User:Umimmak/sandbox/Catullus 42

Catullus 42, historically sometimes given the title In Quandam or referred to by its incipit adeste, hendecasyllabi, quot estis is a poem by the Roman poet Gaius Valerius Catullus. It is written in hendecasyllabic verse and is 24 lines. In this poem, Catullus addresses his personified verses, ordering them to shame and insult a woman who will not return his writing tablets. She remains unfazed, so the poem ends with them trying to flatter her instead. This poem depicts the Roman folk justice practice of flagitatio, and also has has been singled out for its comedy.

The poem was written in Classical Latin. Like many of Catullus' works, textual criticism has shown various manuscripts have had different versions, and various Catullan scholars have proposed ways to emend the texts to better reflect what Catullus might have actually written. Michael C. J. Putnam has called Catullus 42 "one of his wittiest and most famous" poems. Jean-Pierre Cèbe has also called it "célèbre" ('famous'). Classics and literature scholars have found connections between C. 42 and the works of various authors, both in antiquity and later, including homages and pastiches.

Text

Carmen XLII

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Adeste, hendecasyllabi, quot estis omnes undique, quotquot estis omnes. iocum me putat esse moecha turpis, et negat mihi nostra reddituram pugillaria, si pati potestis. persequamur eam, et reflagitemus. quae sit, quaeritis? illa quam videtis turpe incedere, mimice ac moleste ridentem catuli ore Gallicani. circumsistite eam, et reflagitate, 'moecha putida, redde codicillos, redde, putida moecha, codicillos!' non assis facis? o lutum, lupanar, aut si perditius potes quid esse. sed non est tamen hoc satis putandum. quod si non aliud potest, ruborem ferreo canis exprimamus ore. conclamate iterum altiore voce 'moecha putida, redde condicilllos, redde putida moecha, codicillos!' sed nil proficimus, nihil movetur. mutanda est ratio modusque vobis, siquid proficere amplius potestis: 'pudica et proba, redde codicillos.'

The Latin text in R. A. B. Mynors's 1958 book for Oxford Classical Texts is generally seen as the standard text of Catullus in the Anglosphere; variations in the text of Catullus are often framed in terms of deviations from Mynors. However, Mynors' text is often viewed as being conservative, hesitant to adopt conjectures to address corruptions in the text. Catullus's works have only survived from one manuscript which itself noted how corrupt it was. There still remain various unsolved problems in the text of Catullus. It has been said that the works of Catullus "may well hold the record for textual corruption among classical Latin texts". There are still many disagreements as to how to best reconstruct the original passages of Catullus. Thus, while Mynors is often used as a working text, there is not a single definitive text of Catullus since many conjectures remain controversial. The Latin text of C. 42 has several points where scholars differ.

(4) vestra/nostra

The 'O' manuscript use a scribal abbreviation for vestra in 42.4. Nostra would have an initial 𝔫 instead of 𝔲.

One point of contention concerns line 4 and whether the fourth word should be nostra or vestra, i.e., if the tablets are "ours" (belonging to Catullus and the verses) or "yours" (just belonging to the verses). The scribal abbreviations for both words, ñra and ũra, are easily interchanged. This has been considered one of the "notoriously troublesome" passages in Catullus' works. The earliest available manuscripts all wrote vestra; Girolamo Avanzi's 1535 edition is the first published work to propose the emendation to nostra. The Italian classical scholar Poliziano (1454–1494) had also independently come up with this conjecture in his personal annotations of the 1472 edition of Catullus. Mynors follows Avanzi in having nostra.

In a 1961 paper, Eduard Fraenkel argues that Catullus probably wrote vestra, i.e., that the Renaissance emendation was incorrect. Fraenkel wrote: "The poems are themselves considered the legitimate owners of the codicilli, the pugillaria ... it is the poems who are their masters and owners". Various scholars cite Fraenkel and also use vestra. Kenneth Quinn's edition of Catullus agrees with Fraenkel, writing "the poems are the legitimate owners of the tablets on which they originally came into existence". and other have similar argumentation

vestra means "yours" -- because they contain hendecasyllabic verse, like those Catullus is addressing.

• vestra}
• (Lowrie 2009, p. 38) the tablets belong to the poetry, so vestra. Cites Quin and (Fraenkel 1961, pp. 46–47)

Other Catullan scholars acknowledge Fraenkel's arguments, but instead use nostra. Gordon Williams wrote "there seems to be little point in attributing ownership of the tablets to the lines only; their function is to help the injured person who is Catullus". Hans Peter Syndikus thinks that, as the verses Catullus is addressing must be newly composed ones, the stolen tablets cannot belong to them; rather the tablets belong to Catullus. The plural possessive nostra is used as he and these new verses form a group of collaborators. Sander M. Goldberg follows Williams and Syndikus, noting Catullus is addressing new verses. Werner Eisenhut's edition of Catullus' poems uses nostra without commentary. Paul Claes argues for nostra due to the principle of "lexical concatenation"; nostra also appears in c. 43.7 and noster, the masculine form, appears in c. 44.1 noster.

(Elder 1980, p. 371) also secondary source for Thomson 1978 picking nostra going against (Fraenkel 1961)

• (but also see )

(9) ringentem

Another proposal with some 21st century support is emending ridentem 'laughing' in line 9 to ringentem 'snarling'; this was initially tentatively proposed as an option by Ludwig Schwabe in 1886, and argued for by Trappes-Lomax in 2007. Trappes-Lomax notes Catullus only uses the verb rideo in positive contexts and that dogs cannot smile but they do snarl and bare their teeth. Reviews of Trappes-Lomax's book have included this as one of his more convincing conjectures.

(13/14) facit/potest

Two additional, related, points of contention concern the grammatical person of facis (l.13) and potes (l.14). The earliest manuscripts of Catullus have these second person forms; it has been conjectured that these be changed to third person forms facit and potest. Using the second person would mean Catullus is speaking directly to the woman; the third person would mean Catullus is just talking about her. The Vatican Library's manuscript Vat.lat.1630, written c. 1430, is the earliest example with potest in line 14. T.J. Halbertsma was the first to propose the change to facit in an 1877 paper. Mynors uses the second person forms as in the earliest manuscripts.

Harrison argued the third person forms should be used in a 1999 paper. He notes that moecha is the subject of other third person verbs in the poem like putat (l.3) and negat (l.4), and if the poem had facit and potest then Catullus is only ever addressing the hendecasyllables in this poem instead of both the hendecasyllables and the woman at various times. He claims o lutum, lupanar is "an expostulatory exclamation", and should not be taken as a direct address. Goold and Lee both use the third person forms. Goldberg uses Mynors' text, but says facit and potest are "plausible" citing Harrison. Trappes-Lomax also argues for both third person forms, in part citing Halbertsma's arguments.

The Veronensis manuscript had 2nd person potes (l.14).

. In a 1877 paper he notes that ... and also that third person is also used in movetur (l.21).

• Harrison in Harrison & Heyworth (1998), p. 95
• (Trappes-Lomax 2007, p. 113) (Thomson 2009)

• (Fraenkel 1961, p. 48) has facis but potest "makes the expression much more forcibile and idiomatic"

(Becker 2020, p. 50) secondary source on (Thomson 1998) + (Goold 1995) facit/potest; (Bardon 1973) facis/potes(t) (hedges on latter); and (Mynors 1958) facis/potes. Becker himself goes with facit/potest.

• (Fedeli 1985a, p. 417) re (Eisenhut 1983)

• (Fordyce 1978, p. 194) notes "Catullus may well have written potest", noting he likes the phrase aut si quid -ius est.

• (Munro 1905) has potes in L.14

(16-17) Line order

The poem is generally presented with the lines in order from 1–24, however an alternate order where lines 16–17 are transposed to be between lines 23 and 24 has been proposed. The 19th century German classicist Rudolf Westphal was the first to propose this order; and Alexander Riese agreed with Westphal's transposal, agreeing with his reasoning. Munro notes the reasoning for this transposal, but provides a different solution involving the word ut. Bardon mentions Westphal's and Riese's transposal, additionally commenting "nec recte" ("not correctly"). Goold has also used this transposed order in his works, including in the Loeb Classical Library. Antonio Ramírez de Verger's translation of Catullus into Spanish follows Goold's line order for c.42, calling it "more logical". In the 21st century, Trappes-Lomax also follows Westphal in recommending this order of lines in his 2007 book. Thomas's review of Trappes-Lomax's book includes this transposal as one of its conjectures with convincing arguments. This ordering has been called "intrigu[ing]". Stephen Harrison has noted moving these lines would alleviate some grammatical complications, but instead argues Catullus is making use of aposiopesis. In a 2012 paper, Trappes-Lomax conjectured lines 16–17 only had to be moved to be after line 18 instead of after line 23.

(22) nobis/vobis

The earliest available manuscripts have nobis ("us".dat) in line 22 concerning who the poet says needs to change their strategy; a 15th century scribe emended this to vobis ("you".dat). This change was first made in the marginalia of the British Library's manuscript Egerton 3027, written in Perugia in 1467. The words nobis and vobis would be easily confused for each other in miniscule writing. In a 1931 paper, Gennaro Perrotta argued that the Renaissance emendation was correct for similar reasons to the emendation to vestra in line 4; he found it astonishing that Kroll and Elmer Truesdell Merrill used vestra in l.4 but nobis in l.22. Robinson Ellis and Phyllis Forsyth have both said that vobis "seems required" due to potestis ('you can') in line 23. Mynors and Fraenkel both use vobis; Quinn lists these two in his critical apparatus as scholars adopting this emendation. Various other editions of Catullus published after Mynors also use vobis, including Goold, Bardon, Fordyce, Quinn, and Thomson; Eisenhut's edition, however, uses nobis.

Summary

This poem beings with Catullus calling out to his hendecasyllables to assemble (ll.1–2). He explains that a woman, whom he refers to as a moecha turpis "shameful slut", refuses to return his writing tablets (ll.3–5). Catullus describes the woman to the verses, insulting her walk, her laugh, and compares her to a Gallic dog (ll.7–9) He orders them to surround her and to shout at her "Rotten slut, return the tablets; return the tablets, you rotten slut!" (ll.9–10) Catullus continues insulting her. (ll.13–17) He orders his verses to shout the same refrain again, louder. (ll.18–20) She remains unfazed so he tells the verses to change their strategy (ll.22–23), and ends with him telling the verses to tell her "Pure and proper one, return the tablets" (l.24)

• (Richlin 2017, p. 172)

The poem does not explain what, if anything, was written on the tablets, how the woman got the tablets, or who she is in relation to Catullus.(Kroll 1989, p. 67)

Some have surmised that this woman is a former lover of Catullus who has refused to return love poems after a break-up,Deroux (1969, p. 1060) Goldberg (2005, pp. 110–111) or that Catullus had given her erotic poetry and then changed his mind.(Kroll 1989, p. 67)

The poem begins with Catullus calling out his hendecasyllablesconceit of

• (Cookesley & Bristed 1849, p. 42)
• (Fordyce 1978, p. 192)
• (Putnam 2006, pp. 83–84)

• He calls out to an "unlimited" number of hendecasyllabi, "all that happen to be in existence." (ll.1–2)
• "summons the hendecasyllables as he composes" (Østerud 1978, p. 146)

Catullus describes her using various invective such as moecha 'adultress', [undefined] Error: {{Lang}}: no text (help)

• The circumstances surrounding who this woman is and how she got this are "obscure".

