Propertius, 2. 30 A and B1

Francis Cairns

doi:10.1017/S0009838800028950

Propertius, 2. 30 A and B1

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009

Francis Cairns

Show author details

Francis Cairns: Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

The difficulties of this poem have led scholars to employ surgery of various sorts upon it.

This article attempts to show that surgery is unnecessary and that, given a fuller exegesis and a partial reinterpretation of subject-matter, the poem can be read as a single and consistent piece.

Type: Research Article
Information: The Classical Quarterly , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , May 1971 , pp. 204 - 213

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838800028950 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © The Classical Association 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 204 note 2} For examples of erotic fugae see Pease on Virg. Aen. 4. 314.

^{page 204 note 3} Philol. lxxii (1913), 274.Google Scholar

^{page 205 note 1} Prop. 3. io. 21 ff. (with Cynthia); 4. 8. 33 ff. (with the two meretrices); 2. 34. 57 (qua amatory poet).

^{page 205 note 2} Prop. 2. 9. 21–2; 2. 16. 5–6.

^{page 205 note 3} Prop. 3. 25. 1–2.

^{page 205 note 4} See, e.g., Xen, . Mem. 1. 5. 3Google Scholar; Plaut. Bacch. 118 ff.; Ter. And. 84–92. The scene in Piaut. Bacch. is particularly interesting in that there (as in Propertius and Catullus) senes criticize the amatory activities of young men. Clearly the notion is topical and Hellenistic, if not earlier.

^{page 205 note 5} See also T.L.L. s.v. for later appearances of these theories.

^{page 205 note 6} A further small and dubious verbal correspondence is the appearance in Propertius of uita (line 14), reflecting perhaps on conuiuia. Catullus uses the verb uiuamus (5. 1).

^{page 206 note 1} The tibia is doubly apt in this context because of its everyday association with conuiuia.

^{page 207 note 1} e.g. Thuc. 1. 5. 2; Moschus 3. 82; Virg. Eel. 6. 46, 62; Hor. Sat. 1. 10. 36; 2. 5. 41. The example most relevant to what follows is: et qui per freta duxit Argonautas, Stat. Sil. 2. 7. 77 (referring to Varro of Atax).

^{page 207 note 2} See Enk ad loc.

^{page 207 note 3} Cf. schol, ad Ap. Rhod. 4. 257–62b; 282–91b.

^{page 207 note 4} Ibid. The latter point is not clear in the scholiast.

^{page 207 note 5} See Enk on lines 31 and 35, though Enk's suggestion about Oeagri figura (line 35) is weakened by Minoa figura (3. 19. 21).

^{page 208 note 1} In the late Republic P. Terentius Varro Atacinus had written such a work, a free translation of Apollonius. Propertius refers to him, 2. 34. 85.

^{page 208 note 2} Luck, G. (Rhein. Mus. 105 [1962], 344 ff.)Google Scholar also refers these two lines to the Thebancycle but his interpretation of the surrounding lines differs from mine.

^{page 208 note 3} For a riddle on the same subject cf. A.P. 14. 38

^{page 210 note 1} For the latter meaning cf. Carmen de Figuris line 135 leges discendimi est: discit amores (cited by Bailey, Shackleton, Proper-tiana, Appendix, p. 293Google Scholar) where leges and amor are also contrasted. One is tempted to connect the adjective antiquis with antiquare in the sense ‘to reject a law’ and with its cognates, but this may be excessive.

^{page 210 note 2} e.g. Cic. Or. 198; Hor. Car. 4. 2. 12.

^{page 210 note 3} Cf. Arist. Nub. 1353 fr.; Daitales (i. p. 449KGoogle Scholar; ii. p. 103M).

^{page 210 note 4} e.g. Eupol. (i. p. 294.K; ii. p. 481M); Antiph. (ii. p. 45K; ii. p. 46M).

^{page 211 note 1} See Postgate, Select Elegies of Propertius, Introd. p. xcvi.

^{page 211 note 2} Just as νομόν (Aesch. Ag., line 150) was always rendered by scholars as ‘lawless’ until Lloyd-Jones, [CQ n.s. iii (1963), 96]Google Scholar pointed out that it could more suitably be derived from νόμος ═ tune.

^{page 211 note 3} I am indebted to Mr. J. G. Howie for this suggestion.

^{page 211 note 4} See p. 210 n. 1.

^{page 211 note 5} Professor D. A. West kindly drew my attention to this metaphor.

^{page 211 note 6} Cf. K.-S. i. p. 720.

^{page 211 note 7} Further argument in favour of tibia being the subject of ire could be made by adducing Propertius' free semi-personified way of talking about the tibia at 2. 7. 11; 3. 10. 23; and 4. 6. 8. But while not dismissing the idea as out of the question, I remain sceptical.

^{page 211 note 8} e.g. Pind. Pyth. 10. 51; 11. 40; Virg. Georg. 2. 41; Hor. Car. 4. 15. 1–4; Ovid, Met. 15. 176–7; Tr. 2. 548.

^{page 211 note 9} e.g. Prop. 3. 3. 22–4; 3. 9. 3–4, 35–6.

^{page 212 note 1} It might be argued that the Maeander and the Phrygiae undae form such a contrast. But the difficulty of fitting the concept into a consistent pattern leads me to believe that this convention was not in the forefront of Propertius' mind.

^{page 212 note 2} Prop. 3. 3 and 3. 9 inter alia demonstrate the ease with which Propertius moves from one metaphor for writing to another, there being no hard and fast barrier in his imagination between these metaphors.

^{page 212 note 3} West, M. L. Cf. on Hesiod, Theogony, lines 22–34.Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 4} Lucr. De Rer. Nat. 4. 1071.

^{page 213 note 1} Cf. the sententia dia Catonis (Hor. Sat. 1. 2. 34 f.) and Plaut. Trin. 642 ff.

Article contents

Propertius, 2. 30 A and B1

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests