Joseph Watkins, Boston University
In poem 23, Catullus denies Furius Bibaculus, another transpadane poet, money and mocks him for being excessively dry. Marsilio and Podlesney have argued that the terms of Furius’ dryness constitute a critique of his poetic style. I agree that poem 23 focuses on literary criticism, and I would add that lines 17-8, in which Catullus discusses Furius’ mundities, “cleanliness,” and refers to him as purus,”pure,” also contain linguistic connotations, tapping into the contemporary debates on the nature of the Latin language and shining a light on the poetics of assimilation and ethnicity in Republican Cisalpine Gaul.
Catullus makes no secret of his Cisalpine heritage. He frequently employs Gaulish words and specifically claims transpadane identity (O’Bryhim; Krostenko; Adams, 2003; Cat.39.13). While Young has outlined some of the demographic tensions in the Latin poetic climate of the time, and Holland has argued for Cisalpine linguistic elements in Catullus’ style, Catullus’ own presentation and construction of his cisalpine identity have yet to be explored. Catullus 23 is ostensibly about money and health, but, following Marsilio and Podlesney’s meta-poetic interpretation, the poem offers a unique glimpse into two Cisalpine writers interacting in Latin about (Latin) style. The second half of the poem witnesses a shift from Catullus discussing Furius’ (poetic?) poverty to the claim that he is nevertheless beatus, a loaded word that frames the end of the poem (23.15 & 27, O’Hearn). While scholars usually take this claim as tongue in cheek, or, as O’Hearn takes it, philosophically weighted, I suggest that it may not be entirely insincere and the discussion of Furius’ mundities and puritas here refer to his linguistic style. Both mundities and purus were stylistically charged terms, relating specifically to a lack of linguistic barbarisms, that is to say, foreign loan-words (Cic.Orat.79; Rhet.Her.4.8.11; Adams, 2007). Catullus himself frequently employs non-Latin vocabulary, but I suggest he obliquely admits that Furius’ “pure” (purus) Latin style warrants some degree of praise. This praise, or more specifically, Catullus’ recognition that a lack of barbarisms can make one at least somewhat beatus, may reflect an awareness of the benefits of assimilation for these provincial poets. In contrast to Furius’ assimilation, however, Catullus’ own liberal use of Gaulish words might reflect a degree of pride in his transpadane identity and perhaps adds a multicultural element to his construction of urbanitas.