Horace, Catullus, and Alexandrianism

Author(s): N. B. Crowther
Source: Mnemosyne, Fourth Series, Vol. 31, Fasc. 1 (1978), pp. 33-44
Published by: BRILL
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4430759 .
Accessed: 22/04/2014 05:02
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Mnemosyne.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Mnemosyne, Vol. XXXI, Fase, ?

HORACE,

AND

CATULLUS,

ALEXANDRIANISM1)
BY
N. B. CROWTHER

The
has

influence

of Alexandrian

been

the

and

Hellenistic

on Horace
poetry
are numerous,
but the
of the century
Reitzen-

discussions

long
recognized;
following
may be noted: in the early years
stein 2) discussed
his relationship
to Hellenistic
poetry;
Pasquali3)
devoted many pages to Hellenistic
themes in Horace ; Wehrli 4) clearly
showed

Horace's

Horace

as a continuator

Wimmel
machean

e) listed

indebtedness

to Callimachus

of the

passages

'neoteric'

where

Horace

discussed
; Alfonsi5)
movement
; more recently
was influenced
by Calli-

Horace

the
discussed
theory;
Schwinge7)
with reference to Alexandria;
Castorina

phasis
Horace

or wide-spread
was the "least

of
stylistic
theory
a chapter
8) devoted
to the 'neoterismo*
in Horace;
a whole book
Gagliardi ?) composed
on 'neoteric'
in Horace.
tendencies
Yet even so, certainly
in the
the
Alexandrian
and
Callimachean
elements
world,
English-speaking
of Horace
have not throughout
the years received
sufficient
emmaintained
that
acceptance:
Campbell10)
to
Alexandrian
of
all
influences
the
open

?) Some of the ideas in this article were included in a thesis submitted

to the University of Sheffield for the degree of Ph. D. (1968).
Horaz und die hellenistische Lyrik, NJA 21 (1908),
2) R. Reitzenstein,
81-102, 365-67. See also Horaz als Dichter, NJA 49 (1922), 24-41, A. Rostagni,
Orazio, Arte Poetica (Torino 1930), 46 ff.
3) G. Pasquali, Orazio lirico (Firenze 1920), 141-641.
4) F. Wehrli, Horaz und Kallimachos, Mus. Helv. 1 (1944), 69-76.
5) L. Alfonsi, Poetae novi (Como 1945), 112 ff.
6) W. Wimmel, Kallimachos in Rom (Wiesbaden i960), passim.
7) E.-R. Schwinge, Zur Kunsttheorie des Horaz, Phil. 107 (1963), 75-96.
8) E. Castorina, La poesia d'Orazio (Roma 1965), 159-70.
9) D. Gagliardi, Orazio e la tradizione neoterica (Napoli 1971).
io) A. Y. Campbell, Horace (London 1924), 139.

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HORACE, CATULLUS, AND ALEXANDRIANISM

34
Latin

classic

studies
of the
poets";
Commager
n) in his critical
for a re-examination
of Horace's
to Alexanrelationship
This study
was to a large extent
undertaken
poetry.
by

Odes called
drian

Newman
has pointed
12), whose ideas (a reviewer
out1S)) are not
as original as the author first thought.
The purpose
of this article
is not to re-assess
or re-emphasise
for the relations
the evidence
of
Horace

to Alexandria,

Horace's

relationship
for
stumbling-block

for the results

are clear, but rather to examine

for Catullus
has become
a
Catullus,
in their discussion
scholars
of Horace
and
with

For how could a poet who is often believed

to be
of 'neoteric' poetry be so steeped in Alexandrianism
an opponent
14) ?
It will be worthwhile
to re-examine
the relationship
of Horace and
with particular
reference
to their literary ideals.
Catullus

Alexandrianism.

The only
tenth

reference

of Horace

of the first book

poem
to a large extent
can this statement

is deduced

to Catullus

by name is found in the

It is from this passage that
of the two poets. But
antipathy

of Satires.
the

be justified
in the light
much discussed
verses (14-19) 15), Horace
Old Comedy who should be imitated:

of the evidence
speaks

? In these

of the writers

of

li) S. Commager, The Odes of Horace (New Haven and London 1962),
35, where he lists others who reject Alexandrianism in Horace. Cf. ?. Otis,
Horace and the Elegists, TAPA 76 (1945), 190, who speaks of the opposition
of Horace to the Alexandrianism of the neoterics.
12) J. K. Newman, Augustus and The New Poetry (Bruxelles 1967), 270 ff.
13) L. P. Wilkinson in Gnomon 41 (1969), 156-59.
14) Cf. F. Plessis, La po?sie latine (Paris 1909), 320, P. Grimal, Horace
(Paris 1958), 14, who believe Horace was critical of Catullus and the neoterics,
j. Ferguson, Catullus and Horace, AJP y y (1956), i, Tenney Frank, Catullus
and Horace (Oxford 1928), 162-64, A. Kiessling, R. Heinze, Horaz: Oden
und Epoden (11 Edit. Z?rich-Berlin 1964), 484 ff., A. La Penna, Orazio e
Videologia del principato (Torino 1963), 166 f.
15) G. L. Hendrickson, Horace and Valerius Cato, CP 12 (1917), 329-50,
?. Otis, op. cit., 177 ff., suggested the verses were disparaging. However,
E. K. Rand, Catullus and the Augustans, HSCP 17 (1906), 15-30, B. L. UUman, Horace, Catullus, and Tigellius, CP 10 (1915), 270-96, take the opposite
point of view: Ullman believes that cantare can have the sense of satirize,
but this interpretation is rejected by N. Rudd, The Satires of Horace (Cambridge 1966), 292-93 n. 15. See also Rudd, op. cit, 289 n. 46, who rejects the
view of J. Perret, Horace (Paris 1959), 59, that cantare can mean to mock.
The term cantare may well be connected with Cicero's cantores Euphorio-

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HORACE, CATULLUS, AND ALEXANDRIANISM

35

ridiculum acri
fortius et melius magnas plerumque secat res.
illi scripta quibus comoedia prisca viris est
hoc stabant, hoc sunt imitandi: quos neque pulcher
Hermogenes
umquam legit, neque simius iste
nil praeter Calvum et doctus cantare Catullum.
is known

of Hermogenes
is identified
by the

Little

referred

to as simius

but the
Demetrius,
the Catullan-type
of
suggest
obviously
or
At
end
the
same
satire
the
of
not).
(90-91)
(ironically
and Hermogenes
:
bids farewell to Demetrius

iste, who
terms pulcher
poetry
Horace

1?) and the poet

with
scholiasts

discipularum

and

doctus

Demetri, teque, Tigelli,

inter iubeo plorare cathedras

where

it appears that mention

of female pupils (discipulae)
of chairs
for women
and
the
iubeo
phrase
(cathedrae),
plorare (a play on the
more common
of love-poetry
iubeo valere) suggest criticism
17). The
and his contemporary
is not that they
criticism
against Hermogenes
followed
Calvus and Catullus,
but that they did so to the
merely
of other poets (nil praeter).
exclusion
As Brink explains,
"Horace
to
not
to
their
narrow
their
but
tastes"
tastes
objects
18). Their
in terms of love-poetry,
for in almost
narrow tastes were probably
all cases

where

writers,
sequent
tude of Horace

Calvus
the

and Catullus

towards

are mentioned

together
by subin
attimind
The
19).
love-poetry
and
the
love-poetry
specially
preoccupa-

