A Further Note on Catullus 111

Author(s): Archie C. Bush

Source: The Classical World , Jan., 1972, Vol. 65, No. 5 (Jan., 1972), pp. 148-151
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press on behalf of the Classical Association
of the Atlantic States

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4347633

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.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The Johns Hopkins University Press and Classical Association of the Atlantic States are
collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Classical World

This content downloaded from

134.176.245.81 on Wed, 14 Oct 2020 10:06:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 148 THE CLASSICAL
A FURTHER NOTE ON CATULLUS 111
Aufilena, uiro contentam uiuere solo,
nuptarum laus e laudibus eximiis;
sed cuiuis quamuis potius succumbere par est,
quam matrem fratres ex patruo ....
In a recent issue of The Classical Worldl W.
De Grummond argues that the last line of Ca-
tullus 111 has been generally misinterpreted. In
the final verse, he claims, Aufilena should not be
made to bear by her patruus children who are her
own fratres patrueles, but rather should be made
to conceive, by an illicit union with her husband's
brother, children who are half-brothers to those
of her marriage. The kin terms fratres and
patruus, De Grummond maintains, are used from
the viewpoint of Aufilena's legitimate children.
Although this interpretation is interesting and
adds to our understanding of the poem, never-
theless we should not lightly abandon the more
traditional explanation which makes Aufilena
have an affair with her paternal uncle and con-
ceive children by him.
Apparently De Grummond was led to his less
obvious interpretation of the poem by circum-
scribing the use of the term frater " cousin" within
quite narrow contextual bounds which become The examples do not prove that frater could only
be equivalent to frater patruelis in contextually
greatly strained when viewed with closer scrutiny.
In an extended footnote he states: "That frater
could in the Republican period, alone and with-
out previous explanation, be equivalent to frater
patruelis seems to be doubtful in the first place,"
and then he adds: " Cicero, it is true, in his letters
to Atticus at least twice used frater to mean
'cousin': at 1.5.1 ... and at 12.7.1 ... but Cicero
can, of course, depend upon Atticus' knowledge
of the relationships involved and know that he
will, as it were, supply his own context." Frater,
then, De Grummond admits, can sometimes be
used in Ciceronian Latin in place of fraterpatruelis,
but, he concedes, frater can be used in this way 2See also CIL 3.2.5333 where a mother's brother's
only if the context has been previously clarified
or is readily apparent. Yet, it may be asked, to
whom was Cicero or more importantly to whom
was Catullus obliged to make a context apparent?
Was it to the ancient audience and reader or to
the Classical scholar? Moreover, what criteria
will always enable us to determine with certainty
whether a context such as that given for Catullus
111 was clear or unclear to Aufilena, her patruus,
or the general reading public of that era? For
the most part the distinction between contex-
tually clear and unclear passages seems quite
artificial, and in fact usually provides no objec-
1"A Note on Catullus 111," CW64 (1970) 120-121.
This content downloaded from
134.176.245.81 on Wed, 14 Oct 2020 10:06:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
WORLD JANUARY 1972
tive standard of reference. In the final analysis,
then, either frater really does on occasion equal
frater patruelis or else it does not; there should be
no two ways about it. That the term frater
really can at times be used to denote a frater
patruelis De Grummond's statement obviously
shows, but what he does not reveal clearly enough
is that the Ciceronian passages he cites as con-
textually clear (Att. 4.3.4; Har. Resp. 21.45 bis;
Dom. 3.7; and Red. in Sen. 10.25) do not actually
exemplify instances when frater is used in lieu of
frater patruelis, but rather represent some
though by no means all - of the Ciceronian pas-
sages (Dom. 13, 70, 87; Fam. 5.3.1.4; Cael. 60)
where frater is used as a term embracing any of
the relationships subsisting between the two
brothers Q. Metellus Celer and Q. Metellus
Nepos - and their two first cousins Appius
Claudius Pulcher and Publius Clodius. The
Metelli were strictly speaking the consobrini
"mother's brother's children" 2 to Publius Clodius
and his brother, whereas Clodius and his brother
were amitini "father's sister's children"3 to the
two Metelli. In short, what these Ciceronian
examples do show is that frater could at times be
used to designate an amitinus and/or consobrinus.
clear instances, but, on the contrary, reveal that
the term frater could designate any male first
cousin. 4
De Grummond assumes that Atticus (4.3.4)
"could be expected to have accurate foreknowl-
edge" of the exact genealogical connections of the
Metelli and Clodii. It is likely that he did, but
it is not a certainty. Nor is it by chance that two
historians, Livy (35.10.1-9) and Velleius Pater-
culus (2.8.2), both take pains to clarify a popular
son or consobrinus is designated as a frater.
3See Sententiae Receptae Paulo 4.11.4 where it is
stated: amitinus amitina, id est amitae filius filia,
and also Gaius Inst. 3.6.4 where the important
distinction is made that amitae tuae flii consob-
rinum te appellant, tu illos amitinos.
40ther Ciceronian passages which exemplify in-
stances when frater is used in place of frater patruelis
are Q. Fr. 1.3.3 and Att. 2.7.5 - Cicero speaking
of his son and brother's son; Verr. 3.170, 4.25,
4.137, 4.145 - Cicero speaking of his cousin
Lucius; Fin. 5.76 - Lucius referring to Cicero;
Fin. 5.87 - M. Piso referring to Cicero while
speaking to Lucius; Fam. 4.7.6.2, 4.9.2, 4.9.4
Marcus Claudius Marcellus speaking of Gaius
Claudius Marcellus; Fam. 4.11.1.3 - M. Claudius
Marcellus referring to Gaius in writing to Cicero.
Instances in non-Republican Latin are represented
by Quintus Curtius 6.10.24; SHA Lucius Verus
9.2-3; and CIL 9.1018.
 JANUARY 1972 THE CLASSICAL WORLD 149

