1. The exception, which taught me plenty, is the wide-ranging and audacious study by Cairns, F., ‘Horace Odes 3, 22: Genre and Sources’, Philologus 126 (1982), 227–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2. Commager, S., The Odes of Horace: A Critical Study (New Haven 1962), 127Google Scholar: no other reference to 3.22, even in the seminal chapter, ‘The World of Nature: Time and Change’ (235–306). Cf. Collinge, N.E., The Structure of Horace’s Odes (Oxford 1961), 48Google Scholar (‘rustic devotions’), 68 (‘of simple type’), 126 (‘static and simple, although it can be analysed as invocation [one stanza] and dedication [one stanza]’); Fraenkel, E., Horace (Oxford 1957), 201f.Google Scholar: ‘a surge of delight and nostalgia in the heart of everyone who is as fond of the Italian countryside as he is fond of Horace.’ Syndikus, H.P., Die Lyrik des Horaz II (Darmstadt 1973), 196–200Google Scholar, dwells on the generic Epigrammtypus—before taking us to paradise, ‘ein glückliches Arkadien…ein Welt, in der alles noch frömmer und reiner war als in der Gegenwart…’. Cairns (n.1 above) is, naturally, the best treatment.

3. ‘Insofar as the spatial image of Horace’s farm located within a context of literary genre also comprises a descriptive topography positioned within a geographical context, the poetic space is simultaneously a cultural space.’ (Leach, E.W., ‘Horace’s Sabine Topography in Lyric and Hexameter Verse’, AJP 114 [1993], 271–302, at 275.Google Scholar) The present essay takes a different line across the same terrain as this crucial intervention—which happens not to mention 3.22. Cultural geo-politics is now attracting exciting contributions, e.g. the essays in Keith, M. and Pile, S. (eds.), Place and the Politics of Identity (London 1993)Google Scholar; Duncan, J.S. and Ley, D. (eds.), Place/Culture/Representation (London 1993)Google Scholar; and Rodaway, P., Sensuous Geographies: Body, Sense and Place (London 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4. Giono, J., The Man who Planted Trees (London 1989), 39Google Scholar. Cf. ibid. 45: ‘Giono later wrote…that his purpose in creating (Elzéard) Bouffier “was to make people love the tree, or more precisely, to make them love planting trees”.’

5. Anouchka (film written and directed by J.-L. Godard, Paris 1966).

6. Donne, J., ‘The Triple Fool’, in Poems, ed. H.I’A. Fausset (London 1958), 8Google Scholar. Cf. Docherty, T., ‘Donne’s Praise of Folly’, in R. Machin and C. Norris (eds.), Post-Structuralist Readings of English Poetry (Cambridge 1987), 84–104Google Scholar, at 100.

7. McLuhan quoted in Redfern, W., Puns (Oxford 1984), 166Google Scholar (‘Across the Rivers and Into the Trees’).

8. Cf. Wright, J.R.G., ‘Iccius’ Change of Character: Horace, Odes I 29’, Mnemosyne 27 (1974), 44–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9. ‘[Horace] writes as if he had a close relationship with Mercury.’ (Nisbet, R.G.M. and Hubbard, M., A Commentary on Horace Odes Book 1 [Oxford 1970], 127Google Scholar [introduction to 1.10].) Cf. Miller, P.A., ‘Horace, Mercury, and Augustus, or the Poetic Ego of Odes 1–3’, AJP 112 (1991), 365–88Google Scholar.

10. Traill, D.A., ‘Horace Carmen 1.30: Glycera’s Problem’, CPh 88 (1993), 332Google Scholar, convincingly argues that the rush is on because the whore is fading fast.

11. Santirocco, M.S., Unity and Design in Horace’s Odes (Chapel Hill 1986), 133–38Google Scholar (and cf. 148 and 171), sees a row of triplets between 3.16 and 29: 17–19 feasts, 19–21 on love/drink, 21–23 on religion, 24–26 on politics vs. love, 26–28 farewells to love/poetry; at 136–38 (= ‘The Poetics of Closure: Horace Odes 111.17–28’, Ramus 13 [1984], 74–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 78–80), he reads 3.21–23 together as a sequence.

12. A further pre-frame at 3.24.63f., crescunt diuitiae: tamen/ curtae nescioquid semper abest rei (cf. 3.16.17, crescentem…pecuniam).

13. Hamsun, K., Growth of the Soil (London 1980), 97, 203Google Scholar.

14. Horace must be lie behind Frost, R., ‘On a Tree Fallen Across the Road (To hear us talk)’, from New Hampshire (1923), in Selected Poems (Harmondsworth 1973), 138Google Scholar: The tree the tempest with a crash of wood Throws down in front of us is not to bar Our passage to our journey’s end for good, But just to ask us who we think we are … Fatal crushing is a primal, so primeval phobia: thus Draco’s original law-code (‘decreed exile for homicides, including any objects that should fall on and kill a person’, Paus. Perieg. 6.11.6). Incidentally, ἐμπίπτω) is the word for whatever ‘befalls’, for all accidents. (Don’t let slip Trimalchio’s pun, Petron. Sat. 55.2, after the boy fell on him [ceciderat], non oportet hunc casum sine inscriptione transire…: Quod non expectes, ex transuerso fit…/ et supra nos Fortuna negotia curat…)

15. The crashingly over-written launch here introduces ‘The Tree’ unforgettably—indelibly, even. By comparing 13.3f. (in nepotuml perniciem opprobriumque pagi; cf. uenena Colcha, 8) with Phaedr. 4.7.11 (in perniciem Graium et barbarum), you could reclaim a fragment for Ennius’ Medea proem (suggested Robin Nisbet, olim: Henderson, J., Anecdote and Satire in Phaedrus: Commentary and Discussion [Oxford DPhil Thesis 1976], 156Google Scholar). Coming after 2.12, the poem particularly resuscitates the opening sequence of Epod. 1–3, where the stresses of warfare give way to (anti-)vision of the rhythms of rustic life—vines wed to poplars, branches pruned and grafted, offerings for Silvanus, tutor finium, rest sub antiqua ilice, or in winter wild boar driven into the nets, a lamb or kid for a holiday feast (2.9f., 143f., 22, 23, 31f., 59f.)—, before the fun starts for Maecenas with a curse for the murderous harvester’s lunch of garlic, a poison worse than Medea’s (3.1–4, 9–14; cf. Davis, G., Polyhymnia: The Rhetoric of Horatian Lyric Discourse [Berkeley & Los Angeles 1991], 82–89Google Scholar; Schmidt, E.A., ‘The Date of Horace, Odes 2.13’, BICS Supplement 51 [1988], 118–25Google Scholar, at 123).

16. For the memorably graphic and extravagant ‘comic hyperbole’ here, cf. McDermott, E.A., ‘Horace, Maecenas and Odes 2, 17’, Hermes 110 (1982), 211–28Google Scholar, at 226f.

17. Cf. 3.6.3, aedesque labantis deorum, with 3.5.45, labantis consilio patres… Flattened trees and failed beams metaphorise sociopolitical collapse, of community and self, particularly brought to prominence as a ‘theme’ intertwined with the nexus of ‘architectural poems’ at 2.14–16 and 2.18 (cf. Jr.Pearcy, L.T., ‘Horace’s Architectural Imagery’, Latomus 36 (1977), 772–81Google Scholar; adumbrated at Serm. 2.3.306–13): the thread runs through Book III from start to finish.