author

had

nis. See ?. ?. Crowther, ?? ?e?te???, poetae novi, and cantores Euphorionis,

CQ 20 (1970), 325 ff., W. Allen Jr., Ovid's Cantare and Cicero's Cantores
Euphorionis, TAPA 103 (1972), 1-14.
16) On the identification of Hermogenes, see M?nzer's article in RE VI
AI, 943-46, Rudd, op. cit., 292-93 ?. 15. Ullman, loc. cit., made much of the
fact that Calvus attacked a Sardian Tigellius (fr. 3 Morel), but it is uncertain
whether this Tigellius can be identified with the Hermogenes Tigellius of
Satire I 10. However, Hermogenes in I 4, 72 is associated with the vulgus,
hardly a Catullan concept (see infra). Clearly Hermogenes does not possess
all the qualities of a Catullus. Cf. Sat. I 9, 25 and invidia (infra).
17 See Ullman, op. cit., 277.
18) CO. Brink, Horace on Poetry. Prolegomena to the Literary Epistles
(Cambridge 1963), 167.
19) Cf. Prop. II 25, 3-4; 34, 87-90; Ov. Am. Ill 9, 61-62; Plin. Ep. I 16,
5; IV 27, 4; Aul. Gell. XIX 9, 7?

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HORACE, CATULLUS, AND ALEXANDRIANISM

36
tion

of a love-poet
with a single
there
although
may be criticism

in

this

there

poem,

principles.
A basic

argument
and Catullus

in the

Satires

originates,
Furius.
However,
sented by Horace
there

is well-known
20). However,
of the subject-matter
of Catullus
of style or poetic
criticism
apparent

often put forward to show antipathy

between
is the allegation
that the minor poets criticized
were the chief survivors
of the Catullan
school21).
one feels, from the references
to Valerius Cato and

Horace
This

is no

theme

even

if the passage
is genuine 22), Cato is repreof Lucilius (I io, 1-8) ?), and clearly
here against
Cato for writing
Catullan-type

as a defender

is no criticism

the Furius of II 5, 39 ff. and the Alpinus of I 10,

Similarly,
poetry.
for 'neoteric'
their identities
36 f., whatever
24), are not attacked
but for quite the reverse, for writing turgid epic. Another
tendencies,
known 'neoteric',
Varr? of Atax (I 10, 46) is mentioned
merely as a
in
writer of unsuccessful
Of
the
criticized
the Satires,
satire.
poets
who is associaDemetrius
only Hermogenes,
(and perhaps Fannius
of Catullus,
ted with Hermogenes
110, 79 f.) appear to be 'followers'
but it was their subject-matter,
as we have seen, and not their style
An examination
of the other poets mentioned
that was assailed.
by
Horace

bears

out

this

statement:

Crispinus

(I 1, 120 f,;

4, 13 ff.)

20) Cf. Odes I 33 where Albius (Tibullus ?) is chided for singing unceasing
plaintive elegies, and Ep. II 2, 90 ff. where Horace contrasts his own poetry
with that of an unnamed elegiac poet, often believed to be Propertius. (Here
is found Horace's only direct reference to Callimachus v. 100.) Cf. Heinze,
ad loc, Otis, op. cit., 188 f.
21) Cf. Hendrickson, loc. cit., Otis, loc. cit., Ferguson, loc. cit.Otis in Virgil.
A Study in Civilized Poetry (Oxford 1963), 33, believes that Horace was
critical of the neoterics for their failure to apply to themselves their own
principles of polish and artistry. Cf. also Newman, op. cit., 340.
22) For literature on the subject, see E. Burck in the Appendix to Heinze's
edition of the Satires, 411. To his list add Brink, op. cit., 167 n.l.
with Lucilius, see R. P. Robinson, Valerius
23) For Cato's involvement
Cato, TAPA 54 (1923), 109, H. Bardon, La litt?rature latine inconnue I (Paris
*952)> 338-39, Rudd, op. cit., 119.
24) On the identity of the poet(s), see the scholiasts, who (with the exception of Porphyrion on the first passage) identify the bombastic epic poet
with Bibaculus. For another interpretation, see Rudd, op. cit., 289 f. ?. 52.
See also ?. ?. Crowther, Valerius Cato, Furius Bibaculus, and Ticidas, CP
66 (1971), 109., where it is shown that in fact Bibaculus is not a 'neoteric*.

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HORACE, CATULLUS, AND ALEXANDRIANISM

was

37

too fast25).
Cassius
too much poetry,
writing
but
of
a
harsh
was
a
61
style 2e).
ff.)
prolific writer,
(I io,
for presenting
his books and bust
(I 4, 21 ff.) was attacked

criticized

Etruscus
Fannius

for

Laberius
are
to an institution
27). The mimes of Decimus
of Rhodes (110, 21 ff.)
said not to be true poetry (110, 6). Pitholeon
mixed Greek and Latin words in his epigrams,
said to be of poor
is
an
unknown
otherwise
Pantilius
poet 2g).
quality **).
(110, 78)
in poetry have often been seen as
Horace's
claims to originality

unasked

of a slight

evidence
follows

to Catullus30).

The

relevant

passages

are

as

princeps Aeolium carmen ad Italos

deduxisse modos.
(Odes III 30,13-14)
libera per vacuum
posui vestigia
princeps,
non aliena meo pressi pede . . .
.. . Parios ego primus iambos
ostendi Lati?, num?ros animosque secutus
Archilochi, non res et agentia verba Lycamben.
hunc ego, non alio dictum prius ore, Latinus
volgavi fidicen.
(Ep. I 19, 21-33).

25) Cf. Porphyrion: Plotius Crispinus philosophiae studiosus fuit. Idem

et carmina scripsit, sed tam garrule, ut aretalogus diceretur.
26) He is identified by the scholiasts with Cassius Parmensis (cf. Ep. I
4, 3), a writer of epigrams, elegies, and tragedies, but this interpretation
is rejected by Heinze.
27) See Rudd. op. cit., 120.
28) Porphyrion:
epigrammata effutivit potius quam scripsit.
29) T. F. Higham, Ovid: Some Aspects of His Character and Aims, CR
48 (1934), I10> nas pointed out the similarity of language of I 10, 78 and A ?
XI 322, where Antiphanes is attacking the water-drinkers (generally believed
to be Callimachus and his school), e.g. ????e? and cimex. Cf. Heinze ad loc.
Otis, TAPA (1945), 179 n.8, believes that here Horace is reviving against
the poetae novi the abuse used against Callimachus and his friends. This
is an interesting suggestion, but there is no evidence, as we have seen, in
the Satires for attacks against 'neoteric* principles. One may consider against
Higham and Otis the comparison of Cassius to a rushing river (I 10, 61 ff.),
which is reminiscent of Callimachus' criticisms of ApoUonius! (Ap. 108 ff.).
Cf. similar criticisms of Lucilius I 4, 11 and I 10, 50 f.
30) Cf. especially Ferguson, op. cit., 4, who states that Horace's claims
"are really rather impudent".

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HORACE, CATULLUS, AND ALEXANDRIANISM

38
Horace

was obviously
not the first literally to introduce
to Rome
nor
Parian
It
that
claims
lyric poetry,
iambics31).
appears
to originality
were almost conventional
and much sought after in
Greek

We may compare
to Lucilius
Horace's
reference
as the
Rome32).
inventor in satire, although
he was obviously
preceded
by Ennius.
What Horace probably
had in mind in the first passage quoted, was
he was

that

Roman

the

first
that

poet to establish
he was the inventor

poetry,
necessarily
imply criticism
may be seen in Propertius

of earlier

lyric as a distinct
genre in
or e??et?? 33). This does not
writers in the genre. A parallel

(II i, 3-4) :

