Third-century BCE epic poetry can not be understood without taking into account that, especially with the so-called epyllion, it represents an attempt at renovating, in terms of forms and contents, a genre that more than any other is weighed down by a fixed and repetitive diction and made harsher by a circular narrative fashion, i.e. by features that originally were due to a different facies of Greek culture, that is orality. Attempts at renovating epic tradition begin already in the fourth century with Choerilus of Samos and Antimachus of Colophon. Sometimes Callimachus and Theocritus exhibit features similar to those already experimented by Antimachus; however, their use of the Homeric langue has a very different functionality. The process brings forth a lowering of the level of ‘high’ genres, where the language of poetry draws its vocabulary from prose or dialects, even if with an epic nuance, and an elevating of the so-called ‘low’ genres within the frame of the literary hierarchy, by now already standardised by the teachings of Aristotle. A general trait, covering the entire Hellenistic poetry, from Callimachus to Apollonius, concerns on the other hand both the presence of tragic σχήματα reproduced in diegetic function (the deus ex machina, the figure of the messenger, mythological narratives of digressive nature that are typical of choral sections) and the use of topic Homeric scenes, employed as typological structure refashioned and varied in view of several narrative functions. The authors of the shor poems preserved in the Corpus bucolicorum have assimilated well mechanisms and devices of narrative renovation, that represent the most relevant literary experience on the part of the major Hellenistic authors, and they reproduce them with a sophisticated rhetorical skill, sometimes exhibiting a good knowledge of archaic and classical literature. However, they appear rather cold with respect to the drive to find a new langue, one that may be evocative, estranging and imaginative, and apt to renovate poetry radically, which had been a fundamental need on the part of Callimachus and, in a different way, an engagement which Apollonius did not neglect; or rather they underestimate its relevance. Instead, they reproduce only the most superficial features of the ‘new style’ poetry, basically easier to imitate and vary.