Classical Studies 310
Term paper
Who was Lesbia?
Brett Banks
81684045
Professor Dr. David Creese

The name Lesbia appears 16 times in the poems of ancient Roman poet
Catullus.
i
This title was most likely not her real name, such as to hide her true identity. This technique was a common tool used by Elegiac poets in the generation that followed Catullus, as seen with Ovid and his beloved Corinna.
ii
The question, though, is who exactly was this Lesbia for whom Catullus did pine? The evidence seems to point towards one Clodia. This apparent fact was first given light by a 2 nd century North African writer named Lucius Apuleius.
iii
That, unfortunately, is as concrete as the evidence gets in regard to Lesbia’s true identity. The literary trail does at least point towards a member of the family Claudii. The debate, though, is in regard to which of the 3 sisters, all named Clodia, was Catullus referring. Was it the infamous Clodia Metelli of Cicero’s
Pro Caelio or was it one of her two sisters?
This essay will wade through the evidence starting by looking at Clodia
Metelli and the evidence in Catullus’ poems that hint towards her as Lesbia. We will then look at some of the contrasting scholarly viewpoints on this issue including touching upon what is known as the Maas-Wiseman hypothesis. This essay will argue that given all the tenuous and circumstantial evidence available we will most likely never concretely know Lesbia’s true identity. Also it will argue that all the main theories espoused are plausible but that the circumstantial evidence leans slightly more towards the Clodia Metelli camp.
So why should one presume Lesbia was Clodia Metelli or even a Claudii at all? As stated in the introduction we do have a pretty good idea that she was named
Clodia. The patrician Claudii family, though, had 3 girls named Clodia and a son named Clodius Pulcher.
iv
The main source for the Clodia Metelli connection comes from Cicero’s
Pro Caelio. This example of forensic rhetoric is a political speech by the orator Cicero that dates at about 56 BC. In this speech he is defending one Caelius

Rufus, who is being prosecuted for, amongst other things, the attempted murder of
Clodia Metelli, the sister of Cicero’s bitter enemy Clodius. Caelius and Clodia had been involved in an affair that obviously did not end well. Part of Cicero’s strategy was to paint a nefarious picture of the complainant. According to the orator, Clodia was someone who “readily offers intimacy in all directions”.
v
Cicero also makes light of the rumour that incest had occurred in this family when he ‘accidentally’ refers to
Clodius as Clodia’s husband.
vi Cicero throughout this speech paints an unsavoury picture of the Roman lady and it is this depiction, combined with the poems of
Catullus, that lead some scholars to see Lesbia as possibly the one and only Clodia
Metelli.
Poem 79 in Catullus’ collection is the strongest link to one of the Claudii sisters being Lesbia. This particular poem mentions a Lesbius and the notion that
Lesbia prefers him to Catullus.
vii
This inference to incest, according to some scholars, fits nicely with the Cicero speech and could lead one to believe that Clodia Metelli is
Lesbia. What this poem does accomplish, though, is build a strong link to at least one of the Claudii sisters. The problem, according to Marilyn Skinner is that incest was possibly a fairly common tool in political life for casting aspersions on members of the ruling elite. She also notes how the youngest Clodia, who was married to
Lucullus, was earlier accused in a similar fashion at the Bona Dea trial.
viii
So one can argue that Cicero may have merely transferred this accusation upon Clodia Metelli and likewise one may argue that Catullus did the same and maybe even did so upon the third sister.
Poem 58 could be considered the strongest piece of evidence linking Clodia
Metelli to Lesbia. This poem mentions a Caelius and their common love for Lesbia.
This could lead one to make the connection with Caelius Rufus of Cicero’s
Pro