misconception by each recording an instance when the legally or definitionally correct term for a
the use of the term frater has completely blurred parent's cousin, is avoided by Agorastocles
the distinction between brothers and cousins. throughout the play, nor does Hanno ever use
Livy, in describing the consular elections of 193 the phrase filius fratris patruelis6 in referring to
B.C., states that the frater of one candidate had his cousin's son. Clearly lahon and Hanno were
to make it known that he, unlike the frater of more nearly fratres than fratres patrueles.
another principal candidate, was a germanus or De Grummond continues his argument against
"real brother," not just a frater patruelis: the use of frater for frater patruelis by citing an-
P. Cornelius Cn. filius Scipio, qui ex other example from Catullus: "Both TLL and
Hispania provincia nuper decesserat . . . et Forcellini list fratris at Catullus 66.22 as the
L. Quinctius Flamininus, qui classi in Graecia equivalent of frater patruelis, but this is clearly
praefuerat . . . nam et in unum locum pete- not right." But, it is right, if the genealogical
bant ambo ... ceterum ante omnia certamen connections of Berenice and Ptolemy III Euer-
accendebant fratres candidatorum . . . (T. getes are carefully delineated, for we find that,
Quinctius Flamininus) Pro fratre germano since Ptolemy and Berenice are the offspring of
non patrueli se petere aiebat . .. His obtinuit two half-brothers, 7he is indeed her frater patruelis.
ut praeferretur candidato quem Africanus Moreover, in a poem filled with Alexandrian
frater ducebat, . . . erudition, it cannot be expected that frater used
By his declaration Flamininus did win the elec- in the sense of frater patruelis or for that matter
tion for his brother, but the important point, many other lexical items will occur solely in "a
which ought not to be overlooked, is the very context previously clarified by the poet or already
surprising fact that it was at all necessary to understood by the reader or listener . . . ." De
clarify the precise genealogical connections of two Grummond seems to be demanding too much of
very prominent men. Evidently the two Scipiones the poet.
were generally regarded as brothers by their con- In addition to the poetic examples already cited
temporaries. That the Romans did not always from De Grummond (Poen. passim; Catullus 66
distinguish between brothers and cousins is made & 111), important instances when frater is used
very clear once again from the passage in Velleius in poetry as an equivalent for frater patruelis are
Paterculus, where the historian, in speaking of aalso found in Terence (Phorm. 820) and in Ovid
censorship held by the two Metelli in 102 B.C., (Her. 8.29; 14.117; 14.122; 14.130; Fast. 1.12; Met.
is constrained to add that the men were not really
13.31). Furthermore, Ovid, who does not refrain
brothers: Nam censura Metellorum patruelium, from using such phrases as patruelia regna,
non germanorum fratrum fuit quod solis contigeratpatruelis origo, and patruelia dona, 8 has written a
Scipionibus. very interesting collocation of words in the Meta-
Turning aside from prose De Grummond as- morphoses (13.31) where he depicts Ajax pressing
serts: "In poetry of the Republic apparently the his claim for the arms of Achilles. The impas-
only instances of this usage (i.e. frater for frater sioned Ajax exclaims: Frater erat; fraterna peto!
patruelis) are to be found in a Plautine comedy, . . . Ovid's preference for fraterna rather than
and then only to avoid repetition of the cumber- patruelia may be attributed to metrical consid-
some full phrase frater patruelis. The occurrences erations, but it is just as likely that the poet chose
of frater 'cousin' in the Poenulus (122, 125, 952 to portray these two Greek warriors as siblings
alibi) are carefully explained in advance (e.g. at rather than as cousins.
59, 70), and in case the audience should become Cicero twice alerts us to the fact that kin
forgetful, the relationship is again spelled out at terminology is likely to follow sentiments. He
1069." Yet, despite this statement, Plautus' kin not only mentions the great affection he felt
terminology is not really so simplistic. There toward his cousin Lucius (Fin. 5.1): . . . Lucius
are, to be sure, two fratres patrueles Iahon and Cicero, frater noster coqnatione patruelis, amore
Hanno. However, Agorastocles, the son of Iahon, germanus . . ., but also speaks of the deep regard
repeatedly addresses and refers to Hanno as his in which his son Marcus held his own cousin, the
patruus " father's brother," and Hanno in turn
always addresses or refers to Agorastocles as his
filius fratris "brother's son." Propius sobrino,5
6Just. Dig. Gaius 38.10.1.7; Sententiae Receptae
Paulo 4.11.5; Just. Inst. 3.5.
7There is no terminological distinction in Latin
5Just. Dig. Gaius 38.10.1.7; Just. Dig. Paulus between a full- or half-blood sibling, see Just. Dig.
38.10.10.16; Sententiae Receptae Paulo 4.11.5; Paulus 38.10.13.
Tractatus de Gradibus 7; Just. Inst. 3.5. 8Her. 14.61; Met. 1.352; 13.41.

