CATULLUS 68 - Scuola Normale Superiore

orn the Hours, Lawfulness, Justice, Peace and the Moirai (Theog. 901-906). From Aeschylus and perhaps
already from Pindar onwards, there is attested a tradition that identifies the goddess as a previous owner of
the Delphic oracle, after Gaia and before Phoebus and possibly Phoebe (Pi. Py. 11.9, Aesch. Eum. 2-4, Eur.
I.T. 1259-1269, Paus. 10.5.6, etc.; see further RE V-A2.1628.1-42, Vos 1956: 62-67, Sourvinou-Inwood
1987 and Corsano 1988).
Catullus is the only ancient author to connect her with the Golden Age. Why did he do so? Kroll and Fordyce
compare Aratus Phaen. 112f. λλ β〉ε! κα⇐ ροτρα κα⇐ α⎡τ↓ π〉τνια λα∩ν / μυρ⇔α π ντα παρε⇑ξε
Δ⇔κη, δ⊕τειρα δικα⇔ϖν and Cat. 64.385f. sese mortali ostendere coetu / caelicolae nondum spreta
pietate solebant, which echoes Aratus Phaen. 102f. He appears to have identified Aratus’ Maiden with
Themis. She could have appeared suitable for this role either in view of her name and her associations with
rights and justice, or less likely perhaps because she belonged to an earlier generation of gods and was
known as an earlier owner of the Delphic oracle.
The third ingredient in Catullus’ mixture is the idea shared by many Romans that their ancestors were more
dutiful and more virtuous than themselves, or rather more so than their contemporaries (see below on
antiquis … piis). A Greek myth is viewed through Roman eyes.
Compare the similar passages at Cat. 64.384-408, where the poet markedly contrasts the harmony, virtue and
piety of the past with the depravity of the present, and at 34.22-24 Romulamque (thus Fowler ap. Lyne 2002:
604 for Romulique in the MSS) / antique ut solita es, bona / sospites ope gentem, a prayer to Diana, in which
antique and solita es echo antiquis solita est in the present passage.
153 huc I.e. to Catullus’ gift to Allius (hoc … munus, line 149).
addant Here the principal MSS have the indicative addent; the humanistic conjecture addant is first found
in MS 106, datable to not much after 1502. The conjecture appears to have been forgotten and all editors
have printed addent, but Trappes-Lomax (2007: 244) defends addant. He points out that in a prayer one
needs a subjunctive, which is surely correct; we already have one in sitis two lines below, and an indicative
would not make sense before quam plurima ‘as many as possible’.
diui diuus is a by-form of deus that can be used both as an adjective (‘divine’) and as a substantive (‘god’).
The word is widely attested in the earliest Latin texts, including the so-called Duenos-inscription at CIL 1.2.4
iouesat diuos, i.e. iuuerat per diuos, and the first verse of the Carmen Saliare, frg. 1 diuum †empta cane,
diuum deo supplicate. At some point d(e)iuus gave rise to deus (see Ernout-Meillet s.v.) and the two words
are already found side by side in Ennius. In classical prose deus becomes the standard form, except in
religious formulas such as prayers and in especially pious contexts; in poetry the archaism diuus remains
common. Its survival caused perplexity already among the Romans, who debated whether there was any
difference in meaning between the words (see Servius and Servius Danielis on Verg. Aen. 12.139; the latter
quotes Varro’s correct observation that in the past diuus had been used simply for deus). In Catullus’ poems
the two words appear to be identical in meaning, but not in tone. Overall he uses diuus only slightly more
often than deus (19x against 16x), but in differrent contexts: in the polymetric poems (1-60) he prefers deus
248