Quinn (1973b, p. 217) writes "The fact that certainty is impossible should warn us that we are letting our curiosity extend beyond what C. has fixed as the relevant data for his poem".

• "presumably a poem of solicitation" (also summary)

• Poem has conceit of addressing hendecasyllables like a gang.
• "act as a gang of street urchins"

• Postulates Catullus is mad because he has unfinished drafts on his tablets which might be mocked/copied. Irony of completed poem about draft poems.(Godwin 2008, p. 7)

• "presumably contained nearly finished drafts"(Power 2010)

• (Johnson 2012, p. 169) thinks she "presumably" stole tablets because they contained invectives against her.

• (Farrell 2009, p. 173) C doesn't say what moecha might do, suggests she might destroy them like C.36, but might also circulate poems he might wish to keep private, circulate under another's name, or make them worse and circulate them under C's name. Also goes into detail about pugillaria and codicilli being forms prior to circulation.

e

• (Kiss 2016, pp. 125–126) tablets "not a common format for literary works", "choicide of writing material and the urgency" "may have contained early copies of his poems, pre-publication versions as it were, which may have circulated in one or a few neat copies among the author and his acquaintences"

• (Godwin 1999, p. 6) Catullus is upset that his initial drafts are no longer under his control, where they might be subject to mockery or plagiarism. Godwin notes there's an irony that Catullus 42 is a final product about a draft.

Twist

• "final twist", in public setting " undercuts and threatens to ruin reputation which could not have been based on chastity". makes sense in a public setting. (Graf 2005, p. 196)
• (Johnson 2012, pp. 168–169)
• "punchline" (Lowrie 2009)
• notes efforts fail, so he resorts to "disingenuous compliments" (Polt 2021, p. 161)
• "sarcasm hits us like a club"
• "surprise ending", like epigram. See also Poem 10.(Williams 1968, p. 198)
• "joke of the last line" "comically changed"
• ratio modusque ("theory and technique") suggests a serious tone, "to make the final line all the more bathetic"
• There is a phonetic similarity between pudica and putida, hence the earlier insults are still suggested.

Scansion/Meter

C.42 was written in phalaecian hendecasyllable, Catullus' most-used meter. Lines in this meter begin with an "aeolic base", with the possibilities of a spondee (– –), trochee (– ⏑), or iamb (⏑ –); lines could not begin with a pyrrhic (⏑ ⏑). Each line consisted of eleven syllables: × × – ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ×.

The poem opens with a direct address to its own hendecasylables signaling one should pay attention to the meter.

• (Becker 2020) HAS MUCH MORE

Eleven of the twenty-four lines begin with a trochee or an iamb, Pliny the Elder calles these "harsh" (citing Heyworth (2001); Morgan (2010, pp. 94–92)).

• Poem 42 has "overwhelming preference" for a caesura after the fifth syllable, with this happening in twenty of the twenty four lines. In general Catullus placed caesura after the fifth or sixth syllable at roughly equal rates. Goldberg thinks this is to create repeated ithyphallic metrical phrases (– ⏑ – ⏑ – –) after the caesura. These care seen are "aggressive" and "dramatic". The poem also lines up syntactic units with these repeated phrases, for example: (ll.2,5,8,13) in particualar si pati potestis, mimi ac moleste, and o lutum, lupanar.
  • (Morgan 2010, p. 85) disagrees with this analysis. Standard breaks it up into glyconic and bacchiac (cf. Barchiesi 1994:209–210 (Barchiesi 2009)

Hendex can be used for anger (Johnson 2012, p. 49)

"clearly iambic" per (Heyworth 2001, p. 129)

Elision

M. Owen Lee has noted Catullus often has used elision in order to emphasize imagery of in his poems of being bound and enclosed. Among other lines from Catullus' poetry, Lee points to lines 42.10 and 42.18 which highlight how the verses surround and attack the woman: circumsistite‿eam‿et reflagitate... (l.10), conclamate‿iterum‿altiore voce. (l.18). The pronoun eam "her" in l.10 is literally surrounded by the verses which are ordered to "gather around" (circumsistite) her. If read with prodelision then the word eam, and by extention the woman, "would virtually disappear. The word eam also undergoes elision in line 6, where it "is almost swallowed up" after persequamur ("let's persue"): persequamur eam‿et reflagitemus (l.6).

Comedy

Suggests scene in comedy or mime (citing: Goldberg (2005, pp. 87–114); Syndikus (1984, pp. 226–230); Agnesini (2004, p. 91)).

• Comedy from personification of hendecasyllables.

• (Goldberg 2000)
• (Goldberg 2005)

• funny (Graf 2005, p. 196)

• "joke" from using form of flagitatio

• humor, pace Fedeli who thinks negative tone. (Pelling 2002)

Rhetorical devices

• (Lowrie 2009) goes through all the verbs poems are subject of

• (Lowrie 2009) falso talks about the use of grammatical person.

Catullus utilizes asyndeton in 42.13, lutum lupanar is an alliterative invective phrase with the second term being stronger.

Alliteration and assonance

C.42 makes use of alliteration and assonance. The phrases pugillaria, si pati potestis (l.5), mimice ac moleste (l.8) lutum, lupanar (l.13), perditius potes (l.14), and pudica et proba (l.42) have all had their alliteration pointed out. There is also assonance of /u/ and /a/ in lutum, lupanar (l.13). Fraenkel has argued the repetition of r, which the Romans called the littera canina, in ruborem / ferreo canis exprimamus ore (ll.16–17) creates a growling with the imagery of a snarling, growling dog. This use of r is first connected with the woman in the word ridentem (l.9) and is reinforced with the repitition of reflagitate and reddere.

Line 7 quae sit, quaeritis? illa quam videtis has both alliteration (q-s-t-q-t-s-q-[d]-t-s) and assonance (ae-i-ae-i, i-i-a-a, i-e-i), which, along with metrical effects, has been argued to "giv[e] marked acoustic intensity to the line and its rhetorical question."

Ferguson notes "the primary letter of this pieces is p; it is an explosive letter which expresses all the force of Catullus's feelings". This use of p is first set up with pugillaria, si pati potestis / persequamur (5–6), and continued with putida throughout, as well as perditius potes (14). The ending of the poem siquid proficere amplius potestis: / 'pudica et proba, redde codicillos.' continues this pattern, keeping up the tone even though the words have changed.

N. I. Herescu's analysis of Roman poetry argues Roman poets made use of "vocalic rhyme", i.e., assonance of the final stressed vowel across lines. Herescu analyzed c.42 to demonstrate this effect, writing that this poem had a "parade of assonances" only interrupted by the refrain (ll.11–12, 19–20, 24) or other repetitions (ll. 1–2). He calls this "an almost mechanical embellishment". L. P. Wilkinson's review of Herescu's book for Gnomon is skeptical of this being a technique widely used by Roman poets, but does note the analysis does work well for c.42. Herescu draws attention to the patterns of repetition of the following final, stressed vowels: turpis (3), redituram (4), potestis (5), reflagitemus (6), videtis (7), moleste (8), Gallicani (9), reflagitate (10), lupanar (13), esse (14), putandum (15), ruborem (16), ore (17), voce (18), movetur (21), nobis (22), and potestis (23).

Vine also discusses the "vertical" repitition of /p/ throughout the poem (Vine 1989)

Ferguson (1985, p. 122) discusses alliteration

Repetition of words/phrases

There's repetition of omnes.

• “omnes undique, quotquot estis omnes” has "chiastic symmetry"

Moecha...

• "chiastic" order
• There is antimetabole in lines 11–12(Poteat 1919, p. 146)
• (Godwin 1999, p. 161) "same words, different order"

repitition of quot estis ... quotquote estis, as well as repeated omnes

nihil

• the "lightly corrupted" nil ... nihil is a "classic Catullan combination" (17.21, 42.21, 64.146).

(Claes 2002, p. 127) "most [of C.'s] poems have a ring-like structure marked by lexical repetition", cites Elder 1966:149n20 "It is Catullus' wont, I believe to tie togetehr the beginning and end of a poem". Braces also mark link w/ center of poem.

• reddituram - {redde, redde} - redde; potestis - {potes, potest} - potestis. (Claes 2002, p. 128)

Guggenheimer (1972, p. 137) notes that there is repetition an the beginning and end of a line in 1–2:adeste, hendecasyllabi quot estis // omnes undique, quotquot estis omnes.

Guggenheimer (1972, pp. 138–139) also notes the entire cola gets repeated (potentially with slight changes) in 19–20: moecha putida, redde codicillos; redde, putida moecha, codicillos. (a colon is "regular elements of acoustic structure such as verse lines in poetry)

(Wills 1996)

• 1-2: 88, 428
• 11-12; 19-20: 96, 181, 422
• 18-21: 464

Flagitatio

Commentary of Catullus 42 often includes a connection with the Roman practice of flagitatio. The German philologist Hermann Usener wrote a 1901 paper on popular justice strategies in Ancient Rome where he wrote Catullus is emulating the practice of flagitatio in c.42; he was the first to describe c.42 in terms of being a flagitatio. Fraenkel summarized Usener's analysis of flagitatio in relation to c.42. Catullus 42 has been called "perhaps the best example" of a depiction of flagitatio in Roman literary sources.

• (Augello 1991) also looks at flagitatio.}
• (Goldberg 2005) maybe
• (Østerud 1978, p. 150) follows Williams maybe
• (Polt 2021, p. 161) also see C. 55. Cites (Usener 1901), (Fraenkel 1961), (Williams 1968), (Augello 1991), and (Goldberg 2000). Follows (Selden 1992, p. 484) in disagreeing with (Fraenkel 1961) & (Williams 1968) in noting it doesn't matter how true he is.

• Ferguson (1986, p. 5) 12, 25, and 42 are flagitatio

Granarolo (1967, pp. 233ff) is not convinced.

Notes on vocabulary and grammar

Grammar

• the comparative form perditius is also found in various works by Cicero, pace Riese and Lenchontil who say it's not found elsewhere.
• (Garrison 2004, pp. 116–117) has various notes

Iocus

• Baehrens and Fordyce both quote Prop. 2.24.16 & Petron 57.4 on that use of iocus. Fletcher also says to look at Hor. Sat. 2.5.37.

OLD quotes Cat. 42.3; Hor.S.2.3.37; Prop. 2.24.16 among others for this sense of "an object of derision, laughing stocks", vs general sense of "joke, jest, sport". OLD 964.

Moecha

The Greek word Ancient Greek: μοιχός, romanized: moikhós, lit. 'adulterer' was borrowed into Latin becoming the masculine word moechus. The feminine form moecha was first found in the works of Catullus. Catullus both used this word to mean "adultress" as well as "whore". Catullus 42 is the earliest instance of moecha not having its technical sense of adultress, but rather as "a generalised hyperbolic term of condemnation".

The Latin word moecha is the feminine form of 

• (Adams 1982, p. 133) calling her an adultress/whore has nothing to do with the charge of not returning

property so this is likely a generic insult.

• (Adams 1983, pp. 350–353)

The word moecha only appears six times in all of Catullus's works; five of these six are within this poem. The sixth occurance is in Catullus 68 referring to Helen of Troy, who was a literal adulterous. The related verb moechor appears once in Catullus 94.

(Putnam 2006) also notes Helen described as "moecha"

"foul slut", literally "adultress"

"vile adultress" is the strict sense but in this context "whore"

• Goldberg takes this to indicate she took on a new lover, refusing to return old poems.

Lupanar

lupanar, literally "brothel", is a "collective intensification of lupa. Apuleius's Apologia also used lupanar in a similar way.

"Not just a whore—she is an entire whorehouse"

"terms of stronger invective" "the 'tart' is now a whole brothel"

Dog imagery

Catullus insults the woman by comparing her to a dog with canis (l.17) and ridentem catuli ore Gallicani. This comparison also appeared in Catullus 84, where he described Lesbia as having "barked".

Dogs don't laugh so what this means is her laugh makes her look her face look like that of a dog, specifically a Gallic one. Gallic dogs were known to be ugly (Arrian Cyn. 3.1–5)

Gallic dogs (Salemi 1981, p. 94) notes "puppy" / "whelp" is maledicitive in various languages, pointing to the term "Insolent puppy!". He also notes the use of the word canis highlights the use of catuli earlier.

• (Barchiesi 2009, p. 239f)

• dogs where thought to be shameless
  • cf. Homer Il. 3.180 & 1.225

• (Putnam 2006, p. 86)

• (Cèbe 1967, pp. 175–177) the comparison between her mouth and that of a dog primarily evokes the idea of ugliness, her big mouth is made even uglier, distorted from laughter. However it also signals disapproval of her moral character, her way of being/acting like a "bitch". Ancient Roman physiognomy connected a "dog mouth" with being irascible, impudent, tending to yell, and loving to be outraged. Since Homer, dogs have been associated with their shamelessness.

Judith P. Hallett was the first to proposed that catuli ... Gallicani "... of a little dog from Gaul" (l.9) is perhaps a self-referential pun on Catullus' part; the word catulus, "puppy", resembles Catullus' cognomen, and Catullus himself was from Cisalpine Gaul. This has been called a "nearly unavoidable pun" or "potential" wordplay. Stephen John Heyworth has also pointed out that Catullus had said the woman acted "like a mime artist" mimice (l.8) and then is immediately described in terms of "an almost exact reproduction" of Catullus. He also argues this helps show "a sense of equivalence between the poet and victim". Hallett finds a "possible parallel" with c.42 and the ancient comedic play Pseudolus by Plautus; Plautus makes use of maccis, an invented nonce-word used as the name of a spice, which bears a similarity to Plautus' nomen Maccius.

Gait

In line 8, turpe incedere...

• (Cranstoun 1867, pp. 218–219) per Ovid's Ars Amatoria, the ancient Romans found a light, graceful gait important.

• If this is Lesbia, Cicero has also commented on her shameless/indedent gait.
• (Godwin 1999, p. 160)

• (Fordyce 1978, p. 194) has spoken about this; this is used to describe prostitutes (cf. Cicero Cael. 49).

• affected way(Garrison 2004, p. 116–117)

Relationship with other Carmina

It's unknown whether Catullus himself placed the poems in their conventional order or not. FIND BETTER SOURCE

Early manuscripts of Catullus included poems 40-48 as being unseparated. Leonardo Bruni thought 41-43 were a distinct poem because all are similar, invectives against a women.

Muret gave this poem the title "In Quandam" in his 1554 book Catullus et in eum commentarius

Catullus 42 was the last composition of Catullus to be identified as a distinct composition. Previously, Catullus 41–42 were considered a single poem; even earlier Catullus 40–42 were unseparated. The Florentine Renaissance classical scholar Poliziano annotated his personal copy of the 1472 Vindelinus de Spira edition of Catullus by drawing a line separating the two, suggesting he thought of Catullus 42 as a distinct poem. However, Marc-Antoine Muret's 1554 book was the first to print Catullus 42 as its own poem; he gave it the title "In Quandam".

Wendell Vernon Clausen has noted within the first sixty poems, the polymetra, that there is a tendency to separate two similar poems with one which differs. He notes that the arrangement of Poems 41–43 "seems especially careful" as C. 41 and C. 43 are both 8-line poems about "an ugly whore", separated by C. 42 which is a longer poem of 24 lines, and all three are in the same meter. Thomas K. Hubbard has also noted the sequence of 42–42–43 as an instance of variatio, the practice of putting a contrasting poem between two similar ones.

Forsyth thinks 41-43 form a "Catullan triad".

Forsyth also thinks that 35-42 form a "poetic cluster" all speaking to the general theme of poetry and mistresses.

(Schmidt 1973, pp. 221–223) has a cycle from 31-44 about personified objects.

• also in Cat 12 mentions hendex w/ napkin thief (Johnson 2012, p. 48). (Roller 1998, p. 271)

• Cat 14 and 42 goes after thieves Polt (2021, pp. 23–24)

• (Claes 2002, p. 77) 41 & 42 linked by ideas of demand (claiming, reclaiming), and by questioning. 42-44 all share syntactic construction with verb of speaking with an accusative subject, copula and predicative accusative (42.3 iocum me putat esse).

• (Claes 2002, p. 75) finds an "oral motif" linking cc. 40, 42-5, 47-51, 53-5, and 57-60. JSTOR 3662133 Claes points to catuli ore and canis...ore.

• (Claes 2002, p. 113) links 41 and 42 "claiming payment for love" / "reclaiming of love poems"; links 42 and 42 "attack on Mamurra's girl" / "praise of the poet's girl"

(Dettmer 1997, pp. 66–67) analyzes Poems 34–44 as being a sequence with a ring structure. She notes Schmidt (1973, pp. 221–224), Clausen (1976, p. 39), Offermann (1977, pp. 274–277), Ferguson (1986, p. 6) and Forsyth (1984, pp. 24–26) as other examples who have discussed the reasoning for the order of these poems. She connects Poems 36 and 42 together with both being jeaux d'esprit about a woman having possession of Catullus's poetry.

Ferguson (1986, p. 5) 12, 25, and 42 are flagitatio. C. 25 "looking back to 12 and forward to 42".

(Ferguson 1986, p. 6) 41 and 43 deal with Mamurra's mistress Ameana. In between is a magnificent dramatic monologue calling to some girl to give back his poems, a flagitatio. There is no great change of mood, but the mock-courtesy at the end of 42 leads to the mock-courtesy at the beginning of 43.

Per Dettmer (1997, pp. 82–85), poems 35-44 are about personified identified objects and form a ring arrangement. Poems 35 and 42 are linked by being "clever pieces" which "invert similar elements". Poem 35 contains personified papyrus as Poem 42 contains personified verse.

Dettmer also draws connection with C. 42 and C. 44.

cf. Catullus 40.2 re personificaiton of verse

Identity of moecha

The woman, referred to not by name but by moecha turpis (l.1) or moecha putida is unnamed.

• (Forsyth 1977) -- has secondary sources for people

E. d'Arbela, F. della Corte (does he??? seems to say people think lesbia or ameana), and Marmorale all identified her as Lesbia. " This older view is rightly rejected my most scholars" (Leon 1960, p. 145)

Some people think the woman Lesbia, Catullus' lover mentioned in several of his other poems.

• (Álvarez Hernández 2006)
• Guy Lee thinks it seems to be Lesbia because she is an adultoress (cf. XI. 17 moechis, XXXVII. 16 moechi).
• (Cèbe 1967, p. 176) says "notably" N. Herescu and G. Lafaye believe she's Lesbia
• (Quinn 1973a, pp. 100–101) sees 42 as a follow-up to 37 so identifies her as Lesbia.

Some think it's Ameana, mentioned in 41 and 43.

• (Forsyth 1977) -- has secondary sources for
• Ameana is described as having a rustic appearance (cf. l.9 Gallicani).
• asserted to be Ameana w/o discussion, the "moecha putida" of Catullus 42 can only be inferred from its tone and position in the collection
• (Claes 2002, p. 77) follows Ellis 116, Kroll 76, Forsyth 1977 "points to Ameana". points to various examples of "lexical concatenation", repetition of similar/related words both between 41&42, annd 42&43.
• (Cèbe 1967, p. 176) argues for it being Ameana, not Lesbia, citing (Kroll 1989)
• (Dettmer 1997, p. 82) "possibly"it's Amiana

Some think it can't be Lesbia.

• (Deroux 1969, p. 1060) says Catullus would never call Lesbia ugly even when he was fighting with her, pointing to Catullus 86.
• (Kroll 1989, p. 76) says "certainly not Lesbia", but it might be Ameana.
• (Munro 1905, p. 119) agress with Ellis, can't be Lesbia.
• (Syndikus 1984, p. 226) Although Lesbia might be insulted for being whorish, Catullus would never insult her appearance.
• (Goold 1983, p. 244) notes she's been speculated to be Ipsitilla, Aufilleana, or Ameana, or perhaps someone else since she's unnamed, but Goold thinks she can'be Lesbia since "even at her most degraded he does not treat as a common woman"

Quinn (1973a, pp. 135–136) uses the similarities between Cicero's description of Clodia in Pro Caelio and Catullus' description of the 'whore' in Catullus 42 to help argue that Lesbia is Cloda. However Wiseman (1974, p. 106) has called the connection between Lesbia and 42's moecha as "an adventurous idea" and said it was a weak argument to use to identify Lesbia as Clodia as he does not thing the descriptions are so close enough to warrant the necessity of one copying the other.

T. P. Wiseman has described the identification of the woman in C. 42 as

• (Østerud 1978, p. 142) "not convinced" that the language in C.42 like moecha putida/moecha turpis is too strong to refer to Lesbia.

• Dettmer (1997, p. 74) notes that Catullus never insults Lesbia for her provincialism so she think it's "improbable" that the woman is Lesbia. Suggests that those surmising she's Amiana are "perhaps right".

(Holzberg 2001, p. 32) says "we need no longer hesitate" to connect Lesbia with the woman in C. 42, noting moecha turpis is "a typical example of the abuse reserved for heterae!", and fits in with Catullus's overal depiction of Lesbia as a hetaera. He cites (Dettmer 1997, p. 74) on one hand and (Wiseman 1974, p. 106) and (Wray 1996, pp. 211–212)

Chester Louis Neudling has suggested that she might be Aufilena, the woman mentioned in cc. 100, 110, and 110. Neudling also considered Ameana to be a possibility. Schmidt(Neudling 1955, pp. 4, 17)

Miquel Dolç acknowledges (Perrotta 1931)'s arguments that she's Lebia, but himself thinks she's Ameana.

Some have said there's no point in trying to identify her.

• (Fraenkel 1961)

• "The identity of the (real or imaginary) victim is neither revealed nor important"

References and allusions to C. 42

Catullus 42 has been referred to in other writers of the classical world, as well as writers of the Renaissance.

Antiquity

Horace Epode 17

The Roman poet Horace's Epode 17 (30 BCE) contains the line tu pudica, tu proba, which some have taken to be a reference to Catullus's phrase pudica et proba in the final line of C.42.

A fragment by the poet Lucius Afranius contains the phrase proba et pudica. Fordyce cited this fragment to argue Horace was likely making use of a stock phrase rather than specifically alluding to Catullus: "the alliterative phrase was probably conventional". Lindo also thinks this was merely just a stock phrase, and argues the origin of the phrase might go back to the ancient Greek poet Stesichorus' description of Helen of Troy in his Palinode.

Some acknowledge similar phrases were used by other authors but think Horace was still specifically alluding to Catullus, or making a "layered allusion".

• (Johnson 2012, pp. 168–170), citing (Putnam 2006), (Kiessling & Heinze 1968), (Fraenkel 1957), (Oliensis 1991), (Porter 1995), (Lowrie 2009) thinks it is a reference. Notes (Lindo 1969) and (Mankin 1995) disagree.
• McNeill (2007), pp. 365, 368 "quotes", "echoes inversion"
• Miller (2019), pp. 57–58 "diretly imitated" "all but directly quotes"
• (Oliensis 1998, p. 71) "heavy-handed allusion" (revised of (Oliensis 1991, pp. 115–116))

• (Putnam 2006, pp. 83–87, 157nn23–25)
• (Lindo 1969, p. 176): notes (Fraenkel 1957, p. 65), (Keller & Holder 1899, p. 332), (Kiessling & Heinze 1968, p. 561) have all drawn similarity and thought Horace borrowed this from Catullus. However, it goes back to Afrianus (Ribbeck 1962, p. 179), "would seem to be part of the stock of complimentary epithets reserved for descriptions of feminine chastity". Suggests that this might go back to Stesichorus's description of Helen.
• (Fraenkel 1957, p. 65) -- calls it "quotation".

• (Kiessling & Heinze 1968, p. 561)
• (Keller & Holder 1899, p. 332) notes Catull. 42,24 "pudica et proba", also Afranius u. 116, p. 179 R. "proba et pudica", also Ov. am. III 14, 13sq. no commentary.
• (Barchiesi 2009)

• (Mankin 1995, p. 283) says it is "possibly" a reference to Cat, but notes Afran. çom. 116 Ribbeck and Ov. Am 3.14.13-14 and quotes Fordyce as saying "the alliterative phrase was probably conventional".

• Horace echoes the palinode, "equally disingenuous retraction"

• (Power 2010) cites Putnam and (Farrell 2009)
• (Putnam 2006) citing (Hahn 1939); (Fraenkel 1957, pp. 64–65) (Lindo 1969); (Oliensis 1991); (Porter 1995).

Michael C. J. Putnam. The Classical Journal 92, no. 1 (1996): 86–88. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3298470.

Martial, Statius, inscription, Charisius

Martial's epigram 7.26 (published c. 92 CE) begins Apollinarem conveni meum, scazon ("Go and meet Apollinaris, limping verse"). This has been compared to the first line of Catullus 42 since both contain the author directly addressing his verses using the name of the meter. The final line of this epigram repeats its initial line, which is a technique also used by Catullus, e.g., Catullus 16; it has been argued that Martial apparently borrowing this Catullan feature would reinforce the allusion to Catullus 42 in readers' minds.

Statius's Silvae 4.9 (c. 95 CE) has Catullus 14 as its main influence as both mock a book of poor writing given as a gift. Kathleen Coleman describes the ending of Silvae 4.9 as a "pastiche of motifs in Catullus". The self-referential use of hendecasyllables has been compared to Cat. 12 and Cat. 42; in both these poems Catullus refers to hendecasyllables as a means of attack. The hendecasyllables in Silvae 4.9 and Cat. 42 both ask for something back. The allusions to c.42 in Pliny's 4.10 show this was a poem people were familiar with and Statius can rely on his poem's recipient to note the references. Silvae 4.9 also makes uses of the word codicilli for writing tablets, also used in C.42.4; this is a word generally used in prose; its first appearance in Latin poetry was in Catullus 42 and was only used by Martial before appearing in Silvae 4.9.

A hymn to Priapus found in Tibur dating to the 2nd or 3rd century has been said to "ech[o]" Catullus' Carmina 2b, 3, and 42; Catullus had a holiday home in Tibur so his poetry would likely continue to have been read there. Line 13 of this inscription reads: "convenite simul quot est[is om]nes"; scholars of these fragments have drawn connections with these lines and {{lang|la|opening of Catullus 42. The editions of Catullus by Francesco Della Corte and Miquel Dolç have also made this connection. Emil Baehrens's edition of Catullus says the inscription's author "imitates" 42.1–2, and also that this gets repeated in line 16 of the inscription: "convenite quot estis atque [be]llo".

The 4th century grammarian Charisius wrote in his book Ars Grammatica that "Catullus says haec pugillaria in the neuter gender rather frequently in his hendecasyllables". As line 42.5 contains the only extant instance of pugillaria in Catullus' works, this is included as an example of an ancient testimonium of Catullus 42.

Horace C.I.16

(Johnson 2012, p. 170) cites (Putnam 2006) also (Hahn 1939, pp. 213–220), (Lindo 1969, pp. 176–177)

WHAT IS THIS???

(Putnam 2006) does talk

Pliny the Younger letter 5.10

Pliny the Younger's letter 5.10 to the historian Suetonius has also been compared to c.42. This letter was written c. 105 – c. 106 and in it Pliny urges Suetonius to publish an unnamed work. The Italian philologist Giorgio Brugnoli said Pliny transferred the motif of hendecasyllables in c.42

• Power cites Roller and (Brugnoli 1968, p. 29 n 40)

• (Whitton 2019, pp. 99–100, 307, 269) links Ep. 5.10 and Ep. 4.14.1, citing Roller (1998, pp. 287–288)

Propertius III.23

Elegy 3.23 by the Roman poet Propertius concerns the loss of his writing tablets. Williams has argued Propertius "uses the motif of Catullus 42".

• (Williams 1968, p. 492) (cited by (Goldberg 2005, p. 112))
• (Comber 1998, p. 51)
• (Roman 2006, p. 360)
• Hubbard (1975), pp. 91–92
• (Fedeli 1985b)
• (Pelling 2002) citing (Williams 1968, p. 492) & (Fedeli 1985b, pp. 659–61)
• (Power 2010) citing Roman re Propertius & Ovid

• (Fedeli 2002, p. 271)

Pseudolus

Sander Goldberg argues that Catullus 42 alludes to a flagitatio in the ancient comedic play Pseudolus by Plautus. This scene of Pseudolus depicts

• (Agnesini 2004, p. 91)f
• (Goldberg 2000)
• (Hallett 1993)
• (Richlin 2017)
• (Goldberg 2005)
• (Polt 2021) follows (Goldberg 2005) saying he "argued persuasively"

f

'o lutum, lupanar' has precedent in Plautus and is echoed by Apluleius (citing Thomson 312) (Marsh 2010)

Post-antiquity

The earliest pastiche of Catullus after antiquity was based on Catullus 41–43; it is attributed to Leonardo Bruni. Its title is Incipiunt endecasyllabi Leonardi Aretini" and dates to c. 1405–1415.

The first poem in Giovanni Gioviano Pontano's book of hendecasyllables, published posthumously in 1505, has as its tenth line "Huc, huc, hendecasyllabi, frequente" ('Here, here, you thronging verses'). Rodney G. Dennis, his translator for The I Tatti Renaissance Library, has said this "echoes" the first line of Catullus 42, and "shows how close Pontano can come to Catullus without simply quoting him". Also

Various poets in the French Renaissance were inspired by the works of Catullus as well, with Catullus 42 being a specific influence for several poems. Jean Visagier's 1538 poem "Ad amicos" is in part based on Catullus 42; its first three lines read: Amici rogo vos quot estis omnes, / Omnes undique quotquot estis oro, / Ad nostrum properate, adeste, luctum. Pierre de Ronsard published a book of Folastries in 1553. Part of Folastrie III is an invective against a courtesan which imitates Catullus 42. Joachim du Bellay's 1558 book Poemata includes the poem Voti solutio, which has been described as "a patchwork of Catullan reminisces". This poem includes an exhortation to hendecasyllables (At vos hendecasyllabi / [...] / Adeste huc, precor: et quot estis omnes) which has been seen as a reference to the first two lines of Catullus 42. Jacques Maniquet wrote a poem for Les Epitaphes sur le trespas de Joachim du Bellay Angein, a 1560 book of poems in honor of Du Bellay upon his death. This is a neo-Catullan epigram written in hendecasyllabic verse, and makes use of many expressions associated with Catullus' oeuvre; line 23 of Maniquet's poem begins quotque estis, which reflects quotquot estis in Catullus 42.2.

The 16th century Scottish humanist George Buchanan composed a set of eleven poems Hendecasyllabi which consisted of Catullan imitations.

Francesco Negri (1500–1563) published his Epitome of Ovid's Metamorphoses in 1542 in Zürich, it begins with an unsigned poem, presumably written by Negri, written in "Catullan hendecasyllabics" which was inspired by Catullus 42.

Leigh Hunt wrote a letter to Byron in October 1822 consisting of a loose translation of Catullus 42, adapting it to be about how the publisher John Murray refused to return a manuscript.

The English poet Alfred Tennyson's 1863 poem "Hendecasyllabics" has had part compared to Catullus 42, although some have thought other poems of Catullus have had a greater influence.

The American poet Charles Bukowski was described as being "in a Catullian mood" in reference to his 1960 poem "To The Whore Who Took My Poems". This poem is an imitatio, an imitation-based work impersonating Catullus. Although Catullus wrote about thieves in C. 12 and C. 25, the main inspiration for Bukowski's poem is Catullus 42. David Stephen Calonne has called it "an homage to Catullus 42".

