Catullus c. 60

The importance of c. 60, the final poem of the polymetria in our present arrangement of the collection, has never been fully recognized. In fact, generally it has been thought of as a few flat, unconsequential lines and as entirely inappropriate as a closing poem. This paper argues that the poem is far more important than has been recognized: it alludes to the addressee, who may be identified with both Lesbia and Clodia Metelli, and is a fitting close to the polymetria. The poem has two well-known literary precedents: Patroclus’ words to Achilles in <i>Iliad</i> 16 and the bitter, final speech of Jason in Euripides’ <i>Medea</i> (1323-1350). Scholars argue that Catullus may have taken either passage as his model, or perhaps both, or even another passage that stood in this tradition. Certainty is difficult, since the addressee of c. 60 is unnamed. My argument relies on the last line of the poem, which however, is not line five. Some time ago it was pointed out (Schmid, <i>Catullus: Ansichten und Durchblicke</i> (1974); Goold, <i>Catullus</i> (1983)), that this poem contains a remarkable acrostic construction in which the first letter of each line and the last letter of each line (in reverse, from line five to line one) form the Latin phrase <i>natu ceu aes</i> ‘by nature like bronze’. The acrostic does not seem to be widely known, and to my knowledge no one has considered it important enough to study it or bring its existence to bear upon the interpretation of the poem. If we take is earnestly, however, it will seem crucial, because it is clearly a paraphrase of <i>Medea</i> line 1345 τοιόν ἐμπέϕσκέ σοι θράσος. This would seem to support the arguments of those who want to see c. 60 as a poem to Lesbia. What is more, for the careful reader the allusion must have called forth the immediately following words of Euripides’ text, because they were notorious in antiquity: ἔρρ’, αἰστροποιὲ ‘be gone, doer of shameful deeds!’ The word αἰστροποιός, however, was a euphemism for fellatio - not in Euripides’ play, but in other contexts perhaps already in Euripides’ day (see Page’s commentary; Athenaeus 8.582 = Machon 18 Gow, with commentary pp. 127-8). The line can be read as bidding good riddance to a fellatrix, and one should, then, read the allusive acrostic as a farewell to Lesbia (λεσβιάζειν ‘to perform fellatio’). And a final shocking claim: <i>natu ceu aes</i> can also be read as ‘by birth like bronze’ (or ‘copper’, ‘brass’). Here is an allusion to Clodia, who by birth was a Metelli, a cognomen Romans associated with Lat. <i>metallum</i> ‘metal’, Grk. μέταλλον (see Accius, <i>Ann.</i> 1 Warmington, J. Dangel’s Budé ed., p. 263-4; Fest. 146.13L). In my reading, the poem links Lesbia to Clodia Metelli, a daring act that is best hidden in an acrostic. The paper will conclude with some thoughts about how this reading may influence our understanding of the construction and cohesion of the polymetria.