Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-03T12:00:55.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A TE IN CATULLUS POEM 50: A PUN

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 September 2023

Simon Trafford
Simon Trafford*
Affiliation:
Chislehurst & Sidcup Grammar School, UK
*
simon.trafford@csgrammar.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In Catullus 50, after an enjoyable day writing poetry with Licinius Calvus, the poet warns his friend not to ignore him lest Nemesis punish him for it, ne poenas Nemesis reposcat a te (‘lest Nemesis demand punishment from you’). It will be proposed in this article that, in keeping with neoteric ideals, Catullus is playing on the phrase a te to create a bilingual pun on the Greek word ἄτη ‘delusion’, ‘mental blindness (often divinely sent)’.

Keywords

CatulluswordplaypunbilingualNemesisἄτηpunishmentretributionNeoteric
Type
Research Article
Information
Greece & Rome , Volume 70 , Issue 2 , October 2023 , pp. 281 - 288
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Harrison, E., ‘Catullus, LXXXIV’, CR 29 (1915), 198–9Google Scholar; Latta, B., ‘Zu Catulls Carmen 1’, MH 29 (1972), 201–13Google Scholar; Hunter, R., The Shadow of Callimachus. Studies in the Reception of Hellenistic Poetry at Rome (Cambridge, 2006), 107 n. 57CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ferriss, J., ‘Catullus Poem 71: Another Foot Pun’, CPh 104 (2009), 376–84Google Scholar; Muse, K., ‘Fleecing Remus’ Magnanimous Playboys: Wordplay in Catullus 58.5’, Hermes 137 (2009), 302–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cowan, R., ‘Boring Ipsitilla: Bilingual Wordplay in Catullus 32’, MH 70 (2013), 190–8Google Scholar.

2 Quinn, K., The Catullan Revolution (Melbourne, 1959), 55–8Google Scholar; Fordyce, C. J., Catullus. A Commentary (Oxford, 1961), 215Google Scholar; Segal, C., ‘Catullan “Otiosi”: The Lover and the Poet’, G&R 17 (1970), 25–31Google Scholar; Burgess, D. L., ‘Catullus c. 50: The Exchange of Poetry’, AJPh 107 (1983), 576–86Google Scholar; Pasco-Pranger, M., ‘Sustaining Desire: Catullus 50, Gallus and Propertius 1.10’, CQ 59 (2009), 142–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 I. Meleager, ‘Spicilegium Iani Meleagri Germani in C. Valerii Catulli Librum Carminum’, in I. Gebhardus (ed.), Iani Gebhardi in Catullum, Tibullum, Propertium Animadversiones cum Jani Meleagri in C. Valerium Catullum Spicilegio (Hanoviae, 1618), 12–35; I. Vossius, Cajus Valerius Catullus Et in eum Isaaci Vossii Observationes (Londini, 1684).

4 For instance, R. Ellis, A Commentary on Catullus (Oxford, 1876); Fordyce (n. 2); W. Kroll, C. Valerius Catullus (Stuttgart, 1968); K. Quinn, Catullus. The Poems (London, 1970).

5 Quinn (n. 2), 56.

6 See J. O'Hara, True Names. Vergil and the Alexandrian Tradition of Etymological Wordplay (Ann Arbor, MI, 1996), 61–3; P. Barrios-Lech, ‘Heads Up’, Mnemosyne 70 (2017), 681.

7 Kroll (n. 4), 91; Fordyce (n. 2), 218.

8 R. Maltby, ‘The Limits of Etymologising’, Aevum Antiquum 6 (1993), 257–75; R. Cowan, ‘How's Your Father? A Recurrent Bilingual Wordplay in Martial’, CQ. 65 (2015), 736–46.

9 D. Vallat, ‘Bilingual Word-play on Personal Names in Martial’, in J. Booth and R. Maltby (eds.), What's in a Name? The Significance of Proper Names in Classical Latin Literature (Swansea, 2006), 121–43.

10 F. Geisser, Götter, Geister und Dämonen: Unheilsmächte bei Aischylos - Zwischen Aberglauben und Theatralik (München, Leipzig, 2002), 81–92.

11 For example, Aesch. Ag. 385 ff., 763 ff., 1227 ff.

12 For discussion of ἄτη in Aeschylus and its connection with punishment, see A. H. Sommerstein, ‘Atē in Aeschylus’, in D. Cairns (ed.), Tragedy and Archaic Greek Thought (Swansea, 2013), 1–16.

13 For the significance of Nemesis as punisher of pride and jilted lovers, see: Burgess (n. 2), 585; E. Stafford, ‘Tibullus’ Nemesis: Divine Retribution and the Poet’, in Booth and Maltby (n. 9), 40–3.

14 Quinn (n. 2), 56.

15 L. R. Farnell, The Cults of the Greek States, 5 volumes (Oxford, 1896–1909), 494–6; W. Burkert (trans. J. Raffan), Greek Religion. Archaic and Classical (Oxford, 1985), 185; M. B. Hornum, Nemesis, the Roman State, and the Games (Leiden, 1993), 6–10.

16 Latta (n. 1), 201–13; T. P. Wiseman, Clio's Cosmetics. Three Studies in Greco-Roman Literature (Leicester, 1979), 169–70.

17 Cowan (n. 1), 190–8.

18 Harrison (n. 1), 198–9.

19 Hunter (n. 1), 107 n. 57.

20 Cowan (n. 8), 738.

21 Ferriss (n. 1), 377, argues convincingly that in Poem 71 podagra not only means ‘gout’ but also ‘metrical incompetence’. Quinn (n. 4), 139, points out that there is also the instance of punning on pes ‘foot’, seen in Poem 14: abite illuc, unde malum pedem attulistis (‘go away back to where you brought your faulty feet from’), where the idea of the ‘physical foot’ works as well as the idea of ‘poorly written poetry/meter’. In addition, as suggested by Martial 11.6, there is the famous passerem Catulli, which has been argued for as a pun, where the passer of Catullus 2 and 3 might mean ‘penis’ rather than (or in addition to) ‘sparrow’. For this last example, see R. W. Hooper, ‘In Defence of Catullus’ Dirty Sparrow’, G&R 32 (1985), 162–78.