"Sincerity" and the Roman Elegists

Author(s): Archibald W. Allen

Source: Classical Philology, Vol. 45, No. 3 (Jul., 1950), pp. 145-160
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/266153
Accessed: 21-02-2020 20:07 UTC

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 [email protected].

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

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Classical Philology

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CLASSICAL PHILOLOGY

Volume XLV JULY 1950 Number 3

"SINCERITY" AND THE ROMAN ELEGISTS

ARCHIBALD W. ALLEN

I said of the rhetorical style which most

ELEGIA quoque Graecos provocamus, persuasively reveals the character of the
cuius mihi tersus atque elegans orator: "proprie, iucunde, credibiliter
maxime videtur auctor Tibullus. dicere sat est."3 It is evident that in such
Sunt qui Propertium malint. Ovidius a style it is not the peculiar character of a
utroque lascivior, sicut durior Gallus."' unique individual that is revealed, but
Among modern critics there has been rather gen- a general type of character to which
eral agreement with the preference which the speaker conforms or seems to con-
Quintilian showed for both Tibullus and form. If we look beyond Quintilian we find
Propertius over Ovid, although the num- that these are not simply the criteria
ber of those qui Propertium malint has adopted by a teacher of rhetoric. Poets
perhaps increased at the expense of Tibul- also used such terms of stylistic identifica-
lus. Postgate's opinion represents the pre- tion when they wished to characterize in
vailing attitude toward Ovid: "His calm a single word the essential quality of an-
surface is most rarely disturbed by genu- other poet. When Ovid praised his prede-
ine feeling. With Tibullus and Propertius cessors in elegy, he characterized Catullus
love was at any rate a passion. With Ovid as doctus (Am. iii. 9. 62), Tibullus as cultus
it was une affaire de coeur."2 Despite the (Am. i. 15. 28 and iii. 9. 66) and comis
apparent agreement between the ancient (Tr. v. 1. 18), Propertius as tener (A.A. iii.
and the modern critic, it should be ob- 333) and blandus (Tr. ii. 465 and v. 1. 17).
served that the criteria by which they Martial found Propertius lascivus (viii.
reached their judgments are significantly 73. 5) and facundus (xiv. 189. 1). Proper-
different. tius, in urging his friend Lynceus to turn
The terms tersus, elegans, lascivus, and from epic to elegiac verse, wrote:
durus, which Quintilian used in describing Incipe iam angusto versus includere torno,
the elegists, are all technical terms of Inque tuos ignes, dure poeta, veni [ii. 34,
stylistic criticism. The qualities which he 43-44].

found most admirable in Tibullus were his The writing of elegy can, as here, be de-
formal perfection and his sureness of scribed either as writing in a polished
taste. These are qualities which we should style or as writing of one's own love. As
expect to be admired by Quintilian, who an epic poet Lynceus was durus, but if he
[CLASSICAL PHILOLOGY, XLV, JULY, 1950] 145

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
146 ARCHIBALD W. ALLEN

would turn to elegy and the theme of love regarded as a function of personality. Be-
he would become a tener poeta.4 From this fore judging a Roman poet by modern
point of view the personality of the poet standards we must be careful to under-
himself, in so far as he is a poet, is deter- stand him by the standards of which he
mined by the style in which he writes. was himself conscious, and take care that
While Quintilian was concerned with other preconceptions do not cause us to
the style of the elegists and not with their misunderstand him.6
personality as it might exist apart from In classical literary criticism this prob-
their style, Postgate was concerned with lem did not receive the amount of atten-
the style as it reveals the personality of tion that it has in modern criticism, but it
the poet. He found in Tibullus and Pro- was not ignored. Since the theory of rhet-
pertius proof of the sincerity and genuine oric was more carefully considered and
passion which he evidently regarded as a fully developed than a corresponding
prime requisite of poetry. They, rather theory of poetic, it is in the rhetoricians
than Ovid, awakened in him the impres- that we find the matter most systemati-
sion that a passionate feeling inspired cally treated.7 Rhetorical theory recog-
their verse. Finding them superior to Ovid nizes that the orator faces the practical
in the quality of their feeling, he consid- requirement that he must get people to
ered them superior also as poets. The believe what he says; therefore he re-
ethical standard for him was prior and quires not only to convince an audience by
determined literary judgment. his argumentation, but also to persuade
This point of view is no longer so widely them of his sincerity. Fides is the word
held in literary criticism as was the case a which in Latin comes nearest to expressing
few years ago, but it has had a very con- the idea contained in our word "sinceri-
siderable influence in classical scholarship. ty,"I8 but there is an important difference.
In criticism of the Roman elegists, so Fides contains simultaneously the ideas of
much of whose work is of a personal and "sincerity" and "persuasiveness." Its
ostensibly confessional nature, the ques- precise meaning was studied by Heinze,9
tion of the relation between poetry and who showed that it contains an essential
the personality of the poet has assumed notion of a relationship existing between
particular importance. A consideration of an individual and others who assume a
the general critical point involved would particular attitude toward him:
lie outside of the scope of the present dis- Fides, die ... notwendig mit der Anerkennung
cussion.5 We can, however, consider the durch andere zusammenhangt, ist ein Stuck
difference between the ancient and mod- Personlichkeit, das deren Wert in den Augen
ern views of the nature of poetic sincerity, anderer ganz wesentlich bestimmt, aber eben
and seek to avoid the danger of applying noch davon abhangt, ob diese Augen anderer
sie sehen und ob sie sie als gross oder klein, gut
misleading standards of judgment to the
oder schlecht sehen.10
Roman elegists. The interest in individual
personality which is characteristic of mod-Fides therefore includes both a subjective
ern thought has led to the development of element (ein Stuck Personlichkeit) and an
a concept of artistic sincerity which is objective element (Wert in den Augen an-
basically different from that which the derer); in its former aspect the closest
contemporaries of the elegists considered English equivalent is sincerity, while in
relevant. Instead of being regarded as a the latter it is persuasiveness. The fides of
function of style, sincerity has come to be an orator depends on the conviction which

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 "SINCERITY" AND THE ROMAN-ELEGISTS 147