18. More memorably odd lexis here; cf. Bradshaw, A., ‘Some Stylistic Oddities in Horace, Odes III 8’, Philologus 114 (1970), 145–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 145f.

19. This review of 3.16–24 follows Porter, D.H., Horace’s Poetic Journey. A Reading of Odes 1–3 (Princeton 1987), 44–47Google Scholar, who adds (46) the ‘protective power over the young’ in 18.3f., paruis/ aequus alumnis, to that in 22.2f., laborantis utero puellas…audis; the echo in incedas abeasque (18.3) ∼ audis adimisque (22.3) fixes the parallels into the heart of these complementary prayers.

20. Muecke, F., Horace Satires II (Warminster 1993), 194f., 197Google Scholar.

21. Kilpatrick, R.S., The Poetry of Friendship. Horace, Epistles I (Edmonton 1986), 96–98Google Scholar; Voit, L., ‘Das Sabinum im 16 Brief des Horaz’, Gymnasium 82 (1975), 412–26Google Scholar.

22. Rand, E.K., A Walk to Horace’s Farm (Oxford 1930), 35, 56Google Scholar.

23. Grimal, P., Les Jardins Romains (Paris 1943), 419–25Google Scholar (‘Horace’ at 421).

24. Cato RR 1.3, <praedium> sub radice montis siet, 7, silua caedua…arbustum…glandaria silua; Varro RR 1.12.1, sub radicibus montis siluestris uillam ponere, cf. Brind’Amour, P., ‘PAULUM SILVAE SUPER HIS FORET’, REA 74 (1972), 86–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25. Varro RR 1.15, fines praedi satione arborum tutiores fiunt…serunt alii circum pinos, ut habet uxor in Sabinis, alii ulmos…

26. Cf. Troxler-Keller, I., Die Dichterlandschaft des Horaz (Heidelberg 1964), esp. 70–90Google Scholar: 3.22’s pine is for shade (84–86), and sign of Italy (92). Such studies as Schmidt, E.A., ‘Das horazische Sabinum als Dichterlandschaft’, A&A 23 (1977), 97–122Google Scholar, dwell on the evocative Carm. 1.17, 3.13. See above all Pucci, P., ‘Horace’s Banquet in Odes 1.17’, TAPA 105 (1975), 259–82Google Scholar.

27. For a recent salutary disaggregation of the usual story of Maecenas’ gift ‘c. 33 BCE’ eliciting the whole array of countrified images in his client’s verse, cf. Bradshaw, A., ‘Horace in Sabinis’, in C. Deroux (ed.), Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History V (Brussels 1989), 160–86Google Scholar: 3.22 is still ‘probably’ a reference to said farm (161). Cairns, F., ‘The Power of Implication: Horace’s Invitation to Maecenas (Odes 1.20)’, in T. Woodman and J. Powell (eds.), Author & Audience in Latin Literature, (Cambridge 1992), 84–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 107–09 (‘Appendix: Did Maecenas give Horace a “Sabine Farm”?’), restores the property. For the authorised version, cf. Wish/art, D., I, Virgil (London 1994), 290Google Scholar: ‘…part of an estate which had been in [Maecenas’] family for two generations. It was in very poor condition. The tenant farmer who rented it was childless and too old now to keep the place up….[He] would be well taken care of financially and was quite happy with the arrangement….[T]he farm hardly paid for itself as it was…in a terrible state, rank with weeds, its fruit trees unpruned, fences rotten or missing, equipment scanty or worn out. The farmhouse itself was almost a shack. Its roof leaked, its walls were riddled with holes and the inside looked as if a herd of pigs had been wintered there. The place was a complete mess. Horace took it all in and, literally, beamed. “It’s perfect.’”

28. See R. Frost, ‘A Cabin in the Clearing’ (n.14 above, 220f.), from In the Clearing (1962): (Smoke) They’ve been here long enough To push the woods back from around the house And part them in the middle with a path. (Mist) And still I doubt if they know where they are. And I begin to fear they never will.

29. (Farmer Oak) Hardy, T., Far From the Madding Crowd (London 1964), 38Google Scholar.

30. Miller (n.9 above) 372, 377. Thomas, R.F., Lands and Peoples in Roman Poetry: The Ethnographical Tradition (Cambridge 1982), 8–34Google Scholar (‘The Landscapes of Horace’), explores the poetic space of Epp. 1.16.

31. Leach (n.3 above) 298, 300.

32. Cf. Harrison, R.P., Forests: The Shadow of Civilisation (Chicago 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 201 on our ‘abode’ in the forest margin. On the ‘forêts de nous-mêmes’, cf. Bachelard, G., The Poetics of Space (Boston 1969)Google Scholar, esp. 185–90.

33. Oksala, T., Religion und Mythologie bei Horaz: Eine literarhistorische Untersuchung, Comm. Hum. Litt. 51 (1973) 34Google Scholar (on 3.22). See Lee, M.O., Word, Sound, and Image in the Odes of Horace (Ann Arbor 1969), 59–67Google Scholar, on the plasticity of the verbal embrace in 2.3: quote from MacNeice, Louis, ‘Memoranda to Horace’, in Collected Poems (London 1966), 541Google Scholar.

34. Cf. Leach (n.3 above), 297, ‘…offends the egotism of ownership.’

35. Morov, N.T., The Story of the Pine (London 1976), 83, 132Google Scholar: the lower branches are pruned for fuel; untrimmed it grows pine-shape. Cf. Nisbet, R.G.M. and Hubbard, M., A Commentary on Horace Odes Book II (Oxford 1978), 58Google Scholar (on Carm. 2.3.9).

36. Imagine this party, glimpsed over the garden wall in a mural from the ‘House of Romulus and Remus’: Jashemski, W.F., The Gardens of Pompeii, Herculaneum and the Villas Destroyed by Vesuvius (New York 1979), 70Google Scholar (and cf. 300, figures 453–54); cf. Virg. Ecl. 7.65, 68, fraxinus in siluis pulcherrima, pinus in hortis…fraxinus in siluis cedat tibi, pinus in hortis; Grimal (n.23 above), 421. Leach, E.W., The Rhetoric of Space: Literary and Artistic Representations of Landscape in Republican and Augustan Rome (Princeton 1988), 233–37Google Scholar, puts Horace’s Sabinum among ‘Sacral-Idyllic Landscapes’.

37. L. MacNeice, ‘Woods’ (n.33 above, 231). ‘During the Augustan period…the villa would seem to have comprised twelve ground-floor rooms, a heated bath-complex, and a terrace opening onto a garden with a piscina at its center, and a surrounding porticus’ (Leach [n.3 above] 272).

38. For mons < emineo/minor, cf. Austin, R.G., P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber Secundus (Oxford 1964)Google Scholar, ad Aen. 2.240; Pease, A.S., P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber Quartus (Cambridge MA 1935)Google Scholar, ad Aen. 4.88. Minor can portend good as easily as bad (e.g. Hor. Serm. 2.3.9).

39. Cf. Paul. Sent. 5.6.13, arbor quae in alienas aedes imminet (Cairns [n.1 above], 232 n.22).

40. For hunter’s dedications, cf. esp. Leonidas or Mnasalcas Anth. Pal. 6.110. 3f., (a hind) Cf. Buchmann, J., Untersuchungen zur Rezeption hellenistischer Epigrammatik in der Lyrik des Horaz (Diss. Konstanz 1974), 128fGoogle Scholar.

