Sulpicia

Roman poet

• Born: fl. late first century b.c.e.
• Birthplace: Unknown

Sulpicia wrote at least six brief but well-crafted elegies, the only substantial body of poetry written by a Roman woman that has survived.

Early Life

Sulpicia (suhl-PIH-shuh) was a descendant of the most aristocratic of Roman families. In one of her poems, she proudly identifies her father as Servius (Servius Sulpicius Rufus), who, critics now agree, was the son of the distinguished jurist of the same name. Sulpicia’s grandfather was a close friend of Cicero, the Roman statesman, orator, and philosopher. In 50 b.c.e., Cicero approached the elder Servius Sulpicius, praising his friend’s son for his good character and his intellectual gifts and proposing that the son become the third husband of Cicero’s daughter Valeria. It is assumed that Sulpicia was born of that union.

Sulpicia’s father was a highly educated man, a polished orator, and a poet. Evidently he died young, and his wife chose not to remarry. Valeria’s brother, Marcus Valerius Messalla Corvinus, who, like his father, was a prominent statesman and orator, may well have been named his niece’s guardian. At any rate, Sulpicia’s uncle Messalla obviously played an important role in her life during her early years, and the second of her elegies shows that their close relationship continued after she became an adult.

As an upper-class girl growing up in the first century b.c.e., Sulpicia would probably have been educated by private tutors. Although her sex would have precluded her being trained in oratory, her education would not otherwise have been much different from that of a boy, in that it was liberal in nature, stressing fluency in both Greek and Latin as well as knowledge of the literatures in both languages. Sulpicia would have been free to make use of the family library. Moreover, because both her father and her uncle Messalla wrote poetry, she may have learned from her association with them.

Life’s Work

There is no way to know at what age Sulpicia began writing poetry, but it is obvious from her surviving elegies that at the time they were written she was a young woman and almost certainly unmarried. The fact that her poems survived is due to her belonging to a literary coterie, a group of friends who reviewed one another’s works before they were “published” (meaning circulated from hand to hand, made available for sale in bookshops, and placed in public libraries).

Sulpicia is the only Roman woman who is known to have been a member of such a coterie. She owed this distinction to Messalla, who was one of Rome’s most important literary patrons. Recognizing Sulpicia’s poetic talent, he undoubtedly encouraged her to write, made suggestions about her work, and helped her to publish, just as he did for other young poets in his coterie, including Ovid and Tibullus, who became one of the most famous poets of his time but who, ironically, is now remembered primarily because of his connection with Sulpicia. It is in the collection bearing his name, the Corpus Tibullianum, which contains works not only by Tibullus but also by several other poets, that Sulpicia’s poems appear.

In keeping with the long-standing notion that modest women keep their feelings to themselves, for centuries it was assumed that Sulpicia’s poems were meant merely to be read by the persons addressed and that she would never have permitted them to be published during her lifetime. However, as scholar Matthew Santirocco and others point out, if the poem now usually printed first is read as an introduction to the elegies, one must note that in it Sulpicia rejects the idea of secrecy. In fact, she explicitly states her intention of making her feelings about her lover known to the world. Moreover, in this poem she credits the Muses for persuading Venus to send her a worthy lover. This makes it clear that Sulpicia did not merely dabble in poetry. She was a devotee of the Muses, a conscious artist, whose seemingly simple poems are in reality as carefully crafted as those of her contemporary, the poet Catullus, to whom Sulpicia is often compared.

The six poems whose authorship is not in question relate a brief history of a love affair. In the introductory poem, Sulpicia emphasizes her joy that at last she has found a man worthy of her love. Not until the second poem does she give his name, and even then she uses the pseudonym “Cerinthus.” This is significant, for by admitting her identity while shielding that of the lover, Sulpicia is reversing the traditional pattern of love poetry. In this case, it is the woman who glories in the relationship, while the object of her love is not identified. The implication is that his role in the relationship is more passive than that of Sulpicia.

Sulpicia’s conscious artistry is again evident in the fact that she presents the second and third poems in the series as a pair, a device often used in Roman elegies. Initially she writes a poem addressed to her uncle Messalla, who had planned to celebrate her birthday with a trip to the country. In it, she urges Messalla to reconsider, pointing out that her birthday would hardly be a happy one if she had to spend it away from her lover. In the poem that follows, Sulpicia announces happily that the trip has been called off; one may speculate that perhaps her uncle took heed of her pleas. Sulpicia is delighted that she will be able to celebrate her birthday in Rome, presumably in the company of her lover.

In the fourth poem, true love encounters a more serious obstacle. In lines dripping with sarcasm, Sulpicia pretends to be pleased that her lover has taken steps to keep her from falling more deeply in love with him. What he has done, it becomes evident, is to become involved with a low-class woman, thus seeming to value her more than the daughter of an aristocrat. The poem ends with a veiled threat: Sulpicia asserts that people are worrying about her. However, she does not make it clear whether they are concerned about her feelings, worried that she will break off with her lover, or hopeful of taking his place. Again, Sulpicia’s artistry is evident, for example, in her use of the hissing, snakelike “s” sound that dominates the lines in the Latin original.