Caelio .
ix
While there is no way of proving they are one in the same, one may argue that it is too much of a coincidence given Pro Caelio and the fact that Catullus and
Caelius were acquaintances for it not to be so. Also one can look at poem 77 as referring to Caelius Rufus. In this poem Catullus mentions how a Rufus has “robbed poor me of all I value”.
x
While one could make the connection with Caelius Rufus, there is no way of knowing for sure. The cognomen Rufus was quite common at the time with both Cicero and Catullus sharing it as well.
xi And also Catullus mentions to a Rufus in poem 69 that he is a “nasty brute” but at that time Caelius Rufus was young and attractive.
xii
Yet we cannot know if he was just being spiteful and insulting or even if that was the same Rufus.
“Farewell and long life with her adulterers” xiii
, Catullus states in poem 11, which is considered by some to be his last poem to Lesbia.
xiv This statement can also be seen as possible evidence that Lesbia was Clodia Metelli. As was noted earlier,
Clodia Metelli had a fairly infamous reputation for being promiscuous as played upon by Cicero in Pro Caelio. As well, there is a more tenuous connection in poem 83 where Catullus talks of Lesbia “abusing” him in front of her husband.
xv
As we know
Clodia Metelli was married to the Consul Metellus who later died in 59 BC. This poem, combined with poem 109, which one could argue shows Catullus asking Lesbia to marry him, could be seen as possible evidence.
xvi
One could look at this poem as coinciding with the death of Metellus, in turn making the once married Lesbia now available. A counter argument to this evidence would be that all of the three sisters were married and then either separated or widowed. The youngest was wed to
Lucullus but it ended by divorce in 66 BC and the third sister was widowed in 61 after being married to Marcius rex.
xvii
Once again we see evidence that hints at the

possibility that Clodia Metelli and Lesbia were one in the same but at the same time we see plausible counter-points.
Now we shall look at some of the main scholarly viewpoints on this debate.
Aubrey Burl sees it as a “tediously unnecessary debate”.
xviii
But yet Burl does not find it tedious enough for him to stay out of the discussion. He tends to argue that the evidence is favourable towards Metelli. Burl mostly relies on the common arguments in favour except for a few variants. One is that he sees Catullus’ poem 49 as the poet’s way of sarcastically thanking Cicero for besmirching the name of his Lesbia.
xix
This could be considered a tenuous stretch yet intriguing all the same. He also mentions how Catullus lived on the same block as Clodia Metelli, only 9 pillars down.
xx
It seems, though, that the Claudii had a few lots on the Palatine, the area in question.
xxi
So it is probable that more than one of the sisters could very well have been living in the immediate area.
The strongest scholarly opposition to the Clodia Metelli is Lesbia theory is what is known as the Maas-Wiseman hypothesis.
xxii
It is based upon the work of two scholars, T.P. Wiseman and P. Maas. They both challenge the traditional chronology, which gives life to the possibility that Clodia Metelli was Lesbia. According to Maas, the old chronology spanned from 63 to 57 BC, after which Catullus leaves for
Bithynia.
xxiii
Catullus is known to have spent a year in Bithynia working on the staff of C. Memmius.
xxiv
Instead they hypothesize that all the Lesbia poems should be dated from 56 to 54 BC.
xxv
Their main argument is that no Lesbia poem can be dated earlier than 56 BC.
xxvi Wiseman counter-argues the one poem from Catullus that possibly hints at the poet knowing Lesbia before returning from Bithynia. This poem, number 76, shows Catullus ruing being away for a long time from his love.
xxvii
Wiseman, though, argues that this poem is too ambiguous and that the Latin text

could be referring to any period longer than a few weeks.
xxviii
He then uses poem 36 as possible evidence that Catullus and Lesbia were on good terms in 55 BC and thus in the early stages of their relationship.
xxix
Thus if all the poems do date from 56 to 54 BC then the Clodia Metelli theory is slightly discredited since she was supposedly not married during this period. As
Wiseman states, there is no concrete evidence that any of the sisters were married at this time. He tries to remedy this dilemma by hypothesizing that one of the sisters may have remarried to one Ofilius, a friend of Caesar who just happened to be married to a Clodia.
xxx
There is no evidence that this is true besides the name, which makes this assertion tenuous at best, but Wiseman feels that it is difficult to believe that any of the three sisters would have remained “unproductively single” for any substantial amount of time.
xxxi Maas also points out that none of Catullus’ speeches before 56 BC mention historical events but yet the poet frequently does so in poems after that date. He finds this quite strange given that Catullus is supposedly having an affair with the wife of a consul and thus most likely involved in political circles at the time.
xxxii
As we can see here the Maas-Wiseman hypothesis mainly rests on the assertion that the only dateable poems are from 56 to 54 BC. Does this mean that all the Lesbia poems then must have been written during that time period? It is a possibility but yet once again, as we have stated before, there is no concrete proof to back it up.
Kenneth Quinn would dare to differ with the Maas-Wiseman hypothesis. He admits that there are always other possibilities and that this theory is the only one that has come close to contradicting the traditional chronology.
xxxiii
Quinn feels, though, that the traditional chronology is inadequate as it presumes that the Catullus-Lesbia affair ended when Catullus left for Bithynia in 57 BC.
xxxiv
He feels that it is quite

