We have established that 68.1-40 could be part of a group of poems about friendship and the exchange of poetry between friends, and that presence and performance have to be part of the deal. That must be why the language of eroticism is so frequently used in these poems - it is the friend’s presence, and the individual performance of the poem, that imbues them with the attractiveness and charm of a gift of Venus. Caecilius’ girl may love the poem - but it is the poet’s neck she clings to. And so Catullus’ refusal of Manlius’ request accompanies a rejection of his entire former way of life. He starts by making specific reference to his life as a Roman, assuming the toga uirilis (15). He then refers to the playfulness we know from c. 50, and to his love affairs (multa satis lusi, 17), as well as to his translations of Sappho: non estDea nescia nostri/quae dulcem curis miscet amaritiem (‘‘Not unknown am I to the goddess who blends sweet bitterness with cares,’’ 17-18).
It was that life, and the poetry he wrote and performed as a part of it, which is now over because of the death of his brother. Bereavement means that he cannot participate in the convivial delights of his circle of friends.13 And whatever lusi means here, be it love or poetry, the point is that Catullus is no longer doing it. He must now absorb himself entirely in grieving, and so turns away, literally, from his addressee, to address the brother instead. Catullus’ lament for his dead brother forms the center of 68.1-40. The loss of the brother is total and absolute, its consequences utterly devastating. Catullus’ lines evoke the sense of a whole world in pieces - the house itself buried, all happiness dead. The final lines affirm the finality of death, the fact that only in life can we enjoy love: omnia tecum una perieruntgaudia nostra/quae tuus in uita dulcis alebat amor (‘‘with you all our joys have perished, joys which, in life, your sweet love used to nourish,’’ 23-4). One can think back here to c. 5 with its exhortations to love and live (uiuamus, mea Lesbia, et amemus) - and the threat of the long night of death hanging over it: nobis, cum semel occidit breuis lux,/nox est una perpetua dormienda (‘‘for us, when our brief moment of daylight falls, there is just one long night to sleep through,’’ 5.5-6). It seems that night has now arrived. As in c. 65, the grieving Catullus refuses to engage in the normal exchange of banter and/ or poetry. On both occasions, Catullus ‘‘breaks out’’ of the letter and addresses his dead brother instead of the letter’s addressee. I think the apostrophes to the brother are also a way of not playing the game - of signaling the poet’s complete absorption in his grief, and his withdrawal from other relationships. The insistent repetition of tu/ tuus, and tecum, and frater drives home that, really, there is only one addressee now. Manlius’ attempt to lure Catullus from Verona seems singularly insensitive after Catullus’ apostrophe to his brother. His intrusion into Catullus’ grief and isolation, with a joke which we cannot quite reconstruct, gives rise to a correction from Catullus - and then to an assertion of his continuing to belong to Rome, in a way (though perhaps not in the way Manlius wants).
Quare, quod scribis Veronae turpe Catulle esse, quod hic quisquis de meliore nota frigida deserto tepefactet membra cubili,
Id, Manli, non est turpe, magis miserum est.
Wherefore, when you write ‘‘It is disgraceful, Catullus, for you to be in Verona, while here all the best people warm their cold limbs in a deserted bed’’ - that, Manlius, is more wretched than disgraceful.
It is difficult to work out what is going on in lines 27-30. I have reverted to the vocative Catulle, which the manuscripts show (so that line 27 at least seems to be presented as a direct quotation from Manlius’ letter), but which is often emended to Catullo, to turn the quotation into indirect speech. The main problem, however, is hic in line 28: does it mean Verona or Rome? Does it mean that the elite in Verona are prudish and frigid, and lie tepidly in deserted beds? Or that everyone who is anyone in Rome is piling into Catullus’ deserted bed with his girlfriend?14 What we can say is that Catullus is reproached for being in Verona, and that Manlius has made some sort of joke about Catullus’ lack of sexual activity. This works with both versions: he is accusing Catullus either of reverting to Transpadane provincial mores, or of neglecting his usual Roman pursuits. In any case, it is Catullus’ absence from Rome that is being challenged. It seems that Catullus does not rise to the bait - whatever its exact nature. Instead, he corrects Manlius’ insensitivity: turpe is the wrong word, there is no shame or disgrace in his leaving Rome, he is wretched and to be pitied, the right word would have been miserum. With Manlius firmly in his place, Catullus returns to the question of the gifts. His recent trauma and his removal from Rome mean that he is no longer that ideal convivial partner who can bring joy to others by mixing the gifts of the Muses and of Venus. Immediately after this final rejection, in what looks like a curious non sequitur, there is the reference to the lack of books - given as one last reason for not complying with the request. Are the books important because Catullus wants to be thought of as not just a convivial poet of occasional verse, but part of an intelligentsia of learned poets? I think so - and now especially, as his new circumstances keep him away from social situations, and he has to rely on writing rather than performance as a means of being heard (and remaining part of Roman society). The scriptores he is missing have stayed behind because they belong - as he himself claims to - in their real home, in Rome (34-6):
Hoc fit quod Romae uiuimus: illa domus, illa mihi sedes, illic mea carpitur aetas;
Huc una ex multis capsula me sequitur.
That is because I live at Rome: that is my home, that is my residence, that is where my life
Is spent. Only one book box out of many follows me here.
Catullus’ striking and rhetorical insistence on belonging in Rome, and the present tense verbs, must be telling us that Verona is temporary, and the poet does intend eventually to return to Rome. When he does, however, he may wish to be known as a different sort of poet: it will not be the bed but the library that will bring him back.
World History