The fifth poem begins with a gentler rebuke. Sulpicia is ill with a fever, and she is uncertain whether Cerinthus is concerned about her. Sulpicia’s use of the ambiguous Latin word “calor,” which means both bodily temperature and sexual passion, suggests that she may be troubled as much by passion as by real illness. After these two poems questioning the sincerity of Cerinthus, in her final poem Sulpicia admits that she has precipitated a crisis in the relationship. She should not have left her lover alone the previous night, she admits; her only excuse is that she wanted to conceal her passion from him. By thus seeming to reject the honest expression of emotion, Sulpicia appears to be retreating from her earlier posture. However, the fact that this sixth poem was written and distributed like the other five suggests that Sulpicia’s comments either reflected a mood or were a calculated ploy. Perhaps it was just that in the final analysis, her devotion to her art always triumphed over her womanly modesty.

It is not known what happened to Sulpicia in later life. She may have continued to write poetry; she may have been the author of other elegies in the Corpus Tibullianum collection, where there are five poems listed as being written by a mysterious amicus Sulpiciae, that is, a friend of Sulpicia. In any case, after centuries in which her works were sometimes attributed to Tibullus, sometimes dismissed as no more than one would expect from a mere female, and more often just ignored, Sulpicia has finally been recognized as the artist she was.

Significance

Sulpicia adheres to the tradition of the short, autobiographical love poem in elegaic form as practiced by her Greek predecessors and by her contemporary Catullus. However, by taking an active part in the love affair she described and by making it clear that her primary allegiance was not to any man but to her muse, Sulpicia brought a voice to Roman poetry that had not previously been heard: that of a strong, independent woman. Her membership in Messalla’s coterie proves that she was highly respected during her lifetime. However, there is no way to ascertain how much she may have influenced other poets, either women or men.

Bibliography

Flaschenriem, Barbara L. “Sulpicia and the Rhetoric of Disclosure.” Classical Philology 94 (January, 1999): 36-54. The author uses detailed textual analysis to support her belief that Sulpicia was a woman in conflict with herself. Though the poet expresses her thoughts and feelings honestly, she makes herself somewhat less vulnerable through the skillful use of conventional literary techniques. A thoughtful study.

Hallett, Judith P., and Marilyn B. Skinner, eds. Roman Sexualities. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1997. A collection of essays in which feminist critical tools are used to explore the hierarchy of power in ancient Rome. It is pointed out that women writers like Sulpicia, who inverted the traditional gender roles of males as the pursuers and females as the pursued, were viewed as posing a threat to traditional power structures.

Heath-Stubbs, John. Preface to The Poems of Sulpicia, translated by John Heath-Stubbs. London: Hearing Eye, 2000. This volume contains a translation of Sulpicia’s poems by a highly respected English scholar. In his prefatory comments, Heath-Stubbs points out how much more favorably scholars now look on Sulpicia than they did in the past. He also deals with the issue of the two poems tentatively attributed to her and with the question of the Sulpicia mentioned by Martial.

Hemelrijk, Emily A. Matrona Docta: Educated Women in the Roman Élite from Cornelia to Julia Domna. New York: Routledge, 1999. Two chapters in this invaluable volume describe the education of upper-class women, thus providing a sound basis for conjectures about Sulpicia’s early life and education. Other especially useful sections of the book explore the attitudes of Sulpicia’s society toward women’s sexual behavior and their artistic endeavors. The chapter titled “Women and Writing: Poetry” contains a lengthy discussion of Sulpicia’s life and her work. Includes notes, bibliography, and indexes.

Parker, Holt N. “Sulpicia, the Auctor de Sulpicia, and the Authorship of 3.9 and 3.11 of the Corpus Tibullianum.” Helios 21 (1994): 39-62. Argues that two additional poems in Tibellius’s collection, traditionally included in a group by an unnamed writer, were in fact written by Sulpicia. Though controversial, this theory deserves consideration, for the poems have significant biographical content.

Santirocco, Matthew. “Sulpicia Reconsidered.” Classical Journal 74 (1979): 229-239. The author refutes the long-standing assessment of Sulpicia as merely an emotional amateur, thus setting the stage for serious study of her poetry as the work of a conscious artist.

Skoie, Mathilde. Reading Sulpicia: Commentaries 1475-1990. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Selections show how the attitudes toward Sulpicia and her works have altered over time. An appendix includes her six poems in Latin and in translation. Two bibliographies, one organized chronologically and the other alphabetically. Includes index.

Snyder, Jane McIntosh. The Woman and the Lyre: Women Writers in Classical Greece and Rome. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1989. Explains the biographical references in Sulpicia’s poems and notes how her work fits into the established elegaic tradition. Includes map, bibliographies, and index.