he arouses that he possesses the qualities poem, i.e., the linguistic construct shaping
which he claims. Fides involves a relation- in the author's mind as he writes." Since
ship between the speaker and his audi- the terms of this definition are "the lin-
ence; it means both good faith on the part
guistic construct" and "the author's
of a speaker and the acceptance by an mind," it is evidently in the relation be-
audience of his pretension to speak in good tween these that they look for sincerity,
faith. If the speaker is to create a beliefrather
in than in the relation between the
his sincerity he must, as Quintilian says, finished work of art and the readers or
himself either possess or seem to possess audience."6 The objective element in the
the good qualities which he praises in classical fides has thus disappeared.
others: a bad speech is one which fails When there has been established for, the
properly to present the character of the judgment of poetry a standard so subjec-
speaker.11 The proper solution for the tive as the relation between the artist and
orator is simply that he should speak in the product of his art, it is not surprising
such a manner as will present his charac- that critics have looked for proof of sin-
ter in the light he desires, and the style of cerity not chiefly in the artistic illusion
his discourse is the means by which he created by the poem itself but rather in
presents his character to the audience.12 the relation existing between the poem
An excess of adornment destroys belief in and the external facts of the poet's life.
the sincerity of the speaker's emotion,13 Indeed some critics have gone further, and
but on the other hand charm of manner is from a forceful impression of sincerity
in itself a means of persuasion.14 The suc- have inferred a necessary existence of the
cessful orator is one who understands the external facts. The current judgment con-
art of charming his listeners, without fall- cerning Propertius and Ovid illustrates
ing into excess and affectation, and so can this habit of mind. Since the poetry of
convince them of the soundness of his Ovid is deliberately "conventional" many
character and the justice of his case. His critics deny him sincerity, and as a corol-
fides, the impression of sincerity resulting lary assume that his poetry is pure fancy
from persuasiveness, is, according to this supported neither by true feeling nor by
doctrine, a product of style.15 Sincerity, real experience. This is the judgment of
then, as we find it in ancient criticism, in-
Schanz-Hosius on the Amores:
volves a relation between the artist and
the public; it is established by the style of [Corinna] existierte aber nur in dem Geiste des
Dichters, um seine Phantasiestutcke individuell
the work of art. The personality of the
zu beleben. So muss Corinna die Figur futr eine
artist, except as it appears to the public in
Reihe erdichteter Situationen abgeben....
the work of art, is irrelevant to the ques-
Keines dieser Lieder verrat eine tiefere Emp-
tion of sincerity.
findung, es sind leichte Spiele der Phantasie.
In modern critical theory, on the other ... Ein Band zwischen Leben und Dichtung
hand, the real personality of the artist is besteht nicht.17
an essential factor in the concept of sin-
cerity, which is regarded as lying in the re- It is easy to see the method of reasoning:
lation between the artist and the product we do not receive from the elegies of Ovid
of his art. In their recent study of the an impression of sincerity; we may there-
basic principles of modern literary theory, fore conclude that there exists in them no
Wellek and Warren define sincerity in connection between life and poetry. For
poetry as "a sincere expression of the Propertius the situation is simply re-

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 148 ARCHIBALD W. ALLEN

versed; we are convinced of the reality of as historical data in constructing an ac-

his passion: count of Propertius' relations with Cyn-
Tiefe und starke Gemiitsbewegung und eine thia. There are seven which are sufficient-
iiberwailtigende Leidenschaft, lebhafte Phan- ly precise to seem useful :20
tasie eines erregten Herzens machen sich in
Et mihi iam toto furor hic non deficit anno,
leuchtenden Gemalden der Freude und des
Cum tamen adversos cogor habere deos
Leides Luft; Glut der Empfindung lodert
[i. 1. 7-8].
ftberall.18
"Vix unum potes, infelix, requiescere mensem,
And it follows, for these critics, that Cyn-
Et turpis de te iam liber alter erit"
thia has a role in the biography of Proper-
[ii. 3. 3-4].
tius which is denied to Corinna in that of
Ovid. Butler and Barber likewise find in Ergo iam multos nimium temerarius annos,

the quality of Propertius' poetry a guar- Improba, qui tulerim teque tuamque do-
mum? [ii. 8. 13-14].
antee of its biographical truth:
It is with Cynthia we must begin. The story of Septima iam plenae deducitur orbita lunae,
their love is in outline simple enough.... Cum de me et de te compita nulla tacent
There is no need to be unduly sceptical about [ii. 20. 21-22].
the poet's story of his love. Many of the
Sic ego non ullos iam norim in amore tumul-
poems, it is true, seem to follow conventional
tus,
forms; the details may often be fictitious; but
Nec veniat sine te nox vigilanda mihi:
underlying all there is such fire and vehemence
Ut mihi praetexti pudor est elatus amictus
that we can scarcely doubt the general truth
Et data libertas noscere amoris iter,
of the story that emerges as we read.'9
Illa rudes animos per noctes conscia primas
The propriety of testing the sincerity of Inbuit heu nullis capta Lycinna datis.
a Roman elegist by relating his poems to Tertius haut multo minus est cum ducitur
annus:
the external facts of his life is fortunately
Vix memini nobis verba coisse decem.
subject to some measure of objective veri-
Cuncta tuus sepelivit amor, nec femina post te
fication. We can both examine "the story
Ulla dedit collo dulcia vincla meo
that emerges" from his elegies to deter-
[iii. 15. 1-10].
mine whether it is coherent and convinc-
ing; and we can consider whether the Peccaram semel et totum sum pulsus in
statements of the Latin poets themselves annum [iii. 16. 9].

justify such a method of interpreting their Quinque tibi potui servire fideliter annos
work. If we find this method invalid, it [iii. 25. 3].
will remain to investigate whether sin-
cerity, regarded simply as a function of In the first of these passages, which occurs
style, offers a more useful criterion. in the elegy that introduces Book i, Pro-
pertius says that the madness of love has
II possessed him for a whole year. ii. 3. 3-4
Many critics have thought that in the are probably to be understood as the
elegies of Propertius they can trace the words of a friend, addressed to the poet
story of his romance with Cynthia. Since shortly after the publication of Book i.
the first necessity in preparing an ade- ii. 8. 13-14 are from an elegy complaining
quate biography is the establishment of of his mistress' infidelity. ii. 20. 21-22 pre-
a chronology, it will be convenient to sumably refer to the period which has
gather the passages which have been used passed since publication of Book i. iii. 15

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 "SINCERITY" AND THE ROMAN ELEGISTS 149

is the only elegy in which Lycinna ap- suggested that the elegy in which Lycinna
pears. In iii. 16. 9 memory of a year of appears (iii. 15) was written immediately
banishment occurs to the poet when he is before the separation. A period of two
debating whether to obey a midnight sum- years has already elapsed since love for
mons of his mistress: her order is danger- Cynthia has erased all thought of Lycinna
ous to obey, but more dangerous to dis- from his mind. Lachmann therefore ar-
obey. iii. 25, in which Propertius claims to ranged the chronology of the love affairs
have served Cynthia faithfully for five as follows: one year for Lycinna, two for
years, is the concluding poem of the book the earlier period of relations with Cyn-
and an epilogue to his love poetry. thia, one for the separation, and five for
The first effort to apply historical the second period of relations with Cyn-
method to the interpretation of these pas- thia. Thus the seven years in the chronol-
sages was made by F. G. Barth, who ar- ogy of Barth became nine in that of
ranged according to the years of the Lachmann.
poet's life the events of his affairs with Despite the apparent precision of
Cynthia and her predecessor Lycinna.21 Barth's conclusions, as modified by Lach-
Relying on the statement in iii. 15, he as- mann, they have since shown themselves
sumed that the first love affair of Proper- open to attack at every point. The iden-
tius was with Lycinna, and that it began tification of the year of i. 1. 7, with that of
shortly after he put on the toga virilis. iii. 16. 9-which Lachmann believed to be
About two years later he fell in love with the most important contribution of his
Cynthia and his love for her lasted for five chronological system to the interpretation
years (iii. 25. 3). Since the usual age for of Propertius and which he made the key-
assuming the toga virilis was sixteen, stone of his system-is extremely doubt-
Barth supposed that the love affair began ful, since it requires the assumption that
when the poet was about seventeen years i. 1 was written at the end of the annus
old. By assigning two years to the affair discidii, and therefore three years after
with Lycinna and five years to the affair Propertius' relations with Cynthia began.
with Cynthia, he found that the events This assumption led Lachmann to regard
which form the subject of the first three i. 1 as a farewell to love,23 a complete mis-
books of Propertius extended over a peri- conception of the elegy.24 Further, the
od of seven years, from his seventeenth to composition of iii. 16 was assigned to a
his twenty-fourth years. This chronology period before the publication of Book i.25
was adopted by Lachmann, but with one The reckoning of years is also much less
important modification.22 He drew atten- certain than Lachmann indicated. The
tion to the year of separation which Pro- year assigned to Lycinna is a mere guess,
pertius mentions in iii. 16. 9 and identified and there is no satisfactory means of de-
this year with the toto anno of i. 1. 7. He termining whether the five years men-
felt that Propertius could not have in- tioned in iii. 25 do or do not include the
cluded this year of separation-the annus year of separation and the previous period
discidii as it has generally been called of relations between Propertius and Cyn-
since Lachmann-among the quinque an- thia. These difficulties are further compli-
nos of faithful service. He therefore reck- cated by the differences between the short
oned the five years of iii. 25. 3 as having periods of time mentioned in ii. 3. 3 and
begun only with the resumption of rela- ii. 20. 21 and the multos annos of ii. 8. 13.
tions after the annus discidii. He further The result of the numerous flaws which

