William Freeman (University of Cambridgeq)
My paper places Vergil’s Eclogues and Georgics in the context of a period of climatic disruption in the Mediterranean, triggered by two volcanic eruptions in the late 40s BCE. The fallout from these eruptions led, in the short term, to spectacular meteorological phenomena and, in the longer term, contributed to a period of agricultural difficulty. I argue that these factors had both a direct and indirect influence on the composition and early reception of Vergil’s poetry on agricultural themes.
The idea that the Eclogues and Georgics were written in response to the contemporary devastation of Italian agriculture has a long history, but these problems have only ever been attributed to the effects of civil war and land confiscation (White, 106-7; Spurr, 175-81). However, new insights into climate history have the potential to change the narrative of the historical context of Vergil’s green poetry. Building on Forsyth’s much earlier study, McConnell et al. have correlated historical reports of famine and celestial portents in the late 40s BCE with climatological data that point to two volcanic eruptions: of Mount Etna in 44 BCE and of Mount Okmok, to the South-East of Alaska, in 43 BCE. The Okmok eruption in particular helped to create the conditions for some of the coldest years in the last two-and-a-half millennia.
The studies of Forsyth and McConnell et al. refer briefly to Vergil’s Georgics, but only as a witness to the sun darkening and Mount Etna erupting at the time of Julius Caesar’s death (Georg. 1.464-63). My paper aims to integrate their new picture of environmental history more fully into a reading of Vergil’s poetry. The evidence for meteorological anomalies and agricultural problems resulting from adverse climatic conditions seems to vindicate the broader effect of the poet’s vision at Georg. 1.464-514, which intertwines multiple freak weather events, volcanic eruption, infertile fields, and warfare with the death of Caesar. Of course, Vergil knew nothing of Okmok and his limited perspective distorts the realities of the situation, since he attributes agricultural decline to the effects of war, rather than external factors (Ecl. 1.70-8, Georg. 1.505-8). As McConnell et al. argue, the relationship between war and agriculture was more reciprocal, with crop failures and famine exacerbating political tensions in the period. Nevertheless, the paleoclimate records corroborate historical accounts of famine (e.g. Appian BC 4.61, 4.63, 5.25) to confirm that Vergil and his readers lived through a time of poor harvests and disrupted supply chains. The difficulty with which Vergil characterises farming in Georg. 1 (especially 118-203) was more than a literary trope. Likewise, the hopes for marvellous bounty expressed in Ecl. 4 and at various points in the Georgics must have held a particular resonance for those with a memory of agricultural problems. I argue further that the recent integration of climate science into narratives of ancient history lends new significance to Vergil’s exposition of the entanglement of human civilisation with agriculture, climate, and celestial phenomena.