41. Cairns (n.1 above), 245, and cf. 244f.; cf. Bakker, J.T., Living and Working with the Gods: Studies of Evidence for Private Religion and its Material Environment in the City of Ostia (100– 500 A.D.) (Amsterdam 1994)Google Scholar, Index s.v. Diana.

42. The important methodological study by North, J.A., ‘Religion and Rusticity’, in T.J. Cornell and K. Lomas (eds.), Urban Society in Roman Italy (London 1995), 135–50Google Scholar, unfortunately has precious little to say about Horace (and nothing about 3.22).

43. Broise, H. and Scheid, J., ‘Étude d’un cas: le lucus Diae à Rome’, in Les Bois Sacrés (Naples 1993), 145–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar (for these formulae see 152–57, Testimonia); cf. Hughes, J.D., Pan’s Travail: Environmental Problems of the Ancient Greeks and Romans (Baltimore 1994), 169f., 172–75Google Scholar; Grimal (n.23 above), 176–83. Beard, M., ‘Writing and Ritual: A Study of Diversity and Expansion in the Arval Acta’, PBSR 53 (1985), 114–62Google Scholar, explains the Arval club’s orientation around a graphematic identity.

44. Broise and Scheid (n.43 above), 151.

45. Cf. Hughes (n.43 above), 175. On the Lucaria, or July hedgerow-clearing, cf. Dupont, F., Daily Life in Ancient Rome (Oxford 1992), 202Google Scholar.

46. Cf. J. Scheid, ‘Lucus, nemus. Qu’est-ce qu’un bois sacré?’, in Les Bois Sacrés (n.43 above), 13–20, esp. 15 on Nilsson’s myth, ‘Aux origines, done, on vénère les arbres’, and surveying the other great mythologists of the Sacred Wood (for Rome, cf. esp. Preller, L., Römische Mythologie ³ [Berlin 1881] i.107–14Google Scholar).

47. C. Ampolo, ‘Boschi sacri e culti federali nel Lazio’, in Les Bois Sacrés (n.43 above), 159–67, at 166.

48. Their fusion in this representation gives the lie to such claims as: ‘Poetry in Rome is one thing, and life (and religion) is another; there is no necessary, and certainly no immediate, connection’ (Williams, G., Tradition and Originality in Roman Poetry [Oxford 1968], 576Google Scholar, on Carm. 3.18). Only a prior determination to define ‘religion’ as elsewhere can brush aside the semiotic networking of 3.22 across the spread of the cultic/mythic/literary/rustic terrain of Roman culture.

49. Frazer, J.G., Folklore in the Old Testament (London 1918), iii.53Google Scholar, on Jeremiah 2.34, ‘Bloody sacrifices to sacred oaks’: ‘The preposition…leaves it uncertain whether the blood was smeared on the trees or poured out at their foot’; ‘at Marseilles, every tree was washed with human blood’ (Lucan 3.405).

50. Davidson, H.E., Patterns of Folklore (Ipswich 1978), 98f.Google Scholar, cueing Mannhardt, W., Waldund Feldkulte, I: Der Baumkultus (Berlin 1875), 46fGoogle Scholar.

51. Porter (n.19 above), 191.

52. DuPont (n.45 above), 215. Cf. Burkert, W., Homo Necans: The Anthropology of Ancient Greek Sacrificial Ritual and Myth (Berkeley 1983), 38f.Google Scholar, for offerings to wish that a building, house, bridge, dam perdure.

53. For a ‘tribal’ ceremony relating a ‘clan’ to its estate, cf. Keen, I., ‘Ecological Community and Species in Yolngu Religious Symbolism’, in R. Willis (ed.) Signifying Animals: Human Meaning in the Natural World (London 1990), 85–102Google Scholar, at 96–98 (‘The Tree’), with 98f. (‘Birth of Children to the Clans’): ‘The image of the tree is pervasive in the ceremony and…in the significance of the clan’s estate. The tree signifies the permanent connection of the clan, its members, the spirits of the dead, and the [spiritual powers and conception spirits] to the country….The [founding beings] are credited with planting trees…at the clan estate….A tree planted by a [conception spirit] stands eternally in that place. If someone finds out that such a tree has fallen, he or she might point out a sapling and say that it is replacing the tree, an analogue of the succession of human generations….’

54. See Van Dam, H.-J., P. Papinius Statius Siluae Book II: A Commentary (Leiden 1984), 334Google Scholar [ad 2.3.75–77, reuirescet]. Van Dam rightly sets Carm. 3.22 looming over Statius’ arbor (cf. 302 [ad Silu. 2.3.20, imminet], 311 [ad 35–42], 316 [ad 43–52], 321 [ad 52]), esp. 319 [ad 49f.]: ‘We may also assume that there is a yearly sacrifice to the tree and the domina sedis, as in Hor. Carm. III 22, perhaps on Melior’s birthday.’ On Melior, cf. ibid. 69, introduction to Silu. 2.1: ‘Unmarried, had no children, and his parents were dead….He lost his dearest friend Blaesus, then his favourite Glaucias and finally the only thing left to him, his parrot.’ On Iunius Blaesus, cf. Hardie, A., Statius and the Silvae: Poets, Patrons and Epideixis in the Graeco-Roman World (Liverpool 1983), 66fGoogle Scholar. Vessey, D.W.T., ‘Atedius Melior’s Tree: Statius Siluae 2.3’, CPh 76 (1981), 46–53Google Scholar, offers a political reading in terms of the ideology of otium.

55. Cf. (e.g.) Isid. Orig. 11.2.21, uirgo a uiridiori aetate dicta est, sicut et uirga. For uirga as the line linking a scion to his stock on a Roman family-tree, cf. Juv. 8.7: Martial uses the images of ‘authoring’ and ‘owning’ for the relationship between his planter and plant (auctorem dominumque). The guess that Julius planted the tree as propraetor in 61 might be referentially correct, but is ideologically/ mythologically hors de combat (e.g. E. Post, Selected Poems of Martial [Boston n.d.], 224, ad loc). The poem plays with Caesarian- as between ‘Caesarian vs. Pompeian’ partisan-talk, strict reference to Julius, and open appellation of the whole plantation of the dynasty (e.g. the final victor over Pompey’s son Sextus. Augustus’ conquests in Spain would fit; in time a Caesar would himself spring from Spanish soil. Caesar is here etymologised a caesarie, Caesar supposedly born with a full head of hair (Paul. Fest. 57, Maltby, R., A Lexikon of Ancient Latin Etymologies [Leeds 1991], 93Google Scholars.v.). This tree will never lose his head—unlike the battered old oak Pompeius topp<l>ed by Caesarian fulmination in Lucan’s famous pair of proem similes (1.135–43 and 151–57. Martial’s o magni Caesaris arbor, 18, further turns the reader to the Bellum Ciuile’s struggle between Magnus and Caesar). For another plane as ‘house-tree’, cf. Stat. Silu. 1.3.59–63, mediis seruata penatibus arbor,l tecta per et postes liquidas emergis in auras,/ quo non sub domino saeuas passura bipennes…/ non abruptos tibi debet Hamadryas annos.

56. See Cairns (n.1 above), 231f.

57. Theocr. 1.1 , Virg. Ecl. 1.38 (ipsae te…pinus,l ipsi te fontes, ipsa haec arbusta uocabant), Aen. 11.136 (actas ad sidera pinus), 10.708f. (de montibus altisl actus aper, multos Vesulus quern pinifer annos defendit).

58. Horace the man will perish πρóρριζoς (‘roots and all’); cf. Alexiou, M., The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition (Cambridge 1974) 198–201Google Scholar, on ‘The Tree’, from Horn. Il. 14.414–18, to ‘the Civil War of 1945–9: seeing her husband brought in dead, a woman cries out Πεύκoμoυ Hon! (My pine tree!)’.

59. So Caims (n.1 above) 229, courageously, despite n.8, ‘I have not yet succeeded in finding an example of…’, and despite 243, ‘It is improbable that the ode was imagined by Horace as inscribed upon or affixed to the pine tree, since its hymnic character speaks against this.’ It is improbable that a Pindaric Victory Ode should be incised in gold lettering in the Temple of Athena in Rhodian Lindos, but there you go (Ol. 7, ‘once literally worth its weight in gold’, Nisetich, J.J. [tr.], Pindar’s Victory Songs [Baltimore 1980], 111Google Scholar). Credamus quia improbabile—

60. Nichols, B., The Tree that Sat Down (London 1975), 16Google Scholar.

61. Cairns (n.1 above), 233, is on the right path but the wrong trail: ‘quam… quae… are deliberately non-symmetrical in significance’. How near— For ‘La Peur, le Désir et 1’Animal’, see Borgeaud, P., Recherches sur le dieu Pan (Geneva 1979), 177–92Google Scholar.

62. Zeitlin, F.I., ‘Introduction’ to J.-P. Vernant, Mortals & Immortals: Collected Essays (Princeton 1991), 16f.Google Scholar, and cf. esp. ibid. 197f. (‘Her Place’) and 200; on ‘L’accouchement’, cf. Vernant, J.-P., La Mort dans les yeux: figures de l’autre en Grèce ancienne (Paris 1985), 22fGoogle Scholar.

63. Somewhat in this vein, Pratt, A., Dancing with Goddesses: Archetypes, Poetry and Empowerment (Bloomington 1994), 283–313Google Scholar (‘Where the Wild Things Are: The Artemis Continuum’).

64. Pulleyn, S., ‘The Power of Names in Classical Greek Religion’, CQ 44 (1994), 17–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar, grudgingly accepts that Catull. 34.21, Hor. Carm. 3.19.5, Carm. Saec. 16 afford some reason to suppose that correct nomination of deities had magical overtones for Romans, but discounts any such phenomenon in Greek culture: the gauntlet—

65. Rilke, trans into French by C. Vigée, into English by M. Jolas in Bachelard (n.32 above), 201 and 200: …O, I who long to grow, I look outside myself, and the tree inside me grows. If you want to achieve the existence of a tree, Invest it with inner space, this space That has its being in you.

66. Cairns (n.1 above), 228.

67. For poetry as morphophonemic plasticity, cf. Hollander, J., Melodious Guile: Fictive Patterns in Poetic Language (New Haven 1988), esp. 198Google Scholar.

68. Foley, W., A Child in the Forest (New York 1985), 8Google Scholar.

69. Cf. Serv. Virg. Aen. 7.81; auct. Eel. 6.27; auct. Georg. 1.10 (Maltby [n.55 above], s.v.). Cf. Nisbet and Hubbard (n.9 above) on Carm. 1.17.2: ‘Faunus seems to have been one of Horace’s favourite gods; perhaps…he connected his name with fauere….Pindar had a personal cult of Pan…However, it would be quite wrong to regard Horace’s Faunus as an alien poetical fancy; he remains a truly Italian deity, sanctified by deeply rooted local cults.’ Guess that quite means ‘utter-ly’ for M.H., but ‘equi-vocally’ for R.G.M.N.? On the ‘folk deity’ status of Italian Silvanus, cf. Dorcey, P.F., The Cult of Silvanus: A Study in Roman Folk Religion (Leiden 1992), esp. 3–6Google Scholar.

70. Serv. auct. Virg. Aen. 1.498; Varr. ap. Prob. Virg. Ecl. 6.31; Cic. De Nat. Deor. 2.69; Varr. ibid. (Maltby [n.55 above], s.v.).

71. Diana and [Apollo] share stanza 1 with their paired parents; stanza 2 is for uirgines, stanza 3 for mares (lluos…- //uos…); despite totidem…laudibus (9), stanza 4 turns to hic…hic, twinning bellum lacrimosum…, miseram famem pestemque, populo et principe, Persas atque Britannos, but of Diana ne uerbum quidem. The iunctura of natalem…Delon Apollinis (10) drums up praise to order; cf. Tempe totidem tollite laudibus (9: lector, audi), for Delos became ‘manifest’, a stably referential proposition once this floating signifier was fixed to the map as Leto’s maternity ward (—cf. Maltby [n.55 above], s.v.), at the instant that Apollo was dubbed (ibid., s.v.).

72. Nisbet and Hubbard (n.9 above), ad loc.

73. Virg. Ecl. 6.3, cued by the Callimachean Cynthius of Carm. 1.21.2 ∼ Ecl. 6.3 (cf. Thomas, R.F., Virgil Georgics Books III-IV [Cambridge 1988]Google Scholar, ad Virg. Georg. 3.36). For tener, cf. Virg. Ecl. 10.53f., teneris…arboribus, and Catull. 35.1, Poetae tenero, meo sodali… This love supreme between girls and goddess is deep as the chaste prayer would love supremo Jupiter’s lust for Leto to have been (dilectam penitus, 4): all that Ovid fouls in the teneris…modis of his alAmores (2.1.4, ‘tender strains’/‘teen tunes’/‘sexy sex’/‘chic poetry’/‘Callimachean refinement’—Henderson, J., ‘Wrapping Up the Case: Reading Ovid, Amores, 2, 7 [+8]. II’, MD 28 [1992], 27–83Google Scholar, at 81).

74. Cf. the very last entry in Paul. Fest., uernisera: messalia auguria (520L.), with Tibull. 1.1.23f. (agna cadet nobis, quam circum rustica pubes/ clamet, ‘io messes et bona uina date’…), 41f. (non ego diuitias patrum fructusque requiro,/ quos tulit antiquo condita messis auo…), 53 (te bellare decet…, Messalla…). Tibullus’ whole project, we could say, turns on this difference within the entitlement of his Apollo-figure Messalia. In 3.21, Horace also brings home the bacon, for the wine goes with the well-cured strength of flavour in the savoury savvy of the Elder Cato’s flitch—Porcius written all over him (cf. 11, with sapientium, 14).

75. For deposiuit (slithering out into a well-oiled oliuam), cf. Phaedr. 1.19.4; Bornemann, F., Callimachus: Hymnus in Dianam (Florence 1968)Google Scholar, ad Callim. Hymn to Artemis 25 .

76. /siluarumque…/saltuumque pre-echo sonantum//, //montium returns in /amnium (for saltus, cf. Isid. 17.6.8, densitas arborum alta, uocata hoc nomine eo quod exiliat in altum et in sublime consurgat, Maltby [n.55 above], s.v.).

77. ‘She appears to be called by the Latins Juno Lucina:…because from that light of hers in which conception takes place until that one in which there is a birth into the light, the moon assists until with the completion of the months she has brought it forth into the light, the name Juno Lucina was coined from iuuare (“assist”) and lux (“light”).’ See Maltby (n.55 above), s.v. Lucina.

78. Cf. the recollection in tranquillity of Eur. Hipp. 165–69, .

79. Cf. Grimal (n.23 above), 60 and n.4.

80. Cf. Demand, N., Birth, Death, and Motherhood in Classical Greece (Baltimore 1994), 88–91Google Scholar (‘Artemis and Eileithyia’).

81. Almost all this from Cairns (n.1 above), 233–35, who relates the material back through the Greek hymnic tradition toward an archaic Lesbian archetype from Alcaeus.

82. LSJ S.v.

83. G. Capdeville, ‘De la forfêt initiatique au bois sacré’, in Les Bois Sacrés (n.43 above), 127–43, at 133 and n.72: Fēronia ‘emprunté à un parler italique, sans doute le sabin, où le e long s’ était conservé’. For other combinations, cf. Preller (n.46 above) i.322 and n.1; the post-Hadrianic hunting-memorial of Q. Tullius Maximus in Portugal names Diana…Delia uirgo triformis (CIL 2.2660): truly, me peritus discet Hiber (2.20.19f.).

84. E.g. Prop. 2.19.19 (antlers nailed to a pine); Virg. Ecl. 7.24 (pipes hung from a pine)…

85. Minadeo, R., The Golden Plectrum: Sexual Symbolism in Horace’s Odes (Amsterdam 1982), 202fGoogle Scholar. and the discretion of 72 n.4. Remember in this connection that quantity is not supposed to be what counts (pīnus/penis). Catull. 17.18f., nec se subleuat ex sua parte, sed uelut alnus/ in fossa Liguri iacet suppemata securi… is the locus classicus for the erectile/flaccid ‘tree’. Trees loom swollen with erotic investment in the metaphorics of seduction (e.g. Virg. Ecl. 9.41f., populus antro/ imminet), erotic myth (e.g. Stat. Silu. 2.3.20, [Pan] praedae leuis imminet – [platanus] decliuis ama), wedding-ritual (e.g. Catull. 61.166, [uir] totus immineat tibi).

86. DuPont (n.45 above), 215: another kind of discretion.

87. Cairns (n.1 above), 240. Men. Rhet. Epideikt. iii.402 Sp. advises (Cf. Buxton, R., Imaginary Greece: The Contexts of Mythology [Cambridge 1994], 203Google Scholar and fig. 17: ‘Trees, too, can be good to think with. The mountain pine is frequently associated with aggressive violence. Here a branch is wielded by a Centaur…’.) Again, this work of interpretation is on a continuum with the enthusiasm of an Elworthy, F.T., The Evil Eye (New York 1958), 97Google Scholar and 235: ‘The pinetree was beloved of virgins….The pinea corona was the emblem of virginity.’…

88. For the variants, cf. Fontaine, J. (ed.), Sulpicius Severus, Vita S. Martini 13.1 (Paris 1968), ii.742Google Scholar; Graillot, H., Le Culte de Cybèle (Paris 1912), 121ffGoogle Scholar.

89. Cf. Knight, C., Blood Relations: Menstruation and the Origins of Culture (New Haven 1991), esp. 343, 396Google Scholar; Buckley, T. and Gottlieb, A. (eds.) Blood Magic: The Anthropology of Menstruation (Berkeley 1988), 3–50Google Scholar (‘A Critical Appraisal of Theories of Menstrual Symbolism’). On the ‘ideology of blood’, cf. Testart, A., Essai sur les fondements de la division sexuelle du travail chez les chasseurs-cueilleurs (Paris 1986)Google Scholar.

90. Nodum soluere, 3.21.22: cue for 3.22. Cf. King, H., ‘Bound to Bleed: Artemis and Greek Women’, in A. Cameron and A. Kuhrt (eds.), Images of Women in Antiquity (London 1983), 109–27Google Scholar, at 121f.: ‘Birth is not…the only time when Artemis releases. The phrase to release the girdle, is used not only in labour…but also for defloration….As Λυσίζωvoς she “releases the girdle” both in defloration and in labour.’

91. Cf. King (n.90 above), 119, 121: ‘The eternal parthenos does not shed her blood in the hunt, in sex, or in childbirth….Artemis does not bleed, but she does shed the blood of others, both as huntress and as director of the process by which a parthenos becomes a gyne….The birth of the first child is particularly important in making the woman into a true gyne…and this is completed by the first lochia, the discharge from the uterus after childbirth….In the Hippocratic texts the lochia are analogous to menarche; both are normally “like the flow of blood from a sacrificed beast (Peri Gynaikeiōn 1.6/1.72 and 2.113, etc.)”.’

92. Golding, W., Lord of the Flies (Norwich 1958), 33f. and 200Google Scholar. (‘Beelzebub’ means ‘Lord of the Flies’.)

93. C. Montepaone, ‘L’alsosllucus, forma idealtipica artemidea: il caso di Ippolito’, in Les Bois Sacrés (n.43 above), 69–75.

94. Ov. Met. 10.710–39. In contemplating this connection, we rejoin the Frazerian quest: cf. Frazer, J.G., Adonis, Attis, Osiris: Studies in the History of Oriental Religion (London 1906Google Scholar = The Golden Bough Part IV), with e.g. Burkert, W., Structure and History in Greek Mythology and Ritual (Berkeley & Los Angeles 1979), 99–122Google Scholar (‘The Great Goddess, Adonis, and Hippolytos’).

95. Apul. Met. 8.4f. Cf. Hygin. Fab. 248, qui ab apro percussi interierunt; Schnapp, A., ‘Pratiche e immagini della caccia nella Grecia antica’, DArch 1 (1979), 36–59Google Scholar; Rubin, N.F. and Sale, W.M., ‘Meleager and Odysseus: A Structural and Cultural Study of the Greek Hunting-Maturation Rite’, Arethusa 16 (1983), 137–71Google Scholar.

96. Goff, B.E., ‘The Sign of the Fall: The Scars of Orestes and Odysseus’, CA 10 (1991), 259–67Google ScholarPubMed, at 262f.; cf. Segal, C., ‘The Phaeacians and Odysseus’ Return, Part 2: Death and Renewal’, in Singers, Heroes, and Gods in the Odyssey (Ithaca 1994), 37–64Google Scholar, at 49: ‘The Recognition by Eurykleia and the narrative of the scar (19.392–475) bring back not only his early youth but his birth and infancy, memories shared by the nurse who placed him on his grandfather’s knees to be named (399–414).’

97. The subject of a forthcoming essay by Froma Zeitlin.

98. Recall that Eumaeus’ own (anti-epic) story began, the way the Father of History, Herodotus, would begin History, with his nurse getting off with a sailor, a Phoenician trader in port, then absconding with the child to pay her passage (Od. 15.415–84: Artemis shot the woman down and she was fed to the seals and fish overboard, 478–81). For Od. 24, cf. J. Henderson, ‘The Name of the Tree/Homer, Odyssey 24.340–2’ (forthcoming) and P. Pucci, ‘Between Narrative and Catalogue: Life and Death of the Poem’ (forthcoming). βλωθρóς becomes a Homeric gloss favoured by Hellenistic poetasters (e.g. Ap. Rhod. Arg. 4.1476 buries his Argonaut Polyphemus son of Eilatus beneath a ). For Artemis and the plantation, cf. King (n.90 above), 122f.: ‘Artemis is associated with the plant world; not just with wild trees…, but also with cultivated trees. Near the sanctuary of Artemis Kalliste in Arkadia…’.

