Katherine Dennis (Princeton University)
Grafting and Displacement in Vergil’s Eclogues
Grafting is one of the clearest examples of human intervention in the natural world, and a fixture of ancient agricultural texts, including Vergil’s Eclogues and Georgics. In particular, the description of grafting in G. 2.22-82 is the subject of much scholarly scrutiny, mostly surrounding the plausibility of the grafts Vergil describes and their impact on the reader. Ross and Thomas argue that the grafts are impossible and that Vergil’s imagery and diction “clearly illustrate the farmer’s violence and subsequent distortion of the natural” (Ross 1980:68). Lowe, Thibodeau, and Gowers conversely claim that the grafts would’ve been credible or participate in an imaginative utopia, and therefore aren’t as disturbing as pessimistic critics would have them appear. Grafting has also been read symbolically. Henkel and Clément-Tarantino argue that grafting is metapoetic, representing competitive engagement between author and source or the clash between genres. Wilhelm sees grafting as a productive political metaphor, emphasizing the importance of cultural blending for creating Rome’s prosperous civilization (cf. Nappa 2005:73).
The Eclogues are either absent from these discussions or used to illustrate the association between implied grafts and adynata in Ecl. 3.89, 4.29, and 8.52-3. This paper considers two other lines that mention grafting explicitly and have much to tell us about the political implications of the concept. The first, 1.73, is part the lament where Meliboeus reflects on the loss of his home: insere nunc, Meliboee, piros, pone ordine vitis. The second, 9.50, is from a song recalled by Lycidas: insere, Daphni, piros; carpent tua poma nepotes. Given their linguistic parallels and the shared context of the land confiscations, the two lines surely respond to one another. Servius comments that Lycidas’ line represents the former securitas of land-tenure and inheritance: the ability to complete horticultural tasks and interact with the natural world thus represents the pastoral ideal, and Meliboeus bitterly refers to what is now an impossibility.
The political analyses of grafting cited above have a one-sided focus on the benefits of Rome’s incorporation of Greek and Italian cultural and natural resources, but even Horace acknowledges the power imbalance involved in Graeca capta’s influence on Latium. Moreover, the process Wilhelm describes—the flow of people and products into and out of an imperial epicenter—is essentially a process of colonization, which the Eclogues confront explicitly in their treatment of the land confiscations, and whose devastating costs Meliboeus and Lycidas embody.
This paper demonstrates why these paradigmatic expressions of pastoral loss are articulated with reference to grafting and argues that grafting further inscribes pastoral song within the histories of violence inherent in colonization and imperial expansion. Using material and historical evidence in conjunction with the Eclogues allows us to complicate the optimistic grafting symbolism and see it reflecting the displacement and forced migration of myriad peoples during the period. Moreover, grafting provides a powerful opportunity for reflecting on the nature, impact, and precarity of humanity’s intervention in the environment, and consequently informs our understanding of the ecocritical value of pastoral.