No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Catvlliana1
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
Extract
THE clue to the meaning and interpretation of this poem, which has long been the despair of critics, is, I believe, to be found in a variant on line 9, faithfully preserved in the Codex Sangermanensis (G) and yet unaccountably neglected hitherto. G's text I transcribe from M. Chatelain's photo-lithograph facsimile of the manuscript (Leroux, Paris, 1890).
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 1913
References
page 123 note 1 Prof. Ellis, Catulli Ver. Lib., Proleg. p. xvi.
page 123 note 2 Cf. lxxvii. 4, si at mi R. Ven.
page 123 note 3 Baehrens, Commentary on C, p. 76. Add to his examples Cat. lxi. Fescennina iocatio and Ovid T. v. 1, 20, Cur unquam Musa iocata mea est?
page 123 note 4 Harum, sc. iocationum can hardly stand. For horum nescio quid cf. Cicero's rumoris nescio quid and litterarum nescio quid, ad Att. xvi. 5, 1, and vii. 2, 8; Plaut. Cist. 50, di horum nil facere possunt; Hor. S. ii. 6. 8, si utneror stultus nihil horum, ‘O si angulus ille,’ etc.
page 123 note 5 See Ellis and Baehrens ad, loc
page 123 note 6 In Classical Philology, Vol. 5, No. 2 (April 1910), pp. 217–219, ‘Passer, Catull. Carm. ii.,’ a paper which no student of Catullus should miss.
page 124 note 1 On the probability of such loss see Prof Ellis's app. crit., Catulli Veronensis liber, at iii. To the examples there collected add xxxiv. 3, which by some oversight is omitted.
page 124 note 2 Cf. lxiv. 353, where G has cultor and O messor, apparently a very similar confusion. For other quotations of Catullus in Ovid cf. Ovid Met. iii. 353 sqq. with Catullus lxii. 39 sqq.; Met. ix. 745 with Catullus lxxvi. 11; Am. i. 8, 57, 58 with Catullus i. 1, v. 10 and xvi. 12; and Fasti iii. 473–476 with Catullus lxiv. 143. (This last instance from Baehrens ad loc.)
page 124 note 3 En for et, an easy correction, sui may have come in owing to haplography of the m (solaciolum mei) or indeed from ferunt just below, (fui from fui). Heinsius, if Doering reports him aright, strangely conjectured that Lesbia had given the passer to Catullus. On the contrary, Catullus had given the passer to Lesbia.
page 124 note 4 Cf. lxx. Nulli se dicit mulier mea nubere malle Quam mihi K.T.λ. ixx. is also a Lesbia poem (Ellis and Baehrens).
page 124 note 5 et turn edd. uett.
page 124 note 6 For the psychology of the poem cf. Dry den′s song, Long betwixt love and fear Phyllis tormented (The Oxford Dryden, p. 377).
page 125 note 1 The poem is ‘articulated’ thus, 5, 3, 3, 3, 5; cfm p. 128, note 2.
page 125 note 2 So Seneca, H. F. 245, 246, caelibis semper tori regina gentis uiiua Thermodontiae. See the Corpus Gramm. Lat. iv. p. 216; v. p. 275; v. p. 445 line 21, caelibem solitaria (sic)
page 126 note 1 Terence Audria and Phormio; Horace A. P. 237; Sat. i. 10. 40, ii. 5. 91; and especially A. P. 114, where the MSS. waver between divusne and Davusne.
page 126 note 2 Porson on Medea 139
page 126 note 3 See Baehrens′ Praefatio, and Dr. Postgate on the Veronese codex 0f Catullus, C. R. xiii 438 sq.
page 127 note 1 animiscit Par., Saec. x. animis miscet cett. animis ciet Friedrich. Wilkins ad loc.
page 127 note 2 Classical Review, xxvi. 206–207
page 128 note 1 Cf. also Ter. Andr. 849 sqq. S. Quid istuc tibi negotist? D. mihinc? S. Ita. D. mihin? S Tibi ergo. Terence seems to use in such repeti- tions (e.g.) eone... eone and eone... eo in differently. The following passages bear on the point; Adelphoe 237, 408, 709, 758; Andria 910.
page 128 note 2 On the cognate subject of the ‘aequabilis partitio carminum Horati’ see Dr. Draheim in the Wochenschrift fur Klass. Phil, for December 9, 1912, No. 49, 1348 sqq.