a poet as Catullus should be much quoted and imitated. For my present purpose however I confine myself chiefly to Martial, one of the most ardent admirers of our poet. If I should appear needlessly diffuse, let my readers understand that there is a meaning in my tediousness. Imitations of, or allusions to, one or other of the first four verses occur in the following passages of Martial: we find 'lepidos libellos' in x1 20 9, and in VIII 3 19, where the right reading surely is 'Romano lepidos sale tinge libellos': 1 113 6 Per quem perire non licet meis nugis; II 1 6 Nec tantum nugis seruiet ille meis; Iv 10 1 Dum nouus est, rasa nec adhuc mihi fronte libellus...I, puer, et caro perfer leue munus amico Qui meruit nugas primus habere meas; 82 1 Hos quoque commenda Venuleio, Rufe, libellos... Non tetrica nugas exigat aure meas; v 80 3 Dum nostras legis exigisque nugas; vi 1 1 Sextus mittitur hic tibi libellus; VII 26 7 Quanto mearum scis amore nugarum Flagret: in v. 3 there is an imitation of v. 9 in Catullus: VIII 72 1 Nondum murice cultus asperoque Morsu pumicis aridi politus...libelle; XII, in prose preface, 'de nugis nostris iudices'; XIII 2 4 Non potes in nugas dicere plura meas. As vss. 5, 6 and 7 of Catullus' poem refer merely to a particular work of Nepos, we cannot look for any allusions to them. To come to the last three vss., v. 8, as Ellis has shewn, is clearly imitated by Censorinus I Quodcumque hoc libri est meis opibus comparatum natalicii titulo tibi misi. Baehrens' reading appears to be confuted by this, as well as by the fact that 'qualecumque' seems never to be joined with a genitive, as 'quidquid' and 'quodcumque' are. If it be said that Censorinus wrote in the third century and that Catullus was interpolated before this time, I would appeal to Martial III 1 1 Hoc tibi quidquid id est longinquis mittit ab oris Gallia, which, coming as it does at the opening of a book, strikes me as a clear reference to this verse of Catullus. For the last two vss. I would first of all compare Martial v 60 5 Qualiscumque legaris ut per orbem, the rhythm of which reminds me of v. 9 of Catullus as I have given it. Then look at Martial's prose dedication of VIII to Domitian: Omnes quidem libelli mei, domine, quibus tu famam, id est uitam dedisti, tibi supplicant, et puto propter hoc legentur. For as our poem was so much in Martial's thoughts, the last words recall to my mind the 'patroni ut ergo cet.' Compare also the end of Statius' dedication of Siluae II: Haec qualiacumque sunt, Melior carissime, si tibi non displicuerint, a te publicum accipiant: sin minus, ad me reuertantur. For here too I catch an allusion to the end of our poem as I have given it. Domitian and Melior take the place of Nepos. Last of all look at Martial 11 2, a short poem manifestly modelled on Catullus' poem. It thus commences: Cuius uis fieri, libelle, munus?' after Catullus'' Cui dono lepidum nouum libellum?' Martial continues Festina tibi uindicem parare': then in v. 6 'Faustini fugis in sinum? sapisti'. The poem thus concludes Illo uindice nec Probum timeto', taking up vss. 2 and 6 exactly as Catullus, if we are right, would take up v. 3' Corneli tibi' with 'patroni ut ergo cet.'. uindex too having much the same meaning as patronus, All these points when taken together appear to me not to be without significance. เ เ 2 [Reprinted from the Journal of Philology, vol. iv p. 241, 242.] Passer, deliciae meae puellae, quicum ludere, quem in sinu tenere, credo ut cum grauis acquiescet ardor: 10 et tristis animi leuare curas! This delightful little poem would seem to have been written while the love of Catullus and Lesbia was yet according to the notions of the time comparatively innocent. All is clear except in vss. 7 and 8 which are manifestly corrupt. The latter has been altered in various ways: Credo ut tum (ut iam, uti) grauis acquiescat ardor. A change would seem to be required in v. 7 as well, and very old critics have suggested in or ut for et; ad too might be proposed. Lachmann indeed, followed by Haupt, Schwabe and others, keeps et and refers us to 38 7 Paulum quid lubet allocutionis. But in this he is quite mistaken: it may be seen from the very large number of instances collected by Neue (II pp. 485 486), that the best writers continually use libere, licere and oportere as personal verbs, but in a very peculiar way, with the neuters of pronouns such as id, ea, ista, quid, quod, quae, quidquid, and of cer tain kinds of adjectives, omnia, quantum, multum, multa; and so Catullus in 61 42 has quae licent, as well as paulum quid lubet, quoted above. But, as Neue observes, in the whole of classical Latinity these verbs never have a substantive for their subject; and solaciolum libet is quite solecistic. Ellis keeps et and reads in 8 Credo, et cum grauis acquiescit. But though Editors alter three or at least two words, none of their readings appears to me to give a suitable sense they seem all to take dolor and grauis ardor to be synonymous or nearly so, while I believe them to be used in decided opposition to each other: dolor denotes the grief and aching void which the heart feels in the absence of a loved object, which it desires to have with it: comp. Propert. 1 20 32 A! dolor ibat Hylas ibat Hamadryasin: which is imitated by Ovid in Heroid. 13 104 Tu mihi luce dolor, tu mihi nocte uenis, by which Laodamia expresses her everpresent yearning for Protesilaus. Then see Catullus. himself, 50 16, Hoc, iucunde, tibi poema feci, Ex quo perspiceres meum dolorem; by which he denotes his longing desire for the company of his friend Calvus, whose wit and conversation he so regretted that he could not sleep or rest. Whereas grauis ardor expresses that furious storm of passion which could not last long at one time without destroying its possessor, but which while it did last would put any other gratification, except that of the passion itself, out of the question. This ardor a Medea could feel in the presence of Iason: Et iam fortis erat, pulsusque recesserat ardor; Cum uidet Aesoniden, extinctaque flamma reuixit: Erubuere genae totoque recanduit ore (Ovid Metam. VII 76): Catullus too felt it himself often enough: Cum tantum arderem quantum Trinacria rupes Lymphaque in Oetaeis Malia Thermopylis (68 53). As well attempt to quench a conflagration with a squirt, as allay the grauis ardor, the Aetna-like fire, of a Medea, a Lesbia, a Catullus by the antics of a bird. The grauis ardor must destroy itself for the time by its own intensity before the dolor remaining behind could find relief in playing with a sparrow. I feel convinced therefore that these two verses are to be transposed, transposition being one of the simplest remedies in the case of a text resting finally on a single manuscript; and that we are to read credo ut, cum grauis acquiescet ardor, "when the bright lady of my longing love is minded to try some charming play, for a sweet solace of her heartache, I trow, whenever the fierce storm of passion shall be laid'. 'Cum acquiescet' is in Catullus' manner: 5 13 Cum sciet, another cum preceding in v. 10, as here in v. 5; 13 13; 64 344, 346, 350, 351; esp. 236 ut... Agnoscam, cum te reducem aetas prospera sistet. I have little to add to this notice which was printed six years ago. I still look upon it as a more satisfactory arrangement of the beautiful poem than any which Catullus' Editors have offered, tho' Ellis throughout his commentary makes not the slightest reference to it, and Baehrens thus prints 7 and 8: In solaciolum sui doloris (Credo, tum grauis acquiescet ardor). Notwithstanding all I have said, Ellis in commenting on 7 still holds that Lachmann may be right in making |