CATULLUS 68 - Scuola Normale Superiore

gentilicia. 42 This analysis is modified in part by a recent article by Morgan, who points out that there
is evidence for the use of the praenomen among close friends: in a letter to Atticus Cicero recalls
having turned to his friend the senior politician Sex. Peducaeus with the words Sexte, quidnam
ergo?, while Martial addresses friends of his as Aule and as Mani. 43 Cicero even uses the praenomen
Sexte to address an adversary. 44 If the praenomen could be used as an intimate or, better perhaps, an
informal term of address, this would explain its use by fictional characters, and also its ingratiating
usage noted by Dickey: a flatterer or a parasite would naturally pretend to be a close friend. 45
In his article Morgan argues that in lines 11 and 30 the vocative Mani “can be justified in at least five
mutually compatible and mutually reinforcing ways”, namely on account of (i) its relative rareness,
(ii) the addressee’s close friendship with Catullus, (iii) their close familiarity, (iv) in imitation of the
tendency of Greeks to address Romans by their praenomen, as the addressee would have been
particularly Hellenized, and (v) because of the addressee’s mollitia, his effeminacy. 46 In our case (i)
may not apply, as Manius was not nearly as rare as the rare aristocratic praenomina Appius, Spurius
and Kaeso, which were used quite often on their own; (iv) raises more questions than it answers
(could Catullus have been so tactless as to drop a hint about the excessive Hellenization of his
addressee at such a delicate moment?); and Morgan’s category (v) is based on a misinterpretation of
Horace Sat. 2.5.32f. gaudent praenomine molles / auriculae, where molles does not mean
‘effeminate’ but simply ‘soft’ as a generic epithet for ‘ears’: compare Cat. 25.2, where ear-lobes are
listed among other soft objects. 47 This leaves (ii) and (iii). It might be better to take the use of the
praenomen among close friends and that among intomages as one category. However, it could be a
problem that Catullus does not appear to be particularly close to the addressee of these lines (see line
9n.) – though the addressee’s personal difficulties may have called for a language of intimacy. In any
case, it does remain a problem that elsewhere in his poetry Catullus does not address anyone by his
praenomen alone – not even his closest friends, whom he calls Verani (9.1, 28.3), Licini (50.1, 50.8)
and Calue (14.2, 96.2), nor his brother, whom he simply addresses as frater (65.10, 68.20, 68.21,
68.92, 101.2, 101.6, 101.10), even though at home he might have used the praenomen. Does
Catullus, and do Roman writers in general, avoid the praenomen for some particular reason – for
example because they want the general public to be able to identify their addressee?
42
Dickey 2002: 63-67 (quotation from p. 63).
43
Morgan 2008: 148f. Sexte, quidnam ergo?: Cic. Att. 10.1.1. Aule: Martial Epigr. 6.54.2, 6.78.1, 7.14.1, 9.81.1,
11.38.1 and 12.51.1. Mani: ibid. 10.13(20).3.
44
Cic. Quinct. 38 and 40. Here he uses the praenomen in alternation with the gentilicium (ibid. 37 Naeui), but it is
surely significant that he has the liberty to do so.
45
The praenomen is used regularly by fictional characters in comedy: note Tit. com. 32 Tiberi, Afran. com. 3 Numeri,
95 Serui, 211 Manius, 272 Numerius and 304 Tite.
46
Morgan 2008: 148f. (quotation from p. 148).
47
The passage by Horace comes from a longer speech (Sat. 2.5.23-57) about how to entice a rich old man to include
you in his testament. Here the use of the praenomen is a linguistic trick to simulate intimacy.
24