[Footnote 11:  When Vergil wrote the Georgics, on a subject which the poet of the Aetna derides as trivial (264-74) he seems to apologize for abandoning science, in favor of a meaner theme, Georgics II, 483 ff.  Is not this a reference to the Aetna?]

The poet after an invocation to Apollo justifies himself for rejecting the favorite themes of myth and fiction:  the mysteries of nature are more worthy of occupying the efforts of the mind.  He has chosen one out of very many that needs explanation.  The true cause of volcanic eruption, he says, is that air is driven into the pores of the earth, and when this comes into contact with lava and flint which contain atoms of fire, it creates the explosions that cause such destruction.  After a second invitation to the reader to appreciate the worth of such a theme he tells the story of two brothers of Catania who, when other refugees from Aetna’s explosion rescued their worldly goods, risked their lives to save their parents.

The poem is not a happy experiment.  There is no lack of enthusiasm for the subject, despite the fact that the science of that day was wholly inadequate to the theme.  But Vergil could hardly realize this, since both Stoics and Epicureans had adopted the theory of the exploding winds.  The real trouble with the theme is its hopelessly prosaic ugliness.  Lucretius, by his imaginative power, had apparently deceived him into thinking that any fragment of science might be treated poetically.  In his master the “flaring atom streams” had attained the sublimity of a Platonic vision, and the very majestic sadness of his materialism carried the young poet off his feet.  But the mechanism of Aetna remained merely a puzzle with little to inspire awe, and the theme contained inherently no deep meaning for humanity—­which, after all, the scientific problem must possess to lend itself to poetic treatment.  The poet indeed realized all this before he had finished.  He sought, with inadequate resources, to stir an emotion of awe in describing the eruption, to argue the reader into his own enthusiasm for a scientific subject, to prove the humanistic worth of his problem by asserting its anti-religious value, and finally, in a Turneresque obtrusion of human beings, to tell the story of the Catanian brothers.  But though the attempt does honor to his aesthetic judgment the theme was incorrigible.  Perhaps the recent eruptions of Aetna—­they are reported for the years 50 and 46 B.C.—­had given the theme a greater interest than it deserved.  We may imagine how refugees from Catania had flocked to Naples and told the tale of their suffering.

There is another element in the poem that is as significant as it is prosaic, a spirit of carping at poetic custom which reminds the reader of Philodemus’ lectures.  Philodemus, whether speaking of philosophy or music or poetry, always begins in the negative.  He is not happy until he has soundly trounced his predecessors and opponents.  The author of the Aetna has learned all too well this scholastic method, and his acerbity usually turns the reader away before he has reached the central theme.  There is of course just a little of this tone left in the Georgics—­Lucretius also has a touch of it—­but the Aeneid has freed itself completely.