Facile, precor gelida quando quando pecas omnia ruminat, and so forth.

. . . Old Mantuan, old Mantuan! who understandeth thee not, loves thee not.

spacer1. When in Love’s Labor’s Lost Holofernes misquotes the first line of the Adulescentia, Shakespeare could still rely on his audience’s widespread familiarity with the eclogues of “good old Mantuan” to catch the error of his foolishly pedantic schoolmaster.  Indeed, it is partly because of Holofernes’ real–life counterparts in the grammar schools that Mantuan’s eclogues played such a crucial role in the culture of western Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.  That these poems are, despite W. P. Mustard’s admirable edition, less well known today among students of the Renaissance is doubtless due to the decline of the study of Latin in the twentieth–century curriculum and to the lack of a modern translation of the entire collection.  What follows is an attempt to rectify this situation.  The primary aims of my translation have been utility and fidelity to the Latin text; only accidentally are they concerned with stylistic elegance.  I have been less given to paraphrase than my two English predecessors, George Turberville and Thomas Harvey, and my medium has been prose rather than verse—a treatment under which Mantuan suffers a good deal less than does Virgil. NOTE 1   My version has been affected by the notes on vocabulary and syntax in Mustard’s edition as well as in the Renaissance commentaries of Jodicus Badius and Andreas Vaurentinus, but no effort has been made to incorporate this material into my own annotation.  The voluminous notes on verbal echoes of ancient and medieval writers in the eclogues have likewise been excluded, except in cases (e.g., II, 103n) where they are immediately and strikingly contextual.  Given the widespread use of Badius’ commentary in the Renaissance, however, I have included a selection, with translation, of his interpretative notes, in particular his important introductory discussions of the first and seventh eclogues.spacerNOTE 2
spacer2. The Latin text of the Adulescentia, based on the first printed edition of the eclogues (the Mantua edition of 1498), is Mustard's and follows his modifications in spelling and punctuation.  Mustard's edition has grown scarce and difficult to obtain, and, given the many citations that have been made to it over the years, it seemed desirable to make his text widely available again.  More importantly, his pedagogical aim of keeping Mantuan's eclogues as a living document for twentieth–century readers of Latin continues to seem a laudable and more attainable goal with his text.  In cases such as the texts printed in my first appendix, where the interest is more specialized and scholarly, I have retained the orthography and punctuation of the original.
spacer3. Since the publication of Mustard’s edition, the research of Ludovico Saggi and Graziano di Santa Teresa in particular have virtually transformed our knowledge of Mantuan’s life and career.  While I have taken their work into account, my introduction and notes focus only on those biographical aspects immediately relevant to the composition and publication of his Adulescentia.
spacer4. Mantuan’s request in his dedicatory letter to Paride Ceresara that all manuscript copies of earlier versions of his eclogues be destroyed has until recently proved so effective that information on the composition and publishing history of the Adulescentia has remained scattered and sketchy.  To rectify this situation, in the Introduction and first appendix I have printed and discussed transcriptions of manuscript versions of the ninth and tenth eclogues as well as newly discovered excerpts from the original, unprinted collection.  In addition, the Introduction and a second appendix supplement Edmundo Coccia’s bibliography in order to more fully document the publishing history of the Adulescenitia.  Finally, I have, unlike Mustard, taken note of an important letter from Mantuan to his father that, written when he was at work on the first version of his eclogues, sheds important light on the circumstances of their composition.
spacer5. Comments on the style, theme, and organization of Mantuan’s Adulescentia, set forth in the Introduction, are elaborated in the notes to the individual eclogues.  In discussing literary conventions and backgrounds, my annotation goes somewhat beyond what Mustard took for granted in an earlier day.  (It is still assumed, of course, that interested students will consult The Oxford Classical Dictionary as well as The Oxford Companion to Classical Literature and other reference works in the field.)  In particular, I have presented more of the Carmelite heritage that informs the revised version of Mantuan’s collection.
spacer6. The work of Mustard and other scholars on the influence of the Adulescentia on European culture and literature has been incorporated into the introduction and notes to the individual eclogues. NOTE 3 In many ways, this remains the most dated aspect of Mustard's edition.  A good deal of critical endeavor has been expended since 1911 on the influence of the Adulescentia.  The need now would seem to be for a full–scale treatment of the place of Mantuan’s eclogues within European literature.  This is clearly an aim outside the bounds of an edition.  For all that, if my endeavor succeeds in encouraging such an undertaking, what follows will have more than served its purpose.
spacer7. In the arduous task of checking references I have had the able assistance of the staffs at the Folger Shakespeare Library, the Library of Congress, the Newberry Library, the New York Public Library, the libraries at Yale, Michigan, Columbia, North Carolina, and Virginia as well as the Cochran Library at Sweet Briar.  Katherine Pantzer, Harriet Jameson, Giulia Bologna, Carla Bonanni Guiducci, and John Morrison were all very kind in answering questions and providing material to resolve an array of bibliographic problems.  I am grateful to the Bodleian Library, Oxford, as well as to the Vatican Library and Collegio di Sant’ Isidoro, Rome, for permission to print transcriptions from manuscripts in their collections.  Thanks also are due to the editors of Renaissance Quarterly and Renaissance Studies for permission to print material that first appeared in their pages.  To the staffs of the Folger Library (especially Laetitia Yeandle and Nati Krivatsy), the Bodleian Library, and the libraries at Virginia and North Carolina—at all of which places work on this edition was carried out—as well as to John Jaffe and Christoper Bean at the Sweet Briar Library I owe a deep and longstanding debt of gratitude.
spacer8.   Grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities and the Southeastern Institute of Medieval and Renaissance Studies helped to support work on this edition under the sympathetic encouragement of Jean–Claude Margolin and Louis Martz.  Portions of the manuscript were read at different times by them and by Charles Fantazzi, Laetitia Yeandle, Herbert Matsen, and the late Calvin Anderson (who generously opened to me the hospitality of Whitefriars Hall, Washington, and the treasures of its library).  John B. Dillon saved me from a number of errors by his careful reading of an earlier version of the entire manuscript.  (He also communicated material, so marked, on literary influences on the Adulescentia, based on an annotated copy of the eclogues made by Howard T. Easton, Mustard’s pupil at Johns Hopkins during the 1920s.)  Catherine Cravens assisted in preparing the final version, which was gone over by Scott Bentley at Garland.  To R. G. M. Nisbet of Corpus Christi College, who read and offered numerous suggestions on the translation, I owe a further debt of gratitude for his having originally helped me to discover the delights of Virgil and pastoral poetry during a sabbatical year at the University of Oxford.  Last but not least, I owe a continuing indebtedness to the interest and support of my wife, a twentieth–century woman of science intrigued, if sometimes puzzled, by the world of quattrocento Italian humanism.

