Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 May 2015
Catullus c. 67 is a problematic piece that has proved troublesome for scholars, primarily because its story of sexual scandal is highly ambiguous. Various scholars have claimed that they have finally solved the details of the poem's slippery narrative, and have identified the author's intention in creating such obscurity. Copley, Giangrande and Richardson argue that the story is clear, and then create a web of hypothetical events to explain the ambiguities in the text. Unfortunately, the hypotheses contradict one another, and none provides an account of the story that explains away all the problems. So far, consensus on a ‘solution’ has not been reached. More recently, scholars have turned away from this controversial topic, focusing instead on the poetic and thematic effects of the poem.
This article substantially expands the paper that I originally presented at Roman Byways: A Conference in Memory of Charles Tesoriero in 2007. The conference attendees provided much food for thought and I am grateful for their perceptive comments. Further thanks are due to the anonymous reader for Antichthon, and to Professor Marilyn B. Skinner, Professor Christopher van den Berg and Associate Professor Lindsay Watson, who provided stimulating discussion and helpful comments on this topic.