CATULLUS 68 - Scuola Normale Superiore

prefer to speak of amorous troubles of an unspecified sort: Moriz Schmidt writes about “liebesfatalitäten”. 100
One scholar thinks that Manlius’ problem was unrequited love, while others believe that there are two
alternatives, that he must have lost his wife or beloved either literally, as she died, or metaphorically, as she
left him. 101 Others still identify Manlius’ affliction with separation from Catullus, with a terminal illness and
with the loss of an elder brother or perhaps of a child. 102 Finally there are those who believe that it may not
be possible to identify more closely the misfortune Manlius has suffered. 103
We can eliminate some of these possibilities at once. Manlius cannot be terminally ill: he would be eager to
make love (lines 5f.) and asks Catullus, who is no doctor, to ‘restore him to life’ (lines 3f.). There is no sign
anywhere in the poem that he has lost an elder brother or a child. Separation from Catullus could downcast
one who was dependent on him for his daily entertainment (we have no sign that this was the case for
Manlius or for anyone else), but it could hardly be construed as a cruel stroke of fate of the type alluded to in
line 1. The death of Manlius’ wife or beloved would explain his intense sorrow, but not his being desertus. 104
Moreover, it is hardly credible that someone who has just lost the partner whom he dearly loved should
complain that he is now deprived of sex. And Manlius does not seem to be suffering from unrequited love:
desertus would imply in this case that his love was requited at first. There remain in the ring the hypotheses
that he should have been left behind by his partner, or that he should have suffered some unspecified sort of
romantic (or erotic) misfortune. But we should also keep open other possibilities. What if Manlius could not
access the joys of love because of some other sort of difficulty – due to financial or social problems – or if
his main problem was entirely different, but it was aggravated by the fact that he happened to be unable to
console himself with the pleasures of love?
100 Manlius abandoned by beloved: Perrotta 1927, Tescari 1935, Salvatore 1949, Godel 1965, Kinsey 1967, Levine
1976, Sandy 1978, Shipton 1978, Citroni 1979, Tuplin 1981, Woodman 1983, Courtney 1985, Forsyth 1987, Powell
1990, Fear 1992, Casali 1996 and hesitantly also Vahlen 1902. Temporary absence of beloved: Pennisi 1959 and
Sarkissian 1977 and 1983. “liebesfatalitäten”: M. Schmidt 1880: 782; thus also Westphal 1867, Birt 1890, Quinn
1970, Wiseman 1974, Goold 1983, Lefèvre 1981 and Simpson 1994.
101 Unrequited love: Bright 1976. Death or departure of wife/beloved: Howald 1918 and Fordyce 1961.
102 Absence of Catullus: von Mess 1908, Coppel 1973 and Skinner 2003. Terminal illness: Schöll 1880. Loss of
eldest brother or of a child: Léon Herrmann 1957.
103 Thus Magnus 1875, Riese 1884, Prescott 1940 and Thomson 1997.
104 Birt 1890: iv also thought that in this case his bed would have had to be called uiduus rather than caelebs, but in fact
caelebs can also characterize widowers: see ad loc. (line 6).
50