L. P.

Sweet Briar
February 1989

Preface to the Second Edition

spacerPublished in 1989, this edition is increasingly coming to seem the work of another person. It was meant to introduce to twentieth-century Anglophone readers an interesting poet who had an immense influence on the literature of early modern Europe, a purpose that from requests I receive it still seems to serve at the dawning of a new millenium. Copies of the printed edition have long since disappeared, and I am therefore grateful to Taylor and Francis for reverting all rights to me and to Dana Sutton for agreeing to put up an electronic version in The Philological Museum.   For the most part I have resisted the flexibilty of this new medium, confining my changes in the text to corrections of typographical and other minor errors together with a scattering of new bibliographic references.  The major exception is an expansion of my discussion in the general introduction of the uses made of Mantuan’s eclogues in the schools.  When the first edition went to press, I was just beginning research on this immense topic, and I have taken advantage of a new version to add a selection of what turned up in the intervening years.  Finally, I am appending below a list of works in English, published after the first edition appeared, on Mantuan’s eclogues and their influence on European literature.

L. P.

Sweet Briar
December 2008

Paul Alpers.  What Is Pastoral?  University of Chicago Press, 1996.

Gary M. Bouchard.  Colin’s Campus: Cambridge Life and the English Eclogue.  Selinsgrove: Susquehanna University Press, 2000.

Sukanta Chaudhuri.  Renaissance Pastoral and Its English Developments.  Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989.

Thomas K. Hubbard.  The Pipes of Pan: Intertextuality and Literary Filiation in the Pastoral Tradition from Theocritus to Milton. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1998.

E. Kegel-Brinkgreve.  The Echoing Woods: Bucolic and Pastoral from Theocritus to Wordsworth. Amsterdam: Gieben, 1990.

John N. King, “Spenser's May Eclogue and Mid-Tudor Religious Poetry.” Early Modern English Poetry: A Critical Companion. Oxford University Press, eds. Patrick Cheney et al. 48 - 59.

William A. Oram. Edmund Spenser. New York: Twayne, 1997.

Lee Piepho.  Holofernes’ Mantuan: Italian Humanism in Early Modern England.  Bern/New York: Peter Lang, 2001.

________  “Spenser and Neo-Latin Literature,” in the Oxford Handbook of Edmund Spenser, ed. Richard McCabe,  Oxford University Press (2010) 573 - 85.

Bart van Es. “Spenserian Pastoral.” Early Modern English Poetry: A Critical Companion. Oxford University Press, eds. Patrick Cheney et al. 79 - 89.       




spacerNOTE 1 Translations from ancient authors follow, as indicated, the versions in the Loeb Classical Library.  Translations from the Bible are from the Douay-Rheims Version.

spacerNOTE 2  In annotating the eclogues, I have tried to credit the commentator to first document a specific literary echo, determine a particular interpretation, and the like.  Whenever possible, line numbers parallel the original annotation, the annotator being named in each note or indicated in parentheses by an initial (e.g., Ad = Badius; M = Mustard).

NOTE 3   I have taken what seems to me most useful in Mustard’s survey.  Some of the echoes he hears (e.g., Candidus’ complaint against niggardly patrons [V.145f.] in Thomas Lodge’s Fig for Momus) are too general to admit a particular influence. Others are too imperfectly or inaccurately documented to be traceable (e g., his discussion [pp. 44 - 45] of quotations from the eclogues in Burton’s Anatomy of Melancholy and a treatment [p. 47] of borrowings from the eclogues in Otto Melander’s Iocorum atque seriorum...centuriae aliquot iucunda).