mi/mesis].  The remark, therefore, can only apply to the ‘rustic’ productions.  But, as Aristotle’s phrase suggests, burlesque, or caricature, is only idealization in a different direction, so that there appears to be less antagonism between the two tendencies than might at first be supposed.  Moreover, no one has suggested that the rustic shows were the origin of the Arcadian drama, so that it is to be presumed that Carducci had in mind the more or less frequent but still sporadic elements borrowed by the eclogues from the popular drama.  These, however, are found in conjunction with idealized elements of courtly tradition, both in the dramatic eclogues themselves and more especially in the ecloghe maggiaiuole or May-day shows of the Congrega dei Rozzi.  Thus, although it is true that we should not expect idealization to be evolved out of caricature, there is no reason to deny its evolution from a form in which burlesque and romance subsisted side by side. (b) ’Those eclogues that are not burlesque are occasional compositions equally incapable of developing into the Arcadian drama.’  Though, no doubt, usually written for presentation upon some particular occasion, several of the dramatic eclogues present no topical features.  Nor does it appear why a form of composition, the type of which was fairly constant although the individual examples might be ephemeral enough, should not develop into something of a more permanent nature.  Moreover, the topical allusions scattered throughout the Aminta, as well as the highly occasional character of the prologue to the Pastor fido, serve to connect these plays directly with the ‘occasional’ eclogue. (c) The metrical form of the recognized dramatic pastorals differs from that of the eclogues.’  While beginning, however, with simple terza or ottava rima, the dramatic eclogue gradually became highly polymetric in structure, though it is true that it seldom affected the free measures peculiar to the Arcadian drama.  These, however, were no more suited to short compositions than the stiff terzines and octaves to more complicated dramatic works.  The prevalent metre, as indeed many other points, might well be borrowed by the dramatic pastoral from the practice of the regular stage without it thereby ceasing to be the formal descendant of the eclogue.

Another point in debate is the view taken of the question by contemporary critics—­that is, by Guarini and his adversaries.  Rossi pointed out a passage in Guarini’s Veraio of 1588[367] which he held to support his theory of development.  Translated, the passage runs:  ’And why should it not be thought lawful for the eclogue to grow out of its infancy and arrive at mature years, if this has been possible in the case of tragedy? ...  Even as the Muses grafted tragedy upon the dithyrambic stock, and comedy upon the phallic, so in their ever-fertile garden they set the eclogue as a tiny cutting, whence sprang in later years the stately growth of the pastoral,’