This poem, of which I have quoted 5 out of 27 lines, tho' its subject leaves no room for the highest qualities of Catullus' poetry, is a most finished and witty specimen of light and airy banter, of easy yet vigorous versification. This Furius and Aurelius, the companion with whom he is joined in the 11th and 16th poems, are among the most enigmatical of all the associates whom Catullus commemorates. They would appear to have been needy men, more or less parasites and dependents of Catullus among others, yet at the same time with some pretensions to fashion and breeding: in the next poem Furius is called a 'bellus homo' or fine gentleman. Why were they selected in the memorable 11th poem to carry the poet's last message to Lesbia? was it because that poem, probably one of his latest and written with direct reference to the 51st, perhaps his very earliest, was designed in this point too to stand in glaring contrast with the other? were Furius then and Aurelius to carry the 11th poem to Lesbia, because M. Tullius Cicero had carried to her the 51st?

I am somewhat surprised, and an accomplished scholar has likewise expressed to me his surprise, at the interpretation which Ellis has put on this 23rd poem. The attack' he says 'is unusually fierce even from Catullus and we may doubt whether the object of its unsparing sarcasm ever forgave the injury'. 'Even to one familiar with Catullus' habit of assaulting his most intimate friends most violently, and who had himself experienced something of this scurrility in 16, the personalities of 23 must have seemed to go beyond the licence naturally conceded to poets; they could not be treated as merely jocose'. Elsewhere, p. 376, he places this poem among the three or four coarsest of all that Catullus has written. I regard it in a much more in

nocuous light: I can fancy Furius taking it philosophically enough and being more than consoled by a dinner or a sum of money much smaller than he asks for at the end of our poem. However, as I have said, he is to me an enigmatical personage, and many people no doubt would find the poet's banter offensive enough.

เ

To come now to the verses which I have quoted above: in 10 Haupt's furta seems to me a certain correction, just as in 68 140 I take the generally accepted furta to be a certain correction of the facta of V: see Haupt quaest. Cat. p. 9-12, who well supports his emendation. But I would likewise call in the antiquarian Arnobius IV 28 praecellere in furtorum dolis: these words may very well be a reminiscence of 'Non furta impia, non dolos ueneni', as his unius bubulci' a few chapters later may recall the 'unus caprimulgus' of the preceding poem. Why should not this constant imitator of Lucretius occasionally have the contemporary Catullus in his thoughts? Take too Seneca Agam. 673 (708) Non quae tectis Bistonis ales Residens summis impia diri Furta mariti garrula deflet: the fact that Seneca here is on quite another topic rather strengthens the supposition that he had Catullus' 'furta impia' in his mind, the more so that just before he may have been thinking of some other verses of Catullus, 65 12-14, as well as of Virgil; and most certainly a few lines below fluctu leuiter plangente sonent', he had in his thoughts Cat. 64 273 leuiterque sonant plangore cachinni, confirming O and Baehrens against nearly all recent editors.

11 casus alios periculorum: besides Cicero quoted by Doering, comp. Cic. epist. v 16 5 casum incommodorum tuorum; bell. Alex. 7 1 ut ad extremum casum periculi omnes deducti uiderentur; bell. Gall. vIII 34 1

similem casum obsessionis; Suet. Claud. 25 ad arcendos incendiorum casus. In the last line'sat es beatus' is surely a certain correction for 'satis beatus' of Mss. : Ellis should not in his first volume have adopted Bergk's 'beatu's': this archaic elision of the vowel in es and est together with that of s in the preceding word was unknown to Cicero and Lucretius even, who yet elide the final s so much more freely than Catullus does. I much doubt whether even Lucilius admitted such a licence.

[Reprinted from the Journal of Philology, vol. v p. 306.]

25 4-7

Idemque Thalle turbida rapacior procella,

cum diua mulier arios (or aries, or aues) ostendit oscitantes,

remitte pallium mihi meum, quod inuolasti, sudariumque Saetabum catagraphosque Thynos.

The second line in this extract is one of the most desperate in Catullus: fifty conjectures have been made by critics and editors, old and recent; not one of which I believe has found much acceptance. All the explanations of diua for instance strike me as thoroughly unsatisfactory. Though I do not think that the conjecture I am going to offer is likely to be received with more approbation than former ones, I yet venture to give it, in the hope that it may perhaps present the question in a new light. This then is what I propose:

Conclaue com uicarios ostendit oscitantes.

What suggested the reading to my mind was first the very common substitution in manuscripts of d for cl as

in Catullus 7 5 ora dum for oraclum; 68 43 sedis for saeclis; and next the frequency with which our archetype confuses a and co; many instances of which confusion I have given in p. 23 of the third number of the Journal of Philology. Thus conclaueco might pass into condaua, com diua; and then muicarios into mulierarios or something else that looked like Latin.

ne

Conclaue was a room that could be locked up, if cessary, and might be used for a storeroom, a bedroom, a dining-room, or the like. The uicarii, who are often spoken of by writers and in inscriptions, were the slaves of slaves and were employed in any menial capacity. Probably then at some feast these uicarii would have charge of such articles as are mentioned here, and when they were off their guard, Thallus would take the opportunity of pouncing upon the things in question. It has always seemed to me more probable that they should be stolen in such a way as this, than taken from the person of their owner.

On the above verse more conjectures appear to have been made than on any other line in Catullus: Schwabe records eleven, which exhibit the most astonishing diversity of meaning and language. Ellis and Baehrens add to the number. By the way I do not know whether Ellis can support his gāuias: my feeling and impression are certainly for găuias; but as I have no evidence one way or the other, I will not argue the question. I have ventured to reprint what I wrote some years ago; because it strikes out a new sense and situation, different from those given by any of the other multitudinous conjectures. But I feel now, as indeed I felt at

the time, that my reading is far too venturesome, especially in tampering with the genuine-looking 'Cum diua'. It seems clear from the Fasti Maffeiani, Dec. 21, C. I. L. 1 p. 307 and the Fasti Praenestini, Dec. 21, with Mommsen's supplements C. I. L. 1 p. 319, that the mysterious Angerona, with mouth closed and sealed, who knew and must not reveal the hidden name of Rome, might be called Diua: comp. with this Pliny III 65 non alienum uidetur inserere hoc loco exemplum religionis antiquae, ob hoc maxime silentium institutae. namque diua Angerona, cui sacrificatur a. d. XII kal. Ian., ore obligato obsignatoque simulacrum habet: comp. too Macrob. sat. I 10 7 and Ianus' note. Adhering therefore to the general sense of what I have proposed above, I would suggest

Cum Diua mi [or, iam] uicarios ostendit oscitantes,

But when O and G are examined, it would appear that aries is the oldest form of the corruption, and that aues, alios, arios are rude attempts to correct. I assume then that (except ostendet for ostendit) the words mulier aries alone call for emendation, and I still believe that the oscitancy of servants and not of guests is referred to, as all the property stolen is Catullus' own. No one seems to have thought of the goddess Murcia, and yet she would be in point: August. ciu. dei Iv 16 deam Murciam quae praeter modum non moueret ac faceret hominem, ut ait Pomponius, murcidum, id est nimis desidiosum et inactuosum. I don't know what might

be thought of the following attempt:

Cum diua Murcia atrieis ostendit oscitantes.

Comp. too Arnob. Iv 9 quis [praesidem] segnium Murcidam: so the sole codex: Murciam Sabaeus. In Catullus atrieis is a very simple correction for aries: