Lucretius regularly suggests alternative causes for unusual phenomena, but Virgil, argues Perkell, differs in that he suggests contradictory causes. This portion of the argument I find implausible. Virgil may not profess to know the physical causes of certain phenomena, but he does have the courage to offer physical explanations. He does not simply throw up his hands in despair and declare the phenomena incapable of all explanation. To be contrasted with science is myth.
Myth is used both in connection with natural events and as a model of human experience.
Myth may be in one sense false but it is the poet's primary medium for addressing the mysteries of existence. Whatever the truth concerning Virgil's views of the value of science, there can be no doubt that it is through myth that Virgil confronts us most directly and most powerfully with the dilemmas of human existence. The issues dealt with indirectly in the first three and a half books are made pressing and concrete when presented in the persons of Aristaeus, Orpheus and Eurydice. This is a short book. It will by no means revolutionise our understanding of the Georgics , but it does make a valuable contribution to a continuing debate.