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
150 ARCHIBALD W. ALLEN

have been found in Lachmann's theory is ii. 8. 13, and to ii. 20. 21, reject the annus
that many efforts have since been made to discidii from their reckoning, and take the
reconcile the chronology of Propertius' toto anno of i. 1. 7 simply as indicating the
romance with the chronology of his poems.period of composition of Book i. They are
It will be sufficient to indicate the meth- then left with only two passages from
ods which have been followed by Birt26 which to determine the chronology of
and by Butler and Barber,27 since their at- Propertius' love story; but each of these
tempts are typical. offers particular difficulties. The first of
The solution offered by Birt is the more these passages is that in which Lycinna is
radical. He believed that expressions of mentioned (iii. 15. 1-10). It was she, Pro-
time have in general only a subjective pertius says, who initiated him into the
meaning for the poet: they signify only experience of love, but his later love for
that a given period of time has seemed Cynthia has made him forget her, and in
long or short. Birt found it possible to almost two years they have scarcely ex-
argue that when Propertius says three changed ten words. Butler and Barber,
years (iii. 15. 7) he really means exactly who date the beginning of Propertius' love
the same length of time as when he says for Cynthia in 29 B.C. and the composition
five years (iii. 25. 3).28 He could also argue, of Book iii in the years 25 to 22 B.C., are
on the same basis, that when Propertius troubled by the poet's statement that it is
says a year he really means a month, and only two years since he left Lycinna for
when he says a month he really means a Cynthia. They therefore follow Lachmann
year: in suggesting that these lines actually
were composed earlier than the rest of the
Schreibt nun also Properz III. 16, 9: Peccaram
semel et totum sum pulsus in annum, so genuigt book:
es, da Properz sich m6glichst stark ausdruickenIII. xv, though its date is uncertain, cannot
will, nicht ein Jahr, sondern einen Monat der well be later than 27 B.C. It is, that is to say, as
Trennung zu verstehen; schreibt er dagegen II. far as 1-10 at least are concerned, an early
3, 3: vix unum potes, infelix, requiescere men- poem which would naturally have found a
sem, et turpis de te iam liber alter erit, so ist das place in Book II. It is possible that 1-10 rep-
in diesem Fall eine ganz offenbare Uebertrei- resent an early fragment, which was later
bung in das Minus, und wir dutrfen wiederum made use of to introduce the story of Dirce and
ruhig als Abstand zwischen der Monobiblos Antiope, which, like the story of Hylas in I.
des Properz und dem Beginn seines sog. xx, is in reality the main theme of the poemA30
zweiten Buches den Zeitraum eines vollen
Jahres ansetzen.29
A similar difficulty is raised by the quinque
annos of iii. 25. 3. These five years cannot
All things are, in fact, possible under this be counted from the publication of the
method, even Birt's conclusion that Pro- book, for they would then carry us back
pertius really loved Cynthia for only three only to 27 or 28 B.C., when the first book
years, and then spent seventeen years in had already appeared. Butler and Barber
writing poetry about her. But since such therefore offer the following explanation:
conjectures are no more susceptible of If the liaison was broken at the end of 25 B.C.
disproof than of proof, they are entirelyor early in 24 B.C., and Bk. III was published
beyond critical control. in 22 B.C. (and it cannot at most have been
The method of Butler and Barber more than a few months earlier), at least two
seems more circumspect. They deny years must be assumed to have elapsed be-
chronological importance to ii. 3. 3, to tween the composition of the Cynthia poems

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 "SINCERITY" AND THE ROMAN ELEGISTS 151

in this book and their publication. vate

In this there
sphere of the poet's own experience,
is nothing impossible. Eli. xxiv and xxv may into which the reader is only occasionally
well have been composed and sent to Cynthia and, as it were, by chance allowed an en-
at the time of the rupture. Propertius kept
trance; they have meaning rather as de-
them by him and when the time came for pub-
tails which serve to enforce perception of
lishing saw that they would give an artistic
the essential and typical aspects of experi-
conclusion to the volume.3'
ence in love.
The upshot of this is that the evidence for The effort to transfer the elegiac treat-
the chronology of the romance has been ment of love from the poetry in which it
reduced to two passages, each of which, was written into the form of an historical
it is admitted, cannot mean what it seems biography has failed; it was inevitable
to mean. It is sheer caprice which chooses that no two scholars who attempted to re-
to explain iii. 15. 7 and iii. 25. 3 as literallytell the story of the romance should reach
true while regarding the multos annos of quite the same conclusions, since they can
ii. 8. 13 as "no doubt exaggerated"32 and never quite agree on their data. Biography
leaving ii. 3. 333 and ii. 20. 2134 uncertain. is a branch of historical study, and history
The analysis of the chronological evi- demands facts, which Propertius does not
dence on which the biographical critics of give us. The particular events of his own
Propertius have built their story of his life were not for him a given framework to
romance compels two conclusions. The whose imperious rigidity he must adapt
first is that no hypothetical reconstruction his poetry. He created, changed, or ig-
of the story can ever be convincing, since nored particular facts as best served his
it must rest upon conjectures which are purpose. Cynthia was his first love (i. 1. 1)
not capable of verification. Propertius and the only woman he ever cared for (iv.
does not give us the facts we need. The 1. 139-46); but if his poetic intention re-
second conclusion, which necessarily fol- quired a personal occasion for telling the
lows from the first, is that Propertius did story of Dirce and Antiope, Lycinna could
not intend that his elegies should be read appear for the moment (iii. 15) and then
as a story. It is an essential quality of a disappear from his verse. He could claim
story that it present a sequence of events;to have served Cynthia faithfully for five
without progression in time a story cannot years (iii. 25. 3) and yet meanwhile have
exist. And there is no progression in time called upon his own experience to prove
in the elegies. The opening elegy is an in- the advantage of having two mistresses at
troduction to love, and the last elegy of one time (ii. 22) or have declared that he
the tlhird book is a valediction to love. Be-was resorting to girls of the street (ii. 23
tween these two are elegies which treat and 24). He could even regard Cynthia in
all the aspects of love, fruition and lone- his elegies sometimes as a courtesan and
liness, renunciation and renewal, hope and sometimes as a woman of social position. 5
despair, jealousy and penitence. But there Such contradictions cannot be resolved;
is no plot which unites them and deter- they must be recognized, and the method
mines the order in which they shall ap- of our interpretation must be adapted to
pear. Propertius is not concerned to tell a the kind of poetry we are reading.36
story, but rather to impart the quality of We set out to determine whether the
an experience. Explicit statements of quality of Propertius' poetry can be re-
time, place, person, and circumstance garded as proof of its biographical truth.
have meaning not as references to a pri- It is now apparent that the theory fails to

