and if those words applied to himself as a poet are irony, so must the words applied in strong contrast to Cicero as an advocate (tanto—quanto) be equally ironical. In that case the omnium in the last line must not be taken in connexion with optimus, but with patronus. Cicero's readiness to be 'omnium patronus' is sarcastically commented on with immediate reference to his defence of Vatinius, which startled some of his best friends among the constitutional party. The formal address 'Marce Tulli' is also ironical. (If that is so, probably also the 'Romuli nepotum' is used in mock heroic irony, like the 'Remi nepotum' in lviii.) What then is the favour for which Catullus writes these ironically complimentary thanks? Schmidt supposes that Cicero had expressed either publicly or privately a very poor opinion of Catullus' poems, and that Catullus revenges himself by professing to agree with him, to be most grateful for the criticism (gratias tibi maximas Catullus agit), and to repay it by heaping ironical coals on his head.
It is just possible that the poem might have been so understood in the set to which Catullus belonged, if we were certain that it was written at the time when Cicero defended Vatinius. But the general public could hardly have understood it so, and it is not surprising that it never occurred to any one to understand it in that sense till within the last year or two. It is not in keeping with Catullus' straightforward, outspoken vituperation, nor with the manners of the time (as shown in Cicero's speeches), to write an epigram which would leave the object of it in doubt whether it was written in earnest or derision. No doubt Catullus did not seriously think himself 'the worst of living poets,' worse for instance than Volusius. But there is an irony of modest self-depreciation, as that of Virgil when he applies to himself the words 'argutos inter strepere anser olores,' as well as of insulting banter. The change in the construction of the 'omnium' in the two consecutive lines would be at least startling. That Catullus, a young man, not intimate with Cicero, should address him as Marce Tulli is not perhaps more remarkable than that a young poet of the present day should in writing to a man of great eminence, twenty years his senior, address him as Mr. ——. Cicero writes banteringly and good-naturedly to one of his correspondents, Volumnius, probably a much younger man (Fam. vii. 32): 'Quod sine praenomine familiariter, ut debebas, ad me epistolam misisti, primum addubitavi, num a Volumnio senatore esset, quorum mihi est magnus usus.' There is no reason for supposing that Cicero ever passed any criticism favourable or unfavourable on Catullus, though in his letters he twice uses his phrases; and if he did, it was not in Catullus' way to retaliate without making it perfectly clear what he was retaliating for. Cicero was constantly in the way of doing kindnesses to all sorts of people, in the law-courts or by recommending them to some of his influential friends. He especially says that he had always done what he could to foster the genius of poets. He was attracted to young men like Catullus (he was not of the 'grex Catilinae'); and of his friend Calvus he writes with genuine appreciation. It is more natural as well as more pleasant to think of these two men of genius, in so far as they came in contact, having agreeable relations with one another, than to believe that the poet wrote these apparently straightforward, kindly appreciative lines in revenge for some real or fancied disparagement of his verses.
[40] Cf. xxiv. 7:—
Qui? non est homo bellus? inquies. Est.
[41] Two of the four poems connected with Calvus allude to his antagonism to Vatinius, which went on actively between the years 56 and 54 b.c. In none of them is there any allusion to Lesbia, who was never out of Catullus, thoughts or his verse till after his Bithynian journey.
[42] Horace contrasts the 'dirge of Simonides' ('Ceae retractes munera neniae') with the lighter poetry of love.
[43] Cf. Munro's Lucretius, p. 468, third edition.
[44] lxxii. 5-8:—
Nunc te cognovi: quare etsi impensius uror,
Multo mi tamen es vilior et levior.