primus ego ingredior puro de fonte sacerdos

Itala per Graios orgia ferre choros
where

the poet also claims

The comment

predecessors.
applicable

to Horace

originality,
of Camps

but was surely aware of his

verses seems equally

on these

34) : "it is as likely

that

he is simply

rejoicing

31 ) Catullus had written two poems in Sapphics. Laevius, too, had written
lyric, although probably not in the Greek manner (Porphyrion ad Odes III
i, 2-3). However, the two poems of Catullus are mingled among other occasional poems in different metres. Even Quintilian (X 1, 96) does not include
Catullus as a lyric poet, but only Horace and Caesius Bassus. In Ep. I 19,
32-33 Horace appears to exclude Sapphic stanzas by referring only to Alcaeus (hunc as identified by Bentley). See Fraenkel, Horace (Oxford 1957),
of Odes III 30, see Newman,
339 ff. on Ep. I 19. For other interpretations
Ennius the Mystic?II,
G & R 12 (1965), 43 n. 2, who suggests that Horace
was not concerned with metre, but rather with attitude : he adapted Aeolian
lyric for an Italian national purpose. For the theory that Horace was being
original in metre, see E. H. Sturtevant, Horace, Carm. 3. 30. 10-14, and the
Sapphic Stanza, TAPA 70 (1939), 295 ff. On the term princeps, see E. Mar?ti,
Princeps Aeolium carmen ad Italos deduxisse modos, AAntHung 13 (1965),
104 ff. See also, Commager, op. cit., 158. For predecessors of Horace in
iambics, see Heinze ad Ep. I 19, 23 and 26.
32) For other claims to originality in Horace, see infra. For the primus
theme in other poets, cf. Lucretius I 117, 926; IV 1 ff.; V 336 f.; Virgil
Eel. Ill 86; VI 1 f.; Georg. II 175; III 10 f.; Propertius III 1, 3; Statius
Ach. I 9 f. ; III 292 f. ; Manilius I 6; III 1 ff. ; Aetna y f. Cf. W. Kroll, Studien
zum Verst?ndnis der r?mischen Literatur (Stuttgart 1964. First pubi. 1924),
13 ff., G. Williams, Tradition and Originality in Roman Poetry (Oxford
1968), 253 and passim. For other references, see R. G. M. Nisbet, M. Hubbard, A Commentary on Horace: Odes Book 1 (Oxford 1970), 307 f.
33) Cf. Heinze ad Sat. I 10, 46.
34) W. A. Camps, Propertius Elegies'. Book III (Cambridge 1966), 53.

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HORACE, CATULLUS, AND ALEXANDRIANISM

in his

without
and achievement,
originality
to compare
himself with others".
and poetic
their different
temperaments

own

intention

Despite
and Catullus

do in fact

ideals, which
The following
particular

show

a remarkable

to a large extent
gives an indication

are based
table

to verbal

reference

similarities

any

39
particular

themes,
in their

affinity
on Callimachean
of

these

affinities

Horace
literary
theory.
with

3d).

of major importance
to
of originality
was obviously
The concept
Catullus and Horace. In the first line of his first poem Catullus
above the primus
speaks of his novum libellum 3e). We have discussed

both

I princeps
originality
to fontibus

We may add Horace's

claim to
Horace37).
in the poetry of Lesbos in Odes I 26, with the references

theme

of

integris (v. 6) and fidibus novis (v. 10), and his hymn to
Dionysus
(Odes III 25), not heard before (recens v. 7). In his Ars
of originality
also discusses
the problems
Poetica
(131 ff.) Horace
but
he
to
be
no
servile
imitator
with Callimachean
seems
allusions,
but adopts his theory for his own purpose 38).
of the Alexandrian,
was a hope of both poets. In his introductory
poem
Immortality
Catullus hopes that his poem will last for more than one generation.
II
in stronger
in the epilogues
to Books
Horace
terms proclaims
uses
III
of
the
Odes
that
his
will
not
die.
Catullus
and
poetry
35) For passages where the terms occur, see D. Bo, Lexicon Horatianum
(Hildesheim
1965-66), M. ?. Wetmore, Index Verborum Catullianus (New
Haven 1912), R. Pfeiffer, Callimachus II (Oxford 1953), 141 ff., and the
discussion infra. For a further discussion of some of these terms and their
use in other poets, see Wimmel, op. cit., passim, Gagliardi, op. cit., passim,
W. Steidle, Studien zur Ars Poetica des Horaz (W?rzburg 1939), passim,
J. H. Brouwers, Horatius en Propertius over Epiek en Lyriek (Nijmegen
1967), P. L. Smith, Poetic Tensions in the Horatian 'Recusatio', AJP 89 (1968),
56-65, C. O. Brink, Horace on Poetry. The Ars Poetica (Cambridge 1971).
36) Cf. J. P. Elder, Catullus ?, His Poetic Creed, and Nepos, HSCP 71
(1966), 147.
37) See especially n. 32.
38) Cf. Brink, Ars Poetica, 208 f., who states that "Callimachus had
barred the road to the forms which for Horace were the most seriously
poetic ... As so often, therefore, when Horace makes use of Callimachean
language, he turns it upside down ; he employs it to affirm what Callimachus
had denied". With this passage of Horace, cf. Call. Aet. I fr. 1, 27-28, Ep.
XXVIII Pf.