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
152 ARCHIBALD W. ALLEN

pass the first test: there is no coherent they should be molliculi ac parum pudici;
story which emerges from the elegies. All only so will they properly accord with
the circumstantial accounts that have their literary type. The same contrast ap-
been written about the relations of Pro- pears in Ovid:
pertius with Cynthia are based on dubious Crede mihi, distant mores a carmine'nostro:
interpretations of a few passages whose Vita verecunda est, Musa iocosa mea
relation to biographical fact we have no [Tr. ii. 353-54].
means of determining. and again in Martial:
There remains the second test, the
Lasciva est nobis pagina, vita proba
statements of the poets themselves. In the
[i. 4. 8].7
verses to Lynceus quoted above (p. 145),
Martial also, in another epigram, insists
Propertius urged his friend not only to
that he is bound by the law governing the
write in the polished style, but also to
kind of poetry he writes:
write of his own love. Concerning Proper-
tius himself, Ovid wrote: Saepe suos soli- Lex haec carminibus data est iocosis,

tus recitare Propertius ignes (Tr. iv. 10. Ne possint nisi pruriant, iuvare
[i. 35. 10-11].
45). These statements, both by and about
Propertius, have sometimes been thought The verses of Catullus are quoted by the
to support a belief that such poetry as his Younger Pliny, who appears to have been
is autobiographical, and that it should disturbed by criticism of his poems. He
contain the kind of truth which consists in has left two letters in which he defends
a correspondence between poetry and the himself. In the first he declares that his
particular facts of experience. Neverthe- actual fault is that, through timidity, he
less we have concluded that in the elegies has abstained from the really outspoken
in which Propertius writes of love he has language which Catullus had proclaimed
so invented or suppressed particular cir- as proper to such verse.38 In the other
cuLmstances that it is impossible to learn letter he defends himself against the more
the events of his life from the evidence ofspecific criticism that such poetry ought
his verse. There is, however, no contra- not to be written by a man in his po-
diction between this conclusion and the sition.39 He places the writing of versi-
words of Propertius and Ovid, if we regard culos severos parum on a level with attend-
their statements as referring to poetry ing mimes and comedies, and with reading
written in a personal form without further the poetry of others. His own writing he
implication as to its factual accuracy. justifies by the authority of the good and
Catullus, in lines which were often illustrious men who have done the same.
quoted or imitated by later writers, de- By asserting that men whose sanctitas
clares that there must be a complete dis- morum is unquestionable have not ab-
tinction between the poet and his poetry: stained from lascivia rerum in their verse,
Castum esse decet pium poetam he answers the question whether poetry
Ipsum, versiculos nihil necessest; need have a basis in real experience-
Qui tum denique habent salem ac leporem whether it is necessary to write of actual
Si sunt molliculi ac parum pudici facts when, in verse, iocamur, ludimus,
[xvi. 5-8]. amamus, dolemus, querimur, irascimur.

The poet himself should be castus; not so Apuleius also had occasion to quote the
his verse, since the essential quality of verses of Catullus, in his Apology, when he
such verses as Catullus is writing is that found it necessary to defend himself

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 "SINCERITY" AND THE ROMAN ELEGISTS 153

against the charge that his erotic epi- that such poetry must not be interpreted
grams were an indication of his personal as autobiographical. Between Ovid and
immorality.40 He preserves for us a line of Propertius there are marked differences
the emperor Hadrian, for inscription on both in style and in the attitudes toward
the tomb of the poet Voconius: lascivus love which appear in their work. The two
versu, mente pudicus eras. Hadrian would elegists are different kinds of lovers. Post-
never have so written, Apuleius reminds gate saw in this difference between the
his accusers, siforent lepidiora carmina ar- poets primarily a difference between them
gumentum impudicitiae habenda. Recallingas men: Propertius loved a real Cynthia,
this passage of Apuleius, Ausonius neatly Ovid wrote love poetry to an imaginary
summarizes the distinction between poet- Corinna. We have had to reject this ex-
ry and poet: Apuleium in vita philoso- planation as unproved and incapable of
phum, in epigrammatis amatorem.41 Thus proof. The classical conception of fides
we find this doctrine constantly repeated: suggests that we restrict our attention to
erotic poetry, though its form may be the elegists as poets, and concern our-
personal, cannot be taken as an indication selves with the effect of their style. The
of the conduct of the writer. This does not sincerity which we can look for in them is
mean that erotic poets were never in love, the kind of sincerity which lies in a con-
but it does mean that classical literary sistency between the style of their poetry
doctrine did not assume any specific and and the emotional condition their elegy
normal connection between personal poet- depicts. The question we should ask is not
ry and the actual experience of the poet. "Did the elegists really feel this?" but
The doctrine insisted upon the independ- rather "Is it reasonable that the lover
ence of the poet, and his right freely to whose character appears in the elegies
choose fitting material wherever he might should speak in this manner?"
wish, provided only that it accorded with This question is in fact raised in Prop.
the kind of poetry he was writing. Doubt- ii. 24. 1-2:
less there were always hunters of gossip
"Tu loqueris, cum SiS44 iam noto fabula libro
who pretended that they could judge the
Et tua sit toto 'Cynthia' lecta foro?"
deeds of a poet from his verse, but we have
seen that the writers themselves explicitly The reference here is to the previous elegy,
rejected such interpretation.42 When we in which Propertius had assumed the role
are tempted to take the statements of a of a moralist in the tradition of the popu-
poet as indicating the actual facts of his lar philosophers, and had sententiously
life, despite the warnings of Catullus and declared that the man who will be free
those who followed him in the course of must not yield to love.45 Elegies ii. 23 and
Roman literature, we have a fair warning 24 form a contrasting pair. In 23 Proper-
in Apuleius' remark about his accusers tius steps out of character as the dis-
traught
that they tam dure et rustice legere ut lover, while in 24 he is recalled to
odium moverent.43 his usual role. The two poems differ as
markedly in style as they do in the point
III
of view expressed, a fact which we may
The Roman elegists used personal properly connect with the rhetorical doc-
terms of poetry written in a personal, or trine that style should reveal the speak-
"subjective" manner. It was, however, er's character. This point has not been
the opinion of competent Roman critics noted by commentators, and it will be

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 154 ARCHIBALD W. ALLEN

necessary to consider the two elegies Ingenuus quisquam alterius dat munera
somewhat closely. servo,

They are related in subject, since both Ut promissa suae verba ferat dominae,
5 Et quaerit totiens: "quaenam nune porti-
deal with the idea that relations with com-
cus illam
mon prostitutes are a lesser evil than en-
Integit?" et "campo quo movet illa
tanglement with a married woman or a
pedes?"
fashionable meretrix. The classical moral-
Deinde, ubi pertuleris quos dicit fama la-
ists constantly bring against the latter bores
type of affair the criticism that it compels Herculis, ut scribat, "muneris ecquid
the lover to undergo loss of libertas, res, habes?",
and fama. Lucretius, for example, in his Cernereve ut48 possis vultum custodis
arraignment of love, makes these three amari,
charges in lines which succeed each other 10 Captus et inmunda saepe latere casa,