probable that Clodia Metelli and Catullus had two separate affairs, one that fits the pre-Bithynia traditional timeline and the other after he returns which would fit the 56-
54 poems.
xxxv
Quinn argues that poem 107 could be taken as Catullus pleading to
Lesbia, “give yourself back to me”.
xxxvi
He also sees poem 36 as a possible “take back Catullus” entry. This poem would date then to 56 BC with Caelius now out of the picture and Catullus back from Bithynia ready to start anew with Lesbia.
xxxvii
These two assertions are very unreliable as evidence given their ambiguity. One, though, could use poem 76 as possible evidence of a period of separation that may have coincided with Catullus’ year away. Quinn also comments that there are too many poems in the collection that lead one to believe that they had a “long drawn out and slowly disintegrating affair”.
xxxviii
I would have to agree with Quinn that one does get that feeling but of course it is just a feeling and two years can seem like a lifetime for a relationship and as well it is plenty of time to write that many poems.
This essay has tried to delve as deep as possible into the Lesbia debate. There are points of contention that due to limits in time and space have been passed over. I feel though that the most important and crucial ones have been covered. So what can one conclude? It seems that all the arguments on either side are plausible and yet at the same time have counter-points and arguments that could be seen to work against them if not disprove them. The only semi-concrete point is that Lesbia was indeed named Clodia but even then we cannot be sure where Apuleius got his information. I would argue that it seems to be too much of a coincidence given the references to
Caelius and in turn his known affair with Clodia Metelli and his friendship with
Catullus, for it not to be Clodia Metelli. It seems, unfortunately, that there is not enough literary evidence to know the answer for sure, that is, unless another document, maybe yet undiscovered, sheds further light on the issue.

i T.P. Wiseman, Catullus and his world: a reappraisal (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985),
130. ii Kenneth Quinn, Catullus: an interpretation (London: Batsford, 1972), 60. iii Aubrey Burl, Catullus : a poet in the Rome of Julius Caesar (London: Constable, 2004), 138. iv Ibid, 130. v Cicero, “Pro Caelio” , in Cicero: Selected Political Speeches trans. Michael Grant, (Harmondsworth:
Penguin, 1977), 184. vi Ibid, 184. vii Catullus, Catullus: The Complete Poems trans. Guy Lee (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990),
129. viii Marilyn B. Skinner, “Pretty Lesbius ” , Transactions of the American Philological Association Vol.
113,1982, 205. ix Catullus, 55. x Ibid, 127. xi P. Maas, “The Chronology of the Poems of Catullus
”,
The Classical Quarterly Vol. 36, no.5, 1942,
81. xii Catullus,123. xiii Catullus, 13. xiv Quinn, 167. xv Catullus, 131. xvi Ibid, 143. xvii T. P. Wiseman, Catullan Questions (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1969), 52-53. xviii Burl, 135. xix Ibid, 137. xx Ibid, 37. xxi Wiseman, 26. xxii Quinn, 192. xxiii Maas, 80. xxiv Quinn, 139. xxv Wiseman, Catullan Questions, 48. xxvi Ibid, 47. xxvii Catullus, 125. xxviii Wiseman, Catullan Questions, 46. xxix Ibid, 46. xxx Ibid, 59. xxxi Ibid, 58. xxxii Maas, 80. xxxiii Quinn, 138. xxxiv Ibid, 190. xxxv Ibid, 195. xxxvi Catullus, 143. xxxvii Quinn, 198. xxxviii Ibid, 192.

Bibliography
Burl, Aubrey. Catullus : a poet in the Rome of Julius Caesar. London: Constable, 2004.
Catullus. Catullus: The Complete Poems. Translated by Guy Lee. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1990.
Cicero. Pro Caelio, in Cicero: Selected Political Speeches. Translated by Michael Grant.
Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1977.
Maas, P. “The Chronology of the Poems of Catullus ”. The Classical Quarterly Vol. 36, no.5 (1942):
79-82.
Quinn, Kenneth. Catullus: an interpretation. London: Batsford, 1972.
Skinner, Marilyn, B. “Pretty Lesbius ”.
Transactions of the American Philological Association Vol. 113
(1982): 197-208.
Wiseman, T.P. Catullus and his world: a reappraisal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
Wiseman, T.P.Catullan Questions. Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1969.