The generall Argument
of the whole booke.
Itle I hope, medeth mee at large ta diſcourſe the firſt Origin all of Æglogues, hauing areadie touched the ſame. But for the word Aeglogues I know is vnknowne to moſt, and alſo miſtaken of ſome the beſt learned (as they thinke) I will ſaie ſomewhat thereof, being not at all impertinent to my preſent purpoſe.
They were firſt of the Greekes the inuentors of them called Aeglogas as it were Aegon, or Aeginomon logi, that is Goteheardes tales. For although in Virgil and others the ſpeakers be moſt ſheepheardes, & Goteheardes, yet Theocritus in whom is more ground of authority, then in Virgil this ſpecially from that deriuing, as from the firſt head and Wellſpring the whole Inuention of this Aeglogues, maketh Goteheardes the perſons and authors of his tales. This being, who ſeeth not the groſenes of ſuch as by colour of learning woulde make vs belieue that they are mere rightly termed Eclogai as they would ſaie extraordinarie diſcourſes of vnneceſſarie matter: which definition al be in ſubſtance and meaning it agree with the nature of the thing, yet no whit anſwereth with the Analyſis & interpretation of the word. For they be not termed Eclogues, but Aeglogues, which ſentence this author very well obſeruing, vpon good iudgement, though in deede few Goteheards haue to doe herein, neuertheleſſe doubteth not to call them by the vſed and beſt knowne name. Other curious diſcourfes hereof I referue to greater occaſion. Theſe xij, Aeglogues euerie where aunſwering to the ſeafons of the xij. monethes may be well deuided into three formes or ranckes. For either they be Plaintiue, As the firſt, the ſixt, the eluenth and the twelth, or recreatiue, ſuch as all thoſe be, which conteine matterof loue