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HORACE, CATULLUS, AND ALEXANDRIANISM

40

HORACE

CATULLUS

CALLIMACHUS

novus
princeps
primus

novus

(cf. A et. I
fr. i, 25 ff.,
Ep. XXVIII

Brevity:

parvus
libellus
brevis
tenuis
tenuare

parvus
libellus

?????
?????st???a
?????
??a??s???a???
?p? t?t???
?at? ??pp??

Epic terms:

tumidus
turgidus
pinguis
crassus
durus
fortis
grandis
gravis
perpetuus
labor
operosus
ars

tumidus

pa???
?a????
???a?
d???e???

expolitus
(cf. invigilata
Cinna fr. ii, ?
Morel)
populus

????p???
p????

Originality :

Polish /toil:

Antipathy to
Populace :

Description
of Poems :

Qualities
Poetry:

of

populus
vulgus
invidia
invidere
plebs
libellus
nugae
versiculi
iambi
carmina
doctus
tener
lepidus
illepidus
ludere
urbanus
mollis
facetus

libellus
nugae
versiculi
iambi
carmina
doctus
tener
lepidus j lepos
illepidus
ludere
urbanus
molliculus
facetiae
infacetiae
infacetus

Pf.)

f?????
?as?a???

?a????
s?f??
?ept??
?epta????
???a???
???s??? ?????

l?vis
deducere
musa pedestris
invenustus

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HORACE, CATULLUS, AND ALEXANDRIANISM

4I

per ennius
(Odes III 30, 1) 39).
(I io), Horace
of
the
ideal
Catullus
refers in Poem
brevity.
poets espoused
I to his libellus (see infra), and in Poem XCV b praises the parva
of poetry. Horace uses both the terms libellus and parvus
monimenta
term

the

perenne

Both

and others

for his poetry *?).

poet, in compliance

Callimachean
theory, composed
of
followed
the Alexancourse,
Catullus,
epic poetry.
the short epic or epyllion41).
innovation
of writing
Horace
no such hexameter
of
but
the
Alexandrian
qualities
poem,

Neither

with

traditional
drian
wrote
the

ode have

Barred by Callimachus
long been noticed42).
of
and
the
drama, Horace used the
epic
writing
major genres
device of recusatio \ excusatio *&). We may note in addition
Augustan
of the opus longum
Horace's
criticism
(A. P. 360) **), his use of
Europa

