A Defense of the Ambrosian Strophic Sequence of Simaetha's Incantation in Theocritus' Idyll 2 Pharmaceutria, with Reference to the Superiority of its Textual Witness

Abstract

In the last century, various scholars have argued that the strophic sequence of Simaetha's incantation in Theocritus' Idyll 2 should not be determined simply on the basis of the textual witness. Rather, they assert that the sequence of its strophes should be decided on the basis of poetic structure. As a result of this view, subsequent critics have sought to bypass the textual superiority of the Ambrosian sequence of the incantation and to reassert the vulgate or "traditional" reading of the Laurentian sequence, on the grounds that the Ambrosian sequence violates the poetic structure of the incantation and that such structure is best preserved by following the Laurentian sequence. In this paper, I shall argue the superiority of the Ambrosian sequence, both on the basis of its superior textual witness and on the basis of poetic structure. I shall do this by first examining and critiquing the work of one of the most significant defenses of the Laurentian sequence in the last fifty years, that of Professor Gilbert Lawall in his 1961 article "Simaetha's Incantation: Structure and Imagery." I shall argue that Lawall's arbitrary and excessively detailed structural argument fails to do justice to the text of the incantation and that a better paradigm is the literary idea of psychological realism, as set forth by Anna T. Rist in her 1975 article "The Incantatory Sequence in Theocritus' Pharmaceutria." On the basis of my critique of Lawall's view and my assertion of psychological realism in Simaetha's incantation I shall argue that the superiority of the Ambrosian textual witness is insurmountable in this debate and that those opponents who seek to discredit it on poetic grounds are fundamentally wrong in their attempt to bypass its textual witness and to reassert the Laurentian sequence simply on the basis of poetic structure.