Talk:Catullus

message: I am currently studying Catullus in the AP curriculum.  I would like to contribute by posting literal translations of the poems, how should this be organized? There dont seem to be any good literal translations anywhere, and I know that this is what most students are interested in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.191.188  (talk • contribs) 04:08, 10 November 2004
*Wikipedia is not a place to copy original sources, or translations of them.  In particular, "Mere collections of public domain or other source material such as entire books or source code, original historical documents, letters, laws, proclamations, and other source material that are only useful when presented with their original, un-modified wording. Complete copies of primary sources should go into Wikisource. There's nothing wrong with using public domain resources such as 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica to add content to an article. See also Wikipedia:Don't include copies of primary sources."  You could probably post your translations on Wikisource, as well; but Wikipedia is also not a free web hosting provider, or a place for original research, so maybe you'd be better off finding somewhere else to post your original work. Russ Blau (talk) 14:23, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
*Also, IMHO Wikipedia shouldn't be a source for lazy students who want help cheating on their Latin translation. campbel2 —Preceding undated comment added 20:57, 12 August 2005
*So should the "Catullus #" articles be marked for deletion or is there a community here that could make them useful as appropriate Wikipedia articles? John (Jwy) 18:42, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Translations

message: I moved this from the article:
(This is incorrect.  Cicero never once mentions Catullus.  He does, however, mention to his friend Atticus that he finds the neoteric poets kinda silly in their use of fifth-foot spondees in dactylic hexameter.  I find this rather interesting, for even Homer (8th century BCE) uses this metricl device.)  (Left by 24.199.71.216)
It's an interesting comment and worth preserving.  24.199.71.216, if you come back, feel free to edit the article; use the talk page for comments and so forth.  Cheers, Antandrus 06:07, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: comment by an anon

message: The belief that Catullus was born on the Palatine Hill derives from a confusion between Gaius Valerius Catullus (the author) and Quintus Lutatius Catulus (the politician and philanthropist). Catulus owned one of the most extravagant villas on the Palatine Hill, which rivalled even that of Crassus for its opulence. Catullus/Catulus is a common spelling error. El barty 17:03, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Catullus' place of birth and Cicero

message: From the list of carmina below, of which all but one (if a saw it correctly) are dead links, I suppose I am to understand that someone wants to include all his Carmina within Wikipedia. Imho this is not the right place for full-text poetry; it had better be added to Wikisource.
Caesarion 16:54, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: listing below

message: This doesn't seem very NPOV: " from writing laborious odes to the reputed beautiful woman to irritating whines about the woman ("illi rumpens"). " 
"laborious" and "irritating" could be taken out, no?
Also
"Catullus writes a poem about a person, attempting to sound very upperclass..." 
Which poem is this specifically? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.76.4  (talk • contribs) 23:46, 2 May 2005
Specifically, it's poem 84.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.25.191 (talk) 02:37, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV?

message: Hmmm, wandering through the questionable edits by IP 194.154.22.51 I noticed the blanking of section Works on 29 November 2005.  I noticed the later addition of section See also, which may duplicate/replace some links in the older Works.  Could an expert review/revise?  I just want to be sure the material wasn't permanently lost to vandalism.  Shenme 10:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Works

message: When I clicked the wikiquote link, I got 'no quote pages with this name' - does this mean we should delete the link? Adambrowne666 08:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikiquote

message: As far as I know, there are no actual, verified images of Catullus in existence, so no picture will be completely accurate, but -- with all due respect -- the current image seems kind of preposterous. It's very difficult to accept this as a reasonable likeness of Catullus, and is fairly distracting to anyone who has a knowledge of the late Republican period. The image depicts a middle-aged man with thick facial hair and a headdress, when the generally accepted fact is that Catullus died at around 30 years of age, and we know that he lived in a time when culturally, it was unacceptable for Roman men (especially young men) to wear long beards or moustaches. (There is also no evidence that Catullus wore a headdress of any kind, and it seems strange to assume that he did, as it was not the fashion of the time.) Maybe this would be a more appropriate picture. Again, no picture will ever be totally correct, I'm just suggesting one that is more in keeping with what a young, Roman man of the late Republic might have looked like. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.171.151.31 (talk) 05:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it looks rather more like a portrait of Homer (were it not for the apparent eyesight). Being an obviously inept reconstruction, the picture has no added value, but is misleading instead. I am replacing it with another image which, although it is not a portrait, hopefully captures something of the 'feeling' of Catullus' time and of his poetry. I took it from Wikipedia Commons. Iblardi 20:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Strange choice of picture

message: I noticed that User:Byrgenwulf/Catullus is a nice index of the carmina (although some are just links back to this article) that never seems to have gotten integrated into this article. Is that template a good navigational aid? If so, then please use it. -- 199.33.32.40 00:17, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nice index of carmina

message: There's a merge-proposal notice on the top of the Poetry of Catullus page, and the discussion link goes to this talk page, although I see no discussion on a merger anywhere, so here goes:
I've added substantially to the "Poetry of Catullus" page and also to the biography section of this article. The articles could still be merged, making a rather long article. I think it's probably better to leave the articles separate, which would leave plenty of space in the "Poetry" article for more discussion of the poems (and in more detail). (The two articles could certainly be merged into a large article as well.) My preference would be to summarize the poetry section of the biography article a bit and move some of the more detailed paragraphs over to the "Poetry" article. If the two articles remain separate, that needs to be done. Any thoughts? Noroton 21:37, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think keeping them separate is the way to go.  I agree that as they stand now, they could be merged.  But both sections, poetry in particular could be expanded.  There's a chunk of stuff that should be added about Catullus and the Novae Poetae/neoteric poetry, as well as information regarding the poetry itself.  I've been meaning to do some addition myself, but my trusty ol' textbooks are inaccessible to me at the moment, so I've let it sit on the back burner.  It's probably worth making a note that both articles aren't as small as they appear - merely incomplete at the moment.  Bitnine 00:03, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree: keep them separate. To join them would tend to confuse the issue of how much his writings can serve as a source for his biography. Also it makes for difficult categorization when an article about writings is merged with an article about a person. Andrew Dalby 12:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: On merging [[Poetry of Catullus]] with this biography article

message: I think there should be a list of his works on this page given that there isn't anywhere else eg:
*Catullus 1
*Catullus 2
etc. but i didn't want to add such a big and possibly messy and overwhelming chunk without hearing other people's opinions. Shold we put it here? or on Poetry of Catullus? or a whole new page? or not at all? Storeye 10:40, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List of works

message: This article was recently tagged for having a trivia section but I though that a trivia section and a popular culture section were different things? Storeye 04:12, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia

message: I have changed the  priority of the article from low to high. Catullus is a major poet. Xn4 17:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Priority

message: Catullus cannot be called an Epicurean in good faith. Perhaps he fits the commonly understood definition of the word "Epicurean" today, but since the word links to a description of the philosophical movement, it's inaccurate. His poetry is the exact opposite of ataraxia. I'm deleting the word.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.119.178.23 (talk) 01:45, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Epicurean?

message: "Catullus' poems have been preserved in an anthology of 116 carmina (three of which are now considered spurious — 18, 19 and 20 — although the numbering has been retained)"
Nope. It is not so that "poems 18-20 are now considered spurious". Quite contrary, the MSS. simply do not contain anything between poems 17 and 21. The gap in the numbering goes back to early printed editions, as some editor inserted three poems there, which he had found in the (IIRC) Catalepton and attributed to Catullus. This insert has later been expelled from the Catullus' text as having been done without a real reason, but the gap in numbering has been retained. Please correct this, the current formulation suggests that the Catullan MSS. do preserve these three poems. 109.243.55.208 (talk) 10:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: poems 18-20 now considered spurious

message: I don't have any objections to using a modern portrait, since no ancient image is available. To me, this is like using a 19th-century painting to illustrate an article on an ancient deity, particularly if no ancient depictions survive or are available. How people used the myth later, or continued to think of the writer, has its own significance. However, I do think it should always be clear what kind of representation these are: for instance, "a French Neoclassical depiction of" or "a pre-Raphaelite interpretation of." So it would be good to know something of the artist's intention or the purpose or period of the sculpture portraying Catullus. (The bust was clearly modeled after an individual face.) The image file, however, gives minimal info. For now, I'm just going to note the relevance of the artwork's location. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:23, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: modern portrait

message: In the article it says his mother was "Blandus," but this is a male name in Latin. I don't want to correct it to "Blanda" because I have no idea who Catullus' mother or father was.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lejarrag (talk • contribs) 03:39, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Done a bit of digging, and can't find any reference to Catullus' mother's name. It's been waiting for a cite since October, so I think we can remove it. --Nicknack009 (talk) 08:32, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catullus' Mother 

message: Catullus is an important character in the novel “The Venus Throw” by Steven Saylor, along with Clodia and Cicero.  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Venus_Throw Minicarmen (talk) 02:05, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Entry for “Cultural depictions”? 

message: Heya! I realize this talk page isn’t super active but I’ve written List of bibliographies of works on Catullus and submitted it to be a featured list candidate and would greatly appreciate any feedback here
On a side note, in the course of my research I’ve come across Talk:Catullus/References which seems to be fairly orphaned — I didn’t include it in the article because Wikipedia doesn’t like citing user-generated content but it’s been identified as a useful list of sources about individual poems (see  in the Talk page) that I think easily might have gotten lost in the shuffle (RIP Wikipedia:WikiProject Catullus).
Definitely would appreciate any reviews or feedbacks, and I hope it can be a helpful resource for anyone trying to gather sources! Umimmak (talk) 01:54, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of bibliographies — FLC