Refs

Works cited

• Adams, J. N. (1982). "The Vocabulary Relating to Sexual Acts". The Latin Sexual Vocabulary. London: Duckworth. pp. 118–213. ISBN 0-7156-1648-X.
• Adams, J. N. (1983). "Words for 'Prostitute' in Latin". Rheinisches Museum für Philologie. 126 (3/4): 321–358. JSTOR 41233491.
• Adams, J. N. (2021). "Catullus". Asyndeton and its Interpretation in Latin Literature: History, Patterns, Textual Criticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 482–495. doi:10.1017/9781108943284.028. ISBN 978-1-108-83785-9.
• Agnesini, Alex (2004). "Gannire". Plauto in Catullo. Edizioni e saggi universitari di filologia classica. Vol. 63. Bologna: Pàtron. pp. 90–91. ISBN 88-555-2767-3.
• Alfonsi, Luigi (1950). "Lesbia". The American Journal of Philology (in Italian). 71 (1): 59–66. doi:10.2307/291342.
• Álvarez Hernández, Arturo (2006). "La moecha ( = Lesbia ) del poema 42 de Catulo". Euphrosyne (in Spanish). 34: 269–278. doi:10.1484/J.EUPHR.5.124318.
• Arkins, Brian (1994). "Textual Questions in Catullus". In Deroux, Carl (ed.). Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History. Vol. 7. Bruxelles: Latomus. pp. 221–226. ISBN 2-87031-167-2.
• Augello, Giuseppe (1991). "Catullo e il Folklore: La flagitatio nel c. 42". In Buttitta, Antonino; et al. (eds.). Studi di filologia classica in onore di Giusto Monaco (in Italian). Vol. II. Letteratura latina dall'età arcaica all'età augustea. Palermo: Università di Palermo. pp. 723–735.
• Baehrens, Aemilius (1876). "XLII". Catulli Veronensis Liber (in Latin). Vol. 1. Lipsia: B. G. Teubner. pp. 35–36. [Reprinted: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2010. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511784026.002. ISBN 978-1-108-02442-6.]
• Baehrens, Aemilius (1885). "XLII". Catulli Veronensis Liber (in Latin). Vol. 2. Lipsia: B. G. Teubner. pp. 230–234. [Reprinted: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2010. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511784026.005. ISBN 978-1-108-02442-6.]
• Barchiesi, Alessandro (2009). "Final Difficulties in an Iambic Poet's Career: Epode 17". In Lowrie, Michèle (ed.). Horace: Odes and Epodes. Oxford Readings in Classical Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 233–246. ISBN 978-0-19-920769-5. [Translation of: "Ultime difficoltà nella carriera di un poeta giambico: l'Epodo XVII". Atti dei Convegni di Venosa, Napoli, Roma: Novembre 1993 (in Italian). Venosa. 1994. pp. 205–220.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)]
• Bardon, Henricus, ed. (1973). "42". Catulli Veronensis Carmina (in Latin) (2nd ed.). Stutgardia: B. G. Teubner. pp. 41–42. ISBN 3-519-01133-6.
• Barwick, Carolus; Kühnert, F., eds. (1997) [1964]. "Liber Primus". Flavii Sosipatri Charisii Artis grammaticae libri V. Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana (Corr. ed.). Stutgardia: B.G. Teubneri. doi:10.1515/9783110964783.1. ISBN 3-8154-1137-8.
• Becker, Andrew S. (2020). "Gutter Music: A Case Study of Accentual Poetics in the Hendecasyllables of Catullus". Classical World. 114 (1): 39–57. doi:10.1353/clw.2020.0056.
• Bellandi, Franco (2007). "Poesia e scrittura: tabbellae, codicilli, palimpsesti, libelli e libri". Lepos e Pathos: Studi su Catullo (in Italian). Bologna: Pàtron. pp. 13–32. ISBN 978-88-555-2973-0.
• Bertone, Susanna (2021). Dispositio Carminum Catulli: I carmi di catullo nella tradizione manoscritta e a stampa dal tardo Trecento al 1535 (in Italian). Berlin: De Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110735543. ISBN 978-3-11-073813-1.
• Bizer, Marc (1995). "Joachim Du Bellay: Faustine, ou l'amour de la poésie amoureuse". La poésie au miroir: Imitation et conscience de soi dans la poésie latine de la Pléiade (in French). Paris: H. Champion. pp. 61–107. ISBN 2-85203-465-4.
• Brugnoli, Giorgio (1968). "Problematica Suetoniana". Studi Suetoniani. Lecce: Edizioni Milella. pp. 9–37, 207–208.
• Buecheler, Franciscus, ed. (1897). "1504". Carmina Latina Epigraphica. Anthologia Latina. Vol. 2. Lipsia: B. G. Teubner. pp. 707–709.
• Butrica, J.L. (2007). "History and Transmission of the Text". In Skinner, Marilyn B. (ed.). A Companion to Catullus. Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World. Malden, MA: Blackwell. pp. 13–34. doi:10.1002/9780470751565.ch2. ISBN 978-1-4051-3533-7.
• Butterfield, D. J. (2009). "Catullus Semilautus: Trappes-Lomax (J.M.) Catullus: A Textual Reappraisal". The Classical Review. New Series. 59 (1): 117–120. doi:10.1017/S0009840X08002114. JSTOR i20482627.
• Butterfield, David (2021). "Catullus and Metre". In Du Quesnay, Ian; Woodman, Tony (eds.). The Cambridge Companion to Catullus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 143–166. doi:10.1017/9781108147859.009. ISBN 978-1-107-19356-7.
• Calonne, David Stephen (2008). Introduction. Portions from a Wine-Stained Notebook: Uncollected Stories and Essays, 1944–1990. By Bukowski, Charles. San Francisco: City Lights. pp. xi–xxiv. ISBN 978-0-87286-496-2.
• Cèbe, Jean-Pierre (1967). "Catulle et la physiognomonie". Annales de la Faculte des Lettres d'Aix (in French). 43: 173–178.
• Claes, Paul (2002). Concatenatio Catulliana: A New Reading of the Carmina. Amsterdam: J. C. Gieben. doi:10.1163/9789004409040. ISBN 90-5063-288-2.
• Clausen, Wendell (1976). "Catulli Veronensis Liber". Classical Philology. 71 (1): 37–43. doi:10.1086/366231. JSTOR 268516. [Reprinted: Gaisser, Julia Haig, ed. (2007). Catullus. Oxford Readings in Classical Studies. Oxford University Press. pp. 56–65. ISBN 978-0-19-928034-6.]
• Comber, Michael (1998). "A Book Made New: Reading Propertius Reading Pound. A Study in Reception". Journal of Roman Studies. 88: 37–55. doi:10.2307/300804. JSTOR 300804.
• Cookesley, G. G.; Bristed, C. A., eds. (1849). "Carmen XLII. In Quandam". Selections from Catullus, For the Use of Classical Students. New York: Stanford & Swords. pp. 42–43.
• Courtney, E., ed. (1995). Musa Lapidaria: A Selection of Latin Verse Inscriptions. Atlanta: Scholars Press. ISBN 0-7885-0141-0.
• Cranstoun, James, ed. (1867). "Poem XLII". The Poems of Valerius Catullus. Edinburgh: William P. Nimmo. pp. 66, 218–219.
• Crossett, John (1955). "Tennyson and Catullus". The Classical Journal. 50 (7): 313–314. JSTOR 3293002.
• Della Corte, Francesco, ed. (2006). "42". Catullo: Le poesie (in Italian) (11th ed.). Roma: Fondazione Lorenzo Valla. pp. 64–67. ISBN 88-04-12713-9.
• Dennis, Rodney G., ed. (2006). Giovanni Gioviano Pontano: Baiae. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-02197-5.
• Deroux, Carl (1969). "Catulle et Ameana". Latomus (in French). 28 (4): 1060–1064. JSTOR 41527631.
• Dessau, Hermannus, ed. (1887). "3565". Inscriptiones Latii Veteris Latinae. Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. Vol. 14. Berolini: Georgius Reimerus. p. 379.
• Dettmer, Helena (1997). Love by the Numbers: Form and Meaning in the Poetry of Catullus. Lang Classical Studies. Vol. 10. New York: Peter Lang. ISBN 0-8204-3663-1.
• Dolç, Miguel, ed. (1997). "42". G. Valerio Catulo: Poesías (in Spanish) (4th ed.). Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas. pp. 36–37. ISBN 84-00-02579-0.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: ignored ISBN errors (link)
• Du Quesnay, Ian (2021). "Catulli Carmina". In Du Quesnay, Ian; Woodman, Tony (eds.). The Cambridge Companion to Catullus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 167–218. doi:10.1017/9781108147859.010. ISBN 978-1-107-19356-7.
• Eisenhut, Werner, ed. (1983). "42". Catulli Veronensis Liber. Bibliotheca Scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana (in Latin). Leipzig: B. G. Teubner. pp. 28–29.
• Elder, J. P. (1980). "Catullus: A Critical Edition. D. F. S. Thomson". Book Reviews. Classical Philology. 75 (4): 369–371. doi:10.1086/366590. JSTOR 269609.
• Ellis, Robinson, ed. (1878). "Carmen XLII". Catulli Veronensis Liber (2nd ed.). Oxonium: Typographeus Clarendonianus. pp. 63–64. hdl:2027/nnc1.0021616124. [Reprinted: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2010. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511708343.004. ISBN 978-1-108-01273-7.]
• Ellis, Robinson (1889). "XLII". A Commentary on Catullus (2nd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 147–151.
• Evrard-Gillis, Janine (1976). La récurrence lexicale dans l'oeuvre de Catulle: Étude stylistique. Bibliothèque de la Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres de l'Université de Liège. Vol. 217. Paris: Les Belles Lettres. hdl:2268.1/4533.
• Farrell, Joseph (2009). "The Impermanent Text in Catullus and Other Roman Poets". In Johnson, William A.; Parker, Holt N. (eds.). Ancient Literacies: The Culture of Reading in Greece and Rome. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 164–185. doi:10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199793983.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-534015-0.
• Fedeli, Paolo (1979). "Catullo, Le poesie. A cura di Francesco Della Corte". Recensioni. Rivista di Filologia e di Istruzione Classica (in Italian). 107: 450–455. ProQuest 1302940343.
• Fedeli, Paolo (1985a). "Catulli Veronensis liber. Ed. W. Eisenhut". Gnomon (in Italian). 57 (5): 415–419. JSTOR 27689037.
• Fedeli, Paolo, ed. (1985b). "3,23". Properzio: Il Libro Terzo delle Elegie (in Italian). Bari: Adriatica. pp. 657–670.
• Fedeli, Paolo (1987–1988). "Properzio, Catullo e le tavolette smarrite". Oriente e Occidente (Pūrvāparam): Rivista di Cultura (in Italian). 10–11. Marsala: 1–17.
• Fedeli, Paolo (2002). "Le fonti". In Catanzaro, Giuseppe; Santucci, Francesco (eds.). Properzio alle soglie del 2000: Un bilancio di fine secolo (in Italian). Assisi: Accademia properziana del Subasio. pp. 251–272.
• Ferguson, John (1970). "A Note on Catullus' Hendecasyllabics". Classical Philology. 65 (3): 173–175. doi:10.1086/365622. JSTOR 267720.
• Ferguson, John (1985). "Catullus 42". Catullus. Lawrence, KS: Coronado. pp. 121–123. ISBN 0-87291-158-6.
• Ferguson, John (1986). "The Arrangement of Catullus' Poems". Liverpool Classical Monthly. 11 (1, 2): 2–6, 18–20.
• Ficari, Quirinus (1932). "De Catulli Carmine XLII". Il Mondo Classico (in Latin). 2 (3–4): 331–332.
• Fletcher, G. B. A. (1967). "Catulliana". Latomus. 26 (1): 104–106. JSTOR 41526287.
• Ford, Philip (2013). "Epitaphs and tombeaux". The Judgment of Palaemon: The Contest between Neo-Latin and Vernacular Poetry in Renaissance France. Medieval and Renaissance Authors and Texts. Vol. 9. Leiden: Brill. pp. 127–158. doi:10.1163/9789004245402_006. ISBN 978-90-04-24539-6.
• Fordyce, C. J., ed. (1978). "42". Catullus: A Commentary (6th repr. with corr.; 1st ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 22–23, 192–195. doi:10.1093/actrade/9780198721475.book.1. ISBN 0-19-872147-1.
• Forsyth, Phyllis Young (1977). "The Ameana Cycle of Catullus". The Classical World. 70 (7): 445–450. doi:10.2307/4348714.
• Forsyth, P. Y. (1984). "The Lady and the Poem: Catullus 35–42". The Classical Journal. 80 (1): 24–26. JSTOR 3297394.
• Forsyth, Phyllis Young (1986). "The Commentary: 42". The Poems of Catullus: A Teaching Text. Lanham, MD: University Press of America. pp. 245–250. ISBN 0-8191-5150-5.
• Fraenkel, Eduard (1957). "Other Epodes in the Iambists' Manner". Horace. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 55–65.
• Fraenkel, Eduard (1961). "Two Poems of Catullus". Journal of Roman Studies. 51 (1–2): 46–53. doi:10.2307/298835. JSTOR 298835. [Reprinted in part: Gaisser, Julia Haig, ed. (2007). "Catullus XLII". Catullus. Oxford Readings in Classical Studies. Oxford University Press. pp. 354–368. ISBN 978-0-19-928034-6.]
• Fröhner, W. (1892). "Kritische Studien". Rheinisches Museum für Philologie (in German). 47: 291–311. JSTOR 41248314.
• Gaisser, Julia Haig (1982). "Catullus and His First Interpreters: Antonius Parthenius and Angelo Poliziano". Transactions of the American Philological Association. 112: 83–106. doi:10.2307/284072.
• Gaisser, Julia Haig (1993). "Imitatio: Catullan Poetry from Martial to Johannes Secundus". Catullus and his Renaissance Readers. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 193–254. ISBN 0-19-814882-8.
• Gaisser, Julia Haig (2009). Catullus. Blackwell Introductions to the Classical World. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-1-405-11889-7.
• Galán Vioque, Guillermo (2002). "Commentary 26". Martial, Book VII: A Commentary. Translated by Zoltowski, J.J. Leiden: Brill. pp. 191–195. doi:10.1163/9789004350977_005. ISBN 90-04-12338-5.
• Gale, Monica R. (2005). "Catullus". The Classical Review. 55 (2): 511–514. doi:10.1093/clrevj/bni281. JSTOR 3873843.
• Gale, Monica R. (2016). "Aliquid putare nugas: Literary filiation, critical communities and reader-response in Catullus". In Hunter, Richard; Oakley, S. P. (eds.). Latin Literature and its Transmission: Papers in Honour of Michael Reeve. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 88–107. doi:10.1017/CBO9781316337066.007. ISBN 978-1-107-11627-6.
• Garrison, Daniel H., ed. (2004). The Student's Catullus. Oklahoma Series in Classica Culture. Vol. 5 (3rd ed.). Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. pp. 30, 116–117. ISBN 0-8061-3635-9.
• Godwin, John, ed. (1999). Catullus: The Shorter Poems. Oxford: Aris & Phillips. ISBN 978-0-85668-715-0.
• Godwin, John (2008). "A Writer's World". Reading Catullus. Exeter, Devon: Bristol Phoenix. pp. 1–17. doi:10.5949/liverpool/9781904675631.001.0001. ISBN 978-1-904675-63-1.
• Goldberg, Sander M. (2000). "Catullus 42 and the Comic Legacy". In Stärk, Ekkehard; Vogt-Spira, Gregor (eds.). Dramatische Wäldchen: Festschrift für Eckhard Lefèvre zum 65. Geburtstag. Spudasmata. Vol. 80. Hildesheim: Olms. pp. 476–489. ISBN 3-487-11227-2.
• Goldberg, Sander M. (2005). "Comedy at Work". Constructing Literature in the Roman Republic: Poetry and Its Reception. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 87–114. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511720024.005. ISBN 978-0-521-85461-0.
• Goold, G.P., ed. (1983). "XLII". Catullus. London: Duckworth. pp. 86–87, 229. ISBN 0-7156-1435-5.
• Goold, G.P., ed. (1995). "Catullus". Catullus, Tibullus, Pervigilium Veneris. Loeb Classical Library. Vol. 6. Translated by Cornish, F.W. (2nd, rev. ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. pp. 48–51. doi:10.4159/DLCL.catullus-poems.1913. ISBN 0-674-99007-2.
• Graf, Fritz (2005). "Satire in a Ritual Context". In Freudenburg, Kirk (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Roman Satire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CCOL0521803594.012. ISBN 0-521-80359-4.
• Granarolo, Jean (1967). L'œuvre de Catulle: Aspects religieux, éthiques et stylistiques. Collection d'études anciennes (in French). Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
• Granarolo, Jean (1978). "Catullus, Carmina, iterum edidit H. Bardon, Stuttgart, Teubner, 1973". Comptes rendus. Latomus (in French). 37 (4): 971–975. JSTOR 41531099.
• Grant, Linda (2019). Latin Erotic Elegy and the Shaping of Sixteenth-Century English Love Poetry: Lascivious Poets. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108663847. ISBN 978-1-108-49386-4.
• Green, Peter, ed. (2005). The Poems of Catullus. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24264-5.
• Guggenheimer, Eva H. (1972). Rhyme Effects and Rhyming Figures: A Comparative Study of Sound Repetitions in the Classics with Emphasis on Latin Poetry. The Hague: Mouton. doi:10.1515/9783111341316.
• Hahn, E. Adelaide (1939). "Epodes 5 and 17, Carmina 1.16 and 1.17". Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association. 70: 213–230. doi:10.2307/283085.
• Halbertsma, T. J. (1877). "Otium Harlemense: Ad Catullum". Mnemosyne. Nova Series. 5 (3): 333–335. JSTOR 4424373.
• Hallett, Judith P. (1993). "Plautine Ingredients in the Performance of the Pseudolus". The Classical World. 87 (1): 21–26. doi:10.2307/4351437.
• Hankins, James (1990). "The Latin Poetry of Leonardo Bruni". Humanistica Lovaniensia. 39: 1–39. JSTOR 23973730.
• Harrison, Stephen (2000). "The Need for a New Text of Catullus". In Reitz, Christiane (ed.). Vom Text zum Buch. Subsidia Classica. Vol. 3. St. Katharinen: Scripta Mercaturae. pp. 63–79. ISBN 3-89590-095-8.
• Harrison, S. J.; Heyworth, S. J. (1998). "Notes on the Text and Interpretation of Catullus". Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society. 44: 85–109. doi:10.1017/S0068673500002224. JSTOR 44696767.
• Herescu, N. I. (1946). "L'assonance latine". Lettres d'humanité (in French). 5: 132–148. ISSN 0184-6965.
• Herescu, N. I. (1960). "L'assonance". La poésie latine: Étude des structures phoniques. Leiden: E. J. Brill. pp. 135–165.
• Heyworth, Stephen J. (2001). "Catullian Iambics, Catullian Iambi". In Cavarzere, Alberto; Aloni, Antonio; Barchiesi, Alessandro (eds.). Iambic Ideas: Essays on a Poetic Tradition from Archaic Greece to the Late Roman Empire. Greek Studies: Interdisciplinary Approaches. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 117–140. ISBN 0-7425-0816-1.
• Heyworth, S. J. (2008). "Review of Catullus. A Textual Reappraisal". Bryn Mawr Classical Review. 2008.09.32.
• Holzberg, Niklas (2001). "Lesbia, the Poet, and the Two Faces of Sappho: 'Womanufacture' in Catullus". Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society. 46: 28–44. doi:10.1017/S0068673500002431. JSTOR 44696757.
• Hubbard, Margaret (1975). "The Quest for Callimachus". Propertius. Classical Life and Letters. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. pp. 68–115. ISBN 0-684-14464-6.
• Hubbard, Thomas K. (1983). "The Catullan Libellus". Philologus. 127 (1–2): 218–237. doi:10.1524/phil.1983.127.12.218.
• Ingleheart, Jennifer (2014). "Play on the Proper Names of Individuals in the Catullan Corpus: Wordplay, the Iambic Tradition, and the Late Republican Culture of Public Abuse". The Journal of Roman Studies. 104: 51–72. doi:10.1017/S0075435814000069. JSTOR 43286866.
• Johnson, Marguerite (2018). "Radical Brothers-in-Arms: Gaius and Hank at the Racetrack". In Murnaghan, Sheila; Rosen, Ralph M. (eds.). Hip Sublime: Beat Writers and the Classical Tradition. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press. pp. 97–115. doi:10.2307/j.ctt2204rr5.9. hdl:20.500.12657/30546. ISBN 978-0-8142-1355-1.
• Johnson, Timothy S. (2012). "Horace's Lying Lyre (Epodes 16–17)". Horace's Iambic Criticism: Casting Blame (Iambikē Poiēsis). Mnemosyne. Supplements. Vol. 334. Leiden: Brill. pp. 153–179. doi:10.1163/9789004216037_006. ISBN 978-90-04-21523-8.
• Keilius, Henricus, ed. (1857). "Flavii Sosipatri Charisii Artis grammaticae libri V: Liber Primus". Grammatici Latini. Vol. I. Lipsia: B. G. Teubner. pp. 7–151. [Reprinted: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2009. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511704604.004. ISBN 978-1-108-00636-1.]
• Keller, O.; Holder, A., eds. (1899). "Horati Epodon 17". Q. Horati Flacci Opera (in Latin) (2nd ed.). Lipsia: B. G. Tevbner. pp. 329–336.
• Kelly, J. M. (1966). "The Underlying Sanctions of Roman Litigation". Roman Litigation. Oxford: Clarendon. pp. 1–30.
• Kenney, E. J. (1976). "Calculated Discontinuities". The Classical Review. 26 (1): 28–30. JSTOR 711102.
• Kiessling, Adolf; Heinze, Richard, eds. (1968). "Iamb. 17". Q. Horatius Flaccus Oden Und Epoden (in German) (13th ed.). Dublin: Weidmann. pp. 555–564.
• Kiss, Dániel (2009). "John M. Trappes-Lomax, Catullus: A Textual Reappraisal". Revista de libros. Cuadernos de Filología Clásica. Estudios Latinos (in Spanish). 29 (2): 227–231.
