page 40 note 1 Direct imitation of Theoc. XI. is perhaps shown by ‘lilia lucida’ (v. 30), the adjective reproducing that of κρίνα λευκ⋯ (Theoc. XI. 56): certainly by ‘uacuam pastoris in aulam dux aries saturas ipse reduxit oues,’ which is a translation of Theoc. XI. 12 πολλ⋯κι τα⋯ οῐες ποτ⋯ τ ω ὔ λ ι ο ν α ὐ τ α ⋯ ⋯π⋯νθον, with, I should say, the memory of Virgilian pastoral works in Propertius' head. Propertius is thinking here of the simple Cyclops cave and his offerings to Galatea—hence ‘furtiua per antra’ of v. 33.
Direct imitation of Eclogues II. 45–48 is shown by ‘nunc uiolas tondere manu, nunc mixta referre lilia uirgineos lucida per calathos’ (vv. 29–30): for, while Eclogues II. imitates Theoc. XI. (which Propertius also has in mind), the Virgilian violets are culled from Theoc. VII. 63–64. Virgil combined Theoc. XI. and VII. for his list of garland-flowers, and so came to bring violets and lilies (inter alia) together. Propertius, who makes no direct use of Theoc. VII. and whose plan is very far away from that poem, simply takes over what he finds in Virgil. The violets are not of Theoc. XI. It is easy enough to see how Propertius was led to Eclogues II. and Theoc. XI.
His poem is an elaboration of the Virgilian ‘sordent tibi munera nostra’: Eclogues II. uses Theoc. XI. as a primary source. Without doubt Propertius knew of this fact.
Direct imitation of the Georgics is shown by ‘dique deaeque omnes, quibus est tutela per agros’ (cf. Georgics I. 21 ‘dique deaeque omnes, studium quibus arua tueri’).
Thus, Propertius III. [IV.] xiii. (xii.) 25–42 may fairly be said to constitute a rehash of Theocritean and Virgilian pastoral motives.