This content downloaded from

134.176.245.81 on Wed, 14 Oct 2020 10:06:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 150 THE CLASSICAL
young Quintus Cicero (Q. Fr. 1.3.3): . . . quem
meus Cicero et amabat ut fratrem et iam ut majorem
fratrem verebatur. Therefore, whenever the term
frater was used in the sense of "cousin," it re-
flected an extension of brotherly sentiments, even
if somewhat attenuated, to include a frater
patruelis or even an amitinus or consobrinus.
Soror, too, (Cicero Phil. 2.99; Ovid Met. 1.351,
Her. 8.29; 14.123) was frequently used to denote
a soror patruelis. Here again the criterion of an
" accurate foreknowledge" of genealogical con-
nections, at least on the part of any ancient
listeners or readers, is often impossible to assess.
In one passage Cicero (Red. Quir. 6) is content
to supply this context:
Non enim pro meo reditu . . . multi . . .
cognati atque adfines deprecati sunt, non ut
pro Q. Metello, clarissimo viro, iam spectata
aetate filius, non L. Diadematus consularis,
summa auctoritate vir, non C. Metellus
censorius, non eorum liberi, non Q. Metellus
Nepos, qui tum consulatum petebat, non
sororum filii, Luculli, Servilii, Scipiones;
permulti enim tum Metelli aut Metellarum
liberi pro Q. Metelli reditu vobis ac patribus
vestris supplicaverunt.
The orator does not, however, feel compelled to
elaborate upon the family tree of Q. Metellus
Numidicus, but a cross-check of the prosopo-
graphical data9 reveals that, whereas Numidicus'
sister Metella was married to L. Licinius Lucullus,
his sorores patrueles, the two Metellae who were
the daughters of his paternal uncle Q. Metellus
Macedonicus, were married to C. Servilius Vatia
and P. Scipio Nasica. Thus the term sorores, as
it is here used by Cicero, simultaneously em-
braces a true sister and two sorores patrueles.
At least once, though, Cicero had a very special
reason for deliberately obfuscating the distinction
between sibling and cousin. In his Philippics
(2.99) he makes a jibe at his arch-enemy Mark
Antony by intimating that his opponent was so
unprincipled that he even cohabited with his
sister:
Frequentissimo senatu Kalendis Ianuariis
sedente patruo hanc tibi esse cum Dolabella
causam odi dicere ausus es quod ad eo sorori
et uxori tuae stuprum oblatum esse com-
perisses.
Cicero, of course, could have used the full term
sorori patrueli in referring to Antony's actual
9RE 3.1.1229-1230 Stemma der Caecilii Metelli; RE
3.1.1234 Caecilia nr. 130, Caecilia nr. 131, Caecilia
nr. 132. Friedrich Miinzer, Romische Adelspar-
teien und Adelsfamilien (Stuttgart 1920) 252-253.
This content downloaded from
134.176.245.81 on Wed, 14 Oct 2020 10:06:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
WORLD JANUARY 1972
blood relationship to his wife, yet he chose the
terms sorori and patruo for the very same reason
that Catullus used fratres and patruo. It was just
as repugnant for a man to marry a "sister," as it
was for a woman to conceive "brothers." Hence
we may suppose that, as Cicero here intended to
make a close union seem incestuous, so Catullus
wanted to render an incestuous union horrendous.
Both authors, as it seems, are making an inten-
tional play upon the ambiguity inherent in the
Latin terms for siblings.
Here once again it can be shown how closely
sibling sentiments were associated with cousins,
for the extension of the term sorortoencompass a
soror patruelis definitely paralleled an extension of
sisterly feelings to include a female cousin. St.
Augustine (Civ. Dei 15.16) explains why men till
his day had generally refrained from marrying
cousins, even though such unions had only re-
cently been declared illegal:
experti tamen sumus in conubiis consobrian-
arum'0 etiam nostris temporibus propter
gradum propinquitatis fraterno gradum prox-
imum quam raro per mores fiebat
and then the church father adds a statement about
the terminological identification of siblings and
cousins:
. . .quod fiebat cum consobrina paene cum
sorore fieri videbatur quia et ipsi inter se
propter tam propinquam consanguinitatem
fratres vocantur et paene germani sunt.
Furthermore, Pseudo-Aurelius Victor (Caes. 48)
tells us why at this time Theodosius I felt con-
strained to forbid cousin marriages:
... tantum pudori tribuens et continentiae,
ut consobrinarum nuptias vetuerit tamquam
sororum.
Accordingly cousins were not felt to be far differ-
ent from siblings, and this accounts for the ten-
dency toward terminological identification and
sexual regulation.
The Roman jurists also make it quite plain
that a cousin could be regarded as a frater or
soror, for an amita "father's sister" and a mater-
tera "mother's sister" (Just. Inst. 1.10.5) as well
as a proavunculus " great grandmother's brother"
(Just. Dig. Paulus 23.2.39) were in loco parentis.
Consequently, if an aunt or great-great uncle
were considered "like a parent," then the children
1 0Consobrinus, -a is the most general term for cousi
in Latin, see Just. Dig. Gaius 38.10.1.6: sed fere
vulgus omnes istos communi appellatione consobrinos
vocant and also Just. Dig. Paulus 38.10.10.15: sed
plerique hos omnes consobrinos vocant, . . .
 JANUARY 1972 THE CLASSICAL WORLD 151

of these relations must have been regarded as

"like siblings." Although a patruus is never
described as "like a parent," nevertheless the
reason for this omission is not hard to find. The
majority of the excerpts recorded in the Digest
postdate the first century after Christ, but in A.D.
49 Agrippina had already wed her patruus, the
emperor Claudius, who forthwith legalized such
marriages.'1 Thereafter a patruus, who could
now be regarded as a potential mate, would
scarcely be considered in loco parentis. Still it is
quite reasonable to assume that prior to A.D. 49
a patruus was also in loco parentis, and that his
offspring were in loco fratrum "like siblings," as
Catullus 111 has lead us to expect.
In most types of kinship systems all parallel
cousins are terminologically merged with brothers
and sisters, 12 and in at least one type of kinship
schema all cousins parallel and cross are
completely identified with siblings. 3 Although
Latin does not very frequently or as a general rule
merge siblings with cousins and other relations,
nevertheless it, too, can at times extend the terms
THE CARREY
for brother and sister to include cousins as well as
other collateral relatives. It is worth pointing
DRAWINGS
out that there are instances in Latin when the
term frater is used to denote an avunculusl4 or a
OF THE
patruus'5 or even a nepos fratris.16 These kin-
ship usages would not surprise an anthropologist
PARTHENON
who would immediately recognize them as mani- SCULPTURES
festations of a phenomenon common to many lan-
guages. Therefore, even though the use of the Edited by Theodore Bowie
terms frater and soror to designate more remote
and Diether Thimme
collaterals may seem unnatural to us as speakers
of a language having an Eskimo-Type kinship
The only reliable pictorial evi-
system which always distinguishes siblings from
cousins and other collateral relatives, still such dence of the appearance of the
extensions are quite natural in other languages Parthenon before the destruction
having different kinship arrangements. It is now of the past three centuries is this
obvious that "a context previously clarified . . .
collection of drawings made by a
or already understood . . ." has nothing whatso-
French painter, Jacques Carrey,
ever to do with the use of frater for frater patruelis
in Latin, and that fratres can indeed be the equi- in 1674. Here the forty-four ex-
valent of fratres patrueles in Catullus 111. tant Carrey drawings are repro-
duced in two colors and juxta-
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA ARCHIE C. BUSH
posed with photographs of the
Elgin marbles to create an au-
"Suetonius Claud. 26.3; Tacitus Ann. 12.7; for last- thentic guide to the original
ing influence of this legislation see Gaius Inst. 1.62;
Tituli ex Corpore Ulpiani 5.6; Mosaicarum et splendors of the Parthenon.
Romanarum Legum Collatio 6.2.2 excerpt from
163/4" x 15".
Ulpian.
"Crow-Type, Omaha-Type, Iroquois-Type.
1 12 pages $25.00
3Hawaiian-Type.
14Pliny Ep. 6.20.10.
Indiana University Press
'5lustinus 34.3.5-6. Bloomington, Indiana 47401
16Ovid Fast. 4.943, see RE 4.2.2160 Stammbaum der
Dardanien.

This content downloaded from

134.176.245.81 on Wed, 14 Oct 2020 10:06:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms