period. The literature however in which such echoes would naturally be found, if found at all, has disappeared almost to the last line. It is certain too that the important and far-reaching revolution of taste represented by the archaistic school of Fronto had a decided effect on the tradition of the great Augustan poets. Yet here too we must remember that the Imperial reading public was still too large, if not too independent, to be deeply affected as a whole by any one school, however important. On the whole therefore it is probably safe to say that Tibullus, though still a popular author, was less read than in the previous period, and was already entering the stage of being read about, and admired from afar — the fate, as a rule, of the world's best books.

The march to oblivion in the third and fourth centuries was considerably accelerated no doubt by the lack of professorial recognition, such as it was. At all events grammatical references to Tibullus are unusually rare, and there is nothing to show that he was ever paid the compliment of a commentary. To be sure an occasional echo in poets like Nemesianus, Ausonius, and possibly Paulinus Nolanus, indicates that even in this period Tibullus was still read. But he can hardly have been known to the larger reading public, and least of all, if we may believe Ammianus (28, 4, 14), to the Roman nobility. These degenerate representatives of what had once been the most highly cultivated class in the Empire he does not hesitate to describe as-'detestantes ut venena doctrinas, Iuvenalem et Marium Maximum curatiore studio legunt, nulla volumina praeter haec in profundo otio contrectantes.' It has even been urged that the reason why Hieronymus makes no reference to Tibullus and Propertius in his Chronicle is because he had never read either of them.

The last ancient author, and the first since Apuleius, to mention our poet is Sidonius Apollinaris (fifth century). His information (see p. 181) is without warrant in previous tradition, and his works give no signs of a knowledge of Tibullus at first hand. careful examination of the elegies of Maximianus, written about

550, suggests that he may have had a direct knowledge of Tibullus, but the evidence is slight and not especially convincing (see 1, 2, 19-20 and note).

Here at last the tiny rivulet of Tibullian tradition finally dries up. There are no citations from him in Priscian, and henceforth until the Renaissance, if we exclude three or four mediaeval book catalogues, all evidence of him is confined to the occasional quota ́tion of a passage which may always be traced either to one of the mediaeval florilegia (see p. 89) or to a note of some ancient grammarian or commentator.1

With the Revival of Learning our poet, together with Catullus and Propertius, once more came to the front, and for the time being resumed his place in the territory over which Ovid had so long reigned alone. Delia again becomes a familiar character; the literary gossip of Apuleius and Sidonius is revived and enlarged. Genuine literary echoes begin near the end of the fourteenth century and until the sixteenth century occur with some frequency in the poetry of the Humanists (Joannes Secundus, Sannazaro, Baptista Mantuanus,2 Aleandro, Pontanus, etc.). Since then Latin verse has reverted more or less to the manner and form of Ovid.

The number of editions issued before 1700 is a good proof that Tibullus must have been fairly well known to the more cultivated reading public throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It must be confessed however that there are no very striking proofs of it in the vernacular literature of that period. In England for example the tradition has always been slender. Jonson's Poetaster numbers Tibullus among its dramatis personae ; Daniel's choice of Delia as the title of a collection of amatory sonnets (1592) is an early example of an allusion which since then has appeared again and again; occasionally Tibullus furnishes the tag of Latin regularly

1 For details see R. Ehwald, Philologus, 46, p. 639 f.

2 The examples are noted by W. P. Mustard in his edition of Mantuan's Eclogues, Baltimore, 1911, p. 57, n. 67.

adorning the title page of Elizabethan books; occasionally too one hears an echo of him in Spenser, and in certain lyric and dramatic poets of this period. But there is no 'Tudor translation' of Tibullus, no one piece of poetry inspired by him or showing a deep and sympathetic study of his works.

Robert Herrick has been called the English Tibullus.' He mentions Tibullus once, and has the same genuine love for the country, but he does not imitate him, and it would be difficult to find two writers more unlike in their ideas of poetic art. The inimitable Burton does not exclude Tibullus from his unique library on the subject of Melancholy, and traces of the poet may be detected here and there in Cowley, Rowe, Walsh, and other authors; but as a whole references to him in English of the seventeenth century are more rare and less striking than in the previous age.

The tradition of him in France of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries is much the same. He is referred to by Rabelais and quoted a few times by Montaigne. Echoes of him are occasional in the poets, especially in such poets of the Pléiade as Ronsard, Belleau, and Baïf. Delia becomes, as in England, a literary reminiscence. In 1655 de Maroles published a translation into French.

In Italy Tibullus was studied and admired from an early date. Petrarch may have been acquainted with him, but the evidence for it noted in his Italian works does not seem conclusive. The same is true of Boccaccio. Dante was too early to have known him, except in the tenuous tradition of the Middle Ages. From the middle however of the fifteenth century, echoes of him occur with considerable frequency. Among others may be mentioned Sannazaro's Arcadia, the Orlando Furioso of Ariosto, the Cortegiano of Baldessar Castiglione, and the Aminta of Tasso. The most striking example perhaps in the entire literature of Italy is the Elegie of Luigi Alamanni, published in 1532. In his dedicatory epistle the author speaks of Tibullus and Propertius

as 'i miei maestri,' and these pleasing and well-written poems in terza rima - among the first of their name in a modern are an ample justification of this claim.

language

The deliberate use of the literary echo together with a notable enthusiasm for the Roman poets, formal classicism combined with a growing tendency to the idyllic erotic, were all favourable to the popularity of Tibullus in the eighteenth century. In this age of Pope, Watteau, and Voltaire, of Dresden shepherdesses and pastoral operas, of petit-mattres and caurs sensibles, the prominence of Tibullus in the literatures of Europe was more marked than it has ever been except in his own time. France, Germany, Italy, England, Spain — each really deserves a chapter by itself.

6

The translation of 'Mr. Dart' in 1720 was followed by that of James Grainger in 1759. Both are decidedly mediocre. Apart too from the traditional echo, which becomes more frequent, we now find occasional translations of favourite passages, 'imitations' of Tibullus, poems written after the manner of Tibullus,' and the like. Indeed James Hammond's (1710-1742) poems to 'Delia' (Miss Dashwood) - practically all the verse he ever wrote owe their inspiration entirely to the elegies of our author.

In France the indications of Tibullus's popularity are even more marked. Among translations may be mentioned those of Pezai (1771), de Longchamps (1777), Pastoret (1784), Mirabeau (1798), and Mollevault (1808). There are also frequent 'imitations' by La Harpe, Lebrun, Loyson, Andrieux, etc. Bertin, like Hammond, owes a large share of his inspiration to Tibullus alone. The élégie itself becomes more prominent and the regular echo of our poet more frequent. Now too-and apparently for the first time-we find, as in Voltaire, entire poems suggested by a single passage. Les Amours de Tibulle by de la Chappelle (2d ed., 1732) is a sentimental romance of Tibullus's life and adventures, in which is interspersed the translation of his elegies. The book reminds one at once of the

romances of Honoré d'Urfé, which at that time were especially popular.

One of the most notable literary developments of the nineteenth century was the rise of the German elegy under Goethe and his contemporaries. The great leader himself was most deeply affected by Propertius, but a number of translations, among others that of Johann Heinrich Voss (1810), and no less than four annotated editions, are in themselves ample proof that the interest of the German public in Tibullus at this time was unusually deep and widespread.1

In France and Italy too the literary tradition of Tibullus was continued, but on the whole, and especially in England during the Victorian period, the interest in him during the nineteenth century was less general than in the previous age. Tennyson shows no traces of him. On the other hand Cranstoun's translation, published in 1872, is the best complete version in English, and the occasional renderings of Elton (1814) are still admired. Whiffen's versions (1829) are deservedly forgotten. The best French translation is by Martinon (1895). Williams's translation (Boston, 1905), so far as I know, is the first version by an American. Among modern writers who show traces of his influence the most notable is Carducci.3

IV. CRITICISM AND DISCUSSION

It will be seen that the influence of Tibullus upon subsequent thought has on the whole been considerable. And yet it has probably been less than that of any other great Roman poet. Literary echoes of him are rare, quotations from him are uncommon,

1 The influence of Tibullus on German literature is now being studied by Dr. R. B. Roulston, Associate in German in the Johns Hopkins University, and his results will soon be published.

2 A few occur in Byron and Moore. The Lake Poets and their kind appear to know nothing of the elegy.

8 See esp. his Juvenilia, 27 and 31.