like clauses in a judicial indictment: Quam care semel in toto nox vertitur
anno!49
Adde quod alterius sub nutu degitur aetas;
Ah pereant, si quos ianua clausa iuvat!
Labitur interea res et Babylonica fiunt,
Contra reiecto quae libera vadit amictu
Languent officia atque aegrotat fama vacil- Custodum et nullo saepta timore, placet,
lans.46
15 Cui saepe inmundo Sacra conteritur Via
socco,
The lover surrenders to another the con-
Nec sinit esse moram, si quis adire velit;
trol of his life, his wealth is lost in the pur-
Differet haec numquam nec poscet garrula,
chase of exotic luxuries, and by neglecting quod te
his responsibilities he loses the respect of Astrictus ploret saepe dedisse pater,
other men. Elegies 23 and 24 are con- Nec dicet: "timeo: propera iam surgere,
cerned with these dangers as they threat- quaeso;
en a man who allows himself to fall in love 20 Infelix, hodie vir mihi rure venit."
with a meretrix (or perhaps a married Et quas Euphrates et quas mihi misit
woman) rather than satisfy himself with Orontes,
Me iuverint: nolim furta pudica tori;
the parabilem Venerem facilemque recom-
Libertas quoniam nulli iam restat amanti:
mended by Horace and Lucretius.47 In 23
Nullus liber erit, si quis amare volet.
the danger to be avoided is loss of liberty,
in 24 it is loss of reputation, and in both Here Propertius speaks from the point of
the waste of money involved is men- view of accepted morality, and the con-
tioned. These traditional themes are ventional material of the elegy appears in
adapted by Propertius to elegiac treat- an ordered, indeed a schematic form. It is
ment, but the manner in which he treats treated in a general discussion formally in-
the conventional elements and the degree closed in a frame of personal statement
to which he gives personal form and in- (vv. 1-2, 21-22) and is restated in a final
tensity to traditional material vary wide- sententious distich (vv. 23-24). The gen-
ly in the two poems. In each case the eral discussion itself falls into two parallel
style accords with the attitude assumed sections presenting first the disadvantages
by the poet. of serving a mistress and then the advan-
This is the text of ii. 23: tages of patronizing girls of the street.
Cui fuit indocti fugienda haec semita vulgi,Each of these sections contains ten lines,
Ipsa petita lacu nune mihi dulcis aqua which balance each other distich for dis-
est. tich: a mistress is surrounded by servants

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 "SINCERITY" AND THE ROMAN ELEGISTS 155

who must be flattered and bribed, while The elegy is a difficult one because the se-
the approach to a prostitute is direct and quence of ideas is not controlled by a rea-
unimpeded (vv. 3-4, 13-14); a mistress soned progression of argument, as in elegy
must be sought for, a prostitute is always 23. Instead, it reflects the sudden disturb-
at hand (vv. 5-6, 15-16); a mistress first ance of the poet's mind caused by the re-
demands every sacrifice and then her alization that his character as the slave of
greed is insatiable, but a prostitute comes love is firmly established in men's eyes.
at call and her price is low (vv. 7-8; 17- The initial question is presented as spoken
18); the unpleasantness and danger in- by a reader of the previous elegy, who
volved in serving a mistress is absent from scoffs at such sentiments from Propertius.
relations with a prostitute (vv. 9-10; 19- This criticism he immediately recognizes
20). The first section closes with a rejec- as justified; sweat breaks out on his fore-
tion of the mistress (vv. 11-12), the sec- head, revealing the shame with which he
ond with a welcome to the prostitute (vv. realizes his situation. His fault is that he
21-22). This ordered balance of arrange- has followed neither of the two permissible
ment and this subordination of immediate courses of action: "either decent restraint
personal feeling to the clear rhetorical de- or a love affair on the quiet.""5 Shame
velopment of a conventional theme dis- quickly yields to a desire for self-justifica-
tinguish this elegy from those in the usual tion, and the blame is laid on Cynthia. It
manner of Propertius, just as the attitude is not a noble defense, but we should not
of superiority to passion is unusual in him. look to an elegist for noble sentiments. If
A tone such as this in the elegies of Cynthia were more kind he would not be
Propertius was an obvious violation of called the type and pattern of folly, and be
consistency and artistic decorum. Who an object of shameful ridicule to the whole
was Propertius that he should preach such city. Though he burned with passion he
doctrine? All Rome knew of his passion for would deceive men under cover of a good
Cynthia; by undertaking to express the reputation.52 Therefore he has turned to
precepts of accepted morality he made the cheap girls of the Sacred Way; they
himself ridiculous. ii. 24 presents his sud- are a means of escape from his present dis-
den realization of the effect love has had grace. Another of Cynthia's faults is her
on his reputation: habit of constantly demanding gifts. But
"Tu loqueris, cum sis iam noto fabula libro in the closing lines these complaints are
Et tua sit toto 'Cynthia' lecta foro?" suddenly brushed away; the real cause of
Cui non his verbis aspergat tempora sudor? his unhappiness is the shame his faithless
Aut pudor ingenuus, aut reticendus amor!
mistress causes him when she makes open
Quod si tam facilis spiraret Cynthia nobis,
Non ego nequitiae dicerer esse caput, sport of him. Thus the end of the elegy
Nec sic per totam infamis traducerer urbem: returns to the beginning, to the shame
Urerer et quamvis, nomine verba darem. which love for Cynthia has brought upon
Quare ne tibi sit mirum me quaerere viles: him. Shame is now mingled with jealousy,
Parcius infamant: num tibi causa levis? since Cynthia is fallax, and it is doubtless
Et modo pavonis caudae flabella superbae
before his successful rival that she holds
Et manibus dura frigus habere pila
Propertius up to public ridicule.53 The
Et cupit iratum talos me poscere eburnos
situation of the poem is treated as a purely
Quaeque nitent Sacra vilia dona Via.
Ah peream si me ista movent dispendia; sed personal one. The maxim which Proper-
me tius states in v. 4 appears as a rule based
Fallaci dominae iam pudet esse iocum.50 simply on his own experience, rather than

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
156 ARCHIBALD W. ALLEN

on such general reflections disciplined toas justified

present the
reasoned argument,
maxim which concluded elegy 23. The while in 24 the poet has surrendered to his
complaints about Cynthia's extravagance situation and reveals his distracted condi-
in vv. 11-14 are entirely personal and tion of mind. In each of these elegies, if
specific, in contrast to the generalized considered in isolation, Jides is maintained,
muneris ecquid habes? of 23. 8. The lack of since the style is proper to the sentiments
cl'ear connection between v. 10 and v. 11 expressed. But, because of its departure
has led some editors to assume a lacuna from the usual character of the Propertian
at this point. It is possible that they may lover, 23 seems insincere. It is recognition
be right in doing so, but such sudden of this apparent insincerity which pro-
transitions reveal the distraught state of vides the theme of the following elegy.
the lover's mind. Although more clearly In Ovid's Amores, which are so fre-
marked grammatically, the emotional quently accused of insincerity, we find a
style similar to that of Propertius, ii. 2a.
transitions at v. 5 and v. 15 are even more
violent. It is both more lucid and less passionate
In this elegy, unlike the preceding one, than the usual style of Propertius. Great-
the conventional elements are entirely er clarity of language, more orderly pro-
subordinated to personal feeling. The ele- gression of ideas, and smoother verse
gy is not concerned with the faults of the structure combine to suggest a lover who
typical mistress, but of Cynthia, a figure is more in control of his emotion than
to whom Propertius has already given Propertius. Ovid seems less concerned to
vivid life and being. The central point of present the impact of love upon an indi-
both elegy 23 and elegy 24 is a general vidual than to reveal its typical working;
statement, but there is a difference: in onehe treats conventional elements in such a
case the general statement is presented as way that their general truth will be es-
a conclusion reached by ordered argument tablished. The lover who appears in the
and a reasoned balancing of facts drawn elegies of Ovid differs from the normal
from common experience, while in the Propertian lover primarily in that he is
other it is offered as a course of personalmore in control of his own attitude toward
conduct, the propriety of which has been love. The attitude that we find in Proper-
learned by the poet from the facts of his tius is actually more conventional and
own immediate situation. In contrast with more firmly established in literary tradi-
23, 24 seems spontaneous and directly in- tion than that of Ovid. Propertius writes
spired by personal feeling and experience, entirely within the psychological theory
although it is actually no less conventional that love is the most ungovernable of pas-
in the ideas it contains and no less influ- sions, a state of the soul in which it is
enced by the traditional material of completely impervious to reason. Profes-
erotic commonplace. A dramatic vivid- sor Frankel has pointed out how much
ness results both from the introduction of more complex than this is Ovid's presen-
another speaker in the opening lines and tation of the nature of love, and describes
from the successive changes in the mood Ovid as "proposing that it was love which
of the poet as his defense proceeds. Thegave man a feeling soul in addition to his
arguments seem to arise immediately from body, and that it was sexual love which
the situation rather than to follow a pre- taught him to know and understand and
determined course. In 23 reason is in con-like his fellow human beings, so that he
trol and the style is clear and evidentlywould build up a society."54 Love itself, if it

