Militat omnis amans, et habet sua castra Cupido;
Attice, crede mihi, militat omnis amans.
quae bello est habilis, Veneri quoque convenit aetas.
turpe senex miles, turpe senilis amor.
Every lover serves as a soldier, and Cupid has his own military camp; believe me, Atticus, every lover serves as a soldier. The age that is fit for war is also suitable for Venus. Shameful is an old soldier, shameful is elderly love.
The passage draws a compelling parallel between love and military service, a common metaphor in Roman love poetry. This comparison (known as militia amoris) cleverly plays on the shared experiences of discipline, suffering, and dedication required in both pursuits.
Cupid (also known as Amor), the Roman god of love, is portrayed as a military commander with his own camp, suggesting that lovers are his soldiers. This militaristic imagery transforms the pursuit of love into a kind of campaign, with its own strategies and hardships.
The mention of Atticus suggests this is addressed to a friend or literary patron, following the conventional Roman practice of dedicating or addressing literary works to specific individuals.
The final lines reflect Roman cultural attitudes about age-appropriate behavior. The Romans believed that both warfare and love affairs were the domain of young men. The elderly were expected to retire from both military service and romantic pursuits, as continuing either into old age was considered undignified and contrary to the natural order.
quos petiere duces animos in milite forti,
hos petit in socio bella puella viro.
pervigilant ambo; terra requiescit uterque—
ille fores dominae servat, at ille ducis.
militis officium longa est via; mitte puellam,
strenuus exempto fine sequetur amans.
The courage which generals sought in a brave soldier, this a beautiful girl seeks in her male companion. Both keep vigil; each rests on the ground—one guards his mistress’s doors, the other his general’s. A soldier’s duty involves a long journey; send a girl ahead, and the energetic lover will follow without limit.
The passage exemplifies the militia amoris (warfare of love) theme that pervades Roman love poetry. This literary conceit equates lovers with soldiers, drawing detailed parallels between military service and romantic pursuit.
The paraklausithyron (lament before closed doors) motif appears here—lovers in Roman poetry frequently spent nights outside their mistresses’ houses, just as soldiers kept watch at their posts. The word “domina” specifically refers to the beloved in elegiac poetry, casting her as a commanding figure who holds power over her lover, just as a general commands his troops.
The comparison extends to physical hardship: both soldier and lover sleep rough on the ground (terra), endure long journeys, and show unlimited dedication to their cause. The final lines suggest that love, like military service, knows no boundaries—the lover will follow his beloved anywhere, just as a soldier follows orders without question.
ibit in adversos montes duplicataque nimbo
flumina, congestas exteret ille nives,
nec freta pressurus tumidos causabitur Euros
aptaque verrendis sidera quaeret aquis.
quis nisi vel miles vel amans et frigora noctis
et denso mixtas perferet imbre nives?
He will go against opposing mountains and rivers swollen by storms, he will trample through piled-up snows, and when about to sail the seas, he won’t make excuses about the swelling East winds, nor will he look for stars suitable for sweeping the waters. Who except either a soldier or a lover would endure both the cold of night and snows mixed with dense rain?
This excerpt beautifully develops the militia amoris theme through vivid natural imagery. The East winds (Euri) were considered particularly troublesome for ancient Mediterranean sailing, often bringing storms and dangerous conditions. The reference to looking for stars reflects ancient navigation practices - sailors relied heavily on celestial observation to guide their journeys.
The imagery of mountains, swollen rivers, and accumulated snow presents challenges that both soldiers and lovers might face in their respective pursuits. Roman soldiers indeed had to cross treacherous Alpine passes and ford dangerous rivers during campaigns, while lovers in Roman poetry traditionally braved severe weather to reach their beloveds. The final rhetorical question emphasizes the exceptional nature of both military and romantic dedication, suggesting that only love and war could drive people to such extremes of physical endurance.
mittitur infestos alter speculator in hostes;
in rivale oculos alter, ut hoste, tenet.
ille graves urbes, hic durae limen amicae
obsidet; hic portas frangit, at ille fores.
One scout is sent against hostile enemies; the other keeps his eyes fixed on his rival, as on an enemy. One besieges mighty cities, the other the threshold of his harsh mistress; this one breaks down gates, that one doors.
This elegiac comparison extends the militia amoris theme to military reconnaissance and siege warfare. The poem plays with the dual meaning of hostis (enemy) - both military foes and romantic rivals are considered enemies to be watched and fought against.
The reference to the dura amica (“harsh mistress”) reflects a common trope in Roman love poetry where the beloved is portrayed as cruel and resistant to the lover’s advances. The threshold (limen) holds special significance in Roman poetry as the symbolic barrier between lover and beloved, often featuring in paraklausithyron scenes where excluded lovers lament at their mistresses’ doors.
The parallel between military siege operations and a lover’s persistent courtship would have resonated with Roman readers familiar with both the techniques of warfare and the conventions of love poetry. The vocabulary of martial conflict (obsidere, frangere) is deliberately applied to both scenarios, emphasizing how both soldier and lover must overcome barriers - literal city walls in one case, metaphorical resistance in the other.
Saepe soporatos invadere profuit hostes
caedere et armata vulgus inerme manu.
sic fera Threicii ceciderunt agmina Rhesi,
et dominum capti deseruistis equi.
nempe maritorum somnis utuntur amantes,
et sua sopitis hostibus arma movent.
custodum transire manus vigilumque catervas
militis et miseri semper amantis opus.
