines 84-100. Pollio's name is mentioned three times in quick succession. Perhaps Vergil means to suggest to the alert reader the powerful (polleo) position Pollio occupies in this poem in contrast with the weak poetasters Bavius and Maevius. More cogently Savage argues that the temple of Jupiter Terminus is alluded to in Damoetas' riddle. Tris … non amplius is a pun on Terminus.

15. Schmidt, p. 295, makes the observation.

16. J. S. Campbell, “Damoetas' Riddle: A Literary Solution,” CJ [Classical Journal] 78 (1982-3), 125.

17. Coleiro, p. 126.

18. Campbell argues that Vergil intended to suggest Callimachus and Aratus in the riddles at the end of the Eclogue and on the cups of Menalcas. The figures on the cups are Conon the astronomer, who identified the lock of Berenice among the stars, of which Callimachus writes in the fourth book of the Aetia, and Eudoxus, whose Phaenomena Aratus set to hexameters. Both Callimachus and Aratus were highly influential for the novi poetae and Campbell concludes that this eclogue may be Vergil's tribute to them. The balance between Conon and Eudoxus is very nice. Both are astronomers who influenced poets, but once again the pun is overlooked. The argument on the basis of balance is not so convincing as the proof of the pun. After all, a case can be made for Aratus as a neat counterbalance for Conon. Both are third-century students of the heavens who spent time at the courts of Hellenistic rulers.

19. See Barry Powell, “Poeta Ludens: Thrust and Counterthrust in Eclogue 3,” ICS [Illinois Classical Studies] 1 (1976), 113-121.

20. Scholars have usually assumed that Menalcas' memory fails him because Vergil did not want his herdsman to appear too erudite. Menalcas would not be a convincing rustic if he could rattle off the names of two astronomers without faltering. Menalcas may, however, not be merely forgetful. There is good reason for his lapse of memory. Aratus' own work is a paraphrase of Eudoxus' Phaenomena and Cicero has confused the issue even more by translating Aratus' poem into Latin. No wonder the poor herdsman has forgotten Aratus' name. It is just possible that Vergil intends to pay Cicero's translation of Aratus' poem a compliment: Cicero's work is so good that it is difficult now to remember who wrote the original. Perhaps this eclogue is not only a tribute to Callimachus and Aratus, as Campbell argues, but a recognition of Catullus and Cicero, their Latin translators as well. As has been observed, vv. 41-2 are reminiscent of Catullus' translation of Callimachus' Aetia IV, fr. 110, and v. 60 contains striking similarities to the first line of Cicero's translation of Aratus' Phaenomena. (H. W. Benario in a note on Eclogue 3. 60 in CW [Classical World] 47 (1954), 199 has argued that Vergil's Ab Iove principium musae “is almost identical with Cicero's first line: Ab Iove Musarum primordia.” Schmidt (p. 295) has suggested “die Anspielung eben auf Catulls Uebersetzung” in vv. 41-2.)