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 "SINCERITY" AND THE ROMAN ELEGISTS 157

is to be this civilizing force, must be sub- dox that all the Roman elegiac poets had
ject to control; so we find in the Amores the same experiences, though each wrote
the constant suggestion that passion, al- of his own experience. Yet the ancient
though it can and should not be denied, reader expected this conformity of indi-
must in some manner be mastered and vidual with general experience. When the
placed under restraint by the lover. This elegist took for his material traditional
may require that he deceive himself or beg commonplaces of erotic literature, he did
his mistress to hide from him her infideli- so because those commonplaces were the
ties, but it is a deliberate and necessary repository of a practised attitude toward
kind of deceit. This is a complex and new love and because through them the poet
interpretation of love, for which the style established a community of experience
of Propertius would be altogether unsuit- with his readers.
able, but which finds effective form in the The excellence which we are accus-
sure and controlled style of Ovid. In it tomed to find in Propertius lies in such
convention can be presented so nakedly lively personal realization of convention
because the attitude expressed is so un- as we find in ii. 24 rather than in ii. 23.
conventional. The characteristic effect of his poetry is
The particular function of Roman love one of personal immediacy. The violence
elegy was to give personal form to typical of language which results from the density
experience, as both Propertius and Ovid of particular detail in his verse and the
themselves declared.55 Their elegies tell of abruptness of the transitions which ac-
their experience in love, but they are also company the swift changes in his mood
an anatomy of love; in the poet's experi- are the means by which he achieved this
ence every lover can recognize the pattern effect. (They are also the source of his dif-
of his own love. It is true that Roman love ficulty, which therefore arises from the
elegy is "subjective"; in it the poet writes same source as his excellence.) They cre-
as one declaring what he himself has felt ate an impression of passionate feeling,
and thought and done. But of the peculiar but we should not forget that this impres-
circumstances and the facts of purely pri- sion is a product of Propertius' style and
vate significance he tells us almost noth- that, as we have seen, he could also write
ing. He writes only of that which he knows in a different style. If sincerity is consid-
will be interesting to others because it is ered a function of style, both Propertius
part of common experience. To modern and Ovid, writing in their characteristic
taste the individual style of Propertius manners, are sincere because each em-
appeals as giving proof of sincere and ploys a style which accords with the char-
genuine feeling. The modern reader has acter his elegies portray. When we re-
been trained to find in the particular, in gard the elegists in this way we have a
the individual and the unique, an intrin- more firm, if perhaps narrower, approach
sic importance and value. He seeks in the to understanding them than when we at-
work of a poet those features of the poet's tempt to find in the elegies a reflection of
experience which are his unique and per- the real character and experience of their
sonal possession. The presence of conven- authors. We may still prefer Tibullus or
tional and generalizing elements appears Propertius to Ovid, as Quintilian did, but
as a sign of insincerity, a flaw which may we shall be able to do so in terms pertinent
sometimes be excused but can scarcely to poetic style rather than in terms of un-
ever be admired. It seems to him a para- certain inferences drawn from style.

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 158 ARCHIBALD W. ALLEN

NOTES

1. Quint. x. 1. 93. 537). D'Altoii apparently assumes that "the real prob-
2. J. P. Postgate, Select Elegies of Propertius (Lon- lem" concerns "style in our modern sense," an as-
don, 1881 and frequently reprinted), p. lxxix. sumption of doubtful value when it leads us to look in
ancient works of literature for characteristics which
3. Quint. vi. 2. 19.
they were not designed or expected to contain.
4. Cf. Cat. xxxv. 1, poetae tenero and the note of
8. So, for example in Cic. Or. lxii. 209 (where Cicero
Kroll (C. Valerius Catullus, Leipzig and Berlin, 1923)
is speaking of excessive use of a periodic style): "si
ad loc.: "tener wird oft von Liebesdichtern gebraucht
enim semper utare, cum satietatem affert tum quale
(Ovid. Rem. 757 u. o.), ist aber nicht auf sie beschrankt
sit etiam ab imperitis agnoscitur; detrahit praeterea
und kann alle nach Feinheit der Technik strebenden
Dichter, also namentlich auch Angehorige des neo-
actionis dolorem, aufert humanum sensum auditoris,
tollit funditus veritatem et fidem." Professor H. M.
terischen Kreises bezeichnen." E. Reitzenstein, "Zur
Hubbell translates this in the Loeb edition: "If you
Stiltheorie des Kallimachos," Festschrift Richard
Reitzenstein (Leipzig and Berlin, 1931), pp. 23-69,
use it constantly, it not only wearies the audience, but
even the layman recognizes the nature of the trick:
shows that tener is a Latin equivalent of Xe7rT6s, which
furthermore, it takes the feeling out of the delivery, it
characterized the style of Callimachus.
robs the audience of their natural sympathy, and
5. This is one aspect of the wider problem of the in- utterly destroys the impression of sincerity."
trusion of purely historical interests into classical lit-
9. R. Heinze, "Fides," Hermes, LXIV (1929), 140 ff,
erary studies, which has been discussed by H. Cher-
reprinted in Vom Geist des R6mertums (Leipzig and
niss, "The Biographical Fashion in Literary Criti-
Berlin, 1938), pp. 25-58.
cism," Univ. of California Pub. in Class. Philol., XII
(1943), 279-91. 10. Ibid., p. 38.