• Kiss, Dániel (2016). "The Protohistory of the Text of Catullus". In Velaza, Javier (ed.). From the Protohistory to the History of the Text. Studien zur klassischen Philologie. Vol. 173. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. pp. 125–140. doi:10.3726/978-3-653-06169-7. ISBN 978-3-631-66676-0.
• Kiss, Dániel (2017). "Poems with Apparatus". Catullus Online: An Online Repertory of Conjectures on Catullus. Retrieved 27 April 2022.
• Kiss, Dániel (2020). "Catullus Online: A Digital Critical Edition of the Poems of Catullus with a Repertory of Conjectures". In Chronopoulos, Stylianos; Maier, Felix K.; Novokhatko, Anna (eds.). Digitale Altertumswissenschaften: Thesen und Debatten zu Methoden und Anwendungen. Digital Classics Books. Vol. 4. Heidelberg: Propylaeum. pp. 99–114. doi:10.11588/propylaeum.563. ISBN 978-3-947450-92-3.
• Kroll, Wilhelm, ed. (1989). "Liber 42". C. Valerius Catullus (in German) (7th ed.). Stuttgart: B. G. Teubner. pp. 76–79. doi:10.1515/9783110951851.1. ISBN 3-519-24001-7.
• Lease, Emory B. (1897). "Diaeresis at Every Foot in Latin Hexameter, Phalaecean and Choliambic Verse". The Classical Review. 11 (3): 148–150. doi:10.1017/S0009840X00026524. JSTOR 693304.
• Lee, Guy, ed. (2008) [1991]. "XLII". Catullus: The Complete Poems. Oxford World's Classics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 42–43, 159. doi:10.1093/actrade/9780199537570.book.1. ISBN 978-0-19-953757-0.
• Lee, M. Owen (1962). "Illustrative Elisions in Catullus". Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association. 93: 144–153. doi:10.2307/283756.
• Leon, Harry J. (1953). "Due Studi Catulliani. By Francesco della Corte". Reviews. The Classical Weekly. 47 (1): 8–10. doi:10.2307/4343481.
• Leon, Harry J. (1960). "A Quarter Century of Catullan Scholarship (1934–1959), II". The Classical World. 53 (5): 141–148. doi:10.2307/4344302.
• Levine, Philip (1985). "Catullus c.67: The Dark Side of Love and Marriage". Classical Antiquity. 4 (1): 62–71. doi:10.2307/25010824. JSTOR 25010824.
• Lindo, Locksley I. (1969). "Horace's Seventeenth Epode". Classical Philology. 64 (3): 176–177. doi:10.1086/365500. JSTOR 268162.
• Loomis, Julia W. (1972). "Phalaecean Hendecasyllable". Studies in Catullan Verse: An Analysis of Word Types and Patterns in the Polymetra. Mnemosyne, Supplements. Vol. 24. Lugdunum Batavorum: E. J. Brill. pp. 34–62. doi:10.1163/9789004327337_006. ISBN 90-04-03429-3.
• Lorenz, Sven (2019). "Micro to Macro: Martial's Twelve Books of Epigrams". In Henriksén, Christer (ed.). A Companion to Ancient Epigram. Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World. Hoboken: Wiley. pp. 521–539. doi:10.1002/9781118841709.ch30. ISBN 978-1-118-84172-3.
• Lowrie, Michèle (2009). Writing, Performance, and Authority in Augustan Rome. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199545674.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-954567-4.
• Luck, Georg (1966). "Notes on Catullus". Latomus. 25 (2): 278–286. JSTOR 41524525.
• Luck, Georg (2008). "John M. Trappes-Lomax: Catullus: A Textual Reappraisal". Buchbesprechungen. Museum Helveticum (in German). 65 (4): 233–234. JSTOR 44079396.
• Lyne, R. O. A. M. (2007) [2004–2005]. "[Tibullus] Book 3 and Sulpicia". Collected Papers on Latin Poetry. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 341–367. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199203963.003.0019. ISBN 978-0-19-920396-3.
• Mancini, Ioachim, ed. (1952). Tibur. Inscriptiones Italiae (in Latin). Vol. 4.1 (Altera emendata et aucta ed.). Roma: La Libreria Dello Stato.
• Mankin, David, ed. (1995). "Commentary: Epode 17". Horace: Epodes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 272–293. ISBN 0-521-39469-4.
• Manuwald, Gesine, ed. (2019). "C. Asinius Pollio: Against Valerius (F 42)". Fragmentary Republican Latin, Volume V: Oratory, Part 3. Loeb Classical Library. Vol. 542. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. pp. 418–419. doi:10.4159/DLCL.fragmentary_republican_latin-oratory.2019. ISBN 978-0-674-99725-7.
• Markley, A. A. (1998). "Barbarous Hexameters and Dainty Meters: Tennyson's Uses of Classical Versification". Studies in Philology. 95 (4): 456–486. JSTOR 4174622.
• Markley, A. A. (2004). "Classical Prosody and the 'Ocean Roll of Rhythm'". Stateliest Measures: Tennyson and the Literature of Greece and Rome. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. pp. 87–120. doi:10.3138/9781442680180-006. ISBN 0-8020-8937-2.
• Marsh, David (2010). "Obscenity and Poetic Invective in the Early Italian Renaissance". In Schnur, Rhoda; et al. (eds.). Acta Conventus Neo-Latini Budapestinensis: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Congress of Neo-Latin Studies, Budapest, 6–12 August 2006. Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies. pp. 447–460. ISBN 978-0-86698-434-8.
• Marshall, Anthony J. (1968). "Cicero, Ad Quintum Fratrem ii. 10. 1". The Classical Review. 18 (1): 16–17. JSTOR 708683.
• McCarthy, Kathleen (2019). "Poetry as Performance: Catullan Invective as Performance". I, the Poet: First-Person Form in Horace, Catullus, and Propertius. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. pp. 113–133. ISBN 978-1-5017-3955-2.
• McNeill, Randall L. B. (2007). "Catullus and Horace". In Skinner, Marilyn B. (ed.). A Companion to Catullus. Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World. Malden, MA: Blackwell. pp. 357–376. doi:10.1002/9780470751565.ch19. ISBN 978-1-4051-3533-7.
• Merrill, Elmer Truesdell, ed. (1893). "42". Catullus. College Series of Latin Authors. Boston: Ginn & Company. pp. 73–74.
• Meyer, Elizabeth A. (2001). "Wooden Wit: Tabellae in Latin Poetry". In Tylawsky, Elizabeth; Weiss, Charles (eds.). Essays in Honor of Essays in Honor of Gordon Williams: Twenty-five Years at Yale. New Haven: Henry R. Schwab. pp. 201–212. ISBN 0-939681-50-1.
• Miller, Paul Allen (2019). "Going Soft on Canidia: The Epodes, an Unappreciated Classic". Horace. Understanding Classics. London: I.B. Tauris. pp. 51–80. doi:10.5040/9781788318983.ch-002. ISBN 978-1-78453-329-8.
• Moreno, Jesús Luque (2016). "Catulo métrico" [Metrical Catullus]. Myrtia (in Spanish). 31: 399–411. ISSN 1989-4619.
• Morgan, Llewelyn (2010). "The Hendecasyllable: An Abbreviated History". Musa Pedestris: Metre and Meaning in Roman Verse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 49–113. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199554188.003.0002. ISBN 978-0-19-955418-8.
• Morrison, Mary (1955). "Catullus in the Neo-Latin Poetry of France before 1550". Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance. 17 (3): 365–394. JSTOR 20673790.
• Morrison, Mary (1956). "Ronsard and Catullus: The Influence of the Teaching of Marc-Antoine de Muret". Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance. 18 (2): 240–274. JSTOR 20673838.
• Morrison, Mary (1963). "Catullus and the Poetry of the Renaissance in France". Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance. 25 (1): 25–56. JSTOR 20674441.
• Munro, H.A.J., ed. (1905). "42". Criticisms and Elucidations of Catullus (2nd ed.). George Bell and Sons. pp. 118–120.
• Muretus, M. Antonius (1554). "In Quandam". Catullus. Et in eum commentarius. Venetiae: Paulus Manutius. pp. 50–51.
• Myers, K. Sara (2021). "Gender and Sexuality". In Du Quesnay, Ian; Woodman, Tony (eds.). The Cambridge Companion to Catullus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 70–80. doi:10.1017/9781108147859.006. ISBN 978-1-107-19356-7.
• Mynors, R. A. B., ed. (1958). "XLII". C. Valerii Catvlli Carmina. Scriptorvm Classicorvm Bibliotheca Oxoniensis (in Latin). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 30. doi:10.1093/actrade/9780198146049.book.1. ISBN 0-19-814604-3.
• Nappa, Christopher (2001). "The Substance of Song: Catullan Conceptions of Poetry (poems 1, 22, 42)". Aspects of Catullus' Social Fiction. Studien zur klassischen Philologie. Vol. 125. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. pp. 133–150. ISBN 3-6313-7808-4.
• Neudling, Chester Louis (1955). A Prosopography to Catullus. Iowa Studies in Classical Philology. Vol. XII. Oxford.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Obermeier, Anita (1999). "The Classical Tradition: The Stesichorean Paradigm". The History and Anatomy of Auctorial Self-Criticism in the European Middle Ages. Amsterdam: Rodopi. pp. 25–43. ISBN 90-420-0405-3.
• Oliensis, Ellen (1991). "Canidia, Canicula, and the Decorum of Horace's Epodes". Arethusa. 24 (1): 107–138. JSTOR 26309415. [Reprinted: Lowrie, Michèle, ed. (2009). Horace: Odes and Epodes. Oxford Readings in Classical Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 160–187. ISBN 978-0-19-920769-5.]
• Oliensis, Ellen (1998). "Making Faces at the Mirror: The Epodes and the Civil War". Horace and the Rhetoric of Authority. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 64–101. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511582875.003. ISBN 0-521-57315-7.
• Østerud, Svein (1978). "Sacrifice and Bookburning in Catullus' Poem 36". Hermes. 106 (1): 138–155. JSTOR 4476047.
• O'Sullivan, Timothy M. (2011). "The Art of Walking". Walking in Roman Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 11–33. ISBN 978-1-107-00096-4.
• Päll, Janika; Steinrück, Martin (2022). "Switzerland". In Pontani, Filippomaria; Weise, Stefan (eds.). The Hellenizing Muse: A European Anthology of Poetry in Ancient Greek from the Renaissance to the Present. Berlin: De Gruyter. pp. 306–357. doi:10.1515/9783110652758-008. ISBN 978-3-11-064123-3.
• Pavlock, Barbara (2013). "Mentula in Catullus 114 and 115". Classical World. 106 (4): 595–607. doi:10.1353/clw.2013.0070. JSTOR 24699700.
• Pelling, Christopher (2002). "Duplices Tabellae: A Reading – and Rereading – of Propertius 3, 23". Studi italiani di filología classica. 20 (1–2): 171–181. ISSN 0039-2987.
• Perrotta, Gennaro (1931). "Il carme 42 di Catullo" (PDF). Atene e Roma. Nuova Serie (in Italian). 12 (1): 45–58.
• Platter, Charles (1996). "'Adeste, Hendecasyllabi, Quot Estis?': George Buchanan's Catullan Imitations". In Wood, Diane S.; Miller, Paul Allen (eds.). Recapturing the Renaissance: New Perspectives on Humanism, Dialogue, and Texts. Knoxville: New Paradigm. pp. 125–140. ISBN 1-886935-14-9.
• Polt, Christopher B. (2021). Catullus and Roman Comedy: Theatricality and Personal Drama in the Late Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108885195. ISBN 978-1-108-83981-5.
• Porter, David H. (1995). "Quo, Quo Scelesti Ruitis The Downward Momentum of Horace's Epodes". Illinois Classical Studies. 20: 107–130. hdl:2142/13037. JSTOR 23065402.
• Poteat, Hubert McNeill (1919). "The Functions of Repetition in Latin Poetry (Concluded)". The Classical Weekly. 12 (19): 145–150. doi:10.2307/4387795.
• Power, Tristan J. (2010). "Pliny, Letters 5.10 and the Literary Career of Suetonius". The Journal of Roman Studies. 100: 140–162. doi:10.1017/S0075435810000080. JSTOR 41724769. [Reprinted: Power, Tristan (2021). Collected Papers on Suetonius. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. pp. 1–45. doi:10.4324/9781003096030-3. ISBN 978-0-367-55565-8.]
• Putnam, Michael C. J. (2006). "Helen". Poetic Interplay: Catullus and Horace. Princeton: Princeton University Press. pp. 72–92. doi:10.1515/9781400827428.72. ISBN 978-0-691-12537-4.
• Quinn, Kenneth (1973a). Catullus: An Interpretation. New York: Barnes & Noble. ISBN 0-06-495757-8.
• Quinn, Kenneth, ed. (1973b). "42". Catullus: The Poems (2nd ed.). London: Macmillan. pp. 24–25, 215–218.
• Quinn, Kenneth (1973). "Trends in Catullan Criticism". In Temporini, Hildegard (ed.). Von den Anfängen Roms bis zum Ausgang der Republik. Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. Vol. 1.3. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 369–389. doi:10.1515/9783110836424-011. ISBN 3-11-004251-7.
• Ramírez de Verger, Antonio, ed. (2000). Catulo: Poesías (3rd ed.). Madrid: Alianza Editorial. ISBN 84-206-3611-8.
• Ribbeck, Otto (1962) [1873]. "L. Afranivs: Epistvla". Scaenicae Romanorvm Poesis Fragmenta (in Latin). Vol. II, Comicorvm Fragmenta (2nd ed.). Hildesheim: Georg Olms. pp. 178–181.
• Richlin, Amy (2017). "Singing for Your Supper". Slave Theater in the Roman Republic: Plautus and Popular Comedy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 138–198. doi:10.1017/9781316585467.005. ISBN 978-1-107-15231-1.
• Riese, Alexander, ed. (1884). "42". Die Gedichte des Catullus (in German). Leipzig: B. G. Teubner. pp. 80–83.
• Roller, Matthew (1998). "Pliny's Catullus: The Politics of Literary Appropriation". Transactions of the American Philological Association. 128: 265–304. doi:10.2307/284415.
• Roman, L. (2006). "A History of Lost Tablets". Classical Antiquity. 25 (2): 351–388. doi:10.1525/ca.2006.25.2.351. JSTOR 10.1525/ca.2006.25.2.351.
• Salemi, Joseph (1981). "Catullus XLII". Maledicta. 5 (1–2): 93–94. ISBN 0-916500-25-X. ISSN 0363-3659.
• Sandy, G.N. (1973). "A Note On Virgil, Catalepton 13,6". Mnemosyne. 26 (3): 286–289. doi:10.1163/156852573X00855.
• Santangelo, Salvatore (1905). "Alcune fonti delle 'Baiae' di G. Pontano". Rassegna critica della letteratura italiana. 1905: 193–217. hdl:2027/hvd.32044105199988.
• Schafer, John K. (2020). Catullus Through His Books: Dramas of Composition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108559584. ISBN 978-1-108-47224-1.
• Schmidt, Ernst A. (1973). "Catulls Anordnung seiner Gedichte". Philologus (in German). 117 (1–2): 215–242. doi:10.1524/phil.1973.117.12.215.
• Schmidt, Paul; Smith, James; Whitehead, Glenn, eds. (1960). "Notes on Contributors". Quagga. Vol. 1, no. 3. Austin. pp. 27–28.
• Schuster, Mauriz (1949). "Marginalien zu einer neuen Ausgabe Catulls". Wiener Studien (in German). 64: 82–106.
• Schwabius, Ludovicus, ed. (1886). "42". Catulli Veronensis Liber: Ad optimos codices denuo collatos (in Latin). Berolini: Weidmann. p. 29.
• Scott, Helen (2006). "Omnes unius aestimemus assis: A Note on Liability for Defamation in Catullus" (PDF). Roman Legal Tradition. 3: 95–110. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 Jul 202. {{cite journal}}: |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; 13 July 2020 suggested (help)
• Selden, Daniel L. (1992). "Ceveat lector: Catullus and the Rhetoric of Performance". In Hexter, Ralph; Selden, Daniel (eds.). Innovations of Antiquity. New York: Routledge. pp. 461–512. doi:10.4324/9781315799988. ISBN 0-415-90129-4. [Reprinted: Gaisser, Julia Haig, ed. (2007). Catullus. Oxford Readings in Classical Studies. Oxford University Press. pp. 490–559. ISBN 978-0-19-928034-6.]
• Shapiro, Susan O. (2011). "The Mirror of Catullus: Poems 12, 22, 39, 41, 42 and 84". Syllecta Classica. 22 (1): 21–37. doi:10.1353/syl.2011.0006.
• Sillig, Carolus Julius, ed. (1823). "Liber XLII. In Quandam". C. Valerii Catulli Carmina (in Latin). Gottinga: Henricum Dieterich. pp. 67–68.
• Skinner, Marilyn B. (2003). Catullus in Verona: A Reading of the Elegiac Libellus, Poems 65–116. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press. hdl:1811/28650. ISBN 0-8142-0937-8.
• Skinner, Marilyn B. (2015). "A Review of Scholarship on Catullus 1985–2015". Lustrum. 57 (1): 91–360. doi:10.13109/lutr.2015.57.1.91.
• Smith, Mariah Elaine (2020). "Composing the puella: Pliny the Younger's Elegiac Experimentation". Illinois Classical Studies. 45 (1): 132–157. doi:10.5406/illiclasstud.45.1.0132.
• Stärk, Ekkehard (2003). "Theatrum amantum: Pontanos Baiae und Catull". In Baier, Thomas (ed.). Pontano und Catull (in German). Tübingen: Narr. pp. 295–305. ISBN 3-8233-5794-8. [Reprinted: Gärtner, Ursula; Lefèvre, Eckard; Sier, Kurt, eds. (2005). Kleine Schriften zur römischen Literatur. Tübingen: Narr. pp. 299–307. ISBN 3-8233-5982-7.]
• Statius, Achilles, ed. (1566). "In qvandam". Catvllvs cvm commentario (in Latin). Venetiis: Manutius. pp. 119–123.
• Stroup, Sarah Culpepper (2010). "An Object of Catullan Affection". Catullus, Cicero, and a Society of Patrons: The Generation of the Text. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 216–236. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511730177.012. ISBN 978-0-521-51390-6.
• Syndikus, Hans Peter (1984). "42. Gedicht". Catull: Eine Interpretation (in German). Vol. I. Die kleinen Gedichte (1–60). Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. pp. 226–230. ISBN 3-534-01507-X.
• Tatum, W. Jeffrey (2007). "Social Commentary and Political Invective". In Skinner, Marilyn B. (ed.). A Companion to Catullus. Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World. Malden, MA: Blackwell. pp. 333–354. doi:10.1002/9780470751565.ch18. ISBN 978-1-4051-3533-7.
• Thomson, D.F.S., ed. (1998) [1997]. "42". Catullus. Phoenix. Supplementary. Vol. 34 (Repr. with corr., 1st ed.). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. pp. 125–126, 311–313. doi:10.3138/9781442672789. ISBN 0-8020-0676-0.
• Thomson, Douglas (2009). "Trappes-Lomax, J.M. 2007. Catullus, A Textual Reappraisal". De novis libris iudicia. Mnemosyne. 62 (4): 679–685. doi:10.1163/156852509X340183. JSTOR 27736390.
• Trappes-Lomax, John M. (2007). Catullus: A Textual Reappraisal. Swansea: Classical Press of Wales. ISBN 978-1-910589-50-2. JSTOR j.ctvvnbr2.
• Trappes-Lomax, John M. (2012). "Further Thoughts in Catullus". Paideia. 67: 633–645. doi:10.1400/198853.
• Usener, Hermann (1901). "Italische Volksjustiz" (PDF). Rheinisches Museum für Philologie. Neue Folge (in German). 56: 1–28. JSTOR 41245957.
• Vine, Brent (1989). "Some "Vertical" Phonetic Effects in Catullus". Syllecta Classica. 1 (1): 87–95. doi:10.1353/syl.1989.0002.
• Webb, Timothy (2014). "Catullus and the Missing Papers: Leigh Hunt, Byron and John Murray". The Byron Journal. 42 (2): 111–122. doi:10.3828/bj.2014.15.
• Webb, Timothy (2018). "A Cockney Catullus: The Reception of Catullus in Romantic Britain, 1795–1821". Book Review. The Keats-Shelley Review. 32 (2): 179–183. doi:10.1080/09524142.2018.1520468.
• Westphal, Rudolf, ed. (1870). "42. Adeste, hendecasyllabi, quot estis". Catull's Gedichte in ihrem geschichtlichen Zusammenhange (2nd ed.). Breslau: F. E. C. Leuckart. pp. 227–229. hdl:2027/mdp.39015011673251.
• Wheeler, Arthur Leslie (1908). "Hieremias De Montagnone and Catullus". The American Journal of Philology. 29 (2): 186–200. doi:10.2307/288788.
• Wheeler, Michael Ian Hulin (2015). "Iambi and Amores: Catullus' Flexible Hendecasyllable". Meter in Catullan Invective: Expectations and Innovation (PhD). Boston University. pp. 137–183. hdl:2144/15640.
• Whitton, Christopher (2019). The Arts of Imitation in Latin Prose: Pliny's Epistles/Quintilian in Brief. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108688550. ISBN 978-1-108-47657-7.
• Wilkinson, L. P. (1961). "Herescu, La poésie latine". Gnomon. 33 (4): 355–360. JSTOR 27682562.
• Williams, Gordon Willis (1968). Tradition and Originality in Roman Poetry. Oxford: Clarendon.
• Wills, Jeffrey (1996). Repetition in Latin Poetry: Figures of Allusion. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 0-19-814084-3.
• Wiseman, T. P. (1974). "Lesbia and her Children". Cinna the Poet, and Other Roman Essays. [Leicester]: Leicester University Press. pp. 104–118. ISBN 0-7185-1120-4.
• Wray, David (2001). "Towards a Mediterranean Poetics of Aggression". Catullus and the Poetics of Roman Manhood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 113–160. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511482441.005. ISBN 0-521-66127-7.
• Zarker, John W. (1972). "Lesbia's Charms". The Classical Journal. 68 (2): 107–115. JSTOR 3295822.