99. Usually we find pigs destroying crops (e.g. Avianus 30 = Aesopica 583 Perry)—for which (Ovid holds) pigs paid by becoming the first blood-offering, in Ceres’ revenge (Fast. 1.351f.)— and cultivated trees, e.g. Ov. Met. 8.290–95 (sternuntur…baca…cum ramis super frondentis oliuae), Philostr. Imag. 1.28.1–6 ΘHPEγTAI (‘Hunters <of pederastic desire>’): …. The Aesopic fable runs: ‘Asked by the fox why he was whetting his tusks when there was no hunter or danger present, he said “But I’m not doing this in vain: if danger does come upon me, I shan’t have time to spare for whetting then—I’ll have tusks ready for use.”’

100. ‘He raised himself up high and chopped the pig down with a billet of oak, which he left when he was splitting up wood. They slaughtered it and singed off the bristles….’ Cf. C. Segal, ‘The King and the Swineherd: Rags, Lies, and Poetry’, in Singers (n.96 above), 164–83, at 168.

101. Cf. Antipater Anth. Pal. 6.111 (the hide and horns of a hind killed round Erymanthus are hung by the shrine of the ).

102. Horn. Il. 11.414–18 (), 13.471–75 ; cf. Muellner, L., ‘The Simile of the Cranes and Pygmies’, HSCP 93 (1990), 59–101Google Scholar, at 63.

103. Why an Italian ‘castrated boar’ should sound like the dedicated offering of a Graeco-Roman ‘goddess’ whose name is that of a Greek ‘nurse’, maialis and Mαîα/μαîα, may or might not seem such a daft question. What will you think when you read of Eumaeus’ prayer as he carved the pork and reserved a portion ‘for the Nymphs and for Hermes’ (Od. 14.435)? As Eustathius, again, reads it, ‘Nymphs’ spell ‘brides, mothers-to-be, nubility’, and productivity in the wild, the woods, the country, the farms; and ‘Hermes’ spells ‘spelling, language, interpretation, cunning, questions-and-answers’ (p. 1766 on Od. 14.435). When Homer writes ‘Hermes, Mαιά- δoς υίεî’, this spells ‘the son of Maia’, but assimilates god and worshipper, too, as Eustathius (ibid.) notes: . So how far away is υίóς from ? And how near is the ‘son’ of Laertes’ (and Eu-maios’) estate to the ‘castrated pig’?—For the domestic cicur, cf. Serv. on Virg. Georg. 3.255 (ipse ruit dentesque Sabellicus exacuit sus: dicit autem suem domesticum quern cicurem uocant), Varro RR 3.13.1 (apros…et captiuos et cicuris, qui ibi nati sint, pingues solere fieri scis), Paul. Fest. 33 (cicur ex apro et scrofa domestica)… For the castrated maialis, cf. Varro RR 2.42. And on δελφάκιov, Schaps, D., ‘When is a Piglet not a Piglet?’, JHS 111 (1991), 208fCrossRefGoogle Scholar. Herdsmen could get boar living wild in the woods to come for feed to their call (Ael. Nat. An. 8.19, Varro RR 2.4.20); before their own scrap in the Grove of Planes, bands of Spartan ephebes set on each other (Paus. 3.14.10).

104. Williams (n.48 above) 150f. Cf. Wickham, E.C., The Works of Horace (Oxford 1912), i.198Google Scholar (‘The participle seems to imply that his tusks are just growing to the fit size,—he is thinking of using them, but has not yet done so,—and so points his age’); Page, T.E., Q. Horatii Flacci Carminum Libri IV (London 1886), 369Google Scholar (‘the boar is a young one just trying its powers’); Gow, J., Q. Horati Flacci Carmina, Liber Epodon (Cambridge 1906), 304Google Scholar (‘The boar is young and his tusks only give promise of the sidelong blow’); Kiessling, A.-Heinze, R.Q Horati Flacci Oden und Epoden ₁₂ (Dublin 1966), 346Google Scholar (‘obliquum m. i. meint also nicht den Pindars (fr. 234), der sich (Od. ι 450) gegen Jäger und Meute zur Wehr setzt, sondern den Frischling, der sich der Kraft seiner Hauer bewusst wird; es bezeichnet das Alter des Opfertieres’).

105. Cairns (n.1 above), 230, 237, 240.

106. Cairns (n.1 above), 237f. On the ancient Italian breeding season for pigs, cf. Varro RR 2.4.7.

107. Harris, M., Cows, Pigs, Wars and Witches: The Riddles of Culture (Glasgow 1977), 36, 45Google Scholar.

108. See the important discussions of Golden, M., ‘Male Chauvinists and Pigs’, EMC 32 (1988), 1–12Google Scholar, esp. 3, 8; and of Stallybrass, P. and White, A., The Politics and Poetics of Transgression (London 1986), 44–59Google Scholar (‘Thinking Pigs’). For our ancient evidence on ancient (boar and) swine, cf. Winkelstem, K., Die Schweinezucht im klassischen Altertum (Diss. Giessen 1933), esp. 33fGoogle Scholar. on slaughter and castration, 39–45 on cult practices; Nimtz, P., Die Haltung und Zucht des Schweines in dessen Bedeutung für Volkwirtschaft und Kultus im griechischen-römischen Altertum (Diss. Berlin 1927)Google Scholar.

109. Cf. Polyb. 2.15.1, Varro RR 2.4.9, Bayet, J., Les Origines de l’Hercule Romain (Paris 1926), 429–31Google Scholar (‘Le Pore Sacrificiel’).

110. Cf. Headlam, W. and Knox, A.D., Herodas: The Mimes and Fragments (Cambridge 1922)Google Scholar, ad Herod. 4.16. In uncut drafts of Jude the Obscure, before editorial castration, ‘Arabella throws the characteristic part of a castrated pig (penis without testicles) at Jude; and it is a part that she has herself amputated from the already mutilated boar. They even meet on the footbridge and carry on a conversation of a fairly bland sort, but whose underlying sexual tension is comically objectified in their subconscious awareness of that piece of flesh dangling over the rail….Arabella’s connection with the fate of the boar is…compounded in the later conflict with Jude during the pig-killing episode that ends their marriage’ (Stieg, M., Stories of Reading: Subjectivity and Literary Understanding [Baltimore 1989], 144–56Google Scholar [‘The Intentional Phallus in Dickens and Hardy’], at 154f.).

111. Cf. Thomas, R.F., ‘This Little Piggy had Roast Beef (Catullus 47)’, Prudentia 26 (1994), 147–52Google Scholar, on Porcius/Philodemus; Nisbet, R.G.M., M. Tulli Ciceronis In L. Calpumium Pisonem Oratio (Oxford 1961), 98Google Scholar, ad Cic. In Pis. 37.

112. Cf. Stallybrass and White (n.108 above), 56: ‘In the common prints of the world turned upside down…of early modem Europe, the pig is often shown as slitting the butcher’s throat.’

113. So Williams, G., The Third Book of Horace’s Odes (Oxford 1969), 118Google Scholar, ad loc.

114. Burkert (n.52 above), 62f., with n.20.

115. So Acron on 3.22.7: modum ferientis porci describit. nam saeuius laedunt uerres, cum transuersi feriunt iuxta dentium naturam. Cf. Ov. Met. 8.399f. (quaque est uia proximo leto,/ summa ferus geminos direxit ad inguina denies), 401f. (sanguine multo…cruore), 10.715f. (trux aper insequitur totosque sub inguine dentes/ abdidit et fulua moribundum strauit harena). Her. 4.104 (obliquo dente timendus aper), Apul. Met. 8.5 (perfemus dexterum dimisit lanceam tanto ille quidem fidentius, quanto crederet ferri uulnera similiafutura prosectu dentium)…

116. Quote from ‘Pigs on the Wing (Part 2)’, on Pink Floyd, Animals (EMI 1977). Stallybrass and White (n.108 above) explain how the pig has been demonised by the very discourse which invests rage, fear, affection, revulsion in the construction of selves for humanity.

117. For the fons Bandusiae likewise, see Smith, D.R., ‘The Poetic Focus in Horace, Odes, 3,13’, Latomus 35 (1976), 822–26Google Scholar, esp. 825f.: ‘In addition to the present state of the spring, two future events can be seen—the sacrifice of the kid and the nobility of the spring….The poetic focus…jumps temporal boundaries, to give close-up views of the future and to intertwine the future with the present.’ Cf. Cairns, F., ‘Horace, Odes, III, 13 and III, 23’, AC 46 (1977), 523–43Google Scholar, at 524. Caims (n.1 above), 230, rightly identifies the power of the binding of the future into the present dedicatory moment as the ‘generic’ difference of the poem considered as anathematikon.

118. Schottmeijer, M., Animal Victims in Modern Fiction: From Sanctity to Sacrifice (Toronto 1993), 79Google Scholar. Cf. Girard, R., Things Hidden since the Foundation of the World (Stanford 1987), 68–73Google Scholar (‘The Domestication of Animals and Ritual Hunting’); Vemant (n.62 above), esp. 290–302 (‘A General Theory of Sacrifice and the Slaying of the Victim in the Greek Thusia’), at 298.

119. Gordon, R., ‘The Veil of Power: Emperors, Sacrificers and Benefactors’, in M. Beard and J. North (eds.) Pagan Priests (London 1990), 199–231Google Scholar, at 206; and cf. Vernant (n.62 above), 294f.

120. Cf. Visser, M., The Rituals of Dinner (London 1993), 33Google Scholar, delving into the give-and-take production of sacrificial ‘thankfulness’. On the shock of blood, cf. Burkert (n.52 above), 21. Hexter, R., ‘O Fons Bandusiae: Blood and Water in Horace, Odes 3.13’, in M. Whitby, P. Hardie and M. Whitby (eds.), Homo Viator: Classical Essays for John Bramble (Bristol 1987), 131–39Google Scholar, reviews the question of pathos (if not of the transference) in that local sacrifice.

121. Cf. Harder, M.A., ‘Untrodden Paths: Where do they Lead?’, HSCP 93 (1990), 287–309Google Scholar, esp. 292f., 304, on ‘the affective expression ’, for fear not Homeric bloodlust, and on the oxen as ‘secondary focalizers’: ‘seeing the sharp knife that is going to kill them mirrored in the water, the implied reader is invited to look through their eyes.’

122. Cf. Miller, J.F., ‘The Fasti and Hellenistic Didactic: Ovid’s Variant Aetiologies’, Arethusa 25(1992), 11–31Google Scholar, at 19f.

123. For ‘The Role of the Voice in the Maintenance of Gender Boundaries’, see Gleason, M.W., Making Men: Sophists and Self-Presentation in Ancient Rome (Princeton 1995), 98–101Google Scholar, with 1–30 (‘Voice and Virility in Rhetorical Writers’).

124. Orwell, G., Animal Farm: A Fairy Story (Harmondsworth 1951), 120Google Scholar: the end.

125. Dahl, R., ‘Pig’, in Kiss Kiss (Harmondsworth 1959)Google Scholar: this story stays with you not least for the way it brings the lore that human flesh, or ‘long pig’, tastes like finest pork into the next restaurant you visit, and, worse still, the last restaurant you visited. Bon appetit.

126. In Alcaic style, Horace at 2.3.11f. labours to shiver his runaway stream out of the clutches of his/our stanza by poising obliquo as the pivot before the rhythm changes in release through the dactylic chase down the Alcaic channel to stanza-end—off, away from the intertwined network of a loving embrace: Towering pine and silver poplar— Why do they intermingle their friendly Shade? And why do these cantering waters Jockey their way through winding banks? (In MacNeice’s version: pinus…populus/ umbram hospitalem consociare amantl ramis. quid ōblīquō laboratl lympha fugax trepidare riuoll. Cf. Gold, B.K., ‘Mitte sectari, rosa quo locorum sera moretur: Time and Nature in Horace’s Odes’, CPh 88 (1993), 16–31Google Scholar, at 24 and n.27).

127. Quinn, K., Horace: The Odes (London 1980)Google Scholar, ad loc. (282), sees here ‘a concluding image to slacken the tension, as frequently in the Odes. H., i.e., asks us to imagine him confronting the “wild boar” and striking it down as it takes aim for a charge at him.’ …A ‘whimsical image’ this is not. How near, yet—

128. On this topic, see now Bulman, P., φθóvoς in Pindar (Berkeley 1992)Google Scholar; Vallozza, M., ‘II Motivo dell’invidia in Pindaro’, QUCC 60 (1989), 13–30Google Scholar; and cf. Dickie, M.W., ‘The Disavowal of inuidia in Roman Iamb and Satire’, in F. Cairns (ed.), Papers of the Liverpool Latin Seminar 3 (Liverpool 1981), 183–208Google Scholar.

129. Limat puns between ‘files’ and ‘looks sideways at’. For the imagery, cf. 39–41, rident uicini…, rodere…, inuidet… Cf. Serm. 2.5.52 for a sneaky snoop’s scan, sic tamen ut limis rapias quid prima secundol cera uelit uersu…; Virg. Eel. 3.8 (9111 te transuersa tuentibus hircis, where the leer supplies the repressed sexual transitivity) and Carm. Priap. 73.1 (obliquis quid me, pathicae, spectatis ocellis?) toy with inuidia as the emasculating look. (Cf. Hudson-Williams, A., ‘Some Passages in Virgil’s Eclogues’, CQ 30 [1980], 124–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 124f.).

130. Dickinson, E., The Complete Poems (London 1975), 506f.Google Scholar, no. 1129 (distended to a two quatrain stretch); cf. Hollander (n.67 above), 5.

131. Auden, W.H., ‘Our Bias’; see J. Patrick, ‘Going Round Versus Going Straight to Meaning: The Puzzles of Auden’s “Our Bias’”, in C. Hosek and P. Parker (eds.), Lyric Poetry: Beyond New Criticism (Cornell 1985), 281–97Google Scholar, esp. 292.

132. Harrison, G., ‘Piggies’, on The Beatles ‘White Album’ (EMI 1968)Google Scholar.

133. Verrall, A.W., Studies Literary and Historical in the Odes of Horace (London 1884), 115Google Scholar: ‘…if we attend to the preparatory suggestions of III.22, where the poet gives thanks for the safe delivery of a mother (a noticeable thing surely in the work of a bachelor), …then it may cross our minds that there was at this time a member of the Caesarean house, a most “unique Caesar”,…— the infant son of Julia, sole heir of Julia, Augustus, and Rome’. So to 3.25. This ‘what crosses our minds’ gets it exactly.

134. Quinn (n.127 above), ad loc. (282): ‘per exactos annos] = “on each anniversary” (each birthday of the child just born)’.

135. Cairns (n.1 above), 236–39.

136. Cf. Argetsinger, K., ‘Birthday Rituals: Friends and Patrons in Roman Poetry and Cult’, CA 11(1992), 175–93Google Scholar, at 188f.

137. R. Gordon, ‘From Republic to Principate: Priesthood and Ideology’, in Pagan Priests (n.119 above), 177–98; North, J., ‘Religion and Politics, From Republic to Principate’, JRS 76 (1986), 251–58Google Scholar.

138. Cf. Beard, M., ‘A Complex of Times: No More Sheep on Romulus’ Birthday’, PCPS 33 (1987), 1–15Google Scholar; A. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Time for Augustus: Ovid, Augustus, and the Fasti’, in Whitby et al. (n.120 above), 221–30. For succinct introduction to this theoretic after Bourdieu, cf. Gell, A., The Anthropology of Time: Cultural Constructions of Temporal Maps and Images (Oxford 1992), 294–305Google Scholar (‘Calendars and Consensual Co-ordination’) and 306–13 (‘Calendars and Power’).

139. Cf. Barchiesi, A., Il Poeta e il Principe: Ovidio e il Discorso Augusteo (Rome 1994), esp. 59–62Google Scholar (‘Augusto riscrive Roma’); Feeney, D., ‘Si licet et fas est: Ovid’s Fasti and the Problem of Free Speech under the Principate’, in A. Powell (ed.), Roman Poetry and Propaganda in the Age of Augustus (Bristol 1992), 1–25Google Scholar.

140. Nowotny, H., Time: The Modern and Post-Modern Experience (Cambridge 1994) 151Google Scholar, 143f., paraphrasing Elias, N., Time: An Essay (Oxford 1992)Google Scholar, on the Ibo village in Eastern Nigeria in Chinua Achebe’s novel, and the seventeenth century Japanese strategist Shinmen Musashi; see esp. 103–31 (‘Politics of Time: The Distribution of Work and Time’). For Horatian time, cf. Feeney, D.C., ‘Horace and the Lyric Poets’, in N. Rudd (ed.) Horace 2,000: A Celebration. Essays for the Bimillennium (London 1993), 41–63Google Scholar, at 58–60. Cf. Ancona, R., Time and the Erotic in Horace’s Odes (Durham NC 1994)Google Scholar, whose study is limited to a selection from the ‘love odes’.

141. Cairns (n.1 above), 237f. Cairns wants the porker’s ripening for the chop to place the poem within a specific seasonal temporality, geared into the pig’s reproductive and maturing biopackage, but in my view he is out on a limb (237f.).

142. Though his oblique meditation scrutinises the calendar lore for the Ides of August intently, finding festal-rites for Vertumnus to anamorphose in 3.22.7’s uerris…ictum (238). Quod datur accipe: when the pig is offered, hold open the poke…

143. Nadeau, Y., ‘Speaking Structures—Part Four (Hor. Carmina 3, 13–17)’, QUCC 60 (1989), 85–104Google Scholar, at 91, implicating Livy’s hook-up at 1.7.

144. Auentinum…ab aduentu hominum, quod commune Latinorum ibi Dianae templum sit constitutum (Varro LL 5.43). Gender polarity was further enshrined on the Aventine when, thirsty from strangling Cacus, Hercules was denied a drink there by the priestess of Bona Dea and in revenge banned women from his worship for ay (Prop. 4.9, cf. Myers, K.S., Ovid’s Causes: Cosmogony and Aetiology in the Metamorphoses [Ann Arbor 1995], 86–90Google Scholar).

145. On Diana in Carmen Saeculare and Carm. 4.6, cf. Putnam, M., Artifices of Eternity: Horace’s Fourth Book of Odes (Ithaca 1986)Google Scholar, esp. 122.

146. Humphrey, C. and Laidlaw, J., The Archetypal Actions of Ritual (Oxford 1994)Google Scholar, iconoclastically argue that decrypting of ritual actions by reference to cultural codes mystifies the praxis of ritual, which is satisfied in its framing commitment.

147. P. Albert-Bireau, Les Amusements Naturels, tr. M. Jolas in Bachelard (n.32 above), 185: And with a stroke of the pen I name myself Master of the World. Unlimited man.

148. Culler, J., The Pursuit of Signs: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction (London 1981), 153Google Scholar: ‘Apostrophe is not the representation of an event; if it works, it produces a Active, discursive event.’ In 3.22, if it doesn’t work, we flctive Horaces bleed on the page.

149. Cf. Esser, D., Untersuchungen zu den Odenschlussen bei Horaz (Meisenheim am Glan 1976), 133Google Scholar.

150. Cf. Johnson, W.R., The Idea of Lyric: Lyric Modes in Ancient and Modern Poetry (Berkeley 1982)Google Scholar, esp. 127f.

151. Actually, sheep’s gut (Horn. Hymn. Hermes 51) or oxgut (Apollod. 3.1.2) provided ‘catgut’ for the paradigmatic strings.

152. Dorgan, T., ‘Leabhar Mór na Héirann’, in I. Breakwell and P. Hammond (eds.), Brought to Book: The Balance of Books and Life (London 1994), 136–39Google Scholar, at 136.

153. The Female as blanket hologram still thrives, as in the work of Burkert (n.52 above), 79f.: ‘The goddesses of Greek polytheism, so different and complementary, are, nonetheless, consistently similar in appearance at an earlier stage, with one or the other simply becoming dominant in a sanctuary or city. Each is the Great Goddess presiding over a male society; each is depicted in her attire as Mistress of the Beasts, and Mistress of the Sacrifice, even Hera and Demeter. Artemis enjoys the closest ties to the hunt, but at the same time Artemis of Ephesus is very much like Asiatic Kybele. Aphrodite recalls Oriental origins, the naked goddess…becoming more sexual and less dangerous in the course of civilisation….These goddesses are characteristically savage and dangerous: they are the ones who kill, who demand and justify sacrifice.’ Horace’s imagination is on a continuum with this—

154. Docherty (n.6 above), 93.

155. Cf. Caws, M.A., Reading Frames in Modern Fiction (Princeton 1985), 114–16Google Scholar (‘Writing and The Sideways Look’).

156. Cairns (n.1 above), 230 and 245.

157. See Armstrong, D.F., Stokoe, W.C. and Wilcox, S.E., Gesture and the Nature of Language (Cambridge 1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, for the argument that language (and so humanity) emerged through visible bodily action.

158. The [9th C] Exeter Book of Riddles, tr. K. Crossley-Holland (Harmondsworth 1979), 47Google Scholar: no. 26, ‘The Book’.

159. Eliot, T.S., ‘East Coker’, Four Quartets (London 1963), 30Google Scholar: Because one has only learnt to get the better of words for the thing one no longer has to say, or the way in which one is no longer disposed to say it…

160. 4.351 (Shadduck, G., A Critical edition of Abraham Cowley’s DAVIDEIS [New York 1987], 419Google Scholar): see Hollander (n.67 above), 171. Cowley explains his intrusion of Alexandrines among the heroic couplets in his note on Davideis 1.352: ‘The thing is, that the disposition of words and numbers should be such, as that out of the order and sound of them, the things themselves may be represented….The Latines (qui Musas colunt seueriores) sometimes did it, and their Prince, Virgil, always.’

161. Cf. Woodman, A.J., Review of Nisbet and Hubbard (n.35 above), LCM 6.6 (1981), 159–66Google Scholar, at 160. We should not, however, play blind to historicality: Johnson had his own cultural-political axe to swing when he cut the Caroline Pindarist and his biblical extravaganza down to size. Still, would Joyce be so bad a guide to Roman poetics?