6. A.-M. Guillemin, Pline et la vie litteraire de son 11. Quint. vi. 2. 18: "quas virtutes cum etiam in
temps, "Coll. d'Wt. Lat.," IV (Paris, 1929), pp. 61-62, litigatore debeat orator, si fieri potest, approbare,
discusses the effect of introducing modern psychologi- utique ipse aut habeat aut habere credatur. sic
cal ideas into the study of ancient authors: -II semble, proderit plurimum causis quibus ex sua bonitate faciet
a premiere vue, qu'elle (sc. la critique litteraire an- fidem. nam qui, cum dicit, malus videtur, utique male
tique) ait ete vide et pauvre. Elle ignore de l'aeuvre dicit."
d'art les aspects que nous trouvons les plus interes-
12. Op. cit., vi. 2. 13:"summavirtuseaest,utfluere
sants. D'abord la personnalite de l'auteur. On con-
omnia ex natura rerum hominumque videantur utque
naissait la psychologie du Romain; celle de l'homme en mores dicentis ex oratione perluceant et quodam modo
general, peu; celle de l'individu, pas du tout. II est agnoscantur. "
vrai que l'individu n'existait guore, ou, ce qui revient
au meme, ne se montrait guere. En nous mettant a sa 13. Op. cit., ix. 3. 102: "ubi vero atrocitate, invidia,
recherche, nous autres modernes, nous avons multiplie miseratione pugnandum est, quis ferat contrapositis et
les contresens, accrochant nos tendances recemment pariter cade;ntibus et consimilibus irascentem, flentem,
ecloses a des expressions deformees ou a des phrases rogantem? cum nimia in his rebus cura verborum dero-
comprises a rebours." The difference between the an- get adfectibus fidem, et ubicumque ars ostentatur,
cient and modern ideas of sincerity seems to be con- veritas abesse videatur"; cf. also ix. 4. 143.
nected with this changed psychological interest; an- 14. Op. cit., iv. 2. 119: "[iudex] nescio quomodo eti-
cient criticism tended to regard the finished work of
am credit facilius quae audienti iucunda sunt, et
art as the complete subject of critical concern, while voluptate ad fidem ducitur." Cf. also v. 14. 35: "quo-
modern criticism tends to regard the work of art genet-
que quid est natura magis asperum, hoc pluribus con-
ically, as a creative process. In the one case the work diendum est voluptatibus: et minus suspecta argu-
of art is a final and sufflcient object of study; in the mentatio dissimulatione, et multum ad fidem adiuvat
other case the work of art is only a partial expression audientis voluptas." Here it is interesting that dis-
of the artist's experience, and the nature of this origi- simulatio is recommended as a means of achieving
nal experience becomes an object of interest to criti- fides.
cism.
15. Hence the importance of the doctrine of decorum
7. J. F. D'Alton, Roman Literary Theory and Criti-
throughout ancient literary criticism, since, as Aris-
cism (London, 1931), pp. 129-33; 536-40, discusses the
totle states, it is appropriate style that produces con-
classical view of the relation between style and sin-
viction: "r&Oavo? 5& T3 lrpa7pya KaLi t)oLKea XMZW rapaXOyL?eTa&
cerity in a manner colored by his own conviction that
-yp i Vyxi C~s &XCors XMyOvTOs, STr f rt TOLs TOLOJTOLS O6TC
the modern point of view alone is valid. In discussing
fXoVatp, C6TT olopTat, et Kati /AOiTCdi gXeL, Cis o X-yw'v, T& 7rp6vy
decorum he complains of the narrowness he flnds in the
ara OITws 4xetv.L- (Rhet. iii. 7. 4).
classical attitude: "The question might be raised how
far the Ancients took into account individuality in 16. R. Wellek and A. Warren, Theory of Literature,
style in our modern sense; how far they recognized a New York, 1949, p. 215. Wellek and Warren them-
style that was the direct outcome of an author's pecul- selves doubt the value of sincerity, thus defined, as a
iar habits of thought and mental outlook. They, of criterion of literature, and state further that "the fre-
course, took into account certain superficial idiosyn- quently adduced criterion of 'sincerity' is thoroughly
crasies which quickly betray a writer. But the real false if it judges literature in terms of biographical
problem goes deeper, and is concerned with the style truthfulness, correspondence to the author's experi-
that can be regarded as a faithful reflex of a man's dis- ence or feelings as they are attested by outside evi-
tinctive intellectual and emotional life" (op. cit., p. dence." (op. cit., p. 74).

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 "SINCERITY" AND THE ROMAN ELEGISTS 159

17. Geschichte der R6mischen Literatur, II4 (Munich, 33. "It is unlikely to indicate with any precision the
1935), 212-13. interval between the publication of Bk. I and the
18. Ibid., p. 201. commencement of Bk. II" (op. cit., p. 195).

19. H. E. Butler and E. A. Barber, The Elegies of 34. "Perhaps the seventh month from the publica-
Pro pertius (Oxford, 1933), p. xi. A similar concern tion of Book I. But there can be no certainty" (op.
with the truth of the story appears in J. Fontenrose, cit., p. 225).

"Propertius and the Roman Career," Univ. of Cali- 35. Some critics therefore insist that Cynthia was a
fornia Pub. Class. Philol., XIII (1949), 371-88. In married woman, e.g. F. Plessis, La Poesie Latine
discussing the relations of Propertius and Cynthia, (Paris, 1909), p. 385: "Cynthie n'etait ni une courti-
Fontenrose writes (p. 381): "To me Propertius ap- sane, ne une affranchie, mais une femme mariee";
pears to be telling the truth in his protestations, while others declare that she was a courtesan, e.g.
throughout his first book, of exclusive attachment to P. J. Enk, op. cit., p. 12.
Cynthia." The remark which immediately follows in- 36. Propertius' subordination of interest in the par-
dicates, however, the difficulty of holding consistently ticulars of biographical fact to his interest in revealing
to this point of view: "But even if he is not completely the precise qualities of emotional experience has been
truthful, the point that I make is not affected: namely discussed by E. Reitzenstein, "Wirklichkeitsbild und
that he is not likely in his prologue to give away the
Gefuhlsentwicklung bei Properz," Philologus, Suppl.
case that he makes throughout his book." This is a
XXIX, Heft II (Leipzig, 1931). Reitzenstein points
decisive argument in support of Fontenrose's point out that the same indifference toward external Wirk-
(that nullo vivere consilio in Prop. i. 1. 6 cannot be a
lichkeit which can be seen in the "subjective" elegies
confession of sexual promiscuity), but it substitutes a is also evident in the epistle of Arethusa to Lycotas
standard of artistic coinsistency for one of biographical (Prop. iv. 3), and emphasizes that Propertius' work
accuracy.
can only be judged fairly when this feature of his
29. Quotations of Propertius are from the Teubner style is recognized (ibid., p. 17).
text of Hosius (3d ed.; Leipzig, 1932) except as noted.
37. Cf. xi. 15. 13: Mores non habet hic meos libellus.
21. Sex. Aurel. Propertius Varietate Lectionis et
38. Plin. Ep. iv. 14. 2-5.
Perpetua Adnotatione Illustratus, Leipzig, 1777, pp.
39. Plin. Ep. v. 3.
lxxviii-lxxxviii.
40. App. Apol. 11.
22. K. Lachmann, Sex. Aurelii Propertii Carmina,
Leipzig, 1816, pp. xxiii-xxvii. 41. Aus. Cento Nuptialis.