from

scriptor cyclicus
(A. P. 136) in the same sense as Callimachus45),
the derogatory
term turgidus of the epic poet Alpinus
(Sat. I 10, 36),
with the tumidus Antimachus
which may be compared
of Catullus
of the bombast
of tragedy,
which is
(XCV b 2) 4e), his criticism
similar to that of Callimachus
47).
are not apparent in the fragments of Calli39) Hopes for immortality
machus, but see Ep. VII Pf.
40) For parvus, cf. Odes III 3, 72; IV 2, 31 ; 15, 3; Ep. II 1, 257; for brevis/
brevitas, cf. A. P. 25, 335; Sat. I 10, 9. For tenuis, which has a quantitative
as well as a qualitative connotation, see Odes I 6, 9; II 16, 38; 20, 1 ; III 3,
72 (tenuare); Ep. II 1, 225, A. P. 46.
41) On the epyllion, see Crowther, op. cit., 322 ff.
42) See C. W. Mendell, Catullan Echoes in the Odes of Horace, CP 30 (1935),
289 ff., who comments on the theme of the betrayed mistress, the concentration on a small part of a myth. Cf. Ferguson, op. cit., 5 ff., Newman,
New Poetry, 306 f. on the learned nature of the poem, Fraenkel, op. cit.,
on its Hellenistic qualities.
43) On Horace and the major genres, see Brink, Ars Poetica, 208 f.; on
see Wimmel, op. cit., 162 ff., Smith, op. cit., 57 f. Cf.
recusatio/excusatio,
also Williams, op. cit., 46 f., who suggests that Horace and the Augustans
gave a new twist to the terms: they praise Augustus by declaring their
inability to write on great subjects. Cf. ?. 38 on originality.
44) Cf. Lucilius frr. 338-47 Marx, 401-10 Warmington.
45) Cf. Ep. XXVII 1 Pf.
46) Cf. pinguis indirectly of Furius (Sat. II 5, 40), tumidis sermonibus
(Sat. II 5, 98). These are the Callimachean equivalent of pa?? (fr. 398 Pf.,
Cf. Aet. I fr. 1. 23 Pf.
of Antimachus).
47) Cf. ampullas (A. P. 97) and ???sa ?????????sa (Call. fr. 215 Pf.),
and Porphyrion's comment: hoc a Callimacho sustulit.

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HORACE, CATULLUS, AND ALEXANDRIANISM

42

is another noticeable
feature of
(ars-t????)
uses the term expolitus in Poem I of his own
in Poem XXII
and praises
criticizes
hasty workmanship
poetry,
the Zmyrna
of Cinna published
"nonam
after nine years:
post
Careful

workmanship
the two poets. Catullus

edita post hiemem"

/ quam coepta est nonamque
a
similar
uses
Horace
phrase in the Ars
remarkably
(XCV 1-2).
worked
where he recommends
that a poem be carefully
Poetica,
Horace
annum
is
critical
in
over: nonumque
388)
48).
(v.
prematur
denique

messem

of Lucilius,
in Satires I 4 and 110, especially
of shoddy workmanship
and of Roman poets in general for their lack of limae labor (A. P.
bee and fashions his
himself to the Matinian
291) 4?). He compares
toil : per labor em \.
own poetry
with incessant
carmina fingo (Odes IV 2. 29-32).
and Horace were both contemptuous
Catullus
people.

Catullus

was

writing
ideals
Callimachean

for

an

. . operosa
of the
learned

parvus

common

circle

esoteric,
of poetry, as set out in Poem

who

XCV.
appreciated
of the envy of the people, malignum
critical
Horace
is especially
he is concerned
only
vulgus (Odes II 16, 39-40) *?). Like Catullus,
into poetry d1). Horace seems to have more in
with those initiated
who is especially
with Callimachus,
common
than does Catullus
concerned

with

the envy

of rival

poets d2).
terms used

by the two poets to

interesting
Especially
uses the term libellus in Poem I of
their poetry.
Catullus
describe
his work 53), Horace libellus of the first book of Satires (Sat. I 10,
are the

92) and libelli

of the three books

of Odes (Ep. 113,

4) 54). Porphyrion

48) Cf. Cinna invigilata . . ./carmina (fr. 11, 1-2 Morel), nocturna . . . manu
(A. P. 269).
49) Cf. Brink, Ars Poetica, 322, who suggests that "the solemnity is so
great that a humorous bathos is inevitable and can scarcely be unintentional". Can this be compared with Catullus' allusion to the carti laboriosi
of Nepos in Poem I ?
50) Cf. invidia (Odes II 20, 4). For other references, see Sat. I 4, 72, Odes I
1, 32, IV 3, 16, Ep. I 19, 37.
51) Cf. odi profanum vulgus (Odes III 1, 1).
52) Cf. A et. I fr. 1, 17, Ep. XXI 4, Hymn Ap. 105, 107, 113 Pf. Cf. especially Odes IV 3, 16.
53) On what poetry is meant by libellus, see now W. Clausen, Catulli
Veronensis Liber, CP 71 (1976), 37-43.
54) See Heinze ad loc.

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

HORACE, CATULLUS, AND ALEXANDRIANISM

on nugae : sic verecunde poetae nugas
culos suos 55) ; Catullus in Poem I and Horace

remarks

Odes and Satires)

seem

to refer to their work

43

soient

vers?appellare
in Satire I 9, 2 (of his
with this mock-modest

of his verses
uses the diminutive
versiculi
5e). Catullus
description
L
Horace
as
does
I
10, 32, Epod. XI 2). Both
4),
(XVI 3, 6;
(Sat.
term
iambi
to
the
describe
employ
biting verse 57).
Catullus
and Horace
seem in general
to agree on the desirable
of poetry. We may take as illustrations
the term doctus 58),
qualities
and ludere 59) which seems to be a distinctive
word in both poets to
describe

in the Ars Poetica

However
recomHorace
lyric poetry.
that
mends
should have pondus
which
poetry
(v. 320), a quality
seems to contrast
with Callimachean
theory and have more in common

with

traditional

out that in this

epic eo). It should be pointed
of
is
in
and
nowhere
drama,
passage
speaking
composing
his poetry is pondus a recommended
for
quality
lyric 61).
in themes and outlook
differences
Therefore,
despite the obvious
the poetry
of Catullus
and Horace
does have much in common,
Horace

paiticularly
have cared

in literary
more than Horace
would
ideals,
perhaps
to admit.
What clearly
Horace
does not like are the

55) Ad Sat. I g, 2.
56) Cf. also Ep. I 19, 42; II 2, 141 ; A.P. 322, where nugae are contrasted
with the pondus of drama. Cf. Brink, Ars Poetica, 347, Newman, New Poetry,
348.
57) Cf. Cat. XXXVI 5 ; XL 2 ; LIV 6; fr. 3 ; Hor. Ep. I 19, 23 (of Epodes) ;
Odes I 16, 3, 24; Epod. XIV 7. Noteworthy is the quote of Diomedes (GLK
I 485, 15-17), who places Horace and Catullus in the same iambic tradition,
and of Quintilian (X 1, 96), who speaks of the bitterness of the iambus in
Catullus, Bibaculus, and Horace.
58) The word doctus becomes almost a technical term for poetic ability
from the time of Catullus; cf. C. J. Fordyce, Catullus (Oxford 1961), 178,
Brouwers, op. cit., 122 ff., Kroll, op. cit., 37. It seems to be the equivalent
of the Greek s?f?a (Call. Aet. I fr. 1, 18; Ep. VII 4; XLVI 4 Pf.).
59) Catullus in Poem L 2, 5 uses it of composing poetry at leisure; in
Poem LXVIII 17 it seems to be associated with love. Horace in Sat. I 10,
37 contrasts ludere with the writing ot bombastic epic. Cf. Brouwers, op. cit.,
y t ff., ?. Wagenvoort, Ludus poeticus, LEC 4 (1935), 108-20, who suggests
the term is used for slight poetry as opposed to epic.
60) Cf. Brink, Ars Poetica, 345 f., who suggests it contrasts with the Callimachean ???a???. Heinze ad loc. compares the gravitas of epic.
61) By contrast Horace speaks of his own poetry as l?vis (Odes I 6, 20;
cf. Odes I 1, 31, II 1, 40).

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

44

HORACE, CATULLUS, AND ALEXANDRIANISM

had in mind love-elegy

exigui elegi (A. P. 77) ; but Horace probably
as we have seen. One should
and the narrow tastes of its authors,
not deny to Horace a general acceptance
he rejects one small part of it e2).
London

(Canada),

University

of Western

of Callimachean

theory,

if

Ontario

62) Brink, Ars Poetica, 167, suggests the term exigui elegi casts "a slur
on Callimachean pride in the small and highly wrought poem", but it would
be hard to find a better exponent than Horace of this kind of poem.

This content downloaded from 151.97.124.157 on Tue, 22 Apr 2014 05:02:45 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions