Catullus 68 has for generations been the site of hard-fought and inconclusive philological battles. This, it may be confidently predicted, will continue to be the case. The present contribution, therefore, can pretend to no more elaborate aim than the opening up of certain new fronts. It falls into two parts of unequal length: first some general observations on the contents of the poem — or poems, for the Einheitsfrage cannot be evaded — and the underlying theme thereof; second a detailed (...) examination of the source and significance of perhaps the most remarkable passage in an altogether remarkable piece of work, to wit the barathrum simile. The argument of I has, the reader will observe, a not inconsiderable bearing on that of IIB, though it is in no way dependent on the latter's acceptability. The argument of IIA, to the contrary, has no necessary link with those of I and IIB and may profitably be judged by itself. (shrink)

Catullus 68 has for generations been the site of hard-fought and inconclusive philological battles. This, it may be confidently predicted, will continue to be the case. The present contribution, therefore, can pretend to no more elaborate aim than the opening up of certain new fronts. It falls into two parts of unequal length: first some general observations on the contents of the poem — or poems, for the Einheitsfrage cannot be evaded — and the underlying theme thereof; second a detailed (...) examination of the source and significance of perhaps the most remarkable passage in an altogether remarkable piece of work, to wit the barathrum simile . The argument of I has, the reader will observe, a not inconsiderable bearing on that of IIB, though it is in no way dependent on the latter's acceptability. The argument of IIA, to the contrary, has no necessary link with those of I and IIB and may profitably be judged by itself. (shrink)

For Bernd Niebling and his colleagues at the Lesesaal Altes Buch of the Universitätsbibliothek MünchenWhile the earliest complete manuscripts of Catullus to survive today were written in the fourteenth century, it is well known that poem 62 already appears in an anthology from the ninth century, the Codex Thuaneus (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Parisinus lat. 8071). However, the Thuaneus may once have contained one more poem of Catullus. In his commentary on the poet, which appeared in 1684 but had (...) been written decades earlier, the Dutch scholar Isaac Vossius makes the following comment on the last two lines of poem 11:Praetereunte postquam Tactus aratro est] Vetustissimum exemplar Thuanæum in quo hoc Catulli carmen variorum epigrammatis subjungitur, legitfractus, nontactus. Et hoc probo, nisi malisstratus, nam in quibusdam libristractuslegebatur.It is surprising to find a reference to a lost part of such a well-known manuscript in a source from the seventeenth century. One may well ask whether Vossius really read this poem in the Codex Thuaneus. Could he have seen this manuscript? Can he be relied on to report its contents truthfully? And could a part of the volume have been lost since the seventeenth century? I will argue that the answer to all these questions is yes, and that it is very likely that the Thuaneus once contained Catullus 11 as well as 62. I will set out the consequences of this for our understanding of Catullus' manuscript tradition. Next, I will discuss another ancient manuscript of Catullus that Vossius claims to have read, namely his ‘vetus liber Mediolanensis’. The article will close with an appendix on the history of the Thuaneus before it was studied by Vossius. (shrink)

In carm. 55, Catullus supposes his friend Camerius may be caught in erotic adventure:num te lacteolae tenent puellae?si linguam clauso tenes in ore,fructus proicies amoris omnes:uerbosa gaudet Venus loquella. 20uel, si uis, licet obseres palatum,dum nostri sis particeps amoris.

Modern editors of Catullus all agree on the text of line 53. The manuscripts also agree on the line, the only difference being R transmittingmutantibus, while O and G transmitnutantibus. Nevertheless, a few scholars have in the past questioned the reading ofnutantibus. As the lines quoted above illustrate, Catullus generally translates Callimachus’ poem closely. But neither of the words suggested in the manuscripts seems wholly to describe the rapid and vigorous movement of Callimachus’ κυκλώσας βαλιὰ πτερά, ‘having whirled its swift (...) wings’. The reading ofnutantibusis somewhat supported by Apuleius’pinnarum nutantium. But there too the nodding, swaying and wavering sense ofnutaredoes not seem to illustrate the hurried and rapid action of Jupiter's eagle. Additionally, the wording of the passage is sufficiently disputed to make it possible thatnutantiumis not the correct reading. (shrink)

Aeneas' encounter with Deiphobus forms a critical juncture in Vergil's "Aeneid". In the underworld Aeneas retraces his past to its beginning; so too Vergil's audience returns to its starting point: the fall of Troy. Deiphobus himself is a metonym of Troy, embodying her guilt and punishment. But Aeneas is frustrated in his attempt to reconcile himself to this past. Aeneas attempts the Homeric rites of remembrance-heroic tumulus and epic fama-but these prove to be empty gestures. The aition of Deiphobus' tomb (...) is revealed to have miscarried. Rhoeteum was known as the tomb and shrine of Telamonian Ajax, not Deiphobus, and Octavian's recent restoration of the Rhoetean memorial would have strengthened the already close association between Rhoeteum and Ajax in the mind of Vergil's audience. Vergil exploits Rhoeteum's resonance with Telamonian Ajax and Odysseus, Antony and Octavian, to reflect on the process of constructing national memory, a process of which epic is an integral part. Vergil suggests that one hero's memorial frequently involves the appropriation and effacement of another. In a similar vein, the heroic fama of Deiphobus which Aeneas had heard in Troy is proven false. Deiphobus' narrative of his death is replete with Odyssean allusions which critique both Homeric heroism and Homeric kleos. Evocative allusions to Catullus' laments for his brother suggest eternal elegiac mourning as an alternate generic model for memorial and reconciliation with the past. But Aeneas is denied this option. At the center of the epic, at high noon, on a cosmic crossroads, Aeneas is poised between past and future, between mourning and hope, between Deiphobus and Deiphobe, between epic and elegiac. The Sibyl interrupts and moves Aeneas forward. Aeneas is not purged of his past, but rather denied the opportunity for true reconciliation, which is bestowed not by forgetting but by remembrance. (shrink)