The text of Vergil’s Georgics used in this commentary is the Oxford Classical Text edited by R.A.B. Mynors (Oxford 1969). I have followed it everywhere, though there are a few places where I note variants that might be of interest to some readers. Unlike some editors, I do not omit any lines. The only substantive change is in orthography: the 3rd declension -īs endings have been changed throughout to -ēs, to facilitate reading, especially for less experienced Latin readers.
Throughout I make reference in the notes to other commentaries. Some of these are quite old, which are available via Google Books; others are more recent. Each have their strengths. I often consulted these commentaries when I was first reading the Georgics with my students, and periodically I refer back to them, in cases where there is a dispute, a particularly apt phrasing, or where I think that those who are interested might find more details. Bibliographic details for all commentaries, and hyperlinks where appropriate, can be found below.
In general, those readers who are interested in parallel passages in Greek and Latin literature or issues of textual criticism will find that Conington, and Thomas have the most to offer. Huxley’s commentary focuses on meter to a greater extent than any other, and Mynor’s treatment of flora and fauna is the best by far.
This commentary has been designed to aid the most inexperienced readers, and so the kinds of help you will find (such as sentences rewritten in English word order, or notations of some rather basic case usages) will be unnecessary for more advanced readers, but were aids that helped my own novice students. A reader who makes their way through the entirety of the text will see a great deal of repetition: for example, I note every instance of a 3rd person perfect plural verb ending in -ere. This may feel needless for some, but someone who wishes only to read the Orpheus and Eurydice tale would otherwise miss valuable information, and even my own students would occasionally miss a grammatical construction that should by the end of the book be familiar. In some places I offer choices for how one might read an ablative (i.e., as an ablative of means or of cause). I am not trying to dither about which one is “right”; rather, I approach the reading of Latin texts—and the understanding of case usage—in a more holistic way. I don’t believe that Vergil sat with stylus to lip pondering “now is this a subjective or an objective genitive?” Rather, certain cases fit certain jobs; sometimes we choose a phrasing specifically because of its richness, its ambiguity, or because (as a native speaker) it “feels” right. I believe those writing in Latin did the same, and offering the reader a choice allows them to come into the conversation and make their own assessments.
In the same way, I try to illuminate things that might be unclear (for example, what is an oak gall?), but I try not to prescribe interpretations. Part of the joy of the Georgics is coming to it for the first time and trying to piece it together. There are lots of books that will tell you how to read Georgics 4 (and many of them are listed below), but I believe that reading is most meaningful when we are able to create connections for ourselves. So, I have chosen to clarify what might be obscure, and the draw connections that you might have missed. In the essays I offer more interpretations, but, if you are coming to Georgics 4 for the first time, I encourage you to read it first before reading what I—or anyone else—has made of it.
Elizabeth Manwell
Cover Image: A Greek gold ring, 3rd c. BC. Getty Museum 85.AM.278. Inscription: E Φ (short for Ephesos), one letter on either side of head of bee. Image credit: Getty Museum.