Often it has proven advantageous to attack drowsy enemies and to slaughter unarmed crowds with an armed hand. Thus fell the fierce troops of Thracian Rhesus, and you, captured horses, abandoned your master. Indeed, lovers make use of husbands’ sleep, and move their weapons while their enemies slumber. To slip past the bands of guards and crowds of watchmen is always the task of both soldier and wretched lover.
The text draws a parallel between military strategy and romantic intrigue through the story of Rhesus, a Thracian king who fought against the Greeks in the Trojan War. According to legend, Odysseus and Diomedes infiltrated his camp at night, killed him in his sleep, and stole his famous horses. This mythological episode serves as an exemplum for both military night raids and lovers’ stealth.
The mention of guards (custodes) and watchmen reflects Roman social reality where wealthy households employed door-keepers and night watchmen. For lovers trying to visit married women, these guards represented a serious obstacle, just as sentries challenged soldiers attempting military infiltration. The reference to “husbands’ sleep” (maritorum somnis) points to the adulterous nature of many affairs in Roman love poetry, where the cuckolded husband often appears as an unwitting obstacle to the lovers’ meetings.
The poem continues the militia amoris theme, but here focuses specifically on stealth and nocturnal operations, suggesting that both love and war sometimes require deception and careful timing rather than direct confrontation.
Mars dubius nec certa Venus; victique resurgunt,
quosque neges umquam posse iacere, cadunt.
Ergo desidiam quicumque vocabat amorem,
desinat. ingenii est experientis amor.
ardet in abducta Briseide magnus Achilles—
dum licet, Argeas frangite, Troes, opes!
Mars is uncertain and Venus is not assured; the conquered rise again, and those whom you would deny could ever fall are falling. Therefore, whoever used to call love idleness, let him cease. Love belongs to an experienced mind. Great Achilles burns with passion for the stolen Briseis—while you can, Trojans, destroy the Argive forces!
The opening lines play with the dual nature of Mars and Venus as both deities and metaphors—Mars representing war and Venus love. This duality reinforces the militia amoris theme where love and war are interchangeable.
The reference to Achilles and Briseis recalls a pivotal moment in the Iliad when Agamemnon takes Briseis, Achilles’ war prize, causing Achilles to withdraw from battle in rage and grief. The poet cleverly uses this mythological example to demonstrate how love affects even the mightiest warriors. The Trojan War provides the perfect backdrop for exploring the intersection of love and warfare.
The text challenges the common criticism that love makes men soft or idle (desidia). Instead, it argues that love requires experience and skill, just like warfare. The final exhortation to the Trojans to strike while Achilles is distracted by love demonstrates how romantic passion can affect military outcomes, further blurring the distinction between love and war.
Hector ab Andromaches conplexibus ibat ad arma,
et, galeam capiti quae daret, uxor erat.
summa ducum, Atrides, visa Priameide fertur
Maenadis effusis obstipuisse comis.
Mars quoque deprensus fabrilia vincula sensit;
notior in caelo fabula nulla fuit.
Hector went from Andromache’s embraces to arms, and it was his wife who would place the helmet on his head. The greatest of leaders, Atrides, is said to have been stunned by the sight of Priam’s daughter with flowing hair like a Maenad’s. Mars too, when caught, felt the craftsman’s chains; no story was better known in heaven.
The passage weaves together three famous mythological love stories. First, we see the touching scene of Hector’s departure for battle, with his wife Andromache helping him arm - a moment immortalized in Book 6 of Homer’s Iliad. The intimate detail of her placing his helmet emphasizes the intersection of domestic affection and martial duty.
The reference to Atrides (Agamemnon) and Priam’s daughter alludes to his captivation by Cassandra, whom he took as a war prize after Troy’s fall. The comparison to a Maenad (wild female worshipper of Bacchus) with flowing hair suggests dangerous, overwhelming passion - Maenads were known for their frenzied, ecstatic behavior.
The final couplet recalls the famous tale of Mars and Venus caught in adultery by her husband Vulcan, who trapped them in a magical net of his own crafting (fabrilia vincula). This story, told in Homer’s Odyssey, was a favorite subject of Roman poetry and art, representing both the power of love over even the god of war and the humorous consequences of discovered infidelity.
ipse ego segnis eram discinctaque in otia natus;
mollierant animos lectus et umbra meos.
impulit ignavum formosae cura puellae
iussit et in castris aera merere suis.
inde vides agilem nocturnaque bella gerentem.
qui nolet fieri desidiosus, amet!
I myself was lazy and born for carefree leisure; bed and shade had softened my spirit. Care for a beautiful girl drove me from my idleness and ordered me to earn wages in her military camp. Hence you see me active and waging nocturnal wars. Whoever doesn’t want to become idle should fall in love!
The poem plays with the militia amoris (warfare of love) metaphor by describing love as military service, complete with wages (aera) and a camp (castris). Roman soldiers received their pay in bronze coins, making the metaphor particularly apt. The mention of “nocturnal wars” (nocturna bella) has a double meaning, referring both to nighttime military operations and to amorous encounters.
The contrast between otium (leisure) and love’s demands reflects a common theme in Roman poetry. Otium was traditionally associated with poetry and contemplation, but could also suggest dangerous idleness. The poet presents love as a motivating force that transforms him from lazy (segnis) to active (agilis), inverting the common Roman criticism that love made men soft and ineffective.
The final line presents a paradox typical of Roman love poetry: love, while often associated with leisure and pleasure, is presented as a cure for laziness, requiring active service and dedication like a military campaign.