Other direct connections between individual poems of Catuhus and Horace are based more generally upon the shared exploration of topics that are typical of iambic and lyric poetry. These include drinking songs and epigrams (e. g., Catull. 27; Hor. Epod. 13 and Carm. 1.9, 1.11,1.18, 1.27,1.38), expressions oflove and erotic desire (e. g., Catuh. 5, 7, 32, 86, 107; Hor. Epod. 15 and Carm. 1.19, 2.4), propemptica (e. g., Catuh. 46; Hor. Carm. 1.3, 1.29, 3.27), return poems (e. g., Catull. 9, 31; Hor. Carm. 1.36, 2.7, 3.14), dialogues (Catull. 45; Hor. Carm. 3.9), poems of consolation (Catull. 96; e. g., Hor. Carm. 1.24), offerings (Catull. 101; Hor. Carm. 3.13), anecdotes (e. g., Catull. 10, 17, 56; Hor. Epod. 3, 5, and elements of Carm. 1.37, 3.5, 3.8), attacks (e. g., Catull. 16, 21, 25, 33, and the Gehius and Mamurra cycles, 74, 80, 88-91, 116, and 29,41, 43, 57, 94,105, 114,115; cf. Hor. Epod. 8,12, and Carm. 1.25, 4.13), and hymns (e. g., Catuh. 34, 61, 62; Hor. Carm. 1.10, 1.21, 1.35, 2.19, 3.18, 3.22, 4.6, and Carm. Saec.).
Expanding the field of reference even farther, Horace frequently establishes wide-ranging connections to Catullus’ poems across meters and genres alike; direct quotations and allusions are interlaced with subtle adaptations or overarching references to CatuHan scenarios, sentiments, and themes. For example, Horace deftly works echoes of two very different Catullan poems into the lines of Odes 4.7, in such a way as to forge a striking juxtaposition between the eternal cycle of the natural seasons and the pathetic brevity of human life. Compare
Frigora mitescunt Zephyris, ver proterit aestas
Frosts are softened by the west wind, Summer crushes the Spring (Carm. 4.7.9)
With
Lam ver egelidos refert tepores, iam caeli furor aequinoctialis iucundis Zephyri silescit aureis
Now the Spring brings back unchilled warmth, now the fury of the equinox sky grows quiet on the gentle breezes of the west wind (Catull. 46.1-3)
And
Cum semel occideris et de te splendida Minos fecerit arbitria,
Non, Torquate, genus, non te facundia, non te restituet pietas
Once you have died and Minos has rendered his distinguished judgment in your case, Torquatus, neither your lineage nor your eloquence nor your devotion to duty will bring you back (Carm. 4.7.21-4)
With
Nobis cum semel occidit breuis lux, nox est perpetua una dormienda.
Once our brief light has set, we must sleep throughone long unending night. (Catull.5.5-6)
Comparable manifestations of this transmetrical and transgeneric technique can be found at Odes 3.27 (with marked similarities in the lament of Europa to that of Ariadne in Catullus 64; see Lowrie 1997); Satires 1.3 and 1.4 (with their themes of universal but mostly harmless human failings and Callimachean literary criticism, both of which are explored together in Catullus 22); and Satires 1.9 (with widely noted connections to Catullus 10, especially in terms of the depiction of casual ‘‘street’’ encounters that serve as important mechanisms of social interaction and performance; see, e. g., Skinner 1989).
Finally, as the above examples from the Satires demonstrate, fertile points of contact abound between Horace and Catullus in terms of their respective depictions of themselves as characters in their poetry. Horace undertakes a highly conscious and sophisticated program of self-presentation across his literary compositions, deploying in his works a wide variety of self-images that are carefully tailored to specific social situations as well as to the rhetorical and thematic requirements of his verse (see, e. g., Oliensis 1998). Recent scholarship has shown that Catullus too engages in careful control and manipulation of his self-image, and that many of his poems serve as crucial venues for the portrayal and execution of meaningful acts of public social performance (see, e. g., Wray 2001; Krostenko 2001a).
As a result, despite significant differences in Catullus’ and Horace’s overall techniques of self-presentation, certain commonalities can be identified between them, further underscoring the extent to which Horace remains keenly aware of Catullus as a valuable thematic literary model in a variety of circumstances throughout his literary career. For instance, Horace follows Catullus (as Catullus follows
Sappho) in depicting the sensation of being in love as a series of physical symptoms, as he observes himselfin the act of observing his beloved (Hor. Carm. 1.13.3-8; Catull. 51.7-12; cf. Sappho 31.5-14). Horace, like Catullus, experiments with lyrical adaptations of the conventions of love elegy in order to present himself in the guise of an unsuccessful lover - complaining miserably about his mistress’ disdain (e. g., Catull. 60; Hor. Carm. 3.10.16-20), fretting over her faithlessness (e. g., Catull. 70; Hor. Carm. 2.8), or sadly contemplating the aftermath of a failed love affair (Catull. 8; Hor. Carm. 3.26). In a similar vein, each poet employs from time to time the tactic of artful self-deprecation as a means of winning over the sympathies of his audience or reinforcing its sense of affection for him. Thus Catullus presents himself at various points as being flustered and embarrassed when caught in a clumsy white lie (Catull. 10.24-34), comically poverty-stricken (Catull. 13.7-8), cheated and ‘‘screwed over’’ by a superior (Catull. 28.9-10), and ludicrously aroused after a good lunch (Catull. 32.10-11). Horace, meanwhile, offers self-portraits in which he imagines himself bleary-eyed and stood up by a prostitute (Sat. 1.5.30-1, 49, 81-5), beset by indigestion and practical jokes (Epod. 3.15-18), chasing hopelessly after a nymphet (Carm. 1.23), or farcically scampering out of a mistress’ house when her husband comes home unexpectedly and the dogs start barking (Sat. 1.2.127-33).
As part of their self-representation within the context of established social relationships, Catullus and Horace alike place a special emphasis on the importance of reliability and friendship. It should be noted, however, that the two poets’ depictions of their friendship differ in certain essential particulars. Catullus presents himself as moving within a wide circle of friends, acquaintances, and rivals, whose relationships and levels of intimacy with the poet are constantly shifting and must regularly be renegotiated (see Wray 2001; Nappa 2001). Horace, by contrast, focuses primarily on the careful depiction of a single relationship: his close yet highly complicated friendship with Maecenas, his patron and benefactor (see Bowditch 2001). Both Catullus and Horace address the issue of loyalty and trust in friendships, albeit in markedly different ways (Catullus dwells upon the emotional costs of betrayal, while Horace emphasizes the duties and obligations of amici; cf. Catull. 30, 73; Hor. Sat. 1.6 and Ep. 1.7). Teasing and practical jokes are acceptable among friends (e. g., Catull. 6, 14; Hor. Epod. 3), but can be greeted with disdain if attempted by outsiders or others who are for some reason deemed socially unacceptable (e. g., Catull. 12).
Nor indeed is friendship the only feature of social interaction to which Catullus and Horace turn their attention; the theme of social exclusion is nearly as frequent in the work of both poets. Catullus tends to mock the bumptious habits of upstarts and recent arrivals to Rome, while Horace focuses more upon social climbers eagerly trying to gain access to Maecenas and Octavian (see, e. g., Catull. 12, 22, 23, 25, 39, 84; Hor. Sat. 1.9, 2.8). Both poets tend to dwell with some satisfaction on the pleasant sensations of being on the inside of an exclusive social circle, Horace with somewhat more ambivalence (Catull. 12; Hor. Sat. 1.5, 2.6).
World History