23. O p. cit ., p . xxv: " sane libri primi prooemio amori 42. Quintilian (Inst. Or. x. i. 100) says of the comic
valedicebat. " poet Afranius: utinam non inquinasset argumenta
24. I have discussed the interpretation of this elegy
puerorum foedis amoribus, mores suos fassus. It may
be that this is an example of the kind of criticism
in "Elegy and the Classical Attitude toward Love:
against which poets objected. It is also possible that
Propertius I, 1," Yale Classical Studies, Vol. XI.
the fact about Afranius was known to Quintilian from
25. This suggestion is dubious though not abso-
a source external to his works. Afranius appears to
lutely impossible. The four books of Propertius were have departed from the accepted convention of come-
published in chronological sequence. This is clear both
dy by his emphasis on homosexual love. Perhaps crit-
from the gradual development of style from one book
ics were accustomed to explain his departure from the
to another, and from the incidental references to con-
normally heterosexual erotic themes of comedy by
temporary events which serve approximately to date
reference to a known fact about the writer. This
the various books. (Cf. Butler and Barber, op. cit.,
would of course not be the same as inferring the char-
pp. xii-xvii, xxv-xxviii, lxii-lxvi.) It is possible that
acter of the writer from his works. It should be noted
an occasional elegy was rejected by Propertius in pub-
that Quintilian, in his comment on Tibullus, makes no
lishing an earlier book and included in a later, but it
reference to the Marathus elegies.
would be a malign coincidence which caused the elegy
which contains the most precise chronological state- 43. App. Apol. 9.
ment to appear so far out of its proper chronological
44. sis, a variant reading in P, is a Renaissance cor-
order. The technique of iii. 15 is, moreover, that of
rection of sit. If sit were to be retained in v. 1 its repe-
Book iii rather than of Book i.
tition in v. 2 would be otiose. The point of the (rhe-
26. T. Birt, "Die Fulnfzahl und die Properzchronol- torical) question is not that Cynthia is notorious (cf.
ogie," Rh. M., LXX (1915), 253-314. Rothstein, ad loc., "Cynthia ist Subjekt zu fabula sit
und zu lecta sit"), but that Propertius himself is; a
27. H. F. Butler and E. A. Barber, op. cit., pp. xx-
verb in the second person is therefore required. For the
xxiii. The account of Propertius' life given by P. J.
idea, Rothstein rightly compares Hor. Epod. xi. 7-8:
Enk in his recent edition of Book i of Propertius (Sex.
Heu me per urbem, nam pudet tanti mali, Fabula
Pro pertii Elegiarum Liber I, Vol. I [Leyden, 1946], quanta fui!
3-16) does not differ materially either in method or
conclusions from that of Butler and Barber. 45. Prop. ii. 23. 23-24:

28. Op. cit., pp. 259-60. Libertas quoniam nulli iam re stat amanti,
Nullus liber erit si quis amare volet.
29. Ibid., p. 265.
46. Lucr. iv. 1122-24. Horace emphasizes loss of res
30. Butler and Barber, op. cit., p. xxiii. and fama in Sat. i. 2, and in Sat. ii. 7 he ridicules the
31. Ibid., pp. xxii-xxiii. slavery of the lover. The Roman elegists themselves
particularly developed the theme of loss of liberta8 as
32. Ibid., p. xxiii. a consequence of love, as has been shown by F. 0.

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 160 ARCHIBALD W. ALLEN
Copley, "Servitium amoris in the Roman Elegists," Rothstein's joining of elegy 24, 1-16 to elegy 23. Cf.
TA PA, LXXVIII (1947), 285-300. also W. Abel, Die Anredeformen bei den r6mischen
Eligikern (Berlin-Charlottenburg, 1930), pp. 44-46.
47. Hor. Sat.I. 2. 119; Lucr. iv. 1071. In ii. 23, Pro-
pertius assumes the same attitude as Horace and Lu- 51. Rothstein, Die Elegien des Sextus Propertius2
cretius. The resemblance of ii. 23 to Sat. i. 2 is so close (Berlin, 1920), ad loc, connects ingenuus and amor
that Propertian imitation of the satire was suggested ("Ingenuus amor ist die Liebe zu einer freigeborenen
by P. Lejay, Q. Horati Flacci Satirae (Paris, 1911), Frau.... Es gibt eine Art zu lieben, in der man sich

p. 34, and has recently been argued by L. Alfonsi, nicht als Sklave zu fiihlen, die man deshalb auch nicht
"Note Properziane," Aevum, XIX (1945), 367. This zu verheimlichen braucht"), but this connection is
Is not, however, a necessary assumption. There are no highly artificial, while pudor ingenuus and reticendus
certain verbal reminiscences of the satire in the elegy, amor form natural units both in sense and in the

and there is nothing common to the two poems that metrical structure of the verse. Abel (op. cit., p. 45,
cannot be paralleled elsewhere. The sources of Sat. i. 2 n. 52) explains pudor ingenuus as "das Verhaltnis zu
have been studied by G. C. Fiske, "Lucilius and Cynthia" and amor as "das Sinnliche betonende
Horace: A Study in the Classical Theory of Imita- Liebe zur Dirne." This reverses the actual meanings.
tion," Univ. of Wisconsin Stud. in Lang. and Lit., Pudor ingenuus did not forbid discreet relations with
No. 7 (Madison, 1920), 248-74. The similarity be- common prostitutes, while amor, as pointed out by

tween Propertius and Horace is adequately explained B. 0. Foster, CP, II (1907), 215, refers to "liaisons
as resulting from their writing within a common social with demi-mondaines, such as Cynthia, and [isl not
tradition and drawing upon a common store of literary regarded by Propertius as applicable to chance inter-

material, each adapting this material to his own kind course with women of a yet lower stratum, like the
of poetry. daughters of Euphrates and Orontes."
52. nomine (v. 8), in the sense "good fame" or "rep-
48. The MSS read cernere uti. Their reading has
utation" (cf. Prop. i. 20. 5 and ii. 20. 19) provides ad-
been accepted by editors; but the asyndeton between ut
mirable sense and there is no need to consider emen-
scribat (v. 8) and uti possis is harsh and without point.
dation.
The correction which I have proposed assumes that
53. Cf. ii. 9. 19-22:
cernereve ut was corrupted to cernere ut, eueu having
At tu non una potuisti nocte vacare,
been reduced by haplography to eu; the later change of
Impia, non unum sola manere diem.
ut to uti obscured the corruption by correcting the
meter.
Quin etiam multo duxistis pocula risu;
Forsitan et de me verba fuere mala.
49. I have departed from Hosius' punctuation in
54. Hermann Frankel, Ovid: A Poet Between Two
vv. 6-11 and followed essentially the punctuation of
Worlds (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1945), p. 62.
Rothstein. Hosius places commas after vv. 6 and 8,
and a question mark (presumably a full stop) after 55. Prop. i. 7. 13-14; 21-24:
v. 10. This punctuation obscures the syntax of the Me legat assidue post haec neglectus amator,
passage. The question which begins in v. 3 ends with Et prosint illi cognita nostra mala....
v. 6. In v. 7-with deinde and the shift to the second Tum me non humilem mirabere saepe poetam
person-there begins a new sentence which extends Tunc ego Romanis praeferar ingeniis;
through v. 11. The exclamatory v. 11 provides the Nec poterunt iuvenes nostro reticere sepulero:
main clause of the sentence beginning with deinde. "Ardoris nostri magne poeta iaces."
Ovid, Am. ii. 1. 5-10:
50. The MSS do not begin a new elegy after v. 16,
but editors generally do so. Professor Godolphin has Me legat in sponsi facie non frigida virgo
argued that no division should be made after v. 16 Et rudis ignoto tactus amore puer.
(AJP, LV [1934], 64-65); but the MSS are an uncer- Atque aliquis iuvenuin quo nunc ego saucius arcu
tain guide in this matter, and vv. 17-52 have no con- Agnoscat flammae conscia signa suae,
nection with the loss of fama, the theme of vv. 1-16. Miratusque diu "Quo" dicat "ab indice doctus
F. Jacoby, "Drei Gedichte des Properz," Rh. M., Composuit casus iste poeta meos?"
LXIX (1914), 427-42, has shown reason both for
making a separation after v. 16 and for rejecting YALE UNIVFRSrrY

This content downloaded from 143.107.3.34 on Fri, 21 Feb 2020 20:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms